Uncategorized

Humanity Is on a Path Toward “Climate Chaos.” Scientists Warn: The Time to Act Is Now

Posted by CLR

The latest State of the Climate report, released October 29 by a team of leading scientists, delivers a clear message: humanity is racing toward climate chaos. In 2024, people and industries burned record amounts of oil, gas, and coal, pushing greenhouse-gas emissions to new highs. The result? The hottest year ever recorded, devastating wildfires and floods, and rising risks for communities everywhere.

“The planet’s vital signs are flashing red,” the authors warn. The data show the crisis is no longer a distant threat. It’s here.

A Planet on the Brink

Twenty-two of the planet’s thirty-four key “vital signs” are now at record levels: heat, ocean temperatures, ice loss, and extreme weather. Greenland and Antarctica are melting faster than expected. The oceans are warmer and more acidic than ever, and forests are burning at historic rates.

The human footprint is at the heart of it. Global energy use from coal, oil, and gas keeps growing, while cleaner options still lag far behind. Every week, humanity adds more people, more livestock, and more consumption—stretching the planet’s limits and deepening inequality. The wealthiest 10 percent of the world’s population account for roughly two-thirds of the warming since 1990.

Disasters Are Getting Deadlier and Costlier

The past year has seen a surge in deadly disasters: floods in Texas, billion-dollar wildfires in California, lethal heat waves across India and Europe, and storms that wiped out homes and crops from Asia to the Americas. Since 2000, climate-linked damages have topped $18 trillion worldwide.

These aren’t isolated events. They’re symptoms of a destabilized climate. As the planet warms, we’re seeing more “weather whiplash”: swings between drought and deluge, and fires feeding on the heat they help create.

What We Can Still Do

The report makes clear that solutions already exist. What matters now is how quickly we act and whether policy matches the science. Three big levers stand out:

  1. End the fossil-fuel era. Set clear phase-out timelines, redirect subsidies toward renewables, and scale up storage, grid upgrades, and efficiency.
  2. Protect and restore nature. Forests, wetlands, and oceans absorb carbon and shield communities. Conserving and restoring them is one of the most powerful and affordable climate tools we have.
  3. Transform food and consumption. Cutting food waste, supporting plant-rich diets, and reducing overconsumption—especially among the affluent—can slash emissions while improving health and equity.

Unfortunately, the world is still moving in the opposite direction.

The Power of Social Tipping Points

Change often begins quietly—in living rooms, faith groups, and community halls—long before it shows up in policy. Social scientists call this a tipping point: when a small but steady wave of public resolve becomes impossible to ignore. Even a few percent of the population, acting with persistence and compassion, can shift national priorities.

Right now, many people feel not just discouraged but afraid. Afraid of what’s coming, of how divided we seem, and of whether anything they do can matter. That fear is understandable. It comes from love—love of family, home, and the places we cherish. Talking about that fear openly and without judgment is one of the most powerful things we can do.

Start where you are. Talk to your friends, your children, your congregation, your neighbors. Ask how they’re feeling about what’s happening to the world we share. Listen more than you speak. You don’t have to convince anyone. Just let them know they’re not alone. When fear is shared, it becomes connection, and connection can become courage.

That’s how social tipping points form: through empathy, shared purpose, and everyday acts of care that ripple outward until institutions have no choice but to follow.

A Call for Courage, Connection, and Care

The climate crisis is not only an environmental challenge; it’s a human one. It asks us to remember who we are to each other. Every person, community, and nation has a role to play. Governments can phase out fossil fuels and invest in clean energy. Businesses can innovate and repair what’s been damaged. Citizens can stay engaged, informed, and kind, even when the future feels heavy.

We can root our response in whatever gives our lives meaning—faith, family, duty, compassion. For some, it’s a spiritual call to care for creation. For others, it’s the simple desire to leave their children a world that works. All of those motivations belong.

Here’s what that looks like in practice:
• Talk with empathy. Calm, caring conversations about the climate build trust and dissolve isolation.
• Act locally. Join community efforts to plant trees, cut pollution, or help neighbors recover from floods or heat.
• Support fair policies. Encourage leaders to protect the most vulnerable and to base decisions on both science and compassion.
• Care for yourself and others. Hope is sustained through connection, rest, and community, not guilt.

Every conversation, every policy, every act of courage adds up. Fear may be what wakes us up, but love is what will move us forward.

