".-
.
"* -
[\ -.
-
I
hange Program
rmm *ฃ*:' $f\' ***.
ress Report
**. JiAu -mJK^.
-------
State and Local Climate Change Program Participants
State greenhouse gas inventory
and action plan completed (20)
State greenhouse gas
inventory completed (18)
State greenhouse gas
inventory in progress (1)
Participant in Cities for
Climate Protection
Campaign (109)
Alachua County, FL
Albuquerque, NM
Amherst, MA
Ann Arbor, Ml
Arcata, CA
Arlington, MA
Arlington County, VA
Aspen, CO
Atlanta, GA
Augusta, ME
Austin, TX
Berkeley, CA
Boston, MA
Bridgeport, CT
Boulder, CO
Brookline, MA
Broward County, FL
Buffalo, NY
Burien, WA
Burlington, VT
Cambridge, MA
Carrboro, NC
Chapel Hill, NC
Charleston, SC
Chicago, IL
Chittenden County, VT
Chula Vista, CA
College Park, MD
Corvallis, OR
Dane County, Wl
Davis, CA
Decatur, GA
Delta County, Ml
Denver, CO
Duluth, MN
Durham, NC
Fairfax, CA
Fairfield, CT
Fort Collins, CO
Georgetown, SC
Gloucester, MA
Hennepin County, MN
Hillsborough County, FL
Honolulu, HI
Huntington, NY
Ithaca, NY
Keene, NH
Little Rock, AR
Los Angeles, CA
Louisville, KY
Lynn, MA
Madison, Wl
Maplewood, NJ
Medford, MA
Memphis, TN
Mesa, AZ
Miami Beach, FL
Miami-Dade County, FL
Milwaukee, Wl
Minneapolis, MN
Missoula, MT
Montgomery County, MD
Mount Rainier, MD
Mount Vernon, NY
Multnomah County, OR
Nashua, NH
New Haven, CT
New Orleans, LA
Newark, NJ
New Rochelle, NY
Newton, MA
New York, NY
Northampton, MA
Oakland, CA
Olympia, WA
Orange County, FL
Overland Park, KS
Pawtucket, Rl
Philadelphia, PA
Portland, ME
Portland, OR
Prince George's Co., MD
Ramsey County, MN
Riviera Beach, FL
Sacramento, CA
Saint Paul, MN
Salt Lake City, UT
San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
San Jose, CA
Santa Cruz, CA
Santa Fe, NM
Santa Monica, CA
Saratoga Springs, NY
Schenectady County, NY
Seattle, WA
Somerville, MA
Spokane, WA
Springfield, MA
Suffolk County, NY
Takoma Park, MD
Tampa, FL
Toledo, OH
Tompkins County, NY
Tucson, AZ
Washtenaw County, Ml
Watertown, MA
Westchester County, NY
West Hollywood, CA
-------
EPA State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress 2001
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction 2
Program Goals and Achievements 2
Results at a Glance ,..,.., ,..,.., 3
Chapter 2: Climate Change and State and Local Governments , , ,6
Opportunities for Multiple Benefits 6
Projected Regional Effects of Climate Change 7
Potential Benefits of Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...,..,.., 8
Chapter 3: State Greenhouse Gas Inventories , 10
State Partners 1990 Emissions as a Percentage of U.S. Emissions 10
States That Have Initiated or Completed an Inventory 10
Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks by State and Sector 11
Inventories as Tools for Education 12
Inventory Updating 12
Inventory Highlights 13
Facilitating the Inventory Process 13
EPA Publications and Web Sites on State Greenhouse Gas Inventories 14
Chapter 4: State Climate Actions 15
Emission Reductions from State Action Plans 15
States That Have Initiated or Completed an Action Plan 15
Emissions Reduction Goal Set in New Jersey 16
Economic Savings from State Action Plans 16
Cost Savings Identified in Action Plans 16
Annual Potential Reductions Identified in Action Plans 17
Highlights of Action Plans 18
State Greenhouse Gas Registries 19
Legislative Highlights 20
EPA Publications and Web Sites on State Greenhouse Gas Action Plans 21
Chapter 5: State and Local Demonstration Projects 22
Demand for Wind Power Up in Colorado 22
Results Achieved at the Local Level 22
Energy and Greenhouse Gas Results of Selected Demonstration Projects 23
EPA State and Local Climate Change Program Publications and Web Sites on
Demonstration Projects and Mitigation Activities 24
Chapter 6: Education and Outreach on Climate Change and Mitigation 25
Climate Change a Local Issue in Oregon 25
Direct Outreach to State and Local Officials 25
Public Awareness Raised in Washington State 26
State and Local Climate Change Program Outreach Publications and Web Sites .... 26
Chapter 7: Future Directions 28
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Chapter 1:
Introduction
Since 1990, EPA's State and Local Climate
Change Program has provided technical and
financial assistance to states and localities in
their efforts to address global climate change.
State and local governments have the ability
to affect U.S. greenhouse gas emissions signif-
icantly. They set policies and make daily
investment decisions in electricity produc-
tion, land use, buildings, transportation, and
other key areas that provide opportunities to
reduce emissions.
Currently 38 states and Puerto Rico partici-
pate in the program.1 At the local level, the
program supports the Cities for Climate
Protection Campaign of the International
Council for Local Environmental Initiatives
(ICLEI), which currently involves 109 cities
and counties in the United States with a com-
bined population of 44.3 million.
In addition to working with state and local
governments, either directly or through
ICLEI, the program has established relation-
ships with a number of nongovernmental
organizations that support state and local gov-
ernment operations, including the following:
Environmental Council of the States;
International City/County Management
Association;
National Association of Counties;
National Association of Regulatory Utility
Commissioners;
National Association of State Energy Officials;
National Conference of State Legislatures;
National Governors Association;
State and Territorial Air Pollution Program
Administrators-Association of Local Air
Pollution Control Officials; and
United States Conference of Mayors.
EPA works with these organizations to
increase the level and quality of climate
change outreach and to facilitate the sharing
of successful mitigation activities.
The program provides partners with a variety
of tools, resources, and publications, includ-
ing the following:
Searchable online databases of information
on state emissions, action plans, case
studies, actions implemented or under con-
sideration, tools to assess mitigation options
and activities, funding opportunities for
climate change-related projects, and
climate-related legislation;
A listserv for those interested in climate
change impacts and solutions from the state
and local government perspective; and
Publications, such as the electronic newslet-
ter "Inside the Greenhouse," guidance doc-
uments and methodologies, and a CD-based
outreach kit that enables states to develop
their own outreach materials.
Program Goals and Achievements
The State and Local Climate Change Program
helps states and local communities develop
the ability to assess their greenhouse gas emis-
sions and implement voluntary measures that
save money, reduce greenhouse gas emis-
sions, and improve public health and quality
1 A state is deemed a program participant if it has received financial and/or technical assistance from EPA's State and Local
Climate Change Program.
2
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Results at a Glance
State Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories
Number of completed state greenhouse gas emis-
sions inventories: 38
Percentage of U.S. emissions accounted for by
states that have submitted inventories: 87 percent
Net greenhouse gas emissions reported by states
submitting greenhouse gas emissions inventories:
about 1,050 million metric tons of carbon equiva-
lent (MMTCE)
State Actions to Reduce Emissions
Number of completed state action plans: 20
Estimated annual greenhouse gas emissions
reductions from partner states' actions in 2000:
3.2 MMTCE2
Potential greenhouse gas emissions reductions
from actions proposed in state action plans by
2010: 53-71 MMTCE
Potential greenhouse gas emissions reductions
from actions proposed in state action plans by
2020: 69-96 MMTCE
Estimated cost savings from actions proposed by
states for 2010: $8 billion
State and Local Climate Change Program
Outreach through 2000
Attendees at 4th Annual Partners' Conference in
November 2000: 212
Number of publications distributed since
1990: 68,762
Number of hits to state and local section of the
Global Warming Web site since 1997: 152,246
Number of outreach toolkits distributed since
release in 2000: 4,205
Number of hits to outreach toolkit Web page since
release in 2000: 7,024
Number of stakeholders reached at trade
conferences since 1990: 2,600
Number of listserv messages sent since listserv
launch in 1997: 204
Cumulative number of listserv subscribers since
1997: 700
State and Local Demonstration Projects
Estimated total greenhouse gas emissions
reductions from demonstration projects:
approximately 1.9 MMTCE
Estimated total cost savings from demonstration
projects: more than $70 million annually
Estimated total air pollution reductions: more than
28,000 tons per year3
2 All emissions reductions reported are gross estimates provided by state and local governments and may differ from EPA
program reductions reported elsewhere. In national documents, for example, the State and Local Climate Change
Program discounts the reductions to avoid double-counting between federal programs; therefore the numbers in those
documents are generally smaller.
3 Pollutants included in this total are NOX, SOX, carbon monoxide, VOCs, and PM-10.
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
3
-------
of life. The program encourages states and
localities to use a multipollutant approach,
integrating the control of criteria air pollu-
tants and hazardous air pollutants with efforts
to address greenhouse gases.
