Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/03/2015 - RESOLUTION 2015-030 UPDATING COMMUNITY GREENHOUSEAgenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY March 3, 2015 City Council STAFF Lucinda Smith, Environmental Sustainability Director Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Manager SUBJECT Resolution 2015-030 Updating Community Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is for City Council to consider:  reaffirming the existing goal to reduce communitywide greenhouse emissions to 20% below 2005 levels by 2020,  establishing new goals to reduce communitywide greenhouse gas emission to 80% below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050,  directing the City Manager to develop a 2020 Climate Action Implementation Plan based on the 2015 Climate Action Plan: Framework. In April 2014, City Council asked that an ad hoc committee be formed to develop a proposed updated Climate Action Plan (CAP) that describes how the community could achieve the greenhouse gas emissions reduction objectives stated above. Following nine months of work, a draft framework has been prepared that outlines steps needed to put Fort Collins on a path to meet the goals. The 2015 Climate Action Plan: Framework (“CAP Framework”) provides a high level assessment of steps needed to set Fort Collins on the path to achieve carbon emissions reduction objectives as requested by Council, but does not determine future implementation details. The work on climate action planning is, by nature, iterative. Very few cities have taken the initiative to explore, to this depth, what it would take to meet ambitious long-term goals. Recommended next steps are to complete a 2020 Climate Action Implementation Plan to develop details of near-term programs. Any tactics or programs requiring Council action will be developed in more detail and discussed on a case-by-case basis prior to Council’s consideration. Achieving these goals will be challenging and will require sustained action and focus, and involvement by all sectors of the community. Anticipated outcomes of setting visionary greenhouse gas goals include attracting outside capital as well as increased local innovation and entrepreneurial activity. These goals can drive further action to reduce emissions than would occur without the goals or a plan. They can spur the community’s engagement, competitive spirit, and sense of pride. Setting a new goal for 2030 also establishes an important interim target for action between now and 2050—an interim goal that is set out in the future but is close enough to be able to be visualized assists in keeping the community on track for long-term carbon reductions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 2 BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION History Fort Collins has a long and thoughtful history of community planning, including taking steps to reduce our carbon footprint and implementing actions to improve our resiliency against a changing climate. Community support for reducing greenhouse gas goals has been significant since the CAP was first adopted in 1999 and then updated in 2008. The greenhouse gas reduction goals adopted in 2008 are to reduce community GHG emissions to 20% below 2005 levels by 2020, and to 80% below 2005 levels by 2050. The 2008 Climate Action Plan and corresponding 2009 Energy Policy continue to support several community values and strategic outcomes including Economic Health, Community Livability, Environmental Health, Safe Community, and Transportation. The Energy Policy sets a solid foundation for successful, nationally recognized energy efficiency programs and increased renewables Recognizing Fort Collins’ special vulnerability to climate disruptions, as well as the advancements in technology and markets that have occurred since 2008, in 2014, City Council considered three different alternatives for advancing Fort Collins community GHG goals. Need for Accelerated Climate Action 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. Fortunately, cities, including Fort Collins, have taken a leadership role in working to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase resiliency as predicted climate change occurs. (See Attachment 1 for more information.) 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. Colorado State University has an objective to ultimately become carbon neutral. Process In April 2014, Fort Collins City Council passed Resolution 2014-028, calling for an ad hoc citizen advisory committee to develop, for City Council’s consideration, and updated Climate Action Plan that described the steps our community will need to take to achieve communitywide GHG reduction goals to:  20% below 2005 levels by 2020  80% below 2005 levels by 2030  100% below 2005 levels by 2050 (Carbon neutral) In response to Resolution 2014-028, a 23-member Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) was convened. The CAC, comprised of members from many different parts of the Fort Collins community, has met nine times to provide ideas, input and guidance. A core analytical team, led by the City and supported by Brendle Group and Rocky Mountain Institute, has developed a framework to assess the implications of strategies to achieve the goals. In addition, Platte River Power Authority has analyzed an electricity supply scenarios that would reduce system-wide emissions to 80% by 2030. This analysis was provided under an Intergovernmental Agreement to perform modeling work between Platte River and City of Fort Collins, but it does not represent a direction that has been endorsed by the Platter River board. A forecast was developed of future community GHG emissions under a Business as Usual (BAU) state. Fort Collins community GHG emissions are projected to increase to 16% by 2030 and to 39% by 2050, above 2005 levels, in the absence of additional actions to curb them. This projection is referred to as “Business As Usual.” Some actions are anticipated that could lower emissions as a result of actions that are outside the direct control of the Fort Collins community or City government. Increased federal standards for vehicle fuel efficiency (Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency, or CAFE) are expected to lower emissions in the Fort Collins Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 3 community by 12% by 2050. Greenhouse gas emissions from Fort Collins’s electric supply could drop if Platte River Power Authority decides to proceed toward the guidelines established by the Platte River board in 2013. These guidelines were established for a study of options that could: (1) reduce emissions to 20% below 2005 levels by 2020 and to 80% by 2050, (2) achieve 20% energy supply from renewable sources by 2020 (not including existing hydropower), (3) maintaining reliability through minimum 15% reserve margin, and (4) remaining the lowest cost wholesale electric supplier located in Colorado. No changes to the electric supply from Platte River have been approved by its Board, but are assumed to have been implemented in this Adjusted Business As Usual scenario. Since 2013, Platte River has already added 60 MW of new wind generation and the Board has approved installation of up to 30 MW of solar generation at the Rawhide site. Additional changes may be considered over time based on Platte River’s ongoing resource planning efforts. Subtracting the anticipated benefits of the CAFE vehicles standards and assuming CO2 reductions associated with Platte River’s 2013 study guidelines are implemented, total Fort Collins projected emissions would drop. This is referred to as the “Adjusted Business As Usual” scenario. The strategies identified in this CAP framework strive to fill in the gap between the “Adjusted Business As Usual” emissions level and what would be needed to accomplish emissions reductions of 20% by 2020, 80% by 2030, and carbon neutrality by 2050. Table 1. Fort Collins GHG Emissions Forecasts and Needed Reductions 2005 2020 2030 2050 Business As Usual Forecast Emissions (with projected heat increase) 2,343,000 2,433,000 2,711,000 3,265,000 “Adjusted Business As Usual” reduction from anticipated federal vehicles fuel efficiency standards and assuming CO2 reductions associated with Platte River Power Authority’s study guidelines 567,000 951,000 1,739,000 Adjusted Business As Usual (ABAU) Forecast Emissions 1,866,000 1,760,000 1,526,000 Target % (below 2005) 20% 80% 100% Target Emissions 1,874,000 469,000 0 Needed Reductions from ABAU -8,000 1,291,000 1,526,000 Reductions Outlined in 2015 Climate Action Plan Framework 272,000 1,119.000 1,192,000 Remaining Emissions 1,594,000 641,000 334,000 Percent below 2005 baseline with 2015 Climate Action Plan Framework 32% 73% 86% 2015 Climate Action Plan: Framework With the help of The Brendle Group, the Rocky Mountain Institute, and staff, the Citizen Advisory Committee has considered and developed a list of strategy areas for emissions reductions. Ultimately, a suite of eleven strategies has been quantified in the framework document, and additional strategies were identified but not Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 4 quantified. The selection of strategies and tactics is based on research and analysis covering all emissions categories. To develop assumptions about the strategies, more than 100 individual tactics were evaluated, from City-led efficiency programs to entrepreneurial mobile applications and services, based on interviews with more than 40 local, regional and national experts and analysis by independent consultants. Table 2 below summarizes the strategies, by focus area. Table 2. Estimated Percent of Total Emissions Reductions from CAP Framework Strategies 2020 2030 2050 Buildings: Boosting Efficiency, Comfort and Health Build in Efficiency From the Start 3% 2% 3% Make Existing Homes More Efficient 20% 15% 21% Increase Energy Efficiency in the Institutional, Commercial, and Industrial Sectors 27% 18% 21% Advanced Mobility: Making Transport Faster, More Convenient and Cleaner Shift Land Use Patterns to Shorten Trips and Reduce the Need to Drive 7% 4% 5% Drive Adoption of Multimodal Transport 3% 3% 3% Accelerate Adoption of Fuel Efficient and Electric Vehicles 2% 2% 6% Energy Supply and Delivery: The Shift to Renewable Energy Resources Advance Utility-Scale Renewable Energy Supply 0% 30% 11% Advance Residential and Commercial Solar Adoption 18% 14% 10% Shift Heating Loads to Biofuels, Geothermal, and Electrification 3% 4% 12% Waste Reduction and Materials Regeneration Road to Zero Waste 17% 7% 9% Carbon Sequestration < 1% <1% <1% TOTAL ESTIMATED MTCO2e REDUCTION FROM STRATEGIES 272,000 1,119,000 1,192,000 Estimated Percent Reduction from 2005 Baseline 32%+ 73%+ 86%+ The draft 2015 CAP Framework contains information about the need for Fort Collins to play its part in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, a description of the process, a summary of the strategies and potential tactics, and potential next steps. (See Exhibit A of accompanying resolution.) Attachment 2 provides additional supporting information about what the best practice research revealed, and illuminating case studies. Potential Benefits Approval of the proposed new goals would place Fort Collins squarely among the vanguard of cities working to achieve deep carbon reductions, and offer significant opportunities for research, innovation, testing and providing replicable models for action. Other anticipated outcomes of setting ambitious greenhouse gas goals include attracting outside capital as well as increased local innovation and entrepreneurial activity. Goals can Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 5 drive further action to reduce emissions than would occur without a goal and plan. They can spur the community’s engagement, competitive spirit, and sense of pride. A 2030 goal also establishes a critical interim target for action between now and 2050, to keep the community on track for long-term carbon reductions. Numerous other potential benefits exist, including increased community resiliency through  provision of more efficient buildings that require less energy or may operate independently  combining the use of distributed and renewable energy resources with microgrid or “islanding” technology can assist in protecting valuable community services such as hospitals, police and other emergency management facilities during extreme events  reduction in air pollution emissions associated with cleaner modes of transportation will lessen the threat associated with increase heat and ground level ozone formation  reduction of waste to the landfill preserves valuable landfill space in the event of extreme events such as floods that may generate large amounts of debris that must be landfilled  increased urban forest can assist in the reduction of the urban heat island effect and provide localized cooling to buildings and other areas  promotion of sustainable building practices and green streets includes the use of low impact development  structures that provide cooling benefits, divert storm water, improve overall water quality, while reducing water demand and conserving resources Indirect economic benefits from the draft CAP strategies could accrue to the community. For example:  Extensive research documents that health effects from motor vehicles create a large economic cost to society One study (Delucchi et al. 1996 (Mark Delucchi and Donal McCubbin, 1996. Social Cost of the Health Effects of Motor-Vehicle Air Pollution, UC Davis, ITS, Table 11.7-6) ) reviewed hundreds of studies of various pollutants and quantified risks from four “criteria” pollutants (carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, and particulate matter) and six “toxic” air pollutants (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, benzene, 1,3- butadiene, gasoline particulates, and diesel particulates) and estimated that air pollution health costs range from $0.008/VMT to $1.233/VMT. For example, with a 10% reduction in Fort Collins current VMT is realized, this would translate into a $12.8 million dollar reduction in air pollution health costs using the studies weighted fleet average values. • The $350+ million investment in energy efficiency measures installed could create 2,255 new FTE jobs based on an analysis conducted by RMI using a 2010 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory study that tracked 38 energy efficiency programs across 11 states. Potential Costs The preliminary analysis completed as part of this plan suggests that the benefits could outweigh the anticipated costs in the long run. The preliminary order-of-magnitude analysis suggests that the cumulative costs associated with actions between 2015 and 2020 may be $600M, cumulative savings in that same period may be $300M, for a net cumulative cost between $300M by 2020. Even though there is considerable uncertainty associated with these cost estimates, this underscores the need for exploration of financing options to distribute these costs over time. Longer-term, the preliminary analysis indicates that there could be net savings to be realized community-wide, potentially on the order of $2-6 billion by 2050. However, these long-term estimates do not include costs for energy storage options, renewable electric transmission and distribution system integration and infrastructure enhancement costs, stranded assets, and more detailed modeling. These costs were not included in the analysis because it is exceedingly difficult to estimates those costs with any level of confidence now, given rapid evolution of technologies and market conditions. Additionally, the cost estimates do not include multiple indirect benefits that can accrue from the proposed strategies, including: Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 6 o Improved public heath resulting from more active modes of transportation (walking and bicycling); o Improved public health resulting from reductions in air pollution and emissions; o Indirect economic and social benefits to the community through increased resiliency to predicted climate change impacts (e.g., increased flooding); o Job creation and resulting wages from Climate Action research and program implementation; o Indirect economic benefit to the community from increased investment in local power generation (e.g., increased solar and distributed energy installation). Additional analysis and modeling needs to be performed as part of the development of implementation plans to further clarify costs, financing approaches and savings associated with near-term actions. Checks and Balances for Implementation There are a number of key checks and balances in the processes needed to implement CAP strategies that should serve to ensure that costs of future actions remain commensurate with community values. 1. Financing Guiding Principles - A set of guiding principles for investment is being developed as part of the framework plan. These guiding principles provide a potential set of boundary conditions for the implementation of the plan with the goal of mitigating a portion of the risk inherent with the unknowns of a framework plan. (See below.) 2. City Council Review and Vetting of Individual Strategies - Any CAP strategy or program that requires City Council action will need to be independently designed to the operational level then discussed and vetted before Council consideration. 3. City Budget process - The City’s biennial budget process allocates City budget in a balanced way that considers a range of strategic objectives and community needs, and prioritizes decision accordingly. 4. CAP Update Process - The Climate Action Plan will need to be reviewed periodically (at least every five years) to ensure that the latest community conditions, opportunities, and technological innovations are being considered. Draft Guiding Principles for Climate Action Plan Financing City of Fort Collins 1. No significant adverse impact on the City’s balance sheet 2. No adverse impact on the City’s credit rating 3. The City’s investment should catalyze investment in strategies by end-users and the third parties 4. Internally the City’s priority is utility rate revenue before general fund revenue Consumers / End Users 1. Access to affordable energy and value-added services 2. Confidence in the energy efficiency results of services provided 3. Experience a streamlined purchase process 4. Experience enhanced customer service 5. An understanding of benefits versus costs that allows each user to make their own determination of value Businesses / End Users 1. Access to information and assistance to select the right investments 2. Minimal impact to business operations 3. Access to capital funds that do not negatively impact their own balance sheet 4. Experience a streamlined purchase process 5. Experience enhanced customer service 6. Opportunities to partner with third parties to improve energy efficiency and reduce on-going costs Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 7 Private/Third Party Sources of Capital 1. Earn returns commensurate with level of risk assumed 2. Recognition of the key role of capital providers in the implementation of the CAP 3. Transparency in expectations of capital providers 4. Recognition of the fixed costs associated with establishing financing programs, and the key role of scale in reducing the cost of capital 5. Ensure that public sector commitments, if any, to support or scale programs are honored 6. Cooperation on the part of local stakeholders to help address any barriers to the provision of capital or its timely repayment Summary The CAP analysis effort has been significant and a framework has been outlined that could achieve the majority of the requested reduction objectives. The analysis approach is based on examples from best practices elsewhere, judgments by staff and the consulting team, and estimates of foreseeable cost trends and adoption rates for specific strategies. This effort has been robust and the CAP document provides an important framework from which to evaluate next steps and advance implementation. Still, uncertainties about the future exist. The electric supply industry is changing rapidly. Details such as electric transmission and distribution grid systems integration, electric storage and balancing requirements to complement high level of wind/solar, and the overall integration of technology from various sectors are evolving quickly as the industry moves to adapt to new methods of renewable energy generation and storage. Researchers around the world are working to address these types of questions, and Fort Collins and its partner Platte River Power Authority can play an important role in the evolution of energy systems by engaging in this research and development. The draft 2015 CAP Framework lays out a suite of strategies that if, if implemented, could come close to achieving the goals. The plan incorporates a modeled scenario of Platte River system-wide changes that the Platte River Board has not adopted. The near-term direction from the Platte River board will become clearer upon completion of their resource planning initiative. Continued coordination with Platte River will be important in determining details moving forward. Many of the adoption rates are aggressive, so strategic public engagement strategies will be critical to achieving long-term success. The development and implementation of the CAP is, by nature, an iterative process. Accordingly, the CAP provides a framework that enables periodic evaluation and updates that consider advancements in technology, community engagement, and financing approaches. As implementation plans are developed, strategies and tactics can be modified within the overall framework of the plan to minimize costs, avoid unfavorable outcomes, and take advantage of new technical and economic opportunities. Proposed Next Steps Upon direction from City Council, and with approval of necessary resources, the following next steps are recommended to support progress towards adopted community GHG reduction goals. Mid-cycle budget requests to support planning, address increased demand for existing programs, or pilot new initiatives may be developed for consideration. Develop a 2020 Climate Action Implementation Plan Funding will be sought to support an interdepartmental staff team in preparing a 2020 Climate Action Implementation Plan, using the 2015 CAP Framework as a guide, to identify prioritized actions and associated near-term budget requests necessary for progress between 2015 through 2020 to meet the 2020 greenhouse gas reduction goal and put Fort Collins on a trajectory to achieve the goal to reduce emissions to 80% below 2005 by 2030. The 2020 Climate Action Implementation Plan will leverage the modeling capability, research, and analyses already completed for the 2015 CAP Framework. In order to be successful, actions identified in the 2020 Implementation Plan must reflect coordination and cohesion among involved City departments as Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 8 well as community input on preferences or concerns regarding next steps. Therefore, community awareness raising and engagement will be a critical element in determining the key next steps that go beyond already approved activities. Community Engagement If Fort Collins is to meet its greenhouse gas goals, increased community engagement, “ownership,” and action is critical. Funding will be sought to implement a robust campaign to raise awareness and involve citizens. This may include:  Engagement targeted at collaborative problem-solving with the largest users of energy (such as computer server facilities)  Engagement with large institutions such as Colorado State University to align efforts toward meeting similar goals  Innovative neighborhood-scale approaches to energy generation, distribution and use  Broad, community-wide awareness-raising and engagement campaigns  Community capacity-building to leverage and expand the activities of non-profits, grass roots organizations, businesses, and educational institutions  Collaboration with Platte River Power Authority and its owner municipalities (Longmont, Estes Park, and Loveland) to advance progress regionally. Research Equitable Financing Mechanisms that Support Community Climate Action Additional staff and/or outside expertise will be sought to investigate new financing approaches that enable Fort Collins to bring forward the actions called for in the 2015 CAP Framework while mitigating adverse and/or inequitable economic impacts, e.g., a public-private partnership to leverage outside financing. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Adoption of this Resolution alone does not impact the City budget. However, implementing actions in the framework plan will require support from City budget as well as external funding sources. Within the current budget cycle, it is anticipated that staff would seek additional funding to implement the recommended actions listed above and work with other potential funding sources to assist in implementation. In future budget cycles, City Council can anticipate requests to fund actions that directly support multiple City objectives and also reduce GHG emissions. Council may be asked to consider electric rate increases to fund increased energy efficiency and renewable programs, alongside any rate impacts associated with needs to maintain the electric distribution system. In order to protect the City’s credit rating and balance sheet, Financial Guiding Principles have been developed to guide City investments. These principles will be clarified and refined with the development of a 2020 Climate Action Implementation Plan. Staff’s initial assessments of potential economic (as well as social and environmental) impacts of the draft framework plan are outlined in Attachment 4 on “Sustainability Assessment Tool.” BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION In addition to working with the Climate Citizen Advisory Committee over nine months, City staff visited eight City Council Advisory boards (several more than once) in 2014 and early 2015 to introduce the topic and then seek feedback on the CAP strategy concepts. A summary of motions passed is presented below. More details about board dialogue are provided in Attachment 3 on Public Outreach. All of the Climate Citizen Advisory Committee meeting minutes are posted to <http://www.fcgov.com/climateprotection/cap.php>) Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 9 Climate Citizen Advisory Committee (January 21, 2015) - a majority voted to  Endorse the objectives in Resolution 2014-028 that: • reaffirm the current goal to reduce communitywide greenhouse gas emissions to 20% below 2005 levels by 2020, • set the aspirational goals to reduce communitywide greenhouse gas emissions to 80% below 2005 levels by 2030, and carbon neutrality by 2050.  Find that the suite of strategies identified through the CAC process demonstrates the feasibility of substantially achieving accelerated goals (20% reduction by 2020, 80% reduction by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2050), and recommends City Council adopt a framework incorporating these strategies, realizing that the strategies will evolve over time.  Recommend that Council develop an implementation plan to identify and prioritize near term tactics that support the strategies to meet the goals, establish a system of metrics to be reported on regularly to City Council and citizens, establish a citizen oversight committee, and infuse climate objectives into City policies and programs. Natural Resources Advisory Board - (January 21, 2015) voted to …support the aspirational greenhouse-gas- reduction community goals set forth in resolution 2014-028 of the City of Fort Collins City Council …and endorse the suite of strategies in the draft framework. Transportation Board (January 21, 2015) voted to support the development of the CAP update to meet the goals proposed by City Council to be met by the strategies presented thus far. Air Quality Advisory Board (January 26, 2015) - voted to support the adoption of the aspirational goals in the proposed 2015 Climate Action Plan framework and recommend that Council direct staff to develop near-term implementation plans for the next two budget cycles consistent with the framework plan and the long-term goals for 2030 and 2050. Staff should be directed to solicit and consider input from appropriate boards and commission and the public. Energy Board (February 5, 2015) - voted to …Endorse the accelerated greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals specified in Resolution 2014-028, Recommend that Council provide direction and resources to Fort Collins Utilities staff and the City of Fort Collins Sustainability Services to manage the development of a robust implementation plan for near-term actions needed to meet these goals, and recommend this implementation plan contain cost limits and be reviewed and revised periodically. Updates to the CAP analysis that occurred subsequent to the CAC and above board’s position have resulted in a small adjustment to the percent greenhouse gas reduction below baseline in the goal years, and a shift out to the year 2031-2034 when the preliminary order-of-magnitude cost estimates begin to indicate the possibility of net societal savings. PUBLIC OUTREACH City staff conducted outreach to a number of stakeholder groups over the nine month process to develop an updated CAP for Council consideration. The details are provided in Attachment 3. In addition, three public open house events were held, one in December 2014 and two in January 2015, and more than 120 people attended at least one of these events. A Web site comment box was available for comment throughout the process. Agenda Item 15 Item # 15 Page 10 ATTACHMENTS 1. Post 2008 Climate Change and Predictions (PDF) 2. Best Case Examples (PDF) 3. Public Outreach Summary (PDF) 4. Sustainability Assessment Summary and Tool (PDF) 5. Work Session Summary memos (PDF) 6. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) Post 2008 Climate Change Findings and Predictions Findings - Environment The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a final summary report in Copenhagen in November 2014. This report underscores three major facts about climate change:  Climate change is human-caused and is already having dangerous impacts across the world;  If the world community acts now, warming can still be kept below the politically agreed upon "safe" limit of two degrees Celsius;  The ability to secure a safe climate future is not only possible but also economically viable. The summary report also recognizes that “Mitigation can be more cost-effective if using an integrated approach that combines measures to reduce energy use and the greenhouse gas intensity of end-use sectors, decarbonize energy supply, reduce net emissions and enhance carbon sinks in land-based sectors.”1 U.S. Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions increased 2.5% in 20132  Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) increased from 5,267 million metric tons (MMmt) in 2012 to 5,396 MMmt in 2013 (2.5%).  The 2013 increase was largely the result of colder weather leading to an increase in energy intensity (energy measured in Btu per dollar of gross domestic product [GDP]) from 2012.  Heating degree days were up 18.5% in 2013 versus 2012.  In only three years since 1990 have emissions increased more: 1996, 2000, and 2010. 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%.)3 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.4 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.5 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 1 http://ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/ 2 http://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/carbon/ 3 http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/CO2EmissionsFromFuelCombustionHighlights2013.pdf 4 http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/05/130510-earth-co2-milestone-400-ppm/ 5 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2013/13 ATTACHMENT 1 2 tornado hit near El Reno, OK on May 31st, 2013, causing eight fatalities; this was the widest tornado on record.6 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 2013.7 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.8 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.9 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 2011.10 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 According to the National Weather Service, extreme heat killed more Americans in the last decade than any other weather-related event. The City of Fort Collins commissioned the Rocky Mountain Climate Organization to prepare a study to analyze climate model predictions for future heat impacts in Fort Collins specifically. The study finds the Fort Collins experienced twice as many 90-degree days in the past 14 years than in the previous 39 years. This is a wakeup call for how the City will need to adapt to impacts from increased heat including impacts 6 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2013/13 7 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/13 8 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/ 9 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2013/13 10 http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12781 3 to water quality and quantity, elevated wildfire risk, worsening air quality, and increased energy use for cooling purposes.11 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 economic case for taking action is further underscored by the following two reports that have been released since April 2014. “The Cost of Delaying Action to Stem Climate Change”, released by the White House on July 29, 2014, states that the net cost to mitigate CO2 emissions will increase by approximately 40 percent for each decade of delay. The higher cost can be attributed to both greater economic damages associated with higher temperatures and CO2 concentrations, and the cost increase of mitigating more CO2 later.12 Another report, “Risky Business: The Economic Risks of Climate Change in the United States” (June 2014), was led by a bi-partisan group of political and business leaders including Henry Paulson, Tom Steyer, Michael Bloomberg, Robert Rubin, and Olympia Snowe. This report makes it clear that human-induced climate change leading to rising temperatures will directly and indirectly cost the country hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century.13 http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Risky_Business_Report.pdf 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.14 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.15 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.16 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.17 11 http://www.fcgov.com/climateprotection/pdf/heat-report-jan-2014.pdf 12 http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/the_cost_of_delaying_action_to_stem_climate_change.pdf 13 http://www.4cleanair.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Risky_Business_Report.pdf 14 http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/30/11/2167.abstract 15 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jul/10/extreme-weather-manmade-climate-change 16 http://www.ipcc.ch/news_and_events/docs/srex/srex_press_release.pdf 17 http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/killer-heat/files/killer-summer-heat-report.pdf 4 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. 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.18 Calls for Action Sooner 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.19 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.20 18 http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/download/NCAJan11-2013-publicreviewdraft-letter.pdf 19 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) 20 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.) 1 Best Case Examples In researching best practices for the CAP update, Rocky Mountain Institute provided the following examples of success elsewhere in the country. Cities and States are Driving Down Carbon Emissions from Electricity Generation A growing number of cities and states, are taking steps to drive down carbon emissions and increase local job creation and other benefits by shifting their electricity supply portfolios toward renewables. While no two cities or regions are alike in terms of their existing supply mix, alternative supplies, cost structures and other factors, the trend reflects growing activity in some leading jurisdictions to clean up their electricity generation portfolios, while taking advantage of the falling cost of renewables.  Palo Alto. Palo Alto’s city council voted in March 2013 that the city’s municipal utility should become entirely carbon-neutral as soon as possible. By 2014, Palo Alto Utilities achieved this goal through the purchase of renewable energy credits (RECs) to offset carbon emissions from the city’s electricity supply. By 2017, the city’s electricity supply portfolio will be 100% renewable based on direct power purchase agreements, allowing the elimination of the current REC purchases.  Austin. Austin’s city council voted in August 2014 to require that the city’s municipal utility, Austin Energy, supply 50% of electricity from renewables by 2020, rising to 65% by 2025. In December, the city raised its solar power goal from 200 MW by 2020 to 950 MW by 2025. Of this total amount, 200 MW will operate within Austin’s city limits and 750 MW will be utility-scale solar. Once implemented, the 950 MW of solar power is expected to reduce carbon emissions from electricity production by 75– 80%. Currently, the city gets a significant share of its electricity from two fossil fuel plants that will be phased out. About 850 MW of wind farms in West and South Texas also provide electricity to the utility.  Los Angeles. In 2013, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) announced plans to phase out all coal-fired generation from its supply portfolio by 2025. Currently, LADWP owns a 22% interest in the 2,250 megawatt Navajo Generating Station and purchases additional power from Utah’s Intermountain Power Project.  California. California is well on the road for achieving its existing 33% renewable electricity supply goal by 2020. Governor Jerry Brown has proposed raising the state-wide renewable supply goal to 50% by 2030.  Ontario. The province of Ontario, home to 13.5 million people, began ten years ago to gradually phase out coal-fired electricity generation, which accounted for nearly 25% of electricity supply. In 2014, the government announced the closure of the last coal-fired generating station in the province, thereby fully eliminating coal from its power supply mix. Economies of Scale  The US DOE’s Better Buildings Neighborhood Program delivered more than 100,000 energy efficiency upgrades to homes and commercial buildings from 2010 to 2013, saving customers an estimated $730 million. The large-scale effort was made possible by focused neighborhood campaigns and by innovative funding, such as allowing building owners to pay for the improvements on their energy bills, which were lowered by the efficiency improvements. The large-scale approach cut costs and attracted private funding, enabling an impressive 80% of the costs to be borne by the private sector. ATTACHMENT 2 2  DOE’s Solarize program raised the adoption rate of solar PV systems 24-65 times higher than previous efforts, while cutting installation and financing costs by 30–40% in Massachusetts, Connecticut and Florida. The Solarize program works by giving residents the benefit of economies of scale. An installer can offer reduced prices by concentrating its efforts in one area and working with the community to spread the word about the program. The more people in the community who sign up, the lower the price goes for everyone, even the first to sign up.  The City of Houston‘s Residential Energy Efficiency Program (REEP) delivers weatherization services to low-income residents using intensive, neighborhood-by-neighborhood outreach campaigns. Within the first four years of operation, the program achieved an average 36% participation rate among more than 30,000 people in 12 neighborhoods. Participation rates in some neighborhoods, however, reached as high as 95%. These results were achieved by using a combination of outreach approaches, including block parties, door-to-door canvassing, and advertisements in community newspapers, radio, television, and public transit.  In the Canadian Rockies town of Jasper an energy efficiency program, offered by Alberta Power, successfully delivered energy efficiency measures to 70% of all households in the community in just six months. Although the utility had initially targeted 75% participation, it terminated the program early after reaching its goal of reducing peak residential demand by 22%. The program focused on installing simple measures such as compact fluorescent lighting, power-saver cords, indoor/outdoor lighting timers, and hot-water tank insulation. In essence, the program was a turn-key operation delivered in one home visit that minimized inconvenience and costs to the homeowner. The program delivered reductions in peak demand that cost just 53% of what the utility would have had to spend on equipment to meet that demand.  Austin Energy’s PowerSaver Multifamily Rebates program is tied to a city ordinance that mandates energy audits for all multifamily residences over 10 years old. Over the last 25 years, this program has achieved a landmark 93% participation from close to 191,309 units. While audits are mandated, energy efficiency improvements are required only if the building is a high energy use building that, on a per-square foot basis, exceeds 150% of the average energy use of similar buildings. For upgrades such as air-conditioners, lighting and insulation, the City offers rebates of up to $200,000 for a single building in a fiscal year to reduce upfront barriers to upgrades. The program is funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the City budget and also through utility rate collections.  The South California Edison small business program has emerged as a huge success in the recent past because of its focus on local job creation as a part of overarching energy efficiency initiatives. Through a pilot that emphasized outreach and communication efforts — partly through local community organizations and faith-based groups — the program was able to increase the uptake rate from 36% to 55% of total eligible participants. As a result, more than 10,000 customers participated, saving close to a total of 45 GWh in electricity demand. The program was also able to create 30 permanent skilled jobs in installation, auditing and administration. The True Costs of Vehicle Ownership One of the most misunderstood aspects of electric vehicles is the total cost of ownership. Not only is electricity much less expensive than gas or diesel (even compared with today’s gas prices), but the electric drivetrain is vastly simpler than the internal combustion engine (ICE) resulting in greatly reduced maintenance and need for repairs. And contrary to popular perception: not only is the long-term operational cost of electric vehicles more affordable than ICEs, the purchase and lease price for electric 3 vehicles has also reached cost parity with comparable ICEs. For example, a Nissan Leaf can be leased for $199/month, the same as a Toyota Camry. However, the Leaf will save owners ~$400/year in fuel1 and $423/year in maintenance and repairs2 compared with the Camry, meaning that a Leaf would save owners a total of almost $2500 over the course of a 3-year lease, at $1.75/gallon for gas. In fact, the gas station would have to pay the driver $0.19/gallon for a Camry to reach cost parity with a Leaf. Fleet Electrification  Indianapolis is in the process of electrifying its entire municipal fleet (500+ vehicles by 2025)3. Vision Fleet Capital (VFC) is working to help Indianapolis retire its old vehicles and replace them with hybrid or electric models through a money-saving lease arrangement. VFC is among the leading 3rd party leasing agents focused on fleet electrification4. Mobility and Multimodal Transit  With the help of Google and non-profit Open Trip Planner, Portland’s TriMet was the first public transit agency to open its mass transit schedules to the public through a web-based route-planner and via an open Application Programming Interface (API). The Trip Planner provides static and real-time data and route-finding for city bus, MAX (regional light rail), WES (regional commuter rail), streetcar (city rail), biking and walking. Usage of Portland's mass transit systems went up dramatically after open release of its data and its Trip Planner 5. Portland's open API has allowed for 50+ transit apps to be developed by third parties at no cost to Portland or TriMet. Wait times are down, rider satisfaction is up, and ridership is up. Several apps are now competing to provide the best user interface to the community6.  Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA was able to decrease the vehicle miles traveled by its residents roughly 60% by creating an integrated smart growth approach, including Complete Streets7. Energy Efficiency  Seattle Power and Light was the first utility in the U.S. to enable metered energy efficiency transaction structures (MEETS). A MEETS is structured in the following way: an ESCO comes in and installs ECMs, "owning" those upgrades to a building. The ESCO pays the building owner some annual fee for "renting" their building to install these measures. The local utility then pays the ESCO some amount for developing those negawatt assets, just like they would for other capacity installations. The utility then turns around and charges the building owner for the consumption of those negawatts. This structure holds the top line constant for the utility, enables the building owner to earn some cash flow off the ECM installations, and allows the ESCO to develop negawatt generating assets and capture a revenue stream from them8. These structures are especially powerful for driving energy efficiency adoption in small to medium sized commercial. 1 Comparison based on 12,000 miles/year, $1.75/gallon gas, $0.0994/kWh, 2015 Nisan Leaf and 2015 Toyota Camry 2 www.edmunds.com/tco.html 3 Source: http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/In-Gear/2012/1214/Electric-municipal-fleets-Indianapolis-thinks-so 4 Source: http://www.visionfleetcapital.com/ 5 Source: Bibiana McHugh, Portland TriMet IT Manager, quoted in PIRG report. 6 Source: Ibid 7 Source: http://www.uic.edu/orgs/brownfields/research-results/documents/AtlanticStationCaseStudyFinalforposting1- 3-13.pdf 8 Source: RMI expert interview with EnergyRM's Rob Harmon. Interview conducted 8/28/14. 4  The state of Arkansas was the first to launch the Clinton Climate Initiative’s Home Energy Affordability Loan (HEAL) program, an employer-assisted energy benefit program. Benefits are administered in much the same way as voluntary benefit programs such as employee 401k plans or Flexible Spending Accounts9. Utility Scale Solar  In early 2013, El Paso Electric Company and First Solar signed a 50 MW long-term power purchase agreement (PPA) for 5.8 ¢/KWh 10 , which is about half the price of coal based generation and less than half the residential electric rate 11 . More recently, Austin Energy signed a 150 MW, 20 year PPA with Recurrent Energy at 5¢/KWh 12 , which is among the lowest reported prices for large scale solar PPAs in the US. Not only does this emphasize lower solar prices because of supply side factors, it also suggests that it is possible to leverage economies of scale to drive prices even lower in the present competitive economic environment. Figure 1: Utility Scale PV PPA Prices by Date of Signing and Project Size, Source: BNEF, Dec 2014; FERC Utility Scale Storage for Peak Power When compared to alternatives for developing peak power plants, utility scale storage is becoming more and more cost competitive. 9 Source: http://www.arkansasenergy.org/industry/incentives-and-programs/home-energy-assistance-loan- %28heal%29-program.aspx 10 Source: http://cleantechnica.com/2013/02/03/thin-film-solar-power-to-be-sold-for-less-than-coal/ 11 Source: http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/update/ 12 http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Austin-Energy-Switches-From-SunEdison-to-Recurrent-For-5-Cent- Solar 5  A jointly filed settlement, between Arizona Public Service and the Residential Utility Consumer Office, if approved, will require APS to evaluate storage, efficiency, renewable and demand response as an alternative to developing natural gas peak power plants13.  A 32 MW Wind farm in Virginia is already serving as a demonstration project for the peak power potential of utility scale storage. When compared to the price per kW of a recently developed peak gas plant, the storage option came in roughly $350 cheaper per kW over a 4 hour period than the natural gas option14. Utility-owned Distributed Solar  Arizona Public Service (APS) and Tucson Electric Power (TEP) recently announced bids to "pay" their customers to host distributed residential PV systems. APS also plans to explore the operational advantages of installing rooftop solar with advanced inverters. While APS is facing some regulatory opposition, the TEP project has been approved15.  In 2009 Southern California Edison (SoCalEd) launched a commercial distributed generation program. The program currently enables SoCalEd to develop 125MW of rooftop and groundmount commercial solar, to be owned and operated by SoCalEd16.  NRG has launched a community solar project in Vermont in partnership with Green Mountain Power (GMP). They offer a 10 year lease product to customers, with a goal to offer new leases after 10 years due to the 20-30+ year life of solar. Customers make payments to NRG, who has a separate agreement to sell output to GMP. The project is owned and operated by NRG (financed on NRG’s balance sheet with tax appetite) with marketing help from GMP17. Solar for Residential  DOE’s Solarize has proven the potential to drastically increase the rate of solar adoption through neighborhood scale campaigns. In Durham, CT, a town of roughly 3,000 people installed ~1MW of Solar. Only 20% of the population had solar-appropriate building stock, this translates into between a 25 to 33% solar resource capture rate. Durham, CT targeted areas intensely, phasing in per neighborhood to build anticipation for the next neighborhood. At present SmartPower, one of the largest Solarize organizers, is now partnering with EnergySage to create an online platform where developers can now even compete on rates for these campaigns18. Shift Heating Loads Away from Natural Gas  Next Step Living, an energy concierge service in the Northeast, has realized success in helping consumers make choices to switch off of natural gas for heating. This high touch service enables consumers to bypass much of the learning curve around various technologies, while streamlining the incentives and installation processes. Next Step’s business model is built on referrals to local installers, further increasing the multiplier effect of such programs beyond fuel savings19. 13 Source: http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/A-Major-Settlement-Could-Make-Arizona-the-Next-Growth- Market-for-Storage 14 Source: http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2014/03/11/aes-sells-batteries-replace-peak-power-plants 15 Source: http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Arizona-Staff-Give-Mixed-Reviews-to-Utility-Plans-to-Own- Rooftop-Solar 16 Source: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/02/california-utility-scales-back-rooftop-solar- program-to-save-money 17 Source: http://www.greenmountainpower.com/innovative/gmp-nrg-making-vermont-a-national-leader/ 18 Source: RMI expert interview with Smart Power’s Toni Bouchard, 8/29/14. 19 Source: RMI expert interview and correspondence with Next Step Living's Travis Estes. Interview conducted on 9/9/14, correspondence 9/24/14. 6  Massachusetts and New Hampshire have both passed renewable heat portfolio standards20, requiring a certain percentage of new-home heating load to be generated by renewable sources. Massachusetts' target is 3.5% (compared to similar legislation in Germany that started with industrial and commercial customers and has recently expanded to residential, requiring 14% renewable thermal load21).  Tennessee Valley Authority has a program for new homes providing incentives for all-electric, with rebates graduated according to how much more efficient the home is over code, including installation of heat pumps. The program includes a network of contractors and incentives directed at contractors22.  Richard Stockton College (Pomona, NJ) has been operating a ground-source heat pump for campus-wide heating and cooling since 1994. Additional campus examples of heat pump district heating include Oberlin College, Ball State University, Fort Polk, and University of Ontario23. Colorado State University is in the process of developing the country’s largest commercial ground source heat pump. 20 Source: http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/doer/renewables/thermal/carts-report.pdf 21 Source: http://energysmart.wordpress.com/2007/12/12/driving-renewable-power-through-building-code-german- style/ 22 Source: http://www.energyfinancesolutions.com/main/homeownerstennessee/title/tennessee 23 Source: http://www.nrel.gov/tech_deployment/climate_neutral/ground_source_heat_pumps.html ATTACHMENT 3 SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT SUMMARY DATE: January 7, 2015 SUBJECT: Sustainability Assessment (SA) Summary for Climate Action Plan Sustainability Assessment tool used: Key issues identified:  Social: Higher initial costs from multiple strategies to low income/fixed income individuals may compromise ability to meet basic needs. Average monthly cost savings/person and multiple benefits (e.g., more comfort in buildings, increased transportation options, public health improvements) seen in later years  Environmental: Numerous environmental benefits as a result of this scenario with the most positive impacts focused on climate change, reductions in air pollution, and protection of ecosystem functions especially in highly vulnerable ecosystems (e.g., forests)  Economic: Possible regressive economic impact on small businesses and lower margin businesses. Some strategies in this scenario present substantial implementation costs for businesses. Suggested mitigation actions: • Mitigation strategies for social and economic impacts not developed yet. Economic , ‐1.0 Social , ‐1.2 Environmental 3.0 Overall Rating, 0.3 ‐5.0 ‐4.0 ‐3.0 ‐2.0 ‐1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 Sustainability Rating Rating without mitigation Rating with mitigation Rating Legend 3 Very positive 2 Moderately positive 1 Slightly positive 0 Not relevant or neutral -1 Slightly negative -2 Moderately negative, impact likely -3 Very negative, impact expected ATTACHMENT 4 *The Fort Collins SAT was developed by modifying the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis Tool developed by Eugene, Oregon, July 2009. 1 City of Fort Collins SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL (SAT) (January 6, 2015) Creating a sustainable community Plan Fort Collins is an expression of the community’s resolve to act sustainably: to systemically, creatively, and thoughtfully utilize environmental, human, and economic resources to meet our present needs and those of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we depend. How to use the tool The Sustainability Assessment Tool (SAT) is designed to inform a deeper understanding of how policy and program choices affect the social equity, environmental health and economic health of the community. The City of Fort Collins has developed a Sustainability Assessment Framework that describes the purpose, objectives, and guidelines to assist City Program/Project Managers to determine: • The process for cross-department collaboration in using the SAT • Timing for applying a SAT • When to apply a SAT • How to document the results of the SAT and present at City Council Work Sessions and Regular Council Meetings Further detailed guidance is available at: http://citynet.fcgov.com/sustainability/sustainabilityassessments.php The SAT does not dictate a particular course of action; rather, the analysis provides policy makers and staff with a greater awareness of some of the trade-offs, benefits and consequences associated with a proposal, leading to more mindful decision-making. 2 Brief description of proposal Please provide a brief description of your proposal – 100 words or less Scenario 1 consists of 11 quantified strategies. The sustainability analysis was conducted using the January 5, 2015 version of the strategy analysis. 