• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Private Content
US and Canada Green City Index: Assessing the environmental performance of 27 major US and Canadian cities
 

US and Canada Green City Index: Assessing the environmental performance of 27 major US and Canadian cities

on

  • 1,528 views

The US and Canada Green City Index, a research project conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit, sponsored by Siemens, seeks to measure and assess the environmental performance of 27 major US and ...

The US and Canada Green City Index, a research project conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit, sponsored by Siemens, seeks to measure and assess the environmental performance of 27 major US and Canadian cities across a range of criteria. The cities were picked independently rather than relying on requests from city governments to be included, in order to enhance the Index’s credibility and comparability.

This report presents the key findings and highlights from the Index, and is intended to provide stakeholders with a unique tool to help cities in the region learn from each other in order to better address the common environmental challenges they face. A panel of global experts in urban environmental sustainability advised the Economist Intelligence Unit in developing the methodology for the US and Canada Green City Index. The EIU would like to thank the members of the panel for their time and valuable insight.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,528
Views on SlideShare
1,528
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
25
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    US and Canada Green City Index: Assessing the environmental performance of 27 major US and Canadian cities US and Canada Green City Index: Assessing the environmental performance of 27 major US and Canadian cities Document Transcript

    • US and Canada Green City IndexAssessing the environmental performance of 27 major US and Canadian citiesA research project conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit, sponsored by Siemens
    • Contents US and Canada Green City Index004 The cities00 016 Category findings 021 Exemplar projects 028 Methodology 060 Denver 100 Philadelphia 016 CO2 021 Energy and CO2 0 064 Detroit 104 Phoenix006 Expert advisory panel 017 Energy Los Angeles: A comprehensive 032 City portraits 068 Houston 108 Pittsburgh 017 Land use approach to renewables 032 Atlanta 072 Los Angeles 112 Sacramento008 Introduction 018 Buildings 022 Land use 036 Boston 076 Miami 116 San Francisco 018 Transport The million-tree strategy in NYC 040 Calgary 080 Minneapolis 120 Seattle010 Results 019 Water 023 Buildings 044 Charlotte 084 Montreal 124 St Louis 019 Waste Community power works in 048 Chicago 088 New York City 128 Toronto012 Overall key findings 019 Air Seattle 052 Cleveland 092 Orlando 132 Vancouver 020 Environmental governance 024 Transport 056 Dallas 096 Ottawa 136 Washington DC Denver: From T-Rex to Fastracks – an integrated mobility concept 025 Water Cutting water consumption in Calgary 026 Waste San Francisco recycling: Popular laws have dramatic effects2 3
    • Calgary Vancouver Seattle Ottawa Montreal Minneapolis Toronto The cities Detroit Boston Chicago Cleveland New York City Pittsburgh Philadelphia US and Canada Green City Index Denver Washington DC Sacramento St Louis San FranciscoThe US and Canada Green City Indexmeasures and rates the environmental Charlotte Los Angelesperformance of 27 cities in the US and AtlantaCanada. The cities were picked Phoenix Dallasindependently rather than relying onrequests from city governments to beincluded, in order to enhance the Index’s Houstoncredibility and comparability. Orlando4 Miami 5
    • Expert advisory panel US and Canada Green City IndexA panel of globalexperts in urbanenvironmentalsustainability advisedthe EconomistIntelligence Unit indeveloping themethodology for theUS and Canada Don Chen Gareth Doherty Andreas Georgoulias Mark Alan Hughes Rich Kassel Tom Wright Rae ZimmermanGreen City Index. Senior Program Officer Lecturer Co-founder and researcher Distinguished Senior Fellow Senior Attorney Executive Director Professor of Planning and Ford Foundation Harvard University Zofnass Program for Sustain- University of Pennsylvania Air and Energy Program, Regional Plan Association Public AdministrationThe EIU would like to Graduate School of Design able Infrastructure, Harvard School of Design Natural Resources Defense (RPA) New York Universitys University Council (NRDC) Robert F. Wagner Graduatethank the members School of Public Serviceof the panel for their Since joining the Ford Foundation Gareth Doherty currently teaches Andreas Georgoulias is a lecturer Mark Alan Hughes is a distin- For two decades Rich Kassel has Tom Wright is the executive Professor Rae Zimmerman has in 2008 Don Chen has worked on landscape architecture, and urban and a founding member of the guished senior fellow of the been a leading advocate for city, director of Regional Plan directed the Institute for Civiltime and valuable reforming the rules that shape planning and design at the Harvard Zofnass Program for Sustainable TC Chan Center for Building state and federal programs that Association and a visiting lecturer Infrastructure Systems at NYU’sinsight. municipal and regional growth by University Graduate School of Infrastructure at the Harvard Simulation and Energy Studies. have reduced pollution from US in public policy at Princeton Wagner School since 1998. pursuing integrated approaches to Design (GSD). Together with University Graduate School of He is also associate director for vehicles. In the 1990s his Dump University Woodrow Wilson School Her academic and professional affordable housing, public Mohsen Mostafavi he edited Design. His research focuses on Policy, Markets and Behavior at the Dirty Diesels Campaign brought of Public and International Affairs. experience focuses on urban area transportation, land use and Ecological Urbanism, published by large-scale sustainable develop- US Department of Energy’s Energy greater public awareness to the He lectures widely on growth problems from the perspectives of community planning. His grant Lars Müller Publishers in 2010. ments and infrastructures. Efficient Buildings Hub at the diesel pollution problem in US management and regional infrastructure, sustainability, making at the Ford Foundation Mr Doherty is also a founding editor Dr Georgoulias has worked in Philadelphia Navy Yard. cities. Through his work to develop planning, and supervised climate change, the environment, supports institutions working to of New Geographies, a journal design and construction Additionally, Mr Hughes is a faculty New York City Transit’s clean-fuel production of the Draft Vision Plan natural hazards and security. She reduce poverty and provide edited by doctoral candidates at management with Obermeyer, fellow of the Penn Institute for bus program, he helped create a for the City of Newark (2006), the has authored or co-authored over economic opportunities for low- Harvard GSD. He received a doctor Hochtief and the US General Urban Research, a senior fellow of model for low-emission transit New Jersey State Development and 100 articles and book chapters in income people through equitable of design degree from Harvard Service Administration, and in the Wharton School’s Initiative for fleets that has been replicated in Redevelopment Plan (2001), and these areas. She is a fellow of the development in US metropolitan University, and a masters of liberal infrastructure financing with Global Environmental Leadership, cities worldwide. Most recently, he A Region at Risk: The Third Regional American Association for the areas. Previously, Mr Chen was the arts and certificate in urban design HVB/UniCredit. Recently, he has and a distinguished scholar in has worked closely with the Plan for the New York–New Advancement of Science, and past founding executive director and from the University of Pennsylvania. been a consultant for new city residence at Penn’s Robert A. Fox administration of New York Mayor Jersey–Connecticut Metropolitan president and fellow of the Society CEO of Smart Growth America, Mr Doherty’s recent research has developments in Saudi Arabia and Leadership Program. Previously he Michael Bloomberg to develop and Area (1996). He has taught at the for Risk Analysis. Her advisory where he led efforts to create the focused on paradoxes of green in Pakistan, and he conducts research served as chief policy adviser to implement the transportation and Columbia University Graduate appointments have been with National Vacant Properties arid urban environments. on sustainable urban economics Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter air quality components of PlaNYC School of Architecture, Planning numerous agencies, including the Campaign and the Transportation for the Gulf Encyclopedia of and was the founding director of 2030, New York City’s sustainabili- and Preservation, the Lincoln US Environmental Protection for America Campaign. He was a Sustainable Urbanism for Qatar sustainability for the city. ty plan. Institute of Land Policy, and the Agency, the National Research founding board co-chairman of the Foundation. New Jersey Institute of Technology Council and the National Science Environmental Leadership School of Architecture. Foundation. Program, and served on the boards of West Harlem Environmental Action and Grist magazine.6 7
    • Introduction US and Canada Green City Index A unique Index The 27 cities selected for the US and Canada Green City Index were chosen with a view to representing a number of the most populous metropolitan areas in the United States and Canada. The cities were picked independently rather than relying on re-US and Canadian cities: predicts it will decline another 14% in the next or urban sprawl, but increasingly cities are also examines the key findings from the nine indi- quests from city governments to be included, in order to enhance the Index’s credi-laboratories for an urban future two decades, even as the overall national popu- generating unique solutions to these chal- vidual categories in the Index: CO2, energy, land bility and comparability. lation rises. A similar trend is expected to emerge lenges through effective local policies. use, buildings, transport, water, waste, air and The methodology, described in detail in a separate section in this report, has beenT he United States and Canada, already largely urban, are becoming ever more so.According to the United Nations Population in Canada around 2020. Not surprisingly, the two countries’ cities play a fundamental role in national life and help to The US and Canada Green City Index, a research project conducted by the Economist Intelli- gence Unit, sponsored by Siemens, seeks to environmental governance. Third, the report presents a variety of leading best-practice ideas from across the US and Canada. Fourth, it gives developed by the Economist Intelligence Unit in cooperation with Siemens. It relies on the expertise of both organizations, a panel of outside urbanization experts, and the experience from producing the European Green City Index in 2009, as well asDivision, 82% of Americans and 81% of Canadi- perpetually redefine what it means to be Ameri- measure and assess the environmental perfor- a detailed description of the methodology used the Latin American Green City Index in 2010 and the Asian Green City Index inans lived in cities in 2010 and these proportions can or Canadian. Cities are cultural and intellec- mance of 27 major US and Canadian cities across to create the Index. Finally, an in-depth profile 2011. One of the great strengths of the US and Canada Green City Index is theare set to continue rising, reaching 90% for the tual centers. They drive economic activity. And a range of criteria. This report presents the key for each city outlines its particular strengths, breadth of information it uses. For every city 31 individual indicators are evaluated,US and 88% for Canada by 2050. This is not a they are the main recipients of new ideas from findings and highlights from the Index, and is challenges and ongoing environmental initia- often based on multiple data points. Value also comes from how the Index is pre-new phenomenon. As early as 1955, two-thirds immigrants, the vast majority of whom settle in intended to provide stakeholders with a unique tives. These profiles rightly constitute the bulk sented: each city is assessed in nine categories and ranked against the others to in-of the populations of both countries lived in cities when they arrive. Cities are ideal laborato- tool to help cities in the region learn from each of the report because the aim of the study is to dicate its relative position. The process is transparent, consistent and replicable, andcities. Urbanization, though, has now reached a ries for innovative responses to their countries’ other in order to better address the common share valuable experience. is designed to reveal sources of best practice.stage where rural America has begun to shrink. challenges, including environmental issues. It is environmental challenges they face.In absolute terms, the rural US population well known that city life can exacerbate prob- The report is divided into five parts. First, itdropped by 12% in the last 20 years and the UN lems such as harmful greenhouse gas emissions examines the overall key findings. Second, it8 9
    • Results US and Canada Green City Index Overall CO2 Energy Land use Buildings Transport Water Waste Air Environmental governance City Score City Score City Score City Score City Score City Score City Score City Score City Score City Score 1 San Francisco 83.8 1 Vancouver 91.4 1 Denver 86.0 1 New York City 93.0 1 Seattle 98.2 1 New York City 76.6 1 Calgary 94.1 1 San Francisco 100.0 1 Vancouver 95.1 = 1 Denver 100.0 2 Vancouver 81.3 2 Miami 90.1 2 Boston 82.4 2 Minneapolis 80.1 2 San Francisco 85.6 2 San Francisco 67.0 2 Boston 91.8 2 Seattle 83.1 2 San Francisco 91.9 = 1 New York City 100.0 3 New York City 79.2 3 New York City 89.4 3 San Francisco 81.1 3 Ottawa 75.0 3 Washington DC 79.3 3 Vancouver 66.6 3 New York City 88.8 3 Los Angeles 81.9 3 New York City 89.2 = 1 Washington DC 100.0 4 Seattle 79.1 4 Los Angeles 86.5 4 Vancouver 80.1 4 Boston 74.9 4 Pittsburgh 78.5 4 Montreal 65.3 4 Minneapolis 88.2 4 Toronto 78.6 4 Sacramento 89.1 4 Seattle 96.7 5 Denver 73.5 5 Ottawa 86.0 = 5 Los Angeles 77.8 5 Vancouver 74.1 5 Vancouver 77.2 5 Ottawa 65.1 5 San Francisco 87.4 5 Minneapolis 72.6 5 Los Angeles 88.7 = 5 Houston 94.4 6 Boston 72.6 6 Seattle 84.7 = 5 Toronto 77.8 6 Washington DC 69.9 6 Denver 68.8 6 Chicago 64.7 6 Vancouver 86.6 6 Sacramento 72.2 6 Philadelphia 82.9 = 5 Los Angeles 94.4 7 Los Angeles 72.5 7 Toronto 81.6 7 Minneapolis 76.5 7 Philadelphia 67.7 7 New York City 68.7 7 Minneapolis 63.9 7 Denver 85.6 7 Vancouver 69.0 7 Seattle 80.5 = 5 Philadelphia 94.4 8 Washington DC 71.4 8 San Francisco 81.1 8 Chicago 75.9 8 San Francisco 66.6 8 Atlanta 66.7 8 Denver 60.7 8 Ottawa 84.9 8 Ottawa 66.2 8 Montreal 79.5 = 8 Minneapolis 93.3 9 Toronto 68.4 9 Washington DC 80.8 9 Phoenix 72.9 9 Charlotte 64.6 9 Houston 66.4 9 Seattle 59.8 9 Charlotte 84.8 9 Montreal 63.7 9 Toronto 79.2 = 8 San Francisco 93.3 10 Minneapolis 67.7 10 Montreal 80.1 10 Philadelphia 72.5 10 Miami 59.2 10 Boston 62.1 10 Sacramento 56.0 10 Toronto 83.5 10 Houston 59.5 10 Denver 79.0 10 Vancouver 91.1 11 Chicago 66.9 11 Boston 79.0 11 Houston 71.0 11 Calgary 57.8 11 Calgary 56.0 11 Dallas 54.4 11 Seattle 83.3 11 Calgary 58.8 11 Washington DC 78.9 11 Charlotte 88.9 12 Ottawa 66.8 12 Philadelphia 78.4 12 Seattle 69.8 12 Montreal 57.7 12 Los Angeles 53.5 12 Houston 53.6 12 Chicago 82.2 12 Orlando 58.0 12 Atlanta 78.2 = 12 Atlanta 87.8 13 Philadelphia 66.7 13 Dallas 77.5 13 Washington DC 69.4 13 Houston 56.8 13 Toronto 53.4 13 Washington DC 52.0 13 Los Angeles 81.7 13 Philadelphia 57.6 13 Ottawa 76.7 = 12 Chicago 87.8 14 Calgary 64.8 14 Denver 76.0 14 Cleveland 68.0 14 Seattle 56.2 14 Chicago 51.3 = 14 Miami 51.2 14 Orlando 81.0 14 Chicago 55.2 14 Boston 74.3 14 Pittsburgh 85.6 15 Sacramento 63.7 15 Calgary 75.4 15 Pittsburgh 67.6 15 Chicago 56.0 15 Dallas 49.6 = 14 Pittsburgh 51.2 15 Houston 80.5 15 Boston 54.7 15 Chicago 70.3 15 Boston 84.4 16 Houston 62.6 16 Sacramento 67.6 16 Dallas 65.8 16 Orlando 54.5 16 Orlando 42.3 16 Calgary 50.8 16 Dallas 78.7 16 New York City 53.1 16 Charlotte 69.5 = 16 Dallas 82.2 17 Dallas 62.3 17 Phoenix 66.3 17 Orlando 64.2 17 Toronto 54.3 17 Sacramento 41.7 17 Boston 50.2 17 Miami 78.2 17 Denver 51.9 17 Dallas 67.4 = 16 Orlando 82.2 18 Orlando 61.1 18 Charlotte 59.8 18 Calgary 62.5 18 Denver 53.3 18 Minneapolis 37.0 18 Orlando 49.4 18 Phoenix 77.4 18 Washington DC 44.8 18 Orlando 66.4 = 18 Calgary 76.7 19 Montreal 59.8 19 Chicago 58.5 19 Miami 61.5 19 Pittsburgh 50.7 19 Montreal 36.4 19 Cleveland 47.9 19 St Louis 77.0 19 Dallas 41.8 19 Phoenix 65.2 = 18 Sacramento 76.7 20 Charlotte 59.0 20 Atlanta 57.0 20 Ottawa 56.9 20 Phoenix 49.6 20 St Louis 33.8 20 Atlanta 47.6 20 Sacramento 76.3 20 Charlotte 40.9 20 Cleveland 60.0 20 Montreal 74.4 21 Atlanta 57.8 21 Orlando 52.2 21 Charlotte 55.7 21 Los Angeles 45.3 21 Philadelphia 29.5 21 Philadelphia 47.2 21 Atlanta 71.7 21 Phoenix 40.5 21 Miami 57.8 = 21 Miami 62.2 22 Miami 57.3 22 Detroit 43.8 22 New York City 53.8 22 Sacramento 44.4 22 Ottawa 28.2 22 Toronto 47.1 22 Pittsburgh 71.6 22 Atlanta 29.6 22 Minneapolis 57.0 = 21 Ottawa 62.2 23 Pittsburgh 56.6 23 Minneapolis 40.2 23 St Louis 50.2 23 Dallas 43.1 = 23 Miami 26.7 23 St Louis 44.4 23 Philadelphia 70.4 23 Miami 28.4 23 Calgary 50.8 = 21 Phoenix 62.2 24 Phoenix 55.4 24 Pittsburgh 38.8 24 Sacramento 49.0 24 St Louis 38.0 = 23 Phoenix 26.7 24 Los Angeles 42.9 24 Washington DC 67.3 24 St Louis 26.6 24 Houston 49.3 24 Toronto 60.0 25 Cleveland 39.7 25 Houston 32.1 25 Atlanta 44.8 25 Atlanta 36.7 25 Charlotte 26.2 25 Charlotte 40.8 25 Cleveland 56.1 25 Pittsburgh 25.5 25 Pittsburgh 40.1 25 Cleveland 56.7 26 St Louis 35.1 26 St Louis 10.9 26 Montreal 33.8 26 Detroit 35.8 26 Detroit 18.1 26 Phoenix 38.0 26 Montreal 47.2 26 Cleveland 22.2 26 Detroit 37.4 26 Detroit 16.7 27 Detroit 28.4 27 Cleveland 1.2 27 Detroit 27.3 27 Cleveland 28.1 27 Cleveland 16.7 27 Detroit 37.5 27 Detroit 38.8 27 Detroit 0.0 27 St Louis 29.5 27 St Louis 5.610 11
    • Overall key findings US and Canada Green City IndexWhile there is a correlation more resources to environmental topics. “A lot First, there are differences in environmental pri- which despite its high poverty rate does better of the wealthiest cities. The strength of the east In the past decade, however, eastern and north-between wealth and environmen- of environmental performance in the US is based orities between US and Canadian cities. Canadi- than some more affluent cities in the Index in coast cities, however, tells an important story eastern cities have begun to address sustain-tal performance, it is weaker in on the individual actions of cities rather than a ans are more aligned with Europeans when it areas such as land use and environmental gov- about how local governments have successfully ability problems more vigorously. The catalystthe US and Canada than in Europe centrally regulated and monitored system,” comes to carbon emissions and energy use. ernance. In Philadelphia, he says, “sustainability integrated environmental programs into broad- has not been merely concern for the environ-and Asia says Andreas Georgoulias, a lecturer in the They are more willing than Americans to invest is about poverty reduction not carbon reduc- er development strategies to simultaneously ment. Confronted with the long-term decline in Department of Architecture at the Harvard Uni- in emissions reductions and energy efficiency. tion.” Across the US, he argues, “there are high- revitalize their economies and make urban areas the manufacturing economy, cities have intro-T here is a correlation between how cities perform in the US and Canada Green CityIndex and their income (as measured by GDP versity Graduate School of Design. A stronger local economy, therefore, enables cities to embark on projects and make environmental On the other hand US cities prioritize different environmental areas like water and air quality. A second important factor is that, in the US, and low-income constituencies for sustainabili- ty.” In other words, this connection between sus- tainability and development means that lower- more livable. Dr Hughes recalls that west coast cities used to have significantly better environ- mental records than those in the north-east. duced sustainability efforts in an attempt to increase their competitive advantage, thereby attracting jobs and stimulating economicper capita), just as there was in the European investments with higher costs and longer time environmental ambition is often wrapped up income cities will address environmental issues Cities like San Francisco, Seattle and Portland, growth. In particular, older cities have tried toand Asian Green City Indexes. Wealthier cities horizons. with other public policy goals such as economic as part of a larger strategy to tackle poverty. influenced by the US conservationist move- revitalize urban infrastructure dating back wellcan afford better projects – environmental or However, the link between income and overall development and poverty alleviation, especially ment, which was born in the American west, over a century, such as narrow streets, compactotherwise. They are also more able to deploy Index scores is weaker in the US and Canada in lower-income cities. As Mark Hughes, distin- US cities – a more integrated were more concerned about the impact that lots, and vertical commercial and residentialwell-financed departments with relevant exper- than it was in either Europe or Asia. Relatively guished senior fellow at the PennDesign and TC development approach and active urban growth had on the surrounding environ- buildings. Once viewed as unpleasant con-tise to introduce and monitor appropriate envi- low-income Vancouver, for example, places Chan Center of the University of Pennsylvania, policy can improve performance ment. The Sierra Club, one of the largest envi- straints on development, these are now regard-ronmental policies. In the US, for example, second overall, suggesting that other factors explains, urban planners and policymakers see ronmental organizations in the US, was found- ed as the building blocks of a more sustainablemunicipal governments are able to set their have a significant influence on the results. What environmental sustainability as part of a more In the US, cities on both coasts, such as San Fran- ed in San Francisco in the 19th century, and the urban environment – decreasing the cost ofown environmental priorities and budgets, and might these factors be? There are a couple of cohesive attempt to address a range of prob- cisco, New York, Seattle and Boston, rank at the roots of Portland’s comprehensive land use poli- energy and transportation for businesses andconsequently wealthier cities are able to devote possibilities. lems. He presents the example of Philadelphia, top. Part of this is economic: these are also some cy can be traced to the start of the last century. citizens residing in the city.12 13
    • The Index results illustrate how effective these formers in the Index, environmental issues are mental governance mechanisms are compara- Environmental Design (LEED) building stan- lishing environmental reports (see also “Cate- be expected to given their lower income. Oneintegrated approaches can be: cities from both just one part of a mix of sometimes difficult ble to the best cities the Green City Indexes have dards, which were created by the US Green gory Findings” on page 20). factor in Canadian cities’ strong performancecoasts have converged – a remarkable feat of hurdles. The experience of their peers suggests, evaluated around the world. For example, the Buildings Council – a non-profit organization could be their robust environmental policies.catch-up for the easterners. There remain some however, that the solution will likely need to be average leakage rate, 13%, is lower than in any that has a large number of corporate members Canadian cities in the Index Canadian cities have higher policy scores ondifferences in emphasis. New York and Boston, a holistic one that includes a consideration of other continent and 26% of waste is recycled, from the building industry. He notes that such outperform the US when wealth is average – at 78 points out of 100 overall, com-for example, now do particularly well on land sustainability as an integral element from the compared with 28% for the 15 richest cities in initiatives, which can take place without top- taken into account pared with 70 for American cities, whichuse, which is a weaker area for west coast cities. beginning, rather than as something to be con- Europe. down central organization, might be particular- demonstrates the commitment they have madeWest coast cities in contrast are trailblazers in sidered once the economy is back on track. Americans and Canadians are also innovating ly useful examples for those in “developing Canadian cities have a reputation for being to improving environmental performance.recycling. Overall, though, the results are very in the area of urban sustainability, as the exem- countries where a central administration is either more environmentally conscious than US cities, Another factor could be cultural differences insimilar. US and Canadian cities lead on plar projects show. For Americans in particular, not very strong in driving individual action or but a first glance at the Index tells a different attitudes towards willingness to accept environ-This is more than just history – it suggests a way water infrastructure, recycling though, with their long tradition of private sec- would like to encourage private institutions to story. Vancouver, which is one of five Canadian mental regulations, but here it is important toahead for some of those cities ranked low in the and harnessing the private sector tor and non-governmental organization (NGO) deliver some of the environmental leadership.” cities in the Index, places second overall, but avoid over-simplification.Index. Cleveland, St. Louis and Detroit share activity, this innovation is not always through In addition, as illustrated in the individual city the other four are clustered around the middle Canadians certainly have a long history of envi-things in common beyond geographic proximi- Environmental problems in US and Canadian government institutions. For example, the Clin- portraits later in this report, many US and Cana- of the ranking. If wealth is taken into account, ronmental activism – Greenpeace was born inty. These cities have seen their traditional cities are well-documented: greenhouse gas ton Foundation – an American NGO – recently dian cities operate dedicated sustainability however, all of the Canadian cities punch well Vancouver in 1970 – but the modern environ-sources of economic growth decline in recent emissions are high by any standard and urban joined forces with C40 Cities, an organization of departments within the municipal govern- above their weight. Despite an average per mental movement in the US, especially in thedecades, and have been confronted with formi- sprawl remains a challenge. However, US and large global cities committed to combating cli- ments, and even slightly outperform European capita GDP $7,000 lower than the average of west, also grew up in the 1960s and both coun-dable challenges, including population loss and Canadian cities excel in several areas. Water mate change. Similarly, Dr Georgoulias of Har- cities on their commitments to international the 22 US cities in the Index, Canadian cities tries have conservation movements reachingshrinking city budgets. As with the high per- infrastructure, recycling levels and environ- vard points to the Leadership in Energy and environmental covenants and regularly pub- rank nine to ten places higher than they would back over a century.14 15
    • Category findings US and Canada Green City IndexCO2 emissions figures are not likely to have dropped   In terms of carbon emissions per unit of eco- Energy sume 52 gigajoules of electricity per person, energy used by cities and on overall energy con- significantly, with few exceptions. nomic output, US and Canadian urban areas are although this covers a huge range, from 10 giga- sumption makes it difficult to present a moreActive CO2 emissions reduction policies have   These emission figures in both the US and more in line with their international peers, pro- Energy is another challenge for many US and joules to 152 gigajoules. This average is signifi- comprehensive picture of energy use.helped cities in the US and Canada Green City Canada are on average higher than in Europe or ducing 296 metric tons per $1 million of GDP Canada Index cities. Electricity use is high even cantly higher than the 7.2 gigajoules consumedIndex fall below national emissions levels. How- Asia. In the European Green City Index the aver- (200 on average in Canada, 319 in the US). The when taking into account the underlying level of per person in the Latin American Green City Land useever there is still significant room for improve- age was 5.2 metric tons per capita and for the average of the 30 cities in the European Green economic activity. Index, which is the only other Green City Indexment, particularly among US cities. Asian Green City Index it was 4.6. In the latter, City Index was 260 metric tons. However it is   Most cities have only partial or even no poli- with comparable figures for electricity use. Part US and Canada Index cities have large amounts  On average, residents of all Index cities emit the Chinese cities, the largest emitters, aver- important to compare like with like: all of the US cies to promote the use of green energy in homes of the difference comes from the higher level of of green space – although often this is com-14.5 metric tons of carbon dioxide per capita aged 7.6 metric tons of carbon emissions. and Canada Index cities fit into the top half of or businesses through subsides or tax breaks. economic development in the US and Canada. bined with low population density. Consistentannually. The difference between US and Cana-   The emissions from the Index cities do, how- Europe’s income scale. For the 15 wealthier Projects to increase locally produced energy   When looking at economic efficiency of elec- with this, they tend to have good policies ondian cities is large, with the former emitting 16 ever, outperform national averages calculated cities in Europe (with an average income of are also typically underdeveloped. Only three tricity use, US and Canadian cities do relatively parks and trees but are less active in containingmetric tons per person and the latter only about by the World Bank. US per capita emissions in about $63,000), emissions per $1 million of cities – Denver, Orlando and Toronto – score full better, using an average of 332 gigajoules per urban sprawl.half that much, at 8.1 metric tons. 2002 were 19.8 metric tons (19.3 in 2007), com- GDP are 75 metric tons, again, far below US and marks in these areas. $1 million of GDP, while the Latin American   On average 12% of the area of Index cities is  The emissions figures for the US cities may be pared to 16 metric tons in the 22 US cities in the Canada figures.   US and Canada Index cities lag behind the average is 761 gigajoules. In this case, though, green space.slightly high as the best available and compara- Index (in 2002). Canada’s national 2007 figure   On the policy side, 26 of the 27 US and Cana- European cities in the same income range. A the Canadian cities consume a considerably   Some cities are able to mix higher densityble city data comes from 2002, while the Cana- was 16.9 – more than twice the 8.1 metric ton- da Index cities measure carbon dioxide emis- majority of the high-income European cities had higher 581 gigajoules per $1 million of GDP, with maintaining parkland: New York and Sandian numbers are from 2008. Between 2002 average of its Index cities. Some cities, such as sions to some extent, and 21 out of 27 have set a implemented all of the green energy policies whereas the US cities consume an average of Francisco are the two highest density cities, butand 2008, however, national per capita carbon Vancouver, at 4.2 metric tons, or New York, at carbon reduction target seperate to any national evaluated in the Index. 277 gigajoules per $1 million of GDP. 20% and 17% of their areas are green spaces,emissions in the US fell by just 3%, so the urban 8.6 metric tons, are well below national averages. target.   On average, US and Canada Index cities con-   A lack of data on the proportion of renewable respectively. More often, though, low-density16 17
    • cities tend to have more space for parks and to retrofit, as did European cities with compara- one encourage the public to use green means of density cities in the Index have higher shares of This is not only a result of being able to afford a similar to the European cities of similar income.other green areas. ble incomes. getting around, as well as providing green public commuters travelling to work by public trans- better infrastructure, as the link between GDP   On average 26% of waste is recycled in all  The average density for Index cities is 8,100   All but four cities regulate energy consump- transport vehicles. The presence of most of port, foot or bike than the Index average. and lower leakage is much weaker. cities in the Index, compared with 28% in thepeople per square mile, which is about 2.5 times tion for new buildings. these policies is as widespread as in the wealth-   Culture has a role to play, too. Residents of   Although water stress is not a universal issue, wealthier European cities.less than for the Asian cities, at 21,100 people   Less common in the US and Canada, however, ier cities of Europe. both countries are very attached to the indepen- according to the Commission for Environmental   Two cities, San Francisco, at 77%, and Losper square mile, and is also less than in Latin are comprehensive requirements for energy   Even more common than in Europe are incen- dence their cars give. And there is little need for Cooperation it affects 10% of the Canadian pop- Angeles, at 62%, recycle a higher amount ofAmerica (11,700) and in Europe (10,100). audits: just three Index cities require such audits. tives for efficient car use (all but two cities have residents to shift to public transport when the ulation and 40% of US residents, especially in waste than any city in the European or German  All but one city has at least some policy to sus-   On average, the Index cities have 6.4 LEED- such incentives) and road traffic management overall average commuting time is just under the US southwest, suggesting that greater atten- Green City Index except one, Leipzig, at 81%.tain and improve the quantity and quality of certified buildings per 100,000 inhabitants. This measures (all but one have them). half an hour (27 minutes in the US and 35 min- tion to consumption may become necessary. Two other cities recycle over half of their waste –green space, and two thirds have active tree figure varies drastically between cities, however,   Infrastructure is another story: US and Canada utes in Canada).   The high usage figures do not arise from a Vancouver, at 55%, and Seattle, at 51%.planting programs. The latter can be quite large: with as many as 18.3 per 100,000 inhabitants in Index cities on average have only 1.7 miles of lack of attention to water: all cities monitor their   Although all European cities of similar incomeMillionTreesNYC seeks to plant and care for a Atlanta while some Index cities have construct- public transport network for every square mile Water water quality to some degree and nearly all pro- have comprehensive waste reduction strategies,million trees over the next decade. ed fewer than one LEED-certified building per of area, which is about half the 3.1 miles of Euro- mote lower use. only 14 of 27 US and Canada Index cities do,  Only 11 cities, however, get full marks for 100,000 people since 2000, when the certifica- pean cities of the same wealth. This, however, US and Canadian cities have efficient water infra-   On the infrastructure side, the average leak- suggesting that waste reduction has notmeasures to prevent urban sprawl. In 2011 the tion was introduced. conceals a national difference: in Canada, the structure and robust policies regarding water age rate is just 13%, which beats even the received as much priority in North America as itCommission for Environmental Cooperation – a   The lack of energy consumption data for average figure is 6.2 miles of public transport conservation. Nevertheless, their water con- wealthy cities of Europe, at 16%. has in Europe. However, inconsistencies in theCanada-US-Mexico joint government body – buildings makes more comprehensive compar- network per square mile, compared with just 0.7 sumption is far higher than in Asia, Latin Ameri-   Only four of 27 cities do not recycle water to way different cities measure waste generationidentified growth in urban land area as a leading isons of performance difficult. miles per square mile in the US. This seems to be ca or Europe. some extent – compared with 21 of 30 Euro- make it impossible to do meaningful compar-environmental issue deserving greater attention. the result of choice rather than income: GDP per   Residents of Index cities use an average of pean cities that do not recycle water, including isons. It is therefore unclear how well Index Transport capita has no correlation with the size of public 155 gallons of water per person per day, although nine of the 15 wealthiest. The vast majority treats cities reduce waste.Buildings transport networks. the range is very wide, with the best performer, wastewater before discharging it.   Whether or not they reduce waste, however, Policies to promote green transportation are   Fewer people on average commute by car to New York, at 69 gallons per person per day, con- US and Canada Index cities certainly recycle.Most cities are encouraging residents to have widespread in US and Canada Index cities, but work in the Canadian Index cities, at 74%, com- suming less than one quarter of the Index city Wastemore energy efficient buildings, but are not these have little effect in practice. Although pared with those in the US, at 90%. In global with the highest water consumption. Airrequiring energy audits in which buildings are many US cities have ambitious goals to expand terms, however, both figures are remarkably   The overall average is about twice as high as Index cities have robust waste policies and doinspected for energy usage. Moreover, wide- public transport, strained city budgets have pre- high. In the European cities with a similar level in other parts of the world. In the European Index very well in terms of recycling when compared Air quality is an area of strong policy focus inspread regulations on the energy efficiency of vented them from investing sufficiently in these of wealth, an average of 43% of commuters it was 76 gallons, for Asia it was 73 and for Latin with global figures. Index cities, and denser cities have had somenew structures are not leading to a large number infrastructure projects. Both US and Canadian drive. In poorer European cities, where cars are America 70, indicating that even the best cities in   Nine out of 27 cities get full marks in all waste success in reducing particulate matter and nitro-of Leadership in Energy and Environmental cities also face a cultural battle, with most citi- less affordable, this share is even lower. the USA and Canada are only average interna- policy areas and only one city scores no points. gen oxides emissions.Design (LEED)-certified buildings. zens seeing no need to get out of their cars.   Residents in high-density cities are less tionally.   The vast majority has at least some version of   All but three cities have some form of air qual-  All but a handful of cities provide residents   All but three cities provide at least some sup- inclined to drive than those in more sprawling,   There is a strong correlation between higher selective disposal mechanisms and sustainable ity policy and 20 Index cities even score fullwith energy efficiency education and incentives port for the use of public transport, and all but lower-density cities: seven of the eight high- GDP per capita and lower water consumption. waste management practices. The proportion is marks for this measure.18 19
    •   Air quality targets, on the other hand, are This, along with other areas of strong policy,   Cities in the US and Canada Index demon-slightly less widespread: only 12 out of 27 cities suggests that environmental performance in strate very similar records on urban environ-score full marks for this indicator. the US and Canada Index cities should improve. mental governance as the 15 European Green  Nevertheless, denser cities are able to make   The vast majority of cities have environmental City Index cities in the same income range. Thean impact, whether through robust policies or strategies – at least to some degree. In particu- policies covered in the environmental gover-less reliance on automotives: nitrogen oxides lar, every city has some type of environmental nance category are about as likely to have beenand particulate matter emissions decline notice- contact point, all but one have an environmen- adopted by US and Canadian cities as they are byably with density. tal authority, and all but two have an environ- high-income European cities. Some policies are mental plan endorsed by the mayor. slightly more common in Europe, such as city-Environmental governance   Conducting a baseline review and setting tar- level commitments to international environ- gets across all environmental fields were the mental covenants; others are adopted a bit moreIn their efforts to manage environmental gover- weakest areas for these cities, but even here, 11 frequently in North America – for example thenance, US and Canada Index cities are compara- had done a comprehensive baseline review and publication of annual or biennial environmentalble to those of the high-income European cities. 14 had set targets in every area. reports. Exemplar Projects US and Canada Green City Index Energy and CO2 ford Wind farm in Utah and geothermal energy from Mexican utilities. Ontario, the water was too cold to be treated for consumption. Enwave used the cold water to Although the LADWP understandably takes a provide air conditioning to downtown offices, Los Angeles: A comprehensive leading role on renewable energy, other depart- saving 61 megawatts of energy annually. More- approach to renewables ments are helping too. The Hyperion Waste- over, this process raised the water temperature water Treatment Plant, the main sewage treat- to a level sufficient for drinking-water treatment Los Angeles already performs well on CO2 ment facility run by the Department of Public – thus eliminating the original problem. emissions and energy consumption, with some Works, will soon begin capturing natural gas in In 2005 Seattle’s mayor launched the “Kyoto of the lowest rates for both among the 27 cities order to generate 70% to 80% of its own elec- Challenge” encouraging American cities to meet in the US and Canada Green City Index. It is not, tricity needs. Meanwhile, the smaller Tillman the Kyoto Protocol’s greenhouse gas reduction however, resting on its laurels. Instead, Los Wastewater Treatment Plant has had nearly targets. Since then, more than 1,000 mayors Angeles is taking a comprehensive approach to 26,000 square feet of solar panels installed. The have followed Seattle’s lead, signing the US alternative energy generation. Unlike many department is a partner in a unique pilot scheme, Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, which cities in the US and Canada, the municipality the Terminal Island Renewable Energy (TIRE) includes a commitment to meet or beat the directly owns the local power utility, the Los project, which injects biosolids – currently about Kyoto emission targets to cut greenhouse gas Angeles Department of Water and Power 25% of the city’s total – deep into the earth and emissions 7% below 1990 levels by 2012. (LADWP). Through this body, the city is aggres- collects methane emissions. sively seeking to change its power mix. By 2020 the LADWP plans to eliminate its use of coal, Ideas from other cities which currently accounts for roughly 40% of power generation, and to have 40% of electricity Chicago and Excelon, a major power generator, come from renewables. By the end of 2010 it partnered to build Excelon City Solar, the largest had already achieved half the target, with 20% urban solar plant in the US. Opened in 2010 and of the city’s power coming from renewable spread across a 41-acre brownfield site that had sources owing to projects like the 120-mega- been vacant for over three decades, the plant watt Pine Trees facility, America’s largest munici- now produces 10 megawatts of power, cutting pally-owned wind farm. 14,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions annu- Overall, 47% of the city’s renewable power ally and creating several hundred local jobs. comes from wind, 30% from hydro, 22% from Enwave Corporation, owned in part by the city geothermal and 1% from solar. Not all of this of Toronto, turned an energy problem into a was generated in the city, however. The LADWP sustainability opportunity. When the city had to purchases substantial wind energy from the Mil- move its water-intake pipe deeper into Lake20 21
