California lawmakers to decide on extending key climate program and boosting grid reliability

Sacramento, California – The fate of a California California Climate, Governor Gavin Newsom, has defended as a crucial tool to react to the environmental declines of the Trump administration is in the hands of state legislators.

The legislature dominated by the Democrats is expected to vote on Saturday on the advisability of extending the state cap and exchange program, which should expire after 2030. The program, which was launched in 2013, allows emitters of greenhouse gases to buy state emission allowances, with less available over time. Revenues finance the mitigation of climate change, affordable housing and transport projects, as well as public service bill for Californians.

Newsom, a Democrat, and legislative leaders, who declared months ago that they would prioritize the reutorialization of the program, almost lacked time to introduce the proposal before the state in Wraps for the year.

“After months of hard work with the Legislative Assembly, we have accepted historical reforms that will save money on your electricity bills, stabilize gas supply and reduced toxic air pollution – while following California’s transition to a green and green job creation economy,” said Newsom after having concluded the agreement this week.

The proposal would reautorize the program until 2045, would better align the drop in the ceiling on emissions with the climatic targets of the State and potentially stimulates carbon elimination projects. It would also change the name “cap and invest” to underline its financing of climatic programs.

The legislature will vote on another bill initiating the annual financing of the program’s income. It includes $ 1 billion for the high -speed high -speed high -speed railway project of the state, $ 800 million for an affordable housing program, $ 250 million for community air protection programs and $ 1 billion for the legislative assembly to decide each year.

The votes intervene as civil servants support the balance of the ambitious climatic objectives of the state and the cost of living. California has some of the highest prices for the country’s public and gas. The authorities are faced with increased pressure to stabilize the cost and the supply of fuel among the expected closings of two oil refineries which represent approximately 18% of the state refining capacity, according to energy regulators.

Supporters of the extension indicate that it will give companies a certainty about the future of the program. The state has lost $ 3.6 billion in revenue in the past year and a half, largely due to uncertainty, according to a Clean and Prosperous California report, a group of economists and lawyers supporting the program. Some environmentalists say that Trump administration attacks on climate programs, including the prohibition of the State in the sale of the sale of new gas cars by 2035, added the urgency to the re -authorization effort.

The ceiling and trade are an important profitable tool for braking carbon emissions, said Katelyn Roedner Sutter, California state director for the environmental defense fund.

“Supporting this program and making this commitment in the future is extremely important-more than ever,” she said.

But the defenders of environmental justice oppose the proposal say that it is not far enough and lacking strong air quality protections for low -income Californians and more likely to live near major polluters.

“This really continues to allow great oil to reduce their broadcasts on paper rather than in real life,” said Asha Sharma, head of state policies to the leadership council for justice and responsibility.

Critics have also said that this would increase the cost of living.

“This advance, instead of reducing costs, it makes California even more expensive,” said republican state senator Tony Strickland. “They increase the price of energy and gas and goods and services.”

The ceiling and trade have increased gas costs by around 26 cents Le Gallon, according to a February report from the independent emission advisory committee, a group of experts who analyze the program. He played “a very small role” in the increase in electricity prices because the state network is not very intensive in carbon, indicates the report.

The legislators and lobbyists criticized the governor and the legislative leaders for having precipitated the agreement with little public contribution.

Ben Golombek, executive vice-president of the California Chamber of Commerce, said during a hearing this week that the legislator should have taken more time to “do this correctly”.

The Senator of the Democratic State Caroline Menjivar said that this should not be normal for the course for the legislators hiding through bills without the possibility of modifications.

“We have to vote on it,” she said about Democrats. “If not, you are not part of the team or don’t want to be a team player.”

Menjivar finally voted to pass the bill outside the committee.

The cap and exchange invoices are part of a scanning package to advance the state energy transition and reduce costs for Californians.

One of the bills would rationalize permits for the production of oil in the county of Kern, which the supporters praised as a necessary response to the closings and the expected criticism of the refinery as a threat to air quality.

Another would increase air surveillance requirements in areas overloaded by pollution and co -order an office within the Ministry of Justice created in 2018 to protect communities against environmental injustices.

The State could fulfill a fund which covers the cost of damage caused by forest fires caused by public service companies and establishes public funding to build electrical public services.

The legislators will also vote on a measure allowing the network operator of the State to associate with a regional group to manage the electricity markets in the Western states. The bill aims to improve the reliability of the grid. This would save money to taxpayers because California would sell energy to other states when it generates more than what it needs and buy cheaper energy outside the state if necessary, said the Governor’s office.