HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem A: Sustainability Commission Recommendations
ECC
UGENE ITY OUNCIL
AIS
GENDA TEM UMMARY
Work Session: Sustainability Commission Recommendations
Meeting Date: October 8, 2008 Agenda Item Number: A
Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Felicity Fahy
www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5017
ISSUE STATEMENT
The Sustainability Commission is proposing its first set of policy recommendations to the City Council
to enable the City organization and community to operate more sustainably. The commission requests
that the council pursue and approve these recommendations.
BACKGROUND
Introduction
In January 2007, the council adopted the Sustainability Initiative Goal to develop the Office of
Sustainability and the Sustainability Commission to support sustainable practices and businesses
producing sustainable products and/or employing sustainable practices.
The council adopted Ordinance No. 20379 in February 2007, establishing the Sustainability Commission
as a policy advisory body to the council and City Manager to assist in the development of programs to
create or enhance sustainable practices within the community. The Sustainability Commission is
charged with advising the council on policy matters related to: sustainable practices; businesses that
produce sustainable products and services; City building design and infrastructure; and related issues
that directly affect sustainability efforts considered by the City Council.
On May 8, 2008, the council adopted the Sustainability Commission’s work plan. The work plan
outlines a framework of eight broad priority issues organized into three main component areas: internal
City operations, community, and education and outreach. The commission is currently researching
some of the issues identified before recommending specific actions to the council. However, the
Sustainability Commission believes that there are several issues with sufficient information to support
the policy recommendations detailed below.
Since its first meeting on November 28, 2007, the commission has received a variety of reports,
presentations and public testimony regarding many of the proactive policies and positive actions being
implemented across Eugene, Portland and other communities nationwide. In addition, the commission
has reviewed and discussed a range of social, economic and environmental issues that pose a variety of
complex and interconnected threats to our local, regional and global well-being. Throughout
commission deliberations there has been a palpable sense of urgency from members of the commission
and the community regarding the serious and imminent nature of these threats. The 2007 Community
Survey results also reflect the need and desire for more action from the City on sustainability issues.
When asked how important it was to them that the City engage in environmentally sustainable practices
Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M081008\S081008Aand attA.doc
over three quarters (76%) of respondents selected 4 or 5 (on a scale where 5 is very important and 1 is not
important). However only 43% selected 4 or 5 (on a scale where 5 is excellent and 1 is poor) when asked
to rate the City performance employing such practices. In short, while there is much for Eugene to be
proud of and celebrate related to our sustainability efforts to-date, many of the challenges we face require
a radical and immediate departure from our current methods of operation and decision- making.
Immediate Action Subcommittee
On May 21, 2008, the Sustainability Commission created a subcommittee tasked with developing a set
of recommendations to present to the council as soon as possible. Specifically, the commission directed
the subcommittee to (1) review the Sustainable Business Initiative Task Force (SBI) Report, the
Portland Peak Oil Task Force Report “Descending the Peak: Navigating the Transition from Oil and
Natural Gas” (PPOR) and requests for action brought before the commission by the public, and (2)
prepare a package of recommendations for the commission to forward to the council for consideration.
In addition to reviewing the documents and information described above, the subcommittee also
received staff briefings on the City’s sustainable procurement policy (related to SBI Recommendations 5
and 6) and the City’s waste assessment and reduction efforts (related to SBI Recommendation 7). The
full commission received a staff briefing on the community greenhouse gas inventory, completed in July
2007. The subcommittee met four times over a six-week period.
Recommendations
The Immediate Action Subcommittee identified seven recommendations and numerous individual
example actions that the council could consider. The commission identified the recommendations below
as being the highest priority at this time. The remaining recommendations for immediate action, which
focus on food security, the availability and cost of oil, building efficiency and waste management will be
brought to the council later this fall.
In addition to these recommendations, the commission has included a list of “example actions” as
Attachment A. The commission’s intent in including this list is to offer solutions that can be
immediately championed by individual councilors, the City Manager, or staff as appropriate.
Recommendation 1
Climate Change has been identified as an important issue by the Sustainability Commission. The SBI
report and many other scientifically reputable reports find that the observable rise in global temperature
can be linked to a similar rise in human-induced greenhouse gas emissions. The SBI report concludes
that proactively addressing climate change through mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas emissions
a
and specifically carbon emissions will have positive economic, social and environmental impacts on
our community. The City has been very proactive in reducing its carbon emissions in a number of
significant ways including through active energy management, use of hybrids in the City fleet, capture
and use of methane at the wastewater treatment plant and providing free bus passes to employees. The
City has just completed updating a greenhouse gas inventory for City operations. A summary of initial
findings as included as Attachment B. The final report will be completed by late October 2008. The
report findings include that emissions have remained the same from 2000 to 2005 despite the increase in
City employees and services provided to the community. However, the City still produces significant
volumes of greenhouse gas throughout its operations. A specific emissions reduction goal and a
coordinated City approach will enhance the internal effort to decrease emissions and identify additional
ways to ensure wise use of resources.
a
Carbon is a shortened form of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions. All greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide,
methane, nitrous oxide and others can be described in terms of carbon dioxide equivalency, the amount of CO2 that would
have the same global warming potential, when measured over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years).
Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M081008\S081008Aand attA.doc
Based on its review of the SBI report and other relevant information, the commission recommends that
immediate action to further reduce the amount of carbon generated by City of Eugene facilities and
operations is needed. Therefore the commission recommends the following:
The City of Eugene shall formally adopt the following goal and annually report to the Sustainability
Commission on progress made to reach the goal:
All City-owned facilities and City operations shall be “carbon neutral” (i.e. shall reduce net
carbon emissions to zero, or if that is not possible, cancel all remaining emissions through the
b
funding of approved local offset mechanisms or the purchase of approved offsets) by 2020.
Recommendation 2
While City facilities and operations contribute to local carbon emissions, their collective impact at the
community, metro and regional level is of far greater significance. The City, in conjunction with several
community partners, completed a Eugene Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Report in
July 2007. The August 2007 memo to the council and Inventory Report is included as Attachment C.
The “next steps” section of the August 2007 memo to the council noted it was vital to have in-depth
discussions with community members and local agencies in order to identify reduction strategies and
ways to get there.
While the commission recognizes that the City is limited in its jurisdictional authority to regulate outside
its boundary, it also recognizes that Eugene must be a leading participant in moving our region toward
carbon neutrality. While Eugene has relatively low carbon emissions compared with many other North
American cities, much of that is due to the excellent work of EWEB to provide us with primarily low
carbon emission hydro and wind power and their focus on energy conservation since the 1970s.
However, based on the review of the SBI report and other relevant information, the commission has
determined that immediate action to develop a community climate action plan, including a community
carbon emission reduction goal is needed. Therefore the commission recommends the following:
The City of Eugene shall, in conjunction with a wide variety of community partners:
Develop a community climate action plan within 18 months that will (1) set a carbon emission
reduction goal and establish targets for achieving that goal; (2) identify strategies to achieve those
targets; (3) identify necessary adaptations;, (4) develop measures for tracking success, and (5)
include periodic progress reports back to the community with annual reports of progress to the
Sustainability Commission.
RELATED CITY POLICIES
The Sustainability Commission recommendations build on and add detail to the sustainability-related
policies the council has previously adopted, including in particular Resolution No. 4618, which outlines
a definition and statement of intent regarding the application of sustainability principles to the City of
b
(1) Carbon emissions of City facilities and operations shall be defined as all Scope I and Scope II emissions as defined by
the General Reporting Protocol of The Climate Registry. (2) The policy shall prioritize the reduction of City emissions at
source, then funding of offset-style local mitigation (i.e., carbon/ greenhouse gas-reducing) projects over the purchase of
offsets from projects that do not result in decreased local emissions or increased local carbon sequestration. Any selected
local mitigation project shall consider and address the major concerns of national and global markets for offsets, including
but not limited to additionality, permanence, leakage, monitoring and verification, double counting, and transparency.
Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M081008\S081008Aand attA.doc
Eugene, and affirmed the commitment of City elected officials and staff to uphold these principles. The
recommendations are also in alignment with the council approved Sustainable Initiative Goal action
plan.
