The short version
Claim we investigated
Most of Washington's Climate Commitment Act spending on cutting emissions pays far more per ton than the state's carbon price.
True. 97% of 2025 emission-cutting money paid more per ton than the top carbon price; 87% paid over double. The state's corrected report puts the average at $322 a ton, 4.5 times the highest auction price of $70.86. A few ferry and factory projects delivered most cuts cheaply; most money bought costly ones.
Quote or cite this fact-check
FactHub rates the claim “Most of Washington's Climate Commitment Act spending on cutting emissions pays far more per ton than the state's carbon price” True (high confidence): 97% of 2025 emission-cutting money paid more per ton than the top carbon price; 87% paid over double. Reviewed November 3, 2026. https://facthub.org/n/article/wa-cca-spending-cost-per-ton/2
Key points
What the evidence establishes
- Established. Ecology's revised report says 2023-25 projects will cut 1.2 million tons over their lives, not 8.6 million, at $322 a ton, not $40.
- Established. In 2025, 97% of emission-cutting money went to projects costing more per ton than the top auction price; 56% went to projects over $1,000.
- Established. Hybrid ferry conversions and two factory retrofits got 15% of the money but supply 63% of the projected cuts.
- Context. Only 26% of the $1.5 billion spent in 2023-25 was expected to cut emissions directly; the law also funds resilience, health and Tribal priorities.
- Not shown. The tons are agency projections, not measured cuts, and the report does not test whether the cap would have forced the same cuts anyway.
- Established. The revised total still lists three ferry terminals' cuts twice, about 68,000 tons; counting them once raises the cost per ton.
The evidence
The conclusion rests on the combined record. Expand each item to see its role and limitations.
| Method | Institution / country | Year(s) | What it shows | Key limitation | Primary links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compared Ecology's original and revised 2023-25 totals from its March 19, 2026 letter to legislators with Commerce's January 2026 correction and the Washington Policy Center's January 2026 estimate. | Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Commerce, Washington Policy Center United States | 2025, 2026 | The November 2025 report said $386 million of 2023-25 projects would cut 8,635,900 tons over their lives, at $40 a ton. Commerce had entered 7.5 million tons for eight rebate projects that will cut about 78,000. After checking all 37 agencies, Ecology corrected 61 Commerce projects. The revised total is 1,201,286 tons, at $322 a ton: 86% less than first claimed, as the Washington Policy Center estimated the day Commerce announced the error. Commerce's own corrected total, nearly 308,000 tons, covers only its programs, about a quarter of the statewide figure. | Both totals are agency projections over each project's lifetime from calculator tools, many adapted from California's. Ecology says it found no errors at other agencies, but this article found apparent double counting at one (evidence 5). | Washington Department of Ecology Washington Department of Commerce Washington Policy Center (Todd Myers) |
| FactHub extracted all 2,360 fiscal year 2025 rows of Appendix B and kept the 567 with a numeric lifetime estimate. Cost per ton = fiscal year 2025 CCA spending / projected lifetime tons. Compared with quarterly allowance settlement prices. | Washington Department of Ecology, FactHub United States | 2023, 2024, 2025 | The 567 line items total $333.1 million and 866,116 tons, matching Ecology's own totals exactly. Pooled, that is $385 a ton; the median line item costs $1,639. Allowances sold for $25.76 to $70.86 from 2023 to 2025, and averaged $44 in the eight auctions of fiscal years 2024-25. Of the money, 97% went to line items costing more than $70.86 a ton, 87% to items above double that, and 56% to items above $1,000. Ecology's own median for the two-year period is $1,730. | Ecology now credits CCA dollars with a co-funded project's whole cut, so for projects with other funding the true cost per ton is higher. Under a binding cap, a subsidized cut at a capped source can also free an allowance for another emitter, which would raise the true cost further. Some projects span several rows or years. The auction price does not measure a project's other benefits. | Washington Department of Ecology FactHub FactHub FactHub California Legislative Analyst's Office |
| FactHub grouped the 567 line items into 13 project types by appropriation title and computed each type's share of spending and of tons, and the cumulative share of each by cost per ton. | Washington Department of Ecology, FactHub United States | 2025 | Ferry hybrid conversions (about $101 a ton) and industrial projects ($61 a ton on average, led by two Lamb Weston potato-plant retrofits) got 15% of the money and 63% of the tons. Projects at or below $71 a ton got 3% of the money and 28% of the tons. EV charging ($1,610 a ton), public building upgrades ($1,543), walking and biking ($13,354) and home weatherization ($14,787) took 39% of the money for 7% of the tons. | Types are FactHub groupings, not Ecology's. Many costly projects, such as safe routes to school and weatherization for low-income homes, were built mainly for other goals, so their cost per ton overstates the cost of the cut itself. | FactHub FactHub Washington Department of Ecology |