Through support of state action plans,
demonstration projects, and outreach and
education programs, the program's activities
have directly or indirectly led to annual
greenhouse gas emissions reductions of more
than 4 million metric tons of carbon equiva-
lent (MMTCE) in 2000.4-5 This reduction is
equivalent to taking almost one million cars
off the road.6
The program encourages states and localities to
view climate protection as an essential aspect of
protecting public health, as a way to enhance
their ability to be economically competitive,
and as the road to attaining quality environ-
mental conditions.
Inventories and Action Plans
One of the major objectives of the program is
to encourage states to complete a greenhouse
gas inventory and then develop an action plan
to reduce net emissions. Thirty-seven states
and Puerto Rico have completed an inventory
using EPA guidance.7 Those states account for
approximately 87 percent of total U.S. carbon
dioxide emissions. Texas currently is develop-
ing an inventory. In spring 2001, EPA issued a
request for proposals to support new invento-
ries and action plans and received proposals
from five states interested in developing or
updating inventories.
To date, 25 states and Puerto Rico have initi-
ated or completed a climate change action
plan. Actions identified in 12 of the com-
pleted action plans could, if implemented,
reduce greenhouse gas emissions in those
states by a combined total of up to 70 MMTCE
per year by 2010. Fourteen of the plans have
identified options that could reduce those
states' annual emissions by a combined total
of nearly 100 MMTCE by 2020. Actions iden-
tified in several state plans could save the
states and their residents a combined total of
about $8 billion annually by 2010.
The State and Local Climate Change Program
actively encourages partner states to imple-
ment their action plans voluntarily and take
advantage of the benefits they themselves have
identified. In response to the 2001 request for
proposals issued by EPA, the program received
proposals from three states interested in devel-
oping action plans.
Demonstration Projects
State and local governments often have inno-
vative ideas for new programs to reduce emis-
sions but need to test the ideas before
launching a major effort. EPA's State and Local
Climate Change Program supports demonstra-
tion projects that catalyze efforts in states and
localities to test and implement the best
approaches for reducing greenhouse gases. By
demonstrating and disseminating information
about the success of various mitigation options,
these projects facilitate replication of the most
promising practices across the country.
4 This number represents gross reductions and does not omit reductions that other federal programs, such as
ENERGY STARฎ, may attribute to their efforts. The State and Local Climate Change Program seeks to facilitate greenhouse
gas reductions and encourages state and local governments to take advantage of other federal programs and tools to
achieve these reductions.
6 State and local governments frequently report emissions and reductions in short tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. The
State and Local Climate Change Program converts these reported values to MMTCE.
6 U.S. EPA Annual Emissions and Fuel Consumption for an "Average" Passenger Car, U.S. EPA 1997.
7 Louisiana is the only state that did not receive financial assistance from the State and Local Climate Change Program to
conduct an inventory. Louisiana developed its inventory independently using EPA guidance.
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
The State and Local Climate Change Program
has funded 16 demonstration projects
throughout the United States since 1990.
Projects completed or underway have achieved
total emissions reductions of approximately 1.9
MMTCE per year.
The State and Local Climate Change Program
works in cooperation with its partners to
develop demonstration projects that meet the
needs of the local community yet are widely
replicable by others. For example, the State
and Local Climate Change Program supports
ICLEI's Cities for Climate Protection cam-
paign. Campaign participants commit to
developing a greenhouse gas emissions inven-
tory, setting a reduction target, developing
and implementing a local action plan, and
monitoring and verifying reductions. ICLEI
provides cities with assistance in reaching their
goals, including technical information, train-
ing workshops, and guidance. The successes of
the participants are shared with other partici-
pants in order to foster replication of the poli-
cies that generate the most benefits. This
campaign has resulted in total annual reduc-
tions of greenhouse gas emissions of an esti-
mated 1.86 MMTCE, criteria air pollutant
reductions of 28,000 tons, and cost savings of
more than $70 million.8
Outreach and Education
The State and Local Climate Change Program
has awarded 32 grants and cooperative agree-
ments totaling more than $3.5 million for
education and outreach programs. Support
for education and outreach helps provide
states with an opportunity to inform their own
citizens about the potential impacts of climate
change. States can develop messages and
information that are specific to their own par-
ticular conditions and needs. These activities
can augment and improve federal efforts to
increase awareness about climate change.
For example, with EPA assistance, the
Wisconsin Department of Administration
developed information on energy and climate
change that was distributed through the
Wisconsin K-12 Energy Education Program to
more than 1,200 teachers by the fall of 2000.
The department also held a "Time for
Change, Not Climate Change" bookmark
contest for sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-grade
students that resulted in the dissemination of
nearly 750,000 winning bookmarks through-
out Wisconsin by the state and a utility that
put them in every customer's bill.
In another project, the Interstate Renewable
Energy Council developed and distributed
1,500 copies of the second edition of the
Procurement Guide for Renewable Energy Systems to
state and local procurement officials.
Building Networks
Since its inception, the State and Local
Climate Change Program has held four con-
ferences for partners, creating opportunities
to share results, techniques, and lessons
learned. More than 200 individuals attended
the fourth conference, held in Alexandria,
Virginia, in November 2000. At that meeting,
they exchanged information and perspectives
on harmonized options to reduce greenhouse
gases and criteria pollutants, voluntary reg-
istries of emissions reductions, outreach chal-
lenges and successes, carbon sequestration
and offsets, energy tax credits, renewable
resource trust funds, transportation opportu-
nities, and other key topics.
' U.S. Communities Acting to Protect the Climate: Achievements of ICLEI's Cities for Climate Protection-U.S. 2000. International Council
for Local Environmental Initiatives. Berkeley, California.
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
5
-------
Chapter2:
Climate Change and State and
Local Governments
Earth's climate is predicted to change because
humans are altering the chemical composition
of the atmosphere. The burning of fossil fuels
and other activities have led to a buildup of
heat-trapping greenhouse gasesprimarily
carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide.
The warming effect of these gases is expected
to lead to widespread changes in temperature,
precipitation, extreme weather events, and sea
level. Although scientists are unsure exactly
how the climate will respond to a continuing
increase in greenhouse gases, global tempera-
tures are rising.
Climate change is a global phenomenon with
regional and local impacts. Long-term
changes in climate can affect local economies,
public health, water supplies, electric power
production, and key industries such as
tourism, agriculture, and forestry. An increase
in the frequency and severity of extreme
weather events could lead to more droughts,
floods, and storm damage in many parts of the
country. Low-lying coastal communities face
added risk from sea level rise and associated
increases in storm surges and coastal flooding.
Some regions and economic sectors may
benefit from climate change while others may
be harmed. Any adverse impacts would occur
concurrently with other stresses, such as land-
use change, air and water pollution, and pop-
ulation growth.
Although the actions of an individual state
may have little impact on global greenhouse
gas concentrations, the combined effect of
many states and localities acting together can
be significant. For example, actions identified
in the climate change action plans of just 12
states could reduce their total net emissions
by up to 70 MMTCE by 2010. At the local
level, the U.S. cities and counties that partici-
pate in ICLEI's Cities for Climate Protection
campaign have reduced their greenhouse gas
emissions by nearly 2 MMTCE per year, an
amount equivalent to taking half a million
cars off the road.
States and localities have unique authorities
to affect emissions in areas such as energy use,
transportation, and growth and development
patterns. In many cases they may be able to set
policies and implement them more quickly
than the federal government can.
By acting now to inventory greenhouse gas
sources and sinks and to develop plans to
reduce emissions, states and localities learn
more about what climate change and climate
change mitigation could mean for them.
States and localities then can select policy
responses that are appropriate to their cir-
cumstances and most beneficial to them while
also helping to minimize the future impacts
of climate change.
Opportunities for Multiple Benefits
The burning of fossil fuels results in emissions
of greenhouse gases, criteria air pollutants that
contribute to smog, and hazardous air pollu-
tants. When fossil fuels are used more effi-
ciently, or when they are replaced by non-fossil
energy sources such as solar or wind power,
both air pollution and greenhouse gas emis-
sions are reduced.
Pollution prevention strategies that focus on
achieving multiple benefits provide a framework
for efficient, coordinated, and cost-effective
compliance with a wide range of regulatory
requirements and voluntary goals. Historically,
however, most regulators have treated individual
environmental problems separately, so state and
local agencies may not have the capacity, tools, or
flexibility to take an integrated approach.
6
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Projected Regional
Effects of Climate Change
According to the U.S. Global Change Research
Program's National Assessment of the Potential
Consequences of Climate Variability and Change,
the following regional impacts are among those that
may occur during the next 100 years9:
Northeast: Rising temperatures are very likely to
increase the heat index dramatically in summer,
with impacts on health and comfort. Warmer win-
ters are likely to reduce cold-related stresses. It is
very probable that warm weather recreational
opportunities like hiking will expand while cold
weather activities like skiing will decline.
