This month, California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, traveled over 6,000 miles to Rome to deliver a brief speech on climate change at a Vatican-sponsored conference. While media reports focused on his remarks about former President Donald Trump and his conversation with Pope Francis, who praised his suspension of executions in California, Newsom did touch upon climate change, particularly criticizing the oil industry.
“It’s because of the burning of gas, the burning of coal, the burning of oil,” Newsom stated. “We have the tools, the technology, and the capacity to address the issue globally, and they’ve been fighting every single advancement, and we have got to call that out.”
Despite Newsom’s frequent travels, which rely on petroleum-fueled planes and automobiles, he has declared that California will achieve carbon emission neutrality by 2045, just 21 years from now.
In 2022, the state Air Resources Board issued a “scoping plan” outlining multiple steps to achieve this goal. Newsom praised it as “a comprehensive roadmap to achieve a pollution-free future” and likened the potential economic transformation to the industrial revolution.
However, achieving these ambitious goals in such a short timeframe is daunting, with some progress stalling or even regressing. It’s uncertain if California can generate enough power from solar panels and wind turbines to meet current demand and supply additional electricity for millions of battery-powered cars and trucks envisioned in the plan. Fearing blackouts, Newsom has extended the operation of some natural gas-fired power plants and the state’s only nuclear plant beyond their planned phaseout dates.
Electric car sales have also lagged, despite a mandate for automakers to stop selling gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicles in just 11 years. Consumers are hesitant due to the insufficient number of recharging stations. Furthermore, to address a budget crisis, Newsom has cut spending on climate change programs.
One significant uncertainty about a carbon-neutral future is its impact on economic sectors that rely on transportation. A new report on Southern California’s logistics industry highlights this issue.
Decades ago, Southern California’s leaders envisioned the twin ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach as the nation’s primary gateway for trade with Asia, supported by extensive transportation and warehousing facilities. The California Center for Jobs and the Economy, part of the California Business Roundtable, has released a report showing the success of this vision. The “regional trade cluster” is now the largest single source of employment in the area, supporting 1.85 million jobs, two-thirds of which require only a high school education or less, crucial for the region’s large immigrant population.
However, global transportation is highly competitive, and the twin ports have experienced declining traffic due to competition from ports with lower operational costs. Additionally, state and local authorities are pressuring the sector to convert ships, trucks, locomotives, and other machinery to low- or no-emission propulsion, which incurs significant costs. There has also been opposition to the massive warehouse complexes in inland areas.
The question remains: Can the logistics industry undergo the massive conversion required by Newsom’s plan within 21 years without losing competitiveness and shedding jobs that many regional families rely on? This dilemma reflects the larger uncertainty surrounding California’s ambitious carbon-neutral goals.