Matthew Burris, AICP, LEED AP
CTG Energetics, Inc.
The Climate Change Imperative
 Science
 Legislative Trends
The Science
 The debate is over
 98% of climate research indicates
warming is occuring
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
(1)Signal: Atmospheric concentration
(2)Source: Land use and human
activity
National GHG Emissions
We are changing the planet
Impacts of Climate Change
Physical Impacts
 Higher air temperatures
 Rising sea levels
 Changing precipitation
patterns...
The Legislation and
Targets
Hierarchy of Emissions Targets
National targets
State targets
Regional targets
Local targets
Project targets
National Targets
Our Brave New World
 AB 32—Global Warming Solutions Act
 Mandates reporting, caps emissions at 1990 levels,
scoping plan...
Climate Change
Connections
 Energy
 Water
 Transportation
 Materials
 Agriculture
 Solid Waste
 Land Use
 Habitat
Source: CARB Proposed Scoping Plan
Transition to the New Normal
BAU
Challenge
 California must reduce per capita
greenhouse gas emissions from
14+ to 1.5 metric tons/year by 2050
0.0
2.0
4....
Local Targets
AB 32 Scoping Plan recommends that
local governments reduce emissions by
15% from current conditions -- in l...
Understanding
Emissions
 How do you calculate carbon emissions,
anyway?
The Simplicity of Carbon…
Emitting
Activities
Emissions
Factor
Total
Emissions
Metric tonnes of
CO2 equivalent
per year
Activities:
• SF of buildings
• Miles traveled
• Waste generated
• Water consumed...
Carbon is connected to
everything
Emissions “sectors”
 Residential
 Commercial
 Transportation
 Agriculture
 Water
 ...
Land Use as an Emissions
Nexus
Building
Energy
55%
Transportation
37%
Solid Waste
5%
Water
3%
Residential
21%
Commercial
1...
Understanding Emissions
Land Use
Layers
• Density
• Housing
• Land cover
• Zoning
• Brownfields
• Parcels
• Planning areas...
By location, time, land
use…
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
PA50
PA15
PA09
PA36
PA08
PA04
PA...
Changing Sources
Systems Problem
 Systems problem needs systems
thinking for viable solutions
A brief turn towards
sustainability
 "In every deliberation we must consider
the impact on the seventh generation...
even...
Three legged stool of
sustainability
 Environment
 Economy
 Equity
Environment
Equity Economy
The Three E’s
Economy
EnvironmentSociety
The Three e’s
 Economy exists
within society
 Society exists with
environment
 2 interpretations
Environ-
ment
Society
...
Sustainable Design
Methodology
 Reduce Loads
 Improve Efficiency
 Renewable
 Regenerative
Passive Strategies
System Ef...
Sustainable Design Process
Goals,
Needs,
Resources
Measurement
& Verification
Implementation/
Education
Cost/
Benefit
Anal...
State of The
Practice Solutions
Land Use as an Emissions
Nexus
Land-use influences a wide-range of greenhouse
gas emissions, including:
Building
Systems
T...
Role of Local Government
 Regulatory authority
 General & Specific Plans
 Zoning & Ordinances
 Review of Environmental...
CEQA
 AB 32 Goals are being realized at the
community level via CEQA
 Planning and permitting
 General Plan Updates
Current CEQA expectations
Plans and projects should support state
GHG reduction goals. This includes:
 Assess the impact ...
Typical CEQA strategy:
Demonstrate a Break From
BAU Business-as-usual
Proposed
PDF
s
Years
Buildout
GHGemissions
Carbon ne...
GHG inventory
Project Design Features
 Building shell and systems upgrades
 20% better than Title 24 (2005)
 Offset construction phas...
Role of Project Design Features
Business-as-usual (T24 2005)
Years
Buildout
GHGemissions
Carbon neutral
Energy efficiency
...
Example: Merriam Mtns, San
Diego
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 20...
Approximate cost *
 First cost to builder
 $0.25-$1.50 per square foot
 $500-5,000 per DU
 Long term cost to home owne...
Project Targets
Type GHG
reduction
from BAU
Features
Planned Community 35% Energy efficiency + PV +
reclaimed water +
xeri...
Project GHG performance commitments
A recent Southern California master planned community
Category Baseline Pct of
emissio...
Climate Action
Plans Establishing programmatic frameworks
 Mitigation for community scale efforts
Implicit requirements for
California
1. Assess the implications of the project
for climate change and the
consequences of ...
Next Step: Layers of Plans
AB32/Scoping Plan
Sustainable Communities Strategies
Local government plans
Climate Action Plan...
Climate Action Plans
 Climate Action Plans are the foundation
for local government action
 Basis for policy, programs, r...
What Comprises a CAP?
 Emissions Inventories
 Targets
• Emissions targets to support AB 32
 Reduction Strategies
• Poli...
The Process
Implement Programs
Establish Policies
Analyze Strategies
Set Targets
Characterize Loads
Conduct Inventory
Set ...
Inventories
76%
12%
8%
3%
1%
0% 0%
CTG Inventory GHG Emissions CO2e
Transportation Residential Non-residential
Solid Waste...
Targets
20061990 2020
Community-wideGHGEmissions
30%
15%
Community-Level GHG
Reduction Strategy
• There is no silver bullet
• Solutions vary based on:
– Location/ climate
– Local ...
Passive Design
Efficient Systems
On-Site Generation
(Emissions Offsetting)
Hierarchy of Strategies
Solutions on many scales
 Buildings
 Land Use
 Transportation
Example: Reduction in Intensity
 Reduce Building Energy Use Intensities
 Reduce EUI of 100 % of buildings by 35 % by
201...
Example of reduction policy
-
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
4,500,000
2006...
Land Use Solutions
 More: dense, energy
efficient, transit-oriented,
walkable land uses
 Lower per capita GHG
emissions
...
Land use solutions
 Dense, “high intensity” projects can
decrease per capita emissions
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Conventional
project...
Land use solutions
 Dense, “high intensity” projects can
decrease per capita emissions
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Conventional
project...
Transportation solutions
Source: Travelmatters.org
Irvine’s Process
 Bringing ICLEI
database down from
regional to Irvine-
specific:
 Transportation
 Water
 Utilities
Irvine Emissions Sectors
Community
Residential
Commercial
Municipal
Water
Solid Waste
Transportation
2006 emissions inventory
Demographic and economic
Information
2020 emissions estimates
Identify and prioritize reduction
s...
Identifying Emissions
 Data collection can
be a challenge the
first time
 The uncertainties in
data will serve as a
road...
CAP Targets by Sector
Community
Residential
New
Residential
Target
Existing
Residential
Target
Commercial
Municipal
Water
...
Irvine Projections – Business As
Usual
-
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
4,5...
Irvine Projections – 15 % Below
2006
-
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
4,500...
Irvine Projections – 30 % Below
2006
-
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
4,500...
Elements of the Irvine CAP
Emissions reduction
strategies include:
• Actions that can reduce
emissions in a sector or
sub-...
Four Types of Reduction
Strategies
Reductions include:
 State actions
 e.g., Renewable Portfolio Standard
 Existing cit...
For 30 % Below 2006 – 52 % of Carbon
Intensity needs to be reduced
-
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000...
Integration of Reduction
Strategies to Reach 52 % goal
Years2006 2020
Existing Programs
Community-wideGHGEmissions
52%
CAP Implementation
Community-wide
and sector targets
Key Performance
Indicators for each
target
Implementation
plan for ea...
Key: Implementing an M & V
Plan
 Identify Key Performance
Indicators to Measure
(Based on Sensitivity
Analysis)
 Update ...
Funding
Energy Master Plan = Approx.
$100K
GHG Protocol Development =
Approx. $100K
Climate Action Plan Development
= Appr...
Climate Change
Adaptation
 The climate is already changing
 CAPs typically provide little guidance on
this issue
Impacts of Climate Change
Physical Impacts
 Higher air temperatures
 Rising sea levels
 Changing precipitation
patterns...
Risks
 Extended heat waves
 Increased flooding
 Increased storm damage
 Erosion and sedimentation
 Reduced water supp...
Adaptation Strategies
 Flood control
 Water conservation
 Protection of open space
 Alternative water and energy sourc...
Developing an Adaptation Plan
 Conduct Vulnerability Analysis
 Identify the hazards and impacts
 Profile the hazards an...
Developing an Adaptation Plan
 Create a strategy to mitigate disasters
 Identify a range of mitigation options
 Select ...
Examples of Adaptation
Strategies in Coastal California
 Shoreline Flooding
 Acquistion/relocation
 Breakwaters,
bulkhe...
Example: Steamboat
Springs
Implications for
Buildings and Land Use
1. Permitting and Planning
 New plans
2. Design
 New tools and strategies
Design
 Today
 Design and engineering focuses on first costs and
energy code; based on historic climatic conditions
 Gr...
Green building and GHGs
 Reducing GHG’s involves
more than green buildings
 Green buildings involve
more than GHG’s
GHG
...
LEED-NC and GHGs
GHG
reduction Example
LEED-NC
Credits (%)
Likely reduction Optimize energy 30%
Possible reduction Control...
Identifying and Prioritizing
Credits
National average office building
prototype 135,000-sf, 9-to-5
operations
Relative val...
LEED, GHGs and
Entitlement
4,600 TCO2e | 9 T/FTE
Median building
1,100 TCO2e | 2 T/FTE 4,200 TCO2e | 8 T/FTE
Efficient building with transit Efficien...
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
SLLCredit9
SLLCredit8
SLLCredit7
SLLCredit6
SLLCredit5
SLLCredit2
SLLCredit11
SLLCredit10
NPDCredit...
Next Step:
Place-based Green Building
 Place-based, context-dependent green
building strategies
 Green building “score c...
Building type,
location, and
operation
Relative importance
of credits
Available
credits
Different
Scorecards
Take Home Messages
 New paradigm for planning
 Plans and projects must quantify and
disclose GHG emissions
 Challenges ...
Discussion
Matthew Burris, AICP, LEED AP
Director
Sustainable Communities + Climate Services
CTG Energetics
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Cal Poly Climate Planning Guest Lecture

1,897
-1

Published on

Guest lecture at Cal Poly SLO on Climate Action Planning

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,897
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • “There is some common ground where each of the circles converge, but the main priority in this model is the health of the economy. Economists sometimes refer to this as the weak sustainability model ….. it assumes that the degradation of one group of assets, (environmental, social or economic) can be compensated for by improvement in another and that externalities can be externalised (PRISM and Knight, 2000, cited in PCE, 2002). This weak sustainability model fails to acknowledge the ecological constraints that humans, other species, markets, policies and developments must operate within” (
  • Stong Sustainability“This model recognises that the economy is a subset of society (i.e. it only exists in the context of a society), and that many important aspects of society do not involve economic activity. Similarly, human society and the economic activity with it are totally constrained by the natural systems of our planet”
  • Emissions IntensitiesExplicit consideration of growth and intensity
  • Cal Poly Climate Planning Guest Lecture

    1. 1. Matthew Burris, AICP, LEED AP CTG Energetics, Inc.
    2. 2. The Climate Change Imperative  Science  Legislative Trends
    3. 3. The Science  The debate is over  98% of climate research indicates warming is occuring
    4. 4. Greenhouse Gas Emissions (1)Signal: Atmospheric concentration (2)Source: Land use and human activity
    5. 5. National GHG Emissions
    6. 6. We are changing the planet
    7. 7. Impacts of Climate Change Physical Impacts  Higher air temperatures  Rising sea levels  Changing precipitation patterns Social-Economic Impacts  Risks to public health  Risks to property  Displacement of vulnerable people and economic activity
    8. 8. The Legislation and Targets
    9. 9. Hierarchy of Emissions Targets National targets State targets Regional targets Local targets Project targets
    10. 10. National Targets
    11. 11. Our Brave New World  AB 32—Global Warming Solutions Act  Mandates reporting, caps emissions at 1990 levels, scoping plan…  SB 375  Links land use, transportation planning and housing with emissions reductions  SB 97  Amends CEQA guidelines  Projects must consider climate change
    12. 12. Climate Change Connections  Energy  Water  Transportation  Materials  Agriculture  Solid Waste  Land Use  Habitat
    13. 13. Source: CARB Proposed Scoping Plan Transition to the New Normal BAU
    14. 14. Challenge  California must reduce per capita greenhouse gas emissions from 14+ to 1.5 metric tons/year by 2050 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 2007 2020 2050 PercapitaGHGemissions
    15. 15. Local Targets AB 32 Scoping Plan recommends that local governments reduce emissions by 15% from current conditions -- in line with the state’s overall reduction.
    16. 16. Understanding Emissions  How do you calculate carbon emissions, anyway?
    17. 17. The Simplicity of Carbon… Emitting Activities Emissions Factor Total Emissions
    18. 18. Metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year Activities: • SF of buildings • Miles traveled • Waste generated • Water consumed Emissions per: • Square Foot • Employee • Per Capita • Per unit activity …or not Emitting Activities Emissions Factor Total Emissions
    19. 19. Carbon is connected to everything Emissions “sectors”  Residential  Commercial  Transportation  Agriculture  Water  Solid Waste  Energy  Land Conversion
    20. 20. Land Use as an Emissions Nexus Building Energy 55% Transportation 37% Solid Waste 5% Water 3% Residential 21% Commercial 18% Industrial 29% Transportation 32% Commercial- Building Related 25% US Total 75%
    21. 21. Understanding Emissions Land Use Layers • Density • Housing • Land cover • Zoning • Brownfields • Parcels • Planning areas Public Service Layers • Fire • Public health • Schools • Community Services • Public offices • Recreational facilities Infrastructure Layers • Electricity • Water supply • Water treatment • Telecom Environment Layers • Parks • Open space • Critical habitat • Rivers • Water bodies Energy Layers • Energy demand • On-site energy supply • Utility energy supply
    22. 22. By location, time, land use… - 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 18,000 PA50 PA15 PA09 PA36 PA08 PA04 PA11 PA14 PA06 PA12 PA01 PA21 PA38 PA05 PA33 PA24 PA10 PA20 PA17 PA51 PA40 PA19 PA27 PA30 PA18 PA22 PA23 PA03 PA13 PA16 PA25 PA28 PA29 PA31 PA32 PA34 PA35 PA39 NumberofDwellingUnitsbyPlanningArea 2006 Residential Growth in DUs Residential Commercial TransportWater Solid Waste Each Planning Area
    23. 23. Changing Sources
    24. 24. Systems Problem  Systems problem needs systems thinking for viable solutions
    25. 25. A brief turn towards sustainability  "In every deliberation we must consider the impact on the seventh generation... even if it requires having skin as thick as the bark of a pine.“  Great Law of the Iroquois
    26. 26. Three legged stool of sustainability  Environment  Economy  Equity Environment Equity Economy
    27. 27. The Three E’s Economy EnvironmentSociety
    28. 28. The Three e’s  Economy exists within society  Society exists with environment  2 interpretations Environ- ment Society Economy
    29. 29. Sustainable Design Methodology  Reduce Loads  Improve Efficiency  Renewable  Regenerative Passive Strategies System Efficiency Regenerative Design Renewable Sources
    30. 30. Sustainable Design Process Goals, Needs, Resources Measurement & Verification Implementation/ Education Cost/ Benefit Analysis Planning & Design Develop Baseline Design Alternatives Monitoring
    31. 31. State of The Practice Solutions
    32. 32. Land Use as an Emissions Nexus Land-use influences a wide-range of greenhouse gas emissions, including: Building Systems Transport Water Solid Waste Materials
    33. 33. Role of Local Government  Regulatory authority  General & Specific Plans  Zoning & Ordinances  Review of Environmental Documents  Incentive Programs  GHG Policies  CEQA
    34. 34. CEQA  AB 32 Goals are being realized at the community level via CEQA  Planning and permitting  General Plan Updates
    35. 35. Current CEQA expectations Plans and projects should support state GHG reduction goals. This includes:  Assess the impact on GHG emissions and the consequences of changing climatic conditions  Quantify and disclose emissions  Reduce emissions to a level “consistent with AB 32”  Baselines also vary
    36. 36. Typical CEQA strategy: Demonstrate a Break From BAU Business-as-usual Proposed PDF s Years Buildout GHGemissions Carbon neutral Mandates
    37. 37. GHG inventory
    38. 38. Project Design Features  Building shell and systems upgrades  20% better than Title 24 (2005)  Offset construction phase emissions  5% additional energy efficiency  On-site generation  Solar PV on 25% of suitable rooftops  Water use efficiency  50% reduction in potable water consumption
    39. 39. Role of Project Design Features Business-as-usual (T24 2005) Years Buildout GHGemissions Carbon neutral Energy efficiency PV Water
    40. 40. Example: Merriam Mtns, San Diego - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 GHGemissions(metrictonsCO2e) Estimated year Without construction With construction Proposed BAU Master planned community • 2,700 DU • 110,000sf commercial
    41. 41. Approximate cost *  First cost to builder  $0.25-$1.50 per square foot  $500-5,000 per DU  Long term cost to home owner  Cash flow neutral on a monthly basis  Savings on monthly energy bill exceeds additional financing cost for improvements * Cost data are typical for these features across Southern California projects – not specific to Merriam Mountains
    42. 42. Project Targets Type GHG reduction from BAU Features Planned Community 35% Energy efficiency + PV + reclaimed water + xeriscape + sequestration Mixed use infill 28.8% Energy efficiency + PV + water Mixed use infill 25% Energy efficiency + PV + water Planned Community 22% Energy efficiency + PV + water
    43. 43. Project GHG performance commitments A recent Southern California master planned community Category Baseline Pct of emission s Goal Features Building systems Energy code 48% -35% Energy efficiency Transportatio n State reg. 29% -12% TDM Water Local reg. 14% -60% Reclaimed Solid waste Regional avg. 8% 0% No change TOTAL at least -25%* * Including transportation
    44. 44. Climate Action Plans Establishing programmatic frameworks  Mitigation for community scale efforts
    45. 45. Implicit requirements for California 1. Assess the implications of the project for climate change and the consequences of climate change for the project 2. Quantify and disclose emissions 3. Demonstrate a break from “Business as Usual”
    46. 46. Next Step: Layers of Plans AB32/Scoping Plan Sustainable Communities Strategies Local government plans Climate Action Plans Project development plans
    47. 47. Climate Action Plans  Climate Action Plans are the foundation for local government action  Basis for policy, programs, regulation, and project review  Changes to traditional tools
    48. 48. What Comprises a CAP?  Emissions Inventories  Targets • Emissions targets to support AB 32  Reduction Strategies • Policy options that prioritize and allocate reductions across sectors, planning areas, time, etc.
    49. 49. The Process Implement Programs Establish Policies Analyze Strategies Set Targets Characterize Loads Conduct Inventory Set Goals
    50. 50. Inventories 76% 12% 8% 3% 1% 0% 0% CTG Inventory GHG Emissions CO2e Transportation Residential Non-residential Solid Waste Wastewater Water Municipal Infrastructure 70% 15% 11% 3% 1% 0% ICLEI Inventory GHG Emissions CO2e Transportation Residential Non-residential Solid Waste Wastewater Water Municipal Infrastructure
    51. 51. Targets 20061990 2020 Community-wideGHGEmissions 30% 15%
    52. 52. Community-Level GHG Reduction Strategy • There is no silver bullet • Solutions vary based on: – Location/ climate – Local resources – Cost of energy – Utility and regulatory environment – Land use distribution, densities, mix – Risk tolerance
    53. 53. Passive Design Efficient Systems On-Site Generation (Emissions Offsetting) Hierarchy of Strategies
    54. 54. Solutions on many scales  Buildings  Land Use  Transportation
    55. 55. Example: Reduction in Intensity  Reduce Building Energy Use Intensities  Reduce EUI of 100 % of buildings by 35 % by 2014  Reduce EUI of 80 % of buildings by 50 % by 2016  Reduce EUI of 60 % of buildings to Net Energy Zero Energy by 2020
    56. 56. Example of reduction policy - 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 City Of Irvine - Preliminary Projections (MTCE) Water Traffic Lights (TC-1) Street Lighting SolidWaste Transportation Employee Commute Vehicle Fleet Agriculture and Pumping Industrial (TOU-GS) Medium Commercial (GS-2) Small Commercial (GS-1) Residential Public buildings 15 % Below 2006 Baseline 30 % Below 2006 Baseline Reduce EUI's Below 2006 Levels Efficiency Required: 52 % Intensity Reduction Achieved: 28 %
    57. 57. Land Use Solutions  More: dense, energy efficient, transit-oriented, walkable land uses  Lower per capita GHG emissions  Fewer: low density, inefficient, auto-oriented land uses  Higher per capita GHG emissions
    58. 58. Land use solutions  Dense, “high intensity” projects can decrease per capita emissions 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Conventional project Diverse product mix Diverse product mix with GHG features PercapitaGHGemissions 2 million sf development
    59. 59. Land use solutions  Dense, “high intensity” projects can decrease per capita emissions 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Conventional project Diverse product mix Diverse product mix with GHG features PercapitaGHGemissions 2 million sf development
    60. 60. Transportation solutions Source: Travelmatters.org
    61. 61. Irvine’s Process  Bringing ICLEI database down from regional to Irvine- specific:  Transportation  Water  Utilities
    62. 62. Irvine Emissions Sectors Community Residential Commercial Municipal Water Solid Waste Transportation
    63. 63. 2006 emissions inventory Demographic and economic Information 2020 emissions estimates Identify and prioritize reduction strategies for each sector Select emissions reduction targets for the community, each sector, individual strategies Irvine CAP Development
    64. 64. Identifying Emissions  Data collection can be a challenge the first time  The uncertainties in data will serve as a roadmap for future monitoring and verification plans
    65. 65. CAP Targets by Sector Community Residential New Residential Target Existing Residential Target Commercial Municipal Water Solid Waste Transportation
    66. 66. Irvine Projections – Business As Usual - 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 City Of Irvine - Preliminary Projections (MTCE) Water Traffic Lights (TC-1) Street Lighting SolidWaste Transportation Employee Commute Vehicle Fleet Agriculture and Pumping Industrial (TOU-GS) Medium Commercial (GS-2) Small Commercial (GS-1) Residential Public buildings
    67. 67. Irvine Projections – 15 % Below 2006 - 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 City Of Irvine - Preliminary Projections (MTCE) Water Traffic Lights (TC-1) Street Lighting SolidWaste Transportation Employee Commute Vehicle Fleet Agriculture and Pumping Industrial (TOU-GS) Medium Commercial (GS-2) Small Commercial (GS-1) Residential Public buildings 15 % Below 2006 Baseline Efficiency Required: 41 %
    68. 68. Irvine Projections – 30 % Below 2006 - 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 City Of Irvine - Preliminary Projections (MTCE) Water Traffic Lights (TC-1) Street Lighting SolidWaste Transportation Employee Commute Vehicle Fleet Agriculture and Pumping Industrial (TOU-GS) Medium Commercial (GS-2) Small Commercial (GS-1) Residential Public buildings 15 % Below 2006 Baseline 30 % Below 2006 Baseline Efficiency Required: 52 %
    69. 69. Elements of the Irvine CAP Emissions reduction strategies include: • Actions that can reduce emissions in a sector or sub-sector • Address all or part of emissions in a sector • Applied over some time schedule between now and 2020
    70. 70. Four Types of Reduction Strategies Reductions include:  State actions  e.g., Renewable Portfolio Standard  Existing city programs  e.g., Irvine Green Building Program  Proposed (unrealized) city programs  e.g., municipal building retrofit program  New actions  e.g., community-wide building retrofit program
    71. 71. For 30 % Below 2006 – 52 % of Carbon Intensity needs to be reduced - 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 City Of Irvine - Preliminary Projections (MTCE) Water Traffic Lights (TC-1) Street Lighting SolidWaste Transportation Employee Commute Vehicle Fleet Agriculture and Pumping Industrial (TOU-GS) Medium Commercial (GS-2) Small Commercial (GS-1) Residential Public buildings 15 % Below 2006 Baseline 30 % Below 2006 Baseline Efficiency Required: 52 %
    72. 72. Integration of Reduction Strategies to Reach 52 % goal Years2006 2020 Existing Programs Community-wideGHGEmissions 52%
    73. 73. CAP Implementation Community-wide and sector targets Key Performance Indicators for each target Implementation plan for each target Monitoring for each Key Performance Indicator Public reporting, review, and improvement
    74. 74. Key: Implementing an M & V Plan  Identify Key Performance Indicators to Measure (Based on Sensitivity Analysis)  Update Inventory and Actual Performance on an Ongoing Basis (at least annual)  This will calibrate inventory as well as creating a feedback loop on progress.
    75. 75. Funding Energy Master Plan = Approx. $100K GHG Protocol Development = Approx. $100K Climate Action Plan Development = Approx $135K Web-based Monitoring and Verification = Approx. $200K
    76. 76. Climate Change Adaptation  The climate is already changing  CAPs typically provide little guidance on this issue
    77. 77. Impacts of Climate Change Physical Impacts  Higher air temperatures  Rising sea levels  Changing precipitation patterns Social-Economic Impacts  Risks to public health  Risks to property  Displacement of vulnerable people and economic activity
    78. 78. Risks  Extended heat waves  Increased flooding  Increased storm damage  Erosion and sedimentation  Reduced water supply  Increased wildfires  Public health threats  Reduced ag outputs
    79. 79. Adaptation Strategies  Flood control  Water conservation  Protection of open space  Alternative water and energy sources  Thermal comfort  Diversified economy  Flexible and adaptable design
    80. 80. Developing an Adaptation Plan  Conduct Vulnerability Analysis  Identify the hazards and impacts  Profile the hazards and impacts and potential consequences  Weigh and compare risks
    81. 81. Developing an Adaptation Plan  Create a strategy to mitigate disasters  Identify a range of mitigation options  Select for effectiveness ○ Risk reduction ○ Feasibility ○ Cost  Create implementation framework ○ Steps to take ○ Timing ○ Funding ○ Priority ○ Responsibility  Link/Integrate with CAP and or General Plan
    82. 82. Examples of Adaptation Strategies in Coastal California  Shoreline Flooding  Acquistion/relocation  Breakwaters, bulkheads, revetments, seawalls, levees  Building Codes/Safety Codes  Detention/retention basins  Deed restrictions  Elevation of structures  Evacuation plans  Interconnected network design  Risk and vulnerability mapping  Subdivision regulations  Transfer of Development Rights
    83. 83. Example: Steamboat Springs
    84. 84. Implications for Buildings and Land Use 1. Permitting and Planning  New plans 2. Design  New tools and strategies
    85. 85. Design  Today  Design and engineering focuses on first costs and energy code; based on historic climatic conditions  Green building is based on static state or national standards  Tomorrow  Dynamic, placed-based green building rating systems  Consideration for climatic conditions anticipated over the performance life of the project (e.g., higher temperatures)
    86. 86. Green building and GHGs  Reducing GHG’s involves more than green buildings  Green buildings involve more than GHG’s GHG Reduction Activities Green Building
    87. 87. LEED-NC and GHGs GHG reduction Example LEED-NC Credits (%) Likely reduction Optimize energy 30% Possible reduction Controllability of systems 13% Life cycle Resource re-use 22% Indeterminate Innovation 7% No reduction Low VOC 28%
    88. 88. Identifying and Prioritizing Credits National average office building prototype 135,000-sf, 9-to-5 operations Relative value of LEED-NC credits with respect to GHG reduction
    89. 89. LEED, GHGs and Entitlement
    90. 90. 4,600 TCO2e | 9 T/FTE Median building 1,100 TCO2e | 2 T/FTE 4,200 TCO2e | 8 T/FTE Efficient building with transit Efficient building without transit Different Footprints
    91. 91. 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% SLLCredit9 SLLCredit8 SLLCredit7 SLLCredit6 SLLCredit5 SLLCredit2 SLLCredit11 SLLCredit10 NPDCredit9 NPDCredit… NPDCredit… NPDCredit… NPDCredit… NPDCredit… NPDCredit… GCTCredit8 GCTCredit7 GCTCredit6 GCTCredit5 GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… GCTCredit… SLLCredit1 NPDCredit8 NPDCredit6 NPDCredit5 NPDCredit4 NPDCredit… NPDCredit3 NPDCredit1 NPDCredit2 GCTCredit9 SLLCredit4 NPDCredit7 SLLCredit3 Percentageofpointspercredit Comparison of point allocation for alternative reference projects (LEED for Neighborhood Development) Rural Reference Project Urban Reference Project Urban credit weights Rural credit weights
    92. 92. Next Step: Place-based Green Building  Place-based, context-dependent green building strategies  Green building “score cards” that respond to local conditions and prioritize strategies based specifically on carbon reduction potential
    93. 93. Building type, location, and operation Relative importance of credits Available credits Different Scorecards
    94. 94. Take Home Messages  New paradigm for planning  Plans and projects must quantify and disclose GHG emissions  Challenges remain to the consistent calculation, interpretation, and communication about GHG emissions  Quite behind on planning for adaptation
    95. 95. Discussion Matthew Burris, AICP, LEED AP Director Sustainable Communities + Climate Services CTG Energetics

    ×