The planet’s vital signs are indeed flashing red, but the human spirit still holds immense capacity for cooperation and care. If we meet this moment with empathy and humility, we can turn away from climate chaos and toward renewal—a future built not just on survival, but on shared purpose and grace.

Why California Needs Emission Budgets to Close Its Climate Blind Spot

Posted by CLR

California has built a global reputation for climate leadership, with some of the most ambitious policies in the world. But even a leader can’t steer effectively without a clear dashboard. Right now, California’s climate policy suffers from a major transparency gap — a lack of clear, public accounting that connects its reduction targets to the total carbon budget consistent with the Paris Agreement.

The Missing Link: From Targets to Trajectory

California tracks annual emissions and sets percentage reduction goals for 2030 and 2045, but those figures tell us little about whether the state’s pathway actually aligns its targets and with limiting global warming to 1.5 °C. Without a defined emission budget, there’s no way to see whether California’s planned reductions add up to its fair share of the global carbon limit and are aligned with its targets — or whether it’s quietly overspending its climate allowance.

Why Transparency Matters More Than Ever

Other jurisdictions, like the United Kingdom and Germany, use national CO₂ budgets to quantify the relationship between near-term policies and long-term temperature goals. That allows scientists, policymakers, and the public to detect both implementation gaps (whether policies are on track) and ambition gaps (whether those policies are strong enough).

In California, we can’t even begin that assessment. The data exist, but they aren’t organized or communicated in a way that links the state’s emissions to a finite carbon limit. As a result, we have a sophisticated set of tools — cap-and-trade, renewable mandates, vehicle standards — without a clear sense of whether they collectively keep us within climate safety bounds.

What a Carbon Budget Would Add

A CO₂ budget translates the abstract Paris temperature targets into a concrete number: the total amount of emissions California can produce while still contributing fairly to global goals. This benchmark doesn’t replace existing policies — it grounds them.
By defining that total, the state could:

  • Evaluate whether its targets are ambitious enough and whether implementation is aligned with the target.
  • Track whether real-world emissions are staying within the budget.
  • Communicate transparently how each sector contributes to overall progress.

Why California Needs Emission Budgets to Close Its Climate Blind Spot

California has built a global reputation for climate leadership, with some of the most ambitious policies in the world. But even a leader can’t steer effectively without a clear dashboard. Right now, California’s climate policy suffers from a major transparency gap — a lack of clear, public accounting that connects its reduction targets to the total carbon budget consistent with the Paris Agreement.

From Leadership to Clarity

California doesn’t need to assume it’s falling short — but it does need to know. Adopting a system of periodic emission budgets would transform guesswork into accountability, allowing the public and decision-makers to see, year by year, whether the state’s climate spending stays within planetary means.

If California wants to remain a climate leader, it should lead not just in ambition, but in clarity. Emission budgets — regularly updated and publicly tracked — are how we make that leadership measurable.

California’s Agency Reports: A Helpful Tool — With Big Gaps

Posted by CLR

Each year, California lawmakers pass hundreds of new laws, nearly 1,000 in 2024 alone. Many require agencies to report back on how well those laws are working. But most of those reports never make it to the public, or even to the Legislature.

The Agency Reports Portal, maintained by the Office of Legislative Counsel, has been around for more than a decade. It’s a valuable resource that lets anyone search for reports that state agencies are legally required to file, by agency, year, or topic. Despite its usefulness, few people know it exists.

It also could be much more powerful. The problem is what’s not there. According to CalMatters reporting, of 867 reports due between January 1 and December 9, 2024, 84% had not been filed. Even among those that were submitted, about half were late. Some agencies say they completed their reports but never properly filed them; others simply missed the deadline. In some cases, reports can sit in limbo awaiting approval before being sent on.

This lack of follow-through makes it harder for lawmakers, and the public, to see what’s working and what isn’t. If you care about how the state spends your tax dollars, check out agencyreports.ca.gov. Just keep in mind: if a report isn’t there, it might not mean it doesn’t exist. It might just not have been filed. Transparency depends on more than laws. It depends on implementation follow-through.

Follow through might be encouraged if the portal also posted in red the agencies that are delinquent and if agencies were ordered to review the Legislative Analysist’s website and to file missing reports in their possession within 6 months.

Climate Bills Sitting on the Governor’s Desk

Posted by CLR

As the 2025 legislative session wraps up, several climate-forward bills are sitting on the Governor’s desk waiting for his signature. These bills together would strengthen California’s commitment to clean energy, local resilience, and fair governance. Here’s why these five bills matter — and why they deserve his signature.

