Mitigating future climate change and managing future air quality are inter-related fields that have the potential to benefit from coordinated strategies that leverage the efforts in one area to achieve positive outcomes in the other area. California plans to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emission by 80% (relative to year 1990) by the year 2050. The changes required to meet this target also have the potential to improve air quality. Previous work developed an energy-economic model CA-TIMES and an emission inventory model CA-REMARQUE to study the possible pathways of meeting the GHG mitigation target and the air pollutant emissions associated with those pathways. Here we update the CA-TIMES and CA-REMARQUE model framework and analyze six different sce-narios: (i) BAU -a business-as-usual future reference scenario, (ii) CAP30 -a loose GHG reduction scenario that meets current policy references but only achieves a 40% GHG reduction (relative to 1990 levels) by the year 2030, (iii) GHGAi -a climate-friendly 80% GHG reduction scenario featuring broad adoption of advanced technologies and renewable energies, (iv) CCS -a scenario that achieves 80% net GHG reductions but allows for more fossil energy combustion by focusing on adoption of carbon capture and sequestration technology, (v) NGB- a variation on the GHGAi scenario that allows for more natural gas combustion for residential and commercial buildings, and (vi) NGT - a variation of the GHGAi scenario that allows for more natural gas combustion for electricity generation. Results show that the GHGAi deep GHG mitigation scenario significantly reduces emissions (-41% PM0.1,-8% PM2.5, and-26% NOX) and improves air quality (-1 mu g m(-3) PM2.5) yielding public health benefits (+USD 20B yr(-1)) relative to the BAU scenario. The CCS scenario achieves the same GHG reductions but increases emissions in some areas (+2.5% PM2.5) resulting in only one third of the public health benefits compared to the GHGAi scenario. The NGB and NGT scenarios show that an 18% increase in natural gas utilization in buildings or a 15% increase in natural gas power generation offsets 32% and 46% of the ultrafine particle emission reduction achieved in the GHGAi scenario but has little impact on PM2.5 concentrations, producing approximately 90% of the public health benefits of the GHGAi scenario. These public health benefits should be considered when making decisions about future GHG mitigation strategies.