Abstract The decarbonization of regional electricity systems is a critical enabler of broader economy-wide decarbonization strategies and has motivated robust research on how to decarbonize electricity systems at minimum monetary cost. Since these efforts often focus on the operation of electricity systems, however, they do not account for emissions of the full life cycle associated with different resources. Different resource mixes can achieve a similar level of apparent decarbonization through operational emissions, while achieving very different levels of life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions. To explore these differences, we model the expansion of the California electricity system from 2030 to 2045 using a simplified electricity dispatch model to investigate how the planning of future electricity systems may differ between prioritizing minimum cost versus minimum life cycle GHG emissions under a common target for operational GHG reductions. We find that explicitly planning for minimum life cycle GHG emissions yields an additional 1.6%–2.0% reduction in annual life cycle GHG emissions at a cost penalty of 5.1%–6.9% and that electricity resource mixes that minimize life cycle GHG emissions tend to favor high capacity factor zero-carbon resources and long-duration storage compared to a minimum cost approach. Comparatively, we find that aggressive supply chain decarbonization of generation and storage technologies reduces life cycle GHG emissions of electricity supplies by 3.0% to 14% and combining both increases these reductions to 5.0% to 16%. Further, we find that applying a carbon tax to minimum cost-based capacity expansion can incentivize planning to account for life cycle GHG emissions. Our results indicate that a planning approach focused on minimizing life cycle GHG emissions may not be palatable, but significant reductions in life cycle emissions can be realized through conventional mechanisms like carbon taxes, import standards, and targeted supply chain decarbonization.