HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 02/11/2014 - COMMUNITY GREEN HOUSE GAS GOAL REVIEWDATE:
STAFF:
February 11, 2014
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Sustainability Director
John Phelan, Energy Services Manager
Bruce Hendee, Chief Sustainability Officer
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Community Green House Gas Goal Review.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this work session is to frame alternative community greenhouse gas goals and seek direction on
Council priorities for which goal(s) to aim for in the upcoming Climate Action Plan update. In 2008, Fort Collins
City Council adopted community greenhouse gas reduction goals for 2020 and 2050, and progress is reported
annually. New findings about the urgency of addressing climate change and recent technological opportunities
warrant a re-evaluation of these goals; do they position Fort Collins optimally to address the environmental,
economic and social objectives of the community? Three alternative goals were identified and discussed at a high
level:
o Alternative A: 80% below 2005 by 2050 (Keep current long-term goal)
o Alternative B: Carbon neutral (100% reduction) by 2050
o Alternative C: 80% below 2005 by 2030 (Accelerate achievement of current goal by 20 years)
City Council will have the opportunity to consider goal options to inform the 2014 update to the Fort Collins
Climate Action Plan and the Energy Policy.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does Council support upcoming climate action planning to consider two scenarios:
- accelerated goal for 2030 & carbon neutral by 2050
- current goal of 80% reduction by 2050
2. Does City Council have any feedback on which values or principles to emphasize in upcoming climate
action planning?
3. What feedback does City Council have regarding the information presented, or proposed next steps for
the Climate Action Plan update?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Opportunity
Fort Collins has made good progress since first embarking on Climate Action Plan (CAP) implementation in 2000.
The ClimateWise voluntary business assistance program, born out of the original Climate Action Plan, now
assists over 300 local businesses in reducing emissions while saving money. The Fort Collins Energy Policy sets
a solid foundation for successful, nationally recognized, energy efficiency programs and increased renewables.
Important community activities such as the Mason MAX corridor, economic clusters (clean energy, water and
local food), and the new Road to Zero Waste Plan serve many community priorities while also reducing
greenhouse gas emissions. Choices made now will impact Fort Collins’ future for years to come, so it is important
to establish a clear, active and positive vision for a sustainable and resilient Fort Collins.
February 11, 2014 Page 2
Reasons to Review GHG Goals Now
Now is an opportune time for Fort Collins to re-evaluate its community greenhouse gas goals for several reasons.
Scientific findings about climate change have advanced significantly since the Climate Action Plan was
adopted in 2008. (See below and Attachment 1)
New opportunities to reduce emissions have emerged since 2008, including advancements in energy
technologies such as smart grid, vehicle electrification opportunities, changes in the price of energy solutions,
new waste reduction strategies, etc. that warrant a fresh look at reduction strategies.
To ensure alignment and coordination with several major planning initiatives underway in Fort Collins,
including updates to the 2009 Energy Policy, completion of a new Road to Zero Waste Plan, updates to the
2007 Roadmap for Green Building, discussion of climate adaption planning strategies for the City of Fort
Collins, and Platte River Power Authority’s strategic planning process.
The Climate Action Plan needs to be updated in 2014 because it does not identify a complete pathway to the
current 2020 goal, and does not address how to achieve the 2050 goal.
Clarification of intent for community greenhouse gas goals (which are an element of the Climate Action Plan)
can inform the 2015/2016 Budgeting for Outcomes process.
Urgency to Take Action Is Growing
The vast majority of the world’s scientists agree that climate change is impacting us now, and it will get worse if
we don’t do something about it. Climate protection discussions in the international political area have often
focused on limiting carbon dioxide levels to 450 PPM (parts per million). This level of carbon dioxide has been
equated with limiting the average global temperature rise to 2°C above pre-industrial levels by 2100, a level
hoped to thwart the worst impacts of climate change.
However, many scientists now, including James Hansen, the Head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space
Studies, argue that stabilization at 350 PPM is the level needed to mitigate the worst impacts, given the amount of
climate change already “in the pipeline”, and the increasing rate of both slow and fast feedback mechanisms. See
Attachment 1 for more information. Of greatest note are the very recent draft findings by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Group III on climate change mitigation. Draft findings (January 2014)
indicate that another 15 years of failure to limit carbon emissions could make the problem virtually impossible to
solve with current technologies and make the case that waiting to reduce emissions will become costlier as time
moves on. The IPCC WG III’s report on climate mitigation is scheduled for release in April 2014.
In light of the urgent need for action, a number of leading communities and countries have elected to set long
term (i.e. 2050) goals to achieve carbon neutrality, often along with interim short and mid-term goals and source-
specific goals to guide their way. Seattle, WA, Davis, CA, Norway and Costa Rica are among the entities that
have established carbon neutral goals.
Climate Change is Impacting Us Now
Climate change has already been well documented throughout the western U.S. Average temperatures have
risen 2-4 degrees F over the last century. The last two years demonstrate the vulnerability of the Fort Collins
community and its regional neighbors to extreme weather events.
To inform recent City climate risk and vulnerability assessments, data from global climate models have been
adjusted to local scales to look at predicted impacts locally. Changes that are highly likely in the Fort Collins
region include:
Up to 6° F warmer summers by 2040
Continued declines in snowpack
Earlier Spring runoff
Declines in water availability and soil moisture
Greater likelihood of severe storms, extended drought and severe wildfire
February 11, 2014 Page 3
Increased frequency and severity of heat waves and ozone formation
Increased spread and outbreaks from disease and pests and invasive species
According to the National Weather Service, extreme heat killed more Americans in the last decade than any other
weather-related event. The recently released Fort Collins Extreme Heat Report shows that the predicted
frequency of single 95° days could rise from an annual average of 3 (1961-1999 annual average) to 10, or 3.5
times higher in Fort Collins by mid-century under a lower emission scenario, or 17 (annual average) if future
emission rise at a medium-high rate. By the end of century, the predicted frequency of single 95° days could be
about four times higher with lower future emissions, or about 13 times higher (38 days per year on average) with
medium-high emissions. Other impacts from increased heat include impacts to water quality and quantity,
regional agriculture and tourism, elevated wildfire risk, worsening air quality, and increased energy use for cooling
purposes.
Solutions are Available Now
In 2004, Princeton Professors Socolow and Pacala published a paper in Science, “Stabilization Wedges: Solving
the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies (http://citeseerx.ist.
psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.152.8157&rep=rep1&type=pdf). The paper asserts that humanity already
possesses the ability to solve the carbon and climate problem for the next half-century and that a portfolio of
technologies exists to meet the world’s energy needs over the next 50 years and limit atmospheric CO2 to a
trajectory that avoids a doubling of the preindustrial concentration. Socolow reaffirmed this assertion in 2011.
GHG GOAL CHOICES
Purpose of Goal Setting
Goal-setting is an important part of the overall climate planning process. By establishing a vision for the future, goals
provide a framework for climate planning efforts and serve to focus community attention and action. Goal setting,
combined with a powerful positive vision, is a strong motivator.
There are a number of approaches to goal-setting. A community can:
Set a goal that is built upon a plan to achieve it. Fort Collins followed this approach when first
establishing its goal and Local Action Plan in 1999.
Establish an aspirational goal or vision and then develop a plan to achieve the long-term goal.
Set an aspirational vision and develop a pragmatic shorter-term plan with milestones and update
requirements built into it. Fort Collins followed this approach in 2008 by first establishing goals for 2020
and 2050 and then developing the Climate Action Plan, an interim strategic plan that illuminated most
of the pathway towards the 2020 goal.
For reference, the European Union countries have just chosen to set new climate and energy goals to reduce
emissions 40% below 1990 by 2030 and to achieve a 27% share of renewable energy by 2030. The underlying
Green Paper that established the 2030 framework recognized the importance of certainty achieved by goal-
setting, by stating,
“clarifying the objectives for 2030 will support progress towards a competitive economy and a secure
energy system by creating more demand for efficient and low carbon technologies and spurring
research, development and innovation, which can create new opportunities for jobs and growth. This
in turn reduces both directly and indirectly the economic cost.”
GHG Goal Elements
There are four core elements that comprise a greenhouse gas goal:
1. Boundary (where does the community draw the boundaries of responsibility?)
2. Scope (what emission sources are to be included?)
February 11, 2014 Page 4
3. Magnitude (by how much will emissions be reduced?)
4. Timeframe (by what date will the emissions goals be achieved?)
Table 1 below identifies the components of Fort Collins community GHG emissions.
Table 1. Fort Collins GHG inventory (2012)
Element Boundary % of total GHG
Electricity City limits (municipal utility) 52%
Ground
transportation
City Growth Management Area 23%
Natural gas City limits (private utility) 17%
Air travel Fort Collins citizens 4%
Solid Waste Organics from FC contribution to
landfills
3%
Water Process
emissions
Process emission from wastewater
treatment
0.3%
GHG Goal Alternatives
Three goal alternatives were identified for evaluation during Fall 2013. Brendle Group was contracted to evaluate
these alternatives using a conceptual framework and to conduct first-order, scoping level analyses of possible
pathways for achieving the alternatives and total costs and savings associated with these pathways. (See detail
in Attachment 2)
Alternative A: Keep current long-term goal
This alternative includes reducing GHG emissions 80 percent below the 2005 baseline by 2050. This represents
the current City of Fort Collins goal as well as the State of Colorado goal. For context, a straight-line interpolation
between 2005 and 2050 would require a 27% reduction below 2005 by 2020. This 2050 goal is the same as the
current goal adopted by Portland, Oregon; York, England; and Madison, Wisconsin, among others.
Alternative B: Increase magnitude of goal to carbon neutral (100% reduction)
This alternative would achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. The straight-line interpolation is 33 percent reduction
by 2020, for context. Seattle, Washington; Copenhagen, Denmark; and Melbourne, Australia have adopted
goals for carbon neutrality by 2050.
Alternative C: Accelerate achievement of current goal by 20 years
This alternative includes reducing GHG emissions 80 percent below the 2005 baseline by 2030 rather than 2050
− an acceleration of 20 years. The straight-line interpolation is an interim milestone of 48 percent reduction by
2020. This alternative reflects the scenario presented in a recent white paper developed by the Rocky Mountain
Institute (RMI) that identifies “How far?” and “How fast?” could Fort Collins move towards a prosperous, secure
and clean energy future. (See Attachment 3)
Table 2. Summary of Fort Collins GHG Goal Alternatives
Goal Description
Potential Interim
2020 Milestone
Goal
Average
Annual
Reduction
Alternative A.
Keep Current Long-Term Goal
27% below
baseline
80% below 2005 baseline
by 2050
1.8%
Alternative B.
Increase Magnitude
33% below
baseline
100% below 2005 baseline
February 11, 2014 Page 5
GHG Goal Alternatives Discussion
Electricity and Natural Gas
All scenarios assume emissions from electricity ultimately reach net zero. Scenarios assume varying rates of
reduction through efficiency and conservation improvements such as:
More aggressive and widespread adoption of conventional and cost-effective technologies
Behavioral and smart control strategies that optimize how building occupants use energy
Integrative design approaches that consider energy efficiency opportunities in renovations and new
construction
Aggressive engagement with industrial energy users to reduce process related emissions
The electric supply changes will be addressed through:
Transition away from coal replaced by natural gas and renewables widespread adoption of
photovoltaic
large increases in utility scale wind generation
other renewables
Transportation
In the transportation sector, all scenarios assume 30% reduction in of per capita miles driven through smart
growth and increased alternatives modes, and incentives/disincentives to reduce single occupancy vehicle use.
The scenarios also assume an accelerated shift to more fuel efficient and electric vehicles.
Solid Waste
Strategies to achieve zero waste by 2030 are spelled out in the Road to Zero Waste Plan. Major strategies
include:
Enhanced education
Universal recycling
Composting facilities
More diversion of construction and demolition waste
Prohibition of certain materials going into the waste stream
Carbon Neutrality
Alternatives A and C have a small amount fossil fuel emissions remaining in the long-term in the natural gas and
transportation sectors. In order to achieve carbon neutrality (Scenario B), the remaining fossil fuel emissions will
need to be offset. Fort Collins could chose to offset these emissions by developing excess local renewable
energy generating capacity or developing a local carbon offset program, possibly focused on local or regional
ecosystem services.
How Far? How Fast?
The Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) has prepared a paper to address the questions of “How far?” and “How fast?”
could Fort Collins move towards a prosperous, secure and clean energy for the purpose of informing Energy
Policy discussions. (See Attachment 3.) The RMI paper, “Stepping Up: Benefits and Costs of Accelerating Fort
Collins’ Energy and Climate Goals”, investigates opportunities in three sectors: building, electricity supply, and
transportation. The paper draws on the best practices, technology trends, and plausibly achievable goals for
customer adoption. The analysis is based on existing technologies and proven adoption rates , but assumes
maximum proven adoption rates in all sectors, sustained over time. The report suggests that Fort Collins can
achieve 80% reduction below 2005 by 2030 while:
February 11, 2014 Page 6
Reducing building energy use 31% through efficiency
Achieving carbon neutral electricity by 2030
Reducing transportation emissions by 48%
Economic Implications
Preliminary analyses were completed to evaluate total costs and savings of the alternatives. In the upcoming
climate action plan update, the economic implications will be more fully evaluated to determine who pays and who
saves, cash flows and financial models, and this will be part of the public and Council review process.
Brendle Group conducted a first order economic analysis for the alternatives that is intended to be illustrative and
directional, applying scoping level analytical practices commonly used in climate action scoping. These economic
analyses consider direct capital costs and savings from reduced fuel use. They may be considered conservative
because they do not consider a cost for carbon, human health cost savings from reduced emissions, indirect
economic benefits to Fort Collins economy, or quantified risk of inaction.
The analyses show that significant investments will be needed by 2050, but that cumulative savings could be two
to three times higher than cumulative costs by 2050. For all scenarios, the analyses show that savings start to
exceed costs in approximately 2030. They also illustrate that greater investments near-term yield greater savings
long-term.
The RMI paper, “Stepping Up: Benefits and Costs of Accelerating Fort Collins’ Energy and Climate Goals” also
contains economic evaluations that look at the total resource costs. This analysis shows that, by 2030, combining
results across all sectors, the accelerated scenario results in a net benefit for the community, compared to
business as usual. By 2050, the accelerated scenario could result in a significantly larger net benefit compared to
business as usual.
Reaching any of the alternative GHG goals will require fundamental changes to the supply of electricity, now 50%
of the community GHG inventory. Platte River Power Authority’s (PRPA) 2009 Climate Action Plan identified a
mix of strategies PRPA could implement to reduce its GHG emissions. PRPA’s 2014 Strategic Plan includes
initiatives and goals related to the importance of collaboration with owner municipalities, diversifying the energy
supply portfolio, expanding renewable energy sources, and evaluating ways to significantly reduce its carbon
footprint while remaining the lowest cost wholesale power provider located in Colorado.
Very preliminary work has been done by PRPA staff to update assumptions and analysis for GHG reduction
strategies that were include in the 2009 PRPA CAP, including lower surplus sales, increasing energy efficiency in
homes and businesses, replacing a portion of coal generation with natural gas combined cycle, and increased
utility scale wind generation. (See Attachment 7) Platte River plans to conduct detailed analysis of a wide range
of GHG reduction options and associated costs as part of its 2014 Integrated Resource Plan, which is due to be
completed by the end of this year. Collaboration with PRPA and its member cities will be imperative in Fort
Collins’ climate action planning and implementation efforts.
Even though the objectives and thus the approaches for the economic analyses differed, some important
commonalities can be identified, including:
• Significant investments will be required near term.
• Savings start to outweigh costs around the year 2030.
• Net savings to the community are significant by 2050.
• The higher the initial investments, the greater the net saving longer-term.
Financing Models
Large capital investments will be needed to achieve any of the GHG goal alternatives, and a range of financial
tools will be necessary. Funding sources will likely fall along a full spectrum as follows:
Private investment (e.g., venture capital)
February 11, 2014 Page 7
Private investment (e.g., home improvements)
Energy services company model (investor repaid by saving)
Philanthropy
Citizen and business voluntary contributions (e.g., Crowd source funding)
Grants/Prizes
Public/Private Partnerships
Rate-Payer
Tax Payer
The CAP planning process can consider establishing guiding criteria to manage cost impacts, or establishing cost
thresholds, such as PRPA retaining the lowest wholesale electric power rate in Colorado.
Potential Aspects to Emphasize in Future CAP Update
When defining a path to meet future goals, several considerations come into play, including:
Collaboration with regional planning efforts
Community leadership
Cost management
Future cost of carbon
Maximize innovation
Maximize other benefits
Risk mitigation/diversifying energy supply
Feedback on which aspects to emphasize in upcoming climate action planning will be sought in public outreach
and considered while crafting alternative scenarios to meet preferred GHG goals.
Economic Health Potential
There are many similarities among the GHG goal alternatives, including recognition of the need to go beyond
simple efficiency to fundamental changes to energy supply, the need for increased near-term investments, the
estimation that those investments will deliver net economic benefits to the community by 2050, and the risk
management benefits of de-carbonization and diversifying our energy supply.
There are some important differences as well. The first primary difference between “staying the course with
existing goals” (Alternative A) and seeking more aspirational goals is the greater environmental benefit of
increased carbon reduction. The second primary difference is the economic health potential of establishing a
clear, leadership position with aspirational goals.
The accelerated scenarios represent a fundamentally different paradigm for investment in energy assets and
infrastructure, and provide greater opportunities for local job creation, economic health, stimulus for innovation,
and growth of local businesses. The accelerated scenarios call for increased investments in efficiency, smart grid,
distributed power and other local energy assets, and decreased investment in coal and natural gas. This shift in
investment, from distant to local sources, reduces the outflow of cash in the community for decades to come and
would generate an estimated 400-500 local jobs, according to RMI’s analysis.
The RMI paper discusses the unique opportunities available to Fort Collins though visionary goal setting.
“Few communities in the nation have the combination of factors that align to make Fort Collins a
community that can lead in creating forward-looking energy policy for community benefit. These
factors include strong and pragmatic civic leadership, manageable size, an innovative and well-
positioned municipal utility, workable options for creative transportation policy, and low cost
options for clean and affordable electricity supplies. Accordingly, it is no surprise that Fort Collins’
innovative energy programs and policies, notably the FortZED project, have already attracted
national and international attention.
February 11, 2014 Page 8
By stepping forward to pioneer new approaches, Fort Collins has galvanized the support of
community leaders and attracted the participation of leading businesses and other institutions in
the area. Now the City has an opportunity to sustain and advance its leadership position by taking
up new goals that leverage existing achievements and opportunities. In doing so, Fort Collins
could embark on a transformative path of reinvestment in community-based energy systems and
put itself at the forefront of innovation nationally-stimulating local economic development,
reducing outflows of money from the community, improving security, and reducing risk.”
With the addition of a truly aspirational GHG reduction commitment, Fort Collins would be uniquely positioned to
attract the level of intellectual and financial capital necessary and foster the innovation needed to achieve an
aspirational goal. In doing so, Fort Collins could demonstrate success and become a replicable model for other
communities.
Proposed Next Steps
Based on direction received from this work session on priority scenarios for future greenhouse gas reduction
planning, the Fort Collins Energy Policy and the Climate Action Plan will be updated and brought back for Council
consideration. A consultant has been retained to conduct the technical analyses of strategy options, savings and
costs. Cost impact scenarios and financial models will be developed to inform the public outreach and Council
decision-making process.
It is important that the CAP and Energy Policy reflect community values. Further, community support will be
essential to achieve any of the goal alternatives. Staff proposes to convene a committee of stakeholders
including residents and business entities to participate in CAP update to ensure various perspectives are heard
and to build critical partnerships and support. A robust public involvement process will be conducted to gather
feedback on the draft CAP. A separate committee may be convened to develop and help implement a public
engagement plan for the CAP.
The CAP will be updated in close concert with PRPA’s 2014 resource planning process. The CAP update will
also consider and incorporate strategies that enhance resiliency to a changing climate that are aligned with
mitigation.
Staff anticipates returning with a draft updated Climate Action Plan for Council review at a work session by the
end of 2014. See Attachment 6 for a summary of proposed stakeholder involvement.
Table 3. Proposed Timeline
Action Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014
Convene CAP Advisory Committee X
Energy Policy Update X X X
CAP strategy development / technical
analyses
X X X
Conduct CAP public outreach X X X
Public, Board, Council review of draft CAP X
ATTACHMENTS
1. Climate Change Findings (PDF)
2. GHG Goal Alternative (PDF)
3. Stepping Up Fort Collins (PDF)
4. Public Perspectives and Outreach (PDF)
5. TBL Sustainability Assessment (PDF)
6. Proposed Public Engagement Process (PDF)
7. Platte River Power Authority Preliminary Cost Estimates (PDF)
8. Work Session Summary, August 13, 2013 (PDF)
9. Powerpoint presentation (PDF)
Post 2008 Climate Change Findings and Predictions
Findings - Environment
The International Energy Agency reported that 2012 global CO2 emissions from fossil-fuel
combustion reached a record high of 31.6 billion tons, representing a 1.4% increase over 2011
levels. (2012 CO2 emissions in the U.S. fell 3.8% compared to 2011 levels, while China’s grew
3.8%.)1
On May 9, 2013, measured concentrations of carbon dioxide at the Mauna Loa Observatory
surpassed 400 parts per million (ppm) for the first time since record-keeping began there
several decades ago. Before the Industrial Revolution, atmospheric carbon dioxide
concentrations were approximately 280 ppm.2
California had its driest year on record during 2013 with 32.8% of average precipitation. The
Rim Fire burned over 255,000 acres near Yosemite – the third largest fire on record in CA.
Colorado had a year of extremes. In June, the Black Forest Fire destroyed over 500 homes
near Colorado Springs, the most destructive wildfire in state history. In September record-
breaking rainfall and flooding impacted the Front Range.3
In early 2013, Lakes Michigan and Huron reached record low levels in the 1918-present period
of record, according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. All of the Great Lakes had water
levels well below average. On May 20, 2013 an EF-5 tornado hit Moore, OK destroying
thousands of homes. 24 fatalities made this the deadliest tornado of 2013. A 2.6 mile wide EF-3
tornado hit near El Reno, OK on May 31st, 2013, causing eight fatalities; this was the widest
tornado on record.4
The year 2013 ties with 2003 as the 4th warmest year globally since records began in 1880. The
annual global combined land and ocean surface temperature was 1.12o F above the 20th
century average of 57.0o F. This marks the 27th consecutive year (since 1976) that the yearly
global temperature was above average. Only one year during the 20th century – 1998 – was
warmer than 2013.5
2012 was the warmest year on record for the contiguous United States. The average
temperature was 55.3°F, 3.2°F above the 20th century average, and 1.0°F above 1998, the
previous warmest year. July 2012 was hottest month ever observed for the contiguous U.S. and
2012 was the second most (climate) extreme year on record for the nation.6 Temperatures
across most of North America were above average during 2013, but overall more moderate than
2012, which brought record heat to much of the continent.7
2012 also ranks as the warmest calendar year in the 124 year record for the Fort Collins, CO
weather station on CSU campus.
In 2012, more than 40,000 daily heat records were broken nationwide, compared to 25,000 daily
records broken in June of 2011.8
1 http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/CO2EmissionsFromFuelCombustionHighlights2013.pdf
2 http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/05/130510-earth-co2-milestone-400-ppm/
3 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2013/13
4 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2013/13
5 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/13
6 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/
7 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/13
8 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12781
Attachment 1
2
Findings – Local Environment
To inform 2013 City climate risk and vulnerability assessments, data from global climate models
that have been adjusted to local scales to evaluate predicted impacts locally. Changes that are
highly likely in the Fort Collins region include:
Up to 6° F warmer summers by 2040
Continued declines in snowpack
Earlier Spring runoff
Declines in water availability and soil moisture
Greater likelihood of severe storms, extended drought and severe wildfire
Increased frequency and severity of heat waves and ozone formation
Increased spread and outbreaks from disease and pests and invasive species
Findings – Public Health
One third of the nation’s population experienced 10 or more days of summer temps above
100°F. in 2012.2
Findings – Economic Impacts
The health costs associated with six climate change–related events that struck the United
States between 2000 and 2009 exceeded $14 billion, with 95 percent due to the value of lives
lost prematurely. Actual health care costs were an estimated $740 million.9 The future health
costs associated with predicted climate change–related events such as hurricanes, heat waves,
and floods are projected to be enormous.
Correlations and Predictions
For the first time recently, scientific studies have been able to make strong statistical links
between climate change and certain extreme weather events. For example, The UK’s Guardian
reported on July 10, 2012, that the 2011 record warm November in the UK, the second hottest
since records began in 1659, was at least 60 times more likely to happen because of climate
change than owing to natural variations in the earth's weather systems.10
A special report released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in
November 2011 predicted that global warming will cause more dangerous and “unprecedented
extreme weather” in the future.11
A 2012 report by the Natural Resources Defense Council indicates that rising temperatures
driven by unabated climate change will increase the number of life-threatening excessive heat
events, resulting in thousands of additional heat-related premature deaths each year, with a
cumulative toll of approximately 33,000 additional heat-related deaths by mid-century in these
cities, and more than 150,000 additional heat-related deaths by the century’s end.12
The draft National Climate Assessment Report was released in January 2013. Key findings
include:
Human-induced increases in atmospheric levels of heat-trapping gases are the main
cause of observed climate change over the past 50 years. The “fingerprints” of human-
induced change also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system,
including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic
sea ice.
9 http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/30/11/2167.abstract
10 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jul/10/extreme-weather-manmade-climate-change
11 http://www.ipcc.ch/news_and_events/docs/srex/srex_press_release.pdf
12 http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/killer-heat/files/killer-summer-heat-report.pdf
3
Past emissions of heat-trapping gases have already committed the world to a certain
amount of future climate change. How much more the climate will change depends on
future emissions and the sensitivity of the climate system to those emissions.
