Latest news with #LCFS
Time of India
11 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
California gas prices jump 2¢ per gallon, pain at the pump hits again and you are responsible for it
Drivers across California are bracing for a new hit at the pumps: gas prices rise by approximately 1.6 cents per gallon today, July 1, as the state's automatic annual gas tax increase took effect. This additional charge supports infrastructure projects, including road repairs. This increases the total excise tax to 61.2 cents per gallon. Stricter Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) rules also added 5–9 cents per gallon, bringing the estimated price hike to 7-10 cents overall, far below claims of a 65-cent surge. The LCFS changes require fuel suppliers to offset carbon emissions, which experts say could drive up future costs but benefit long-term emissions goals. Refinery closures are also contributing to pressure on fuel supply. Lawmakers are now pushing reforms to stabilize fuel markets and manage carbon credit pricing. Motorists in Fresno and beyond already took notice. 'Everything costs more in California,' said local resident Max Emberton, reflecting widespread frustration. Another driver added, 'I feel like gas prices are artificially inflated,' despite broader market stability. That tax hike is just the first push, the California Air Resources Board 's Low Carbon Fuel Standard is expected to further raise costs, adding yet another layer to the final price at the curb. Live Events Matt McClain of GasBuddy explained, 'This creates a higher price point in California than really most any other state in the United States,' linking California's reg alone to consistently steeper pump prices. Local businesses are also feeling the pinch. Scott Miller of the Fresno Chamber of Commerce warned, 'For some businesses, it'll be less profit. For some, they'll be passing the cost … to their customer.' While short-term price trends may dip slightly, ongoing regulatory fees and automatic tax escalators will likely prevent significant relief anytime soon.
Politico
4 days ago
- Business
- Politico
Breaking up with Big Oil is hard to do
IT'S COMPLICATED: California still wants to break up with Big Oil — but it needs a ride first. California Energy Commission Vice Chair Siva Gunda outlined his much-anticipated plan on Friday to keep gas prices from spiking as the state weans itself off of oil. TLDR: Support in-state crude oil production, boost imports of refined oil — and pause a profit cap on refineries passed by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2023. Newsom had already previewed the pivot when he asked Gunda to redouble efforts to keep in-state refineries operating profitably in April after two of them announced plans to close amid a long-term decline in demand. The recommendations on Friday not only mark a softening of the state's fight against the oil and gas industry, but also a recognition that attacks from Republicans on gas prices are sticking. 'The gist is, 'We get it,'' Natural Resources Secretary Wade Crowfoot told reporters Friday. California's climate officials are now on the tightest of political tightropes. For example, Gunda recommended the Legislature waive some environmental review rules to streamline further oil extraction from oilfields in Kern County — while also expanding limitations on new offshore oil and gas development and codifying a ban on well stimulation treatments. Meanwhile, the California Air Resources Board stuck by its hot-button emissions trading program for transportation fuels, announcing Friday that their changes to the low-carbon fuel standard will take effect early next week despite fears that tightening the restrictions on the carbon intensity of fuels could cause a spike in gas prices. Senate Democrats are already girding for a fight with the agency. They introduced a bill backed by Senate Pro Tem Mike McGuire on Tuesday to freeze credit prices that encourage the switch to electricity, hydrogen and other non-fossil fuels, cutting the legs out from under the program. For a deeper dive into the LCFS fight, read our exclusive Q&A with CARB Chair Liane Randolph below. — CvK, AN Did someone forward you this newsletter? Sign up here! CARB'S COUNTER: Randolph isn't taking Senate Democrats' attempt to weaken the LCFS quietly. The state's top air quality official pushed back against the bill, SB 237, in an interview Friday, saying the proposal 'is just irresponsible' after the Trump administration already revoked the state's power to enforce its electric car and heavy-duty truck mandates. POLITICO spoke with Randolph about the heated LCFS debate. Read the full interview on POLITICO Pro for her thoughts on California's climate disclosure law and what's next for discussions with automakers. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. What are you concerned about as the news of the LCFS changes taking effect becomes public, and what are you trying to get ahead of? It's super important to be proactive, to remind people about the importance of this program. It is designed to provide a cost-effective path to support the transition to lower-carbon fuels and to zero-ignition infrastructure that reduces greenhouse gas emissions, right? And so in all of this conversation about cost, I don't want people to forget about the incredible benefits of the program and the fact that it's generated $4 billion in annual private sector investment in the clean transportation sector. It attracts dollars. It attracts investment in the state. It delivers, under our estimate, $12 billion in health-related savings, and California businesses will see increased revenue of $6 to $8 billion from LCFS credit generation sales through the life of the program. It's really important to emphasize that this program has clear economic benefits. This news is coming against the backdrop of SB 237, a new bill that would weaken the LCFS program. Do you regret at all how the rulemaking was done and the initial estimate that LCFS would raise gas prices up to 47 cents? Has that put you in the crosshairs of lawmakers? The LCFS rulemaking was an incredibly robust process. There were multiple workshops, tons of stakeholder engagement, two public hearings in front of the board. So the idea that there was not a robust public discussion about all the pros and cons of all of the complexities of the program is just inaccurate. And we had multiple briefings with legislative staff, outreach from members that we responded to. So it was an absolutely robust public process. The second thing I'll say is that in this era, when the federal administration is literally taking away every tool that they can think of, the idea that we as a state would attempt to cripple programs that have been effective, that have resulted in economic development and better air quality, cleaner fuels, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, is just irresponsible. SB 237 is endorsed by Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire. How seriously do you take it, have you talked to the governor about this, and what could result from a proposal like this even if it doesn't move forward? It is a proposal that has the potential to set California back. And I think that it's really important for our elected leaders to be thinking about all the different aspects of how we achieve our air quality and climate goals, and to recognize that we as Californians really should control our own destiny as much as we possibly can. — AN SEE YA, CEQA: Newsom is asking lawmakers to approve an overhaul of one of California's landmark environmental laws before he signs off on this year's budget. A trailer bill introduced Friday carves out sweeping exemptions from the California Environmental Quality Act, which mandates environmental reviews of construction and has drawn the ire of pro-building and Republican voices accusing it of slowing down key projects. Under the bill, environmental review of housing projects would be limited, and many wildfire mitigation projects, including fuel breaks near homes and vegetation thinning near evacuation routes, would no longer need to be reviewed. Improvements to certain community water systems as well as some construction on the state's high-speed rail project would also be exempted. The exemptions got immediate praise from the California State Association of Counties on Friday. 'No longer will CEQA be leveraged to stall critical county wildfire, water and housing projects,' said CSAC President and Inyo County Supervisor Jeff Griffiths. They were panned, however, by environmental groups. 'The trailer bill 131 is the worst rollback of environmental and public health protections that we've seen in decades,' said Matthew Baker, the policy director at the Planning and Conservation League, in a press conference Friday. The bill is expected to be approved Monday in the statehouse and then signed into law by the governor. — CvK BYE BYE, LOCOMOTIVES: CARB officially repealed its rule to phase out diesel locomotives Thursday night. Board members voted unanimously to revoke the in-use locomotive rule, six months after the agency announced that it had withdrawn the emissions standard from consideration for an EPA waiver, once it became clear approval wouldn't happen before former President Joe Biden left office. The rule, approved in April 2023, was projected to reduce 386,300 tons of smog-forming nitrogen oxides by 2050, making it CARB's most impactful vehicle emissions standard. The loss compounds the blow from car and truck rules being axed, and means regions like Southern California and the Central Valley are all but guaranteed to be out of compliance and face the threat of federal sanctions. — AN BILLABLE HOURS: A Sacramento County Superior Court judge gave Attorney General Rob Bonta the green light late Thursday to keep his big climate lawsuit against oil and gas companies in the hands of an outside firm, Lesley Clark of POLITICO's E&E News reports. The decision to outsource the headline-grabbing lawsuit to the San Francisco law firm Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein got Bonta in a tussle with his own employees. Their union, the California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and Hearing Officers in State Employment sued over the decision, arguing in-house lawyers were capable of handling the complex work themselves. But Judge Shelleyanne Chang wrote in her preliminary ruling that there was not enough evidence of that and that hiring an outside firm was well within state law. As Lesley has previously reported, the state's contract with Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein lawyers shows its lawyers billing up to $1,241 an hour; lawyers with another outside firm, Sher Edling, hired to help with the work are making up to $625 an hour. — CvK — A California appeals court struck down one of the state's largest planned communities for not analyzing its greenhouse gas emissions impacts enough. — The San Diego region's water wholesaler approved a rate hike of 8 percent amid declining demand and high fixed costs. — Western states have had relatively cool temperatures this summer, but a national heat surge is coming.
