Whilst efforts at the federal level suffer from policy gridlocks and rollbacks, there has been a shift to the state level, with each state government having its own judicial, legislative, and executive branches [1, 2]. Last November, Michigan adopted a historic climate package, making it a leader in the clean energy economy according to NGO Ceres [3]. But how does Michigan compare to other states? A scorecard developed at the Northeast-Midwest Institute will be used to score mitigation efforts. It is based on ten criteria, each scored as one if the criterion is met and zero otherwise [4]. This article will look at four states: Wyoming, California, Texas, and Michigan. This choice was made to have two Democratic and two Republican states while also having a state from the top, middle and bottom of a recent US state climate policy ranking [5].
Figure 1. Scores by the authors and ref [4].
The ten criteria are:
- GHG reduction target for 2030
- Carbon pricing in place
- Mandatory Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS)
- Adoption of California’s zero-emission vehicle standards
- Having an environmental justice office/interagency
- Member of US Climate Alliance
- Climate action plan
- Climate task force present
- Green bank
- Attempts to include climate change in the curriculum via legislation
Table 1.
| State | Carbon pricing | Mandatory RPS | Zero emission vehicles standards | Environmental justice offices | US Climate Alliance | Climate Action Plan | Climate task force | Green bank | Climate change curriculum | TOTAL SCORE | |
| WY | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | |
| CA | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 10 | |
| TX | 0 | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1.5 | |
| MI | 0 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 | 8 |
Wyoming (Republican trifecta)
Wyoming scored very poorly with 0.5/10 overall. The half point is based on a report that scored Wyoming the highest in the country on addressing climate change in public schools [6]. Despite this, there have been no legislative efforts to enshrine climate change education in the curriculum, and efforts by conservatives to promote climate denial still exist [7]. None of the other criteria are met [8-15]. While the governor pledged to make the state carbon-negative, there is no timeline nor is it binding [16].
California (Democratic trifecta)
Meeting all criteria, California scored a perfect 10. The state has set a legally binding target of 40% emission reductions by 2030 (relative to 1990 levels) and a non-binding target of 48% reduction. However the latter will be difficult to meet [17]. One measure to achieve its target is the cap-and-trade system which covers about 75% of the state’s emissions [9]. Its carbon price in the final quarter of 2023 was 38.73 USD (35.33 euros) [18]. Another measure is its renewable portfolio standard (RPS) which sets binding targets (Figure 2), thereby incentivizing the uptake of renewable energy [19].
In addition, the state’s stringent car regulations will contribute not only to reduced emissions but also to better air quality. From 2035 onwards, all new passenger cars, trucks and SUVs sold in California must be zero-emission vehicles [20]. Its two green banks* will contribute towards reducing emissions through the financing of green initiatives [21]. Moreover, California’s Office of Environmental Justice, established in 2021, will help to “protect people and communities that endure a disproportionate share of environmental pollution and public health hazards” [22]. Last September, a bill was adopted in the state requiring grades 1-12 to include coursework on climate change [23].
Texas (Republican trifecta)
Texas scored 1.5 out of 10 and has a Republican trifecta in power [24]. In the last two decades, hydraulic fracturing, or fracking as it is commonly referred to, led to an oil and gas boom. The state is a hub for the extraction, refining and shipping of fossil fuels, accounting for 32% of oil and gas refining emissions and 29% of fossil fuel emissions, excluding coal mining, in the USA [25]. The largest source of emissions on the planet is the Permian Basin in West Texas [26].
An “all-of-the-above” strategy for energy is in place and thus both fossil fuel emissions as well as renewable energy capacity are trending upwards. The state achieved its goal of installing 10,000 MW of new renewable energy by 2025, fifteen years ahead of schedule, but did not set new goals [27]. Installed and potential wind capacity in Texas (2023, Q1) is the highest of any state [28].
Texas only narrowly meets the criteria for including climate change in the curriculum, largely ignoring it as recently as 2020 [29]. Although human influence on climate change is taught in public schools, many textbooks were rejected by the Texas Board of Education in late 2023 due to climate change messaging [30].
Michigan (Democratic trifecta)
Michigan’s score is 8 out of 10, which is largely a result of the historic 100% clean energy and climate bill passed in late 2023. The bill will bring $8 billion in funds from the US government’s Inflation Reduction Act and create 160,000 jobs [31]. For the first time since 1984, the state has a left-leaning majority leadership in the governorship, house and senate (Democratic trifecta) [32].
Michigan is a manufacturing hub with reduction targets for GHG emissions and a green bank [31, 33]. Greenhouse gas emissions dropped 18% between 2023 compared to 2005 levels after Michigan joined the US Climate Alliance [34]. The state established an Environmental Justice Office in 2020 and in 2023 updated the optional climate change curriculum [35, 36].
Michigan’s RPS focuses on expanding renewable energy sources, improving energy efficiency, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions through the most reasonable means [37]. Michigan’s Climate Action Plan commits to carbon neutrality by 2050 and net negative emissions thereafter [38].
Conclusion
Using the Northeast-Midwest Institute scorecard of 10 criteria for mitigating GHG emissions, Wyoming, California, Texas, and Michigan have 0.5, 10, 1.5, and 8 points respectively. There are no universally met criteria; climate goals and educational requirements are highly varied across the United States. Total GHG emissions and per-capita emissions vary greatly, see Figure 3.
Figure 3. Greenhouse gas emissions in 2022, 10,071 individual emissions sources over a 20-year period; the four states contributed 1.7 of 8.8 Gt CO2eq, 19% of total emissions from the USA [25]; 1 metric gigaton (Gt) = 1000 metric megatons (Mt); adapted from Climate TRACE [26].
Although each state permits teaching climate change topics to children in grade school, Wyoming and Michigan do not require climate education [3, 4]. Although climate change education is required in Texas, many standardized educational resources available in US states were rejected by the Texas State Board of Education based on climate-change messaging, so choices are limited [27].
California and Michigan are the only two states with emission reduction targets, aiming for 100% renewable energy by 2045 and 2050, respectively [15, 38]. California meets all ten criteria, the only one of the four states with carbon pricing and universal zero-emissions vehicle standards [14, 16]. In conclusion, Michigan ranks behind California and ahead of Wyoming and Texas on climate action. For further reading on climate policy, Climatalk’s climate adaptation publications can be found here.
* 1. Infrastructure Bank (IBank) and 2. California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority (CAEATFA) & California Pollution Control Financing Authority (CPCFA)