| Repeated the comparison against EPA's 2023 social cost of carbon dioxide, an estimate of the damage from one more ton; with every project's tons doubled, tripled or multiplied by five; and with project types whose main goal was not cutting emissions left out (walking and biking, weatherization, habitat and Tribal consultation). | U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, FactHub United States | 2023, 2025 | EPA put the damage from a ton emitted in 2030 at $230 (2020 dollars, 2% discount rate). 82% of 2025 emission-cutting money went to projects costing more than that. If every project cut three times its projected tons, 82% of the money would still pay more than $70.86; at five times, 80% would. Leaving out the four types built mainly for other goals, the other 449 line items cost $329 a ton, and 96.5% of their money paid more than $70.86. Lifetime tons arrive over decades, when allowances may cost more; even at double the top price, 87% of all the money is above it. | EPA's estimate depends on its discount rate; at 1.5% the 2030 value is $380. The multiplier test is a stress test, not an estimate of under-counting. Which project types count as built for other goals is a FactHub judgment. | U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FactHub FactHub FactHub |
| Searched the 567 rows for identical tonnage on rows describing the same project, and checked the report's per-row cost column and narrative against the revised data. | Washington Department of Ecology, FactHub United States | 2025, 2026 | Three ferry terminals (Bainbridge Island, Bremerton, Clinton) each appear on two rows with the same lifetime tons, 67,596 tons in all. The report's own cost column divides both rows' spending by the tons once, yet its total adds them twice. With these and two similar repeats counted once, 2025 tons fall 8%, to 794,701, and the pooled cost rises from $385 to $419. The revised report also still says some appliance projects cost "just $1" a ton; no revised 2025 row reports under $34. | FactHub did not get agency confirmation of which rows repeat. Three Yakima County solar rows with the same tonnage may be separate projects and were kept. | FactHub Washington Department of Ecology Washington Department of Ecology |
1. 1. The state's correction cut projected emission reductions by 86% Compared Ecology's original and revised 2023-25 totals from its March 19, 2026 letter to legislators with Commerce's January 2026 correction and the Washington Policy Center's January 2026 estimate.
The November 2025 report said $386 million of 2023-25 projects would cut 8,635,900 tons over their lives, at $40 a ton. Commerce had entered 7.5 million tons for eight rebate projects that will cut about 78,000. After checking all 37 agencies, Ecology corrected 61 Commerce projects. The revised total is 1,201,286 tons, at $322 a ton: 86% less than first claimed, as the Washington Policy Center estimated the day Commerce announced the error. Commerce's own corrected total, nearly 308,000 tons, covers only its programs, about a quarter of the statewide figure.
Limit: Both totals are agency projections over each project's lifetime from calculator tools, many adapted from California's. Ecology says it found no errors at other agencies, but this article found apparent double counting at one (evidence 5).
Verify: Letter to legislators on the updated CCA Investment Report, March 19, 2026 Commerce submits corrected greenhouse gas emissions data for state climate report (January 6, 2026) State CO2 report shows 86% of Washington's claimed climate benefits are probably fake (January 6, 2026)
- The first report projected 8,635,900 tons from $386.3 million of 2023-25 spending (26% of the total); the revision projects 1,201,286 tons. Washington Department of Ecology
- Ecology revised its average cost per ton from $40 to $322. Washington Department of Ecology
- Ecology corrected 61 Commerce projects and says it found no errors at other agencies. Washington Department of Ecology · Qualifies
- Commerce had reported 7.5 million tons for eight rebate projects because of a data-entry error. Washington Department of Commerce
- Myers estimated that about 86% of the claimed cuts were not real. Washington Policy Center (Todd Myers)
- Commerce's corrected total of nearly 308,000 tons covers only Commerce programs. Washington Department of Commerce
About 86 percent of the total CO2 reductions claimed by the report are probably fake.
Context: Myers wrote this the day Commerce corrected its data, after noting that eight of nearly 3,600 projects accounted for most of the claimed cuts at $1 or $4 per ton. Ecology’s March 2026 revision lowered the 2023-25 total from 8,635,900 to 1,201,286 tons.
Source: Todd Myers, Washington Policy Center, "State CO2 report shows 86% of Washington’s claimed climate benefits are probably fake," January 6, 2026 · View in the dataset
With this correction, Commerce is now reporting a total reduction in emissions of nearly 308,000 tons across all their CCA-funded programs.