    • Land use Ideas from other cities In 2008 San Francisco City Hall hosted an exhi- bition Victory Garden to encourage vegetable Buildings 25 large commercial buildings, and four hospi- tals. The goal is that each retrofit will lead to Pittsburgh has instituted a Density Bonus that allows new buildings to be 20% taller and have Washington DC has launched the CapitalSpace growing within the city. The garden produced energy savings of 15% to 45% for individual 20% more floor space than normal for theirThe million-tree strategy in NYC partnership to unify green-space management over 100 pounds of food a week that was donat- Community power works in Seattle buildings, and in total reduce carbon emissions zone, if they are Leadership in Energy and Envi- across various levels of government. It is taking a ed to food banks. by 70,000 metric tons. Although funded partly ronmental Design (LEED)-certified.New York City, already the Index leader in land holistic approach that concentrates on six In 2008 Vancouver, one of the Index cities with Seattle recently launched its ambitious Com- by a federal grant of $20 million, in addition to With the encouragement of the City of Denver,use thanks to its high density and high propor- themes: creating a greenway to link parks, im- the highest density, adopted its own EcoDensity munity Power Works program. It aims to retrofit $120 million in local money, participating prop- its Botanic Gardens, Colorado State Universitytion of green space, is seeking to vastly expand proving public schoolyards, enhancing urban Charter, which focuses on reducing sprawl about 15% of buildings in central and southeast erty owners will be required to contribute. The and other groups have identified a range ofits urban forest. MillionTreesNYC, part of PlaNYC – natural areas, improving playing fields, enhanc- through relevant planning decisions. Seattle, including 2,000 homes, 75 apartment plan, however, will provide loans, rebates and plant species suitable to create green roofsa joint public-private partnership under the lead- ing center city parks and transforming small New York is not the only city trying to plant a mil- buildings, 120 small businesses (particularly financing that let people pay for the retrofits (roofs covered in vegetation to absorb CO2 andership of the city’s long term planning unit – is in parks into public spaces. lion trees: Houston’s program, among other restaurants, stores and cold-storage facilities), over time rather than up front. Specialists will prevent stormwater run-off) in a semi-arid cli-the middle of a ten-year project which, as the features, encourages companies to give their advise property owners on the upgrades most mate. Some of the city’s notable public buildingsname suggests, aims to plant and care for a mil- employees trees for planting as presents during appropriate for their buildings. now have green roofs, including the US Environ-lion trees inside the five boroughs. Since 2007, the holiday season. Another goal in Seattle is to create about 2,000 mental Protection Agency building, the Central430,000 trees have already been planted. The city of Denver and other partners are begin- well paid, green jobs. Companies participating Library and the Museum of Modern Art.The scope of the project is impressive but so is ning consultations on the South Platte River in the Community Power Works program willthe strategic thinking behind it. For example, Area-wide and Brownfields Plan. Rather than have to meet or exceed standards for laborconsider the target to plant 220,000 “street focus on individual sites, this regeneration pro- wage, working conditions and training.trees”, defined as any tree growing on a public ject will first consider the needs of the entireright of way. This is a highly ambitious target 2,000-acre corridor and then identify catalyst Ideas from other citiesbased on a major 2006 tree census, which found projects to help spark broad regeneration.that 220,000 was the absolute maximum num- Detroit Greenmap is a web page produced by In 2010 Philadelphia created the RetroFIT Phillyber of new trees that could fit in the remaining Sustainable Detroit – a non-governmental orga- Coolest Block contest, a public-private partner-space on city streets. In addition, the city has nization – that shows users the location of sus- ship between the city and a private chemicalfocused on street tree planting in six designated tainability-oriented business, organizations, company. Seventy-four blocks competed toTrees for Public Health neighborhoods. These recreation centers, green spaces and citizen reduce energy expenses in order to win cool roofswere chosen because they have low existing groups. (made of material that reflects sunlight), air seal-tree stocks and high hospital admission rates for ing and insulation upgrades. Meanwhile, fromasthma for children under five years old. Program September 2011 Lincoln Financial Field, theofficials are also experimenting with innovative city’s football stadium, will be self-sufficient forways of keeping trees healthy, and are conduct- power, relying on 80 wind turbines, 2,500 solaring research on past urban reforestation projects. panels and a 7.6-megawatt co-generation plant.22 23
    • Transport miles of light rail – more than triple the existing 35 miles. This will add six new lines as well as For the last five years, Minneapolis has been converting all its High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Water meters mandatory. In 2010 Calgary’s water utili- ty began installing them in 53,000 unmetered wetlands help further clean the already treated effluent; the water also sustains diverse animal extensions to the existing three lines. The plan lanes to High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes. These homes – out of about 280,000 total residences. and plant life, including 143 species of birds.Denver: From T-Rex to Fastracks – also includes an extension of the bus network remain free of charge for vehicles with more Cutting water consumption The city expects to install about 10,000 per year, The original 25 acres of the park is currentlyan integrated mobility concept and 18 miles of bus rapid transit lanes. Accord- than one person in them, but when the lanes are in Calgary finishing the project in 2014, and the impact is being expanded to nearly 400. ing to the American Public Transportation Asso- underused, allow cars with single drivers to likely to be substantial. Local studies show that Washington DC is having success with a planDenver has been investing heavily in mass ciation, it is the biggest public transportation drive in them for a fee. The exact amount of the Since 2003 Calgary has been implementing its the introduction of a meter reduces the average that helps both waste reduction and water quali-transportation. In the early part of the last decade project since Washington DC broke ground on its toll depends on conditions and is updated every 30-in-30 policy of reducing per capita water household’s water consumption by around 60%. ty. The Skip the Bag, Save the River programit completed the $1.67 billion Inter-modal Trans- Metro system in the early 1970s. When com- three minutes. consumption by 30% over 30 years in order to Although the meters are now compulsory, the helps fund the Anacostia Watershed Trashport Expansion Program (T-REX); about half the pleted, Denver expects to boast one of the five In 2011 Los Angeles unveiled its Electric Vehi- keep total demand steady as the population city is trying to win people over rather than use Reduction Plan, an effort to clean up one of themoney went toward widening two major high- longest rail systems in the country. cle Pilot Program. To encourage the purchase grows. As part of the plan, it has made water regulatory force to have them installed. In par- most polluted rivers on the East Coast. City resi-ways – I-25 and I-225 – which were almost per- and use of electric cars, the city is offering ticular, it is focusing on customer service. Resi- dents pay a five-cent charge for every disposablemanently clogged during daylight hours. This, Ideas from other cities rebates of up to $2,000 for the first 1,000 appli- dents can book an installation appointment bag received from stores, 80% of which goes tohowever, was no mere highway extension. The cants to defray the costs of electric vehicle home online anywhere from the next week to months river cleanup efforts. As of October 2010 thehighways themselves received intelligent trans- Montreal introduced Canadas first self-service chargers and installation. City officials say they in advance. They can also leave feedback and number of bags given out by Washington mer-portation systems that relay information to dri- bike rental network, BIXI – a word derived from hope to expand the rebate program to provide score the installation team. Between November chants had declined by 80% and the numbervers and control access at onramps. Most of the the combination of BIcycle and taXI – in 2009. It between 3,000 and 5,000 home chargers in the 2010 and March 2011, the reviews all rated the found littering the Anacostia River by 66%.remaining funds went toward a 19.1 mile exten- is currently North America’s biggest bike sharing near future. service as four or five out of five. Finally, the Since 2006 Houston has been using 20 Solar-sion of the city’s light transit system, more than scheme, with approximately 5,000 bicycles and Sacramento spent $110,000 in late 2010 to meters even help households save money. Bees at Lake Houston, one of its drinking-waterdoubling its existing network. Several of the 400 docking stations. After 3.3 million trips in equip 184 city-owned vehicles with GPS- Installation is free and on average in 2009 sources. These energy efficient solar-powerednew rail stations were constructed with park- 2010, only 1% of bikes were lost or stolen. The enabled fleet telematics technology – an inte- metered households paid C$41.89 per month, aeration mixers oxygenate the water to help pre-and-ride facilities, and all had links to the city’s program has been introduced in Toronto and is grated use of telecommunications and infor- compared with C$50 per month for those still vent algal blooms, which cause an unpleasantbicycle network. The project also expanded bus likely to expand to Vancouver, Minneapolis, matics. By relaying information about these on the flat rate. odor and taste. The low-cost solution has pro-services, and bridges were built across the high- Washington DC, and even London. vehicles to a central point, the city is able to duced reductions in energy costs of 28% andways for pedestrians and cyclists. The project New York’s Green Light for Midtown program increase the efficiency of driving routes, reduce Ideas from other cities chemical costs of 78% compared with previouswas completed between 2001 and 2006, on time created expanded pedestrian plazas in Herald trip distances, decrease idling, improve vehicle methods of reducing the blooms.and slightly under budget. Over 35,000 people Square and Times Square, and rearranged traffic operational efficiency and reduce emissions. Phoenix is letting nature help with its waste-per weekday use the new rail line and local patterns with a view to reducing congestion and Sacramento is planning to install the technology water treatment and gets an award-winningbuses have seen increased ridership as well. improving pedestrian safety in the Midtown on several hundred vehicles over the next four wetland in return. A portion of wastewater fromRecently the city embarked on a project that area. The results are impressive: there were 63% years and expects its total five-year investment the city’s 91st Avenue Wastewater Treatmentmakes T-REX look small. Fastracks is a $6.7 bil- fewer injuries to motorists and passengers, and of $2.6 million to lead to savings of $800,000 Plant is discharged into the manmade wetlandslion program that aims, by 2017, to add 122 35% fewer pedestrian injuries. per year. of the Tres Rios park. The flora and fauna of the24 25
    • Portland – leading tion criteria, yet because of the city’s environ- mental track record it provides many examples of sions are based on minimum density require- ments and proximity to mass transit, and the city by example best-practice leadership that can serve as models to other US and Canadian cities. Here are three of has policies in place to encourage walking and cycling in the city center rather than driving. With the best: around 22,000 people commuting to work each   LEED leader: Portland has 18.4 Leadership in day by bicycle along the city’s 324 miles of bike Portland, located in the Pacific Northwest US Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)-certi- lanes, Portland boasts the highest share of bicy- state of Oregon, is a recognized environmental fied buildings for every 100,000 people living in cle commuters of any large US city. leader, and consistently performs well in numer- the city, which is slightly more than any city in the   Reducing waste and promoting recycling: ous environmental and quality-of-life rankings. Index. It has mandatory LEED standards for city- Portland has ambitious waste management and As early as the 1970s city planners began to take owned buildings and offers incentives for LEED- recycling goals, including strong incentives. As a proactive steps to contain urban sprawl, and safe- certified private construction projects. One of the result, the recycling rate compares with the best guard the city’s surrounding forests and farmland city’s flagship LEED-certified buildings is the Rose US cities in the Index, at 61%. The city’s goal is to against population growth. Since then, Portland Garden Arena, which is home to the National Bas- reduce total solid waste by 25% by 2030 by work- has implemented a range of programs that have ketball Association’s Trail Blazers. It received an ing with non-profits and other city organizations ensured its status as a model of sustainable urban LEED gold rating in 2010. to encourage businesses and residents to pur- development. The nation’s first car-sharing pro-   Containing sprawl: Portland is a pioneer in chase durable, repairable and reusable goods, gram was founded there and has since expanded smart growth policies to contain sprawl, dating and to increase the amount they recycle. In addi- to cities across the country. A bicycle-friendly city, back to a state mandated policy in 1973 to limit tion, the city is looking to improve its long-stand- Portland has over 300 miles of bikeways. And in urban areas. By law, all municipalities in the state ing recycling program by providing weekly curb- 2005, the Christian Science Monitor called the were required to define their urban boundaries side collection of food waste and recycling, and city, “the new capital of the ecohouse move- and restrict development outside the city limit. shifting standard residential garbage collection ment.” Portland established its boundary in 1979 and to every other week. Officials are also exploring Portland was not included in the US and Canada over the following decade the city’s population the possibility of making residential recycling Green City Index because it fell outside the selec- density increased 50%. Today city zoning deci- mandatory.Waste time San Francisco has used regulation to address waste issues. In 2007 the city prohibited In Montreal, the Direction de l’environnement et du développement durable, working with the major grocery and pharmacy chain stores from Conférence régionale des élus de Montréal, hasSan Francisco recycling: Popular giving out plastic shopping bags. The city esti- created an online database of waste materials tolaws have dramatic effects mates that the law has reduced its plastic bag serve as a virtual warehouse for artists who waste overall by 15% to 20%, or roughly five mil- might want to use them.In 2009 San Francisco recycled 72% of its lion bags per month. Houston, in cooperation with a local non-gov-waste, already far ahead of any city in the US The politics of such restrictions are not always ernmental organization, has created Houstonand Canada Green City Index, thanks to a proac- easy. In the run-up to the recycling law, there Mulch – a brand of compost created from greentive policy stance. San Francisco had long recy- was some concern over the proposed maximum debris in the city. Available citywide since 2009,cled a wide range of different materials, and had fine of $1,000 for individuals, so it was reduced its environmental benefit in terms of loweringcharged residents and businesses on a pay-as- to $100. For the most part, though, the law CO2 emissions is the equivalent of keepingyou-throw basis for non-recyclable garbage, seems to be very popular. The city was surprised around 10,800 cars off the road.which encouraged waste reduction. San Fran- by how many people began sorting composta-cisco wanted to meet a longstanding goal to bles well before it came into effect, and byrecycle 75% of waste by 2010. Officials also December 2010 not a single individual or busi-wanted to reduce the amount of compostable ness had required a fine for non-compliance,material in the city’s waste, which made up which is monitored by city officials.more than a third of the total material discardedby city residents. Ideas from other citiesUnlike many cities in the US, San Francisco putmandates in place to achieve its recycling goals. The tailgate party is a traditional part of enjoyingIn 2009 the city required residents and business a football game, and in Pittsburgh the Pennsyl-owners to separate recyclable materials from vania Resources Council – a local non-profitwaste using special curbside containers. At the organization – and the Alcoa Foundation aresame time, the city mandated a similar separa- using it as an opportunity to promote recycling.tion of compostable material, the first such reg- At the last three Steelers home games and intoulation in the US. The impact was significant: the playoffs, the Let’s Tackle Recycling Programtotal recycling went up to 77% and composting, provided the opportunity for tailgaters to recyclemeanwhile, rose from 400 tons a day before the their trash and learn about the benefits of recy-law went into effect to 600 tons each day in the cling. The scheme was very popular and in fiveyear following the ordinance. This is not the first games diverted eight tons of trash from landfills.26 27
    • employment (labor force in the goods sector as a percentage of total labor force was used for Canadian cities); they were defined as “services intensive” if employment in the services sector was more than 88.1% of total employment (labor force in the services sector as a percent- age of total labor force was used for Canadian cities). Data sources A team of in-house and external contributors from the EIU collected data for the Index in late 2010. Wherever possible, the EIU used publicly available data from official sources. Data sources for US cities included the US Census Bureau, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the US Geological Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Trust for Public Land, Purdue University’s Vulcan Project, and the National Transport Database. For Canadian cities sources included Statistics Canada, Environment Canada and the Conference Board of Canada. When data was not available from national sources, it was collected from city agencies and authorities. National sources were favored over city sources given that data obtained from national sources is measured in a consistent manner across the cities included in the Index. Methodology Particular attention was given to the geographi- cal level at which the data was collected, and efforts were made to collect data consistently across the 27 US and Canadian cities in the Index for each of the 31 indicators. In practice, this US and Canada Green City Index sometimes involved choosing city-level data or metropolitan-area data depending on the geo- graphical area at which the data was more com- monly available for the range of cities covered in the Index. The EIU made every effort to integrate the most recent data. When uncertainties arose regardingT he Index measures the environmental per- formance of 27 major cities in the US andCanada and their commitment to reducing their ropolitan areas in the United States and Canada. The Index scores cities across nine categories – CO2, energy, land use, buildings, transport, The goal of the study is to allow key stakeholder groups, such as city authorities, policymakers, infrastructure providers, environmental non- Low Medium High the accuracy of individual data points, the agency or city official from which the data was sourced was contacted to confirm. The main Population < 515,505 people 515,505 – 2,177,633 people > 2,177,633 peoplefuture environmental impacts. The methodolo- water, waste, air quality and environmental gov- governmental organizations, urban sustainabili- exception to the rule of using the most recent Population density < 5,276 people 5,276 – 10,937 people > 10,937 peoplegy behind it was developed by the Economist ernance – and is composed of 31 indicators. Six- ty experts and citizens, to compare how their per square mile per square mile per square mile data is for CO2 emissions for US cities. Here theIntelligence Unit (EIU) in cooperation with teen of the Index’s 31 indicators are derived city performs against other cities, both overall EIU chose 2002 Vulcan Project data over dataSiemens. It builds on the work of the Green City from quantitative measurements – e.g., a city’s and within each of the nine categories. Area < 97.6 square miles 97.6 – 324.2 square miles > 324.2 square miles available from city agencies because it ensuresIndex series (Europe, Latin America, Asia and CO2 emissions, electricity consumption, preva- Income < $41,960 in GDP $41,960 – $49,991 in GDP > $49,991 in GDP that CO2 emissions are measured consistentlyGermany) and aims to closely follow the struc- lence of public transport and levels of air pollu- Clusters per capita per capita per capita for all US cities in the Index. In the several in-ture of previous indices. However, the Index has tants. The remaining 15 indicators are qualita- Temperature < 50.1 degrees Fahrenheit 50.1 – 60.9 degrees > 60.9 degrees stances in which gaps in the data existed, thebeen adapted to accommodate variations in tive assessments of cities’ environmental policies, In order to conduct a deeper analysis of city Fahrenheit Fahrenheit EIU produced estimates by scaling down datadata quality and availability in the US and Cana- aspirations and ambitions – e.g., a city’s com- trends, the 27 cities in the Index were clustered from larger geographical areas.da, and environmental challenges specific to the mitment to consuming energy produced from into a series of groups, defined by the size of the For the purposes of comparability across US andregion. An independent panel of urban sustain- green and local sources, the extent to which it population, population density, area, income, data point less than 0.5 standard deviation cities with a data point greater than 0.5 standard Canadian cities, the EIU converted all metric unitability experts provided important insights in promotes the usage of public transport and temperature and share of industry. For each of below the mean in a given category were deviation above the mean were assigned to the data from Canadian sources to units typicallythe construction of the Index. makes efforts to reduce road traffic, the ambi- the six measures, three bands were created by assigned to the low band, cities with a data point high band (see graphic above). used in the US. The exception to this is for CO2The 27 cities selected for the US and Canada tiousness of its waste reduction and water man- calculating the mean of the relevant data for the between 0.5 standard deviation below the Regarding the share of industry, cities were emissions, which were measured in metric tonsGreen City Index were chosen with a view to rep- agement policies, and the stringency of its envi- 27 cities and then calculating 0.5 standard devi- mean and 0.5 standard deviation above the defined as “goods intensive” if employment in in their original source, Purdue University’s Vul-resenting a number of the most populous met- ronmental strategy. ation above and below the mean. Cities with a mean were assigned to the medium band, and the goods sector was more than 15.8% of total can Project.28 29
    • List of categories, indicators and their weighting in the US and Canada Green City Index Category Indicator Type Weighting Description Normalization technique CO2 CO2 emissions per Quantitative 33% Total CO2 emissions, in metric tons per US$m of GDP. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max unit of GDP of data for all cities. CO2 emissions per person Quantitative 33% Total CO2 emissions, in metric tons per person. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max of data for all cities. CO2 reduction strategy Qualitative 33% Assessment of the ambitiousness of greenhouse gas Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10. emissions reduction strategy as well as of the rigor of the city’s CO2 reduction target and emissions measurements. Energy Electricity consumption Quantitative 33% Total electricity consumption, in GJ per US$m of GDP. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max per unit of GDP of data for all cities. Electricity consumption Quantitative 33% Total electricity consumption, in GJ per person. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max per person of data for all cities. Clean and efficient energy Qualitative 33% Measure of a citys commitment to promoting green Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10. policies energies, developing green energy projects and increasing the amount of locally produced energy. Land use Green spaces Quantitative 25% Sum of all public parks, recreation areas, greenways, Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max waterways and other protected areas accessible to the public, of data for all cities. as a percentage of total city area. Population density Quantitative 25% Number of inhabitants per square mile. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max of data for all cities. Green land use policies Qualitative 25% Assessment of a city’s efforts to sustain and improve the Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10. quantity and quality (for example, proximity and usability) of green spaces, and its tree planting policy. Urban sprawl Qualitative 25% Assessment of how rigorously a city promotes containment Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10. of urban sprawl and reuse of brownfield areas. Buildings Number of LEED-certified Quantitative 33% Number of LEED-certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max buildings per 100,000 persons. of data for all cities. Energy efficient building Qualitative 33% Assessment of whether a city requires energy audits and Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10. standards whether energy consumption regulations require that new buildings satisfy energy efficiency standards. Energy efficient building Qualitative 33% Assessment of a city’s incentives for retrofitting buildings to Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10. incentives improve energy efficiency and how widely it promotes energy efficiency in homes and offices. Transport Share of workers travelling Quantitative 20% Percent of workers travelling to work by public transit, Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max by public transit, bicycle, bicycle, or foot. of data for all cities. or foot Public transport supply Quantitative 20% Evaluation of availability of public transport, including length Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max of public transport network. of data for all cities. Average commute time Quantitative 20% Average commute time from residence to work, in minutes. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max from residence to work of data for all cities. Green transport promotion Qualitative 20% Assessment of how extensively the city promotes public Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10. transport and offers incentives for less carbon-intensive travel. Congestion reduction Qualitative 20% Assessment of a citys efforts to reduce congestion. Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10. policies Water Water consumption per Quantitative 25% Total water consumption, in gallons per person per day. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max capita of data for all cities.Despite all of these steps, the EIU cannot rule out Qualitative indicators were scored by analysts of Index construction Water system leakages Quantitative 25% Share of non-revenue public water leakages. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max of data for all cities.having occasionally missed an alternative reli- the Economist Intelligence Unit with expertise Water quality policy Qualitative 25% Assessment of the level and quality of a city’s main Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10.able public source or more recent figures. in the city in question, based on objective scor- The Index is a composite of all underlying indica- water sources. ing criteria that considered concrete environ- tors. To create the category scores, each indica- Stormwater management Qualitative 25% Indication of whether a city has a stormwater Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10.Indicators mental actions, strategies and targets set by tor was aggregated according to an assigned policy management plan. cities. Except in one case, qualitative indicators weighting. In several cases, when indicators rep- Waste Percent of municipal solid Quantitative 50% Percentage of municipal solid waste recycled. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max waste recycled of data for all cities.For the 16 quantitative indicators in the Index, are composed of two or more sub-indicators. resented similar measures of environmental Waste reduction policies Qualitative 50% Assessment of measures to reduce waste and make Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10.the EIU first “normalized” the data points repre- The qualitative sub-indicators were scored on a performance, they were bundled together and waste disposal more sustainable.senting each quantitative indicator on a scale of scale of one to three, with three points assigned assigned the weight of a single indicator before Air Nitrogen oxides emissions Quantitative 25% NOX emissions per annum, in lb per person. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/max0 to 10, where the high benchmark was set by to cities that met or exceeded the criteria estab- the category score was calculated. The category of data for all cities.the best-performing city for each indicator and lished in the Index, two points assigned to cities scores were then rebased on a scale of zero to Sulphur dioxide emissions Quantitative 25% SO2 emissions per annum, in lb per person. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/maxthe low benchmark was set by the worst-per- that partially met the criteria, and one point 100. Finally, to build the overall score for the 27 of data for all cities. PM10 emissions Quantitative 25% PM10 emissions per annum, in lb per person. Scored on a scale of 0 to 10 based on min/maxforming city for the given indicator. The best- assigned to cities that showed no progress cities, each of the nine category scores were of data for all cities.performing city for each indicator was assigned toward meeting the criteria. The independent assigned an equal weighting (that is, multiplied Clean air policy Qualitative 25% Measure of a city’s efforts to reduce air pollution. Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10.a score of 10, while the worst-performing city expert panel provided input into the criteria by 11.1%) and summed to arrive at a final score Environ- Green action plan Qualitative 33% Measure of the rigor of a citys green action plan. Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10.for each indicator was assigned a score of 0. assigned to each indicator. After the sub-indica- on a scale of zero to 100. The decision to assign mental Green management Qualitative 33% Measure of the extensiveness of environmental Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10.Remaining cities were assigned a score between tors were scored, they were bundled into a sin- equal weighting to the category scores reflects gover- management undertaken by the city. nance0 and 10 according to their distance from the gle qualitative indicator and rescored on a com- feedback from the expert panel and research on Public participation in Qualitative 33% Measure of the city’s efforts to involve the public in Scored by EIU analysts on a scale of 0 to 10. green policy monitoring its environmental performance.high benchmark. posite scale of 0 to 10. measuring environmental sustainability.30 31
    • authorities say the program, which started in will eventually connect 45 neighborhoods February 2008, had cut municipal GHG emis- around Atlanta’s downtown. The project, which sions 13% by October 2010. Atlanta has also has no fixed timeframe for completion, includes completed a citywide inventory of non-munici- the redevelopment of 1,100 brownfield acres. pal sources of GHG emissions, which will pro- vide the basis of a “Community Climate Action Buildings: Eighth, 66.7 points Plan”, although the specific plans and targets This is Atlanta’s highest category placing, and have yet to be set. the city’s score is boosted by having the highest proportion of LEED-certified buildings in the Energy: 25th, 44.8 points Index in relation to population, at 18.3 per Atlanta consumes the most electricity in the 100,000 people. Strict energy efficiency re- Index on a per capita basis, at 152 gigajoules gulation for new buildings has increased the per person, much higher than the average of pace of LEED certification, but so too has the 52 gigajoules. Atlanta’s electricity consumption city’s LEED commitment on municipal buildings per $1 million of GDP, at 357 gigajoules, is also (see “green initiatives” below). Atlanta’s overall higher than the Index average of 332 gigajoules. buildings performance would have been even There are some mitigating circumstances, how- better were it not for the fact that the city does ever. The city’s relatively low population, com- not require energy audits from property owners, bined with the numerous and energy demand- and is relatively weak, by Index standards, in ing companies operating there, has driven up providing incentives to retrofit buildings. Public the per capita figure. Atlanta scores better on information on how to decrease energy con- policy areas. For example, through a mixture of sumption in offices and homes is also not as tax incentives and subsidies, the city promotes readily available in Atlanta as it is in the majority green energy for both homes and businesses. of Index cities. Green initiatives: Atlanta’s “Em-Powered to Green initiatives: Atlanta passed an ordinance Change” program, started in February 2011, is in 2003 requiring any new construction of city designed to increase city-employee awareness facilities and city-funded projects, as well as ren- about energy conservation. The goal is to ovations, to be silver LEED-certified. Renovation reduce energy consumption 20% in city facili- work has included Atlanta’s international air- Atlanta ties over the next five years. In another initia- port, which is on track for silver LEED certifica- tive, Atlanta announced a partnership with a tion in 2012. In the same year the ordinance was private automobile manufacturer in October passed, Atlanta installed a 3,000-square-foot 2010 and will be developing an electric vehicle garden on the city hall roof to reduce energy charging network for the first delivery of elec- consumption and improve stormwater manage- US and Canada Green City Index tric vehicles, expected during 2011. ment. The city’s sustainability program (see ref- erence in “green initiatives” for CO2) reportedly Land use: 25th, 36.7 points reduced city hall energy consumption by a quar- Less than 5% of Atlanta’s administrative area is ter between February 2008 and October 2010. A tlanta, the capital of the southeastern state of Georgia, is a regional economic hub, with one of the highest concentrations of Fortune mental Design (LEED)-certified buildings in the Index. Although the city places 21st in the water category, mainly because of a high leakage rate, ric tons of CO2 per person, above the Index aver- age of 15 metric tons. It releases 390 metric tons of CO2 for every $1 million of GDP, higher than given over to green space, versus an Index av- erage of 12%. The city performs well for proac- tive measures on tree planting and brownfield 500 companies in the US. The city has in particu- it has strong policies to reduce water consump- the Index average of 296 metric tons, and also regeneration, but there are still policy chal- lar attracted several high-tech start-up compa- tion. Atlanta is in the bottom half of the Index for the highest amount among services-intensive lenges in order to overcome a historical legacy nies, which has led some to call it the Silicon Val- CO2, energy, land use, waste and transport, so cities. A large manufacturing base, despite a of city planning that did not put a priority on Atlanta CO2 Best ley of the South. As a result, Atlanta’s economy is there is still room for improvement in these cate- high reliance on services, helps explain Atlanta’s green space. For example, Atlanta is one of only Average 100 services intensive, although manufacturing gories, particularly for controlling sprawl and relatively high CO2 emissions per unit of GDP. a few cities in the Index that does not have any 80 Environmental Energy maintains a strong presence. The Coca-Cola recycling. The city’s mayor, Kasim Reed, is lead- Since 2002, when the CO2 data for all US cities in measures in place to protect existing green governance Company, for example, has its headquarters ing efforts to improve sustainability and has this Index was collected, Atlanta has ramped up space from building development. There are 60 there. With a GDP per capita of around $42,200, announced a goal for Atlanta to become one of efforts to reduce its carbon footprint (see “green plans to increase Atlanta’s green space by 40% 40 Atlanta has the 16th highest income in the US the most sustainable cities in the US, in part by initiatives” below). through Atlanta Beltline (see “green initiatives”Background indicators and Canada Green City Index. Data for the Index securing grants for a wide range of environmen- below) but city authorities concede it will take Air 20 Land use for Atlanta is based on a mix of statistics covering tal projects. Green initiatives: Atlanta signed the US Con- many years before that target is achieved. 0Total population 1) 540,000 the city boundary, with a population of 540,000, ference of Mayors Climate Protection Agree-Administrative area (miles2) 1) 131 and the wider metropolitan area, which has a CO2: 20th, 57 points ment in 2006. Signatories pledge to reduce car- Green initiatives: Atlanta Beltline, a $2.8 bil-GDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 42,200 population of 5.5 million. Atlanta performs well for its overall CO2 re- bon emissions 7% below 1990 levels by 2012. To lion urban redevelopment project launched inTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 62 Atlanta is ranked 21st overall in the Index. Its duction strategy, gaining some of the best help meet that target, Atlanta has embarked on 2006 by city authorities in partnership with Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 11 strongest category performance is in buildings, marks in the Index for setting targets and moni- a “sustainability program” to reduce greenhouse private companies, aims to convert a 22-mileServices employment (%) 2) 89 at eighth, bolstered by having the highest per- toring, but high carbon emissions drag down gas (GHG) emissions in municipal buildings. railroad corridor into an integrated network ofGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA centage of Leadership in Energy and Environ- the overall performance. The city emits 21 met- Assisted by state and federal funding, city parks, trails and public transit. Atlanta Beltline Waste Water32 33
    • Green initiatives: Atlanta has been running a pilot recycling program to incentivize house- holders to set aside recyclable waste since November 2009. The scheme, Rewards for Collecting all Recyclables Together (ReCART), involves 10,000 households. Each household is provided with recycling carts retrofitted with an ID tag, which is scanned for weight infor- mation and collection frequency. Households are then awarded points according to the weight of recyclables they put aside, which are allocated to their recycling account. The reward points can then be redeemed with local ven- dors. The first phase of ReCART will last for up to three years. A decision will then be made if it is viable for citywide expansion. Environmental governance: of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement, which 2008. As well as embarking on a series of 12th, 87.8 points Atlanta signed up to in 2006, are in line with the sustainability initiatives, which has focused on Air: 12th, 78.2 points The city turns in a strong performance for overall Kyoto Protocol. However, the city does not pro- municipal operations, the division has secured Atlanta performs best for sulfur dioxide emis- green management. It has a dedicated environ- duce any regular environmental reports, either state and federal grants totaling $28 million to sions, which at 12 lb per person per year are mental authority, gives public access to infor- annually or biannually, to monitor and evaluate help fund environmental improvements. A sus- well below the Index average of 22 lb. Nitro- mation on the city’s environmental performance policy implementation. tainability sub-cabinet, tasked with improving gen oxides and particulate matter emissions are and policies, and has made environmental com- coordination among government offices and slightly above the averages. A robust set of mitments at an international level. The carbon Green initiatives: Atlanta established the tracking greenhouse gas emissions, held its inau- polices, including targets, has no doubt helped emission reduction targets of the US Conference Mayor’s Office of Sustainability in February gural meeting in February 2011.Transport: 20th, 47.6 points with the same profile, including many that are Atlanta’s air quality. It is also a low-density cityAtlanta scores well for its efforts to promote in the mid-temperature range. Strong policies, with a high-services economy, and other cities ingreen transport, but is marked down for relatively which include the promotion of lower water the Index with this profile also have lower sulfurweak congestion policies. Its public transport usage (see “green initiatives” below), have dioxide and nitrogen dioxide emissions.network is relatively short compared to other helped. But the performance on water con-cities in the Index, at 0.2 miles per square mile, sumption is weakened by Atlanta’s water distri- Green initiatives: The municipal governmentcompared with the Index average of 1.1 miles bution system. Nearly a third of the water pass- runs various schemes to reduce traffic and Quantitative indicatorsper square mile. The share of Atlanta’s workers ing through Atlanta’s system is lost to leakages, improve air quality, in partnership with state-taking public transport, riding bikes or walking, compared with the Index average of 13%, due wide and local groups. One example is a com- Category Indicator Average Atlanta Year Basis Source Commentsat 5%, is much lower than the 13% Index aver- to aging infrastructure. muter rewards program, which provides cash CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 390.1 2002 MSA Purdue University - The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysisage. A common feature of low population den- incentives for using greener forms of transport.sity cities, of which Atlanta is one, is low take-up Green initiatives: Atlanta offers rebates of up More than 70,000 commuters across Georgia CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 21.2 2002 MSA Purdue University - The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population US Census Bureauamong workers of greener forms of transport. to $100 to replace older inefficient toilets with have signed up to the scheme. The city also con-Municipal authorities have recognized the chal- low-flow models. The program, running since ducts outreach events, including “Walk Day” Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.36 2009 City Mayors Office of Sustainability; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysislenges and in 2009 created the city’s first-ever the beginning of 2008, has led to the replace- and “Give Your Car the Day Off”, as well as subsi-comprehensive transportation plan (see “green ment of more than 3,700 toilets, and nearly 22 dizing public transit fares for public employees. Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 152.4 2009 City Mayors Office of Sustainability; Using city population US Census Bureauinitiatives” below). million gallons of water have been saved. The city also launched a toilet rebate program in October Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 4.6 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000Green initiatives: Connect Atlanta, a wide- 2010, targeting 108,000 apartments built prior Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 4,129.2 2009 City US Census Bureaureaching transportation plan through to 2030, to 1992, when water efficiency standards were Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 18.3 2010 City US Green Building Council Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons)aims to expand its rapid transit network to put upgraded.500,000 residents within a 10-minute walk of Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 5.3 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Surveyrapid transit, up from the 70,000 residents who Waste: 22nd, 29.6 pointshave that access level today. The plan, announ- The city has one of the lowest proportions of Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.2 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square milesced in 2009, also aims to extend bike access to Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 36.8 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area population recycled municipal waste in the Index, at 7%,green space from 1,000 acres to 3,400 acres. compared with the Index average of 26%. In Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 2.2 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles per square mile (vehicles/miles2) addition, it has one of the lowest rates amongWater: 21st, 71.7 points other cities with incomes in the middle range. Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 30.1 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community SurveyAlthough Atlanta turns in a middling perfor- One reason is that the city has only recentlymance in this category in general, the city does begun to introduce recycling initiatives (see Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 7.1 2009 City Department of Public Worksexceptionally well in limiting water usage. Water “green initiatives” below). And on waste policy, Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 121.9 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied populationconsumption per capita is 122 gallons per day, Atlanta has made only moderate efforts to re-which is below the Index average of 155 gallons. duce waste creation. Local waste management Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 31.4 2009 City Mayors Office of SustainabilityDespite being both a high temperature and a practices, such as composting and the conver- Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 70 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationservice intensive city, Atlanta has much lower sion of waste by-products to energy, are also Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 32 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationwater consumption per capita than other cities relatively underdeveloped. Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 12 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population34 35