1. Green building for new construction/redevelopment 2. Shift land use patterns to shorten trips 3. Increase Residential energy efficiency 4. Increase institutional, commercial & industrial energy efficiency 5. Adoption of multimodal transport 6. Accelerate adoption of fuel efficient and electric vehicles 7. Advance renewable energy at the Utility scale 8. Advance residential & commercial solar adoption 9. Shifting heat loads 10. Road to Zero Waste 12 .Implement sequestration/adaption Staff lead(s): Please note staff name, position/division and phone number  Lucinda Smith, Director, Environmental Services, 224‐6085  Bonnie Pierce, Environmental Data Analyst, Environmental Services, 416‐2648 Social Equity Described: Placing priority upon protecting, respecting, and fulfilling the full range of universal human rights, including those pertaining to civil, political, social, economic, and cultural concerns. Providing adequate access to employment, food, housing, clothing, recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy environment and social services. Eliminating systemic barriers to equitable treatment and inclusion, and accommodating the differences among people. Emphasizing justice, impartiality, and equal opportunity for all. Goal/Outcome: It is our priority to support an equitable and adequate social system that ensures access to employment, food, housing, clothing, education, recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy environment and social services. Additionally, we support equal access to services and seek to avoid negative impact for all people regardless of age, economic status, ability, immigration or citizenship status, race/ethnicity, gender, relationship status, religion, or sexual orientation. Equal opportunities for all people are sought. A community in which basic human rights are addressed, basic human needs are met, and all people have access to tools and resources to develop their capacity. This tool will help identify how the proposal affects community members and if there is a difference in how the decisions affect one or more social groups. Areas of consideration in creating a vibrant socially equitable Fort Collins are: basic needs, inclusion, community safety, culture, neighborhoods, and advancing social equity. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of the issues that need to be addressed. They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis. Proposal Description 3  Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? 1. Meeting Basic Human Needs • How does the proposal impact access to food, shelter, employment, health care, educational and recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy living environment or social services? • Does this proposal affect the physical or mental health of individuals, or the status of public health in our community? • How does this proposal contribute to helping people achieve and maintain an adequate standard of living, including housing, or food affordability, employment opportunities, healthy families, or other resiliency factors? Analysis/Discussion  The initial costs of $44/month/person through 2020 may create financial hardship for residents of low income or on a fixed income. This option may force some choices between purchasing utilities vs. other basic necessities (e.g., medicine, food, etc.); regressive (impact low income individuals more) (highest costs associated with strategies 1, 5, 8, 9)  Could result in increased building costs that may negatively impact housing affordability (strategies 1, 3, & 4)  Physical or mental health of individuals can be compromised when financial stresses increase (tied to early costs of strategies 1, 5, 8, 9)  Savings for residents are anticipated by 2040 ($19/month/person) and increase to $56/month/person by 2050. The long term prospects for residents of low‐income are that utilities and transportation costs may be less which may help them to achieve a higher standard of living by allowing them to spend these savings on other basic necessities. This benefit assumes that other costs of living do not become inflated.  Cost of deep retrofits of whole existing buildings can range from $2 to $7/square foot1 and present a challenge to low‐income individuals. (strategy 1)  It is estimated that there will be 32,364,600 ft2 of new residential building space in Fort Collins by 2030. If all of this building space were LEED‐ certified, the savings in total building operating expenses (for the lifetime of the building) would be over $29 million for local residents2.  There may be more transportation options for individuals with limited finances (strategies 2, 5)  Total reductions in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from both strategies 2 and 5 are estimated at 158,424,354 VMT for 2030. This would result in an estimated $15,914,455 reduction in total automobile external costs between 2014 and 2030 (16‐year period)3.  It may be safer in the long term to travel within the City because of less vehicle traffic and more multimodal transportation options (strategies 2, 5)  More control over environmental settings in homes/businesses with green 1 Lockwood, Charles. 2009, Building Retro, UrbanLand. 2 Leonardo Academy, Inc., 2008, The Economics of LEED for Existing Building for Individual Buildings. 3 Litman, Todd, 2014, Evaluating Public Transit Benefits and Costs, Best Practices Guidebook. 4 building concepts/energy efficiency tactics (strategy 1)  More comfort for building occupants resulting from green building/EE concepts (strategy 1)  Improved access to transportation (strategy 5)  Improvements in public health with reduced greenhouse gases (GHGs) and fossil fuel emissions (will take time for these benefits to be seen due to long‐lived nature of emissions)  Increase in active modes of transportation with resultant positive health impacts (strategies 2, 5, 6)  Cumulative vehicle miles traveled (VMT) savings of 158,468,922 results in total health cost savings of $17,748,519 from reduced air pollution between 2014 and 2030 (16‐year period)4 2. Addressing Inequities and being Inclusive • Are there any inequities to specific population subsets in this proposal? If so, how will they be addressed? • Does this proposal meet the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act? • How does this proposal support the participation, growth and healthy development of our youth? Does it include Developmental Assets? • If the proposal affects a vulnerable section of our community (i.e. youth, persons with disabilities, etc.)  Individuals on fixed incomes (e.g., the elderly, those with disabilities) or low incomes are more impacted by the increase in monthly utility costs through 2030. This is a larger percentage of their income and may require trade‐offs in meeting basic needs.  The long‐term reductions in carbon and other harmful air emissions from burning fossil fuels provide a more healthful and safe environment for the future for our youth  Low‐income groups may live in older or nontraditional homes that may be less energy efficient or more difficult to retrofit (technically or from a cost perspective) (strategy 3)  Improving multimodal transportation infrastructure for all residents serves to help existing low income users (strategy 5) 3. Ensuring Community Safety • How does this proposal address the specific safety and personal security needs of groups within the community, including women, people with disabilities, seniors, minorities, religious groups, children, immigrants, workers and others?  Travel by bicycle, transit, or walking is safer than vehicle travel (strategy 5)  Not relying fully on the grid may provide more energy security (strategy 7)  Having a system that is more reliant on renewables may provide less reliability on the local electric distribution system  May ensure the comfort and health of building occupants (strategies 1, 3, & 4)  Less vulnerability to fossil fuel prices and carbon regulations (strategy 7)  Land use changes implies additional pedestrian/bicycle improvements and increases safety (strategy 2) 4. Culture • Is this proposal culturally appropriate and how does it affirm or deny the cultures of diverse communities? • How does this proposal create opportunities for artistic and  Create a cultural shift community‐wide related to sustainability and a community free of fossil fuel use  May enhance neighborhood collaboration through eco‐districts (strategies 2 & 5) 4 Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2011. Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis II – Air Pollution Costs. 5 cultural expression? 5. Addressing the Needs of Neighborhoods • How does this proposal impact specific Fort Collins neighborhoods? • How are community members, stakeholders and interested parties provided with opportunities for meaningful participation in the decision making process of this proposal? • How does this proposal enhance neighborhoods and stakeholders’ sense of commitment and stewardship to our community?  Green built environment principles and designs improve aesthetics, improve urban habits, and increases access to nature in neighborhoods. (strategy 1)  The Climate Action Plan (CAP) Update process has involved citizens through a Citizens Advisory Council (CAC).  Increase opportunities on a neighborhood level (connections and relationships, also safer neighborhoods) (strategy 2) 6. Building Capacity to Advance Social Equity • What plans have been made to communicate about and share the activities and impacts of this proposal within the City organization and/or the community? • How does this proposal strengthen collaboration and cooperation between the City organization and community members?  Two public outreach events are planned for January 2015. Social Equity Summary Key issues: Higher initial costs from multiple strategies to low income/fixed income individuals may compromise ability to meet basic needs. Average monthly cost savings/person and multiple benefits (e.g., more comfort in buildings, increased transportation options, public health improvements) seen in later years Potential mitigation strategies: Not developed yet. Overall, the effect of this proposal on social equity would be: Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of the following boxes and indicate the overall rating. Rating represents group consensus Rating represents group average x +3 +2 +1 0 ‐1 ‐2 ‐3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately negative, impact likely Very negative, impact expected ‐1.2 Environmental Health Described: Healthy, resilient ecosystems, clean air, water, and land. Decreased pollution and waste, lower carbon emissions that contribute to climate change, lower fossil fuel use, decreased or no toxic product use. Prevent pollution, reduce use, promote reuse, and recycle natural resources. 6 support of future generations of all species. Avoid or eliminate adverse environmental impacts of all activities, continually review all activities to identify and implement strategies to prevent pollution; reduce energy consumption and increase energy efficiency; conserve water; reduce consumption and waste of natural resources; reuse, recycle and purchase recycled content products; reduce reliance on non-renewable resources. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of issues that need to be addressed. They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis. • Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? 1. Environmental Impact • Does this proposal affect ecosystem functions or processes related to land, water, air, or plant or animal communities? • Will this proposal generate data or knowledge related to the use of resources? • Will this proposal promote or support education in prevention of pollution, and effective practices for reducing, reusing, and recycling of natural resources? • Does this proposal require or promote the continuous improvement of the environmental performance of the City organization or community? • Will this proposal affect the visual/landscape or aesthetic elements of the community? Analysis/Discussion  Air quality improvements from: o Less tailpipe emissions because of more multimodal transportation options (strategies 2 & 5) o Less reliance on fossil fuel combustion by increasing solar and renewable energy options (strategies 7 & 8) o Air quality improvements (ozone and particulates) may result in better visibility (strategies 2, 5, 6, 7 & 8)  Potentially less impact to land and water resources from reduced fossil fuel extraction and production (may not be local) (strategy 6 & 7)  This proposal could help slow or prevent degradation of ecosystem services in a variety of different ecosystems (e.g., Evergreen Forest ecosystem services include grazing, carbon sequestration, habitat provision valued at $879/acre/year5 and grassland/herbaceous ecosystem services include grazing; dilution of waste water; natural purification of water; erosion control; habitat for fish and wildlife valued at $85/acre/year6)  This proposal may generate new data and knowledge related to resource use that needs to be communicated to the public to be successful  This proposal could help slow the ongoing loss of species associated, in part, with current climate change (e.g., localized die‐offs of mature aspen stands and pinon pines7 in Colorado)  Increased, reuse, waste reduction & diversion, and recycling (strategy 10) 5 Ingraham & Foster, 2008. 6 Loomis et al, 2000. 7 Union of Concerned Scientists and the Rocky Mountain Climate Organization, 2014, Rocky Mountain Forests at Risk, Confronting Climate‐driven Impacts from Insects, Wildfires, heat, and Drought. 7  The City should have a leadership role in demonstrating the effectiveness of these strategies and be able to share performance results from this scenario  Green buildings have been shown to reduce water by up to 50%  If carbon sequestration is accomplished through increasing the biomass and canopy cover of the urban forest, this may bring additional benefits to the community such as reducing the urban heat island effect (strategy 12)  Increased carbon sequestration in plant biomass improves the aesthetic aspects of the landscape and provides more wildlife habitat (strategy 12)  Improved ecosystem functioning in soils that receive compost (strategy 10) 2. Climate Change • Does this proposal directly generate or require the generation of greenhouse gases (such as through electricity consumption or transportation)? • How does this proposal align with the carbon reduction goals for 2020 goal adopted by the City Council? • Will this proposal, or ongoing operations result in an increase or decrease in greenhouse gas emissions? • How does this proposal affect the community’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or otherwise mitigate adverse climate change activities?  Expect reductions in carbon emissions primarily from: o Reduced energy use in commercial, institutional, and industrial buildings (strategy 4) o Reduction in waste to landfills and materials re‐use (strategy 10) o Reduced energy use in homes (strategies 1 & 3) o Decreased fossil fuel use (more solar and other renewables) (strategies 7 & 8) o Reduced upstream emissions from fossil fuel extraction and production (strategies 7 & 8) o Reduced emissions from transportation strategies o Behavior change likely to reduce energy use and reduce VMT and therefore greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions • The development of new landfills May be postponed and this leads to lower methane emissions that contribute to GHGs (strategy 10)  Does meet the old 2020 goals, but does not meet the new 2030 goal of 80%.  By 2030, Scenario 1 results in 208,606 MWh of electricity generation. The following table compares the lifecycle GHG emissions from switching from fossil fuels to PV‐generated electricity8: Type of electricity generation Lifecycle GHG emissions Percentage increase over PV PV 9,178,663,384 NA Natural Gas 99,505,055,322 1,084% Coal‐fired 204,225,260,294 2,225% 8 NREL website, Jan 2015, http://en.openei.org/apps/LCA/ 8 3. Protect, Preserve, Restore • Does this proposal result in the development or modification of land resources or ecosystem functions? • Does this proposal align itself with policies and procedures related to the preservation or restoration of natural habitat, greenways, protected wetlands, migratory pathways, or the urban growth boundary • How does this proposal serve to protect, preserve, or restore important ecological functions or processes?  This proposal (all strategies) will likely preserve local ecosystem functions or at least reduce the severity of impacts from climate change in the long‐ term. Scenario 1 may: o Slow or reduce the loss of species and biodiversity o May prevent the unpredictable or irreversible impacts to normal ecosystem functions such as water quality, primary productivity, flood prevention (e.g., extreme events), fire (e.g., extreme events), nutrient cycling, erosion control, etc. (note: the authors of this SAT recognize that flood and fire are a part of normal ecosystem functioning) o Prevent changes in species phenology (timing of annual life events such as flowering, migration, breeding) o Slow or reduce the spread of invasive species and diseases o Slows or reduce the negative economic impacts to outdoor recreation from changes in species populations, habitats, and ecosystem functions  The development of new landfills may be postponed and this can help to reduce pollution sources to soils and groundwater (strategy 10)  Wind and solar power production are more land use intensive and could have an impact to the community if provided locally  This scenario (all strategies) may help to reduce the loss of natural habitat from climate change (severe impacts to forest and riparian systems) expected if no carbon reductions 4. Pollution Prevention • Does this proposal generate, or cause to be generated, waste products that can contaminate the environment? • Does this proposal require or promote pollution prevention through choice of materials, chemicals, operational practices and/or engineering controls? • Does this proposal require or promote prevention of pollution from toxic substances or other pollutants regulated by the state or federal government? • Will this proposal create significant amounts of waste or pollution?  Ramping up the solar industry (strategy 8) brings an increase in hazardous wastes (may not be local): o Toxic or reactive industrial solvents o Wastewater treatment sludges containing cyanides and heavy metals o Reactive discarded commercial chemical products  Concurrent reduction in hazardous wastes (RCRA “exploration and production wastes”) associated with fossil fuel extraction/production (strategies 6, 7, & 8)  Expect early and on‐going reductions in solid waste from the Road to Zero Waste strategy (strategy 10)  All strategies help to reduce temperature increases that will likely negatively impact surface water bodies (and consequently water quality) and the organisms that depend on these surface waters 5. Rethink, Replace, Reduce, Reuse, Recirculate/Recycle  Road to Zero Waste strategy includes embracing all of these waste 9 • Does this proposal prioritize the rethinking of the materials or goods needed, reduction of resource or materials use, reuse of current natural resources or materials or energy products, or result in byproducts that are recyclable or can be re-circulated? reduction strategies (strategy 10)  Green building principles involve using recycled and low‐volatile organic compound (VOC) materials 6. Emphasize Local • Does this proposal emphasize use of local materials, vendors, and or services to reduce resources and environmental impact of producing and transporting proposed goods and materials? • Will the proposal cause adverse environmental effects somewhere other than the place where the action will take place?  Increase in alternative power production could be provided by local vendors if local job training/opportunities were supported (strategy 8)  Local food production reduces environmental impacts of transporting goods  Possible additional impacts from rare earth mineral and natural gas extraction to land, water, and air to other locations outside of Fort Collins  There are limited sources of rare earth minerals on the planet  Locally conserved lands provide recreational opportunities without increased VMT and opportunities to build transportation networks via trail systems  Green building principles support the purchase of local products Environmental Health Summary Overall a very positive impact to environmental health, but expect to still require climate adaptation strategies due to global nature of the climate change impacts. Key issues: Numerous environmental benefits as a result of this scenario with the most positive impacts focused on climate change, reductions in air pollution, protection of ecosystem functions especially in highly vulnerable ecosystems Potential mitigation strategies: Not applicable. Overall, the effect of this proposal on environmental health would be: Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of the following boxes and indicate the overall rating. Rating represents group consensus x Rating represents group average +3 +2 +1 0 ‐1 ‐2 ‐3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately negative, impact likely Very negative, impact expected +3 Economic Health 10 They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis • Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? 1. Infrastructure and Government • How will this proposal benefit the local economy? • If this proposal is an investment in infrastructure is it designed and will it be managed to optimize the use of resources including operating in a fossil fuel constrained society? • Can the proposal be funded partially or fully by grants, user fees or charges, staged development, or partnering with another agency? • How will the proposal impact business growth or operations (ability to complete desired project or remain in operation), such as access to needed permits, infrastructure and capital? Analysis/Discussion  There is potential for local job creation related to the solar industry and green building construction (strategies 1 & 8)  Solar power infrastructure will specifically be designed to optimize resource use and lower dependence on fossil fuels (strategy 7)  May be significant end user and City implementation costs for Scenario 1 through 2050 (all strategies)  By 2030 there will be an estimated 3,929 new businesses in Fort Collins. If each of these buildings were LEED‐certified, each business may see the following benefits9: o $5,204 value added/employee/year o 21% higher employee morale o 4.88% average productivity increase o 18% lower employee turnover/year o 2.88 fewer sick days/employee/year o 22% easier recruiting of employees o 23% more effective client meetings  A lot of the carbon savings through 2020 appear to occur in the institutional, commercial, and industrial sector with the most cost effective price tag for implementation (strategy 4)  Solar power implementation costs appear high relative to other strategies (strategy 8)  Attraction of innovative industries and new technologies (strategies 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10)  May be a regressive impact on smaller businesses and lower margin businesses  The $485 million investment in energy efficiency measures installed could create 3,056 new FTE jobs10  Real or perceived increases in cost or bringing forward those changes sooner may result in business contraction  The initial costs of implementation may create financial hardship for 9 U.S. Bureau of Labor and Statistics, 2008 Occupational Employment Statistics, as cited in Pogue et al., 2009, Journal of Sustainable Real Estate. 10 RMI, 2014. Stepping Up: Benefits and Cost of Accelerating Fort Collins’ Energy and Climate Goals. 11 locally owned, low margin, or small businesses.  If lose competitive advantage of low utility rates, businesses may not move here  Increased land use/transportation efficiency equals business investment (strategies 2,5, & 6)  Setting an aspirational goal may bring new businesses to the community and private investment/capital  Less investment in fossil fuel outside our region may create new energy jobs locally (strategies 7 & 8)  May be job loss associated with changes in energy production  There may be impacts due to stranded costs (e.g., natural gas infrastructure)  There are multiple competing proposals in the City that may limit the ability to invest in these strategies  High performance (energy efficient) buildings can charge an average of 6% more for rent and sell for 16% more than comparable non‐Energy Star or LEED‐certified buildings11. 2. Employment and Training • What are the impacts of this proposal on job creation within Larimer County? • Are apprenticeships, volunteer or intern opportunities available? • How will this proposal enhance the skills of the local workforce?  If local jobs are created for green building and solar industry locally, this may benefit the local economy (strategies 1 & 8)  By 2027, $199 million in costs for residential building upgrades could result in 7,562 indirect jobs created over 25 years12  By 2027, $286 million in costs for non‐residential building upgrades could result in 30,316 indirect jobs created over 25 years9  May need to create training programs to develop new skill sets for green building and solar industries (strategies 1 & 8)  Certain industries may become outmoded/obsolete therefore retraining may be needed locally as a result of job losses  Diverting waste from landfills has been shown to create 20 times more jobs  May need to work with CSU/community colleges/technical schools to set new training 3. Diversified and Innovative Economy • How does this proposal support innovative or entrepreneurial activity?  Green jobs may be created by expanding the solar industry locally. (strategy 8)  It is also possible that new green building technologies will evolve as a 11 Eichholtz et al., 2012. Doing Well by Doing Good: Green Building Attributes, Building and Environment as cited in Kok et al., 2012, The Economics of Green Retrofits, Journal of Sustainable Real Estate. 12 Cadmus. 2012, Focus on Energy, Calendar Year 2012, Economic Impacts Report, No. 2013. 12 • Will “clean technology” or “green” jobs be created in this proposal? • How will the proposal impact start-up or existing businesses or development projects? result of this proposal (strategy 8)  Adoption of CAP goals can be an impetus for innovation and may bring in more research money 4. Support or Develop Sustainable Businesses • What percentage of this proposal budget relies on local services or products? Identify purchases from Larimer County and the State of Colorado. • Will this proposal enhance the tools available to businesses to incorporate more sustainable practices in operations and products? • Are there opportunities to profile sustainable and socially responsible leadership of local businesses or educate businesses on triple bottom line practices? 