Context: The release corrected eight home electrification and appliance rebate projects from 7.5 million to 78,000 lifetime tons and said Ecology would publish a corrected report for all agencies.
Source: Washington Department of Commerce, "Commerce submits corrected greenhouse gas emissions data for state climate report," January 6, 2026 · View in the dataset
2. 2. Almost all 2025 emission-cutting money paid more per ton than the carbon price FactHub extracted all 2,360 fiscal year 2025 rows of Appendix B and kept the 567 with a numeric lifetime estimate. Cost per ton = fiscal year 2025 CCA spending / projected lifetime tons. Compared with quarterly allowance settlement prices.
The 567 line items total $333.1 million and 866,116 tons, matching Ecology's own totals exactly. Pooled, that is $385 a ton; the median line item costs $1,639. Allowances sold for $25.76 to $70.86 from 2023 to 2025, and averaged $44 in the eight auctions of fiscal years 2024-25. Of the money, 97% went to line items costing more than $70.86 a ton, 87% to items above double that, and 56% to items above $1,000. Ecology's own median for the two-year period is $1,730.
Limit: Ecology now credits CCA dollars with a co-funded project's whole cut, so for projects with other funding the true cost per ton is higher. Under a binding cap, a subsidized cut at a capped source can also free an allowance for another emitter, which would raise the true cost further. Some projects span several rows or years. The auction price does not measure a project's other benefits.
Verify: Climate Commitment Act Investments Report: Fiscal Year 2025 (Pub. 25-14-107), updated March 2026 Fiscal year 2025 projects with emission estimates: totals Share of projects, spending and tons above carbon-price benchmarks Washington allowance auction settlement prices, 2023-2026 Cap-and-Trade Revenue: Issues for Legislative Consideration (February 3, 2016)
- Ecology computes an average of about $322 per metric ton for 2023-25 emission-reducing spending. Washington Department of Ecology
- Ecology reports an average per-project cost of $14,236 per ton and a median of $1,730 for 2023-25. Washington Department of Ecology
- Since fiscal year 2025, agencies credit a co-funded project's whole emission cut to CCA spending rather than a share. Washington Department of Ecology · Qualifies
- 567 line items, $333.1 million and 866,116 lifetime tons: $385 a ton pooled, median $1,639. FactHub
- 97.1% of the money went to line items above $70.86 a ton, 87.3% above $141.72, and 55.6% above $1,000. FactHub
- Quarterly settlement prices ranged from $25.76 (March 2024) to $70.86 (December 2025) in 2023-2025 and averaged $43.66 in the eight auctions of fiscal years 2024-25. FactHub
- Under a binding cap, subsidizing a cut at a capped source frees allowances for other emitters, changing who emits but not the total. California Legislative Analyst's Office · Qualifies
3. 3. A few cheap ferry and factory projects supply most of the projected cuts FactHub grouped the 567 line items into 13 project types by appropriation title and computed each type's share of spending and of tons, and the cumulative share of each by cost per ton.
Ferry hybrid conversions (about $101 a ton) and industrial projects ($61 a ton on average, led by two Lamb Weston potato-plant retrofits) got 15% of the money and 63% of the tons. Projects at or below $71 a ton got 3% of the money and 28% of the tons. EV charging ($1,610 a ton), public building upgrades ($1,543), walking and biking ($13,354) and home weatherization ($14,787) took 39% of the money for 7% of the tons.
Limit: Types are FactHub groupings, not Ecology's. Many costly projects, such as safe routes to school and weatherization for low-income homes, were built mainly for other goals, so their cost per ton overstates the cost of the cut itself.
Verify: Share of spending and share of tons cut, by project type Cumulative share of spending and of tons by cost per ton Climate Commitment Act Investments Report: Fiscal Year 2025 (Pub. 25-14-107), updated March 2026
- Ferries ($101 a ton) and industrial projects ($61) got 15% of the money and 63% of the tons; EV charging, building upgrades, walking and biking, and weatherization got 39% and 7%. FactHub
- Line items at or below $71 a ton got 2.9% of the money and 28% of the tons. FactHub
- Ecology notes that some of the costliest projects per ton had other main goals, such as walkability or congestion. Washington Department of Ecology · Qualifies
4. 4. The result holds with a higher yardstick, larger tonnage, or only projects aimed at emissions Repeated the comparison against EPA's 2023 social cost of carbon dioxide, an estimate of the damage from one more ton; with every project's tons doubled, tripled or multiplied by five; and with project types whose main goal was not cutting emissions left out (walking and biking, weatherization, habitat and Tribal consultation).
EPA put the damage from a ton emitted in 2030 at $230 (2020 dollars, 2% discount rate). 82% of 2025 emission-cutting money went to projects costing more than that. If every project cut three times its projected tons, 82% of the money would still pay more than $70.86; at five times, 80% would. Leaving out the four types built mainly for other goals, the other 449 line items cost $329 a ton, and 96.5% of their money paid more than $70.86. Lifetime tons arrive over decades, when allowances may cost more; even at double the top price, 87% of all the money is above it.
Limit: EPA's estimate depends on its discount rate; at 1.5% the 2030 value is $380. The multiplier test is a stress test, not an estimate of under-counting. Which project types count as built for other goals is a FactHub judgment.
Verify: Report on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Estimates Incorporating Recent Scientific Advances (November 2023) Share of projects, spending and tons above carbon-price benchmarks Sensitivity: if projects cut more than reported Fiscal year 2025 CCA line items with lifetime emission-cut estimates
- EPA's table puts the social cost of CO2 at $190 for 2020 emissions and $230 for 2030 emissions at a 2% discount rate (2020 dollars). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency · Qualifies
- 82.4% of the money went to line items above EPA's $230 social cost of carbon. FactHub
- With tons tripled, 82.4% of the money would still be above $70.86 a ton; with tons multiplied by five, 80.2%. FactHub
- Without walking and biking, weatherization, habitat and Tribal consultation projects, 449 line items remain: $281.0 million for 853,234 tons ($329 a ton); 96.5% of that money is above $70.86 a ton and 85% above $141.72 (FactHub arithmetic from the table). FactHub
- 97.1% of the money went to line items above $70.86 a ton, 87.3% above $141.72, and 55.6% above $1,000. FactHub
5. 5. The revised report still counts some cuts twice Searched the 567 rows for identical tonnage on rows describing the same project, and checked the report's per-row cost column and narrative against the revised data.
Three ferry terminals (Bainbridge Island, Bremerton, Clinton) each appear on two rows with the same lifetime tons, 67,596 tons in all. The report's own cost column divides both rows' spending by the tons once, yet its total adds them twice. With these and two similar repeats counted once, 2025 tons fall 8%, to 794,701, and the pooled cost rises from $385 to $419. The revised report also still says some appliance projects cost "just $1" a ton; no revised 2025 row reports under $34.
Limit: FactHub did not get agency confirmation of which rows repeat. Three Yakima County solar rows with the same tonnage may be separate projects and were kept.
Verify: Sensitivity: line items that repeat a project's full tonnage Climate Commitment Act Investments Report: Fiscal Year 2025 (Pub. 25-14-107), updated March 2026 Letter to legislators on the updated CCA Investment Report, March 19, 2026
- Counting five repeated rows once removes 71,415 tons (8.2%) and raises the pooled cost from $385 to $419 a ton. FactHub
- The revised report still says some appliance projects for lower-income households cost $1 per ton. Washington Department of Ecology · Contradicts
- Ecology corrected 61 Commerce projects and says it found no errors at other agencies. Washington Department of Ecology · Qualifies
Common questions 8
“Converting state ferries to hybrid-electric power was one of the climate law's cheapest emission cuts.”
Short answer: Yes, about $100 a ton
Ferry conversions cost about $100 per projected ton in 2025, the second-cheapest project type, and supply 49% of the year's projected cuts. About 68,000 of those tons appear on two rows; counted once, ferries cost about $120 a ton, still among the cheapest.
- Ferries ($101 a ton) and industrial projects ($61) got 15% of the money and 63% of the tons; EV charging, building upgrades, walking and biking, and weatherization got 39% and 7%. FactHub
- Counting five repeated rows once removes 71,415 tons (8.2%) and raises the pooled cost from $385 to $419 a ton. FactHub
See the evidence: 3. A few cheap ferry and factory projects supply most of the projected cuts
“About 86 percent of the total CO2 reductions claimed by the report are probably fake.”
Ecology's revision cut the 2023-25 total from 8,635,900 to 1,201,286 tons, an 86.1% drop, mostly from the eight Commerce projects Myers flagged. Commerce called it a data-entry error.
- Myers estimated that about 86% of the claimed cuts were not real. Washington Policy Center (Todd Myers)
- The first report projected 8,635,900 tons from $386.3 million of 2023-25 spending (26% of the total); the revision projects 1,201,286 tons. Washington Department of Ecology
- Commerce had reported 7.5 million tons for eight rebate projects because of a data-entry error. Washington Department of Commerce
See the evidence: 1. The state's correction cut projected emission reductions by 86%
“So far, CCA-funded projects are projected to reduce just 308,000 metric tons of CO2 over their lifetime”
The 308,000 tons was Commerce's total for its own programs. All agencies' corrected total is 1,201,286 tons, about four times as much.
