California's law has done absolutely nothing.  Instead, greenhouse gas emissions have significantly increased since it went into effect.  The only way to significantly lower these emissions is to radically change American behaviors that cause them, and few if any politicians are willing to tell people that, let alone for for it.  Of course, the average American isn't willing to do it either, which is the heart of the problem in the U.S.

I agree with what you've said to an extent ("the only way to significantly lower emissions is radically change American behaviors")...  Unfortunately, I forsee significant emission reductions by the average American when and only when the almighty dollar forces it.  :(   This will either happen with business as usual whenever fossil fuels deplete to the point that renewables and energy-efficient appliances/cars etc. are the cheapest.  Trivial, right?  

I would like to add that the majority of our energy consuption and subsequent GHG emissions come from sources that the average consumer really doesn't have much control of...industry, agriculture, cement production, POWER PLANTS, gas flaring, etc.  It's these carbon/methane/etc. emitting monsters that's causing the majority of emissions, and it's these that need to be controlled with policy.  Granted, if everyone used less water in the shower, the utility companies wouldn't need to supply as much natural gas...you can make this argument for power plant electrical production as well...but i think they're weak arguments.

In my opinion, SIGNIFICANT change has to come in the form of gov't policy - emissions caps, carbon taxes, something!!! to essentially FORCE the price of GHG-emitting energy sources up.  The idea being it would act as a catalyst for rapid emission reductions.

forgot to get to my point...i think these goals for emissions reductions are without a doubt a good start. They "get the ball rollin'" with the policy makers.  After the goal has been set, they have to go back and figure out how to make it happen; w/o any established goals, there would be no time pressures and little political/social pressures, thus insignificant results.

solarwind can't be serious that consumers don't have control over emissions. One consumer of course not, but collectively consumers set the demand for gasoline, natural gas and electricity. Turn off the switch and powerplant emissions go down. It is as simple as that. (Utilities do not go on burning coal or uranium just to make electricty that they "throw away".)

Higher energy prices, whether from higher resource costs or carbon taxes will reduce consumption and reduce GHG, but there will be serious economic repercussions. How will the environmentalist - consumer advocate - progressive politico coalition hold out then? Looks shaky already with Hillary and Barak over retail gas tax!