STATE CARBON PRICING NETWORK

The State Carbon Pricing Network (SCPN) is a network of hundreds of advocates, legislators, and experts spearheading carbon pricing efforts in their state. It is a platform for campaign leaders to connect and collaborate with one another, exchanging wisdom and resources.

The SCPN provides a range of critical services to state campaigns, including:

Deep dive webinars on hot-button carbon pricing topics, such as the role of carbon pricing in a just transition, the conservative case for carbon pricing, the Green New Deal, and more.

Campaign training resources for every stage of your campaign, with guidance on understanding the legislative process, working with the media, building a coalition, and engaging different stakeholders.

Monthly phone calls for carbon pricing leaders across the country to provide updates, successes, and challenges from their states’ campaigns, every third Wednesday at 3pm ET.

Consistent media coverage on carbon pricing news and developments.

Online platforms, including a collaborative Linkedin group, to encourage interactions among advocates and legislators across the country.

State-specific research and policy analysis on the economic and environmental benefits of carbon pricing.

CAMPAIGN AND POLICY UPDATES

OVERVIEW OF THE CARBON PRICING MOVEMENT

In the wake of striking federal inaction on climate change, states have taken a leadership role in the fight for carbon pricing. Campaigns have emerged in dozens of states, with Northeastern and Western US leading the way.

16 states have introduced carbon pricing bills this year

California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New YorkOregon, Vermont, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Washington

New England

  • New England is paving the way in the fight for carbon pricing. Every New England state has introduced carbon pricing legislation in 2019, with Massachusetts serving as the undeniable leader of the pack. Bay State legislators have proposed a fee on carbon pollution every year since 2013, and this year’s bills boast more co-sponsors than ever before. It remains to be seen if legislation will be enacted this session, but keep your eyes peeled  for a public hearing on Rep. Benson’s and Sen. Barrett’s bills in the coming weeks.
  • In Maine, the state’s first-ever carbon tax bill faced significant opposition at its public hearing and did not pass out of the Committee on Energy Utilities and Technology. But with a new, more progressive governor in office, the state will likely continue enacting stronger climate policy.
  • Connecticut Rep. Jonathan Steinberg has introduced carbon pricing bills for three years now. This year’s bill struggled just to get a hearing.
  • Two carbon pricing bills were introduced in New Hampshire; one is a study bill and one imposes a $20 per carbon ton fee. Both were tabled this session.
  • Lawmakers in Vermont have once again proposed carbon pricing, but the legislation did not advance.  
  • The Energize Rhode Island coalition has faced a slow start, but in March, helped introduce legislation in both the House and Senate. While the bills are not likely to go forward this session, the state did approve long-awaited funding for a carbon pricing study.

Mid-Atlantic

  • The Mid-Atlantic has also seen its share of carbon pricing activity.
  • In New York, the NY Renews coalition has been pushing for strong climate legislation; carbon pricing language has been included in three bills in both the Assembly and Senate. The state passed the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act this June.
  • Gov. Murphy announced New Jersey will rejoin RGGI. At the same time, NJ Student Climate Activists have been actively working on developing a “carbon cashback” policy that will likely be introduced next year.
  • Pennsylvania’s Environmental Quality board accepted a Clean Air Council  petition to establish a cap-and-trade program. Over 200 environmental, health, and religious groups, businesses and municipalities have now signed on. The Governor has supported further study of this petition, and the Department of Environmental Protection will return to board with recommendations in the next few months.
  • Maryland’s carbon pricing bill, sponsored by Delegates David Fraser-Hidalgo and Ben Kramer, was tabled.

Midwest

  • Not a whole lot is happening in the Midwest in regards to pricing pollution. However, early coalition-building efforts are in the works in Illinois. Minnesota also now has a Democratic majority in the House and successfully established an Energy and Climate Committee.

South

  • There aren’t many notable carbon pricing advancements in the American South. Virginia was supposed to join RGGI, but that never happened.
  • In Texas, a bill imposing a $5 per ton fee on greenhouse gases was introduced in March but has not received a hearing.
  • Know of an active carbon pricing campaign in the South that we missed? Contact the network.

Mountain

  • Rep. Joel Briscoe has once again introduced carbon pricing legislation in Utah. Last year, the legislation garnered attention due to its bipartisan support, but both of the Republicans that cosponsored that bill have retired.  After the bill failed to gain momentum in the legislature, a group of citizens banding together as Clean the Darn Air have launched a campaign to put carbon pricing on the ballot in 2020.
  • In Montana, carbon pricing bills were put forward by lawmakers for the first time, but they died in committee.
  • In New Mexico, Governor Lujan Grisham signed an executive order committing the state to aggressive action against climate change, and a carbon pricing bill died in committee in early March.
  • Carbon pricing has not yet been introduced in Colorado at the state level, but advocates in Denver are mobilizing a push for a November ballot initiative.

Pacific

  • There’s lots to keep up with in the Pacific US. California’s cap-and-trade program remains the only state-level, multi-sector carbon pricing scheme in the country, and additional legislation seeking to tax products based on their carbon intensity was introduced this session.
  • Oregon’s Clean Energy Jobs bill was introduced again this session, and appeared to be gaining momentum. The passage of this comprehensive cap-and-trade program was a noted priority of Gov. Kate Brown, and efforts to push the legislation forwards were led by the Renew Oregon coalition. A floor vote never occurred following the Republican Senate walk-out.
  • After failing to pass carbon pricing at the ballot two times in both 2016 and 2018, Washington State legislators introduced cap-and-trade legislation and a bill that will impose a gradually-increasing, $10 per ton fee on carbon pollution. But, neither gained much momentum, and the state has opted to combat climate change in ways other than carbon pricing.
  • Hawaii lawmakers introduced five carbon pricing bills this session after the state’s Climate Commission unanimously called on the legislature to pass a carbon tax. One bill, repealing the state fuel tax and replacing it with a $6.35 per carbon ton fee, unanimously passed through the Senate but never got a hearing in the House.  A carbon pricing study bill was also defeated.

ARKANSAS

State Update

While there is not currently any legislation for carbon pricing in Arkansas this session, the Citizens Climate Lobby is working hard to pass clean energy initiatives. With a 6th chapter being finalized now, Arkansas’ CCL is supporting SB 145 in the Senate, which would expand renewable energy use and make it more accessible. This bill, sponsored by Senator David Wallace (R), passed the House and Senate as of March 12th, and is awaiting action by the Governor.

2019 Legislation

The 2019 Legislative Session convened on January 14th and will adjourn on May 2nd.

Political Context

  • Republican Governor Asa Hutchinson supported Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, and has not supported emission-curbing policies.
  • Republicans have an overwhelming majority in the Senate (26-9) and House (76-24).

Past Legislation

N/A

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

N/A

Further Reading

Not Yet Available

Key Figures

CALIFORNIA

State Update

California has long been a state leader in climate change, imposing some of the most ambitious reduction targets and strongest regulations. It is currently the only state with an economy-wide cap-and-trade program, though Oregon looks to join this prestigious group in the coming months. The cap-and-trade program generated $525 million in revenue in its first year alone, and more than 7 billion in aggregate since 2013. It has also been successful in helping California meet its 2020 emission reduction target, which it surpassed in 2018, and stay on track to meet its 2030 reduction goals. A carbon tax study bill has also been introduced this session. SB 43 is making its way through Committee and would have the Air Resource Board conduct a study that looks into replacing current sales tax with one that takes into account carbon intensity of products.

2019-2020 Legislation

The 2019-2020 Legislative Session began on December 3, 2018 and will adjourn on November 30, 2020.

  • A carbon tax study bill (SB 43) has been introduced by Sen. Ben Allen. The tax would replace the sales-and-use tax with a carbon tax that would be based on the “carbon intensity” of the product.
    • Status: Passed by Senate Environmental Quality Committee (5-2) and by the Senate Governance and Finance Committee (4-2). Passed as amended by the Committee of Appropriations. Ordered to Assembly and referred to the Committee on Natural Resources and the Committee on Revenue and Taxation

Political Context

  • Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom is a long-time environmentalist. He supports former Gov. Jerry Brown’s goal of California producing 100% of its energy from renewable sources by 2045, and has even stated he wants the state to be a “net exporter” of clean power, shipping surplus electricity to neighboring states.
  • Overwhelming Democratic majorities exist in both the Senate (29-11) and House (60-20).  
  • Emission reduction targets:
    • By 2020: 1990 levels
    • By 2030: 40% below 1990 levels
    • By 2050: 80% below 1990 levels

Past Legislation

  • In 2013, California became the first US state to launch a multi-sector, cap-and-trade program. The program regulates the emissions of more than 450 businesses – large electric power plants, large industrial plants, and fuel distributors – that are collectively responsible for about 85% of the state’s total greenhouse gas emissions.
    • Origin of program: In 2006, California’s Global Warming Solution Act (AB 32), introduced by Assembly members Fran Pavley and Fabien Nunez, laid the groundwork for California’s cap-and-trade program. The Act called for the California Air Resources Board (CARB) – the state’s clean air agency – to enact regulations that would allow the state to reduce its emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. These regulations ultimately came in the form of an economy-wide cap on emissions.
    • Fee system: Entities regulated by the program are allocated a specific number of carbon allowances each year, an amount that declines annually.
      • The California emissions cap, which stood at 358 million tons of carbon in 2018, will plummet to 200 million by 2030, a 44% decrease.
      • After an entity pollutes beyond its allocated amount, they must purchase additional allowances via quarterly auctions. These allowances, essentially permits to pollute, are sold at a reserve price (minimum price) that increases by 5% annually. For example, in California’s August 2017 auction, allowances were sold for $15.48 per ton, even though the reserve price was $13.57.
      • The carbon market, shaped by how much companies are willing to pay and what demand looks like, determines the price of allowances. Allowance sales are how the program raises revenue, as the initial supply of allowances provided to governments is free.
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 45% invested in reducing state emissions, through renewable energy and energy efficiency measures
      • 35% rebated to households and businesses
      • 15% allocated to energy-intensive and trade-exposed (EITE) industries
      • 5% held in the state reserve
    • Status: A scoping plan for the program is updated every 5 years. In 2015, a provision was added that emissions should be 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. In 2017, legislation (AB 398) extended the cap-and-trade program through 2030.