The “Letter to the American People”, drafted by members of the National Climate
Assessment and Development Advisory Committee to accompany the draft report
states:,
“Climate change, once considered an issue for a distant future, has moved firmly into the
present. This report of the National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory
Committee concludes that the evidence for a changing climate has strengthened
considerably since the last National Climate Assessment report, written in 2009. Many
more impacts of human-caused climate change have now been observed.13
Calls for Action Sooner
Draft findings by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Working Group III on
climate change mitigation indicate that another 15 years of failure to limit carbon emissions
could make the problem virtually impossible to solve with current technologies. Delaying
mitigation through 2030 will increase the challenges and reduce the options," warns a summary
of the report. The real question will become whether to take some economic pain now, or more
later. This report is scheduled for release in April 2014.14
The world could avoid much of the damaging effects of climate change this century if
greenhouse gas emissions are curbed more sharply, according to a study published in 2012 in
Nature Climate Change.15
Limiting climate change to target levels will become much more difficult to achieve, and more
expensive, if action is not taken soon, according to a new analysis from IIASA, ETH Zurich, and
NCAR. The paper, published in Nature Climate Change, explores technological, policy, and
social changes that would need to take place in the near term in order to keep global average
temperature from rising above 2°C, a target supported by more than 190 countries as a global
limit to avoid dangerous climate change.16
13 http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/download/NCAJan11-2013-publicreviewdraft-letter.pdf
14 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/17/science/earth/un-says-lag-in-confronting-climate-woes-will-be-
costly.html?smid=tw-share&_r=2 and http://phys.org/news/2014-01-years-vital-panel.html
15 Arnell N.W., et. al., A global assessment of the effects of climate policy on the impacts of climate change. 2013. Nature
Climate Change. doi:10.1038/nclimate1793 (See
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1793.html for abstract and
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/13/us-emissions-climate-idUSBRE90C0E120130113 for summary)
16 Rogelj, J., D.L. McCollum, B.C. O'Neill, and K. Riahi. 2012. 2020 emissions levels required to limit warming to
below 2 deg C. Nature Climate Change. doi:10.1038/NCLIMATE1758 (See
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-12/iifa-ncc121312.php for summary.)
Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 1
Memo
To: Lucinda Smith
From: Judy Dorsey, Becky Fedak
Date: January 22, 2013
Re: Greenhouse Gas Goal Evaluation – Fort Collins Sustainability Services (DRAFT 6)
The purpose of this memorandum is to:
• summarize the need to review Fort Collins community greenhouse gas (GHG) goals
• summarize a set of GHG goal alternatives, including the existing goal
• present pathways for achieving each goal alternative
• review external factors that could impact goal alternatives, and
• offer the pros and cons of each goal alternative to inform community and Council discussion.
Benefits of Climate Action Planning and GHG Goal Setting
There are many reasons for communities to embrace climate action. First, climate leadership makes
good economic sense. Fort Collins’ energy programs saved the community $20 million in 2012
through a combination of direct utility cost savings and indirect benefits, such as purchases of goods
and services, which spurs local economic activity. Communities leading the way in climate action
are well positioned to attract the most innovation, outside investment, and opportunities to share
risk due to their ‘first-to’ mentality. Fort Collins has realized this benefit through various leading
programs, including FortZED and the community’s advanced meter infrastructure program. Moving
forward, Fort Collins should continue to try new approaches and test new technologies and
opportunities as they unfold over the planning horizon through 2050. Staying in front of these
opportunities will require thoughtful risk-taking and strategic partnerships to realize the potential of
a leadership position. Additionally, reducing Fort Collins’ climate impact can also help it better
prepare for future climate disruptions, improve its risk management capabilities, and increase its
ability to endure and thrive in an uncertain climate future. While eliminating GHG emissions in Fort
Collins may not greatly impact overall global climate change – that will require similar commitments
by communities all over the globe to have impact – reducing the community’s own greenhouse gas
emissions is important for meeting multiple economic, environmental and social objectives and has
many additional benefits.
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 2
Purpose of Goal Setting
Goal setting is an important part of the overall climate planning process. By establishing a vision for
the future, goals provide a framework for climate planning efforts and serve to focus community
attention and action. The process of goal-setting affords a community the opportunity to weigh the
pros and cons between degrees of aspiration and pragmatism, desired timing of investment and
paybacks, and approaches to risk reduction. There are a number of approaches to goal-setting. A
community can set a goal that is built upon a plan to achieve it. Fort Collins followed this approach
when first establishing its goal and Local Action Plan in 1999. Alternatively, a community can
establish an aspiration goal or vision first and then develop either a plan to achieve the long-term
goal or an interim plan towards a milestone along the way. Fort Collins followed this latter approach
in 2008 by first establishing goals for 2020 and 2050 and then developing the Climate Action Plan,
an interim strategic plan that illuminated most of the pathway towards the 2020 goal. Setting
ambitious near-term goals without a defensible path for achievement increases the potential for
goal failure, which can cause disengagement within the community, reducing support and
participation. Analyzing potential goals for their overarching merit and probability of success leads
to outcomes that build momentum and engender ownership in the plan.
Opportunity to Review Goals
The Brendle Group is providing an evaluation of alternative community greenhouse gas (GHG) goals. In June
2008, City Council adopted goals to reduce Fort Collins’ community GHG emissions 20 percent below 2005
levels by 2020 and 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. This was followed by a Climate Action Plan (CAP)
that was adopted in 2008 and provides a strong framework for making progress toward the goals.
Since 2008, advancements in climate science and technology as well as updates to various City plans make
this an optimum time to re-evaluate Fort Collins’ GHG goals:
• Advancements in scientific findings that underscore the importance of reducing emissions and
increasing resiliency in the face of a changing climate
• New opportunities, including advancements in energy technologies such as smart grid, vehicle
electrification opportunities, changes in the price of energy solutions, new waste reduction strategies,
etc., that warrant a fresh look at reduction strategies
• Alignment and coordination with several major planning initiatives underway in Fort Collins, including
updates to the 2009 Energy Policy, completion of a new Road to Zero Waste Plan (Draft in October
2013), updates to the 2007 Roadmap for Coordinated and Enhanced Green Building Services, and
Platte River Power Authority’s 2014 Strategic Plan.
GHG Goal Elements
There are four core elements that comprise each goal alternative:
1. Boundary (where does the community draw the boundaries of responsibility?)
2. Scope (what emission sources are included?)
3. Magnitude (by how much will emissions be reduced?)
4. Timeframe (by what date will the emissions goals be achieved?)
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 3
The first of these two elements – Boundary and Scope – are determined by the GHG emissions protocol
followed by the City and are the same for all goal alternatives. The City has recently adopted the
methodology of the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) Community Protocol;
ICLEI’s methods have been incorporated into the City’s 2012 community GHG inventory. The City’s
Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Quality Management Plan from August 2013 includes a
definition of these boundary and scope conditions.
Boundary
For the purposes of the Community GHG Emissions Inventory, the City limit provides the geopolitical
boundary for electricity and natural gas usage and solid waste and recyclables data, and the Growth
Management Area (GMA) provides the boundary for transportation data. Emissions that result from activities
taking place within these community boundaries and that are controlled or influenced by City of Fort Collins
policies and programs are included in the City’s annual Community GHG Inventory.
Scope
The Community GHG Emissions Inventory is categorized by direct or indirect emissions into Scopes. Scope 1
consists of direct emissions and includes emissions from natural gas usage and mobile combustion sources
(e.g., ground travel), excluding rail. Scope 2 emissions are indirect emissions from consumption of purchased
electricity that occur as a result of activities that take place within the inventory boundaries, but occur at
sources located outside the government’s jurisdiction. Scope 3 are other indirect emissions resulting from
activities such as transport-related activities (e.g., air travel for city residents that occurs outside the inventory
boundary), and emissions associated with the management and disposal of solid waste generated by the
community.
The second two elements – Magnitude and Timeframe – are the focus of this GHG goal evaluation. All
proposed goals for Fort Collins are calculated based on a reduction from a baseline year of 2005. A 1990
baseline was also considered that would result in more aggressive goals, but rejected because of the
challenges associated with developing an accurate 1990 baseline, Additionally, a 2005 baseline aligns with
Colorado’s statewide goal.
GHG Goal Alternatives
The first step in evaluating GHG goals is to identify and define goal alternatives. Coordinating with the City
staff, three goal alternatives were identified during the Fall 2013 with an eye towards ensuring Fort Collins
maintain leadership and innovation in the climate action space. Table 1 provides a summary of the three goal
alternatives. This table is followed by a short description of each alternative and why each has been included
as an option in this analysis.
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 4
Table 1. Summary of Fort Collins GHG Goal Alternatives
Goal Description
Potential Interim
2020 Milestone
Goal
Average Annual
Reduction
Alternative A. Keep Current Long-Term Goal 30% below baseline 80% below 2005 baseline by 2050 1.8%
Alternative B. Increase Magnitude 40% below baseline 100% below 2005 baseline by 2050 2.2%
Alternative C. Accelerate Timeframe 50% below baseline 80% below 2005 baseline by 2030 3.2%
Historical Emissions Reductions 9% below 2005 by 2012 1.2%
Alternative A: Keep current long-term goal
This alternative includes reducing GHG emissions 80 percent below the 2005 baseline by 2050. This option
was included because it represents the current City of Fort Collins goal as well as the State of Colorado goal.
For context, a straight-line interpolation between 2005 and 2050 would require a 27% reduction below 2005
by 2020. This 2050 goal is the same as the current goal adopted by Portland, Oregon; York, England; and
Madison, Wisconsin , among others.
Alternative B: Increase magnitude of goal to carbon neutral (100% reduction)
This alternative would achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 with an interim milestone of 33 percent reduction
by 2020, for context. This alternative reflects a more aggressive approach than the existing goal by
increasing the magnitude of emissions to be eliminated from the community’s inventory. Seattle,
Washington; Copenhagen, Denmark; and Melbourne, Australia have adopted goals for carbon neutrality by
2050.
Alternative C: Accelerate achievement of current goal by 20 years
This alternative includes reducing GHG emissions by 80 percent below the 2005 baseline by 2030 rather than
2050 − an acceleration of 20 years. In order to achieve this accelerated timeframe, the straight-line
interpolation would result in an interim milestone of 48 percent reduction by 2020. This alternative reflects
the scenario presented in a recent white paper developed by the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) to inform
Energy Board and Energy Policy discussions and reflects a significant acceleration of the existing goal. The
RMI paper addressed the questions of “How far?” and “How fast?” could Fort Collins move towards a
prosperous, secure and clean energy future. However, it is even more aggressive than the RMI white paper
because it includes the City’s entire emissions inventory whereas the RMI paper focused on Scope 1 and
Scope 2 emissions only, which do not include solid waste, air travel or water process emissions.
Figure 1 depicts each of the goal alternatives along with the projected emissions forecast from 2012 as well
as the average trend in emissions reductions since 2005. For simplicity this analysis assumes a linear
reduction trajectory for each of the goal alternatives, however, to achieve any of these leading edge goals will
require transformative pathways that likely won’t look linear in their implementation. Both short term
efficiency and distributed renewable energy implementation with longer term urban design and
transformation of the transportation and electric grids will be required. Potential pathways to achieve each of
the goal alternatives are outlined in more detail in the following section.
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 5
Figure 1. Fort Collins GHG Goal Alternatives Emissions Forecast
Spheres of Influence for Achieving Goals
Each of the proposed goal alternatives will require implementation of strategies at different rates and
magnitudes in order to be achieved. Evaluating these pathways and the potential implications of each is an
important step in selecting the most appropriate goal for Fort Collins. In general, the City government has
four broad areas of potential authority through which it can influence energy use:
1. Financial—Use of incentives, financing mechanisms, procurement, pricing
2. Regulatory—Ordinances, fees, codes and standards
3. Innovation/Technology—Grants, pilot adoption
4. Education/information—Education and outreach
Table 2 displays the potential application of these forms of influence in relation to the three major
areas of GHG emissions.
Table 2. City Government Options for Influencing Emissions Reductions
Form of
Influence
Energy Transportation Waste
Financial Incentives/rebates; financing,
electric rates and time of use
and other pricing signals
Incentives; transit
investments; subsidized
programs
Incentives to encourage waste
diversion
Regulation Code requirements, building
information requirements
Parking management Disposal restrictions; required
recycling opportunities
Innovation –
Technology
Demonstration projects; city
leading by example;
grants/competitions to foster
innovation
Access to alternative fuel
infrastructure (e.g., electric
vehicle charging stations);
city leading by example
Demonstration projects for
alternative uses for waste
Education –
Information
Outreach; program promotion;
social marketing, utility data
accessibility
Outreach; program
promotion; social marketing
Outreach; program promotion;
social marketing
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 6
Taking these forms of influence into consideration, there are various pathways and approaches Fort
Collins could to take to achieve each of the goal alternatives. As a starting point, a number of
existing planning efforts have been leveraged and built upon to sketch out proposed reduction
pathways illustrated in the figures below. These existing efforts include the recent RMI white paper
(Stepping Up: Benefits and Costs of Accelerating Fort Collins’ Energy and Climate Goals), the Road
to Zero Waste Plan (December 2013), and planning efforts conducted under FortZED. More
detailed analyses will be needed to clarify the steps and pathway towards each alternative.
The first step in developing a pathway to emissions reduction is defining the business-as-usual
(BAU) forecast. The BAU forecast for this analysis takes the most recent GHG inventory year for the
City of Fort Collins (2012) and applies an annual growth rate to each emissions source based on
anticipated growth in each sector. Details on these growth rates can be found in Attachment A -
Assumptions Summary.
Part of the analysis included evaluating each of these pathways by emissions source: electricity,
natural gas, transportation, and waste. The estimated reduction pathway for each emission source
takes into consideration the proportional contribution of each source to the community’s GHG
inventory to determine how much reduction is required by that emission source. Additionally, the
planning studies mentioned above were used to determine the magnitude of reductions within
each emission source that are estimated to be achievable based on various case studies and data
sources. In this way, the pathways were built from the bottom up, based on what is predicted to be
possible, rather than top down based on what is required to achieve the goals. Using this bottom up
approach, within each emissions source, some basic meta-strategies were considered:
• Energy – building efficiency, electric supply, fuel switching from natural gas to electricity
• Transportation – fuel economy, miles reduction, alternative transportation fuels
• Waste – waste diversion
Table 3 summarizes the decadal emissions targets for each of the three alternatives and the gap
that needs to be filled to achieve each of these targets. Figures 2-4 illustrate a potential pathway for
each goal alternative and the required contribution by each emission category.
Table 3. Decadal Emissions Targets and Gap after Existing Program Reductions (MT CO2e)
2020 2030 2040 2050
Business as Usual Emissions Forecast 2,300,000 2,500,000 2,700,000 2,900,000
ALTERNATIVE A: Keep Current Goal
Emissions Target 1,800,000 1,400,000 920,000 490,000
Gap to Achieve Target 560,000 1,200,000 1,800,000 2,400,000
ALTERNATIVE B: Increase Magnitude of Goal to Climate Neutral
Emissions Target 1,600,000 1,100,000 540,000 0
Gap to Achieve Target 720,000 1,400,000 2,200,000 2,900,000
ALTERNATIVE C: Accelerate Achievement of Current Goal by 20 Years
Emissions Target 1,300,000 490,000 New goals and
future actions
New goals and
future actions
Gap to Achieve Target 1,100,000 2,000,000 New goals and
future actions
New goals and
future actions
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 7
Figure 2. Potential Pathway for Goal Alternative A
Figure 3. Potential Pathway for Goal Alternative B
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 8
Figure 4. Potential Pathway for Goal Alternative C
Electricity and Natural Gas
In 2012, electricity consumption represented over half of the GHG emissions generated by the Fort Collins
community while natural gas contributed an additional 17 percent. Incorporating a variety of efficiency and
conservation approaches and interventions as presented in the RMI white paper will be required in these
sectors, especially electricity, to achieve any of the goal alternatives:
1. More aggressive and widespread adoption of conventional and cost-effective technologies
2. Behavioral and smart control strategies that optimize how building occupants use energy
3. Integrative design approaches that consider energy efficiency opportunities in renovations and new
construction
4. Aggressive engagement with industrial energy users to reduce process related emissions
Considering RMI analysis, as well as detailed planning studies conducted for FortZED, it is estimated that
overall emissions can be reduced by around 20 percent from baseline through the planning horizon through
these efficiency and conservation measures. Any additional energy emissions reductions are expected to
come from a combination of switching from natural gas fuel to electricity and renewable energy generation.
In order to achieve the defined outcomes for goal alternatives, a nearly carbon free electricity supply would
be required along with some natural gas fuel switching. To achieve the goal of carbon neutrality under
alternative B, steps would need to be taken to increase natural gas fuel switching in order to achieve
completely emissions free energy consumption (both electricity and natural gas). Energy generation
strategies are estimated to reduce overall emissions by an additional 35 to 40 percent from baseline through
the planning horizon.
Overall, electricity and natural gas pathways to achieve the proposed goal alternatives are estimated to
reduce overall emissions of 55 to 65 percent below the 2005 baseline.
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 9
Figure 5. Electricity Decadal Targets, reduction below 2005 baseline
Figure 6. Natural Gas Decadal Targets, reduction below 2005 baseline
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 10
Transportation
Gasoline and diesel fuel consumption for ground transportation in Fort Collins contributed 23
percent to the 2012 emissions inventory; air travel contributed an additional 4 percent, bringing
total transportation related emissions to just under 30 percent of the total 2012 inventory. Outside
influences, such as new national fuel economy standards and increased adoption of electric
vehicles, will help reduce transportation related emissions in Fort Collins resulting in an estimated 2
to 7 percent reduction in overall emissions from baseline. However, to achieve the alternative goals,
additional steps will be required within the transportation sector as presented in the RMI white
paper:
1. Reducing vehicle miles traveled by Fort Collins residents through smart growth, alternative
commuting options, intelligent transportation systems, and pricing signals like parking fees
2. Accelerating the adoption of fuel-efficient and electric vehicles
These advanced transportation strategies, including a 30 percent reduction in vehicle miles travelled per
person as well as an accelerated shift to fuel-efficient and electric vehicles, have the potential to reduce
overall emissions by an additional 15 percent. While air travel is included in Fort Collins’ GHG inventory, none
of the pathways presented here include strategies that would directly reduce emissions from air travel.
Strategies such as promotion of teleconferencing and “Stay-Cations” could result in some reduction of
emissions in this sector, but have not been estimated here.
Overall, based on meta-strategies that are projected for Fort Collins, transportation related pathways to
achieve the goal alternatives are estimated to reduce overall emissions by around 10 percent below the 2005
baseline, depending on the alternative.
Figure 7. Transportation Decadal Targets, reduction below 2005 baseline
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 11
Waste
Solid waste emissions contributed to 8 percent of Fort Collins’ total emissions in 2005 and 3 percent
in 2012. Though it is a smaller emissions source, the community has taken great strides to reduce
waste generation. In fact, the overall waste diversion rate in the City was almost 58 percent in 2012.
In December 2013, City Council adopted a goal to achieve 100% diversion (zero waste) by 2030,
which would eliminate emissions associated with Fort Collins’ waste stream. Achieving this zero
waste goal would reduce overall emissions 8 percent below the 2005 baseline.
Figure 8. Waste Decadal Targets, reduction below 2005 baseline (sector related emissions / overall emissions)
Local Offsets
For alternative B and the goal of carbon neutrality, some emission sources, namely airline travel
and a small portion of ground transportation activity, will probably still come from fossil carbon
sources given the lack of known alternatives. One possible path for Fort Collins to offset these
emissions would be to develop excess on-site renewable energy generating capacity within the City
or region to address any remaining emissions. The relative contribution of this excess generating
capacity as compared to the other pathways is shown by the local offsets wedge in Figure 3.
Another path to offset the emissions would be to develop a local carbon offset program, possibly
focused on local or regional ecosystem services.
Pathway Summaries by Decade
Figure 9 illustrates the contribution of each emission source by decade. The series of pie charts by
decade shown in Figure 10 illustrates how the pathways for the various emission sources would be
combined for each goal alternative. The shrinking size of the pie in each decade demonstrates the
impact of efficiency and conservation measures intended to reduce Fort Collins’ net GHG emissions.
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 12
Additionally, the shift in make-up of the pie pieces shows the transition as fossil carbon-based fuel
sources are replaced with greener carbon free sources.
Figure 9. Pathway Summaries by Decade – Bar Chart
Figure 10. Pathway Summaries by Decade – Pie Chart (see next page)
Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 13
ALTERNATIVE A: 80% BY 2050
ALTERNATIVE B: 100% BY 2050
ALTERNATIVE C: 80% BY 2030
50%
16%
26%
8%
2005
50%
16%
26%
8%
2005
50%
16%
26%
8%
2005
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 14
Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 15
External Factors Relevant to GHG Goals and Climate Action
Fort Collins does not operate in isolation and has impact on and is impacted by factors outside of
the city, many of which are relevant to the GHG goal alternatives. Table 4 summarizes some of the
external factors that will need to be considered and addressed as part of Fort Collins’ climate action
planning process.
Table 4. External Factors, Related Impact, and Proposed Action
External Factor Impact Proposed Action
State and
Federal
Regulations
Regulations, such as the state’s renewable
portfolio standard (RPS) and federal
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE)
standards for vehicle fuel efficiency, will
change the GHG emissions impact of Fort
Collins’ electricity and on-road
transportation activity, respectively.
The estimated impacts of the RPS and CAFE have been
built into the goal alternative analysis. For example,
CAFE represents a large portion of the 2 to 7%
reduction below baseline for outside influences. As
Fort Collins updates its Climate Action Plan, the
impact of regulations should continue to be
evaluated.
Population
Growth
The City anticipates an average annual
growth rate of 1.9% through 2020 and $10
billion in new construction over the next
10 years.
The business-as-usual emissions forecast includes
factors such as projected increases in electricity
consumption and population growth, and estimated
increases in vehicle miles traveled.
Economic and
Lifestyle
Trends
Historical trends point to more energy and
resource consumption per capita, not less.
As more detailed strategies are developed for the
CAP, considerations will be made for targeted
programs that address this trend, such as initiatives to
reduce plug load energy consumption associated with
increased household electronics.
Overall Comparison of Goal Alternatives
On the basis of the information presented, Table 5 summarizes all three goal alternatives and the
pros and cons of each. This summary table is intended to inform further discussion by the
community and City Council, eventually leading to the selection of a revised GHG goal for Fort
Collins.
Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 16
Table 5. Summary Comparison of Goal Alternatives
Goal Alternative Summary Cumulative Cost ($M) Cumulative Cost Savings
($M)
Cost
Effective-
ness ($M)
Qualitative Comparison
Name Magnitude/
Timeline
Annual
Average
Reduction
Year By Sector TOTAL By Sector TOTAL NPV Pros Cons
Alternative A.
Keep Current
Long-Term
Goal
80% below
2005
baseline by
2050
1.8%
2030
Energy: $770
Trans: $160
Other: $0
$930
Energy: $970
Trans: $380
Other: $0
$1,300 $190
Maintain already
adopted direction,
consistent with state ;
Same as renewables
guidance expressed in
PRPA’s 2014 Strategic
Plan goal; Achieve a
positive net present
value more quickly
Does not position Fort
Collins at the forefront of
leadership/commitment;
may not drive innovation
and associated financial
benefits that could be
realized by more
aggressive goal because of
less upfront investment
our long term financial
savings are reduced
2050
Energy: $1,700
Trans: $440
Other: $0
$2,200
Energy: $4,200
Trans: $2,000
Other: $0
Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 17
ATTACHMENT A: Assumptions Summary
The following is a summary of the main assumptions included in the GHG goal alternatives analysis.