AB 1167 (Berman et al) & SB 24 (McNerney et al): Stop Utilities from Charging Ratepayers for Lobbying

Update: AB 1167 Signed by the Governor; SB 24 Vetoed

For years, investor-owned utilities have passed the cost of political lobbying and image-polishing campaigns onto ratepayers. AB 1167 and SB 24 would close that loophole. Together they ensure that shareholder-funded advocacy stays separate from customer bills, bring new transparency, and empower the Public Advocate’s Office to enforce fairness.

At a time when Californians are struggling with record-high utility costs, this reform is basic accountability. Customers shouldn’t have to bankroll the political influence of the companies that send them their bills.

SB 279 (McNerney): Expanding On-Farm and Community Composting

Update: Signed by the Governor

Composting is one of the simplest, most powerful climate solutions — and SB 279 removes barriers for the people already doing the work. The bill lets farms, schools, and community sites compost more organics on-site without facing expensive industrial-scale permits.

That means less waste trucked to landfills, fewer methane emissions, and richer soils across the state. It’s a straightforward way to cut climate pollution while empowering local growers and neighborhoods.

SB 30 (Cortese): Ending the Export of Dirty Diesel Locomotives

Update: Signed by the Governor

California shouldn’t be exporting its pollution. SB 30 prevents decommissioned diesel locomotives and other on-track equipment from being resold or donated for continued use elsewhere unless they meet modern emissions standards. The logic is simple: if engines are too dirty for California’s air, they’re too dirty for anyone’s air.

SB 63 (Wiener / Arreguín): Giving the Bay Area the Power to Fund Transit

Update: Signed by the Governor

Transit is climate infrastructure. SB 63 authorizes a Bay Area-wide vote on a modest regional sales tax dedicated to public transportation. It creates accountability, financial oversight, and regional coordination — the ingredients transit needs to survive and thrive. With ridership still recovering and service gaps widening, this bill gives voters a voice in shaping a sustainable transportation future.

Each of these bills tackles a different piece of the climate puzzle: accountability, waste reduction, clean technology, and sustainable mobility. Together they move California closer to its carbon-neutral goals while centering equity and community solutions.

Governor Newsom has until October 12 to act. Signing these measures into law would reaffirm California’s role as a global climate leader and show that bold environmental policy can also mean fairness, affordability, and empowerment.

Future Generations and California: Lessons from Wales

Posted by CLR

In 2015, the Welsh Parliament passed the Well-being of Future Generations Act, a world first. It legally requires public bodies to act in the interests of people not yet born. The Act sets out seven national well-being goals, from prosperity and health to resilient ecosystems and global responsibility, and obliges agencies to plan long-term, work preventively, and integrate across sectors. An independent Future Generations Commissioner was created to hold government accountable.

Nearly a decade later, the Act has reshaped governance in Wales. Public bodies publish well-being objectives and reports. Local Public Services Boards prepare collective well-being plans. High-profile decisions, such as cancelling a billion-dollar motorway, have been justified on long-term grounds. Since the Act came into force, Wales has climbed to one of the highest recycling rates in the world, now over 66%, a tangible sign of how future-focused governance can deliver measurable results. The framework is not flawless since environmental goals lag behind social ones, and fiscal constraints often pull leaders back toward short-term fixes, but it has embedded the idea that future generations have legal standing in policy.

A Global Trend

Wales is not alone.

•        New Zealand has built a “Well-being Budget” process into fiscal policy, linking expenditure to long-term social and intergenerational outcomes. It is also considering adopting a similar law.  , an effort headed by the Tomorrow Together Aotearoa coalition.

•        Australia has adopted a national “Measuring What Matters” framework to track progress beyond GDP, and is evaluating the Wellbeing of Future Generations Bill 2025.

•        International organisations such as the OECD and United Nations now cite Wales as a model for embedding intergenerational justice into governance.

The message is clear: governments are beginning to realise that GDP growth alone cannot safeguard the future.

Why California Should Pay Attention

California faces many of the same intergenerational challenges: climate risk, water scarcity, biodiversity loss, housing stress, and persistent inequality. These cannot be solved in a single budget cycle. And yet the state’s politics, like most democracies, remain dominated by short-term pressures.

A California Future Generations Act could change that. It would oblige agencies, from Caltrans to the Department of Water Resources, to demonstrate how policies align with the well-being of Californians decades into the future. A Future Generations Commissioner could scrutinise budgets and infrastructure projects through a 30- or 50-year lens, providing an independent check on short-termism.

