Should NH set stricter limits on greenhouse gas emissions?

This week, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a new law which sets strict limits for the state’s greenhouse gas emissions, creating a new target of lowering them to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. The goal exceeds the federally mandated Clean Power Plan limits, which require emissions nationally to be reduced to 32% below 2012 levels by 2030.

The new law expands upon previous California legislation that requires the state to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, a goal California is reportedly on target to meet thanks to subsidies for electric car purchases, development centered around mass transit systems, and the creation of a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions by power generators.

New Hampshire already participates in a cap and trade program through the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), which has an overall goal of reducing carbon emissions across the nine participating states to 45% of 2005 levels by 2020. However, the state has not passed any legislation mandating a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions beyond participation in RGGI, and RGGI does not cover other pollutants, such as methane.

Supporters of more strictly reducing greenhouse gas emissions argue that the move is necessary to fight climate change, which is believed to increase the risks of drought, wildfire, and other environmental threats. They hold that better energy efficiency and investment in new technology will boost the state economy.

Opponents counter that the move will have a negative economic impact on the state, arguing it will increase energy prices, discourage manufacturing, and cause job losses. They also note that New Hampshire is one of the lowest carbon emitters in the nation already, ranked only behind Vermont, Rhode Island and Delaware. 

UPDATE: Read our Citizen Voices℠ report and find out where New Hampshire stands on this issue.