Natural History Wanderings

A summary of how the California State Legislature did on bills relating ot climate energy and the environment from the LA Times- Boiling Point by Sammy Roth

The legislative session had come to a close in Sacramento, and elected officials had approved a whole bunch of climate change, energy and environment bills — and rejected others. Here’s a brief roundup of some of the highest-profile legislation.

New requirements for big business:

• Lawmakers approved the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act, which will require companies with more than $1 billion in annual revenue to disclose their carbon emissions — including emissions from their supply chains. Gov. Gavin Newsom said he would sign the bill, along with legislation that will require corporations with annual revenue above $500 million to disclose their climate-related financial risks. (Stories by The Times’ Dorany Pineda and the Sacramento Bee’s Jenavieve Hatch)

• Senate Bill 704 would make it harder for proposed oil and gas developments along the Pacific coast, including drilling and refining operations, to get approved — assuming the bill is signed by Newsom. (Natalie Hanson, Courthouse News Service)
• Assembly Bill 1167 would make it harder for big oil and gas companies to pass off old wells to smaller companies that might not be able to afford to clean them up — again assuming the bill is signed by Newsom. (Ari Plachta, Sacramento Bee)
• Assembly Bill 631 would ensure that California “has 21st century enforcement tools to protect communities from oil and gas operations that violate the law and endanger both public health and the environment,” according to the legislation’s author.
• In a win for the fossil fuel industry, legislators approved a bill that critics say would weaken a recent law designed to limit price-gouging at the gasoline pump. Environmental activists hope Newsom will veto this one. (Blanca Begert, Politico)

New support for clean energy:

• Assembly Bill 1373 — which could help get California’s first offshore wind farms built, and maybe some clean geothermal power plants too, by allowing the state to sign long-term contracts to buy electricity from those facilities — was approved. Here’s my story from earlier this month on the deal between Newsom and legislative leaders that led to this bill.
• Speaking of which, AB 1373 could also help spur construction off a pumped storage hydropower plant in San Diego County, which would be operated by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Energy and another company. If you’re wondering how the San Vicente pumped hydro project made it into the bill, the San Diego Union-Tribune’s Rob Nikolewski has answers.
• Another bill, meanwhile, would require state officials to develop a plan to prepare California’s ports for offshore wind power.
• Senate Bill 619 — which could speed up the state permitting process for electric lines — was overwhelmingly approved.
• Not a single lawmaker voted against Senate Bill 49, which would instruct state agencies to evaluate the potential for solar panels along highways — one way to protect public lands from large solar farms. (Kelsey Misbrener, Solar Power World)
• Senate Bill 410 could prompt utilities to connect electrical equipment to the grid faster, Politico notes in a legislative roundup.

Clean transportation and buildings too:

• Legislators approved Assembly Bill 579, which would require all new school buses to be zero-emission — most likely electric — starting in 2035. Industry trade group Advanced Energy United has said it’s worried that Newsom could veto the bill.
• Under pressure from the oil industry, lawmakers and Newsom struck a deal to spend $106 million building hydrogen fueling stations, even though hardly anyone drives hydrogen cars. The money is part of broader legislation that will devote far larger sums to other clean transportation infrastructure, including electric vehicle chargers. (Alejandro Lazo, CalMatters)
• Lawmakers approved Senate Bill 48, which the advocacy group Environment America says would require state officials to develop a strategy to “improve energy and water efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in large buildings.”
• Legislators also passed Senate Bill 394, which would require state officials “to create a statewide plan to help school districts integrate climate resilience and sustainability into their master plans,” as Public News Service’s Suzanne Potter writes.

Protecting our water supplies:

• A bill headed to Newsom’s desk would ban the use of drinking water to irrigate purely decorative grass that no one uses. Another bill approved by lawmakers would allow cities to ban the installation of artificial turf at homes, based on research showing that fake grass can result in microplastics washing into streams and the ocean. (Ian James, Los Angeles Times)
• Assembly Bill 249 would tighten standards for lead testing in schools’ drinking water. (Dorany Pineda, L.A. Times)
• In the latest chapter in San Diego County’s ongoing water drama, lawmakers approved a bill that could make it harder for local water agencies to withdraw from larger regional water authorities — but too late to stop the contentious bureaucratic divorce already underway in San Diego County due to high water costs. (Jeff McDonald, San Diego Union-Tribune)
• Assembly Bill 779 would tweak California’s work-in-progress groundwater rules to “level the playing field for all groundwater users, particularly small farmers and farmers of color,” according tothree UCLA law students who helped write the bill.

The housing-climate nexus:

• Lawmakers approved several bills designed to get more infill housing built in cities — a big deal for climate, because the denser our cities, the less gasoline we burn driving. A broader deal could be on the horizon next year. (Politico)