Inventory and Forecast
[i] 2005-2012 emissions imported from City inventory reports with the following emission sources included:
electricity, natural gas, ground transportation, air travel, solid waste, embodied energy in recycled waste,
and water
[ii] Embodied energy in recyclable waste was removed from the net emissions considered for the
goal alternatives analysis
[iii] Beyond 2012, emissions are forecasted using the following growth factors to correspond with the City’s GHG
Emissions Inventory Quality Management Plan
Emission Source
Annual Growth
Rate
Electricity 0.50%
Natural Gas 0.00%
Ground Transportation 0.94%
Air Travel 1.91%
Solid Waste 2.50%
Water 1.91%
Electricity
[i] Current efficiency programs are already accounted for in the BAU Forecast
2011 Community QMP Table 27. Fort Collins Greenhouse Gas Emission Forecast Revisions
Electricity Growth Assumption - 0.5% annual growth rate
FortZED Planning Tool
Growth rate with / without existing efficiency programs = 0.5% / 1.5%
[ii]
14%
Efficiency Potential from Remaining Conventional Technologies (% reduction from
2030/50 BAU)
5,442 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative A & B
10,720 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Efficient
Buildings Figure 1
Approximately 15% efficiency potential for electricity portion of Part 1
FortZED Planning Tool
Estimate 19% savings potential for additional programs beyond existing DSM programs (ESCO
Model, LED Streetlighting, and Pre-Pay programs)
Derated slightly to match RMI white paper outcomes recognizing targeted FortZED programs
may have reduced impact city-wide
[iii] 6.4% Efficiency Potential from Controls and Behavior (% reduction from 2030/50 BAU)
2,449 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative A & B
4,824 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Efficient
Buildings Figure 1
FortZED Planning Tool
Aligns with estimates in tool for Smart Controls
[iv]
21.4%
Efficiency Potential from Integrative Design (% reduction from 2050 BAU) – Alternatives
A & B
6.4% Efficiency Potential from Integrative Design (% reduction from 2030 BAU) – Alternative C
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 18
8,163 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative A & B
4,824 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Efficient
Buildings Figure 1
Assume same rate applies to electricity and natural gas
For RMI accelerated scenario, it was assumed that only 30% of savings potential would be
achieved - for 2050 goal alternatives assume full potential would be achieved
[v]
8.6%
Efficiency Potential from Electricity Substitution (% reduction from 2030/50 BAU) –
Pathway A & C
27.5%
Efficiency Potential from Electricity Substitution (% reduction from 2030/50 BAU) –
Pathway B
(3,265) Annual emissions addition (MT CO2e) – Alternative A
(10,491) Annual emissions addition (MT CO2e) – Alternative B
(6,432) Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Efficient
Buildings Figure 1
[vi] Renewable Electricity Supply used to address any remaining electricity emissions reductions required
to meet overall goal
[vii] The distinction between what is currently possible versus what is needed to achieve the overall goal for each
pathway is based on the assumption that currently possible includes remaining conventional technologies,
controls & behavior, and half of the renewable energy strategies
Natural Gas
[i] Current efficiency programs are already accounted for in the BAU Forecast to align with Electricity
assumption
2011 Community QMP Table 27. Fort Collins Greenhouse Gas Emission Forecast Revisions
Flat (no growth or decline)
[ii]
23%
Efficiency Potential from Remaining Conventional Technologies (% reduction from
2030/50 BAU)
2,387 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative A & B
5,194 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Efficient
Buildings Figure 1
Approximately 22% efficiency potential for natural gas portion of Part 1
[iii] 5.2% Efficiency Potential from Controls and Behavior (% reduction from 2030/50 BAU)
537 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative A & B
1,169 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Efficient
Buildings Figure 1
Assume same rate applies to electricity and natural gas
[iv]
17.4%
Efficiency Potential from Integrative Design (% reduction from 2050 BAU) – Alternatives
A & B
5.2% Efficiency Potential from Integrative Design (% reduction from 2030 BAU) – Alternative C
1,790 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative A & B
1,169 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Efficient
Buildings Figure 1
Assume same rate applies to electricity and natural gas
For RMI accelerated scenario, it was assumed that only 30% of savings potential would be
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 19
achieved - for 2050 goal alternatives assume full potential would be achieved
[v]
7.8%
Efficiency Potential from Deep Industry Engagement (% reduction from 2050 BAU) –
Alternatives A & B
[v]
2.3%
Efficiency Potential from Deep Industry Engagement (% reduction from 2030 BAU) –
Alternative C
796 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e)
519 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Efficient
Buildings Figure 1
Only applies to natural gas
For RMI accelerated scenario, it was assumed that only 30% of savings potential would be
achieved - for 2050 goal alternatives assume full potential would be achieved
[vi]
19.8%
Efficiency Potential from Gas Fuel Switching (% reduction from 2030/50 BAU) –
Alternatives A & C
46.3%
Efficiency Potential from Gas Fuel Switching (% reduction from 2030/50 BAU) –
Alternatives B
2,029 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternatives A
4,753 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternatives B
4,415 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Efficient
Buildings Figure 1
[vii] The distinction between what is currently possible versus what is needed to achieve the overall goal for each
pathway is based on the assumption that currently possible includes remaining conventional technologies,
and controls & behavior
Ground Transportation
[i] 34% Transportation energy use reduction by 2030 as estimated in RMI white paper
12,013 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e)
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Advanced
Transportation Figure 1
Includes new national fuel economy standards and to a lesser extent increases in electric vehicle
adoption
Assume that the estimated savings from these activities would continue to increase beyond the
2030 target year presented in RMI accelerated scenario
Calculated % reduction from 2030 Demand with Frozen Efficiency
[ii] 19% Reduced Gasoline and Diesel Consumption from Driving Less
3,762 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternatives A & B
4,358 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Advanced
Transportation Figure 1
[iii]
7%
Reduced Gasoline and Diesel Consumption from High Efficiency
Vehicles
1,447 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternatives A & B
1,676 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Advanced
Transportation Figure 1
[iv] 6% Reduced Gasoline and Diesel Consumption from Electric Vehicles
1,157 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternatives A & B
1,341 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 20
Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins' Energy and Climate Goals Advanced
Transportation Figure 1
[v] The distinction between what is currently possible versus what is needed to achieve the overall goal for each
pathway is based on the assumption that half of the required emissions reductions could be achieved
currently
Solid Waste
[i] Diversion 58% 75% 90% 100%
Year 2012 2020 2025 2030
2012 - Community graphs 062013-ls.xls (10.02.13 email from Lucinda)
2020, 2025, 2035 - Road to Zero Waste Plan (09.20.13 email from Lucinda)
Estimate reduction in landfill gas emissions as a result of increased diversion rate
Based on known emissions and diversion rate in 2012
Water Process Emissions (part of FC inventory so included, no specific strategies to address this emissions source)
[i] 80% Reduced Emissions from (Waste)water Activity
(Alts A & C) 385 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative A
574 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e) – Alternative C
2012 Fort Collins Climate Status Report
(www.fcgov.com/airquality/pdf/FC2012ClimateStatusReportLowRes.pdf)
Water emissions split between Reclamation Facility Process Emissions (15%), Reclamation
Facility Digester Gas (18%), and Electricity consumption for Water Treatment and Distribution
(67%)
Assume 80% of these emissions could be reduced through activities such as water conservation
(reduce energy requirements), capturing digester gas for energy generation, and supplying
renewable energy for remaining energy requirements
80% Percent of savings attributed to electricity consumption
20%
Percent of savings attributed to digester gas and applied to Waste category in wedge
diagram
[ii] 100% Reduced Emissions from (Waste)water Activity
(Alternative B) 481 Annual emissions reduction (MT CO2e)
2012 Fort Collins Climate Status Report
(www.fcgov.com/airquality/pdf/FC2012ClimateStatusReportLowRes.pdf)
Water emissions split between Reclamation Facility Process Emissions (15%), Reclamation
Facility Digester Gas (18%), and Electricity consumption for Water Treatment and Distribution
(67%)
Assume 80% of these emissions could be reduced through activities such as water conservation
(reduce energy requirements), capturing digester gas for energy generation, and supplying
renewable energy for remaining energy requirements
Because of neutrality of this pathway assume additional steps would be taken to realize net zero
emissions impact for (waste)water activities
70% Percent of savings attributed to electricity consumption
30%
Percent of savings attributed to digester gas and applied to Waste category in wedge
diagram
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 21
UNIT COST
Electricity ($ per kWh) 0.09
Source: Norm Weaver, email 06.26.12 (Projected cost of PV Energy)
Escalation 0% Assume no escalation for conservative cost savings estimate
Natural Gas ($ per therm) 0.60
Source: standard assumption
Escalation 0% Assume no escalation for conservative cost savings estimate
Gasoline and diesel fuel prices vary by year in accordance with RMI analysis
Source: Transportation Analysis_20131015.xls (NPV 2030 tab)
EMISSIONS FACTOR
Source: 2011 QMP
Electricity (lbs/MWh) 1,490
Natural Gas (tons/MMBtu) 0.0597
Transportation (kg CO2/gal) 9.4950
IMPLEMENTATION COSTS
Remaining Conventional Technologies
Source: FortZED Planning Tool, Average of levelized cost for all existing programs
Electricity
Residential $ 0.17 per kWh
Commercial $ 0.27 per kWh
Average $ 0.22 per kWh
Source: SteppingUp_ElectricityBuildingsConmbined Model_RMI_2012_1112.xls (Gas Efficiency tab)
Natural Gas
LCOE $ 4.45 per Dth
Controls and Behavior
See Remaining Conventional Technologies above, assume same implementation cost per comments in RMI white paper
appendix
Integrative Design
Per Stepping Up Appendix (pg 14), assume NPV neutral
Deep Industry Engagement
Per Stepping Up Appendix (pg 14), assume NPV neutral
Gas Fuel Switching
Source: SteppingUp_ElectricityBuildingsConmbined Model_RMI_2012_1112.xls (Fuel Switching tab)
Off-The-Shelf Heating Equipment Data
Residential LCOE ($/MMBTU)
Energy Star Gas Furnace 2.5
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 22
Cold Climate Ductless Heat Pump 11.30
Commercial LCOE ($/MMBTU)
High Eff. Gas Furnace 0.7
High Eff. Air Source Heat Pump 7.11
LCOE ($/MMBTU)
Average Heat Pump Cost premium 7.61
Renewables
Source: FortZED Planning Tool
33% % Renewables as on-site Solar Estimate from Figure 1 (pg 34) of RMI paper
67% % Renewables as utility Wind Estimate from Figure 1 (pg 34) of RMI paper
17% Solar PV Capacity Factor
35% Wind Capacity Factor
Solar Implementation cost ($/W)
Year 2011 2020
Cost ($/W); Residential $ 4.50 $ 2.10
Cost ($/W); Commercial $ 3.75 $ 2.00
Cost ($/W); Average $ 4.13 $ 2.05 Cap at $1/W
Wind Implementation cost
$2.80 Utility Wind, $/W
BAU Ground Transportation Efficiency Savings
Because considered part of BAU condition savings and cost not included in this analysis
Driving Less
Source: 2011 QMP (Table 30, weighted average)
Average Vehicle Fuel Economy
19.8 MPG
Source: Transportation Analysis_20131015.xls (NPV 2030 tab)
Assumed cost per VMT
0.75 $ per VMT reduced
High Efficiency Vehicles
Per Stepping Up Appendix (pg 25), assume no cost premium and replacement based on standard sales projections
Electric Vehicles
Source: Transportation Analysis_20131015.xls (Current State tab)
36.4 kWh/Gal Gasoline
Stepping Up Appendix (pg 25) assumes no cost premium and replacement based on standard sales projections, but Figure 2 in
the Stepping Up Report (pg 56) shows this includes $12,500 incentive per vehicle
Include a $12,500 cost premium for EVs starting in 2013, linearly decreasing through 2028
The Brendle Group, Inc., (970) 207-0058 Page 23
Source: Transportation Analysis_20131015.xls (Accelerated EVs tab)
Average New Cars Purchased in FC 2,600 (reference IMS for annual numbers)
Year Before 2020 After 2020
% of New Cars as EVs 25% 50%
Road to Zero Waste
For simplification, assume NPV neutral for this small reduction strategy
Water
For simplification, assume NPV neutral for this small reduction strategy
Local Offsets
Assume local offsets would include purchase of utility scale wind, no associated cost savings
Stepping Up:
BenefitS and CoSt of
aCCelerating fort CollinS'
energy and Climate goalS
By roCky moUntain inStitUte,
in partnerShip with fort CollinS UtilitieS
aUthorS: Coreina Chan, lena hanSen,
JameS newComB, greg rUCkS, JoSh agenBroad
primary ContaCtS: Coreina Chan (CChan@rmi.org)
and lena hanSen (lhanSen@rmi.org)
1820 folSom Street | BoUlder, Co 80302 | rmi.org
download at: www.rmi.org
Copyright roCky moUntain inStitUte.
pUBliShed SeptemBer, 2013.
2
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
taBle of ContentS
ExEcutivE Summary...................................................................................................... 3
01: aBOut tHiS rEPOrt............................................................................................... 8
02: iNtrODuctiON: WHy accElEratE fOrt
cOlliNS’ climatE gOalS? .................................................................... 12
03: EfficiENt BuilDiNgS ...................................................................................... 18
04: rENEWaBlE ElEctricity SuPPly ........................................... 30
05: aDvaNcED traNSPOrtatiON ....................................................... 46
06: imPlicatiONS.................................................................................................................. 57
07: mOviNg fOrWarD................................................................................................ 62
08: cONcluSiON.................................................................................................................... 65
3
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
eS
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
4
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
this report examines the opportunity for accelerating fort Collins’
energy and climate goals to reflect the community’s values, and
capture economic, social, and environmental benefits. in the five
years since fort Collins initially established its current greenhouse
gas emissions goals, rapid changes in the cost and availability of
clean, energy efficient technologies, together with the emergence
of new business models and financing methods for implementing
these measures, have dramatically shifted the solutions space
for addressing the community’s energy needs. the cost of solar
panels, for example, has fallen nearly 75% since 2008, with further
dramatic declines yet to come; the retail price for energy-efficient
led lightbulbs has fallen by 50% in the past year. these and other
changes have opened the door for the City to implement new
solutions to reduce emissions and waste, stimulate local economic
development, improve security, and reduce risk.
aNalySiS aPPrOacH
this study provides an independent, forward-looking view of fort
Collins’ energy options, based on the latest information about state-
of-the-art technologies, policies, and programs. the approach is built
largely on accepted methods and findings from rocky mountain
institute’s (rmi) nation-wide study, Reinventing Fire: Bold Business
Solutions for a New Energy Era, as well as from other relevant
studies and meta-analyses, which have been adapted to fort Collins
as appropriate and possible. the analysis also takes into account
researched case studies and lessons learned from rmi’s related
energy consulting and advisory work for cities and states, university
campuses, building portfolio owners, and industrial clients.
to answer questions about how far and how fast fort Collins could
reduce its Co2 emissions, and at what cost, the report first assesses
the economic potential for efficiency and renewables in fort Collins
and the opportunities for integrative, cross-sector solutions:
• How much efficiency is available in fort Collins’ building stock?
• By how much could the city reduce fossil fuel consumption from
transportation activities?
• to what extent could the community’s energy needs be met by
both local and centralized renewable energy resources?
models for each sector have been developed reflecting the City’s
existing and projected building stock, economic and population
growth, transportation assets and requirements, electricity
distribution system, distributed resource potential and other
attributes. to provide a basis for comparing the overall costs,
emissions, and other implications of energy policy choices for the
City, the study compares an accelerated scenario to a business-as-
usual scenario. the business-as-usual scenario analyzes what might
happen absent additional intervention; the accelerated scenario
reflects a combination of policies and strategies across the sectors
aimed at increasing energy efficiency and reducing emissions. While
the accelerated scenario “pushes the envelope,” the measures
considered and the approaches to implementation are based on
rigorous analysis drawing on best practices, technology trends, and
plausibly achievable goals for customer adoption.
the total cost of the two scenarios is evaluated on a present value
cost basis for the periods 2013–2030 and 2013–2050. Because
high initial investments in the accelerated scenario confer long-
exeCUtive SUmmary
exeCUtive SUmmary
5
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
term benefits of reduced fuel and operating costs, the longer time
horizon captures the benefit streams more completely for a fair
comparison of the consequences of the policy choices considered.
today, a growing number of cities and states are already making
energy investment choices based in part on a carbon price,
and the federal government has recently issued a report that
assesses the social cost of carbon starting today. this analysis
uses a conservative figure of a “penny a pound” ($22 per metric
ton in $2012) to value carbon emissions in both scenarios, with no
escalation to 2030.
KEy fiNDiNgS
this analysis indicates that, in the accelerated scenario, fort Collins can
achieve an approximate 80% reduction in Co2 emissions by 2030, two
decades ahead of its existing 2050 greenhouse gas reduction target.
in doing so, the community could:
• reduce building energy use by 31% through efficiency,
• achieve a carbon neutral electricity system by 2030, and
• reduce transportation energy use by 48%.
in the buildings sector, increased investment in energy efficiency
could reduce energy use in buildings 31% compared to business
as usual by 2030, saving the community $140 million and
reducing the cost of meeting future electricity supply needs from
renewable sources.
• driven by economic growth and increasing population, building
energy demand under business-as-usual could increase 19%
by 2030 from today’s consumption levels, increasing Co2
emissions by 24%.
• through a combination of cost-effective efficiency measures
including conventional energy efficient technologies, behavior
changes and smart controls, and integrative design approaches,
building energy use could be reduced by 31% from business as
usual. this would also reduce building Co2 emissions by 30%
from business as usual.
• fuel switching for building heating would reduce energy use by
an additional 8% from business as usual, and Co2 emissions by
another 5% by 2030.
• achieving these goals would entail achieving an equivalent
of 2.4% electricity efficiency savings improvements annually
between now and 2030. fort Collins currently targets 1.5%
annual efficiency savings (which it achieved in 2012), already
putting it among the highest tier of efficiency targets in the
nation. By comparison, efficiency Vermont, one of the best-in-
class electricity efficiency programs in the nation, has achieved
a maximum electricity savings of 3.1% of retail sales in a single
year, and 1.8% of retail sales or greater each year since 2007.
in the electricity sector, fort Collins can achieve a carbon neutral
electricity system by 2030 while providing 25% of electricity supply
from local resources.
• today, fort Collins Utilities provides its customers with very
low cost power—in 2012, the utility’s residential customers paid
average monthly bills that were lower than 46 of Colorado’s 53
electric utilities and 40% lower than the national average.
exeCUtive SUmmary
6
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
• the total present value cost of achieving the accelerated
scenario would be 19% higher than the costs of business as
usual through 2030, taking into consideration the value of
avoided carbon emissions; the equivalent additional cost
per person per year from 2013–2030 would be $69. over
the period from 2013–2050, however, the total costs of the
accelerated scenario would be lower by 14%. this reflects
a significantly greater up-front investment that is repaid by
dramatically lower fuel costs and reduced exposure to carbon
prices over time.
• approximately 25% of electricity supply in the accelerated
scenario would be provided by distributed resources, largely
financed by developers or third parties.
• efficient, scaled deployment of solar pV, together with simplified
permitting, inspection, and interconnection rules, could result in
significant reductions in the “soft costs” of solar deployment with
significant benefit for fort Collins' citizens.
• Wind generation capacity would increase by approximately
230 megawatts by 2030, providing 45% of fort Collins total
electricity supply.
• the accelerated scenario would lower cumulative Co2
emissions from electricity generation by 10 million metric tons
relative to business as usual between now and 2030, and by
30 million metric tons between now and 2050, equivalent to
removing 600,000 cars from the roads for
ten years.
in the transportation sector, fort Collins could reduce gasoline and
diesel consumption by 48% from business as usual, saving $480
million in fuel costs and avoided vehicle maintenance by 2030.
• fort Collins could reduce vehicle miles traveled by building on
existing smart growth strategies to provide increased access
to pedestrian, bicycle, and public transport options. doing so
could reduce transportation energy consumption by 30% from
business as usual.
• less driving means less congestion, and consequently,
improved local air quality, and builds on one of the community’s
greatest strengths—being a bikable, walkable city.
• increased adoption of more efficient and electric vehicles with
lower total costs to owners could reduce energy consumption
by an additional 18% from business as usual.
exeCUtive SUmmary
7
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
exeCUtive SUmmary
rEcOmmENDatiONS
few communities in the nation have the combination of factors that
align to make fort Collins a community that can lead in creating
forward-looking energy policy for community benefit. these factors
include strong and pragmatic civic leadership, manageable size, an
innovative and well-positioned municipal utility, workable options
for creative transportation policy, and low cost options for clean
and affordable electricity supplies. accordingly, it is no surprise that
fort Collins’ innovative energy programs and policies, notably the
fortZed project, have already attracted national and international
attention. By stepping forward to pioneer new approaches,
fort Collins has galvanized the support of community leaders
and attracted the participation of leading businesses and other
institutions in the area.
now the City has an opportunity to sustain and advance its
leadership position by taking up new goals that leverage existing
achievements and opportunities. in doing so, fort Collins could
embark on a transformative path of reinvestment in community-
based energy systems and put itself at the forefront of innovation
nationally—stimulating local economic development, reducing
outflows of money from the community, improving security, and
reducing risk.
imPlicatiONS
By 2030, combining results across all sectors, the accelerated sce-
nario results in a net benefit of $260 million for the community com-
pared to business as usual, and an avoided 15 million metric tons of
Co2. By 2050, the accelerated scenario could result in a total net
benefit of $2.0 billion compared to business as usual.
moreover, the accelerated scenario represents a fundamentally
different paradigm for investment in energy-related assets and
infrastructure compared with business as usual, providing greater
local job creation, economic development, stimulus for innovation,
and growth for local businesses. investments in energy efficiency
and distributed energy resources along the lines of the path
already envisioned for fortZed contribute to the local economy
and reduce cash flows out of the community. By investing now in
efficiency and renewables, the City can reduce outflows of cash for
decades to come.
in the accelerated scenario, the amount of money spent on coal
and natural gas to generate electricity supplied to the community is
lower by an average of $16 million per year compared with business
as usual. investment in efficiency, distributed solar power, smart
grid, and other local energy assets is higher by $20 million per year.
this shift in investment—from distant to local resources—would
generate an additional 400–500 jobs within fort Collins over the
entire period from 2013–2030.
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
eS 01
about
this report
9
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
aBoUt thiS report
in 2008, the City of fort Collins adopted a climate action target
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% from 2005 levels by
2050. five years later, significant opportunities and motivations to
accelerate fort Collins’ goals have arisen. today, fort Collins could
embark on a transformative path of reinvestment in community-
based energy systems and put itself at the forefront of innovation
nationally—stimulating local economic development, reducing
outflows of money from the community, improving security, and
reducing risk.
in november 2012, major energy stakeholders including
representatives from the City of fort Collins, fort Collins Utilities,
Colorado Clean energy Cluster, fort Collins energy Board, and
the fortZed Steering Committee came together to explore the
opportunities and challenges in creating a clean energy future for
the community. participants in that two-day workshop expressed
enthusiasm not only for developing strategies to achieve fort
Collins’ greenhouse gas emission targets, but also for accelerating
the time frame.¹ they posited that not only is acceleration feasible,
it could drive local economic growth and system resilience at the
same time.
this report answers that call to action by exploring “how far” and
“how fast” fort Collins can go toward a prosperous, secure, and
clean energy future.
tHE PurPOSE Of tHiS DOcumENt iS tO:
• offer a non-partisan framework for thinking about the
community’s full potential for efficiency and renewable
energy supply,
• provide a foundation for the energy Board and City Council to
move forward with a reassessment of the community’s climate
action goals,
• explore the implications, costs, and benefits of accelerating the
City’s goals,
• recommend new community-wide and sector based climate
action goals, and
• identify the most important target areas and strategies to
address in an accelerated timeframe.
gOal SEttiNg aPPrOacH
this report is based on the premise that there are “right steps in
the right order” to take in energy goal setting and planning. Before
a community decides on an energy target and creates programs
to meet that target, it should first understand what is technically
and economically possible. How much efficiency is available in fort
Collins’ building stock? By how much could the city reduce fossil
fuel consumption from transportation activities? to what extent
could the community’s energy needs be met by local renewable
energy resources? to answer questions about how far and how
fast fort Collins can reduce its emissions, this report seeks first to
understand the full potential for efficiency and renewables available
to fort Collins.
¹ for a Complete liSt of partiCipantS and fUll SUmmary of the workShop, viSit
http://www.rmi.org/pdf_fort_Zed_report
01: aBoUt thiS report
10
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
the analysis presented in this report was conducted by rmi. an
“accelerated scenario” is compared to “business as usual” that
represents what might happen in the community absent additional
intervention. our approach is built largely on accepted methods and
findings from our nation-wide study, Reinventing Fire: Bold Business
Solutions for a New Energy Era, as well as from other relevant
studies and meta-analyses, which we have adapted to fort Collins
as appropriate and possible. We also take into account researched
case studies, as well as lessons learned from our own experiences
in a range of related energy consulting work. We provide a brief
description of our quantification methods, along with major data
sources, in the appendix to this report.
Understanding the community’s full potential, and quantifying the
biggest areas of opportunity, will allow fort Collins to set an aggressive
goal along with a rationale for where to focus future program
design and set in motion detailed analysis that may be needed for
implementation plan development and funding commitment.
²for a fUll deSCription, See: 2012, “City of fort CollinS environmental ServiCeS, Com-
mUnity greenhoUSe gaS emiSSionS inventory QUality management plan: yearS 2005
throUgh 2011 and 2020 foreCaSt,” p14.
01: aBoUt thiS report
EmiSSiONS ScOPE
fort Collins’ current climate action goals are based on reductions in
community greenhouse gas emissions—specifically carbon dioxide
(Co2), methane (CH₄), and nitrous oxide (n2o)—from Scope 1,
Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions sources.² in contrast, the analysis
in this report is limited to the quantification of Co2 emissions from
Scope 1 and Scope 2 emission sources. emissions from the embodied
energy in materials purchased by the community, as well as from
community airplane travel and waste, are not included in our analysis.
NExt StEPS
fort Collins Utilities plans to submit this report to the fort Collins
energy Board for consideration. Should the energy Board
recommend the City consider new energy policy and climate action
goals, additional analysis may be conducted and recommended
goals presented to the City Council.
11
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
aBOut rOcKy mOuNtaiN iNStitutE
rocky mountain institute (rmi) is an entrepreneurial non-profit with
30 years of research and collaboration experience in the electricity,
building, industry, and transportation energy sectors. our mission
is to drive a business-led transition from fossil fuels to efficiency
and renewables in the United States in ways that strengthen and
sustain communities. in 2011, we published Reinventing Fire: Bold
Business Solutions for a New Energy Era, a roadmap for eliminating
oil, coal, and nuclear energy in the U.S. by 2050, while reducing
national reliance on natural gas to one-third of today’s consumption.
realizing this vision would provide improved energy services,
generate opportunities for job and economic growth, and save
$5 trillion in net-present-valued cost while shrinking fossil carbon
emissions 86% from 2000 levels.
at the invitation of fort Collins Utilities, rmi, as part of on-going
work with electricity leaders through the electricity innovation lab
(e-lab), convened and facilitated the november 2012 workshop in
fort Collins.
01: aBoUt thiS report
12
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
image courtasy of ryan Burke
IntroductIon:
Why accelerate
fort collins’
climate goals?
02
13
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
iNtrODuctiON:
why aCCelerate fort CollinS’
Climate goalS?
it may be surprising to think of fort Collins as being at an urgent
energy crossroads. many of us think of decisive moments in the
energy sector as ones defined by crisis, whether by a natural
disaster that disables the grid or the closure of a critical power plant.