COUNCIL OPTIONS
The council may:
1. Approve the Sustainability Commission recommendations
2. Approve the recommendations with changes
3. Request changes to the recommendations before approval
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends Option 1, approval of the Sustainability Commission recommendations.
SUGGESTED MOTIONS
Recommendation 1:
Move to direct the City Manager to formally adopt the goal of making all City-owned facilities and City
operations carbon neutral by 2020.
Recommendation 2:
Move to direct the City Manager to develop a community climate action plan within 18 months, that will
(1) set a carbon emissions reduction goal and establish targets for achieving that goal; (2) identify
strategies to achieve those targets; (3) identify necessary adaptations; (4) develop measures for tracking
success, and (5) include periodic progress reports back to the community with annual reports of progress
to the Sustainability Commission.
ATTACHMENTS
A.Example Actions to Implement Recommendations
B.City of Eugene Internal Operations Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory: Summary of Initial
Findings (September 2008)
C.August 2007 Memo to Council and Eugene Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
Report (July 2007)
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Felicity Fahy
Telephone: 682 5017
Staff E-Mail: felicity.m.fahy@ci.eugene.or.us
Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M081008\S081008Aand attA.doc
ATTACHMENT A
Example Actions to Implement Recommendations
In addition to the primary recommendations included in the AIS, the commission has included the
following list of “example actions,” to support the recommendations. These suggestions are not
inclusive of all possible actions, but rather the commission’s intent is to offer suggestions of some ways
to consider implementing the recommendations. These recommendations could also be used by
community groups, business leaders, other public agencies and members of the public to incorporate
sustainability efforts into their own business and personal activities.
The following example actions are presented for consideration by the council and staff:
Recommendation 1
The City shall formally adopt the following goal:
All City-owned facilities and City operations shall be “carbon neutral” (i.e. shall reduce net carbon
emissions to zero, or if that is not possible, cancel all remaining emissions through the funding of
approved local offset mechanisms or the purchase of approved offsets) by 2020.
Example action:
?
Prioritize and fully fund the development and implementation of the internal climate action
planning process currently underway.
Recommendation 2
The City of Eugene shall, in conjunction with a wide variety of community partners:
Develop a community climate action plan that will (1) set a carbon emission reduction goal and
establish targets for achieving that goal;, (2) identify strategies to achieve those targets;, (3) identify
necessary adaptations;, (4) develop measures for tracking success, and (5) include periodic progress
reports back to the community.
Example actions:
?
Identify new (or re-envisioned) funding sources for alternative transportation projects.
?
Formally adopt a community-wide “no idling” policy and encourage other jurisdictions to do the
same.
?
Dedicate funds to improving bike and pedestrian accessibility:
Develop more safe bike zones.
o
Improve biking safety corridors to schools.
o
?
Install round-abouts instead of stop signs at new intersections (to reduce use of brakes).
?
Create incentives for businesses to provide bus passes for employees.
Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M081008\S081008Aand attA.doc
Attachment B
City of Eugene Internal Operations Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory: Summary of Initial Findings
(September 2008) – included separately for you to attach
Attachment C
August 2007 Memo to Council and Eugene Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Report
(July 2007) – included separately for you to attach, thanks.
Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M081008\S081008Aand attA.doc
ATTACHMENT B
City of Eugene Internal Operations Greenhouse Gas
Emission Inventory: Summary of Initial Findings (Sept. 08)
1. Introduction
In concert with the values of environmental stewardship held by the community of
Eugene, the City organization has implemented numerous internal resource conservation
programs. These efforts have resulted in reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Examples of these initiatives include ongoing efficiency upgrades at the wastewater
treatment plant, use of alternative fuels and hybrid vehicles and a long-term energy
management program for City buildings.
The City of Eugene has completed inventories of both internal and community-wide
GHG emissions since 2005. This report is the final piece of the initial quantification
phase and completes the work begun with the preliminary internal inventory undertaken
in 2005 with the assistance of University of Oregon students, continued with the
Community GHG Inventory and now completed with this detailed assessment of
emissions from City operations.
The Sustainability Commission has identified climate change as an important issue and
one of the top priorities. The Sustainable Business Initiative (SBI) report concludes that
proactively addressing climate change through mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas
1
emissions and specifically carbon emissions will have positive economic, social and
environmental impacts on our community.
This inventory provides the information necessary for the preparation of an internal city
operational climate action plan.
2. Key Findings
The inventory of greenhouse gas emissions from City operations includes a 1990 estimate
based on limited data, and calculated figures for the years 2000 and 2005. The most
striking finding of the analysis is that, after total emissions increased about one-third
between 1990 and 2000, there has been no growth – and actually a slight decline - in
GHG emissions between 2000 and 2005 (see graph on page 2). In other words, City
operations have succeeded in arresting growth of GHG emissions over the last five years.
This is especially impressive in the face of continued growth of City services. The
amount of GHG emissions per City employee has decreased by 4.7% between 2000 and
2005. This has been achieved primarily with substantial investment in efficiency
upgrades and hybrid vehicles, and a change to the use of partially bio-based fuels. While
1
Carbon is a shortened form of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions. All greenhouse gases including carbon
dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and others can be described in terms of carbon dioxide equivalency, the
amount of CO2 that would have the same global warming potential, when measured over a specified
timescale (generally, 100 years).
1
the City’s achievement in “capping” the growth in GHG emissions is a great start, the
City will need to be very proactive to meet Kyoto Protocol targets or other selected goals.
Total Emissions, Employees and Population/100 1990, 2000 & 2005
15,0002,000
1,900
12,500
11,129
11,147
1,800
Employees and Population/100
1,700
Metric Tonees of CO2
10,000
8,403
1,600
7,5001,500
1,400
5,000
1,300
1,200
2,500
1,100
01,000
1990199520002005
Total Emissions# of EmployeesPopulation/100
The inventory of internal GHG emissions shows which activity sectors and energy types
within City operations are the largest emissions sources. For both the 2000 and 2005
years, the activity sector (see graph on page 3) with the largest emissions impact has been
building use (46% of emissions in 2005), followed by the city’s vehicle fleet (35%) and
then employee commute (15%). The energy source (see graph on lower page 3) with the
largest emission impact, for both years studied, has been gasoline (36% in 2005 for fleet
and employee commute combined), followed closely by natural gas (25%).
2
City of Eugene GHG Emissions from Internal
Operations by Activity Sector 2000 & 2005
50.0%
40.0%
Percent of GHG Emissions
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
BuildingsVehicle FleetEmployeeStreetlightsWater/SewageWaste
Commute
-10.0%
20002005
City of Eugene GHG Emissions from Internal Operations by
Source 2000 & 2005
30.0%
Percentage of Total Emissions
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
Gas - Empl. CommuteNatural Gas
EWEB SteamPaper Products
ElectricityPlant Debris
Food Waste
Gas - FleetWood/Textiles
Diesel (ULSD)
Diesel
Biodiesel (B-20)
-5.0%
20002005
3
A third way to evaluate GHG emissions is by their “scope”, defined by the degree of
direct or indirect control an entity has over the emissions related to its activities.
According to the ICLEI (Local Governments for Sustainability) Draft Local Government
Operations Protocol, Scope 1 includes all direct GHG emissions such as vehicle fuels and
natural gas in buildings, excluding CO2 emissions from biomass combustion; Scope 2
includes indirect GHG emissions related to the consumption of electricity, steam, heating,
or cooling energy purchased from a third party or utility, amd Scope 3 includes all other
indirect emissions not covered in Scope 2, i.e. upstream and downstream sources outside
the City’s direct control to manage. It is expected that future reporting required under
both ICLEI and the Climate Registry will be based on the concept of “Scope,” with GHG
emissions levels and targets expressed in terms of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions.
