Can California Cap and Trade if Brussels Stumbles?

By Jeffrey Rector 

Last week, the European Parliament rejected a proposal to reduce the quantity of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions allowances in order to fix a supply-demand imbalance in the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). Some view this as the beginning of the end of the European Union’s ten-year carbon cap-and-trade experiment. A high profile failure of the EU ETS is likely to provide ammunition to critics California’s cap-and-trade program. 

Continue Reading...

What Will It Cost for California to Save the World? California Conducts its First Greenhouse Gas Cap-and-Trade Auction

By Whitney Hodges, Randy Visser & Olivier Theard 

The landmark Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (“AB 32”) tasked the California Air Resources Board (“ARB”) with reducing greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. In adopting a scoping plan assembling a number of differing, but complementary, GHG reduction strategies, the ARB included a “cap-and-trade” program as one such strategy to help satisfy AB 32’s goals while allowing industry flexibility in choosing emissions reduction options (i.e., facilities could choose to buy pollution credits, or could choose to reduce emissions and sell credits on the market). The “cap-and-trade” program was deemed preferable to other potential options such as a carbon tax.

Continue Reading...

ARB Initiates Potentially Controversial Agricultural Equipment Regulation

By Olivier Theard and Whitney Hodges 

I. Background

The California Air Resources Board (“ARB”) recently commenced development of a new regulation targeting emissions from “off-road” agricultural equipment, such as tractors and combines. The “In-Use Self-Propelled Off-Road Mobile Agricultural Equipment Regulation” is intended to help the State attain federal air quality standards. ARB officials claim the rule is a necessary tool in employing the upcoming ozone and particulate matter state implementation plans (“SIPs”), initiated in 2007.

Continue Reading...

Overcoming Inertia -- Advancing Corporate Leadership in Adaptation

Sheppard Mullin Partner Geoff Willis was a recently a featured panelist before the Global Adaptation Institute on the subject of Overcoming Inertia — Advancing Corporate Leadership in Adaptation.

Continue Reading...

Revising Flammability Standards to Reduce Flame Retardants in Furniture

By Heather Zinkiewicz

On June 18, 2012, Governor Brown directed the Bureau of Electronic and Appliance Repair, Home Furnishings and Thermal Insulation (“Bureau”) to recommend changes to California’s four-decade-old flammability standard for upholstered furniture. Specifically, Governor Brown is seeking to reduce toxic flame retardants in furniture while still providing fire safety. Toxic flame retardants are found in a variety of items, such as high chairs and couches. Evidence suggests that toxic flame retardants harm the environment and are linked to liver and thyroid toxicity, neurological problems, and reproductive issues.

Continue Reading...

California Appellate Court Greenlights Air Resources Board's Cap-And-Trade Program [1]

Association of Irritated Residents v. California Air Resources Board et al., A132165 (1st  Dist. Div. 3, June 19, 2012)

By Whitney Hodges and Randolph Visser

On June 19, 2012, the California First District Court of Appeal upheld the California Air Resources Board’s (“ARB”) Climate Change Scoping Plan (“Scoping Plan”), which charts dozens of climate change control measures. This ruling clears the way for ARB to move forward with its designated plan to combat greenhouse gas (“GhG”) emissions with a market-based cap-and-trade program. The decision also found the Scoping Plan to be in compliance with the 2006 California Global Warming Solutions Act, also known as AB 32, which required ARB to prepare a scoping plan to reduce GhG emissions to 1990 levels by the end of 2020. A ruling against ARB could have forced ARB to revise the Scoping Plan and freeze implementation of its GhG regulations.

Continue Reading...
Tags:

California Adopts Revolutionary New Clean Car Standards

By Whitney Hodges

On January 27, 2012, the California Air Resources Board (“ARB”) notched a potential victory in the battle against greenhouse gas (“GhG”) emissions. In a unanimous vote, ARB adopted the Advanced Clean Cars (“ACC”) regulatory package, which is a program designed to deliver cleaner air, reduce GhG emissions, and help build the market for fuel cell and battery-electric vehicles. At the opening of the ARB hearing on this historic vote, Mary Nichols, ARB Chairman, predicted:

Continue Reading...

ARB Passes Final Regulations for Cap-And-Trade Program

After months of CEQA litigation and political lobbying, including an appeal to the California Supreme Court (previous article can be found here), California's landmark climate change bill, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 ("AB 32"), has been modified and appears ready to be implemented starting in January 2012.

Continue Reading...

California AB 32's Cap-And-Trade Program Developments

By Randolph Visser, Olivier Theard and Whitney Hodges

This article is the latest in a series chronicling the first litigation challenge to AB 32 (the Global Warming Solutions Act) and the cap-and-trade program in Association of Irritated Residents, et al. v. California Air Resources Board, Case No. CPF-09-509562, ("Ass'n of Irritated Residents v. CARB ").  Though environmental justice groups continue to object to cap-and-trade as the primary vehicle to reduce greenhouse ("GHG") emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, the California Supreme Court recently allowed California Air Resources Board's ("ARB") cap-and-trade implementation to move forward, and agency rule development continues.
 

Continue Reading...

Environmental Justice Groups Intensify Judicial and Legislative Campaign Against California's Proposed Cap-and-Trade Program

By Olivier Theard

Environmental Justice groups have redoubled their efforts to terminate the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) proposed cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 under the Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32). As opposed to a traditional regulatory approach whereby a GHG source would be forced to reduce its on-site emissions, cap-and-trade is a market based approach that allows a GHG source the option to either reduce on-site emissions, or to offset its emissions or pay another source to reduce GHG emissions. Environmental Justice groups have long argued that a market based cap-and-trade program would allow GHG sources to buy their way to compliance and result in disproportionately higher emissions in lower-income communities where large GHG sources reside. These groups have now increased their opposition to cap-and-trade on both the judicial and legislative fronts.
 

Continue Reading...