Lawmaker Propose Carbon Emissions Reporting Requirement
On January 26, 2021, Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) introduced SB 260, known as the Climate Corporate Accountability Act, would require companies to report carbon emissions and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to regulate those emissions.
By January 1, 2023, the CARB is required to develop and adopt regulations requiring publicly traded domestic and foreign corporations that do business in California and have annual revenues of more than $1 billion to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions publicly. By January 1, 2024, CARB is required to develop and adopt regulations requiring covered entities to set science-based emissions targets based on the reported emissions by.
By January 1, 2025, companies must disclose their greenhouse gas emissions and science-based emissions targets publicly and on a widely available digital platform, have their public disclosures have independently verified by a third-party auditor, and approved by the state board.
The bill would also require the CARB board to consult with a panel of experts to determine standards and protocols for the state board to utilize to collect data and to set science-based emissions targets for covered entities.
The must include experts in climate science and corporate carbon emissions accounting, implementing state agency representatives, stakeholders representing consumer interests, and covered entities that are leaders in collecting, reporting, and setting targets for the reduction of their own carbon footprint.
The bill applies to Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions:
Scope 1 emissions are all direct greenhouse gas emissions that stem from sources that a covered entity owns or directly controls, including, but not limited to, fuel combustion activities.
Scope 2 emissions are indirect greenhouse gas emissions from electricity purchased and used by a covered entity.
Scope 3 emissions are indirect greenhouse gas emissions, other than scope 2 emissions, from activities of a covered entity that stem from sources that the covered entity does not own or directly control and may include, but are not limited to, emissions associated with the covered entity’s supply chain, business travel, employee commutes, procurement, waste, and water usage.
Other energy and climate legislative proposals
Statewide 2045 climate goal: AB 284 would require the state board by January 1, 2023 to identify a 2045 climate goal for the state’s natural and working lands and identify practices, policy incentives, market needs, and potential reductions in barriers that would help achieve the 2045 climate goal. It would also require the state board by January 1, 2024 to develop standard methods for state agencies to consistently track GHG emissions reductions, carbon sequestration, and additional benefits from natural and working lands over time.
The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 requires the state board to approve a statewide GHG emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions level in 1990 to be achieved by 2020 and to ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40 percent below the 1990 level by 2030.
Funding for biomass: AB 322 would require the Energy Commission to allocate at least 20% of the funds appropriated for the Electric Program Investment Charge (EPIC) program to bioenergy projects for biomass conversion.
Removal of Oil Trust Fund limits: AB 353 would remove the $300 million limit on the total amount deposited in the fund. Oil Trust Fund money is used to finance the costs of well abandonment, pipeline removal, facility removal, remediation, and other costs associated with removal of oil and gas facilities from the Long Beach tidelands.
Energy tax legislative proposal
Solar energy system property tax exclusion: SB 267 would provide that for a partnership that owns an active solar energy system after a partnership flip transaction, neither an initial transfer of a capital and profits interest nor any subsequent change in the allocation of the capital and profits among the members is deemed a transfer of control or a majority interest in the legal entity. This exclusion prevents a property tax reassessment under Proposition 13.