    • campaign, Sparking Boston’s Climate Revolut- capacity to 3.1 megawatts in 2010, up from ion, to identify ways for the city to reduce 1.8 megawatts in 2008. Its goal is to produce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The plan’s 25 megawatts from solar by 2015. main recommendations are for Boston to lower its GHG emissions by 25% by 2020 from 1990 Land use: Fourth, 74.9 points levels; immediately start incorporating the Boston’s strong performance in this category is projected effects of climate change in all plan- largely driven by its high population density, ning and review processes for municipal and assuring the efficient use of the city’s limited private projects; develop a comprehensive land. With 13,400 people per square mile, public engagement effort; use climate action Boston has the third highest population density opportunities to advance Boston’s green econo- in the Index and well above the average of 8,100 my and job goals; and ensure that climate action people per square mile. Additionally, it has an has clear public and private leadership and above average percentage of green space, at resources. Though its recommendations are 16% of the city’s area, compared with the Index non-binding, the city has already begun imple- average of 12%. Boston has made strong efforts menting the campaign into city policy. to promote green spaces over the years, high- lighted by the so-called Emerald Necklace – a Energy: Second, 82.4 points green network that links parks throughout the Boston receives its highest ranking in this cate- city. Boston also has been proactive about pro- gory, along with the water category. The city tecting its greenbelts from urban sprawl, fo- consumes 41 gigajoules of electricity per per- cusing on “smart growth” that makes efficient son, compared with an Index average of use of the area’s limited land. Boston US and Canada Green City Index B oston is the capital of the US state of Massa- chusetts and the largest city in the New Eng- land region. With a population of just 650,000 facilitates the city’s environmental efforts. Boston ranks sixth overall in the Index. It scores best in the energy and water categories, placing at 12 metric tons per person compared with an Index average of 15 metric tons, and emissions per $1 million of GDP, at 199 metric tons, versus 52 gigajoules, and just 100 gigajoules of elec- tricity per $1 million of GDP, versus the Index average of 332 gigajoules. A major reason for people, Boston is smaller than the average North second in each. These scores are driven by high the average of 296 metric tons. Boston’s carbon Boston’s success in this area is its comprehensive American city in the US and Canada Green City marks in electricity consumption per unit of GDP, levels benefit from consuming less electricity plans for promoting energy efficiency, which Boston CO2 Best Index, although its metropolitan area extends strong green energy policies and low water con- than many other cities in the Index, as well as a extend much further than for many other cities Average 100 into neighboring Rhode Island and New Hamp- sumption. Additionally, among the cities with relatively low level of coal consumption. In- in the Index. Boston also excels in its policies for 80 Environmental Energy shire, and has a population of 4.6 million. In the small administrative areas, Boston places second stead, emissions from petroleum consumption – local and green energy projects. Led by recent governance Index, a mix of city and metropolitan data is used. in land use, demonstrating that the city’s policies both by road transport and, unusually for US and solar projects (see “green initiatives” below), 60 Historically a center of shipping and manu- to efficiently use the little land available have Canadian cities, from electricity generation – are Boston is one of only five cities in the Index to 40 facturing, Boston’s economy has largely shifted been effective. Perhaps the biggest factor con- the main drivers of Boston’s carbon output. On a receive the highest marks for both green energyBackground indicators to services. Today finance, insurance and research tributing to Boston’s high overall ranking is that policy level, Boston’s greenhouse gas reduction projects and local energy production. Air 20 Land use centered on the area’s acclaimed universities the city ranks below 15th in only one category, strategy is considered average compared to other 0Total population 1) 650,000 drive the economy. Boston has also recently transport, in which it falls to 17th. While excelling North American cities, but its strong record on Green initiatives: In 2008 the city launchedAdministrative area (miles2) 1) 48 become one of the leading centers for high-tech in a few categories, Boston’s overall strength lies green energy projects (see “energy” category Solar Boston, a program to encourage the wide-GDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 57,100 firms in the US. The success of these industries in its well-rounded environmental policies. below) is likely to contribute to lowering CO2 spread adoption of solar energy. Details includeTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 52 helps give Boston the fourth highest income in emissions. easing permitting requirements, mapping feasi- Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 11 the Index – with a GDP per person of $57,100. CO2: 11th, 79 points ble locations, and planning for purchasing,Services employment (%) 2) 89 Boston is also one of the oldest cities in the Index, Boston has slightly better than average marks in Green initiatives: In 2010 Boston’s Com- financing, and installing of solar technology.Geographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA contributing to a more compact downtown that CO2 emissions. This is both on a per capita basis, munity Advisory Committee launched the Through these efforts Boston increased its solar Waste Water36 37
    • Green initiatives: The Urban Wilds Initiative, Boston received $40 million in federal funds in Environmental governance:initially created in 1976, seeks to protect city- 2009 to renovate public housing developments 15th, 84.4 pointsowned urban green space and other natural using green technology to increase energy Boston’s middling ranking in this category canareas from development and degradation. The efficiency. The first phase includes building be explained largely because the city’s centralinitiative includes the Boston Youth Clean-up 100 to 150 new housing units and a community environmental strategy was designed as a seriesCorps, which provides clean-up and vegetation center, which will include improved “building of advisory policies rather than a full-scalecontrol, and has enlisted neighborhood and envelopes” (building shells that dramatically action plan, and has only been accepted thus farnon-profit groups for similar activities. In coop- improve insulation to reduce heating and cool- as a recommendation. While the plan has theeration with the state agency, the Massa- ing costs), interiors designed to capture and full support of the mayor and several recom-chusetts Department of Conservation and Re- store solar heat through specially designed win- mendations have served as the basis for key poli-creation, the initiative has helped protect many dows and skylights, shading devices, and natur- cies and targets, the city council has notacres of land from development and covers 36 al ventilation cooling. approved all of the strategy’s ambitious mea-unique regions within Boston. sures. The strategy, however, was developed in Transport: 17th, 50.2 points coordination with local community leaders,Buildings: Tenth, 62.1 points Although Boston’s small administrative area giving the city high marks in the Index forBoston is near the Index average for the number contributes to a comparatively high rate of non- also better than the Index average of 13%, sug- major air pollutants evaluated in the Index – hoods, businesses, academics, and other groups transparency and public outreach. As a result ofof buildings with Leadership in Energy and En- automobile commuting – 18% compared with gesting that the city’s proactive policies in this nitrogen oxides, particulate matter and sulfur for projects related to reducing air pollution these efforts, the recommendations representvironmental Design (LEED) certification, at the Index average of 13% – the city’s public area have paid off as well. dioxide. Boston’s above average performance in emissions. The program is focused on small the collective wishes of a diverse group of6.5 buildings per 100,000 people, compared to transport options are limited. The city has air quality is largely the result of its dense popu- community projects designed to reduce green- stake-holders and emphasize city-communitythe average of 6.4. However, this number is like- 0.3 miles of public transit per square mile com- Green initiatives: The statewide Massachu- lation and service-oriented economy. Compared house gas emissions and air pollution. Past cooperation.ly to increase due to newly implemented zoning pared with an Index average of 1.1, and has only setts Water Authority provides state residents to cities with similar population densities, the awards have gone to youth workshops, door-to-requirements (see “green initiatives” below). 0.8 public transit vehicles available per square free water-efficiency kits, which include low- city is third weakest. While Boston funds air qual- door outreach programs, and alternative vehi- Green initiatives: Boston GreenFest is anMeanwhile, although Boston offers rebates to mile, well below the Index average of 9 public flow shower heads, low-flow faucet aerators ity improvement projects (see “green initiatives” cles for community organizations. In another annual festival, held since 2009, in which resi-homes and businesses for energy efficiency transport vehicles, and near the bottom of the and leak detection dye tablets. In 2008 the below), it does not have any air quality targets. initiative, in 2010 Boston awarded nearly dents come together from across Greater Bostonretrofits, the municipality does not require ener- Index. Meanwhile, Boston performs close to the authority expanded its low-flow toilet retrofit $100,000 to retrofit diesel vehicles to run on to display ideas and tips to make the city a moregy efficiency audits. Index averages for “annual vehicle revenue rebate and pilot water audit projects, which Green initiatives: Since 2007 Boston has given ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel. Businesses must sustainable place to live. The festival works miles” (a measure of the availability of public offer $100 for rebates for residents to acquire out Community Climate Action and Air Quality commit to using only this cleaner fuel in vehicles specifically with schools and is officially support-Green initiatives: In 2007 Boston was the first transport), at 21 miles versus the average of more water-efficient home appliances. The city Grants, which provide funding to neighbor- that are awarded grants. ed by the mayor.city in the US to mandate green standards in 24 miles, and commute time, at 28 minutes aims through these initiatives to help Bostonmunicipal zoning regulations, requiring that compared to the average of 29 minutes. meet its goal of keeping total water consump-all large-scale building projects – generally mea- Boston’s support for green public transit is also tion below 300 million gallons per day. Sincening greater than 50,000 square feet – meet limited, although all city-owned vehicles must 2008 Boston has given grants to replace approx- Quantitative indicatorsLEED standards, including minimum require- be hybrid or run on alternative fuels. imately 350 toilets per year, in addition to sever-ments for energy savings, water efficiency and al water auditing pilot projects. Category Indicator Average Boston Year Basis Source CommentsCO2 emissions reduction. In another initiative, Green initiatives: Formed in 2007, the Boston CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 198.6 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysis Bikes initiative seeks to make Boston a world- Waste: 15th, 54.7 points CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 12.2 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population class bicycling city by expanding bike lanes and Boston’s recycling rate, at 20%, is below the US Census Bureau offering new biking programs such as providing Index average of 26%, and in addition, the city free breakfast at City Hall on Fridays to bicycle Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.10 2009 City City of Boston; US Census Bureau Using MSA GDP has only limited recycling options for industrial commuters. In 2011 the city is planning to and hazardous waste. The city’s performance in Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 40.6 2009 City City of Boston; US Census Bureau Using MSA population establish a bike-sharing system that will have this category is improved though by a strong Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 16.3 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using city population twice as many bicycles as Washington DC’s pro- commitment to reducing waste. Efforts in this Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 13,441.0 2009 City US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000 gram, which is currently the country’s largest. area have included changing the name and Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 6.5 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureau Under the plan, Central Boston will be served by focus of the Department of Sanitation to the a network of 2,500 bikes and 290 stations with Department of Waste Reduction, and reducing Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 18.3 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey 3,750 docking spaces, with the potential to the number of trash bins available per house- expand to a 5,000-bike system. hold. Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.3 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 20.8 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area population Water: Second, 91.8 points Green initiatives: Boston’s climate action plan Maximum public transport vehicles available per square mile (vehicles/miles2) 9.0 0.8 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles Boston has its best showing in this category, recommends that the city switch to single- along with the energy category, a performance stream recycling (placing all recyclable materials Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 28.4 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey largely driven by the city’s low level of water con- in one bin to make recycling easier), establish sumption. At 74 gallons per person per day, mandatory recycling policies, charge a fee for Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 20.0 2009 City City of Boston Department of Public Works Boston has the second lowest consumption rate trash pickup, and develop a year-round com- of all the Index cities, behind New York, and posting program. These recommendations are Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 73.5 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied population less than half the Index average of 155 gallons. currently at the planning stages and have not This low consumption rate is the product of con- been implemented. Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 9.0 2009 City Mayors Office of Sustainability certed efforts and incentives to help residents Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 50 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population reduce consumption (see “green initiatives” Air: 14th, 74.3 points Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 16 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population below). Boston’s water leakage rate, at 9%, is Boston ranks better than average for the three Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 14 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population38 39
    • CO2 per person compared with the Index av- tricity to power 3,000 homes and saving city, because the money from energy savings is erage of 14.5, and an estimated 253 metric $1.7 million annually. Additionally, Calgary has used to repay the company that provides the tons of CO2 per $1 million GDP, compared with retrofitted 170 intersections with LED lights, improvements over a 10-year contract term. the average of 296. Considering the dominant which use 80% less energy. role of the oil and gas industry as well as a large Transport: 16th, 50.8 points reliance on coal in the electricity mix, Calgary Land use: 11th, 57.8 points Calgary has just 0.2 miles of public transport does well to finish near the middle of the Index Calgary’s score in the land use category is hurt per square mile of city territory (0.13 kilometers for both figures. This is the result of concerted by its low population density, at 3,500 people per square kilometer), well below the Index efforts to reduce CO2 emissions, which include per square mile (1,400 people per square kilo- average of 1.1 miles (0.7 kilometers). Its score a target of 20% reductions by 2020 based on meter), compared with the average of 8,100 in transport is further hindered because its 2005 levels. (3,100). Calgary has made important strides “annual vehicle revenue miles” (a measure of to increase green space though; it has plans to public transport supply) is the lowest in the Green initiatives: In October 2009 Calgary – add 11 new parks over the next three years and along with 14 other global energy-producing already has 15% green space compared with the cities such as Houston, Texas and Stavanger, average of 12%. Additionally, Calgary has made Norway – signed the Calgary Climate Change strong efforts to contain sprawl with an inte- Accord, pledging to reduce greenhouse gas grated land use and transportation plan (see emissions from city operations by 20% by 2020 “green initiatives” below). and 80% by 2050 from 1990 levels. The plan focuses on increasing the use of renewable Green initiatives: In 2009, as part of the over- energy, capturing methane from landfills for all Plan It Calgary development plan, which was energy production, greening the vehicle fleet, launched in 2007, the city approved specific conserving energy and water in city buildings, initiatives that aim to add dense residential and piloting innovative environmental tech- and commercial centers along public transit cor- nologies and practices. As of January 2009 Cal- ridors to encourage mass transit use. In 2001 gary had reduced greenhouse gas emissions Calgary initiated the BirthPlace Forest, an from municipal operations by more than initiative to plant one tree for every baby born in 34% over 1990 levels. The city expects to the city. This was part of the larger Forever achieve a 63% reduction of total municipal Green program, one of the largest greening Calgary greenhouse gas emissions by 2012 and to re- initiatives in Calgary’s history. The goal is to duce emissions from electricity to zero. involve citizens in reducing Calgary’s tree short- age by connecting population growth to tree Energy: 18th, 62.5 points growth, and offering subsidies to residents who Calgary’s result in this category reflects high plant trees. Since 2001 over 54,000 “birthplace US and Canada Green City Index electricity demand deriving from the city’s goods- trees” have been planted. driven economy and cold temperatures. With usage at 620 gigajoules of electricity per $1 mil- Buildings: 11th, 56 points Index, at an estimated 9 miles (14 kilometers) lion GDP, Calgary consumes nearly double the Calgary officials have placed recent emphasis on per person, well below the average of 24 miles Index average of 332. In per capita terms the greening the city’s buildings. To this end the city (39 kilometers). However, Calgary was one of city fares better, consuming 34 gigajoules per has reduced permit fees for buildings incorpora- the first cities in North America to introduce a C algary is the largest city in the Canadian province of Alberta, and with 990,000 resi- dents, it is also the largest city in western Cana- fourth among Canadian cities. The city’s strongest category by far is water, where it places first. It is among the top four cities in the Index for having person compared with the average of 52. Meanwhile, Calgary is ramping up efforts to consume more green energy – including a man- ting green design, and has required that all municipal buildings meet Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards, light rail system in 1981, and has made strong efforts to improve the system in recent years. da. The metropolitan area is home to about low water consumption and leakages, in addi- date for city government electricity purchases the first Canadian city to do so. Nonetheless, 1.1 million people, and a combination of city and tion to having highly regarded water policies. to come from renewable sources – and expects Calgary’s overall building score remains in the Calgary CO2 Best metropolitan area data are used for Calgary in Calgary ranks 11th or below in other categories, to be the largest consumer of green electricity middle of the pack due to a current lack of LEED- Average 100 the US and Canada Green City Index. Located largely due to obstacles such as a low population by percentage in North America by 2012. certified buildings, at 3.2 LEED buildings per 80 Environmental Energy about 400 miles (644 kilometers) south of the oil density and cold winters that require high ener- 100,000 people, compared with the Index av- governance 60 sands, one of the largest sources of petroleum in gy consumption – Calgary has the coldest aver- Green initiatives: The Energy Management erage of 6.4. the world, the greater Calgary area is a major age temperature in the Index. Compared to its Office (EMO) is a joint initiative between Calgary 40 energy producer, and the oil and gas sector is the peers though, Calgary fares well; among low and ENMAX, a local utility, to manage the city’s Green initiatives: Energy performance con- 20Background indicators largest contributor to the city’s GDP. Led by this density cities it places third overall, with high energy use and stimulate the creation of new tracting is an innovative partnership between Air Land use industry, the city’s per capita GDP of $50,200 marks for CO2 emissions and land use, and it energy-related initiatives. Current EMO projects the city and private enterprise to improve ener- 0Total population 1) 990,000 ranks eighth overall in the Index. Calgary has the places first in the buildings category when com- include the Calgary Downtown District Energy gy efficiency in buildings. Initiated in 2004, Cal-Administrative area (miles2) 1) 280.5 highest goods-oriented economy in the Index, pared to other cold weather cities. project that will provide co-generative heating gary’s program saves about 30,000 tons ofGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 50,200 also largely a result of the energy industry. In for downtown municipal buildings, pilot projects greenhouse gas emissions annually throughTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 39 addition, the city is a major transportation cen- CO2: 15th, 75.4 points for solar water heating and electricity for munici- improvements to lighting systems, heating, Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 24 ter, home to the Canadian Pacific Railway and a Calgary places slightly better than average for pal buildings. Also, in 2005 Calgary was the first ventilation and air conditioning equipment;Services employment (%) 2) 76 hub for several airlines. carbon emissions, both in terms of per capita city in North America to install flat-lens energy building controls; and energy supply systems. Waste WaterGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) CMA Calgary ranks 14th overall in the Index and and per unit of GDP. It emits 12.7 metric tons of efficient street lights, conserving enough elec- The upgrades are provided at no net cost to the40 41
    • This includes introducing a wind-powered lightrail (see “green initiatives” below) and doublingthe length of the network since 2001. The cityhas also introduced carpooling initiatives andmultiple bus-light-rail connections. As a resultof these efforts, 22% of Calgary’s workers com-mute by public transit, bicycle or foot, com-pared with an Index average of 13%.Green initiatives: In 2001 Calgary initiatedRide the Wind, a program which powered itslight rail transit entirely with wind-generatedenergy. This initiative gave Calgary the firstwind-powered public transit system in NorthAmerica and reduced greenhouse gas emissionsby 26,000 tons annually. Furthermore, in 2005Calgary started one of the first large pilots inwestern Canada to support city-owned biodieselvehicles. The program has grown from support-ing a single vehicle to a sustainable year-roundprogram including 250 vehicles. the Index that receive full marks for policies son, versus 25 lb (11 kg). Calgary is working at related to waste reduction. Calgary is making the provincial level to improve overall air quality,Water: First, 94.1 points efforts to increase composting, and has expan- but has yet to set concrete municipal targets.This is by far Calgary’s strongest category ded its recycling program to increase the rangein the Index. The city consumes 113 gallons of goods that are either recycled or sustainably Green initiatives: The PM/O3 Management Quantitative indicators(428 liters) of water per person per day com- disposed. Plan is a collaborative effort involving the govern-pared with the Index average of 155 gallons ments of Calgary and Alberta, as well as local Category Indicator Average Calgary Year Basis Source Comments(587 liters). Impressively, the city’s water distri- CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 253.4 2008 City City of Calgary, Environment Canada, Using estimated city GDP Green initiatives: Calgary’s Landfill Gas Recov- businesses and NGOs. During 2010 activities Statistics Canadabution leakage rate is just 4%, the third lowest ery and Utilization Project collects and treats included promoting air quality awareness, en-rate in the Index and well below the average of CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 12.7 2008 City City of Calgary, Environment Canada, Using city population methane to generate electricity. Calgary’s three couraging air quality research, and highlighting Statistics Canada13%, which reflects the city’s vigilance in contin- active landfills are the city’s biggest source of improved air quality as a way of attracting busi-ually monitoring the system. Additionally, with a greenhouse gas emissions. Turning the emis- nesses. The plan’s goal is to make the Calgary Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.62 2006 City City of Calgary Using CMA GDPhigh percentage of metered customers and sions into energy is the equivalent of taking metropolitan area one of the best air qualitystrong wastewater management, the city is 16,000 cars off the road, while generating regions in Canada. Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 34.0 2006 City City of Calgary Using city populationpoised to remain at the top in the water category. about 11 million kilowatt hours of electricity, and recovering about 15 million kilowatt hours Environmental governance: Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 15.0 2006 City City of Calgary Using area of city in 2006Green initiatives: In 2009 Calgary passed a law of heat energy, which is used to power the facili- 18th, 76.7 points Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 3,522.9 2006 City Statistics Canada Equivalent in metric units: 1,360 persons/km2requiring water meters for all city residents by the ties. Furthermore, in 2006 Calgary set a goal to Guided by the long-term plan imagineCALGARYend of 2014. Approximately 10,000 meters will divert and recycle 80% of waste from landfills by (see “green initiatives” below), the city has in Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 3.2 2010 City CaGBC LEED Database Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons)be installed on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood 2020. As part of this initiative, the city has place strategies for improving its environment,basis between 2010 and 2014 to meet the target; launched a pilot program that offers special which include targets and reporting, and re- Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 22.4 2006 CMA Statistics Canadaby the start of 2011 over 80% of Calgary’s homes rates to commercial customers to recycle con- ceive strong political support. Calgary’s en- Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.2 2006 Metro-area Calgary Transit Using city area; Equivalent in metric units: 0.1 km/km²already had water meters installed. Beyond crete, brick, asphalt and selected metals. vironmental governance score is hindered,2014, Calgary aims to install peak and off-peak however, by the lack of central coordination of Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 8.7 2010 Metro-area Calgary Transit Using CMA population; Equivalent in metric units: 14.1 km/personmeters that allow for different water rates. Cal- Air: 23rd, 50.8 points environmental efforts, and the city’s transpa-gary’s goal is to accommodate the water needs of This is Calgary’s weakest category performance. rency on environmental indicators also lags Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 3.0 2010 Metro-area Calgary Transit Using city area; Equivalent in per square mile (vehicles/miles2) metric units: 1.1 vehicles/km²an increasing population, while holding the Although the city has made efforts to reduce pol- behind Index leaders.amount of water it takes from local rivers at 2003 lution from automobiles – including an anti- Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 33.0 2006 CMA Statistics Canadalevels. The city is also active in supporting resi- idling law, mandating particulate matter filters Green initiatives: imagineCALGARY launched Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 13.5 2009 City Calgary Waste and Recycling Service Annual Reportdents’ efforts to reduce water consumption. for diesel fleets, and encouraging the use of bio- in January 2005 with the goal of producingThrough its toilet rebate program the city distrib- fuels – its goods-driven economy contributes to a long-term urban sustainability plan for Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 113.3 2005 City City of Calgary, Water Services Using city population; Equivalent in metric units: 427.8 litersuted 7,188 low-flow toilets in 2010 alone. high levels of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide Calgary. Over 18,000 of Calgary’s residents pollution. Calgary emits 110 lb (50 kg) of nitro- added their voice to the initiative, making it Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 3.5 2009 City City of Calgary, Water ServicesWaste: 11th, 58.8 points gen oxides per person, versus an average of 66 lb the largest community visioning process of its Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 110 2007 Metro-area Calgary Region Airshed Zone Equivalent in metric units: 50 kgCalgary has a recycling rate that is below the (30 kg), which is one of the highest levels in the kind anywhere in the world. The city provided Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 13 2008 Mixed Environment Canada; Statistics Canada PM10 from non-industrial, mobile, and waste sources. Data point hasIndex average, weakening its performance in Index. It emits 46 lb (21 kg) of sulfur dioxide per staff and resources to support over 150 active been scaled down from provincialthis category. The city recycles 14% of its muni- person, more than twice the Index average of and committed stakeholders who were respon- level by proportion of GDP repre- sented by Calgary; Equivalent incipal waste, compared with the average of 26%. 22 lb (10kg). The city’s particulate matter emis- sible for developing the plan, which includes metric units: 6 kgHowever, officials have recognized the need to sions, though, are considerably better than the goals to address a wide range of environmentaladdress this issue and the city is one of nine in Index average, estimated at 13 lb (6 kg) per per- aspirations. Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 46 2007 Metro-area Calgary Region Airshed Zone Equivalent in metric units: 21 kg42 43
    • well served by strengthening its CO2 reduction Green initiatives: Charlotte has made brown- Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities Office and Old strategy. The city has not set any CO2 reduction field redevelopment a high priority. The city City Hall (see “green initiatives” under “CO2”). Fol- targets separate from national guidelines, and runs two programs to aid brownfield revita- lowing an energy audit report, the city says ener- the city’s strategy for reducing greenhouse gas lization efforts: first, it offers free assessments gy usage at the Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities emissions falls behind the Index leaders. Howev- of brownfield property sites up to a cost of Office can be cut by 35% and save $31,400 per er Charlotte has taken measures to reduce emis- $40,000 to developers whose clean-up propos- year. A 46% energy reduction and annual savings sions from municipal facilities by improving als have been approved; secondly, it offers of $22,600 are projected for the Old City Hall. energy efficiency (see “green initiatives” below). matching funds of up to $20,000 to property Furthermore, the city has allocated $600,000 of owners or developers for the design and execu- grant money to support energy efficiency and Green initiatives: Charlotte’s plans to cut tion of clean-up activities. The city has targeted weatherization improvements for low-income greenhouse gas emissions from city operations, largely through energy efficiency improvements at municipal facilities, began in earnest follow- ing the award of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant in 2009. At a cost of $1.4 million, taken from the energy grant, retro- fits at the Charlotte Mecklenburg Utilities Office (home of the water utility) and Old City Hall are slated to begin in 2011, and are expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 1,500 and 1,000 metric tons, respectively, each year. Energy: 21st, 55.7 points In per capita terms, Charlotte consumes an estimated 50.8 gigajoules of electricity, which is slightly better than the Index average of Charlotte 52 gigajoules. However, like most goods-inten- sive cities, Charlotte has comparatively high electricity consumption relative to GDP. The city uses an estimated 355 gigajoules per $1 million of GDP, higher than the Index average of 332 gi- US and Canada Green City Index gajoules. While the city earns points for progress on developing its own green energy projects, Charlotte’s score in this category is hindered by the Business Corridor Revitalization Area, which residents. Under this program the city provides omissions in the area of clean and efficient poli- is home to more than 400 brownfield sites, eligible homeowners up to $6,000 for upgrade cies. It is one of only five cities in the Index that including 100-acre rail yards, 45 dry cleaning works. And as part of countywide legislation, C harlotte, located in the southern state of North Carolina, is an important financial center and home to several of the US’s largest against other cities with low population densi- ties. The city’s next best category is environ- mental governance, where it places 11th owing do not promote the use of green energy for busi- nesses and homes. operations and dozens of industrial properties. Buildings: 25th, 26.2 points property developers in Charlotte can receive a rebate of up to 25% of the building permit fee up to a maximum of $100,000 for LEED-certifica- banks. Charlotte also has a strong manufac- largely to its green action plan, which is one of Green initiatives: In 2010 Charlotte launched Along with transport, this is Charlotte’s weakest tion projects. turing base and, home to one of the leading the strongest in the Index. Across the other cate- the Neighborhood Energy Challenge. Seven category in the Index. The city scores well for energy companies in the country, is transform- gories in the Index Charlotte places in the bot- neighborhoods were selected under the scheme offering incentives and subsidies to improve ing itself into a hub for energy firms. The city is tom half of cities. However, since the award of and each was awarded $80,000 to improve energy efficiency (see “green initiatives” below); the third most prosperous in the US and Canada the federal energy grant in 2009 Charlotte has energy efficiency on a community-wide basis. it has also prioritized energy efficiency at munici- Green City Index, generating a GDP per capita of stepped up environmental efforts, suggesting The city is assisting these communities in deve- pal facilities, suggesting its performance may Charlotte CO2 Best $57,700. Charlotte’s 700,000 inhabitants occu- that its overall rank may improve in coming loping energy action plans; initiatives include improve in coming years. However, it has one of Average 100 py a space of 242 square miles, placing the city in years. Nevertheless, there are environmental home energy audits, installation of solar-pow- the lowest numbers of Leadership in Energy and 80 Environmental Energy the low population density bracket of the Index. weaknesses to address. Public transit supply in ered lighting and conservation workshops. Environmental Design (LEED)-certified buildings governance 60 Index data for Charlotte are based on a mix of Charlotte is one of the lowest in the Index, for in the Index, with just 0.6 per 100,000 people, statistics for the city and its wider metropolitan example, as is the proportion of municipal waste Land use: Ninth, 64.6 points compared with the Index average of 6.4. The 40 area, which has a population of 1.7 million. The the city recycles. Together with water, Charlotte registers its high- city’s score is further weighed down by the rela- 20Background indicators city’s environmental efforts are today under- est rank in land use. Among low population den- tive weakness of its buildings policies: it is one of Air Land use pinned to large degree by a $6.8 million Energy CO2: 18th, 59.8 points sity cities in the Index only Ottawa has a better just four cities that do not require new buildings 0Total population 1) 700,000 Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant, which Charlotte scores well for relatively low CO2 emis- overall performance in this category than Char- to meet energy efficiency standards.Administrative area (miles2) 1) 242 the US Department of Energy awarded the city in sions in relation to its economic output. At lotte. The city scores particularly well on policy,GDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 57,700 2009. 192 metric tons for every $1 million of GDP, the which includes green space protection and the Green initiatives: Of the $6.8 million federalTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 61 Charlotte ranks 20th overall in the Index. Its city does much better than the Index average of promotion of brownfield regeneration (see energy efficiency grant awarded to Charlotte in Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 14 strongest categories are land use and water, 296 metric tons of CO2. In per capita terms, “green initiatives”). The proportion of green 2009, the biggest slice – nearly $2.5 million –Services employment (%) 2) 86 largely because of robust policies in both areas. It Charlotte emits 14.5 metric tons of CO2, on par space in Charlotte, at 12%, is in line with the has been allocated to energy efficiency im- Waste WaterGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA places second in land use when measured with the 27-city average. Charlotte would be Index average. provements at municipal buildings, including the44 45