We expect brownouts or blackouts that necessitate, very visibly, a
different path forward. fort Collins, on the other hand, enjoys lower
retail energy costs and service interruptions than most of the nation.
its municipal utility has one of the highest annual energy efficiency
savings rates. Why is there an urgent need for fort Collins to change
its course and take on bolder goals?
as a handful of cities in the United States and around the world
are starting to demonstrate, the real opportunities in energy don’t
precipitate from avoiding disaster. they result from preemptive
decisions to capitalize on being first. fort Collins can anticipate the
evolving demands and interests of its citizens, and plan strategically
in the face of national and regional energy trends. in fact, what
constitutes leadership today in energy planning is not sufficient for
tomorrow. next-generation cities are the ones making the transition
to a clean energy future...and there is no such thing as doing
nothing. today’s energy system continues to require operations and
maintenance, and also requires major investments and infrastructure
upgrades that commit fort Collins for decades or longer. even
maintaining the status quo has consequences.
five years ago, when fort Collins committed to climate action goals
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% (from 2005 levels) by
2050, it began the community’s trajectory towards reshaping its
energy future, and along with it, establishing the future form and
footprint of the city’s energy infrastructure for decades to come.
the community is on track to meet an interim 20% reduction target
by 2020, and is exploring options for meeting its 2050 target. the
coming months present an opportunity for the City to not only revisit
that target, but in doing so, ask whether it is ambitious enough. as
the City reassesses its emissions targets and energy goals, it could
make a bold choice to accelerate the date by which it can achieve
its goal. Specifically, this report outlines a pathway by which:
FoRt ColliNS CaN aChiEvE aN 80%
REduCtioN iN Co2 EmiSSioNS By 2030, two
dECadES ahEad oF itS 2050 GhG taRGEt,
aNd iN thE pRoCESS:
• REduCE BuildiNG ENERGy uSE By 31%
thRouGh EFFiCiENCy,
• aChiEvE a CaRBoN NEutRal ElECtRiCity
SyStEm, aNd
• REduCE tRaNSpoRtatioN ENERGy uSE
By 48%.
02: why aCCelerate fort
CollinS' Climate goalS?
14
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
WHat Will BE gaiNED By accElEratiNg?
the path that fort Collins chooses to take towards a transformed
energy system will impact the long-term benefits that result
for the community. on one hand, it’s possible for a majority
of carbon reductions to be achieved “remotely.” all future
renewable energy could be supplied from centralized resources
much like coal-based electricity is today, sourced from locations
outside of fort Collins. or, emission goals could be met largely
through the purchase of renewable energy credits, offsetting
fort Collins’ energy carbon footprint through investments in
remote renewable projects. But if fort Collins seeks to advance
its local economic development and system resilience while
simultaneously reducing carbon emissions, it also needs to
consider major investments in community-based solutions.
the target suggested here would support local economic
development, creating greater price certainty into the future,
and sustaining already high reliability in the face of increasing
risks. initial analysis indicates that this transformation could be
accomplished by 2030 for a net benefit of $260 million as compared
to business as usual on a present value basis, with much of the
investment directed toward local growth. money, which today flows
to remote infrastructure and energy sources, would stay within
the community to fund local ingenuity and innovation. fort Collins’
citizens, largely passive in today’s energy system, would drive their
own energy future as principal change agents in local building
efficiency, distributed power generation, and cleaner transport—
becoming long-term benefactors of energy cost savings and other
benefits, with a strong sense of ownership in the transformation of
their community.
Hitting the audacious targets suggested here would dramatically
reduce fort Collins’ contribution to climate change and other
environmental degradation. Some climate action plans, such
as fort Collins's current plan, call for an 80% reduction in Co2
emissions by 2050 in order to limit global warming to 2 degrees
centigrade.3 However, many scientists believe that this goal is
simply not aggressive enough, calling a 2-degree global warming
limit a "prescription for disaster."4 By accelerating its goal twenty
years, fort Collins would avoid an additional 22 million metric tons
of Co2 emissions by 2050 above and beyond its current goal.
By accelerating its goal and leading a rapid transformation of the
community’s energy system, fort Collins would draw the best and
brightest energy minds throughout the nation. through expanded
research, university, and industry partnerships, fort Collins would
become a hot bed for established companies and start-up efforts
alike, magnetizing funding support and partners, and seeding
the creation and growth of innovative local businesses. ancillary
businesses would cluster around the burgeoning economy,
attracting residents and investors to what continues to rank as one
of the nation’s “best places to live.”
WHy NOW?
national and local trends make it feasible and attractive for fort
Collins to depart today from business as usual. Circumstances
surrounding fort Collins’ incumbent energy sources (coal for
electricity and oil for transportation) create a growing imperative
to find alternatives. the nation is moving decisively away from
coal; the environmental protection agency’s in-progress rules will
effectively prevent new coal plants from being built while shutting
15
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Capital expenditures required to maintain the nation’s aging
electricity infrastructure are translating into higher rates for
customers across the nation, inviting scrutiny into energy supply,
transmission, and distribution options for the coming years.
fort Collins’ current low energy costs do not make it immune. fort
Collins has experienced a total rate increase of 41% since 2004, and
the community is expecting electric rates to increase an average of
another 2% in 2014.
meanwhile, exciting alternatives are currently viable from a
functional and economic perspective. improved technologies like
smart grid, electric vehicles, and thermal storage are no longer
“next generation” capabilities but are being adopted today. recent
developments in the production of alternative technologies and
leasing business models make cost, once
an excuse to “buy later,” a compelling reason in many cases to
“buy now.” regional utility-scale wind is already cost-competitive
for fort Collins. Solar photovoltaics are experiencing steep
and persistent cost declines. more efficient vehicles—and even
electric vehicles—are competitive today against their conventional
counterparts, especially when buyers take into account near term
costs for fuel in addition to sticker price.
a greater array of effective financing mechanisms and models exists
today than ever before to enable community-scale investment
and overcome high up-front costs. today’s relatively low cost of
capital from public and private sources presents a compelling, and
potentially limited, window to invest.
auDaciOuS But NOt uNPrEcEDENtED
the accelerated fort Collins climate goal is audacious but not unprecedented.
Communities around the country and the world are moving towards drastically
reducing or eliminating carbon emissions over the coming decades. an 80% carbon
reduction goal by 2050 is no longer uncommon in cities and communities ranging
from madison, Wis., to Burlington, Vt., to Chicago, ill. Some cities are targeting more
than an 80% reduction by 2050, while the most ambitious are moving ahead to be
completely renewable much sooner.
the specific goals and approaches of leading cities vary significantly, reflecting
differences in priorities and timetables. greensburg, Kansas, leveled in 2007 by a
tornado, has rebuilt municipal and commercial buildings to leed platinum standards
and has eliminated electricity-related carbon emissions by investing in a large
wind farm on the edge of town. on a larger scale, San francisco has achieved
greenhouse gas emission reductions of 7% below 1990 levels, and is aiming to
provide 100% of electricity from renewable sources by 2020. in that effort, San
francisco has installed 18.5 mW of in-city renewables, including 15 mW of solar pV.
locally sourced, truly clean electricity is always preferred, however some cities are
using other means to reach clean energy targets.
the City of palo alto achieved carbon neutrality this year by relying on renewable
energy credits for a large share of purchases for at least the early transitional years.
Santa Barbara is accelerating its own clean energy plans, embarking on a “fossil
free by ‘33” campaign that includes permitting a 100 mW wind farm in the county
and ordinances requiring all new or remodeled buildings to be carbon neutral. on
the other side of the world, Copenhagen is promoting itself as a “living lab” for
clean energy solutions in order to increase energy efficiency and renewable energy
supply to support its target for carbon neutrality by 2025. By 2012, the danish
capital achieved 25% carbon reductions below 1990 levels, and it has a 50-point
strategy in place to achieve carbon neutrality. elsewhere, Sydney, australia released
a master plan in 2013 to achieve 100% renewable energy for electricity, heating,
and cooling by 2030, relying on a diversified energy portfolio and development of
decentralized generation sources.
16
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
02: why aCCelerate fort
CollinS' Climate goalS?
WHy Will fOrt cOlliNS SuccEED?
the biggest challenges fort Collins faces to meeting this
accelerated goal are not technical. Success depends largely
on the community’s ability to drive down costs, quickly ramp
up to landmark levels of community adoption of efficiency and
renewables, create and deliver attractive financing mechanisms,
and foster effective collaboration between public and private
stakeholders. the following unique characteristics put fort Collins in
a position of strength:
• Significant head start from past successes and existing
programs, such as participation in the global reporting
initiative, local business commitment and partnership through
ClimateWise, the recent renewable and distributed System
integration (rdSi) project, advanced metering infrastructure
(ami) rollout, on-bill financing, and existing pedestrian- and
bicycle-friendly infrastructure.
• Momentum gained from the ongoing FortZED projects, which
aim to transform the downtown area of fort Collins and the main
campus of Colorado State University into a net-zero energy
district. fortZed will put fort Collins on a steep learning curve
to coordinate unprecedented levels of customer engagement
in energy issues, allowing fort Collins to test and extrapolate
programs from this microcosm of 7,200+ stakeholders to the
larger community.
• Benefits from being a municipally-owned electric utility with a
collaborative power supply partner, such as greater control of
energy decisions, established partnerships in the community,
and access to low-cost capital and creative financing.
• A highly engaged community with prominent leaders in
energy research and awareness (Colorado State University,
new Belgium Brewery, Woodward, Spirae and others)
whose reputational standing in the community and focus on
sustainable initiatives make them effective drivers of change.
Colorado State University alone accounts for more than a fifth
of fort Collins’ population, and represents a valuable source of
cutting edge technical research to help speed
fort Collins’ energy transformation.
17
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Figure 1: Fort Collins' 2012 energy profile, in terms of emissions, primary fuels, intermediary fuels, and end uses.
0 5,500,000 11,000,000 16,500,000 22,000,000
2012 Emissions
Primary
Fuels
Intermediary
Fuels
End Uses
Gigajoules
RENEWABLES
INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
PETROLEUM
Source: “FC GHG and RE Data 2005-2012.xls”; City of Fort Collins, 2012. "Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Quality Management Plan
2005-2011," City of Fort Collins, Environmental Services, October 2012. Available at http://www.fcgov.com/climateprotection/FC GHG Quality Management Plan
2012 fOrt cOlliNS ENErgy PrOfilE
iN tHiS rEPOrt
the way in which energy is used ultimately determines how the
community can reduce its carbon emissions and by how much;
thus the remainder of this document is organized accordingly.
in the buildings chapter, we explore the full potential for energy
efficiency based both on how people use energy within buildings
and on how an integrated, whole system view can expand that
potential. in the electricity chapter, we identify the portfolio of
central and distributed technologies that can replace fossil fuel
electricity supply, and the key strategies needed to enable them. in
the transportation chapter, we assess both the potential to reduce
the need for fossil-fueled transportation and the options available
to replace it with alternative modes and drivetrains. finally, in
the implications and moving forward chapters, we highlight the
implications of achieving an accelerated climate goal and suggest
key actions the City and community must take to put itself on a path
toward a clean energy future.
WHErE iS fOrt cOlliNS StartiNg?
ninety-five percent of the energy consumed by fort Collins’ today
is sourced from fossil fuels: coal, oil, and natural gas. While coal
accounts for only 20% of fort Collins’ energy consumption, it is
responsible for 99.5% of its electricity Co2 emissions and 55%
of its overall Co2 emissions. all of fort Collins’ coal consumption
and 0.5% of its natural gas consumption is used to produce
electricity; the remaining natural gas is used for heating, cooking,
and industrial process heat; and virtually all petroleum is used to
produce transportation fuels. as far as end uses, 26% of total energy
fuels fort Collins’ residences; 27% its commercial buildings, 11% its
industrial processes; and 36% its transportation fleet.
02: why aCCelerate fort
CollinS' Climate goalS?
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
eS 03
efficient
buildings
19
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
effiCient BUildingS
By 2030, aCCElERatioN Could REduCE
ENERGy uSE iN BuildiNGS By 31% CompaREd
to BuSiNESS-aS-uSual, SaviNG thE
CommuNity $140 millioN.
fort Collins is home to over 65,000 buildings powered by
electricity and natural gas. Consider all the equipment we use to
light, heat, and cool our homes and workplaces. add to that the
computers and appliances we plug in to enable our modern lives.
Buildings are responsible for 85% of the community’s electricity
consumption and 82% of its natural gas use, costing about $150
million annually and making them the number one contributor to
fort Collins’ Co2 emissions.
not only is building energy demand significant today, it is expected
to increase as fort Collins grows. the community’s near term
projected population growth is 1.9% per year—almost three times
the national average.⁵ at this rate, business-as-usual efficiency
improvements would not be sufficient to curtail energy growth.
Without additional intervention, building energy demand could
increase as much as 19% by 2030 from today’s consumption levels,
increasing Co2 emissions by 24%.
the good news is that it’s possible for fort Collins’ buildings to use
much less energy while providing the same or better functionality.
Building occupants aren’t interested in consuming energy per
se; they’re interested in the services provided by energy, such as
lighting, heating, cooling, and entertainment. By using more efficient
technologies and intelligent, whole-system design, buildings can do
more with less, eliminating wasted energy while bringing occupants
greater comfort, productivity, and health with less expense.
How much better fort Collins’ buildings perform by 2030 depends
on the level and type of intervention carried out by the City, owners,
occupants, and other stakeholders. our analysis suggests an
estimated 18.6% of fort Collins’ total building energy use could be
reduced from business as usual through the widespread adoption
of conventional, cost-effective, efficient technologies. an additional
5.7% (on average, but up to 12% in some building types) could be
achieved through behavioral and smart control strategies that
optimize when and how occupants use energy. another 6.8%
savings can be achieved through integrative designs that coordinate
deep energy saving retrofits with planned renovations or new
construction, and through deep engagement with industrial energy
users. this brings total reductions from efficiency alone to 31% from
business as usual. on top of that, fuel switching for building heating
(from natural gas to electricity) could save an additional 8%, bringing
total potential reductions in buildings by 2030 to 39% from business
as usual.
While fort Collins’ current retail electricity and natural gas prices
are low compared to national averages, most efficiency measures
are even cheaper. initial analysis indicates that reducing total
building energy use by 31% through efficiency could yield the
community a net benefit of $140 million in avoided utility bills
between now and 2030.
⁵ “CommUnity greenhoUSe gaS emiSSionS inventory QUality management plan:
yearS 2005 throUgh 2011 and 2020 foreCaSt,” City of fort CollinS,
environmental ServiCeS, oCtoBer 2012, p. 38.
03: effiCient BUildingS
20
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
dramatic efficiency savings will benefit fort Collins’ future in
significant ways besides and beyond energy cost savings. first,
efficiency doesn’t just reduce the environmental impact of the
buildings sector, it also speeds the transformation of the entire
electricity supply system. the more fort Collins can reduce its
energy demand, the smaller the investment required to meet the
community’s changing energy supply needs. Second, efficiency is
by nature local, requiring onsite skills and labor. at scale, efficiency
contributes both directly and indirectly to demand for local service
providers and practitioners. third, well-designed, efficient buildings
can be healthier and more comfortable than their conventional
counterparts, providing better spaces in which to live and work.⁶
finally, efficiency is fort Collins’ cleanest resource, since the
resource that produces the least emissions is the energy that isn’t
used at all.
⁶ katS, g. 2010. “greening oUr BUilt world: CoStS, BenefitS, and StrategieS.”
iSland preSS, inC.: waShington dC.
Figure 1: this building energy efficiency potential estimate for Fort Collins is based on a detailed, national-level analysis conducted by Rocky mountain institute for Reinventing Fire,
which draws from analysis
by National academies and lawrence Berkeley National laboratory. potential savings from industrial process loads, while not strictly addressing building end use, are also included in
this potential since they
represent a considerable opportunity and also frequently occur in or around buildings.
03: effiCient BUildingS
2012 fOrt cOlliNS BuilDiNgS ENErgy EfficiENcy POtENtial
21
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
uNDErStaNDiNg tHE full POtENtial
By adapting national findings around technical and economic
efficiency potentials to fort Collins’ unique building stock, we can
get a sense of the full potential for efficiency in fort Collins.
Part 1: An estimated 18.6% of energy could be saved from
business-as-usual by 2030, through the widespread adoption
of conventional efficient technologies.
a significant amount of savings could be achieved simply through
replacing existing equipment in buildings with efficient technologies
that are currently available and already employed throughout
the nation. these technologies—ranging from efficient lighting to
insulation—address all the ways people use energy in residences
and commercial buildings, such as cooling, heating, lighting,
cooking, refrigeration, and plug loads. the cost of conserved energy
(CCe) for the conventional efficiency technologies analyzed in
this study is, on average, 4.4 cents/kWh cheaper than the price of
energy for electricity-saving measures, and $2.33/mmBtu cheaper
for natural gas-saving measures. of the 61 end uses we investigated,
60 were cheaper than respective electricity and natural gas retail
rates in fort Collins.
• Electricity
all conventional electricity efficiency measures are cost-
effective in fort Collins today. accessing this full potential
would be equivalent to reducing total building electricity use
in fort Collins by 18.6% relative to business as usual.
• Natural Gas
all conventional natural gas efficiency measures, with the
exception of some for residential water heating, are cost-
effective today in fort Collins. if retail gas prices increased by
$2/mmBtu for the residential sector, cumulative measures for
this end use, too, would be cost-effective.
Part 2: Targeting people, not just technology, can capture
another 5.7% savings (on average, but up to 12% in some
building types) in residential and commercial buildings.
after replacing building components with more efficient
technologies, an additional 5.7% reduction in energy demand can
be achieved cost-effectively by using smart controls and other
strategies to encourage changes in how people operate and
interact with buildings. after all, buildings don’t use energy, people
do. measures in this category borrow from the latest in behavioral
science about why and how people actually make decisions.
Strategies range from providing real-time feedback on energy use
to stirring competition and inciting neighborhood-scale change by
letting people know how much energy they are using compared to
Figure 2: the average CCE for all conventional efficiency measures, by end use, is significantly less
than the retail rate for both natural gas and electricity in all sectors.
rEtail ratE fOr ElEctricity aND Natural gaS
vs. cOSt Of cONSErvED ENErgy
03: effiCient BUildingS
22
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
⁷ "eleCtriCity impaCt” Chart, opower weBSite, aCCeSSed on 8/19/13. http://opower.Com/
UtilitieS/reSUltS/av
their neighbors. as just one example, opower works with utilities
nationally to provide customers with information about how their
energy use compares to others in their neighborhood, and that
information alone has produced a steady state savings of 1.5–3.5%.⁷
fort Collins was one of the first ten utilities served by opower, and
is now in the 4th year of this program. the first three-year savings for
customers was 2.5%.
tactics like these aren’t geared towards occupant sacrifice in terms
of service, comfort, or convenience. rather, they seek to raise
awareness of, and curtail, wasteful habits that lead to unintended
energy consumption, such as leaving the heat on at times when
the home is unoccupied. Smart controls can cut energy use without
changing individual occupant behavior, for example by automatically
setting back thermostats or shutting off equipment during off-
hours at work. the nest smart thermostat learns and adapts to a
homeowner’s behavior, automatically adjusting the temperature to
keep the home comfortable when occupied, and saving money and
energy when not.
in a similar fashion, fort Collins’ water use dropped 25%
during and immediately after the severe drought in 2002. the
community has adopted more of an ethic of water conservation,
supported by education, metering, and water rates such that
water use has not bounced back to pre-drought levels even when
water is more plentiful.
Part 3: Integrative designs that time deep energy-saving
interventions with planned renovations and new construction could
capture another 4.9% savings relative to business-as-usual.
efficiency improvements can have cascading energy benefits
that aren’t typically recognized when measures are considered
incrementally, as they almost always are. for example, a lighting
retrofit from incandescent to compact fluorescent lamps (Cfls) or
halogen reflectors directly reduces lighting loads in a building. But it
also reduces the amount of heat generated by the lighting system,
which in turn reduces demands on the building’s cooling system.
grouping individual measures together to capture these cascading,
or “integrative,” benefits can often uncover far greater energy
savings per dollar invested than possible through an incremental,
measure-by-measure approach. integrative design can be so
effective that, in some cases, buildings can achieve high enough
levels of efficiency to downsize equipment or entire building
systems, resulting in potentially significant reduced or avoided
capital costs.
fort Collins has existing as well as emerging programs to encourage
and assist in integrative design practices for commercial new
builds and existing buildings; increased adoption of these will be
critical for adopting beyond-conventional savings. for example,
fort Collins’ forecasted population growth will lead to construction
of new buildings over the coming decades. those new buildings
present an important opportunity to “get it right the first time” from
an energy efficiency perspective, and integrative design can be an
important tool. additionally, the majority of today’s buildings will
still be standing in 2030 and even in 2050. integrative design can
be employed in these buildings as well, through what is commonly
known as a deep retrofit.
03: effiCient BUildingS
23
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
deep retrofits, which are sometimes thought to be too expensive by
building owners, can become much more cost-effective when timed
to coincide with ongoing capital improvement events in a building’s
lifecycle. for example, high-performance windows and led lighting,
expensive when planned as isolated efficiency events, can become
cost-effective if together they reduce cooling loads enough to
lessen or avoid the cost of an upcoming chiller replacement. in
fort Collins, coinciding deep retrofits with building repositioning
(which is becoming increasingly common throughout local infill
developments) could help owners access greater, cost-effective
energy savings.
in early 2013, the new Buildings institute documented 50 case
studies of retrofit projects across the nation that save an average of
40% relative to existing energy use or local codes.⁸ for example,
the Johnson Braund design firm purchased a two-story office
building built in Washington in 1984 with heating, cooling, and
ventilating equipment that was nearing the end of its useful life.
instead of simply completing one-for-one equipment replacements,
the firm implemented multiple efficiency measures to optimize the
building energy performance. the building now operates in the 6th
percentile for its building type and uses 47% less energy than a
comparable building.
figure 1 includes the full potential for energy reductions from
employing integrative design practices; we estimate that only 30% of
this potential is achieved as part of the accelerated scenario, resulting
in the targeted 4.9% savings through this strategy.
Part 4: Deep engagements with industrial energy users could cap-
ture another 1.9% savings, bringing total potential reduction from
efficiency to 31%.
potential savings from industrial process loads, while not strictly
addressing building end use, are also included in this potential
since they represent a considerable opportunity and also frequently
occur in or around buildings. Cost-effectively addressing industrial
processes, especially those driven by natural gas, requires tailored
strategies for individual manufacturers and users, many with unique
loads and equipment. While there are hundreds of industrial energy
users within fort Collins, only a very small number account for
the majority of industrial energy use. direct engagements with
these users to target deep savings, including for process loads,
could result in additional savings. industrial efficiency efforts have
historically suffered from siloed design efforts. Convening experts
from multiple disciplines and industries to tackle related problems
across fort Collins’ large commercial and industrial energy users
could kick-start an effective solution.
figure 1 illustrates the full potential for energy reductions from
employing deep engagement practices; we estimate that 50% of
this potential is achieved as part of the accelerated goal, resulting in
the targeted 1.9% savings through this strategy.
⁸ a fUll CatalogUe of the StUdieS Can Be foUnd in the reSearCh liBrary at
www.greenBUildingfC.Com
03: effiCient BUildingS
Part 5: Fuel switching for building heating, from natural gas to
electricity, could save another 7.8%. This brings total potential sav-
ings to 39% from business-as-usual.
for many buildings in fort Collins, building heating and domestic
hot water is fueled by natural gas. Viable alternatives exist today,
including solar hot water, ground source heat pumps, and air source
heat pumps. in fact, implementing these technologies is a common
practice in new builds and retrofits today. the challenge for fort
Collins will be to help individual buildings right-time implementation
to make installation more cost-effective, and to coordinate a high
level of adoption at a fast pace.
fuel switching is a key lever for meeting aggressive climate target
goals, and has been and continues to be incorporated into strategic
long term energy plans for cities and regions around the world. for
example, the european Climate foundation’s roadmap 2050 report,
which lays out a pathway to 80% carbon reductions and provides
policy guidance for the next 5 to 10 years to european leaders,
addresses fuel switching as a viable and necessary strategy.9 in this
study we consider the potential of energy and carbon savings from
switching from gas-powered heating to electric heat pumps.
24
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
9 “roadmap 2050: a praCtiCal gUide to a proSperoUS low-CarBon eUrope,” eUropean Climate foUndation, 2010. http://www.roadmap2050.eU/attaChmentS/fileS/volUme1_fUllreport_
preSSpaCk.pdf
10 "vermont town energy USage and SavingS" workSheet, effiCienCy vermont weBSite, aCCeSSed on 8/15/13. http://www.effiCienCyvermont.Com/aBoUt_US/energy_
initiativeS/vt_town_energy.aSpx
11 “on a riSing tide: the fUtUre of U.S. Utility CUStomer-fUnded energy effiCienCy programS.” CharleS goldman et al., lawrenCe Berkeley national laBoratory, 2012, p3.
12 “California energy demand foreCaSt 2010–2020: Staff draft foreCaSt,” California energy CommiSSion, JUne 2009. http://www.energy.Ca.gov/2009pUBliCationS/CeC-200-2009-
012/CeC-200-2009-012-Sd.pdf
acHiEviNg aN EquivalENt Of 2.4% aNNual EfficiENcy SaviNgS
iN ElEctricity
to fully capture the efficiency potential in electricity, the community would need to
achieve an equivalent of 2.4% electricity efficiency savings improvements annually
between now and 2030. fort Collins currently targets 1.5% (met in 2012) annual efficiency
savings, already putting it among the highest tier of efficiency targets in the nation.
in comparison, efficiency Vermont, one of the best-in-class electricity efficiency
programs in the nation, has achieved a maximum electricity savings of 3.1% of retail
sales in a single year, and 1.8% of retail sales or greater each year since 2007.10
achieving a sustained 2.4% savings per year is unprecedented but achievable. to
date, five states in the U.S. (California, Connecticut, massachusetts, rhode island, and
Washington) require utilities to pursue all cost-effective efficiency measures.11 and it
is important to note that efficiency savings numbers reported by utilities around the
country may be underestimating the full amount of efficiency being achieved, since
they rarely reflect efficiency driven by codes and standards or “naturally occurring”
efficiency that people perform absent a utility incentive or mandate. for example,
California’s energy demand forecast 2010-2020 shows a cumulative 2.8% savings
from utility and public agency programs over the period, a 7.7% savings from codes
and standards, and a 3.7% savings from naturally occurring efficiency in 2008.12
03: effiCient BUildingS
25
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
13 2012 energy effiCienCy indiCator, gloBal reSUltS, JUne 2012, inStitUte for BUilding effiCienCy, JohnSon ControlS.
