The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About072111_01 BoCCiCC Agenda JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST TO: Board of County Commissioners and Port Townsend City Council Philip Morley, County Administrator David Timmons, City Manager Zoe Ann Lamp, Associate Planner - DRD Lead, Jefferson County Judy Surber, Senior PlannerlPlanning Manager, City of Port Townsend July 21, 2011 Joint Session City Council and Board of County Commissioners Climate Action Committee (CAC) - Draft Climate Action Plan and Revised Work Plan ATTACHMENTS: 1) Draft Climate Action Plan 2) Draft Revised Connnittee Work Plan FRO'VI: DATE: SUBJECT: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Per joint resolution (County Resolution No. 02-08 and City Resolution No. 08-001 - Appendix B of the attached draft Climate Action Plan) the Jefferson County/City of Port Townsend Climate Action Connnittee (CAe) submits the draft Climate Action Plan (Attachment 1) and a revised committee work plan (Attachment 2) for review and subsequent adoption. BACKGROUND: On January 7, 2008 the City Council and Board of County Commissioners approved a Joint Resolution creating a Climate Action Committee tasked with developing a Climate Action Plan. Specifically the committee was to provide recommendations for: . Achieving community-wide standard of cutting greenhouse gas emissions to levels 80 lower than 1990 levels by 2050 with preliminary reduction targets to be set for earlier years; . Implementing policies and measures to meet the emission reduction targets, and . Monitoring and verif)'ing rcsults On January 12, 2009, in a joint resolution (City Resolution No. 09-002 and County Resolution No. 06-09) the Board of County Commissioners and the City of Port T ovlTIsend adopted the Inventory of Energy Usage and Associated Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the Backcasts, Forecasts, and Interim Targets and the Climate Action Committee Work Plan. The committee created and reviewed a list of potential measures the government and the community can take to reduce greenhouse gases. In June 2009 the committee held road show events in Brinnon, Port Hadlock and Port Townsend for public input. Based on the public input and direction from the Board of County Commissioners and City Council, the committee created the attached draft Climate Action Plan. The committee focused the plan on specific steps the city and county governments can implement to lead the community into action. The plan also includes suggested voluntary actions for the community-at-Iarge. Using software from ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability, the committee projected the impact of BaCCICC Agenda each measure (refer to Appendices C and E ofthe draft Climate Action Plan). A.'IALYSIS/STRATEGIC GOALS/PROS and CO.'lS: To reach the adopted target of cutting grcenhouse gases to levels 80 % below 1990 levels by 2050 broad community support and action are required. The plan provides specific actions to be implcmentcd by the City and County to reduce emissions from municipal operations along with suggested measures for implementation to reduce community-wide emissions. While the City and County governments will each have a major role in carrying out the objectives and actions, successful implementation will require many diverse partners, including neighboring jurisdictions, non-profit organizations, business leaders, and neighborhood associations. FISCAL IMPACT/COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS: As stated on page 10 ofthe plan: The plan proposes ambitious carbon-reduction efforts that promise to benefit the region's long- term cconomic, social and environmental prosperity while we lower our greenhouse gas emissions. By adopting this climate action plan, thc City and County are not obligated to implement all the policies described herein. Rather, the activitics listed are intended as a menu of ideas from which can be selected over time the specific actions that are affordable, feasible, and appropriate for our community. Adopting a comprehensive, long-tcnn plan puts the City and County in a bctter position to take advantage of funding and other opportunities as they arise. Currently, there is no designated budget for the Climate Action Committee. Departmental budgets pay for staff time and resources to support the Climate Action Committee. RECOMMEND A nON: In ajoint resolution, thc Board of County Commissioners and the City Council shall: . Adopt the draft Climate Action Plan . Adopt the revised committee work plan . Extend the Climate Action Committee to Dccember 31, 2014 REVIEWED BY: / Philip Morley, County Administrator Date \- '/ c /" /-! \~_L// David-T~ns, City Manager -, \d - U Date 2 Climate Action Plan Port Townsend/Jefferson County, Washington CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15,2011 June 27, 2011 Page I of 54 City of Port Townsend & Jefferson County 2011 Climate Action Plan June 15, 2011 - CAC Recommended Draft Board of County Commissioners John Austin, Phil Johnson, David Sullivan City Council Michelle Sandoval George Randels David King Catherine Robinson Laurie Medlicott Kris Nelson Mark Welch Climate Action Committee Kees Kolff, Chair Deb Stinson Faith-Based Citizen-At-Large John Austin Ayla Taylor Jefferson County BoCC Student Alternate Barney Burke Scott Walker Non-Motorized Transportation Jefferson PUD No. 1 Mark Welch Larry Crockett Port Townsend City Council Port of Port Townsend Stanley Willard Richard Dandridge Citizen-At-Large Citizen-At-Large Annie Young Denise Pranger Port Townsend High School Student Citizen-At-Large (forestry) Pete Raab Building Industry Representative CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 2 of 54 Climate Action Staff Judy Surber, City of Port Townsend Planning Manager Zoe Ann Lamp, Jefferson County Associate Planner/ DRD Lead A n electronic version of this document is available at http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment/ClimateChange.htm Acknowledgements Climate Action Committee - Former members Taylor Beard Tom Opstad Port Townsend High School StudentEducation (alternate) Tim Behrenfeld Kristin Marshall EducationPort Townsend Paper Nora BurnfieldMike Pollack Port Townsend High School StudentJefferson Transit Josh Bryant Dana Roberts Port Townsend High School StudentJefferson PUD No. 1 Jim Fritz David Turissini Olympic Stewardship Foundation Jefferson Transit Barbara Nightingale Citizen-At-Large (marine) The City of Port Townsend and Jefferson County and Climate Action Committee members wish to thank the following individuals for their contribution in developing this Climate Action Plan. Al Cairns, Jefferson County Soild Waste Kathyrn Lamka of Meeting Works – for her facilitation of the prioritization exercise Karen Barrows – former Jefferson County Associate Planner Special mention to the following individuals: Joanna Loehr, who spearheaded the Baseline Emissions Inventory for 2005 with her husband Thomas, who died Aug. 20, 2010 Deb Stinson for her tireless editing work and expert software skills CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 3 of 54 Table of Contents Executive Summary I. Introduction A.How Was the Plan Created? B.What’s in the Plan? C.What’s Next? II. The Challenge of Climate Change A. The Problem B.The Benefits of an Aggressive Response III. Our Goal – Think Globally, Act Locally IV. Summary of Inventory of Energy Usage and Associated Greenhouse Gas Emissions V.The Plan: Objectives and Actions A. Reducing Government Emissions - Leading By Example General Policies Actions 1. Buildings and Energy 2. Urban Form and Transportation 3. Consumption and Solid Waste B.Encouraging Community-wide Reductions VI.For Further Consideration - CAC-Recommended Transportation and Land Use Policies VII.Monitoring and Adaptive Management CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 4 of 54 Appendices Joint Resolution County 44-07 City 07-022 to commit to Appendix A: addressing energy use and climate change Joint Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners Appendix B: County Resolution No 02-08 and the Port Townsend City Council City Resolution No 08-001 Providing Composition Terms of Office And Procedural Rules for the Climate Action Committee Worksheets – CO2e Forecasts and Targets Appendix C: Potential Funding Sources Appendix D: Worksheets - Proposed Actions for Government Operations Appendix E: Portland Climate Action Now’s, Climate-friendly Actions At Appendix F: Home & For your Business Figures Figure 1. ICLEI Climate Action Plan 5-Milestone Process Figure 2. Procedural Flowchart Figure 3. Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Jefferson County – Base Year, Backcasts, Forecasts and Reduction Targets Figure 4. Annual Per Capita Emissions Targets Compared to Population Growth Over Time e Emissions in 2005 Figure 5. Community-wide CO 2 Figure 6. Port Townsend City Operations - COe Emissions in 2005 2 Figure 7. Jefferson County Operations – COe Emissions in 2005 2 Figure 8. CO2e Projections and Targets for City & County Operations contrasted against projected population growth . CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 5 of 54 Tables Table 1 Baseline Conditions and Emissions Targets Table 2 Sample of Pledges Under the Copenhagen Accord Table 3 Baseline Conditions and Emissions Targets Table 4 Community-Wide and Government Subset Emissions 2005 Table 5 2005 Carbon Dioxide Emissions per capita Table 6 2020 Objectives for City and County Operations Table 7 Actions for Reducing Emissions from City Government Operations Table 8 Actions for Reducing Emissions from County Government Operations Table 9 Objectives & Recommended Actions for Community-wide Emissions Reductions CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 6 of 54 Letter from the Mayor and County Commissioner Reserved *Expressing the call to action, need to get started, urgent but hopeful; this plan is only a first step Executive Summary A near total consensus of the world’s leading climate scientists has concluded that carbon-based fossil fuel emissions from human activity are destabilizing the Earth’s climate, making it the most significant challenge for the future of our planet and our community. Average global temperatures and sea levels are already rising, and further climate changes will have far reaching effects on public health, local economies, food production, water supplies, power production, and habitability for many of Earth’s life forms. Reducing carbon emissions is a global challenge that must be met by all of us, locally and beyond. Much of the heavy work must take place at the federal and state level through alternative transportation investments, progressive energy policies, appropriate utility regulations, wise public lands use patterns, and stronger building codes. At the local level, we must also do our part, and both city and county governments must not only lead by example, but must also pursue policies that help our community reduce our carbon emissions. This Climate Action Plan is a product of the Climate Action Committee (CAC), which was appointed by the Port Townsend City Council and Jefferson County Commissioners in 2007. The council and commission set a goal of reducing county-wide carbon-based emissions to 80% of 1990 levels by the year 2050. This document begins to address the immense challenge required to attain that goal. The CAC ultimately decided on a phased approach to reach our goal. This plan is only phase one. It addresses specifically what the City and County governments can do to lead by example. It also recommends measures that the community should consider, as well as outreach, education, and partnership opportunities. Finally, it outlines land use and transportation policies that the City and County should refer to their respective planning commissions for further consideration. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 7 of 54 To produce this plan the committee first studied the sources and amount of carbon-based emissions in 2005. This was the year for which good data was available to develop a baseline and then be able to “backcast” an estimate for 1990 and forecast to 2050 with our projected population increase and “business as usual”. Here in Jefferson County, stationary emission sources like buildings and industry contribute 61% and the transportation sector contributes 39% to our emissions. The estimate for 1990 was slightly more than half a million tons of CO2 equivalent emissions, and the forecast with “business as usual” for 2050 was twice that amount of emissions, or just over one million tons per year. To set the community on course for the ultimate 2050 goal of an 80% reduction, interim targets were adopted. Due to energy efficiency measures implemented during the past 20 years, mostly at the local paper mill, our community-wide CO2 equivalent emissions are estimated to have gone up only slightly from 1990 to 2005, the baseline year for which we gathered data. In addition we assumed that due to ongoing efficiencies there has been no significant increase between 2005 and 2012. The targets for 2020 and 2030 were arbitrarily set with a straight- line reduction from 2012 to the goal of an 80% reduction by 2050, knowing that this is not the pattern in which emissions are likely to be reduced. With broad community and government staff input, the committee then compiled a set of potential measures and implementation steps to address each significant source. The plan includes a beginning list of specific actions to be taken by local county and city governments so that they can do their part. It also includes numerous action ideas for the community at large to consider. The interim targets and ultimate goal of an 80% reduction in emissions may not apply to every sector, every building, every business or every individual. Instead, a reasoned approach needs to be applied that considers many factors, especially cost effectiveness. A case in point is the Government Sector, which produces less than 1% of the emissions in our county. Some of these are generated by essential services like the fire departments, police and sheriff departments, and water and sewer utilities, where emissions reductions may be very costly or unwise. It may be more cost effective to reduce emissions in the community rather than in the government sector. Some government investments could significantly reduce overall community emissions for example, limited resources may yield greater reductions in emissions in CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 8 of 54 helping homeowners make private homes more energy efficient than in further retrofitting historic government buildings. In some situations, the most cost effective answer might even yield higher government sector emissions. Another low hanging fruit would be to encourage a shift in transportation mode away from motor vehicle use and toward increased walking, bicycling and transit use. This could be realized by implementing a number of strategies including: a significant investment for expanded Jefferson Transit service; greater investment in walking and biking facilities; a reduction, maximum cap, or elimination of motor vehicle parking requirements; and instituting parking fees in the commercial centers. These steps would result in a modest increase in Jefferson Transit’s emissions but could yield an immense reduction in overall community emissions. The Government Sector must play a leadership role in continuing to make this challenge a high priority and should do what it reasonably can to reduce its own emissions. This plan will guide future efforts by the community and provide an innovative framework for the transition to a less carbon-based future. Irrespective of climate change issues, fossil fuels are a finite and costly resource and the steps taken to reduce carbon emissions will lead to a more stable, prosperous and healthy community. Implementing the plan will strengthen our economy, create local jobs, improve social equity, improve public and individual health, reduce our exposure to fluctuations in energy price and energy availability, improve air and water quality, and save money. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 9 of 54 I. Introduction In the fall of 2007, Jefferson County and the City of Port Townsend made a joint commitment to reduce community-wide carbon emissions by 1 (Appendix A, County 80% below the 1990 level by the year 2050 Resolution No. 44-07; City Resolution No. 07-022). To set the community on course for the ultimate 2050 goal, interim targets were adopted as shown in the table below. Due to energy efficiency measures implemented during the past 20 years, mostly at the local paper mill, our community-wide CO2 equivalent emissions are estimated to have gone up only slightly from 1990 to 2005, the baseline year for which we gathered data. In addition we assumed that due to ongoing efficiencies there has been no significant increase between 2005 and 2012. The targets for 2020 and 2030 were arbitrarily set with a straight-line reduction from 2012 to the goal of an 80% by 2050, knowing that this is not the way in which emissions are likely to be reduced. Table 1 - Baseline Conditions and Emissions Targets YearPercent in relation toEmissions in 1990 levels Tons of CO2eq 1990 (backcast) 100% 522,868 2005 (data base) 3% higher 536,713 2012 (target) 3% higher 536,713 2020 (target) 15% lower 445,737 2030 (target) 37% lower 332,016 2050 (goal) 80% lower 104,574 (For additional details see Section II, Our Goal In our Community, page 18*). This Jefferson County/Port Townsend Climate Action Plan may at first appear overwhelming, unrealistic, politically infeasible, impossibly expensive and/or absolutely unnecessary. Indeed, these would all be true if the plan were intended for immediate implementation with only local funding and resources and without significant policy changes and additional support from state and federal governments. That is NOT how this plan is meant to work. The plan proposes ambitious carbon-reduction efforts that promise to benefit the region’s long-term economic, social and environmental prosperity while we lower our greenhouse gas emissions. By adopting this climate action plan, the City and County are not obligated to implement all the policies described herein. Rather, the activities listed are intended as a menu of ideas from which can be selected over time the CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 10 of 54 specific actions that are affordable, feasible, and appropriate for our community. Port Townsend and Jefferson County governments have already taken many steps towards trying to reduce energy use and the resulting greenhouse gas emissions. They range from buying and using electric and hybrid vehicles to building a LEED Silver certified City Hall annex. We must be ready with a comprehensive, long-term plan in order to take advantage of funding and other opportunities as they arise. Additional strategies will likely be developed over time further to meet the challenges and opportunities posed by global warming and climate disruption. Other government entities in the Pacific Northwest, like the state of Washington, King and Skagit Counties, Tacoma, Seattle and City of Portland-Multnomah County are also responding to the challenge with climate action plans. Two of the plans, the Skagit County Plan and the Portland-Multnomah Plan, proved to be especially valuable models in the drafting of this plan. A. How Was the Plan Created? The Jefferson County- City of Port Townsend Climate Action Plan is the culmination of a multi-year process, various stakeholders were represented on the committee (Appendix B) and numerous public meetings were held including two separate series of open houses. Launched in the Fall of 2007 by the City and County’s joint commitment to reduce carbon emissions, the process to develop the Climate Action 1 Plan followed the 5-Milestone process developed by ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability (www.iclei-usa.org): 1 T he City and County committed to reduce community-wide carbon emissions by 80% 1 from the 1990 level by the year 2050 (County Resolution No. 44-07; City Resolution No. 07-022). CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 11 of 54 Conduct a baseline emissions inventory - was Milestone One - completed by the Climate Protection Task Force, a motivated group of citizen activists (Appendix C). Working in collaboration with City and County staff and with technical support from ICLEIthe task force compiled the 2005 emissions inventory for both community-wide and municipal operations. The inventory was adopted by City Council and the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) on January 12, 2009 (City Resolution 09-022 and County Resolution 06-09). A copy of the complete inventory is available for public inspection at the City and County planning departments and is posted on the County website at http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment/ClimateChange.htm The Climate Action Committee (CAC), appointed by the Council and BoCC, continued to build on the momentum initiated by the task force. Per the adopted scope of work, the CAC was tasked with establishing interim targets and developing a Climate Action Plan (Milestone 2) This Action Plan provides guidance on implementation (Milestone 3). and outlines a monitoring program . (Milestone 4)(Milestone 5) CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 12 of 54 More detailed guidance was provided in the Climate Action Committee Workplan. CAC members completed the following steps: 2 Develop Initial List of Potential Measures to Reduce Emissions – The committee brainstormed ideas and borrowed ideas from numerous sources including but not limited to: ICLEI Milestone guide, State CAT report, Natural Capitalism Solutions Climate Protection Manual for Cities, and models from other jurisdictions. In crafting the list of potential measures, the Committee was directed by the adopted resolution, to apply the following hierarchical approach: Conservation/Efficiency Measures Voluntary/Incentive based interventions Regulatory controls Identified Existing Measures – CAC members interviewed various community leaders (including but not limited to US Navy, City and County Department Heads, Port Townsend Paper Mill, etc. ) to identify existing measures. Where feasible, emissions savings were estimated. Conduct a Series of three Open Houses - In October 2008, three open houses were conducted in Port Townsend, Brinnon, and Chimacum to inform the public of the adopted goal and solicit input on potential measures. Conduct Backcasting and Forecasting of GHG Emissions and Proposed Interim Targets for Reductions. Solicit Input on Potential Measures from State Departments of Commerce and Ecology as well as ICLEI support staff. Refine the List of Potential Measures – CAC members narrowed the list of potential measures to those that seemed the most promising given various factors including potential benefit/emissions reductions, cost, and public perception. The committee was aided by Kathryn Lamka and the MeetingWorks software. A software tool, Climate and Air Pollution Planning Assistant (CAPPA) designed by ICLEI was then used to compare the relative benefits and help identify those most likely to be successful. CAPPA includes a customizable and expandable library of more than 110 distinct emissions reduction strategies for local governments. Its calculation functions are based on real-world data from other U.S. communities and a variety of expert sources. 2 County Resolution No 02-08; City Resolution No 00-081 CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 13 of 54 Conduct Series of Open Houses - A Public Discussion Document dated June 9, 2009, was vetted by BOCC and City Council on June 17, 2009. This document was then presented at a series of open house events (Port Townsend, Brinnon, and Chimacum) which included informational displays, a slideshow lecture, and an audience participation activity. Identifying Identifying Potential Measures Potential Measures Climate Action Public Input Committee Research October 2008 Brainstorming guidance documents, Summer 2009 model plans Meeting Works Select most likely candidates Complete data sheets CAPPA Software CAPPA Software Compile and Review the Draft Climate Action Plan over a series of noticed public meetings. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 14 of 54 B. What’s in the Plan? Following is a quick overview of the contents of the Action Plan: Chapter 1 the Introduction Chapter 2 discusses and the benefits the challenge of climate change of an aggressive response. Chapter 3 outlines at the federal, state and local level. goals Chapter 4 presents the results of municipal and community-wide greenhouse gas emissions . inventories Chapter 5 presents the climate , including 26 discrete action plan measures to reduce emissions from municipal operations as well as suggested measures for implementation community-wide. Local government cannot meet the challenge alone. We will have to work together as a community and take action at all levels. Chapter 6 provides a discussion of potential transportation and land use . The Climate policies that are recommended for further consideration Action Committee recommends exploring transportation and land use policy amendments in the following categories. to enhance the carbon sequestering Rural Resource Management, potential of the County’s forests, farms and open spaces to locate and move both people Urban Form and Transportation, and goods in a carbon-efficient manner and provide regional tools for compact, livable communities of mixed uses. Chapter 7 includes a system for measuring and efforts to monitoring reduce community-wide emissions and an adaptive management approach. And finally, ais provided. Glossary of Terms Appendices include associated resolutions and detailed worksheets and a table of potential funding sources. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 15 of 54 C. What’s Next? With adoption of the 2011 Climate Action Plan, the City and County have taken a substantial step forward in meeting adopted goals to reduce GHG emissions, both as organizations and as a region. But there is more work to be done. 1. Implementation: The target will only be achieved by building a movement that achieves sustained action and coordination across stakeholders and sectors. Key to our success is our ability to generate awareness and educate the community about ways to reduce emissions. This Action Plan recommends: 1)Specific measures to reduce government sector emissions (Chapter V.A) 2) Community outreach and engagement (Chapter V.B) and 3) Further consideration of transportation & land use policy (Chapter VI) What will implementation cost? In the current challenging fiscal environment, no one is more aware than the City Council and Board of Commissioners of the need to make the best use of the taxpayer dollar and to eliminate waste and overhead wherever possible. For actions targeting government sector emissions, the City and County, with the assistance of the Resource Conservation Manager (RCM), will need to develop an implementation strategy and, during budget proceedings, each will need to consider earmarking funds for implementation of recommended measures. It is anticipated that the City and County will take a phased approach to implementation based on specific types of funding available, feasibility, and rate of return. There will be many competing priorities and at times it will be more effective to help fund activities to reduce emissions in the community sector rather than attempt to make smaller, more expensive reductions in the government sector. Fortunately, actions that reduce emissions also reduce electricity and fuel use, minimizing energy costs which in turn can also save an enormous amount of taxpayer dollars. Nearly every action in this document will save money, some in the near-term while others will require a longer period for cost recovery. In 2005, through ICLEI’s Cities for Climate Protection ® (CCP) Campaign, more than 160 U.S. local governments reported collective savings of over CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 16 of 54 23 million tons of global warming pollution and $600 million in related energy and fuel costs. Wise investments in retrofits can reap great rewards; for example, with a total investment of $105,000, the Portland City Hall Renovation Project saves the city an estimated $15,000 a year and $80,000 of upgrades to Fire Station #1 saves $8,000 a year. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 17 of 54 2. Climate Change Preparation/Adaptation: This phase involves an examination of the possible impacts of future climate changes (e.g., increased incidence of drought, flooding, forest fires, and disease, and other impacts like rising sea levels) and developing strategies to deal with these impacts. 3. Endorse Federal and State Initiatives: The federal government must make fundamental shifts in energy policy and align its vast research and development resources with climate protection. The State of Washington has an invaluable role in transportation investments, strengthening building codes, regulating utilities, managing forest lands, reducing waste and guiding local land use policies. We have an indispensable role in pressuring federal and state governments to support our efforts. Our local action plan therefore also calls for the endorsement of state and federal actions that are required to make our actions both effective and affordable. We in Jefferson County have the primary role in developing the fundamental shape of our local community, transportation systems and buildings, and in helping individuals make informed decisions about everyday business and personal choices. In conclusion, this Climate Action Plan will guide future efforts by the City, the County and the citizens with an innovative framework for our transition to a more prosperous, sustainable and climate-stable future. In doing so, it will strengthen local economies, create more jobs, improve health, and help maintain the high quality of life for which we are already known. Throughout this document, the term “carbon emissions” refers to all 1 greenhouse gas emissions. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 18 of 54 II. The Challenge of Climate Change A. The Problem: Climate change is the defining challenge of the 21st century. The world’s leading scientists report that carbon emissions from human activities have begun to destabilize the Earth’s climate. Millions of people are already experiencing these changes through threats to public health, national and local economies, and supplies of food, water and power. Low-income and vulnerable citizens have fewer resources to respond to these changes and are facing disproportionate impacts of climate change and rising energy prices. This increase in greenhouse gases is resulting in an unpredictable climate that is changing rapidly. Our state is particularly vulnerable to a warming climate — especially our snow-fed water supplies that provide our drinking water, irrigation for agriculture- and nearly three-fourth of the electrical power we produce. Close to 40 communities – including some of the state’s largest population centers — along our 2,300 miles of shoreline are threatened by rising sea levels. Ocean acidification, which is created when carbon dioxide reacts with seawater and reduces the water’s pH, threatens our abundant shellfish. The survival of local salmon and shell fish is at stake, as are the economies that depend upon them. For more information on impacts visit the Department of Ecology website at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/index.htm Unfortunately all of these changes will intensify in the decades ahead even as we begin to reduce our emission. There is a long time lag between changes in emissions and global climate patterns. Our near future climate will first reflect the past century of emissions, while ultimately reflecting our choices today. Efforts to reduce emissions must be coupled with preparations for this climate change. B. Benefits of an Aggressive Response: To respond to these intertwined problems — climate change, social inequity, economic stressors, rising energy prices, and degraded natural systems — requires an integrated response that goes far beyond reducing carbon emissions. Climate protection must be linked with actions to create and maintain jobs, improve community livability and public health, address social equity and foster strong, resilient natural systems. By integrating these elements, Port Townsend and Jefferson County will: CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 19 of 54 1. Create Local Jobs: The past decade has proven that many of the technologies, products and services required for the shift to a low-carbon future can be provided by regional and local companies. More dollars currently spent on fossil fuels will stay in our local economy to pay for home insulation, lighting retrofits, solar panels, bicycles, engineering, design and construction. 2. Improve Social Equity: Low income and vulnerable citizens face disproportionate impacts from climate change in part because they have fewer resources to respond to these changes. We must ensure that impacted communities are included in the implementation of the Climate Action Plan in a meaningful and engaging way. Fortunately, measures that reduce emissions may also serve to improve social equity through increased access to local green jobs, healthy local food, affordable and efficient transportation and energy-efficient homes. We will need to seek out programs that ensure energy efficiency is affordable for all, for example Portland’s “Clean Energy Works” program. This program provides financing to homeowners for energy efficiency upgrades. Low income households receive the lowest interest loans. Loans are repaid through the energy cost savings. The program is a model for creation of quality jobs and advancing social equity. 3. Create Healthier Residents: Walkable neighborhoods, fresh foods and clean air mean healthier, more active residents. The “health dividend” is potentially vast in financial terms and invaluable in its contribution to quality of life. 4. Become More Energy Self-Sufficient and Secure: Every action in this Plan will reduce reliance on fossil fuels. As prices continue to increase and supplies become more uncertain, a reduced reliance on volatile oil supplies will diminish the risks faced by everyone. 5. Protect and Enhance Air and Water Quality and Natural Systems: Sustaining the values and functions of our tree canopies, forests, rivers, streams, wetlands and oceans is an essential part of our strategy. It can simultaneously reduce emissions, sequester carbon and strengthen our ability to adapt to a changing climate. 6. Save Money: Using less energy in our homes, buildings and vehicles means lower energy and transportation costs for residents, business and government. Likewise, home-grown food saves on grocery bills. The savings from reduced health-care costs of a healthy, active community are potentially most significant of all. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 20 of 54 Think Globally, Act III. Our Goal – Locally Globally - In its Fourth Assessment report in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) calculated that developed countries need to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to 25-40% below 1990 levels by 2020 and to 80-95% below 1990 levels by 2050 in order to keep global atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations below 450 ppm of CO2e. Subsequent studies indicate that keeping atmospheric CO2e below 350 ppm may be necessary to avoid significant climate impacts, which would require even more significant decreases in GHG emissions. In 1994, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was formed. The Convention promotes cooperation, information sharing, implementation of national strategies for reducing GHG emissions and adapting to climate change. Recently, participating countries began to submit pledges under the Copenhagen Accord (December 18, 2009) to limit global warming to less than two degrees Celsius (3.6°F) above the average global surface temperatures in the preindustrial era. As of December 2010, 114 countries have submitted pledges, including the United States. In January of 2010, the US administration announced a target to reduce emissions in the range of 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, 42 percent below 2005 levels by 2030, and 83 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. Congress has not yet adopted these targets. Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, the Copenhagen Accord is not legally binding. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 21 of 54 Table2: Sample of Pledges Under the Copenhagen Accord 3 Developed Countries Quantified economy-wide Base Year emissions targets for 2020 Australia5 to 25% 2000 Canada 17% 2005 European Union 20% to 30% 1990 Japan 25% 1990 Russian Federation 15 to 25% 1990 United States 17%2005 Developing Countries Pledge China40 to 45% emission intensity 2005 reduction India20 to 25% emission intensity 2005 reduction Source: http://www.pewclimate.org Unfortunately, a UN report completed in 2010 found that even if all the pledges were met, it is likely that further reductions will be needed to reach the stated goal. 4 At the State level - More than two years ago, Governor Gregoire committed Washington State as a whole to reducing statewide greenhouse gas emissions to 50% below 1990 levels by 2050. Later in 5 2007, the Legislature codified these goals. The Department of Ecology (Ecology) is charged with monitoring the state’s progress (RCW 70.235.020). Although, according to Ecology, policies currently being implemented will limit Washington’s emissions growth to 3 percent between now and 2020; the state is not on track to meet its statutory reduction limit for 2020 or beyond. In a February 7, 2011 News Release, Ecology Director Ted Sturdevant said: “Washington state agencies have taken significant actions to reduce their own energy use and carbon emissions; to work with businesses and others on carbon reductions; to develop a program for reporting greenhouse gas emissions; and to implement the federal program to regulate greenhouse gas emissions 3 "These numbers target 450ppm for GHG, not the 350 required. Furthermore, many signatories included the following proviso "provided that other developed countries commit themselves to comparable emission reductions and that developing countries contribute adequately according to their responsibilities and respective capabilities.” 4 http://www.climatecentral.org/blog/emissions-reduction-pledges-to-date-fall-far-short-of-copenhagen- accor/ 5 http://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/washington.htm CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 22 of 54 under the federal Clean Air Act.” “However, the actions that nations and states are taking now aren’t enough to forestall the impacts of climate change. So we in Washington are building a plan to help prepare our coastal communities and vital infrastructure, ensure water supply in water-short areas, and provide emergency relief for people in prolonged heat waves. It will take all of us working together to be ready for the changes that already are affecting our state.” In our Community - Jefferson County Commissioners and the Port Townsend City Council have committed to the following goals of reducing our estimated 1990 community-wide greenhouse gas emissions (an estimated 536,000 ton CO2e) as follows: 6 Table 3 - Baseline Conditions and Emissions Targets YearPercent in relation to 1990 Emissions in levelsTons of CO2eq 1990 (backcast) 100% 522,868 2005 (data base) 3% higher 536,713 2012 (target) 3% higher 536,713 2020 (target) 15% lower 445,737 2030 (target) 37% lower 332,016 2050 (goal) 80% lower 104,574 In developing the interim year 2012, 2020, and 2030 targets, the CAC began with calculated 2005 emissions, and then estimated a “backcast” to 1990 and business as usual forecasts. The emission forecast to the target year of 2050 represents a “business-as-usual” prediction of how 7 GHG emissions would grow in the absence of GHG policy, including any existing or future legislation at the state or federal level. The following figure illustrates how the business-as-usual emissions are estimated to increase, thus widening the emissions reductions needed by 2050. . 6 Resolutions 44-07 and 07-022 respectively 7 Adopted January 12, 2009 (City Resolution No 00092 County Resolution No 069). CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 23 of 54 CAC used Clean Air Climate Protection Software, created by ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability, which allows for computer-calculated backcasting and forecasting using census and estimated population growth data. (For additional detail, please see Appendix C. Worksheets – C02e Forecasts and Targets) Interim years 2012, 2020 and 2030 were selected for showing emissions from “business as usual” and for interim emission level targets with the rational that this would allow the community adequate time to implement some measures to reduce emissions as we work towards our long-term goal for 2050. The interim target for 2012 is the same level as our baseline for 2005. It is hoped that due to increasing efforts already underway and new measures planned in the community and by local, state and federal governments, our emissions may have begun to level off and will return to the 2005 baseline by the year 2012 in spite of continued growth in the population. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 24 of 54 After that date, the target follows a straight-line decline in emissions towards our long-term goal, resulting in a target of 17% below 1990 emissions by 2020, and a 38% reduction by 2030. Putting the goals into perspective – how can individuals help? These targets are difficult to comprehend. What does it mean? What will it take to achieve these targets? To put the overall targets into perspective, the CAC estimated the per person reductions that would be needed to meet the interim targets. (To be clear, the action plan focuses on actions that the City and County can carry out on their own operations. It encourages, but does not require, individuals to take action to reduce GHG emissions.) The goal is to reduce emissions despite population growth. Thus, if we were proposing to reach our goal by asking each individual to conserve energy, it would become increasingly more difficult as the population grows. Figure 4. Annual Per Capita Emissions Targets Compared to Population Growth Over Time If each of us were willing to reduce our carbon foot print, what would it take to reach the adopted targets? CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 25 of 54 It may seem impossible to reduce our consumption of fossil fuels and electricity enough for us to attain our goal by 2050. We should recall that it will be easier to do so as new technologies and efficiencies are employed during the next several decades. An example of this is shown in the Climate Action Plan for Portland/Multnomah County. They have estimated that a mere 63% reduction in vehicle miles traveled per capita will result in an 80% reduction in the total CO2 emissions from the transportation sector between 2005 and 2050, in spite of a 94% increase in population. Similarly, they project that they will require an only 68% reduction in per capital electricity use. Fortunately, there are a myriad of ways to reduce emissions. Portland Climate Action Now provides a number of ideas for reducing your carbon footprintwww.portlandclimate action.org (also see Appendix F) for example, eating locally grown foods, switching to an electric mower, etc. Each of us will choose a different combination of ways to reduce energy consumption. Action must be taken at all levels if we are to succeed. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 26 of 54 The Process of change: Adopting new policies and changing behaviors will take time. The activities in our plan will be implemented gradually and their effect will at first be modest. Over time the effects will increase as ideas spread, additional policies are adopted and the benefits of our actions become more apparent. Our progress will not likely be in a straight line, but rather in a roughly “S” shaped curve with little effect at first while we get started, increasing success as actions are adopted, technologies developed and policies accepted, and then only gradual change again when we finally tackle the most difficult sources of emissions last. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 27 of 54 IV. Summary of Inventory of Energy Usage and Associated Greenhouse Gas Emissions In order to set targets and develop strategies to curb our emissions, an inventory of energy usage and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions was performed by the Climate Protection Task Force, and adopted by the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners and the Port Townsend City Council (January 12, 2009). The following is a brief summary. (A complete copy is on file at both the City and County planning departments). Data was gathered for the Jefferson County community as a whole and for the County and City government operations as subsets of the whole. Energy use and emissions were grouped into 3 different Sectors: Stationary (buildings and equipment), Transportation (on-road mobile sources), and Solid Waste. The Clean Air and Climate Protection (CACP) software provided by ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability converted the energy-usage data into units of MMBtu and calculated COe (equivalents of CO)released in tons (one ton equals 2,000 pounds). 22 Table 4. Community-Wide and Government Subset Emissions 2005 SectorCommunity- Jefferson Port or Subsector Community-WideCountyTownsend 1 Wide(% COe)OperationsCity 1 2 (tons COe)(tons COe)Operations 22 (tons COe) 2 Stationary 325,133 61% 1,443 1,609 Energy 23% Residential 121,605 9%1,443 1,609 Commercial 49,017 29% Industrial 154,511 Transportation 209,079 39% 1,886 533 Solid Waste 2,502 <1% 35 Water, PUD#1 364 8 Total 536,714 100% 3,728 2,142 8 The inventory included electricity consumed by Jefferson Public Utility District No. 1 to provide water service to County residents. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 28 of 54 1 Community-wide includes County and City operations. Data obtained 2 from CACP Model output. How do we compare with others? Table 5. 2005 Carbon Dioxide Annual Emissions per capita AreaMetric tons of CO per 2 capita United States19.3 Canada 17.3 Jefferson County 19.4 Washington State 16.4 Germany 9.8 Sweden 5.7 China 4.3 India, Vietnam, Peru <1.5 Source: Washington State and Jefferson County numbers from Backcasting and Forecasting of GHG (available on the Jefferson County Emissions and Proposed Targets for Reductions in Jefferson County website http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment/ClimateChange.htm); remainder taken from: Wikipedia which provides a list of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita from 1990 through 2007. All data were calculated by the US Department of Energy's Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC), mostly based on data collected from country agencies by the United Nations Statistics Division. Why would per capita emissions be higher in Jefferson County than elsewhere in Washington State? To answer this we turn to the source of the emissions - What is the source of these emissions? As depicted in the Community-Wide Summary below, the transportation sector is the largest emitter of GHG, representing 39% of community- wide emissions. Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for Jefferson County in 2005 were 1.3 times greater than the Washington State average. This helps explain why the total COe emissions of 19.4 tons per capita (Table 2 5 above) in Jefferson County were 1.2 times greater than the value for the entire state. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 29 of 54 Stationary Sector emissions account for 61% of total GHG emissions community-wide, with approximately one-half coming from electricity usage. Stationary sources refer to emissions generated from fixed places or objects,such as buildings and machinery. Stationary emissions include electricity, fuel oil, propane, and wood used in the Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Sectors Figure 5. Community-Wide CO Emissions in 2005 2 Emissions are for Transportation Sector and for Residential, Commercial and Industrial Subsectors of the Stationary Energy Sector. Emissions from the Solid Waste Sector were too small to include. Data obtained from CACP Model output. The inventory identified a very different profile for the City of Port Townsend when compared to the County. Thus, the two may have different priorities when it comes to reduction strategies. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 30 of 54 Figure 6. Port Townsend City Operations - COe Emissions in 2005 2 Figure 7. Jefferson County Operations – COe Emissions in 2005 2 Streetlights, Water PUD, 1% 10% Employee Commute, Buildings, 38% 19% Vehicles, 32% Source: CACP Model output It should be noted that at the time of the inventory, Puget Sound Energy (PSE) was the sole electric purveyor to Jefferson County. PSE's fuel mix for electricity delivered in 2010 consisted of: 41% Hydroelectric, 36% Coal, 20% Natural Gas, 1% Nuclear, and 2% Other (Source of data: PSE). The Jefferson County Public Utility District (PUD) is in the process of purchasing the local electric infrastructure from PSE. The PUD has a contract to buy power from the Bonneville Power Administration; BPA power is approximately 85 percent hydro and 15 percent nuclear. But while the change to BPA-supplied power will significantly boost our efforts to reduce carbon emissions, it does not diminish the need to conserve energy and look to green technologies as the local demand for power increases over time. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 31 of 54 V. The Plan: Objectives and Actions The goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Port Townsend and Jefferson County by 80 percent (compared to 1990 levels) by 2050 will be difficult, if not impossible, using technologies that are currently available or expected to be available in the near future. Nonetheless, the actions outlined here offer ways to begin reducing greenhouse gases today The actions contained in this plan provide a menu of recommended measures for the City and the County – the list is not intended to be limiting. We fully expect and hope that additional measures will be identified and implemented. In this document: “Plan" refers to the entire climate action effort. "Goals" are the broad overall carbon emissions reductions - 80 percent by 2050 and 17 percent by 2020. “Objectives" are specific measurable outcomes. Objectives have been identified by sector. If we are successful in achieving each of the objectives, we will meet our 2020 interim goal. "Actions" are the specific steps that will be strategically implemented to meet the 2020 obectives. j This section is divided into two main categories: This section recommends actions to reduce Government actions - emissions from City and County operations. This section recommends education Community-wide actions - and outreach and the formation of partnerships. Several recommended voluntary measures are included. Our success requires participation at all levels. The municipal and community categories are explored independently for several reasons: As documented in the inventory, a much finer resolution is possible for municipal operations (energy use by facility, etc.) than for the community as a whole. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 32 of 54 When attention is turned to the question of where emissions reductions are possible, there will be a different set of options for municipal facilities than for private sector emissions. For example, a county might opt to implement a procurement policy requiring that certain vehicles in the county fleet be replaced by hybrid vehicles, whereas in the private sector an education program about hybrids or an incentive program would be appropriate. Actions for government operationsare under the operational or financial control of City/County government; while community-wide efforts are voluntary and incumbent upon all. A. Government Leading by Example Together, the City of Port Townsend and Jefferson County government account for less than one percent of the total emissions in our county. Despite their limited emissions, governments have an essential obligation to do their part and to lead by example. Just as the City and County must provide enabling policies, technical assistance, education, incentives and other support to help the community achieve the objectives of this Climate Action Plan, the City and County must also lead the way in their own operations. If we can demonstrate success, others may follow suit. Most of the actions listed here can also be taken by other public entities in the county, like the Public Utility District, the Port of Port Townsend, Jefferson Health Care, the school districts, the fire districts, Jefferson Transit and Fort Worden State Park. Representatives from many of these entities participated in the development of this Climate Action Plan. Furthermore, it is hoped that these different public entities will collaborate in making their operations more energy efficient by sharing resources and funding opportunities. One example of this is the new Resource Conservation Manager partly funded by grants from PSE and WSU and jointly hired by the City, the County, Fort Worden State Park, Chimacum and Port Townsend School Districts to reduce energy consumption. Most of the actions listed here are also applicable to private businesses. Hopefully citizens of our community will become increasingly motivated to take actions in their personal lives as well as in their places of work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Increasingly, tourists and other consumers have demonstrated support for those businesses that make efforts to demonstrate their concerns about climate change. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 33 of 54 Table 6. 2020 Objectives for City and County Operations – An 18% decrease in CO2e emissions from 2005 levels. (Greenhouse gas emissions in tons of CO2e) Stationary Trans-SolidWaterTotal Percent Sources portationWaste(& Sewer of 1990 in UGAs) County 1,182 1,545 29 298 3,055 115% City 661 437 -- 657 1,755 115% An 18% decrease from the high emissions mark in 2005 is still 15% higher than the estimated 1990 emissions levels. and. As shown in Figure 8 below, this rate of reduction keeps us on track for making the needed reductions between 2020 and 2050. Once again, the reduction targets have been arbitrarily assigned to each category identified in the Inventory, realizing that one size does not fit all and that some sources of emissions may be more cost-effective to address than others. The actions listed in this plan further demonstrate some of these differences. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 34 of 54 Figure 8 CO2e Projections and Targets for City & County Operations contrasted against projected population growth. listed in the following tables were derived from the CAC, citizen Actions workshops and action plans from other communities, especially those in Portland and Multnomah County. They have been vetted by the Resource Conservation Manager (RCM) and City and County Department Heads. Existing measures currently being implemented by the City and County have been included. Actions are listed in the order by which the magnitude of emissions reductions appeared to be the highest (Additional detail is provided in the Worksheets, Appendix F). For the rough analyses, the CAC relied on municipal information, research, and the assistance of ICLEI CAPPA Software. It is anticipated that the City and County will take a phased approach to implementation based upon specific types of funding available, feasibility, and rate of return (See Appendix E. Potential Funding CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 35 of 54 Sources). City and County, with the assistance of the RCM, will need to develop an implementation strategy and, during budget proceedings, each will need to consider earmarking funds for implementation of recommended measures. The RCM will play a significant role in implementing the government actions outlined below. However, it is important to keep the scope of the RCM clear. Due to the source of grant funding, the RCM does not currently handle transportation related energy costs. The first two years of the RCM scope also exclude assessment of costs associated with the pool and golf course. Though it is hoped the RCM’s position will be more flexible in future, in the interim others will need to take the lead in these areas. Tables 7 and 8, Actions for Reducing Emissions from City and County Government Operations, refer to worksheets found in Appendix E which provide additional detail. Again, we emphasize, the actions contained in this plan are not intended to be limiting. We fully expect and hope that additional measures will be identified and implemented and that some of these may allow a further reduction in Government Sector emissions as well as those in the community at large. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 36 of 54 Ý·¬§±ºÐ±®¬Ì±©²»²¼ Ù±ª»®²³»²¬Ñ°»®¿¬·±² Ý±¬ CO2e Î»½±ª»®§ (metric É±®µ¸»»¬ß½¬·±²Leadtons) øÇ»¿®÷ Ý±«²¬§ ïòïìÐ«®½¸¿»Ù®»»²Û²»®¹§º®±³¬¸»¹®·¼ß¼³·²·¬®¿¬±®²ñ¿íîð Þ«·´¼¿´´²»©Ý·¬§úÝ±«²¬§¾«·´¼·²¹¿²¼¼»ª»´±° ·¬»¬±¿¬´»¿¬¿ÔÛÛÜÍ·´ª»®½®·¬»®·±²ô±®±³»±¬¸»®Ý·¬§Ý±«²½·´ ¬¸·®¼°¿®¬§½»®¬·º·½¿¬·±²±º»²»®¹§ô©¿¬»®¿²¼©¿¬»¿²¼Ð«¾´·½ ïòï½±²»®ª¿¬·±²¬®¿¬»¹·»ø»ò¹òôß®½¸·¬»½¬«®»îðíð÷É±®µðòìêïïè «²¬§±©²»¼ Ý±²¼«½¬»²»®¹§¿«¼·¬º±®»¿½¸½·¬§±®½± ¾«·´¼·²¹¿²¼·²º®¿¬®«½¬«®»¬±¼»ª»´±°¿²¼ ïòì·³°´»³»²¬¿°´¿²¬±®»¼«½»»²»®¹§½±²«³°¬·±²òÎÝÓìòèïïïî ïòçÝ±²ª»®¬Í¬®»»¬´·¹¸¬¬±ÔÛÜÐ«¾´·½É±®µîòìçìí Í»¬¹±¿´º±®¹±ª»®²³»²¬¼»°¿®¬³»²¬¿²¼»²½±«®¿¹» ¿´´´±½¿´¾«·²»»¬±¾»½±³»½»®¬·º·»¼¾§¬¸»Ù®»»²ÎÝÓúÝ±«²¬§ ïòïíÞ«·²»°®±¹®¿³±ºÖ»ºº»®±²Ý±«²¬§Ø»¿´¬¸Û²ªòØ»¿´¬¸ìð ×²¬¿´´°¸±¬±ª±´¬¿·½°¿²»´±²»¨·¬·²¹¾«·´¼·²¹¿²¼ º±®¬¿²¼¿´±²»´·¹¸¬·²¹±²¬®»»¬¿²¼·²°¿®µô©¸»®»ÎÝÓúÐ«¾´·½ ïòê¿°°®±°®·¿¬»¿²¼°®±¼«½¬·ª»É±®µïèòîêîì Ü»°¬òØ»¿¼ô Û¬¿¾´·¸¿®»¼«½»¼·¼´·²¹°±´·½§º±®¿´´¹±ª»®²³»²¬Ú´»»¬Ó¹®ú ïòéª»¸·½´»ø¸»¿ª§¬®«½µ÷ÝßÝðòðìêï ÛÝ¿®Ó±®»»ºº·½·»²¬º´»»¬¿²¼«»±ºª»¸·½´»Ú´»»¬Ó¿²¿¹»®ìð ··±²ª»¸·½´»Ú´»»¬ Î»°´¿½»´±©»ºº·½·»²½§¿²¼¸·¹¸»³ ©·¬¸º«»´»ºº·½·»²¬ú´±©»³··±²ª»¸·½´»ô´·µ»°´«¹Ó¿²¿¹»®ú ïòë·²¸§¾®·¼ô¿±±²¿°±·¾´»Ü»°¬òØ»¿¼ðòððîî Ý®»¿¬»·²½»²¬·ª»º±®»³°´±§»»¬±®»¼«½» »³··±²·²¬¸»·®¼¿·´§½±³³«¬» ïòïðÜ»°¬òØ»¿¼ïòðèïì ×³°´»³»²¬ª»¸·½´»¬®·°®»¼«½¬·±²°±´·½§·²½±®°±®¿¬·²¹ ¬»´»½±²º»®»²½·²¹ô¬»´»½±³³«¬·²¹¿²¼¿´¬»®²¿¬·ª» ©±®µ½¸»¼«´»ô©¸»®»°®¿½¬·½¿´òÛ¬¿¾´·¸ª·¼»± ¿²¼ñ±®©»¾½±²º»®»²½·²¹½¿°¿¾·´·¬·»·²¿´´³¿¶±®Ý·¬§ ïòî¿²¼Ý±«²¬§º¿½·´·¬·»Ü»°¬òØ»¿¼ìòðçïì Ë»»´»½¬®·½ª»¸·½´»±®¾·½§½´»©¸»²»ª»®°±·¾´»ÝßÝúÚ´»»¬ ïòíø»ò¹òôº±®³»¬»®®»¿¼·²¹¿²¼¾«·´¼·²¹·²°»½¬·±²÷Ó¿²¿¹»®ëòðçïï Î»°´¿½»¿´´¬¸»©¿¬»®³»¬»®©·¬¸®»³±¬»®»¿¼ ³»¬»®òß¾±«¬ìðð±º¬¸»¬±¬¿´ëôððð¿®»¿´®»¿¼§ ÛÓ»¬»®®»³±¬»®»¿¼òÐ«¾´·½É±®µïòììç Ú´»»¬ Û¬¿¾´·¸¿®»¼«½»¼·¼´·²¹°±´·½§º±®¿´´¹±ª»®²³»²¬Ó¿²¿¹»®ú ïòéª»¸·½´»ø´·¹¸¬ª»¸·½´»÷Ü»°¬òØ»¿¼ðòðíì Ë»©»¬´¿²¼©¿¬»©¿¬»®¬®»¿¬³»²¬¿¿²¿´¬»®²¿¬·ª» ¬±¬®¿¼·¬·±²¿´³»¬¸±¼·²Ë®¾¿²Ù®±©¬¸ß®»¿©¸»®» ïòïî©¿¬»®¯«¿´·¬§½¿²¾»°®»»®ª»¼Ð«¾´·½É±®µìïòïíïðë Ì±¬¿´Ù®»»²¸±«»Ù¿Û³··±²Î»¼«½¬·±²øïíû¿¾±ª»îðîð¹±¿´÷çíé CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 37 of 54 Ö»ºº»®±²Ý±«²¬§ Ù±ª»®²³»²¬Ñ°»®¿¬·±² Ý±¬ CO2e Î»½±ª»®§ (metric É±®µ¸»»¬ß½¬·±² Lead øÇ»¿®÷tons) ïòïìÐ«®½¸¿»Ù®»»²Û²»®¹§º®±³¬¸»¹®·¼Þ«·´¼·²¹²ñ¿çêé Ý±²¼«½¬»²»®¹§¿«¼·¬º±®»¿½¸½·¬§±®½±«²¬§±©²»¼ ¾«·´¼·²¹¿²¼·²º®¿¬®«½¬«®»¬±¼»ª»´±°¿²¼ ïòì·³°´»³»²¬¿°´¿²¬±®»¼«½»»²»®¹§½±²«³°¬·±²òÎÝÓêòìîïèè Í»¬¹±¿´º±®¹±ª»®²³»²¬¼»°¿®¬³»²¬¿²¼»²½±«®¿¹»ÎÝÓú ¿´´´±½¿´¾«·²»»¬±¾»½±³»½»®¬·º·»¼¾§¬¸»Ù®»»²Ý±«²¬§Û²ªò ïòïíÞ«·²»°®±¹®¿³±ºÖ»ºº»®±²Ý±«²¬§Ø»¿´¬¸Ø»¿´¬¸ðòðçïîì ×²¬¿´´°¸±¬±ª±´¬¿·½°¿²»´±²»¨·¬·²¹¾«·´¼·²¹¿²¼ º±®¬¿²¼¿´±²»´·¹¸¬·²¹±²¬®»»¬¿²¼·²°¿®µô©¸»®»ÎÝÓú ïòê¿°°®±°®·¿¬»¿²¼°®±¼«½¬·ª»Ð«¾´·½É±®µïèòîêìé ×³°´»³»²¬ª»¸·½´»¬®·°®»¼«½¬·±²°±´·½§·²½±®°±®¿¬·²¹ ¬»´»½±²º»®»²½·²¹ô¬»´»½±³³«¬·²¹¿²¼¿´¬»®²¿¬·ª» ©±®µ½¸»¼«´»ô©¸»®»°®¿½¬·½¿´òÛ¬¿¾´·¸ª·¼»± ¿²¼ñ±®©»¾½±²º»®»²½·²¹½¿°¿¾·´·¬·»·²¿´´³¿¶±®Ý·¬§ ïòî¿²¼Ý±«²¬§º¿½·´·¬·»Ü»°¬Ø»¿¼ïòðíëì Ü»°¬òØ»¿¼ô Û¬¿¾´·¸¿®»¼«½»¼·¼´·²¹°±´·½§º±®¿´´¹±ª»®²³»²¬Ú´»»¬Ó¹®ú ïòéª»¸·½´»ÝßÝðòðëìî Î»°´¿½»´±©»ºº·½·»²½§¿²¼¸·¹¸»³··±²ª»¸·½´»Ú´»»¬ ©·¬¸º«»´»ºº·½·»²¬ú´±©»³··±²ª»¸·½´»ô´·µ»°´«¹Ó¿²¿¹»®ú ïòë·²¸§¾®·¼ô¿±±²¿°±·¾´»Ü»°¬Ø»¿¼ðòððîè Ý®»¿¬»·²½»²¬·ª»º±®»³°´±§»»¬±®»¼«½» »³··±²·²¬¸»·®¼¿·´§½±³³«¬» Ü»°¬Ø»¿¼ïòçëîí ïòïð Ë»»´»½¬®·½ª»¸·½´»±®¾·½§½´»©¸»²»ª»®°±·¾´»ÝßÝúÚ´»»¬ ïòíø»ò¹òôº±®³»¬»®®»¿¼·²¹¿²¼¾«·´¼·²¹·²°»½¬·±²÷Ó¿²¿¹»®ëòðçé ê Ûì¼¿§Ì»´»½±³³«¬»Ì®¿²°±®¬ðòðð ÛÆ»²²Û´»½¬®·½Ê»¸·½´»Ì®¿²°±®¬ðòððì Ì±¬¿´Ù®»»²¸±«»Ù¿Û³··±²Î»¼«½¬·±²øçû¿¾±ª»îðîð¹±¿´÷ïôìçð In developing this plan, we listed and analyzed the actions that we believed were within our current capabilities. They clearly do not yield reductions below 1990 by the year 2020, but they do put the government sector on track to meet the 2050 goal. Perhaps interim targets for all of Jefferson County should not be arbitrarily applied to every sector, every building, every business or every individual. Instead, a reasoned approach needs to be applied that considers many factors. A case in point is the Government Sector, which produces less than 1% of the emissions in our county. Some of these are generated by essential services like the fire departments, police and sheriff departments, and CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 38 of 54 water and sewer utilities, where emissions reductions may be very costly or unwise. It may be more cost effective to reduce emissions in the community rather than in the government sector. Limited resources may yield greater reductions in emissions in helping homeowners make private homes more energy efficient than in further retrofitting historic government buildings. Some government investments could significantly reduce overall community emissions for example, i. investments in promoting a shift in transportation mode away from motor vehicle use and toward increased walking, bicycling and transit use. This could be realized by implementing a number of strategies including: a significant investment for expanded Jefferson Transit service; greater investment in walking and biking facilities; a reduction, maximum cap, or elimination of motor vehicle parking requirements; and instituting parking fees in the commercial centers. These steps would result in a modest increase in Jefferson Transit’s emissions but could yield an immense reduction in overall community emissions. In spite of our limited abilities to reduce emissions further today, we must be prepared to take advantage of every opportunity to reduce our community-wide emissions in the near future. The Government Sector must play a leadership role in continuing to make this issue a high priority. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 39 of 54 B. Encouraging Community-wideReductions While the City or County will have a major role in carrying out many of the following objectives and actions, successful implementation will require many diverse partners, including neighboring jurisdictions, non- profit organizations, business leaders, and neighborhood associations. . Educating ourselves about the need for Education and Outreach change, the choices available to us, and the values that motivate us is a fundamental part of this plan. In order to reach our greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, Port Townsend & Jefferson County need informed and supportive employees and citizens. Government must promote a broad awareness of the predicted effects of climate change and provide the tools and incentives to reduce GHG emissions in homes, businesses, and workplaces. Outreach efforts will require the formation of partnerships – both municipal partnerships and public-private partnerships. The City and County have already begun to reach out to other counties and cities, here on the Olympic Peninsula including Clallam County, Port Angeles and Sequim. Examples of government partnerships include: Peninsula Development District (PDD), through the PDD, local jurisdictions collaborated on a proposal and submitted a grant application (the DOT TIGER II – HUD Community Challenge Planning Grant) to develop and implement a regional strategy to reduce vehicle miles traveled and plan for a more sustainable transportation system across the North Olympic Peninsula. Though the DOT TIGER II grant was not funded, the PDD will continue to seek funding. Jefferson County Public Health Green Business Program – Staff from the Green Business Program have been coordinating with CAC staff and anticipate enhanced outreach under the existing Green Business program. This program is focused on assisting businesses in developing cost-effective “green” solutions to prevent waste and pollution, and to conserve valuable resources. The program provides free technical assistance to business aimed at improving existing practices. Green Business is a voluntary program that gives recognition to businesses that are working to reduce waste, recycle and otherwise conduct business in an environmentally conscience manner. http://www.jeffersoncountypublichealth.org/index.php?green- business CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 40 of 54 The Jefferson County Public Utility District (PUD) is in the process of purchasing the local electric infrastructure from Puget Sound Energy (PSE). As a public utility, the PUD uses community input in making local energy policy decisions, and takes a lead role in encouraging energy conservation and the reduction of greenhouse gases through incentive and outreach efforts. ICLEI for Sustainable Governments is another example of a collaborative effort. With over 600 member jurisdictions, ICLEI provides software support for analyzing the effect of reduction activities, and other resources for ideas. ICLEI tools have proven invaluable in the development of the inventory and targets as well as evaluating measures to reduce emissions. Other potential partners include: Local 2020 - a citizen-based organization dedicated to exploring opportunities in our local community to promote economic self- reliance, environmental stewardship, and community well-being. Local 2020 holds regular meetings offering opportunity for community members to voice their thoughts and get involved, maintains an informative website, and distributes a weekly email newsletter.http://www.L2020.org Jefferson CAN - Jefferson Climate Action Now is a website dedicated to giving individuals the tools needed to save energy, save money, and reduce their carbon (CO2) footprint – at home, at work, and on the road – with tools specific for Jefferson County, Washington.–www.JeffersonCAN.org Jefferson County HomeBuilders - As per Homebuilders website, “Built Green™ of Jefferson County’s program is tailored to fit our unique community. The guidelines demonstrate that green building is not an “all or nothing” method of construction. Experienced builders will not be daunted by any of this. The checklist provides a baseline for determining minimum thresholds for cost-effective, resource-efficient homebuilding. Conservation of materials, energy efficiency and good site planning are among the items considered.” http://www.jeffcobuiltgreen.com/ Other local government entities. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 41 of 54 Objectives & Recommended Actions The Climate Action Committee has identified several potential actions to be implemented as part of the campaign. All are voluntary. With the exception of the First Priority Item - Task the CAC with Designing and Implementing the Community Outreach Campaign - they are There not listed in any particular order nor are they all inclusive. are numerous measures that may be implemented to reduce emissions and new opportunities will arise as technology evolves. Five Action Areas have been identified and are further outlined in the following tables: Education and Outreach Buildings and Energy Urban Form and Transportation Consumption and Solid Waste Food & Agriculture Table 9. Objectives & Recommended Actions for Community-wide Emissions Reductions Education and Outreach Objective: Actively engage the public in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Task the CAC with Designing and Implementing the Community 1. Outreach Campaign. The campaign should be designed to build on existing efforts, foster partnerships and develop new initiatives. The CAC committee membership may be modified to include representatives from the following: Jefferson County Builders Association – Built Green Jefferson County Public Health – Green Business Local 20/20 – JeffersonCAN WSU Jefferson County Extension RCM Research has identified a set of tools to promote behavior change: obtaining commitments, using prompts, utilizing social norms, designing effective communications, providing incentives, and CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 42 of 54 removing external barriers. Depending on the audience and available funding, a variety of outreach materials may be produced (e.g., expanded websites, electronic newsletters, email messages, brochures, print ads, flyers, and postcards for direct mailings; newspaper articles; workshops, festivals or fairs, curriculum or lesson plans for grades K-12). At a minimum, the CAC should: Partner with local media to publish articles and a regular newspaper column with information about sustainability and maintain a reference list and links on the website. (B-1.14) Engage and inspire other public institutions and private businesses to incorporate climate protection action into their daily affairs. Promote voluntary measures that reduce emissions – including measures recommended herein. Partner with local educational institutions to develop and provide classes for clean energy, gardening, agriculture, sustainability skills. (B-1.15) Buildings and Energy Encourage Community Action Objective. Community-wide emissions target of 445,737 tons of CO2eq by 2020. Currently, this sector accounts for 61% of overall emissions. 1 Conservation – Encourage businesses and homeowners to reduce energy and water consumption (e.g., energy from outdoor lighting can be reduced by minimizing the number, using motion sensors, Lower water or installing highefficiency bulbs, etc.) usage cuts •• energy 2 Promote the use of drought-tolerant native plants as well as consumption for tolerant non-natives. water treatment 3 Increase use of energy assessments in homes and businesses by and pumping. encouraging owners to conduct assessments periodically. 4 Encourage all local businesses, to become certified by the Green Business program of Jefferson County Health. (NOTE: This program incorporates many of the measures listed throughout this Climate Action Plan.) (A-1.13) CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 43 of 54 5 Establish lowinterest loan and energy assistance programs that •• reduce energy consumption (e.g., weatherization, appliances, lighting, heating, ventilating and air conditioning improvements, and renewable energy) for both existing and new housing. 