California’s efforts to promote cleaner vehicles will continue, but the state’s initiatives to combat climate change and other pollutants may be hampered by major policy shifts at Trump’s EPA.
The Trump administration’s plans to undo dozens of environmental regulations, from rules on vehicle emissions to runoff into rivers, marks a dramatic shift in U.S. policy that’s flying in the face of California’s push for a cleaner, climate-friendly future.
California has often led the nation in combating pollution and global warming, and some state policies could shield California from the flurry of deregulatory proposals marched out this week by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Still, the reach of the federal government is huge, and the EPA rollbacks could weaken environmental protections across many sectors of California’s economy. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin praised the plans, which counted 31 actions, as necessary for lowering costs for Americans and revitalizing industry.
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
“We are driving a dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion,” Zeldin said in the announcement late Wednesday.
California environmental groups and policymakers, meanwhile, blasted the EPA’s plans as a major setback for the health and well-being of the state.
“This is stuff that’s really designed to keep the public safe,” said Julia Stein, deputy director for the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA School of Law. “I don’t think any of us want to see us backsliding, (for example) going back to the kind of air we had before we had the Clean Air Act. That’s not what the EPA is designed to do. This is really antithetical to the mission of the agency.”
One of the most far-reaching proposals calls for revisiting the EPA’s underlying authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Many scholars say that reversing what’s known as the endangerment finding, essentially the finding that carbon pollution is hurting humans, will be a tough legal road to hoe, but if successful it would stymie federal efforts to address climate change.
Matthew Tejada, senior vice president of environmental health at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said environmental groups across the nation are putting a lot of “faith and confidence” in states like California “to continue to pursue things that will actually combat climate change and protect the health of the folks that live in their states.”
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
But while California has several of its own initiatives to curb planet-warming gases, from regulations on power plants to a cap-and-trade program limiting industrial emissions to zero-carbon goals, the federal government has a lot of authority the state doesn’t have, as well as greater reach. Being in partnership with Washington is far more effective in addressing the changing climate.
Another consequential proposal announced this week by the EPA is the rollback of tailpipe emissions regulations for cars and light trucks. The transportation sector accounts for the majority of heat-trapping pollution in California — and the nation — as well as a lot of unhealthy air.
The Biden administration had tightened tailpipe rules to the point that auto manufacturers would have to move away from gas-powered vehicles and develop electric and hybrid fleets, dramatically reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants. The policy was in line with California’s push to ban the sale of gasoline cars and trucks by 2035.
“A central fight against climate change is the transition to clean vehicles, and this (EPA action) will slow it down,” said Michael Gerrard, a law professor and faculty director of Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law.
While California has historically had a waiver allowing the state to go its own way and enact stricter vehicle emissions rules, the Trump administration is seeking to revoke that authority. If successful, the state would have to defer to whatever the federal standards are or become.
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
Of course, how much pollution is ultimately emitted by cars and trucks is determined by auto manufacturers, which could choose to continue to make cars that comply with California’s more stringent demands, even if they are rolled back. They did this when President Donald Trump sought to rollback tailpipe regulations during his first term; the industry doesn’t want to have to build different cars for different states, so adhering to the strictest rules can make financial sense.
“The motor vehicle manufacturers could decide to make cleaner vehicles anyway,” Gerrard said.
The EPA’s raft of deregulatory proposals also includes a plan to narrow the scope of waterways protected by the Clean Water Act, known as the “waters of the United States.” Such a rollback would have ramifications for California, with farmers and developers given more leeway to allow sediment and runoff to flow into creeks and ponds but, as a result, with more contaminants building up in watersheds.
“To draw a line and say, ‘Oh well, because a stream dries up for a portion of the year it doesn’t deserve to be protected’ is kind of crazy,” said Kim Delfino, who runs the environmental consulting firm Earth Advocacy in Sacramento. “The risk remains. Pollution still gets into the system.”
California’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act gives state regulators the ability to regulate what pollutants get into California waterways, though it goes only so far. Additionally, the state has no oversight on what contaminants might flow in from other states.
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
“We have something in place as a backup,” Delfino said. “But it’s not perfect, there are still gaps left.”
The Bay Area Air District, which regulates stationary sources of air pollution in nine counties, said in a statement from spokesperson Kristine Roselius that local and state regulations safeguarding local air quality, climate and the health of Bay Area residents remain strong.
Even if the federal government weakens the Clean Air Act, the law “explicitly authorizes states to go beyond the federal minimum level of regulation, and California and the Bay Area in particular have done that for decades,” Roselius said.
“Regardless of changes at the federal level, we will continue to enforce our stringent state and local regulations which remain in place,” she said.
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
Reach Kurtis Alexander: kalexander@sfchronicle.com X: @kurtisalexander; Bluesky: @kurtisalexander.bsky.social
Reach Julie Johnson: julie.johnson@sfchronicle.com; X: @juliejohnson; Bluesky: @jjreport.bsky.social
Kurtis Alexander is an enterprise reporter for The San Francisco Chronicle, with a focus on natural resources and the environment. He frequently writes about water, wildfire, climate and the American West. His recent work has examined the impacts of drought, threats to public lands and wildlife, and the nation’s widening rural-urban divide.
Before joining the Chronicle, Alexander worked as a freelance writer and as a staff reporter for several media organizations, including The Fresno Bee and Bay Area News Group, writing about government, politics and the environment.
Julie Johnson is a reporter with The Chronicle’s climate and environment team. Previously she worked as a staff writer at the Santa Rosa Press Democrat, where she had a leading role on the team awarded the 2018 Pulitzer in breaking news for coverage of 2017 wildfires.
About
Contact
Services
Account