- Myers wrote that all CCA-funded projects would cut 308,000 tons over their lifetime. Washington Policy Center (Todd Myers) · Contradicts
- Commerce's corrected total of nearly 308,000 tons covers only Commerce programs. Washington Department of Commerce
- The first report projected 8,635,900 tons from $386.3 million of 2023-25 spending (26% of the total); the revision projects 1,201,286 tons. Washington Department of Ecology
See the evidence: 1. The state's correction cut projected emission reductions by 86%
“Most Climate Commitment Act money isn't meant to cut emissions, so cost per ton is an unfair test.”
Short answer: Partly
That is true of 74% of the money, and this article leaves that money out. For the 26% that agencies said would cut emissions, the law requires Ecology to report cost per ton, and Ecology itself does. Some of those projects were built mainly for safety, health or habitat. Leaving those types out, 96.5% of the remaining money still paid more per ton than the top auction price.
- The first report projected 8,635,900 tons from $386.3 million of 2023-25 spending (26% of the total); the revision projects 1,201,286 tons. Washington Department of Ecology
- Ecology notes that some of the costliest projects per ton had other main goals, such as walkability or congestion. Washington Department of Ecology · Qualifies
- Without walking and biking, weatherization, habitat and Tribal consultation projects, 449 line items remain: $281.0 million for 853,234 tons ($329 a ton); 96.5% of that money is above $70.86 a ton and 85% above $141.72 (FactHub arithmetic from the table). FactHub
See the evidence: 1. The state's correction cut projected emission reductions by 86%
“These projects cut emissions on top of what the cap requires.”
Short answer: Not necessarily
Where the cap is binding, a subsidized cut at a capped source can free an allowance for someone else to use, so total emissions may not change. California's nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office has made this point about its own cap. Ecology counts the projects' cuts as added reductions and does not test this.
- Under a binding cap, subsidizing a cut at a capped source frees allowances for other emitters, changing who emits but not the total. California Legislative Analyst's Office · Qualifies
See the evidence: 2. Almost all 2025 emission-cutting money paid more per ton than the carbon price
“Lifetime tons miss the long-run benefits of building a clean-energy economy.”
Short answer: Possibly, but unmeasured
Ecology says enabling investments, such as storage and transmission, unlock cuts it cannot measure, and those are not in this count. But the result is not close: even if every project cut three times its projected tons, 82% of the money would still pay more than the top auction price.
“The auction price is the wrong yardstick; climate damage per ton is much higher.”
Short answer: Same result with EPA's figure
Using EPA's 2023 estimate of $230 of damage per ton emitted in 2030, 82% of the 2025 emission-cutting money still paid more per ton than that. The auction price matters because it is what emitters pay to cut a ton under the cap.
- EPA's table puts the social cost of CO2 at $190 for 2020 emissions and $230 for 2030 emissions at a 2% discount rate (2020 dollars). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency · Qualifies
- 82.4% of the money went to line items above EPA's $230 social cost of carbon. FactHub
“Some state appliance rebate projects cut carbon for just $1 a ton.”
Short answer: Not in the revised data
Ecology's revised report still says so, but no 2025 row in its revised appendix reports less than $34 a ton, and the home appliance rebates average $613. The $1 figures matched the erroneous Commerce entries that Ecology corrected.
- The revised report still says some appliance projects for lower-income households cost $1 per ton. Washington Department of Ecology · Contradicts
- Ferries ($101 a ton) and industrial projects ($61) got 15% of the money and 63% of the tons; EV charging, building upgrades, walking and biking, and weatherization got 39% and 7%. FactHub
- Commerce had reported 7.5 million tons for eight rebate projects because of a data-entry error. Washington Department of Commerce
See the evidence: 1. The state's correction cut projected emission reductions by 86%
Conclusion
The state's own numbers settle the main question. After Ecology corrected the report, the 2023-25 projects that were meant to cut emissions cost $322 per projected ton on average. That is 4.5 times the highest price allowances have ever sold for, and about 7 times the $44 average during those two years.
Project by project, the 2025 data are more lopsided. 97% of the money went to projects costing more per ton than the top auction price. More than half went to projects costing over $1,000 a ton.
