California Environmental Protection Agency

California Air Resources Board

California’s Air Pollutionand Climate Change Policies

Bart Croes, ChiefResearch Division

Control policy drivers ...

California’s Air Quality Problem

24 million gasoline-powered vehicles

1.3 million diesel-fueled vehicles and engines

35 million people

Unique geography and meteorology confine air pollutants

Over 90% of Californians breath unhealthy air

California’s Disproportionate Air Pollution Exposure

California41%

Rest of Nation59%

8-Hour Ozone(NAAQS = 160 µg/m3)

California63%

Rest of Nation37%

Annual PM2.5(NAAQS = 15 µg/m3)

Population-weighted and minus national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), based on 2000-2002 data

Air Pollution and Premature DeathCalifornia Estimates

a Median value from “An expert judgment assessment of the concentration-response relationshipbetween PM2.5 exposure and mortality”, Industrial Economics, Inc. (2006)

b “Revised analysis of time-series studies of air pollution and health”, HEI Special Report, p.21 (2003)c Ostro, Tran and Levy “The health benefits of reduced tropospheric ozone in California”, JAWMA (2006)d 2003-2005 air quality data, population-weightede At least a factor of two uncertainty

Pollutant Averaging Time

Increased Risk inAll-Cause Mortality

(per 10 µg/m3) e

Threshold or Background

(µg/m3)

Average Annual

Exposure(µg/m3) d

AnnualDeaths e

PM2.5 Annual 10% a 2.5 to 7 13.5 13,000to

22,000

PM10 24-hour 0.25% b 5 22.3 1000

Ozone 8-hour 0.27% c 80 130 1500

Cal/EPA-OEHHA, “Environmental Protection Indicators for California” (2002)www.oehha.ca.gov/multimedia/epic/Epicreport.html

California Climate Impactsover the past 100 years

0

2

8

7

1

9

10

11

12

13°F

3

4

0.7ºF (0.4°C) higher temperatures

7 inch sea level rise

12% decrease in fraction of runoff between April

and July

snowmelt and spring blooms advanced

2 days/decade since 1955

67891011

0

4

32

5

1

ºF

11°F

Lyell GlacierYosemite National Park

2003

1903

Projected Climate Impacts on California, 2070-2099as compared with 1961-1990

2.5 - 4 times as many heat wave days14 - 22 inches of sea level rise70 - 80% loss in Sierra snowpack30% decrease in forest yields (pine)55% increased risk of large forest fires10% increase in energy demand

Medium Warming Range(3 – 4.5 °C)

3 - 4 times as many heat wave days22 - 30 inches of sea level rise90% loss in Sierra snowpack20% increase in energy demand

Higher Warming Range(4.5 – 6 °C)

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13°F

Our Changing Climate: Assessing the Risks to California (2006), www.climatechange.ca.gov

2 - 2.5 times as many heat wave days6 - 14 inches of sea level rise30 - 60% loss in Sierra snowpack7 - 14% decrease in forest yields (pine)10 - 35% increased risk of large forest fires3 - 6% increase in energy demand

Lower Warming Range(1.5 – 3 °C)

0

4

3

2

5

1

ºF

Decrease in Sierra Nevada Snowpack%

of r

emai

ning

sn

owpa

ckre

lativ

e to

19

61 –

1990

Increasing GH

G Em

issions

Lower WarmingRange (1.5 – 3 ºC)

Medium WarmingRange (3 – 4.5 ºC)

Higher WarmingRange (4.5 – 6 ºC)

60

40

20

0

April 1 snow water equivalent (inches)~0 453015

Our Changing Climate: Assessing the Risks to California (2006), www.climatechange.ca.gov

Implications of Climate Change for Air Quality

* Fresno

*Los Angeles

*San Francisco

*Sacramento

Riverside*

Ozone versus Temperature Riverside, 2003-2005

CaliforniaOzone

Standard

California Ozone Standard

R2 = 0.60

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120Daily Maximum Temperature (oF)

Dai

ly M

axim

um 1

-hr O

zone

(ppb

)

Ozone versus Temperature Fresno, 2003-2005

California Ozone Standard

R2 = 0.82

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

30 50 70 90 110Daily Maximum Temperature (oF)

Dai

ly M

axim

um 1

-hr O

zone

(ppb

)

Projected Climate Impact on Ozone, 2050Central California

Rob Harley slide to be updated later-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

T/ReactionRates

T/BiogeneicEmissions

2050Emissions

2050 InflowBC

CombinedClimate

Climate +2050

Emissions &BC

% C

hang

e in

Ozo

ne

Fresno Sacramento Bay Area

Steiner et al., “Influence of future climate and emissions on regional air quality in California”, JGR (2006)

PM2.5 versus Temperature Fresno, 2003-2005

R2 = 0.15

0

50

100

150

200

250

30 50 70 90 110Daily Maximum Tempreature (oF)

Dai

ly M

axim

um 1

-hr P

M2.

5 (µ

g/m

3 )

PM2.5 versus Temperature Riverside, 2006

R2 = 0.02

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Daily Maximum Temperature (oF)

Dai

ly M

axim

um 1

-hr P

M2.