Further Reading

Key Figures

COLORADO

State Update

While Colorado has not been successful in moving carbon pricing legislation forward at the state level, the state has demonstrated leadership at the city level through initiatives such as the Boulder Climate Action Plan. State activists have been closely watching Utah lead the way in the region. On March 29th, Governor Jared Polis put forward a proposal that would require utilities to factor in the social cost of carbon when making resource planning decisions. Colorado also passed the Climate Action Plan to Reduce Pollution (HB 19-1261) this session. Signed into law on May 30th, the bill establishes statewide greenhouse gas emission reduction goals of 26% by 2025, 50% by 2030, and 90% by 2050 in comparison to 2005 levels.

2019 Legislation

The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 4th and will wrap up on May 11th.

  • A bill (SB 236) proposing that the Colorado Public Utilities Commission consider the social cost of carbon when making utility decisions was introduced  in the Senate.
    • Fee System: Price would start at $46 per ton in 2020 and increase by at least the rate of inflation.
    • Status: The bill, introduced in April, passed the legislature on May 3rd and was signed into law by the governor on May 30th.

Political Context

  • Democrats currently hold the majority in both the House (41-24) and Senate (19-16)
  • Governor Jared Polis (D) made environmental issues a cornerstone of his campaign, and has pledged to ensure the state’s energy supply is 100% renewable by 2040.

Emission reduction targets

    • By 2025: More than 26% below 2005 levels
    • By 2030: More than 50% below 2005 levels
    • By 2050: More than 90% below 2005 levels

Past Legislation

While carbon pricing legislation has not yet been introduced at the state level, the city of Boulder made headlines in 2007, when voters approved an electric-sector carbon tax.

  • In 2007, the city of Boulder passed the Climate Action Plan (CAP), which was branded as America’s first voter-approved tax aiming to address climate change. The fee is based on the amount of electricity consumed.
    • Fee system: The CAP levies a tax on residents and businesses, imposing different rates depending on the sector. Xcel Energy collects the tax on its monthly utility bills, and customers subscribing to wind-generated power are exempt from taxation.
      • The average resident pays $21 per year.
      • The average commercial organization pays $96 per year.
      • The average industrial organization, approximately 13 of the city’s largest energy users, pay $9,600 per year.
      • Based on those three sectors, annual revenue from the fee is about $1.8 million.
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 38% to enhance commercial and industrial building energy efficiency
      • 25% to enhance residential building efficiency
      • 25% for local renewables, EVs, and market innovation
      • 12% for strategy development, outreach, and program evaluation
    • Status: In 2015, the city of Boulder voted to extend the CAP tax through 2023. So far, the tax has generated almost $18 million in revenue.

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

N/A

Further Reading

Denver Advocates Look to get ‘Carbon Pricing’ on November Ballot

Key Figures

CONNECTICUT

State update

Legislators have been vying for an economy-wide fee on carbon pollution for several years now. Such legislation was introduced by Rep. Jonathan Steinberg (D) in each of the last three years. Once again, carbon pricing did not get out of Committee. Some advocates have shifted their focus on the Transportation and Climate Initiative and on reinstating highway tolls; Connecticut is one of the few Eastern Seaboard states that does not have any highway tolls.

2019 Legislation

The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 9th and wrapped up on June 5th.

  • On the Senate side, “An Act Establishing a Carbon Price for Fossil Fuels Sold in Connecticut” (SB 1064) was introduced by Rep. David Michel and Rep. Mary Mushinky.
    • Fee system: Will impose a $15 per carbon ton fee in 2021, rising $5 per year after.
    • Revenue breakdown: 45% returned to employers in state via dividends, 50% to residents, 5% to cover administrative costs.
    • Status: Introduced on March 12 and referred to Joint Committee on the Environment. Deferred after March 18 hearing.

Political Context

  • Democratic Gov. Lamont has promised constituents he will prioritize climate issues during his first term. His goals are ambitious: for the state’s energy portfolio to be 100 percent renewable by 2050, and for all new homes and buildings to be zero carbon by 2035. He’s also advocated for the state to put a price on carbon.
  • Democrats hold majorities in both the Senate (19-16) and House (41-24).
  • There are many new legislators in the state this session who have formed a Progressive Caucus. These lawmakers could be strong legislative champions going into the 2020 session.

Emission reduction targets

    • By 2020: 10% below 1990 levels
    • By 2050: 80% below 2001 levels

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

  • Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative: Connecticut remains a member of RGGI, a regional cap-and-trade program on electric sector emissions between 10 states.
  • Transportation and Climate Initiative: Newly elected Gov. Ned Lamont (D) has announced plans to join TCI, a regional collaboration that would cap emissions from the transportation sector.
  • Carbon Costs Coalition: Connecticut legislators are a part of a multistate alliance between legislators focused on reducing and pricing carbon.

Past Legislation

  • In 2015, Connecticut formed the Governor’s Council on Climate Change to evaluate ways to reach the state’s ambitious greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of 80% below 2001 levels by 2050.
  • In 2017, Rep. Steinberg (D) introduced “An Act Establishing a Carbon Price for Fossil Fuels Sold in Connecticut”(HB7247).
    • Fee system: Starting price is $15 per carbon ton, increasing by $5 annually
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 25% toward climate resilience, efficiency, and renewable energy programs
      • 30% rebated to employers in the state
      • 40% rebated to state residents
      • 5% to administration
    • Result: Did not make it out of committee
  • In 2018, Rep. Steinberg, along with Rep. Cristin Vahey and Rep. Mushinsky, introduced a revenue neutral carbon pricing bill, “An Act Establishing a Carbon Price for Fossil Fuels Sold in Connecticut” (HB 5363).
    • Fee system: Starting price is $15 per carbon ton, increasing by $5 annually
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 50% rebated to residents
      • 45% rebated to employers
      • 5% for administrative purposes
    • Result: Did not make it out of committee

Further Reading

Key Figures

DELAWARE

State Update

Delaware, a founding member of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), pledged this fall to partake in another carbon pricing scheme- the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI), which would cap transportation-sector emissions. But, the idea of imposing a direct, multi-sector fee on carbon pollution hasn’t gained much traction in the state. The League of Women Voters of Delaware conducted a study on statewide carbon pricing in 2015, which found that pricing carbon, either via a direct fee or a regulatory mechanism like cap-and-trade, would significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

2019-2020 Legislation

The 2019-2020 Legislative Session began on January 8th and will wrap up on June 30th.

Political Context

  • Democratic Governor John Carney generally supports strong climate policy. He firmly opposed Trump’s repeal of the Clean Power Plan, and is a member of the U.S. Climate Alliance. He hasn’t advocated for carbon pricing, however.
  • Democratic hold majorities in the Senate (12-9) and House (26-15), but no clear carbon pricing champions have stood out in the legislature. (Consequently, no carbon pricing legislation has been introduced).
  • Emission reduction targets:
    • By 2030: 33% below 2008 levels

Past Legislation

No prior legislation

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

Further Reading

Not Available at this Time

Key Figures

HAWAII

State Update

This session, Hawaii became just the second US state to see a direct fee on carbon be approved by a legislative chamber (Massachusetts was the first, last year). “An Act Relating to Taxation” (HB 1459), which would have repealed the fuel tax and replaced it with a modest, $6.25 per ton carbon price, was unanimously approved by the Senate but never got a hearing in the House.  

The state government has largely supported the idea of carbon pricing; Hawaii’s Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission firmly recommended that lawmakers enact carbon pricing, declaring that a “price on carbon is the most effective single action that will achieve Hawaii’s ambitious and necessary emissions reduction goals.” Hawaii was also the first state in the country to legally commit to a zero-emissions, carbon neutral economy by 2045.

2019-2020 Legislation

The 2019-2020 Legislative Session began on January 16 and will wrap up in May of 2020.  

One Carbon Pricing Bill Passed Through Senate

  • “An Act Relating to Taxation” (SB 1463 / HB 1459) calls for the replacement of an “environmental response, energy, and food security tax” with a carbon emissions tax. The bill, introduced by Sen. Russell Ruderman and Sen. Karl Rhoads, would have repealed the state fuel taxes under the fuel tax law and leave the state with as much revenue as it would otherwise have.
    • Fee system: $6.25 per carbon ton, changing according to department of taxation’s annual recommendation.
    • Revenue is invested in: pollution removal, clean energy initiatives, renewable energy development, and agricultural development.
    • Status: Passed through Senate, tabled in House.

