Pub. 5 Issue 4

24 Issue 2 2020 While meeting with Newsom in Sacramento last week, Trump expressed skepticism about the scientific evidence of climate change, saying: “It’ll start getting cooler. You just watch.” The state has sued the Trump administration to block efforts by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to rescind a special federal waiver that permits California to set its own strict pollu- tion controls to improve air quality, the foundation of the state’s aggressive efforts to combat climate change. While pleased about Newsom’s action on zero-emission vehi- cles, environmental activists remain skeptical about his actions on fracking. In November, Newsom imposed a temporary mora- torium on new hydraulic fracking permits, saying he wanted them to undergo independent scientific review. Since April, however, his administration has issued close to 50 new permits to Chevron and Aera Energy, frustrating environmentalists. “Newsom is really good at making announcements that sound big, but they aren’t. We can’t let the fact that he’s acting on cars eclipse the fact that he’s still protecting the oil industry,” said Kassie Siegel, director of the Climate Law Institute at the Center for Biological Diversity. “He is the governor of the state at the very center of the climate emergency right now, and he has the political environment here that allows him to think big. If he won’t take strong action that we so desperately need, who will?” This week, Siegel’s organization threatened to sue Newsom unless he halted all new permits for gas and oil wells in the state, saying the governor has failed to protect the health of vulnerable Californians from pollutants released by the state’s petroleum industry. Since taking office, Newsom has faced pressure from politically influential environmental groups to ban new oil and gas drilling and completely phase out fossil fuel extraction in California, one of the nation’s top petroleum-producing states. But the Democratic governor has pushed back, promising to take a more measured approach that addressed the effects on oil workers and California cities and counties that are economi- cally dependent on the petroleum industry. California has 1,175 active offshore wells and 60,643 active on- shore wells. In 2019, the state produced just under 159 million barrels of oil, CalGEM records show. The state’s annual crude oil production has been consistently declining since 1985. California oil industry representatives have argued that phasing out oil production in the state, which has some of the world’s strictest environmental regulations, would force more oil to be imported by train and tanker ships from countries that do not have the same environmental safeguards. According to the Western States Petroleum Assn., there are more than 26 mil- lion vehicles with internal-combustion engines in California. Cars, trucks and other vehicles are the largest emitters of greenhouse gases in California, accounting for about 40% of the statewide total. Their emissions have been stubbornly creeping upward in recent years. Driving down transportation pollution remains the state’s biggest challenge in achieving its goal of slashing planet-warming emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. Under the current regulations, California’s Air Resources Board requires automakers to sell electric, fuel cell and other zero-emission vehicles in increasing percentages through 2025. Electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles accounted for 7.6% of new car registrations in California in 2019. In 2018, under then-Gov. Jerry Brown, the state set a goal to put 5 million zero-emission cars on the road by 2025. According to auto industry sales data, there were 670,000 zero-emission vehicles sold in California through the end of 2019. In June, the Air Resources Board adopted the nation’s first sales mandate requiring heavy-duty truck manufacturers to sell in- creasing percentages of electric or fuel cell models until all new trucks sold in California are zero-emission by 2045. But efforts to completely phase out gas-powered cars have not gained traction. Three years ago, Brown directed the state’s chief air quality regulator, Mary Nichols, to look into stepping up the state’s timetable. But so far, her agency has only floated the idea of banning gas-powered vehicles in the state’s congested areas. And legislation lawmakers introduced in 2018 to require all cars registered in the state be zero-emission by 2040 didn’t move forward. Some local governments have set their own zero-emission ve- hicle targets, which they are unlikely to achieve without the backing of tougher regulations. A “Green New Deal” plan by Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, for example, aims to increase the percentage of zero-emission vehicles to 25% by 2025, 80% by 2035 and 100% by 2050.  Under the current regulations, Cal i fornia’s Ai r Resources Board requi res automakers to sel l elect ric, fuel cel l and other zero- emission vehicles in increasing percentages through 2025.