The Water, Energy, & Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth Planning in Phoenix

418 views

Published on

http://repository.asu.edu/items/23060

Phoenix is the sixth most populated city in the United States and the 12th largest metropolitan area by population, with about 4.4 million people. As the region continues to grow, the demand for housing and jobs within the metropolitan area is projected to rise under uncertain climate conditions.

Undergraduate and graduate students from Engineering, Sustainability, and Urban Planning in ASU’s Urban Infrastructure Anatomy and Sustainable Development course evaluated the water, energy, and infrastructure changes that result from smart growth in Phoenix, Arizona. The Maricopa Association of Government's Sustainable Transportation and Land Use Integration Study identified a market for 485,000 residential dwelling units in the urban core. Household water and energy use changes, changes in infrastructure needs, and financial and economic savings are assessed along with associated energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.

The course project has produced data on sustainable development in Phoenix and the findings will be made available through ASU’s Urban Sustainability Lab.

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
418
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The Water, Energy, & Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth Planning in Phoenix

  1. 1. Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co- benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix FINAL PRESENTATION CEE486/494/598, PUP598, SOS598: URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE ANATOMY & SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2014 NOON, WRIGLEY 481, ASU TEMPE CAMPUS
  2. 2. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 2 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Background Maricopa Association of Government’s (MAG) Sustainable Transportation and Land Use Integration Study (ST LUIS). Projected market demand in 2040 around future transit corridors. ◦ 485,000 households (≈ 1.4 million people) ◦ 127 million ft2 of commercial space If this development occurs, how will water and energy consumption change through 2070 compared to typical Phoenix development? INTRODUCTION
  3. 3. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 3 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 TOD vs. BAU Transit-oriented development (TOD) • Projected future demand for housing and commercial space around high-capacity transit (HCT) in the core of Phoenix. • 485,000 households • 127 million ft2 of commercial space • Assessing potential long-term benefits which result from extra effort up front to change current practices. Business as usual (BAU) • Current Phoenix-area development patterns in the urban core and mostly on the fringe. • Assessing the outcome of not changing current development habits. INTRODUCTION
  4. 4. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 4 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014
  5. 5. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 5 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014
  6. 6. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 6 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Research Question
  7. 7. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 7 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Assessment Framework Automobile Travel due to Commercial and Residential Space Commercial and Residential Electricity Consumption Commercial, Residential, and Energy Production Water Usage Mobility Assessment Energy Assessment Water Assessment SYSTEM OUTPUTS: Greenhouse Gases (metric tonne CO2 equivalents: mt CO2e) Energy Consumption (TeraJoules: TJ) Costs (2012 US dollars: $2012 USD) CONSUMPTION: INFRASTRUCTURE: Pavement for Roadways and Parking Lots Electricity Generation Plants and Transmission Infrastructure Waste Water Treatment Facilities and Distribution Network INPUT: INTRODUCTION
  8. 8. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 8 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Automobile Travel due to Commercial and Residential Space Commercial and Residential Electricity Consumption Commercial, Residential, and Energy Production Water Usage Mobility Assessment Energy Assessment Water Assessment SYSTEM OUTPUTS: Energy Consumption (TeraJoules: TJ) CONSUMPTION: INFRASTRUCTURE: Pavement for Roadways and Parking Lots Electricity Generation Plants and Transmission Infrastructure Waste Water Treatment Facilities and Distribution Network INPUT: Greenhouse Gases (metric tonne CO2 equivalents: mt CO2e) Costs (2012 US dollars: $2012 USD) Transitions Transitions Assessment Potential Solutions and Strategies to Enable TOD in the Future Political and Socio- Economic Barriers to TOD in Phoenix INTRODUCTION