Newsweek
5 days ago
- Automotive
- Newsweek
California Gas Prices to Go Up July 1: What to Know
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. California drivers will see higher gas prices starting July 1, as two state policies take effect. First, the state's gas excise tax will increase from 59.6 cents to 61.2 cents per gallon, part of an annual adjustment for inflation. At the same time, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is rolling out stricter rules under its Low-Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), which requires fuel producers to cut the carbon emissions from their products more sharply than before. The 2025 benchmark requires a 22.75 percent cut in carbon intensity from 2010 levels—a sharp increase from the previous goal of 20 percent by 2030. To meet these targets, companies will need to blend in more expensive clean fuels or buy emissions credits—costs that are expected to be passed on to drivers. Meanwhile, two major refineries, Phillips 66 in Los Angeles and Valero in Benicia, announced they will close by the end of 2026. The closures will reduce the number of gasoline producers in the state from nine to seven, which could trigger a sharp spike in fuel prices, based on analysis by University of Southern California Professor Michael Mische. His projections indicate gas could hit $6.43 per gallon after the first closure and soar to $8.43 once both refineries are offline, with even higher prices possible under volatile market conditions. Together, these changes could raise gas prices by as much as 6 to 10 cents per gallon. But some experts warn the increase could be even higher. Why It Matters Retail prices for regular grade gasoline in California are already consistently higher than in any other state in the continental United States, often exceeding the national average by more than a dollar per gallon. Therefore, a dramatic surge in gas prices could deepen California's cost-of-living crisis, strain working families, and reverberate through the broader economy. Gasoline prices above 6.00 dollars a gallon are shown at a gas station in Los Angeles on Tuesday, June 7, 2022. Gasoline prices above 6.00 dollars a gallon are shown at a gas station in Los Angeles on Tuesday, June 7, 2022. Richard Vogel/AP What To Know A University of Pennsylvania report projected that changes to California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) could raise gas prices by 65 cents per gallon in the near term and 85 cents by 2030. In response, Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones launched a petition urging lawmakers to repeal what he called an "unaffordable 65 cent gas price hike," arguing, "Californians already face the highest gas prices in the country." As of Thursday morning, the petition has more than 29,000 signatures — 21,000 short of its target. However, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) disputed the 65 cent figure, calling it "misinformation." A spokesperson said prices may rise only 5 to 8 cents and that any increase would come from oil companies deciding how much compliance costs to pass on. Governor Newsom's office echoed that, calling the higher estimate false and emphasizing the LCFS could actually reduce fuel costs per mile by 42 percent by 2045. Studies back this up. Research from the University of Minnesota and Biofuels Digest found little connection between LCFS credit prices and retail gasoline prices. In fact, California's gas price gap with the national average remained steady before and after the LCFS was introduced. Jones rejected those claims, calling them "hogwash," telling Newsweek, "I'm really not too concerned about whether it's 10 cents or 65 cents. Basically we're splitting hairs at that point in time. It probably is in between somewhere. The bottom line is, these regulations are going to cause the price of gasoline to increase." He also accused Newsom's office of trying to walk back an earlier CARB estimate of a 47 cent increase, saying, "They originally came out with 47 cents... and then they had to walk that back." CARB did initially project a 47 cent increase for 2025, but later clarified that the analysis was not meant as a direct pump price forecast. Meanwhile, Democrats in the state Senate unanimously voted down a bill from Jones to pause the LCFS changes, which he claimed was part of Newsom's broader effort to phase out gas vehicles in favor of EVs. "I believe Newsom's goal is to push Californians into EVs under the ideological guise that he's saving the planet," Jones said. Newsom's office defended the policy on environmental grounds, noting that transportation accounts for over half of the state's carbon emissions and nearly all of its toxic