For the City of Eugene’s operations, GHG emissions in Scope 1 include natural gas used
in buildings, and for wastewater treatment and all fuels used in the vehicle fleet –
biodiesel, diesel, ULSD and gasoline. Scope 2 emissions include electricity for buildings,
streetlights and signals, and wastewater treatment, as well as EWEB steam used in City
buildings. Scope 3 emissions include gasoline from employee commuting, and waste
products produced by City operations including paper, plant debris, food waste and
wood/textiles. As shown in the graph on page 5, Scope 1 is the largest contributor of
GHG emissions for the City. This category increased from 55% of total emissions in
2000 to 60% in 2005. Natural gas used in City buildings and gasoline consumed by fleet
vehicles are the largest emission sources within this category for both years. Scope 2
emissions, primarily electricity and steam purchased from EWEB, declined from 34% of
total emission in 2000 to 28% in 2005. Scope 3 emissions - primarily related to
employee commute and solid waste from City operations - increased from 11% of total
City emissions to 12% from 2000 to 2005.
4
City of Eugene GHG Emissions from Internal Operations
by Scope 2000 & 2005
70.0%
60.2%
54.6%
% of GHG Emissions
60.0%
50.0%
34.5%
40.0%
28.2%
30.0%
20.0%
11.6%
10.9%
10.0%
0.0%
Scope 1Scope 2Scope 3
20002005
3. Concluding Remarks
The inventory of the City’s internal GHG emissions provides the foundation for an
operational climate action plan. The next steps in the process are to adopt an emissions
reduction goal, define emissions reduction targets, quantify the relative impacts of
existing efforts and develop specific strategies to achieve these targets. While the
magnitude of the City’s operational emissions is small in comparison to the community-
wide emissions, it is critical that the City provide leadership by demonstrating both
commitment and workable strategies within our own operations. When combined with a
climate action plan for the community, the City of Eugene’s internal plan will help form a
comprehensive strategy for local climate action.
5
Central Services
Facility Management
City of Eugene
210 Cheshire
M
Eugene, Oregon
EMORANDUM
97401
(541) 682-2690
(541) 682-6222 FAX
www.eugene-or.gov
Date: August 2, 2007
To: Eugene Mayor Piercy and City Council
From: Glen Svendsen, Division Manager
Subject:Eugene Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory
Local governments are increasingly playing a key role in the development and implementation of local
measures to prevent climate change and reduce global warming. Eugene is one of some 600 cities that
have signed the U.S. Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement. As the first step to developing local
strategies for climate change initiatives, the City has completed an inventory of greenhouse gas emissions
(attached) within the Eugene urban growth boundary.
Background
To help carry out this effort, the City has joined the International Council for Local Environmental
Initiatives (ICLEI) “Cities for Climate Protection” program, which provided a framework for completing
the emissions inventory. The ICLEI framework, used by over 200 US communities, also provides a
model for developing a climate action plan. Eugene’s greenhouse gas emissions inventory will provide a
basis for developing and then evaluating community-wide greenhouse gas reduction strategies.
The development of the greenhouse inventory was guided by a consortium of local agencies that are also
pursuing green house gas reduction initiatives. This inter-agency steering group, comprised of EWEB,
Lane Community College, Lane Council of Governments, Lane County Solid Waste, Lane Regional Air
Pollution Authority, Lane Transit District, Northwest Natural Gas, School District 4j, the City of
Springfield and the University of Oregon reviewed the City’s approach to developing the community-
wide greenhouse gas inventory and the findings of the inventory.
Greenhouse Gas Inventory
The community-wide inventory of greenhouse gas emissions provides baseline information on past,
current and projected emissions levels. The community’s emissions for 1990 and 2005 have been
calculated. Emissions for the year 2020 have been projected based on current population and business
growth estimates. The inclusion of a “business as usual” scenario for the year 2020 provides a benchmark
against which the future impact of emissions reduction strategies can be measured.
The inventory focuses on greenhouse gas produced within Eugene, including electricity, natural gas, and
other minor fuel sources such as wood fiber and heating oil. The impact of gasoline and diesel fuel used
Page 1 of 2
in trips made by residents and businesses within Eugene is also included. The inventory does not include
the energy embedded in consumer goods and food imported into Eugene from outside the metro area or in
the transportation of goods into Eugene. The impacts of through travel on I-5 are also not included.
Key Findings
The inventory shows the source of local greenhouse gas emissions in terms of both economic sectors
(residential, commercial, industrial and transportation activities) and fuel sources for 1990, 2005 and
2020. Currently, the transportation sector contributes one-half of the community’s greenhouse gas
emissions. Transport is expected to account for one-half of the Eugene area emissions in the future, even
with the projected benefits of nodal development and the extension of LTD’s EMX system. The
residential and commercial sectors each contribute about 20% of total greenhouse gas emissions, and the
industrial sector is responsible for the remaining 10% of emissions.
Natural gas used in the residential, commercial and industrial sectors is the fastest growing source of
greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions from natural gas are likely to increase from about 30% of total
emissions in 1990 to 40% of emissions in 2020. By 2020, natural gas and transportation fuels are
projected to account for about 90% of Eugene’s total community-wide greenhouse gas emissions.
Electrical generation accounts for only 11% of Eugene’s total greenhouse gas emissions, reflecting
EWEB’s reliance on hydroelectric power and renewable energy sources. Statewide, electrical generation
accounts for 42% of Oregon’s total greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels. Partly due to EWEB’s
“clean” energy, Eugene’s per capita emissions are relatively low, at 8.6 metric tonnes in 2005, compared
to a statewide average of 16.6 metric tonnes in 2000.
While the level of per capita emissions in Eugene is projected to grow moderately from 8.1 metric tonnes
in the baseline year 1990 to 8.8 metric tonnes in 2020, the total volume of greenhouse gas emissions
community wide will have increased by two-thirds. This increase is due primarily to the growth in
Eugene’s population. This is significant, in that emissions reductions goals are usually expressed in terms
of reductions in total greenhouse gas emissions, rather than per capita emission levels. This magnifies the
impact of reduction strategies when they are converted to per capita emissions measures. For example,
reducing community-wide greenhouse gas emissions just to 1990 levels by the year 2020 would require a
40% reduction in per capita emissions, from a projected level of 8.8 metric tonnes, down to 5.2 metric
tonnes per capita.
Next Steps
Strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions have the potential to impact a broad range of personal
choices and economic decisions, and deserve significant public involvement. It is vital to have in-depth
discussions with community members as well as partner with local agencies in order to discuss options
and develop strategies to reduce greenhouse emissions. Once the Sustainability Commission is formed,
this inventory will be presented to the group as the starting point in discussions on the need to develop a
comprehensive community climate action plan for Eugene.
For more information on the Eugene community-wide greenhouse gas inventory, contact Glen Svendsen,
Facility Division Manager, at 682-5008 or by email to glen.l.svendsen@ci.eugene.or.us For information
on the City’s overall sustainability program, contact Felicity Fahy, Sustainability Manager, at 682-5017
or by email to: felicity.m.fahy@ci.eugene.or.us
Page 2 of 2
CITY OF EUGENE
Eugene Community Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Inventory Report
óÈÑÄ
Ý·¬§ ±º Û«¹»²» Ý»²¬®¿´ Í»®ª·½»
Ú¿½·´·¬§ Ó¿²¿¹»³»²¬ Ü·ª··±²
îïð ݸ»¸·®» ߪ»²«»
Û«¹»²»ô ÑÎ çéìðï
Ю»°¿®»¼ ¾§
Ô§²²» Û·½¸²»®óÕ»´´»§
Ù´»² ͪ»²¼»²
Community Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory
Prepared by the City of Eugene
July, 2007
Page
1.Introduction 1
2.Executive Summary 1
3.Methodology Overview 2
4.Key Findings 3
5.Analysis of Inventory Findings 5
5.1 Results by Sector 5
5.2 Results by Source 9
5.3 Results Combined by Sector and Source 11
6.Putting It All Together 12
7.Context for Setting Targets 14
8.Other Considerations 15
9.Strategic Implications 16
10. Next Steps 16
11. References for Further Information 16
Appendix 1: Data Sources and Detailed Methodology by Emissions Source 17
Appendix 2: Summary of Data Inputs to CACP software 22
Eugene’s Community Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory
1. Introduction
The community of Eugene has a long history of environmental stewardship. The City
organization has historically implemented programs which have had the consequence of
reducing greenhouse gas emissions in addition to their intended goal, such as the Transportation
Options program, solid waste reduction and recycling or the energy management program. The
City of Eugene completed a preliminary inventory of the City’s own operational greenhouse gas
emissions in April 2005, with the assistance of graduate students from the U of O Planning,
Public Policy and Management Program.