6 Provide and/or promote incentives for carbonreducing design & •• retrofit of buildings (e.g. passive solar, solarthermal, •• solarphotovoltaic, heat pumps, wind, and other •• renewableenergy systems.) One example is the FIRST program. •• Objective: 15% of total energy used within Jefferson County will be from renewable energy sources. These figures are taken from the City of Portland Multnomah County Climate Action Plan 2009 and serve as a reminder of the hierarchy of energy efficiency. Urban Form and Transportation Encourage Community Action Objective: Community-wide emissions target of 445,737 tons of CO2eq by 2020. Currently, the transportation sector accounts for 39% of overall emissions. Develop a program to promote ridesharing, walking and biking; such as Whatcom County’s Smart Trips program and the grant application developed by the Peninsula Development District (PDD) for the 2010 DOT TIGER II – HUD Community Challenge Planning Grant) Develop a commuterfriendly transit plan and increase service. Reduce transportation energy needs by promoting the purchase of local goods and services. Increase consumption of local food in facilities with central CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 44 of 54 cafeterias; such as schools, hospital and housing. Provide strategically placed recharging stations and priority parking for electric vehicles. Increase nonmotorized transportation infrastructure by fully implementing existing plans in PT. Build "complete streets" with facilities for pedestrians and bicycles. Explore barge shipping as a more efficient means of transporting freight. Support investments to provide high-performance broadband connectivity to every business and residence to enable widespread e- commerce, telecommuting and improved emergency response. Consumption and Solid Waste Encourage Community-wide Objective: Community-wide emissions target of 445,737 tons of CO2eq by 2020. Currently, solid waste accounts for less than 1% of overall emissions. . Reduce trash through incentives and other measures. (E.g. Require waste recycling especially for construction sites; increase pickup •• services for reuse, upcycling and recycling; and encourage reduced use of packaging, especially for building materials.) Increase composting of all food and yard waste through a variety of measures (e.g. neighborhood composting centers, worm bins, etc.) Encourage relocation or deconstruction and recycling of structures to be demolished. Encourage adaptive reuse of buildings. Food & Agriculture Encourage Community-wide Objective: Community-wide emissions target of 445,737 tons of CO2eq by 2020. Promote sustainable local organic farming - CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 45 of 54 VI. For Further Consideration CAC Recommended Transportation and Land Use Policies City Council and the Board of County Commissioners tasked the CAC with developing recommended amendments to the county and city codes and comprehensive plans to align with the Climate Action Plan strategies City and County Code define distinct public participation processes for adoption of land use comprehensive plan amendments and development regulations, through which the suggested code and policy amendments specified below, have not yet been vetted. The City Council and Board of County Commissioners hereby direct their respective Planning & Development Services Departments to take the following steps: Review the recommended strategies for consistency with adopted policies. If consistent and non-regulatory in nature, implement the strategy as resources allow. For all other strategies, further investigate the potential emissions reductions and feasibility of strategies and advance those with the greatest potential for success during the next cycle of Comprehensive Plan update/amendments to the development regulations. Land Use Policy recommendations are divided into three sections: to enhance the carbon sequestering Rural Resource Management, potential of the County’s forests, farms and open spaces to locate and move both people and Urban Form and Transportation, goods in a carbon-efficient manner and provide regional tools for compact, livable communities of mixed uses. A:Rural Resource Management Maximizing Carbon Sequestration in Natural Resource Lands and Open Space Much of Jefferson County’s land is natural resource land, including forestry, agriculture, open space, conservation land, and critical areas such as wetlands and wildlife habitat. Our large land base, particularly that in forestry, provides a large amount of sequestration for carbon CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 46 of 54 emissions generated elsewhere. Jefferson County should maximize this “carbon sink” function of our natural resource lands by supporting and encouraging management practices that retain or improve storage. Jefferson County should work with the forestry and agricultural communities to explore ways to turn net-carbon-emitting natural resource lands into carbon sinks, without jeopardizing the profitable industry. Options to be explored include, but are not limited to: 1.Explore economic incentives (e.g., Tax benefits or other subsidies) that may encourage landowners to increase carbon storage on their land as well as decrease the conversion out of farmland and forest use. 2.Fund demonstration projects and highlight best practices for forestry and agriculture. 3.Seek ways to cluster legally allowed development rights on smaller portions of natural resource lands and permanently conserve the carbon sequestration qualities of the remaining land (this may be accomplished on a working forest/farm if properly managed). 4.Identify key areas with high carbon sequestration rates and consider protection measures such as transfer of development rights, purchase of development rights/conservation easements. 5.Assess the potential for increasing carbon sequestration on County-owned forest lands. 6.Increase tree planting requirements or incentives for all public and private projects, including transportation projects that incorporate the use of trees. Tree lined corridors provide a carbon sponge and increase the attractiveness of the area. 7.Increase investment in local wood manufacturing businesses that are able to supply local products for wood markets. 8.Increase the amount of local wood products grown and manufactured locally and purchased by government and private sectors. Thus encouraging the economic viability of forest land in our area. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 47 of 54 B: Urban Form and Transportation There is no practical way to divorce land use and transportation. As our community develops, we must be mindful of where we build and how we build. Emissions from buildings account for more than half of the total community-wide GHG emissions in Jefferson County (Stationary emissions including buildings and machinery account for 61%). Traveling between destinations accounts for over half of the carbon emissions released in Washington State and 39% of Jefferson County community-wide emissions. In general, concentrating development within urban growth areas (UGAs) will produce fewer harmful effects than development outside UGAs. For this reason, the County, in coordination with the City, must reemphasize the need for future development to occur within urban growth areas (UGA). Jefferson County and the City of Port Townsend should collaborate to manage growth in accordance with the Growth Management Act (GMA) in a manner that: Adheres to principles of sustainability and reduction of carbon emissions Promotes more livable, pedestrian/bike-friendly, transit-oriented communities Preserves carbon sink potential of surrounding rural and natural resources areas. Built Green and LEED are two national standards for energy efficiency and sustainability in new construction and remodeling. In practice, Built Green is used more in residential projects while LEED is used more in commercial projects. Both organizations offer comprehensive means to rate newly proposed subdivisions or other large-scale residential development: the Built Green Communities Checklist and LEED for Neighborhood Development. The City and County should consider the following policy options: 1. Direct staff to research the benefits of implementing a city and county energy code for commercial and residential construction that exceeds current WA state code (e.g. greater insulation, passive solar, Passive House and small footprints) and for new buildings, site development and substantial remodels consider establishing a minimum compliance target (e.g., meet at least a LEED Silver or similar level for Built Green or another green building standard). CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 48 of 54 2. Within designated UGAs, encourage increased urban density through code revisions for items such as setbacks, height restrictions, cluster and mixeduse development. •• 3. Consider further reductions in offstreet parking requirements in order to increase density and further promote transportation choices. 4. Increase nonmotorized transportation infrastructure by completing NMTP plans for areas in the county. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 49 of 54 VII. Monitoring & Adaptive Management As with the Objectives and Actions in Section V, monitoring for the municipal and community categories are explored independently, primarily because a much finer resolution is possible for municipal operations (energy use by facility, etc.) than for the community as a whole. Applying an adaptive management approach; we fully anticipate that the plan will be revised periodically as we monitor our progress, track changing conditions, and become aware of new information and technological advancements. Government Emissions For each action recommended for implementation, the City and County will work to refine, monitor, and report on measurable indicators of success. A number of tools and practices exist that can enable the City and County to track and report progress toward achieving the goals outlined in this plan, including monitoring the funds allocated to climate-protection goals. Tools can be as simple as spreadsheet tracking sheets developed to monitor estimated annual energy and water savings; waste diverted, and associated GHGs reduced. Most of the actions recommended in Section A are under the purview of and will be monitored by the Resource Conservation Manager. Those measures falling outside of the RCM’s scope of work (e.g., measures to reduce fuel consumption by vehicles) will need to be monitored by the fleet manager or other designated staff. Community-wide Emissions Track community-wide aggregate emissions – The Climate Action Committee should be tasked with conducting a GHG emissions inventory approximately every three to five years. Measuring GHG emissions on a regular basis is important to verifying that the climate initiatives are effectively reducing emissions and that the appropriate scale of GHG reductions are being pursued. Other indicators of success may include miles of bike lanes and number of households actively participating in composting and recycling programs. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 50 of 54 GLOSSARY OF TERMS Adaptation Climate refers to the ability of a system to adjust to climate adaptation change (including climate variability and extremes) to moderate potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences. For example, relocating development from areas prone to flooding, adjusting to increased summer drought conditions). Compare to . mitigation Backcasting The process of estimating a previous GHG emission if a base year's emissions are known. This estimate is based primarily on the ratio of the population of the base year to the population at some previous time. It is assumed that this population ratio is proportional to the ratio of the base year emissions to that of the previous year being backcast. (For our reports, the base year for which we had good data was 2005. In backcasting to 1990 we used not only changes in population but included as well an estimate of how the Port Townsend Paper Corporation emissions had been reduced since then.) Carbon footprint Shorthand for an estimate of the total GHG emissions caused by, or associated with, a person, product, activity, or organization. Usually expressed in units of CO2e. An average. In 2007, an average American’s carbon footprint was about 19 tons of CO2e per year. In the United Kingdom it was 9, while in China it was 5. (www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissi ons_per_capita) CAPPA Software ‘Climate and Air Pollution Planning Assistant' is designed by ICLEI to help U.S. local governments explore, identify and analyze potential climate and air pollution emissions reduction opportunities. CAPPA allows users to compare the relative benefits of a wide variety of emissions reduction measures, and helps identify those most likely to be successful for a community based on its priorities and