The average hides a split. Hybrid ferry conversions and industrial projects cut carbon for about $60 to $100 a ton and supply most of the projected tons. EV chargers, building upgrades, bike and pedestrian projects and home weatherization took about 39% of the money for 7% of the tons. Many of those projects were built mainly for other reasons, such as safety, health or lower bills, which cost per ton does not value. Leaving the clearest of them out barely changes the result.
The Washington Policy Center was right that the first report overstated cuts by about 86%. Its later 308,000-ton figure was wrong: that was Commerce's total alone, about a quarter of the statewide figure.
The figures are agency projections, not measured cuts. They also count some tons twice, and under a binding cap some cuts may simply free allowances for others. Both points would raise the true cost per ton. Tripling every project's tons would still leave over 80% of the money above the top auction price. That is why confidence is high.
How we checked
- Defined the claim as the cost per projected lifetime ton of Climate Commitment Act spending that agencies expected to cut emissions, compared with the allowance auction price.
- Downloaded Ecology Pub. 25-14-107 (updated March 2026) and its transmittal letter, and rebuilt all 2,360 fiscal year 2025 Appendix B rows from text positions; the 567 rows with estimates match Ecology's stated totals exactly.
- Took allowance prices from an earlier FactHub dataset sourced to Ecology auction reports, and EPA's social cost of carbon from its 2023 report.
- Computed cost per ton by row, by project type and cumulatively; tested duplicates, larger tonnage and a higher benchmark.
- Checked the Washington Policy Center's two statements against the revised figures and Commerce's correction.
- Recorded limits: projections rather than measured cuts, cost basis for co-funded projects, interaction with the cap, and unconfirmed duplicates.
Editorial note: Scope: This article rates the cost per ton of Climate Commitment Act spending that agencies expected to cut emissions, using Ecology's revised fiscal year 2025 report. It does not judge spending meant for other goals, the cap itself, or the program's gas-price effect, which a separate FactHub article covers. External review: No external economist or climate-policy specialist has reviewed this article. To verify yourself: 1. Click every source link. 2. Check the limitation statements against the primary material. 3. Open the FactHub dataset and compare any row with Appendix B of Ecology Pub. 25-14-107 at the listed PDF page. 4. Submit counter-evidence via the challenge form. Challenge this fact-check: Identify the specific conclusion you dispute and provide verifiable evidence that could change it. Credible challenges deserve review and a visible response.
Expert-review status
No external specialist review has been recorded for this article.
Funding and conflicts
Funding: No external funding was received for this article or its dataset.
Ownership: The FactHub Research Team prepared the dataset, charts and article. Original figures remain attributable to the Washington Departments of Ecology and Commerce.
Conflicts: None known.
Sources 15
Sources are labeled by kind, with what this fact check takes from each, so readers can check the evidence independently.
-
Government
Washington Department of Ecology.
Climate Commitment Act Investments Report: Fiscal Year 2025 (Pub. 25-14-107), updated March 2026
Identifier: Ecology Pub. 25-14-107
The 565-page annual report on how 37 agencies spent CCA money, with each project's projected emission cut in Appendix B.
Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. Ecology runs the CCA and compiles figures each agency reports. It revised the report in March 2026 after Commerce's errors.
-
Ecology computes an average of about $322 per metric ton for 2023-25 emission-reducing spending.
What the source says
Taking the total dollars spent on emissions reductions during the 2023-25 Biennium and dividing by the total emissions reduced during the timeframe yields a per-dollar cost effectiveness of about $322/MT
Cost-effectiveness of emissions reductions, p. 43 -
Ecology reports an average per-project cost of $14,236 per ton and a median of $1,730 for 2023-25.
What the source says
the average per-project cost effectiveness during the 2023-25 Biennium was $14,236/MT…effectiveness was $1,730/MT
Cost-effectiveness of emissions reductions, pp. 43-44 -
Qualifies: Ecology notes that some of the costliest projects per ton had other main goals, such as walkability or congestion.
What the source says
some of the highest per-project emissions reduction costs came from projects that had other primary objectives (emissions reductions were secondary)
Cost-effectiveness of emissions reductions, p. 44 -
Contradicts: The revised report still says some appliance projects for lower-income households cost $1 per ton.
What the source says
several projects that funded high efficiency electric appliances and equipment in low to moderate income households had a cost effectiveness of just $1/MT
Cost-effectiveness of emissions reductions, p. 44 -
Qualifies: Since fiscal year 2025, agencies credit a co-funded project's whole emission cut to CCA spending rather than a share.
What the source says
Ecology directed agencies to calculate the total emissions reductions resulting from projects that paired CCA funding with external funding sources.