diesel pollution. "This is the most impactful step our state can take to fight climate change," Newsom said in 2023, arguing that car emissions worsen asthma, wildfires, and sea-level rise. But Jones dismissed such arguments. "California has done a very good job over the last 20 to 30 years cleaning up our air," he said, adding that the state's emissions make up just "about 1 percent of global emissions," and eliminating all internal combustion engines "would have zero impact on the rest of the planet." Meanwhile, California gas prices remain high. In April, the state's average price per gallon was $4.85—$1.69 higher than the national average. Prices have spiked above $6 twice in the past two years, sparking public backlash and new legislation. What Happens Next The updated Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) regulations were resubmitted to the Office of Administrative Law on May 16, after being rejected in February. The office has until June 30 to issue a final decision, and if approved, the changes could take effect as soon as July 1.
Newsweek
06-06-2025
- Automotive
- Newsweek
California Democrats Vote to Increase Gas Prices
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The California Senate on Wednesday rejected a measure that sought to stop gas prices rising by a projected 65 cents per gallon. Senate Bill 2 had aimed to halt proposed changes to California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) that were approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in November. Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones, a Republican who authored the bill, forced a floor vote on the measure on Wednesday. Lawmakers rejected it in a 10-23 vote, with Democrats unanimous in their opposition. A Chevron sign at a gas station, showing California gas prices, in Walnut Creek, California, April 8, 2025. A Chevron sign at a gas station, showing California gas prices, in Walnut Creek, California, April 8, 2025. Getty Images Why It Matters A report by the University of Pennsylvania's Kleinman Center for Energy Policy predicted that the changes could increase the cost of gas by 65 cents a gallon in the near term and by 85 cents a gallon by 2030. Supporters say the new rules are necessary to keep California on track for its climate goals. But critics have warned that the new standards could raise gas prices even higher in a state where drivers already pay some of the highest fuel costs in the nation. What To Know Senate Bill 2 aimed to "void specified amendments to the Low-Carbon Fuel Standard regulations adopted by the state board on November 8, 2024, or as subsequently adopted, as specified." The proposed changes to the LCSF include updated targets to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels used in California in order to reduces air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Jones, a Republican, accused Democrats of choosing "higher gas prices over hardworking Californians," pointing to the estimates that the updates to the LCSF will raise gas prices by as much as 65 cents per gallon. But David Clergen, a spokesperson for the California Air Resources Board, has called the 65-cent figure "misinformation," saying that independent experts estimate gas prices may rise by just 5 to 8 cents per gallon. He also told the Sacramento Bee that the LCSF does not directly add to gas prices. What People Are Saying California Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones said in a statement on Wednesday: "I forced a Senate Floor vote to repeal Governor Newsom's 65-cent gas price hike. Senate Democrats unanimously opposed it. They had a chance to stand with California drivers, but instead, they chose to defend the highest gas prices in the nation." CARB spokesperson David Clergen told the Sacramento Bee: "Independent experts have projected LCFS pass-through costs could range from as low as 5 cents per gallon to as high as 8 cents per gallon, much lower than widely reported projections that are as high as a dollar or more." He added that any additional costs "would be from oil companies passing through the cost of complying with the regulation and they would decide how much, if any of that cost to pass through to consumers." What's Next The proposed updates to the LCFS were resubmitted to the Office of Administrative Law, which reviews the legality of state regulations, on May 16, after the agency rejected the proposed changes in February. The agency has until June 30 to make a final determination and if approved, the changes could go into effect on July 1. That could come on the same day that an increase in California's state gas tax is set to take effect, rising from 59.6 to 61.2 cents per gallon.