The issues surrounding global warming have provided the impetus for broadening the City’s
internal efforts to look at the community-wide issue of climate change. In March 2006, the City
of Eugene joined over 200 U.S. cities in becoming a member of the International Council for
Local Environmental Initiatives, or ICLEI. Membership in ICLEI affords local governments a
cost-effective way to build internal expertise for continuing climate change work. This
community greenhouse gas inventory was initiated in August 2006 based on experience gained
from the City’s of Eugene’s internal inventory and with the training, technical assistance and
software available to ICLEI members.
The inventory of community-wide greenhouse gas emissions is the first step in developing
Eugene’s climate action plan. This inventory provides the basis for completing other elements of
a climate action plan, including the selection of an emissions reduction target and development
of specific strategies to achieve emissions reductions. When completed, the climate action plan
will serve as the foundation for Eugene’s ongoing efforts to reduce emissions, and provide the
basis for measuring progress and improving reduction strategies in the future.
This inventory presents a picture of Eugene’s current greenhouse gas emissions, and is not
intended to introduce the issue of climate change. Some references to general information on
global warming and climate change are included at the end of this report. A more complete
discussion of the impact of global warming on Eugene, and individual measures to respond to
climate change, will be included in the final climate action plan.
2. Executive Summary
Eugene’s 2005 community-wide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are estimated at
approximately 1.25 million metric tonnes, or 8.6 metric tonnes per capita. (A metric “tonne”,
which is approximately 2,200 pounds, is used in this inventory to be consistent with standard
practice.) This total is projected to increase to 1.5 million metric tonnes by 2020. This closely
matches population growth, and annual per capita emissions are projected to reach 8.8 metric
tonnes in 2020. Eugene has a relatively low level of per capita emissions compared to Oregon
and the nation. Eugene’s 2005 per capita emissions are one-half of the statewide average per
capita emissions, and about two-fifths of the national per capita emissions. Eugene’s relatively
low level of GHG emissions, due primarily to our “clean” electrical energy, will influence the
1
future selection of GHG reduction strategies. Many approaches considered in other communities
are focused on their source of electrical energy, and may not be the best measures for Eugene.
Over half of the community’s current GHG emissions are related to the use of gasoline (41% of
total emissions) and diesel fuel (11%). The next largest source of GHG emissions is from the
use of natural gas, which accounts for 37% of total emissions. Electrical energy contributes 11%
of community-wide GHG emissions. Remaining GHG sources are less than 1% of the total.
Combined residential, commercial and industrial transportation activities within Eugene create
over half of total community emissions. Residential activities are the next largest source of GHG
emissions at 22% of total emissions, due primarily to the use of natural gas as a source for
heating and water heating. Commercial activities account for 17% of total GHG emissions,
again related primarily to the use of natural gas. Industrial activities contribute only 10% of the
community’s GHG emissions, again related to natural gas usage in industrial processes and space
heating.
Understanding the overall mix of Eugene’s greenhouse gas emissions provides information on
the relative importance of different activities as sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Knowing
the specific sources and activities related to GHG emissions in the community will establish a
basis for selecting emissions reduction strategies.
3. Methodology Overview
Eugene’s community-wide inventory followed the protocol developed by ICLEI and the authors
of the Clean Air and Climate Protection (CACP) software. Data was gathered from five sectors
that produce the majority of community-level emissions: residential energy, commercial energy,
industrial energy, transportation and waste. Utility level energy data and community wide
figures for transportation and solid waste disposal were collected from numerous sources (see
Appendix 1). Where necessary, data was either projected back in time (a method called
backcasting) or estimated using the best available information. The CACP software converts all
data to the equivalent value in CO2 (eCO2) in order to compile the information.
The focus of the inventory of community greenhouse gas emissions is on activities that directly
produce greenhouse gas emissions, or on the direct consumption of energy. It is these types of
local activities that can most effectively be addressed by community-level emissions reductions
strategies, and progress toward reduction targets most directly measured. As a result, the
methodology used for this inventory does not currently include energy embedded in consumer
goods from outside the community, nor does it include the potential for capture and storage of
carbon by living plants (called biomass sequestration). In the transportation sector, through-
trips, such as on I-5, and local trips without an origin or destination in Eugene are also not
included in the inventory. Two small emissions sources, wood burning and fuel oil, were
included because of significant issues with particulate pollution and significant change in use,
respectively.
2
Boundaries for the inventory were chosen to correspond, for the most part, to the boundaries of
Eugene Water and Electric Board’s (EWEB) territory. EWEB’s service area roughly matches
the Eugene portion of the Metro Plan boundaries. River Road/Santa Clara and the Blachly Lane
service territory along Hwy 99, south of Awbrey Lane, were also included.
The year 1990 was chosen as a baseline year in order to be consistent with the climate goals of
the State of Oregon and many other US cities. This also allows us to comply with the spirit of
the Kyoto Protocol, as recommended by the US Mayor’s Climate Protection Agreement. Mayor
Kitty Piercy is a signatory of the Agreement. An interim year, 2005, was chosen to provide a
snapshot of the current emissions situation and allow quantification of reduction measures
undertaken after 1990. The target year of 2020 for this inventory is within the planning horizon
of most local agencies. This enables the model to use reasonable and existing growth
projections, yet still allows sufficient time to implement significant emissions reductions
measures.
The projections for 2020 were done with a “business-as-usual” scenario. Any emissions
reduction measures or programs that are currently in existence or are already included in
agencies’ growth projections are therefore included in the base case 2020 scenario. For
instance, nodal development and continued expansion of the bus rapid transit system are
included in the community vehicle-miles-traveled “business as usual” projections for 2020.
4. Key Findings
The growth in GHG emissions from 1990 levels to 2005 was approximately 38%. Projected
growth of GHG from 2005 to 2020 is estimated at 21.4%. Total growth in emissions from the
base year of 1990 to the target year of 2020 is projected to be two-thirds higher than total 1990
emissions. It’s important to note that any goal to go below 1990 levels must not only reduce
current emissions, but avoid all additional GHG emissions resulting from population growth.
Figure 1 below shows the growth in total GHG emissions and population for Eugene from 1990
to 2005 and projected to 2020.
3
While overall emissions increased 38% from 1990 to 2005, per capita GHG emissions in Eugene
have increased only 6% between 1990 and 2005. This means that the rate of growth in total
emissions has been primarily due to the growth in total population from 1990 to 2005. However,
per capita GHG emissions are projected to rise at about the same rate through 2020, based
primarily on the increased use of natural gas as an energy source.
Eugene’s 2005 per capita emissions are one-half of the statewide 2000 average per capita
emissions, and about two-fifths of the national 2000 per capita emissions, as shown in Figure 2
below. This difference may be due to a combination of EWEB’s comparatively clean power
mix, which emits about one-tenth of the greenhouse gas per megawatt hour of the Oregon power
grid average emissions, and the limited scope of economic activity covered in the community
greenhouse gas inventory. As the community greenhouse gas inventory focuses primarily on
emissions generated within Eugene, the “embedded” green house gas emissions of imported
goods and materials are not included in Eugene’s inventory. (Theoretically, the emissions
related to imported goods would be counted in those communities where the manufacturing takes
place.) The Oregon and United States GHG emissions estimates encompass a broader range of
economic activities, including manufacture and transport of goods across the State and the
nation. More analysis of the comparison of the GHG emissions in goods exported from and
imported to Eugene is needed to determine what adjustment, if any, should be made to Eugene’s
per capita GHG estimate. City staff has recommended to Oregon Department of Energy and
ICLEI researchers that this is an area needing an accepted protocol.
