“Every day, Californians are taking small actions that collectively are helping us create a better world for our kids and grandkids,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a written statement last week. “From saving water and planting trees to taking public transit and being disaster ready — we’re all in this together.”

If only the governor’s actions backed up his words.

Shortly after announcing the Climate Action Counts campaign, described as an effort to engage 1 million people in climate action, Newsom vetoed two bills that would have helped Californians burn less fossil fuel.

One bill would have reversed a decision by Newsom’s appointees to the Public Utilities Commission that makes it more expensive for apartment renters, farmers, schools and strip malls to install rooftop solar panels.

The other bill would have required newly sold gas stoves to come with health warning labels, because they spew nitrogen dioxide, benzene and other potentially deadly pollutants. Gas also heats the planet when burned.

So on the one hand, we’ve got Newsom encouraging us to save water and take public transit, which is great.

On the other hand, we’ve got Newsom keeping schools and renters from going solar — and making it harder for people to find out that buying a gas stove instead could result in their kids suffering from asthma attacks.

What the hell is going on?

Politics, if I had to guess.

In his veto message for the gas stove bill, AB 2513, Newsom said he “appreciate[s] the author’s intent to provide consumers with information.” But he also expressed concern with the bill’s “static approach,” which he said “falls short in enabling timely updates to the labeling content that should align with the latest scientific knowledge.”

“This bill codifies highly prescriptive labeling content that could only be changed by a future [law],” he wrote.

In other words, Newsom seems to be saying, maybe we’ll eventually discover we made a mistake, and then we’ll have to pass another law. It’s a borderline nonsensical argument, given that the scientific research into gas stove pollution is decades-old and increasingly robust, and that the California Legislature loves passing new laws.

Newsom’s argument does, however, carry the whiff of industry talking points.

Activists call on Gov. Gavin Newsom to shut down the Aliso Canyon gas storage field in the San Fernando Valley, which sprang a record-breaking methane leak in 2015.

(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

The Assn. of Home Appliance Manufacturers and the California Building Industry Assn. urged lawmakers to reject the bill, claiming that improved ventilation is “by far the most important improvement in indoor air quality related to cooking.” Those groups also implied that certain air contaminants “originating in the foodstuffs cooked” are as serious a concern as gas combustion and leakage, despite independent researchers finding otherwise.

The bill’s other opponents included the California Chamber of Commerce and Southern California Gas Co.

The rooftop solar story is more complicated.

For a decade, electric utility companies such as Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric — as well as consumer watchdog groups including the Utility Reform Network — have argued that state-mandated incentives for rooftop solar power are too high. Required incentive payments for Edison, PG&E and San Diego Gas & Electric customers with rooftop solar have led to higher electric bills for other utility customers, critics say.

Based on that logic, Newsom’s appointees voted to slash “net metering,” which had helped more than 1.5 million homes and businesses go solar. Since then, the solar industry has been rocked by bankruptcies and job cuts.

Instead of working to right the ship, the Public Utilities Commission has followed up with other similarly harmful rulings — including one that undercut rooftop solar economics for schools, apartment renters and farmers.

It’s this ruling that would have been undone by SB 1374 from state Sen. Josh Becker (D-Menlo Park).

Alas, Newsom once again overrode the Legislature.

In his veto message, the governor described California’s long history of support for solar, and the cost declines spurred by that support. Given “the growing need to address the affordability of electric bills,” Newsom said, he couldn’t support legislation that would overturn a thoughtful decision by the Public Utilities Commission.

“This bill would increase the amount that most customers would pay for their own electric service,” he wrote.

Unlike Newsom’s veto of the gas stove bill, the reasoning here is at least intelligible. Electric bills are already too high, and rising fast — an affordability crisis that punishes low-income families and threatens California’s climate goals. People are less likely to drive electric cars and switch to electric appliances if electricity is wildly expensive.

That said, it’s also hard not to see politics at play in Newsom’s veto.

SB 1374’s opponents included Edison, PG&E and SDG&E, as well as groups representing utility workers. The utility companies and utility labor unions thrive on big infrastructure — think sprawling solar farms connected to far-off cities by long-distance power lines. Rooftop solar panels cut into those profits, and those union jobs.

Workers install rooftop solar panels in L.A.’s Watts neighborhood in 2021.

(Gary Coronado / Los Angeles Times)

I should also note that rooftop solar companies and many environmental activists are certain that the size of the solar “cost shift” driving up electricity rates has been exaggerated by utility companies and state officials.

But to the extent the cost shift is one of several factors contributing to higher utility bills — and I tend to trust the academic experts who say that it is — Newsom would have hardly affected electric rates by signing SB 1374.

“It just makes no sense,” said Becker, the bill’s author.

Most folks involved with this debate agree that in the long run, California will need enormous amounts of all kinds of solar — giant projects in the desert, rooftop installations, shade structures covering parking lots.

Unfortunately, Newsom keeps undermining rooftop solar rather than helping Californians do their part.

When I asked Newsom’s office about his track record, spokesperson Alex Stack pointed out he had signed a bill to streamline solar permitting — a key barrier to access. What’s more, Newsom championed hundreds of millions of dollars for solar and storage in low-income and disadvantaged communities, Stack said in an email.

