CARB Takes Heat on Excess Carbon Allowances

Concerns about excess allowances in California’s carbon cap-and-trade program and how they may impact the state’s ability to reach its 2030 greenhouse reduction goal were aired this week in the state capitol.

During a May 24 hearing of the Joint Legislative Committee on Climate Change Policies, the question of whether extra allowances in the market will cause the state to miss its target for cutting emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels in 12 years “is unaddressed,” warned Danny Cullenward with Near Zero.

He told the lawmakers excess emissions allowances are a common problem in carbon markets, specifically in the Northeast’s Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and European Union markets.

Cullenward criticized what he called a lack of scientific integrity in the California Air Resources Board’s analysis. Instead of measuring projected emissions from only those entities covered by the state’s cap-and trade, the Air Board’s projected emission levels are based on emissions from both covered and non-covered facilities. “This is just basic accounting,” Cullenward said, calling for “an honest conversation” about the issue

“There is uncertainty” as to whether the state will meet its 2030 target, the Air Board’s Eddie Chang told lawmakers. “How we get to 2030 is as important as meeting the target,” she added.

The Air Board faced criticism for not following a provision of AB 398, which extended the cap-and-trade program to 2030. The clause requires offsets to be limited to 4 percent of the market emissions allowances between 2020 and 2025 and then raised to 6 percent.

However, Cullenward said the Air Board’s analysis increased offset levels to 6 percent in 2024 and 2025, two years ahead of what is required by law.

Critics further took issue with the Air Board’s expansive definition of carbon offset projects.

“It is inconsistent with the intent of the legislation if all projects qualify,” said Ross Brown of the Legislative Analyst’s Office. He and others insisted that offsets count only if they directly benefit Californians and not just reduce greenhouse gases.

“Offsets should provide direct environmental benefits to California communities,” said Bill Magavern, Coalition for Clean Air policy director.

The discussion was one in a series of oversight hearings the committee has held on the state’s program to cut greenhouse gas emissions. —Elizabeth McCarthy

Over 11K Stories!

| Independently Powered Energy News

CARB Takes Heat on Excess Carbon Allowances

William J. Kelly

Related Posts

Op-Ed: Before and After Net Energy Metering 3, A Thought Experiment

Auld Lang Zine

Air Regulators 2022 Scoping Plan to Slash Emissions is a Go

CAISO Considers Revenue Streams for Energy Storage