Study Bill Ultimately Defeated

  • “An Act Relating to Carbon Emissions” (HB 1584) would have appropriated funding to the University of Hawaii to conduct a comprehensive study on the effects of a statewide carbon price.
    • Status: Passed through the House and two Senate Committees, but tabled by the Senate Committee on Ways and Means on April 4th.

Other Carbon Pricing Bills Tabled

  • “An Act Relating to a Carbon Tax” (HB 1287), introduced by Rep. Chris Lee and Rep. Amy Perruso.
    • Fee system: $20 per carbon ton, increasing by $5 annually until reaching $55 per ton in 2034
    • Revenue:  50% rebated back to taxpayers, 25% to address hazardous waste, and 25% for clean energy initiatives.
    • Status: Referred to Committee on Energy and Environmental as of January 28th, where it died.
  • “An Act Relating to Statewide Sustainability Initiatives” (HB 1579)
    • Fee system: $15 per ton of carbon (no annual increase)
    • Revenue: All of the revenue invested in renewable energy development, electric vehicles, adaptation efforts, employment transition, and infrastructure.
    • Status: Tabled by two House committees on January 28th.

Political Context

  • Gov. David Ige (D) has been a leader on climate issues and will likely support carbon pricing legislation.
  • Democrats have overwhelming majorities in both the Senate (24-1) and House (46-5). Legislators have noted, however, that these figures can be misleading, as politicians often run as Democrats in order to increase their chances of election.

Past Legislation

  • In 2017, Rep. Kaniela Ing introduced “A Bill for an Act Relating to Environmental Protection” (HB 1991), which aimed to price carbon in the state for the first time.
    • Fee system: $10 per carbon ton, increasing annually by $5 until reaching $40 in 2025.
    • Revenue breakdown: 80% for the state general fund and 20% for pollution detection and removal.  
    • Result: Tabled in committee.

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

  • Carbon Costs Coalition: Hawaii Sen. Mike Gabbard is part of a multistate alliance between legislators focused on reducing and pricing carbon.

Further Reading

Will Hawaii be the first state to price carbon? (Feb. 2019)

Hawaii’s Carbon Pricing Bill Passes Senate with Unanimous Support (March 2019)

Key Figures

ILLINOIS

State Update

The Illinois Pricing Pollution Coalition, comprised of members from the Climate Reality Project and Citizens’ Climate Lobby, is working to introduce a carbon pricing initiative by 2021. The group has been focused on raising awareness and educating the general public on carbon pricing. Decarbonization concepts bills have also been introduced in the House and Senate this session.

2019-2020 Legislation

The 2019-2020 Legislative Session began on January 9th, 2019, and will wrap up on January 6th, 2021.  

  • On the House side, An “Inter-Agency Report on Decarbonization and Economic Opportunities Act” (HB2801) was introduced by Rep. Emanuel Chris Welch.
    • Requires several state agencies in Illinois to develop a broad-based policy approach to decarbonizing the state’s electric sector, with a goal of ending polluting power plants in Illinois by 2030 and creating new economic opportunities in the process.
    • Status: Referred to Renewable Initiatives Subcommittee as of March 6th. It was re-referred to the House Rules Committee on March 29th.
  • The same bill was introduced in the Senate by Sen. Heather Steans as SB2020.
    • Status: Passed Senate Committee of Environment and Conservation on March 14th. It had its third reading in the Senate on April 9th and was re-referred to the Committee on Assignments on April 12th.

Political Context

  • Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker announced plans to join U.S. Climate Alliance, upholding the goals of the Paris Climate Accord. In his inaugural address, he pointedly said, “I believe in science” and spoke of the threat climate change poses. He hasn’t explicitly advocated for carbon pricing, however.
  • Democrats have significant majorities in Senate (40-19) and House (74-44) after enjoying a blue wave in the November midterm elections.

Emission Reduction Targets

    • By 2020: 1990 levels
    • By 2050: 60% below 1990 levels

Past Legislation:

N/A

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

N/A

Further Reading

Not Available at this Time

Key Figures

MAINE

State Update

For the first time in Maine history, legislators introduced a carbon fee in the House that has already been co-sponsored by more than 80 legislators. For eight years, Gov. Paul Lepage (R) largely opposed strong climate action, but the election of Gov. Janet Mills (D) has spurred fresh excitement for the carbon pricing movement. 

On June 7th, the House passed “An Act To Promote Clean Energy Jobs and To Establish the Maine Climate Council” (LD 1679). The Council would be responsible for developing policies to reduce Maine’s carbon emissions by 45% by 2030 and by 80% by 2050. They would be called to submit a state Climate Action Plan by December 1, 2020.

2019–2020 Legislation

The 2019–2020 Legislative Session began on January 2nd, 20019 and will wrap up in April 2020.

  • “An Act to Price Pollution” (HP 343), introduced by Rep. Deane Rykerson (D), places a fee on carbon emissions and establishes a Carbon Content Assessment Fund that would reduce utility rates for electric consumers.
    • Fee system: $5 per ton of carbon, increasing by $5 until reaching $40 by 2028. The fee does not apply to the electric sector.  
    • Revenue: 100% of money rebated back to consumers “in an equitable way” through utility rate decreases.
    • Status: Public hearing occurred on February 28th. On March 7th, the Committee on Energy Utilities and Technology voted not to pass the bill.

Political Context

  • Democratic Gov. Janet Mills has signaled climate action is a top priority for her administration.  
  • Democrats hold sizable majorities in both the Senate (21-14) and House (89-57). Momentum for carbon pricing has been growing in both chambers.

Emission reduction targets

    • By 2020: 10% below 1990 levels
    • In long-term: 75-80% below 2003 levels

Past Legislation 

Not Available at this Time

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

  • Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative: Maine remains a member of RGGI, a regional cap-and-trade program on electric sector emissions between 10 states.
  • Transportation and Climate Initiative: Maine is a part of TCI, a regional collaboration that seeks to cap emissions from the transportation sector. The state hasn’t officially joined yet, however.
  • Carbon Costs Coalition: Rep. Rykerson and Rep. Stanley Paige Ziegler are part of a multistate alliance between legislators focused on reducing and pricing carbon. The state hasn’t officially joined yet, however.

Further Reading

Key Figures

MARYLAND

State Update

For the second year in a row, legislators introduced bills that impose a fee on carbon pollution. This year’s bill, the Healthy Climate Initiative, progressed in both the House and Senate, earning 30 co-sponsors and sparking conversation and debate on the issue of carbon pricing. Nevertheless, they failed to advance out of committee. There is now coalition-building activity to reintroduce a similar bill next year with a larger coalition behind it. The Chesapeake Climate Action Network, a powerful advocacy organization in the area, has become involved in the campaign and assigned a staff person to the cause. The Sierra Club is now also somewhat involved in the campaign.

At the same time, the environmental community was focused on passing the Clean Energy Jobs Act, a 50% renewable portfolio standard bill that passed through the General Assembly but now awaits signature by Governor Larry Hogan (R). Advocates hope that if and when this bill is signed into law, carbon pricing will begin to be prioritized. 

2019 Legislation

The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 9th and wrapped up on April 8th.

  • In the House,“An Act Concerning the Healthy Climate Initiative” (HB 1235) was introduced by Delegate Fraser-Hidalgo.
    • Fee System: $20 per ton fee on greenhouse gas emissions that will increase by $5 annually.
    • Revenue Breakdown:
      • 70% rebated to households and employers
        • 85% to households
        • 15% to employers
      • 30% to Healthy Climate Infrastructure Fund, for transportation, energy efficiency, resiliency, and transition efforts.
    • Status: Introduced to House on February 8th. A hearing was held by the Committee on Economic Matters on March 19th, where it received an unfavorable report.
  • A companion bill (SB 0702) was introduced by Delegate Kramer
    • Status: Introduced to Senate on February 4th and heard by the Senate Finance Committee on March 5th.

Political Context

  • Governor Hogan is one of 16 governors who has joined the bipartisan U.S. Climate Alliance.
  • Democrats currently hold significant majorities in the House (98-43) and Senate (32-15)

Emission Reduction Targets

    • By 2030: 40% below 2006 levels

Past Legislation

  • “Regional Carbon Cost Collection Initiative” (HB 939) introduced by Delegates Kramer and Fraser-Hidalgo.
    • Fee System: The fee would have started at $15 per carbon  ton in 2019, increasing by $5 per ton annually until capping off at $45 in 2025.
    • Revenue Breakdown:
      • 90% rebated to households and employers
      • 10% invested in a Green Infrastructure Fund for various climate initiatives
    • Status: Given an unfavorable report by Economic Matters Committee in March 2018

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

Further Reading

Key Figures

MASSACHUSETTS

State Update

Since 2013, Massachusetts legislators have been actively working to place a statewide fee on carbon pollution. Sen. Michael Barrett and Rep. Jennifer Benson have emerged as key legislative champions in the fight for carbon pricing in Massachusetts. This session, both have introduced carbon pricing bills, one in the House and one in the Senate. The bills have been well-received by state lawmakers, with large majorities in both chambers supporting the carbon pricing bills.