5. Relevance to Local Economic Development Strategy Economic Prosperity Summary Key issues: Possible regressive economic impact on small businesses and lower margin businesses. Some strategies in this scenario present substantial implementation costs for businesses. Potential mitigation strategies: Not developed yet. Overall, the effect of this proposal on economic prosperity will be: Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of the following boxes and indicate the overall rating. Rating represents group consensus Rating represents group average x +3 +2 +1 0 ‐1 ‐2 ‐3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately negative, impact likely Very negative, impact expected ‐1 ATTACHMENT 5 Climate Action Plan - Strategies 1 City Council Meeting – March 3, 2015 Updating Community Greenhouse Gas Goals and 2015 Climate Action Plan: Framework ATTACHMENT 6 Local Climate Action 2 Opportunities •Advancing technologies •Risk mitigation Need • Climate change is impacting us now • It will get worse if we don’t do something about it • Substantial reductions now can reduce costs of • mitigation later • Solutions are available now Role of Goal and CAP Goal • Community leadership • Attract outside capital • Enhance innovation • Spur community engagement Climate Action Plan (CAP) Framework • High level strategic plan • Requires periodic updates • Each action requires further analysis and vetting 3 44 2014 City Council Direction ….describe the steps the Fort Collins community will need to take to achieve a community-wide greenhouse gas emissions reduction *goal of • 20% by the year 2020 • 80% by the year 2030 • 100% by the year 2050 – carbon neutrality *Goal reductions relative to 2005 levels 5 2013 Community GHG Emissions 66 Planning Objectives 77 Resources Community • Citizen Advisory Committee • Council Advisory Boards • Public / Stakeholders Subject Matter Experts • Citizen Advisory Committee • Local & National experts Consultants • Brendle Group • Rocky Mountain Institute • Platte River Power Authority 8 2005 2020 2030 2050 Business As Usual Emissions Forecast 2,343,000 2,433,000 2,711,000 3,265,000 Adjusted Business As Usual Reductions - Federal vehicle standards - Platte River 2013 planning guidelines -567,000 -951,000 -1,739,000 Adjusted Business As Usual Forecast 1,866,000 1,760,000 1,526,000 Target % Reduction (below2005) 20% 80% 100% Target Emissions 1,874,000 469,000 0 Needed Reductions from ABAU -8,000 1,291,000 1,526,000 Emissions Reductions in 2015 CAP Framework 272,000 1,119,000 1,192,000 Percent below2005 baseline 32% 73% 86% Summary 999 BUILDINGS • Build in Efficiency from the Start • Make Existing Homes More Efficient • Increase Energy Efficiency – Commercial and Industrial TRANSPORTATION • Shift Land Use Patterns to Shorten/Reduce Number of Trips • Drive Adoption of Multi-Modal Transportation • Accelerate Adoption of Fuel Efficient & Electric Vehicles Quantified Strategies 10 ENERGY SUPPLY • Advance Utility Scale Renewable Energy Supply • Advance Residential and Commercial Solar Adoption • Shift Heating Loads to Biofuels, Geothermal, and Electrification WASTE REDUCTION and MORE • Road to Zero Waste • Carbon Sequestration Quantified Strategies 11 2015 CAP Framework Strategies by 2030 will Buildings • Annual reduction in energy use reaches 3%/ per year • Existing home/businesses use 36% less energy than today • New construction uses 30% less energy than today’s code Transportation • Reduce vehicle miles of travel by 29% • 50% new passenger cars purchased will be electric • Remaining new vehicles purchased will be 40% more efficient than avg. new stock 12 2015 CAP Framework Strategies by 2030 will Energy Supply • Electric supply emissions will be 80% lower than 2005 • 50% of new construction will be net zero • 22% of homes / 50% existing businesses will have installed solar to be net zero Waste Reduction • Zero waste by 2030 13 Quantified Strategies - Estimates 2020 2030 2050 Buildings 50% 35% 45% Transportation 12% 9% 14% Energy Supply 21% 48% 33% Waste Reduction 17% 7% 9% Total 100% 100% 100% Total Reductions (MTCO2e) 272,200 1,119,000 1,192,000 14 Platte River Analysis: Uncertainties • System Engineering • Business Operations • Construction times & installation • Emissions Permitting 15 - 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 Renewable Energy (MWh) Platte River Current Wind and Solar Supply Trend Total Carbon Free – 32% 19% Hydro 11% Wind 2% Solar Source Transitions 16 2020 2030 2040 2050 % below 2005 baseline 32%+ 73%+ 81%+ 86%+ Cumulative Costs $600M Cost $2 - 2.5B Costs $2.8- 3.7B Costs $3.3- 4.6B Costs Cumulative Savings $ 300M Savings $1.7-2.3B Savings $3.8-5.9B Savings $5.9-10.8B Savings Net Cumulative Costs/Savings $300 M Cost $200-300 M Costs $800M - $2.2B Savings $2.5 - 6.2 B Savings Avg. monthly cost/savings per Household $70 Cost $10-20 Costs $40-90 Savings $70-180 Savings Preliminary Costs/Savings Estimates** ** Note caveats 17 Cost Analysis Still Needed • Energy storage options • Infrastructure enhancements • Stranded assets Analysis does not consider indirect economic benefits • Improved health • Job creation • Increased resiliency Preliminary Costs/Saving Caveats 18 Financing Guiding Principles City of Fort Collins • No significant adverse impact on the City’s balance sheet • No adverse impact on the City’s credit rating • The City’s investment should catalyze investment in strategies by end-users and the third parties Consumers / End Users Businesses / End Users Private/Third Party Sources of Capital 19 Increased Resiliency • More efficient buildings require less energy and may operate independently • Reduced air pollution emissions lessens threat of increased ozone with warming temperatures • Reduced waste to the landfill preserves landfill capacity • Increased tree planting and open space protection reduces the urban heat island 20 CAP Implementation Processes; Checks and Balances 20 • Financing Guiding Principles • City Council Review and Vetting of Individual Strategies • City Budget Process • Annual Progress Reports • Periodic CAP Update Process 21 What would it take? • Current analysis provides majority of 2030 pathway • Big actions called for • Energy storage, system integration costs/issues must be addressed • Community involvement is critical • Program details not developed Impacts? • Higher initial costs, must be mitigated with careful planning • Potential net savings for community after 2030 • Increased resiliency Can it be funded? • Financing tools are in development to leverage outside capital • Additional City budget support will be needed Key Considerations 22 Public Engagement • 15 stakeholder groups • 8 City Council Advisory Boards • Three public open houses • Web comment opportunity 23 • reaffirming the existing goal to reduce communitywide greenhouse emissions 20% below 2005 levels by 2020, • establishing new goals to reduce communitywide greenhouse gas emission 80% below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, • directing the City Manager to develop a 2020 Climate Action Implementation Plan based on the 2015 Climate Action Plan: Framework Resolution Under Consideration 24 Contacts Lucinda Smith Environmental Services Dir. 970-224-6085 lsmith@fcgov.com fcgov.com/climateprotection fcgov.com/utilities Travis Paige Utilities Community Engagement Mgr. 970-416-2627 tpaige@fcgov.com - 1 - RESOLUTION 2015-030 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS UPDATING COMMUNITY GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION GOALS WHEREAS, there is widespread consensus that human emissions of greenhouse gases are impacting the earth’s climate system, causing the potential for unprecedented large-scale adverse health, social, economic and ecological effects; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins is especially vulnerable to the effects of climate change, with highly likely predicted changes to this region that include summer temperatures becoming up to 6 degrees Fahrenheit warmer by 2040, continued declines in snowpack, greater likelihood of severe storms and extended drought, and increased frequency and severity of heat waves and ozone formation; and WHEREAS, in 2008, City Council expressed its intent to reduce Fort Collins’s community-wide greenhouse gas emissions to 3.3% below 2005 levels by 2012; and additionally established the goals of reducing emissions to 20% below 2005 levels by 2020 and to 80% below 2005 levels by 2050; and WHEREAS, in 2008, City Council adopted a Climate Action Plan (“CAP”) that established a pathway toward achieving the 2012 greenhouse gas emissions reduction intent and a partial pathway toward achieving the 2020 goal; and WHEREAS, by 2013, Fort Collins’s community-wide greenhouse gas emissions were 5% below 2005 levels; and WHEREAS, in 2013 and 2014, City Council considered alternative options for accelerating community greenhouse gas goals; and WHEREAS, by the adoption of Resolution 2014-028, City Council authorized the formation of an ad hoc advisory committee to develop a proposed updated CAP that describes the steps the Fort Collins community will need to take to achieve a community-wide greenhouse gas emissions reduction of 20% (relative to 2005 levels) by the year 2020, by 80% (relative to 2005 levels) by 2030, and to achieve carbon neutrality by the year 2050; and WHEREAS, the City, together with consultants and the Climate Citizen Advisory Committee, worked to develop the 2015 Climate Action Plan Framework (“2015 CAP Framework”), attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” that describes the steps necessary to meet the 2020 greenhouse gas reduction objective and to meet the majority of the 2030 and 2050 greenhouse gas reduction objectives; and WHEREAS, the 2015 CAP Framework contains a high level analysis of the strategies necessary to achieve the 2030 and 2050 goals and recognizes both the challenges and the uncertainty of achieving the long-term goals; and - 2 - WHEREAS, the transformation of energy technologies, systems and markets is expected to evolve rapidly in the United States and in the world over the next several decades; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate for local government to take responsibility for emissions which occur in service of its jurisdiction, because local community actions can speed the deployment of technology-based solutions and provide replicable models to other communities tp help drive reductions in global emission levels; and WHEREAS, Fort Collins is well-positioned to collaborate with other national and global leaders in studying, piloting, refining and implementing ways to accelerate greenhouse gas reduction at the community level within the span of several decades while remaining economically vibrant; and WHEREAS; actions to reduce community greenhouse gas emissions also improve community resilience to climate disruption and provide multiple ancillary benefits such as reduced risk through a diversified energy portfolio, reduced air pollution and associated health benefits, and increased mobility choices. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the Council hereby reaffirms its goal to reduce Fort Collins’s community-wide greenhouse gas emissions to 20% below 2005 levels by 2020. Section 2. That the Council hereby expresses its intent to strive to reduce community-wide greenhouse gas emissions to 80% below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, without compromising key community economic, social and economic values. Section 3. That the Council recognizes the 2015 CAP Framework as an appropriate framework from which to develop a near-term implementation plan, recognizing that strategies contained in the 2015 CAP Framework are likely to evolve over time. Section 4. That, subject to annual appropriations, the City Manager is hereby directed to provide adequate resources to prepare a 2020 Climate Action Implementation Plan, using the 2015 CAP Framework as a guide, to identify prioritized actions and associated near-term budget requests necessary for progress between 2015 through 2020 to meet the 2020 greenhouse gas reduction goal and put Fort Collins on a trajectory to achieve the goal to reduce emissions to 80% below 2005 by 2030. Section 5. That such 2020 Climate Action Implementation Plan shall include the list of strategies of the 2015 CAP Framework; shall include schedules, milestones, resource needs, and metrics; shall reflect public input, consider relevant technical, economic, political, and social factors; and shall promote economic vitality and prioritize investments in the Fort Collins community. - 3 - Section 6. That the City government must lead by example in this area by minimizing greenhouse gas emissions in its own operations through the establishment and implementation of policies and directives that will lead the community to a sustainable future. Section 7. That the City government must play an important role to build partnerships, inspire community action, and promote involvement by all segments of the community (local businesses, governments, utilities, schools, universities, non-profit organizations, homeowners, and other individuals) in efforts to reduce community-wide greenhouse gas emissions. Section 8. That the City Manager is further hereby directed to prepare an annual report tracking progress toward attainment of the goals established herein, including a community-wide greenhouse gas emissions inventory and a list of quantified emission reductions actions for the preceding calendar year. Section 9. That the City Council hereby recognizes that new data, scientific findings, mitigation technologies, and quantification methodologies may emerge over time and that future Councils may choose to revise the community greenhouse gas goals and plans to take into account evolving science, technology or other opportunities. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 3rd day of March, A.D. 2015. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk CLIMAATE ACTION PLANN FRAMEWORK –– February 25, 20 DR P 15 Draft RAFT LAN 2015 N: F 5 RAMEW WORK 1 Fort 201 FRAME DRAFT – City of Fort PO Box 58 Fort Collins fcgov.com/ fcgov.com/ t Col 5 Cli EWORK February 25, t Collins 80 s, CO 80522 /climateprotect /enviro lins mate 2015 tion e Action Plan CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Fort Collins City Council Karen Weitkunat, Mayor Gerry Horak, Mayor Pro-tem, District 6 Bob Overbeck, District 1 Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Gino Campana, District 3 Wade Troxell, District 4 Ross Cunniff, District 5 Climate Citizen Advisory Committee Bill DeMarco Bryan Watkins Chadrick Martinez Dana Villeneuve Dianne Ewing Eric Levine Glen Colton Greg Rittner Harry Edwards Holly Wright John Holcombe Kellie Falbo Marge Moore Mark Easter Mike Freeman Olivia Stowell Rich Fisher Sara Frazier Scott Denning Stacey Clark Suraj Renganathan Tom Ghidossi Yvonne Myers Participating Climate Committee Alternates: Chris O’Dell Hunter Buffington John Shenot Kelly Giddens Stacey Baumgarn Shawn Tierney City Manager Darin Atteberry Deputy City Manager Jeff Mihelich Project Management Team Bruce Hendee, Chief Sustainability Officer Sustainability Services Lucinda Smith, Project Manager Bonnie Pierce Emily Wilmsen Josh Birks Melissa Hovey Fort Collins Utilities Steve Catanach John Phelan Lance Smith Lisa Rosintoski Travis Paige Planning, Development and Transportation ii CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ................ 1 EMISSIONS TRENDS AND PREVIOUS TARGETS ........................................... 1 SETTING NEW GOALS .................................................. 2 2015 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK .............. 3 ESTIMATED EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS BY STRATEGY ....................................................... 4 FROM PLANNING TO ACTION ..................................... 5 A ROLE FOR EVERYONE ............................................. 5 Chapter 1 - Need for Climate Action ......................... 6 WHY CLIMATE CHANGE MATTERS IN FORT COLLINS ................................................. 6 MULTIPLE CO-BENEFITS OF CLIMATE ACTION .................................................. 7 ROLE OF CITIES ............................................................ 8 FORT COLLINS’ CLIMATE COMMITMENT ................... 8 WHY ACCELERATE FORT COLLINS’ CLIMATE ACTION GOALS .................................. 10 THE RISKS ................................................................... 10 WHY FORT COLLINS CAN SUCCEED ....................... 11 Chapter 2 - Framework for Action ........... 13 THE PROCESS ............................................................ 13 WHERE ARE WE STARTING? .................................... 13 PROJECTED FUTURE EMISSIONS ............................ 14 Chapter 3 - Emissions Reduction Strategies ............ 17 BUILDINGS: BOOSTING EFFICIENCY, COMFORT AND HEALTH.................................... 18 ADVANCED MOBILITY: MAKING TRANSPORT FASTER, MORE CONVENIENT AND CLEANER ........................... 22 ELECTRICITY SUPPLY AND DELIVERY: THE SHIFT TO RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES....................................... 27 WASTE REDUCTION / MATERIALS REGENERATION ........................... 32 Chapter 4 - Triple Bottom Line Considerations ............. 38 PRELIMINARY COSTS AND SAVINGS ESTIMATES ........................................ 38 FINANCING OPPORTUNITIES ................................... 39 INCREASED RESILIENCY .......................................... 42 TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE IMPACTS .............................. 43 SUPPORT FOR CITY CITY STRATEGIC PLAN OBJECTIVES .............. 44 Chapter 5 - What does this mean for the Community? ... 46 HOUSEHOLDS ............................................................ 46 BUSINESSES .............................................................. 46 CITY OF FORT COLLINS GOVERNMENT ................. 47 Chapter 6 - Actions for 2015 and 2016 ....................... 48 PLANNED ACTIONS ................................................... 48 RECOMMENDED NEW ACTIONS .............................. 49 Chapter 7- Accountability: Plan, Do, Check, Act ............. 50 CLIMA Ex The sc inactio econo greenh activel action benefi educa Plan (C GHG e  20 p  80 p  and EMIS Fort C reduct emissi from c growth FIGUR * Airlin ATE ACTION PLAN xecut cience is clear on is unaccepta mic prosperity, house gas (GH ly explore ways s to reduce com ts. To date, Fo ting and inspiri CAP) Framewo emissions of: percent below percent below d carbon neutra SSIONS T Collins has calc tion efforts on i ions are down community-gen h in population RE 1. FORT CO ne travel has be N FRAMEWORK – tive S - climate chang able. Globally, , health and hu HG) emissions s to adapt and mmunity GHG ort Collins has ing the commu ork has been d 2005 by 2020, 2005 by 2030, ality by 2050. 2 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft FIGURE 2. FORT COLLINS GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, SALES & USE TAX* AND POPULATION *Does not include the Keep Fort Collins Great tax collections. From 2008 through 2014, Fort Collins City Council targeted community GHG reductions at 20% below 2005 levels by 2020 and at 80% below 2005 by 2050. Our recent experience suggests that reaching an additional 15% carbon reduction in five years remains a challenge unless we rethink our approach. While no single step can reverse climate change effects, Fort Collins can pursue more reduction strategies, take advantage of leading edge technologies, and engage more citizens across our community in this effort to reduce carbon pollution. SETTING NEW GOALS Comparing the trend in community GHG emissions to the 2008 goals, it has become increasingly clear that additional strategies are needed to spur additional action. Fortunately, targeting higher GHG reductions and accelerating our actions to achieve these reductions provides a range of benefits that can appeal to all segments of the community. Many residents choose to live in Fort Collins because of its natural beauty and their enjoyment of an active outdoor lifestyle, and therefore will continue to support increased pedestrian and bicycling transportation options and access. Businesses are attracted to the local innovative, entrepreneurial spirit and are willing to embrace new technologies that help reduce use of energy and other resources. Citizens of all ages want to see increased local job opportunities arise out of greening our buildings, generating energy from renewable sources, and creating transportation systems that serve more while using fewer fossil fuels. Many may enjoy opportunities to improve the comfort of their homes while reducing utility usage and costs through their retirement years. In 2014 City Council demonstrated a willingness to consider more aspirational GHG reduction goals of:  20% below 2005 levels by 2020  80% below 2005 levels by 2030  100% below 2005 levels by 2050 (carbon neutral) -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% % CHANGE FROM 2005 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS POPULATION FORT COLLINS SALES & USE *TAX CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 3 City Council then acted by authorizing formation of a citizen advisory committee to explore what it would take to meet these objectives, and directing staff to conduct analyses of the steps necessary to meet these GHG reduction objectives. The value of goal setting cannot be underestimated. By setting a goal that makes Fort Collins a leader in the transition to a clean energy economy, the City may stimulate local innovation and entrepreneurial activity, attract new partners and outside capital, and encourage funding for cutting edge research and development. Community-wide goals provide a framework for public and private stakeholders to collaborate, and also encourage coordinated actions that simultaneously boost the community’s engagement, competitive spirit, and sense of pride. 2015 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK This document provides a framework for climate action planning to guide implementation of a new set of strategies that strive for more dramatic GHG reductions in Fort Collins. It is the result of a 9-month planning effort that engaged a core analytical team, a Citizen Advisory Committee, and input from experts across the nation to investigate state-of-the-art reduction tactics, and existing and best practices. The research and preliminary numerical modeling that was conducted to investigate strategy interrelationships and community impacts provides an initial understanding of what is possible. More detailed planning for implementation will be required for each strategy that incorporates emerging technologies, pricing and market information, and available financing tools. We will also learn through piloting new programs and projects. Each implementation step will build upon previous steps and incorporate lessons learned. Of course, there are associated costs and risks tied to both pursuing aggressive climate action and to not taking these actions or delaying them. We must be mindful to not deploy technologies before they are fully developed or have become cost effective, and deliberate about ensuring the reliability of our electric supply. Investments into the solutions will be required. We have a responsibility to manage initial costs to lessen upfront impacts and avoid inequities. But doing nothing or delaying accelerated reduction scenarios runs the risk of continued fossil fuel dependence, with its impending carbon regulations. At the same time, inaction can lead to even greater traffic congestion and worsening air quality. The City’s communications strategy is vital to the success of these planning efforts. We need to continue the steady, responsible actions already underway to reduce GHG emissions while engaging even more residents and businesses in Fort Collins. The new strategies described in this framework plan will bring more choices to more people, and these opportunities should be communicated broadly to Fort Collins' citizens to ensure successful adoption. 4 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft ESTIMATED EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS BY STRATEGY The estimated total carbon reductions for the suite of strategies and tactics described in this framework plan come within 10 to 15% of City planning objectives to reduce emissions 20% below 2005 levels by 2020, 80% below 2005 levels by 2030 , and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. FIGURE 3. ESTIMATED PERECENT OF TOTAL EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM CAP FRAMEWORK STRATEGIES BELOW ADJUSTED BUSINES AS USUAL FORECAST 2020 2030 2050 Buildings: Boosting Efficiency, Comfort and Health Build in Efficiency From the Start 3% 2% 3% Make Existing Homes More Efficient 20% 15% 21% Increase Energy Efficiency in the Institutional, Commercial, and Industrial Sectors 27% 18% 21% `Advanced Mobility: Making Transport Faster, More Convenient and Cleaner Shift Land Use Patterns to Shorten Trips and Reduce the Need to Drive 7% 4% 5% Drive Adoption of Multimodal Transport 3% 3% 3% Accelerate Adoption of Fuel Efficient and Electric Vehicles 2% 2% 6% Energy Supply and Delivery: The Shift to Renewable Energy Resources Advance Utility-Scale Renewable Energy Supply 0% 30% 11% Advance Residential and Commercial Solar Adoption 18% 14% 10% Shift Heating Loads to Biofuels, Geothermal, and Electrification 3% 4% 12% Waste Reduction and Materials Regeneration Road to Zero Waste /Carbon Sequestration 17% 7% 9% Carbon Sequestration <1% <1% <1% TOTAL ESTIMATED MTCO2e REDUCTION FROM STRATEGIES 272,000 1,119,000 1,192,000 Estimated Percent Reduction from 2005 Baseline 32%+ 73%+ 86%+ CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 5 FROM PLANNING TO ACTION An appropriate next step will be to compile a 2020 Climate Action Implementation Plan that outline actions required to meet community GHG goal for 2020 and put Fort Collins on a trajectory to meet an aspirational 2030 GHG reduction objective. Detailed steps that lay out schedules, milestones, resources, and metrics will be developed to ensure proper sequencing and integration of strategies. Determining critical timing and funding strategies for key strategies must be coordinated across City departments and support must be sought from community businesses and leaders. And perhaps most importantly, community awareness raising and engagement must be successful in order to put the Implementation Plan into motion. A ROLE FOR EVERYONE Every community member has a stake in this effort. We all can play a role – be it small or large – to building a new pathway towards a more sustainable future. It could be a simple as installing a smarter and simpler-to-use programmable thermostat that cuts your energy use, or riding the bus or your bike more often. Others might consider investing in an electric vehicle (EV) or residential rooftop solar. Businesses might invest in rooftop solar or offer their employees new opportunities that address carbon reduction, ranging from EV charging stations and ride share programs to make it easier to commute while reducing the number of miles driven. We have individual opportunities to seek solutions to this community issue and invest in those solutions, we can all derive multiple benefits socially, economically, and for our environment now and into the future. 6 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft CHAPTER 1 Need for Climate Action Widespread consensus exists that human-caused emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) are impacting Earth’s climate system, causing the potential for unprecedented, large-scale, adverse health, social, economic, financial, security, and ecological effects. The risks associated with climate change have prompted many cities to plan differently for the future, Fort Collins among them. The time to act is now The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a final summary report in Copenhagen in November 2014. This report underscores three major facts about climate change:  Climate change is human-caused and is already having dangerous impacts across the world;  If the world community acts now, warming can still be kept below the politically agreed upon "safe" limit of two degrees Celsius;  The ability to secure a safe climate future is not only possible but also economically viable. The summary report also recognizes that “Mitigation can be more cost-effective if using an integrated approach that combines measures to reduce energy use and the greenhouse gas intensity of end-use sectors, decarbonize energy supply, reduce net emissions and enhance carbon sinks in land-based sectors.” This is the premise upon which Fort Collins’ Climate Action Plan Framework is built. WHY CLIMATE CHANGE MATTERS IN FORT COLLINS Here’s what the Fort Collins region can expect from climate change unless greenhouse gas emissions are dramatically reduced:  Soaring summer temperatures. Days in which the thermometer climbs past 90 degrees F, once rare, will become commonplace. Climate models, down-scaled for our region, predict it is highly likely our summers will be up to 6OF higher by 2040.1 Increased heat can exacerbate ground level ozone and smog, worsen visibility and affect citizens’ health.  Longer and more intense droughts. These will have cascading negative effects on all environmental fronts, from native trout viability to urban and national forest productivity.  Less snowpack, with earlier snowmelt runoff. This means reduced stream flows and soil moisture in summer months, so that water may not be available when it is most needed.  Despite the increasing frequency of drought conditions, the rainfall that does come may be more concentrated in heavy downpours, increasing the risks of flooding.  Higher temperatures and lower soil moisture will increase the threats to forests from fire, insects, and disease, affecting recreation, the timber industry, and air and water quality.  More severe heat waves and storms will threaten human health, perhaps even human lives. The Fort Collins “Extreme Heat” report documents the occurrence of more hot days and heat waves this century than in earlier decades.2 With continued climate change, the forecast is for much more extreme heat, especially if future emissions of heat-trapping pollution are high. 1Climate Change Primer for Fort Collins, 2013. (http://www.fcgov.com/climateprotection/pdf/fortcollinsclimatechangeprimer2013.pdf) CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 7 Fort Collins and the State of Colorado have already caught possible glimpses of the disasters that may come without quicker action to cut emissions. The 2012 High Park and Waldo Canyon wildfires, and the 2013 Black Forest fire, were the most destructive in the state’s history, destroying hundreds of homes. The September 2013 flood swept away roads, bridges and homes along the Big Thompson River and other areas, and caused more than $2 billion in regional damage. The August 2013 heat wave forced the community’s schools to close. And the mountain pine beetle, unleashed by milder winters, has decimated more than 4 million acres of forest across the state. These predicted and actual impacts illustrate what Fort Collins has at stake as humans change the climate and why reducing climate-changing pollution matters.2 MULTIPLE CO-BENEFITS OF CLIMATE ACTION Studies continue to illustrate that taking action to address climate change can be beneficial. In 2013, the Carbon Disclosure Project, along with the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, found that, of the 110 global cities reporting, 91% say that tackling climate change presents economic opportunities. Sixty-two percent of the reported reduction activities being undertaken by cities have the potential to make cities more attractive to businesses, with the largest attractors being energy efficiency actions and development of infrastructure for non- motorized transport.3 The Fort Collins community could realize significant ancillary economic, environmental and social benefits by undertaking responsible steps to combat climate change.  