Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 07/19/2006MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD Regular Meeting 200 W. Mountain, Suite A July 19, 2006 For Reference: Linda Knowlton, NRAB Chair - 223-9328 Ben Manvel, Council Liaison - 217-1932 John Stokes, Staff Liaison - 221-6263 Board Members Present Glen Colton, Clint Skutchan, Ryan Staychock, Rob Petterson, Nate Donovan, Joann Thomas, Alan Apt Board Members Absent Linda Knowlton, Jerry Hart (open board seat) Staff Present Natural Resources Dent: John Stokes, Tara McGibben, Lucinda Smith, Guests Dave Ussary PRPA, John Bleem PRPA, Ann Hutchison Chamber of Commerce, Phil Friedman Fort Collins Sustainability Group, Agenda Review Nate proposed to approve the minutes at August meeting. Committee updates will be at the end of the agenda. John Stokes will provide an update on the ICLEI environmental conference. Nate will discuss community reports and announcements. Meeting called to order at 6:04pm. New Business Nate Donovan moved to approve June's minutes at the next regular meeting session. The board unanimously agreed. Agenda Item 1 Phil Friedman presented a handout: Resolution to Convene a Task Force to Update the City of Fort Collins Climate Protection Policy and to Promote Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Technologies, Services, and Practices. The group consists of 12 private citizens, and they plan to bring the resolution through City Council. Phil is asking the board support the resolution. Natural Resources Advisory Board July 19, 2006 Page 2 of 6 • Donovan: As a business owner what will it cost for me and my business to adopt this approach and how much will it cost for my government to get this done? From the perspective of the business owner, because it's all about me and I can say climate change is a myth; I can see someone going to council saying it's bad for businesses who are trying to bring all the resources to the city. What do you tell them? • Friedman: This is a direct bolster and augmentation to the clean energy cluster. Ft. Collins isn't on the map; there's small activity but nothing to speak of. This proposal will complement that. Our first tactic is looking at climate change and making sure we are meeting our goals in terms of reducing green house gas emissions. We boost the clean air energy cluster. • Donovan: What will this cost? Does that mean I have to make a decision? What if I was council, would I have to cut an employee to pay for the task force? What exactly will they do? Does passing the resolution commit to X number of dollars in terms of re -inventing the committee? • Friedman: We don't have the financial resources to answer that question. David Roy attends meetings and has asked the question of reconciliation. I would imagine that we would fit into the city financial strategy in a way that makes sense. I don't have that answer or knowledge. Between council and finance they can discuss staff and money to produce a small report that will help us update the existing program. Section #2 is the promotion really at attracting clean air promotions. Section #3 is a public forum series. Climate neutral city and there are none yet. • Skutchan: Over all implementation seems to me you can... you need a ball park figure to work from. As a voter I would need a fiscal note attached to the task force portion. You can do that with comparable numbers. These types of programs implemented result in taxes or fees. Climate neutral cities implement huge taxes; as a business owner will I be heavily taxed. I'm worried if we start now, what will my taxes be later. Someone will have to pay for that, most often it's the user. • Friedman: We're proposing to council they (climate neutral) mail focus is how to approach it as a community. The technology isn't there yet with any type of " financial sanity. I never envisioned in section 3 it would cost 25K. It's bringing to the forefront as a community. It's to create a public dialog within the community. We're asking taking an existing program and making sure it's doing what it's intended to do in 1999. The city is falling short. • Skutchan: Where are we now and how do you then propose the deductions? You're looking to follow up on those resolutions statement. • Friedman: That's the whole purpose. Cost is impossible to say at this point. • Apt: All facilities will be as energy efficient as possible by leveraging off the resolution. What do we save by making these investments versus what it would cost? I think there's lots of money to be saved. If you look at energy cost, it's not going down. You have to look at what are we investing versus what are we saving. This is sound economic business. All energy prices are