14 over a doZen StUdieS provide evidenCe SUggeSting a 3 to 6 % rent premiUm and 10% or more SaleS priCe premiUm (See CodeS 15.71 and 15.72 of green BUilding finanCe ConSortiUm re-
SearCh liBrary, www.greenBUildingfC.Com)
15 new BUildingS inStitUte, 2011. eleven CaSe StUdieS from: a SearCh for deep energy SavingS in exiSting BUildingS. http://newBUildingS.org/proJeCt-profileS-SearCh-deep-energy-
SavingS ¹⁵ miller, pogUe, goUgh, & daviS, green BUildingS and prodUCtivity, JoUrnal of SUStainaBle real eState, no. 1-2009. aSSUmeS average of 250 SQUare feet per worker and aCtUal
average Salary of tenantS of $106,644.
16 miller, pogUe, goUgh, & daviS, green BUildingS and prodUCtivity, JoUrnal of SUStainaBle real eState, no. 1-2009. aSSUmeS average of 250 SQUare feet per worker and aCtUal aver-
age Salary of tenantS of $106,644.
cOuNtiNg BENEfitS BEyOND ENErgy cOSt SaviNgS
numerous studies and surveys show that, compared to their average market
counterparts, energy-efficient green buildings boast reduced absenteeism, better
employee health, higher occupancy rates, increased sales prices, increased
productivity, higher property values, and decreased risk. today, most owners and
investors for existing buildings ignore the full range of potential value, instead basing
their retrofit decisions on energy costs alone, with an average allowable payback
period of only 3.4 years.13 However, because the cost of energy is on average
about one-tenth the cost of rent or mortgage and about one-hundredth the cost of
employee-occupants, energy costs are just a small piece of the affected value when a
building is upgraded.
leading-edge building owners are beginning to shift how they value energy
performance to align efficiency projects with core priorities for business. past and
emerging studies are helping to quantify the amount of value beyond energy cost
savings, suggesting rent premiums of 3 to 6%, occupancy premiums up to 10%, and
sales price premiums of 10% or more for investor owned leed certified or energy Star
office buildings.14 for example, the investor-owner of the Beardmore building in priest
river, idaho not only enjoys the satisfaction of owning a highly sustainable property
but also reaps the bottom-line benefit of increased tenant attraction, which in
combination with the historic qualities of the building enables him to charge rent 35%
above the local average (more than 10 times the value of the energy cost savings).15
Case studies identified years ago in natural Capitalism show a 6 to 16% gain in labor
productivity from better thermal comfort, visibility, and quiet. a study based on a
survey of 534 tenants in 154 office buildings in 2009 found that tenants in leed
or energy Star buildings reported, on average, 2.88 fewer sick days per year per
person, resulting in average bottom-line cost savings of $1,228 per worker or $4.91
per square foot.16
mOviNg tOWarDS imPlEmENtatiON
even though the value proposition for increased energy efficiency
in buildings is compelling, there are challenges to implementation
at scale. only a small portion of the cost-effective energy efficiency
potential in the U.S. has been captured. So what is slowing adoption?
fort Collins faces a number of challenges—some common
to other municipalities and utilities and some specific to fort
Collins—with a few that rise to the top. though some utilities have
piloted successful programs that address one or more of these
challenges, no community or utility has addressed all these barriers
comprehensively. fort Collins has the opportunity to lead by
example, in some cases through applying best practices to date,
in other cases developing a best practice required to achieve such
aggressive levels of efficiency savings quickly.
Challenge 1: People have little awareness of energy issues and
have competing priorities.
Beyond cost, financing, and information, efficiency is simply not a
priority, or is too much of a hassle, for many people. Very little is
possible without good data, yet there is a surprising lack of good
information available to service providers and customers throughout
the U.S. electricity sector.
03: effiCient BUildingS
26
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Strategy: Implement new approaches to increase motivation
and enthusiasm, and provide relevant, timely, and compelling
information.
a prerequisite for increasing motivation is to provide education,
transparent information, and normative messaging to build a
case for action. a wide range of
useful information can help building owners and occupants
alike, including: knowing exactly how much energy is being
used by what end use at any given time, understanding
how electricity prices change over the course of a day, the
efficiency performance of a home before it is purchased,
information about new technologies that could save more
energy at less cost, and understanding how individual action
contributes to community and societal goals.
in fort Collins, the utility has begun to build this foundation
by rolling out advanced meters that are needed to gather and
communicate information and by promoting home energy
audits to identify what homeowners can do to improve
efficiency. examples of additional strategies the City could take
include mandating energy audits at times of sale, making
relevant non-confidential customer data available to service
providers to help target solutions, leveraging its smart grid
investments to provide time-of-use data and pricing to
customers, providing user-friendly reporting metrics, enabling
smartphone real-time monitoring and feedback, and labeling
of building energy performance.
03: effiCient BUildingS
Building on that foundation, one of—if not the—most significant
actions fort Collins can take is to develop approaches to
support increased adoption of efficiency by making efficiency
and conservation part of the community’s culture. examples of
potential strategies include developing a community organizer
approach, direct installations for customers, utilizing innovative
approaches that make efficiency savings fashionable and a
point of pride, increasing codes/standards, and gamification
and neighborhood competition for energy savings and solar
pV penetration. furthermore, supporting the development of a
residential energy services company (eSCo) model could help
drive participation by simplifying the time and effort required
by an individual homeowner.
Challenge 2: Fort Collins has a high percentage of historically
hard-to-reach customers, yet a need to scale efficiency quickly.
there is no one-size-fits-all answer for efficiency. While not unique
to fort Collins, the community has a highly fragmented building
population making a rapid, deep efficiency roll out difficult. for
example, there are a high percentage of residential rental properties
with a high churn rate, a high percentage of residential customers
living in multi-family buildings, and a diverse small commercial
sector. achieving the target efficiency improvement means that the
community cannot only target “low hanging fruit,” or the largest
customers, but must instead target greater adoption of both
individual, incremental measures, and deeper, tailored approaches.
27
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Strategy: Tailor and phase programs to specific leverage
points in individual market segments.
fort Collins Utilities has already increased annual efficiency
savings from negligible levels a few years ago to 1.5% today,
in part, by tailoring programs to specific targets. recognizing
the fragmented nature of the building population, the City
should continue down this path by segmenting the market,
aided by data newly available from its advanced meter rollout,
and identifying the unique issues and leverage points in each
segment. this approach will allow efficiency programs to most
effectively drive scale in each segment.
While the majority of fort Collins’ existing efficiency programs
are targeted at individual end-uses or technologies (for
example, rebates for more efficient light bulbs), the community
can achieve greater savings by understanding the total energy
use profiles of specific customers and pursuing comprehensive
energy savings. often these “deep” savings can be most
cost-effectively achieved when timed with a planned retrofit
or system replacement. the City should also consider how to
phase efficiency programs to be timed with expected capital
expenditures in individual buildings (e.g. building permits,
change of use, time of sale).
examples of innovative, tailored approaches already being
piloted by the City include: targeting efficiency programs for
multi-family buildings that impact a large number of customers
through fewer select projects, and developing a deep retrofit
program that rewards whole-system savings.¹⁷
Challenge 3: There are high up-front costs and misaligned
economic incentives.
efficient technologies, like most renewable technologies, require an
up-front capital expenditure to accrue savings later. that
up-front cost can be a significant hurdle for some people, especially
those with other priorities and limited capital.
Because efficiency requires a capital expenditure but results in
operational cost savings, there is a misaligned incentive between
owner and tenants in both residential rental properties and leased
commercial properties. the owner is responsible for capital
upgrades, but tends to invest in the lowest cost technology rather
than the most efficient, since she doesn’t pay the utility bills. the
tenant bears the burden of high utility bills each month, but has little
incentive to invest capital in a rental property. and though many
efficiency measures are cost-effective, savings from an individual
measure may only amount to a few dollars per month. the potential
aggregate financial savings from efficiency are significant from a
community perspective; from an individual perspective, they may
not be.
¹⁷ for example, See “going deeper: a new approaCh for enCoUraging retrofitS,”
kelly Smith and mathiaS Bell, inStitUte for BUilding effiCienCy (JCi) and roCky
moUntain inStitUte, SeptemBer 2011. http://www.inStitUteBe.Com/inStitUteBe/
media/liBrary/reSoUrCeS/exiSting%20BUilding%20retrofitS/iSSUe_Brief_deep_pro-
gramS_for_retrofitS.pdf
03: effiCient BUildingS
28
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Strategy: Provide new solutions to economic, financing, and
misalignment issues.
fort Collins Utilities has already begun to address these issues
by providing efficiency incentives and an on-bill financing
program. there are many other creative strategies that could
be incorporated, including:
• address the owner-tenant split incentive by driving increased
adoption of programs that provide rebates directly to the
property owner rather than the tenant, adopting an energy code
for rental housing, or by developing financing options that offer a
meter-based approach.
• make investment more attractive to investors by aggregating
small projects for scale, and adequately addressing term,
interest rates, and transferability.
• reassess and make explicit an approach for effectively
setting incentives. incentives should be optimized within the
boundaries of a portfolio cost of conserved energy (CCe)
approach, rather than a per measure approach.
• leverage a combination of strategies by introducing new
rate structures or incentive programs that encourage both
efficiency and solar pV while generating the revenues fort
Collins Utilities needs to maintain financial stability. provide
access to low-cost financing through interest rate buy downs or
loan loss reserves and incentives, while testing novel program
designs and customer engagement strategies, some of which
are described above.
Challenge 4: Fort Collins is small and not solely responsible for its
energy system.
fort Collins is small compared to many other cities and to other
utilities that cover whole regions, so it is at a disadvantage in
achieving economies of scale through strategies that work for
larger utilities. this affects purchasing power, outreach and
communications, and program implementation capabilities. further,
Xcel energy rather than fort Collins Utilities supplies natural gas for
heating, cooking, and industrial process, so the City has less direct
control over natural gas efficiency programs. finally, the value of
efficiency (and other distributed resources) is rarely accounted for in
current practices for building valuation and appraisals, a constraint
that needs to be tackled at the industry level.
Strategy: Build partnerships and coalitions to drive economies
of scale in cost and in best practices.
expand cooperative relationships with platte river and other
member cities to build greater economies of scale.
in doing so, and in conjunction with Xcel energy, plan for data
sharing and develop complementary program rules. Build
stronger connections with other public utilities and experts
around the country to regularly share efficiency
and industry best practices and to strengthen partnerships
with national retailers. establish fort Collins as a test bed for
the best ideas, attracting both leading technologists
and financing.
03: effiCient BUildingS
29
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Challenge 5: There are not enough adequately trained
service providers.
achieving target levels of efficiency requires not only increased
demand for efficiency, but also adequate reserves of service
providers who can meet that demand. in fort Collins, contractor
expertise and comfort with efficient technologies and design
approaches remains a key hurdle.
Strategy: Create a highly trained, efficient workforce.
Work with contractors to ensure every renovation, remodel,
and new construction project aligns with community goals
for maximizing efficiency. fort Collins Utilities already has
a contractor training program for home energy upgrades.
potential strategies for growth include collaboration at the
local, regional (e.g. platte river cities), state (e.g. Colorado
energy office), and national (e.g. Building performance
institute) levels to align work standards, training, and
certification approaches. the City could also consider
partnering with energy Service Companies (eSCos) that
can provide trained workers at scale.
Summary
By 2030, fort Collins could reduce its building energy use by
31% from efficiency, creating a net benefit of $140 million for the
community in saved utility bills, spurring local job growth through
onsite construction and building projects, and transforming fort
Collins’ buildings into more comfortable and healthier places to
live and work. By fuel switching from natural gas to electricity
for building heating, fort Collins could save an additional 7.8% in
energy use.
the barriers to achieving dramatic energy savings are not
technical—all the requisite technologies are already in place, and
increasingly advanced building technologies continue to come to
market. rather, the challenge for fort Collins is to drive landmark
community adoption rates of existing and emerging efficiency
programs, and to grow the available contractor and provider base
to meet increased demand. Because buildings are responsible for
85% of fort Collins’ current electricity consumption, the benefits
of increased efficiency adoption is not isolated to the buildings
sector. the more fort Collins can shrink the demands of its
biggest user, the more viable a near-term future powered almost
entirely by renewables.
03: effiCient BUildingS
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
eS
image courtasy of new Belgium Brewery
04
renewable
electricity
supply
31
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
renewaBle eleCtriCity SUpply
fOrt cOlliNS caN acHiEvE a carBON NEutral ElEctricity
SyStEm By 2030.
energy efficiency can go a long way towards lowering fort Collins’
energy costs and carbon emissions—but it is not sufficient. By
integrating local and centralized renewables, the City can energize
local economic development and innovation and enable the
transition to cleaner and more secure energy options in other sectors
of the energy economy, notably transportation. today, electricity supply
accounts for 55% of fort Collins' Co₂ emissions, and from 2013 to
2030 will produce another 17 million metric tons, even after efficiency
measures. the majority of these carbon emissions originate from just
two coal-fired power plants that together provide 71% of fort Collins’
electricity.
fort Collins’ current dependence on coal-fired electricity exposes
the community to rising fuel prices (the energy information
administration projects a 30% or more increase in coal prices from
2013 to 2030), security and reliability risks, and detrimental air
pollution impacts to human health and the environment. Quickly
incorporating more renewable energy at scale is critical to fort
Collins’ accelerated clean energy strategy.
0
500
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
Generation - GWh
Business-As-Usual Scenario Accelerated Scenario
0
500
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
Generation - GWh
0
100
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Capacity - MW
0
100
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
200
300
Figure 2: the total present valued costs reflected
here include investment in the electricity system
and also in the building efficiency that influences
total electric load. while the accelerated case has
significantly higher capital costs, those costs are
largely offset by avoided fuel costs over time.
32
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
the portfolio of resources modeled in this study to drive an
accelerated carbon goal is shown in figure 1 (p. 31), compared
to business as usual, for both energy generation and capacity.
in fact, fort Collins is already taking initial steps along this
path. platte river power authority (platte river), the generation and
transmission utility that provides electricity to fort Collins Utilities,
is currently considering additional wind generation that would
roughly double the city’s wind supply, along with strategies it could
employ to facilitate integration of variable renewables (e.g., new
gas capacity). fort Collins Utilities is rolling out advanced meters
throughout the community, has established an on-bill financing
program, and is actively engaged in designing programs to support
rooftop solar financing and smart grid technology.
given the abundant renewable resources available in Colorado—
together with rapidly improving technology to access these
resources—fort Collins electricity supply could be made carbon
neutral by 2030. achieving this accelerated goal would require:
• meeting the building efficiency savings described in the
previous chapter;
• driving landmark adoption rates of distributed solar and
centralized wind, including enough to offset remaining natural
gas generation; and
• providing sufficient resource diversity and flexibility (e.g., flexible
natural gas generation, demand response, storage, etc.) to
ensure robust and resilient grid operations.
2013–2030 ElEctricity SyStEm PrESENt valuE cOSt
2013–2050 ElEctricity SyStEm PrESENt valuE cOSt
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
Figure 3: historical natural gas
price forecasts compared to actual.
thin blue lines depict the u.S.
Energy information administration's
expectation for future natural gas
prices, as projected in the Eia annual
Energy outlook (aEo), 1985-2012
(numbers following each line indicate
the year of publication for each aEo
report). the orange line depicts
the average gas price that actually
resulted in each year. the red line
shows the 2013 aEo mountain Region
gas forecast, the reference case
assumed for Fort Collins in this report.
33
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
initial analysis indicates that the total present valued cost of an
accelerated electricity scenario would be 19% higher compared to
business as usual. By 2050, accrued fuel savings, reduced exposure
to carbon costs, and continued efficiency savings could make the
present valued cost of the accelerated electricity scenario 15% less
expensive than business as usual.
a number of key assumptions shape the economics of this
transition. two of those—natural gas prices and the cost of carbon—
are consistent sources of debate and variability around the country
and therefore sensitivity-tested here. as seen in the chart below,
natural gas price forecasts are constantly changing, and actual
prices often deviate far from forecasted. Both the business-as-usual
and the accelerated scenarios above use the energy information
administration’s mountain region reference case for natural gas
prices. as a sensitivity, we modeled scenarios in which gas prices
are 30% higher or lower than the reference case in all years. given
that the accelerated case relies on less natural gas than business as
usual, higher gas prices would reduce the 2013–2030 present value
cost premium from 19% to 15%—supporting the case for accelerated
renewables deployment further. Should gas prices be lower than
the reference case—persisting at or below recent historic lows—the
Eia PrOjEctiONS vS. actual u.S. avEragE WEllHEaD Natural gaS PrOjEctiONS
85
86 87
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
34
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
present value cost of the accelerated case through 2030 would be
25% higher than business as usual. either way, the impact of natural
gas prices is limited given the low level of gas in both scenarios.
today, leaders like the state of California are already making energy
investment choices based in part on a carbon price, and the federal
government has recently issued a report that assesses the social
cost of carbon starting today. We use a conservative figure of a
“penny a pound” (approximately $22 per metric ton in 2012$) to
value carbon emissions in both scenarios, with no escalation to
2030. as a sensitivity, we tested a 2013 White House interagency
working group forecast that starts at $35/metric ton (2007$)¹⁸ in
2013. doing so would reduce the cost premium associated with the
accelerated scenario from 19% to 8%.
audaciously shifting fort Collins to a carbon neutral electricity system
would have important and compelling outcomes, including:
• lowering cumulative Co₂ electricity emissions by 30 million
metric tons between now and 2050 compared to business as
usual, the equivalent of removing 600,000 cars from the roads
for ten years.
• Supporting local economic development by (i) creating a
long-term market for rooftop solar pV (and energy efficiency)
requiring local skilled labor, and (ii) solidifying fort Collins’
reputation as an innovation and sustainability hub, attracting
businesses and high-quality jobs.
• Building off of fort Collins’ already notable electric reliability
to create a truly resilient electric system that will sustain the
community into the future.
DESigNiNg tHE ElEctricity POrtfOliO Of tOmOrrOW
Creating a Diverse Portfolio of Central and
Distributed Resources
achieving carbon neutrality in fort Collins’ electricity system is not
just a matter of driving investments into expanded renewable supply
from platte river. it is critical for centrally sourced renewables,
notably wind, to be scaled quickly. But local distributed resources
like commercial and residential rooftop pV, community pV, and even
local energy storage and electric vehicles are key enablers of a
more vibrant and thriving energy future for the community. Because
of rapidly falling costs of distributed renewable technologies,
increased personal awareness and demand, and innovative
financing and business models, it’s feasible today for distributed
pV and other sources to provide a large share of the renewable
resources required to achieve carbon neutrality. Creating a diverse
portfolio that includes both central and distributed resources will
diversify fort Collins’ supply, ensuring the community’s electricity
system will be not only cleaner but more secure and resilient than it
is today.
fort Collins has a variety of renewable supply options, each with
its own attributes and implications. Creating an optimized portfolio
requires an understanding of what each supply option offers in
terms of affordability, technical feasibility, reliability, environmental
performance, and public acceptability. the following table provides
a high-level qualitative comparison of various renewable options
including distributed and utility-scale solar photovoltaics (pV), wind,
¹⁸ "teChniCal SUpport doCUment: teChniCal Update of the SoCial CoSt of CarBon
for regUlatory impaCt analySiS - Under exeCUtive order 12866," interagenCy work-
ing groUp on SoCial CoSt of CarBon, United StateS government, may 2013. http://
www.whitehoUSe.gov/SiteS/defaUlt/fileS/omB/inforeg/SoCial_CoSt_of_CarBon_
35
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Figure 4: identifying the right mix of energy generation options requires weighing a variety of factors. in this qualitative comparison between different options, a completely black
circle signifies “high”
and a completely white circle signifies “low” qualitative ability to meet certain criteria.
important Criteria to ConSider for different energy
generation optionS
DiStriButED
Pv
Commercial &
residential rooftops,
community solar
utility Pv
Large-scale,
ground mount
solar arrays
WiND
Large-scale
windfarms
BiOmaSS
I.e. Wood,
pulp,
agricultural
residue for
cogeneration
cHP/ccHP
Combined heat
and power or
combined cooling
heat and power
Operations (Variable Output)
power from renewable resources can fluctuate with the weather, adding variability, and requires smart
integration to best shape output system needs.
Y Y Y N N
Siting (Distributed or Centralized)
Smaller, more modular energy resources can be installed by disparate actors outside of the purview of centrally
coordinated resource planning.
D C C C/D D
Potential to Provide Value Beyond Energy Generation
Value beyond energy generation can include benefits to grid operations and total system efficiency. for
example, distributed resources can reduce line losses, defer capacity investments, and minimize land impacts.
renewable resources can act as a hedge against volatile natural gas prices. Combined heat and power
increases efficiency by utilizing waste heat.
Potential for Cost Reduction
different technologies are expected to see on-going cost reductions to a greater or lesser extent. for example,
scale and technology development continues to drive rapid solar cost reductions, whereas wind is a more
mature technology and costs are expected to decline less rapidly.
Potential to Support Local Economic Development
different forms of energy generation can bring local jobs, attract outside investment, and further the city’s standing
as a beacon of innovation. for example, local resources like distributed pV may foster a local base of knowledge
and jobs associated with installation, operations, maintenance, and management, whereas centralized resources
may not to the same extent.
Potential for Improved Environmental Performance, Beyond CO2 Emissions
environmental impacts of energy generation can extend beyond emissions to health impacts, degradation in
land use, erosion, soil, water, and wildlife.
and biomass. Combined heat and power (CHp), although generally
natural-gas fueled, is included as well because of its high efficiency
and potential to be fueled by renewable sources such as biomass.
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
36
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
affOrDaBility
fort Collins Utilities provides its customers with very low cost
power—in 2012, the utility’s residential customers paid average
monthly bills that were lower than 46 of Colorado’s 53 electric
utilities and 40% lower than the national average. that sets a high
bar for renewables to compete on cost. the good news is that
renewables’ fuel is free, their energy price is locked in for decades,
and their capital costs are either already low or falling quickly. the
following chart shows a levelized cost comparison between utility-
scale resources, reflecting both current and forecasted costs.
in 2011, rocky mountain institute forecasted that the levelized costs
of utility-scale solar pV would decline 13% to 19 cents/kWh by 2015,
yet actual installed projects in 2013 have already achieved and
surpassed that forecast. in June, 2013, the City of palo alto signed
a contract for 80 mW of utility-scale solar pV at a levelized cost of
just 6.9 cents/kWh (including the federal investment tax Credit).19
recent wind projects in the mountain West report prices below 4.0
cents/kWh.20
distributed solar pV has a similar story, with reported installed
prices having fallen 6%–7% per year from 1998 to 2011.21 along
with the advent of solar financing models that, for example, allow
customers to put solar on their roof for zero dollars down, this has
resulted in a rapidly accelerating distributed solar market. in fort
Collins, residential rooftop solar pV now costs approximately 12
cents/kWh for a homeowner-owned system, including federal, state,
and local incentives. these costs are approaching fort Collins’
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.5
0
2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
2013 $/kWh
Source: Q1 2013 LCOE Ranges, Bloomberg New Energy Finance, 2013; Annual Energy Outlook 2011, Energy
Information Administration, 2011; "Reinventing Fire: BOLD BUSINESS SOLUTIONS FOR THE NEW ENERGY
ERA," Amory Lovins and Rocky Mountain Institute, White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green, 2011.
Year of Installation
Biomass Incineration Wind
Utility PV
New Coal Hydropower
Combined Cycle Natural Gas
19 weSoff, eriC. "palo alto goeS Solar, 80 megawattS at 6.9 CentS per kilowatt-hoUr". greenteChmedia. http://www.greenteChmedia.Com/artiCleS/read/palo-alto-Ca-goeS-Solar-
Cheaply-80-megawattS-at-6.9-CentS-per-kilowatt-ho
20 lBnl. 2012 wind teChnologieS market report. aUgUSt 2013. http://newSCenter.lBl.gov/newS-releaSeS/2013/08/06/new-StUdy-findS-that-the-priCe-of-wind-energy-in-the-United-
StateS-iS-near-an-all-time-low/
21 wiSer et al. traCking the SUn vi. lBnl. JUly 2013.
Figure 5: levelized Cost of Electricity (lCoE): the renewable costs shown exclude tax credits and
similar subsidies. Centralized sources of renewable electricity offer attractive pricing in the near
term. utility pv becomes competitive with new coal around 2030 and joins the ranks of the most
cost-effective sources of non-hydro renewable electricity over a longer time horizon. distributed
resources such as rooftop and community pv are not shown because they do not compete in the
same space.
WHOlESalE lEvElizED cOSt Of ElEctricity (lcOE)
cOmPariSON
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
37
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
average residential rate of 8.6 cents/kWh, with some systems
already reporting lower costs and continued cost reductions likely
in the next few years. more importantly, by developing a city-wide
strategy to deploy solar pV at scale, even greater reductions in
cost can be achieved, especially in so-called “soft costs” of solar
systems including costs of finance, customer acquisition, permitting,
inspection, and interconnection.
flExiBility
Beyond cost, any future electricity system scenario must also be
able to provide power at least as reliably as fort Collins’ current
system. Because electricity cannot be easily or cheaply stored,
utilities must maintain a delicate balance of supply and demand at
each moment to keep the lights on. this becomes more difficult with
the addition of variable renewable resources that produce power
when the sun shines or when the wind blows, not when the utility
necessarily wants it. therefore, a critical part of an electricity system
transformation in fort Collins is the addition of flexibility resources—
devices or resources whose output can be adjusted to match
variability produced by the combination of load and renewables.
Beyond platte river’s existing natural gas peaking plants and any
new combined cycle natural gas capacity that could be developed,
local sources of flexibility that may be available in fort Collins
include demand response (already available in fort Collins in limited
quantities), customer-sited thermal or electrical storage, and electric
vehicles (eVs), as well as the grid intelligence needed to access
those resources.
demand response—the ability to modulate when energy is
demanded, not just when it is supplied—has the potential to provide
a significant source of flexibility to fort Collins. fort Collins Utilities’
recent doe-funded renewable and distributed Systems integration
(rdSi) project demonstrated the capability of a portfolio of demand-
and supply-resources, including demand response, to reduce peak
demands on a distribution circuit by 20%. elsewhere in the country,
demand response is now allowed to bid into wholesale markets,
providing a significant portion of new capacity needs.
aggressive adoption of electric vehicles as discussed in this report’s
transportation chapter could result in electrification of up to 30% of
fort Collins’ light duty vehicle transportation fleet by 2030 (about
20,000 vehicles). if unmanaged, this sizable fleet could present
challenges for the grid when large numbers of electric vehicle owners
plug in their cars after work, rapidly driving up fort Collins’ peak
demand and therefore costs. But actively managed, electric vehicles
can be staged to manage peak impacts and potentially even provide
services back to the grid.
another critical lever in enabling a more optimized, localized
electricity system is grid intelligence—smart grid technologies that
enable two-way communication between the utility and customers,
supporting real-time information and signals as well as more
effective control and coordination of distributed resources. Smart
meters and smart grid infrastructure form the foundation for more
distributed grid operations and ultimately a more granular grid,
enabling the kind of results fort Collins has tested with its rdSi
project and other on-going initiatives.