Politico
03-06-2025
- Automotive
- Politico
The other climate rule Trump's attacks are boosting
Presented by the Stop the Oil Shakedown Coalition. With help from Camille von Kaenel, Marie J. French and Caitlin Oprysko THE OTHER CLEAN-CAR LAW: New York lawmakers reeling from Congress' vote to kill California's electric vehicle mandate are eyeballing another Golden State rule to pick up the slack: the low-carbon fuel standard. Fair warning to Democrats considering this route: Things could get bumpy. A yearslong push in Albany to establish New York's version of the controversial program that sets emissions limits for transportation fuels is regaining steam in the wake of Senate votes last month to revoke a trio of EPA waivers that let California — and a dozen states that follow its lead — enforce stricter vehicle emissions standards. We're still waiting for President Donald Trump to sign the resolutions and kick off a court battle that Attorney General Rob Bonta has promised to wage, but New York enviros are already using the moment to lobby for LCFS standards, as POLITICO's Marie J. French reports. 'New York has to lead,' said Julie Tighe, president of the New York League of Conservation Voters, at a press conference last week. 'We cannot let four years go by without taking real action to transition away from fossil fuels, and Washington, D.C., is not going to help.' New York lawmakers don't need to look particularly hard to find out what sort of headaches they could be in store for if a bill from state Sen. Kevin Parker that would establish the state's clean fuel standard crosses the finish line. (That proposal is awaiting a hearing in New York's Senate Finance Committee and still faces an uphill battle to reach Gov. Kathy Hochul's desk.) Case in point: the bare-knuckled sparring on Friday between moderate Assemblymember Jasmeet Bains, a Bakersfield Democrat and potential 2026 challenger to Republican Rep. David Valadao, and the California Air Resources Board, which approved amendments last year (still pending approval by the state's Office of Administrative Law) to tighten the stringency of the program — and potentially raise gas prices. Bains called on CARB Chair Liane Randolph to resign after she said at a hearing last week on transportation fuels that the agency doesn't extrapolate on how much consumers pay at the pump because 'in many instances, that would be speculative.' 'It is outrageous the director would pursue such policies without even trying to analyze the impact on prices,' Bains said. The incident is part of the continued fallout from last year's messy reauthorization of the nearly 15-year-old program. The heated debate largely centered on concerns about the rule's potential to raise gas prices, and CARB did itself no favors by initially estimating a 47-cent per gallon hike, before walking that figure back. The backlash against Bains was swift, as Gov. Gavin Newsom and environmental groups rushed to Randolph's defense. 'What's outrageous is the Assemblymember's stunt as she gears up to run for Congress,' Newsom spokesperson Daniel Villaseñor said in a statement. Equally important, though, is who was missing from the defense. Business groups that oppose LCFS over affordability concerns, and environmental justice advocates who argue the state should focus on electrification rather than alternative fuels, were nowhere to be found. Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas — who established an oversight committee last month, headed by Assembly Transportation Chair Lori Wilson and Assemblymember David Alvarez, to study the LCFS' impact on prices — also stayed out of the squabble, and his spokespeople didn't respond to requests for comment. Those political dynamics are already shaping up in New York, where the state Senate passed an LCFS bill in 2022 that couldn't clear the Assembly. EJ groups came out against the bill last week, writing in a letter that New York can't 'invest in half-measures and failed solutions that burden environmental justice communities.' But New York businesses are backing Parker's bill. The Business Council of New York State, an Albany-based chamber of commerce with over 3,000 members, announced its support in April, arguing that an LCFS rule would allow the state to 'keep open all fuel and technology options' as it attempts to slash greenhouse gas emissions 85 percent from 1990 levels by 2050. — AN Did someone forward you this newsletter? Sign up here! SPEAKING OF GAS PRICES: Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton unveiled a plan Monday to lower energy and fuel prices based on dismantling California's climate programs. Hilton, a GOP television