Southeast: Under warmer and wetter scenarios,
the range of southern tree species is likely to
expand. Warmer and moister air will very likely
lead to more intense rainfall events, increasing the
potential for flash floods. It also is very probable
that rising sea levels and storm surges will
threaten natural ecosystems and human coastal
development and reduce buffering capacity
against storm impacts.
Midwest: Prairie potholes, which provide important
habitat for ducks and other migratory waterfowl,
are likely to dry up in a warmer climate. Higher
carbon dioxide concentrations are likely to offset
the effects of rising temperatures on forests and
agriculture for several decades, increasing pro-
ductivity. In the Great Lakes, lake levels are likely
to decline, leading to reduced water supply and
more costly transportation. Shoreline damage due
to high water levels is likely to decrease.
Southwest: With an increase in precipitation, the
desert ecosystems native to this region are likely to
decline while grasslands and shrublands expand.
Northwest: Higher winter temperatures are very
likely to reduce snowpack and peak runoff and
shift the peak to earlier in the spring, reducing
summer runoff and complicating water manage-
ment for flood control, fish runs, municipal water
supplies, and agricultural irrigation. Increasing
stream temperatures are very likely to further stress
migrating fish, complicating restoration efforts.
Alaska: Sharp winter and springtime temperature
increases are very likely to cause continued thaw-
ing of permafrost, further disrupting forest
ecosystems, roads, and buildings.
Pacific and Caribbean Islands: Low-lying islands
that are not rising are very likely to be at risk from
sea-level rise. Examples of sites that are already
close to sea level include the Republic of the
Marshall Islands in the Pacific and much of the
metropolitan area of San Juan in Puerto Rico.
The effects described above are based on the projec-
tions of computer-based climate models. These
models do a reasonably good job of simulating the
large-scale aspects of a complex climate system.
Still, model accuracy is limited by a number of fac-
tors such as difficulties reproducing the effects of
clouds, water vapor and ocean heat transport on our
changing climate. Model projections scaled down to
the regional level contain considerable uncertainty.
Language Used to Express Considered Judgement9
ittle Chance"
or
^Unlikely"
"Likely"
or
"Some Chance"
"Possible"
"Likely"
or
"Probable"
"Very Likely"
or
"Very Probable"
9 National Assessment Synthesis Team (NAST), Climate Change Impacts on the United States: The Potential Consequences of Climate
bility and Change: Overview Rjiport, Report for the U.S. Global Change Research Program, Cambridge University Press,
New York, 154pp., 2000.
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
7
-------
EPA's State and Local Climate Change
Program encourages states and localities to
develop integrated multipollutant strategies
that achieve optimal reductions in soot, smog,
air toxics, and greenhouse gases while mini-
mizing costs and administrative burden.
Potential Benefits of Reducing Greenhouse
Gas Emissions
States and localities that decide to address
climate change can reap multiple benefits
that improve air quality, local economies, and
public health as well as the climate.
Public Health
Improved respiratory health. Actions that
reduce the use of fossil fuels lead to less air
pollution, with significant health benefits,
particularly for populations that are vulnera-
ble to air pollution such as children, the
elderly, and people with asthma and other
lung diseases. Even modest exposure to high
levels of ozone can cause healthy individuals
to experience chest pains, nausea, and pul-
monary congestion.
Environmental Quality
Better air quality. By reducing greenhouse
gas emissions, states and municipalities will
likely reduce other pollutants and compli-
ance costs associated with air pollution.
Reduced environmental costs associated with
air pollution that is mitigated through green-
house gas mitigation policies. Cities and
states incur costs from acid rain and smog,
which adversely affect trees, wildlife, natural
ecosystems, agriculture, and structures and
equipment such as buildings and cars.
Improved water quality from reduced
nitrogen deposition. Nitrogen fertilizer
management to reduce nitrous oxide emis-
sions reduces surface water acidification
from agricultural runoff.
Reduced climate change and its
potential effects.
Economics
Reduced energy costs to households, busi-
nesses, organizations, and governments.
Energy efficiency saves money while reducing
greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution.
Lower material costs and disposal fees due
to recycling and source reduction.
Lower maintenance costs required for
alternative technologies such as efficient
appliances and lights, compared with con-
ventional products.
Greater reliability of certain alternative
power sources, such as fuel cells, which may
benefit businesses and agencies that rely on
uninterrupted power.
Increased demand for energy efficiency
technologies and alternative power sources,
translating into more profits and jobs for
businesses that supply those sectors .
Land Use
More walkable cities and towns. Mixed resi-
dential and commercial areas can reduce
car use (and vehicle miles traveled) by
enabling consumers to walk or bike to
nearby retail stores, workplaces, and recre-
ational areas instead of driving to distant
chain retailers.
More efficient use of land within communi-
ties, preserving the vibrancy of downtown
areas while conserving valuable open space
and farmland outside cities.
8
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Forestry
Greener cities and towns. Trees can be
planted to remove carbon dioxide from the
atmosphere while making urban areas and
towns more attractive.
Reduced summer cooling costs through
strategic tree planting. Trees can provide
shade for buildings, window air-condition-
ers, and streets, reducing the amount of
energy needed to cool buildings.
Sustainably managed forests. When forests
are managed for long-term carbon storage,
sustainable forestry practices are observed.
Reduced urban heat island effect. Declining
tree cover is a major cause of increasing
urban temperatures. Materials such as
asphalt store much of the sun's energy and
remain hot long after sunset. Trees can help
by providing shade and cooling through
evapotranspiration.
Reduced stormwater runoff. Tree roots can
reduce urban runoff by holding soil in place
and increasing water infiltration.
Agriculture
Reduced energy costs to farmers from
improved energy efficiency in farm building
operations and farm equipment.
Reduced energy costs from conservation
tillage. Low-till or no-till agriculture saves
significant amounts of diesel fuel and helps
reduce soil erosion.
Reduced costs to farmers through alternative
farming practices such as the strategic use of
fertilizers. Reducing the use of nitrogen fer-
tilizer helps prevent emissions of nitrous
oxide, a potent greenhouse gas, while
reducing fertilizer costs to farmers.
New potential source of income for farmers
from the use of agricultural crops for biofuels
such as methanol or biodiesel. Some biofuels
may reduce greenhouse gas emissions by
displacing fossil fuels.
Reduced energy costs and a new income
source for farms through processing of live-
stock waste to produce power.
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Chapter3:
State Greenhouse Gas Inventories
A greenhouse gas inventory allows a state to
identify major sources and sinks of green-
house gas emissions and to create a baseline
for evaluating the success of emission reduc-
tion strategies. An inventory represents a
state's first step toward developing a climate
change action plan.
From FY 1992 through FY 2000, EPA's State
and Local Climate Change Program pro-
vided technical assistance and $781,265 in
grants and cooperative agreements to help
38 states and Puerto Rico prepare green-
house gas inventories.
Inventories present annual greenhouse gas
emissions by sector, source, and gas, as well as
estimates of key sinks such as forests. The
inventory methodology is based on activity
data, such as electricity use, and emission
factors derived for specific activities and gases.
Since 1995, EPA has revised its emissions
inventory guidance three times to incorporate
changes in international guidelines, U.S.
inventory methodologies, and advice from a
panel of state representatives. Most recently,
the guidance has been thoroughly reviewed,
revised, and updated under the auspices of
the Emission Inventory Improvement
Program (EIIP), a program to determine
standard methodologies for performing air
emissions inventories.
Currently 37 states and Puerto Rico have com-
pleted inventories using EPA guidance, repre-
senting more than 1,050 MMTCE or 87
percent of total U.S. emissions in 1990. Texas
initiated an inventory recently and expects to
complete it by the end of 2001.
