In 2020, former Oregon Gov. Kate Brown signed an executive order to achieve the state’s carbon reduction goals. The order directs state agencies to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Three years later, we check in with Nora Apter, a senior program director for climate at the Oregon Environmental Council, about where the plan stands now and the progress Oregon’s Department of Environmental Quality is making on climate goals.
The following transcript was created by a computer and edited by a volunteer:
Dave Miller: This is Think Out Loud on OPB. I’m Dave Miller. Three years ago, then Oregon Governor Kate Brown signed an executive order creating an Oregon Climate Action Plan. The goal was to reduce greenhouse gas emissions throughout the state. We’re going to get an update on the plan today because there’s a lot going on. A few weeks ago, the Department of Environmental Quality released its final proposed rules for its Climate Protection Program. The State also announced the nonprofit that will focus on spending the estimated hundreds of millions of dollars that will be generated from the program. Meanwhile, the Oregon Supreme Court is going to hear arguments later this month in a case brought by a coalition of industry groups. They’re asking the court to block the program from taking effect. Nora Apter is the senior program director for climate at the Oregon Environmental Council. She follows all of this very closely and she joins us once again to talk about it. Welcome back to the show.
Nora Apter: Thanks for having me, Dave.
Miller: So can you just first remind us what Governor Brown required in her executive order in 2020?
Apter: Sure. So folks might remember this was a sweeping executive order that Governor Brown issued in March 2020. The executive order did three really big things: It established new greenhouse gas reduction goals for the state; It directed our state agencies and missions to prioritize climate action and help achieve those goals; And it also included a series of specific directives for our state agencies to help achieve those emissions reductions and prioritize communities on the front lines of climate impact.
So really, this still is the most significant and meaningful executive action on climate in our state’s history and has really set our state up for success in transitioning to a clean energy future, protecting communities on the front lines of climate impact and creating clean energy jobs for families and workers across the state.
Miller: Before we talk about the new finalized proposed rules for a really significant piece of this, can you just tell us what has already been set up? What is already up and running?
Apter: Sure. And there’s a lot to cover. I will emphasize one of the most significant pieces of the Oregon Climate Action Plan and really a cornerstone of Oregon’s recent climate action in general, which is the Climate Protection Program or CPP. This is a program that was developed over the course of an 18-month rulemaking process with extensive community and stakeholder input. It was adopted in December 2021 after the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) received more than 7600 public comments, the overwhelming majority [of which] were in favor of that program and strong climate protections.
The CPP will dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Oregon over the next 30 years and in doing so, it will deliver critical near term public health and employment and economic benefits for Oregon communities. So there are three defining features of the Climate Protection Program which, as you mentioned, is facing a number of threats right now. But first, I’ll focus on what this program is. A key aspect of the CPP is its declining limit, or cap, on greenhouse gas emissions from oil companies and gas utilities in Oregon. It will effectively require those companies to cut their emissions in half by 2035 and 90% by 2050.
The program also regulates site specific greenhouse gas emissions at major industrial facilities. So think semiconductor manufacturers or data centers. Those industrial emitters are regulated by what’s called a “best available emissions reduction” approach. And then finally, the Climate Protection Program created a groundbreaking community climate investment program that will enable, potentially, hundreds of millions of dollars annually to be invested in clean energy projects to benefit environmental justice in other communities in Oregon.
So, in short, the climate protection program is absolutely vital to achieving Oregon’s climate goals as well as to positioning our state for success and creating jobs and economic benefits in the clean energy economy.
Miller: What’s at stake in the final proposed rules that were just released a few weeks ago?
Apter: To clarify, the rulemaking underway right now is really focused on defining certain pieces of this historic Climate Protection Program. So right now oil and gas companies and their allies are fighting tooth and nail to hold on to their antiquated climate polluting and help-harmful ways of doing business. The oil and gas industry is fighting these protections for climate and communities through two main venues: they’re seeking to weaken the CPP through rulemaking as well as to overturn the program entirely through litigation.