Support local businesses and stimulate economic development  Provide economic stimulation of research and development activities  Reduce home and business energy costs for heating, cooling and lighting  Reduce home and business motor vehicle fuel costs  Reduce dependence on foreign fuel sources  Reduce vulnerability to energy price increases and volatility  Reduce peak energy demand and improve utilization of the electricity system  Diversify energy supply and reduce loads on transmission system  Reduce air pollution emissions including ozone precursors and fine particles  Improve public health  Improve local visibility  Reduce waste and increase landfill diversion rates  Reduce vehicle miles of travel and road congestion  Reduce water consumption in the community  Increase Fort Collins’ ability to adapt to a changing climate  Provide opportunities for regional, state and national leadership and recognition Local governments have strong financial incentives to address climate change. Reducing local carbon emissions means pursuing a variety of programs and practices that are energy prudent, and thus ultimately fiscally responsible. 2“Extreme Heat in Fort Collins”, 2014 (http://www.fcgov.com/climateprotection/pdf/heat-report-jan-2014.pdf) 3 https://www.cdp.net/CDPResults/CDP-Cities-2013-Global-Report.pdf 8 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft ROLE OF CITIES With more than 80% of Americans living in urban areas, cities play a pivotal role in addressing climate change. The design of cities—what we consume, how we design our buildings, how we develop our land, how we get around, and how we deal with our waste—significantly determines the amount of energy we use, the greenhouse gas emissions we produce, and the risks of disruption from climate-related weather events. While Fort Collins’ impact on global greenhouse gas emission is very small, leadership action is a powerful force that can be multiplied many times over. This capacity to inspire change is further complemented by the City’s control of local electricity and water utility operations. Cities like Fort Collins, and other leading cities, have the opportunity to demonstrate to the nation and the world that it is possible to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while maintaining and enhancing its position as a healthy, prosperous and resilient place to live, work, and play. Cities and communities are today at the forefront of practical, meaningful climate action. Many cities and some states are taking action. In a recent survey of 288 major cities, more than half (53%) had committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions4. National and international networks of cities, including 100 Resilient Cities, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, C40 Cities, and many others are sharing best practices and comparing results. Local planning enables communities to craft policies that are best adapted to local values, opportunities, constraints, and economic considerations. Communities and states that have been proactive in formulating policies to address climate change, like Fort Collins and the State of Colorado, will be better prepared to meet the EPA’s proposed carbon emissions regulations under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. FORT COLLINS’ CLIMATE COMMITMENT Fort Collins has been a leader in climate protection for almost two decades, starting with the first “Local Action Plan to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emission” adopted in 1999. Through leadership and involvement by many, emissions are below 2005’s baseline, at the same time that population and economy have grown. This CAP framework is the latest in a series of progressive actions that the Fort Collins community has taken over the past two decades to respond to increasing concerns about climate change and its global and local impacts. The goals in this framework plan are among the most ambitious in the nation. 4http://usmayors.org/pressreleases/uploads/2014/0422-report-climatesurvey.pdf CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 9 FIGURE 3. FORT COLLINS’ CLIMATE COMMITMENT 10 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft WHY ACCELERATE FORT COLLINS’ CLIMATE ACTION GOALS In April 2014, Fort Collins City Council passed Resolution 2014-028, calling for an ad hoc citizen advisory committee to develop, for City Council’s consideration, an updated Climate Action Plan that described the steps our community will need to take to achieve community-wide GHG reduction goals of:  20% below 2005 levels by 2020  80% below 2005 levels by 2030  100% below 2005 levels by 2050 (carbon neutral) Why? Because:  Fort Collins is especially vulnerable to the effects of climate change, so enhanced actions to reduce emissions and prepare for climate change are needed.  New opportunities have emerged to reduce local emissions since the 2008 Climate Action Plan was adopted.  Fort Collins is uniquely positioned to demonstrate to other communities how deep reductions in GHG emissions can be made while remaining economically vibrant. Most countries have acknowledged the threat of climate change and are making commitments, or issuing rules and regulations, to reduce emissions. Some community climate action plans, such as Fort Collins’ 2008 plan, call for an 80% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050 in an effort to limit global warming to two degrees centigrade (3.6 degrees F). However, many scientists believe that this goal is simply not aggressive enough, calling a 2-degree global warming limit a “prescription for disaster.” A clear, long-term goal allows Fort Collins to determine in advance the major efforts and initiatives it must undertake as a community over the next two to three decades, and to identify and prioritize near term actions. By setting a goal that makes Fort Collins a leader in the transition to a clean energy economy, the City has the potential to stimulate local innovation and entrepreneurial activity, attract new partners and outside capital, and encourage funding for cutting edge research and development. Such an aspirational goal may drive more action to reduce emissions than would occur without a goal and plan and could boost the community’s engagement, competitive spirit, and sense of pride. United action could bring many benefits to Fort Collins—and make a compelling case for other communities to quickly follow suit. The benefits of a long-term aspirational goal and a Climate Action Plan framework include:  opportunity to analyze options and prioritize actions  establish a process for tracking, evaluating, and recalibrating  provide clarity and inspiration to the community and other potential partners/allies  align and combine the strengths of the private/public sectors THE RISKS Accelerating the City’s emissions reductions targets is not without cost or risk. At the same time, the risks of not taking aggressive action against climate change are significant. Fort Collins is now largely dependent on coal and natural gas to generate electricity and heat for homes, and on oil to fuel vehicles. Simply maintaining the current electricity grid, local residential/commercial building stocks and transportation system to 2030 and 2050 is expensive. Delaying implementation strategies may not be fiscally prudent. As the U.S. and other countries move towards mandatory curbs on greenhouse gas emissions, the costs associated with carbon-generating activities will increase. Some of the risks are outlined below. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 11 FIGURE 4. TO ACT OR NOT TO ACT - BOTH CHOICES HAVE RISKS AND COSTS Risks of inaction (business as usual) Risks of accelerated climate action  Significant opportunity cost: Fort Collins loses its position as a leader in the clean tech market and misses out on opportunities to attract funding, investor capital and innovative businesses.  Greater congestion and worsening air quality: Failure to significantly reduce onsite combustion from transportation reduces Fort Collins’ quality of life and attractiveness as a community.  Carbon regulation (and costs) imposed on Fort Collins: New national rules could impact citizens and businesses by applying a cost to carbon emitting activities.  Continued fossil fuel dependence: Fossil fuel price spikes and fuel supply shocks may hurt the local economy.  Investing too early: Technologies may not yet be fully developed or cost- effective.  Inequitable impacts: Costs may not be borne equally across the community, leading to inequities.  Less reliable electricity: Adding lots of renewable electricity to the grid could result in instability if not properly managed.  Higher costs: Steps to boost efficiency and add renewable power will require increased upfront investment by the City and its businesses and taxpayers. ( Care must be taken to manage the risks outlined above. Risks of accelerated action must be managed through careful program design, pilot testing and refinement where appropriate, and vetting with the community and stakeholder groups. WHY FORT COLLINS CAN SUCCEED Achieving aspirational, long term greenhouse gas reduction goals will not be easy. It will require community involvement and ownership in seeking and implementing solutions. It will require finding new and innovative ways to finance upfront costs. However, Fort Collins is well positioned to be among the leaders in advancing greenhouse gas reduction at the community level for several reasons, outlined below:  A strong foundation of existing community, City and utility programs ,such as an award-winning Utility that consistently provides highly reliable power, the recent successful Renewable and Distributed System Integration (RDSI) project, Advanced Metering Fort Collins (AMFC) rollout, existing extensive pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly infrastructure and a transit oriented development/land use code. The City offers a comprehensive portfolio of efficiency programs garnering savings that are amongst the best in the country and regularly enhances programs to enable additional community participation.  A highly engaged and collaborative business community. Numerous local businesses already have voluntarily committed to reduce GHG emissions through City programs. Among them are several prominent leaders whose standing in the community and focus on sustainable initiatives make them effective drivers of change. The business sector leads the way in annual efficiency savings, with over 40% of community businesses participating in programs and services provided by Fort Collins Utilities. 12 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft  Owning an electric utility with a collaborative regional power supply partner. Municipal ownership brings greater control of energy decisions, access to low-cost capital and flexible financing, and potential for collaboration with other communities. The City of Fort Collins has ownership in Platte River Power Authority (Platte River), along with three neighboring communities (Longmont, Estes Park, and Loveland), which further provides benefits in regional decision-making that guides generation production, as detailed in Fort Collins Utilities Energy Policy.  A partnership with Colorado State University. As a leader in climate change research and education, CSU can help Fort Collins shape and implement its energy transformation. The University has its own aggressive goals to achieve carbon neutrality (and alone accounts for about a fifth of Fort Collins’ population).  A Platinum Bike Friendly Community. Bicycling has become a primary means of transportation for many, a major form of recreation for most, and a significant factor in attracting new businesses and new residents to Fort Collins. The 2014 Bicycle Master plan sets a vision for the year 2020, whereby one in five people will ride a bike, and bicycle- related crashes will be fewer than today.  Citizen surveys show interest in taking action to address climate change .The 2011 Fort Collins Air Quality/Recycling survey indicates that a resounding 86% of citizen agree or strongly agree that “governments should offer voluntary programs that enable citizens and businesses to reduce climate change”. Another 74% agree or strongly agree that “governments should enact legislation and regulations intended to reduce climate change”.  Continued support from philanthropy and other levels of government. Foundations like the New Belgium Family Foundation and the Argosy Foundation have already begun to invest in strategies described in the CAP framework in anticipation of significant future social and economic benefits to the community.  Tangible experience being on the innovation edge of climate action. The City has launched landmark local initiatives like the FortZed zero energy district and the plan for Zero Waste by 2030. It has also contributed to national programs like the USDA’s Climate Hubs program and the Presidential Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience, in which the mayor was an active participant. Fort Collins was a founding member of the Colorado Clean Energy Cluster and the Water Innovation Cluster, whose initiatives are advancing innovative climate solutions locally. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 13 CHAPTER 2 Framework for Action THE PROCESS This Climate Action Plan framework has been developed in response to Resolution 2014-028. The City first established a 23-member Citizens Advisory Committee and assembled a team of expert analysts and advisors, including members of City staff and outside consultants. The Committee and the experts then assessed how the City could achieve the ambitious goals, and also estimated the costs and benefits to the community of doing so. Key elements for developing the framework included::  A core analytical team, led by the City and supported by Brendle Group and Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI), assessed the implications of using different strategies to achieve the goals. In addition, Platte River has analyzed scenarios indicating changes in power production required to meet the City’s electricity supply needs in support of an updated CAP.  A Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), comprised of members from many different parts of the Fort Collins community, met nine times to provide ideas, input and guidance.  Ideas for strategies and tactics to achieve climate action goals were generated from the CAC, the core team, and interviews with more than 40 leading experts and specialists from Fort Collins and around the nation.  A preliminary triple bottom line evaluation was applied to assess potential aspects of the framework plan’s economic, environmental and social implications. The journey toward a2030 goal of reducing emissions by 80%, and a 2050 goal for carbon neutrality is a long one, which will require adjustments over time. Strategies and tactics will inevitably shift and evolve, even as the long-term target remains the same. A key element of this plan, therefore, is to provide a framework to periodically reevaluate—and alter as needed— actions that the City is taking. WHERE ARE WE STARTING? Currently, 97% of GHG emissions are generated by burning coal, oil and natural gas (Figure 5). Natural gas accounts for 20% of emissions, almost all of it from the gas used to heat our buildings, cook our food and power industrial processes. Meanwhile, the petroleum that fuels our cars, buses, trucks and other vehicles is responsible for another25% of total emissions. Fort Collins’ community GHG accounting follows standardized accounting protocols for communities, which is “production based”, focusing on fossil fuel combustion directly associated with community activities. Although it does not incorporate the life-cycle emission embodied in all the products and materials we use in our daily lives (“consumption-based” accounting), information about the carbon footprint of products is important to share with citizens, further empowering their choices to reduce their carbon footprint. 14 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft FIGURE 5. FORT COLLINS COMMUNITY 2013 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BY SOURCE* *Airline travel excluded. Fort Collins emits about 14.7 metric tons of CO2equivalent per capita annually, down from 18.0.tons per capita in 2005. Fort Collins’ emissions are lower than national averages for the U.S. as a whole and for Colorado, thanks in part to deliberate efforts undertaken in recent years to reduce emissions. But our dependence on fossil fuels remains high, and our overall emissions exceed those of a majority of the world’s population on a per capita basis, including some cities with significantly higher per capita gross domestic product (GDP) than Fort Collins. PROJECTED FUTURE EMISSIONS Fort Collins’ community total GHG emissions are projected to increase 16% by 2030 and 39% by 2050, above 2005 levels, in the absences of additional actions to curb them. This projection is referred to as the ”Business As Usual” forecast. Fortunately, some actions are anticipated that will lower emissions as a result of actions that are outside the direct control of the Fort Collins community or City government. Increased federal standards for vehicle fuel efficiency (Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency, or CAFE) are expected to lower emissions in the Fort Collins community by 12% by 2050. Greenhouse gas emissions from Fort Collins’ electric supply could drop if Platte River decides to proceed toward the guidelines established by the Platte River board in 2013. These guidelines were established for a study of options that could: (1) reduce emissions 20% below 2005 levels by 2020 and 80% by 2050, (2) achieve 20% energy supply from renewable sources by 2020 (not including existing hydropower), (3) maintaining reliability through minimum 15% reserve margin, and (4) remaining the lowest cost wholesale electric supplier located in Colorado. Since 2013, Platte River has already added 60 MW of new wind generation and the Board has approved installation of up to 30 MW of solar generation at the Rawhide site. Additional changes may be considered over time based on Platte River’s ongoing resource planning efforts. 0.4% 3% 20% 25% 52% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% WATER-RELATED SOLID WASTE NATURAL GAS GROUND TRAVEL ELECTRICITY PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL EMISSIONS (CO2E) CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 15 Subtracting the anticipated benefits of the CAFE vehicles standards and assuming CO2 reductions associated with Platte River’s study guidelines are implemented, total Fort Collins projected emissions could drop. This is referred to as the “Adjusted Business As Usual” scenario. Note that no changes to electric supply from Platte River have been approved, but are assumed to have been implemented in this Adjusted Business As Usual scenario. The strategies identified in this CAP framework strive to fill in the gap between the “Adjusted Business As Usual” emissions level and what would be needed to accomplish emissions reductions of 20% by 2020, 80% by 2030, and carbon neutrality by 2050. FIGURE 6. FORT COLLINS GHG EMISISONS FORECAST AND REDUCTONS NEEDED (MTCO2E) 2005 2020 2030 2050 Business As Usual Forecast Emissions (with projected heat increase) 2,343,000 2,433,000 2,711,000 3,265,000 Adjusted Business As Usual Reductions - federal vehicles fuel efficiency standards - Platte River Power Authority 2013 study guidelines - 567,000 - 951,000 -1,739,000 Adjusted Business As Usual (ABAU) Forecast Emissions 1,866,000 1,760,000 1,526,000 Target % (below 2005) 20% 80% 100% Target Emissions 1,874,000 469,000 0 Needed Reductions from ABAU -8,000 1,291,000 1,526,000 16 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 17 CHAPTER 3 Emissions Reduction Strategies This chapter describes a framework of actions the community can take to substantially meet accelerated greenhouse gas reduction goals. The selection of strategies and tactics included in this framework plan is based on research and analysis covering all emissions categories. More than 100 individual tactics were evaluated, from City-led efficiency programs to entrepreneurial mobile applications and services. They were based on interviews with more than 40 local, regional and national experts and analysis by independent consultants. The strategies and tactics described here are grouped in four major sectors:  reduce energy use in buildings  reduce energy use in transportation  reduce emissions from electricity  Reduce waste and eliminate landfill emissions by recycling or composting FIGURE 7. ESTIMATED PERECENT OF TOTAL EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM CAP FRAMEWORK STRATEGIES BELOW ADJUSTED BUSINES AS USUAL FORECAST 2020 2030 2050 Buildings: Boosting Efficiency, Comfort and Health Build in Efficiency From the Start 3% 2% 3% Make Existing Homes More Efficient 20% 15% 21% Increase Energy Efficiency in the Institutional, Commercial, and Industrial Sectors 27% 18% 21% `Advanced Mobility: Making Transport Faster, More Convenient and Cleaner Shift Land Use Patterns to Shorten Trips and Reduce the Need to Drive 7% 4% 5% Drive Adoption of Multimodal Transport 3% 3% 3% Accelerate Adoption of Fuel Efficient and Electric Vehicles 2% 2% 6% Energy Supply and Delivery: The Shift to Renewable Energy Resources Advance Utility-Scale Renewable Energy Supply 0% 30% 11% Advance Residential and Commercial Solar Adoption 18% 14% 10% Shift Heating Loads to Biofuels, Geothermal, and Electrification 3% 4% 12% Waste Reduction and Materials Regeneration Road to Zero Waste /Carbon Sequestration 17% 7% 9% Carbon Sequestration <1% <1% <1% TOTAL ESTIMATED MTCO2e REDUCTION FROM STRATEGIES 272,000 1,119,000 1,192,000 Estimated Percent Reduction from 2005 Baseline 32%+ 73%+ 86%+ 18 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft BUILDINGS: BOOSTING EFFICIENCY, COMFORT AND HEALTH The building sector is the Fort Collins community’s top energy consumer and its number one contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. While Fort Collins’ current retail electricity and natural gas prices are low compared to national averages, most efficiency measures may be even cheaper to employ. This section describes strategies to reduce energy use in existing buildings and reduce energy use in new buildings. Although energy efficiency alone will not enable Fort Collins to reach an 80% reduction in GHG emissions by 2030, efficiency and conservation measures are typically the most cost-effective approach to reduce emissions and represent the best place to start and/or expand programs. By reducing the overall demand for energy, building efficiency also makes it more feasible to transition to a carbon-neutral energy system. BENEFITS OF GREEN BUILDINGS Research on the benefits of increasing building energy efficiency (incorporating green building concepts into our new and existing homes and businesses) shows tremendous social and economic benefits. When green built schools provide more daylight for the learning environment, children progressed through school curricula 20 to 26% faster5; the net economic and health benefits of green schools has been reported to be $63/square feet.6 Retail stores that installed skylights have reported 40% increases in gross sales.15 Increased worker productivity has been well documented for LEED- certified, ENERGY STAR, and other high performance green commercial and industrial buildings. Studies have demonstrated that green buildings provide up to 18% lower employee turnover, 21% higher employee morale, 22% easier recruiting of employees, and 23% more effective client meetings.7 The benefits derived from higher ventilation rates promoted in green buildings are especially important in high density buildings such as hospitals, nursing homes, and childcare facilities and can account for 50% to 370% reductions in rates of respiratory illnesses.8 Two studies documented a 7.1% rental premium for LEED-certified retrofit buildings9 and a 16% rental premium for new LEED-certified buildings.10 Challenges to accelerated action in the building sector include developing financing programs and business models that enable more cost-effective and broader uptake of efficiency measures without impacting affordability in Fort Collins, addressing issues unique to rental properties, finding solutions to address the unique 5Heschong, Lisa. HeschongMahone Group. “Daylight and Retail Sales.” California Energy Commission: Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Fair Oaks, California, 2003: http://www.terrapinbrightgreen.com/reports/the- economics-of-biophilia/#footnote-22. 6Greening America’s Schools, Cost and Benefits, Gregory Kats, October 2006. 7CBRE and USD Survey Data 2009; U.S. Bureau of Labor and Statistics 2008; Occupational Employment Statistics, 2009 - Miller N.G., Dave Pogue, Quiana D. Gough, and Susan M. Davis; Green Buildings and Productivity (Vol. 1, No. 1-2009, Journal of Sustainable Real Estate). 8Elzeyadi, I. “Daylighting-Bias and Biophilia: Quantifying the Impacts of Daylight on Occupants Health”, Thought and Leadership in Green Buildings Research;Greenbuild 2011, Proceedings, Washington, DC: USGBC Press. 2011 (http://www.terrapinbrightgreen.com/reports/the-economics-of-biophilia/#footnote-22). 9Kok, N., Miller, Norman G., and Morris, Peter, 2012, The Economics of Green Retrofits, Journal of Sustainable Real Estate. 10Eichholtz, Piet M.A., N. Kok, and J.M. Quigley. Doing Well by Doing Good: Green Building Attributes. Building and Environment, 45:11, 2553-2561 as cited in Kok, N., Miller, Norman G., and Morris, Peter., 2012, The Economics of Green Retrofits, Journal of Sustainable Real Estate. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 19 needs of commercial and industrial facilities, and successfully raising awareness and motivating citizens and business to understand the benefits of energy efficiency and invest in those solutions. 2030 Buildings Vision Annual reductions in buildings’ energy use reaches 3% percent per year by 2030. Existing homes and businesses will use 36% less energy than today. New construction will use ~30% less energy than under today’s code. FIGURE 8. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED GHG BENEFIT OF BUILDINGS STRATEGIES (MTCO2E) Strategy: Build in Efficiency from the Start Fort Collins’ many historic structures show that buildings can have useful lives for scores or even hundreds of years. That longevity emphasizes the importance of designing new construction to be as energy efficient as possible. Building it right the first time locks in energy savings and that brings benefits for decades to come. By 2030, the following actions could reduce energy consumption in this new construction by 30% compared to business as usual. This framework plan builds on the City’s longstanding green building efforts by continually raising the bar for high performing buildings while supporting and rewarding beyond-compliance efforts. Tactics under consideration include: Increase energy efficiency in new construction  Continue to adopt the latest energy codes for new residential and commercial buildings along with specific local requirements to exceed minimum standards.  Engage local builders to determine best practices for meeting and exceeding code requirements, and connect contractors with the training and resources needed to deliver efficiency savings at the scale required to meet the goals.  Ensure new buildings meet codes to realize the expected savings.  Reward builders who go beyond the efficiency codes with incentives programs. Encourage “demand-response” for new residential construction  Consider incentives or requirements for demand-response, which calls for home energy management systems to be built into all new residential construction. Combined with `smart’ appliances, demand- 2020 2030 2050 Buildings: Boosting Efficiency, Comfort and Health Build in Efficiency From the Start 8,000 24,000 34,000 Make Existing Homes More Efficient 55,000 165,000 247,000 Increase Energy Efficiency in the Institutional, Commercial, and Industrial Sectors 73,000 207,000 252,000 20 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft response enables voluntary or programmed pauses in appliance use during peak times, and helps encourage residents to re-schedule tasks for periods of low demand.  