Scepticism about the state’s ability to reach its climate targets may be warranted. “It’s another thing to actually attain those.”
“It’s one thing to set goals, which we’ve done a great job of,” says Anthony Rendon, the Speaker of California’s state assembly. The state’s politicians are used to being badmouthed by their counterparts in Texas and Florida, but on climate the toughest criticisms often come from within. But recently some have argued that its big achievements-such as implementing a cap-and-trade system in 2013-are long past. This could be heaven or it could be hellįew dispute California’s past successes. Wildfires have incinerated towns and their smoke has dirtied the air. Lastly, Californians have been suffering the effects of climate change for years. Thanks to a colossal budget surplus, Mr Newsom’s $22.5bn climate blueprint is almost twice the size of President Joe Biden’s 2023 budget request for the EPA (although the EPA is just one of many federal agencies that formulate climate policy). The Golden State is the world’s fifth-largest economy. Second, California has the cash and manpower to invest in climate mitigation and adaptation. In a recent poll 68% of Californians said the effects of climate change are already being felt, and nearly three-quarters said they support the 2030 target. States without Democratic supermajorities or climate-conscious conservatives cannot hope to move as fast.
“Arnold Schwarzenegger was pretty lonely among Republican governors who believe deeply in the need to address climate change,” says Bill Ritter, a former governor of Colorado who runs the Centre for the New Energy Economy at Colorado State University. CARB was created during Ronald Reagan’s governorship in the 1960s. First, it enjoys rare bipartisan support for bold climate action. Yet as of 2016 only New York had lower emissions per person.Ĭalifornia was early on emissions-cutting for several reasons. Today California still has the second-highest total emissions (after Texas) among the 50 states. Lawmakers then required the state to cut emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. The EPA restored the waiver last month around the time it announced new federal pollution limits for buses, vans and lorries-based on similar rules in California. The decision was the most serious manifestation of President Donald Trump’s resentment of California’s environmental leadership, says Richard Revesz of New York University. Yet the Trump administration revoked California’s waiver in 2019, arguing that it should not set standards for other states. Los Angeles’s air quality is still often foul, but it has improved a lot over the past 40 years (see chart 1). Transport accounts for 29% of greenhouse-gas emissions in America and fully 41% in California. The state’s laser focus on car exhaust stems from twin concerns: local air pollution and the global climate crisis. By 2022, 16 states followed California’s standards. Today, states can choose to adopt the Environmental Protection Agency’s ( EPA) rules for vehicle emissions, or California’s. California has applied for more than 100 waivers since 1967. Officials enacted exhaust-emissions limits in 1966 to try to tame the city’s noxious smog.īecause California’s rules predated the Air Quality Act of 1967 and the Clean Air Act of 1970, when federal officials first set national standards for air quality, the feds granted the state waivers which allowed it to set its own, stricter pollution rules. The sky was so filthy one summer day in 1943 that Angelenos worried they were victims of a gas attack related to the war. In the 20th century, Los Angeles’s booming population, topography and sprawling port contaminated its air. First is California’s unique ability among America’s states to set its own standards for vehicle emissions. Two policies stand out for their impact within the state and beyond.
0 kommentar(er)