    • Air: 16th, 69.5 points ployees on transport options; programs include It also has a dedicated environmental authori- Charlotte’s rank in the air category is bolstered “vanpooling” in which 15 commuters who live ty, and produces regular reports that monitor by better than average rates of sulfur dioxide and work near each other can share one vehi- and evaluate policy implementation. Despite and nitrogen oxides emissions. The city releases cle, and employers can also receive volume-pur- involving citizens in environmental decision 9 lb of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere per chase discounts for the public transport net- making, one weakness in Charlotte is that resi- person per year, considerably less than the work. By 2010 the program had reportedly dents do not enjoy the same level of access to Index average of 22 lb. Likewise, with nitrogen avoided 4.8 million vehicle miles and prevented information on the citys environmental perfor- oxides emissions of 58 lb per person per year 280,000 pounds of nitrogen oxides emissions. mance and policies as in other Index cities. Charlotte beats the average of 66 lb. This rela- Initiatives to reduce nitrogen oxides emissions tively good performance has been helped by are also taken at a county level by the Mecklen- Green initiatives: For the first time in 2010, programs to improve air quality at both a city burg County Air Quality department. In 2007 Charlotte appointed an energy and sustaina- and county level (see “green initiatives” below). the department partnered with six nearby bility manager to oversee and implement pro- However, the city gets marked down for not set- counties to launch a diesel engine replacement grams run under the auspices of the federal ting any specific air quality targets and for hav- scheme called Grants to Replace Aging Diesel Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block ing above-average particulate matter emis- Engines (GRADE); the program was extended to Grant. The grant supports 17 projects city-wide sions. 13 counties in 2010. designed to reduce emissions and energy con- sumption, create new green jobs and increaseTransport: 25th, 40.8 points plan calls for a minimum of 65% of Charlotte water sources for quality and supply levels, and Green initiatives: The Charlotte region Clean Environmental governance: the use of renewable technologies. In additionCharlotte records its lowest rank, along with residents to live within one-quarter of a mile proactively encourages water conservation (see Air Works! program, launched in 2006, aims 11th, 88.9 points to managing the grant, the city sustainabilitybuildings, in transport. The city is marked down of transit service; the implementation of a bal- “green initiatives” below). The city also has a fair- to improve air quality through encouraging Charlotte scores well for its integrated en- manager is charged with advocating for en-for having the third shortest public transport anced and multi-modal transport system; and ly efficient water distribution system by the vehicle sharing and non-automotive com- vironmental strategy, which contains explicit vironmental initiatives within the city’s En-network in the Index at just 0.09 miles per for the city to monitor and determine the ade- standards of the Index, losing 11% of its supply muting. The initiative works with over 100 of targets for each environmental issue and has vironment Focus Area Plan and promoting bestsquare mile of area, versus an Index average of quacy of services for motorists, bicyclists and to leaks against the Index average of 13%. the region’s largest companies to educate em- been endorsed by the city administration. environmental practices.1.1 miles. As a result only about three of every pedestrians at signalized intersections, among100 workers use public transit, bicycles or go by many other policies. In addition, 144 of the city Green initiatives: The city offers homeownersfoot in Charlotte, which is, again, considerably fleet’s 320 buses had been fitted with diesel free water audits, which include instructions onlower than the Index average of 13%. However, particulate filters by the end of the city’s 2009- how to measure the amount of water consumed. Quantitative indicatorsofficials have made efforts to expand the public 10 fiscal year. This measure, coupled with the When consumers return the audit forms theytransport network: in 2007 Charlotte unveiled use of ultra-low-sulfur diesel in the entire city receive water conservation kits, including low- Category Indicator Average Charlotte Year Basis Source Commentsits first light rail line, LYNX, which stretches 9.6 fleet, has cut emissions from city-owned vehi- flow shower heads, faucet aerators and leak CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 191.6 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysismiles. It is the only city in the southeastern US cles by 90%. detection tablets. Twice a year the local utilitythat boasts a light rail system and Charlotte offi- hands out awards to homeowners and busi- CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 14.5 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population US Census Bureaucials are drafting plans to expand the ser vice. Water: Ninth, 84.8 points nesses that have taken measures to conserveBut there is still room for improvement: the city Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.36 2008 Mixed Energy Information Administration; State retail electricity sales; Charlotte registers its highest rank, along with water. US Bureau of Economic Analysis Scaled down to city level usingis one of four in the Index that lack central land use, in the water category. Consuming population data; Indicatorpedestrian zones and it has a mixed record on 153 gallons per capita every day, Charlotte nar- Waste: 20th, 40.9 points constructed using MSA GDPpromoting public awareness of green forms of rowly beats the Index average of 155 gallons. Of The city scores well for its waste reduction strat- Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 50.8 2008 Mixed Energy Information Administration; State retail electricity sales US Census Bureau scaled down to city level usingtransport. all the other high temperature cities in the Index egy and good waste management practices, population data (with average annual temperatures above 60°F) such as composting and converting local waste Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 11.6 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000Green initiatives: Charlotte adopted a 25-year only Atlanta consumes less water per capita per by-products to energy. However, Charlotte’sTransportation Action Plan (TAP) in 2006 to day than Charlotte. Water efficiency and treat- rank in the waste category drops significantly Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 2,910.8 2009 City US Census Bureau Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 0.6 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city populationguide city transport projects and policy. The ment policies are also strong. The city monitors due to its low recycling rate: the city recycles (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureau just 12% of its municipal waste versus an Index average of 26%. It is the weakest performance Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 3.1 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey among high-income cities, although recent recycling programs (see “green initiatives” be- Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.1 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles low) show intent to improve. Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 22.9 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area population Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 1.2 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles per square mile (vehicles/miles2) Green initiatives: Charlotte introduced single- stream recycling, in which all recyclable mate- Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 25.0 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey rials are placed into one bin and then separated by the waste company, in 2010. The same year, Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 11.6 2009 County Mecklenburg County Land Use & Using county population Environmental Services Agency; with federal funding, the city installed 15 new US Census Bureau recycling containers in the uptown area to make daily recycling more convenient for Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 153.3 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied population pedestrians. To encourage use of the con- tainers, two large private companies have run Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 11.0 2010 City Mayors Office of Sustainability “Get Caught Green Handed” campaigns, where Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 58 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population people using the bins are selected at random Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 32 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau and given money or food vouchers of $25. Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 9 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau46 47
    • non-motorized forms of transit and reduce con- gestion. Chicago is in the top half of the Index in the categories of energy, water and environ- mental governance. Its weakest performance is in the CO2 category, where it places 19th, due main- ly to above average levels of carbon emissions. CO2: 19th, 58.5 points Chicago’s carbon emissions are higher than average, with per capita CO2 emissions of 19.4 metric tons per person, compared with the Index average of 14.5. It is also well above the average for CO2 emissions per unit of GDP, at 406 metric tons per $1 million, compared with the average of 296 metric tons. The city’s carbon emissions are also the highest among the most Green initiatives: In 2009 Chicago partnered Buildings: 14th, 51.3 points densely populated cities in the Index. Officials with a private utility and a solar-panel manu- Municipal officials have acknowledged major have recognized the challenges and the city has facturer to develop the US’s largest urban solar opportunities for improvement in this area, with enacted an impressive CO2 reduction strategy, power plant at a former industrial site in Chica- buildings altogether responsible for 70% of which includes adding four million square feet of go’s South Side. The $60 million project, com- Chicago’s carbon emissions. Currently the city green roofs. Like most US cities, however, Chica- pleted in July 2010, includes more than 32,000 has 5.2 Leadership in Energy and Environmen- go does not oversee the privately owned utilities solar photovoltaic panels capable of generating tal Design (LEED)-certified buildings per that supply the city’s power, and therefore is like- enough electricity to power roughly 1,200 100,000 people, below the Index average of ly to face challenges in significantly improving its homes annually. The plant is expected to dis- 6.4. However, Chicago has the highest percen- performance in carbon emissions. place more than 14,000 tons of greenhouse gas tage of LEED buildings among the Index’s most emissions per year, the equivalent of removing highly populated cities, demonstrating a com- Green initiatives: The city has committed to a 2,500 cars from city streets. paratively strong performance. With a mandate 25% reduction of CO2 emissions below its 1990 in place that city building projects must greenhouse gas level by 2020. The long-range Land use: 15th, 56 points obtain at least LEED silver certification, the num- goal is an 80% reduction by 2050. To achieve this Chicago is the fifth most densely populated city ber of LEED buildings in Chicago will likely target, the city has identified 26 “mitigation” in the Index, with 12,600 residents per square increase. The city also has stringent energy effi- actions within the strategic areas of buildings, mile, compared with the Index average of ciency regulations and retrofitting incentives for energy, transportation and waste. Chicago is 8,100. However, the city is marked down for a residents. using funding sources such as the state’s Energy relative lack of green space, at 8% of the city’s Efficiency Portfolio Standard, as well as other total area, compared with the Index average of Green initiatives: The city of Chicago has state and federal grants, to finance these mea- 12%. The relative lack of green space in Chicago undertaken several initiatives to improve the sures. may be due in part to a historical divide between environmental performance of its buildings. the city’s more expansive industrialized areas – One example, the Chicago Energy Conservation Energy: Eighth, 75.9 points Chicago where there is room for park space but few peo- Code, approved in November 2008, requires The city’s ranking in this category is bolstered by ple nearby to use it – and highly populated resi- new residential buildings as well as large-scale its per capita electricity consumption of 31 giga- dential areas, where there is less available land. retrofits to meet energy efficient measures that joules, better than the Index average of 52 giga- However, Chicago has enjoyed a measure of suc- exceed the Illinois Building Energy Code. The joules. Chicago likewise outperforms the Index cess in developing the 319-acre Millennium Park US and Canada Green City Index average for electricity consumption per unit of downtown and, as the Index shows, has a record GDP, at 202 gigajoules per $1 million, compared of formulating robust policies in the area of Chicago CO2 Best with the average of 332 gigajoules. Chicago’s brownfield regeneration and tree-planting. Average 100 performance in the energy category was W 80 Environmental Energy ith a population of 2.9 million, Chicago is siderable environmental challenges. Neverthe- improved by its leadership in the development Green initiatives: Aiming to improve perfor- governance the third largest city and the fifth most less, the city’s leadership and citizenry have of major green energy projects, intended to dis- mance in the area of land use, Chicago has been 60 densely populated in the US and Canada Green demonstrated a commitment to long term place the city’s fossil fuel dependence and proactive in its efforts to promote revitalization 40 City Index. Home to the headquarters of many improvements that are consistent with sus- increase overall energy security. The city of abandoned and idle land. The Chicago Brown-Background indicators businesses and a major financial center, Chicago tainable growth. The data for Chicago in the believes that its proximity to some of the coun- field Initiative was adopted in 1993 under the Air 20 Land use is the economic engine of the US Midwest, with Index is based on a mix of statistics for the city try’s largest “wind potential” areas, along with objective of simultaneously achieving environ- 0Total population 1) 2.9 million a GDP per capita of $45,400. In recent years the and the wider metropolitan area, which has a the presence of at least 14 wind power com- mental restoration, and creating jobs and taxAdministrative area (miles2) 1) 227 city has prioritized environmental issues, spear- population of 9.6 million. panies located in Chicago, will lead to an revenues through redevelopment. The pilotGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 45,400 headed by former Mayor Richard Daley, who Chicago ranks 11th overall in the Index. Its best increase in the city’s share of renewable energy. phase of the initiative incorporated $2 million ofTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 49 gave strong public backing to Chicago’s climate performance is in the area of transport, where it Chicago has key support in this goal from the Illi- capital, raised through municipal bonds. To date Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 14 change action plan in 2008. However, Chicago’s ranks sixth. This is due to its robust public transit nois state government, which aims to switch to a total of 900 acres have been returned to pro-Services employment (%) 2) 86 ageing infrastructure and land use constraints, system, and policies that aim to expand and renewable sources for 25% of its statewide ener- ductive use and the private sector has becomeGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA among other factors, present the city with con- improve public transport options, encourage gy supply by 2025. increasingly engaged in this initiative. Waste Water48 49
    • and generate a sizeable share of the city’s pollu- Climate Action Plan (see “green initiatives” tion. Chicago has enacted policies to improve below), one of the few of its kind released at air quality, but has not implemented an air qual- the time, as a model for initiating similar plans. ity target. However, the city is expected to Although the city is marked down in the Index address this in its Air Quality Action Agenda, for a relative lack of public involvement in pro- which it plans to launch by 2012. jects with environmental impacts and for a lack of specific environmental targets, the prospects Green initiatives: City officials are currently for Chicago’s continued dedication to impro- working with the Chicago Area Clean Cities ving environmental performance and strength- coalition and the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus ening environmental governance are favor- to promote the use of alternative fuels, such as able. compressed natural gas, propane and biodiesel, in city fleets. The city has also been building Green initiatives: In accordance with its com- alternative fueling stations since 2003 using mitment to improve environmental governance, federal grants, and is developing a comprehen- the city has developed the Chicago Climate sive training program to educate 2,800 fleet Action Plan, a comprehensive agenda that in- operators in the procurement and use of alter- volves many stakeholders across the city and native fuels. addresses the major environmental issues,code requires improved insulation of floors, 36 miles per person, is well above the Index waste-water into area waterways, an inevitable Air: 15th, 70.3 points establishes targets and performance indicators,roofs and walls, as well as the installation of average of 24 miles. Besieged by one of the high- byproduct of ageing water infrastructure. While annual particulate matter and sulfur diox- Environmental governance: and pledges to issue progress reports every twoenergy efficient windows and mechanical sys- est levels of congestion in the US, the city is ide levels in Chicago are below the Index aver- 12th, 87.8 points years. In addition, the city has websites withtems. Another initiative, the Chicago Green addressing the problem through some of the Green initiatives: Currently, one-third of the ages, nitrogen oxides emissions, at 68 lb per The city has an environmental department public information on the potential impacts ofOffice Challenge, is a voluntary competition for best policies on traffic management in the Index. total energy utilized by wastewater treatment person year, are slightly above the average of with strong political support and conducts rig- climate change and has started a campaign toproperty owners and business tenants who are Although Chicago has the most comprehensive plants operated by Chicago’s Metropolitan 66 lb. Two of Chicago’s major power plants are orous environmental reporting. Indeed, many enlist individual residents’ support in addres-set environmental targets over the course of a public transit system in the Midwest, across the Water Reclamation District comes from methane between 70 and 110 years old, and coal-fired, other US cities looked to the 2008 Chicago sing these issues.year. In the first round of the program, almost 27 cities in the Index the length of its public gas capture from sewage sludge. The District150 participants competed and together transport system, at 0.6 miles per square mile, has also adopted an independently verified envi-reduced CO2 emissions by 54,000 metric tons, fell below the average of 1.1 miles. However, the ronmental management system governing thethe equivalent of removing 10,000 cars from city has prioritized the expansion and improve- use of biosolids, which are the byproduct of Quantitative indicatorsChicago streets. The second round of the com- ment of public transport options, while en- wastewater treatment that can be used for agri-petition began in early 2011. couraging non-motorized forms of transit. culture and landscaping. The city has also in- Category Indicator Average Chicago Year Basis Source Comments stalled a greywater recycling system in a CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 406.3 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic AnalysisTransport: Sixth, 64.7 points Green initiatives: The most recent initiative to new public housing project, added water-saving CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 19.4 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA populationThis is Chicago’s best category performance in improve and diversify transportation options plumbing fixtures in city buildings, and insti- US Census Bureauthe Index. The city’s “annual vehicle revenue available to city residents is Bike 2015, a plan to tuted required water meters for industrial andmiles” (a measure of public transport supply), at increase the percentage of bicycle trips to 5% of commercial water users, for residential buil- Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.20 2005 City Mayors Office of Sustainability; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysis journeys of less than five miles, and to reduce dings with more than three units, and for new the number of bicycle injuries by 50% from cur- residential users. Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 30.8 2005 City Mayors Office of Sustainability; Using city population US Census Bureau rent levels. Under Bike 2015, the municipal gov- ernment will add 120 miles of on-street bike- Waste: 14th, 55.2 points Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 8.2 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000 ways to Chicago’s existing bike infrastructure, Despite the middling ranking in this category, Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 12,560.7 2009 City US Census Bureau 35 miles of off-road bike paths, 11,000 bike Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 5.2 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population Chicago’s policies for waste reduction are among (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureau racks, and a bike commuter station at the city’s the best in the Index, including a comprehensive main downtown park equipped with 300 bike sustainable waste management and reduction Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 15.3 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey parking spaces, shower and locker facilities, and program that includes convenient options for bike repair services. The city has also initiated a residents to dispose of household, recyclable and Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.6 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles bike-and-ride scheme and a bus rapid transit hazardous waste. Chicago continues to face the Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 36.1 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area population pilot program. challenge of increasing its recycling rate, which Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 10.0 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles per square mile (vehicles/miles2) at 8% is well below the Index average of 26%. Water: 12th, 82.2 points This is also the lowest rate among the high-popu- Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 30.7 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey Chicago has the lowest rate of water leakages lation cities in the Index. Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 8.0 2005 City City of Chicago Department in the Index, at 2%, well below the Index aver- of Public Works age of 13%, which reflects well on the city’s Green initiatives: Although Chicago has a ongoing leak detection and repair efforts. Chica- Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 144.8 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied mixed record in successfully implementing population go also performs well for the strength of its a citywide recycling program, the city has been a water supply monitoring policies, as well as pro- Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 2.0 2009 City City of Chicago Department leader in establishing a facility for the recycling of Water Management grams to promote water conservation, and of household chemicals. Funded by federal, an effec-tive stormwater management plan. Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 68 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population state and city sources, the $3.8 million plant was However, Chicago continues a difficult fight to Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 14 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population constructed in 2005 on a brown-field site, and eliminate altogether the discharge of untreated Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 14 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population eventually earned an LEED gold certification.50 51
    • are 29.1 metric tons per person, compared with of power generated from renewable energy Buildings: 27th, 16.7 points the Index average of 14.5 metric tons, while CO2 sources are expected to have a positive impact The city is placed in this rank because it has the emitted per $1 million of GDP totals 721 metric on the city’s energy profile. lowest number of Leadership in Energy and tons, a dramatically higher figure than the Index Environmental Design (LEED)-certified buildings average of 296. The area’s three coal-fired Green initiatives: Cleveland has adopted an in the Index, and also lacks mandatory energy power plants, as well as the region’s economic energy portfolio standard requiring Cleveland efficiency or auditing requirements. Cleveland’s orientation towards metal-related and other car- Public Power, one of the city’s utilities, to use performance is no doubt affected by the fact bon-heavy manufacturing, are among the pri- energy sources that are more efficient, cleaner that half of the city’s housing units were built mary reasons behind Cleveland’s large carbon or renewable to supply 15% of electricity by before World War II, a figure higher than in most footprint. 2015, 20% by 2020 and 25% by 2025. In 2010, other major cities in the US. However, though through a partnership with the non-profit orga- Cleveland faces real challenges in this area, the Green initiatives: Though it has not made a nization First Suburbs Development Council, city’s efforts to introduce green building stan- specific commitment to CO2 reduction, the city the city legally demarcated and contributed dards (see “green initiatives” below) can be seen has started to take action and is seeking to pro- $100,000 to a new so-called special improve- as an important starting point. Also, the fact that cure energy efficient LED streetlights and traffic ment district in the hopes of making energy effi- three Cleveland neighborhoods are trying to lights from a local supplier. The municipal gov- cient retrofits more affordable to residents. The meet LEED neighborhood-development stan- ernment hopes this initiative will reduce the initiative aims to increase resident-financed dards is a step forward. city’s carbon emissions by 25,000 tons each energy efficiency projects by providing low-cost year. The city, along with local charitable foun- financing to be repaid through tax assessments. Green initiatives: In 2007 the city introduced dations, runs the Cleveland Carbon Fund, which This will, it is hoped, help residents cut utility a green building standard. This requires pro- accepts donations from businesses and individu- costs while avoiding new debts. In late 2010 the jects receiving public funding or tax breaks to als, and then distributes grants for local projects Greater Cleveland Energy Alliance, a public-pri- meet standards consistent with leading nation- that improve energy efficiency, water conserva- vate partnership between the municipal govern- al green best practices such as the LEED silver tion and residential weatherization. One initial ment and ShoreBank Enterprise, a non-profit certification. In addition, city officials have star- project will fund the installation of 10,000 com- business development organization, received ted conducting energy assessments of public pact fluorescent light bulbs in two Cleveland $150,000 to develop an energy efficiency retro- facilities, such as water treatment plants, public neighborhoods. fit program for commercial and residential cus- utility buildings and City Hall, to identify oppor- tomers. tunities to reduce carbon emissions and save Energy: 14th, 68 points Cleveland money at the same time. The municipal govern- Cleveland consumes the lowest level of electrici- Land use: 27th, 28.1 points ment credits these efforts with over $110,000 ty in the Index on a per capita basis, at an esti- Green space comprises only 6% of the city’s area, in annual savings in its water division alone. mated 10 gigajoules annually, compared with compared with the Index average of 12%. Cleve- Finally, the city provides information on its web- the Index average 52 gigajoules. Electricity con- land’s population density, at 5,600 people per site on how to reduce energy and conserve US and Canada Green City Index sumption per unit of GDP is also better than the square mile, is also below the average of 8,100. water in buildings. Index average, at 247 gigajoules per $1 million, Although Cleveland faces a sprawl challenge familiar to other cities in North America, munici- Transport: 19th, 47.9 points pal officials have had a measure of success in Cleveland has a relatively large light rail system, L ocated on the shores of Lake Erie, Cleveland is one of the smaller cities in the US and Canada Green City Index in terms of population, wider metropolitan area, which has a popula- tion of 2.1 million. Cleveland ranks 25th overall among the 27 revitalizing the downtown area. Between 1990 and 2000 Cleveland’s downtown population increased by one-third. and a recent extension connected the down- town to University Circle, a cultural center on the east side of the city. Overall, the city’s supply at 430,000 people, and area, at 77 square cities in the Index, and performs best in the ca- of public transport measures 0.2 miles per miles. Cleveland’s economy is more oriented tegory of energy, where it ranks 14th. Because Green initiatives: Using federal Environmen- square mile, which is well below the Index towards industry compared with other cities in Cleveland, as well as the state of Ohio, has com- tal Protection Agency funding, the city estab- the Index, with nearly 16% of jobs generated in mitted to renewable energy targets, prospects lished a brownfield redevelopment program in the goods sector. However, more than half of for its continued strong performance in this 2005. The program’s goals include identifying Cleveland CO2 Best the city’s manufacturing jobs vanished between area are favorable. Cleveland has also intro- sites for re-use, helping developers and busi- Average 100 1950 and 1990, along with nearly half of the duced some innovative programs and policies nesses determine costs associated with redevel- 80 Environmental Energy population, which left Cleveland with daunting to improve transportation and more generally opment, maintaining green space, and con- governance economic challenges; currently it is in the lower address environmental performance. However, verting vacant properties to uses that can 60 half of the Index for income, with a per capita the city faces sizeable challenges in the areas of contribute taxes to city revenues. Entities eligi- 40 GDP of $41,400. Looking ahead, Cleveland CO2 emissions, land use, buildings and waste. ble for financial incentives include public andBackground indicators hopes to make sweeping changes in its econo- Political will for environmental action is one non-profit organizations, and businesses and Air 20 Land use my and environmental performance through encouraging aspect of the city’s current plan- compared with the Index average of 332 giga- developers with existing projects in Cleveland. 0Total population 1) 430,000 the many programs being initiated at the ning strategy, and only the future will tell if it joules. Both figures were estimated by scaling All parties that contributed to the sites’ contam-Administrative area (miles2) 1) 77 municipal level. Although getting there will will succeed in leading to tangible improve- retail electricity sales down to the city level using ination are ineligible to receive funds. As ofGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 41,400 not be easy, Cleveland benefits from the ments. population data, as local figures could not be 2008 the city had used $39 million in incen-Temperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 50 support of Mayor Frank Jackson, who has obtained. Though Cleveland performs relatively tives, mostly low-interest loans and grants, to Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 16 made a strong public case for the relevance of CO2: 27th, 1.2 points well in the area of energy, state and local man- bring about $440 million in investments, whileServices employment (%) 2) 84 climate action and sustainability. Most of the This category is one of Cleveland’s weakest per- dates requiring utilities to make energy effi- creating nearly 4,000 jobs, according to oneGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA data for Cleveland came from the city and the formances in the Index. Per capita CO2 emissions ciency improvements and increase the share regional newspaper. Waste Water52 53
    • Air: 20th, 60 points Cleveland has higher than average nitrogen oxides levels, at 76 lb per person compared with the Index average of 66 lb, but its levels for sulfur dioxide and particulate matter are better than the Index averages. With many environmental challenges, air quality is not the city’s most urgent priority, but implementing measures such as air quality targets could help Cleveland achieve a stronger performance in the future. Green initiatives: In 2007 the city replaced 60 vehicles in the municipal fleet with diesel-elec- tricity hybrid vehicles, and the city has an anti- idling policy for city vehicles and equipment, but the extent to which the policy is enforced is unclear.average of 1.1. As a consequence, only 6% of faced challenges in improving its water system, Green initiatives: In 2005 Cleveland estab- various municipal efforts in different areas. In third annual summit will take place in Septemberworkers currently travel by public transporta- especially in preventing sewer overflows during Environmental governance: lished an Office of Sustainability to help the city addition, the city organized “Sustainable Cleve- 2011. Finally, Cleveland is one of only two UStion, bicycle or foot, compared with the Index heavy storms, which is a problem for many other 25th, 56.7 points become more efficient, reduce consumption land 2019” summits in 2009 and 2010, three- municipal signatories to the UN Global Compactaverage of 13%. According to a city report, part North American cities with aging infrastructure. Although Cleveland has not set environmental and waste generation, and use sustainability as day, 700-participant events wherein residents (the other is Milwaukee), which includes threeof the problem stems from the fact that Cleve- However, the regional sewer district plans a targets or committed to regular environmental an economic development tool. The depart- weighed in on their vision for long-term sustain- principles specifically related to improving theland’s streets and bridges are more conducive to $3 billion upgrade that will include building large reporting, the city has formulated a partial envi- ment’s website includes information about the ability planning and voted on priority issues. The environment.automobile traffic than to cyclists or pedes- underground holding tanks aimed at lessening ronmental strategy, set up a dedicated environ-trians. Despite these challenges, Cleveland has the incidence of sewerage overflows. mental authority, and initiated public aware-initiated policies and programs aimed at im- ness campaigns. In addition, Cleveland isproving area transit, like park-and-ride schemes Green initiatives: The city’s water department assisted by the strong support of Mayor Frank Quantitative indicatorsand carpooling lanes. Cleveland has also set a announced plans in early 2011 to connect more Jackson, who in 2006 signed the US Mayors Cli-goal to develop a 190-mile network of trails and than 425,000 water meters to homes and busi- mate Protection Agreement, acknowledging a Category Indicator Average Cleveland Year Basis Source Commentsbike routes. However, the fact that the state of nesses. The project is expected to take three commitment to try to reduce the city’s carbon CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 721.3 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic AnalysisOhio is one of the lowest investing states in the years to complete and to significantly reduce footprint.US for public transportation means that the city leaks and energy consumption, which have CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 29.1 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population US Census Bureauwill have to work that much harder to find fund- been persistent problems for the city.ing sources to facilitate significant improve- Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.25 2008 Mixed Energy Information Administration; State retail electricity sales scaled US Bureau of Economic Analysis down to city level using popu-ments in this area. Waste: 26th, 22.2 points lation data; Indicator constructed The city’s recycling rate is only 9%, compared using MSA GDPGreen initiatives: The city has announced an with the Index average of 26%. This figure was Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 10.3 2008 Mixed Energy Information Administration; State retail electricity sales US Census Bureau scaled down to city level usingoverarching strategy to provide more trans- estimated by a city of Cleveland official, based on population dataportation options that will promote economic county-level waste figures. Improving wastedevelopment and quality of life. Within this management has been a challenge for the city, in Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 6.4 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000strategy are commitments to developing mass part because it is administered at the county Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 5,602.2 2009 City US Census Bureautransit, encouraging mixed-use development level. However, Cleveland’s growing recycling Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 0.0 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureauincorporating commercial and residential activi- program is a positive step (see “green initiatives”ties, and promoting non-motorized transport. below). Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 6.3 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community SurveyHowever, city officials have not issued specifictargets or initiated any major programs to Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.2 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles Green initiatives: In late 2010 Clevelandachieve these goals. Using federal and munici- Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 16.7 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area population rolled out a $2.5 million curbside recycling pro-pal funding, the city has committed to undertak- gram, which provided 150,000 households Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 1.6 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles per square mile (vehicles/miles2)ing a study on bus rapid transit, but the timeline with special bins that are equipped with com-is unclear. Cleveland spent over $600,000 trans- puter chips connected to the city’s computer Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 24.4 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Surveyforming part of a downtown parking garage into system. The system allows officials to monitora station for bicycle parking, storage and repair, household recycling by weighing the bin. In Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 8.5 2007 County Cuyahoga County (Ohio) Solid Waste Residential waste only; Management District Data point is for countywhich is scheduled to open in 2011. addition, the city’s water department recycles at least 50% of the construction and demolition Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 165.3 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied populationWater: 25th, 56.1 points waste generated from capital improvementWater consumption in the city is not much higher projects, a practice that other departments are Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 28.7 2003 City EPAthan the Index average, at 165 gallons per per- expected to adopt shortly. Also, the city wantsson daily versus 155, but the 29% leakage rate to build a $180 million waste-to-energy plant Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 76 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationin Cleveland’s water distribution system is well and the plans are currently being reviewed at Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 14 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationabove the Index average of 13%. Cleveland has state level. Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 20 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population54 55
    • The city scores well for monitoring emissions and setting a CO2 reduction target separate from national guidelines (see “green initiatives” be- low). City authorities say that municipal opera- tions account for only around 4% of the Dallas carbon footprint. Green initiatives: Dallas signed up to the US Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agree- ment in 2006, which commits the city to reduc- ing greenhouse gas emissions 7% below 1990 levels by 2012. The same year, Dallas completed a baseline inventory of greenhouse gas emis- sions in 2005 comprising municipal and non- municipal sources. Dallas will complete another baseline inventory in 2011, which will be based on 2010 emissions. City authorities say they are on track to meet the 7% reduction target, pri- marily through energy conservation programs property. Despite some policy oversights, Dallas funding, the city is also retrofitting older munici- and the purchase of renewable energy. has a reasonable amount of green space: 13% of pal buildings to make them more energy effi- its total administrative area is green against an cient. The Dallas Convention Center has already Energy: 16th, 65.8 points Index average of 12%. been renovated, achieving silver LEED certifica- Dallas is second only to Houston as the largest tion, and a new terminal at one of the citys two municipal purchaser of renewable power in the Green initiatives: An Urban Forest Advisory airports, Dallas Love Field, will be built to LEED Dallas US, with 40% of the city’s electricity coming Committee, established in 2005, advises city silver standards. from clean sources, primarily wind, according to officials and educates the public about the envi- the federal Environmental Protection Agency ronmental importance of trees in an urban envi- Transport: 11th, 54.4 points (EPA). The city also has better than average elec- ronment. In 2006 the city appointed a city Dallas achieves its highest rank in transport. The tricity consumption figures. Dallas consumes an forester to develop an urban forestry program. city scores well for promoting green transport, US and Canada Green City Index estimated 208 gigajoules of electricity per In another initiative, a citizen forestry scheme, which includes efforts to make the city fleet $1 million of GDP against an Index average of started in 2007, trains residents in basic tree greener. Dallas is an Index pacesetter in convert- 332 gigajoules. The performance looks more skills and encourages tree planting. ing city fleets to cleaner energy, purchasing its impressive when taking into account that first alternative-fuelled vehicle in 1992. Ten goods-intensive economies are generally less Buildings: 15th, 49.6 points years later Dallas became the first city in Texas to efficient than service-intensive ones. Although The city’s middling score in the buildings catego- use biodiesel. Over 40% of the city’s 2,000-vehi- Dallas is not classed in the Index as goods-inten- ry is one of the lowest among mid-income cities. cle fleet now operates on alternative fuel, either D allas is located in the southern state of Texas. Sprawling across 342 square miles, the city has one of the largest administrative make the city’s fleet greener and other efforts to promote environmentally friendly transport. Dallas also scores relatively well in the CO2 cate- sive, it falls just outside that bracket. Estimated electricity consumption per capita in Dallas is also slightly better than the Index average, at Dallas’s performance is dragged down primarily by a relative lack of strong policies: the city does not require energy audits and has only limited compressed natural gas, biodiesel, propane or hybrid gasoline-electric. Despite efforts to make transport cleaner, the city’s score in this areas in the US and Canada Green City Index. But gory, at 13th, picking up points for its efforts to 50 gigajoules per person versus 52 gigajoules. incentives for retrofits. The number of Lead- with only 1.3 million inhabitants in the city lim- curb carbon emissions. The city has signaled its ership in Energy and Environmental Design its, it has the Index’s sixth lowest population intent to improve its overall green performance Green initiatives: Dallas has replaced incan- (LEED)-certified buildings is also relatively low, density. The city’s economy is dominated by by putting in place a management framework descent bulbs with more energy-efficient LED at 4.3 per 100,000 people, versus the Index banking and energy, and is also boosted by a that is designed to exceed environmental com- traffic lights at intersections. The replacement average of 6.4. However, the city has made large number of big-name telecom manufactur- pliance requirements. The weakest areas for program has resulted in annual savings of progress on municipal buildings – Dallas has cut Dallas CO2 Best ers setting up base there. It is among the mid- Dallas are land use, where it places 23rd, and 14.5 million kilowatt hours, the equivalent of annual energy usage in its city buildings by Average 100 income cities in the Index, with a GDP per capita waste, at 19th. $1.45 million per year. Investment in solar ener- almost 5% through retrofits between 2004 and 80 Environmental Energy of $48,900. Like other southern cities, Dallas is gy projects is also underway, the most notable 2009 (see “green initiatives” below). And in governance relatively hot, which places demands on energy CO2: 13th, 77.5 points being a solar panel installation on the Dallas 2009 the city set out energy and conservation 60 consumption, but the city is responding by mak- Low population density cities with hot climates Convention Center. standards for residential and commercial con- 40 ing strides in adopting renewable energy and tend to have higher than average CO2 emissions struction, which help boost its performance. 20Background indicators transferring its municipal fleet to alternative per capita, but not Dallas. At 11.6 metric tons, Land use: 23rd, 43.1 points Air Land use fuels. The statistics in the Index for Dallas are a the city’s annual per capita CO2 emissions are Dallas registers its lowest rank in land use. A low Green initiatives: As part of the city’s Green 0Total population 1) 1.3 million mix of data for the city and the wider metropoli- better than the Index average of 14.5 metric population density works against the city, but its Building Program, started 2003, all new munici-Administrative area (miles2) 1) 342 tan area, which has a population of 6.4 million, tons. When measured against economic output, performance is also hindered by relatively weak pal buildings over 10,000 square feet have toGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 48,900 and which is one of the largest metropolitan the city registers the third-best performance policies. The city does not have any measures in meet LEED silver certification standards, and thisTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 67 areas in the US. among its mid-income peers: 191 metric tons place to protect green space from building was upgraded to gold in 2006. The city built 17 Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 15 Dallas ranks 17th overall in the Index. It achieves for every $1 million of GDP, compared with the development, for example. Nor is there a tree green buildings between 2003 and 2010, andServices employment (%) 2) 85 its highest rank, at 11th, in the transport catego- Index average of 296 metric tons. Strong poli- planting policy, although the city does at least had 26 others in the design and construction Waste WaterGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA ry, largely thanks to long-standing efforts to cies have helped Dallas rein in carbon emissions. supply citizens with trees to plant on public phases. Using $9.1 million of federal stimulus56 57
