-
Click here to listen to this article - Share via
See more from the L.A. Times in Google Search. Set us as preferred
- California lawmakers are considering high-stakes energy and environment bills that will shape climate spending, pollution rules and the state’s response to Trump-era rollbacks.
- Central fights include how to divvy up cap-and-invest climate dollars, whether to shield utilities from wildfire liability, and whether to roll back controversial shortcuts to environmental review for industrial projects.
- Other proposals aim to tap home batteries, electric vehicles and plug-in “balcony solar” to address soaring power bills, while tightening oversight of coal exports and the offshore drilling pushed by the Trump administration.
With only days left in the legislative session, California lawmakers are racing through dozens of high-stakes bills that will shape energy and environmental priorities at the state and federal levels.
There are fights over funding for climate projects, utility protections from wildfire liability and controversial shortcuts on environmental reviews, all against the backdrop of Trump-era rollbacks. The legislative session ends Monday.
Some experts said they hope lawmakers in Sacramento will use the remaining days to push back against fossil fuel interests and deregulation favored by corporations. Polling shows voters are “connecting the dots between cost increases, corporate greed and weather disasters,” said Shannon Olivieri Hovis, chief strategy officer at the nonprofit California Environmental Voters.
One key item centers on the state’s primary pot of money for climate and environmental programs, known as the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. It is fed by California’s cap-and-invest program, which allows large polluters to buy and sell allowances for their greenhouse gas emissions.
State lawmakers voted last year to extend the cap-and-invest program through 2045 and created a new three-tier system for deciding how its proceeds are allocated. The first two tiers include core state commitments such as the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, a tax credit for manufacturers and the high-speed rail.
But recipients of Tier 3 funds — which include long-standing programs for affordable housing, low-carbon transit, clean drinking water and community air pollution — are unhappy with the new structure because it reduces their allocation if there isn’t enough money after funding Tiers 1 and 2. Many of these programs rely heavily or exclusively on the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.
Lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration are now negotiating a last-minute bill that could change the spending plan and help protect Tier 3 programs when revenue falls.
In a planning memo, Sen. John Laird (D-Santa Cruz) described this trailer bill as a “much stronger spending plan” than the one currently on the books. But Clayton Munnings, a cap-and-invest analyst with the group Elevate Climate, said the Tier 3 group was never guaranteed to receive funding under the law.
Plug-in solar panels that can power refrigerators and other household appliances are getting more common. One California lawmaker is trying to make them legal in the state.
Newsom is also considering a closely watched package that would shield utilities from potentially crippling wildfire liability. It has drawn strong opposition from survivors and consumer advocates who say it could leave fire victims with less compensation. Two major utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison International, are threatening consequences if lawmakers fail to take action on their behalf.
Another significant proposal, Senate Bill 954 from Sen. Catherine Blakespear (D-Encinitas) would roll back parts of last year’s controversial reform of the landmark California Environmental Quality Act. It exempted a broad array of housing and infrastructure projects from environmental review — opening up a path for advanced manufacturing facilities such as semiconductor plants, nuclear facilities and other entities that handle high-risk hazardous material to be located in vulnerable communities.
Blakespear’s legislation would narrow those exemptions and exclude certain processing and manufacturing uses. It comes in the wake of recent high-profile industrial incidents, such as a near-miss chemical disaster in Garden Grove that prompted thousands of evacuations in May.
Top executives of California’s two biggest utilities warned they would take action to protect their shareholders if Sacramento lawmakers fail to pass legislation limiting their companies’ liabilities for wildfires sparked by their equipment
Other legislative items hope to address rising energy costs and demand, such as Senate Bill 913 from Sen. Josh Becker (D-Menlo Park), which would allow batteries, electric vehicles, smart thermostats and other consumer-owned devices to be bundled together and counted as a reliable source of electricity for the state’s grid. California already has millions of these items, referred to as distributed energy resources, and the bill would make it easier for utilities to tap them when electricity demand is high.
It’s about “taking advantage of the resources that are already in people’s homes,” Becker said during a recent news conference with other lawmakers. “You have these resources, they’re connected now, and if they need to be called on in those very few hours a year that the grid is constrained, they can be called on.”
The item is something of a companion piece to Senate Bill 868 from Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), which passed the Assembly Tuesday and would make it much easier for Californians to use small plug-in solar systems — sometimes referred to as “balcony solar” — without going through the normal rooftop solar permitting process. It’s seen as particularly beneficial for apartment dwellers and renters and would provide users with a relatively inexpensive way to lower their electrical bills by generating some of their own electricity.
Supporters describe both bills as “commonsense” efforts to expand access to affordable clean energy and give households more control.
“Californians need more energy choices that put downward pressure on their electricity costs, not more barriers standing in the way,” said Brandon Garcia, California director at Advanced Energy United, a national energy industry association.
Citing “environmental extremism,” Trump officials want to end California’s ability to challenge offshore oil, floating nuclear reactors and rocket launches.
Other bills look toward federal actions as the Trump administration continues to chip away at California’s environmental authority, including recent payoffs to offshore wind developers and attempts to limit the state’s coastal oversight.
Assembly Bill 40 from Assemblymember Mia Bonta (D-Alameda) is largely a response to the Trump administration’s plan to create a new coal-export terminal in Oakland, announced in June. California has taken pains to eliminate coal as a source of electricity, and this would be the first coal export terminal in California — or anywhere on the West Coast. President Trump has said coal power is a matter of national security because of rising energy costs.
The legislation would require a new environmental impact report before a public agency could approve a large-volume bulk coal facility, giving the state more control over such projects. Supporters say it would also help combat air pollution, rail traffic, climate effects and other environmental consequences from coal.
Similarly, Assembly Bill 1448 from Assemblymember Gregg Hart (D-Santa Barbara) would make it harder for oil producers offshore to pass through state waters or use existing pipelines and equipment. It is partly a response to the president’s push to reopen federal waters off California to offshore oil drilling for the first time in 40 years.
“The Trump administration is doing everything [it] can to reopen offshore drilling and to put the kibosh on offshore wind,” said Olivieri Hovis of California Environmental Voters. Bills such as AB 40 and AB 1448 help to ensure that “California is doing our part and doing what we can to prevent these projects from being expanded.”
Last year, the Trump administration followed a similar playbook when it rescinded California’s authority to set its own electric vehicle sales target. This summer, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sent six more such rescissions to Congress to further strip the state’s ability to enact its own vehicle emissions rules and combat air pollution.
Nearly 100 health, business, science and environmental groups are now urging Congress to reject the resolutions. Congress may take them up for consideration as early as this month.
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
The latest effort is coming from the L.A. County Board of Supervisors. They just announced a $3 million program in conjunction with some nonprofits groups to test and clean the soil at homes still standing in the areas impacted by the Eaton Fire.
California once bet big on offshore wind to help power its clean-energy future, but the Trump administration is now paying developers billions to walk away from their projects. As California’s remaining offshore-wind leases hang in the balance, the state is fighting back in court.