So on the rulemaking front, DEQ, the Department of Environmental Quality, recently released these draft rules that will be absolutely vital to making sure the Climate Protection Program stays on track to achieve its stated climate and public health and economic goals and deliver benefits for environmental justice and other communities in Oregon. So the choice that DEQ makes in this rulemaking will impact the success of this program now and in the future and, in doing so, will also impact energy costs for Oregon consumers for decades to come. So there are a few major issues with the DEQs current proposed rules amendment.
One of the most consequential pieces will determine how fossil gas utilities in Oregon can comply with their required emissions reductions under the Climate Protection Program’s declining cap. The cap of the CPP is really essential to the overall integrity of this program and moving the needle on climate in our state.
So under the CPP rules, as I mentioned, regulated oil and gas companies in Oregon can fulfill their required pollution reductions by either directly reducing their own pollution or investing in the Community Climate Investment Program…
Miller: Let me just stop you right there. I mean, in terms of the first way to actually meet these rules, drastically reducing their greenhouse gas emissions. If essentially your entire product, your business model, is based on burning fossil fuels and putting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere, if that’s your entire business, you can’t do that and stay in your current business, right? You have to find some other option?
Apter: I wanna note too that yes, these are very significant emissions reductions, but recognizing that this is a major change in how these industries operate, there’s an extensive runway, right? This is a 30-year program. So there are years ahead in terms of how the gas utilities and oil companies will achieve these emissions reductions. And the Community Climate Investment Program is a key piece of that, right? So they’re not only asked to reduce their direct emissions, but they’re also given this opportunity to invest in communities and projects around Oregon as part of that compliance obligation. So there really is significant flexibility built into the program for regulated oil and gas companies to achieve the required emissions reductions.
Miller: Am I right that one of the big sticking points has been the extent to which these utilities can, instead of paying into the Community Climate Investment Program, instead pay for out of state programs that will then count on their side of the ledger for carbon emissions reductions?
Apter: Yeah, exactly. So DEQs current proposed rules would essentially allow our natural gas utilities in the state to rely on out-of-state renewable natural gas or biomethane and hydrogen projects to comply with the CPP. That would be detrimental to achieving the overall clean air, public health and economic benefits of the CPP. As you might expect, these out-of-state projects and investments do not deliver direct benefits for Oregon’s air quality, for its workers, ratepayers or communities.
These out-of-state investments do not limit fossil fuel infrastructure expansion in Oregon and essentially will allow our utilities to continue delivering natural gas or methane to Oregon customers. They’ll continue making investments in the gas system while also purchasing what are essentially offsets in other parts of the country.
Miller: Can you help us understand something? So everything you’ve just said makes perfect sense because you’ve been focusing, in all those statements that this is out of state. And so none of the benefits you’ve just outlined would actually happen, they wouldn’t happen in Oregon. Could these companies argue that globally, what they would be doing would make a difference? In other words, would this actually lead to a global reduction in emissions?
Apter: I think those companies would certainly make that claim. We also know that we have an opportunity right now in Oregon to transition to more cost effective electrification that will provide those direct benefits for Oregonians. When we’re thinking about so-called renewable natural gas, that is still primarily methane. So even those projects out of state are still posing the same public health and safety risks as traditional natural gas. And again, as part of the original 18-month long Climate Protection Program rulemaking, the intent of this program is to deliver benefits for Oregonians.
And so these out of state projects don’t create jobs for Oregon workers, they’re not improving our air quality, they’re not supporting economic vitality. These are not investments in our state. And at the same time, we’re really concerned that, as you mentioned, by allowing these out of state investments in renewable natural gas or hydrogen, this proposal will actually divert funding from the CPP’s approved Community Climate Investment Program. So it’s a one-two punch in terms of really derailing the intended climate and health and economic benefits of the CPP.
Miller: You were on the Advisory Committee for Rulemaking for DEQ. It had 14 people. 12 of them represented fossil fuel companies in one way or another, meaning that the companies that are going to be regulated by these rules had a hand in crafting them. What effect do you think that had on these final draft rules?