2019-2020 Legislation

The current legislative session began in January 2019 and ends in July 2020.

  • On the House side, “An Act to Promote Green Infrastructure and Reduce Carbon Emissions” (H 2810) has been introduced by Representative Jennifer Benson.
    • Fee system: Starts at $20 per carbon ton, increasing by $5 annually until reaching $40 per ton.
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 70% rebated to households and employers
      • 30% for a Green Infrastructure Fund for local transportation, resiliency, and clean energy projects
    • Status: The legislation has 108 cosponsors between both chambers, with 74% of House members supporting this bill. Referred to Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy as of January 22.
  • On the Senate side, “An Act to Combat Climate Change” (S 1924) has been introduced by Senator Michael Barrett.
    • Fee system: Fee begins at $15 per carbon ton, increasing by $5 annually until reaching $60 per ton.
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 60% invested in Commonwealth Transportation Fund to develop more efficient public transportation infrastructure and clean transportation
      • 30% for educational aid for Massachusetts cities
      • 5% invested in energy efficiency projects
      • 5% invested in an environmental health and justice fund
    • Status: The legislation has 65 cosponsors, with 60% of Senators support this bill. Referred to the Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy as of January 22. 

Political Context

  • Republican Governor Charlie Baker has made no public statements on carbon pricing bills in past legislative sessions, and has been criticized for not taking aggressive enough action against climate change.
  • Democrats hold veto proof super-majorities in the House (127-33) and Senate (34-6)
  • Funding much needed transportation investments across the state has emerged as a key issue this legislative session. Carbon pricing is a strong candidate for transportation revenue.

Emission Reduction Targets

    • By 2020: 25% below 1990 levels
    • By 2050: 80% below 1990 levels (There are multiple concurrent legislative efforts to boost this to 100% or net-zero by 2050)

Past Legislation

  • On the Senate side, “An Act Combating Climate Change” (S 1821) was introduced by Sen. Barrett in 2017.
    • Fee system: Fee started at $10 per carbon ton, rose by $5 annually until it reached $40 per ton.
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • Funds rebated back to households, in an equal amount per household.
      • Funds rebated to employers based on number of employees.
    • Status: Public hearing held June 2017. Released favorably from joint committee in February 2018. Version incorporated into a comprehensive clean energy bill, which passed Senate unanimously. Comprehensive bill did not receive vote in House.
  • On the House side, “An Act to Promote Green Infrastructure, Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Create Jobs” (H 1726) introduced by Rep. Benson in 2017.
    • Fee system: Fee started at $20 per carbon ton, rose by $5 annually until reaching $40 per ton.
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 80% rebated to households and employers using a formula that favors low and moderate income households
      • 20% invested in clean energy
      • Funds rebated to employers based on number of employees.
    • Status: Public hearing held June 2017. Not released from committee for vote in House.

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

  • Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative: Massachusetts remains a member of RGGI, a regional cap-and-trade program on electric sector emissions between 10 states.
  • Transportation and Climate Initiative: Gov. Charlie Baker (R) has announced plans to join TCI, a regional collaboration that would cap emissions from the transportation sector.
  • Carbon Costs Coalition: Massachusetts legislators are a part of a multistate alliance between legislators focused on reducing and pricing carbon.

Further Reading

Key Figures:

MINNESOTA

State Update

While carbon pricing legislation was not introduced this session in Minnesota’s state legislature, the likelihood of future carbon pricing increased after the  Democratic party gained 18 seats in the House in the 2018 midterm elections. The effects of this shift has already been manifested – the House established an Energy and Climate Committee, marking the first time in the state’s history that the word “climate” has been used in a committee name.

2019-2020 Legislation

The 2019-2020 Legislative Session began on January 8th, 2019 and wrapped up on May 21st, 2020.

Political Context

  • Recently-elected Democratic Governor Tim Walz supports expanding the renewable energy standard, reducing carbon emissions in all sectors, fighting for energy justice and advocating for tribal rights. He hasn’t explicitly advocated for carbon pricing, but has suggested that an increased gas tax would make a good revenue source.
  • Republicans have a slight majority in the Senate (34-33), but Democrats now have a significant one in the House (75-59).

Emission Reduction Targets

    • By 2025: 30% below 2005 levels
    • By 2050: 80% below 2005 levels

Past Legislation

  • In 2018, the state’s first-ever carbon pricing bill, the “Carbon Assessment and Rebate Act” (SF.4086 / HF.4517) was introduced by Senator John Marty.
    • Fee system: Imposes a $40 per carbon ton 2020 that increases by $5 annually for the first five years, by $10 annually beginning in the sixth year, and by $15 annually beginning in the 12th year.
    • Revenue breakdown: 100% rebated to individuals on a per capita basis.
    • Status: In May 2018, the proposal was referred to Energy and Utilities Finance and Policy Committee, where it was tabled. 

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

N/A

Further Reading

Not Yet Available

Key Figures

MONTANA

State Update

For the first time in Montana history, legislators have introduced carbon pricing bills in both the House and Senate. While the bills did not pass this session, their introduction demonstrates that even conservative-leaning states are joining the carbon pricing movement. The state has also pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% below 1990 levels by 2050, although this hasn’t been codified into law.

2019 Legislation

The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 7th and wrapped up on May 1.

  • On the House side, “Montana Climate Action Act (HB 193) was introduced by Rep. Mary Ann Dunwell (D), putting a direct fee on carbon pollution for the first time.
    • Fee system: $10 per carbon ton, increasing by $1 annually until pollution levels are in compliance with emission reduction targets.
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 50% towards the general state fund
      • 20% for disbursement in accordance with state law
      • 10% for climate adaptation efforts
      • 10% to help vulnerable communities transition
      • 10% to address environmental damage caused by pollution, such as by revegetating polluted land or rehabilitating polluted bodies of water.
    • Status: Tabled on February 8th after a public hearing in House Taxation Committee on January 31st and died in process on April 25th.
  • A carbon pricing bill has also been introduced on the Senate side (SB 189), by Sen. Dick Barrett (D). The bill provides more exemptions for public and nonprofit properties, as well as an offset system for major electricity sources.
    • Fee system: $10 per carbon ton, with no annual increase.
    • Exemptions:
      • Allows owners of large emission sources to receive a tax credit of up to 50% if they invest in renewable energy sources within the state. 
      • Exempts various types of properties from taxation, like schools, libraries, fire districts, tribal land, etc.
    • Revenue will be used to repeal various other taxes, like the:
    • Status: Heard by the Senate Energy and Telecommunications Committee on February 7th, tabled in Committee on March 23rd, and died on April 25th.  

Political Context

  • Democratic Governor Steve Bullock has been a strong proponent of climate action, vetoing anti-environmental legislation and speaking frequently about the dangers of climate change. Gov. Bullock has opted not to join the U.S. Climate Alliance, however, and has remained quiet on the issue of carbon pricing.
  • Republican hold firm majorities in Montana’s state Senate (30-20) and House (58-42), which should make passage of legislation difficult.

Past Legislation

N/A

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

N/A

Further Reading

 

Key Figures

NEBRASKA

State Update

A group of University of Nebraska-Lincoln students are working to drive a public conversation around climate change and carbon pricing in a state that has historically been stagnant on climate action. The students, working with Citizens Climate Lobby and Our Climate, have strongly supported and lobbied for “A Bill for an Act Relating to Climate” (LB 283), which would provide the University of Nebraska with $250,000 to develop a comprehensive state climate action plan. Actual carbon pricing legislation, however, is still a ways away.

2019–2020 Legislation

The 2019 Legislative Session convened on January 9th and will adjourn on April 15th, 2020.

Political Context

  • Nebraska has a unicameral legislative body, made up of 49 “Senators”.  Currently, Republicans hold an overwhelming majority in this legislature (30-18) with one independent legislator.
  • Governor Pete Ricketts (R) was a strong advocate for the Keystone Pipeline  construction, and has historically been very  unsupportive of environmental initiatives.

Past Legislation

N/A

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

N/A

Further Reading

University Student Sparks Nebraska Carbon Pricing Debate (June 2019)

Key Figures

NEW HAMPSHIRE

State Update

New Hampshire lawmakers introduced a carbon pricing bill for the first time this session. One bill would have mandated a study on the economic impacts of national carbon pricing on the state, while the other would have directly imposed a fee on carbon pollution. Neither bill made it out of committee.

2019 Legislation

The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 2nd and wrapped up in late June.  

  • The study bill, “Establishing a commission to study the economic impact of national carbon pricing in New Hampshire” (SB.75), was introduced by Sen. Martha Fuller Clark.
    • Status: The bill was heard by the Senate Committee on Energy and National Resources on March 19th and was subsequently re-referred to the Committee on March 27th.
  • “An act relative to carbon pricing” (HB.735) by Rep. Oxenham, Sen. Fuller Clark and Sen. David Watters.
    • Fee system: Imposes a $20 per carbon ton fee, which increases by a complicated formula annually, until reaching $53 in 2023.  
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 70% rebated to state residents
      • 20% invested in renewable energy efficiency
      • 5% rebated to large commercial and industrial consumers (those hit unusually hard)
      • 5% for administration
    • Status: Referred to Joint Committee on Science, Technology, and Energy for a January 30th public hearing. The bill was subsequently retained. A subcommittee has been appointed that will meet in September. There are four sessions planned starting with informational sessions, then discussing the bill itself. This could result in a report and new legislation for next session.