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
38
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
mOviNg tOWarD imPlEmENtatiON
this analysis shows that eliminating carbon emissions from fort
Collins’ electricity system by 2030 can be affordable, but that does
not mean it will be easy. Very few communities in the country have
set such ambitious goals, and successfully overcoming inherent
challenges would put fort Collins among
an elite group of leaders.
Challenge 1: Success requires driving unprecedented levels
of adoption of distributed resources, and customers have
historically been largely uninvolved in the electricity system.
eliminating fossil fuels from fort Collins’ electricity supply by 2030 is
an ambitious goal, and meeting that goal largely with local resources
makes it even more challenging. in the accelerated scenario
modeled in this report, fort Collins would need to achieve landmark
levels of adoption of distributed resources, primarily solar. rooftop
solar adoption in fort Collins has grown with the availability of solar
leasing offers over the last several years but overall penetration
remains low compared with leading states such as California.
Strategy: Implement new approaches to increase customers’
motivation and enthusiasm; and provide relevant, timely, and
compelling information.
Understanding what motivates people and how they make
decisions can help ensure that policy-oriented measures
to increase solar adoption are effectively implemented
and conveyed to their intended beneficiaries. fort Collins
Utilities can facilitate greater adoption through more targeted
marketing based on individual customers’ solar potential, costs,
applicable incentives, and broad dissemination of program
information to customers. further, an approach to “right-time”
rooftop solar installations with re-roofing could be developed.
Solar is a uniquely visible resource whose adoption can be
driven by peer effects more than other sources of renewable
power. Carefully targeting highly visible installations across the
city (possibly including an educational exhibit with information
on the incentives that make such installations cost-effective)
can serve as a good starting point to propagate early adoption.
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
39
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Figure 6: Fort Collins’ projected technically and economically feasible solar adoption rate in the accelerated scenario
draws from two best-in-class examples, applying a logistic “S-curve” projection for how adoption would evolve.
Actual PV Penetration*
Projected PV Penetration Pathway for Fort Collins
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
Fort Collins Theoretical Potential: 30% of Total Generation
PV % of Total Generation
*Creti et al 2013, Bonnefoy 2009, Guldolin and Mortarino 2010: Distributed solar adoption is well-approximated by a logistic S-curve. Incentives and
feed-in taris help catalyze acceleration and can impact the steepness parameter of the curve.
**FC curve reflects more moderate adoption than Gainesville, which is now considering sunsetting the program due to upward rate pressure from
faster-than-expected adoption.
Source: Clean Coalition, accessed 2013, http://www.clean-coalition.org/unleashing-clean/success-stories/; Gainesville Sun, Feb 2013,
http://www.gainesville.com/article/20130220/ARTICLES/130229936
Fort Collins
Germany
Gainesville Near term adoption rate is highly accelerated.
Similar to Gainesville, FL.**
Over time, adoption rate resembles that of Germany.
DiStriButED SOlar Pv aDOPtiON iN fOrt cOlliNS
in the first few years of the accelerated scenario, fort Collins’ solar adoption would resemble that of gainesville, florida, a city with about the same population as fort Collins
that instituted a feed-in tariff incentive in 2008 to kick-start implementation. in later years up to 2030, fort Collins’ adoption would be equivalent to sustaining germany’s
solar growth on a logistic S-curve that tails off at 30% of generation.
the germany analog for pV adoption entails two conservatisms: first, fort Collins needs 30% less installed capacity to generate each kilowatt hour of electricity because
sunny fort Collins enjoys more annual solar resource than cloudy germany. this will allow fort Collins to either exceed germany’s rate of adoption, or meet it with less
capacity, or both. Secondly, locally applying a nationwide trend overlooks the ability of well-coordinated and well-positioned communities such as fort Collins to achieve
accelerated local rates of adoption.
fOrt cOlliNS accElEratED SOlar aDOPtiON PatHWay
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
40
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Challenge 2: Distributed resources have high up front costs.
a renewable portfolio has higher capital costs but lower operating
costs (since the fuel is free) compared to conventional resources. While
the higher capital investment associated with the accelerated scenario
pays back over a longer time horizon, it still presents a challenge for
customers with respect to up-front financing.
Historically, solar pV’s total installed cost was dominated by the
technology—the photovoltaic module and inverter. But these
hardware costs have dropped so much in recent years that the
“balance of system” (BoS) costs—all cost components other than
the inverter and module—now comprise the majority of total
installed cost. BoS costs include installation labor; overhead costs,
including office administration, property-related expenses, and
insurance; customer acquisition costs, including marketing and
advertisement; installation hardware such as racking and mounting
brackets; and permitting, inspection, and interconnection costs.
Unlike pV modules that are a global commodity, BoS costs vary
from community to community because of different approaches
to permitting, installation, and other processes. furthermore,
given the nascent stage of most regional U.S. solar markets, many
installers often operate at low efficiency, have poorly configured
supply chains, or have great difficulty accessing financial solutions
for their customers.
Strategy: Drive down distributed resources' costs and provide
new solutions to financing issues.
the City needs to be innovative in employing a full array
of financing mechanisms based on methods used in other
communities, other industries, and the financial sector to
ensure stable electricity prices during this transformation.
already moving in this direction, fort Collins implemented an
on-bill financing (oBf) program in January 2013, although it has
thus far seen limited uptake.
third-party financing has proven to be a market accelerant
for residential and commercial building solar pV markets,
nationally and in fort Collins. a further market accelerant are
feed-in-tariffs (fits), which have resulted in solar pV booms
in several european countries as well as in a limited set of U.S.
jurisdictions, since they provide clear price signals to customers
and lower financing costs due to long-term, predictable credit
dynamics.22
affordability and accessibility are two key criteria for successful
financing programs. one solution that enhances both attributes
is on-bill repayment (oBr), which, unlike oBf, enables equity
ownership of systems by third-parties, with the accessibility
benefit of a single power bill, not available in typical third-
party solar pV leases and power purchase agreements. Solar
pV financing is highly dependent on the monetization of its
considerable tax benefits, thus generally relying on for-profit,
third-party (tax equity) investors to enable the lowest customer
22 “the tranSformation of SoUthern California’S reSidential photovoltaiCS mar-
ket throUgh third-party ownerShip,” eaSan drUry et al, energy poliCy, 2012.
http://CleanteChniCa.Com/2011/11/22/gaineSville-florida-Bigger-per-Capita-Solar-
prodUCer-that-California/ (aCCeSSed 8/22/2013)
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
41
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
pricing. When oBr for solar includes limited loss reserve
protection by the utility, cost of capital is lowered and thus
affordability further improved. oBr, particularly with a utility
loss reserve, lays a foundation for deeper relationships with the
utility, which can become more valuable over time.
a further accessibility benefit of oBr can be achieved by
layering on virtual net metering (community solar or otherwise)
opportunities and credit against-the-meter. Both virtual net
metering and against-the-meter credit determinations enhance
accessibility to renters and building owners with poor solar or
other distributed resource access.
Better financing solutions should allow fort Collins Utilities
to phase back incentives over time, and focus budgeting
decisions on stabilizing utility economics. Budgeting
determinations for the utility are best served by offering
volumetric capped fit offerings, but with enough forward-
market certainty to avoid boom-bust cycles for the local
distributed resource supplier and investor base.
Beyond financing, fort Collins can directly and substantially
influence solar balance of system (BoS) costs, with the
potential to reduce them enough to bring the levelized cost
of rooftop solar pV in line with residential rates. germany has
set a precedent for capitalizing on this type of opportunity.
there, soft costs—customer acquisition, installation labor, and
permitting, interconnection, and inspection—are 73% lower
than in the U.S.
achieving significant BoS cost reductions in the U.S. requires
first adopting best practice recommendations from the Solar
america Board for Codes and Standards’ Expedited permit
process for pv Systems and Emerging approaches to Efficient
Rooftop Solar permitting23 and ireC’s Sharing Success:
Emerging approaches to Efficient Rooftop Solar permitting.²⁴
Best practices include over-the-counter, same-day permit
review; clear, accessible webpages focused on the permitting
process; exempting small systems from requiring building
permit review; and providing consistent and current training
for inspectors. further, fort Collins could develop a “cookie
cutter” solar design, combine building department permitting
with the utility interconnection process, and leverage the City
to aggregate demand and resulting purchasing power up the
hardware supply chain.
0
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
BOS:
Customer
Acquisition,
Permitting,
Interconnection,
Inspection,
Overhead
BOS:
42
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
these approaches have been successfully implemented
elsewhere in the U.S. and are proven to reduce costs:
massachusetts successfully implemented a bulk purchasing
“solarize” program in several communities that lowered
installed costs from the state average by over 25%.²⁵ the City
of denver, together with other partners, recently offered its
employees a group-discounted rate for solar pV installation
of $3.80/W,²⁶ a remarkably low rate secured through a scaled
group purchase. fort Collins, too, has revised its processes,
earning gold level recognition from the Solar friendly
Communities initiative; the City now has an opportunity to
move towards platinum recognition.
finally, a proven method for reducing BoS costs is to optimize
the number of days spent installing a system, since every
reduction in installation cost has a corresponding reduction
in overhead costs.²⁷ to meet this goal, specific strategies and
tactics need to be developed, such as employing a revamped
pV system inspection protocol allowing for self-certification of
pV installs by certified solar installers.
these BoS cost reductions in combination with on-going
module and inverter price reductions can propel fort Collins
toward the U.S. department of energy’s SunShot target of a
total installed cost of $1.50/W by 2020,²⁸ which would allow
Solar pV to be installed well under the cost of grid electricity in
fort Collins without local subsidy.
Challenge 3: Distributed resources have different benefits and
costs compared to centralized resources, and the system is not set
up to measure or monetize those values.
distributed resources have unique siting, operational, and ownership
characteristics compared to conventional centralized resources.
the value of distributed resources is temporally, operationally,
and geographically specific and because of that, existing pricing
mechanisms are not in place to recognize
or reward service that is being provided by either the utility
or the customer.
it is critical to better understand the services that distributed
resources can provide, and the benefits and costs of those
services as a foundation for more accurate pricing and market
signals. the categories of benefit and cost are broadly agreed
on, but some are not readily quantifiable or are not generally
monetized in electric rates. for example, distributed solar coupled
with storage could potentially provide voltage regulation services
to the grid, but the value of that service does not accrue to the
customer who made the investment.
²⁵ preSentation By yoUngBlood, eliZaBeth. "the SolariZe maSSaChUSettS program".
maSSaChUSettS Clean energy Center, 2013.
²⁶ See http://www.SUStainaBleBUSineSS.Com/index.Cfm/go/newS.featUre/id/1920 for
more information.
²⁷ rmi’S Simple BoS proJeCt iS working to CharaCteriZe the BoS CoSt divide Between
germany and the U.S. throUgh a lean proCeSS approaCh, on-Site time-and-motion
StUdieS, indUStry interviewS, and SUrvey-BaSed data ColleCtion. the proJeCt haS
foUnd leading inStallerS are already very CloSely approaChing germany-CaliBer
BoS CoSt levelS.
²⁸ U.S. department of energy. SUnShot viSion StUdy. feBrUary 2012. http://www1.eere.
energy.gov/Solar/pdfS/47927.pdf
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
43
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Strategy: Assess distributed resources' benefits and costs,
and develop appropriate mechanisms to value them.
fort Collins can ensure accurate accounting for the additional
values distributed energy resources provide—including
environmental benefits, avoided generation capacity, avoided
transmission and distribution capacity, avoided line losses, and
fuel price hedging—by first conducting a study to assess the
magnitude of these values on the fort Collins system, then by
adapting pricing and incentive mechanisms accordingly.
an example of how these values are being recognized
elsewhere is austin energy’s Value of Solar tariff (VoSt).²⁹
in austin energy’s case, fully-valued distributed solar pV is
actually worth more than its retail price, creating an appealing
value proposition for the utility and, in turn, for the community.
of course, the total value that distributed solar pV would
provide to fort Collins varies from this example, based on
factors such as the quality of the solar resource and the future
need for electricity capacity. fort Collins has a foundation from
0.02
0.04
0
0.06
0.08
0.10
0.12
0.14
0.16
Environmental
Benefits
Energy
Generation
Generation
Capacity
Savings
Transmission Loss Savings
& Distribution
Capacity
Savings
Fuel Price
Hedge Value
Total Value
Levelized Cost (2013 $/kWh)
12.8 /kWh
Source: Rabago, K., Norris, B., Ho , T., Designing Austin Energy's Solar Tari Using A Distributed PV Calculator. Clean Power
Research & Austin Energy, 2012.
PrOPErly valuiNg DiStriButED SOlar
²⁹ raBago, k., norriS, B., hoff, t., deSigning aUStin energy'S Solar tariff USing a diStriB-
Uted pv CalCUlator. Clean power reSearCh & aUStin energy, 2012.
Figure 8: austin’s value
of Solar tariff provides a
tangible—if incomplete—
proxy for distributed solar
pv valuation.
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
44
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
which to build such an approach—platte river now purchases
energy from fort Collins’ solar power purchase program based
on specific valuation factors.
Challenge 4: Operating a more distributed, diverse system
requires integrating new sources of flexibility and developing new
coordination and communications approaches.
Unlike almost any other consumer product, electricity has no
shelf life—it cannot be easily or cheaply stockpiled or stored.
electricity demand and supply must be perpetually balanced, and
when that balance is disrupted, brownouts and blackouts result.
introducing renewables such as wind and solar makes maintaining
that balance more challenging because unlike coal, natural gas, or
hydro plants, output from wind and solar varies with the weather.
further, the electricity system vision presented here is much more
dispersed—25% of generation is from distributed sources by 2030.
this provides advantages, but only if the mechanisms for deploying
and managing these variable and distributed resources are in place
alongside the hardware to generate them.
the need for flexibility will require use of available natural gas
generation, incorporation of a broad array of storage resources (like
demand response, electric vehicles, thermal storage, and potentially
even battery storage), and real-time grid monitoring and dispatch
that is much more responsive.
Strategy: Support the integration of flexibility resources
including smart grid, demand response, and electric vehicles;
and begin to implement advanced coordination and
communications strategies.
in part because of a decades-old decision to underground
fort Collins’ electricity distribution lines, fort Collins has just
one third the system interruptions compared to the national
average. effectively and reliably operating fort Collins’ electric
system with very high levels of renewables requires innovative
new approaches, including full utilization of the utility’s smart
grid capabilities, expanding demand response potential, and
integrating electric vehicles with smart charging capabilities.
fort Collins already has efforts underway in a number of
these areas, is home to several leading smart grid technology
companies, and has completed one successful demonstration
project (the rdSi project). the City should leverage these
strengths to remain at the leading edge of flexibility resource
adoption and integration.
the key to maintaining reliability is developing a portfolio of
resources that work together seamlessly. there are several
reasons why fort Collins is well positioned to manage this
issue smoothly and maintain reliability. fort Collins does not
have to balance its system alone; it is part of a larger balancing
area operated by Xcel energy, providing significant operational
benefits and ancillary services, and easing the integration of
renewables. platte river is also considering new strategies
for providing flexibility in the form of load following to support
higher integration of variable renewable resources.
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
45
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
further, fort Collins Utilities’ on-going smart grid rollout will
provide more granular, timely data about electricity usage
and eventually enable the utility to send signals to customers
to provide additional grid flexibility. finally, there is active
support and engagement around demand response and
electric vehicles, each of which can provide grid flexibility.
fort Collins Utilities is procuring a new state of the industry
demand response system as part of the advanced meter
fort Collins projects and continues to participate in research
and development following up on the rdSi project. the
electrification Coalition recently launched an initiative to support
widespread adoption of electric vehicles.
Challenge 5: Fort Collins Utilities' has a contractual relationship
with Platte River that disallows purchases from other entities.
except for a very small quantity of distributed generation from
rooftop solar, all city electricity currently originates from large,
centralized sources operated by platte river and Western area power
administration. fort Collins is currently under contract with platte
river for all its electricity requirements, although under its feed-
in tariff (fit) program, fort Collins Utilities will purchase local solar
output as an agent of platte river.
platte river, in turn, is committed to coal power from the yampa
project and rawhide plant 1, which are set to retire in 2030 and 2050,
respectively. as fort Collins implements its accelerated strategy for
carbon neutral electricity, it will demand significantly less coal-based
electricity from platte river. identifying and preemptively addressing
any potential impacts on the fort Collins/platte river partnership will
be key to ensuring a seamless and mutually beneficial clean energy
transition for both organizations.
Strategy: Enhance collaborations with Platte River to develop
effective strategies that enable more renewables.
While much of this chapter has focused on distributed resources
like rooftop solar, community solar, and energy efficiency due to
their unique benefits and implementation challenges, centralized
renewables—particularly wind and utility scale solar—will be a
similarly critical resource in fort Collins’ energy future. the wind
resource that fort Collins Utility has access to via platte river is
extremely cost-competitive and available in the near-term. fort
Collins should continue to collaborate with platte river to develop
strategies to bring more centralized wind into the mix as quickly
as possible. fort Collins’ carbon neutral electricity system by 2030
strategy calls for nearly half of generation from wind, ramping from
7 mW of capacity today (fort Collins’ effective share of platte river’s
capacity) to more than 230 mW in 2030.
Summary
With concerted effort, fort Collins can have a carbon neutral electricity
system by 2030. realizing this vision would require
$240 million present value added investment, but by 2050 would
save $380 million present value, and would energize local economic
development and innovation. it would reduce fort Collins’ carbon
emissions 10 million metric tons from business as usual by 2030, and
would build off of fort Collins’ already notable electric reliability to
create a truly resilient electric system that will sustain the community
into the future.
further, a transformed electricity system would enable the transition
to cleaner and more secure energy options in other sectors of the
energy economy, notably transportation. the City, fort Collins Utilities,
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
05 eS
advanced
transportation
image courtasy of Shutterstock
05
advanced
transportation
47
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
advanCed tranSportation
By 2030, FoRt ColliNS Could REduCE
GaSoliNE aNd diESEl CoNSumptioN By
48% FRom BuSiNESS-aS-uSual, SaviNG $480
millioN iN FuEl CoStS aNd avoidEd vEhiClE
maiNtENaNCE.
the fort Collins community consumes 58 million gallons of gasoline
and diesel each year driving to work and school, delivering products
and services, running errands, or just recreating and getting away.
driving enables business and life to run smoothly, but today’s
transportation paradigm comes with costs.
transportation accounts for 36% of fort Collins’ total energy
consumption, running mostly on gasoline and diesel fuels. almost all
of fort Collins’ oil use is used for transportation. the consumption
of these fuels has wide-ranging impacts on the local environment—
it’s a major contributor to local criteria air pollutants like nox, So₂,
and particulate matter, and on fuel costs to the community. Because
liquid fuels like gasoline and diesel are more expensive than other
primary energy sources, they account for over half of fort Collins’
energy expenditures. transportation energy accounts for 24% of
fort Collins’ total contribution to global Co₂ emissions, thereby also
playing a role in fort Collins’ contribution to broader global climate
issues, including political and security risks from importing oil.
the good news is that aggressive new national fuel economy
standards and, to a lesser extent, modest increases in electric
vehicle adoption will help to curb fort Collins’ future transportation
energy demands, even with projected population increases.³⁰
together, these two developments help to reduce transportation
energy use by 22% from today, and comprise the business-as-usual
trajectory analyzed in this report.
this analysis suggests, however, that there is a potential to reduce
fort Collins’ transportation energy use even further—to about half
that of business as usual—while also providing greater transport
options, ease, and convenience to the community. as described in
fort Collins’ 2011 transportation master plan,³¹ the City is already
pursuing a number of interventions to capture these benefits.
Building on this strong foundation, fort Collins can utilize two broad
policy and planning levers. first, it can reduce the need to drive
in the first place by implementing strategies like improved urban
planning and access to pedestrian, bicycle, and public transport
options. doing so has the potential to reduce transportation energy
consumption by 30% from business as usual. in tandem, fort Collins
could work to dramatically increase adoption levels of more efficient
and electric vehicles so that when people do drive, they use less
oil. this strategy could further lower energy consumption by 18%
from business as usual. Between 2013 and 2030, investments in
both strategies would amount to a net savings of $480 million in fuel
costs and avoided vehicle maintenance for the community.
the benefits of pursuing fort Collins’ full potential for transportation
energy savings extend beyond costs savings. With enhanced urban
planning and smart growth, people can get places faster and more
conveniently. less driving means less congestion, and consequently,
improved local air quality. Continuing the work the City has already
³⁰ aggreSSive new national fUel eConomy StandardS Set in 2012 reQUire 54 mpg
average gaS mileage for new vehiCleS By 2025. in order to meet theSe targetS, all
CarS and trUCkS will BeCome more aerodynamiC, lighter, and have
improved engine teChnology.
48
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
started will also continue to build on one of the community’s
greatest strengths—being a bikable, walkable city. finally, as was
discussed in the electricity chapter, increased electric vehicle
adoption can support the integration of renewable electricity
resources by providing demand response.
uNDErStaNDiNg tHE full POtENtial
By adapting national estimates for transportation energy
reduction potentials to fort Collins, we can get a sense for
“how far” and “how fast” fort Collins can accelerate its own
transportation energy reductions. the analysis presented here
focuses largely on personal vehicles, which account for the lion’s
share—97%—of fort Collins’ total transportation energy use.
figure 1, below, summarizes our findings.
Part 1
(p.52)
Part 2
(p.54)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Trucks Cars Heavy Duty
Million Gallons
BAU
Eciency
Savings
23
2030
Demand with
Frozen
Eciency
68
Driving Less:
30% VMT
Reduction per
Person
13
Electric Vehicles:
EV and PHEVs
Reach 50% of New
Car Sales by 2020
4
High E. Vehicles:
Avg. E. of New
Sales Increased
Half Way to
Best-In-Class
5
2012 Actual
Consumption
58
2030
Accelerated
49
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Part 1: Strategies that make it easier for Fort Collins to drive
less can save an estimated 30% of energy from business-as-usual
by 2030.
on average, fort Collins’ residents drive 7,500 miles per person
each year, about 30% less than the national average.³² this is a
testament to fort Collins’ large university population (that tends
to drive less) and to the great success fort Collins has to date in
developing a vibrant, multiuse core with pedestrian and bicycle
friendly infrastructure. Considering fort Collins’ size, projected
growth, and ongoing transportation initiatives, we estimate annual
vehicle miles traveled (Vmt) per person could be
reduced 25%-40% from business as usual by further:
• increasing smart growth,
• improving multimodal and alternative commuting options,
• creating and evolving intelligent transportation systems, and
• implementing pricing signals and strategies.
these tactics are not intended to infringe on the community’s
prerogative to drive. rather, they aim to reduce the need in the
first place by improving access to destinations and goods, and
by providing other benefits that result in fewer, more timely, and
shorter trips. on average, driving 30% less would save fort Collins’
residents about $1500 per year per person in avoided fuel and
maintenance costs alone.³³
a. Smart Growth
Smart growth is an approach to urban and transportation planning
that emphasizes increased urban density, mixed use development
with commercial, residential, and recreational destinations in close
proximity, and interconnected, walkable and bikeable streets.
people drive less when the things they need are closer and more
easily accessible. a 2007 Urban land institute study concludes that
this type of high-density, multi-use space could lead inhabitants to
drive 20%-40% less.³⁴
fort Collins’ City plan is predicated on smart growth and
development. the City has consistently incorporated smart growth
criteria into its development decisions; impacting codes, zoning,
and transportation master planning. But certainly not all growth in
fort Collins follows smart growth tenets, so there remains significant
opportunity to expand smart growth. Because fort Collins’ near
term projected population growth rate is 1.9% per year (almost three
times the national average), there is likely to be more new growth
than in some other places, and smart growth is easier to implement
at first development rather than in retrofit. therefore, further
emphasizing smart growth could represent an important opportunity
for future reductions in transportation energy use.
³² SoUrCe: ornl tranSportation energy dataBook, edition 31
³³ tranSportation iS the SeCond BiggeSt expenditUre for the average ameriCan (more than food, healthCare, or entertainment). only hoUSing aCCoUntS for a larger Share of
per Capita expenSeS. oak ridge national laBoratory tranSportation energy dataBook, taBle 8.3
³⁴ “growing Cooler: the evidenCe on UrBan development and Climate Change,” reid ewing et al, UrBan land inStitUte, 2007.
http://www.mwCog.org/UploadS/Committee-doCUmentS/U1ZBxlk20070921140031.pdf
05: advanCed tranSportation
50
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
b. Alternative and Multimodal Commuting
Smart growth brings destinations closer and makes walking or taking
public transportation easier. this, in turn, makes it more feasible and
appealing for residents to switch from single passenger vehicles
to alternative commuting (e.g. bicycling, walking, public transit
carpooling, etc.) or to multimodal commuting (using several alternative
modes to get to a single destination).
fort Collins’ current progress towards alternative and multimodal
commuting is encouraging. the community is already a
demonstrated leader in bike ridership (6.8% ridership compared with
the 2009 national average of 0.6%).³⁵, ³⁶ public transit use has also
increased rapidly, and now exceeds two million riders per year. the
City is currently building the first of several planned enhanced travel
Corridors to create multimodal transit links with one of Colorado’s
first Bus rapid transit systems. Continuing to improve and invest
in these options is an essential complement to the other levers for
driving less.
c. Intelligent Transportation Systems
as personal mobile devices like smartphones become more
commonplace and costs for gathering and synthesizing
transportation data become cheaper, cities can integrate real-time
information from the transportation system into streamlined and
convenient user interfaces. doing so would enable commuters to
easily access schedule and traffic updates for all transportation
modes including cars, taxis, bicycles, public transit, and car sharing.
driving less then becomes easier, as the ability to find and confirm
alternate modes of transportation becomes more reliable and trips
can be planned “on the go.”