constraints. CAPPA includes a customizable and expandable library of more than 110 distinct emissions reduction strategies for local governments. Its calculation functions are based on real-world data from other U.S. communities and a variety of expert sources. CO2 Carbon dioxide, a colorless, odorless gas consisting of one atom of carbon and two atoms of oxygen. CO2 is created during combustion of CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 51 of 54 carbon-based fuels and absorbed by most plants in photosynthesis. CO2 currently exists at a global average concentration of 385 parts per million by volume in Earth’s atmosphere. (As reported by NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, in January 2011. www.co2now.org) CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalent. A measure used to compare the effect of a greenhouse gas in terms of an equivalent amount of carbon dioxide. Emission intensity reduction Reduction of carbon emissions per Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Fossil fuels Fuels derived from geologically ancient vegetation that has been transformed into coal, petroleum and natural gas over long periods of time. GHG Greenhouse gas. Chiefly carbon dioxide (CO), Water, Methane (CH), 24 Nitrous oxide (NO) Chlorofluorocarbons, all of which in the atmosphere 2 absorb heat radiation coming from the earth and reradiate it back to the earth thus causing a net increase in the heat balance of the earth. This is actually different than how greenhouses work by isolating warm air inside the structure so that heat is not lost by convection. See. CO2e Gigaton A unit of measure equal to one billion metric tons. A metric ton is approximately 2,205 pounds. ICLEI Also known as, ICLEI “ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability” is an association of over 1200 local government Members from 70 different countries representing more than 569,885,000 people who are committed to sustainable development. ICLEI provides technical consulting, training, and information services to build capacity, share knowledge, and support local government in the implementation of sustainable development at the local level. Our basic premise is that locally designed initiatives can provide an effective and cost-efficient way to achieve local, national, and global sustainability objectives. Founded in 1990 and initially called 'International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives' (ICLEI), its mission expanded and its name was changed in 2003. (www.iclei.org) CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 52 of 54 IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The IPCC is a scientific intergovernmental body set up by the World Meteorological Organization and by the United Nations Environment Programmed. Visit the IPCC website at www.ipcc.ch. kW-h Kilowatt-hour, when you use 1000 watts for 1 hour, that's a kilowatt- hour. For example, it is the amount of energy needed to light a 100 Watt light bulb for 10 hours. LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) is an ecology- oriented building certification program run under the auspices of the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). LEED concentrates its efforts on improving performance across five key areas of environmental and human health: energy efficiency, indoor environmental quality, materials selection, sustainable site development and water savings. LEED has special rating systems that apply to all kinds of structures, including schools, retail and healthcare facilities. Rating systems are available for new construction and major renovations as well as existing buildings. There are 4 levels of energy efficiency of a building. They are in increasing order: Certified, Silver, Gold and Platinum. Mitigation mitigation is any action taken to permanently eliminate or Climate reduce the long-term risk and hazards of climate change to human life, property. Examples include making our vehicles and buildings more energy efficient, expanding carbon “sinks”, trading single-occupancy cars for mass transit, switching to renewable energy sources, etc. Compare to . adaptation MMBtu 1million Btu. The British thermal unit (BTU or Btu) is a standard unit of measurement used to denote both the amount of heat energy in fuels and the ability of appliances and air conditioning systems to produce heating or cooling... It is approximately the amount of energy needed to heat 1 pint (which weighs 16 ounces) of water one degree Fahrenheit. One Btu is approximately one fourth of a food Calorie or 0.29 kW-h. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 53 of 54 Resource Conservation Manager (RCM) Individual dedicated to supporting an agency’s resource conservation program, focusing on energy, water and solid waste. Five jurisdictions (Jefferson County, the City of Port Townsend, Port Townsend and Chimacum School Districts, Fort Worden State Park) hired a shared RCM in November 2010 on a three year contract to evaluate their resource usage and create facility action plans. UGA Urban Growth Area (UGAs) - areas designated by a county, with input from towns and cities, where urban development is to occur. The UGA is one of the major tools provided by the Growth Management Act for deciding where urban development should be encouraged and where the limits to that development should end. UGAs are areas where growth and higher densities are expected and supported by urban services. By directing growth into urban areas, natural resource lands – such as farms and forests – can be conserved and the rural character of rural lands can be maintained. CAC Recommended Draft Climate Action Plan - June 15, 2011 June 27, 2011 Page 54 of 54 Appendix A Joint Resolution County 44-07 City 07-022 to commit to addressing energy use and climate change Appendix B Joint Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners County Resolution No 02-08 and the Port Townsend City Council City Resolution No 08-001 Providing Composition Terms of Office and Procedural Rules for the Climate Action Committee Appendix C. CO2e Forecasts and Targets Ù®»»²¸±«»Ù¿Û³··±²·²¬±²±ºÝÑî» Þ¿½µ½¿¬Þ¿»Ç»¿®Ú±®»½¿¬ô¿«³·²¹½«®®»²¬°®¿½¬·½» Ý¿¬»¹±®§Í»½¬±®ñÍ«¾»½¬±®ïççðîððëîðïîîðîðîðíðîðëð Ý±³³«²·¬§Í¬¿¬·±²¿®§Û²»®¹§ Î»·¼»²¬·¿´èêèîéïîïêðëïíïìèéïìíçíêïêèçéìîêïïîé Ý±³³»®½·¿´íîçðîìçðïéëíèêèêððïîéìèçíïïìêìï ×²¼«¬®·¿´îîëêêëïëìëïïïëìëïïïëìëïïïëìëïïïëìëïï Í¬¿¬·±²¿®§Í«¾¬±¬¿´íìëíçìíîëïííííçèêêíëèìëçíçèíéèëíðîéç Î¿¬»±ºÝ¸¿²¹»º®±³°®»ª·±«³·´»¬±²»ïòðëïòðëïòïïïòíí Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±²ïéëêçéîðçðéçîîèìëëîëêðïèíïçììçìèèçèç Î¿¬»±ºÝ¸¿²¹»º®±³°®»ª·±«³·´»¬±²»ïòðçïòïîïòîëïòëí Í±´·¼É¿¬»ïéééîëðîîèíïíîêïíèîíëèëî Î¿¬»±ºÝ¸¿²¹»º®±³°®»ª·±«³·´»¬±²»ïòïíïòïëïòïéïòëí Ý±³³«²·¬§Ì±¬¿´ëîîèêèëíêéïìëéïïëìêïééíèéîïêëðïðîëïîð Î¿¬»±ºÝ¸¿²¹»º®±³°®»ª·±«³·´»¬±²»ïòðêïòðèïòïéïòìî Ö»ºº»®±²Ý±«²¬§Ù±ªù¬Í¬¿¬·±²¿®§Û²»®¹§ïðîëïììíïëðèïëçïïéêèîíëí Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±²ïíìðïèèêîðêïîíðçîèèîììïï Í±´·¼É¿¬»îëíëìðìêëíèî É¿¬»®îëçíêììïîìéìëëêèëï Ö»ºº»®±²Ý±«²¬§Ì±¬¿´îêìèíéîèìðîïììîðëîëçéêçè Ý·¬§±ºÐ±®¬Ì±©²»²¼Í¬¿¬·±²¿®§Û²»®¹§ëéíèðéèììèçðçèçïíïê Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±²íéçëííëèîêëíèïìïîìé É¿¬»®ñÍ»©¿¹»ëéðèðîçðéïðìëïîîëïèéê Ý·¬§±ºÐ±®¬Ì±©²»²¼Ì±¬¿´ïëîîîïìîîíííîëèèíðîçììíç 204062872432500374274385855656 Ð±°«´¿¬·±²Ü¿¬¿ñÛ¬·³¿¬» Ò±¬»±²½¿´½«´¿¬·±²³»¬¸±¼Ü®¿º¬ìîçïï Ú±®¾±¬¸¾¿½µ½¿¬¿²¼º±®»½¿¬ô¬¸»³»¬¸±¼©¿¬±¿°°´§¬¸»¿²²«¿´°»®½»²¬¿¹»½¸¿²¹»º®±³¬¸»¾¿»§»¿®±ºîððëº±®¿²§¹·ª»²§»¿®·² ¬¸»Ö»ºº»®±²½±«²¬§°±°«´¿¬·±²¬±¬¸»ª¿®·±«·²°«¬·²¬¸»Ý´»¿²ß·®¿²¼Ý´·³¿¬»Ð®±¬»½¬·±²øÝßÝÐ÷±º¬©¿®»ò Ú±®»¿½¸°»®·±¼ô¬¸·¿²²«¿´°»®½»²¬¿¹»½¸¿²¹»©¿¿°°´·»¼¬±¬¸»º±´´±©·²¹·²°«¬æ Î»·¼»²¬·¿´æÛ´»½¬®·½¿´«¿¹»¿²¼²«³¾»®±º¸±«»¸±´¼ Ý±³³»®½·¿´æÛ´»½¬®·½¿´«¿¹»ô°®±°¿²»«¿¹»ôº´±±®¿®»¿ô²«³¾»®±º»³°´±§»»¿²¼²«³¾»®±º»¬¿¾´·¸³»²¬ Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±²æÙ¿±´·²»¿²¼¼·»»´«¿¹» É¿¬»æÌ±¬¿´¬±²ÝÑ î» Ì¸»¿²²«¿´°»®½»²¬¿¹»°±°«´¿¬·±²½¸¿²¹»«»¼©»®»æ ïççð¬244/îòíïû îððë¬2432ïòéèû îððë¬2424ïòéèû îððë¬2414ïòéïû îððëîðëðïòçðû Ú±®¬¸»·²¼«¬®·¿´¾¿½µ½¿¬¿²»¬·³¿¬»±º¬¸»®»¼«½¬·±²±ºÐ±®¬Ì±©²»²¼Ð¿°»®º®±³ïççð¬±îððë±º¿¾±«¬íîû©¿«»¼¾¿»¼±²¬¸» ·²º±®³¿¬·±²«°°´·»¼¾§Õ®·¬·²Ó¿®¸¿´´¿²¼Þ®«½»Ó½Ý±³¿òÌ¸»®»¿º¬»®ô¬¸»º«¬«®»»³··±²©»®»¿«³»¼¬±¾»½±²¬¿²¬¾¿»¼±²¬¸» ¿«³°¬·±²¬¸¿¬¬¸»°®±¼«½¬·±²±º¹®»»²¸±«»¹¿©¿²±¬°±°«´¿¬·±²¼»°»²¼»²¬ò Í¬¿²´»§É·´´¿®¼ Ì¸»»½¿´½«´¿¬·±²©»®»³¿¼»¿¬¬¸»½±³³«²·¬§´»ª»´òÌ¸»Ý·¬§¿²¼Ý±«²¬§Ù±ª»®²³»²¬Ñ°»®¿¬·±²¿®»¿·²½´«¼»¼·²¬¸»Ý±³³«²·¬§ ¬±¬¿´òÌ¸»®¿¬»±º½¸¿²¹»º±®¿»¿½¸«¾»½¬±®©¿¿°°´·»¼¬±¬¸»µ²±©²¾¿»´·²»·²ª»²¬±®§ª¿´«»º±®¬¸»Ý·¬§¿²¼Ý±«²¬§¬±¼»¬»®³·²» ¬¸»º±®»½¿¬¬¸»·®®»°»½¬·ª»«¾»½¬±®òÛ¨¿³°´»æÌ®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±²ÝÑî»·²½®»¿»¼çû·²¬¸»½±³³«²·¬§¾»¬©»»²îððë¿²¼îðïîòÝ·¬§ Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±²·²îðïî·½¿´½«´¿¬»¼¬±¾»ëèîô®»º´»½¬·²¹¿çû·²½®»¿»±ª»®îððëò Ü»¾±®¿¸Í¬·²±² Ì¿®¹»¬º±®Ú«¬«®»ÙØÙÛ³··±² Ù®»»²¸±«»Ù¿Û³··±²·²¬±²±ºÝÑî» Ý¿¬»¹±®§Í»½¬±®ñÍ«¾»½¬±®ïççðîððëîðïîîðîðîðíðîðëð êððððð Ý±³³«²·¬§ Ý±³³«²·¬§Í¬¿¬·±²¿®§Û²»®¹§ ëððððð Î»·¼»²¬·¿´èêèîéïîïêðëïîïêðëççêêðéîîîèïéíêë êððððð ìððððð ëððððð íððððð íîçðîìçðïéìçðïéìððèíîèçïë Ý±³³»®½·¿´êëèð ìððððð îððððð ïëìëïïïëìëïïïíïìèìïðîéððìëïíí ×²¼«¬®·¿´îîëêêë íððððð ïððððð Í¬¿¬·±²¿®§Í«¾¬±¬¿´íìëíçìíîëïíííîëïííîéïîîéîðíèììêçðéç Ý±³³«²·¬§ îððððð ð Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±²ïéëêçéîðçðéçîðçðéçïéîìêðïîêêèéíëïíç ïððððð îðïîîðîðîðíðîðëð ð ïççðîððë ïéééîëðîîðëðïìèë Í±´·¼É¿¬»îëðîíëë Ù®¿²¼Ì±¬¿´ëîîèêèëíêéïìëíêéïìììëéíéííîðïêïðìëéì Ý±³³«²·¬§ Percent from 1990 ðòðíðòðíðòïëðòíéðòèð ïïèîèëé Ö»ºº»®±²Ý±«²¬§Ù±ªù¬Í¬¿¬·±²¿®§Û²»®¹§ïðîëïììíïììíîðë ìðððìððð Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±²ïëìëïïîðîêè ïíìðïèèêïèèê íëðð íëðð Í±´·¼É¿¬»îçîïë îëíëíë íððð íððð îçèîïêëî îëðð É¿¬»®îëçíêìíêì îððð îëðð Ý±«²¬§Ì±¬¿´îêìèíéîèíéîèíðëëîîïíëíð ïëðð Ý±«²¬§ îððð Percent from 1990 ðòìïðòìïðòïëðòïêðòèð ïððð Percent from prev benchmark Ý·¬§ ðòìïðòðððòïèðòîèðòéê ïëðð ëðð êêïìéç Ý·¬§±ºÐ±®¬Ì±©²»²¼Í¬¿¬·±²¿®§Û²»®¹§ëéíèðéèðéïïë ð ïððð îðïîîðîðîðíðîðëð ìíéíïê Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±²íéçëííëííéê ëðð ïççðîððë êëéìéê É¿¬»®ñÍ»©¿¹»ëéðèðîèðîïïì ð Ý±«²¬§Ý·¬§ ïççðîððëîðïîîðîðîðíðîðëð Ý·¬§Ì±¬¿´ïëîîîïìîîïìîïéëëïîéîíðì Percent from 19900.410.410.15-0.16-0.80 Percent from prev benchmark0.410.00-0.18-0.28-0.76 Calculation Notes This version of Targets treats each SubSector separately with 2050 being 20% of what was Backcast for that particular category. The Targets for 2020 and 2030 are simply proportioned from the reduction between 2012 and 2050 according to the number of years. Calculations by Stanley Willard 5-23-11 Appendix D. Potential Funding Sources The Resource Conservation Manager (RCM) is tasked with identifying funding for energy savings related to government operations. Savings on energy costs can then be directed toward other measures. In regards community-wide emissions, stay in touch with ICLEI - they have several recommendations for where to turn when municipal resources fall short such as: Local utilities should invest in energy conservation and offer rebates and other incentives for residential and commercial energy consumption. Assistance through federal and state programs - ICLEI’s program staff can help connect city and county liaisons to resources at the state and national level to provide opportunities for obtaining financial and technical assistance available to local governments. Energy service corporations (ESCOs) ESCOs finance energy improvements which are then paid back by the cost savings from reduced energy bills. These businesses encourage the implementation of energy-saving measures and may be valuable resources for technical assistance, financing, and program implementation. We’ll need to get creative – for example, - seek out partnerships for Education and Outreach like the 'partnership with non-profit' model implemented by Sustainable Connections, Bellingham & Whatcom WA. Another option is to look into funding for community outreach specifically, or even local economic development grants for business outreach (as opposed to just energy/environmental funding sources.) Appendix E Worksheets – Proposed Actions for Government Operations Appendix F Portland Climate Action Now’s, Climate-friendly Actions At Home & For Your Business ¶²²¦?²¶¦¤¶¤¶