Stack also referred me to Michael Wara, a Stanford University energy expert who said California should focus on incentivizing rooftop solar panels only when they’re paired with battery storage devices — a key distinction, since the state has more than enough clean power during the middle of the day but needs more on hot evenings.

By helping households add batteries to their existing solar panels, the Newsom administration could ease strain on an overworked power grid, while helping people keep their air conditioners running during heat waves.

Even here, though, Newsom has let politics torpedo good policy.

Earlier this year, the Contractors State License Board, most of whose members were appointed by Newsom, voted to block solar installers from adding batteries to homes and businesses that already have solar panels. The agency purportedly bought into claims made by utility workers’ unions and electrical contractors — with little evidence — that home batteries pose safety risks, and that typical solar installers aren’t trained to handle those risks.

The rule was set to take effect Oct. 1. But a solar industry trade association and several advocacy groups sued the agency. A judge granted a preliminary injunction last week that blocks the rule while the lawsuit plays out.

Even Wara, whom the governor’s office referred me to, didn’t like the sound of the agency’s decision.

“That feels inconsistent with the direction we need to be going in,” he told me.

Wildfires are still raging in Southern California. Another dangerous heat wave is getting started.

Newsom has done a lot of good on climate. But not enough. Especially if he’s asking the rest of us to help, too.

On that note, here’s what else is happening around the West:

POLITICAL CLIMATE

Homes are located near Inglewood Oil Field. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation related to oversight of oil and gas wells.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Credit where credit is due. Gov. Gavin Newsom did sign a bunch of important climate bills last week:

• “We are taking on Big Oil.” So said Newsom about three bills that should close a major oil field; allow cities to phase out oil and gas drilling; and force fossil fuel firms to plug idle wells. (Melody Petersen, L.A. Times)
• It only took a full decade after lawmakers tried to do this the first time, but Newsom signed a bill that should finally get rid of wasteful plastic bags at grocery store checkout lanes. (Susanne Rust, L.A. Times)
• After a 12-year-old boy died while running during a P.E. class in triple-digit temperatures, lawmakers passed a bill meant to protect students during heat waves. Newsom signed the bill. (Clara Harter, L.A. Times)

The governor also frustrated environmental justice advocates with another signature, and a veto:

• Newsom approved a bill that will regulate industrial warehouse development. Some activists, though, say it’s not good enough to protect air quality in Southern California’s Inland Empire. (Rebecca Plevin, L.A. Times)
• The governor rejected legislation that would have made it easier for farmworkers to get compensation from their employers for heat illness, which, sadly, is all too common in the Central Valley. (Rebecca Plevin)

Although the Legislature’s normal session is over, lawmakers continue to meet in “special session” at the Capitol in Sacramento at Newsom’s behest, in hopes of figuring out how to make gasoline prices drop.

My colleague Russ Mitchell is doing excellent coverage of the policy and politics. He explored whether requiring oil refiners to store more fuel — Newsom’s idea — would keep gas prices from spiking. He also took an in-depth look at the options California is considering for managing gasoline supply as we move toward electric cars.

In other political happenings:

• California’s attorney general, Rob Bonta, alleges in a lawsuit against Exxon Mobil that “advanced recycling” — the oil company’s solution to plastic pollution — has been around for half a century, and that Exxon only recently started hyping it after discovering that consumers like how it sounds. (Tony Briscoe, L.A. Times)
• California’s insurance commissioner, Ricardo Lara, continues to do battle with an influential advocacy group as he tries to make it easier for Californians to get wildfire protection. (Laurence Darmiento, L.A. Times)
• Green Party candidate Jill Stein won’t be on the presidential ballot in Nevada. (David G. Savage, L.A. Times)

WATER IN THE WEST

Dead fish lie on the dry bottom of the Kern River in Bakersfield.

(Gary Kazanjian / For The Times)

There’s always water drama in California. Here are some recent stories from the Central Valley:

I also continue to be endlessly fascinated by the Salton Sea, my old desert stomping grounds:

• Are shorebirds returning to California’s largest lake, even as the strange desert oasis keeps getting smaller and saltier with less Colorado River water flowing off of Imperial Valley farms? (Janet Wilson, the Desert Sun)
• The Sierra Club is suing over a major Colorado River conservation deal in the Imperial Valley, saying stronger safeguards are needed to protect rare desert wildlife and air quality around the Salton Sea. (Janet Wilson)
• It says a lot about U.S. healthcare that Spanish-speaking Imperial Valley residents breathing windblown dust from farm fields and the Salton Sea are driving to Mexico for asthma treatment. (Philip Salata, inewsource)

In other water news:

• Plans for a major East Bay reservoir expansion are collapsing. (Kurtis Alexander, San Francisco Chronicle)
• Rising seas are destroying beaches. Billionaires are scrambling to secure what’s left. (Jack Flemming, L.A. Times)
• It’s not just at Pacific waterfronts where wealthy homeowners try to keep Californians away from their beaches. Riverbanks belong to the people, too, and can sometimes be fiercely contested. (Jessica Garrison, L.A. Times)

This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. Or open the newsletter in your web browser here.

For more climate and environment news, follow @Sammy_Roth on X.