Political Context

  • Governor Chris Sununu (R), who has questioned if carbon is the leading cause for global warming and supported Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, will likely oppose proposed carbon pricing legislation.
  • Democrats hold majorities in the Senate (14-10) and House (234-166).

Emission Reduction Targets

    • 20% below 1990 levels by 2025
    • 80% below 1990 levels by 2050

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

  • Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative: New Hampshire remains a member of RGGI, a regional cap-and-trade program on electric sector emissions between 10 states.
  • Carbon Costs Coalition: New Hampshire legislators are a part of a multistate alliance between legislators focused on reducing and pricing carbon.

Past Legislation

  • In 2017, Senate Bill 123/House Bill 1230 aimed to establish a commission to study the potential impacts of state-level carbon reduction investment program on New Hampshire’s economy and emission levels.
    • Result: Passed through Senate but died in the House

Further Reading

Key Figures

NEW JERSEY

State Update

Nearly eight years since Republican Gov. Chris Christie pulled New Jersey out of RGGI, the state is rejoining the cap-and-trade initiative. Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy announced the return last January, and hopes to finalize the cap on electric-sector emissions this spring. At the same time, a Princeton student group, the New Jersey Student Climate Advocates, has been actively working on developing a “carbon cashback” policy that would rebate revenue from a fee on carbon pollution back to households. New Jersey has developed an Energy Master Plan that aims to get the state on a path to 100% clean energy by 2050.

2018–2019 Legislation

The 2018–2019 Legislative Session began on January 9th, 2018 and will end on January 7th, 2020.

Political Context

  • Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy is undoubtedly more supportive of strong climate policy than his predecessor, Gov. Christie. Gov. Murphy has set ambitious clean energy goals for the state: that more than 1.5 million New Jersey homes must be powered by offshore windmills by 2030, and 100% of New Jersey must be powered by clean energy by 2050. Murphy’s first year in office was praised by most environmental groups, although some worry he has focused too much on electricity and not enough on other emission-intensive sectors, like transportation.
  • Democrats hold firm majorities in both the Senate (25-15) and House (54-26). 
  • New Jersey is swimming in debt, so fiscal responsibility is imperative moving forward.

Emission Reduction Targets

    • By 2020: 1990 levels
    • By 2050: 80% below 2006 levels

Past Legislation

N/A

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

Further Reading

Key Figures

NEW MEXICO

State Update

On January 29, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) signed an executive order committing New Mexico to critical climate action. As a result, the state will join the U.S. Climate Alliance and form a Climate Change Task Force required to create an extensive climate strategy by September 15th, 2019. This strategy must include a “comprehensive market-based program that sets emission limits across New Mexico”, among various other measures. What exactly this market-based program will look like has not yet been determined, but some have speculated it could resemble an existing economy-wide cap-and-trade program like California’s.

Advocates are looking at a transportation-sector carbon fee for the 2020 legislative session.

2019 Legislation

The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 15th and wrapped up on March 16th.

While the consequences of Gov. Grisham’s executive order remain to be seen, legislators have continued their push toward carbon pricing.

The “Next Gen Carbon Emission Pricing Plan” (SB 393), introduced by Sen. William Soules, expands upon existing gas tax structures to put a price on all greenhouse gas emissions.

  • Fee System: Imposes a $0.09 fee per gallon of gasoline, which increases by $0.09 annually until capping off at $0.45 per gallon in 2024.
  • Revenue breakdown:
    • 15% to low-income home energy assistance
    • 15% to renewable energy technology fund
    • 10% to displaced fossil fuel workers
  • Status: Referred to the Senate Corporations and Transportation Committee as of January 29th. Action has been postponed indefinitely.

Political Context

  • Democratic Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham campaigned on the promise of strong climate action, and signed a decisive executive order in her first month in office.
  • Democrats hold sizable majorities in both the Senate (26-16) and House (46-24).

Emission Reduction Targets

    • By 2030: 45% below 2005 levels

Past Legislation

In 2018, “A Study of Carbon Fee and Dividend Legislation” (SM 23) was passed by Senate, mandating a legislative committee to study how a revenue-neutral carbon fee could be implemented in the state, and what impacts it would have on health, the economy, and greenhouse gas emissions.

Further Reading

Key Figures

NEW YORK

State Update

The New York legislature passed the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CCPA), which calls for the entire state’s economy to achieve an 85% reduction in emissions from 1990 levels by 2050, with offsets for the remaining 15% to achieve net zero emissions. The bill does not put a direct price on emissions, but legislators and advocates, led by the broad New York Renews coalition, are pushing for another statewide climate initiative—the Climate and Community Investment Act (CCIA) — which imposes a fee on carbon pollution. At the same time, two carbon pricing bills from previous sessions have been reintroduced in the House.

2019–2020 Legislation

The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 9th and will end on January 6th, 2021.

  • An ambitious carbon pricing bill that has been introduced for several sessions now (A00039), was once again sponsored by Assemblymember Kevin A. Cahill.
    • Fee system: $35 per carbon ton, increasing by $15 annually until reaching $185 per ton.  
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 60% rebated to low and moderate income households
      • 40% invested in clean energy and transportation infrastructure
    • Status: Referred to Ways and Means Committee in January with more than 20 co-sponsors, but has not received a hearing.
  • A more modest carbon pricing bill (A03459) has been introduced by Assemblymember Felix Ortiz. This legislation is also a repeat from previous sessions.
    • Fee: $5 per carbon ton, increasing by 1% annually for the first 10 years, plus the rate of inflation.
    • Revenue breakdown: All goes to a Carbon Tax Revenue Fund, with revenue appropriated by the legislature.
    • Status: Referred to Ways and Means Committee on January 29th, but has not received a hearing. 
  • In the Senate, Senator Parker introduced S03608 identical to A00039 in the House.
    • Status: Referred to Budget and Revenue Committee as of February 11th. It is currently supported by the majority of the Senate, with 35 out of 63 Senators co-sponsoring the bill.
  • The CCIA has not yet been introduced, but is expected to look similar to the 2018 version (S7645).

Political Context

  • Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) has been a proponent of carbon pricing and strong climate action. He’s called for the passage of a ‘Green New Deal’ that mandates the electric sector be 100% carbon-free by 2040, and the establishment of a council that evaluate policies to eliminate emissions across the state. Gov. Cuomo has also set a bold emission reduction target: 80% below 1990 levels by 2050.
  • Democrats hold firm majorities in the Senate (40-23) and Assembly (107-43)

Emission Reduction Targets

    • By 2030: 40% below 1990 levels
    • By 2050: 80% below 1990 levels

Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

  • Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative: New York is a committed member of RGGI, a regional cap-and-trade program on electric sector emissions between 10 states.
  • Transportation and Climate Initiative: Gov. Cuomo has announced plans to join TCI, a regional collaboration that would cap emissions from the transportation sector.
  • Carbon Costs Coalition: Several Connecticut legislators are a part of a multistate alliance between legislators focused on reducing and pricing carbon.

Past Legislation

2017–2018 Session

  • The Climate and Community Investment Act (S7645) was introduced by Sen. Parker.
    • Fee system: $35 per carbon ton, increasing with inflation  
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 33% to provide targeted investments for disadvantaged communities
      • 30% to fund large-scale and multi-region emission reduction projects
      • 30% rebated to low and middle-income New Yorkers via tax credits
      • 7% to displaced fossil fuel workers
    • Result: Failed in committee after gaining 12 sponsors
  • Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton and Sen. Liz Krueger sponsored a bill (SB 4598/A01919) authorizing a study on implementing carbon emissions fee.
    • Result: Failed in committee
  • Senate and Assembly introduced identical bills to “establish a tax on carbon-based fuels.” The Senate bill (S02846) was sponsored by Sen. Parker, while the Assembly bill (A0107) was sponsored by Assemblymember Cahill.
    • Fee system: $35 per carbon ton, increasing by $15 annually until reaching $185 per ton.  
    • Revenue breakdown:
      • 60% rebated to low and moderate income households
      • 40% invested in clean energy and transportation infrastructure
    • Result: Failed in committee (but reintroduced this session)
  • Assemblymember Felix Ortiz introduced A03967.
    • Fee: $5 per carbon ton, increasing by 1% annually for the first 10 years, plus the rate of inflation.
    • Revenue breakdown: All goes to Carbon Tax Revenue Fund, with revenue appropriated by the legislature.  
    • Result: Failed in committee (but reintroduced this session)

Further Reading

Key Figures

OREGON

State Update

Oregon’s highly-anticipated Clean Energy Jobs bill has been introduced again this session, and advocates hope it will pass in the coming days, though uncertainty remains in the wake of the Republican walk-out. Cap-and-invest legislation has been in the works in the state legislature for nearly a decade, with the Renew Oregon coalition leading advocacy efforts in recent years. After Clean Energy Jobs gained considerable support in 2018, Gov. Kate Brown (D), House Speaker Tina Kotek (D), and Senate President Peter Courtney (D) have prioritized passing the carbon pricing legislation this session. 