personality, released his energy platform the day before he's hosting a forum on fuel prices with former Democratic Majority Leader Gloria Romero, who registered as a Republican last year over issues like gas stove bans. Hilton's to-do list includes his party's top asks: ending the state's 2045 net-zero emissions goal, repealing LCFS and lowering the state gas tax. He's also advocating for nixing the cap-and-trade program Newsom and lawmakers are currently negotiating an extension of. — AN WATER TRUCE: San Diego and Los Angeles are ending 15 years of courtroom fights over the cost of water transfers, citing the need for greater flexibility and collaboration to handle unpredictable supplies caused by climate change. Under a settlement agreement announced Monday, the San Diego County Water Authority will pay the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California a fixed price for water transfers instead of a fluctuating one, which San Diego had repeatedly sued over. The settlement ends an acrimonious chapter in Southern California's water wars that had cost the two agencies tens of millions of dollars in legal fees and driven political battles across regional water boards. It also frees the San Diego County Water Authority — which is currently facing an existential threat because of lower-than-expected water sales — to cut deals with other water agencies to offload some of its unneeded water. San Diego has spent heavily in the past two decades on both importing and desalinating water. Other Southern California communities don't have that same luxury of abundant supplies, with both the Sierra Nevada snowpack and the Colorado River under strain. MWD Board chair Adán Ortega said at a press conference Monday that the settlement agreement would usher in 'a new era of regionalism' that the entire Southwest should recognize. — CvK EAST COAST FOIL: Florida's longtime cautionary tale on property insurance is changing — maybe. After years of massive losses, Florida insurers made a $207 million profit in 2024, Thomas Frank of POLITICO's E&E News reports. Private Florida-based insurers are returning, and the state-run insurer of last-resort, Citizens Property Insurance Corp., is shrinking. The AM Best credit ratings firm credits the turn-around to rate hikes that doubled the average premium between 2021 and 2023 and legal reforms that limited lawsuits by policyholders. California, meanwhile, still hasn't shrunk its own insurer of last-resort or brought back private insurers in any big way, despite setting the stage for increased rate hikes. A STEP TOO FAR: Senate Majority Leader John Thune sidestepped Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough to revoke California's vehicle emissions waivers, but he's not willing to do the same for Republicans' budget 'megabill.' 'We're not going there,' Thune said Monday when asked by reporters if overruling MacDonough is under consideration as the Senate crafts its own budget proposal. MacDonough will play the crucial role of deciding what polices can stay in the bill. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer predicted that House GOP proposals, like a plan to place limits on the ability of federal judges to enforce contempt citations, will be booted. The parliamentarian question is going to follow Thune, who gave the thumbs-up for the unprecedented move to ignore MacDonough's opinion that Congress can't overturn EPA's waivers empowering California to enforce nation-leading emissions standards. — AN ON HIS OWN: Former Interior Secretary David Bernhardt is launching his own firm, he told POLITICO's Caitlin Oprysko. Bernhardt was also a longtime Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck lobbyist, including for Westlands Water District. The new Bernhardt Group will primarily provide strategic advice, but may do some lobbying work on an as-needed basis. Bernhardt declined to name any of the new firm's clients. But he said its work won't be limited to natural resources policy and could encompass a number of issues the firm's staff have been involved in, from telecom and privacy to financial services and appropriations. Read more from the interview as well as the full list of people joining him in POLITICO Influence. — The Trump administration is reversing course and keeping eight of the nine USDA field offices it planned to close in California open instead. — Analytics firm First Street forecasts Sacramento will experience some of the country's largest out-migration because of climate risks. — California Democrats want the Trump administration to restaff National Weather Service offices in Sacramento and Hanford that lost the ability to operate 24 hours a day.