State Partners 1990 Emissions as a
Percentage of U.S. Emissions
Other States
13%
State Partners
87%
~^\ States that have initiated an inventoiy
H States that have completed an inventor
10
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks
by State and Sector (1990)
STATE
Alabama
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
Wisconsin
Energy
M
34.1
110.1
20.8
10.6
4.1
50.7
40.8
3.8
56.6
57.0
17.3
17.8
36.8
63.5
4.7
17.2
22.4
21.3
13.9
30.0
7.5
8.3
4.1
32.2
15.9
62.3
30.4
76.9
17.0
68.3
9.7
2.5
26.8
15.7
1.3
28.1
18.4
23.4
%G
90.7
89.2
90.9
92.3
95.3
90.7
90.9
89.6
85.6
92.5
72.1
85.7
83.9
92.9
90.7
92.7
93.3
85.4
55.2
85.8
85.1
92.5
93.8
91.2
92.1
82.3
88.6
85.0
90.7
89.9
92.1
97.6
88.3
92.6
62.9
80.4
80.7
86.9
Waste
M
1.8
5.0
0.5
0.8
0.1
2.7
1.7
0.3
6.9
1.7
0.9
0.3
0.7
1.1
0.4
0.8
1.5
1.2
0.9
0.7
0.2
0.1
0.2
2.7
0.6
11.6
1.5
11.3
0.6
3.6
0.4
0.1
1.5
0.3
0.1
5.8
1.6
0.9
%G
4.8
4.0
2.0
6.8
3.1
4.8
3.9
7.0
10.5
2.8
3.8
1.3
1.6
1.7
7.4
4.1
6.4
4.7
3.8
2.1
2.3
1.6
5.2
7.7
3.3
15.3
4.4
12.5
3.3
4.8
3.8
2.1
5.0
1.8
3.2
16.6
7.1
3.4
Agriculture
M
1.0
4.6
1.4
0.1
0.1
2.5
1.5
0.1
2.2
1.8
4.2
2.6
1.2
1.4
0.1
0.4
0.0
2.5
10.2
2.9
0.8
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.8
0.9
2.3
1.7
0.7
3.3
0.4
0.0
1.3
0.5
0.1
0.8
1.0
2.5
%G
2.6
3.8
6.1
0.5
1.6
4.5
3.4
2.8
3.4
3.0
17.6
12.6
2.7
2.0
1.2
1.9
0.2
9.9
40.7
8.3
9.0
2.5
0.6
0.1
4.4
1.2
6.7
1.9
3.7
4.4
3.5
0.3
4.4
2.8
6.4
2.2
4.4
9.3
Industry
M
0.7
3.7
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.3
1.0
1.6
0.1
5.2
2.3
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.3
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.9
0.1
0.6
0.4
0.7
0.1
0.0
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.3
1.8
0.1
%G
1.
3.
1.
9
0
0
0.4
0.
1
0.0
1.8
0.
0.
1.
6.
0.
6
5
7
5
4
11.8
3.4
0.
1.
0.
7
3
2
0.0
0.
3.
3.
3.
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
2.
0.
0.
2
7
5
3
4
9
2
2
3
7
3
9
6
0.0
2.4
2.
27.
0.
7.
0.
M=MMTCE %G=% Gross GT=Gross Total NT=Net Total
(excludes land use) (includes land use)
Gases included: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, PFCs
8
6
8
8
4
GT
M
37.6
123.4
22.9
11.5
4.3
55.9
44.9
4.2
66.1
61.6
24.0
20.8
43.9
68.4
5.2
18.5
24.0
24.9
25.1
35.0
8.8
9.0
4.3
35.3
17.2
75.7
34.3
90.5
18.8
75.9
10.5
2.6
30.3
16.9
2.1
34.9
22.8
27.0
Land Use
M
-5.4
-7.5
-19.5
-0.2
0.0
-2.5
-4.6
-0.2
0.0
-0.4
-6.9
0.0
-8.5
-6.2
-0.6
0.4
-2.3
-2.4
0.0
-5.7
-4.7
0.0
-1.2
0.0
-1.0
0.0
-2.4
-1.6
1.1
0.1
-1.1
0.0
-1.2
0.0
0.0
-5.7
-5.8
0.2
%G
-14.3
-6.1
-84.9
-1.3
0.0
-4.5
-10.2
-5.5
0.0
-0.6
-29.0
0.0
-19.3
-9.1
-11.7
2.0
-9.6
-9.6
0.0
-16.2
-53.7
-0.5
-27.9
0.0
-6.0
0.0
-6.9
-1.8
5.7
0.1
-10.8
0.1
-4.0
0.0
-0.8
-16.4
-25.3
0.6
NT
M
32.2
115.9
3.5
11.4
4.3
53.4
40.3
4.0
66.1
61.3
17.0
20.8
35.4
62.2
4.6
18.9
21.7
22.5
25.1
29.3
4.1
8.9
3.1
35.3
16.2
75.7
31.9
88.9
19.9
76.0
9.4
2.6
29.1
16.9
2.1
29.2
17.0
27.1
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
11
-------
Inventories as Tools for Education
Rhode Island took an innovative approach to
its state greenhouse gas inventory: The state's
inventory was designed from the start to be
published only on the Web. Rhode Island
also turned the inventory into a learning tool
by creating a companion site for educators
and students.
Released in 2000, the inventory was pre-
pared by Brown University's Center for
Environmental Studies under contract to the
Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management (DEM). Center Director
Harold Ward emphasizes that developing a
Web-based inventory requires a different
approach than that used for printed reports.
"On the Web you don't do a linear presenta-
tion of methodologies and results followed
by conclusions," he says. "You have to start
with what you want to say and provide links
to the supporting information."
Ward proposed publishing the inventory on
the Internet to make it more accessible to a
broad audience. "I've been impressed with
the Web's effectiveness as a way to make envi-
ronmental information available," Ward says.
"It's very powerful." Both DEM and EPA's
State and Local Climate Change Program
responded enthusiastically to the idea of a
Web-based inventory.
The inventory's companion educational site
provides a study guide; background informa-
tion on the science of climate change, emis-
sions sources, and mitigation options; and
links to online lesson plans and other educa-
tional resources. The study guide poses seven
questions related to Rhode Island's green-
house gas emissions, along with step-by-step
instructions for using the inventory to obtain
the answers.
Rhode Island's inventory shows that total in-
state greenhouse gas emissions increased by
44 percent between 1990 and 1996, much of
that due to a 74 percent increase in emissions
from the combustion of fossil fuels. The
increase reflects a major change in the
amount of electricity produced in-state during
that period, as Rhode Island evolved from a
net importer to a net exporter of electricity.
The inventory, the education resources site,
and the study guide are available at:
http: //www. brown.edu/Re search/
EnvStudies_Theses/GHG/index.shtml
Inventory Updating
Once states have created an inventory of their
greenhouse gas emissions and sinks, they have
the capacity to update the inventory on a
regular basis. Many states take advantage of
that ability and conduct periodic updates. For
example, Washington State updates its inven-
tory annually for energy use, based on
adjusted data from the federal Energy
Information Administration. The state
updates its inventories for agricultural and
industrial emissions approximately every two
years. Funding for the updates comes from
the energy policy section of the Washington
Office of Trade and Economic Development,
which prepares a biennial report that includes
a section on global climate change.
Illinois prepares biennial updates of its
greenhouse gas inventory and has prepared
five inventories to date. The state is currently
working on its 2000 inventory. Virginia
updated its inventory in 1999 to incorporate
new energy consumption estimates for 1996.
In September 2000, California Governor
Gray Davis signed a law requiring the state to
update its greenhouse gas inventory on or
before January 2002. The law further
requires an update to be prepared every five
years thereafter.
12
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Facilitating the
Inventory Process
Compiling a comprehensive state greenhouse gas
inventory can be a time-consuming and labor-
intensive effort. To simplify the process, EPA is
developing a spreadsheet-based inventory tool
that simplifies and standardizes the process. The
tool will walk the inventory developer through a
step-by-step process and provide guidance about
sources of data. EPA plans to develop the spread-
sheet to include all sources identified in the
Emissions Inventory Improvement Program guid-
ance and make it available to state partners via
CD-ROM in early 2002.
Inventory Highlights
In addition to Rhode Island, seven states
Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana,
Maryland, Nevada, and Virginiahave
completed greenhouse gas inventories since
the State and Local Climate Change Program's
previous progress report was published in 1998:
Connecticut
The State of Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection worked with the
Environmental Research Institute and the
Department of Natural Resources
Management and Engineering at the
University of Connecticut to produce
Connecticut's Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory:
1990 and 1995 Calendar Years. Connecticut was
one of the first states (along with Rhode
Island) to use methods from the draft 1998
version of EPA's guidance document State
Workbook: Methodologies for Estimating Greenhouse
Gas Emissions. The 1998 workbook covers non-
COg emissions from mobile and stationary
sources and incorporates a number of
methodological improvements. The state
reported net emissions of 11.4 MMTCE in
1990 and 10.4 MMTCE in 1995a 7.6 percent
reduction over the five-year period.
Florida
The Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, with assistance from EPA, com-
pleted a streamlined inventory in 2001. The
Inventory of Florida Greenhouse Gas Emissions
and Sinks: 1990-1997 assessed emissions from
seven sources that represent over 90% of
national emissions. By focusing on the princi-
pal sectors, and excluding minor emissions
sources, sources that require extensive data
sets and sources that lack cost-effective miti-
gation options, Florida was able to more easily
complete an inventory. The state reported net
emissions of 53.37 MMTCE in 1990 and 60.98
MMTCE in 1997a 14% increase over the
seven-year period.
Georgia
The Georgia Department of Natural Resources
completed the Development of a Greenhouse Gas
Inventory for the State of Georgia in January 1999.