Consider establishing variable energy pricing, so the price of energy rises and falls depending on demand. This provides an incentive for homeowners to adjust their energy use help and lower the peak demand in the community. It also gives homeowners the chance to save substantial amounts of money—and to benefit the entire system—by moving tasks, such as washing clothes, to periods of lower demand and thus of cheaper electricity. Strategy: Make Existing Homes More Efficient The majority of homes in 2030 and 2050 will be buildings that already standing today, so it is crucial to boost the energy performance of today’s existing homes. Fort Collins’ citizens will reap additional benefits of efficient homes, such as improved comfort and indoor environmental quality. A two-pronged approach to reducing energy use in existing homes will be most effective; first by retrofitting homes to be more energy efficient, and secondly by conducting educational campaigns to help residents learn to live more efficiently in their homes. Boost energy efficiency in existing homes  Continuously improve efficiency programs to be more effective, and ensure adequate funding to meet interest from customers.  Develop new service and product models that enable homeowners to participate in energy efficiency improvements without upfront costs, by allowing improvements to be paid back over time in utility bills.  Promote new technologies for efficient consumer products and smart homes.  Consider requirements for rating and communicating the efficiency of homes for sale and for rent.  Provide tools and resources to help households manage their energy use.  Build on Fort Collins’ strong sense of community with a public awareness and educational campaign that helps citizens take action. Strategy: Increase Energy Efficiency in the Institutional, Commercial, and Industrial Sectors Boosting efficiency of commercial buildings requires a more tailored approach, compared to residential homes, because the uses and requirements of businesses vary so widely. Tactics for non-residential buildings include policy mechanisms, innovative business models, and a range of potential programs that target small and mid- sized businesses as well as the largest commercial property owners and the highest energy users in industry.  Lead by doing. By setting a goal of cutting the energy use in municipal government buildings by upwards of 30 percent by 2030, the City will set an example to the rest of the community. The City can test efficiency approaches and funding models applicable to commercial buildings in the private sector.  Collect and publicize data on energy use. Explore requirements for the annual energy consumption of large public, commercial and multi-family properties to be reported and made available to the public. A number of cities, including New York and Seattle, already require public disclosure of energy use.  Raise standards. Buildings can be assessed and compared by their annual energy use per square foot, a measure called Energy Use Intensity (EUI). The City should ensure that each of its municipal buildings in a particular category achieve a reasonable level of EUI. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 21  Create innovative new approaches to provide energy efficiency programs to customers. Business models being considered streamline the process for individuals to sign up, and cut down on costs, from initial contracting, to installation, to periodic measurement and verification.  Provide expert advice. The City can work with the largest industrial facilities in Fort Collins to identify and engineer changes that significantly reduce buildings’ energy use.  Implement new rules. The City could look at a variety of new building construction codes, including: installation of efficient lights in non-residential spaces; ensure the energy use of individual tenants in commercial and retail buildings is metered and billed to the tenants; require that buildings be re- commissioned once every decade to ensure that basic systems are operating at optimal performance levels; and, require commercial customers to participate in demand-response programs.  Training and required certification of building operators. Making sure that building operators have the necessary technical expertise to help keep systems running at maximum efficiency.  Build awareness. An educational campaign focused on businesses can help incentivize and motivate the private sector to take a significant role in the community-wide effort to cut greenhouse gas emissions.  Continually Improving. Business savings from efficiency have led the way for community savings since 2004. Continue to improve the programs for assessments, incentives and technical assistance to reach all types of businesses. 22 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft ADVANCED MOBILITY: MAKING TRANSPORT FASTER, MORE CONVENIENT AND CLEANER Fort Collins consumed 62 million gallons of gasoline and diesel in 2013 as people drive to work and school, deliver products and services, run errands, and perform the daily tasks required to keep commerce and life running smoothly. Fort Collins’ street system, buses, and pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure are designed and maintained to meet the highest standards. But in addition to the many benefits it provides, Fort Collins’ transportation system also comes with significant costs. All told, transportation accounts for 25% of Fort Collins’ total greenhouse gas emissions, and is responsible for significant financial, as well as health and societal, impacts. In addition to generating GHGs, burning gasoline and diesel to fuel vehicles is also the major source of local “criteria” air pollutants like NOx, SO2, and particulate matter. Air pollution contributes to asthma and other illnesses in Fort Collins, where one in four residents have respiratory problems.11 In addition, transportation energy is an expensive drain on the local economy.12The infrastructure necessary to support combustible fuels will continue to be capital-intensive, and future fuel costs will continue to be volatile. In contrast to buying homegrown products and services, money spent on gasoline and diesel flows out of the community to refineries and producers elsewhere in the country or the world, contributing to global political and security risks from importing oil. The good news is that the transportation sector is already on a path to reduce GHG emissions and other pollutants because of aggressive new national fuel economy standards set in 2012, which require 54 MPG average gas mileage for new vehicles by 2025. In order to meet these targets, all cars and trucks will be required to be more aerodynamic, and lighter, with improved engine technology. Increases in electric vehicle adoption are also anticipated. This framework plan includes strategies that have the potential to reduce Fort Collins’ transportation energy use even further. Strategies in the plan put more dollars back in people’s pockets in saved fuel costs, while also providing greater transport options, ease, and convenience to the community. As described in Fort Collins’ 2011 Transportation Master Plan,13 the City is already pursuing a number of interventions to capture these benefits. Accelerating these activities and adopting more aggressive community-wide goals will reduce transportation emissions of GHGs even further and result in a net savings in fuel costs and avoided vehicle maintenance for 11 Reference: Breathe Wheezy, Scientific American, Jan 9 2013, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/traffic- pollution-and-asthma/ . 12The costs of congestion and air pollution alone, aside from the other external costs of motor vehicle traffic, are estimated at $260,000 each year in Fort Collins, according to Victoria Transportation Institute, Evaluating Public Transit Benefits (2014), http://www.vtpi.org/tranben.pdf, . 13“Fort Collins Transportation Master Plan,” City of Fort Collins, 2/14/11. http://www.fcgov.com/PlanFortCollins/pdf/tmp.pdf CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 23 the community. Transitioning to a more advanced, low carbon transport system will also reduce significant additional external costs the community pays for transport today, which include the cost of accidents, parking, congestion, road facilities, roadway land value, traffic service, air pollution, noise, water pollution, and other resource externalities which can add $0.202/passenger mile.14 Challenges to accelerated action in this area include continuing to raise awareness and build community support for increased infill densities, addressing barriers associated with infill development, informing consumers about the life-cycle costs of transportation choices, and funding infrastructure needs associated with transit expansion. FIGURE 9. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED GHG BENEFIT OF TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES (MTCO2E) 2020 2030 2050 Advanced Mobility: Making Transport Faster, More Convenient and Cleaner Shift Land Use Patterns to Shorten Trips and Reduce the Need to Drive 19,000 45,000 54,000 Drive Adoption of Multimodal Transport 9,000 31,000 38,000 Accelerate Adoption of Fuel Efficient and Electric Vehicles 5,000 21,000 71,000 BENEFITS OF ACCELERATED TRANSPORTATION ENERGY SAVINGS The benefits of accelerating Fort Collins’ transportation energy savings extend beyond costs savings. With enhanced urban planning and smart growth, people can get places faster and more conveniently. The strength of Fort Collins’ biking network will continue to be a boon not only to its bikers, but to residential property values in the city.15 Increased retail spending per month has been shown to increase when customers travel by bike ($75.66) rather than by car ($61.03)28. The demand for transit has been growing in Fort Collins as evidenced by 70% growth between 2000 and 2014, and 14% growth between 2013 and 2014. Less driving means less congestion, and consequently, improved local air quality. Cumulative vehicle miles traveled (VMT) savings of over 158 million from several transportation strategies in this plan translates into a total health cost savings of over $17 million from reduced air pollution for Fort Collins’ citizens in the 16-year period between 2014 and 203016. Continuing the work the City has already started will also continue to build on one of the community’s greatest strengths— being a bike-able, walkable city. There’s even a potential benefit for the electricity sector from greater adoption of electric vehicles. 14Litman, Todd, Aug 31, 2014. Evaluating Public Transit Benefits and Costs, Best Practices Guidebook. 15People for Bikes and the Alliance for Biking and Walking, Protected Bike Lanes Mean Business, pp10, https://www.sfbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Protected_Bike_Lanes_Mean_Business.pdf 16 Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis II – Air Pollution Costs, Mar 16, 2011, Victoria Transport Policy Institute 24 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 2030 Transportation Vision Reduce vehicles miles travelled by 29%. Expansion of transit network. One in two new passenger cars purchased will be electric by 2030. The remaining new vehicles purchased will be 40% more efficient than the average new stock by 2030. Strategy: Shift Land Use Patterns to Shorten Trips and Reduce the Need to Drive This strategy supports land use changes that shorten vehicle trips and reduce the need for vehicle transport. Perhaps more than any other factor, land use determines individuals’ transportation habits. Tactics include:  Pursue a “complete streets” approach for new road construction. Development should account for the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists as well as cars, through features like well-placed bike lanes and crosswalks.  Evaluate parking requirements. For Fort Collins’ development is deliberately designed to support higher land use intensity. The “market” needs to assign more accurate value to what is currently a highly community- subsidized commodity: the parking space. Changing the number of parking spaces required for new construction projects allows developers to have more autonomy in designing projects.  Evaluate approaches such as retrofitting, charging for, and reducing on-street parking. Improvements in current parking conditions can be made by installing parking meters, establishing district permitting, and creating “smart parking” initiatives (like mobile parking payments, meter-based parking sensors, and responsive pricing,. Improved city parking – both on-street and off-street – can cover its own costs and encourage development and behavior that accounts for the cost of parking. Strategy: Drive Adoption of Multimodal Transport This strategy includes tactics to reduce the demand for, and use of, personal vehicles and to increase the use of alternative modes, including transit, biking, carpooling, and walking. Tactics include:  Coordinate and expand local and regional mass transportation options for commuters  Offer static and real-time public transit data, along with other transportation information, to third-party developers through an open data platform that supports web-based or mobile transit apps. Fort Collins has implemented both web-based and a mobile transit app containing real-time bus arrival information, and plans to release GTFS (transit feed data) publically for use by developers once a license agreement has been completed. These new tools make it simple for commuters and other travelers to walk, bike, or use mass transit while on the go.  Facilitate and support the growth of car share or ride share programs. Clear, coherent policies on the part of the City will help foster emerging transit systems like car share and ride share enterprises. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 25  Continue to implement and expand bike-share programs. In addition to health benefits and reduced traffic congestion, bike share systems provide vital last/first-mile links for transit users and alternative travel options for visitors.  Develop corporate engagement and incentive programs to provide public transit access, and to encourage employee bicycling and walking to reduce vehicle miles traveled from commuting.  Campaign to increase awareness of how transportation costs factor into the total cost of living. Many people are unaware of how the costs of driving (e.g.,vehicle maintenance, fuel, and insurance) add up over time and compete with alternative travel options, which leads to a persistent preference for automobiles despite their costs and risks. Creative tactics can be communicated to help citizens understand the real value of alternative transit and the true cost of driving. OPEN TRANSIT DATA: Leveraging the Ingenuity of the Private Sector to Improve Transit Services One of the most promising, cost-effective tactics available for reducing vehicle miles and thereby emissions is to make transit schedules, stops, prices, and real-time data on the actual location and estimated arrival/departure times more readily available to the public. When data are made available to the public and to third-party developers, or “opened,” municipalities can leverage the skills, resources, and momentum of the private sector to help improve transit services and ridership. Outcomes can include: - Increasingly more effective interfaces and apps that help users figure out what transport options they have, with improved capability over existing City transit sites. --New transit enterprises that provide car and bike-shares where they are needed most, beyond what the City can offer. -New transit solutions provided by the private sector and entrepreneurs -Opening real-time transit data has been shown to increase transit ridership and to significantly improve rider satisfaction by reducing wait times and improving transit reliability.17 With the right hardware and software, the generation of real-time transit data can be relatively inexpensive and sharing that data can be very low cost. Existing research has shown a 2.5% increase in ridership as a result of open real-time transit data, and there is reason to believe that percentage could be much higher among young technology adopters (e.g., students at CSU) and will continue to grow as technology improves.18 Strategy: Accelerate Adoption of Fuel Efficient and Electric Vehicles This strategy is focused on improving the performance of vehicles so that when people do drive, there are fewer resulting carbon emissions and decreased impacts to local air quality. Personal Vehicles Fort Collins has already made significant progress in the adoption of hybrid and electric vehicles (EVs); northern Colorado sells about 20% more EVs than the national average. There are already 25 public charging stations in 17Candace Brakewood, Quantifying the Impact of Real-time Information on Transit Ridership. Forthcoming dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, Jan 2015. 18Ibid 26 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft place (including four DC fast-charging stations), meaning that access to charging for EV drivers is never more than six miles away. Drive Electric Northern Colorado, a regional non-profit dedicated to widespread deployment of EVs, is helping to create influential advocates through its Drive Leadership program and is bringing workplace charging to more than 12,000 employees in Fort Collins. Specific tactics under consideration include:  Develop and execute a campaign to provide decision makers and the public opportunities to drive an EV and experience its benefits.  Build on already successful programs to ensure even more electric vehicle charging stations are available, including public charging stations in highly visible, frequently visited locations, workplaces and residences.  Provide incentives that benefit users and owners of alternative-fuel vehicles, encouraging their adoption.  Aggregate and incentivize bulk purchases of electric vehicles for fleet, car-sharing, or individual use to drive prices lower.  Work with local automobile dealerships to increase electric vehicle stock, and improve training and incentives for EV sales.  Provide time-of-use pricing and utility programs to incentivize EV charging during off-peak hours.  Provide a central market to buy and sell used EV batteries which will unlock significant value from second use of the battery. Commercial and Municipal Fleet System Compared with individual consumers, fleet managers are more cost conscious, more data driven and more willing to make investments with a longer payback. Commercial fleets can also take advantages of economies of scale such as centralized charging, optimized utilization and aggregated purchasing. As a result, owners and operators of commercial fleets are, in many ways, more suitable candidates for transition to electric vehicle adoption. Indianapolis is leading the way, moving toward 100% EVs for their city fleet by 2025 (500+ vehicles). Tactics being considered to encourage efficiency, demand reduction, and electrification of commercial and municipal fleets include:  Facilitate access to third-party leasing agents who can provide EVs, maintenance, charging and financing in one turnkey, cost-effective package.  Align City budgeting (when necessary) under a single point of contact for fleet purchasing/procurement and operational expense decisions to streamline and accelerate the transition to EVs.  Support fleet decision-making by optimizing EV driving schedule and usage for shorter, local trips and use hybrids or existing fleet vehicles for longer trips where charging is impractical.  Encourage the electrification of commercial fleets and point-to-point mobility service providers (e.g., airport shuttles, Uber, Ram Rides).  Encourage the mild-hybridization of special-use vehicles (e.g., fire trucks, police cruisers) to reduce idling emissions. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 27 ELECTRICITY SUPPLY AND DELIVERY: THE SHIFT TO RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES Transitioning Fort Collins’ energy supply to clean, renewable resources is a central part of the Climate Action Plan framework. Today, electricity supply accounts for more than half of Fort Collins’ CO2 emissions. The opportunities for increasing renewable electricity generation from resources such as wind, solar, biomass, and hydroelectric power are abundant and increasingly cost competitive. Prices for wind and solar have been falling sharply in recent years, and northern Colorado’s access to these resources is excellent. By integrating local and centralized renewables, Fort Collins can implement a diversified strategy to reduce emissions, stimulate local investment, and support increased electricity use in the transportation sector. As the transition occurs, impacts to rate-payers’ bills must be managed to ensure continued alignment with community values. This section describes strategies and tactics in three areas to achieve these goals.  Advance utility-scale renewable energy  Advance local residential and commercial solar adoption  Reduce emissions from remaining natural gas heating and industrial process loads through combined heat and power, biofuels and renewably sourced electricity. FIGURE 10. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED GHG BENEFIT OF ENERGY SUPPLY STRATEGIES (MTCO2E) 2020 2030 2050 Energy Supply and Delivery: The Shift to Renewable Energy Resources Advance Utility-Scale Renewable Energy Supply 0 336,000 126,000 Advance Residential and Commercial Solar Adoption 49,000 158,000 119,000 Shift Heating Loads to Biofuels, Geothermal, and Electrification 9,000 49,000 146,000 2030 Electric Supply and Delivery Vision Carbon intensity of utility-scale electricity will be 80% lower in 2030 than 2005 level. 50% of new construction in the year 2030 will have enough solar PV to achieve net zero energy use. By 2030, 22% of existing homes and 50% of existing businesses will have installed solar. 28 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft Strategy: Advance Utility-Scale Renewable Energy Progress to Date Platte River is already taking steps to diversify its energy supply mix and reduce carbon emissions by increasing the shares of wind and solar power in its supply portfolio. Platte River added 60 megawatts of wind energy from projects in Logan County, Colorado, bringing its total wind energy supply to about 13% of total energy consumption by the four municipalities it serves. In addition, Platte River’s board authorized the acquisition of up to 30 MW of solar energy resources from a facility to be built at the Rawhide Energy Station north of Wellington, CO. With the addition of these resources, the non-fossil fuel proportion of Platte River’s energy supply portfolio to the municipalities will exceed 30%. Modeled analysis In support of the City considering an update to Fort Collins’ Climate Action Plan, Platte River produced a set of theoretical analytical scenarios to meet the new proposed CAP goal of 80% greenhouse gas reduction by 2030. The CAP Framework has incorporated results from this “FC80” scenario that models a 20% reduction by 2020, and an 80% reduction by 2030 for electric system-related CO2 emissions (compared to 2005). The FC80 scenario includes various assumed adjustments to the City’s and Platte River’s electric systems including increased electricity demand from electric vehicle (EV) charging and fuel switching (from natural gas to electric), as well as reduced electricity demand from energy efficiency actions, new amounts of distributed solar energy production, and new levels of investment in distributed combined heat and power (CHP). The FC80 scenario includes theoretical changes in Platte River’s generating system necessary to accommodate the City’s greenhouse gas reduction goals (though the Platte River Board has made no commitment to implement this scenario). Through ongoing resource planning efforts, As modeled, the FC80 scenario contains the following assumptions:  The Craig coal units 1 & 2 (approx. 154 MW) both retire at the end of 2019, rather than running to their planned retirement date of 2042.  The Rawhide coal unit capacity factor falls from about 90% to about 60% by 2029 in response to increased distributed generation.  Rawhide (approx. 280 MW) is theoretically retired from the fleet in 2029, rather than running to its planned retirement date of approximately 2046.  Platte River’s surplus sales drop by approximately 60%; these sales provide financial benefits to Fort Collins and if reduced, would increase electric costs;  Platte River adds about 200 MW of reciprocating natural gas engines to provide a portion of energy needed when wind, solar, and distributed resources are not sufficient to meet City needs;(purchases are also required as indicated below)  It is assumed that a portion of the PV solar produced during periods of high total generation could be sold to the surplus market – to ensure that hydropower is delivered as required by contract, additional sales of renewable supply must be assumed to balance the system  It is assumed that large volumes of purchases and sales can be made to and from the regional electric market to allow balancing of the added renewable resources; Multiple questions remain about the viability of implementing the FC80 scenario. Alternative pathways may be available for Fort Collins to reach an 80% reduction in electric supply emissions that merit further exploration as energy technologies, pricing, and regulations continues to evolve. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 29 Fort Collins CAP Modeling Analysis Caveats Platte River has identified several potential limitations of the Fort Collins CAP analysis that could require further investigation before implementing such large levels of renewables and removing existing resources. It is not clear if the proposed new systems can be integrated effectively, or can meet electrical safety and reliability standards. Detailed electric system modeling is needed  Wholesale level – renewables integration / reliability  City distribution level – operations / reliability / renewables integration  Analysis to date has considered only hourly increments – need to do sub-hourly  Additional modeling needed to consider integration of wholesale/retail systems City level PV solar capacity added is assumed roughly equal to the peak load  This level of renewable additions is unprecedented No storage is assumed for PV solar integration at the distribution level Uncertainties exist regarding permitting of combined heat & power sources  No emissions are currently produced in the City from electric generation  NOx emissions limits constrain the size of generation that can be added  Other permitting issues not yet considered – land, water, etc. Future wholesale wind and solar balancing costs unknown  Model assumes costs are covered by Xcel – current scenario (low renewables)  Additional new resources or electric storage may be required – at added cost All federal hydropower allocations cannot be delivered at high solar levels  Excess solar is assumed sold to the market when not needed – validity uncertain Large wholesale market purchases are required to serve load when solar not available  Amounts to nearly 20% of total deliveries to the City – unrealistic  CO2 emissions are not currently included – source evaluation needed When solar and wind are at high levels – large sales to the market are required  Such sales may not be possible – market and other constraints Transmission may not be available for large amounts of wind and solar  It is assumed that purchases are possible using transmission  More regional transmissions studies are needed to evaluate true costs Stranded fixed costs are not included for the existing system:  Decommissioning of coal units / fuel supply agreements / other factors; Need more time to evaluate these costs Construction times required for adding new resources is constrained  Financing and installation of renewable resources  Decommissioning of existing resources  Electrification infrastructure challenges – EV’s and electric appliances 30 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft Strategy: Advance Residential and Commercial Solar Adoption This strategy focuses on increasing the total amount of solar installations for both residential and commercial buildings. Many customers would like the opportunity to receive their energy from renewable sources, but do not own their own home or business or do not have proper orientation and exposure. This strategy also allows more people to adopt solar energy through community solar installations. Tactics to achieve this strategy involve targeting key commercial customers, developing policies that encourage solar in homes, developing or identifying resources and incentives for solar, and educating the community about on-bill financing, “power purchase” agreement options, and existing rebates. Additionally, tactics will address barriers to participation or installation, such as permitting processes and available installation expertise. The following tactics are being considered to help advance residential and commercial solar adoption. Utility-facilitated, locally sited solar  Expand the pilot Solar Power Purchase Program (SP3), whereby Utilities and Platte River coordinate via power purchase agreements for “in-front of the meter” solar systems installed on commercial rooftops or ground sites.  