GHG Emissions

Subscribe to GHG Emissions via RSS

The Commission’s 2030 Climate Target Plan sets out required actions for a number of sectors.

By Paul A. Davies and Michael D. Green

On 17 September 2020, the European Commission (Commission) presented its 2030 Climate Target Plan, which calls for a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction target of at least 55%, compared to 1990 levels; sets out required actions for a number of sectors; and identifies key changes to be made to existing legislation.

To announce the 2030 Climate Target Plan, the Commission released a Communication, a synopsis report that analyses responses to previous consultations, and an impact plan.

The Governor has issued an Executive Order with sweeping implications for the oil and gas industry and others.

By Jean-Philippe Brisson, Joshua T. Bledsoe, Nikki Buffa, and Brian F. McCall

On September 23, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Executive Order N-79-20, which will have sweeping implications for the oil and gas industry, automakers, low-carbon fuel producers, the logistics industry, and public transit agencies, among others (the Executive Order). Newsom announced the Executive Order against the backdrop of what he called “simultaneous crises,” none of which he argued is more impactful and forceful as the climate crisis. The press conference included Mary Nichols, Chair of the California Air Resources Board (CARB), standing before a small fleet of zero-emission vehicles.

In what will likely be viewed as the most far-reaching measure, the Executive Order requires all passenger vehicle sales starting in 2035 to have zero emissions — a mandate that essentially bans sales of new internal-combustion-powered passenger vehicles in California. As discussed below, the Executive Order raises several significant issues.

The Airports National Policy Statement is ruled illegal as a result of government failure to take account of its Paris Agreement commitments.

By Paul A. Davies and Michael D. Green

In R (Plan B Earth and Others) v. Secretary of State for Transport and others, the Court of Appeal in England (the Court) heard an appeal in relation to a judicial review of the UK government’s Airports National Policy Statement (ANPS). The UK government had effectively provided its support for the construction of the third runway at Heathrow under the ANPS, which was the subject of appeal by a number of local authorities and environmental NGOs. In the first instance, these local authorities and NGOs were unsuccessful. However, the Court determined that, in making the ANPS, the Transport Minister had not taken into account the UK’s commitments in the UNFCCC Paris Agreement (the Paris Agreement). Therefore, the ANPS was considered illegal.

By Christopher H. Norton, Lucas I. Quass, and Derek Galey

CEQA Case Report: Understanding the Judicial Landscape for Development[I]

In an unpublished opinion issued July 10, 2018, Sierra Club v. County of Kern, Case No. F071133, the California Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s decision and remanded for the issuance of a new writ of mandate directing the County of Kern (County) to address the improper deferral of mitigation measures for air quality impacts in the Kern River Valley Specific Plan’s (Specific Plan) Environmental Impact Report (EIR). In summary, the court determined:

  • The EIR’s analysis of the long-term significance of the Specific Plan’s greenhouse gas emissions was adequate at its time of release in 2011.
  • The EIR’s approach to mitigating greenhouse gas emissions was not a prejudicial abuse of discretion.
  • CEQA does not require greater than a 1:1 mitigation ratio for the amount of farmland to be placed under an agricultural conservation easement or similar program.
  • County violated CEQA by deferring the formulation of air quality mitigation measures without firmly committing to specific performance standards.

Individuals join growing global trend of citizens bringing climate change litigation in a bid to hold governments to account.

By Paul A. Davies and Michael D. Green

The European General Court has agreed to hear a legal challenge to EU climate legislation for inadequate targets for reducing climate change. Ten families from around the world brought a petition claiming that EU legislation offered insufficient protection, posing a threat to their human rights. The European Parliament (EP) and European Union Council (Council) likely will respond to the petition within approximately eight weeks.

The case is unprecedented in the EU. The 10 families include citizens from Kenya, Fiji, Portugal, Germany, France, Italy, Romania, and the Saami Youth Association Saminuorra (in Sweden). Significantly, though some of these individuals live outside the EU, they are claiming to have EU human rights. This is because the actions that they claim breach these rights take place in the EU, in particular, as a result of excessive greenhouse gas emissions. EU Member States are cumulatively the third largest global emitter of greenhouse gases (GHG).

By Joshua Bledsoe, Sara Orr, and Bobbi-Jo Dobush

Major investors with collective control of more than US$26.3 trillion are continuing to push for an increase in public companies’ governance, oversight, and disclosure of climate-related risk. Unveiled on December 12, 2017 at the One Planet Summit in Paris, the Climate Action 100+ is designed to promote the goals of the 2015 Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement provides a global action plan to limit global temperature rise to well below 2 degrees Celsius.

A group of 225 investors, led by California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) and other major investors, have signed on to the Climate Action 100+ since the invitation to join was issued in September 2017. The signatories will be led by five coordinating partners including Asia Investor Group on Climate Change (AIGCC), Ceres; Investor Group on Climate Change (IGCC), Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC), and Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI).

By Marc Campopiano and Shannon Cheng

A proposed Scoping Plan Update released by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) targets the land use sector and development projects for greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions. The proposed update was spurred by the passage of Senate Bill (SB) 32 and Assembly Bill (AB) 398, which codified California’s goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 and extended the Cap-and-Trade Program, respectively.

In a shift from prior versions of the Scoping Plan, which largely avoided discussing the California Environmental Quality Act’s (CEQA’s) role in addressing climate impacts from new land use development, ARB recommends that local agencies cut GHG emissions from the land use sector in three key ways:

By Jean-Philippe Brisson, Josh Bledsoe, Michael Dreibelbis and Andrew Westgate

On July 12, 2016, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) proposed amendments to the California Cap-and-Trade Program (17 CCR 95800 et. seq.) for the first time since 2014. The amendments include major substantive changes to compliance requirements as well as new program initiatives such as post-2020 caps, additional linking, and Clean Power Plan (CPP) compliance provisions.

In an unusual move, CARB has provided a “Preliminary Draft Proposed Regulation Order and Staff Report” prior to formally initiating the rulemaking. CARB will release a draft of the formal regulatory package on July 19 for Office of Administrative Law review prior to opening the formal comment period. “Final” draft documents will be posted on August 2, and the formal public comment period will begin on August 5.

2021-2031 Emission Cap

CARB has proposed to set emissions caps for 2021 to 2031. The caps decline annually at a linear rate from 2020 to 2030. CARB set the post-2020 caps by calculating the ratio of the 2020 cap in the current regulation (334.2 MMTCO2e) to the statewide GHG target for 2020 (431 MMTCO2e) as set forth in the Scoping Plan. CARB then extrapolates that ratio—77.5 percent—using the goal of 258.6 MMTCO2e established by Governor Jerry Brown in Executive Order B-30-15. The final cap for the 2030 using this methodology is 200.5 MMTCO2e.