California needs a credible update to Cap-and-Invest

Cap-and-Invest is California’s most cost-effective policy that helps keep costs down for families while reducing our emissions causing climate change. Absent a real cap to permanently limit and reduce pollution over time, the program won’t work or meet requirements outlined in state law. Yet, this is precisely what the California Air Resources Board (CARB) proposed on April 14. CARB must fix this framework, so the Board can pass a credible update to Cap-and-Invest next month.

A formula for paralysis, not progress

Initially, CARB suggested tightening the pollution cap by 118 million tons of pollution — the bare minimum required for California to meet its 2030 emissions reduction targets. Instead of making this change permanent, CARB’s newest proposal puts in “reserve” the allowances for 118 million tons of pollution. In other words, CARB is cancelling pollution cuts it said were necessary to meet our climate targets and is making reductions in the cap a matter of its discretion.

Ignoring direction from lawmakers

When state lawmakers extended Cap-and-Invest last year through AB 1207, they required the program, at a minimum, to align with the achievement of California’s pollution reduction targets for 2030 (40% below 1990 levels) and 2045 (85% below 1990 levels). CARB’s proposal does not meet this standard.

A path to more balanced results

While CARB fails to do the bare minimum to meet California’s 2030 climate target, modeling actually shows a more ambitious approach is possible and desirable. Cap-and-Invest can deliver 180 million tons of pollution cuts by 2030 as well as $2.8 billion in benefits for families earning $70,000 or less and $1.4 billion more to invest in climate solutions by 2045.

California’s credibility at risk

Through Cap-and-Invest, California established North America’s first economy-wide carbon market back in 2012. Since then, California has demonstrated emissions reductions and economic growth go hand in hand. Without a real pollution cap to help achieve our climate goals, we aren’t showing the world it can continue looking to California for credible leadership when it can no longer look to Washington, DC.