More Than Symbolism

Critics dismiss such frameworks as symbolic. Wales shows that they can be more. While the Act has not solved all structural problems, it has influenced concrete decisions, elevated long-term thinking, and created a culture of accountability. Symbolism, when embedded in law and supported by oversight, becomes substance.

For California, the question is not whether such an Act would be a silver bullet. It would not. The question is whether the state is willing to institutionalise a duty to look beyond the next election or budget cycle, to align today’s decisions with tomorrow’s needs.

A Call to Lead

California prides itself on leadership, from climate policy to consumer rights, it has often set the pace for the nation. Learning from Wales, New Zealand, and Australia, it could do the same for future generations.

The alternative is to continue governing crisis by crisis, year by year. But for a state that calls itself the innovation capital of the world, is that really enough?

Upcoming IEMAC Meeting

Posted by CLR

IEMAC will be meeting on Thursday, September 25, 2025 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. PDT (or until the close of business) at the Klamath Room CalEPA Environmental Protection Agency Building 1001 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. Remote in options include telephone and zoom. Details here.

Among other things, the IEMAC will be discussing updates to on its conflict of interest policies as well as updates from the Legislature on re-authorization of California’s carbon markets.

Subcommittee No. 4 on Climate Crisis, Resources, Energy and Transportation to Meet on Climate Expenditures Proposed by the Administration

Posted by CLR

February 19, 2025 – Informational Hearing

The subject of the hearing appears to be an examination of how the Governor’s Administration proposes to spend climate funding from Proposition 4, and how the proposal differs from the original proposal crafted by the Legislature.

The hearing can be viewed via live stream on the Assembly’s website at https://www.assembly.ca.gov/schedules-publications/todays-events

Role of Oil Money in the California Legislature

Posted by CLR

California Environmental Voters (formerly California League of Conservation Voters) has been preparing an environmental score card to rate state legislatures since 1977 and just awarded California a B this year for its 2024 environmental and climate action, noting that many opportunities to reduce emissions were left on the table despite record disasters from fires. They note in a recent OpEd to CalMatters that based on their 50 years of observation: “The main obstacle to government action at the scale this crisis demands are corporate polluters as one of the biggest financial spenders on elections and lobbying in California. The California Environmental Scorecard started tracking legislators that accept money from Big Oil at the turn of the decade.”

Oil money continues to play a potent force in California politics. Based on data from the Secretary of State, CalMatters reports that big oil and big tech spent nearly $168 million to influence California lawmakers in in the fall quarter of 2024 alone. The spending spree continued into 2025 with millions spent in attempts to delete the Polluters Pay Superfund Act and other climate legislation.

California Environmental Voters notes that legislators who accept oil money are more likely to vote against environmental initiatives than those who refuse such contributions. Just looking at Democratic lawmakers, those who took oil money had an average voting record on environmental legislation that was 25% lower than their peers who did not. To be fair, their scores were penalized just for receiving oil money, but the penalty accounts for only a small difference in the score.  The bulk of the discrepancy stems from their voting history on environmental issues.

On a more hopeful note, the trend of accepting oil money is on the decline. In 2021, 65% of legislators took oil money, while in 2024 that was down to 51%. Only 30% of Democrats in the Senate and 35% in the Assembly took oil money in 2024. Amongst Republicans, 100% took oil money.

Meeting of the AB 32 Environmental Justice Advisory Committee

Posted by CLR

The first meeting of the Assembly Bill (AB) 32 Environmental Justice Advisory Committee (EJAC) for 2025 is scheduled for February 13, 2025. The public can attend in person or remotely. Details below.

Date:   Thursday, February 13, 2025
Time:              1:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.
Location:         The meeting is being held in-person in Sacramento and remote via Zoom.
CalEPA HQ Building | Sierra Hearing Room, Second Floor | 1001 ” I ” Street, Sacramento, California

Join Virtually:    Zoom (please register ahead of the meeting)
Passcode:           876719

By Telephone:    888 363 4734 (US Toll Free)
Conference code:    176024

New bill would let homeowners and their insurers sue Big Oil for climate disasters

Posted by CLR

Climate change is no longer a future problem—it’s here, and Californians are feeling its effects more than ever. From devastating wildfires to catastrophic flooding, the state has been on the front lines of extreme weather events, and these disasters are taking a huge toll on the state’s and individuals’ lives and wallets. But now, a new bill in the California State Legislature aims to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for their role in fueling the climate crisis—and it could provide much-needed relief for both victims of climate disasters and insurers.