Standardizing Prorating Method, p. 42
-
-
Government
Washington Department of Ecology.
Letter to legislators on the updated CCA Investment Report, March 19, 2026
Ecology's transmittal letter explaining the revision, with the original and corrected totals.
Reliability: Speaks against its own interest. Ecology's own account of a correction that lowers the program's reported results.
-
The first report projected 8,635,900 tons from $386.3 million of 2023-25 spending (26% of the total); the revision projects 1,201,286 tons.
What the source says
The report initially projected that 8,635,900 metric tons of greenhouse gases would be reduced as a result of $386,278,814 in spending that occurred during the 2023-25 biennium (26% of total spending). The revised report projects a reduction of 1,201,286 metric tons of greenhouse gases
What was your review process and what did you find?, p. 2 -
Ecology revised its average cost per ton from $40 to $322.
What the source says
has also been revised from $40 to $322
What was your review process and what did you find?, p. 2 -
Qualifies: Ecology corrected 61 Commerce projects and says it found no errors at other agencies.
What the source says
In total, 61 Commerce-led projects required corrections. Ecology did not find errors in greenhouse gas calculations from other state agencies.
What was your review process and what did you find?, p. 2
-
-
Government
Washington Department of Commerce.
Commerce submits corrected greenhouse gas emissions data for state climate report (January 6, 2026)
Commerce's announcement of its data-entry error and corrected totals.
Reliability: Speaks against its own interest. Commerce made the error and announced the correction.
-
Commerce had reported 7.5 million tons for eight rebate projects because of a data-entry error.
What the source says
Due to a data entry error, Commerce reported that 7.5 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced as a result of eight rebate projects
Paragraph 2 -
Commerce's corrected total of nearly 308,000 tons covers only Commerce programs.
What the source says
Commerce is now reporting a total reduction in emissions of nearly 308,000 tons across all their CCA-funded programs.
Paragraph 4
-
-
Advocacy group
Washington Policy Center (Todd Myers).
State CO2 report shows 86% of Washington's claimed climate benefits are probably fake (January 6, 2026)
Myers' analysis of the original report, identifying the eight outlier projects.
Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. A free-market think tank that criticizes how CCA revenue is spent; Myers first spotted the error.
-
Myers estimated that about 86% of the claimed cuts were not real.
What the source says
About 86 percent of the total CO2 reductions claimed by the report are probably fake.
Body · Todd Myers, Vice President for Research, Washington Policy Center
-
-
Advocacy group
Washington Policy Center (Todd Myers).
HB 2251, Weakening Oversight While Expanding Climate Spending (February 3, 2026)
Myers' legislative memo opposing HB 2251.
Reliability: Has a stake in this finding. Memo by a think tank opposing the bill; it gives no source for the 308,000 figure.
-
Contradicts: Myers wrote that all CCA-funded projects would cut 308,000 tons over their lifetime.
What the source says
So far, CCA-funded projects are projected to reduce just 308,000 metric tons of CO2 over their lifetime
Introduction · Todd Myers, Vice President for Research, Washington Policy Center
-
-
Government
California Legislative Analyst's Office.
Cap-and-Trade Revenue: Issues for Legislative Consideration (February 3, 2016)
Nonpartisan legislative staff handout on spending cap-and-trade revenue in California.
Reliability: Nonpartisan fiscal advisers to the California Legislature, writing about California's cap, which works like Washington's.
-
Qualifies: Under a binding cap, subsidizing a cut at a capped source frees allowances for other emitters, changing who emits but not the total.
What the source says
As long as the cap is limiting emissions, subsidizing an emission reduction from one capped source will simply free-up allowances for other emitters to use.
Regulation and Spending, p. 7
-
-
Government
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Report on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Estimates Incorporating Recent Scientific Advances (November 2023)
EPA's peer-reviewed estimates of climate damage per ton of greenhouse gas emitted.
Reliability: Federal estimate used in benefit-cost analysis; higher values make emission cuts look more worthwhile.
-
Qualifies: EPA's table puts the social cost of CO2 at $190 for 2020 emissions and $230 for 2030 emissions at a 2% discount rate (2020 dollars).
What the source says
Table ES.1: Estimates of the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases (SC-GHG), 2020-2080 (2020 dollars)
Executive Summary, Table ES.1, p. 4
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub.
Fiscal year 2025 projects with emission estimates: totals
Totals for the 567 line items, which match Ecology's stated fiscal year 2025 totals.
-
567 line items, $333.1 million and 866,116 lifetime tons: $385 a ton pooled, median $1,639.
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub.
