Date: May 3, 2014
Ever since America disapproved Kyoto Protocol, the U.S. Federals has been quite passive on climate change issues. As a state of America, California not only has abundant history of climate change legislation, it has also skipped national levels and directly joined Western Climate Initiate for an international connection as a national control unit. California has been active in climate change legislation; their attitudes towards climate change issues are quite different from the U.S. Federal level.
In 2006, the most important legislation of climate change issues in California is “Global Warming Solution Act of 2006.” This law has established California Air Resources Board, CARB as the main responsible board for climate change related policies. CARB is required to set up scoping plans, using the most beneficiary ways to carry out total GHG control. It has set up a target for reduction before 2020, to set up, supervise and execute compulsory reporting system and examination mechanism. Economic incentives are included the project, requesting CARB to set up a trade regulation. Under Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, state government is required to set up Environmental Justice Advisory Committee and Economic and Technology Advancement Advisory Committee to provide recommendation on to provide recommendations for the project and greenhouse gas emission reduction measures. These two organizations, according to Professor Kao, are inspirational for the problems of inflexibility and inefficiency under traditional administrative framework.
Besides Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, California also has individual laws such as Senate Bill X1-2 and Senate Bill 107 for renewable power generation and its distribution system, Assembly Bill 1504 for forest resources and Carbon Sequestration, Senate Bill 375 for transportation and land use (Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008), Assembly Bill 118 for vehicle technology and clean air. These laws are individual laws, but they are quite integrated. The government has established many action plans for climate change issues based on these laws. Other governmental departments besides environmental departments such as transportation and energy departments are involved and assisting in the projects. It is noteworthy that California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA has made adjustment according to climate change situations. In 2007, Senate Bill 97 not only includes responsibility to relevant government organization, it also required CEQA to include GHG emission evaluation into its environmental evaluation.
Overall, Professor Kao deemed that the framework of California climate change legislation is similar to framework legislation and scattered legislation model. As the most important climate change legislation of law, Global Warming Solution Act of 2006 involves governmental organization and responsible parties. It authorizes administrative organization in taking measures, leads later legislation and provides future development. Of other legislations and policies, California especially rely on revolution of energy policies and electronic power system, emphasizing on renewable energy and the usage of distributed power generation system and the development of energy saving techniques. However, Professor Kao also indicated that this kind of energy policies require cooperation of central and local governments.
If we look into the data of California’s achievement in fighting climate change, Professor Kao specifically suggested that while California has grown economically, California’s carbon emission GDP has decreased each year. It is an indication that economic growth and carbon emission are gradually less related. We can see the possibility of economic growth in low carbon scenarios, and this could be arguments for how carbon reduction interferes with economic growth. Researcher Daigee Shaw mentioned that, however, even though GDP carbon reduction may decrease, total carbon emission could still rise up along with economic growth.
California, with its active attitude in climate change related issues, and its important role of international connection, Professor Yeh suggested that we could see the possibility and importance of seeing California as a “country.” Professor Kao responded that as a matter of fact, plenty of Californian scholars and governmental officials have recognized the important status as a country in fighting climate change issues. California could be a role example for America and even for the world. Professor Kao did not reject the idea of seeing California as a country.