Challenge to offset program in California’s cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gases.
- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- California
- /
- Our Children’s Earth Foundation v. California Air Resources Board
Our Children’s Earth Foundation v. California Air Resources Board
Geography
Year
2012
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2012
Status
Opinion issued upholding CARB actions.
Geography
Docket number
A138830
Court/admin entity
United States → State Courts → California Court of Appeals (Cal. Ct. App.)
Case category
Carbon Offsets and Credits (US) → Regulatory (US)State Law Claims (US) → Environmentalist Lawsuits (US)
Principal law
United States → California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32)
At issue
Challenge to offset program in California’s cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gases.
Topics
, ,
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
Beta
02/23/2015
Opinion issued upholding CARB actions.
The California Court of Appeal ruled that the offset component of California’s cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gas emissions did not violate the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). Two environmental groups had charged that the offset program did not satisfy AB 32’s additionality requirements, and in particular that the California Air Resources Board (CARB) had not ensured that offset projects’ emission reductions would be “in addition to … any other greenhouse gas emission reduction that otherwise would occur.” The court was not persuaded by “the rather pedantic position” that AB 32 required “unequivocal proof” that an offset project’s emission reduction would not otherwise occur. The court called this interpretation “unworkable” and said that such a requirement would not account “for the fact that is virtually impossible to know what otherwise would have occurred in most cases.” The appellate court instead concluded that AB 32 delegated rulemaking authority to CARB to establish a “workable method of ensuring additionality” and that CARB had not acted arbitrarily or capriciously in formulating the offset protocols. The court also ruled that AB 32 authorized CARB to grant early action credits for offset projects previously undertaken pursuant to Carbon Reserve protocols.
Decision
Summary
Topics mentioned most in this case Beta
See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more
Group
Topics
Target
Policy instrument
Risk
Impacted group
Fossil fuel
Greenhouse gas
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience
Finance