The state estimated that net emissions in 1990
totaled 38.1 MMTCE and rose 30 percent to
49.6 MMTCE in 1996. Consistent with national
trends, carbon dioxide from the burning of
fossil fuels was the dominant source of emis-
sions in Georgia. By fuel type, coal used for
utilities contributed the largest quantity of
emissions for 1990, while petroleum used for
transportation contributed the most in 1996.10
10 These emission estimates reflect state submissions and may differ from emissions reported in EPA's online state
inventory summaries. The online summaries (http://yosemite.epa.gov/globalwarming/ghg.nsf/emissions/
StateAuthoredlnventoriesPOpen) attempt to reflect the most recent guidance by recalculating some of the emission
estimates supplied by the states. Because this state provided additional information for years or sources not included in
the online summaries, the state's original submission is reported.
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
13
-------
Louisiana
The Center for Energy Studies at Louisiana
State University and the Louisiana
Department of Natural Resources completed
the Inventory of Greenhouse Gases in Louisiana in
2000. The inventory was conducted following
guidance developed by EPA but was funded
independently. The state estimated net emis-
sions of 59.4 MMTCE in 1990. Fossil fuel com-
bustion was responsible for 92% of total
emissions. The land-use sector offset almost
10% of emissions.
Maryland
The Maryland Department of the
Environment prepared the 1990 Maryland
Draft Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory. The
state estimated that net emissions in 1990
totaled 27.2 MMTCE. Fossil fuel consump-
tionparticularly the use of coal and petro-
leumconstituted the major source,
accounting for 65 percent of total emissions.
A large percentage of the state's emissions in
199029 percentcame from ozone-deplet-
ing compounds. The inventory is intended to
aid in taking the next step to produce a green-
house gas mitigation plan and includes a
Maryland Carbon Cycle Budget. The carbon
cycle information helps the state identify
opportunities to mitigate climate change
impacts by increasing carbon storage and
decreasing carbon emissions.11
Nevada
The Nevada Energy Office and the Desert
Research Institute completed the Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Inventory for Nevada in
November 1998. The state estimated that net
emissions in 1990 totaled 8.9 MMTCE, of
which 95 percent was carbon dioxide.
Nevada's results for COg are higher than the
national average of 85 percent of total green-
house gas emissions, a discrepancy accounted
for by the presence of several fossil-fuel-
burning electrical generation plants. Net
emissions in 1995 totaled 10.4 MMTCE, a 17
percent increase from 1990.
Virginia
The James Madison University Integrated
Science and Technology Program prepared
the State Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory for
the Commonwealth of Virginia. The state's esti-
mated net emissions in 1990 totaled 28.0
MMTCE. Although carbon dioxide emissions
from fossil fuel combustion accounted for the
largest percentage of net total emissions,
methane emissions from landfills, coal
mining, manure management, and domesti-
cated animals accounted for a higher-than-
usual percentage of total emissions. Net
emissions in 1995 totaled 26.5 MMTCE, a 5
percent decrease from 1990. However, net
carbon emissions per capita remained essen-
tially unchanged between 1990 and 1995.n
EPA Publications and Web Sites on State
Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Emissions
Inventory Improvement Program Guidelines,
Volume VIII) October 1999. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiip/
techreport/volumeOS/index.html
More information on state greenhouse gas
inventories is available online at
http://yosemite.epa.gov/globalwarming/
ghg.nsf/emissions/state
' For complete information see footnote on previous page.
14
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Chapter 4:
State Climate Actions
After completing an emissions inventory, many
states choose to take the next step and develop
a climate change action plana strategy to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions through fea-
sible and effective policies. Typically, the action
plans are developed by state officials in consul-
tation with stakeholders. Action plans are
designed to minimize the impacts of climate
change while ensuring that efforts to control
emissions do not burden state constituents.
Action plans are tailored to each state's spe-
cific circumstances and needs. An action plan
typically includes a projection of the state's
future greenhouse gas emissions and an emis-
sions reduction goal. It identifies and recom-
mends policy options based on criteria such as
emissions reduction potential, cost-effectiveness,
political feasibility, ancillary benefits, and
public acceptance. Often the state will offer
the plan for public comment.
The impetus to develop an action plan or
assess greenhouse gas emissions reduction
options may come from the legislative branch,
as in Wyoming and Oklahoma; a state agency;
or, as in the case of Maryland, New York, and
Texas, from the state administration.12
From FY 1992 through FY 2000, EPA's State
and Local Climate Change Program provided
technical assistance and approximately $2
million in grants and cooperative agreements
to help 25 states and Puerto Rico prepare
climate action plans. To date, 19 states and
Puerto Rico have completed plans. Actions
identified in several of the completed action
plans could, if implemented, reduce green-
house gas emissions in those states by a com-
bined total of up to 70 MMTCE per year by
2010 and nearly 100 MMTCE by 2020. Actions
already implemented by states avoid a total of
more than 3 MMTCE annually.
Emission Reductions from State Action Plans
400
380
; 360
-8*
-Baseline State
Emissions (MMTCE)
-Emissions After
Action Plans
(high scenario)
States that have initiated an action plan
States that have completed an action plan
Emissions
Reductions from
State Action Plans
represents potential
reductions that would
occur if partner
states implemented
all "maximum feasi-
ble" (High Scenario)
actions identified in
their action plans.
12 Although Wyoming and Oklahoma are not currently partners in EPA's State and Local Climate Change Program, these
states recently passed legislation calling for the assessment of potential mitigation options.
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
15
-------
Economic Savings
from State Action Plans
Iowa's state action plan identifies 16 cost-effective
priority actions that could save up to $300 million
annually in reduced energy costs while reducing
greenhouse gas emissions by at least 4 MMTCE.
North Carolina's action plan, if implemented,
could reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 7 per-
cent below 1990 levels in 2010 and would save
state residents and businesses $6.7 billion in
energy costs in the year 2010.
Tennessee identified policy options that could
achieve $522 million in annual savings to con-
sumers and businesses, create more than 10,000
jobs, and increase annual gross state product by
nearly $500,000 while reducing greenhouse gas
emissions by nearly 10 MMTCE in 2017.
Vermont's greenhouse gas action plan cumula-
tively would reduce energy costs by $6.2 billion
and increase employment by 1 percent, while
reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 21 percent
(13 MMTCE), acid rain precursors by 24 percent,
and ground-level ozone precursors by 30 percent.
Wisconsin identified energy efficiency measures
that, by 2010, could save up to $2.7 billion in
cumulative energy and operating costs, create
more than 8,500 new jobs, and reduce emissions
by nearly 2 MMTCE.
Cost Savings Identified in Action Plans
I $4
$4.3
Emissions Reduction Goal Set in New Jersey
In April 2000, New Jersey's environment com-
missioner, with support from the governor,
issued an executive order to reduce the state's
annual greenhouse gas emissions. The order
called for the reduction of emissions by 4.7
MMTCE, to 3.5 percent below 1990 levels by
2005, using "no regrets" measures that are
readily available and that pay for themselves
within the short term.
The potential emissions reductions identified
in the New Jersey Sustainable Greenhouse Gas
Action Plan amount to 5.05 MMTCE, more
than enough to enable New Jersey to achieve
its goal.
Approximately two-thirds of the reductions will
be achieved through energy efficiency and
innovative energy technologies in residential,
commercial, and industrial buildings; the
remainder will come from energy conservation
and innovative technologies in the transporta-
tion sector, waste management improvements,
and natural resource conservation.
Specific actions include enhanced mainte-
nance of vehicles, upgrades to commercial
lighting, increased recycling, capture and
recovery of landfill methane, tree planting
and open-space preservation, greater use of
mass transit and alternative fuel vehicles, and
use of energy-efficient residential appliances.
The state also worked with The Netherlands
to develop a greenhouse gas emissions credit
trading pilot program.
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Annual Potential Reductions Identified in Action Plans (MMTCE)
State
Delaware
Hawaii
Illinois
Iowa13
Kentucky14
Maine
New Jersey
N. Carolina
Oregon
Puerto Rico
Tennessee
Vermont18
Washington19
Wisconsin20
Total
MMTCE
Identified
20
Low
Estimate
00
High
Estimate
n/a
n/a
0.9
1.5
7.0
3.0
n/a
0.12
n/a
n/a
0.6
n/a
n/a
0.31
n/a
n/a
3.43
11.03
20
Low
Estimate
10
High
Estimate
1.8
0.82
0.9
4.0
7.0
9.0
n/a
1.24
5.0515
2616
2
2
9
6
n/a
0.55
4.7
3.0
53.56
9.5
70.85
20
Low
Estimate
15
High
Estimate
1.8
1
0.9
4.0
0
7.0
9.0
n/a
1.86
5.05
26
3
2
9.
7
6
3"
0.77
4.7
3.0
64.87
9.5
82.78
2C
Low
Estimate
20
High
Estimate
1.8
1.2
0.9
4.0
3.2
7.0
9.0
12.6
2.5
5.05
26
3.7
2.6
9.8
0.79
4.7
3.0
69.24
9.5
96.24
Notes: Illinois, Iowa, and Wisconsin provided low and high estimates for potential reductions; both estimates are shown for
those states. Several states did not quantify emissions reduction potential but assessed policies qualitatively. Only those with
quantitative measurements are included in this table and only for those years reported. Reductions initially were reported
in million short tons of carbon dioxide equivalent in the plans but have been converted to million metric tons of carbon
equivalent for this table.