Some cities (like new york City) are capitalizing on this opportunity
by investing and developing intelligent transportation software
themselves; others (like Chicago) are making transportation data
available for third-party app designers to develop useful and
marketable products.³⁷ fort Collins will be developing the next
version of its fC trip trip-planning website functionality for handheld
or tablet applications, enabling people to more easily access travel
information.³⁸
³⁵ “fort CollinS’ trek to BiCyCle nirvana dependS on more riderS, fewer aCCidentS: elite deSignation iS next goal for City that JUSt aChieved ‘platinUm’ award,” david yoUng,
Coloradoan.Com, 6/13/13. http://www.Coloradoan.Com/artiCle/20130613/newS01/306130074/fort-CollinS-trek-BiCyCle-nirvana-dependS-more-riderS-fewer-aCCidentS
³6 "analySiS of BiCyCling trendS in large north ameriCan CitieS: leSSonS for new york," John pUCher and ralph BUehler, UniverSity tranSportation reSearCh Center, 2011.
http://www.UtrC2.org/SiteS/defaUlt/fileS/pUBS/analySiS-Bike-final_0.pdf.
³⁷ “By the nUmBerS: CitieS are finding USefUl wayS of handling a torrent of data,” the eConomiSt, 4/27/13. http://www.eConomiSt.Com/newS/United-StateS/21576694-CitieS-are-
finding-USefUl-wayS-handling-torrent-data-nUmBerS
³⁸ email CorreSpondenCe with mark JaCkSon, depUty direCtor of fort Collin’S planning, development and tranSportation, 8/22/2013.
05: advanCed tranSportation
51
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
d. Pricing Signals
as multimodal transport options become more plentiful and
convenient, price signals can help the City manage variegated
traffic flows from personal vehicles, public transport, cyclists, and
pedestrians, especially in congested areas and those with persistent
parking issues. fees for parking and congestion, implemented
at rush hour and in the busiest areas, will encourage drivers to
look for alternatives. the City’s current parking plan (adopted in
January 2013) identifies prominent existing parking shortages in
downtown and other heavy traffic areas, as well as future parking
issues in other locations. the parking plan includes future options to
incorporate fees for parking.³⁹
replacing free parking with paid parking is often controversial, but
there are some significant benefits to commuters and business
owners. Because pricing discourages some commuters from driving,
paid parking reduces idling and circling, which accounts for up to a
third of downtown traffic and congestion in some cities.⁴⁰ paid parking
has also been shown to relieve parking constraints in retail areas,
making it easier for people who do need to drive to access shops,
increasing business. for example, enforcing pricing on streets like
College avenue distributes parking to less busy side streets and
parking garages, while also increasing customer turnover.⁴¹ “free”
parking comes with high hidden costs that are passed through to
the public, business owners, and others for associated land and
construction fees. these range between $500 and $800 per year per
space, or an estimated $10,000–$20,000 total for fort Collins.⁴²
Part 2: An additional 18% of energy could be saved from
business-as-usual by accelerating adoption of fuel-efficient
autos and electric vehicles.
programs to maximize the adoption of fuel efficient autos and
electric vehicles can ensure that when people do drive, they’re
consuming less oil—or better yet, substituting oil with cleaner
energy sources like renewable-powered electricity.
Because there is a common perception that hybrid and electric
vehicles are more expensive than conventional cars, general
consensus is that more time needs to pass before these cars
become affordable. But with rapid advances over the last few
years, this perception no longer holds true. Sticker prices for high
efficiency vehicles, hybrids, and electric vehicles (with incentives)
are already competitive today with typical mid-sized vehicles sold
in the U.S. after factoring in fuel cost savings, high-efficiency,
hybrid, and electric vehicles can all be cheaper to own today than
conventional vehicles.
planning a transportation future that minimizes emissions and other
environmental impacts also requires an understanding of vehicle
options in terms of potential for:
• further near-term reductions in cost of ownership
• environmental impact mitigation
• long range, which has been a highly visible limiting factor for
the adoption of battery electric vehicles (BeVs)
³⁹ “parking plan fort CollinS: neighBorhoodS,” City of fort CollinS, 1/15/13. http://www.fCgov.Com/advanCeplanning/parkingplan.php
⁴⁰ “CrUiSing for parking,” donald ShoUp, aCCeSS, no. 30, 2007. http://ShoUp.Bol.UCla.edU/CrUiSingforparkingaCCeSS.pdf
⁴¹ “parking plan fort CollinS: downtown and SUrroUnding neighBorhoodS,” pp. i-1–i-3.
⁴² “tranSportation CoSt and Benefit analySiS ii — parking CoStS,” viCtoria tranSport poliCy inStitUte, 2/22/12. http://www.vtpi.org/tCa/tCa0504.pdf. See alSo: “the high
CoSt of free parking,” donald ShoUp, JoUrnal of edUCation and reSearCh, vol. 17, no. 1, fall 1997, pp. 3–20, and “the high CoSt of free parking,” donald ShoUp, ChiCago:
plannerS preSS, 2011.
05: advanCed tranSportation
52
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
vehiCle deSCription ConSiderationS
High efficiency vehicles like the Nissan Versa
powered by conventional internal combustion engines
burning gasoline or diesel, but with improved mileage due to better aerodynamics, lower
weight, and improved engine technology.
• do not cost more upfront than conventional vehicles in most cases
• Use significantly less fuel (up to 30%–75% less than conventional vehicles) — resulting in significant cost
savings and Co₂ emissions reductions
Hybrid vehicles like the Toyota Prius
rely solely on gasoline or diesel for energy supply but use a combined combustion and
electric motor to improve overall efficiency and reuse otherwise wasted braking energy.
• Can offer further efficiency gains beyond non-hybrid high-efficiency vehicles
• Cost-effective and technologically mature today
Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs)
like the Nissan LEAF
run solely on electricity, offering two to three times higher
efficiency than gasoline or diesel vehicles.
• including incentives, have an equivalent or lower total cost of ownership than other options today. even
without incentives, the leaf is cost-competitive today against an average midsize car.
• Sticker price will likely continue to fall as batteries get cheaper and automakers gain increased
technological experience.
• do not emit local Co₂ or other emissions while operating, and will be responsible for little or no
emissions as the grid is increasingly powered by renewables.
• Currently limited by battery range (e.g. 115 miles for the leaf), a significant constraint in current
adoption rates.
• Could benefit from investments in public charging stations, but commonly available 120 and 240V
outlets are sufficient for most early applications.
Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs)
like the Chevy Volt
operate as electric vehicles, but with a smaller gasoline generator that continues to
power the vehicle once the battery surpasses its range.
• purchase price for these vehicles can be cost-prohibitive without incentives, but prices are expected to
fall dramatically in coming years as batteries get cheaper and automakers gain technology experience.
Considering state and federal incentives, these vehicles can be cost-competitive.
• avoid the range constraint of BeVs.
• offer the same emission benefits as BeVs when operating in electric-only mode.
Compressed natural gas vehicles (CNG)
like the Honda Civic Natural Gas Vehicle
natural gas is stored in a pressurized tank and combusted to fuel the vehicle instead of
gasoline or diesel.
• Have become cheaper to operate as a result of recent low gas prices, but purchase price and first costs
for home refueling stations are still prohibitive.
• Can be more cost-effective for centralized fleets—e.g. taxis—that share refueling stations and
accumulate higher annual mileages.
• responsible for approximately 30% lower Co₂ emissions than conventional gasoline-fired vehicles, as a
result of natural gas’ comparatively more benign emissions profile, on a per unit energy basis.
Hydrogen fueled vehicles (not yet commercially available for light
duty personal vehicles)
Hydrogen is used to fuel the vehicle, either by fuel cell or by combustion engine.
• only offered by a few manufacturers today, as test vehicles in limited numbers
• Cost two to five times more than a conventional vehicle.
• also requires a potentially large investment for hydrogen distribution and refueling infrastructure.
table 1 lists and describes the vehicle types assessed in this report, along with a qualitative summary of important considerations for each. figure 2
compares the current cost of ownership for these vehicles, which includes an analysis of purchase price plus three years of fuel expenses.
table 1: vehicle options
05: advanCed tranSportation
53
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
the future 2030 scenario we analyzed is driven by an accelerated
adoption of cost effective fuel-efficient autos and electric vehicles,
shaped by projected vehicle turnover rates, trends in future vehicle
cost reductions, and a limited near-term BeV market due to range
constraints. to explore the potential for transportation sector energy
reductions we have assumed the following: by 2030, the average
fuel economy of new vehicle sales can be raised halfway to best-in-
class; on top of that, 50% of all new sales are electric vehicles (BeV
and pHeV).
as a benchmark, the state of California has achieved hybrid vehicle
sales roughly twice the national average, and within some zip codes
hybrids exceed 20% of auto sales—four to five times the national
average.⁴³
Part 3: Additional energy reductions from business-as-usual can be
achieved by transitioning heavy-duty trucks to compressed natural
gas and biofuels.
as shown in figure 1, heavy-duty trucks account for a significant
share of remaining energy consumption as car and light trucking
stocks become less oil-dependent. While strategies for reducing this
contribution were not explored fully in this analysis, there are several
options the City can pursue. the City has been converting public
buses to run on compressed natural gas; reducing Co₂ emissions
and saving fuel costs in the process. other heavy-duty truck fleets
(like garbage trucks) could be good candidates for conversion to
natural gas, because they can take advantage of the economies
of scale from investing in central fueling stations. Biofuels are also
a viable alternative, especially for longer-range applications like
freight, because they don’t require as significant fuel tank or fueling
station changes.
⁴³ phone ConverSation with UC daviS prof. thomaS tUrrentine, JUne 10, 2013.
0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000
Purchase Price 3 Yr Fuel Price Incentives Refuel Station Price MPG Equivalent
Conventional:
Budget Midsize
BEV
Hybrid
PHEV
GM Volt
37 Gas / 98 Elec
Civic CNG
31
Nissan Leaf
115
Toyota Prius
50
25
CNG
Hydrogen
Source: Fueleconomy.gov, EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2011: ref2011.d020911a.
$22,000 $6,900
$12,500
$12,500
$5,000
High Eciency
Nissan Versa
$22,000 $4,650 35
$22,000
54
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
mOviNg tOWarDS imPlEmENtatiON
the transformation of the transportation system—both in
infrastructure and in vehicle mix—proposed here is significant.
addressing the following formative challenges will be critical for
implementing a 2030 target.
Challenge 1: Tactics for driving less must be implemented over a
long timeframe, are harder to measure, and are sometimes un-
popular.
While smart growth, public transportation, multi-modal
transportation, and other strategies to drive less have been
proposed for decades around the country, adoption remains low
and changing that requires an on-going cultural and behavioral shift
in the community. Strategies do not reach their full potential unless
integrated well together.
Strategy: Double down on all four driving-less tactics, plus
focus on effective integration to maximize benefits.
the City has recognized the value of smart growth for some
time. Capturing the full opportunity will require continued
planning and discipline—any new development that is not
based on smart growth principles will essentially be locked
in for several decades. opportunities to retrofit smart growth
through infill or redevelopment are less common, but need
to be identified and executed as they arise. Smart growth will
encourage alternative and multimodal commuting by bringing
destinations closer and improving access to transit hubs.
Continued investment in public transit, business commute
trip reduction programs, and fleet driver training, combined
with seamless integration into the rest of the intelligent
transportation System will help users take full advantage of the
infrastructure. With strong alternatives to driving in place, paid
parking can help provide feedback to users.
Challenge 2: Many customers aren’t motivated to prioritize fuel
efficiency and don’t understand the value proposition of high ef-
ficiency or alternatively fueled vehicles.
most people don’t consider fuel cost when they’re at the dealership,
and perceived environmental benefits weigh in among a long list
of other important shopping criteria. tax rebates that may make
these vehicles more economically attractive can be confusing and
a hassle. eVs, including both BeVs and pHeVs, have additional
challenges: most customers don’t know much about eVs and
dealerships aren’t always sure how to sell the value proposition.
Strategy: Implement new approaches to increasing
customers’ motivation and provide education and outreach
around value proposition, drawing from the latest behavioral
science insights.
the City can help citizens better understand their options,
how federal and local incentives work, and perhaps most
importantly that they are contributing to shared community
and environmental goals. many of the same behavioral science
insights discussed with respect to building efficiency and solar
adoption in the efficient Buildings and renewable electricity
Supply chapters are applicable here as well. research has
shown that purchasing a vehicle is as much a statement
05: advanCed tranSportation
55
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
of identity or values as it is about function and utility. the
City could even reinforce a citizen’s choice to participate in
community environmental goals with a sticker or license plate
frame that then also serves to spread program awareness.
the electrification Coalition is working with fort Collins and
local dealerships through its drive electric northern Colorado
program to help reach out to customers, raise awareness,
and better communicate the eV value proposition. the City
is also working to lead by example, purchasing eVs for its
own fleet where they make sense, and this program could
potentially be expanded. finally, fort Collins can work with
its local dealerships to provide education about the eV value
proposition in the same way that building efficiency programs
work with local contractors and hardware stores to educate
customers.
Challenge 3: First cost of alternate vehicles is perceived to be pro-
hibitive, especially before incentives.
While this analysis shows that high efficiency vehicles and eVs can
be cost-competitive today, not many car buyers are aware of that. in
addition, some models are more expensive, the range of models is
limited, and they generally have a high up front cost in exchange for
fuel savings later.
Strategy: Incentivize the purchase of electric vehicles.
fort Collins could potentially drive cost reductions by
facilitating bulk purchases, perhaps partnering with other
like-minded communities (governor Hickenlooper has taken a
similar approach at the state level, but focused on natural gas
vehicles).
the City can offer additional incentives and benefits to
sweeten the deal and further influence behavior. Because the
city has limited control over vehicles coming in and out of the
city, any incentives or fees must be tightly tied to residency
of the purchaser, to avoid gaming the system. implementing
property tax or utility-bill-tied incentives are one option.
Beyond direct incentives, fort Collins Utilities could also
motivate eV purchase through rate design. the city is already
exploring a time-of-use rate for customers who charge their
eVs at night. finally, fort Collins could reward alternative
vehicle owners with favorable parking.
05: advanCed tranSportation
56
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Challenge 4: BEVs have a limited range compared to gasoline
or diesel-fueled vehicles.
perhaps the biggest challenge to BeV adoption is the limited range
of all-electric vehicles. there is a perception that this is a challenge
in general, but especially for infrequent longer trips—e.g. to the
mountains or for a vacation.
Strategy: Find alternative methods of meeting long-range
transportation needs.
importantly, most daily commutes fall well within the range of
all-electric vehicles (over 90% of commuters travel less than 60
miles round trip to work), limiting the scale of the problem day-
to-day.⁴⁴ further, more than half of all households have two or
more vehicles—making two-car households perhaps the best
market for eVs today since they would have a non-BeV available
for longer trips. if 50% of these households were to purchase
an eV as one of their vehicles the next time they went to the
dealership, fort Collins would have 20,000 eVs on the road by
2030, comprising almost 30% of fort Collins’ light duty vehicle
fleet.
pHeVs offer another solution to the electric vehicle range
problem by offering consumers an electric vehicle for city
driving, but without the range limitations for longer trips.
Bloomberg, mcKinsey, and others predict these vehicles will be
cost-competitive by around 2020.⁴⁵
fort Collins can also build out local charging infrastructure
at workplaces and businesses to both address any range
challenges and build awareness. the City might also explore
partnering with rental and car sharing companies to streamline
or subsidize access to long-range vehicles for citizens with only
a BeV.
Summary
By 2030, fort Collins could reduce its transportation energy use by
48% from business as usual, leading to a net benefit of $480 million
in reduced vehicle fuel costs and maintenance for the community
while improving transport options; lessening congestion; improving
local air quality; and creating more walkable, bikeable, vibrant
neighborhoods. the electrification of fort Collins’ transportation
fleet will drive much deeper integration of the community’s energy
system—creating new demands on the electricity system but also
new capabilities to support the integration of renewable electricity
resources. achieving this goal requires, particularly, a consistent,
disciplined drive towards changing perceptions of driving and
alternative transportation throughout the community, and making
driving less and smart growth the norm.
⁴⁴ “tranSportation energy dataBook: edition 32,” StaCy C. daviS, SUSan w. diegel, and
roBert g. BoUndy, JUly 2013, oak ridge national laBoratory, figUre 8.4. http://Cta.
ornl.gov/data/download32.Shtml
⁴⁵ “Battery teChnology ChargeS ahead,” rUSSell henSley, John newman, and matt
rogerS, mCkinSey weBSite, aCCeSSed 8/19/13. http://www.mCkinSey.Com/inSightS/en-
ergy_reSoUrCeS_materialS/Battery_teChnology_ChargeS_ahead See alSo: Bnef
4/17/13 eleCtriC vehiCle Battery priCeS reaChing new lowS, Bnef 12/3/13 are eleCtriC
vehiCleS BeComing more affordaBle?
05: advanCed tranSportation
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
eS
image courtasy of Shutterstock
06
implications
58
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
impliCationS
efficient buildings, advanced transport, and renewably sourced
electricity are interconnected; meeting each of the sector goals has
reflexive impacts on the other components of fort Collins’ energy
system. By making buildings more efficient, we shrink demand for
electricity. this reduces the expense and effort required to meet
loads with 100% renewables. at the same time, transitioning cars
away from oil and towards electric vehicles adds demand back on
the electricity system (albeit to a much smaller degree). finally, even
as buildings and vehicles draw power from renewables, they can
provide demand response and other modulating services to enable
the renewable system to meet the needs of the community.
together, the sector assessments presented here indicate that
fort Collins has the potential to achieve an 80% reduction (from
2005 levels) in Scope 1 and Scope 2 Co₂ emissions by 2030,
essentially speeding its current climate goal by 20 years. By 2030,
this would save 11 million tons more Co₂ emissions compared
to fort Collins’ existing climate goal and 15 million tons more
Co₂ emissions compared to business as usual. achieving this
accelerated goal has a net present value savings of $260 million
to 2030 compared to business as usual, and a $2.0 billion net
present value savings by 2050.
Source: “FC GHG and RE Data 2005-2012.xls”; City of Fort Collins, 2012. "Community Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Inventory Quality Management Plan 2005-2011," City of Fort Collins, Environmental Services, October
2012. Available at http://www.fcgov.com/climateprotection/FC GHG Quality Management Plan
2030 Accelerated
Scenario Emissions
NAT GAS
2005 Actual Emissions
0 600 1,200 1,800 2,400
Thousand
Metric Tons
COAL NAT GAS PETROLEUM
2012 Actual Emissions COAL NAT GAS PETROLEUM
80% REDUCTION FROM 2005 LEVELS
PETROLEUM
Figure 1: Fort Collins has the
potential to achieve an 80%
reduction (from 2005 levels)
in Scope 1 and Scope 2 Co₂
emissions by 2030, thereby
accelerating its current climate
goals by 20 years.
cOmPariSON Of 2030 accElEratED ScENariO EmiSSiONS PrOfilE vS. actual 2005 EmiSSiONS
06: impliCationS
59
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
Figure 3: in the accelerated scenario, efficiency and renewables meet the majority of future
energy demand. lingering fossil fuels, (mostly natural gas for building heating, and oil and
natural gas for transportation), account for 32% of the remaining energy consumption, and
all Co₂ emissions. Remaining natural gas generation for electricity is offset by increased
renewable generation.
the accelerated scenario represents a fundamentally
different paradigm for investment in energy-related assets
and infrastructure compared with business as usual, providing
greater local job creation, economic development, and stimulus
for innovation and growth of local businesses. investments in
energy efficiency and distributed energy resources along the
lines of the path already envisioned for fortZed contribute to the
local economy and reduce cash flows out of the community. By
investing now in efficiency and renewables, the City can reduce
outflows of cash for decades to come.
NEtPrOfilE PrESENt valuE Of 2030 accElEratED ScENariO ENErgy SOurcE
accElEratED ScENariO,
2013–2030
NEt PrESENt valuE Of
accElEratED ScENariO,
2013–2050
06: impliCationS
Figure 2: while transitioning the electricity system to renewables has a net cost, the net savings of
aggressive building efficiency and advanced transportation improvements bring the accelerated
scenario to a combined net present value of $260 million to 2030. By 2050, the accrued net present
benefit is $2.0 billion.
in the accelerated scenario, the amount of money spent on coal
and natural gas to generate electricity supplied to the community is
lower by an average of $16 million per year compared with business
as usual. investment in efficiency, distributed solar power, smart
grid, and other local energy assets is higher by $20 million per year.
this shift in investment—from distant to local resources—would
generate an additional 400–500 jobs within fort Collins over the
entire period from 2013–2030.
60
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
at top of mind for many are three outstanding questions:
• What about the remaining 20% carbon emissions?
• What is the role for natural gas in this vision?
• Why can’t we get there by purchasing renewable energy
Credits (reCs)?
WHat aBOut carBON EmiSSiONS rEmaiNiNg aftEr 2030?
targeting an 80% Co₂ reduction by 2030 puts fort Collins in a good
position to achieve net carbon neutrality across the sectors in the
years to follow. in our analysis, the lingering 20% emissions come
from end uses that are challenging to wean entirely from fossil fuels
in the near-term for both cost and implementation reasons. Creating
explicit efforts and programs targeting these end uses will be critical
to achieve carbon neutrality in the following years. By and large, the
solution will necessarily come from a combination of electrification
and bio-based sources.
• natural gas used for industrial process heat: While some
reduction can be made through individual, deep engagements
with industrial energy users in the study period, some natural
gas will linger due to the lack of readily-available, cost-effective
alternatives to producing process heat. on-going strategies
for reduction include integrative design approaches to these
industrial processes, and potentially fuel switching.
• natural gas used for building heating and domestic hot water:
this study assumes some efficiency improvement and some
fuel switching for these end uses, but due in part to the long
replacement cycles of heating and hot water equipment,
such replacement will need to continue, timed with natural
replacement cycles. district heating could also be considered.
• natural gas used for electricity generation: the accelerated
scenario includes a combined cycle gas turbine, built in the first
few years of the study period to facilitate lessening fort Collins’
dependence on coal and integrating variable renewables.
Carbon emissions from this plant are offset by over-generating
renewable energy, but eventually this plant could be replaced
entirely with renewables.
• oil used for transportation: despite rapid implementation of
smart growth strategies and customer adoption of efficient
and alternatively fueled vehicles, gasoline and diesel use
will continue beyond 2030 because of the nascent state of
alternatives, complexity of consumer choice, and long timeframe
to fully realize the benefits of smart growth. a continued push
towards adoption of alternative vehicles beyond 2030 will
ultimately reduce this lingering fossil fuel.
WHat iS tHE rOlE Of Natural gaS iN tHiS viSiON?
natural gas is the subject of ongoing national debate, on one hand
held up as a critical transition fuel and replacement for coal and
oil, and on the other hand, criticized for the environmental, health,
and climate impacts of shale gas hydraulic fracturing. proponents
cite falling prices, significant domestic shale gas reserves with the
potential to keep prices low, and comparatively low carbon intensity.
opponents cite the environmental and health risks of improper
management in the extraction process, skepticism that low prices
06: impliCationS
61
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
will persist in the long run, and a view that future price volatility
is not only a cost but also a potential major threat to long-term
planning around the resource.
in fort Collins, natural gas is a convenient option in the short-term to
supply those end uses listed above, which are the hardest or most
expensive to shift to renewables. in electricity, platte river’s existing
natural gas combustion turbines were designed to provide peak
power, so running them significantly more is likely cost-prohibitive.
on the other hand, new combined cycle natural gas capacity could
be built not primarily to supply new load but rather to manage the
variability of renewable resources by providing additional flexibility
to the system, in conjunction with more local sources of flexibility.
from a transportation perspective, fort Collins’ bus fleet runs on
biodiesel and compressed natural gas (Cng) today, and will soon be
converted to all Cng. natural gas can continue to make sense as
a fuel source for other community fleets (e.g. garbage trucks, taxis)
where economies of scale can be achieved from centralized fueling
stations. for passenger vehicles, though, electricity is likely to win out.
WHy caN’t WE gEt tHErE WitH rENEWaBlE ENErgy
cErtificatES (rEcS)?
When the City adopted its original climate action goals in 2008, it
stipulated reCs should not be counted in the community’s progress
towards its gHg goals. in fact, fort Collins could meet the same
numerical carbon reduction targets with reCs as would be achieved
by the accelerated goals, and in doing so, support the demand
for clean renewable energy development and ensure that more
certified renewable energy is being generated to meet the nation’s
energy needs. if it chose to, fort Collins could even purchase
enough reCs to become carbon neutral tomorrow (as the City of
palo alto has done), and thereon after through 2050 and beyond.
However, the cost required to purchase reCs to match the
accelerated carbon reduction path, or to meet and maintain carbon
neutrality, is significant. that money flows out of the community to
support renewable generation elsewhere,
without securing the local innovation, job growth, and other
economic benefits that fort Collins seeks from investing in efficiency
and renewables locally. those costs would recur annually, with
no positive returns generated and no long-term investment in the
community itself, resulting in significant negative net present values
through 2030 and 2050. therefore, rather than serving a primary
role in fort Collin’s climate strategy, reCs are likely best used in a
support role in the future to help offset lingering fossil fuels.
net preSent valUe of pUrChaSing reCS to… (in million 2012 $)
paid thru
2030
paid thru
2050
…match the accelerated goal of achieving a carbon neutral
electricity system by 2030
($342) ($714)
…achieve a carbon neutral electricity system tomorrow ($596) ($966)
06: impliCationS
62
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
07
moving
forward
image courtasy of Shutterstock
63
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
moving forward
firSt, SEt a PuBlic targEt
fort Collins can accelerate its climate goal by twenty years to
achieve a 2030 outcome in which its buildings use 31% less
energy,⁴⁶ its vehicles 48% less energy, and its electricity system is
carbon neutral. While it is essential to further develop an actionable
implementation plan, not every aspect of execution needs to be
vetted before a revised goal is adopted. this year, through the
review process outlined in the “about this report” section, the City
of fort Collins should consider the merits of ratifying the accelerated
goal articulated here.
a statement of the City’s commitment would, in itself, play a major
role in enabling acceleration. this commitment is backed by the
significant decision-making power and implementation capabilities
of the community’s municipal utility and power supply partner. a
public target would send a credible signal to interested stakeholders
to engage. for those who are on the fence, ratification would give
a directive to act. a bold public target would alert the nation that an
energy transformation is underway in fort Collins, drawing energy
leaders, funders, and researchers to participate.
