California's Climate Change Scoping Plan

California's Climate Change Scoping Plan
Name	California Climate Change Scoping Plan
Jurisdiction	California
Adopted	2008
Agency	California Air Resources Board
Related	Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, Cap-and-trade, Renewable Portfolio Standard (United States)

Contents

California's Climate Change Scoping Plan The California Climate Change Scoping Plan is a strategic policy blueprint promulgated by the California Air Resources Board to meet state mandates established by the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). The Plan integrates measures across sectors such as California Energy Commission-regulated electricity, California Department of Transportation-managed transport, and California Natural Resources Agency-administered land use, aligning with international frameworks like the Kyoto Protocol and dialogues such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Introduction

The Scoping Plan was first adopted following AB 32’s passage and has been revised in cycles through actions by the California Air Resources Board, coordinated with agencies including the California Environmental Protection Agency, the California Public Utilities Commission, and the California State Legislature. It synthesizes statutory targets from statutes such as Senate Bill 32 and operationalizes mechanisms related to cap-and-trade markets, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and investments similar to programs run by the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank.

The Plan traces legal authority to the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 and subsequent statutes including Senate Bill 375, Assembly Bill 32, and Senate Bill 100. Regulatory tools derive from mandates administered by the California Air Resources Board, implementing cap-and-trade systems modeled on markets like the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and informed by emissions accounting approaches used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the United Nations Environment Programme. Litigation and judicial review have involved courts such as the California Supreme Court and federal venues influenced by precedents set in cases like Massachusetts v. EPA.

The Scoping Plan sets economy-wide greenhouse gas emissions targets to achieve goals articulated in Assembly Bill 32 and expanded under Senate Bill 32 and Executive Order S-3-05. Targets include returning to 1990 levels by 2020, mid-century reductions aligned with Paris Agreement commitments, and sectoral benchmarks coordinated with the Renewable Portfolio Standard (United States) and transportation standards influenced by actions of the Environmental Protection Agency (United States) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Measures include a cap-and-trade program overseen by the California Air Resources Board, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard administered with input from the California Energy Commission, energy efficiency mandates tied to the California Public Utilities Commission, electrification initiatives that intersect with programs run by Pacific Gas and Electric Company and Southern California Edison, and land use and conservation incentives linked to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Natural Resources Defense Council policy proposals. The Plan incorporates carbon sequestration strategies informed by research at institutions like the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley and credits systems related to protocols used by the Verified Carbon Standard and the Climate Action Reserve.

Administrative responsibility rests with the California Air Resources Board coordinating interagency action with the California Environmental Protection Agency, the California Department of Transportation, the California Energy Commission, and the California Public Utilities Commission. Financing mechanisms involve cap-and-trade auction revenues overseen by the State Treasurer of California and investment priorities akin to those of the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank. Implementation has required rulemakings, regulatory impact analyses comparable to those of the Office of Management and Budget and stakeholder processes mirroring practices of California Environmental Justice Coalition and business groups such as the California Chamber of Commerce.

Analyses of the Plan reference economic modeling from entities like the International Energy Agency, the World Bank, and university centers including the University of California, Davis and the Stanford Precourt Institute for Energy. Environmental outcomes relate to air quality improvements tracked by the South Coast Air Quality Management District and public health metrics used by the California Department of Public Health. Job and industry effects have been debated by organizations such as the California Employment Development Department and advocacy groups including the Sierra Club and Environmental Defense Fund.

Critiques have come from coalitions like the Pacific Legal Foundation and industry groups such as the Western States Petroleum Association over cap-and-trade leakage, allowance allocation, and competitiveness concerns raised in venues like the California Chamber of Commerce and litigation referencing precedents like Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.. Environmental justice advocates including Communities for a Better Environment have argued the Plan insufficiently addresses localized pollution near Port of Los Angeles and Altadena communities, while rural stakeholders represented by the California Farm Bureau Federation have raised concerns about Sustainable Groundwater Management Act interactions and land-use constraints.

Monitoring and reporting rely on greenhouse gas inventory methods harmonized with Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change guidelines and data systems linked to the California Air Resources Board’s emissions tracking, paralleling registries like the California Climate Action Registry. Periodic updates have occurred in line with state executive actions such as Executive Order B-30-15 and regulatory cycles following stakeholder engagement processes similar to those of the California Environmental Quality Act reviews, with scientific inputs from institutions including the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the California Energy Commission.

Category:Climate change policy in California