Figure 2 - PerCapitaEmissions
Eugene, State of OregonandUS
25.0
20.6
20.0
16.6
15.0
10.0
8.8
8.6
8.1
5.0
-
Eugene1990Eugene2005Eugene2020Oregon 2000US 2000
(Source of Oregon and US data: Oregon Strategy for Greenhouse Gas Reductions, December, 2004 )
4
5. Analysis of Inventory Findings
The results of the community GHG emissions inventory can be analyzed by the type of activity
contributing to greenhouse gases, and by the energy source that creates those emissions. Both
types of analysis can be used in the development of GHG reduction strategies. The next sections
provide a more detailed view of Eugene GHG emissions data by activity, by fuel source, and
finally by fuel source within each activity sector
5.1 Results by Sector
All economic sectors show growth in the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions from 1990
through 2020, with the exception of solid waste. As noted above, this growth parallels the
growth in Eugene’s population. The following charts show the relative impact of the five
economic sectors over the period included in the model.
The transportation sector is the largest component of Eugene’s greenhouse gas emissions,
projected to increase to almost 800,000 metric tonnes by 2020 (Figure 3). The transportation
sector includes the greenhouse gas emissions due to the residential, commercial and industrial
vehicle use within Eugene, based on computer modeling of vehicle miles traveled by each type
of activity. Emissions related to residential and commercial structures are the next largest
contributors to Eugene’s greenhouse gas emissions, projected to reach about 350,000 metric
tonnes and nearly 300,000 metric tonnes respectively by 2020. The industrial sector produces
the least greenhouse gas emissions, projected at about 170,000 metric tonnes in 2020.
Figure 3 - EugeneCommunityGreenhouseGasEmissions by Sector
900,000
800,000
700,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
300,000
200,000
100,000
-
(100,000)
199020052020
ResidentialCommercialIndustrialTransportationWaste
5
The waste sector is considered in the model as providing carbon storage. This phenomenon is
explained by the multiplication effect of methane and the long-term capture and storage, or
sequestration, of a portion of the total waste. Organic matter that decomposes without oxygen, or
anaerobically, will form methane, a greenhouse gas 21 times more potent than COIf the
2.
methane is not captured or burned, landfills are net sources of greenhouse gas emissions.
However, up to 80% (based on OR DEQ figures) of the methane formed at the Short Mountain
site is captured and burned to produce energy, which converts it back to the less potent CO The
2.
net result is that a little bit more carbon equivalent is buried and trapped in the landfill than is
added to the atmosphere.
This does not mean that creating additional garbage is part of the solution. It does underscore the
fact that the capture and use of methane is a very effective strategy that is already in place, and
needs to be maintained or expanded. Also, this model of estimating greenhouse gas emissions
does not recognize the benefits of recycling. Recycling both reduces the total amount of solid
waste and reduces the “upstream” production of greenhouse gas emissions related to goods and
materials manufactured outside of Eugene. As this inventory captures only energy generated or
consumed directly by the community, the role of recycling as an emissions reduction strategy
needs to be evaluated in other ways.
While total GHG emissions are projected to increase, the emissions from some activity sectors
will increase faster than others. The relative impact of the transportation sector has decreased
from 1990 to 2005 in spite of continued growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). This trend is
expected to continue through 2020. Residential and commercial sector emissions impacts have
increased, in relation to those from transportation, primarily due to the continued fuel-switching
from electric to natural gas for heating. The following graphs (Figure 4) show the relative
contribution of the five economic sectors to community greenhouse gas emissions over the
thirty-year period.
Figure 4 – Eugene Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 1990, 2005 and Projected 2020
1990EugeneGHGEmissions
2005EugeneGHGEmissions
Waste
Waste
0%
0%
Residential
Residential
20%
22%
Commercial
13%
Transportation
Transportation
Commercial
51%
58%
17%
Industrial
9%
Industrial
10%
6
2020EugeneGHGEmissions - Projected
Waste
0%
Residential
22%
Transportation
50%
Commercial
18%
Industrial
10%
Within the transportation sector, residential trips make up the majority of emissions related to
vehicle travel. (Figure 5)Using the Lane Council of Government's regional transportation
model of vehicle travel miles, Figure 5 was derived from the estimated average school-in-session
weekday trips that originate from a Eugene residence, as well as from trips that are not based on
household activity but that have a Eugene origin or destination including commercial vehicle
trips. Of these trips, home to work trips account for about 19% of Eugene-related vehicle miles
traveled (VMT). Home based non-work trips make up 36% of VMT, and includes trips made for
home to school, home to shopping, home to college, and home to recreation, sports and other
purposes. Non-home based trips account for about 32% of the vehicle miles traveled. These are
trips initiated by drivers from a Eugene origin and by trips ending at a Eugene destination and
include service trips such as mail deliveries, garbage pickup, meter reading, as well as work to
shop, work to meals, and college to work trips. Commercial trucking accounts for the remaining
13% of vehicle miles traveled from or to a Eugene location.
Figure5-EugeneVehicleMilesTraveledin2002by
TypeofTrip
13%
19%
AllHome-BasedWork
VehicleTrips
AllHome-BasedNon-Work
VehicleTrips
AllNon-HomeBasedVehicle
32%
Trips
AllCommercialVehicleTrips
36%
7
Eugene’s pattern of emissions due to fossil fuels is significantly different from the State of
Oregon as a whole, as shown in Figure 6. This may mean that the most effective strategies for
reducing greenhouse gas emissions related to fossil fuels are different for Eugene than those
being developed for Oregon or the nation. As noted earlier, Eugene’s pattern of emissions from
fossil fuel, dominated by vehicle transportation emissions, reflects this community’s relatively
clean electrical power. The transportation sector’s share of GHG emissions in Eugene is quite
large at 51% in 2005 compared to 38% for Oregon overall. This is due to the relative lack of
GHG emissions from electrical generation in Eugene with the exceptionally clean power that
EWEB delivers. As shown later, the higher representation of the residential and commercial
sectors is due predominately to use of natural gas.
Figure 6 – Fossil Fuel Equivalent C02 Emissions by Sector in Oregon and Eugene
Eugene2005CO2Emissions
Oregon2000CO2Emissions
Electricity
11%
Electricity
42%
Residential
Transportation
18%
38%
Transportation
52%
Commercial
14%
Residential
Industrial
Industrial
5%
Commercial
12%
5%
3%
Source of Oregon data: Oregon Strategy for Greenhouse Gas Reductions, December, 2004
Comparing Eugene’s 2005 per capita emission levels by sector with the 2000 statewide per
capita emissions highlights key differences (Figure 7). This view shows Eugene’s overall lower
level of GHG emissions from fossil fuels, and Eugene’s dramatically lower level of GHG
emissions related to electrical energy. While transportation accounts for the largest proportion
of Eugene GHG emissions, the per capita level of GHG emissions of transportation fuels is
significantly lower than the statewide average. Since Eugene’s community inventory only
counts travel with an origin or destination within Eugene, the statewide emissions figures may be
more comprehensive, as the state includes more inter-city and through traffic, especially within
the I-5 corridor.
8
Figure7-ComparisonofOregon2000and
Eugene2005PerCapitaGHGEmissionsfrom
FossilFuels
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
TransportationElectricityResidentialCommercialIndustrial
OregonEugene
Eugene’s low level of emissions due to electrical generation reflects EWEB’s predominant use
of hydroelectric power, compared to the state as a whole, and EWEB’s long-term emphasis on
conservation, with an aggressive conservation program in place since 1976. EWEB has stated
that growth in electrical demand has been met through a combination of clean energy and
conservation for the past decade, limiting the need to purchase electrical power generated from
fossil fuel sources. Conservation can play an important role in reducing the per capita level of
greenhouse gas emissions, and can help offset overall emissions that are expected to increase
with population.
5.2 Results by Source
To be most effective, greenhouse gas reduction strategies need to reflect the major energy
sources producing emissions, and identify those energy sources that are most likely to respond to
change strategies. Figure 8 below shows the relative change in the source of GHG emissions in
Eugene over the inventory period.
An important finding from this analysis of the source data is the shifting role of natural gas. In
1990, natural gas is responsible for less than a third of Eugene’s emissions. By 2005, emissions
from natural gas are nearly equal to those of gasoline. Projected emissions for 2020 show that
natural gas will be the largest share of Eugene’s eC02 emissions given a “business-as-usual”
scenario. As previously noted, unlike other areas of Oregon or the nation, electricity is a
relatively minor source of greenhouse gas emissions in Eugene.
9
Figure 8 – Eugene Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Energy Source, 1990, 2005
and Projected 2020
Eugene1990GHGbysource
Eugene2005GHGbysourc
Electricity
Electricity
Diesel
Diesel
11.0%
10.2%
10.5%
11.6%
NaturalGas
FoodWaste
FoodWaste
29.6%
0.2%
NaturalGas
0.3%
37.3%
Fuelwood
Fuelwood
0.2%
1.0%
LightFuelOil
1.0%
LightFuelOil
HeavyOil
0.3%
0.1%
Gasoline
Gasoline
HeavyOil
40.4%
46.2%
0.0%
Eugene2020GHGbysource
Electricity
Diesel
10.4%
10.4%
FoodWaste
0.2%
NaturalGas
Fuelwood
40.2%
0.1%
LightFuelOil
Gasoline
0.1%
38.6%
HeavyOil
0.0%
While natural gas is projected to take the lead in eCO2 emissions in Eugene by 2020, gasoline
has been and will remain a consistently large emissions source. Emissions from gasoline are
currently the leading source of CO2 in the community. Emissions reduction strategies that target
either overall quantity of gasoline used, or the type of vehicle fuels, will likely figure
prominently in a Eugene climate action plan.
10
Woodburning contributes very minimally to the GHG emissions of the community of Eugene.
The CO2 coefficient for burning fuelwood is generally considered to be zero. Carbon released
from burning wood cycles in and out of the atmosphere very quickly when viewed on the
geologic time-scale of the carbon contained in fossil fuel. It is generally thought that the
equivalent amount of carbon released by burning is entirely re-sequestered in growing plant
material, assuming that the ability of vegetation to perform this task is remaining stable. Though
there is ongoing debate about the sequestration ability given the changing nature of forest and
vegetation, for this inventory we have accepted the assumption in the ICLEI model of a net zero
GHG impact of woodburning. It is recommended that future updates of this inventory
investigate the role that significant changes in the area or quality of mature vegetated landscapes
may play in overall atmospheric GHG levels.
Although woodburning is not a significant contributor to CO2 in the atmosphere, it does
contribute substantially to other forms of pollution in Eugene. While this report does not address
the relative criteria air pollutants (CAP’s) of fuel sources, they should be considered an
important factor in the step of choosing GHG reduction strategies. Overall health of the
environment may not be improved by simply trading one impact for another. Future updates of
the inventory will include CAP information in an appendix.
5.3 Results Combined by Sector and Source
The following figures show the source of GHG emissions by the four primary activity sectors for
2005. Understanding the relationship between different economic sectors and their individual
sources of GHG emissions will help in developing emissions reduction strategies. The following
figures show the source of GHG emissions by economic sectors for 2005. (Solid waste was
treated in the ICLEI model as a separate GHG emissions source, and is not included below as it
was shown as reducing overall Community GHG emissions.)
In the residential sector, natural gas is the predominant GHG source, accounting for 83% of
residential GHG emissions. (Figure 9a) Electricity is a distant second, at only 15% of
residential emissions. (Note that the total energy consumed is different from the GHG emissions
due to these energy sources. Natural gas accounts for just under 60% of residential energy
consumption, while electricity amounts to about 40% of total residential energy consumption.)
The relatively low amount of residential GHG emissions from reflects EWEB’s relatively clean
power sources. Light fuel oil and wood are minor sources of residential GHG emissions.
Residential light fuel oil use has decreased since 1990 due to switching to electricity or natural
gas, and the proportion of GHG due to fuel oil is expected to decline further in the future.
The source of GHG emissions for the commercial sector is very similar to the residential sector,
with natural gas at 83% of total commercial GHG emissions. (Figure 9b) Electrical
consumption accounts for 17% of GHG emissions, and fuel oil less than 1% of commercial
emissions.
11
Fig. 9a - Residentialsector 2005
Fig. 9b - CommercialSector 2005
Electricity
Electricity
15%
Fuelwood17%
(Air Dry)
Light
1%
FuelOil
Light
0%
FuelOil
1%
NaturalGas
NaturalGas
83%
83%
The emissions profile of the industrial sector is almost evenly split between natural gas and
electricity. (Figure 9c) Since electricity has a much lower level of emissions per unit, this
means that the predominant source of energy for the industrial sector is electricity. Electrical
use in the industrial sector is almost twice the use of natural gas, which helps keep the GHG
emissions from the industrial sector relatively low.
In the transportation sector, the sources of GHG emissions are gasoline and diesel fuel, with
gasoline accounting for about 80% of the transportation sector’s total GHG emissions. (Figure
9d)
Fig. 9c - IndustrialSector 2005Fig. 9d - TransportationSector 2005
Diesel
21%
Electricity
48%
NaturalGas
52%
Gasoline
79%
6. Putting it All Together
Understanding the overall mix of Eugene’s greenhouse gas emissions provides information on
the relative importance of different activities as sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Knowing
the specific sources and activities related to GHG emissions in the community will establish a
basis for selecting emissions reduction strategies. Figure 10 below shows the composition of
Eugene’s greenhouse gas emissions by activity sector and energy source.
12
The transportation sector’s use of gasoline and diesel fuels dominates the current GHG emissions
signature of Eugene. The next highest contributions to Eugene’s emissions are the residential
and commercial use of natural gas. These four components will need to be a major focus of
GHG reduction strategies for significant reduction to occur in the overall level of GHG
emissions in Eugene. Given the extremely low impact of electricity on Eugene’s GHG footprint,
it will be challenging, but important, to maintain the low emissions levels related to electrical
generation as demand for electricity increases or if use of electrical energy instead of other forms
of energy is encouraged as a strategy.
Figure10-2005EugeneCommunity-Wide
CO2EmissionsbyEconomicSectorand
FuelSource
Residential
Residential
NaturalGas,
Electricity,3%
18%
Commercial
Electricity,3%
Transportation
Gasoline,40%
Commercial
NaturalGas,
14%
Industrial
Electricity,5%
Transportation
Diesel,11%
Industrial
AllOther
NaturalGas,
Sources,1%
5%
13
7. Context for Setting Targets
Targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions typically include both a timeline and a
volume goal. This analysis has assumed a target year of 2020. Setting the target for a reduction
in the volume of greenhouse gas emissions will be the next step in Eugene’s Climate Action
Plan. The following table shows three possible targets, the level of GHG emissions required to
meet each level and the impact on annual per capita tons of CO2 emissions.
Table 1 – Potential 2020 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets for Eugene
Total Eugene % Reduction in Per Capita CO2
Target GHG tonnes/yr total GHG emissions tonnes/year
Business as Usual 1,528,199 No reduction 8.8
Meet 1990 Levels 911,964 40% 5.2
Kyoto Protocol (7%<1990) 848,127 45% 4.9
Governor’s Task force (10% < 1990) 820,768 46% 4.7
As noted earlier, any goal to reduce GHG emissions below 1990 levels must not only reduce
current emissions, but avoid all additional GHG emissions resulting from population growth.
Due to the cumulative impact of population growth on total emissions, reducing total emissions
from current levels will require a large change in per capita emissions in the future. For
example, reducing total community emissions to 1990 levels would require a reduction in per
capita emission of 40% by 2020. Meeting the Governor’s Advisory Group on Global Warming
target of 10% below 1990 levels by 2020 would result in cutting per capita emissions by nearly
50%.
Figure 11 below graphically represents the impact of these possible emissions reduction targets
on both the total volume of emissions, and on the per capita level of GHG emissions, based on
the projected population growth from 2005 to 2020.
The need for a large reduction in personal GHG emissions is not immediately obvious, as the
1990 per capital level of GHG emissions of 8.1 tonnes per capita in only about 6% lower than
the actual 2005 level of 8.6 tonnes per capita. However, population growth since 1990 has
increased the total volume of greenhouse gases by a much higher proportion. As GHG reduction
targets are typically expressed in terms of reductions in total emissions, the per capita impact is
magnified.
14
8. Other Considerations
This analysis is based on the GHG emissions due to activities within the community. As noted
earlier, the “upstream” energy required to both manufacture and transport consumer goods made
outside the community, but consumed within Eugene, are not included in this inventory. While
reductions in consumer goods transported over long distances could reduce GHG emissions
elsewhere, this would not be reflected as a reduction of GHG emissions within Eugene in the
current inventory methodology. Although reducing consumption of imported goods and
increased recycling of consumer waste are not directly measured within this “community” GHG
emissions inventory, strategies encouraging purchasing goods with recycled content, buying
locally, and reducing packaging in consumer goods still have environmental benefits on a wider
scale.
The scope of this inventory focuses on community-wide levels and sources of greenhouse gas
emissions from different economic sectors and fuel sources. However, there are a number of
other factors that could be considered when establishing greenhouse gas reduction targets and
action strategies. For example, fuel sources vary in their emission of other pollutants - such as
nitrogen and sulfur compounds - and the release of airborne particulates that have negative
15
environmental impacts. Awareness of these other factors when designing GHG reduction
strategies will help avoid unintended environmental consequences.
The broader social and economic, as well as environmental, impacts of GHG reduction strategies
need to be considered to develop a truly sustainable climate action plan.
9. Strategic Implications
Determining achievable targets and effective strategies are the next steps in Eugene’s Climate
Action Plan.
The task of reducing emissions is made more difficult by the excellent emissions
signature of our power.
It is critical to maintain the benefit of clean power, which has kept total community
emissions and per capita emission relatively low.
Maintaining excellent methane recovery systems is essential to prevent increased GHG
emissions.
Growth in natural gas use is a key issue, in part due to its proportionate increase as an
energy source.
Conservation remains one of the most direct and cost-effective methods to reduce GHG.
Transportation must be a major focus to accomplish a large-scale reduction in
community-wide emissions levels.
Strategies that address both sectors and sources must be employed.
Broader environmental, economic and social impacts of strategies, in addition to GHG
reduction, should be considered.
10. Recommended Next Steps to Develop a Community Climate Action Plan
Sign on to the Cities for Climate Protection Resolution
Define the roles for governing bodies and staff groups
Set Targets
Identify balance between mitigation measures and adaptation planning
Identify strategies and reductions to implement
Identify and commit financial resources to implement climate change action.
11. References for further information
The Pew Center on Global Climate Change
http://www.pewclimate.org/
Oregon Governor’s Initiative on Global Warming
http://www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/GBLWRM/
ICLEI: Local Governments for Sustainability
http://www.iclei.org/index.php?id=391
16
Appendix 1: Data Sources and Detailed Methodology by Emissions Source
Electricity
Electrical power within the boundaries of this inventory comes from two utilities, Eugene Water
and Electric Board (EWEB) and Blachly-Lane Electric Cooperative. The majority of the area is
served by EWEB, with the exception of a small wedge bisected by Hwy 99 south of Awbrey
Lane. This area is comprised primarily of commercial and industrial enterprises and is served by
Blachly-Lane Coop.
Data for total electrical load by sector were obtained for 1990 and 2005. EWEB provided
residential, commercial, industrial and water utility data. Blachly-Lane provided commercial
and industrial data. Blachly-Lane has no significant residential load within the boundaries of the
inventory.
Load growth projections were obtained from each utility to estimate the total use of each sector
in the target year. (Listed in summary of data inputs)
CO2 emissions coefficients for EWEB power for 1990, 2005 and projection for 2020 were
obtained from Jim Maloney, EWEB. CAP (criteria air pollutant) emissions coefficients were
calculated based on the CCAP software coefficients multiplied by percent of the resource in
EWEB’s mix and projected resource mix for each year.
It should be noted that most community wide inventories use emissions coefficients which are
standardized by NERC (North American Electricity Reliability Council) region. Because EWEB
power is significantly cleaner than either the US or regional average, custom emissions
coefficients were calculated and entered in the software. The table below compares the EWEB
coefficients to the regional and national standards.
Comparison of Emissions Coefficients (in lbs/MWh)
Region Year CO2N2OCH4NoxSox CO VOCPM10
EWEB Electricity 1990 71.2800.0000.0030.0730.155 0.004 0.0010.009
EWEB Electricity 2005 96.6000.0000.0040.0950.175 0.009 0.0020.010
EWEB Electricity-projected 2020 96.6000.0000.0040.0930.169 0.010 0.0020.010
NW Grid-WSCC/NWP 1990 969.4580.0780.0591.7741.640 0.575 0.0660.544
NW Grid-WSCC/NWP 2005 1035.5730.0750.0581.3471.353 0.599 0.0670.521
NW Grid-WSCC/NWP--proj 2020 967.4640.0620.0551.0781.019 0.661 0.0720.426
USA total 1990 1478.6130.0210.0203.5858.194 0.216 0.0260.149
USA total 2005 1491.5860.0210.0192.4615.486 0.218 0.0250.144
USA total--projected 2020 1437.7200.0190.0192.0154.068 0.246 0.0270.126
Sources for this information:
Joe McFadden, Manager Member Services, Blachly-Lane Electric
Tom Williams, Major Accounts, EWEB
Jim Maloney, Resource Project Manager, EWEB.
17
Natural Gas
Northwest Natural supplies the Eugene/Springfield area with natural gas through the North and
South Eugene gates. Information for total annual therm use for both gates from 1990 to 2005
was provided. Northwest Natural also provided estimates of the percent of total used by Eugene
proper and the percent of use between the three sectors within Eugene, residential, commercial
and industrial. Estimates were calculated by first applying the Eugene area percent of use and
then the sector split proportions. This information is summarized in the table below.
Eugene UGB Natural Gas Consumption-Annual Therms
%
Sector split1990 1990 2005 2005
EugeneEugene
Total only Total only
all therms 80% all therms 80%
49,600,000 82,402,000
62,000,000 103,002,500
24,800,000 41,201,000
Residential 50%
17,360,000 28,840,700
Commercial 35%
7,440,000 12,360,300
Industrial 15%
Projected growth in natural gas use in was obtained from the Northwest Natural Gas 2004
Integrated Resource Plan, Volume III, Technical Appendix. The results of NWN Gas planning
process were presented in aggregate for the state of Oregon. The average of the 10 and 20 year
projections for the “medium” growth scenario was 1.75%. This annual growth projection was
used in the ICLEI model.
Sources for this information:
Doug Tilgner, Manager of System Operations, Gas Supply Dept, NW Natural
Jean-Marc Ohlmann, System Design Engineer, NW Natural.
Steam
EWEB provides district steam to 94 commercial customers, at the time of this report, in the
downtown and university areas. Steam is now produced at EWEB’s riverfront plant by burning
natural gas and occasionally, light fuel oil. In 1990 the fuel for producing steam was hogged
wood fuel and heavy fuel oil. Steam is distributed through a network of underground piping.
The City of Eugene has 6 buildings in the downtown core that use steam for space and water
heating.
EWEB initially furnished information on the total annual measured consumption of the steam
system in 1990 and 2005. However, figures were not available that described the overall
emissions signature of EWEB steam, taking into account the mix of fuel and the efficiency of the
delivery system. Figures were available, however, for the total fuel input to the steam system.
18
Since emissions coefficients were available for the fuels used and efficiency was no longer an
issue upstream of the production and distribution of the steam, the input fuel was entered directly
into the CCAP software for 1990 and 2005.
Projecting the future use of the steam system in Eugene in 2020 proved to be a difficult task.
Customers have been dropping off the EWEB steam system causing a cycle of rising cost and
further loss of load. EWEB is forecasting a 10% decrease in steam sales over the next 2 years
but were not able to forecast beyond. In most cases, customers pulling off the steam system will
shift to natural gas for water and space heating needs. For the purposes of this inventory, the
decrease in steam was shifted to natural gas use at the rate of 5% per year for the next 2 years, as
projected by EWEB, and held steady from 2007 to 2020. Future updates of this inventory will
adjust for the status and best known projections of the steam system at that point in time.