Apter: Yeah, I think it’s really fair to point that out, Dave. So the majority of the members on the advisory committee represent companies that have a financial stake in the outcome of these rules. So, as you said, I was one of just two members that represent public interest organizations. And, unlike the original CPP rulemaking, there were not any community-based organizations or environmental justice or labor representatives on that advisory committee. And so what this means is right now during the comment period, that is open on the rules, there’s an even greater need for the public to weigh in and make their voice heard. That was absolutely consequential in determining the original CPP rules and will be decisive in making sure that this rulemaking maintains the integrity of this program and that it ensures those direct public health and economic benefits for Oregon communities.
Miller: I should say there’s going to be a public hearing that DEQ is holding on September 18 - that’s at 4 p.m. And right now the comment period for the rules that we’re talking about, closes four days later on September 22. So we’ve been talking about the rulemaking which is a key piece of the implementation of this Program. But the program is facing, it seems, a more existential threat. Can you explain the legal challenge?
Apter: Regulated industries have filed three separate lawsuits in the Oregon State Court of Appeals challenging the Climate Protection Program overall. And really there are no two ways around it. This litigation is a coordinated act of desperation on behalf of the fossil fuel industry. These companies know what they’re selling is a threat to the health and wellbeing of Oregonians. And they’re fighting the State so they can continue to prioritize profits over people. As I mentioned, DEQ held an extensive public engagement process in crafting the Climate Protection Program. So really these lawsuits are a slap in the face to the will of the people and the sound democratic process that DEQ went through in adopting this program.
These companies who are suing the state are, on the one hand, publicly claiming to be part of the climate solution while simultaneously trying to overturn these protections for climate and communities. And what’s even more egregious is that, in the case of some of our gas utilities, they’re actually trying to use ratepayer dollars to pay for their anti-climate lobbying expenses and pro-gas marketing propaganda. One utility, Avista, actually went so far as to ask customers to pay for their legal fees against the state. It’s pretty ridiculous.
Miller: In the big picture, are we on track right now to meet the emissions reductions targets in this program? Meaning, if you zoom out the furthest, a 90% reduction of 2017 levels by the year 2050. Are we heading there?
Apter: It’s a good question, Dave. And again, this rulemaking will really be decisive in determining whether we stay on track to achieve those emissions targets. We have a lot of concerns with allowing utilities to achieve their emissions reductions through these out-of-state investments. And the rulemaking will really be consequential in making sure that the program stays on track.
Miller: Let me make sure I understand. So are you saying that if the rules don’t change - the rules as written - you think that that does not send us on the trajectory that would actually accomplish the stated goal of the program?
Apter: That’s correct.
Miller: Do you have a sense for how much we would miss because of it? I mean, if we’re talking about this particular piece of it, of being able to essentially buy offsets, buy credits out of state, how significant is that if the rest of the program were to stay in place? And I should say we have about a minute left for your answer.
Apter: As I mentioned, this program is about climate. It’s about making sure that we achieve what science says is necessary to avoid even more catastrophic impacts. It’s also about people in Oregon, making sure that environmental justice communities are able to benefit from this transition to a clean energy economy, that they benefit from the public health impacts from cleaner air, and the job creation benefits of projects in Oregon. As currently drafted, these proposed rules will derail those benefits. So it is really important that the public weigh in right now and help ensure that the agency course corrects.
Miller: Nora Apter, thanks very much.
Apter: Thanks.
Miller: Nora Apter is a senior program director for climate at the Oregon Environmental Council. She joined us to talk about the state’s Climate Protection Program. We are in the first week of a couple weeks of a public comment process for finalized draft rules.
Contact “Think Out Loud®”
If you’d like to comment on any of the topics in this show or suggest a topic of your own, please get in touch with us on Facebook, send an email to thinkoutloud@opb.org, or you can leave a voicemail for us at 503-293-1983. The call-in phone number during the noon hour is 888-665-5865.