NExt, cONcENtratE ON tHrEE KEy lEaDErSHiP rOlES
the City is poised to lead in three key areas necessary to achieve
an accelerated goal. While all are critical to meeting 2030 targets,
the extent to which the City concentrates on each is likely to evolve
as progress is made.
1. Build needed partnerships and coalitions
multi-stakeholder partnerships are important for all cities
endeavoring to take on aggressive climate targets. With a 2030
acceleration target, fort Collins needs to create these partnerships
quickly, establishing coalitions that can create and execute initial
implementation plans as early as this year, and that are structured to
nimbly course-correct over the next decade to ensure programs are
meeting the 2030 objective.
the City already has established relationships with private and
public entities committed to reducing fort Collins’ energy use and
transitioning its electric supply to renewables. through its municipal
utility, transportation and master planning responsibilities, and other
civic duties, it is in a prime position to coordinate the efforts of these
multiple parties. in particular, the City could take the lead by:
• determining the kinds of organizations—and identifying
the specific organizations—that should be coordinated to
orchestrate this energy transformation.
• partnering with platte river to create a shared vision for fort
Collins’ centrally sourced energy supply going forward. platte
river will continue to be the primary centralized supplier to
fort Collins, and the community’s climate targets require platte
river to shift, over time, from being dependent on fossil fuels
to renewables. a successful partnership with platte river
⁴⁶ 39% after aCCoUnting for fUel SwitChing
07: moving forward
64
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
would ensure an increased supply of renewables and develop
approaches to secure the continued financial health of platte
river, fort Collins Utilities, and the community.
• expanding the existing partnership base already formed
through fortZed to support community wide accelerated
targets, by leveraging the support of stakeholders who are
already committed and mobilized to execute on aggressive
energy goals.
• identifying common goals and strategies of other local and
regional partners to leverage investment and combined action.
2. Accelerate customer adoption
achieving the sector goals presented in this report requires
landmark community adoption rates for energy efficiency measures
in buildings, for solar pV, and for reduced driving and efficient or
electric vehicles. to get a sense of the scale of adoption required
to meet these goals, consider that by 2030, (1) all residential and
commercial buildings will have reduced energy use by close to 30%,
(2) 30%–50% of all commercial and residential buildings in fort
Collins will have installed solar pV, and (3) close to 50% of all new
car sales will be either efficient or electric vehicles. acceleration will
require new adoption initiatives that:
• Send the correct pricing signals to participants: ensure that
price structures motivate adoption while fairly distributing costs
and savings across participating stakeholders.
• Overcome the cost hurdle: provide low-cost financing options
and incentives that can be delivered simply and equitably to
participants.
• Find effective ways to entice high-levels of participation:
appeal to the motivations and decision-making criteria of all
segments of the population.
• Be able to deliver services to meet that increased adoption:
engage with providers to deliver services effectively, and at a
deployment rate that can match increased adoption.
the utility, which already serves a diverse customer base, can take
a leading role in designing and implementing these initiatives. in
fact, fort Collins Utilities is already exploring new program options
including a set of initiatives that can be piloted in the fortZed
district to drive increased energy efficiency in buildings and greater
adoption of solar pV and other distributed resources.
3. Coordinate and sequence efforts over time
in addition to its role in creating and communicating clear goals
for the benefit of the community, the City can play a critical role in
tracking and reporting progress toward achieving goals. this will
entail periodic reporting on progress and assessing the usefulness
of programs and initiatives led by the City. for example, as adoption
of efficiency and solar pV increases, fort Collins Utilities will need to
continue the rollout of smart grid technologies in order to manage a
more distributed energy system. in other areas, the City’s role may
entail greater focus on coordination with private sector partners to
facilitate change. taking the lead on coordination can help verify
that different initiatives in and across the three sectors are designed
and timed to meet the accelerated goals.
07: moving forward
65
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
08
conclusion
image courtasy of google
66
Stepping Up: BenefitS and CoSt of aCCelerating fort
CollinS' energy and Climate goalS
ConClUSion
many cities can point back to the formative moments or events
that shaped where they are today. perhaps it was when the local
university or factory opened or closed. or when a nearby airport
was built, or a zoning law passed. looking back, it’s easy to see
how these events triggered what followed next: an uptick in
population as more people came to study and work, a mass exodus
as real estate prices dropped, or the densification of downtown.
in hindsight, it’s easy to recognize decisive moments that shape
the health and vibrancy of a community and set the horizon for its
growth and prosperity.
increasingly, cities like fort Collins are recognizing decisions they
make around energy are integrally tied to the livelihood of their
people. a recent report published by the Carbon disclosure project,
"Wealthier, Healthier Cities: How climate change action is giving us
wealthier, healthier cities", includes results from 110 major national
and international cities who report that 62% of climate actions their
cities are taking have the potential to attract new business and
economic opportunities. the largest share of these emission reduction
efforts are energy efficiency and building retrofit activities, followed by
a variety of transportation-related and waste-management initiatives.
among the reporting cities:
• new york expects its energy efficiency initiatives will lead
directly to new clean-tech ventures in the city;
• dallas is seeing an inverse relationship between the fall in
greenhouse gas emissions and a rise in green jobs;
• Cleveland views investment in clean energy projects as
a “centerpiece of economic development efforts in northeast
ohio.”⁴⁷
few communities in the nation have the combination of factors that
align to make fort Collins a community that can lead in creating
forward-looking energy policy for community benefit. these factors
include strong and pragmatic civic leadership, manageable size, an
innovative and well-positioned municipal utility, workable options
for creative transportation policy, and low cost options for clean
and affordable electricity supplies. it is no surprise that fort Collins’
innovative energy programs and policies, notably the fortZed
project, have already attracted national and international attention.
By stepping forward to pioneer new approaches, fort Collins has
galvanized the support of community leaders and attracted the
participation of leading businesses and other institutions in the area.
now, the City has an opportunity to sustain and advance its
leadership position by taking up new goals that leverage existing
achievements and opportunities. With bold, decisive action today,
fort Collins tomorrow will be able to look back and see a turning
point at which it pivoted from a business-as-usual energy system
dependent on fossil fuels to a healthy, vibrant system that runs
on efficiency and renewables, putting itself at the forefront of
innovation nationally—stimulating local economic development,
reducing outflows of money from the community, improving security,
and reducing risk.
⁴⁷ “wealthier, healthier CitieS: how Climate Change aCtion iS giving US wealthier,
healthier CitieS,” CarBon diSCloSUre proJeCt, 2013. httpS://www.CdproJeCt.net/Cd-
preSUltS/Cdp-CitieS-2013-gloBal-report.pdf
08: ConClUSion
Fort Collins Climate Action Plan Update
Proposed Public Engagement Process
Community support will be essential to achieve future community greenhouse gas goals. Staff
proposes to convene an advisory committee of stakeholders including residents and business
entities to participate in the 2014 Climate Action Plan (CAP) update to:
ensure various perspectives are heard and that the draft CAP reflects the desires of the
community,
tap into the expertise and innovation in the community,
build critical partnerships and support for CAP implementation, including
recommendations for on-going public engagement to implement the plan.
A consultant has been retained to conduct the technical analyses of strategy options, benefits,
savings and costs. Cost impact scenarios and financial model scenarios will be developed.
In addition to the advisory committee, a robust public involvement process will be conducted.
Public Engagement
At least two public forums will be held as the CAP is being updated. One (~ March – April 2014)
will gather ideas from the community and the second (~ Sept-Oct 2014) will seek feedback on
the draft CAP. In addition, staff will contact community groups to offer presentations and gather
feedback. A web site and social media will be used to obtain public input as well.
Board and Commission Involvement
At least two meetings are envisioned with the following Boards and Commissions to seek input
to and comments on the draft CAP;
Air Quality Advisory Board
Economic Advisory Commission
Energy Board
Natural resources Advisory Board
Transportation Board
Proposed Climate Action Plan Advisory Committee
An Advisory Committee of key stakeholders will be convened to provide input to the update of
the Climate Action Plan. Participants will be sought from the sectors listed below.
Citizen Sector (Council advisory board representatives) (5)
Will seek a representative from Air Quality Advisory Board, Economic Advisory Commission,
Energy Board, Natural Resources Advisory Board, and Transportation Board.
Business, Environmental and Social Sectors (~8-10)
Will includes a total of 8-10 representatives to be drawn from groups such as Climate Wise
Steering Committee, Chamber of Commerce, Board of Realtors, Home Builders of Northern
Colorado, Energy and/or Waster Cluster representatives, Fort Collins Sustainability Group,
Northern Colorado Renewable Energy Society, Communities for Sustainable Energy, Sierra
Club, faith-based communities, Community Foundation, Poudre Valley Health Systems, Vida
Sana, etc.
Major Stakeholders (3)
Will include at least one representative each from Colorado State University, Poudre School
District, and Larimer County.
Attachment 6
Subject Matter/Technical Experts (2-3)
Will include subject matter experts to represent the issues of climate change science, water
resources, public health and utility providers (including a representative from PRPA). Technical
experts may be formed into a separate sub-committee.
An Engagement and Implementation Committee may also be developed to focus on public
engagement strategies to implement the plan, with special emphasis placed on key
stakeholders and potential funders, reaching students and faith-based communities, and
leveraging the existing work of non-profits.
Tentative Proposed Schedule (subject to change)
Feb 2014 Invite and finalize Advisory Committee composition
Mar-Apr Public Forum
Mar – June Discuss sector specific targets and begin strategy investigation
July – Aug Various scenarios (groups of strategies) for meeting goals and targets developed
August Advisory Committee review scenarios
August- Sep. Cost-benefit analyses and financial models developed for scenarios
September Public Forum
Oct - Nov Draft plan developed and public/board comments sought
Nov Council work session to review scenarios and associated economic implications
Dec- Jan Council considers adoption of draft CAP
This proposed schedule is subject to change in order to accommodate other planning processes
such as the development of PRPA’s Integrated Resource Plan.
The Energy We Live By™
Attachment 7
Platte River Power Authority Preliminary Cost
Estimates
(January 2014)
These charts were prepared by Platte River Power Authority with the intent of
supporting this work session. The charts are based on very preliminary modeling
of three options considered in Platte River’s 2009 Climate Action Plan (increased
energy efficiency, reducing coal and increasing natural gas generation, and
increasing wind purchases). Platte River plans to conduct detailed analysis of a
wide range of GHG reduction options as part of its next Integrated Resource Plan,
due to be completed by the end of 2014.
These preliminary estimates suggest the following insights:
• Electric loads and resultant CO2 emissions are predicted to rise under the base
case scenario (slides 1 and 2).
• The three reduction strategies considered could lower CO2 emissions about
30% below the base case by 2030 (slide 3).
• Implementing these three strategies would increase the community bill by
about $37 million/yr (18%) in 2020 and by about $24 million/yr (8%) in 2030,
relative to the base case (slide 4).
• The percentage increases in total community bills are much smaller than the
percentage increase in wholesale rates associated with these measures; rate
increases are estimated at about 28% in 2020 and about the same in 2030
(slide 5).
• Implementing these three reduction strategies could keep the total community
electricity bill lower than it would be if a CO2 charge were assessed for the
base case resource mix. The results assume a fixed charge of $22 per metric
ton, assessed from 2014 through 2030 (slide 6).
• Nationally, many utilities have developed forecasts for CO2 charges (slide 7).
There is lack of consensus and a wide range of estimates, with most forecasts
indicating an increasing cost for these charges over time.
The Energy We Live By™
11
Load Forecasting
‐
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
Energy Load Forecast (MWh)
Total Sales
Muni Sales
+ DSM
Preliminary
The Energy We Live By™
22
CO2
Emission Trends
‐
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
4,500,000
CO2 Emissions (tons)
All Sales Municipal Sales
Preliminary
The Energy We Live By™
33
Emission Reduction Estimates
‐
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
4,500,000
CO2 Emissions (tons)
Base
+ DSM
+ Gas vs. Coal
+ New Wind
Preliminary
The Energy We Live By™
44
Municipal Power Purchase Costs
$‐
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
$400
Municipal Charges ($Millions)
Base
+ DSM
+ Gas vs. Coal
+ Wind
Preliminary
The Energy We Live By™
55
Municipal Rate Estimates
$‐
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
$70
$80
$90
$100
Municipal Rate ($/MWh)
Base
New Mix
Preliminary
The Energy We Live By™
66
Municipal Electric Purchase Costs (with CO2
charge)
Base Case Resource Forecast
Preliminary
$‐
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
$400
$450
Municipal Charges ($Millions)
Base Base with $22/ton charge New mix with $22/ton charge
Preliminary
The Energy We Live By™
77
CO2
Price Risk Forecasting
Source –Synapse Energy Economics
26 U.S. Utilities
Resource Planning Forecasts
CO2
Cost ($/ton)
Fort Collins
Community Greenhouse Gas Goals:
Aligning with Community Values
City Council Work Session
February 11, 2014
1
A Thriving Community
2
3
Community Values
• Community & Neighborhood
Livability
• Culture and Recreation
• Economic Health
• Environmental Health
• High Performing Government
• Safe Community
• Transportation
4
Fort Collins Greenhouse Gas Goals
• 20% reduction below 2005 levels, by 2020
• 80% reduction below 2005 levels, by 2050
Fort Collins Climate Action Plan
5
Focus
• Reliability
• Efficiency & conservation
• Renewable energy
• Partnership
Fort Collins Energy Policy
6
Sources: fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do
fcgov.com/climateprotection
GHG / Energy Progress (2012)
Element Boundary
% of
total
GHG
Electricity
City limits
(municipal Utility) 52%
Ground
Transport
City Growth
Mgmt. Area 23%
Natural gas
City limits
(private utility) 17%
Air travel Fort Collins citizens 4%
Solid Waste
Organics from FC
contribution to
landfills
3%
Water
Process
Emissions
Process emission
from wastewater
treatment
0.3%
Challenges ahead
7
8
• Scientists agree
• Climate change is impacting us now
• It will get worse if we don’t do something about it
• Solutions are available now
• Majority public sentiment favors action
The Facts
9
Climate Change is impacting us now
• 2012 – hottest year on record
• Each of the last three decades have been successively
warmer than any of the preceding decades since 1850.
• 1/3 of population experienced 10 or more days of 100 deg
• Fort Collins is experiencing extreme weather events
consistent with climate predictions
10
Local Extreme Heat Report
11
656%
656%
Increased Wildfire Risk
• Up to 6o F warmer summers
by 2040
• Continued declines in
snowpack
• Declines in water availability
and soil moisture
12
Recent News
Draft IPCC report on climate mitigation
• Political willingness to tackle climate change is growing
in many countries.
• Another 15 years of failure to limit carbon emissions
could make the problem impossible to solve with
current technologies.
European Union
New climate and energy goals:
• Reduce 40% emissions below 1990 by 2030
• Achieve 27% share of renewable energy by 2030.
13
New Solutions and Opportunities
Energy solutions are rapidly changing
• Price of renewable energy solutions dropping
• Electricity pricing and information tool
(Advanced metering)
High efficiency, hybrid and electric vehicles
Business models for delivering efficiency
and customer solutions
Research to Date
• GHG goal alternatives evaluation (Brendle Group)
• “Stepping Up” White Paper (Rocky Mountain Institute)
• Platte River Power Authority planning
14
Brendle Group RMI
Fort Collins GHG Alternatives
15
Goal
Alternative
Magnitude/
Timeline
Annual
Reduction
Required
Alternative A.
Keep Current
Goal
80% below 2005
baseline by 2050
1.8%
Alternative B.
Increase
Magnitude
100% below
2005 baseline by
2050
2.2%
Alternative C.
Accelerate
Timeframe
80% below 2005
baseline by 2030
3.2%
Historical Reductions 2005-2012 1.2%
Alternatives Analysis
16
• Sketch out pathways to meet alternative goals
• First order economic analysis looks at net costs/savings
17
Can achieve 80% below 2005 by 2030 through:
• Reduced building energy use 31% through efficiency
• Carbon neutral electricity by 2030
• Reduced transportation emissions by 48%
How far? How fast?
18
Commonalities Among Alternatives
Net Zero electricity emissions
• Widespread adoption of PV
• Large increase in wind energy
Efficient Buildings
• Make new and existing
building stock much more
efficient (technology,
operations, conservation,
integrated design)
19
Commonalities Among Alternatives
Transportation
• 30% reduction in miles driven
through smart growth,
alternative modes, incentives
• Increase fuel efficiency and
electric vehicles
Zero Waste by 2030
Differences Among Alternatives
• Leadership positioning
• Innovation opportunity
• Impacts to outflow of cash from community
• Cost impacts
• Rate of investments and paybacks
• Need for Carbon Offsets
20
21
Climate Leadership is
Economically Smart
• Draws investment capital
• Draws intellectual capital
• Redirects revenue to community
• Reduces risk (of carbon cost/ fossil fuel price escalation)
• Supports jobs; business retention, expansion, incubation
o 62% of GHG reduction actions make cities more
attractive to business
(Source: Wealthier, Healthier Cities, CDP and C40Cities)
What have we learned….
• All scenarios are transformative
• It’s technically possible to be much more
aspirational in goals (acceleration) – RMI
• Efficiency can largely offset expected growth
• Energy supply resources must be changed
• Long term benefits outweigh costs
- Increased near-term investment needed
- Invest now for long term payback
• Leadership position brings resources to
accomplish the goals
22
What have we learned…..
• Need to address local barriers to
implementation (e.g. transmission capacity)
• Collaboration will be essential
• Require community buy-in to achieve
• Comparative risks for carbon cost
23
Public Perspectives
24
2011 Fort Collins Air Quality Survey
• 86 % - governments should offer voluntary
programs that enable citizens and businesses to
reduce climate change
• 74% - governments should enact legislation and
regulations intended to reduce climate change
Climate Change in the Coloradoan Mind (2013)
• More than half of Coloradans say that more should
be done about global warming at all levels of
government
Council Advisory Boards
25
2005 2020 2030 2040 2050
Fort Collins GHG Goal Alternatives
Choices Regarding – How Far? How Fast?
26
• Collaboration
- (with PRPA; with other regional planning efforts)
• Community leadership
• Cost management
• Future cost of carbon
• Maximize innovation
• Maximize other benefits
• Risk mitigation/diversifying energy supply
Range of Values
What to emphasize?
Next Steps
27
• Technical / Economic Analysis
• Public engagement
• Advisory Committee
• Boards
• Forums
• Energy Policy update (2014)
• Climate Action Plan update (2014)
Direction Sought
28
1. Does Council support upcoming climate action
planning to consider two scenarios-
- accelerated goal for 2030 & carbon neutral by 2050
- current goal of 80% reduction by 2050
2. Does City Council have any feedback on which values
or principles to emphasize in upcoming climate action
planning?
3. Does City Council have any feedback on the information
presented or proposed next steps for the Climate Action Plan
update?
$50,000 $120,000
$27,200
$16,300
$5,000
$26,645
$3,150
Conventional:
Average Midsize
$27,200 $6,900 25
$1,500
$2,850
$3,000
Figure 2: total cost of ownership for various vehicle options ($), includes purchase and
three years of fuel. includes state and federal incentives and assumes adequate tax
appetite. Note: volt and Civic are compact cars while all others depicted are midsize class.
tOtal cOSt Of OWNErSHiP fOr variOuS vEHiclE tyPES
05: advanCed tranSportation
Scenario
Demand
23
2030 BAU
Demand
45
-48%
Figure 1: this transportation energy reduction potential estimate for Fort Collins is based on a detailed, national-level analysis conducted by Rocky mountain institute for Reinventing
Fire.
fOrt cOlliNS traNSPOrtatiON ENErgy rEDuctiON POtENtial
05: advanCed tranSportation
³¹ “fort CollinS tranSportation maSter plan,” City of fort CollinS, 2/15/11.
http://www.fCgov.Com/planfortCollinS/pdf/tmp.pdf
05: advanCed tranSportation
and the community all play crucial roles in enabling this transition by
aligning pricing and incentive structures with the community’s goals
and by employing new, creative approaches to accelerating adoption of
customer-sited resources.
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
Customer
Acquisition,
Permitting,
Interconnection,
Inspection,
Installation
Module
& Inverter
BOS:
Installation
Costs
Current
Total Cost -
U.S. Avg.
BOS:
Finance,
Warranty,
O&M,
Residual
Potential Cost
Installed Cost (Q1 2013 $)
$4.93
$2.21
Cost Components Cost Reduction Opportunities
Source: Bloomberg New Energy Finance. July 2013 Solar Spot Price Index. August 2013; GTM/SEIA Q1 2013 Solar Market Insight; Friedman et al.;
Second Annual Benchmarking Non-Hardware Balance-of-System (Soft) Costs for U.S. Photovoltaic Systems, Using a Bottom-Up Approach and
Installer Survey. NREL. Pre-Release. July 2013; Seel et al. “Why Are Residential PV Prices in Germany So Much Lower Than in the United States?”
LBNL. February 2013.
OPPOrtuNitiES fOr rEDuciNg tHE cOSt Of rOOf-mOuNtED SOlar Pv
23 See http://www.SolaraBCS.org/ for more information.
24 See http://www.ireCUSa.org/wp-Content/UploadS/Sharing-SUCCeSS-final-
verSion.pdf for more information.
Figure 7: installed prices for sub 10 kilowatt rooftop pv systems are being installed in the $2.21/
wdc range in Germany as of the first quarter of 2013. over 90% of the cost difference between
the u.S. and Germany is attributable to differences in "soft costs" as depicted above. achieving
such low costs is possible in the u.S., as evidenced by the department of Energy's currently
funded competition that awards companies able to install 5,000 new rooftop solar systems for
an average price of $2.00/w or less.
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
for_ria_2013_Update.pdf
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
07
08
09 10
11
12
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
Price
(2011
$/mcf)
Year
EIA
Projec7ons
v.
Actual
U.S.
Average
Wellhead
Natural
Gas
Prices
Sources: annual energy outlooks 1985-1987, 1989-2011 (see http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/archive.cfm for an archive of reports through 2012.); early aeo 2012 Bea gdp implicit price
deflator
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
400
500
600
700
800
900
Capacity - MW
Hydro
Coal
Gas - Combustion Turbine
Combined Cycle Gas Turbine
Utility Wind
Distributed PV
Utility PV
Combined Heat and Power
Accelerated Scenario
Building Eciency
Business-As-Usual Building
Eciency
Figure 1: Fort Collins’ accelerated clean electricity pathway (right) reflects 100% net electricity
emissions reduction by 2030. the business-as-usual pathway (left) is a projection of 2005–2012
trends to 2030. Capacity is much higher for the accelerated case due to renewables’ lower capacity
factors relative to fossil-fueled generation sources. Excess renewables are generated to offset
remaining natural gas generation.
2013–2030 ElEctricity SyStEm SuPPly POrtfOliO
04: renewaBle eleC. SUpply
fort Collins is thus among the leaders but not at the forefront. at this formative
moment, fort Collins can stay on its current path or it can choose to accelerate its
carbon reduction plan and stand among the world’s leading cities. the community
is uniquely positioned to accelerate its goal, develop a specific implementable plan,
and in doing so, become a replicable model for cities elsewhere, contributing to a
broader energy shift nationally and globally.
02: why aCCelerate fort
CollinS' Climate goalS?
down some of the oldest, dirtiest existing plants, and utilities and
communities around the country are already reflecting the cost of
carbon in planning.
3 roadmap to moving to a low-CarBon eConomy in 2050," http://eC.eUropa.eU/Clima/
poliCieS/roadmap/index_en.htm. aCCeSSed 9/12/13.
4 "2-degree gloBal warming limit iS Called a 'preSCription for diSaSter'," mark
fiSChetti, SCientifiC ameriCan, 12/6/11. http://BlogS.SCientifiCameriCan.Com/
oBServationS/2011/12/06/two-degree-gloBal-warming-limit-iS-Called-a-preSCription-
for-diSaSter/
02: why aCCelerate fort
CollinS' Climate goalS?
$6,300 $1,700
Alternative B.
Increase
Magnitude
100%
below 2005
baseline by
2050
2.2%
2030
Energy: $1,300
Trans: $160
Other: $0
$1,500
Energy: $1,400
Trans: $380
Other: $0
$1,800 $15
Leadership opportunity
to join limited ranks of
communities with
carbon neutral goal;
may attract increased
investment and
innovation
Carbon neutral requires
overproduction of
renewable energy to
compensate for segments
of the inventory/
economy with no local
control; requiring ongoing
investment which limits
financial benefits
2050
Energy: $2,300
Trans: $440
Other: $600
$3,300
Energy: $5,300
Trans: $2,000
Other: $0
$7,400 $1,600
Alternative C.
Accelerate
Timeframe
80% below
2005
baseline by
2030
3.2%
2030
Energy: $2,000
Trans: $180
Other: $0
$2,200
Energy: $2,200
Trans: $440
Other: $0
$2,600 $0
Makes leadership
statement; may attract
increased investment
and innovation; Greater
financial benefits over
the 2050 planning
horizon
Tests boundaries of
program uptake; May
require more financial
investment in the near
term
2050
Energy: $2,400
Trans: $360
Other: $0
$2,700
Energy: $5,900
Trans: $1,600
Other: $0
$7,600 $1,900
by 2050
2.2%
Alternative C.
Accelerate Timeframe
48% below
baseline
80% below 2005 baseline
by 2030
3.2%
Historical Emissions Reductions 9% below 2005 by 2012 1.2%