The Los Angeles Times reports on the close of the California 2025 legislative session and Governor Gavin Newsom's veto of AB 740, a bill that would have directed the state’s energy agencies to create an implementation plan for virtual power plants. The article quotes United's Edson Perez, who called the veto a huge missed opportunity that would have lowered costs. 

Gov. Gavin Newsom wrapped up the 2025 legislative session with the usual flurry of activity, signing several important environmental, energy and climate bills and vetoing others ahead of Monday’s deadline.

Among the newest laws in California are efforts to accelerate clean energy projects and advance the state’s position as a climate leader — but also decisions to ramp up oil drilling and reject the phase-out of forever chemicals.

Here’s a look at what happened this year:

In September, Newsom signed a blockbuster suite of bills including the reauthorization of California’s signature cap-and-trade program, which sets limits on greenhouse gas emissions and allows large polluters to buy and sell emissions allowances at quarterly auctions. The legislature extended the program by 15 years to 2045, rebranded it as “cap-and-invest” and specified how its revenues will be allocated for wildfire prevention efforts, high-speed rail and other projects.

The greenhouse gas trading program is seen as essential for the state to meet its climate targets, including reaching carbon neutrality by 2045.

“California really needed to act this year to decisively try to put in policies to meet our climate goals [and support] the economy and different sectors,” said Susan Nedell, senior western advocate with the nonpartisan policy group E2. She called state legislative efforts especially important as the Trump administration aims to erode California’s authority on tailpipe emission standards, electric vehicle initiatives and renewable energy projects, among others.

“This is the time for California to lead, and I really feel like they came through on it as a state,” Nedell said.

WHAT ELSE BECAME LAW

• One of the more controversial bills of the year was Senate Bill 237, which makes it easier to drill up to 2,000 new oil wells in Kern County. It’s a tradeoff that also makes it more difficult to drill new oil or gas wells offshore. Legislators said it will help address the volatility of gasoline prices following announcements from oil companies Phillips 66 and Valero that they are shutting down two big refineries in the state. Environmental groups were quick to condemn the bill.
• Also controversial was Assembly Bill 825, which will expand California’s participation in a regional power market — enabling the state to buy and sell more clean power with other western states. Opponents feared that it will cede some control of California’s power grid to out-of-state authorities, including the federal government. Supporters said it will improve grid reliability and save money for ratepayers.
  

• The governor vetoed Senate Bill 34, which would have required the South Coast Air Quality Management District to consider certain factors before implementing regulations at the region’s ports. Opponents, including health and environmental groups, said it would have ultimately weakened its authority and ability to meet clean air standards. In its place, the air district and the ports are pursuing a voluntary cooperative agreement that will include obligations for zero-emissions infrastructure and other clean-air efforts. “With the current federal administration directly undermining our state and local air and climate pollution reduction strategies, it is imperative that we maintain the tools we have,” Newsom wrote in his veto. 
• Assembly Bill 740 would have directed the state’s energy agencies to create an implementation plan for “virtual power plants” — networks of small energy resources such as smart thermostats, home batteries and rooftop solar panels that can help reduce strain on the grid. Newsom vetoed it earlier this month, stating that it would result in additional costs for the California Energy Commission’s already depleted operating fund. But Edson Perez, California lead at the nonprofit Advanced Energy United, called its veto a “costly mistake” and said the bill would have saved ratepayers more than $13 billion.