13 The reductions are from policies ranging from "priority" to "maximum feasible." According to the plan, the priority
options identified could save Iowa up to $300 million annually from reduced energy costs.
"Kentucky policy reductions are derived from either "modest options" or "maximum effort options."
16 New Jersey has set a goal of reducing 4.7 MMTCE by 2005 via no-regrets policies that pay for themselves in the short run.
The state has identified measures that could reduce 5.05 MMTCE by 2005 in Table 1 of its action plan.
16North Carolina estimated that it could reduce 26 MMTCE in 2010, saving 504 trillion Btu and $6.7 billion in energy costs.
17Tennessee gave estimates for 2017, not 2015. Reductions would be achieved with a net economic boost to the state, and
more than 10,300 jobs would be created
18 These policies also are expected to increase employment in Vermont by 1 percent, save $6.2 billion in energy costs, reduce
acid rain precursors by 24 percent, and reduce ground-level ozone precursors by 30 percent, cumulatively, by 2020.
Estimates are from page 5-17, table 5.VIII. of Vermont's action plan.
19 Washington acknowledges that the reductions are not additive, but for simplicity we have added them here. Adding them
may overstate the magnitude of the potential reductions.
20 Wisconsin numbers in the table are from Report 3, Volume 1 of the Wisconsin Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Cost Study,
Emission Reduction Cost Analysis, 1998. Those reported previously are from a sub-analysis, Report 4, Economic and Greenhouse
Gas Emission Impacts of Electric Energy Efficiency Investments, 1998. The range covers policies that cost $0/ton-$100/ton.
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
17
-------
New Jersey already has begun to implement a
number of actions in its plan. For example,
New Jersey's Clean Energy Program provides
financial incentives for homeowners and
small businesses that choose to install quali-
fied clean energy systems where they live or
work. The program supports technologies
such as fuel cells, photovoltaics, small wind,
and sustainable biomass equipment with
incentives of $5/watt for small systems (less
than 10 kilowatts), $4/watt for medium-sized
systems (10-100 kilowatts), and $3/watt for
systems larger than 100 kilowatts, up to a
maximum of 60 percent of eligible system
costs. The program is funded through an elec-
tricity surcharge approved by the New Jersey
Board of Public Utilities.
EPA provided technical and financial assis-
tance toward the development of the action
plan and toward several other activities
related to climate change mitigation in New
Jersey, such as the design of the trading
program and outreach activities.
Highlights of Action Plans
In addition to New Jersey, seven states
Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, North
Carolina, Tennessee, and Utahand the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico have com-
pleted state climate action plans since the State
and Local Climate Change Program's previous
progress report was published in 1998.
Colorado
The Colorado Department of Public Health
and Environment released the report Climate
Change and Colorado: A Technical Assessment
Examining Climate Change Science, Greenhouse
Gas Production, Potential Impacts, and Mitigation
in December 1998. The plan provides an
extensive menu of options describing national,
state, and local programs and other potential
strategies to reduce Colorado's greenhouse gas
emissions. Actions implemented thus far have
focused on pollution prevention at ski areas.
Delaware
The Center for Energy and Environmental
Policy at the University of Delaware, in collab-
oration with the government agencies, busi-
nesses, and interest groups of the Delaware
Climate Change Consortium, completed the
Delaware Climate Change Action Plan in January
2000. The consortium adopted a target of
reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 7
percent below 1990 emissions by the year
2010. To reach this target, the plan recom-
mends cost-effective measures for each sector
of the Delaware economy that, cumulatively,
could reduce emissions by 15-25 percent
during the next 12 years.
Hawaii
The Hawaii Department of Business,
Economic Development, and Tourism and
the Department of Health completed the
Hawaii Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy in
November 1998. The plan is primarily
intended to encourage discussion, and it
identifies options that could reduce the state's
greenhouse gas emissions by nearly 1 MMTCE
by 2010, restoring emissions to about 2
percent above 1990 levels by that year. The
Hawaii Climate Change Action Team was
formed in 1999 to catalyze actions such as
reducing emissions through cost-effective and
economically beneficial measures; exporting
technologies, expertise, and services that
reduce emissions; and developing a carbon
offset forestry program.
Maine
The Maine State Planning Office, in collabo-
ration with the Maine Climate Change Task
Force, completed the State of Maine Climate
Change Action Plan in 2000. The state agencies,
public and private interest groups, business
representatives, and state program adminis-
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
trators that participated in the task force eval-
uated each policy option in terms of expected
emissions reductions, investment by the cost-
bearing sector, and the net impact on Maine's
economy. The plan sets a statewide goal to
reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 0.12
MMTCE beginning in 2000. The plan calls to
increase this reduction by 0.12 MMTCE each
year over the course of the next 7 to 22 years
until total annual emissions stabilize at pre-
1990 levels. In order to achieve this goal, the
plan sets specific targets for the transporta-
tion, utility, industrial, commercial, and resi-
dential sectors.
North Carolina
The Department of Geography and Planning
at Appalachian State University completed
North Carolina's $ensible Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Strategies in January 2000. North
Carolina used the Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Software developed for ICLEI to test pro-
posed reduction measures. The state found
that it could avoid 26 MMTCE, exceeding the
strategy's target of reducing greenhouse gas
emissions to 7 percent below 1990 emissions
by the year 2010, and resulting in $6.7 billion
in energy cost savings.
Puerto Rico
The Puerto Rico Department of Natural and
Environmental Resources and Energy Affairs
Administration, working with the Interagency
Committee on Climate Change, completed
the Puerto Rico State Action Plan to Reduce
Greenhouse Gas Emissions in December 1999.
The plan sets a goal to reduce annual emis-
sions by 2.6 MMTCEto 10 percent above
1990 levelsby the year 2010. The report rec-
ommends 23 cost-effective measures or
actions. The commonwealth concurrently
conducted a public opinion poll to gauge
knowledge and perceptions of climate change
issues; the results prompted plans to develop
an aggressive public education campaign.
Tennessee
The Center for Electric Power and the
Tennessee Technological University com-
pleted Tennessee Greenhouse Gas Emissions:
Mitigation Strategies in April 1999. The strate-
gies identified in this report could reduce
annual emissions by nearly 10 MMTCE,
approximately 20 percent from the baseline
level, by 2017. Based on economic models
that simulated the impact on the state
economy of changes in public and private
spending, taxes, and prices, the state expects
that policy measures aimed to reduce emis-
sions also will result in a net economic gain.
Utah
The Utah Office of Energy and Resource
Planning (OERP) and the Utah Division of
Air Quality (DAQ) completed Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Strategies in Utah: An Economic and
Policy Analysis in March 2000. The analysis
examined the economic impact of 13 fossil
fuel-related strategies that Utah could imple-
ment, ranging from "feasible" to "potential"
options. OERP and DAQ found that Utah
could reduce annual greenhouse gas emis-
sions by up to nearly 1 MMTCE, increase
average annual earnings by up to about $24
million (mostly from energy efficiency retro-
fits), and increase average annual employ-
ment in the state by up to 1,600 jobs if all
barriers to adoption were removed.
State Greenhouse Gas Registries
California, Maine, New Hampshire, New
Jersey, Texas, and Wisconsin are creating
greenhouse gas registries that will allow com-
panies and other entities to register their vol-
untary greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
Registries are used to maintain records of his-
toric emissions or voluntary actions taken to
reduce emissions. Benefits of participating in a
registry include the opportunity for entities to
learn more about their emissions profile, the
promotion of cost-effective mitigation tech-
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
19
-------
niques, public recognition of environmental
action, and a credible record of past emissions.
New Hampshire's registry, approved by the
state legislature and the governor in 1999, is
administered by the state's Department of
Environmental Services. The department's final
rule establishing the registry was published in
2001. The registry requires voluntary emissions
reductions to be computed in accordance with
the federal voluntary reporting program for
greenhouse gas emissions (section 1605(b) of
the Energy Policy Act of 1992), although alter-
native protocols will be considered.
New Jersey's environment commissioner
approved an amendment to add greenhouse
gases to the state's existing Open Market
Emissions Trading (OMET) program in April
2000. OMET assigns and verifies credits for
greenhouse gas emissions reductions, but there
is no established, allowable use for those credits
and no trading of greenhouse gas credits cur-
rently is taking place. Information on OMET is
available at http://www.omet.com/
The bill establishing Wisconsin's registry was
passed in May 2000, and rules currently are
being developed by the state's Department of
Natural Resources. The department also is
developing rules for registering reductions in
fine particulate matter, mercury, and other air
contaminants. The Wisconsin Voluntary
Emission Reductions Registry Advisory
Committee has established the following Web
site: http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/aw/air/
hot/climchgcom/
California's Climate Action Registry, passed by
the state's Senate in August 2000 and approved
the following month by the governor, takes
the form of a nonprofit public benefit corpo-
ration, governed by a seven-member board.