    • category is constrained by a relatively short problem and are making concerted efforts totransport network. Dallas’s public transport bring consumption down (see “green initiatives”system measures 0.4 miles per square mile, below).compared with an Index average of 1.1 miles,although the city has plans under way to expand Green initiatives: Through an extensive waterthe system. Furthermore, Dallas has the lowest conservation program, which includes “xeri-share in the Index of workers commuting by scaping” (water-efficient landscaping that re-public transit, bicycle or foot in Dallas, at 3% duces the need for irrigation), Dallas reducedcompared with the average of 13%. annual water consumption 14% between 2001 and 2009, equivalent to 98 billion gallons. TheGreen initiatives: Under the city’s 2030 Tran- city is targeting a further reduction of 1.5% eachsit System Plan, approved in 2006, transport year during 2010-2015. Dallas Water Utilitiesinfrastructure is being upgraded and expanded. has been funneling treated wastewater to irri-By 2030 the plan’s goals are: 43 miles added to gate the golf links at Cedar Crest Golf Coursethe light rail system; 77 miles of enhanced bus since 2005, which had previously been irrigated to one day per week, encouraging residents to Environmental governance: with the Kyoto protocol. The city’s biggest short- spans 11 city departments and 85% of the city’sservice corridors; 20 miles of extra rapid-bus ser- using potable water. Nearly 82 million gallons of separate recyclables from their trash into a sin- 16th, 82.2 points coming in this category, however, is a lack of 13,000 employees. In 2008 the Dallas EMS wasvice corridors; and 116 miles of high occupancy potable water were saved in 2005 alone by this gle container. In addition, sales of recyclables Dallas scores well for having a dedicated envi- citizen involvement in the decision-making pro- awarded “ISO 14001:2004” certification, anvehicle lanes. Additionally, a streetcar project, initiative. added $2.2 million to the city’s coffers in 2010 ronmental authority and producing regular cess surrounding large projects with an environ- international environmental standard that setsfunded by a $23 million federal grant, is in an alone. In another initiative, the Recycle Naturally reports on the citys environmental performance mental impact. out criteria for organizations wishing to exceedenvironmental assessment phase. Under the Waste: 19th, 41.8 points program offers free composting classes to resi- and policies. Environmental commitments have environmental compliance requirements. Aproposed scheme, streetcars in downtown Dal- Dallas’s placement in this category is a reflection dents and free composting bins to class partici- also been made at an international level. The Green initiatives: Dallas uses an environmen- dedicated website launched in 2008 provideslas would link to light rail lines. of its comparatively low recycling rate. The city pants. The Dallas Zoo, by recycling much of its carbon emission reduction targets of the US tal management system (EMS), a management information on the city’s green initiatives and recycles only 13% of its municipal waste, half waste for compost and mulch, has saved over Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agree- framework for setting environmental strategies, accomplishments, and tips to help residentsWater: 16th, 78.7 points the Index average of 26%. However this rate $40,000 in dump fees and materials over the ment, which Dallas signed in 2006, are in line implementing plans and reviewing results. It reduce their environmental footprint.Dallas has a relatively efficient water distribu- should improve in coming years as a result of last ten years.tion system, losing 9% of its supply to leaks com- programs currently underway (see “green initia-pared with the Index average of 13%. Water- tives” below). Through education and the intro- Air: 17th, 67.4 points Quantitative indicatorsrelated policies are also robust. Main water duction of single-stream recycling (in which all Dallas, like many cities in the state of Texas, suf-sources are monitored for quality and supply lev- recyclables are placed in one large container), fers from poor air quality. In the Index only Hous- Category Indicator Average Dallas Year Basis Source Commentsels, lower water usage is promoted and recycled Dallas has already increased recycling from ton, also in Texas, has higher annual emissions CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 190.6 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysiswater is used. However, high water consump- 9,700 tons in 2005 to 44,700 tons in 2010. The of particulate matter than Dallas. The city emitstion weighs down the city’s score in this catego- city’s goal for recycling participation – 50% of 80 lb of particulate matter per year, considerably CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 11.6 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population US Census Bureaury – the second highest rate in the Index – at households by 2011 – was exceeded a year early more than the Index average of 25 lb. Cement219 gallons per person per day, versus the Index with a participation rate of 62%. production constitutes more than 40% of all Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.21 2008 Mixed Energy Information Administration; State retail electricity sales scaled US Bureau of Economic Analysis down to city level using popu-average of 155 gallons. High temperature cities point sources of air pollutant emissions in the lation data; Indicator constructedlike Dallas tend to consume more water than the Green initiatives: The OneDAY Dallas pro- Dallas-Fort Worth region, contributing signifi- using MSA GDPIndex average. City officials have recognized the gram reduces garbage and recycling collections cantly to the city’s air quality problem. But like Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 50.4 2008 Mixed Energy Information Administration; State retail electricity sales US Census Bureau scaled down to city level using Houston, Dallas has put in place a robust set of population data policies to improve air quality (see “green initia- tives” below). Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 13.4 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000 Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 3,799.8 2009 City US Census Bureau Green initiatives: Dallas is part of the Sustain- Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 4.3 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureau able Skylines initiative, a voluntary three-year pilot program to improve air quality in partner- Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 3.0 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey; US Census Bureau ship with the EPA and state government. Some Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.4 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles of the program’s successes include facilitating Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 18.6 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area population the replacement of the city’s old taxi fleet with Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 1.7 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles cleaner, low-emitting vehicles, the construction per square mile (vehicles/miles2) of 30 LEED silver homes in partnership with Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 26.1 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Habitat for Humanity, a housing charity, and the Survey distribution of energy efficiency and water con- Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 13.0 2009 City City of Dallas servation kits to Dallas residents. Due to its suc- cess, the Dallas pilot is now being used as a Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 219.3 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied national model. Other measures to curb air pol- population lutants include the banning of vehicles with a Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 9.1 2009 City City of Dallas gross weight over 14,000 lb from idling for more than five minutes. In addition, a green cement Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 54 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population purchasing policy was adopted in 2007, giving Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 80 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population preference to dry kilns with lower nitrogen Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 14 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population oxides emission levels.58 59
    • tion per capita is 38 gigajoules, also below the Land use: 18th, 53.3 points Index average of 52 gigajoules. The city has This is Denver’s weakest category. The city is taken a proactive approach on managing energy marked down for having the smallest amount consumption, and is one of only three cities in of green space in the Index as a proportion of its the Index that scores full marks for clean administrative area – just 3% versus the Index and efficient energy policies, through its com- average of 12%. A relatively low population prehensive Greenprint Denver plan (see “green density of 4,000 people per square mile, com- initiatives” below). In 2010 the Greenprint Den- pared with the average of 8,100 also works ver Office canvassed 15 neighborhoods around against Denver in land use. But the city scores the city and implemented at least one “energy well for its green land use policies and its mea- action” in 2,500 homes. Actions included mea- sures to contain urban sprawl. These include sures to improve energy efficiency and reduce subsidies to promote brownfield regeneration weatherrelated energy loss. Denver’s energy per- and the protection of its scarce green space from building development. Green initiatives: Denver has been part of the US Environmental Protection Agency’s Brown- fields Program since October 2010. The pro- gram targets the 2,000-acre South Platte River area, which contains 33 brownfield sites, coal- fired power plants and railway corridors, and is home to about 88,000 of the city’s low-income residents. With federal assistance the city is identifying and prioritizing brownfield cleanup projects, evaluating potential uses for proper- ties, and, with site owners, conducting environ- Denver mental assessments. Additionally, in 2006 Den- ver launched the “Mile High Million” with the goal of planting one million trees by 2025. The city reached a fifth of that target by March 2011. US and Canada Green City Index Buildings: Sixth, 68.8 points Denver’s strong rank in this category is a reflection of policies aimed at improving the energy efficiency of buildings. The city offers incentives for building retrofits, and distributes D enver is the capital of the western US state of Colorado. Located in high plains at the edge of the Rocky Mountains, Denver earned the nick- among the leaders in most policy areas across the Index owing to the Greenprint Denver Office, established in 2007, which plans and coordinates Green initiatives: One of the first recom- mendations of the Greenprint Denver Advisory Council in 2007 was to set more ambitious formance also benefits from increasing the amount of locally produced energy, which only a few cities in the Index have managed to achieve. information to offices and homes about ways to reduce energy consumption. Strict energy re- gulation for new buildings has also led to a rise name the “Mile-High City” because of its ele- citywide environmental programs. Denver places greenhouse gas reduction goals. Denver had a In addition, statewide legislation in Colorado in the number of Leadership in Energy and Envi- vation exactly one mile above sea level. With in the top ten in the buildings, water, transport previous target of reducing per capita green- requires that 30% of all electricity produced must ronmental Design (LEED)-certified buildings. 610,000 residents living inside the city limits, and air categories, and is the top performer over- house gas emissions 10% below 1990 levels by come from renewable resources by 2020, and to For every 100,000 people in Denver there are Denver is considered a mid-population city in the all among mid-income cities in the Index. 2012. Taking into account population growth, help meet that target Denver is evaluating 10.2 LEED-certified buildings, many more than US and Canada Green City Index. The larger met- this per capita target would require an 18 million around 300 municipal buildings for solar power ropolitan area is home to some 2.6 million peo- CO2: 14th, 76 points metric ton reduction of greenhouse gases installations. Denver CO2 ple, and a combination of city and metro-level Emissions per capita, at 13.2 metric tons of (16% below 1990 levels). But the advisory coun- Best Average 100 data are used in the Index. Local economic activi- CO2 per year, are below the Index average of cil called for a more ambitious long-term goal Green initiatives: The Greenprint Denver pro- ty is dominated by transportation, telecommu- 14.5 metric tons. And for every $1 million of of reducing absolute greenhouse emissions gram includes several energy saving initiatives. Environmental 80 Energy nications, aerospace and manufacturing. The city GDP that Denver generates, it releases 231 met- 25% from 1990 levels by 2020. The main green- In 2010 alone, 2,000 LED bulbs in 200 traffic governance 60 has a per capita GDP of $49,200, placing it at the ric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, versus an house gas reduction areas identified by the advi- signals were installed with estimated savings of 40 top end of the mid-income group of cities in the Index average of 296 metric tons. A recent sory council were energy conservation, greater almost $800,000 per year. The city is also in theBackground indicators Index. report found that carbon emissions from power energy efficiency in buildings, renewable ener- process of installing solar PV cells with a com- Air 20 Land use Denver is ranked fifth overall in the Index. The plants across Colorado declined by 47% bet- gy and carbon offsets. bined capacity of four megawatts on city build- 1) 0Total population 610,000 city’s strongest categories are energy and envi- ween 2000 and 2010. The largest utility in the ings and public schools, and has announced itAdministrative area (miles2) 1) 153 ronmental governance, where it places first. Its state also has plans to close or retrofit four coal- Energy: First, 86 points will retrofit the central library for projectedGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 49,200 clean and efficient energy policies are among the burning plants, which will have positive ramifi- Along with environmental governance, this is annual savings of $150,000 through reducedTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 50 most robust in the Index, and its environmental cations for communities across the state, includ- Denver’s strongest category in the Index. Elec- energy bills. Low-income households are also Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 12 governance performance is supported by its ing Denver. The city also scores well for mea- tricity consumption per $1 million of GDP is eligible for assistance to improve energy effi-Services employment (%) 2) 88 green action plan, green management and suring carbon emissions and for its greenhouse 184 gigajoules, which is nearly half the Index ciency and the city also provides them with atticGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA strong public participation. Denver also ranks gas reduction strategy. average of 332 gigajoules. Electricity consump- insulation assessments. Waste Water60 61
    • the 6.4 Index average. The one blemish on rently relatively low, at 7.4% versus an IndexDenver’s buildings score is its failure to require average of 13%.energy audits, which would help to identify inef-ficiencies. Green initiatives: In 1993 Denver became the first US city to launch a Green Fleet program toGreen initiatives: As part of the Greenprint prioritize fuel efficiency in its public transportprogram Denver unveiled its first municipal fleet. The program, which city officials revised ingreen building policy: all current and future city 2000, calls for a reduction in carbon emissionsbuildings have to be LEED certified. To en- and fuel expenditures through the adoption ofcourage solar power usage in municipal buil- strategies including the purchase of smallerdings, the city offers minimum 15-year leases to vehicles, encouraging alternative modes ofprivate companies to install, operate and main- transport, minimizing total vehicle miles, andtain solar energy systems. In return for the lease, investing in vehicles that run on alternativeenergy rates must be lower than those charged fuels. In 2004 Denver launched a pilot programby utility companies. Solar systems have been to test clean-burning B20 biodiesel in 60 of theinstalled in numerous city-owned buildings, the city’s vehicles. Today over 1,000 of the city’sbiggest of which is the two-megawatt array at 3,500 vehicles run on biodiesel. of materials is then conducted at treatment facil- A baseline review has been carried out, targets through a variety of initiatives, including Green tion, subsidized home-energy audits, junk mailDenver International Airport. A “green roof” ities. The city saw a 61% increase in recycling have been set, and evaluation reports are regular- Teams. Green Teams are community-based reduction, free CFL porch bulbs and trees forinstallation program for municipal buildings, to Water: Seventh, 85.6 points rates in the first two years of the single-stream ly published. There is also easy access to informa- groups of friends, families and neighbors in- planting in neighborhoods. Greenprint’s resi-cut down energy consumption, is also part of the Denver has one of the most efficient water distri- recycling program. tion on the citys environmental performance and terested in learning about energy efficiency and dential program managers work closely withGreenprint initiative. bution systems in the Index, losing a modest policies, coupled with a central contact point for carbon emissions reduction, and improving Green Teams to set tangible goals and decide 5% of its supply to leaks against the Index aver- Air: Tenth, 79 points citizen complaints. their local environment. The Greenprint Denver on the best outreach methods for expandingTransport: Eighth, 60.7 points age of 13%. Water efficiency and treatment poli- Denver’s performance in the air category is bol- office considers these teams catalysts for participation throughout the community, in-The city’s strong placement in transport is sup- cies are also strong. Main water sources are moni- stered by having some of the strongest clean Green initiatives: Greenprint Denver enables greater community involvement and provides cluding door-to-door canvassing or neighbor-ported by its efforts to make the public transport tored for quality and supply levels, and measures air policies in the Index. Air quality targets public participation in environmental programs them with free income-qualified weatheriza- hood picnics.fleet greener and encourage citizens to walk, are in place to lower water usage. Denver’s one have been set and measures are in place tocycle or take public transport. Congestion re- weakness in the water category is its relatively improve air quality, and they have had a positiveduction policies are also strong. The city boasts high consumption. Denver consumes 181 gal- effect. Denver’s annual sulfur dioxide emis- lons of water per capita per day, which is one of sions, at 14 lb per person, fall well below the Quantitative indicators the highest among mid-income cities and well Index average of 22 lb. But there is still room above the Index average of 155 gallons. for improvement. Both particulate matter and Category Indicator Average Denver Year Basis Source Comments nitrogen oxides emissions are above the aver- CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 231.3 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysis Green initiatives: Denver’s new water recy- ages. cling plant on the South Platte River is the largest CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 13.2 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population US Census Bureau in Colorado and work is underway to expand Green initiatives: Denver has an anti-idling treatment capacity to 45 million gallons a day. ordinance limiting idling to five minutes and Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.18 2009 City Sustainability Department; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysis The facility supplies recycled water for non- police have authority to ticket idling vehicles potable uses, such as irrigation for lakes, parks, left unattended for any period. In addition, Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 37.9 2009 City Sustainability Department; Using city population US Census Bureau golf courses and wildlife preserves. And through since 2003 the state of Colorado has operated a new irrigations systems already in place, city voluntary mobile vehicle emissions testing pro- Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 3.2 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000 authorities say they use 28% less water in parks gram, making it more convenient for motorists Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 3,989.2 2009 City US Census Bureau than in 2001. to get tested. Vans deployed with special laser- Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 10.2 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureau based technology examine vehicles as they Waste: 17th, 51.9 points drive by and alert drivers to whether they have Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 7.4 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey This is one of Denver’s weakest categories, passed or failed. Drivers who fail the test have despite the fact that it treats different types of the opportunity to retest at a traditional emis- Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.1 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database; Using service area square miles US Census Bureaupedestrian-only zones and a well-developed waste, including recyclable, hazardous and sions testing facility.traffic management system to ease traffic flow. industrial. The city also scores well for its waste Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 21.3 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database; Using service area population US Census BureauThe most significant weakness in this category is reduction strategy and for reducing reliance on Environmental governance:the lack of public transit supply, even after the landfills in favor of more sustainable local waste First, 100 points Maximum public transport vehicles available per square mile (vehicles/miles2) 9.0 0.6 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database; US Census Bureau Using service area square milescity invested $1 billion on improving public management practices. Regardless of its efforts Denver ties with New York and Washington DC intransport infrastructure through the Inter-modal to improve recycling (see “green initiatives” this category, earning full points. The perfor- Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 26.8 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community SurveyTransportation Expansion (T-REX) project, which below), Denver has one of the lowest recycling mance is underpinned by the Greenprint Denverwas completed in 2006. The length of the Den- rates in the Index, at just 3%, versus the 27-city Office, Denver’s coordinating body for environ- Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 3.0 2009 City City of Denver Sustainability Departmentver metropolitan area public transport network average of 26%, which restrains its score. mental programs across different city agencies. Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 181.2 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied populationremains one of the shortest in the Index at just Working alongside the Greenprint Denver Imple-0.1 miles per square mile, versus an Index aver- Green initiatives: In 2005 the city of Denver mentation Committee, which helps ensure green Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 5.0 2009 City City of Denver Water Departmentage of 1.1 miles. And, likely a result of the public began a transition to a single-stream recycling measures are integrated throughout city opera- Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 68 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationtransport shortfall, Denver’s share of workers system, which allows residents to place all recy- tions, Greenprint Denver is a best-practice model Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 26 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationusing public transit, a bike or walking is also cur- clable materials into a single container. Sorting of environmental governance in the Index. Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 14 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population62 63
    • beginning in 2012, to track performance and progress toward achieving the CO2 emissions target. Energy: 27th, 27.3 points Electricity consumption per unit of GDP is an esti- mated 1,029 gigajoules per $1 million, com- pared with the Index average of 332 gigajoules, making Detroit’s energy intensity the highest in the Index. Detroit’s per capita electricity con- sumption is estimated at 87 gigajoules per per- son, compared with the Index average of 52. Both figures are estimated based on state retail electricity sales, scaled down to the city level using population data. Policies aimed at promot- ing energy efficiency and renewable energy, which Detroit has partially initiated, are a positive Buildings: 26th, 18.1 points step towards improvement in this area. Detroit has only 0.8 buildings per 100,000 peo- ple certified by Leadership in Energy and Envi- Green initiatives: Although there are few city- ronmental Design (LEED), compared with the level initiatives related to energy, the Michigan Index average of 6.4. Several state-level initia- state government is promoting renewable ener- tives (see “green initiatives” below) offer city gy and energy efficiency. In 2008 the state officials opportunities to consider similar pro- enacted a law requiring 10% of its energy to grams and additional funding at the city level. come from renewable sources by 2015. In 2010 Detroit one of Michigan’s largest power suppliers, which serves southern Michigan and some of Detroit, announced that its supply of renewable power would reach 6% following power pur- chases from four new independent projects. Green initiatives: The state government has introduced a state and federally funded program providing low-income Michigan residents with free weatherization services aimed at saving families up to 25% in heating costs. The pro- US and Canada Green City Index Three of the four projects are in Michigan and gram also offers low-income homeowners a Iowa and generate wind power; the other is in 10% energy efficiency home improvement tax Texas and is a gas-to-electricity landfill. credit on upgrades that meet federal Energy Star efficiency requirements. In addition, in W ith a population of 910,000, Detroit is one of the mid-sized cities in the US and Cana- da Green City Index. The population figure ways and railways that connect Detroit with the region and Canada, Detroit may still find oppor- tunities for revitalization, hopefully integrated CO2: 22nd, 43.8 points CO2 emissions per $1 million of GDP total 427 metric tons, well above the Index average Land use: 26th, 35.8 points In terms of population density, Detroit has 6,600 people per square mile compared with 2009 a Detroit-based utility introduced propos- als to increase its renewable energy and energy efficiency portfolio. No specific targets were included in the Index is from 2009, but the 2010 with environmental excellence. Most of the data of 296 metric tons. Per capita emissions are the Index average of 8,100. Only 7% of Detroit’s announced. US Census – which was not yet published upon for Detroit came from the city and the wider 17 metric tons per person, compared with the area comprises green space, compared with the finalization of the Index – showed a steep 25% metropolitan area, which has a population of Index average of 14.5. Detroit’s large carbon Index average of 12%. In recent years the city decline, accelerating a decades-long trend. Tra- 4.4 million. footprint is a factor of its heavy industrial activi- has taken steps to revitalize certain areas, pre- ditionally a center of automobile manufacturing Detroit ranks at the bottom of the Index, at 27th ty, as well as the fact that the second largest vent further sprawl and increase the quality of and home to the big-three automobile compa- overall. The nine categories in the Index all high- coal-fired plant in the nation is located less than life downtown, but Detroit currently lacks poli- nies, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, Detroit light the challenges the city faces. Nevertheless, 50 miles away. Statewide standards for adopting cies to sustain and improve the quality and peaked in terms of population and economic Detroit has taken some steps to transform itself renewable energy (see “green initiatives” in the quantity of green space. A private group of the Detroit CO2 Best strength in the 1950s. Since then, the city has from a “rust belt” into a “green belt”, helped in no energy category) will, hopefully, help reduce state’s largest employers has called on the Average 100 seen its population shrink as residents moved to small part by the proactive stance of the former Detroit’s CO2 emissions. municipal government to make changes (see 80 Environmental Energy the suburbs or other cities and, in tandem with Michigan Governor, a staunch advocate for “green initiatives” below). governance various shocks to the automobile industry, has alternative energy and green economic develop- Green initiatives: Although the Detroit munic- 60 had to restructure the local economy away ment. The existence of state-level goals for ipal government has not committed to a reduc- Green initiatives: The main organization pro- 40 from a reliance on auto manufacturing. Today, renewable energy and energy efficiency may tion in CO2 emissions, it is nevertheless affected moting revitalization initiatives is BusinessBackground indicators Detroit’s per capita GDP stands at $40,300, help shape, in some capacity, future policies and by state-level policy initiatives. The state govern- Leaders for Michigan. Comprising executives Air 20 Land use below the Index average of $46,000. In 2007 programming at the city level. Already, Detroit ment conducted a greenhouse gas inventory in from the state’s largest job providers and uni- 0Total population 1) 910,000 roughly one-third of Detroit residents lived has taken action to improve the city’s non- 1990, and again in 2002. In 2009 the Michigan versities, in 2010 the entity issued a compre-Administrative area (miles2) 1) 138 below the federal poverty level, the highest per- motorized transport infrastructure as well as the Climate Action Council completed a climate hensive “Turnaround Plan” for Detroit aimed pri-GDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 40,300 centage among large US cities. In April 2008 the variety and quality of public spaces. These initia- action plan, which identifies 54 policy recom- marily at economic development, but includingTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 50 city announced a $300 million stimulus plan to tives, which aim to improve quality of life as well mendations for reducing almost 1 billion metric urban revitalization as one of its goals. So far, Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 14 create jobs and revitalize the diverse, and par- as the city’s environmental performance, are tons of CO2 equivalent, based on 1990 levels, the group has secured the city government’sServices employment (%) 2) 86 tially historic, downtown neighborhoods. As an encouraging win-win strategies that will hope- between 2009 and 2025. The Council also support for some of the plan’s initiatives, butGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA important transportation hub with ports, high- fully be replicated. established an annual reporting mechanism, not those centered on combating urban sprawl. Waste Water64 65
    • have attained, Detroit might follow through with the commitment that its Office of Energy and Sustainability made in 2008, which was to formulate a baseline review based on input from a diverse cross-section of stakeholders (see “green initiatives” below). Green initiatives: In late 2008 the city’s mayor at the time, Ken Cockrel Jr, announced the cre- ation of the Office of Energy and Sustainability, whose mission he identified as the collabora- tion of “city departments, business groups, non- profit organizations and other agencies to protect, enhance and promote sustainability, livability and energy efficiency in Detroit”. The office is an extension of an earlier mayoralTransport: 27th, 37.5 points 400 miles of new bike lanes. To date, the city however, and the city has made some progress al traffic monitoring system that measures the Environmental governance: Green Task Force, created in 2007 to adviseDetroit performs well in the Index for the has identified $86 million in private and gov- rolling out residential recycling in recent years number of cars and their position by means of 26th, 16.7 points the city council and Detroit residents on greenlength of its public transport network, which is ernment funding for projects, and has already (see “green initiatives” below), suggesting that the radiation they emit, and generates data that Though the city has a dedicated environmental principles and practices. There are no websites2.5 miles per square mile of metropolitan area, added some lanes. Officials have not released its performance has actually improved. Though can be used in a number of ways. The results of authority, Detroit does not have an identifiable with information about the status of presentthe fourth highest in the Index, and well above a timeline for the project. the city has used an incinerator for most of its this program and continued activities are un- environmental strategy or environmental tar- initiatives, but the Green Task Force issued athe Index average of 1.1 mile per square mile. waste management in recent years, it recently clear. The Council of Governments has informa- gets, and has not committed to regular repor- progress report in 2008. The document laid outThis figure was estimated based on numbers Water: 27th, 38.8 points shut down the facility following long-standing tion on its website on ways for the public to ting on its environmental performance. In order general progress to date and goals, but did notfrom the national transit database. Detroit per- Per capita water consumption in Detroit is public opposition. improve air quality through consumer habits to reach the level of openness and public include specific targets among its near-termforms less favorably in other transit-related 172 gallons per person daily, compared with the and everyday behavior. engagement that the Index’s top performers objectives.areas. For instance, whereas the Index average Index average of 155. The Index average for Green initiatives: In 2009 the city started afor the percentage of workers traveling by pub- water leakages as a percentage of the water dis- pilot program to introduce curbside recycling forlic transit, bicycle or foot is 13%, in Detroit it is tribution system is 13%, and in Detroit it is 16%. 30,000 homes, or roughly 12% of the city’sonly 4%. It is encouraging that the wider region Detroit is one of only two cities in the Index that households, with plans to serve the entire city Quantitative indicatorsis committing to a long-term plan that includes does not treat all of its wastewater, but it has within five years. The program, expected to costseveral hundred miles of walking and biking begun to address some of the issues facing the $3.8 million, will end Detroit’s status as one of Category Indicator Average Detroit Year Basis Source Commentsfacilities. city’s water system by committing to a long- the country’s largest cities without a recycling CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 426.8 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysis term plan to limit sewage overflows (see below program. In 2009 a local utility offered Detroit CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 17.0 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA populationGreen initiatives: Detroit adopted a non- “green initiatives”). Although Detroit is relatively residents $50 for their old freezers and refri- US Census Bureaumotorized transportation master plan in 2008, weak on many of the policies evaluated in the gerators, and hauled them away for free.aimed at developing a more extensive network Index, the city makes use of recycled water, a Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 1.03 2009 City Detroit Edison; US Bureau Using MSA GDP of Economic Analysisof urban bikeways and walkways, including positive achievement to date. Air: 26th, 37.4 points Detroit performs better than the Index average Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 86.9 2010 City plus a Detroit Edison Using population served portion of the by Detroit Edison Green initiatives: In response to a federal in particulate emissions, which total 17 lb per metro-area mandate, the Detroit Water and Sewerage De- person annually compared with the Index av- partment is in the process of replacing an exist- erage of 25 lb per person. However, Detroit’s Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 6.7 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000 ing pump station with a retention basin that sulfur dioxide emissions of 59 lb per person per Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 6,600.9 2009 City US Census Bureau would eliminate untreated sewer overflow into year are notably higher than the Index average Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 0.8 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureau the nearby Rouge River. The $154 million project of 22 lb, and the city emits 93 lb of nitrogen began in the fall of 2007 and is slated for com- oxides per person annually compared with the Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 3.6 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey pletion in 2011. To the extent they are “feasible, Index average of 66 lb. Over half of nitrogen cost effective and beneficial”, the city has oxides emissions are attributed to on-road vehi- Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 2.5 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles pledged to incorporate “green infrastructure” cles, while over 70% of sulphur dioxide comes Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 17.5 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area population upgrades, such as bioswales (special landscap- from electricity generation. Industrial processes Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 3.5 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles per square mile (vehicles/miles2) ing that filters silt and pollutants from stormwa- also make up a significant share of Detroit’s pol- ter), rain barrels, porous pavers that reduce run- lutants, making the city’s transition from a “rust Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 26.0 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey off by allowing water to permeate into the belt” to a “green belt” all the more urgent in subsoil, and green roofs. terms of air quality. Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 0.1 2006 State data BioCycle and Earth Engineering Center of Columbia University Waste: 27th, 0 points Green initiatives: In the summer of 2007 the Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 172.3 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied population In the category of waste, Detroit ranks last in Southeast Michigan Council of Governments the Index. The city recycles almost none of its Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 15.9 2000 City Detroit Water and Sewerage Department conducted a pilot program aimed at reducing waste, a number estimated from state data, Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 93 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population emissions from high-polluting vehicles through whereas the Index average for recycled waste is Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 17 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population increased public awareness and the use of 26%. This estimate is based on data from 2006 Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 59 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population remote sensing technology. The latter is an aeri-66 67
