By Dan Walters
SPECIAL FOR CALMATTERS
Earlier this month, Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger staged a low-key celebration marking the 20th anniversary of Assembly Bill 32, the landmark legislation committing California to immense reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
It was the most notable achievement of Schwarzenegger’s governorship, not only setting a series of deadlines for emissions reductions, but creating as one of its major tools a system for industry buy-in known as “cap-and-trade.”
Environmental groups were opposed, favoring direct regulations, but Schwarzenegger insisted. Since then, the state has auctioned off a gradually diminishing number of emissions permits, thus, in theory, incentivizing industries to reduce greenhouse gases.
The Los Angeles Times has calculated that early goals were met. But in recent years reductions have slowed, and the 2030 goal of being 40% lower than 1990 emissions levels is highly unlikely.
Popular and political support for the state’s commitment to reach virtual zero emissions by 2045 also has been waning.
Public Policy Institute of California pollsters found that while Californians still support emissions reductions in concept, views on specific programs have slipped. That’s particularly true of Newsom’s desire to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles by 2035. Support for that has dropped from 49% in 2021 to just 32%.
“Affordability has become a dominant theme in public discourse today — and it’s affecting the public’s views on the environment,” the PPIC says. “Most Californians choose cost of living as the top issue facing the people of California today; few name environmental concerns.”
The declining popularity of climate change programs is visible in the political arena.
Newsom spent months portraying gasoline refiners as price gougers and polluters, but when two refineries announced plans to shut down in 2025, raising the possibility of fuel shortages, he quickly changed his tune.
“We are all the beneficiaries of oil and gas. No one’s naive about that,” Newsom said at a press conference. “So it’s always been about finding a just transition, a pragmatism in terms of that process.”
Defying environmental groups, he and the Legislature passed bills designed to increase oil production, and this year the state even redesigned the cap-and-trade program to provide no-cost emissions permits to refineries.
The flip side of declining popular and political support for emissions reduction policies is a new warning from Newsom’s administration that California faces a slow-motion apocalypse.
“Climate change is increasing the frequency, intensity, duration, and impacts of climate related events in California, including short-or long-term hazard events like wildfire, extreme heat, drought, flooding, and sea level rise,” the administration’s 109-page Fifth Climate Change Assessment declares.
It is the latest in a series of such reports issued since AB 32 passed. Newsom endorsed its findings while, as might be expected from a likely presidential candidate, taking a shot at President Donald Trump.
“As the Trump administration turns its back on science, California is doubling down on climate action, on protecting our communities, and on building a safer future,” Newsom said in a statement.
Meanwhile, the climate assessment report’s warning of potentially catastrophic effects is re-energizing those who prescribe aggressive actions.
UC Berkeley’s Center for Law, Energy and the Environment issued what it describes as a “roadmap” of steps that must be taken.
“California is at a critical moment in its efforts to protect residents from the extreme weather caused by climate change,” Louise Bedsworth, the center’s exective director, said. “The next governor will need to demonstrate strong leadership to help the state navigate the intersecting challenges of worsening climate impacts, affordability, and federal hostility to the state’s goals.”
Xavier Becerra, the former attorney general almost certain to succeed Newsom, has been noncommittal about the issue, especially about the 2035 halt on sales of gas-powered vehicles. It’s smart politics given the reversal of popular support.
This commentary was originally published by CalMatters