Unlike the New Hampshire and Wisconsin
registries, California's registry requires organ-
izations to report emissions on an entity-wide
basis, rather than project-by-project. The
enabling legislation contains detailed require-
ments for the registry's organization and
duties, the metrics to be used in reporting,
and provisions for adjusting baselines based
on mergers, acquisitions, and other changes
to the reporting organizations. More informa-
tion on California's registry is available at
http://www.climateregistry.org/, the Web site
of the registry working group.
The Texas Natural Resources Conservation
Commission (TNRCC) issued an executive
order in August 2000 tasking the agency to
investigate and implement a voluntary state
greenhouse gas registry. TNRCC staff is
currently studying registry options and expects
to make recommendations by the end of 2001.
In April 2001, Maine's governor approved a
bill instructing the state Department of
Environmental Protection to establish a vol-
untary greenhouse gas registry. The registry
must provide for the collection of data on
production activity and the origin of carbon
emissions in order to allow the tracking of
future emission trends.
Legislative Highlights
Governors and state legislators play important
roles in addressing climate change by respond-
ing to national policies as well as their con-
stituents' concerns. Legislative responses
implemented by states include laws, bills, exec-
utive orders, joint resolutions, and memorials.
As mentioned earlier, New Jersey's environ-
ment commissioner issued an executive order
to reduce the state's annual greenhouse gas
emissions, but New Jersey is not the only state
to take action at the administrative or legisla-
tive level. Currently 48 states have introduced
or enacted legislation or administrative orders
related to climate change.
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
In 1990, Connecticut became the first state to
pass a law requiring specific actions to reduce
carbon dioxide emissions. Public Act 90-219,
initially proposed by the state's House of
Representatives, established a broad range of
energy efficiency measures, including revi-
sions to the building code and requirements
that the state purchase energy-efficient appli-
ances and vehicles. The law also allows the
state Environmental Protection Commissioner
to require the planting of trees or grass to
offset carbon dioxide emissions.
In 1997, Oregon passed legislation that estab-
lishes a carbon dioxide standard requiring
new power plants to emit 17 percent less
carbon dioxide than the most energy-efficient
plant available. The bill capped emissions at
0.7 pounds of COg per kilowatt-hour for base-
load natural gas-fired power plants. In 1999
the cap was lowered to 0.675 pounds per kilo-
watt-hour. The standard can be met by offset-
ting emissions through energy efficiency or
carbon sequestration projects; energy facilities
may implement projects directly or by paying
into a climate trust that purchases offsets.
In March 2001, Maryland's governor issued an
executive order creating a Maryland Green
Building Council. The executive order directs
the council to develop a High Efficiency Green
Buildings Program and prepare a state action
plan for reducing greenhouse gases. The
order sets goals for state purchases of energy
generated from renewable sources, energy
efficiency in state buildings and purchased
products, waste diversion or recycling, and the
procurement of alternative fueled vehicles.
In June 2001, the governor of New York
issued an executive order establishing a New
York State Greenhouse Gas Task Force and
mandating state agencies to purchase no less
than 10 percent of the overall state facility
energy requirements from renewable sources
by 2005. The task force will make policy rec-
ommendations on greenhouse gas emissions
and climate change by November 15, 2001
and issue a final report in March 2002. The
recommendations will be considered for the
New York State Energy Plan, expected to be
released in the Spring of 2002.
An extensive list of state legislative initiatives is
available on EPA's Global Warming Site at
http://yosemite.epa.gov/globalwarming/ghg
.nsf/actions/Legislativelnitiatives/.
EPA Publications and Web Sites on State
Greenhouse Gas Action Plans
States' Guidance Document: Policy Planning to
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Second Edition
(EPA, 1998). Online at: http://www.epa.gov/
globalwarming/publications/reference/
stateguidance/
More information on state action plans,
including the text of available plans, a data-
base of actions proposed and their current
status, and a list of legislative initiatives, may
be found online at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/
globalwarming/ghg.nsf/actions/
StateActionPlans/
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
21
-------
Chapter 5:
State and Local
Demonstration Projects
Demonstration projects serve as real-world
tests of technologies and policies to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. Projects provide
states and localities with key data on cost-
effectiveness, political feasibility, and environ-
mental and social benefits, which they can use
in formulating future programs and policies.
From FY 1992 through FY 2000, EPA's State
and Local Climate Change Program has pro-
vided technical assistance and more than $3.5
million in grants and cooperative agreements
to support 16 demonstration projects and
local initiatives. To date, demonstration proj-
ects completed or underway have avoided a
cumulative total of more than 5 MMTCE and
have saved approximately $100 million in
energy costs. For example, the State and
Local Climate Change Program supports
ICLEI's Cities for Climate Protection cam-
paign. This campaign alone avoids nearly 2
MMTCE annually while saving $70 million in
reduced fuel and energy costs and preventing
more than 28,000 tons of air pollutants.
Demand for Wind Power Up in Colorado
Twenty thousand households, 500 businesses,
and dozens of cities and towns in Colorado
voluntarily pay a small premium to purchase
some or all of their electricity from wind
power, thanks to a project spearheaded by the
nonprofit Land and Water Fund of the
Rockies, with financial assistance from EPA.
The program, known as the Grassroots
Campaign for Wind Power, is a joint effort by
the Land and Water Fund and Xcel Energy
(formerly Public Service Company of
Colorado). Consumers can purchase wind-
generated electricity in blocks of 100 kilo-
watt-hours (kWh) for a $2.50 per month
premium. Wholesale customers also buy bulk
quantities of wind-generated electricity and
sell it to their own customers for a similar
premium. Approximately 20 Colorado utili-
ties and rural electricity co-ops participate in
the program, committing to purchase more
than 200,000 megawatt-hours (MWh) annu-
ally-enough electricity to power almost
28,000 homes. The program has reduced
COg emissions from electricity generation by
more than 29,000 metric tons of carbon
equivalent, nitrogen oxides (NOX) by 450
metric tons, and sulfur dioxide (SO2) by 500
metric tons in the year 2000.
Wind power in Colorado is still growing. By
the end of 2001, Colorado will have a total of
87 megawatts of wind-generated electric
capacity, 62 megawatts of which has been
installed to meet demand from the program.
In addition, the Colorado Public Utilities
Commission recently ordered Xcel Energy to
acquire another 162 megawatts of wind power,
which is anticipated to be online by 2002.
More information on the Grassroots
Campaign for Wind Power is available at
http://www.cogreenpower.org/
Results Achieved at the Local Level
ICLEI established the U.S. Cities for Climate
Protection campaign in 1993. Part of a larger
global campaign involving almost 500 local
governments worldwide, Cities for Climate
Protection's membership currently includes
109 cities and counties in the United States,
representing 16 percent of U.S. greenhouse
gas emissions. Their combined actions avoid
at least 1.9 MMTCE annually.
22
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Energy and Greenhouse Gas Results of
Selected Demonstration Projects
1997
1998
1999
2000
ICLEI Cities for Climate Protection: Local governments set and achieve emissions reduction targets
Greenhouse Gas
Reductions-MTCE
Approximate
Energy Savings
(kWh)
1,110,000
5,500,000,000
1,340,000
6,600,000,000
1,340,000
6,600,000,000
1,860,000
9,000,000,000
Utah Photovoltaics Project: Conversion of power supply for marina from diesel to solar photovoltaics
Greenhouse Gas
Reductions-MTCE
Approximate Energy
Savings (kWh)
7
47,000
7
47,000
8
53,500
8
53,500
Colorado Land and Water Project: Wind power promotion and commitment program
Greenhouse Gas
Reductions-MTCE
Approximate Energy
Savings (kWh)
-
-
-
-
-
-
29,000
120,000,000
Wisconsin Water Heaters Program: Water heater conversion project from electric to natural gas
Greenhouse Gas
Reductions -MTCE
Approximate Energy
Savings (kWh}
-
-
-
-
-
-
98
483,000
Totals for All Demonstration Projects
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Reductions - MTCE
Approximate Energy
Savings (kWh)
1,110,000
5,490,000,000
1,340,000
6,580,000,000
1,340,000
6,580,000,000
1,880,000
9,260,0(
10,000
Key
MTCE=Metric Tons of Carbon Equivalent
kWh=Kilowatt-hour
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
23
-------
Each local government participating in the
campaign has agreed to establish a target for
reducing its community's greenhouse gas
emissions and to implement a comprehensive
local action plan designed to achieve that
target. Actions completed or underway
include energy efficiency retrofits of city and
county buildings, switching to power-saving
technologies such as LED traffic signals and
exit lights, instituting recycling programs,
recovering landfill methane, and providing
transportation alternatives.