    • Green initiatives: Houston unveiled a Multi infrastructure and has completed small-scale Green initiatives: In recent years Houston has Pollutant Emissions Reduction Plan in 2008, demonstration projects at several city facilities, invested heavily in improving energy efficiency which includes a series of ongoing energy effi- including a 100-kilowatt solar system installed of its buildings. In collaboration with the Clin- ciency and renewable energy measures. Specific on the roof of the George R. Brown Convention ton Climate Initiative, the city has a program projects include municipal building retrofits, Center. In 2010 Houston received a $1.3 million to retrofit 7.1 million square feet of municipal and the installation of a combined heat and grant from the Texas state government to devel- building space in 262 buildings. Houston ex- power system at Houston’s wastewater treat- op off-grid solar-powered generators for emer- pects an average 30% reduction in energy ment facilities, which are responsible for over gency use. In parallel with its solar-powered ini- usage from the retrofitted buildings, through 30% of the city’s energy usage. Completed work tiatives, Houston has almost completed the measures such as lighting upgrades, HVAC effi- includes the retrofitting of the heating, venti- replacement of incandescent bulbs with more ciency improvements and the installation of lating and air conditioning systems at city air- energy efficient and longer lasting LEDs at its energy management systems. Energy savings ports. traffic lights and pedestrian signals. As of March are guaranteed by the private sector partners 2011 calculations from the city based on 300 that implement the retrofits. The funds saved Energy: 11th, 71 points signals showed that Houston will save 2.7 mil- from reduced energy use are used to finance Houston’s electricity consumption per capita is lion kilowatt hours of energy and over $3.6 mil- energy upgrades and improvements. In Sep- generally in line with the Index average, at an lion a year. Savings from the entire project will tember 2010 the City of Houston partnered estimated 50 gigajoules per person versus the be much higher once work on all the city’s 2,450 with the ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustain- average of 52. Consumption per $1 million of signalized intersections is completed. ability to launch the first annual Green Office GDP is higher than the average, at 404 giga- Challenge. Through the challenge, the city will joules, compared with the average of 332. Land use: 13th, 56.8 points bring local, state and national sustainability When income is taken into account, of the eight Houston performs well for its measures to experts together to provide training and mid-income cities in the Index, only Toronto improve the quantity and quality of green space. resources to assist owners of office buildings, consumes more electricity per unit GDP than An active tree planting policy is in place and, property managers and tenants to reduce water Houston, and only Atlanta consumes more elec- with the help of the EPA funding, brownfield use, waste generation and energy consump- Houston tricity per capita. Conscious of the need to regeneration is underway. The biggest policy tion. Participants’ successes and milestones will improve, Houston scores well for its clean and oversight is the absence of any green space pro- be measured throughout the challenge year, tection from building development, although culminating in awards for progress. Reaching Houston’s proportion of green space, at 14%, is out to the same target group, the city launched slightly higher than the Index average of 12%. an energy efficiency incentive program for com- US and Canada Green City Index mercial buildings in early 2011. Green initiatives: Houston’s Brownfields Rede- velopment Program provides free environmen- Transport: 12th, 53.6 points tal site assessments, funded by the EPA, to The city performs well on green transport pro- potential redevelopers. Twenty-four sites have motion, which has included heavy investment H ouston has the second largest administra- tive area in the US and Canada Green City Index, and with a population of 2.3 million, it is nance – coordinating green initiatives across multiple departments and informing citizens and businesses about ways to be more environ- been added to the program since 2005, the majority of which are to become park space. A 2007 regulation requires residential devel- in the municipal fleet to make it more environ- mentally friendly (see “green initiatives”). But public transit is limited by Index standards, with one of the least densely populated cities in the mentally friendly – the city has the potential to opers to create 1.8 acres of park space per two public transit vehicles available per square Index. Located in the southern region of Texas, boost its overall environmental performance in 100 dwellings, or pay a fee of $700 per dwelling. mile, compared with the Index average of nine Houston’s hot climate opens up opportunities the future. Officials have also been successful in Another initiative, the “Million Trees + Houston”, per square mile, and a network that extends to harness solar power. But just as the climate can enlisting outside help. Federal and state funding a public-private initiative started in 2008, aims 0.2 miles per square mile, compared with the help Houston’s environmental efforts, it can also has been drafted in for brownfield regeneration to plant one million trees in the Houston area Index average of 1.1 miles. Houston’s large hinder them through destructive tornados and and for converting the city fleet to cleaner fuel, over a five-year period. hurricanes. The city’s economy, which is goods while the Clinton Climate Initiative, an interna- intensive, generates a GDP per person of $48,000 tional non-profit organization, has played a big efficient energy policies. Through a mixture of Buildings: Ninth, 66.4 points Houston Best CO2 and puts Houston into the mid-income bracket. part in Houston’s drive to make municipal build- tax incentives and subsidies, the city promotes New buildings in Houston have to comply with Average 100 The Index data for Houston is based on a mixture ings more energy efficient. green energy for both businesses and homes. energy efficiency standards and incentives are 80 Environmental Energy of statistics from the city and wider metropolitan Houston is also marked up for developing green available to make existing buildings greener governance area, which has a population of 5.9 million. CO2: 25th, 32.1 points energy projects, which include investment in through retrofits. Houston also offers informa- 60 Houston ranks 16th overall in the Index. The CO2 emissions in Houston are much higher than solar power (see “green initiatives” below). tion to homes and businesses about ways to 40 city’s highest category placing is in environmen- the Index averages, at 25.8 metric tons per per- According to the US Environmental Protection reduce energy consumption. The city’s mainBackground indicators tal governance, where it ranks joint fifth with son versus the average of 14.5, and 433 metric Agency (EPA), Houston overtook Dallas in 2009 weakness is the relatively low number of Leader- Air 20 Land use Los Angeles and Philadelphia. In other cate- tons per $1 million of GDP, compared with the as the largest municipal purchaser of renewable ship in Energy and Environmental Design 0Total population 1) 2.3 million gories, such as energy, land use, buildings, average of 296. Emissions tend to be higher in energy in the US. (LEED)-certified buildings in relation to popula-Administrative area (miles2) 1) 579 waste and transport, Houston ranks near the the Index in other hot, goods-intensive, and low- tion, at 4.3 per 100,000 people against an IndexGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 48,000 middle – yet still in the top half – of the Index. density cities, and Houston falls into all three Green initiatives: Houston is one of 12 US average of 6.4. LEED certification continues inTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 69 The city ranks near the bottom of the Index in categories. Although Houston’s policymakers cities carrying “Solar America City” status; it the city, however. As of January 2010 the city Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 20 two categories, CO2 and air, mainly for high lev- have some catching up to do with their Index received a $200,000 federal grant in 2008 that reported that 28 buildings representing moreServices employment (%) 2) 80 els of emissions. Despite Houston’s mid-table peers in reducing CO2 emissions, the city’s pro- was matched by a private energy company. than one million square feet of LEED projectsGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA overall ranking, by doing relatively well at gover- file does little to help them. Houston has used the funds to develop solar were underway. Waste Water68 69
    • administrative area is certainly a limiting factor, ronmental targets set after conducting a base-as is the region’s reliance on cars, which is simi- line review, and this helps give Houston itslar to other highly populated, sprawling US highest category ranking. The city publishescities. regular environmental reports and performs well for having a dedicated environmentalGreen initiatives: Houston is investing more authority. Houston is also a member of the C40than $4.1 billion to extend the current 7.5-mile Cities Climate Leadership Group. One relativeurban light rail system to 39 miles by 2014. The weakness is a lack of citizen involvement in thecity has also replaced 50% of its passenger vehi- decision-making process of large projects thatcles with gasoline-electric hybrids. And with the have an impact on the environment.help of an EPA grant, 34 of the city’s heavy-dutyvehicles have been replaced with hybrid and Green initiatives: An Environmental Coordi-clean-diesel vehicles. In addition, Houston has nating Council was established in 2009 with thebeen working with private and non-profit part- purpose of coordinating environmental workners to introduce electric vehicles and chargers partnered in 2006 to install 20 energy efficient tiatives” below). The city has facilities to treat companies, is lobbying the Texas state govern- oratory. The mobile lab, which city authorities among all city departments. Specially trainedin the city. One of the city’s partners, for exam- solar-powered aeration mixers, known as “Solar different types of waste: recyclable, hazardous ment for more funds to help improve air quality. claim is the first of its kind in the country, can be staff, spread across different departments, coor-ple, recently launched the first private invest- Bees”, at Lake Houston near the intake for the and industrial. It also performs well for reducing The city says the replacement of older fleet vehi- deployed throughout the Houston area to identi- dinates all environment matters through thement in electric vehicle infrastructure, deploy- water treatment plant. The lake experiences reliance on landfills and moving towards more cles with ones running on cleaner diesel fuel, fy source emissions with near real-time reporting council. The council is also charged with com-ing over 150 charging stations throughout seasonal algal blooms, which give an unpleas- sustainable local waste management practices. at a cost of $2 million, could reduce nitrogen capabilities. municating environmental issues to the public.Houston. ant taste and odor to the water. Instead of using A measure of Houston’s growing competence in oxides emissions by 200 lb per year. The Environmental Standard, an e-newsletter chemicals as a costly short-term fix, the city waste management came in the wake of Hurri- Environmental governance: launched in 2009, informs citizens about cityWater: 15th, 80.5 points installed the mixers to keep the waters oxy- cane Ike in 2008. Working alongside the Clinton Green initiatives: With EPA funding, Houston Fifth, 94.4 points environmental programs and gives advice aboutAlthough Houston’s water consumption, at 158 genated and support the lake’s natural ecosys- Climate Initiative and Living Earth, a charity, the has set up a Mobile Ambient Air Monitoring Lab- A strong green action plan is in place, with envi- ways to improve the environment.gallons per person per day, is near the Index tem. The low-cost solution produced 28% in city managed to divert all of the 5.7 millionaverage of 155 gallons, it fares better when energy cost avoidance through the use of solar cubic yards of debris tree material from landfillscompared with other high temperature cities in power, and 78% in chemical cost savings. and burning.the Index. Out of this nine-city group, only Through the installation of low-flow water Quantitative indicatorstwo cities consume less water than Houston. faucets and toilets in municipal buildings, along Green initiatives: To encourage Houston’sPolicy areas are also reasonably strong. Main with significant enhancements and controls for residents to set aside more recyclable waste, Category Indicator Average Houston Year Basis Source Commentswater sources are monitored for quality and irrigation systems in the city’s parks, Houston is since 2008 the city has reduced heavy trash CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 432.6 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysissupply levels, and the city promotes lower saving over 13 million gallons of water annually. pickup from one-month to two-month intervals.water usage. The percentage of water lost to In the intervening months it picks up only organ- CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 25.8 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population US Census Bureauleakages in Houston’s water distribution system, Waste: Tenth, 59.5 points ic material, such as tree debris. The city also pro-at 12%, is just under the Index average of 13%. Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.40 2008 Mixed Energy Information Administration; State retail electricity sales scaled Houston recycles only 15% of its municipal motes “single-stream” recycling by giving resi- down to city level using popu- US Bureau of Economic Analysis waste versus an Index average of 26%, alt- dents 96-gallon recycling bins for all recyclables. lation data; Indicator constructedGreen initiatives: The Houston Area Water hough several initiatives are underway to boost The scheme covered 104,000 households as using MSA GDPCorporation and the US Geological Services the city’s recycling performance (see “green ini- of January 2011. In addition the city, in coopera- Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 50.4 2008 Mixed Energy Information Administration; State retail electricity sales tion with a local non-governmental organiza- US Census Bureau scaled down to city level using population data tion, has created Houston Mulch – a brand of compost created from green debris in the Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 14.2 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000 city. Available citywide since 2009, its environ- Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 3,899.7 2009 City US Census Bureau mental benefit is the equivalent of keeping over Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 4.3 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureau 10,000 cars off the road. Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 4.0 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey Air: 24th, 49.3 points Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.2 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles Houston’s emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitro- Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 23.6 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area population gen oxides are much higher than Index aver- ages. Its levels of particulate matter, at 93 lb per Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 2.4 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles per square mile (vehicles/miles2) person, are the highest in the Index. But it is the wider region, not just Houston, which suffers Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 27.6 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey from high amounts of air pollutants. The EPA has designated the surrounding area as a Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 14.7 2009 City City of Houston General Services Residential waste only Department “severe ozone non-attainment region”. The region has until 2019 to achieve compliance Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 158.4 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied population with the authority’s national ambient air quality standards for ozone. Houston is responding Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 11.8 2009 City General Services Department, City of Houston well. The city has one of the most robust sets of clean air policies in the Index, setting air quality Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 78 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population targets and putting policies in place to improve Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 93 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population air quality. And the city, along with local private Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 44 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population70 71
    • age of 296 metric tons. For reasons of data avail- tive fuel and creating 35 new parks. Kyoto called Green initiatives: The city is planning a Clean- ability and comparability, the CO2 figures were for reducing greenhouse gas emissions 7% be- Tech Corridor to run alongside the Los Angeles taken from 2002 for all of the US cities in the low 1990 levels by 2012; Los Angeles achieved River by regenerating brownfield sites. Through Index, and in the meantime Los Angeles has that feat in 2008. a variety of incentives, such as favorable ground made progress reducing its emissions and leases and low interest loans, the aim is to fill deserves credit for the green measures it has Energy: Fifth, 77.8 points the corridor with companies specializing in taken. Through a combination of energy ef- Los Angeles ties Toronto in the energy category. green technology development. A timetable for ficiency initiatives and less reliance on electricity Electricity consumption in Los Angeles, both on corridor completion is not yet available. Los generation from fossil fuels (see “green initia- a per capita basis and in relation to economic Angeles’s Million Trees initiative, begun in 2005, tives” below) LADWP has cut CO2 emissions by output, is about half the Index average. The city is a public-private partnership working to plant 2 million metric tons since 2005. The city also uses an estimated 169 gigajoules of electricity one million trees throughout the city. Nearly scores well on policy. Los Angeles monitors per $1 million of GDP, versus an Index average of 300,000 trees have been planted so far and emissions and has a target to reduce CO2 emis- 332 gigajoules. On a per capita basis Los Ange- there is no timeline for when the city hopes to sions 35% below 1990 levels by 2030. les consumes 27 gigajoules, considerably less reach this target. than the Index average of 52 gigajoules per per- Green initiatives: In 2007 the city unveiled the son. Energy saving programs undertaken by Buildings: 12th, 53.5 points Los Angeles Climate Action Plan, which sets one LADWP have helped (see “green initiatives” be- For every 100,000 people in Los Angeles there of the most aggressive greenhouse gas re- low) and the city scores well for green energy are only 1.9 Leadership in Energy and En- duction targets in the Index: 35% below 1990 promotion. However, Los Angeles is marked vironmental Design (LEED)-certified buildings, levels by 2030. To achieve this goal, in 2008 the down for not yet doing more to develop green considerably fewer than the Index average of city established an implementation program energy projects and for its relatively slow 6.4, even though LEED standards for municipal called ClimateLA. Initiatives running under the progress in consuming more locally produced buildings are mandatory (see “green initiatives” auspices of ClimateLA include increasing re- energy. Ambitious plans by LADWP to source below) and other incentives are in place. How- newable energy purchases, making the city fleet more renewable energy look set to address this. ever, Los Angeles scores better in policy areas. greener, retrofitting buildings, and offering New buildings have to comply with energy stan- rebates on energy efficient appliances. Ad- Green initiatives: LADWP generated 40% of its dards, and incentives are available for energy- ditionally, Los Angeles has already met the power from coal in 2009 but aims to be coal-free saving retrofits. There are still some policy gaps: Kyoto Protocol target by taking more than by 2020 with the help of renewable electricity information on how to decrease energy con- Los Angeles 6,000 city-owned diesel trucks off the road, pur- generation. LADWP completed a 120-megawatt sumption in offices and homes is not as readily chasing a fifth of the city’s energy from renew- wind farm in 2009, at a cost of $500 million, available in Los Angeles as in other Index cities, able sources, converting all city buses to alterna- which serves 56,000 households in Los Angeles. for example. Energy efficiency initiatives undertaken by the utility company in the 12 months to March Green initiatives: LEED certification for new US and Canada Green City Index 2010, at a cost of $70 million, have resulted in municipal buildings has been mandatory in Los energy savings of 300 gigawatt hours (nearly Angeles since 2002. Seven years later the Green 1.1 million gigajoules). Measures include the Building Retrofit Ordinance was passed, which distribution of compact fluorescent bulbs to calls for municipal buildings built before 1978 W ith 3.8 million residents, Los Angeles is the second most populous city in the US and Canada Green City Index. Its administrative area, performs particularly well, the city-owned utility has played a lead role in reducing energy con- sumption and cutting carbon emissions. Other households, installation of efficient lighting in small businesses, and a variety of household rebate programs to replace inefficient windows (or occupying more than 7,500 square feet) to meet the silver LEED certification standard. The city plans 100 retrofits per year. Tax credit totaling 468 square miles, is the fourth largest in categories where Los Angeles scores above aver- and appliances. The city also installed solar pan- the Index. The much larger metropolitan area, age are waste and air. The city has one of the els on the LA Convention Center, while nearly which spans across five counties, boasts a popu- strongest records on municipal waste recycling 26,000 square feet of solar panels are to be lation of 12.9 million, making it the second in the Index and, despite its proximity to the installed at the city’s main wastewater treat- biggest city in the US behind New York. Located Long Beach and Los Angeles ports, air quality is ment plant. Los Angeles CO2 Best on a hilly plain along the Pacific Ocean, Los An- relatively high. Los Angeles is in the lower half of Average 100 geles has one of the world’s busiest ports – the the Index in the land use and transport cate- Land use: 21st, 45.3 points 80 Environmental Energy Long Beach and Los Angeles ports combined – gories, but is showing intent to improve in both This is one of Los Angeles’s weakest categories governance which is a strong source of carbon emissions, as areas. It has put forward an innovative scheme in the Index. Only 8% of the city’s administrative 60 is the city’s large manufacturing base. However to finance transport investment by using future area is green space, versus an Index average of 40 the local economy is dominated by less-carbon- tax revenue as collateral for federal borrowing. 12%. Other high temperature cities in the IndexBackground indicators intensive industries, such as media production This may well become a model for other cities also tend to have less green space, but more rig- Air 20 Land use and financial services. With a GDP per capita of to copy if the scheme gains US government orous policies would help improve the city’s per- 0Total population 1) 3.8 million $47,200, the city falls in the mid-income bracket approval. formance. Incentives for brownfield regene-Administrative area (miles2) 1) 469 in the Index. ration are not yet as strong in Los Angeles as inGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 47,200 Los Angeles ranks seventh overall in the Index. CO2: Fourth, 86.5 points other Index cities, although a future initiative isTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 63 Spearheading many of the city’s green initiatives CO2 emissions per capita, at 8 metric tons, are in the planning stages (see “green initiatives” Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 14 is the Los Angeles Department of Water and below the Index average of 14.5. And for every below). The city’s measures to contain urbanServices employment (%) 2) 86 Power (LADWP), the local water and electricity $1 million of GDP the city generates, 162 metric sprawl are also relatively weak, but it does haveGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA utility. In CO2 and energy, where Los Angeles tons of CO2 are released, versus an Index aver- an active tree planting policy. Waste Water72 73
    • incentives and fast-tracked building permits encourage the purchase and use of electric carshave been available to private property develop- the city is offering rebates of up to $2,000 forers seeking silver LEED certification since 2008. the first 1,000 applicants to defray the costs of electric vehicle home chargers and installation.Transport: 24th, 42.9 points City officials say they hope to expand the rebateLos Angeles, notorious for its complex web of program to provide between 3,000 and 5,000highways and traffic-choked rush hours, regis- home chargers.ters its lowest rank in transport. Congestionreduction policies are comparatively weak and Water: 13th, 81.7 pointsthe city’s overall public transit supply is one of Los Angeles has one of the most efficient waterthe most limited in the Index. Of the five large- distribution systems in the Index, losing just 5%area cities covered in this Index, Los Angeles’s of water supply to leaks, compared with a muchpublic transport network, measuring 0.18 miles higher 13% Index average. Among mid-incomeper square mile, is the shortest. City authorities cities only Chicago and Denver boast more ef- when water levels are low. Cleaning sidewalks Green initiatives: The ports of Los Angeles Environmental governance: and enquiries rather than directing all enquiriesare, however, keen to improve supply. Through ficient water systems than Los Angeles. Policy and washing cars during droughts is also prohib- and Long Beach account for 20% of toxic air Fifth, 94.4 points to the general city hotline.an innovative funding arrangement with the US areas are also strong. Main water sources are ited unless an automatic shut-off nozzle is used. emissions in the south coast air basin. Largely Los Angeles ties Houston and Philadelphia ingovernment they are aiming to fast-track an monitored for quality and supply levels, and by replacing dirty-fuel trucks that service the environmental governance. The city’s score is Green initiatives: To ensure private sector par-ambitious $40 billion transport investment pro- water conservation is vigorously promoted (see Waste: Third, 81.9 points ports with cleaner-fuel vehicles, the city aims bolstered by the presence of a dedicated en- ticipation in the city’s environmental goals, ingram (see “green initiatives” below). In policy “green initiatives” below). LADWP reports that Los Angeles records its highest rank in waste. The to reduce emissions of particulate matter vironmental authority and the setting of en- 2009 Los Angeles approved a Green Businessareas the city scores well for its efforts to make its single-family residential customers used 24% city already recycles 62% of its municipal waste, 45% below 2006 levels by the end of 2011. vironmental targets, after conducting a baseline Certification Program. The program, which isthe city fleet greener. less water in February 2011, on average, com- the second highest rate in the Index, and has set Nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide emissions in review. Los Angeles also publishes regular envi- still in the planning phase but is expected to be pared with the same month in 2007. Nonethe- a target to increase that rate to 70% by 2015. Los the port areas are targeted to fall 47% and 52%, ronmental reports and involves citizens in the rolled out by summer 2011, will provide busi-Green initiatives: Los Angeles’s voters ap- less, water consumption per capita, at 187 gal- Angeles also scores well on policy. It is marked up respectively, over the same period. Los Angeles decision-making surrounding large projects that nesses with information on how to adopt sus-proved a general half-cent local sales tax in 2008 lons per day, is considerably higher than the for its facilities to treat different types of waste also provides electric power to berthed ships have an environmental impact. The city could tainability practices and award “certified greento raise $40 billion over a 30-year period to fund Index average of 155 gallons, but high water (recyclable, hazardous and industrial) and for in harbor, eliminating the need for engine improve its rank by providing citizens with a cen- business” seals in order to help meet the city’spublic transport improvements. Under the city’s consumption is a common feature of high-tem- reducing reliance on landfills. Further measures idling. tral contact point for environmental complaints environmental goals.subsequent 30/10 plan, awaiting approval from perature cities. to reduce waste creation could improve the city’sthe US House of Representatives, the 30-year ranking in this category even more.timetable is trimmed to ten years. The 30/10 Green initiatives: A water fixtures ordinance Quantitative indicatorsplan is based on borrowing federal funds up- introduced in 2009 mandates the installation of Green initiatives: The Renew LA program,front, using future sales tax revenue as collater- high-efficiency toilets and faucets in all new Category Indicator Average Los Angeles Year Basis Source Comments started in 2006, aims to divert more than 90% ofal. The city estimates the 12 transport projects buildings. The city estimates this measure will CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 162.0 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP the city’s waste from landfills by 2025 and sets a US Bureau of Economic Analysisincluded in the plan will increase transit board- save 20 billion gallons of water over a ten-year long-term goal of zero waste. Aside from re-ings by 77 million and reduce vehicle miles trav- period. The LADWP also restructured its water cycling, the city is developing waste-to-energy CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 8.0 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population US Census Bureaueled by 191 million. Furthermore, in 2011 the rate system in 2009 to increase rates for heavy projects to achieve the 90% target and variousmayor’s office, in conjunction with LADWP, users. An update to the city’s water conservation technologies are under consideration. Renew Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.17 2009 Mixed California Energy Commission; Scaled county level data to city US Bureau of Economic Analysis level using population data;unveiled the Electric Vehicle Pilot Program. To ordinance in 2010 restricted lawn watering LA calls for a waste-to-energy processing capaci- Indicator constructed using ty of 14,500 tons per day by 2025. MSA GDP Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 26.7 2009 Mixed California Energy Commission; Scaled county level data to US Census Bureau city level using population data Air: Fifth, 88.7 points Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 7.9 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000 Los Angeles’s strong rank in the air category is all Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 8,207.6 2009 City US Census Bureau the more impressive when measured against other large-area cities, which tend to place in the Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 1.9 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureau bottom half of the Index in this category. Annual per capita emissions of all the pollutants mea- Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, 13.0 9.7 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American bicycle, or foot (%) Community Survey sured in the Index are well below average in Los Angeles. The city does particularly well in sulfur Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.2 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using city area dioxide and particulate matter – the city ranks in Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 14.1 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using MSA population the top five for both indicators. While it drops Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 2.5 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using city area per square mile (vehicles/miles2) down to tenth for nitrogen oxides, Los Angeles’s emissions of 55 pounds per person are still con- Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 27.9 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Survey siderably lower than the Index average of 66 pounds. The city’s impressive performance in Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 62.0 2006 City Department of Public Works this category can be attributed to a robust set of Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 187.0 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied population policies aimed at improving air quality over the past decade. Programs include the transition to Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 5.3 2009 City Los Angeles Department of Water and Power vehicles running on alternative fuels and the implementation of an Automated Traffic Surveil- Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 55 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population lance and Control System to reduce idling time, Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 14 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population among others. Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 5 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population74 75
    • reveals the extent to which Miami is unburdened Green initiatives: Miami has established a by the energy intensive impact of an industry-ori- brownfield and land revitalization initiative, ented economy. Per capita energy consumption, extending several financial and legal benefits at 38 gigajoules per person, is also better than to developers who clean up contaminated sites, the Index average of 52. As the hottest city in the including low-interest loans and tax credits Index, most of Miami’s energy is consumed by on building materials. The county govern- buildings as electricity, perhaps explaining why ment also offers economic incentives for brown- some of the city’s green incentives in this area field clean-up and development, including tax (see “green initiatives” in the buildings category, credits, low-interest loans, administrative-fee below) pertain to improving energy efficiency in waivers and insurance. One of the main green buildings. initiatives is the Eastward Ho! Corridor, a 115- mile expanse of land stretching across three Green initiatives: As part of its 2008 MiPlan: counties that contained more than 2,100 conta- City of Miami Climate Action Plan, Miami has minated sites when the program began in 1995. committed to reducing its greenhouse gas out- To date, the partner governments have formu- put by 429,000 metric tons annually, mainly by lated community outreach strategies, initiated using more renewable energy and more local environmental assessments and secured over sources of power (the latter help cut energy $190 million in investment to clean up more than 260 of the sites. Buildings: 23rd, 26.7 points The city has relatively few buildings certified by Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), at only 0.9 per 100,000 people, compared with the Index average of 6.4. It also Miami seems to lack a coherent set of policies aimed at addressing building performance, such as in- centives to retrofit or mandatory energy audi- ting. Buildings are an area where Miami has room for improvement, though it will likely con- US and Canada Green City Index tinue to face the challenge of limited resources and need to depend, at least in part, on county- level initiatives in this area. Given the large amount of development going on in Miami, W ith only 35 square miles of area, Miami is the smallest city in the US and Canada Green City Index. However, because Miami has where it ranks second, likely owing to the lack of industry in the area. Given the size of Miami and local leaders’ sensitivity to using the city’s land outperform the Index average, at 9.3 metric tons per person compared with 14.5. These fig- ures not only reflect the lack of industry in losses during transmission and delivery). While there aren’t any major renewable projects in the city currently, the municipal government has beginning by addressing energy efficiency with developers may be the city’s best bet for making progress in buildings. a rather large population, at 433,000, it is con- effectively, it is perhaps not surprising that Miami, but also result from a utility sector that installed four demonstration solar panels in the sidered a high-population-density city in this Miami also performs well in the area of land use, operates cleaner, newer power plants that have city hall building. It has also retrofitted the Green initiatives: As part of the city’s 2010 study. The city has the eighth lowest GDP per where it places tenth. The city places in the bot- contributed to a reduction in greenhouse gas building’s lighting to make it more energy effi- Miami 21 program, it started requiring all public capita in the Index, at $39,500, based on one of tom half of the Index in other categories. Waste emissions from electricity in recent years. cient, which has led to a 9% increase in energy the most services-oriented economies among remains a challenge – the city is one of three in efficiency. The city uses approximately $2.8 mil- the 27 cities. Miami has developed considerably the Index that have not implemented more sus- Green initiatives: The city conducted a green- lion in federal Energy Efficiency and Conserva- in recent years and officials predict that the city tainable local waste management practices, house gas emissions inventory in 2008 and set a tion Block Grant funding to retrofit 16 munici- will add at least 50,000 residents by 2020. including composting and converting waste by- target to reduce emissions by 25% from 2006 pal buildings to improve energy efficiency. Miami CO2 Best Despite this expansion, Miami has managed to products to energy. Buildings also present levels by 2020, and reduce government-related Average 100 preserve historical areas and also assist the state opportunities for improvement. Despite the emissions 25% by 2015. The municipal govern- Land use: Tenth, 59.2 points 80 Environmental Energy government in protecting the nearby Everglades municipal government’s limited role in some ment has announced plans to offer free com- Although Miami’s parks budget is relatively governance wetlands. Nevertheless, because many of the areas of decision-making, regarding for example pact fluorescent bulbs to city residents, retrofit modest, the city has still managed to introduce 60 services provided to Miami residents, including transport, water treatment and air quality, outdoor city-owned lighting and perform ener- several programs such as tree planting and 40 public transport, are administered by the Miami- Miami has demonstrated an awareness of gy audits on all large city government buildings, green space improvement and expansion. TheseBackground indicators Dade County government, city officials have environmental issues and intention to make but has not yet rolled out these initiatives. policies will, if effective, help Miami increase the Air 20 Land use not attained the same level of achievement or improvements in the areas where it has capacity amount of green space it has from its current 6% 0Total population 1) 433,000 taken as active a role as their peers in initiating to act. Energy: 19th, 61.5 points of total area, which is half the Index average ofAdministrative area (miles2) 1) 35 environmental programs and policies. The data Although ranked in the lower half of the Index in 12%. Miami performs well in terms of density, atGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 39,500 for Miami came from the city and the wider met- CO2: Second, 90.1 points the energy category, Miami has the second best 12,400 people per square mile compared withTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 77 ropolitan area, which has a population of CO2 is Miami’s best category performance. The electricity consumption, on a per unit of GDP the Index average of 8,100, and is the only low- Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 9 5.5 million. city emits 166 metric tons of CO2 per $1 million basis, among Index cities. It consumes only population city in the Index to be classified as aServices employment (%) 2) 91 Miami ranks 22nd overall in the Index. Its of GDP, compared with the Index average of 296. 75 gigajoules per $1 million of economic output, high-density city, owing to the small administra-Geographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA strongest performance is in the CO2 category, The city’s per capita CO2 emissions levels likewise compared with the Index average of 332. This tive area it covers. Waste Water76 77
    • other high-temperature cities, which tend to and some weaknesses in waste management Air: 21st, 57.8 points progress as Index leaders on formulating envi- have poor rates of public transport usage, policies. The city recycles an estimated 18% of In terms of pollutants, the city ranks slightly ronmental strategies and implementing poli- Miami outperforms in terms of the percentage municipal waste, compared with the Index better or on par with the Index averages, with cies aimed at improving environmental perfor- of residents that use public transit, and per- average of 26%. This estimate is based on 54 lb of nitrogen oxides per person annually mance. However, the city has taken some steps forms well against other low-population cities Miami-Dade County statistics, because data for versus the Index average of 66 lb, 18 lb per by reporting its environmental performance for public transit availability. the city of Miami alone is not reported. While it person versus the average of 25 lb for annual publicly, establishing a dedicated environ- has a curbside recycling program (see “green particulate matter emissions, and 22 lb per per- mental authority, and engaging and securing Green initiatives: Under its climate action initiatives” below), Miami is one of three cities son annual sulfur dioxide emissions, equal the support of the mayor. Going forward, the plan, Miami has committed to reducing green- in the Index that does not yet appear to have to the average. The city’s residents are highly test for Miami will be how to creatively use its house gases associated with transport by taken substantial steps towards implementing dependent on automobiles, which affects pol- resources and administrative capabilities to 565,000 metric tons, or approximately 12% more sustainable, non-landfill waste treatment lution levels. effectively rally public support and achieve from 2007 levels, by 2020. To do this, the city such as composting or converting waste to quantifiable improvements in environmental aims to reduce the number of vehicle miles trav- energy, which weighs on its score. Green initiatives: The city does not have any governance. eled, increase fuel efficiency and the use of alter- specific programs to address air quality and native fuels, and promote alternative transporta- Green initiatives: Miami has a curbside re- compliance with federal Environmental Protec- Green initiatives: Miami’s municipal govern- tion. The city has eliminated high-occupancy cycling program available to all single family tion Agency regulations is administered by ment established the Office of Sustainable vehicle (HOV) lanes on one major expressway homes and for apartment buildings with up to Miami-Dade County. The county government Initiatives in 2007 to coordinate the city’s en- and converted them into high-occupancy toll three residential units, or roughly 69,000 has some measures to combat air pollution, vironmental programs and improve environ- (HOT) lanes, which charge tolls for solo drivers at homes citywide, or about 42% of neighbor- including restricting the sale and purchase of mental performance. Countywide, the Environ- busy times. The city has used revenues from the hoods. The city’s Solid Waste Department pro- refrigerant products. mental Education Program of Miami-Dade HOT lanes to roll out bus rapid transit on a limit- vides eligible homes with bins, in which resi- County, founded in 1997, is a consortium of ed basis. After HOT lanes were initiated in 2008, dents can place all recyclable materials, regard- Environmental governance: local non-profit organizations, government agen- bus ridership rose 30%. In October 2009 the city less of type. Larger apartment blocks and all 21st, 62.2 points cies and schools that provides training and adopted its first “Bicycle Master Plan” to become businesses in the city must contract private Due to the limited role that municipal govern- workshops throughout the year, and publishes more bicycle friendly. Additionally, Miami cur- providers for recycling. ment plays, Miami has not made as much environmental information on its website. rently uses 10% biodiesel fuel for its non-emer- gency fleet and plans to increase this to 20%. Water: 17th, 78.2 points Miami has only 8% of leakages in its water distri- Quantitative indicators bution system, which compares favorably with Category Indicator Average Miami Year Basis Source Comments the Index average of 13%. The region is prone to storms that can overwhelm the wastewater sys- CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 165.8 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysis tem and make sewer overflows difficult to avoid. Miami’s direct authority in the area of water CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 9.3 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population US Census Bureau management is limited by the fact that the city has awarded Miami-Dade County responsibility Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.08 2006 City City of Miami; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysis in delivering water services to city residents. However, municipal officials have a record of Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 37.9 2006 City City of Miami; US Census Bureau Using city population strong policymaking in terms of effective water Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 6.3 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000 use, promoting water conservation and improv- Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 12,375.3 2009 City US Census Bureau ing stormwater management. Miami’s score in Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 0.9 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureaubuildings over 5,000 square feet and other build- center for the community, providing educational this category is constrained by high water con-ings over 50,000 square feet to comply with events and a showcase for green technologies. sumption. The city consumes 173 gallons of Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 5.9 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community SurveyLEED silver requirements. This follows a 2008 water per person per day, considerably more Length of public transport (miles/miles2)ordinance requiring all city departments to only Transport: 14th, 51.2 points than the Index average of 155 gallons. 1.1 0.4 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square milesbuy energy-consuming products that meet Ener- Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 21.8 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area population The city offers only 0.4 miles of public transportgy Star energy efficiency requirements, a federal per square mile, compared with the Index aver- Green initiatives: City officials approved a Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 4.5 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles per square mile (vehicles/miles2)government standard. In 2008 the city also age of 1.1 mile. Likewise, the number of public broad series of water-related goals in 2007,pledged to reduce emissions from buildings by transport vehicles available per square mile, at Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 26.7 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community including better resource management, plan- Survey975,000 metric tons, or roughly 20% from 2006 about four, is below the Index average of nine ning, conservation and pollution prevention, butlevels, by 2020. There are several county and vehicles. This reveals the extent to which Miami Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 18.0 2009 County Miami-Dade County Department it is unclear how much progress has been made. of Solid Wastestate-level rebates and tax credits available for transport largely depends on personal automo- At the county level, since 2007 Miami-Dadehomeowners and businesses for energy efficient biles, a fact that is reflected in high congestion Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 172.6 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly County has had water-related regulations for supplied populationretrofits for buildings. Also to facilitate energy levels. However, Miami still performs slightly new construction, including water-efficient land-efficiency improvements, Miami passed an ordi- better than the Index average for commute Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 8.3 2010 County Miami-Dade County Water and scaping and other conservation measures. Sewer Departmentnance allowing for expedited permitting for LEED times, at 27 minutes compared with 29 min-silver-certified buildings. And in 2011 the city utes. Currently only 6% of Miami workers travel Waste: 23rd, 28.4 points Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 54 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationwill start construction on its Miami Green build- by public transit, bike or foot compared with the Miami’s performance in this area is weighed Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 18 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationing, which will serve as a green building resource Index average of 13%. Still, compared with down by a lower than average recycling rate Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 22 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population78 79
    • CO2: 23rd, 40.2 points average of 332 gigajoules. The city also per- At 30 metric tons per person, Minneapolis’s CO2 forms well in terms of electricity use per person, emissions, generated from a variety of sources, at 23 gigajoules, the second best figure in the including transport and the city’s large manu- Index, and well below the average of 52 giga- facturing base, are the highest in the Index, and joules. Both figures are based on 2009 data. well above the Index average of 14.5 metric Minneapolis’ strong performance in this area tons. Emissions per $1 million of GDP are simi- reveals the success of robust local initiatives to larly higher than average, at 543 metric tons, reduce energy consumption and increase effi- compared with the average of 296 metric tons. ciency. The city benefits as well from state-gov- However, for reasons of data availability and ernment-led initiatives, including a regulation comparability, the Index figures were taken requiring utilities operating in Minnesota to from 2002 for all of the US cities in the Index, obtain 30% of their electricity from renewable and in the meantime Minneapolis has benefit- resources by 2020. Minneapolis aims to do its ted from strong emissions policies. It has one of part to support the statewide goal and has com- the best carbon emissions reduction strategies mitted to increasing the city’s share of renew- in the Index, and in 2005 the city persuaded the able energy to 10% by 2014. public utility to convert two large coal-fired power plants to natural-gas-fired combustion, Green initiatives: In 2005 Minneapolis suc- lowering CO2 and air pollution considerably. cessfully lobbied the local public utility to trans- Figures released by the utility company show form two of its coal-fired power plants to natur- that CO2 emissions at these plants dropped 13% al gas. Completed in 2006, this project has been between 2000 and 2006. credited with reducing sulfur dioxide and nitro- gen oxides emissions from power plants by Green initiatives: In 2005 Minneapolis was over 90%. In another initiative, through a $2 mil- one of the early cities to sign the US Mayors Cli- lion grant provided by the utility, the city built mate Protection Agreement, which calls for the largest urban solar array in the Midwest cities to set a goal to reduce greenhouse gas in November 2010. Comprising more than Minneapolis emissions by 7% from their 1990 levels by 2012. 2,600 solar panels atop the Minneapolis Con- idents and other stakeholders into the neighbor- In addition, the municipal government has com- vention Center, the project is expected to pro- hood planning process. By 2005 the city claimed duce enough electricity to power the equivalent it had spent $280 million on improving neigh- of approximately 85 homes, offsetting roughly borhoods, and in a 2010 report set a further tar- 540 metric tons of CO2 emissions. get to improve at least 100 sites by 2014, includ- ing beautification and landscaping efforts, US and Canada Green City Index Land use: Second, 80.1 points neighborhood cleanups, and improvement of With residential use constituting over half of the area pedestrian and bicycle paths. city’s area, Minneapolis has the third highest percentage of green space in the Index, at 20%, Buildings: 18th, 37 points compared with the average of 12%, and it is by Minneapolis performs close to the Index average far the best performer among low-population when it comes to Leadership in Energy and Envi- Index cities. And despite its relatively small pop- ronmental Design (LEED)-certified buildings, ulation and small area, Minneapolis’s popula- M inneapolis is comparatively small both in terms of administrative area and popula- tion, spanning 54 square miles and with a popu- strongest performance is in the land use catego- ry, where it places second, with almost one-fifth of its area given over to green space, and strong tion density is among the mid-range for the Index, at 7,100 people per square mile, not far below the Index average of 8,100. The city’s suc- lation of only 390,000 residents. The city has a policies aimed at revitalization and public tran- cess with green space, as well as population Minneapolis CO2 Best large manufacturing base and a number of the sit-focused development. Minneapolis also density, is the result of proactive policies. It Average 100 country’s largest corporations are headquartered ranks in the top third of the Index in several other showed initiative early on with regard to brown- 80 Environmental Energy there. With a per capita GDP of $50,200, it is categories, including energy, water, waste, mitted to reducing its CO2 emissions 17% by field revitalization, creating a task force in 1987 governance among the high-income cities in the US and transport and environmental governance. The 2020, using 2006 as a baseline. To achieve this to respond to imminent neighborhood decline. 60 Canada Green City Index. Minneapolis was one city has not only developed a comprehensive target, the city’s climate change incentive pro- More recently, in 2000 the city adopted a zoning 40 of the first cities in the US to incorporate environ- environmental strategy, but has also taken gram, which began in 2007, awards residents code that encouraged high-density develop-Background indicators mental sustainability into city planning, which action to implement policies aimed at improving up to $10,000 for innovative and immediate ments focused around public transportation. Air 20 Land use has encouraged other similarly sized cities in and areas where it has direct municipal control, such energy-saving and cost-saving actions, such as 0Total population 1) 390,000 outside of the region to follow suit. Often consid- as water, waste and transportation infrastruc- building rooftop gardens or reducing energy in Green initiatives: Since 1994 the city hasAdministrative area (miles2) 1) 54 ered “one to watch” by environmentalists, pros- ture. Minneapolis has a seemingly inconsistent the home. cleaned up hundreds of brownfield sites whileGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 50,200 pects are good for continued environmental performance in managing air pollution, but has leveraging over $1 billion of private investment,Temperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 45 action in Minneapolis. The majority of data in the already taken action to address these issues – Energy: Seventh, 76.5 points according to its own reports. In addition, the city Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 14 Index for Minneapolis are based on the metropol- persuading the local utility to undertake volun- Minneapolis has the lowest electricity con- has introduced a more broadly defined Neigh-Services employment (%) 2) 86 itan area, which has a population of 3.3 million. tary efficiency improvements, for one, which sumption per $1 million of GDP of all the Index borhood Revitalization Program, created inGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA Minneapolis ranks 10th overall in the Index. Its few other cities have been able to do. cities, at 54 gigajoules, compared with the Index order to improve residential areas, and bring res- Waste Water80 81
    • with 6.5 per 100,000 persons, compared with in downtown Minneapolis; utilizing bicycle lock- only city in the country to accept electronic of hybrid-electric buses to 67, roughly 8% of illustrates that Minneapolis is a leader in environ- tainability initiatives. The committee includesthe average of 6.4. This figure has been helped ers available downtown; and providing business- waste from residents at no cost. To continue the fleet. mental governance. The city has a well-defined two citizens, two representatives from environ-by 2006 legislation mandating LEED certification es and private buildings with bicycle racks, with improving performance in this area, the city has environmental strategy that includes specific tar- mental advocacy groups, two environmental(see “green initiatives” below). Room for im- the city paying half of the cost. Furthermore, formulated strong waste reduction policies, Environmental governance: gets; an annual reporting structure; a dedicated technical experts, two representatives from in-provement, however, remains. For example, over the past five years, the city has been con- such as setting a target to increase recycling Eighth, 93.3 points environmental authority; public aware-ness-rai- dustry, and representatives from the MinneapolisMinneapolis does not require energy audits, and verting all its High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) and compost volumes from 35% to 50% by Having decided early to take action on environ- sing campaigns; and a robust degree of citizen School and Hennepin County boards. The com-it only receives partial marks in the Index for lanes to High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes. These 2013, with 10% coming from composting. mental issues, Minneapolis has carved out a engagement and overall transparency. mittee discusses issues of environmental concernenergy efficiency standards in buildings or giving remain free of charge for HOVs but, when the niche for strong leadership, not only compared and makes recommendations to city officialsincentives for retrofits. The city has led by exam- lanes are underused, allow cars with single dri- Green initiatives: Minneapolis has extended with other cities with similar demographics, but Green initiatives: Minneapolis has established on programs or actions that can be taken tople though with small, but high-profile projects, vers to drive in them for a fee to reduce traffic its recycling program to all municipal residents also compared with larger, wealthier cities. a Citizen’s Environmental Advisory Committee to improve Minneapolis’s overall environmentalsuch as installing a green roof on the historic City congestion. in dwellings with fewer than four units, which Although the city places eighth, its high score advise the city on its environmental and sus- performance.Hall and Courthouse building.Green initiatives: In 2006 the city of Min-neapolis required all new municipal buildingsof 5,000 square feet or larger, as well as majorrenovations, to meet LEED silver-level require-ments. The city also launched a project in 2010to use more than $11.6 million in federal stimu-lus money to upgrade 725 single-family low-income housing units. The nature of the retro-fits will be basic improvements, such as in-stalling energy efficient appliances, boilers,water heaters and new thermostat-program-ming devices.Transport: Seventh, 63.9 pointsMinneapolis has the shortest commuting timeof all the cities in the Index, at 24 minutes, com-pared with the Index average of 29 minutes. Water: Fourth, 88.2 points represents roughly 33% of the total municipalAlthough it is widely regarded as a bicycle Minneapolis is defined by the vast network of population, according to the city’s recycling Quantitative indicatorsfriendly city, car reliance remains an issue. Only waterways – rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands coordinator. The cost of the city’s recycling pro-8% of workers travel by public transit, bicycle or – that surround it, and the city has a long history gram is covered by garbage collection fees. Category Indicator Average Minneapolis Year Basis Source Commentsfoot, compared with the index average of 13%. of taking initiative to improve its water manage- CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 542.9 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic AnalysisAnd, with only 0.5 miles of public transport per ment system. The city’s history of proactive man- Air: 22nd, 57 pointssquare mile, compared with the index average agement and policies are demonstrated by con- Pollutant levels in Minneapolis are much higher CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 30.0 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population US Census Bureauof 1.1, Minneapolis could improve its mass tran- sumption and leakage figures in the Index. It has than the Index averages. Nitrogen oxides, atsit provision. Nevertheless, Minneapolis has a better than average per capita water consump- 126 lb per person, are the highest in the Index Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.05 2009 City City of Minneapolis; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysismade a strong commitment to alter residents’ tion, at 124 gallons per person per day, versus the and almost double the Index average of 66 lb.behavior by encouraging more public transit index average of 155. Minneapolis also performs However, as with CO2 emissions, the city has Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 23.3 2009 City City of Minneapolis; US Census Bureau Using city populationuse and non-motorized transport. In recent better than the Index average for water leakages, strong policies in place to address the issue of pol- Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 19.5 2008 City City of Minneapolis Using area of city in 2000years, the city has set a target to build 163 miles at 6% compared with 13%. lution. Already, Minneapolis has demonstrated Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 7,136.6 2009 City US Census Bureauof new bike trails and has already nearly intentions to improve air quality by setting air Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 6.5 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureaureached that goal; it also boasts a 12.3-mile Green initiatives: The city’s main wastewater quality targets consistent with the recommenda-light rail line that connects to the Minneapolis- treatment facility is the largest in the state, and tions of the federal Environmental Protection Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 7.9 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community SurveySt Paul International Airport, the Mall of Ameri- one of the largest in the country, treating more Agency’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committeeca, Target Field and the Metrodome. than three-quarters of the city’s wastewater. Sev- and the state health guidelines. And municipal Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.5 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using city area eral improvements are planned through 2030, at authorities have set a target to reduce all moni- Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 13.4 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using MSA populationGreen initiatives: The municipal government an estimated cost of $3.8 billion, including up- tored air toxins to levels within the state health Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 1.5 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using city area per square mile (vehicles/miles2)has initiated several programs to encourage resi- grading to a $20 million processing system that guidelines by 2015. According to a Minneapolisdents to take greener forms of transport, includ- will reduce air pollution and remove harmful environmental report issued in 2010, in the five Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 24.3 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Surveying the Pedestrian Master Plan, Minneapolis chemicals such as mercury. years since the US Census Bureau statistics usedBicycle Program, Non-Motorized Transportation in the Index were recorded, air pollutant levels Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 34.9 2009 City Minneapolis Solid Waste and Recycling Residential waste only DepartmentPilot Program, and a bike sharing program. For Waste: Fifth, 72.6 points have declined, although they remain a challenge.these programs it has used local, state and feder- Minneapolis’s recycling rate is better than Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 123.6 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied populational funding, including a $21.5 million federal the Index average, at 35% compared with 26%. Green initiatives: In 2010 the city said it hadgrant awarded to four communities nationwide. The city has enacted several measures to en- reduced fuel use in its municipal fleet by 14,000 Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 6.0 2009 City City of MinneapolisSome of the services these programs offer are courage recycling and composting, including tons, increased the number of hybrid vehicles Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 126 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationenabling residents to purchase daily, monthly or differential pricing based on how much waste is by 9%, and added 45 hybrid-electric buses to its Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 36 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationyearly bicycle subscriptions from over 65 kiosks disposed. Minneapolis also claims to be the fleet in 2008. This brought the total number Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 34 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population82 83
    • reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30% by municipal climate change and poverty reduction the program has subsidized clean-ups for 2020 from 1990 levels. As a first step in this programs. Montreal has begun pilot projects to 132 development projects in Montreal, covering direction, in 2007 Montreal adopted a plan to implement solar and geothermal energy in nearly 509 acres. reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by municipal buildings. These projects aim to 2012. Specific measures include reducing de- establish standard specifications to allow the Buildings: 19th, 36.4 points pendence on cars by encouraging public city to increase the use of renewable energy on Montreal has 1.7 buildings per 100,000 people transit and bicycling alternatives, reducing municipal property. Montreal promises to com- certified by Leadership in Energy and Environ- greenhouse gas emissions from buildings, and plete at least one renewable energy pro- mental Design (LEED) compared with the Index public awareness campaigns on climate change ject annually for the next three years in city average of 6.4, although a recent law (see targeted at residents and employees. buildings. “green initiatives” below) is likely to lead to in- creases in LEED certification for both new and Energy: 26th, 33.8 points Land use: 12th, 57.7 points renovated buildings. Montreal has limited Montreals rank in this category is driven in part Like other island cities such as New York and Van- authority in mandating energy efficiency audits by per capita electricity consumption of 68 giga- couver, Montreal has a favorable population or regulations, but the provincial government joules per person compared with the Index aver- density, with 11,500 people per square mile runs buildings-related programs, such as offer- age of 52 gigajoules, but primarily by electricity (4,400 people per square kilometer) compared ing up to $1 million in financial incentives for companies that improve the energy efficiency of their buildings. Green initiatives: From 2010 Montreal has required LEED gold certification for all new pub- lic buildings of more than 500 square meters and LEED silver certification for all major renova- tions to public buildings. To be certified, build- ings must meet minimum requirements for energy savings, water efficiency, CO2 emissions Montreal reduction and improved indoor environmental quality. Transport: Fourth, 65.3 points Transport is Montreal’s strongest category. Mon- US and Canada Green City Index treal’s public transit system in general is one of the best in the Index. It has the sixth longest sys- tem, at 2.1 miles per square mile (1.3 kilometers per square kilometer), compared with the Index M ontreal is the largest city in the French- speaking province of Quebec, and with 1.6 million people it is the second largest city in with other low-income cities in the Index, rank- ing fifth out of 11 cities in this bracket. It is in the top half of the group of low-income cities for all consumption per unit of GDP, which at 956 giga- joules per $1 million of GDP is nearly three times the average of 332 gigajoules. Montreal is the with the average of 8,100 people per square mile (3,100 people per square kilometer). Mon- treal also has a considerable share of green average of 1.1 miles (0.7 kilometers), and the city has 18 public vehicles available per square mile (7 vehicles per square kilometer), double Canada and the sixth largest city in the US and but two categories, energy and water. second coldest city in the Index, resulting in high space, at 19% compared with the Index average the average of nine vehicles per square mile Canada Green City Index. Montreal’s metropoli- energy usage during winter months. The city’s of 12%, placing it among the top five cities in tan area expands beyond the Island of Montreal CO2: Tenth, 80.1 points energy policies also have room for improve- this indicator. Despite these statistics, Montreal’s to include 3.6 million people, and a mix of city The city has among the lowest per capita CO2 ment. It does not appear to have incentives in land use policies are less developed than those and metropolitan area data are used for this emissions in the Index, at 8.5 metric tons per place to encourage local energy production, for of most of its peers in the Index. While it is seek- Index. Although Montreal is the financial hub for person compared with the Index average of example; however, with 97% of electricity for ing to increase its amount of green space (see Quebec, the city remains relatively industrial, 14.5 metric tons. Although Montreal belongs to the city and surrounding province supplied by “green initiatives” below), the city is one of only Montreal CO2 Best boasting one of the largest inland ports in the the group of low temperature cities in this Index renewable hydropower, there is less reason for five that does not have a tree-planting policy. Average 100 world. In total, goods make up 20% of employ- and requires more power for that reason, it Montreal to establish its own programs. On the 80 Environmental Energy ment, the fourth largest percentage in the derives almost all of its electricity from hydro- other hand, Montreal runs a clean energy pro- Green initiatives: In 2010 the city set a goal to governance Index. Additionally, although Montreal is the power, which greatly reduces its carbon output. gram and pilot projects in solar and geothermal increase the percentage of green space from 60 economic capital of Quebec, Montreal’s GDP per In terms of emissions per unit of GDP, though, power (see “green initiatives” below). about 19% to 25% by 2025. As part of this goal, 40 capita is the lowest in the Index at an estimated Montreal’s low income hurts its score. The city Montreal has created 10 “ecoterritories”, specialBackground indicators $31,500. emits an estimated 268 metric tons of CO2 per Green initiatives: Fonds Energie is a $3 million zones of protection for natural areas. It is also Air 20 Land use Montreal ranks 19th overall in the 27-city Index. $1 million of GDP, but this is still slightly better city-run investment program to finance energy creating promenades through the city’s most 0Total population 1) 1.6 million The city’s strongest category is transport, where than the Index average of 296. Montreal has efficiency and clean energy projects in munici- densely populated sections and reassessingAdministrative area (miles2) 1) 141 it places fourth, a performance due mainly to made commitments to reduce emissions further pal districts. Eight projects, including energy potential threats to green space such as plantGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 31,500 having the second highest percentage of non- (see “green initiatives” below). efficiency retrofits and clean energy heating sys- infestations resulting from warming tempera-Temperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 43 automobile commuters in the Index. Montreal’s tems, have received $2 million in backing since tures. Another initiative, Revi-Sols, is a brown- Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 20 overall score is in part a result of its low income Green initiatives: As part of the Municipal 2008. The projects have combined to eliminate field rehabilitation program that helps propertyServices employment (%) 2) 80 and limited funding for environmental initia- Leaders Summit on Climate Change held in the equivalent of nearly 800 tons of CO2, and owners and developers pay to clean up sites byGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) CMA tives. However, Montreal fares better compared December 2005 in Montreal, the city agreed to the program has won a national award for contributing up to half of the costs. Since 1998 Waste Water84 85
    • (3.5 vehicles per square kilometer). While thecity’s average commute time is longer thannormal due to long commutes from elsewherein the metropolitan area onto the island, thecity’s high population density ensures efficienttransport once in the city of Montreal. The city’shigh score is also driven by having the secondhighest share of non-automobile commuters –29% of workers commute by public transit, bicy-cle, or on foot, more than double the Index aver-age of 13%.Green initiatives: Montreal introduced Cana-da’s first self-service bicycle rental network, BIXI,in 2009. With 5,000 bicycles and 400 dockingstations, it is currently the largest bicycle shareprogram in North America. Also, Montreal creat-ed a transportation master plan in 2008 as partof a wider strategy to address sustainability. Theplan aims to implement 21 initiatives by 2018,including a downtown tramway system, up- Waste: Ninth, 63.7 points recently has been to improve measurement ofgrades and extensions to the subway, a rail line The city is above average in recycling, with a air pollutants, ensuring greater accuracy in theto the airport, a bus rapid transit system and pri- 34% recycling rate compared with the Index coming years and helping improve both residen-ority bus lanes, doubling the length of the city’s average of 26%, driven by extensive recycling tial and commercial pollution. Quantitative indicatorsbicycle paths, and improving walkability in the facilities available to the public, including sepa-downtown. Finally, Montreal is buying high- rate facilities for hazardous materials such as Category Indicator Average Montreal Year Basis Source Comments Green initiatives: In 2008 Montreal authori-fuel-efficiency diesel buses as well as hybrid batteries or paint. Montreal also has a compre- ties adopted an action plan aiming to counter CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 268.5 2006 City City of Montreal Using estimated city GDPbuses, and plans to have an entirely electric bus hensive waste reduction plan (see “green initia- pollution caused by wood heating, a major CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 8.5 2003 City City of Montreal Using city populationfleet by 2025. tives” below) and is making efforts to convert source of residential air pollution in the city. The Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.96 2009 City City of Montreal Using CMA GDP waste to energy, although these programs are plan contained new regulations on burning and Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 67.6 2009 City City of Montreal Using city populationWater: 26th, 47.2 points still in the pilot stage. a public awareness campaign. Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 18.5 2006 City City of Montreal Using area of city in 2006Montreal has both the highest water distribu- Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 11,496.1 2006 City Statistics Canada Equivalent in metric units: 4,439 persons/km²tion leakage rate, at 35% compared with the Green initiatives: Montreal has a comprehen- Environmental governance:Index average of 13%, and the highest per capi- sive plan to increase the amount of total waste 20th, 74.4 points Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) (buildings/100,000 persons) 6.4 1.7 2010 City CaGBC LEED Database Using city populationta water consumption, at 293 gallons (1,110 recovered through recycling and composting Although the city has a strong environmentalliters), compared with the average of 155 gal- from 31% in 2008 to 80% by 2019. The city’s strategy complete with ambitious targets and Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 28.8 2006 CMA Statistics Canadalons (587 liters). The two statistics are linked. commitments include banning single-use water Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 2.1 2009 Metro-area Société de Transport de Montréal Using city area; Equivalent fully backed by the mayor, it is less open about in metric units: 1.3 km/km²One major cause of Montreal’s high water con- bottles in municipal buildings, replacing plastics reporting its environmental statistics. However,sumption figure is leakage and that means near- used in city food banks, offering organic waste the city has run programs in the past to raise Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 24.3 2010 Metro-area Société de Transport de Montréal Using CMA population; Equivalent in metric units: 39.1 km/personly half of the water is not actually “consumed.” collection to all residents, and building new general awareness of environmental issuesThe city promotes water conservation, but until composting centers. In another initiative, in among city residents. Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 18.0 2010 Metro-area Société de Transport de Montréal Using city area; Equivalent in per square mile (vehicles/miles2) metric units: 7.0 vehicles/km²the city’s aging pipes are replaced, it will contin- 2008 Montreal put together a database of wasteue to produce high rates of leaks and, corre- materials that can be converted into works of art Green initiatives: Montreal’s Community Sus- Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 38.0 2005 CMA Statistics Canadaspondingly, consumption. and began connecting donors with artists. To tainable Development Plan 2010-2015 was de- Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 34.0 2009 City City of Montreal highlight these efforts, the city has hosted eco- veloped in collaboration with over 180 partner Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 293.1 2010 City City of Montreal Using city population; Equivalent in metric units: 1,109.5 litersGreen initiatives: In 2002 Montreal began designer bazaars in which eco-designers can sell organizations, including civil society. The planinstalling water meters at all businesses and and demonstrate works of art made from these calls for the reduction of greenhouse gas emis- Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 35.0 2009 City City of Montreal, Division of Public Affairspublic institutions such as schools and hospitals, materials. sions, the responsible management of natural Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 57 2009 City Environment Canada, NOx from non-industrial, mobile, andand aims to have installed 30,000 meters by resources, the adoption of sustainable develop- Statistics Canada waste sources. Data point has been scaled-2013. Though meters are not required for resi- Air: Eighth, 79.5 points ment practices in industry, business and institu- down from provincial level by proportiondences, the city is raising public awareness The city ranks slightly better than the averages tions, and the protection of biodiversity and of GDP represented by Montreal; Equivalent in metric units: 26 kgof water conservation in homes, including send- for the three pollutants evaluated in the Index. green spaces. Additionally, Montreal offers Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 18 2008 City Environment Canada, PM10 from non-industrial, mobile, anding teams of students to deliver door-to-door It emits an estimated 57 lb (26 kg) of nitrogen training to help citizens better manage their Statistics Canada waste sources. Data point has been scaled-water conservation messages. In 2008 Montreal oxides per person, compared with the Index household waste, and informational sessions on down from provincial level by proportionpassed a bylaw requiring a permit for industrial average of 66 lb (30 kg); 18 lb (8 kg) of particu- climate change for organizations involved in of GDP represented by Montreal; Equivalent in metric units: 8 kgfacilities to dispose of wastewater into the city’s late matter per person, compared with the aver- environmental protection. City officials have Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 10 2008 City Environment Canada, SOx from non-industrial, mobile, andtreatment system. In 2008 more than 760,000 age of 25 lb (11 kg); and 10 lb (5kg) of sulfur also taught college-level courses on environ- Statistics Canada waste sources. Data point has been scaled-cubic meters of wastewater was properly treat- dioxide per person, compared with the Index mental issues, and city employees have trained down from provincial level by proportioned and discharged into the sewer system – 40% average of 22 lb (10 kg). While these figures almost 1,000 students and food handlers on of GDP represented by Montreal; Equivalent in metric units: 5 kgmore than in 2007. are estimates, one of Montreal’s chief efforts sustainable practices.86 87
    • sumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions man- dates a 30% greenhouse gas reduction for municipal facilities and operations by 2017 from 2006 levels. Around 50% of the reduc- tions will come from efficiencies in buildings, 32% from improved power generation and 18% from transportation. The city has allocated $280 million for the plan, and has begun more than 200 projects, 80 of which have been com- pleted. A further 118 projects currently in the pipeline will save the city an additional $29 mil- lion a year and reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions by an estimated 117,000 megatons of CO2 equivalent. Energy: 22nd, 53.8 points has shifted away from industrial production it This is New York’s weakest category in the Index. has been active in promoting brownfield devel- The city consumes 500 gigajoules of electricity opment, and New York’s land use policies are per $1 million of GDP, compared with an Index among the best in the Index. average of 332. On a per capita basis the city uses 65 gigajoules per person, once again more Green initiatives: The Million Trees Program than the overall average of 52 gigajoules. New created in 2007 aims to plant 1 million trees by York’s higher than average levels of consumption 2017. New York is currently ahead of its goal, come despite high population density and an having planted an average of 19,000 street trees abundance of tall buildings, which tend to be each of the past three years and planting in total more efficient (indeed, New York ranks seventh over 430,000 trees in parks, open spaces and in the buildings category). Nonetheless, New private backyards. Additionally, in 2010 New York’s thriving economy requires considerable York created the Green Property Certification energy, especially its vast financial services sec- Program to do for brownfields what Leadership tor, which is one of the most energy intensive in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) has service industries. And although the city plans to done for green buildings. Certification under the offer tax incentives for solar power, and is pilot- program provides tangible evidence of the New York City ing wave power and waste-to-energy projects, brownfield clean-up and can help developers large-scale green and local energy projects so far market the environmental quality of their prop- remain limited. erties, much in the way that LEED has become a key selling point for buildings. Green initiatives: New York is conducting fea- US and Canada Green City Index sibility studies and streamlining permitting pro- Buildings: Seventh, 68.7 points cedures for cogeneration – the use of a heat New York’s comparatively strong showing in the engine or a power station to simultaneously buildings category is a reflection of ambitious generate both electricity and useful heat – and policies. New York, for example, is one of just N ew York City is the largest city in the US, and with 8.4 million residents in the city proper it is by far the largest in the US and Canada top ranking city in land use, transport and envi- ronmental governance, and finishes third in the CO2 and air categories. In particular, New York sions per capita and CO2 emissions per unit of GDP. With emissions of 145 metric tons of CO2 per $1 million of GDP, the city has the second has planned a 15-megawatt cogeneration plant. Additionally, New York is creating an online “solar map” that will enable residents to evaluate three cities in the Index that requires energy Green City Index. Indeed, with some 19 million has by far the highest population density and per- lowest levels in the Index and is well below the the potential for solar power production on the New York City CO2 Best people in the metropolitan area, New York is one centage of workers commuting by public trans- Index average of 296 metric tons. Likewise, New buildings in which they live and work. Average 100 of the most populous cities in the world, port, bicycle, or by foot, while also producing top York’s per capita emissions are 8.6 metric tons 80 although this analysis is largely based on city performances in several air and water indicators. versus the Index average of 14.5. The city’s Land use: First, 93 points Environmental governance Energy indicators. The city is the economic powerhouse While the city’s high rankings stem in part from its strong CO2 performance is a reflection of its effi- Along with transport, this is New York’s 60 of North America and boasts a GDP per person of enormous population, which produce favorable cient transportation network and a compara- strongest category. New York is the most dense- 40 $56,900. A global financial and business capital, per capita scores, New York also fares well in tively low use of coal in its energy mix. New ly populated city in the Index, with 27,700 peo-Background indicators New York’s economy is 91% service based. In comparison to other large cities in the Index. York’s CO2 score is expected to improve further ple per square mile, more than three times the Air 20 Land use addition to the dominant role that finance and Measured against large cities, New York ranks in the coming years as the city has set ambitious average of 8,100 people. Yet, despite such a 0Total population 1) 8.4 million insurance play in the local economy, the city first in every category except for waste and ener- targets for emissions reductions (see “green ini- high population density, the city has also man-Administrative area (miles2) 1) 303 is also a major hub for media and the arts. gy. Additionally, New York has one of the highest tiatives” below) and the city’s greenhouse gas aged to maintain and develop green space –GDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 56,900 New York’s population and wealth make it percentages of green space, belying its popula- reduction plan is rated as one of the best in the most notably Central Park, but also several otherTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 55 unique within this Index, as does its population tion density. Index. parks and coastlines throughout the five bor- Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 9 density – four of the city’s five boroughs are on oughs. With 20% of the city’s area consideredServices employment (%) 2) 91 islands, constraining its lateral growth. CO2: Third, 89.4 points Green initiatives: Launched in 2007, New green space, New York ranks second overall,Geographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA New York ranks third overall in the Index. It is the New York ranks well both in terms of CO2 emis- York’s Long-Term Plan to Reduce Energy Con- well above the Index average of 12%. As the city Waste Water88 89