going up. Let's not Natural Resources Advisory Board July 19, 2006 Page 3 of 6 be stupid and make sound investments and help business owners save money. Are we looking at every potential energy saving option? • Stokes: The city plans to build LEED buildings will be silver certified. The city isn't going to meet it's objectives by 2010;. that's due to growth in the area. There's probably more the city can do to reduce green house gases, but due to the small staff there's not a lot we can do. We pay the contractor based on the retro-fit savings. • Skutchan: How were the whereas crafted? They could be seen as value statements. I can see council members not feeling comfortable with this. • Friedman: We based this on updating the city's current plan. • Colton: When are you going to council? • Friedman: August, but there's no compelling time schedule. We would like to have it done by the end of this year. We're hoping to have the opportunity to bring to council in August or September. That's up to council and their agenda. We respect the fact that's it's not the #1 item on council's agenda. • Donovan: We should put this on September's agenda as an action item. • Staychock: Does that sound reasonable to you Phil? Third Wednesday in September? Nate Donovan moved to table the board's decision on the resolution until a date uncertain. The board unanimously agreed • Donovan: It's just not going to happen unless there's a cost associated with this. • Apt: Let us know your progress. Agenda Item #2 John Bleem with PRPA presented Mercury Regulations • Apt: What percentage of the mercury comes to the US? In the US, how much comes from US sources? What is the mercury percentage right here in our back yard? 1n the Northern United States? • Apt: 25-30% of mercury emissions, what's your goal? • Bleem: We need to see what the rule requires. There is no mercury rule right now. • Apt: You're saying there's no technology out right now that can reduce that? • Bleem: Not yet. EOA estimates 10 years to get there. Just like other emission control equipment there will be a lot invested: The bottom line is that 90% comes from somewhere else. PRPA will meet or exceed what ever the rules are. • Apt: What about Criag? • Ussary: We're 18% . There's three units at Craig; it's got the new technology. • Staychock: The limiting issue is the technology that's able to remove the mercury? • Bleem: The problem with getting it to zero is there's so little of it to get it all. • Staychock: Has PRPA taken a position? Natural Resources Advisory Board July 19, 2006 Page 4 of 6 • Bleem: We're in the Colorado Utilites Coalition. Our's is similar to the states proposal.The state will hold back 36.6%. • Bleem: The 36% is based on TRI numbers. The 36% came from the TRI estimates. The EPA suggested holding back 5%. But the EPA said 36% made it convenient for the regulation and easier on the language. • Colton: What is the 10-15 year estimate? • Bleem: That's our estimate to fix the plant. • Colton: How much will this increate the rate? • Bleem: About 1% roughly; I a year so about 1%. • Donovan: How much longer can you add peak units? Is Rawhide.#2 the integrated resource plant at this point? • Bleem: The peak is growing 80% over the next 5 years. The peak is the issue. We don't need a baseload plant to do that. • Donovan: Is there enough capacity in Meadow Springs? • Bleem: There's enough to start the coal unit on gas. Agenda Item #3 Lucinda Smith presented Mercury Regulation in Colorado • Stokes: We didn't expect the board to take any actions. This is what's happening now. • Colton: If emissions were zero, what about the mercury that's in the water now? Over time is that over -laid with other types of sediments? • Bleem: The US is the first to have a reduction rule. If other countries don't, you probably won't see a change. It takes a while for it to dissipate; it won't be immediate. • Skuchan: Could you clarify the difference John? • Bleem: The difference is we're supporting cap and trade. And if we can't achieve the 90% we're forced into serious operational concerns. • Ussary: We need the state of the art technologies to have guarantees. -- • Bleem: Things have improved over the years. The biggest concern with Staap/Alapco is the 90% reduction, which may not be feasible. • Apt: The other possibility is Ft Collins could work with PRPA not to support cap and trade. • Bleem: The board was given the presentation and they indorsed the legislative policy. That's where we're headed. The deci pion maker is the state. • Smith: There is a forum for discussion through the stakeholders meeting. • Staychock: What are the ramifications if you can't meet the standards? • Bleem: We would have to pay enormous penalties. • Staychock: Are we making an action? • Apt: I think it's best to wait until August. • Staychock: We can still send this to council. Natural Resources Advisory Board July 19, 2006 Page 5 of 6 • Donovan: Prior to the rule making hearing. • Apt: There are two. • Stokes: Put it on the September agenda and if you want to make a recommendation by then. Lucinda can come back too. • Staychock: Make an action item on the field memo and mercury. • Stokes: You might want to know more about the city utility like demand side management. I can ask John Phelan to come speak. Let me know. • Colton: I think that would be interesting. • Stokes: They have a bunch of programs. And it weighs into green house gas emissions. • Staychock: Excel is offering credits for solar energy. • Stokes: That's called net. You have to be in their service area to get that. • Staychock: Let's move on to John's update. • Stokes: I attended an ICLEI seminar in Chicago. ICLEI stands for International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives; that's now changed its name to Local Governments for Sustainability. There was global networking taking place all over the conference and good presentations. The mayor has vowed to make Chicago the largest green city. And it shows as soon as you enter the airport advocating recycling with huge banners. We'd like to bring some of the speakers to the Ft. Collins Green Summit next spring. The market place is moving so fast. At local government sector we're a B if I was to grade Ft. Collins. There are opportunities for us to improve our performance and I have ideas on how to do that. We've done a lot of good things as a city organization and we're well respected. Committee Update: • Skutchan: At our first Environmental Economics meeting held Wednesday, July 12 from 4:30 to 5:30. Judy Dorsey presented the recently formed clean air energy clusters. She discussed it from grassroots to where they want it to go. It was a great presentation and the May 18 presentation can be found on line at brendlegroup.com. They're doing a public outreach in August. • Hutchison: The Chamber of Commerce will have some exciting presentations on clean air in the coming months. • Skutchan: If you have anyone you'd like to present let me know. • Stokes: Envirofit, they're doing some cool stuff now. We've talked to them about their retro-fit in Asia and doing carbon trading. It's very conceptual now but it would be fun to get them in and hear on the subject of carbon credits. • Hutchison: October or November would be a good date. We're having two good presenters then. • Staychock: Judy seemed like a fantastic resource for Ft. Collins. • Stokes: Phil was talking about climate change and in Chicago they discussed climate adaptation. They think it's going to happen; take the rising sea levels for instance. They are thinking about doing something about it. We sponsor a local Natural Resources Advisory Board July 19, 2006 Page 6 of 6 ICLEI office where Margit Henschel is working with NOA on grants around the country. We're hoping Ft. Collins can be part of the analysis and look at models and what impacts may occur in Ft. Collins such as what the impacts of climate change and water supply would be. It's conceivable that it can happen. • Apt: At a solar conference a week ago, Hanson gave a preso on climate. Colorado College is doing climate change data work. We might be able to participate in the grant. • The Rocky Mountain Climate organization looks at climate change impacts inter- mountain west. They can come in and talk. Announcements Donovan: On September 21, John and Nate will attend the Colorado Open Space Alliance in Aspen. • Skutchan: Can we get a presentation on the fences up along the rail road tracks along Mason? • Stokes: We tried hard to keep that from happening. • Skutchan: Do we need to any prairie dog follow up? • Stokes: If you think the approach we're adapting is good, then it would be helpful to have it expressed to council. The opposing groups posted flyers and put out an add listing phone numbers of who to call to complain. • Staychock: I will miss the August 16 meeting. Glen Colton and Alan Apt won't be here either. Stokes: Sounds like we can skip August. The agenda includes utilities discussing DSM- demand site management, and that can be done in September. The committees can still meet. August 8 there is another study session on solid waste plan. That plan consists of 1. Yard waste every other week. 2. a -waste ban. 3. Expanded education program -but since there's no funds there's no business plan around it. We'd like to keep it as a reference document since we didn't sense any enthusiasm on that. Adjourn Meeting adjourned at 9:12pm Submitted by Tara McGibben