Sources for this information:
Tom Williams, Major Accounts, EWEB.
Household Fuelwood
The quantity of wood burned in Eugene was estimated using data from the US Census Bureau’s
American Community Survey for 1990 and 2005. The survey provides an estimate for the total
number of households using wood as a heating fuel in the metropolitan area. Splitting out the
number of households by Eugene’s share of the metro area population and multiplying by a
statewide average annual household wood use gave us the figures that were used in this
inventory. Average annual household wood use was obtained from the Oregon Department of
Energy.
Projections for use of household fuelwood were estimated to remain at current levels. While the
trend from 1990 to 2005, and anecdotal evidence from new building permits suggests that wood
use is declining, increases in the cost of home heating fuel may counteract the trend.
Sources for this information:
US Census Bureau, 2005 American Community Survey
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DatasetMainPageServlet?_program=ACS&_submenuId=&_lang=en&_ts=
House Heating Fuel by Metropolitan Area: 1990, Congressional Information Service
from U of O Knight Library archive
Oregon Department of Energy, “Residential Biomass” PPT presentation
Keli Osborne, Permit Review Manager, Planning and Development, City of Eugene.
Fuel Oil
Estimates from US Census Bureau’s American Community Survey for 1990 and 2005 were
again used to derive the number of Eugene households using fuel oil. Average annual
household use in Oregon came from Oregon Petroleum Association figure of 290 gallons of
19
heating oil per year. Multiplying the two together gave us the estimate for light fuel oil use in
the community.
Additionally, EWEB uses a small amount of fuel oil to generate steam. These figures came
directly from EWEB.
Sources for this information:
US Census Bureau, 2005 American Community Survey
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DatasetMainPageServlet?_program=ACS&_submenuId=&_lang=en&_ts=
House Heating Fuel by Metropolitan Area: 1990, Congressional Information Service
from U of O Knight Library archive
Oregon Petroleum Association, quoted in “Winter Forecast Cozy for Home Heating Oil”,
The Oregonian, October 19, 2006.
Tom Williams, Major Accounts, EWEB.
Transportation
Information for transportation impacts was gathered from LCOG (Lane Council of
Governments). The information does not include the impacts of traffic on I-5, since Eugene can
not expect that local policies would have any affect on I-5 traffic. Input into the CACP software
required VMT (Vehicle Miles Traveled) and the distribution of those by vehicle type.
VMT was obtained by using the daily VMT as determined by the 2002 Regional Transportation
Model completed by LCOG and splitting out the Eugene portion by percent of
Eugene/Springfield population. The Eugene-only daily VMT was then backcasted for 1990 and
extrapolated for 2005 using the average annual change in VMT from the Urban Mobility report
as completed by the Texas Transportation Institute. Estimated 1990 and 2005 daily VMT figures
were multiplied by 330, as recommended by the CCP protocol, to account for daily variation in
traffic volume on weekend and holidays. This method was suggested and results reviewed by
Susan Payne, LCOG.
LCOG projects growth in internal Eugene VMT to be 1.27% per year. Compounded over the
next 15 years the total growth in VMT is expected to be 24%.
VMT distribution by vehicle types were calculated by LCOG using the EPA Mobile 6 modeling
protocol. Unfortunately the Mobile 6 model does not classify passenger vehicles by size. This
made it necessary to combine all passenger vehicles, including light duty trucks and SUV’s into
a single classification for entry into the CCP software. When the combined passenger vehicle
category is used, the CCP software uses a passenger vehicle fleet average mpg figure to calculate
fuel use and thus, CO2 emissions. This average increased slightly from 16.1 mpg in 1990 to
17.7mpg in 2005, and is projected, under a business-as-usual scenario to increase to 18.4 mpg by
2020. VMT distribution used for all three years modeled is shown in the chart below. As noted
earlier, we are aware that 1990 emissions are most likely overestimated to some extent because
they are based on the best available, but limited, VMT distribution data.
20
VMT Distribution per Mobile6 Model LCOG to CCAP Software Category
Mobile6 Category CCAP Category
LDGV46.55%Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles( Psgnr Cars) Passenger Vehicle-Gas 86.73%
LDGT1-2 29.07%Light Duty Gasoline Trucks( <6000lbs gvw) Passenger Vehicle-Gas
LDGT3-4 11.11%Light Duty Gasoline Trucks( >6000lbs gvw) Passenger Vehicle-Gas
HDGV 4.17% Heavy Duty Gasoline Vehicles Heavy Truck-Gas 4.17%
LDDV0.15%Light Duty Diesel Vehicles Passenger Vehicle-Dsl 0.35%
LDDT0.20%Light Duty Diesel Trucks Passenger Vehicle-Dsl
HDDV 8.23% Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles Heavy Truck-Diesel 8.23%
MC0.52%MotorcyclesMotorcycles-Gas 0.52%
100.00% 100.00%
Sources for this information:
Susan Payne, Senior Planner, Lane Council of Governments
OR DMV fleet composition for Eugene, 2002 Regional Transportation Model,
o
EPA Mobile 6 modeling
Texas Transportation Institute, Urban Mobility Report 1982-2003.
Solid Waste
Eugene is fortunate to have a community level solid waste and recycling program. Data was
available through this program for residential and commercial solid waste in tons for 1990 and
2005. Additionally, solid waste program estimates indicate that there may be from 10 to 20%
more solid waste generated by “self-haulers” than is captured in the data. Solid waste volumes
were adjusted upwards by 10% to account for this.
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality regularly conducts Waste Characterization
and Composition studies. The most recent report available was done in 2002 and also contains
information from previous studies in 1992-93. The 2002 DEQ data was compiled specifically
for Eugene and was used in the model for 2005 figures. Earlier data specific to Eugene was not
available. Comparison of the DEQ data showed that the 1992-93 data for the “rest of Oregon”
showed a similar profile to Eugene data. This data was used for the 1990 inventory. (See
appendix #2 for actual figures used in the CACP model).
There is some difference of opinion about methane recovery rates at Oregon landfills. OR DEQ
reports that attempts to measure actual methane recovery have reported rates of about 42% at the
Short Mountain facility, while professional opinion based on the fact that Short Mountain is a
state of the art facility, estimate a recovery rate of 80%. The CACP model was run with both
methane recovery rates. In both cases the GHG impact was negative. The 80% recovery rate
was used in the model to maintain consistency with the state-level inventory.
Sources for this information:
Alex Cuyler and Nancy Young, Solid Waste and Recycling Analysts, City of Eugene
Dave Allaway, OR Dept of Environmental Quality
Pete Spendelow, OR Dept of Environmental Quality.
21
Appendix 2: Summary of Data Inputs to CACP software
Annual
Growth
Projections
19902005to 2020
EWEB (kwh)
Residential 958,057,848 960,623,460 1.06%
Commercial 533,748,372 740,774,729 1.06%
Industrial 355,832,248 493,849,820 1.06%
Blachly-Lane Coop (kwh)
Commercial 7,314,575 8,838,538 1.06%
Industrial 69,680,949 84,198,701 1.06%
Northwest Natural Gas (therms)
Residential 24,800,000 41,201,000 1.75%
Commercial 17,360,000 28,840,700 1.75%
Industrial 7,440,000 12,360,300 1.75%
2020 Commercial also includes 10%
fuel switch from Steam, with efficiency
factor.
EWEB steam (fuel units)
Commercial
units hog fuel 41,468 3,479,000 therms -10%
gal light
gal heavy oil 66,234 22,584 oil -10%
Household Firewood (cords)
20,518 11,292 0%
Household Fuel Oil (gallons)
907,475 371,588 -60%
VMT (millions of miles per year)
828.46 925.22 1.27%
Waste disposed (tons)
Residential 40,700 24,974 2.56%
Commercial 64,900 80,906
Waste Composition Estimates
1992-93 2002
"Rest of Oregon" Eugene only
Paper 29.51% 21.99%
Food Waste 17.55% 15.31%
Plant Debris 9.42% 6.02%
Wood/Textiles 9.51% 18.10%
All other 34.01% 38.58%
22