What is SB 222?

Senate Bill 222 (SB 222), introduced by State Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Senator Sasha Renée Pérez (D-Pasadena), would create a legal pathway for individuals and insurers to sue fossil fuel companies for damages caused by climate disasters. The bill claims that oil and gas companies have misled the public about the impact of their products on climate change, and this misinformation has contributed to increasingly severe weather events in California.

If the bill passes, Californians who experience property damage or bodily harm from these disasters would be able to sue the responsible fossil fuel companies for compensation. The bill also provides a route for insurers, including the California FAIR Plan (the state’s insurer of last resort), to recover the costs of claims related to climate change-related damages.

How Does the Bill Work?

Under SB 222, people who have suffered damages of $10,000 or more due to a climate disaster can file a lawsuit against the companies they believe are responsible. The key here is that the companies would be held liable for their role in spreading misleading or deceptive information about the link between fossil fuel products and climate change.

The bill makes it clear that fossil fuel companies would be jointly, severally, and strictly liable for the damages caused, meaning they could be held fully accountable for the harm they’ve caused. And if plaintiffs win their cases, they would be entitled to full compensation, including noneconomic and punitive damages, to ensure that they are made whole.

This would also apply to all Californians who are impacted by climate disasters, such as wildfires and floods, as the bill defines these events as “injuries in fact” for residents harmed by them. Essentially, the bill gives any California resident who’s affected by a climate disaster the right to pursue legal action against fossil fuel companies.

What About Insurance?

The bill isn’t just about helping individuals—it also gives a boost to the insurance industry. In recent years, insurance companies in California have struggled with rising costs due to climate disasters. To address this, SB 222 would allow insurers to seek damages from fossil fuel companies for the costs they pay out on climate-related claims.

The California FAIR Plan, a state-backed insurance program for people who can’t find coverage through private insurers, would be able to sue these companies on behalf of policyholders affected by large-scale wildfires or other climate-related disasters. This could help reduce the burden on both insurers and homeowners who have seen their premiums skyrocket.

The bill also includes provisions for an independent advisory body that will assess the financial impact of climate disasters on the FAIR Plan and guide insurers on whether they should pursue subrogation (seeking reimbursement from the responsible party). This could ultimately help stabilize California’s insurance market, which has been facing huge challenges as insurers pull out of the state due to the increasing risk of climate-related events.

Why Does This Matter?

SB 222 is about more than just lawsuits—it’s about holding the fossil fuel industry accountable for the climate crisis they’ve helped create. California is already experiencing the harsh realities of climate change, and these disasters are only going to get worse. By passing this bill, lawmakers are saying that the companies that have contributed the most to the problem should help pay for the damage they’ve caused.

Senator Wiener, who introduced the bill, put it simply: “Californians are paying a devastating price for the climate crisis, as escalating disasters destroy entire communities and drive insurance costs through the roof. By forcing the fossil fuel companies driving the climate crisis to pay their fair share, we can help stabilize our insurance market and make the victims of climate disasters whole.”

Supporters of SB 222 argue that this is an important step in addressing California’s home insurance crisis and ensuring that people who are impacted by climate disasters don’t have to bear the financial burden alone.

The Road Ahead

While SB 222 has garnered support from environmental groups, it’s not without controversy. Many U.S. insurers have significant investments in fossil fuel companies, and there could be potential conflicts of interest when it comes to pursuing legal action against those companies.

Still, experts argue that this bill could create a clearer pathway for insurers to recover costs from fossil fuel companies—especially if states make it a requirement for insurers to take action as a condition for rate increases. Given the mounting financial pressure on both individuals and insurance companies, SB 222 could be a crucial tool for addressing the escalating costs of climate change.

Conclusion

SB 222 represents a bold move to tackle the dual challenges of rising insurance costs and the increasing frequency of climate disasters in California. By holding fossil fuel companies accountable for their role in climate change, the bill provides a legal avenue for both residents and insurers to recover damages and reduce the financial strain caused by wildfires, floods, and other extreme weather events. As the bill moves through the legislative process, it will undoubtedly spark debates on the role of the insurance industry, the fossil fuel sector, and the responsibility they share in addressing the climate crisis.

For Californians who are bearing the brunt of climate change, SB 222 may offer some much-needed relief—and a chance to push back against the companies that have fueled the crisis for far too long.