".- . "* - [\ -. - 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 ------- ------- |