Two California Policies Critical to Reducing Emissions from Cars and Trucks

The document examines how California's LCFS and Cap-and-Trade Program work together to reduce transportation emissions. The LCFS mandates a reduction in the carbon intensity of fuels, while Cap-and-Trade puts a price on carbon and generates revenue for clean technology investments. The author argues that neither policy is sufficient alone and recommends extending both to 2030 to provide the stability needed for long-term infrastructure and vehicle transitions.

• Transportation is the primary source of global warming emissions in California, accounting for 36 percent of the state's total emissions according to 2016 CARB data.
• The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) regulates the life cycle 'carbon intensity' of fuels, requiring a 10 percent reduction by 2020 compared to 2010 levels.
• Between 2011 and 2016, the LCFS contributed to a 50 percent growth in the use of alternative fuels and a 30 percent decline in their average carbon intensity, resulting in 25 million tons of reduced carbon emissions.
• In 2016, biodiesel, renewable diesel, and biomethane were the primary drivers of LCFS emission reductions, accounting for half of the total. Electricity's contribution to LCFS-related reductions grew from less than 1 percent in 2011 to 9 percent in 2016.
• California's Cap-and-Trade Program covers 85 percent of the state's global warming emissions, with a cap that declines by approximately 3 percent annually until 2020 to reach 1990 levels.
• The Cap-and-Trade Program creates an economic signal for lower-carbon fuels; in 2015, fuel providers purchased approximately $2 billion in allowances for 158 million metric tons of CO2e emissions at a price of around $13 per ton.
• Cap-and-Trade revenue supports clean transportation; through 2016, the state allocated $3.2 billion in total proceeds from allowance sales, with $688 million specifically directed toward low-carbon vehicle and fuel technologies.
• The LCFS and Cap-and-Trade programs are synergistic: carbon pricing integrates climate costs into business decisions and generates revenue, while the LCFS provides a steady market for clean fuels regardless of gasoline prices.

APA

Union of Concerned Scientists (2017). Two California Policies Critical to Reducing Emissions from Cars and Trucks. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2017/01/LCFS-and-carbon-pricing-programs.pdf

Chicago

Union of Concerned Scientists. Two California Policies Critical to Reducing Emissions from Cars and Trucks. 2017. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2017/01/LCFS-and-carbon-pricing-programs.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Union of Concerned Scientists |title=Two California Policies Critical to Reducing Emissions from Cars and Trucks |date=May 2017 |url=https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2017/01/LCFS-and-carbon-pricing-programs.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{unionofconcernedscientists2017two, author = {{Union of Concerned Scientists}}, title = {{Two California Policies Critical to Reducing Emissions from Cars and Trucks}}, institution = {Union of Concerned Scientists}, year = {2017}, month = may, url = {https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2017/01/LCFS-and-carbon-pricing-programs.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }