What about low-carbon fuels, more efficient cars, and solar/green buildings? Won’t that reduce the region’s greenhouse gas emissions? Why do we even need SB 375?

Vehicle technology and transportation pricing (e.g., parking) are likely to have a significant impact on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The impact of more efficient vehicles would be significantly reduced, however, if we continue to drive more and congestion increases because of inefficient land uses. Experts agree that there is no single answer. Changes in technology as well as changes in travel behavior will be necessary to reduce emissions to healthier levels in the future. There are other planning and implementation efforts that address building energy efficiency, renewable energy production, and additional GHG reduction approaches (for example, local Climate Action Plans and Energy Upgrade California (https://energyupgradeca.org/overview.)

Further, SB 375 requires regional planning agencies in the state to include a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in their regional transportation plan that demonstrates how the region could achieve the GHG emissions reductions targets through integrated land use and transportation planning. The CARB Scoping Plan, developed to implement AB 32 as a comprehensive statewide strategy to reduce GHG, specifically charges CARB with implementing GHG reduction strategies related to clean vehicles and fuel efficiency. Therefore, the SB 375 targets analysis does not include the GHG emissions reductions and benefits of statewide standards that are anticipated as the result of fuel efficiency standards and the low carbon fuels standards (LCFS) as part of the region’s efforts to reduce GHG emissions through integrated land use and transportation planning.  Were MTC/ABAG to include those benefits in the SB 375 analysis, the region would be taking credit for emissions reductions in the land use and transportation planning sector that the state is taking credit for as part of ARB’s responsibilities, thus double counting.