The City of Madison, Wisconsin, for example,
has reduced transportation emissions by more
than 11,000 metric tons of carbon equivalent
through its "Rideshare, Etc." program, which
provides matching services for bicycle com-
muters and individuals wishing to participate
in carpools or vanpools. Participants receive a
personalized report that identifies carpool or
vanpool opportunities as well as alternative
transportation options in their area.21
The U.S. office of ICLEI, located in Berkeley,
California, provides technical tools and infor-
mation, training workshops, and software
packages to evaluate emissions reduction
alternatives and to track emissions reductions.
EPA State and Local Climate Change Program
Publications and Web Sites on Demonstration
Projects and Mitigation Activities
More information on demonstration
projects and other mitigation activities
can be found online. Case studies
describing actions taken by states,
localities, and private sector groups are avail-
able on two sites: http://yosemite.epa.gov/
globalwarming/ghg.nsf/actions/CaseStudies
and http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/
publications/outreach/index.html#solutions
More information on Cities for Climate
Protection can be found online at:
http://www.iclei.org/us/
U.S. Communities Acting to Protect the Climate: Achievements of ICLEI's Cities for Climate Protection - U.S. 2000. International
Council for Local Environmental Initiatives. ICLEI reports 46,107 short tons of CO2 equivalent, which translates to 11,287
metric tons of carbon equivalent.
24
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Chapter 6:
Education and Outreach on
Climate Change and Mitigation
EPA's State and Local Climate Change
Program provides technical and financial
support to help states inform their con-
stituencies about climate change and actions
that can be taken to mitigate it. The program
also conducts its own outreach efforts to
inform state and local officials about climate
change through conference presentations,
publications, Web sites, and listservs.
From FY 1992 through FY 2000, the State
and Local Climate Change Program pro-
vided technical assistance and more than
$3.5 million in grants and cooperative
agreements for 32 education and outreach
programs.
In 2000, the program released a CD-ROM-
based outreach toolkit for state and local offi-
cials. The State and Local Climate Change
Outreach Kit is a one-stop-shop collection of
climate change education and outreach
resources. The kit includes publications that
can be downloaded and printed for distribu-
tion, including fact sheets on technologies
and polices; basic and advanced climate
change information for school audiences;
and information on actions that communi-
ties, individuals, and businesses can take.
The outreach toolkit also includes lists of
videos, Internet sites, a glossary of climate
change terms, a slide presentation, and infor-
mation on EPA and U.S. Department of
Energy programs. The contents of the kit are
also available on the EPA Global Warming Site.
For more information on the outreach
kit, see http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/
publications/ outreach/
Climate Change a Local Issue in Oregon
The Oregon Department of Energy, in part-
nership with EPA and other agencies and
Direct Outreach to State
and Local Officials
Total 1992-2000
Number of Stakeholders Reached at Conferences 2,600+
Number of Conferences Attended (since 1997) 20
Number of Publications Distributed 69,000
Number of Hits on State and Local pages of 152,000
EPA's Global Warming Web Site (established 1997)
Number of Listserv Messages Sent (since 1997) 200
Cumulative Number of Listserv Subscribers 700
Number of Outreach Kits Distributed (since 1999) 4,200
Number of Hits to Outreach Kit Web site 7,000
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
organizations, is implementing a targeted
education effort to help Oregonians under-
stand what climate change means to them
and what they can do about it. The partner-
ship has resulted in the creation and distribu-
tion of a video, "Generation to Generation:
The Story of Climate Change in Oregon," as
well as educational brochures, newspaper sup-
plements, magazine articles, presentations to
city councils and local governments, confer-
ences, and a climate change and recycling
curriculum for schools.
With EPA support, the Climate Trust, a
Portland-based nonprofit, conducted five
community forums on climate change in 1999.
The meetings, held in Ashland, Bend,
Corvallis, Newport, and Portland, gave com-
munity leaders a chance to learn about climate
change directly from scientists and to discuss
strategies for addressing climate change.
The program has distributed 40,000 copies of
its educational brochure on climate change,
along with 200 copies of the video.
Public Awareness Raised in
Washington State
The EPA-supported Global Climate Change
Project in Washington State has raised aware-
ness of climate change among city councils,
county commissions, business and civic
groups, the media, and individuals. The
Washington State Department of Community,
Trade, and Economic Development conducts
the project in collaboration with Washington
State University, Climate Solutions (a private
nonprofit), and the Northwest Council on
Climate Change. To date, the project has
created high-quality slide shows and print
publications, reached approximately 1,000
individuals through 26 presentations around
the state, and held press conferences that
resulted in newspaper and radio stories on
climate change in the Northwest.
Outreach to the media through press
releases, public service announcements,
article placements, and press conferences
resulted in television coverage on eight sta-
tions, stories on approximately 50 radio sta-
tions, and 15 articles and editorials in the
print media.
State and Local Climate Change Program
Outreach Publications and Web Sites
EPA's State and Local Climate Change Outreach
Kit. Available online at http://www.epa.gov/
globalwarming/publications/outreach/
index.html
Mapping a Cleaner Future. First progress
report (1998) of the State and Local
Climate Change Program.
Climate Change Policies
Energy and the Home
Green Power
Net Metering
Public Benefit Funds
Renewables Portfolio Standards
State Energy Codes
Statewide Recycling
Climate Change Solutions
Twin Cities Trim Climate Change (1998)
Utah's Solar Project Helps Reduce
Greenhouse Gases (1998)
Vermont Trims Energy Bills for Low-
Income Families (1998)
Oregon Switches to Cleaner Power (2000)
Land and Water Fund of the Rockies
Markets Green Power (2001)
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Climate Change Strategies
Businesses Can Save MoneyAnd
the Environment
Climate Smart Tips to Protect the Earth
Multiple Benefits of Emission
Reduction Policies
Smart Savings: Climate Solutions
for Cities
Climate Change Technologies
Alternative Fueled Vehicles
Biomass Energy
Combined Heat and Power
Fertilizer Management
Fuel Cells
Geothermal Heat Pumps
Landfill Methane Recovery
Light-emitting Diodes
Manure Management
Solar Energy
Wind Energy
State Climate Change Impact Fact Sheets
(one each for all 50 states)
http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/
impacts/stateimp/
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
Chapter?:
Future Directions
Looking forward to 2002 and beyond, EPA's
State and Local Climate Change Program will
continue to build state and local capacity to
mitigate and adapt to climate change. The
program's goal is to assimilate climate change
planning into day-to-day and long-term state
and local government decision making, and
to integrate climate change mitigation goals
with priority objectives for clean air, economic
development, and energy.
Some of the new projects underway or under
consideration for the upcoming year include
the following:
Development of a modeling tool to assess
the clean air and greenhouse gas benefits of
policies. This project will develop and dis-
tribute free software for the integrated
analysis of harmonized strategies for reduc-
ing greenhouse gases and criteria air pollu-
tants. The software can be used by states for
comprehensive strategic planning to
achieve multipollutant, multibenefit objec-
tives. We expect the software to be available
by mid-2002.
Continued legislative tracking. The program
will continue to monitor state legislation,
executive orders, and administrative deci-
sions affecting greenhouse gas emissions
and sinks, with biannual updates to the leg-
islative initiatives summary on EPA's Global
Warming Site.
State mitigation sheets. This project will
develop and distribute fact sheets that sum-
marize climate change mitigation activities
for all 50 states. These publications will
include information about state emissions,
mitigation planning activities, policies imple-
mented that reduce greenhouse gas emis-
sions, legislative activity related to climate
change, and descriptions of the greenhouse
gas, economic, and energy benefits of repre-
sentative mitigation projects that have been
implemented in each state.
State greenhouse gas registry workgroup.
The program formed this workgroup in
2001 to facilitate information exchange
between states that are developing or con-
sidering developing greenhouse gas reg-
istries. The working group also will examine
linkages between state registries, state inven-
tories, and action plans.
State forestry carbon sequestration report.
EPA is developing a joint technical report
with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
Forest Service that will provide state-by-state
carbon sequestration estimates developed
from forestry inventories. EPA expects the
report to be completed in early 2002.
Inventory spreadsheet tool. To facilitate and
standardize the process of compiling, report-
ing, and updating emissions inventories,
EPA is developing an easy-to-use spreadsheet
tool that states can use to calculate emissions
based on their activity data. The program
expects to make the tool available to inter-
ested states in mid-2002.
28
State and Local Climate Change Program Partnerships and Progress
-------
For more information, contact:
State and Local Climate Change Program
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mailing Address:
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. (6205J)
Washington, DC 20460
Street Address:
501 3rd Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202) 564-3467
Fax: (202) 565-2095
E-mail: denny.andrea@epa.gov
Web Site: http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/visitorcenter/publicofficials/
For more information on the Cities for Climate Protection Campaign,
contact:
International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives
15 Shattuck Square, Suite 215
Berkeley, CA 94704
Phone: (510) 540-8843
Fax: (510) 540-4787
Web Site: http://www.iclei.org/us
Office of Air and Radiation (6205J)
EPA 430-R-02-002
"T^ February 2002
msyy
-------
------- |