Organisation Name
Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA)
InfluenceMap Query
Emissions Trading
Data Source
Media Reports
 
 

Score for this Data / Query Cell

-0.07

InfluenceMap has researched and collated the following pieces of evidence associated with the data source and query indicated above. Extraordinary information is indicated by a coloured flag in the upper right corner. Evidence items in order of data inputted with exceptional items first.

 

Opposing emissions trading

InfluenceMap Comment:

Have stated support for emissions trading but oppose currently proposed cap and trade scheme. Funding others to oppose emissions trading. (The Seattle Times, February 2015)

Extract from Source:

Frank Holmes, regional director for the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA), said the industry doesn’t deny climate change and might be willing to discuss a “properly designed” cap-and-trade system. But he called both the system now in place in California and Inslee’s similar proposal in Washington unacceptable. When asked what a properly designed system might look like, Holmes said, “I don’t know that there are any specific proposals that we would be willing to put forward. But there are definitely alternatives for reducing greenhouse gases that are more cost effective and achievable.” [...] In December, on the day Inslee announced his cap-and-trade plan, WSPA and allied groups announced the creation of the Washington Climate Collaborative. The green-sounding group has a website featuring a photo of Mount Rainier and statistics on Washington’s reputation as an environmental leader. The group says it supports incentives for private-sector development of clean energy. But its main focus has been to campaign against Inslee’s cap-and-trade proposal, including commissioning a study that predicts it would raise gasoline and energy prices and destroy thousands of jobs.

Created: 01/07/2015 Last edited: 05/10/2016

 

Not supporting emissions trading

InfluenceMap Comment:

Not supporting measures to increase the carbon price and effectiveness of the scheme (Guardian, July 2017)

Extract from Source:

Some of the proposed changes to the California program are hot-button issues, such as eliminating the use of offsets by companies to meet the emission caps. Offsets are credits earned by putting money into projects, such as preserving forests or turning methane from livestock waste into electricity, that are intended to reduce greenhouse gases. The state currently allows offset projects to take place outside of the state. [...] The Western States Petroleum Association, an oil industry trade group, supports keeping the current offset program, including out-of-state offsets. The existing offset rule helps to support “reasonable allowance prices and expands greenhouse gas reductions in sectors outside of our cap”, says Adam Smith, manager of air and climate at utility Southern California Edison.

Created: 13/07/2017 Last edited: 13/07/2017

 

Supporting emissions trading over other regulation

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting emissions trading scheme but only at the expense of other forms of regulation in California (Capital and Main, July 2017)

Extract from Source:

But some activists worry those efforts could stall if a proposal floated by Governor Jerry Brown and legislative leaders to extend cap-and-trade clears the legislature. One of the two measures in the package, Assembly Bill 398, contains what environmental justice advocates refer to as a “preemption provision,” a clause prohibiting local air districts from regulating carbon dioxide emissions at state-regulated facilities. [...] The preemption language, which didn’t exist in California’s original 2006 climate law, seems to have been added at the behest of the oil industry. Governor Brown has been engaged in controversial negotiations with the industry to craft the cap-and-trade package. The language granting the state air board sole authority over carbon dioxide regulation comes directly from a power point circulated by the Western States Petroleum Association, a powerful industry lobbying group which includes Chevron.

Created: 27/07/2017 Last edited: 14/11/2017

 

Strongly supporting emissions trading

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting an extension to the California cap and trade scheme (Natural Gas Intel, January 2018)

Extract from Source:

California's two major oil and gas associations, the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) and the California Independent Petroleum Association (CIPA), support or remain neutral regarding the auction program and its extension. While recognizing that California's GHG emission reduction goals for 2030 are the "world's most stringent " and therefore technologically challenging, WSPA President Catherine Reheis-Boyd expressed strong support for bipartisan approval of the extended emissions credit auction program. Reheis-Boyd said the pollution trading market is preferred to more draconian, command-and-control approaches the state could have imposed.

Created: 08/01/2018 Last edited: 08/01/2018

 

Opposing emissions trading

InfluenceMap Comment:

Establishing and financing grass roots organizations to oppose California’s Assembly Bill 32 that has a provision to establish a cap and trade scheme (Bloomberg Business, November 2014)

Extract from Source:

A Powerpoint (MSFT) deck now being circulated by climate activists—a copy of which was sent to Bloomberg Businessweek—suggests that there is a conspiracy. [...] The Powerpoint deck details a plan to throttle AB 32 (also known as the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006) and steps to thwart low carbon fuel standards (known as LCFS) in California, Oregon, and Washington State. Specifically, the deck from a presentation by WSPA President Catherine Reheis-Boyd lays out the construction of what environmentalists contend is an elaborate “astroturf campaign.” Groups with names such as Oregon Climate Change Campaign, Washington Consumers for Sound Fuel Policy, and AB 32 Implementation Group are made to look and sound like grassroots citizen-activists while promoting oil industry priorities. [...] In California, O’Connor points out, “we have 70 percent voter approval on clean energy alternatives, so it’s offensive and atrocious they’re using these supposed everyday citizens—who are really paid advertisers—to change the public discourse.”

Created: 11/09/2015 Last edited: 29/09/2016

 

Supporting emissions trading over other regulation

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting emissions trading scheme but only at the expense of other forms of regulation in California (Vox, July 2017)

Extract from Source:

Probably the biggest grievance environmental justice advocates had with AB 398, according to Bill Magavern, policy director of the Coalition for Clean Air, is a specific provision that prohibits California’s Air Resources Board and local air districts from directly regulating carbon emissions by sources that are also subject to the state’s cap-and-trade program. This preemption was one of the top asks of the Western States Petroleum Association, a massive trade group for oil companies that lobbied the legislature hard. Oil companies, as well as other businesses, favor the policy certainty that the preemption provision provides because cap and trade on its own allows for better planning of long-term strategies and investments, while the fear of new regulations does not. Environmental justice advocates, meanwhile, were more concerned that the policy limits the ability to protect the neighborhoods that are home to big emitters and whose residents disproportionately bear the burden of pollution. With the bill, local regulators will no longer be able to, for example, force an oil refinery “to clean up its own operations at the source, in the community where it operates,” Magavern explains. Instead, under only the cap-and-trade program a big polluter could, he says, “buy its way to compliance by purchasing allowances and/or offsets from elsewhere.”

Created: 26/07/2017 Last edited: 14/11/2017

 

Supporting emissions trading over other regulation

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting emissions trading scheme but only at the expense of other forms of regulation in California (E&E News, July 2017)

Extract from Source:

WSPA led the companies, and the oil sector, on spending. The trade group spent $20.1 million since 2015 and nearly $1.4 million in the first quarter of this year. The association represents some two dozen oil companies, including BP PLC, Chevron Corp., ConocoPhillips Co. and Exxon Mobil Corp. Several observers said WSPA won a major plum in the measure that passed, A.B. 398. It contains a provision stating that only the California Air Resources Board (ARB) can regulate carbon emissions at oil and gas facilities, and solely through cap and trade. That means the state's 35 local air districts cannot directly regulate carbon dioxide. Many familiar with negotiations around the bill say that language was inserted at the behest of WSPA and that Brown consented because he wanted a two-thirds vote approving the legislation. Brown needed allies, not opponents. In the end, eight Republicans voted for it, while three Democrats opposed it. WSPA would not agree to an interview. In a blog post after the vote, Catherine Reheis-Boyd, WSPA president, said that the measure as written was the best option for meeting the state's 2030 mandate to cut greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels. Direct regulations from ARB would have been more costly, she said. "Cap-and-trade's market-based approach provides regulated facilities, like those of our industry, with more flexibility as they work to meet the new standards," Reheis-Boyd wrote. "The bipartisan support of A.B. 398 ensured an improved cap-and-trade program with tax cuts, cost containment measures, and significant bureaucracy reduction that will contain costs for all Californians."

Created: 01/08/2017 Last edited: 14/11/2017

 

Opposing emissions trading

InfluenceMap Comment:

Actively opposing cap-and-trade legislation (The Seattle Times, December 2014)

Extract from Source:

Gov. Jay Inslee on Wednesday laid out an ambitious plan for cutting Washington’s carbon emissions that would vault the state to the forefront of global efforts to combat climate change. [...] The trucking group has joined with other major business players, including the Western States Petroleum Association, opposing the cap-and-trade plan through a new coalition calling itself the Washington Climate Collaborative. Inslee’s proposal, called the Carbon Pollution Accountability Act, would cover about 130 facilities that now emit about 85 percent of the state’s greenhouse gases. If approved, Washington would join California and British Columbia in pricing carbon. Several northeastern states also have a joint plan.

Created: 21/09/2015 Last edited: 05/10/2016

 

Supporting emissions trading over other regulation

InfluenceMap Comment:

Supporting emissions trading scheme but only at the expense of other forms of regulation in California (E&E News, July 2017)

Extract from Source:

Aware of the hard math, Brown has been trying to get agreement on a cap-and-trade bill from the Western States Petroleum Association, a trade group for oil companies, Magavern said. The group is seeking a provision to prohibit CARB and local air districts from regulating greenhouse gas emissions at refineries, other than through cap and trade, Magavern said. That could deter some Democrats who want stronger pollution rules for those facilities, because they believe it disproportionately harms lower-income communities nearby, advocates say. It's not clear how much the bill being drafted in the state Senate will incorporate environmental justice language. But it was a key element of the failed bill last month. A.B. 378 was about "improving air quality in communities that have the worst air pollution in California," Magavern said. "So how could a legislator who represents one of those communities vote against this bill? I think you find the answer in the campaign money that they take from polluters."

Created: 26/07/2017 Last edited: 14/11/2017

 

Supporting emissions trading over other regulation

InfluenceMap Comment:

Has stated support for weaker emissions trading policy (Bloomberg BNA, July 2017)

Extract from Source:

Adding provisions to guard against spikes in carbon dioxide allowance prices and energy costs were a big win for industry, Western States Petroleum Association President Catherine Reheis-Boyd told Bloomberg BNA July 26. The group’s members include Chevron Corp. U.S.A., Phillips 66, and Valero Energy Corp. “This program is going to be expensive no matter what way we go, but it would cost 10 times as much without a market-based program,” she said. The California Air Resources Board will consider amendments to the existing program July 27 that are designed to set the stage for extending cap-and-trade though 2030. In the works for over a year but shelved until the law was passed, the proposed revisions authorize the agency to set new emissions caps for the years beyond 2021, continue the link with Quebec’s program, and pave the way for Ontario to join the trading program in 2018.

Created: 01/08/2017 Last edited: 14/11/2017