(The Center Square) – The Climate Commitment Act’s focus on environmental justice may be complicating efforts to link Washington state’s carbon market with the California-Quebec carbon market, a move supporters say will ensure the durability of the cap-and-trade program in the Evergreen State.
California and Quebec have expressed interest in linking to Washington’s carbon market.
“Linking California’s, Quebec’s and Washington’s carbon markets would enable deeper and faster cuts in climate pollution while creating a more stable, predictable market for all,” said Katelyn Roedner Sutter, the Environmental Defense Fund’s California director. “Three major climate leaders joining forces would create a huge momentum boost for climate action.”
One factor complicating linkage efforts is the requirement that CCA funding go to individuals from communities facing environmental harm or health impacts and the organizations serving those communities in what is termed “environmental justice.”
The Washington State Department of Ecology has been holding listening sessions and community meetings to seek public input on linkage.
“Before we make a final decision, the CCA requires that we do an environmental justice assessment,” Nikkia Harris, DOE’s Climate Pollution Reduction Program rulemaking coordinator, explained at a July 22 listening session. “The purpose of that is to identify a wide range of environmental justice impacts this action may have. This is required to occur in the early development stages of work and will help us make informed decisions to reduce environmental harms and to address environmental and health disparities.”
Todd Myers, environmental director at the Washington Policy Center, isn’t opposed to linkage but notes Washington’s strict rules about how CCA dollars can be used may not be going over well in California and Québec.
“There are some benefits to a larger market, and one of them is that cap-and-trade systems can be very volatile, and being part of a larger market smooths out that volatility, so prices aren’t shooting up and down dramatically,” he said.
But California and Quebec have been linked for 10 years, and Myers suggested the two entities may not be inclined to bend to Washington’s desires about how CCA money is spent.
“We don’t get to set the rules, they do,” Myers said. “They are very unlikely to change their rules to accommodate Washington.”
He explained that whatever counts or doesn’t count for ways to reduce carbon dioxide emissions means “we just have to go along with that.”
That could be an impediment to linkage.
“Washington wants to keep all of its special interest payments and preferences and doesn’t want California and Quebec weakening that,” said Myers, who also questioned what “environmental justice” really means when it comes to CCA-funded projects.
“It really just means giving favored special interest groups more money and consideration, and the reason that California and Quebec might not go along with it is that every environmental justice idea proposed actually makes it harder to reduce CO2 emissions,” he said. “It makes it more expensive and less effective.”
For example, Myers questioned the placement of electric vehicle charging stations in low-income communities where there are few, if any, electric vehicles.
“In the case of improving air quality in low-income communities they argue there are too many gas- and diesel-powered vehicles, so we need more electric vehicle charging stations,” he said. “Spending taxpayer money on EV charging stations is incredibly wasteful already, but putting them in places where there are no electric vehicles makes no sense.”
Caroline Halter, communications manager for DOE’s Climate Pollution Reduction Program, emailed to respond to Myers’ criticism about installing charging stations in disadvantaged communities.
“Charging infrastructure is part of what drives electric vehicle adoption, along with options for purchase at a variety of price points and purchasing incentives,” she said. “Combustion-engine vehicles emit greenhouse gases as well as criteria air pollutants, which are known to harm human health. Disadvantaged communities tend to be disproportionately impacted by this type of pollution, so increasing the prevalence of zero-emission vehicles is a part of advancing environmental justice.”
Myers didn’t buy it.
“The argument that we need to put EV chargers in places where there are few EVs because that’s where the problem is seems like looking for your keys where the light is good even if you didn’t drop them there,” he said. “For EV chargers to reduce air pollution, they need to be used.”
There will be more listening sessions and opportunities for impacted communities to weigh in, before the DOE crafts a draft linkage proposal.
“Ecology wants to hear from groups that currently benefit under Washington rules to see if we can maybe convince California to change its rules to be like ours,” said Myers, adding Washington’s projects are, in his opinion, more expensive and less effective.
The elephant in the room is Initiative 2117, which prohibits state agencies from imposing any type of carbon tax credit trading and repeal legislation establishing a cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Voters will decide I-2117 on Nov. 5.
I-2117 seeks to repeal portions of the CCA which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 95% by 2050.
“Billions of dollars have already been collected, so they can spend that, but no money would be collected going forward,” Myers said about what happens if I-2117 passes.