Develop a utility-owned option for traditional “net metered” solar installations.  Expand community solar options allowing residential and commercial customers to participate and purchase solar power as part of a larger system. Solar for existing commercial  Continue to provide funding and incentives for commercial solar projects to meet demand from customers.  Consider an Integrated Utility Services (IUS) program wherein the utility facilitates solar purchases and consumers can finance PV projects in a number of ways while minimizing impacts on their bills.  Aggregate demand among small and medium sized commercial users and connect them to developers and PV projects.  Use Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing to fund solar PV installations for small and medium- sized businesses. Solar for existing residential  Continue to provide funding and incentives for commercial solar projects to meet demand from customers.  Consider an Integrated Utility Services (IUS) program wherein the utility facilitates solar purchases, and consumers can finance PV projects in a number of ways while minimizing impacts on their bills.  Offer programs to engage and inform customers and expand pricing transparency and competitiveness about solar PV installations.  Launch Green Neighborhood and EcoDistrict initiatives. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 31 Strategy: Shift Heating Loads to Biofuels, Geothermal, and Electrification This strategy encourages customers to switch from natural gas for heating their buildings to less fossil fuel intensive alternatives such as geothermal, combined heat and power, biofuels, or electrification (when the electricity is supplied by fossil free sources such as solar, wind, etc.). Tactics under consideration include: Develop utility programs that encourage fuel switching for renovations and replacements in existing homes and businesses  Provide consulting services to determine appropriate technologies and whole home performance.  Offer fuel switching along with energy efficiency, demand response and solar offerings.  Consider new rate and rebate programs to incentivize adoption. Adopt standards and/or codes for major renovations to increaseuseof non-natural gas heating loads  Set renewable heat standards that require (or incentivize) a percentage of all new homes' thermal loads to be generated renewably, (e.g., (solar thermal, heat pump, biomass boiler).  Leverage home-builder networks to build new homes with little to no natural gas load. 32 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft WASTE REDUCTION / MATERIALS REGENERATION The CAP framework focuses mostly on reducing the Fort Collins community’s emissions from fossil fuel combustion associated with direct energy use (electricity, natural gas, and petroleum fuels for transportation.) However, there are important indirect energy and greenhouse gas implications from the use of materials throughout their life cycle, including eventual recycling, composting, or landfill disposal. Reducing, reusing, recycling, recovering energy, and composting deliver multiple benefits to our ecosystems and the economy in addition to greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions. This chapter discusses qualitative and quantitative strategies that can reduce Fort Collins’ carbon footprint through waste reduction, composting, tree-planting, soil management activities, and promoting local food. The Road to Zero Waste Strategy is quantified as part of this framework plan’s quantified reductions. Other strategies such as elements of carbon sequestration and local food are not quantified but are anticipated to deliver GHG reduction benefits in Fort Collins as well as across the region. Challenges and opportunities lie in finding solutions to address the unique needs of larger waste generators, and developing regionally coordinated solutions to manage waste streams. WASTE REDUCTION VISION Increase waste diversion to 75% by 2020. Increase waste diversion to 90% by 2025; achieve per capita waste generation levels of 2.8 pounds/person/day Achieve zero waste by 2030. FIGURE 11. SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED GHG BENEFIT OF WASTE REDCUTION AND CARBON SEQUESTRATION STRATEGIES (MTCO2E) 2020 2030 2050 Waste Reduction and Materials Regeneration Road to Zero Waste 45,000 82,000 104,000 Carbon Sequestration 200 1,000 1,000 Strategy: Road to Zero Waste Fort Collins’ waste stream is responsible for three percent of its community greenhouse gas emissions. These GHG emissions come primarily from decay of organics in the landfill. Fort Collins has aggressive waste reduction goals in place. Achieving these waste diversion goals will support Fort Collins’ path toward accelerated community greenhouse gas reduction goals. In 2013, the Fort Collins City Council passed a goal of recycling or composting 75% of the community’s discards by 2020, 90% by 2025, and working toward zero waste by 2030. These ambitious goals were developed in tandem with a variety of programs and strategies outlined in the Road to Zero Waste Plan, which describes steps to meet the goals. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 33 One of the strong motivations to adopt a zero waste strategy is its impact on the local economy. As noted in the Road to Zero Waste Plan, the Fort Collins community throws away roughly $6.5 million worth of valuable resources in the landfill every year. By reusing, recycling, recovering energy from, or composting these materials instead, that value would be retained in the local economy. One of the greatest waste diversion opportunities for the Fort Collins community is in composting organic materials. Paper, yard trimmings, and food scraps make up over 50% of the materials currently being landfilled. These materials could all be composted, either in traditional windrow composting, or through anaerobic digestion. Anaerobic digestion provides the double benefit of generating useful compost that can be applied to soils, as well as generating methane that can be collected and used as an energy source. Like most materials, it is important to keep in mind that organics are generated throughout the entire region. Regional-scale facilities such as anaerobic digesters could be developed to take advantage of economies of scale and could compost organic materials generated throughout northern Colorado, including agricultural wastes. The Road to Zero Waste Plan outlines steps to achieve the waste diversion goals adopted by City Council. Some of the actions would be implemented by the private sector and some by the City. CITY ACTIONS:  Complete the Community Recycling Center to offer a one-stop-shop for traditional recyclables, yard waste, and hard-to-recycle materials such as wood, concrete, asphalt and metal  Consider a Universal Recycling Ordinance, which would create easier access to recycling for multi-family residents and businesses  Support a culture change by applying community-based social marketing and providing other outreach and education  Use a systems approach to evaluating waste materials, in alignment with Sustainable Materials Management principles  Advance the municipal organization’s readiness to engage in waste-to-clean-energy activities  Pursue a regional approach to developing infrastructure for Zero Waste activities  Seek funding support for a Resource Recovery Park  Add curbside yard trimmings collection for single-family residents  Consider expansion of Universal Building code amendments for construction and demolition waste  Promote materials reuse by construction of a re-use warehouse  Coordinate and participate in regional land conservation efforts that will provide greater opportunities for carbon sequestration.  Act as a catalyst in researching and promoting agricultural practices that contribute to greater soil resiliency and crop health, as well as greenhouse gas reductions. Private Sector Actions:  Help develop mixed construction and demolition (C&D) materials sorting facility in region 34 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft  Help develop food scraps composting and anaerobic digestion facilities  Help develop glass sorting facility in region BENEFITS OF WASTE DIVERSION There are many benefits to the community that could come from pursuing higher waste diversion goals and helping both businesses and residents be more sustainable and efficient, including: Local jobs and economic development from conserving and using resources locally rather than landfilling them Promoting the health and fertility of local soils and improving opportunities to cultivate nutritious, locally grown produce Postponing the construction of new landfills by prolonging the life of existing landfills, which helps limit risks of pollution to groundwater from landfills that may fail in the future Producing clean energy through anaerobic digestion Reducing, reusing and recycling materials and products conserve 3-5 times the amount of energy that could be produced by burning those materials. Decreasing water use by using compost in landscaping and gardening applications Improving air quality and reducing mobile emissions through more local use of resources Reducing the use of pesticides and herbicides; soils that are amended with compost produce healthy plants that require less chemical application Protecting and restoring habitat, biodiversity and open space through decreased need for mining and resource extraction Providing “green” marketing edge for local businesses and Colorado State University. Strategy: Carbon Sequestration There are two major aspects that humans can impact in carbon cycling: the anthropogenic release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and aiding the removal of those gases by carbon sinks such as vegetation and soils. The tactics included in this section address management and conservation techniques to enhance natural systems that store and sequester carbon. Carbon sequestration tactics also provide opportunities for establishing carbon credits or offsets as well as other environmental co-benefits such as improved air and water quality and reduced water, fertilizer, and pesticide use. PRESERVE AND CONSERVE SUITABLE LANDS FOR CARBON BENEFIT Opportunities exist to enhance soil carbon sequestration by identifying and protecting vulnerable lands with high soil carbon storage potential. This could include protecting native prairie grasslands from being plowed under for high intensity crops, protecting rangeland from development or overgrazing, or reforestation of recently burned areas. Additionally, these practices can be encouraged by documenting carbon credits that can be used or sold as offsets. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 35  Support and enhance initiatives through the Nature in the City project that establish baseline data for land use categories and climate change indicator species and characteristics. Support future initiatives to establish periodic data collection and land acquisitions that maximize carbon sequestration opportunities.  Support and enhance Poudre River Restoration projects that include restoring natural vegetation and riparian habitats along the river corridor that have the potential to maximize carbon sequestration opportunities.  Support initiatives, in addition to Nature in the City and Poudre River Restoration, that develop and preserve open space including grasslands, agricultural lands, wildlife habitat and corridors, wetlands, watersheds, and groundwater recharge areas that remove and sequester carbon from the atmosphere.  Support acquisition or protection of land for local agriculture and food production that results in net carbon benefits through decreased transportation or production emissions.  Support acquisition or protection of land for onsite generation of renewable energy. PROMOTE AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT TO OPTIMIZE SOIL CARBON SEQUESTRATION Support conservation efforts that remove or reduce atmospheric greenhouse gases including methane, nitrous oxide as well as carbon dioxide and instead stores carbon in natural carbon sinks. Promoting these agricultural operations can also provide economic opportunities and environmental co-benefits to land owners and farmers. Encourage soil carbon sequestration techniques such as conservation tillage best practices and planting year round cover crops. PROMOTE FOREST AND RANGE MANAGEMENT TO OPTIMIZE CARBON STORAGE AND SEQUESTRATION Forest and rangeland management techniques for carbon sequestration are relatively low-cost, low technology ways of mitigating climate impacts and offsetting carbon emissions. Many of the techniques can be implemented immediately, including tree planting within the urban forest. PROMOTE CONTINUING RESEARCH INTO SOIL AMENDMENTS AND BEST SOIL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Encourage ongoing research into sustainable sources of organic soil amendments that may promote increased soil carbon sequestration without sacrificing soil fertility, soil water retention, the health of the soil microbial community, or the productivity of crops or native plant communities. Qualitative Strategy: Local Food / Urban Agriculture The importance of a vibrant local food system has become increasingly evident in addressing a number of prevalent issues including climate change, public health, food insecurity, and sustainable economic development. Most of our food is grown from sources thousands of miles away via a highly industrialized, fossil- fuel based (i.e., synthetic fertilizers and pesticides), globalized supply chain. By buying locally, we save agricultural land and reduce truck traffic and carbon emissions from transport, packaging production, and refrigeration of our food. The food system is a significant emitter of greenhouse gases in the United States, along with energy production and transportation. Increasing local food production is a practical and simple way to mitigate this. Recent studies have demonstrated other pressing issues related to food. For instance, one of every seven children in Fort Collins faces some form of food insecurity. Additionally, roughly one in four children in Fort Collins is overweight or obese. Increased access to local foods and wellness programs can improve the health of our children. Although the greenhouse gas reduction benefits of local food production are not quantified in this framework 36 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft plan, expanding local food initiatives serves to lower the carbon footprint of the food we consume and increase access to healthier food. Northern Colorado Local Food Cluster. Build on the efforts to develop and support a Local Food Cluster to enhance a resilient food system through economic, regulatory, and engagement activities that promote local food consumption, production, and distribution. Farm Incubator and Conservation Easements. The Natural Areas Department is developing a pilot program to identify select City properties to use for local food production through a land bank and young-farmers mentorship program. Natural Areas is utilizing conservation easements to conserve agricultural properties with the assistance of existing federal funding sources such as the Farm and Ranchland Protection Program. Lead by Example. The City of Fort Collins set a local food goal for municipal operations that 20% of food purchased by City staff for City functions will be grown within 50 miles or prepared by a local business. Urban Agriculture in Fort Collins. The City has developed new ordinances that permit urban agriculture in every zone district in the City. This includes allowing chickens, ducks, and goats to be raised for increased self- sufficiency; allowing farmers markets in more zone districts; and, supporting year-round growing efforts by excluding hoop houses from building regulations Qualitative Strategy: Inspiring Successful Implementation Community support, engagement and partnerships will be essential if Fort Collins is to meet aspirational greenhouse gas reduction goals. To successfully connect with the public in climate change communications, the City must associate with people’s values and world views. Personally relevant solutions are needed to relate climate change to the networks within this community. As global warming impacts increasingly make the news, it is clear that the time to act is now. Engagement strategies must frame the issue and actions in a way the makes sense to people, help people overcome apathy and/or despair when faced with the large issue of climate change, and develop and promote a community vision for systemic, transformative change that addresses triple bottom line needs. Capitalizing on Fort Collins’ strong sense of community pride and sense of place, and leveraging Fort Collins’ volunteerism will be critical. Methods for motivating the public to embrace the strategies in this framework plan must focus on the shared and place-based identities within the city of Fort Collins and Larimer County. Tactics must aim to answer the ‘what’ (what idea/component of the CAP is covered?), the ‘why’ (why do we have a Climate Action Plan and why is this a necessary part of it?), and communicate a call to action (read about it, learn about it, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 37 think about what role ‘you’, as a member of the public, can play in helping to achieve these goals). Piloting Strategies through EcoDistrict or Neighborhood Scale Sustainability Programs Many cities are realizing the value of implementing climate strategies at the neighborhood scale in order to holistically integrate changes in land use, buildings and transportation infrastructure with the community development assets and social networks required to affect change. The City can lead coordination of key neighborhood stakeholders and organizations, property developers, local institutions and businesses, and utilities in the development of district scale projects that realize carbon benefits. The projects should leverage advances made through Fort ZED partnerships and explore development opportunities that innovate and integrate sustainability strategies. The purpose of an EcoDistrict is to provide a platform where citizens, institutions, businesses, municipal leaders and utility providers work together to develop innovative district scale projects that meet sustainability objectives. The EcoDistrict framework includes principles involving economic, social and environmental sustainability, which aligns with the City’s triple bottom line principles and community involvement in decision making. The EcoDistrict performance requirements establish specific goals and targets in the areas of equitable development, community identity, access and mobility, energy and water efficiency, habitat and ecosystem function, materials management, and health and wellbeing. These, in turn, align with the City’s seven strategic planning outcome areas. 38 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft CHAPTER 4 Triple Bottom Line Considerations PRELIMINARY COSTS AND SAVINGS ESTIMATES Technological and social innovations exist to support accelerated GHG emissions reduction in Fort Collins. A carbon-free future provides a compelling value proposition on many levels. However, the question remains – do the benefits outweigh the costs? The preliminary analysis completed as part of this plan suggests that the benefits could outweigh the anticipated costs in the long run. Despite the need for upfront investment, projections indicate long-term benefits can accrue to the community from accelerating emissions reductions. The CAP framework analysis evaluates the aggregate costs of improvements identified in the strategies and the resulting energy and fuel savings, and estimates the cumulative cost, savings, and net through the 2050 planning horizon. There are a variety of factors to consider in any financial analysis, from what financial discount rate to use to accounting for uncertainty in future costs and savings. These estimates should be viewed as preliminary, order-of-magnitude estimates. Figure 12 below identifies a range of cumulative costs, savings, and net costs/savings associated with discount rates ranging from 2.5% percent to 5%, suggesting that the net cumulative implementation costs may be about $300 million in 2020 yet may yield between $2-6 billion in cumulative savings in 2050. FIGURE 12. PRELIMINARY COSTS, SAVINGS AND NET CUMULATIVE IMPACTS (2.5%-5% DISCOUNT RATE) 2020 2030 2040 2050 Cumulative Implementation Cost from 2015($M) Min Max $600 $600 $2,000 $2,500 $2,800 $3,700 $3,300 $4,600 Cumulative Cost Savings from 2015 ($M) Min Max $300 $300 $1,700 $2,300 $3,800 $5,900 $5,000 $10,800 Net Cumulative Cash Flow from 2015 ($)M Min Max $300 $300 $200 $300 $800 $2,200 $2,500 $6,200 There are a number of important caveats that must be made to provide a “disclaimer” on these preliminary costs and savings estimates.  Some cost estimates were not included in this analysis because it is exceedingly difficult to estimates costs with any level of confidence now, given rapid evolution of technologies and market conditions. The following costs are not estimated on the distribution side: – Distribution system modeling – Infrastructure enhancements costs CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 39 The following costs are not estimated on the generation system side: – Stranded fixed costs for the existing systems, such as decommissioning of coal units/ fuel supply agreements – New electric storage resources  Actual future energy costs may not follow the assumptions embedded in this analysis. The assumptions are based on predictions made by the U.S. Energy Information Administration.  Program and infrastructure cost estimates are based on recent averages and do not reflect the continuing drop in prices as technologies come to scale (especially solar PV), and may be over-estimated.  As the City of Fort Collins’ request, Platte River Power Authority completed initial modeling under the IGA with the City. This process has revealed the complex nature of interdependencies between the Platte River modeled results and the CAP model. The results in this analysis represent a best approximation of anticipated carbon reductions and cost implications. We believe the results are directionally correct, but more work will need to be done in the future to more fully analyze options and associated costs for making large-scale changes to the electric generating system.  The estimates do not include potential indirect benefits that can accrue from the proposed strategies, including:  Improved public heath resulting from more active modes of transportation (walking and bicycling);  Improved public health resulting from reductions in air pollution and emissions;  Indirect economic and social benefits to the community through increased resiliency to predicated climate change impacts;  Job creation and resulting wages from Climate Action research and program implementation;  Indirect economic benefit to the community from increased investment in local power generation (e.g., increased solar and distributed energy installation). FINANCING OPPORTUNITIES The City of Fort Collins has begun to explore a range of innovative financing methods already being used by other communities and businesses to address the near term investments required. A menu of available and existing funding mechanisms is provided below (not an exhaustive list). Many of the available mechanisms achieve two essential goals: (a) spread the costs and benefits over time, and (b) provide greater access to individuals and benefits. These financing mechanisms can, in some cases, fundamentally change the flow of services and capital, represent potential new revenue streams and service models, and alter the ways different parties can benefit from the new goals. The mechanisms fall into three main categories: Individual and Business Financing These mechanisms provide access to borrowing or funds that individuals and businesses can use to make investments in energy efficiency, distributed power, and other similar investments. In general, these financing mechanism aid individuals and businesses in amortizing initial costs in improvements over time to reduce the upfront costs. In some cases, the government, whether it is municipal, county, or state, can aggregate the investments into a larger pool to reduce borrowing costs (e.g., On-bill financing, Property Assessed Clean Energy Bonds or Tax Increment Financing). 40 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft Government Financing These mechanisms involve the government borrowing funds, whether it is municipal, county, or state, directly to support investments in utility scale energy efficiency, solar rebates, transit infrastructure, and other similar investments. The intent is to use the borrowing power of the government to accelerate adoption of key strategies, reduce risk to private lenders of consumer lending programs, and make key investments in municipal infrastructure (e.g., public transit) to support carbon reduction goals. In many cases, the borrowing still requires a funding source to justify the debt which can range from the existing revenues (e.g., taxes and/or fees) available to the government to new revenues (e.g., new taxes and/or fees). Other Sources of Funds The last category captures a series of potential funding sources that do not logically fall into the other two categories. These may include new governmental revenue sources (e.g. User Fees, Development Exactions, and Public Benefit Funds) or donations from private parties interested in furthering carbon reduction goals. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 41 FIGURE 13. POTENTIAL FINANCING APPROACHES FOR CAP FRAMEWORK STRATEGIES Borrower Category Financing Mechanism How it Works Examples Comments Individuals and Business Financing Traditional Borrowing Customer applies for loan from traditional source; underwriting determines borrowing amount Bank loan, Consumer lending (Credit Cards), Mortgage/Home Equity Loans Require borrower to have capacity to borrow, reasonable credit rating, and/or collateral Savings Dependent Financing Customer applies for a loan with projected energy savings as the collateral; savings determine borrowing amount Energy Efficiency Loans, MEETS, On‐ Bill Financing Can be delivered by either the private market or through a utility (publicly or privately owned) Government Financing Direct Borrowing Governmental entity uses existing revenue, new revenue, or other collateral to borrow funds General Obligation Bonds, Green Bonds, QCEBs, Social Impact 42 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft INCREASED RESILIENCY The Fort Collins community has been focusing on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions as part of a climate action plan since 1999. While the role of mitigating the sources of emissions has been the primary objective for years, it is clear that to ensure the ongoing quality of life in the Fort Collins community, adapting to the impacts of climate change is also an important need. What does this mean in terms of mitigating or slowing our future greenhouse gas emissions? More action now to avoid reduce emissions will help contribute to a safer, less hot and more stable climate that our infrastructure, buildings and community systems are built to support. A climate action plan that supports aggressive goals and action is one of our best climate adaptation strategies for the future. However, we are already experiencing a changing climate and need to plan and act to ensure we are able to minimize damage and recover more quickly from the types of events such as drought, floods, and fire our community has already experienced. As Fort Collins explores a more aggressive path to reducing our carbon emissions, there are many recognized co-benefits to increasing the overall resiliency of the built environment, transportation, energy and water systems and local economy. There will be long term challenges we will face as the climate warms and extreme events, that we already occasionally experience, will continue to impact our way of life. The following strategic areas offer qualities that will assist in increasing community resiliency and adaptation to a warming climate. Building Efficiency  During extreme heat events, occupants will have safer, healthier options for refuge and protection from the elements  More efficient buildings offer reduced cooling and heating demands to energy systems and provide a more comfortable and productive environment for occupants Use of Alternative Transportation and Increased Electric Vehicle Adoption  Increased use of fuel efficient and electric vehicles would significantly assist in reducing air pollutants such as nitrogen oxide and carbon monoxide and help support state and regional air quality strategies  With an increased number of hot days or heat waves, improved air quality will result in health benefits for vulnerable populations including children, elderly and those with respiratory ailments Increased Distributed and Renewable Energy Sources  Combining the use of distributed and renewable energy resources with microgrid or “islanding” technology can assist in protecting valuable community services such as hospitals, police and other emergency management facilities during extreme events Waste Reduction and Diversion  Strategies to divert waste from landfills during recovery from extreme events can assist in preserving landfill capacity  If extreme events result in large amounts of unrecoverable waste, preserved capacity could be utilized as needed Carbon Sequestration and an Increased Urban Forest  Increased urban forest can assist in the reduction of the urban heat island effect and provide localized cooling to buildings and other areas  Promotion of sustainable building practices and green streets includes the use of low impact development structures that provide cooling benefits, divert storm water, improve overall water quality, while reducing water demand and conserving resources CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 43 TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE IMPACTS As part of its evolving commitment to evaluating the “triple bottom line” implications, the City completed a preliminary Sustainability Assessment to evaluate social, environmental, and economic (or TBL) considerations to support the CAP decision-making process. The following potential impacts were identified. Identification of potential negative impacts allows the opportunity for mitigation strategies to be considered and developed as implementation details are developed for the CAP. Social Impacts  initial implementation costs that could present challenges to low income groups in meeting basic human needs such as food, shelter, and health care.  increased building costs or deep building retrofits could negatively impact housing affordability; compromised physical or mental health from financial stresses; and the disproportionate impact of higher initial utility rates on low income groups.  financial savings with more energy efficient buildings and vehicles.  savings in building operating expenses  more transportation options and access,  more comfort and control over environmental settings in buildings;  more active modes of transportation with resultant health benefits;  less vulnerability to fossil fuel prices and carbon regulations,  public health benefits from reduced air pollution. Environmental Impacts  large reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from multiple sources,  improved indoor and outdoor air quality from reductions in pollutant emissions and use of low volatile organic compound materials;  reduced impacts to land and water resources;  increased materials reuse and recycling; waste reduction; and delayed development of new landfills  increased carbon sequestration  reduced water use in green buildings  reducing the heat island effect by planting more trees  reductions in hazardous wastes associated with fossil fuel extraction and production  generation of hazardous wastes from the solar industry;  higher land use intensity for wind and solar power production,  reliance on rare earth minerals for some renewable energy strategies Economic Impacts  some small and lower margin businesses may face a challenge with initial implementation costs in the absence of mitigation measures  higher City implementation costs  possible loss of the competitive advantage provided by low utility rates  financial impacts due to stranded costs  potential for local job creation in solar, green building construction, and waste reduction and recycling industries 44 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft  significant savings from improved institutional and commercial building energy efficiency;  attraction of innovative industries, new technologies, and research money;  increased land use and transportation efficiency that can bring business investments. . SUPPORT FOR CITY STRATEGIC PLAN OBJECTIVES The City of Fort Collins aspires to provide world-class services to the community. The 2014, the City completed the 2015-2016 City of Fort Collins Strategic Plan that reflects the input of engaged citizens, community and business partners, Mayor and Council Members, and City staff. The Coty’s Strategic Plan has directed the development of current City budget priorities. The strategies identified in the CAP Framework can, through careful implementation, support several of the City’s strategic objectives listed below. COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD LIVABILITY: Provide a high quality built environment and support quality, diverse neighborhoods 1.3. Direct and guide growth in the community through appropriate planning, annexation, land use and development review processes. 1.4. Preserve and provide responsible access to nature. 1.5. Preserve and enhance the City’s sense of place. 1.6. Promote health and wellness within the community.. CULTURE AND RECREATION: Provide diverse cultural and recreational amenities 2.7 Promote a healthy community and responsible access to nature. ECONOMIC HEALTH: Promote a healthy, sustainable economy reflecting community values 3.7. Support sustainable infill and redevelopment to meet climate action strategies. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH: Promote, protect and enhance a healthy & sustainable environment 4.3. Implement indoor and outdoor air quality improvement initiatives. 4.4. Reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions by creating a built environment focused on green building and mobile emission reductions. 4.5. Demonstrate progress toward achieving net zero energy within the community and the City organization using a systems approach. 4.6. Engage citizens in ways to educate and change behavior toward more sustainable living practices. 4.7. Increase the community’s resiliency and preparedness for changes in climate, weather and resource availability. 4.11. Demonstrate progress toward achieving zero waste within the community and the City organization. SAFE COMMUNITY: Provide a safe place to live, work, learn and play 5.4. Protect life and property with natural, aesthetically pleasing flood mitigation facilities through building codes and development regulations. 5.6. Improve safety for all modes of travel including vehicular, pedestrian and bicycles. 5.10. Provide a high-quality, sustainable water supply that meets or exceeds all public health standards and supports a healthy and safe community. TRANSPORTATION: Promote a healthy, sustainable economy reflecting community values 6.2. Improve transit availability and grow ridership through extended hours, improved headways, and Sunday service in appropriate activity centers. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 45 6.3. Fill the gaps for all modes of travel and improve the current transportation infrastructure while enhancing the aesthetic environment. 6.6. Support efforts to achieve climate action goals by reducing mobile emissions and supporting multiple modes of transportation. 46 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft CHAPTER 5 What Does This Mean for the Community? Achieving an aspirational goal to reduce community greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2030 will require landmark actions and the participation of the entire community. Households, businesses, and institutions will all be asked to contribute towards achieving this goal by making changes to their behaviors, operations, and facilities. It will require the full spectrum of approaches; new regulations, new incentives, and new education and engagement opportunities. Platte River Power Authority, Fort Collins Utilities, and the City of Fort Collins are critical player, as well. HOUSEHOLDS Household’s electricity and natural gas usage accounts for 27 percent of the community’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2013. Therefore, residents will need to make a significant contribution to achieving the goals contemplated in this plan. How might the typical household contribute? Actions identified in this plan include the following types of changes:  Improving energy efficiency by increasing insulation, replacing windows, and/or sealing central air ducting;  Replacing appliances with energy efficient models;  Converting water heaters and furnaces to electric models such as geothermal heat pumps;  Replacing air conditioning units with more efficient models;  Purchasing an electric vehicle and reducing the number of miles traveled; and  Installing solar panels to generate electricity. These actions are only possible with the assistance of financing to: a) spread the costs and benefits over time, and (b) provide greater access to individuals and benefits. As the community moves toward implementation there are several principles that should guide the development of new financing tools, especially those geared at encouraging individual or household action. The following principles provide an initial set of guard rails and will be refined through the implementation process: Draft Financial Guiding Principles for Households  Access to affordable energy and value-added services.  Confidence in the energy efficiency results of services provided.  Experience a streamlined purchase process.  Experience enhanced customer service.  An understanding of benefits versus costs that allows each user to make their own determination of value. BUSINESSES Commercial and industrial facilities electricity and natural gas currently account for 43% percent of the greenhouse gas emissions in 2013. Achieving the goals contemplated in this plan will required significant action by businesses as well. Unlike households, many businesses do not own their facilities; therefore, the actions that CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 47 can be taken by businesses will vary significant from those of households. Businesses will be encouraged to take the following types of action:  Partner with their landlords on energy efficiency improvements that can be made to their space;  Replace their fleet vehicles with electric and higher efficiency vehicles;  Encourage their staff through incentive programs to carpool, ride their bikes, and take mass transit;  Purchase goods and services from local suppliers; and  Install solar panels to generate electricity. The actions identified above will only be possible with the assistance of financing, which should be guided by several principles. The following principles provide an initial set of guard rails and will be refined through the implementation process: Draft Financial Guiding Principles for Businesses  Access to information and assistance to select the right investments.  Minimal impact to business operations.  Access to capital funds that do not negatively impact their own balance sheet.  Experience a streamlined purchase process.  Experience enhanced customer service.  Opportunities to partner with third parties to improve energy efficiency and reduce on-going costs. CITY OF FORT COLLINS GOVERNMENT The City of Fort Collins must play a leadership role in advancing carbon reductions, including those of its own operations. As a responsible steward of taxpayer dollars, the City must maintain transparency in developing programs and working towards goals in alignment with the CAP Framework. The City government also has an important role to play in ensuring the plan’s successful implementation by advancing partnerships and coordinating multi-sector efforts, and by tracking and reporting progress annually. The City government will not be called upon to fund the majority of implementation costs identified in the CAP framework. However, the City can pay an important role in leveraging outside funding to help meet accelerated goals. By developing a strategy that ensures the best use of finite public funds, the City can create an attractive investment environment for private investors to do some of the heavy lifting. Successful programs throughout the nation demonstrate that City governments can take the lead in attracting significant 3rd party private investments while limiting or capping public spending, limiting exposure to losses in City reserves, and maintaining the City’s strong credit standing. In order to protect the City’s financial viability, the following guiding principles have been developed to provide an initial set of guard rails. Inevitably these will be clarified and refined as implementation details are developed. Draft Financial Guiding Principles for City Government  No significant adverse impact on the City’s balance sheet.  No adverse impact on the City’s credit rating.  The City’s investment should catalyze investment in strategies by end-users and the third parties.  Internally the City’s priority is utility rate revenue before general fund revenue. 48 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft CHAPTER 6 Actions for 2015 and 2016 PLANNED ACTIONS Fortunately, Fort Collins already has significant actions underway or planned for the 2015/2016 budget cycle that will serve to reduce emissions while supporting other community objectives such as improved health and resiliency. The list below highlights select key activities that are already planned. Planning and Policy  Fort Collins Energy Policy Update will be brought forward for City Council consideration in 2015to support the strategies in the CAP  Revised energy efficiency and local renewable plan will be developed to meet GHG goals and inform future budget planning  Platte River Power Authority will continue resource planning efforts during 2015 to support potential changes to fossil-fuel generation, renewable energy and energy efficiency to meet the needs of its member communities. Buildings  The City of Fort Collins plans to hire a contractual Green Building Program Coordinator  Fort Collins Utilities will evaluate piloting Integrated Utility Services Model  2015 building code update will consider increased efficiency and compliance needs  Fort Collins will participate as a semi-finalist in the Georgetown University Energy Prize with the objective to double the amount of energy savings in the residential and municipal/school district sectors in 2015/2016. The winner gains a $5M purse to advance energy efficiency.  Fort Collins Utilities will continue programs to provide incentives for “above code” commercial and industrial buildings through the “Integrated Design Assistance Program”  Fort Collins Utilities will continue deployment of the Peak Partners program for smart thermostats, water heater controllers and commercial building automation systems. Energy Supply  Expand partnership with Platte River on Efficiency Works programs  Develop programs that benefit low/fixed income such as Low Income Solar Pilot  Consider Time-of-Use and low income electric rate structures Transportation  Implement Car/Bike/Ride share programs  Implement Drive Electric Northern Colorado – Work Place Challenge CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 49 Road to Zero Waste  Complete the Community Recycling Center to offer a one-stop-shop for comingled recyclables, residential scale yard waste, and hard to recycle materials such as wood, concrete, asphalt and metal  Seek to provide recycling to all multi-family residents then to all businesses through consideration of a Universal Recycling Ordinance  Support a culture change by applying community-based social marketing and other outreach/education  Conduct a Waste Stream optimization to systematically evaluate waste materials and Sustainable Materials Management  Advance the municipal organization’s readiness to engage in waste-to-energy activities  Pursue alternatives through regional Zero Waste Plan RECOMMENDED NEW ACTIONS In addition to these and other activities planned but not outlined above, additional actions are recommended for the City of Fort Collins in 2015/2016. Additional funding support will be needed to implement these actions, focusing on the two greatest needs for success; community engagement and new financing approaches. A few of these key recommended actions are outlined below. Develop a 2020 Climate Action Implementation Plan Compile a plan that identifies the specific steps needed for action between now and the end of 2020 to put Fort Collins on a path to meet community GHG goals. A 2020 implementation plan will leverage the modeling capability, research and analyses already completed as part of this broad framework plan by performing detailed analysis in order to identify which tactics and programs must be implemented by 2020, in what order, and identify anticipated budget needs. The plan must consider challenges and opportunities, and consider impacts to key community metrics such as housing affordability. In order to be successful, the actions identified in the implementation plan must reflect coordination and cohesion among involved City departments as well as community input on preferences or concerns regarding next steps. Community awareness raising and engagement are critical elements in determining the key next steps that go beyond already approved activities. Community Engagement If Fort Collins is to meet its GHG goals, increased community engagement, ownership, and action is critical. Funding will be sought to implement a robust awareness raising and engagement campaign. This may include  Engagement targeted at collaborative problem-solving with the largest users of energy (such as computer server facilities),  Engagement with large institutions such as Colorado State University to align efforts and optimize the chance for success in meeting similar goals  Piloting new approaches at the neighborhood scale to test innovative and integrated holistic approaches to energy generation, distribution and use, and  Broad community-wide awareness raising and engagement campaigns  Community capacity building to leverage and expand the activities of non-profits, grass roots organizations, businesses, and educational institutions  Collaboration with Platte River and its member municipalities to advance progress regionally Research Equitable Financing Mechanisms that support Community Climate Action Additional staff and/or outside expertise will be needed to investigate new financing approaches that can bring the actions called for in this plan to scale while mitigating potential harmful inequitable impacts. This may involve piloting a public private partnership to leverage outside finance. 50 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft CHAPTER 7 Accountability: Plan, Do, Check, Act A key to achievement of any goal is measurement and accountability. Progress on Fort Collins’ community greenhouse gas must be monitored, tracked and reported, as it has been in the past. ANNUAL REPORT An annual report will be prepared that tracks progress towards the goals by calculating the annual community greenhouse gas inventory and comparing it to the anticipated trajectory under this framework plan. In addition, progress on major metrics should be tracked and reported annually. A preliminary list of metrics is outlined below. This list may be refined with the development of the CAP 2020 Implementation Plan. The annual report will also identify and quantify major areas of community greenhouse gas reductions that have contributed to changes in communitywide emission levels, and recommend any adjustments to the 2020 implementation plan. METRICS The list below identifies a number of metrics that will be tracked and reported. Additional metrics may be identified through the development of detailed implementation plans.  Percent change in community GHG inventory, relative to the baseline year (2005)  Percent change in municipal government GHG inventory, relative to the baseline year (2005)  Percent change in electricity use (kilowatt hours or kWh) per capita compared to 2005 (baseline year)  Percent renewable energy in Fort Collins electricity portfolio  Cumulative and annual kWh distributed solar installed in Fort Collins  Percent population who commute by bike  Annual % waste diversion  Annual pounds waste generated/capita  Percent change in population from 2005  Percent change in Fort Collins Sales and Use tax from 2005 PERIODIC CAP UPDATE The goals described in this framework plan are bold and ambitious—and they span a time frame of 5–35 years. The CAP framework does not provide a definitive and inflexible roadmap to specific actions over such a long horizon. Instead, the plan is iterative by design, following the “Plan, Do, Check, Act”’ model for which Fort Collins is already known. The strategies and programs identified to achieve the goals will require periodic reevaluation and updating, taking into consideration advancements in technology, community feedback and financing approaches. Recognizing that technologies and markets will continue to evolve, financing structure and opportunities may expand, and scientific finding regarding climate change may continue to emerge over time, it would be prudent for the Fort Collins Climate Action Plan be updated by the end of 2019. This would allow updates and prioritized strategies to be considered during 2020 in the context of the 2021/2022 budget decision- making process. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FRAMEWORK – February 25, 2015 Draft 51 GLOSSARY OF TERMS Adjusted Business As Usual Greenhouse Gas Forecast – a forecast of local GHG emission that represents the emissions expected to occur when taking into account planned federal actions and potential regional actions. In Fort Collins CAP Framework, the Adjusted Business As Usual forecast considers the impact of the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency standards and the greenhouse gas reduction that could occur if Platte River decides to proceed toward planning guidelines established by the Platte River board in 2013. These guidelines were established for a study of options that could: (1) reduce emissions 20% below 2005 levels by 2020 and 80% by 2050, (2) achieve 20% energy supply from renewable sources by 2020 (not including existing hydropower), (3) maintaining reliability through minimum 15% reserve margin, and (4) remaining the lowest cost wholesale electric supplier located in Colorado. Business As Usual Greenhouse Gas Forecast – a forecast of local GHG emission that assumes that future emissions trends follow those of the past and no changes in policies will take place. Carbon Neutral - refers to a community with net zero greenhouse gas emission, meaning that the community has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions as much as possible and then over-generates renewable energy or invests in carbon offsets to achieve net zero emissions. Or “Having achieved a state in which the net amount of carbon dioxide or other carbon compounds emitted into the atmosphere is reduced to zero because it is balanced by actions to reduce or offset these emissions.” Cost of Carbon - an anticipated future cost that would be added to the price of greenhouse gas-emitting activities such as the burning of fossil fuel. This is in alignment with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) definition of “Carbon price”: What has to be paid to some public authority as a tax rate, or on some emission permit exchange for the emission of 1 metric tonne of CO2 into the atmosphere.” (IPCC Glossary, 2007) Metric ton CO2e – metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, where the global warming potential of other greenhouse gases are converted into a carbon dioxide equivalent and summed. Fort Collins considers the contribution of methane and nitrous oxide as well as carbon dioxide. Net Zero Buildings – a building with zero net energy consumption, meaning the total amount of energy used by the building on an annual basis is roughly equal to the amount of renewable energy created on the site. Strategy - As used in the Climate Action Plan (CAP) framework, a strategy refers to a broad area of carbon reduction. The framework plan has quantified the benefits of eleven strategies. Tactic - As used in the CAP framework, a tactic refers to a policy, program or action that could support achievement of the reduction strategies. The priority, timing and details of possible tactics has not been identified yet in this framework plan. 52 City of Fort PO Box 58 Fort Collins fcgov.com/ fcgov.com/ t Collins 80 s, CO 80522 /climateprotect /enviro tion CLIMATE ACCTION PLAN FRAAMEWORK – Febrruary 25, 2015 Draaft Bonds, Pooled Bond Financing The governmental entity is on the hook to repay borrowed funds; can relend funds to individual users or use the proceeds for governmental costs Public Private Partnership Governmental entity uses funds to enhance the credit rating of a private lender Loan Loss Reserves, Debt Service Reserves, Loan Guarantees Government uses its funds (from any number of sources) to mitigate the risk to a private lender; enables greater capital access for the community and broader rate of utilization (wider credit scores and underwriting practices) Other Philanthropic A foundation provides funding to achieve a specific purpose PRIs, Foundations, Smart Growth Funds, etc. Leverage STAR Often tied to a very specific project or objective; depends on the foundation or donor Government Grants A governmental entity provides grant monies to achieve a specific objective Department Of Energy, State of Colorado, Housing and Urban Development, etc. Competitive funding source with no guarantee of award; amount depends on governmental entity and purpose – Reliability sensitivity analysis – Energy storage options TRENDS A ulated and rep ts largest emis 5% since the b erated solid wa (16%) and eco OLLINS COMM een removed fr – February 25, 20 Summ ge is already o the rise in tem uman developm and to increas become more emission and reduced its gre unity. Now , pu developed to ex AND PREV orted its comm ssions sources: baseline year 2 aste. It is signif onomic prospe UNITY GREEN rom the comm 15 Draft mary occurring and is peratures has ment. Fort Colli ingly monitor lo resilient. Since make a differe eenhouse gas ursuant to City C xplore what it w VIOUS TA munity GHG em : electricity, nat 2005, with the l ficant that thes rity (22% as m NHOUSE GAS unity greenhou s no longer a d profound impli ns has long co ocal vulnerabili e 1999 Fort Co nce within our emissions five Council Resolu would take to a ARGETS missions since 1 tural gas, grou argest improve se decreases o measured by sa EMISSIONS use gas invento distant threat. A cations for nat ommitted to red ity to higher tem ollins has pursu community tha e % below 2005 ution 2014-028 achieve reductio 1999 and focus nd travel, and ement seen in occurred over a ales and use tax ory. And the cost of ural resources duce communit mperatures and ued deliberate at has global 5 by partnering 8, this Climate A ons in commun sed its GHG solid waste. O reducing emiss a period of size x collections). 1 , ty d , Action nity verall sions able ANNUAL REPORT ....................................................... 50 METRICS ..................................................................... 50 PERIODIC CAP UPDATE ............................................ 50 GLOSSARY OF TERMS .............................................. 51 Paul Sizemore Numerous other staff contributed to the development of this CAP Framework. Consultants / Resources The Brendle Group Rocky Mountain Institute Platte River Power Authority Described: Support of healthy local economy with new jobs, businesses, and economic opportunities; focus on development of a diverse economy, enhanced sustainable practices for existing businesses, green and clean technology jobs, creation or retention of family waged jobs. Goal/Outcome: A stable, diverse and equitable economy; support of business development opportunities. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of the issues that need to be addressed. Goal/Outcome: Protect, preserve, and restore the natural environment to ensure long-term maintenance of ecosystem functions necessary for