  9. 9. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 9 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 The Project Team Project Assistant: Matt Nahlik Transportation: Melissa Archer Luis Bonilla Jessica Loeber Shawn Monk Alex Cano Chelsea Mann Abbie Woodruff Water: Stephanie Bubenheim Nicholas Stafford Scott Unger Tate Jensen Babu Kannappan Matthew Watson Tom Volo Energy: Maria Beguelin John Heck Jaime Paniagua Daniel Burillo Nick LaGrou Saransh Noel Prasad Transitions: Luis Andrade Keith Guiley Parker Helble Kelley Kirtley Elizabeth Barnes Moayyad Hamad William Hsu Professor: Dr. Mikhail Chester INTRODUCTION
  10. 10. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 10 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Linked Course Structure URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE ANATOMY CEE 486 SENIOR DESIGN CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS & METHODS Developing a neighborhood- scale infrastructure assessment Will develop cost estimations of infrastructure changes This effort is sponsored by the National Science Foundation. INTRODUCTION
  11. 11. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 11 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Presentation Overview • Introduction (Matt Nahlik) • Changes in Transportation, Energy, & Water Systems • Transportation and Infrastructure Analysis (Melissa Archer) • Energy Use and Infrastructure Analysis (Daniel Burillo) • Water Use and Infrastructure Analysis (Tom Volo) • Summary of Quantitative Findings (Matt Nahlik) • Exploring Transition Strategies (Keith Guiley) TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  12. 12. Transportation INFRASTRUCTURE Roadways and Parking Lots TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS Shorter Trip Distances Shifting Trips to Alternate Modes of Transport
  13. 13. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 13 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Purpose and Background • Evaluate transportation infrastructure and use changes caused by shifting residents & commercial activity to TOD configurations • Mode shifts • Shortens trip distance • Estimated reductions in roadway and parking lot expansion and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) • Residential • Commercial TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  14. 14. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 14 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Methodology Transportation Infrastructure Residential • Determined typical lot size • Scaled up to 485,000 households • Number of developments needed to satisfy those households Commercial • Commercial demand obtained from MAG Study • Determined number of parking spaces needed to satisfy demand • Standard parking space sizes • Found square footage of parking lots and associated asphalt TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  15. 15. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 15 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Results Transportation Infrastructure Commercial (Parking) • BAU: 170 Million ft2 • TOD: 84 Million ft2 • Difference equivalent to 430,000 parking spaces or 3,000 football fields Residential (Roadways) • 609 residential developments • BAU: 540 Million ft2 of asphalt avoided for roadways Overall Over 4,200 miles of pavement avoided using TOD 10x the distance of Phoenix to Los Angeles TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  16. 16. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 16 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Results Transportation Infrastructure Asphalt Needed for BAU Residential + Commercial (710 million ft2, 25 mi2) TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER Glendale Ave Interstate 17 Interstate17 Interstate10/Highway51
  17. 17. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 17 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Methodology Transportation Use Commercial Trip Purposes Office Retail • Measured through VMT changes • National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) • BAU/TOD cutoff of 4,000 hh/mi2 • Defined residential and commercial trips by trip purposes • Avg. VMT/Trip • Avg. Trips/Day • Shift 20% of trips from personal vehicles to other modes • Nelson-Nygaard (2005) Residential Trip Purposes Home Social/Recreational Personal Obligations TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  18. 18. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 18 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Results Transportation Use Commercial • Reduction of 2.5 Billion • TOD 52% less than BAU Residential • Reduction of 3.7 Billion VMT/Year • TOD 42% less than BAU 8.9 B 5.0 B5.2 B 2.4 B 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Residential Commercial VEHICLEMILESTRAVELED(BILLIONS) Residential Vs. Commercial Annual VMT Reduction BAU TOD When combined, this represents a potential reduction to forecasted Maricopa County 2030 annual VMT of 14% (6.2 out of 45 billion VMT). TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  19. 19. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 19 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 BAU TOD Energy Commercial Use Residential Use Commercial Infrastructure Residential Infrastructure 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 BAU TOD Cost 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 BAU TOD GHG Emissions Overall Results TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER (mmt CO2e) (Billion USD) (Thousand TJ) 52% 47% 52% Travel energy reduction equal to 168 million gallons of fuel. Travel Travel
