1

Catherine Witherspooncwitherspoon@jps.net

Presentation to EVASeptember 10, 2007

Helsinki, Finland

Climate Programs in CaliforniaClimate Programs in California

2

California Climate Action PlanCalifornia Climate Action PlanCalifornia Climate Action PlanCalifornia Climate Action Plan

• Driven by self-interest• Intended to create wider momentum• Bounded by state’s high growth rate

and already efficient energy system

• Significantly different than Kyoto or proposed EU package

3

0.7 oF higher temperatures

3-8 inch rise in sea level

12% decrease in spring run-off

Snowmelt and spring blooms have advanced by 1-3 weeks since 1975

Source: Cal/EPA Environmental Indicators Report (2002)

CA Impacts – Past 100 YearsCA Impacts – Past 100 Years

4

CA Impacts – Next 100 Yearsmid-case estimate

CA Impacts – Next 100 Yearsmid-case estimate

75% loss in snow pack

1-2 foot sea level rise

70 more extreme heat days/year

80% more ‘likely ozone’ days

55% more large forest fires

Twice as many drought years

4

Source: Climate Action Team Report (2006)

5

GHG Emissions Per CapitaGHG Emissions Per Capita

7.53.9

1.9

Sweden China India

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Russia Japan E.U.

13.110.7 10.5

To

ns

of

CO

2 E

qu

ival

ent

Source: Climate Analysis indicators Tool (CAIT US Version 1.0, CAIT version 4.0), World Resources Institute, 2007 (data is for CY 2001 – 2002 and includes CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 emissions for countries and CO2, CH4, N2O, and F-gases for CA)

24.3

U.S. CA

13.4

WorldAverageWorldAverage

6

CaliforniaGrowth Pressures

CaliforniaGrowth Pressures

• Current population is 37 million– 2050 forecast is ~60 million– 47% increase from 1990 to 2020

• Vehicle travel rises 2% per year

• State economy $1.5 trillion– Growing 4-5% per year

7

Governor’s Solution Governor’s Solution Announced June 2005Announced June 2005

Governor’s Solution Governor’s Solution Announced June 2005Announced June 2005

• Stop GHG emissions growth• Return to 1990 baseline by 2020• Cut emissions 80% more by 2050• Use combination of regulations, market

measures, policies and incentives• Link up with rest of nation and world

8

Magnitude of the ChallengeMagnitude of the Challenge

CAT Report Emissions

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1990 2000 2010 2020 2050

Year

Mil

lio

n M

etri

c T

on

s

(C

O2 E

qu

ival

ent)

1990 Emission Baseline

80% Reduction~341 MMTCO2E

~174 MMTCO2E Reduction

11

11

9Source: March 2006 CAT Report, adapted from CEC, 2005

California’s California’s GHG Emissions (2002)GHG Emissions (2002)

Total statewide inventory

~ 500 MMTCO2E

Agriculture & Forestry8.0%

Transportation41.2%

Others8.4%

Electric Power19.6%

Industrial22.8%

10

Potential Control StrategiesPotential Control Strategies(2006 Action Plan)(2006 Action Plan)

Potential Control StrategiesPotential Control Strategies(2006 Action Plan)(2006 Action Plan)

Source: March 2006 Climate Action Team Report

Vehicles and fuels 41 MMT 24%

Forestry 33 MMT 19%

Land Use/Transportation 27 MMT 16%

Energy Efficiency 21 MMT 12%

Other Utility Measures 19 MMT 11%

Renewable Portfolio Standard 14 MMT 8%

Waste Management 6 MMT 3%

Other, Miscellaneous 13 MMT 7%

TOTAL 174 MMT 100%

11

Legislative InterventionLegislative Interventionand Messagesand Messages

Legislative InterventionLegislative Interventionand Messagesand Messages

• To Governor: “prove you’re sincere”• To Regulators: “get to work”• To Industry: “don’t assume markets”• To NGOs: (mixed messages) • To all: high stakes demand open process

12

Assembly Bill 32 Assembly Bill 32 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006

Assembly Bill 32 Assembly Bill 32 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006

• Locks in 2020 emission target• Makes CARB lead authority• Requires comprehensive plan• Requires early regulatory actions• Requires mandatory GHG reporting• Rulemakings to be finished by 2011• Allows market measures• Two advisory committees (EJ, Econ & Tech)

13

Ongoing Policy FrictionOngoing Policy FrictionOngoing Policy FrictionOngoing Policy Friction

• Debate over what will be regulatory and what will be market-driven

• Different views regarding the desirability of federal pre-emption

• Fear of repeating 2003 energy crisis• Current fiscal crisis, funding for AB 32

14

Shared Technological OptimismShared Technological Optimism

• “GOLD made CA, GREEN will sustain it” • $1.5 trillion economy • Exports account for 25% • Key sectors: machines, computers and

electronics, food, transportation equipment, chemicals

• Green technology next big driver

15

California’s Economic Analysis

California’s Economic Analysis

• Climate plan net positive for CA economy• 83,000 new jobs, $4B growth• Huge savings from energy efficiency and

vehicle emission standards• Remaining strategies priced at 0-$50/ton

16

8% 17% 25% 33% 42% 50% 58%

U.S. EPA Analysisof Cap & Trade Legislation

U.S. EPA Analysisof Cap & Trade Legislation

• Good news– No harm to U.S. economy

• Bad news– Much higher prices for gas and electricity

• Dept of Energy’s analysis pending

17

18

What’s Happening Now in CAWhat’s Happening Now in CAWhat’s Happening Now in CAWhat’s Happening Now in CA

• July – draft scoping plan for 2020 • December – low carbon fuel standard• Ongoing – lawsuit over car waiver• Ongoing – design of cap & trade • Ongoing – expanding partnerships

19

What’s Happening Across USWhat’s Happening Across USWhat’s Happening Across USWhat’s Happening Across US

• 9 Northeast States starting market program for power sector

• 6 Western States and 2 Canadian Provinces set regional GHG target

• Quasi-national GHG emissions registry

• U.S. EPA ordered to begin regulations

20

What’s Happening in DCWhat’s Happening in DCWhat’s Happening in DCWhat’s Happening in DC

• Energy bill passed– Tighter CAFE standard for cars, trucks– Higher renewable fuel mandate– Clean coal R&D

• Cap & Trade legislation pending• Presidential election• Shift in Bush Administration position

21

Range of Views about EU ETSRange of Views about EU ETSRange of Views about EU ETSRange of Views about EU ETS

• What CA and/or US should do• Good idea, worth exploring• Less effective than taxes• Stalling tactic to avoid hard choices• Impossible to do well

• 2nd phase critically important

22

DialogueDialogueDialogueDialogue

• California vs. Europe’s situation and possible choices?

• Validity of economic assessments and cost curves?

• Importance of getting all countries focused on the same goal?

23

Thank YouThank YouThank YouThank You