Assessing California’s progress toward its 2020 GHG limit

We present a retrospective analysis of California’s greenhouse gas emissions to assess how the state has achieved faster-than-expected emissions reductions, meeting its 2020 emissions reduction goal four years early in 2016.

An open-source model of the Western Climate Initiative cap-and-trade program with supply-demand scenarios through 2030

To aid in understanding the range of possible outcomes for the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) cap-and-trade program, we built WCI-RULES, an open-source model that allows users to explore a wide range of scenarios

GHG Accounting in the Power Source Disclosure Program: 2019 Comments

Summary Near Zero submitted a comment letter to the California Energy Commission on its AB 1110 Implementation Rulemaking for the Power Source Disclosure Program. We appreciate the effort the Commission has put into updating the PSD Program to account for the...

California’s Cap-and-Trade Reforms: October 2018 Comment Letter

Near Zero comments on the serious risk that excess allowances in the cap-and-trade program will frustrate its ability to deliver the emission reductions called for in the 2017 Scoping Plan, a potential loophole in the proposed definition of “direct environmental benefits” for carbon offsets, and the need to work toward a science-based policy strategy.


“Cap and Trade Is Supposed to Solve Climate Change, but Oil and Gas Company Emissions Are Up,” ProPublica

“There’s no question a well-designed regulation on oil and gas can have an effect,” said Danny Cullenward, a Stanford researcher and policy director at Near Zero, a climate policy think tank. “And that was traded away for a weak cap-and-trade program.” Covering California’s cap-and-trade program, Lisa Song of ProPublica spoke with Near Zero’s Danny Cullenward.


credit for header photo: Krystle Mikaere