  20. 20. Energy INFRASTRUCTURE Distribution Lines and Power Systems Light Rail CONSUMPTION Residential and Commercial Energy Use Light Rail
  21. 21. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy & Sustainable Development | Slide 21 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 BAU TOD MillionsofDollars Energy Infrastructure Costs Wires Substations Transformers Light Rail BAU TOD Use Costs (Annual for Ratepayers) Commercial Residential Light Rail In terms of economics… A $400 million marginal investment in TOD infrastructure cuts the price of energy by the same amount per year for residential households. TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  22. 22. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 22 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 6.4 3.1 Energy Use (TWh) BAU dwelling are 2.4x larger than TOD dwelling units, and consume an additional 3.3 billion kWh per year -- $400 million per year. Residential Energy Use 760 360 Ratepayer Costs ($ million) BAU TOD Average Annual Residential Energy Use for 485,000 Households American Housing Survey 2011 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER 2,153 879 Dwelling unit size (ft ) APS Rate Schedule E12 Residential Average 2 Energy Use (Billion kWh)
  23. 23. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 23 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 MAG 2013 Sustainable Land Use and Transportation Market Study Commercial Energy Use Same amount of commercial space in BAU and TOD. No evidence to support building energy use changes in 127 Million ft2 of commercial space. Commercial Electricity Consumption Energy Use (Billion kWh / year) 2.6 Ratepayer costs ($ Million / year) 260 GHG Emissions (mmt CO2e / year) 1.2 EIA 2003 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  24. 24. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 24 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Valley Metro Light Rail ValleyMetro.org • Guideway • Bridges • Passenger Stations and Facilities • Park and Ride Facilities • Electric Power Substations • Signal and Communication Systems • Revenue Vehicles • Equipment National Transit Database APS’s Large General Service Tariff Rate Scenario BAU TOD Track Length (miles) 20 41 Energy Use (Million kWh/year) 18 36 Electricity use costs ($Million/year) 1 2 Total Capital Assets ($ Billion) 1 2 TOD investment projected at $1 Billion, with $1 Million per year increase in energy usage. TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  25. 25. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 25 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Energy Infrastructure • 5 dwelling units per acre • All new wires and substations • Connection at each building BAU TOD • 40 dwelling units per acre • Higher capacity grid components • Connection at each multi-unit building BAU infrastructure costs 12 times more per household than TOD; $600 Million more total. $100,000 per linear mile of underground wire. $6 Million per 120MW capacity substation for 4 mi2. Midwest ISO Salt River Project (SRP) TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  26. 26. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 26 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Summary of Energy Results 0 1 2 3 4 5 BAU TOD Greenhouse Gas Emissions Commercial Use Residential Use Light Rail Infrastructure Construction BAU costs residential ratepayers twice as much as TOD. The Greenhouse Gas footprint of residential households in BAU is roughly two times larger than in a TOD configuration. APS Projected Electricity Mix, 2025(mmt CO2e) TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  27. 27. Water WATER USAGE Residential Commercial Industrial Water Embedded in Energy Production INFRASTRUCTURE Water Treatment Facilities Water Distribution Networks
  28. 28. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 28 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Residential, Commercial and Industrial Water Use Two different types of residential development: • BAU: mostly single-family homes, ~340 gpd (gallons per day) per household • TOD: predominantly multi-family structures, ~220 gpd per household • Values determined from American Housing Survey and 2011 Phoenix Water Resource Plan; slightly lower than Phoenix design standards (360, 240). Adjusted to reflect 25% reduction in per capita water consumption over the next 30 years, multiplied by 485,000 households: • BAU: 124 MGD (million gallons per day) • TOD: 79 MGD (savings of 37%) Assume commercial and industrial usage rates (per household) are the same regardless of location (i.e. TOD vs. BAU). • Commercial: 26 MGD; Industrial: 5.0 MGD • Determined by current percentages of residential water use. TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  29. 29. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 29 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Water Used for Energy Production Water consumed in power plants to generate electricity • Nuclear: 785 gal/MWh • Natural Gas: 415 gal/MWh • Coal: 510 gal/MWh • Average among APS and SRP plants (weighted by plant capacity): 500 gal/MWh Estimated 2040 Electricity Demand (Residential + Commercial) • BAU: 9.1 million MWh = 12 MGD • TOD: 5.7 million MWh = 7.8 MGD (savings of 38%) TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  30. 30. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 30 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 45,400 28,700 9300 9300 1800 1800 4500 2800 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 BAU TOD WaterUsage(MG/yr) Energy Industrial Commercial Residential Water Usage Results Enough water to irrigate every golf course in the Valley for 35 years. 427 270 88 88 17 17 43 27 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 BAU TOD EnergyRequirements(TJ/yr) Energy Industrial Commercial Residential 53000 33500 10900 10900 2100 2100 5300 3300 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 BAU TOD GHGEmissions(mtCO2e/yr) Energy Industrial Commercial Residential 34.1 21.5 7.0 7.0 1.4 1.4 3.4 2.1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 BAU TOD Costs($million/yr) Energy Industrial Commercial Residential TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER 45,400 28,700 9300 9300 1800 1800 4500 2800 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 BAU TOD WaterUsage(MG/yr) Energy Industrial Commercial Residential
  31. 31. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 31 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Wastewater Treatment Non-TOD cities combine for a total deficit of 127 MGD. • BAU scenario would require additional infrastructure for wastewater treatment to meet this 127 MGD deficit. • Cost: $21.0M (~$165,000/MGD plant capacity; MAG, 2003) TOD cities have enoughsurplus capacity to accommodate an additional 485,000 households. • TOD scenario therefore would not require additional infrastructure for wastewater treatment 2040 Projected Wastewater Treatment (MGD) City Generation Capacity Surplus/(Deficit) Buckeye 58.68 10.95 (47.73) Cave Creek 1.33 0.23 (1.10) El Mirage 4.52 3.60 (0.92) Gila Bend 5.87 0.70 (5.17) Maricopa County 61.61 24.41 (37.20) Queen Creek 9.36 4.00 (5.36) Surprise 64.44 36.00 (28.44) Wickenburg 2.19 1.20 (0.99) Youngtown 0.66 0.30 (0.36) Totals: 208.66 81.39 (127.27) Analyze projected (2040) wastewater treatment demand for Valley cities, compared to anticipated treatment capacity, as published by MAG. Chandler 27.83 82.60 54.77 Gilbert 23.02 30.00 6.98 Glendale 30.40 33.75 3.35 Goodyear 36.62 53.10 16.48 Mesa 73.01 99.22 26.21 Paradise Valley 2.04 1.80 (0.24) Peoria 38.35 53.16 14.81 Phoenix 238.55 343.00 104.45 Scottsdale 36.26 45.95 9.69 Tempe 34.44 42.50 8.06 Totals: 540.52 785.08 244.56 TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  32. 32. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 32 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Distribution Networks Assume distribution network already mostly in place for TOD scenario. Additional infrastructure for BAU scenario computed using same “model” community as calculations of energy in BAU scenario. 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Plastic12 Plastic30 Concrete12 Concrete30 $Billion Cost of Fire Hydrants Cost of Valves Cost of Manholes Cost of Pipe• Requires manholes at 400 ft spacing, valves at 800 ft, and (for potable water) fire hydrants at 300 ft. TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  33. 33. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 33 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Infrastructure Results TOD: Since decreasing water usage rates in recent decades has resulted in excess system capacity in established areas within the urban core, we see no additional infrastructure for the TOD scenario that would not also be necessary in the BAU scenario. BAU: Expansion on the suburban fringe requires additional distribution networks, as well as additional wastewater treatment capacity in cities whose anticipated capacity in 2040 is below estimated demand. Additional expenses of BAU scenario: Size Energy (TJ) GHG (mt CO2e) Cost ($M) Treatment Plant 127 MGD Small Small 21 Pipe Network 42,000,000 ft 190 14,000 5600 Total 190 14,000 5700 TRANSPORTATION | ENERGY | WATER
  34. 34. Results REDUCTIONS FROM SMART GROWTH Energy Consumption Greenhouse Gas Emissions Infrastructure and Use Costs Water Use
  35. 35. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 35 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Energy Consumption Potential 1.6 million TJ reduction over 60 years. ◦ Equal to each household saving about 420 gallons of gasoline per year; nearly $1,500. 42% Reduction (Million TJ) COMBINED RESULTS Residential Travel Residential Building Energy Commercial Travel Commercial Building Energy All Infrastructure and Water Components
