AWB is also deeply engaged on several proposals for a low-carbon fuel standard (LCFS), which would add costly new refinement requirements for fuel to a lower carbon content of emissions. State Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon, D-West Seattle, has filed House Bill 1110 to implement a LCFS, which is expected to quickly move to the House floor within the first few weeks of session.
The Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA) is also proposing its own regional LCFS, estimating that its new mandate would raise the cost of gasoline by up to 57 cents per gallon by 2030 and raise the cost of diesel by up to 63 cents per gallon over the same time period.
AWB opposes a LCFS for several reasons, beyond that major cost:
- The regulation will impose private-sector infrastructure costs of up to $2 billion in order to achieve compliance;
- The PSCAA estimates an LCFS would reduce the Gross Regional Product (GRP) under every scenario considered;
- In the scenario chosen, the LCFS would reduce the GRP across Washington state by $1.4 billion between its first year of implementation and 2030;
- The only potential air quality benefit demonstrated is a reduction in particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 micrometers, which the agency plainly admits is “mainly as a result of federal vehicle standards”;
- The agency’s economic analysis does not quantify any of the other pollutants that make up greenhouse gas emissions, nor does it offer any form of an estimate on how regional emissions would be impacted as a result of implementing a LCFS;
- California officials estimate their LCFS has reduced greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation sector by just 1.4%; and
- California Legislative Analysis’s Office officials conclude the LCFS is the most inefficient method of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and recommend the state should “amend or eliminate it” all together.