Share of projects, spending and tons above carbon-price benchmarks
Shares of 2025 line items, money and tons above each benchmark.
-
97.1% of the money went to line items above $70.86 a ton, 87.3% above $141.72, and 55.6% above $1,000.
-
82.4% of the money went to line items above EPA's $230 social cost of carbon.
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub.
Share of spending and share of tons cut, by project type
Each project type's share of money and of projected tons.
-
Ferries ($101 a ton) and industrial projects ($61) got 15% of the money and 63% of the tons; EV charging, building upgrades, walking and biking, and weatherization got 39% and 7%.
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub.
Cumulative share of spending and of tons by cost per ton
Shares of money and tons from line items at or below each cost per ton.
-
Line items at or below $71 a ton got 2.9% of the money and 28% of the tons.
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub.
Sensitivity: line items that repeat a project's full tonnage
Totals with five repeated rows counted once.
-
Counting five repeated rows once removes 71,415 tons (8.2%) and raises the pooled cost from $385 to $419 a ton.
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub.
Sensitivity: if projects cut more than reported
Share of money above $70.86 a ton if every project cut two, three or five times its projected tons.
-
With tons tripled, 82.4% of the money would still be above $70.86 a ton; with tons multiplied by five, 80.2%.
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub.
Washington allowance auction settlement prices, 2023-2026
Quarterly settlement prices, each sourced to Ecology auction reports or reports citing them.
-
Quarterly settlement prices ranged from $25.76 (March 2024) to $70.86 (December 2025) in 2023-2025 and averaged $43.66 in the eight auctions of fiscal years 2024-25.
-
-
FactHub record
FactHub.
Fiscal year 2025 CCA line items with lifetime emission-cut estimates
All 567 line items with spending, tons, cost per ton and project type.
-
Without walking and biking, weatherization, habitat and Tribal consultation projects, 449 line items remain: $281.0 million for 853,234 tons ($329 a ton); 96.5% of that money is above $70.86 a ton and 85% above $141.72 (FactHub arithmetic from the table).
-
-
FactHub dataset
Washington Climate Commitment Act spending: cost per ton of emission cuts, fiscal year 2025
-
Tables: projects
Saved analysis share-above-benchmarks
-
Tables: report-totals
Saved analysis biennium-totals
-
About 86 percent of the total CO2 reductions claimed by the report are probably fake.
Todd Myers, Vice President for Research, Washington Policy Center, · In the dataset -
So far, CCA-funded projects are projected to reduce just 308,000 metric tons of CO2 over their lifetime
Todd Myers, Vice President for Research, Washington Policy Center, · In the dataset -
With this correction, Commerce is now reporting a total reduction in emissions of nearly 308,000 tons across all their CCA-funded programs.
Washington Department of Commerce, State agency that runs most CCA rebate and grant programs, · In the dataset
-
- FactHub chart wa-cca-spending-vs-tons-by-cost
- FactHub chart wa-cca-spending-vs-tons-by-type
Update history 2 changes, last
- Initial version.
- Before publication: added a test leaving out project types built mainly for other goals (96.5% of the remaining money still above the top auction price); moved the $44 average price, Commerce's 308,000-ton scope and the cap point into the evidence; corrected the cost range for ferries and industrial projects in the conclusion. Responds to Skeptic and Source Checker findings on version 1.
Feedback these versions applied
- Version 2 Skeptic, 1 finding Source Checker, 1 finding
For developers: ClaimReview data
This page includes standardized ClaimReview metadata describing the exact claim, FactHub's finding, publisher, and review dates. You can inspect the record below and confirm that it matches the article you just read.
View ClaimReview JSON
{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"ClaimReview","url":"https://facthub.org/n/article/wa-cca-spending-cost-per-ton/2","datePublished":"2026-11-03","dateModified":"2026-11-03","author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"FactHub","url":"https://facthub.org/"},"claimReviewed":"Most of Washington\u0027s Climate Commitment Act spending on cutting emissions pays far more per ton than the state\u0027s carbon price.","reviewRating":{"@type":"Rating","alternateName":"True"},"image":"https://facthub.org/node-assets-v2/article/wa-cca-spending-cost-per-ton/2/wenatchee/social-1200x630.jpg"}This metadata helps machines discover the fact-check. It does not prove the conclusion or guarantee special treatment by a search engine.
Challenge this fact-check
Every source above is linked so you can check it yourself. Identify the specific conclusion you dispute and provide verifiable evidence that could change it. Credible challenges deserve review and a visible response.
Submit evidence Send general feedback insteadTechnical details: node handle article:wa-cca-spending-cost-per-ton