  36. 36. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 36 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Potential 140 million metric tonne reduction over 60 years. ◦ Equivalent to each household reducing their footprint by 5 metric tonnes each year. Residential Travel Residential Building Energy Commercial Travel Commercial Building Energy All Infrastructure and Water Components (mmt CO2e) 41% Reduction COMBINED RESULTS
  37. 37. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 37 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Total Cost Potential 100 billion dollar savings over 60 years. ◦ Approximately $3,500 per household per year. Residential Travel Residential Building Energy Commercial Travel Commercial Building Energy All Infrastructure and Water Components (Billions of Dollars) 45% Reduction COMBINED RESULTS
  38. 38. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 38 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Infrastructure Cost Potential $4.7 billion reduction to infrastructure construction cost. ◦ $160 million public savings per year over the proposed 30 year construction time. Transportation Infrastructure Energy Infrastructure Water Infrastructure (Billions of Dollars) 69% Reduction COMBINED RESULTS
  39. 39. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 39 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Water Usage Potential 900 billion reduction to water use. ◦ Equal to 25,000 gallons avoided water use per household per year. (Trillions of Gallons) 30% Reduction Residential Water Commercial Water Industrial Water Water Embedded in Energy COMBINED RESULTS
  40. 40. Transitioning to Smart Growth POLITICAL BARRIERS SOCIO-ECONOMIC BARRIERS
  41. 41. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 41 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Barriers beyond infrastructure How did we tackle this problem? Political Barriers Socio-economic Barriers TRANSITIONS
  42. 42. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 42 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Political Barriers Political Barriers Institutions against TOD Lack of funding Continuing development Photo: Google TRANSITIONS
  43. 43. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 43 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Political Barriers Institutions against TOD Lack of funding Continuing development Photo: Google Political Barriers TRANSITIONS
  44. 44. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 44 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Political Barriers Institutions against TOD Lack of funding Continuing development Photo: Google Political Barriers TRANSITIONS
  45. 45. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 45 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Solutions for Political Barriers Barrier Solutions Institutions against TOD Individualize transit plans; Cities with existing transit continue to work together for improvements. Lack of funding Marketing and public education campaigns; Coalition building in favor of funding TOD. Continuing development Valley Metro creates bigger TOD program; developer incentives for infill development to overcome cost stigma. TRANSITIONS
  46. 46. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 46 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Socio-economic Barriers Socio-economic Barriers Dependence on construction industry Lack of affordable housing TRANSITIONS
  47. 47. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 47 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Socio-economic Barriers Dependence on construction industry Lack of affordable housing Socio-economic Barriers TRANSITIONS
  48. 48. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 48 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Solutions for Socio-Economic Barriers Barriers Solutions Dependence on construction industry Enhance economic diversity through policy incentives and economic development initiatives. Lack of affordable housing Set-asides; Tax breaks for current owners. TRANSITIONS
  49. 49. The Water, Energy, and Infrastructure Co-benefits of Smart Growth in Phoenix Urban Infrastructure Anatomy Sustainable Development | Slide 49 Arizona State University | 29 April 2014 Pathways to Progress • TOD creates less water, energy, and transportation infrastructure for municipalities to maintain. • Avoided tax increases, together with lower infrastructure costs make TOD surprisingly attractive. • Focus on education to change perceptions: • Voters and taxpayers • Cities and communities • Residential and commercial developers • Policy changes will enhance the quality of life for all Maricopa County residents! TRANSITIONS
  50. 50. Thank You! Questions and Discussion PRESENTATION AND REPORT WILL BE AVAILABLE IN JUNE 2014 AT: URBANSUSTAINABILITY.LAB.ASU.EDU/PROJECTS/ Matt - Introduction ● Melissa – Mobility ● Daniel - Energy Tom - Water ● Keith - Transitions

×