How limiting oil production could help California meet its climate goals

The document argues that restricting California's oil production can significantly lower global CO2 emissions because a portion of the avoided production is not replaced by other sources. It estimates that for every barrel of oil left in the ground in California, global consumption would drop by 0.2 to 0.6 barrels, leading to a reduction of 80 to 240 kg of CO2 per barrel. The brief identifies several policy options, including ceasing new well permits, implementing emissions performance standards, and targeting production in pollution-vulnerable areas. It notes that such measures are cost-competitive with other California climate strategies and could address 'carbon leakage' by complementing demand-side policies. Additionally, the report highlights that many of California's most productive oil fields are more GHG-intensive than global averages and are located in disadvantaged communities, making production limits a matter of environmental justice.

• Limiting oil production in California would likely reduce global GHG emissions because a fraction of the avoided production is not replaced by other sources. The authors estimate that for each barrel of California oil not produced, global oil consumption would decrease by 0.2 to 0.6 barrels, resulting in a global emission reduction of 80 to 240 kg CO2 per barrel.
• Phasing out a significant portion of California's oil production, such as 100 million barrels per year, could reduce global emissions by 8 to 24 million tons of CO2 annually. This scale of reduction is comparable to the savings from other sector-specific strategies in California's climate action plan, which range from 3 to 35 million tons CO2e per year in 2030.
• California's most productive oil fields are more GHG-emissions-intensive than the global average due to energy-intensive recovery techniques like steam flooding. For example, the Midway-Sunset, Kern River, and South Belridge fields produce oil with life cycle emissions of 725, 650, and 690 kg CO2e per barrel, respectively, which is at least 15% higher than crudes from Saudi Arabia, Ecuador, Alaska, Colombia, and Kuwait.
• The cost-effectiveness of limiting oil production is comparable to other measures in California's Scoping Plan. For instance, limiting production in the Wilmington, Inglewood, and Los Angeles fields is estimated to cost between $110 and $330 per t CO2, while other measures like the Low Carbon Fuel Standard cost $150 per t CO2e and a more aggressive renewable portfolio standard costs $175 per t CO2e.
• Limiting oil production can address environmental justice concerns, as many fields are located in disproportionately burdened communities. In Los Angeles, 630,000 people live within 800 meters of an active oil well in areas rated in the 95th percentile for pollution burden. Similarly, the Lost Hills and South Belridge fields are in the worst fifth (80th percentile) of census tracts for pollution-vulnerability.
• The document proposes six policy options to limit production: ceasing new well permits (potentially reducing production by 60-70% by 2030), restricting production in high-pollution areas (~40% affected), charging a carbon 'adder' (~25% no longer economic), removing subsidies (up to 50% affected), implementing an emissions performance standard (~70-80% affected), and phasing out high-cost oil (~40% affected).

APA

Erickson, P., & Lazarus, M. (2018). How limiting oil production could help California meet its climate goals. Stockholm Environment Institute. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/sei-2018-db-california-oil2.pdf

Chicago

Erickson, Peter, and Michael Lazarus. How limiting oil production could help California meet its climate goals. Stockholm Environment Institute, 2018. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/sei-2018-db-california-oil2.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Erickson |first1=Peter |last2=Lazarus |first2=Michael |title=How limiting oil production could help California meet its climate goals |publisher=Stockholm Environment Institute |date=2018 |url=https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/sei-2018-db-california-oil2.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{erickson2018how, author = {Erickson, Peter and Lazarus, Michael}, title = {{How limiting oil production could help California meet its climate goals}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2018}, url = {https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/sei-2018-db-california-oil2.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }