Eugene Community Climate Action Plan 2.0 Fossil Fuel and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Forecast, 2018 – 2030 for Existing Plans, Policies, and Programs Draft Date: November 27, 2018.. INTROD
Trang 1Eugene Community Climate Action Plan 2.0 Fossil Fuel and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Forecast, 2018 – 2030 for Existing Plans, Policies, and Programs
Draft Date: November 27, 2018 Note: Draft results presented are preliminary and are subject to change INTRODUCTION
The intent of this memo is to show how close the community gets to accomplishing the Climate
Recovery Ordinance (CRO) fossil fuel targets and greenhouse gas (GHG) goals through existing and planned actions of the Large Lever Shareholders (LLS) Our team reviewed LLS plans, policies, and programs, and collected additional data to calculate fossil fuel and GHG emissions reductions These are used to forecast emissions between 2018 and 2030 and compare that forecast to CRO targets EUGENE CLIMATE RECOVERY ORDIANCE TARGETS AND GOALS
Updated in 2016, Eugene’s Climate Recovery Ordinance includes the following goals and targets
Section 6.675 Climate Recovery – Climate Action Goals
(3) By the year 2030, all businesses, individuals, and others living or working in the city collectively shall reduce the total (not per capita) use of fossil fuels by 50% compared to 2010 usage
(4) By the year 2100, total community greenhouse gas emissions shall be average share of a global atmospheric greenhouse gas level of 350ppm, which is estimated in 2016 to require an annual average emission reduction level of 7.6%
Section 6.685 Climate Recovery - Targets & Benchmarks
To reach the climate action goals, the city council adopts the targets and benchmarks contained in
subsection (1) of this section, and the city will take other actions that the council determines are necessary, for achieving the targets, benchmarks and other climate action goals
For the purpose of the analysis conducted and presented in this memo the following was assumed:
• CRO fossil fuel targets are based on the fossil fuels combusted within the City’s geographic boundary plus fossil fuels used to generate electricity that serves retail load within the
boundary
• Fossil fuel use for electricity is calculated based on EWEB’s current and planned (2017 IERP update) supply contracts (market-based accounting)
• CRO GHG emissions reduction goals are calculated using 2016 as the baseline year with annual reductions of 7.6% applied to the prior year, not the baseline year; out to 2100 This rate of
(1) Targets and benchmarks:
Reduce fossil fuels 50% (from 2010 levels by 2030)
• 2020: 25% reduction from 2010
• 2025: 38% reduction from 2010
• 2030: 50% reduction from 2010
• Annual Average, 2010 - 2030: 2.5% reduction
Trang 2Page 2
reduction is applied to sector-based and consumption-based emissions for the purpose of this memo Good Company’s interpretation of the CRO GHG Goal should be considered
preliminary and subject to change
Relationship Between GHG Inventories and CRO Fossil Fuel Target
Figure 1 shows the relationship between the two types of GHG inventories conducted for the Eugene community (Sector-based and Consumption-based) and Eugene’s CRO Fossil Fuel Target As can be seen, the CRO Fossil Fuel Target (CRO Target) is a subset of the Sector-based emissions inventory (SBEI), which is a subset of the Consumption-based emissions inventory (CBEI)
Figure 1: Relationship amongst consumption-based emissions, sector-based emissions and CRO fossil fuel target
FOSSIL FUEL REDUCTION FORECAST FOR CRO TARGETS
Figures 2 & 3 compare actual 2010 and 2017 community fossil fuel use and the 2030 forecast fossil fuel use after currently adopted plans are implemented to the 2030 CRO fossil fuel target Existing plans are projected to achieve 60% of the CRO 2030 Target reductions compared to 2010 levels The remaining 40% gap is roughly equivalent to substituting an additional 20,000 electric vehicles for gasoline
Eugene 2013 CBEI GHGs 2.75 million MT CO2e
Eugene 2017 SBEI GHGs 1.0 million MT CO2e
Eugene 2017 Fossil Fuel Use
9 million MMBTU CRO 2030 Fossil Fuel Target
5 million MMBTU Note: In a consumption-based inventory,
a fraction of sector-based emissions is excluded to account for local production exported to other communities
Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory (CBEI)
Sector-Based Emissions Inventory (SBEI)
Fossil Fuel Emissions (CRO target)
Trang 3Page 3
powered vehicles1 (beyond what’s assumed in Eugene Transportation Plan), which is about 14% of all registered cars in Eugene
Figure 2: Comparison of actual and forecast fossil fuel use to CRO targets
Figure 3 shows Eugene’s Fossil Fuel Reduction Forecast for 2030 The first bar shows 2017 Fossil Fuel use (in millions of British thermal units, MMBTU) The second bar (blue) shows the increase of fossil fuel use based on a ‘Business as Usual’ (BAU) forecast of GHGs between 2018 and 2030, which captures the effects of community population growth The third bar shows total emissions with population growth assuming 2017 rates of fossil fuel use The fourth bar (orange) shows the expected GHG reductions from actions identified through the CAP2.0 process The fifth bar shows the forecast of GHGs in 2030 assuming the CAP2.0 reductions occur The y-axis minimum is set equal the CRO GHG 2030 Goal (green dashed line)
1 Calculated with EPA’s GHG Equivalency Calculator
Trang 4Page 4
Figure 3: Comparison of actual and forecast fossil fuel use to CRO targets
Note: The equivalency for home electrification is provided as a sense of scale comparison only as Northwest Natural has about 30,000 residential customers in Eugene
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTION FORECAST – CRO CLIMATE GOALS
The CRO includes fossil fuel reduction targets, which are reported in the previous section, as well as GHG reduction goals The rates of reduction are different between the Targets (2.5% annually from a
2010 baseline) and the GHG goals (7.6% annually from a 2016 baseline) It’s important to note that because the GHG goals are more aggressive than the fossil fuel targets, and that local sources of GHGs are greater than just fossil fuel use (e.g methane from waste disposal, fugitive refrigerant loss, etc.), progress towards the GHG goal is less than the CRO fossil fuel targets
Progress towards GHG goals is presented and tracked using two different GHG inventory frameworks – Sector-based and Consumption-based
• Sector-based emissions inventories (or in-geographic boundary inventories) include local
emissions from energy use by homes, businesses, and vehicles as well as emissions from
landfilling solid waste and wastewater treatment It also includes emissions from electricity generation delivered to the local area
• Consumption-based emissions inventories include local, sector-based emissions, and also
include emissions that are generated during production and delivery of imported goods,
energy, and food consumed within the Eugene community, and exclude sector-based emissions from local production that are exported
Figure 4 shows Eugene’s GHG Reduction Forecast based on 2017 Sector-based GHG levels For a definition and more details about Eugene Sector-based emissions, see Appendix B and Eugene’s 2015
Trang 5Page 5
Community GHG Inventory2 The bars in Figure 4 are the same as Figure 3, except that they represent community GHG emissions instead of fossil fuel use (in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, MT
CO2e) The y-axis minimum is set equal to the CRO GHG 2030 Goal
Figure 4: Sector-based emissions and existing policy forecast
Note: GHG Goal value in figure based on Good Company CRO interpretation and is subject to change
Figure 5 shows Eugene’s 2013 consumption-based emissions of goods and food; projected growth based on 2017 emissions rates and population increases; and forecast reductions from existing, already adopted policy Note that Figure 4 (Sector-based) is a subset of Figure 5 (Consumption-based)
Figure 5: Consumption-based emisisons and existing policy forecast
Note: GHG Goal value in figure based on Good Company CRO interpretation and is subject to change.
2 Eugene’s 2015 Community inventory may be downloaded at https://www.eugene-or.gov/2170/Climate-Recovery-Resources
Trang 6Page 6
CAP 2.0 REDUCTIONS FORECAST DETAILS
Fossil fuel and GHG reductions are shown
four ways in this memo, which are
illustrated in Figure 6 “Year 1” represents
reductions expected during the first year of
project implementation “Average Annual”
is the annual average of reductions over the
life of the action “Maximum Annual” is the
maximum annual reduction over the life of
the action For some projects, like
wastewater biomethane to the natural gas
pipeline, Year 1, Average, and Maximum
values will all be very similar because
almost all of the benefit is realized the
moment the system is turned on and every
year after for the action Other actions
accumulate over time, such as annual work
done to improve the energy efficiency of
our community’s buildings These will have
different Year 1 and Maximum values because budgets require that the actions are implemented over time
Figure 7 summarizes the estimated fossil fuel reductions for existing plans, programs, or strategy
bundles where existing data is available Values are sorted by cumulative potential to 2030
Figure 7: Existing plans sorted by cumulative fossil fuel reduction potential (MMBTU)
Note for Figure 7: Zeros (0) indicate no fossil fuel reduction These actions all reduce GHG emissions, but do not reduce local fossil fuel use Some of these actions reduce fossil fuel use, but not locally and not within the CRO Target boundaries
Figure 6: Visual description of GHG or Fossil Fuel reduction values in Figures 10, 11, and 12
Trang 7Page 7
Abbreviation for Figure 7: Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB), Lane Community College (LCC), Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC), Northwest Natural (NWN), City of Eugene (City), Lane County (County)
Figure 8 summarizes the estimated GHG reductions for existing plans, programs, or strategy bundles where existing data is readily available See Appendix A for more detailed accounting Values are sorted by cumulative potential to 2030 See Appendix A for additional details
Figure 8: Existing plans sorted by cumulative GHG reduction potential (MT CO2e)
Abbreviation for Figure 8: Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB), Lane Community College (LCC), Metropolitan Wastewater
Management Commission (MWMC), Northwest Natural (NWN), City of Eugene (City), Lane County (County)
In the next set of graphics, the GHG reductions presented in Figure 8 are divided into three buckets: buildings, transportation, and materials Figures 9, 10, and 11 show action-level details for these three buckets Note the y-axis scale differences between graphics
Trang 8Page 8
Figure 9: 2017 Building-related GHGs reductions for specific actions
The largest action shown in Figure 10 is Eugene’s 2035 Transportation System Plan (TSP) This single plan includes many types of actions carried out by a number of LLSs, such as continued development and updates to active transportation infrastructure (City, County, and others); increased use of public transit (LTD); and support for transitioning to electric vehicles (EWEB, UO, and others) Currently
available data does not allow for calculating reductions for specific components of the TSP That
analysis is planned for early 2019 by LCOG and ODOT staff
Figure 10: 2017 Transportation-related GHGs and emissions reductions for planned
action
Trang 9Page 9
Figure 11: 2017 Materials-related GHGs and emissions reductions for planned action
Figure 11 note: The materials bucket baseline is challenging to define as it includes both Sector-based and Consumption-based emission sources On Figure 11, 2017 Eugene Emission bar includes consumption-based, productions emissions for the subcategories listed in Figure 15
as well as Sector-based emissions from refrigerant loss and waste treatment.
Trang 10Page 10
APPENDIX A – REDUCTION FORECAST RESULTS SUMMARY
Figure 12 provides information similar to other graphics in this memo, but it is organized by LLS and includes those items that are still in process as of this writing
Figure 12: Detailed summary of existing plans, by lead organization Some of the line items, like the Eugene TSP, implementation will be delivered by mulitple agencies
The following documents and tools were used to calculate reductions Thanks to everyone who
provided information
• City of Eugene’s 2010 and 2017 Sector-based Community Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Trang 11Page 11
• City of Eugene’s 2013 Consumption-based Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory
• Portland State University – Population estimates and Lane County Population Forecast
• EWEB Integrated Energy Resource Plan – 2017 update
• NWN’s 2018 Integrated Resource Plan
• Eugene 2035 Transportation System Plan (and specifically a memo titled “Eugene
Transportation System Plan as it Relates to Climate Recovery Ordinance Goals”)
• City of Eugene, Fleet Internal Climate Action Plan
• City of Eugene, Facilities GHG Reduction Analysis
• Oregon Senate Bill 263 (2015) – Updates to Opportunity to Recycle Act
• City of Eugene / Good Company GHG inventory and analysis for road materials
• Lane County data related to landfill diversion rates and plans for 2025 goal
• Environmental Protection Agency, Waste Reduction Model (v14)
• Interviews with City’s staff related to urban forestry
• Oregon’s Waste Composition Study for Lane County
• Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission / Good Company GHG analysis of
wastewater biomethane utilization pathways
• City of Eugene Love Food Not Waste program data
• Lane Community College, DRAFT 2018 Climate Action Plan
• ENVISION Eugene, Residential housing projections
• Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Oregon’s 2018 Greenhouse Gas Inventory
• Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, EWEB emissions coefficients
• Environmental Protection Agency, eGRID 2016
• Energy Information Administration’s 2017 Annual Energy Outlook
• Many other organizational documents were reviewed but were not used for reduction
calculations Thank you to everyone who provided information
Reduction calculations, when possible, were taken directly from LLS calculations and documentation Good Company performed some additional calculations with available data In the final version of this memo, details about values and assumptions will be added as additional appendices
Trang 12Page 12
APPENDIX B: EUGENE FOSSIL FUEL AND GHG INVENTORIES
Community Fossil Fuel Use
Figure 13 and Figure 14 present Eugene’s community fossil fuel use for the CRO baseline year (2010); the most current inventory year (2017); and a 2030 forecast based on 2017 emissions rates and
population growth These are the fuels combusted within Eugene’s geographic boundary as well as the fuel combusted outside our community to generate our electricity Vehicle fuels (gas and diesel)
represent the largest use of community fossil fuel use, making up 75% of the total; natural gas
represents 18% with all other making up the remaining 7%
Figure 13: Eugene community fossil fuel use by type, 2010 versus 2017
Figure 14: Eugene community fossil fuel use, by type, 2010, 2017, and 2030 forecast
Note: 2030 BAU Forecast is calculated based on a population growth rate of 1% annually (Portland State University)
Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Figure 15 presents Eugene’s Sector-Based emissions These can be thought of as “local” emission sources This set of emissions include those sources included in the CRO fossil fuel target plus emissions