5 (µ

g/m3 )

PM2.5 Response to ClimateSouth Coast Air Basin

+34 µg/m3

Base-case episode featuresSeptember 25, 1996Elevated temperature inversionCool nights, warm days

Sensitivity study1. Increase background ozone to

60 ppb2. Increase temperature by +5°C,

constant RH3. Does not account for future

controls or the effect of temperature on emissions.

Results+30 µg/m3 (~25%) increase in daily

peak PM2.5

Kleeman and Cayan (2006)

Increase in Background Ozone

Observed trends in background ozone levels in California (Jaffe et al., 2003)

Historical, current, and projected range of surface annual background ozone concentrations

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1880 2000 2100O

zone

(ppb

)

Background ozone levels in the Northern Hemisphere (Vingarzan et al., 2004)

Policy response ...

Governor Schwarzenegger’s Environmental Targets

50% improvement in air quality from 2003 to 2010

Diesel Engines75% below 2000 levels by 2010, 85% below by 2020Replace or retrofit every diesel engine in California

Goods Movement2001 emission levels by 2010

Diesel PM risk 85% below 2000 by 2020

Greenhouse GasesBy 2010, reduce to 2000 levels (60 MMT, 11% below BAU)

By 2012, cap and trade market linked with EU-ETS and RGGI By 2020, reduce to 1990 levels (174 MMT, 30% below BAU)

By 2050, reduce to 80% below 1990 levels

Hydrogen Highway

Green Government Buildings

California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 32)

Sept 2006 20502020

AB 32 signedinto legislation

Air Resources Board charged with

monitoring and regulating sources

of greenhouse gases in order to reduce emissions

Reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels

Reduce GHG emissions to 80%

of 1990 levels

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

GHG limits and measures

operative

GHG limits and measures

adopted

Publish list of early actions in

June

Publish market and regulatory scoping plan

Inventory baseline and

reporting

Adopt enforceable early action regulations

Reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels

GHG Emissions Per Country / Region

6.91

U.S.

0.06

5.0

1.89

Sweden China India0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Russia E.U. Japan

1.92

4.74

1.35

7

Tons

of C

O2 Eq

uiva

lent

Bill

ion

Met

ric T

ons

of C

O2

Equi

vale

nts

Climate Analysis indicators Tool (CAIT US Version 1.0, CAIT version 4.0), World Resources Institute, 2007 (data is for 2001-2002 and includes CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 emissions for countries and CO2, CH4, N2O, and F-gases for CA)

0.46

CA.

California Greenhouse Gas Emissions

22% 8%

21%

8%41%

Transportation

Agriculture andForestryIndustrial

ElectricalPowerOthers

83%

7%6%4%

CO2CH4N2OHFCs

CEC, “Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2004” (2006)www.climatechange.ca.gov/policies/greenhouse_gas_inventory/index.html

GHG EMISSION SOURCES[MMT CO2 eq] GHG EMISSIONS

BY TYPE

CO2, N2O HFCsCO2, CH4, N2O CO2 CO2

Comparison of Fuel Economy and GHG Emissions Standards Around the World

2002 201620142012201020082006200420

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

EUEU

JapanJapan

ChinaChina

AustraliaAustralia

USUS

MPG

—C

onve

rted

to C

AFE

Tes

t Cyc

le

CanadaCanada CaliforniaCalifornia

Current GHG Reduction Strategies

30

18

13.4 12.511

9

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Reduction Strategy

CO

2 Red

uctio

ns (M

MT)

Light-duty VehicleGHG EmissionStandardsSmart Land Use andIntelligentTransportationLow Carbon FuelStandard

Reforestration

Accleration ofRenewable PortfolioStandard to 33%Utility ElecticitySector Carbon Policy

2006 Climate Action Team Report to the Governor and Legislatureclimatechange.ca.gov/climate_action_team/reports/index.html

Annual reductions in CO2 equivalents (million of tons) by 2020

GHG Emissions Per Person

7.5

3.91.9

Sweden China India0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Russia Japan E.U.

13.110.7 10.5

Tons

of C

O2

Equi

vale

nt 24.3

U.S. CA

13.4

WorldAverageWorldAverage

Climate Analysis indicators Tool (CAIT US Version 1.0, CAIT version 4.0), World Resources Institute, 2007 (data is for 2001-2002 and includes CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 emissions for countries and CO2, CH4, N2O, and F-gases for CA)

Per Capita Electricity Consumption

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000year

kWh/

pers

on

United StatesCaliforniaNew York

www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/sep_use/total/csv/use_csv

SummaryPublic health is the most important policy consideration –

especially premature deaths due to PM2.5

California already affected by climate change – future warming threatens water supply and agriculture

Climate change makes ozone standards more difficult to attain – impact on PM2.5 and PM10 is unclear

Greenhouse gas reduction policies– Adopted: light-duty vehicle standards, energy efficiency measures– Jan. 1, 2010: low carbon fuel standard, other early actions– Jan. 1, 2012: cap and trade market, other regulations