Posted on Jul 17, 2018
Tyson Siegele presented some California Climate-Related Bills and why should we support or oppose them.
 
During the meeting Tyson explained why San Diego 350 supports or opposes these bills, and after the meeting he sent us a recap.
See below the info taken from this document SD350-California-Climate-Related-Bills with some related links.
 
The biggest fight will be on AB 813 (see SD350's webpage on this bill https://sandiego350.org/ab813/).
 
We should all call our representatives on this bill!
 
 
SB 100: California Clean Energy Act of 2017 ​Senator De Leon.Support
Bill Status: ​Passed Senate. Approved by Assembly Committees (Utilities and Energy, as well as Natural Resources). Will be heard in committee July 3
  • Increases the 2030 Clean Energy targets from 50% to 60%, and increases interim targets in the coming years. Establishes that zero-carbon generating facilities supply all electricity procured to serve California end-use customers no later than December 31, 2045.
  • Creates systems and planning initiatives to get the industry on target to achieve 100% renewable energy, or as close as we can get
  • It is possible that SB 100 could be held hostage to AB 813 (regionalization).
 
AB 813: Multi-state regional transmission system organization: membershipAssm Holden. ​Oppose
Bill Status:​ Passed out of the Senate Judiciary and is headed for Appropriations. ​The bill was gutted and amended after leaving the Assembly so it will have to return and pass there as well.
  • Turns over California’s control of its grid operator (currently the CA governor appoints all members of the grid oversight board) to an oversight board of industry insiders mostly from fossil fuel dominated states.
  • California will lose 23,000 wind and solar jobs according to CAISO’s own study (CAISO supports the bill) (​Fig 5- Regional 3 - CP​)
  • AB 813 ties California’s energy future to coal states. Five of the eleven states making up the western region (the proposed regional grid authority area) ​sued the EPA over the Clean Power Plan​. These western states produce ​500 times​ more electricity from coal than California does according to the California Energy Commission.
 
AB 1775: State lands: leasing: oil and gas (2017-2018) Assms Muratsuchi and Limón. ​Support (Principal coauthor: Senator Jackson)
Bill Status​: Passed Assembly. ​I​n Senate Appropriations Committee.
  • This bill would prohibit the State Lands Commission from approving any new leases authorizing oil and gas related infrastructure within state waters that are associated with new offshore oil drilling in federal waters.
  • This bill is consistent with ​Assembly Joint Resolution No. 29​ which had bipartisan support in opposing the Trump administration’s proposed leasing plan that would expose CA to new offshore drilling.
  • By ensuring that new and renewed leases are not granted, California will be better able to protect the environment, our coast, and our economy from the risks posed by offshore drilling and production.
 
SB 834: State lands: leasing: oil and gas (2017-2018)Senators Jackson and Lara. ​Support (Principal coauthor: Senator McGuire) (Principal coauthor: Assm Muratsuchi)
Bill Status​:​ ​Passed Senate. ​I​n Assembly Appropriations Committee.
  • This bill would prohibit the State Lands Commission from approving any new leases authorizing oil and gas related infrastructure within state waters that are associated with new offshore oil drilling in federal waters.
  • This bill is consistent with ​Senate Resolution No. 73​ which had bipartisan support for prohibition on new oil or gas drilling in federal waters offshore of Pacific coast.
  • By ensuring that new and renewed leases are not granted, California will be better able to protect the environment, our coast, and our economy from the risks posed by offshore drilling and production.
 
SB 964: Protecting Public Pension funds from climate risk.Senator Allen​. Support
Bill Status:​ Passed Senate. In Assembly Appropriations
  • Investors of CalSTRS and CalPERS funds to analyze climate risk
  • Defines “climate-related financial risk” to long-term investments, and requires CalPERS and CalSTRS to report on carbon risk in their portfolios
  • “Climate related financial risk” includes:
    • Physical impact risks to environment and infrastructure ​in the headlines: sea level rise,
      extreme weather events (e.g., Wine country fires, hurricanes in TX, FL)
    • Litigation risk ​should be a growing concern for investors (e.g., a company may be sued for damages caused by its contribution to climate change and thus lose value)
    • Stranded asset risk ​- as regulations tighten, fossil fuel co. unlikely to profit from carbon reserves they hold, resulting in billions of assets being stranded
    • Transition risk ​to low carbon economy will negatively impact certain investments
  • Requires these funds to report on risk every 3 years, with the first report due in 2020
 
SB 237: Electricity: direct transactions ​Senator Hertzberg​. ​Oppose
Bill Status: ​Passed in the Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee and will now go to Assembly Appropriations. ​The bill was gutted and amended after leaving the Senate so it will have to return and pass there as well.
  • Would allow any commercial or industrial business to get their electricity from direct access providers with no requirement that the electricity be renewable.
  • Poses existential threat to Community Choice Energy (CCE) programs
  • Will lead to increased use of “dirty” electricity generated by fossil fuel plants when the state should be doing everything it can to clean up the electricity supply
  • Likely to cause mass defection from CCE providers as commercial and industrial businesses seek the cheapest available electricity
  • CCEs could be left with stranded power procurement contracts that would likely be bankrupted by this bill’s passage