2019 Legislation

The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 22nd and wrapped up on June 30th.

  • Clean Energy Jobs (HB 2020) sets an economy-wide limit on the emissions of greenhouse gases that declines each year. Entities responsible for more than 25,000 tons of annual carbon emissions are required to purchase emission allowances at auctions to comply with caps. As the cap decreases, the price of allowances would increase and thereby force companies to reduce their emissions. It was introduced by Senator Michael Dembrow (D) and Representative Karin Power (D).
  • The proposed legislation:
    • Establishes a new carbon office to administer the program.
    • Sets hard interim targets on emissions of 45% below 1990 levels by 2035 and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. (The emissions cap would change annually to ensure Oregon meets goals).
    • Regulates the transportation sector, which will likely be the richest source of revenue in the bill.  
    • Provides manufacturing and industrial companies with 100% free allowances in year one, and then ratchets down that number each year.
    • Provides electric companies with free allowances through 2030 due to the fact they are already subject to several state regulatory laws.
    • Allows regulated entities to meet up to 8% of their compliance obligations by purchasing offset credits.
    • Exempts the emissions of fluorocarbons — powerful greenhouse gases (GHGs) generated as a byproduct of semiconductor manufacturing — from regulation for five years.
  • Revenue breakdown:
    • Some of the revenue raised from the transportation sector must be invested specifically in transportation infrastructure, in accordance with state law.
    • Unrestricted revenue would be invested in a Climate Investments Fund, that could go toward any of the following:
      • Promoting energy efficiency and energy conservation in buildings.
      • Supporting electrical grid decarbonization efforts, such as by investing in renewable resources like community solar projects.
      • Investing in transportation electrification, by promoting fuel and energy efficiency and improving roadside landscape management efforts to promote carbon sequestration.
      • Implementing local planning organizations for reducing GHG emissions.
      • Investing in agricultural or forestry practices in ways that reduce emissions and promote carbon sequestration.
      • Assisting the state’s businesses and industries to be more emission-efficient.
      • Developing the state’s clean energy infrastructure.
      • Strengthening the resilience of fish, wildlife and ecosystems.
      • At least 10% must be allocated for projects and programs that benefit Indian tribes.
  • Status:
    • Referred to Committee on Carbon Reduction on February 4th.
    • Seven public hearings were held between February 15th and March 2nd.
    • Committee recommended to pass with amendments and referred bill to Ways and Means on May 21st. 
    • Assigned to Subcommittee on Natural Resources on June 3rd.
    • Joint Ways and Means Committee recommended to pass with amendments on June 12th. Referred bill to full floor vote.
    • Passed 36-24 in the House on June 17th.
    • Received its first reading in the Senate on June 18th. Referred to Ways and Means Committee.
    • Republican Senators fled the state on June 20th to prevent a quorum, stalling the bill from getting its floor vote.

    Political Context

    • Democratic Governor Kate Brown has championed and prioritized the legislation.
    • After the midterm elections, Democrats hold supermajorities in both the Senate (12-9) and House (26-15). Furthermore, Speaker of the House Tina Kotek (D) and President of the Senate Peter Courtney (D) are committed to the passage of the legislation this session, co-chairing a Joint Committee on Carbon Reduction that has been studying the carbon pricing bill for nearly a year.

    Emission reduction targets

      • 45% below 1990 levels by 2035
      • 80% below 1990 levels by 2050

    Past Legislation

    For a comprehensive history of carbon pricing in Oregon, read here.

    • 2009: Cap-and-trade (SB 80) introduced in Oregon for the first time by Governor Ted Kulongoski. While the bill never makes it out of committee, it continues to be introduced in subsequent sessions.
    • 2011: Two carbon pricing bills and one greenhouse gas fee bill are introduced.
    • 2013: A bipartisan carbon tax study bill (SB 306) passes, making Oregon the first state to thoroughly study state-level carbon pricing in the U.S.
    • 2015: Three carbon pricing bills are introduced but don’t make it through committee:
      • HB 3470: The Climate Stability and Justice Act enforces Oregon’s climate goals and requires the state to develop “market-based compliance mechanisms that sources may use to maximize feasible and cost-effective reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.”
      • HB 3252:  Imposes a $60 fee per carbon ton, with revenue going toward job creation, economic assistance, and transition assistance for low income homes.
      • HB 3250: Cap-and-dividend bill that places legal limits on pollution, creates auctions, and rebates revenues back to taxpayers.
    • 2016: The Healthy Climate Act (SB 1574) is introduced, a cap-and-invest bill.
    • 2017: Clean Energy Jobs (SB 1070) is introduced for the first time, receiving 33 co-sponsors.
    • 2018: Clean Energy Jobs (HB 4001 / SB 1507) introduced once again, and is widely considered a very detailed and refined piece of carbon pricing legislation.

    Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

    • Carbon Costs Coalition: Oregon legislators are a part of a multistate alliance between legislators focused on reducing and pricing carbon.

    Further Reading

    Key Figures

    PENNSYLVANIA

    State Update

    In late November, a coalition of more than 60 environmental, health and religious groups filed a petition to pass a cap-and-trade program. Though a similar petition was rejected by the Environmental Quality Board in 2014, Pennsylvania’s Clean Air Council believes the state is uniquely positioned to pass strong climate legislation on the strength of its Environmental Rights Amendment. The amendment, a part of the constitution’s “Declaration of Rights”, guarantees that people have a right to clean air, pure water and the preservation of the natural, scenic, historic and esthetic values of the environment. 

    On April 14th, the EQB voted to accept the petition for further study, and the Department of Environmental Protection can now take a deeper look at the petition and make recommendations. The DEP announced that it will partner with outside consultants to model the economic impacts of an economy-wide carbon market, as well as a legal analysis of the petition. The report from the consultants is expected to be completed by early next year, with the Department’s own report set to follow.

    On June 6th, Senate Democratic Leader Jay Costa distributed a memo seeking cosponsors for a bill to establish a Cap and Invest program for the electric power sector. The bill would call for a 90% reduction of carbon emissions in the power sector relative to an unspecified baseline level f by 2040.

    2019-2020 Legislation

    The 2019-2020 Legislative Session began on January 1, 2019 and ends on November 30, 2020.  

    Political Context

    • For the first time, Democratic Governor Tom Wolf has set strong carbon reduction goals for the state. 
    • Republicans hold slight majorities in Senate (29-21) and House (110-93), which would make enacting carbon pricing through legislative means be difficult.
    • Pennsylvania’s DEP is looking into implementing a carbon market via regulatory means instead of through the legislature.  

    Emission Reduction Targets

      • By 2025: 26% below 2005 levels
      • By 2050: 80% below 2005 levels

    Past Legislation

    • In the 2017-2018 legislative session, SB 15 was introduced by Sen. Jay Costa, calling for cost-effective emission reductions and for the state’s Environmental Quality Board to develop new emission regulations.
      • One of the proposed regulations are “market-based mechanisms, such as the imposition of emissions caps and a system for the purchase, redemption and trading of carbon dioxide allowances that represents units of emissions.”
      • Status: The bill gained 13 sponsors, but was tabled in the Environmental Resources and Energy Committee.

    Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

    Further Reading

    Key Figures

    RHODE ISLAND

    State Update

    After a challenging start to the session, carbon pricing bills have been introduced in both the House and Senate  Additionally, a carbon pricing study signed into law two years ago (S108/H6305) has finally received funding.

    2019 Legislation

    The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 1st and will wrap up on June 30th.  

    • In the House, the “Economic And Climate Resilience Act of 2019” (HB 5869) was introduced by Representative David Bennett.
      • Fee System: Starts at $15 per carbon ton, increasing by $5 annually until reaching $50 per ton, after which it will increase annually with inflation.
      • Revenue will be invested into a new Economic and Climate Resilience Fund, to the following:
        • 28% to support renewable energy, energy efficiency and climate adaptation efforts.
          • At least a third must go to households whose median income falls in the lowest third of state median incomes.
        • 30% rebated  to employers.
        • 40% rebated  to residents.
        • 2% to cover r administration costs.
      • Status: A hearing was held by the House Environment and Natural Resources Committee on March 21st and it was recommended that the measure be held for further study.

    Political Context

    • Democratic Gov. Gina Raimondo has supported carbon pricing in the past but stated in October 2018 that the state is too small to adopt its own program.
    • Democrats have overwhelming majorities in the Senate (33-5) and House (66-9).