    • gy costs by $700 million annually by 2030. Green initiatives: As of 2010 the Department Together these measures ensure that the city’s of Environmental Protection, which provides energy code applies to all public and private con- water services in New York, had installed over struction projects, require annual energy effi- 278,000 automated meters and expects to ciency benchmarking, and mandate a set of install a total of 834,000 by January 2012. As a cost-effective energy efficiency upgrades and result of metering and water conservation pro- evaluations of the city’s largest buildings. motion, New York’s water consumption rate is now at its lowest in 50 years. Transport: First, 76.6 points New York’s domination of this category is a Waste: 16th, 53.1 points result of the extensive subway and bus networks This is one of New York’s weaker categories. The that span the city’s five boroughs. The network city’s score is bolstered by a better than av- measures 1.8 miles per square mile of city terri- erage recycling rate, at 30%, compared to the tory, well above the Index mean of 1.1 miles. Index average of 26%. Where the city lags, how- High population density encourages walking ever, is in policies related to sustainable waste and biking as well. Indeed, New York ranks first management. New York relies primarily on Environmental governance: four separate environmental departments that “green” public school in 2008 and has plans to overall in the number of workers walking, biking awareness campaigns rather than direct incen- First, 100 points are responsible for driving policy on a vast range build more. The school is equipped with a com- or taking public transport to work – 37% of New tives for waste reduction. New York tops the Index in environmental of environmental issues. puterized heating and cooling system, and natur- Yorkers commute by means other than private governance, along with Washington and Den- al lighting, to conserve electricity. Meanwhile, car, a full eight percentage points above the sec- Green initiatives: The Apartment Building ver. There is strong support from the top the Green initiatives: In addition to generally students are educated on the merits of conserv- ond highest city, Montreal, and well above the Recycling Initiative allows tenants to volunteer mayor, Michael Bloomberg, is a driving force strong environmental oversight at city level, New ing energy and participate in conservation pro- Index average of 13%. New York also has the to increase recycling in their building. Residents behind the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group. York is developing customized environmental jects. Finally, the New York state Green Schools highest number of “annual vehicle revenue who volunteer for the program receive a site New York’s environmental strategy, internation- awareness campaigns tailored to specific sectors Challenge provides extra funding to schools, miles” (a measure of public transport supply), visit from staff who offer personalized recycling al commitments and customized environmental of the public, including the press, schoolchildren including those in New York City, that are devel- with 68 miles per person compared with an tips, as well as free materials to encourage all awareness campaigns are all considered among and those in the building trades. The city is also oping programs to improve waste reduction, Index average of just 24. The city has the second residents to recycle more. the best in the Index. Furthermore, the city has focusing on schools. New York established its first reuse, recycling and composting. highest number of public transport vehicles per square mile, at 45 vehicles, compared with the Air: Third, 89.2 points Index average of nine. Furthermore, New York’s New York’s placement in the air category is a green transit efforts include the largest hybrid- reflection of low per capita emissions in all pollu- electric bus fleet in the world, with 855 hybrid tants measured in the Index. New York emits Quantitative indicators buses as of 2009. 29 lb of nitrogen oxides per person each year, considerably less than the average of 66 lb, plac- Category Indicator Average New York Year Basis Source Comments CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 145.0 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP Green initiatives: Green Light for Midtown, ing it at the top of the Index. Likewise, New York US Bureau of Economic Analysis a pilot project launched in May 2009 that has ranks first, along with Vancouver, with particu- now been made permanent, created expanded late matter emissions of 6 lb per person, well CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 8.6 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population US Census Bureau pedestrian plazas in Herald Square and Times below the Index average of 25 lb. Sulfur dioxide Square. Overall, the program produced a emissions of 10 lb per person each year also Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.50 2009 City City of New York; US Bureau of Economic Using MSA GDP Analysis 63% reduction in injuries to motorists, a 35% re- come in below the 22 lb Index mean. While the duction in pedestrian injuries and a 7% im- city’s service-based economy and low automo- Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 64.7 2009 City City of New York; Using city population US Census Bureau provement in taxi speeds. New York has also bile usage are major contributors to the compar- doubled the number of bicycle lanes in the city atively low levels of air pollution, policy efforts Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 19.7 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000 in the last three years and met its goal of build- have also contributed to improved air quality. Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 27,666.8 2009 City US Census Bureau ing 200 miles of bicycle lanes ahead of schedule Indeed, New York aims to have the best air quali- Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 1.1 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureau in 2009. In the last year, the city has seen bicy- ty of any big city in the US. Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 37.2 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Communityefficiency audits. It also mandates that new cle commuting increase 26%. Surveybuildings meet energy efficiency standards, and Green initiatives: New York has sought tooffers incentives for energy efficiency retrofits, Water: Third, 88.8 points mandate the use of cleaner taxis and offer Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 1.8 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square milesincluding targeted incentives for businesses. Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 68.5 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area population New York’s strong placement in this category is tax breaks to fuel-efficient taxis. While courtsNew York’s buildings score is weighed down, driven by the city’s low level of water con- have blocked the city from introducing these Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 44.9 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles per square mile (vehicles/miles2)however, by a low percentage of LEED-certified sumption, at just 69 gallons of water per person measures thus far, in anticipation of futurebuildings. In an instance where the city’s large per day, less than half the Index average of requirements almost 25% of the city’s Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 34.6 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American Community Surveypopulation hurts its per capita indicators, New 155 gallons. The city’s water policies have effec- 13,200 yellow cabs have converted to hybrid orYork has just 1.1 LEED certified buildings per tively curbed consumption levels, and these clean diesel vehicles, giving New York the Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 30.4 2006 City City of New York100,000 people, well below the average of 6.4. include incentives for installing low-flow appli- largest fleet of clean vehicle taxis in the coun- Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 69.3 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied population ances and discount water rates for buildings that try. Additionally, in 2010 New York unveiled aGreen initiatives: In December 2009 New use recycled water. New York’s water leakage comprehensive agreement that will cut harmful Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 14.2 2009 City City of New YorkYork approved the Greener, Greater Buildings rate is 14%, just above the Index average of 13%, pollution from the Port of New York and New Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 29 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationlaws, the most comprehensive set of efficiency mainly due to an aging network, with some Jersey by launching a $28 million truck replace- Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 6 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationregulations in the US, which aim to reduce ener- water mains more than 100 years old. ment program. Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 10 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population90 91
    • strengths. Orlando has one of the strongest sets of policies for clean and efficient energy in the Index, and boasts a relatively high number of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)-certified buildings in relation to its popu- lation. It is also one of the most adept cities among other low-income peers at recycling municipal waste. The city’s transport score is bolstered by the lead it is taking on the installa- tion of battery-charging stations for electric vehicles. But Orlando still has room for improve- ment. The city would benefit from expanding its public transport network and strengthening policies to curb carbon emissions. CO2: 21st, 52.2 points The city emits 254 metric tons of CO2 per $1 mil- lion of GDP, which is more than 40 metric tons below the Index average of 296. Orlando’s CO2 Orlando also scores the highest marks, along planting policy and has replaced the estimated emissions per capita, at 13.5 metric tons, are with Denver and Toronto, for clean and efficient 10,000 trees lost to hurricane damage in 2004. also narrowly better than the Index average of energy policies. The city promotes green energy, Orlando set a goal in 2010 to increase tree 14.5 metric tons. Despite better-than-average has embarked on green energy projects (see canopy coverage to 40% by spring 2011, up CO2 emissions, policy omissions weigh on Orlan- “green initiatives” below), and has increased the from the 25-35% estimated canopy coverage in do’s score. The city is one of just five in the Index amount of locally-produced energy as a propor- the city when the goal was set. that have failed to set any of their own targets to tion of its overall energy consumption. reduce city-wide CO2 emissions, and its strategy Buildings: 16th, 42.3 points for reducing greenhouse gas emissions falls Green initiatives: Orlando is one of 25 US Low-income cities generally score lower in the behind the more ambitious ones in Index: Orlan- cities carrying “Solar America City” status, enti- buildings category, particularly in policy areas, do’s commitments on greenhouse emissions are tling it to federal funding of $200,000 to devel- and Orlando is no exception. Energy efficiency in line with long-term national targets only (see op solar power infrastructure. Orlando intends regulation for new buildings is not as strict as in “green initiatives” below), whereas many cities to install 11 megawatts of solar energy by 2011, many other Index cities, and Orlando could do have set separate targets. increasing to 15 megawatts by 2015. The instal- more to inform residents and businesses about Orlando lation of LEDs at road signals (see “green initia- ways to decrease energy consumption. The city Green initiatives: Orlando, in line with nation- tives” under “CO2” above) is saving the city more has, however, increased efforts to retrofit low- al targets, has committed to making all city oper- than $25,000 a month through lower energy income and high-energy households through ations greenhouse gas-neutral by 2030 and to consumption. subsidies (see “green initiatives” below). The reducing total greenhouse gas emissions (muni- number of LEED-certified buildings in Orlando is US and Canada Green City Index cipal and non-municipal) 80% from 1990 levels Land use: 16th, 54.5 points 9.3 per 100,000 people, which is one of the by 2050. To achieve these goals the city began Orlando’s proportion of green space, at just un- highest ratios among low-income cities and well transitioning its automotive fleet to bio-diesel, der 5% of its administrative area, is one of the flex-fuel and hybrids. By 2009 one-third of the smallest in the Index. Decades of rapid popula- fleet was running on cleaner fuels. By the same tion growth resulted in urban sprawl in the year every stoplight and pedestrian signal in the already small confines of the city limits. Orlando city was converted from incandescent bulbs to officials appear to have recognized the problem more energy efficient LEDs. and are now making some concerted policy Orlando CO2 O Best rlando is located in the southern US state of ulation terms, with just 240,000 residents. Data efforts. The city is actively improving the quanti- Average 100 Florida. Home to several of the country’s included in the Index, however, are based on a Energy: 17th, 64.2 points ty, proximity and usability of green space, and 80 Environmental Energy largest theme parks and resorts, Orlando’s thriv- mix of statistics for the city and wider metropoli- Orlando consumes 118 gigajoules of electricity measures are in place to protect existing green governance 60 ing tourism sector dominates local economic tan area, which has a far greater population of per capita, more than double the overall average space from building development. With state activity. Additionally, it is home to one of the 2.1 million. Orlando boasts the third highest and one of the highest rates in the Index. This is help, Orlando also promotes brownfield regen- 40 country’s biggest convention centers, attracting average temperature in the Index, placing due in part to the demand for residential heating eration (see “green initiatives” below). 20Background indicators large numbers of business visitors each year. strains on energy demand, because of air condi- and cooling, which is a challenge for the whole Air Land use High tech, aviation and aerospace, and film and tioning in the summer months. state. A recent US Energy Information Agency Green initiatives: With assistance from the 0Total population 1) 240,000 television production also contribute signifi- Orlando ranks 18th overall in the Index. The report found that residential electricity demand Florida Department of Environmental Protec-Administrative area (miles2) 1) 93 cantly to the city’s economy, and many engi- city’s highest ranking is in the waste category, in Florida is among the highest in the country tion, Orlando has designated several brownfieldGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 41,800 neering and manufacturing firms have set up where it places 12th thanks to a better than because of widespread use of air conditioning in sites for regeneration. A number of areas haveTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 73 base there. Orlando has a GDP per capita of average recycling rate. Although Orlando’s per- the summer and home heating during the win- already been revitalized, including a new events Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 10 $41,800, which places it at the upper end of the formance is near the middle of the table in all ter. The city does better on electricity consump- center in downtown Orlando and a performingServices employment (%) 2) 90 low-income group of cities in the US and Canada main categories aside from CO2, where it is 21st, tion per $1 million GDP, which, at 319 gigajoules, arts complex located on a 34-acre brownfield Waste WaterGeographical basis: 1) City, 2) MSA Green City Index. The city is the smallest in pop- the city can claim a number of environmental is slightly better than the Index average of 332. area. Additionally, the city has an active tree-92 93
    • Program (OCHEEP!). Backed by nearly $700,000 efficient water distribution system. It loses 10% proactive policies to improve air quality, which Environmental governance: County produce regular reports on environmen- in federal funds, OCHEEP! provides homeown- of supply to leaks against an Index average of weighs on its score. 16th, 82.2 points tal progress. Areas for improvement include the ers subsidies of up to $1,000 for energy efficien- 13%. Water efficiency and treatment policies are Orlando ties with Dallas in the environmental need for a more comprehensive baseline review cy upgrades. To be eligible, applicants must first also strong. Main water sources are monitored Green initiatives: With federal funding, governance category. The city scores well for and setting more explicit targets for each envi- gather ten or more people together for free for quality and supply levels, and measures are Orange County’s Air Quality Management divi- actively involving residents in environmental ronmental issue. workshops. The workshops are intended to in place to lower water usage. One weakness is sion oversaw the retrofitting of nearly 400 programs and seeking public input on projects change energy usage habits and cover a range relatively high water consumption. Orlando school buses in 2007 and 2008. Buses were fit- that have an environmental impact. Orlando Green initiatives: In 2007 the city convened of topics from common reasons for energy consumes 193 gallons of water per capita per ted with diesel oxidation catalysts to reduce the holds regular public hearings to give residents an internal “green team” comprising staff repre- waste in homes to new technologies. Upon day. This is well in excess of the Index average of amount of carbon monoxide and particulate the opportunity to participate in policy imple- sentatives from across municipal departments. completion of the workshop homeowners are 155 gallons, but high temperature cities, like matter being emitted into the atmosphere. mentation. Furthermore, Orlando and Orange The team’s mandate was to draft a comprehen- required to hire a certified energy rater, who Orlando, do tend to consume more water than sive plan to transform Orlando into an environ- tests the energy efficiency of a property and cre- average. mentally-friendly city. As a result, in mid-2007 ates a customized plan to improve performance Orlando unveiled its environmental action in each home. After implementing the rater’s Green initiatives: To encourage water conser- agenda: Green Works Orlando. The plan in- suggestions, OCHEEP! participants receive re- vation, the city offers rebates as credit on water cludes actions to conserve local natural re- bates of $300 for the energy audits and up to bills to residents who install cisterns to collect sources; invest in green building and vehicles; $700 for up-grade work. and reuse rainwater. The rebate is $0.10 per gal- foster alternative transport options; increase lon up to $1,000 and cistern storage capacity the amount of trees and green spaces in the Transport: 18th, 49.4 points ranges from 200 gallons to 10,000 gallons. city; provide residents the tools and informa- Orlando’s rank in this category is a reflection of Additionally, during summer months watering tion they need to become more environmental- the city’s underdeveloped public transport net- days are limited to two per week per household. ly responsible; and encourage community par- work. On a per square mile basis, the Orlando Household numbers, odd or even, determine ticipation in environmental projects. Green metropolitan area has both the shortest public which days they can water. Works Orlando remains the pillar of local envi- transport network, at just 0.001 miles per ronmental action today. square mile, and lowest vehicle availability, at Waste: 12th, 58 points 0.2 vehicles per square mile, in the Index. How- Orlando records its highest placement in the ever, the city has ambitious plans to expand its waste category. The city recycles 38% of its bus rapid transit network and commuter rail municipal waste versus a much lower 26% Index links (see “green initiatives” below). Additional- average. The performance looks even more ly, Orlando and Florida state authorities are impressive when taking into account that low building a 61-mile rail transit line to improve income and low population density cities gener- Quantitative indicators commuter links across four counties. Service is ally score below average on this indicator, and expected to begin in 2013. But the city will need unlike many cities, Orlando has not yet fully Category Indicator Average Orlando Year Basis Source Comments to boost worker enthusiasm for greener forms of rolled out a single-stream recycling program. CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 254.4 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysis transport. Only around 3% of workers use public Nonetheless, relatively strong policies have transit, bicycles or go by foot in Orlando, which helped. Orlando picks up points for installing CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 13.5 2002 MSA Purdue University – The Vulcan Project; Using MSA population US Census Bureau is well below the Index average of 13%. Where facilities to treat different types of waste (recy- Orlando scores well is for policies to reduce con- clable, hazardous and industrial) and for adopt- Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.32 2010 City Orlando Utilities Commission; Using MSA GDP US Bureau of Economic Analysis gestion and its efforts to make the city fleet ing good waste management practices, such as greener. composting and converting waste by-products Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 117.7 2010 City Orlando Utilities Commission; Using city population US Census Bureau to energy. One policy oversight is the absence of Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 4.9 2008 City Trust for Public Land; US Census Bureau Using area of city in 2000 Green initiatives: Orlando is part of Charge- any measures to reduce waste creation. Point America, a US government-backed pro- Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 2,536.1 2009 City US Census Bureau Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 9.3 2010 City US Green Building Council; Using city population gram to roll out electric vehicle infrastructure Green initiatives: Orlando’s Solid Waste Man- (buildings/100,000 persons) US Census Bureau nationwide. Under the scheme, which the city agement Division provides single-stream recy- Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 3.2 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American joined in June 2010, up to 500 charging stations cling service to businesses in certain areas of the Community Survey will be installed around Orange County by the city. To encourage company participation, col- Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 0.001 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles end of 2011. The city also aims to increase usage lection fees for recycling bins are approximately Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 12.6 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area population of its bus rapid transit system from just over 43% cheaper than for standard waste bins.above the Index average of 6.4. The strong per- Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 0.2 2009 Metro-area National Transit Database Using service area square miles 4,000 daily passengers today to 20,000 by per square mile (vehicles/miles2)formance on this indicator is a reflection of the 2030. Although plans haven’t been finalized, Air: 18th, 66.4 pointspriority the city has given to making its buildings Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 27.0 2009 MSA US Census Bureau American it’s expected the city will extend the free service Orlando’s annual emissions of particulate mat- Community Surveymore sustainable: since 2007 the city has con- from its current 1.5-mile stretch in downtown ter, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides are eachstructed all new municipal buildings to meet Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 38.0 2009 City City of Orlando Orlando to 3.6 miles. The city has said it will like- in line with Index averages. Like other services-LEED standards and says it is drafting a new Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 193.4 2005 MSA USGS Using USGS publicly supplied ly have to introduce a passenger fee between intensive cities with low population densities, populationbuildings code that will establish standards for $0.25 and $1.50 per ride. Orlando records higher emissions of both partic-green homes. ulate matter and nitrogen oxides than the Index Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 10.0 2009 City Orlando Utilities Commission Water: 14th, 81 points frontrunners. The city does comparatively better Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 62 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationGreen initiatives: In 2010 Orange County This is one of Orlando’s strongest placements in on sulfur dioxide emissions, but Orlando is one Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 26 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county populationlaunched its Homeowner Energy Efficiency the Index. The city gains points for its relatively of three cities in this Index that has not adopted Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 20 2005 County EPA; US Census Bureau Using county population94 95
    • outlined the types of measures that would, if the land within Ottawa’s large city boundaries is fully implemented, achieve the plan’s targets. green space, the highest percentage in the The government pledged to reduce emissions Index and well above the average of 12%. The from its own activities by 20% from 1990 levels city has protected this greenbelt for decades and by 2007, a goal the city met. As noted above, the has recently made an effort to transform these city is now embarking on an effort to reduce green spaces into woodlands, further improving emissions 20% by 2012. However, the chal- its landscape. lenges of continued population growth, lack of direct municipal control over such variables as Green initiatives: Ottawa’s Green Acres Pro- building code standards, fossil fuel generation, gram provides landowners with advice and and vehicle fuel efficiency, have put this target assistance in setting up a tree planting plan for into question. their properties. Among the program’s goals is to achieve 30% forest cover (up from 27%, Energy: 20th, 56.9 points currently) and to plant 100,000 trees between Ottawa’s performance in this category is bol- 2006 and 2011. In 2006 Green Acres planted stered by relatively low per capita electricity 91,920 trees to create 45 hectares of new forest. consumption of 34 gigajoules per person, com- pared with the Index average of 52 gigajoules. Buildings: 22nd, 28.2 points However, due to having a low per-capita GDP, Ottawa’s score in the buildings category is Ottawa’s electricity consumption per unit of weighed down by a shortage of Leadership in GDP is comparatively high, weighing heavily on Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)-certi- its ranking. The city consumes 626 gigajoules of fied buildings. The city claims 1.7 LEED build- electricity per $1 million, nearly twice the Index ings per 100,000 people, well below the Index average of 332. Ottawa also lags in local energy average of 6.4, but this could improve as regula- production, although its plans to increase solar tions implemented in 2005 take full effect in power in the coming years (see “green ini- the future (see “green initiatives” below). None- tiatives” below) will boost its performance in theless, the city does not appear to require Ottawa this area. energy efficiency audits, which further weighs on its overall buildings score. Ottawa is also one Green initiatives: In May 2010 Ottawa ap- of just four cities in the Index that do not offer proved two solar parks on land near a municipal homeowners incentives to make retrofits to landfill. The two ground-mounted solar photo- improve energy efficiency. However, it is cur- US and Canada Green City Index voltaic fields could harness enough solar energy rently exploring ways to offer tax breaks for to power 1,500 homes annually. The project is a homeowners to implement retrofits. partnership with a private green energy compa- ny that allows the firm to lease lands for the Green initiatives: As of 2005 all newly con- T he capital of Canada, Ottawa is by far the largest city in terms of area in the US and Canada Green City Index. Sprawling over 1,100 places third. The city limits encompass numer- ous semi-rural areas, which combine to give it the highest percentage of green space in the solar parks for 20 years. The private company will design, construct, operate and maintain both sites. Under the agreement, which is structed buildings in Ottawa greater than 500 square meters must be designed, delivered and certified by the Canada Green Building square miles (2,800 square kilometers), it is Index. Ottawa also fares well in the CO2 and expected to begin in 2012, the city would Council as being LEED-Canada “Certified” at nearly double the size of the second largest city, transport categories, placing fifth in both. Its receive a fixed payment of approximately minimum. All newly constructed buildings Houston, and more than five times the Index per capita CO2 emissions are among the lowest $125,000 from the utility annually while the pri- average of 211 square miles (546 square kilo- in the Index while the city also boasts one of the vate company would enter into a feed-in tariff meters). This vast area is home to just a mid- highest percentages of workers commuting by contract with the Ontario Power Authority and range population of 810,000, giving Ottawa public transport, on foot or bicycle. As noted, retain revenues for its power generation. Ottawa CO2 Best the lowest population density among the many of the environmental challenges Ottawa Average 100 27 cities in the Index. Ottawa’s metropolitan faces are the result of its low population densi- Land use: Third, 75 points 80 Environmental Energy area, with a population of 1.1 million, spills into ty. However, compared to other cities with low measured against other cities with low popula- This is Ottawa’s best category performance in governance neighboring province Quebec, and a mix of city population densities, Ottawa fares well; it tion densities, Ottawa places first for carbon the Index. As noted above, the city limits encom- 60 and metropolitan data are used in the Index. places second in this group, while scoring first emissions overall. The city has taken proactive pass an area that is five times larger than the 40 The city’s low population density and extreme in CO2, land use and transport. steps to improve its already strong performance average city in Index, creating both opportuni-Background indicators climate are principal strains on its environment. in this category. Officials set a goal to reduce ties and challenges for land use policies. On one Air 20 Land use Ottawa’s economy, dominated by services, is CO2: Fifth, 86 points CO2 emissions by 20% by 2012, compared to hand, Ottawa has by far the lowest population 0Total population 1) 810,000 based primarily on housing the federal govern- Ottawa’s per capita CO2 emissions of just 1990 levels, and this is one of the earliest and density in the Index, at 800 people per squareAdministrative area (miles2) 1) 1,100 ment. And although it is one of Canada’s high- 6.9 metric tons per person are the second lowest more ambitious CO2 reduction targets in the mile (300 people per square kilometer), justGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 38,500 tech hubs, its per capita GDP of $38,500 is one in the Index and well below the average of Index. one-tenth the Index average of 8,100 people perTemperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 43 of the lowest in the Index. 14.5 metric tons. The city also performs relative- square mile (3,100 people per square kilome- Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 11 Ottawa ranks 12th overall in the Index and third ly well in the area of CO2 emissions per $1 mil- Green initiatives: In 2005 Ottawa’s Air Quality ter). While this low population density leads toServices employment (%) 2) 89 among the five Canadian cities. Ottawa’s best lion of GDP, at 197 metric tons, compared with and Climate Change Management Plan estab- some urban sprawl, the city limits also encom-Geographical basis: 1) City, 2) CMA performance is in the area of land use, where it the Index average of 296 metric tons. When lished targets for greenhouse gas reduction and pass vast amounts of green space. One-fifth of Waste Water96 97
    • must also incorporate energy efficient features most cities in the Index, with environmentalinto the building design to meet the standards data not as readily available as in other cities.required by another program, the Commercial However, Ottawa’s performance is boosted byBuilding Incentive Program of 2006. strong public involvement in environmental matters. The environmental committee holdsTransport: Fifth, 65.1 points public events, including area tours, whichOttawa’s strong performance in transport demonstrate the effects of city life on the localreflects an extensive and widely embraced pub- environment. Furthermore, the committeelic transport system that links the metropolitan reports directly to the city council on greenarea. Ottawa boasts the third highest share of issues, providing a forum for citizen action.workers commuting by public transit, bicycle,or foot, at 28%, more than double the Index Green initiatives: In 2008 Ottawa, in partner-average of 13%. Compared with other low calls for the implementation of new tracks and city introduced a regulation to restrict water use city to identify high-polluting and sensitive single occupancy vehicles, and high consump- ship with the non-profit software company Zero-income cities in the Index, Ottawa has the sec- stations that improve transit’s service wherever through metering, and in 2013 the city plans to neighborhoods, and intends to use the results to tion vehicles and appliances, as well as control of footprint, launched an information campaignond highest share of workers traveling by possible. The city has also started designing a explore financial penalties for inefficient com- implement a number of air quality initiatives non-source emissions such as wood combustion that helps residents calculate their carbon foot-means other than private automobiles. The light rail network, which is in early planning mercial and residential water use. and reduce its overall air pollution. and road dust. prints and adopt methods for reducing emis-Ottawa metropolitan area also has the third phases now and is expected to become fully sions. The program has a component gearedlongest public transit network in the Index, at operational by 2019. Waste: Eighth, 66.2 points Green initiatives: Ottawa’s Air Quality and Cli- Environmental governance: specifically towards schools, where students can3.9 miles per square mile (2.4 kilometers per Political will has put Ottawa at the forefront mate Change Challenge includes several recom- 21st, 62.2 points monitor their greenhouse gas emissions andsquare kilometer), compared with an average Water: Eighth, 84.9 points of waste-to-energy programs in Canada (see mendations aimed specifically at air quality Although Ottawa has an environmental strate- teachers learn tips for ways to incorporate sus-of 1.1 miles per square mile (0.7 kilometers per Ottawa’s very low per capita water consump- “green initiatives” below), which supports the improvement. In addition to transit, building and gy in place, the plan lacks baseline measure- tainability into the curriculum. Thus far, nearlysquare kilometer). This is a feat made more tion, which is among the best in the Index, bol- city’s score in this category. Canada’s capital also land use initiatives mentioned above, the plan ments for all categories. Ottawa’s performance 40,000 residents have registered with the pro-impressive by the city’s vast total area. Ottawa’s sters its performance in the water category. The takes deliberate measures to reduce waste, and includes implementation of smog control mea- in this category is further hindered because it is gram, with savings calculated at more thanscore is weighed down, however, by a low rate city consumes just 75 gallons (284 liters) of to this end, runs programs that advocate re- sures that discourage such activities as the use of less transparent in environmental issues than 26,000 tons of CO2 emissions.of public transit vehicles, coming in at just water per person per day, less than half the duced packaging, reusing plastic goods and con-0.8 vehicles per square mile (0.3 vehicles per Index average of 155 gallons (587 liters). suming fewer beverages from plastic bottles.square kilometer), compared with the average Ottawa’s water efficiency plan (see “green ini- Despite progressive policies, the city’s recycling Quantitative indicatorsof nine vehicles per square mile (3.5 vehicles tiatives” below) has been effective and is rate is nearly average for the Index: Ottawa recy-per square kilometer). Meanwhile, the city has expected to keep the city among the leaders in cles 25% of municipal waste, compared to the Category Indicator Average Ottawa Year Basis Source Commentsbeen active in promoting public transit and efficient water consumption. The city’s rank in average of 26%. CO2 CO2 emissions per unit of GDP (metric tons/US$m) 296.4 197.0 2008 City City of Ottawa, Planning and Growth Using estimated city GDP Management Departmentalternative fuels (see “green initiatives” below), this category, however, is hindered by abovewhich ensure that Ottawa will remain one of average water leakages. Ottawa loses 15% of its Green initiatives: In 2008 Ottawa was the first CO2 emissions per person (metric tons) 14.5 6.9 2008 City City of Ottawa, Planning and Growth Management Departmentthe top cities for transport in North America. water to system leakages, compared with the municipality in Canada to permit the construc- Index average of 13%. Furthermore, Ottawa is tion of a 100-ton per day commercial gasifica- Energy Electricity consumption per unit of US$ GDP (TJ/US$m) 0.33 0.63 2009 City Hydro Ottawa Using CMA GDP Electricity consumption per person (GJ) 52.2 33.5 2009 City Hydro Ottawa Using city populationGreen initiatives: In 2004 Ottawa launched also one of only four cities that do not promote tion demonstration facility. The 15-megawattan ambitious plan for introducing alternative- the use of recycled water, further hurting its facility is set to begin construction in 2011, and Land use Green spaces as % of total area (%) 11.9 20.0 2005 City City of Ottawa Using area of city in 2006 Population density (persons/miles2) 8,106.8 757.1 2006 City Statistics Canada Equivalent in metric units:fuel vehicles into its city fleet. By 2009 Ottawa performance. will be capable of supplying electricity to 292 persons/km²had converted all of its nearly 250 buses to approximately 15,000 households. Similar tobiodiesel fuel and over 1,000 total city-owned Buildings Number of LEED certified buildings (silver, gold or platinum) 6.4 1.7 2010 City CaGBC LEED Database Using city population Green initiatives: WaterWise, initially laun- systems in Europe, waste is converted into a (buildings/100,000 persons)vehicles to electric/hybrids or ethanol biofuels. ched in 2005, is a comprehensive plan to im- higher form of gas called PlascoSyngas. TheFurthermore, the Ottawa Traffic Master Plan prove water efficiency in Ottawa. The campaign PlascoSyngas is further refined to remove all Transport Share of workers traveling by public transport, bicycle, or foot (%) 13.0 28.4 2006 CMA Statistics Canadaaims to make public transit more affordable focuses on public education, rebates on water major air contaminants and used to fuel a com- Length of public transport (miles/miles2) 1.1 3.9 2009 Metro-area City of Ottawa, communication Using city area; Equivalent in with city official metric units: 2.4 km/km²when compared to driving and better integrate efficient items, and assistance with the cost of bustion engine that produces steam to turn atransit with other modes of travel. The plan also water audits and fixture retrofits. In 2009 the turbine that produces energy. Annual vehicle revenue miles (miles/person) 24.4 23.5 2009 Metro-area OC Transpo Using MSA population; Equivalent in metric units: 37.9 km/person Air: 13th, 76.7 points Ottawa’s air pollution levels vary greatly de- Maximum public transport vehicles available 9.0 0.8 2009 Metro-area OC Transpo Using city area; Equivalent in per square mile (vehicles/miles2) metric units: 0.3 vehicles/km² pending on the specific pollutant, leading to a Average commute time from residence to work (minutes) 28.9 32.5 2005 CMA Statistics Canada middling rank in this category. Due to a compar- atively low use of automobiles, the city has Waste Recycled municipal waste (%) 25.8 25.0 2005 City City of Ottawa below average levels of particulate matter emis- Water Total water consumption per person per day (gallons) 155.1 75.0 2010 City City of Ottawa, communication with Using city population; Equivalent city official in metric units: 283.9 liters sions at 14 lb (6 kg) per person, compared with the Index average of 25 (11 kg), and is close to Water leakages in water distribution system (%) 12.8 14.5 2010 City City of Ottawa, communication with city official the Index average in terms of nitrogen oxides emissions, at 66 lb (30 kg) per person per year. Air Nitrogen oxides emissions per annum (pounds/person) 66 66 2004 City City of Ottawa, Planning and Using city population; Environment Committee Equivalent in metric units: 30 kg In large part due to cold weather, the city emits a far greater amount of sulfur dioxide than the Particulate matter (PM10) emissions per annum (pounds/person) 25 14 2004 City City of Ottawa, Planning and Using city population; Environment Committee Equivalent in metric units: 6 kg Index average, at 36 lb (16 kg) per person versus 22 (10 kg). Ottawa recently piloted a unique air Sulfur dioxide emissions per annum (pounds/person) 22 36 2004 City City of Ottawa, Planning and Using city population; Environment Committee Equivalent in metric units: 16 kg quality mapping project that has enabled the98 99
    • attracts large numbers of tourists each year. The city has a broad-based economy that ranges from pharmaceuticals and financial services to ship- ping and manufacturing. Services account for about 88% of economic activity. Philadelphia’s GDP per capita, at $46,200, places it among the mid-income cities in the Index. Philadelphia ranks 13th overall in the Index. Its best rankings are in the categories of environ- mental governance, where it places fifth, and air quality, at sixth. These results are driven by the city’s much lauded green action plan, strong pub- lic participation in environmental management, and low overall air pollution levels. Additionally, while it places seventh in land use, Philadelphia is first among middle-income cities in the land use category, a score driven by strong policies that are likely to positively influence the city’s overall environmental performance in the coming years. Philadelphia’s weakest ranking is in the water category, at 23rd, largely because it has one of works and contribute to reducing the city’s average, with 13% of city territory classified low), it does not require energy efficiency the highest leakage rates in the Index. CO2 emissions. as green space compared with the Index aver- audits. Furthermore, with just 2.5 Leadership age of 12%. Philadelphia is working to improve in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)-cer- CO2: 12th, 78.4 points Energy: Tenth, 72.5 points this further (see “green initiatives” below), and tified buildings per 100,000 people, Philadel- Philadelphia’s carbon emissions are slightly Better than average levels of electricity use has adopted policies to encourage tree planting phia ranks well below the Index average of 6.4. better than average both in terms of per capita boost Philadelphia’s score in the energy cate- and green-belt protection, including a series of emissions and per unit of GDP. With 11.3 metric gory. The city consumes 28 gigajoules of electri- greenways that connect parks and other green Green initiatives: Philadelphia has set a goal tons of CO2 emissions per person, the city emits city per person each year, versus the Index aver- spaces throughout the Philadelphia metro- to complete energy efficiency retrofits on 15% less than the Index average of 14.5. With respect age of 52 gigajoules. Additionally, Philadelphia politan area. of its public housing by 2015. To highlight this to economic output, Philadelphia emits 233 met- consumes just 154 gigajoules of electricity per goal, in 2010 the city held a neighborhood con- ric tons of CO2 emissions per $1 million of $1 million of GDP, less than half the average of Green initiatives: Green2015, launched by the test called the “RetroFIT Philly Coolest Block”, a GDP, again better than the overall average of 332 gigajoules. When measured against other city in 2010, aims to create new open space dur- public-private partnership between the city and 296 metric tons. For reasons of data availability mid-income cities, Philadelphia has the best ing ongoing neighborhood redevelopments and a private company, in which city blocks com- and comparability, the CO2 figures were taken record for electricity consumption compared to to make vacant lots green. In total, it plans to peted to see how much they could reduce ener- from 2002 for all of the US cities in the Index, economic output. Philadelphia’s efforts at acquire and redevelop an additional 500 acres gy expenses. Seventy-four blocks entered the and according to city officials Philadelphia has in greening this consumption, however, are only of green public space and to ultimately provide contest to win cool roofs, air sealing and insula- the meantime made progress reducing its emis- just beginning. In 2009 the city set a goal to pur- green space for the 202,000 residents who cur- tion upgrades. All told, these efforts aim to help sions. Although a large percentage of Philadel- chase and generate 20% of electricity from alter- rently do not live within a ten-minute walk Philadelphia meet its target of 100,000 houses phia’s electricity is supplied by coal, the city’s low native energy sources, and in particular the city of a park. Additionally, in April 2010 the Depart- retrofitted by 2015. overall electricity consumption (see “energy” is planning to ramp up solar production (see ment of Parks and Recreation launched Green section below) contributes to this better than “green initiatives” below). It has further plans for Philly, Grow Philly with the goal of increasing tree Transport: 21st, 47.2 points Philadelphia average performance in carbon emissions. Still, local geothermal and hydro production, but thus coverage to 30% in all neighborhoods by 2025. Transport is another of Philadelphia’s weaker city officials recognize room for improvement far these remain undeveloped. As an immediate step, the city has revised its zon- and have adopted an ambitious greenhouse gas ing code to allow public and private tree planting reduction strategy (see “green initiatives” be- Green initiatives: Philadelphia has plans for in additional areas, and performed a satellite Philadelphia CO2 Best low) to reduce emissions by 20% by 2015, based three large-scale solar installations, which assessment of the current urban tree canopy, Average 100 US and Canada Green City Index on 1990 levels. together will provide enough electricity to with the goal of planting 300,000 trees by 2015. 80 Environmental Energy power over 600 homes. By 2021 Philadelphia governance Green initiatives: In May 2009 the city intro- hopes to have solar generation capacity of Buildings: 21st, 29.5 points 60 duced the Greenworks Philadelphia plan, which over 57 megawatts, enough to power almost Philadelphia’s placement in the buildings cate- 40 established its greenhouse gas emissions- 9,000 homes. gory is largely a reflection of slow policy imple-Background indicators P 20 hiladelphia is the largest city in the state reduction target. The city has been working to mentation for energy efficiency standards in Air Land use of Pennsylvania, with a population of 1.6 mil- update an emissions inventory that will serve as Land use: Seventh, 67.7 points buildings. The city has implemented just one 0Total population 1) 1.6 million lion. The metropolitan area, home to 6 million a benchmarking tool for reduction goals. Offi- This is one of Philadelphia’s stronger categories. energy efficiency regulation – that new buil-Administrative area (miles2) 1) 135 residents, flows into neighboring states New Jer- cials are gathering information from local utility As one of the older cities in the Index, Phila- dings use highly reflective roofing materials thatGDP per person (real) (US$) 2) 46,200 sey and Delaware, though city data are primarily companies and calculating vehicle miles trav- delphia benefits from high population density meet or exceed Energy Star cool roof standards.Temperature (24-hour average, annual) (°F) 1) 55 used in the US and Canada Green City Index. eled to develop a citywide and regional green- that makes efficient use of its land – the city has City officials are in the process of drafting more Transport BuildingsGoods employment (%) 2) 12 Philadelphia, one of the oldest cities in the US and house gas track