    Emission Reduction Targets

      • By 2020: 10% below 1990 levels
      • By 2035: 45% below 1990 levels
      • By 2050: 80% below 1990 levels

    Past Legislation

    • 2015: Carbon Pricing and Economic Development Investment Act (S0417) introduced by coalition of experts.
      • Fee system: $15 per carbon ton, increasing by $5 annually
      • Revenue: 100% invested in Clean Energy Fund, which can be used for any of the following:
        • Direct rebates to residents and employers
        • Administrative costs
        • Investing in wind, solar, energy storage, and energy efficiency
        • Investing in public transportation
      • Result: Died in committee
    • 2017: Carbon tax study approved (S108/H6305), but does not provide for funding.
    • 2018: Two carbon pricing bills introduced
      • Economic and Climate Resilience Act (H7400/S2188)
        • Fee system: $15 per carbon ton, increasing by $5 annually until reaching $50 per ton.
        • Revenue: Bill expected to raise $150 million in first year, and about $50 million more in each succeeding year.
          • 40% rebated to state residents
          • 30% rebated to employers
          • 28% invested in climate resiliency, renewable energy, and efficiency programs
          • 2% for program administration
        • Includes a “trigger clause” so that the legislation would only take effect if a neighboring state with a population of at least 5 million people adopts a similar policy.
        • Result: Died in committee
      • Global Warming Solutions Act (H7827 / S2747)
        • Fee system: $25 per carbon ton, increasing by $5 annually  
        • Revenue: Rebated back to residents
        • Result: Died in committee

    Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

    • Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative: Rhode Island remains a member of RGGI, a regional cap-and-trade program on electric sector emissions between 10 states.
    • Transportation and Climate Initiative: Gov. Gina Raimondo (D) has announced plans to join TCI, a regional collaboration that would cap emissions from the transportation sector.
    • Carbon Costs Coalition: Rhode Island legislators are a part of a multistate alliance between legislators focused on reducing and pricing carbon.

    Further Reading

    Key Figures

    TEXAS

    State Update

    Texas is far and away the highest carbon-emitting state in the U.S. The state produced 657 million tons of carbon in 2016, 5% higher than the year before and nearly twice as much as California, the second-biggest polluter. It’s also one of the most at-risk states, prone to extreme heat, drought and wildfires. Although it’s one of the most ideologically conservative states in the country, climate advocates are trying to pass a state environmental initiative that’s not quite as far along as carbon pricing, but nonetheless recognizes the impacts of a changing climate and expresses commitment to reducing emissions. Additionally, two carbon pricing bills have been introduced in the House, although neither has gained much support.

    2019 Legislation

    The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 8th and will wrap up on May 27th.

    • HB 223 authorizes a greenhouse gas emissions fee was filed in the House by Rep. Ron Reynolds, but has gained very little support.
      • Fee system: Imposes a $5 per carbon ton fee, which cannot increase in future years.
      • Revenue: Goes to general revenue fund.  
        • 50% invested in a low-income energy efficiency program is established, offering assistance to electric consumers who meet one of the following criteria:
          • Have a household income less than 125% of the federal poverty guidelines
          • Receive nutrition assistance program benefits
      • Status: Introduced to House on February 19th and referred to the House Committee on State Affairs, where it has not received a hearing.
    • HB 4599, introduced by Rep. Cesar Blanco, also authorized a $5 per carbon ton fee.
      • Revenue: Invested in programs that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and payments to carbon capture and sequestration facilities for every ton of carbon dioxide they capture and sequester.
      • Status: Introduced to House on March 9th and referred to the House Committee on Environmental Regulation, where it has not received a hearing.  

    Political Context

    • Republican Governor Greg Abbott has regularly opposed strong climate policy. He supported the appointment of Scott Pruitt to head the EPA, and maintains that though the Earth’s climate is changing, it’s unclear if humans play a significant role.
    • Significant Republican majorities in both the Senate (19-12) and House (83-27) make strong advancing climate policy difficult.

    Past Legislation

    • HB 3175 authorizing a greenhouse gas emissions fee was introduced by Rep. Reynolds in the House.
      • Fee system: $5 per carbon ton, commission can provide for an automatic annual increase
      • Revenue: Invested in Greenhouse Gas Emissions Fee account
        • At least 50% invested in a grant program for utilities to help them with the transition
        • At least 10% invested in a low-income energy efficiency program that offer assistance to electric consumers who meet one of the following criteria:
          • Have a household income less than 125% of the federal poverty guidelines
          • Receive nutrition assistance program benefits

    Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

    N/A

    Further Reading

    Not Yet Available

    Key Figures

    UTAH

    State Update

    This session, Utah lawmakers once again filed a “tax swap” carbon pricing bill that imposes a fee on pollution but in return reduces other state taxes in order to lessen the burden on consumers. The same legislation was filed last year and received some bipartisan support, but the Republican co-sponsors for that bill have retired. After the bill failed in the legislature two years in a row, a group of citizens coming together under the name Clean the Darn Air have launched a campaign to put carbon pricing on the ballot in 2020. The campaign is currently gathering signatures on a proposal to enact a carbon tax, with the goal of gathering 116,000 signatures by February. In addition, Utah’s budget this year includes $200,000 for a study on how climate change will impact the state.

    2019 Legislation

    The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 28th and will wrap up on March 14th.

    • “Fossil Fuels Tax Amendment” (HB 304) was introduced by Rep. Joel Briscoe (D). The bill uses similar language as Utah’s 2018 carbon pricing legislation (see HB 403 below). It no longer has bipartisan support, however, as the Republican legislators that co-sponsored last year’s legislation are now retired.
      • Status: Referred to House Rules Committee as of March 11th, then to House Revenue and Taxation Committee where it failed.

    Political Context

    • Republican Governor Gary Herbert has expressed stiff opposition to carbon pricing.
    • Republicans hold firm majorities in both the Senate (23-6) and House (58-17).

    Past Legislation

    • In 2018, Utah’s first ever carbon pricing bill (HB 403) was introduced in the House by Rep. Joel Briscoe and Rep. Rebecca Edwards (R).
      • Fee system: $10 per carbon ton, increasing by 3.5% annually, plus inflation.
      • Revenue:
        • 90% is rebated to consumers through the elimination of several existing state taxes, including the sales tax on grocery store food and income taxes on mining and manufacturing businesses. 
        • 10% is invested in reducing local air pollution and boosting rural economic development.
      • Result:
        • The legislation was finalized too late in last year’s 45-day session to be considered by the House.

    Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

    • Carbon Costs Coalition: Utah is a part of a multistate alliance between legislators focused on reducing and pricing carbon.

    Further Reading

    Carbon Pricing Ballot Initiative Launched in Utah (April 2019)

    Key Figures

    VERMONT

    State Update

    Two carbon pricing bills were introduced in the House this February, but neither have received a hearing or much support from Democratic leadership. The bills were released in the wake of a Resources for the Future report that concluded that carbon pricing would not hurt the state’s low-income residents or economic growth, and paired with other environmental initiatives, it would help the state meet its emission reduction goals. The consultants looked at a number of carbon pricing policies, including the ESSEX Plan, the Western Climate Initiative, the Transportation and Climate Initiative, and a “high carbon price” starting at $60 in 2020. 

    2019–2020 Legislation

    The 2019 –2020 Legislative Session began on January 9th and will wrap up in mid-May of 2020.

    • An Act Relating To A Carbon Charge, Public Transportation, Tax Credits, Weatherization, And Incentives” (H 477) was introduced by Rep. Diana Gonzalez
      • Fee system: Starts at $5 per carbon ton, increasing by $5 annually until reaching $50 per ton.
      • Revenue breakdown:
        • ⅓ to fund programs and tax credits to support rural Vermonters.
        • ⅓  to fund programs and tax credits to support Vermonters with low income.
        • ⅓ to provide incentives that support electric vehicles and weatherization.
      • Status: Referred to Committee of Energy and Technology on February 27th, where it has not received a hearing.
    • “An Act Relating to a Charge that is Refunded on Electric Bills” (H 463) was introduced by Rep. Selene Colburn. 
      • Fee system: Starts at $5 per carbon ton in 2021, increasing by $5 annually until reaching $40 per ton in 2028. 
      • Revenue: All revenue returned to customers on their electric bills. 
      • Status: Referred to Committee on Energy and Technology on February 27th, where it has not received a hearing. 

    Political Context

    • Republican Governor Phil Scott long opposed a fee on carbon, and even rejected the state’s Climate Action Commission’s recommendation to study carbon pricing. Gov. Scott has repeatedly said carbon pricing would hurt low-income and rural Vermonters, and that he would veto any legislation that taxes emissions.
    • Democrats have majorities in both the Senate (21-6) and House (95-43). However, Speaker of the House Mitzi Johnson and Senator Tim Ashe, president pro tempore of the Senate, have expressed their opposition to the passage of a carbon tax.

    Emission Reduction Targets

      • By 2030: 40% below 1990 levels
      • By 2050: 80-90% below 1990 levels

    Past Legislation

    2017

    • “The Economy-Strengthening Strategic Energy Exchange (ESSEX) Act” (H 791/S 284) was introduced by Sen. Christopher Pearson and Rep. Sarah Copeland-Hanzas.
      • Fee system: $5 per carbon ton, increasing by $5 annually until reaching $40 per ton in 2027
      • Revenue breakdown: 100% rebated to consumers through electric bills
      • Result: Failed in committee
    • “An Act Relating to a Study of Approaches to Greenhouse Gas Reductions” (H 763) required the Joint Fiscal Office to conduct a study, with independent professional assistance, on the costs and benefits to Vermont of various approaches to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and submit a report of its findings to the General Assembly.
      • Result: Despite Gov. Scott’s rejection of the idea, two independent studies on carbon pricing were conducted, paid for mostly through private grants.
    • “Joint resolution requesting the Governor to advocate for a regional carbon tax and to convene the RGGI states to discuss the development and implementation of this tax” (JRH006)
      • Result: Bill failed in committee after gaining 10 co-sponsors.

    Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

    • Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative: Vermont remains a member of RGGI, a regional cap-and-trade program on electric sector emissions between 10 states.
    • Transportation and Climate Initiative: Gov. Phil Scott (R) has announced plans to join TCI, a regional collaboration that would cap emissions from the transportation sector.
    • Carbon Costs Coalition: Six Vermont legislators (Rep. Curt McCormack, Rep. David Deen, Rep. Mary Sullivan, Rep. Mike Yantachka, Rep. Copeland-Hanzas, Sen. Pearson) are a part of a multistate alliance between legislators focused on pricing carbon.

    Further Reading

    Not Available at this Time

    Key Figures

    VIRGINIA

    State Update

    Gov. Ralph Northam (D) campaigned on the promise of strong climate action, pledging to make Virginia the first Southern state to participate in RGGI. But Republicans, holding a three-seat majority in the General Assembly, fiercely opposed the state’s entry into the cap-and-trade program. In a disappointing turn of events, Northam signed a budget that included a GOP provision prohibiting state dollars from being spent to “support membership or participation” in RGGI, effectively barring program administration. The state did, however, approve a new regulation to cap and reduce carbon emissions from large fossil fuel electric power generating facilities by 30 percent by 2030. The move made Virginia the first Southern state — and the first formerly coal state — to adopt climate pollution regulations, and likely means the state will join RGGI in the next few years.

    2019 Legislation

    The 2019 Legislative Session began on January 9th and will wrapped up on February 24th.

      Political Context

      • Republicans currently hold a majority in both the House (49-41) and the Senate (21-19).
      • Governor Ralph Northam (D) supported Virginia joining RGGI, but signed into law a budget that prohibits the state from doing so.

      Past Legislation

      N/A

      Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

      Further Reading

      Key Figures

      WASHINGTON

      State Update

      Washington has been actively working to pass a carbon fee for several years now, introducing carbon pricing ballot initiatives in both 2016 and 2018. In the 2018 November midterms, voters rejected I-1631, which would have imposed a $15 per ton fee on carbon, while in 2016, voters rejected ballot initiative I-732. 732 was a revenue neutral proposal, under which generated funds would be rebated back to taxpayers, while 1631 would have invested money in a variety of environmental initiatives. On the heels of these failures, momentum for carbon pricing in state of Washington has waned. Nevertheless, some carbon pricing legislation was introduced this session (SB 5981), as well as climate bills in other areas such as carbon sequestration (HB 2047). The legislature also successfully passed a clean energy e bill this session (SB 5116) that has committed the state to achieve a carbon-neutral electric grid by 2030. This bill, proposed by Senator Reuven Carlyle (D), is the strongest 100% clean electricity policy in the nation.

      2019-2020 Legislation

      The 2019-2020 Legislative Session began on January 14th, 2019 and ends on April 22nd, 2020.

      • In the Senate, “An Act Relating To Implementing A Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cap and Trade Program” (SB 5981) was introduced by Senator Guy Palumbo.
        • Status: Introduced to Senate on March 6th, referred to the Committee on Environment, Energy, and Technology. It had its public hearing on March 21st.
      • “An Act Concerning Transportation Funding” (SB 5971) was introduced by Senator Annette Cleveland
        • Fee System: $15/ton of carbon
        • Status: Made it out of the Transportation Committee, currently in Ways and Means Committee, pending in the Ways and Means Committee as of April 26th.

      Political Context

      • Governor Jay Inslee has made a name for himself as a long-time advocate of carbon pricing, and championed SB 6203. In his 2020  presidential run, Inslee is keeping climate change as a central part  of his platform.
      • Democrats currently hold majorities in both the House (57-41) and Senate (28-21).

      Emission Reduction Targets

        • By 2035: 25% below 1990 levels
        • By 2050: 50% below 1990 levels, or 70% below expected emissions

      Past Legislation

      • In 2018, a ballot initiative entitled “An Act Relating to Reducing Pollution by Investing in Clean Air, Clean Energy, Clean Water, Healthy Forests, and Healthy Communities by Imposing a Fee on Large Emitters Based on Their Pollution” (I-1631) looked to impose a price on carbon.
        • Fee system: $15 per ton, increasing annually by $2 plus inflation
        • Revenue breakdown:
          • 70% invested in carbon reduction and clean air
            • 15% of this must be targeted to reducing environmental impacts for low income residents
          • 30% invested in pollution and health action areas – regions where residents face more significant environmental health impacts based on their income, pollution levels, and other factors
        • Status: The initiative was rejected by 56% of voters in the November midterm election.
      • On the Senate side:
        • “An Act Relating to Reducing Carbon Pollution by Moving to a Clean Energy Economy” (SB 6203) was introduced by Sen. Carlyle in 2018.
          • Fee system: Initially, carbon would be priced at $20 with an increase equal to inflation. Bill language was then adjusted to $12 per carbon ton, increasing by $1.8 per year until capping off  at $30.
          • Revenue breakdown:
            • 15% rebated to low-income assistance programs
            • 35% to water and state forest funds
            • 50% to carbon reduction and clean air investments
          • Status: Senate rules “X” File as of March, 2018 and does not make it out of the chamber.
        • “An Act Relating to Creating a Fossil Fuel Carbon Pollution Tax” (SB 6335) was introduced by Senators Hobbs and Saldaña in 2018.
          • Fee system: Carbon priced at $15 per ton until 2024 when it will rise to $20 per ton.
          • Revenue breakdown:
            • 40% used to reduce pollution from transportation sources, reduce congestion, and improve mobility
            • 20% invested in clean energy technologies and efficiency
            • 20% invested in reducing stormwater impacts
            • 10% for forest fire prevention and forest management
            • 5% expended for fish barrier correction projects
            • 5% to benefit rural economic development
          • Status: Referred to Committee on Energy, Environment & Technology in January, 2018.
        • “An Act Relating to Establishing a Carbon Pollution Tax” (SB 5930) introduced by Sen. Palumbo in 2017.
          • Fee system: Carbon priced at $15 per ton with a rate increase of $2.50 until it reaches $30 per ton
          • Revenue breakdown:
            • 45% directed to a Carbon Reduction Investment Fund
            • 20% invested in water infrastructure
            • 20% invested in fire resiliency and prevention
            • 15% rebated to vulnerable populations
          • Status: By resolution, was reintroduced in January, 2018 and died in committee there.
      • On the House side:
        • “An Act Relating to Enacting a Carbon Emissions Tax to Fund  Stewardship of Washington’s Natural Resources and Investments in Communities and Economic Opportunity” (HB.2230) was introduced by Rep. Fitzgibbon in 2017.
          • Fee system: Carbon priced at $15 per ton of CO2 with an increase equal to inflation.
          • While exact revenue breakdown was not specified, money would be allocated to the following programs:
            • An Equitable Transition Fund to ensure impacted workers are supported during transition to a clean energy economy
            • A Low-income Carbon Pollution Mitigation Tax Grant to provide rebates for vulnerable populations
            • A Natural Resources Super Account
            • Clean Water Climate Grants
            • Forest Health Investments
            • Clean Air Investment Programs
            • Carbon Reduction Investment Fund
            • Sustainable Infrastructure Fund

      Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

      • Carbon Costs Coalition: Washington legislators are a part of a multistate alliance between legislators focused on reducing and pricing carbon.

      Further Reading

      Key Figures

      WASHINGTON D.C.

      State Update

      In December, Washington D.C. passed the Clean Energy D.C. Act, considered to be one of the strongest pieces of climate legislation in the country. The bill, which transitions DC to 100% renewable energy by 2032, also invests in energy efficiency, funds local sustainability programs, and creates new building standards. The act also mandates DC to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2032, and authorizes the Mayor to impose a carbon fee on motor fuel if Maryland and Virginia do the same. It has been in effect as of March 22nd.

      2019-2020 Legislation

      The 2019-2020 Legislative Session began on January 2nd, 2019 and will end on December 31, 2020.

      Political Context

      • D.C. is represented in the House of Representatives by Eleanor Norton (D).
      • Mayor Muriel Bowser pledged in 2017 to make the District carbon neutral by 2050.
      • Emission reduction targets:
        • By 2032: 50% below 2017 levels
        • By 2050: 100% below 2017 levels

      Past Legislation

      • The “Clean Energy D.C. Act of 2018” (B22-0904) was introduced by Councilmembers to strengthen the jurisdiction’s 2004 renewable energy standard, and set specific emission-reduction targets. The omnibus bill, which also includes provisions on new building emission standards and funding local sustainability initiatives, notably contains a carbon pricing stipulation.
        • Fee system:
          • This bill will increase the Sustainable Energy Trust Fund fee, established by the Renewable Portfolio Standard Act of 2004. This fee increase will result in a $1 increase to residents’ monthly electric and natural gas bills, and in an approximately $2.10 increase to average gas bills. This fund is used to promote energy efficiency, increase the renewable energy generating capacity of low-income housing, and reduce energy consumption.
          • This bill will also impose a carbon fee on motor fuel if Maryland and Virginia, the two most common commuter states for D.C., do the same.
        • Status: Passed in December 2018 and went into effect in January, 2019.

      Other Carbon Pricing Commitments

      Further Reading

      Key Figures