HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAP 2016-02-08 Item 2A - Update - Carbon Reduction Action Agenda with Climate Solutions' New Energy Cities Team41111 New Energy Cities
ACCiIEFAI C.7Y ■iJ CANOCN i:i CJC1∎CN IN THE SO M.:AEST
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Ekberg
Community Affairs and Parks Committee
FROM: Elizabeth Willmott, Climate Solutions' New Energy Cities Team
DATE: January 26, 2016
RE: Background on Potential Carbon Reduction Strategies
I. Introduction
This memo provides background for the City of Tukwila on potential near -term carbon reduction
strategies, which City staff and Climate Solutions' New Energy Cities program collaboratively identified
in fall 2015. This memo accompanies a Powerpoint presentation that summarizes the findings of New
Energy Cities' Energy Map and Carbon Wedge analysis, and provides a high -level overview of potential
carbon reduction priorities for the City to explore, see Attachment A.
The strategies described below are not an exhaustive list of possibilities, nor do they add up to the City's
overall carbon reduction goal, but are a sample of near -term carbon - reducing actions that the City can
take. Staff identified these strategies based on their alignment with local priorities, as well as state and
regional opportunities, such as partnership with the King County- Cities Climate Collaboration (K4C), see
Attachment B.
Consistent with the Carbon Wedge analysis and K4C Joint County -City Climate Commitments, the
strategies are organized by sector: renewable energy, building energy efficiency, and transportation.
Cost information is provided when available. See Appendix for a summary of estimated timelines, costs,
and potential agency leads associated with recommended near -term action items. Note that the
recommended action items do not include ongoing efforts that relate to these climate reduction goals
but instead highlight opportunities for new approaches to meet the City's climate goals.
II. Building Energy Efficiency
• Living Building Challenge Demonstration Ordinance. The Living Building Challenge is currently the
most advanced certification program for green buildings available today. It offers three certification
pathways relating to use of materials, energy, and water for either retrofits or new construction; the
net -zero energy building certification would be most relevant to achieve carbon reduction goals.'
The City of Seattle Living Building Pilot enables developers striving to meet the Living Building
Challenge to request exemptions from the Seattle Land Use Code through design review. The City of
Shoreline is implementing a Living Building Challenge Demonstration Ordinance city -wide and
looking at how it may affect different code areas and incentive opportunities. Renton, Kirkland, and
' "Living Building Challenge." International Living Future Institute. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
http: / /living- future.org /lbc.
Climate Solutions http: / /climatesolutions.org /programs /NEC 1
1
New ¶ities
other K4C cities are interested in adopting ordinances, so King County has formed a workgroup
where Shoreline staff will share their experiences in adapting the Seattle ordinance.
• Green building incentives for private construction. King County Green Tools provides a helpful list
of model green building ordinances and policies for both municipal and private buildings.2 The City
of Issaquah, for example, offers expedited building permit review for projects that achieve Built
Green Five Star (residential) or LEED Gold (commercial).3
• Internal green building standard and municipal projects. In 2013, King County adopted a revised
Green Building and Sustainable Development Ordinance, which covers all King County -owned capital
projects. It requires that all eligible new construction projects strive for LEED Platinum certification
and that all other capital projects strive to achieve a Platinum rating using the King County
Sustainable Infrastructure Scorecard.' King County staff have commented that recent state energy
code changes mean that LEED Silver is no longer a significant stretch beyond code, and
recommended that jurisdictions consider LEED Gold certification at a minimum.
In a local example the King County Housing Authority (KCHA) renovated a 36,000 square -foot,
1980s -era strip mall in Tukwila to become the agency's headquarters.' With Bremerton -based
architect Rice Fergus Miller and Seattle -based design firm Ecotope, the KCHA met its aggressive goal
of creating an affordable, deeply energy- efficient building with a total cost of $95 /square foot (less
than half the cost of new construction) using "careful design and readily available off - the -shelf
technology." 6
In the first nine months of use, the project used one -third of the energy of the KCHA's other primary
office building across the street and 70 percent less than the national average for office buildings.'
This low energy use intensity means that the building is "net zero energy ready " —i.e., it is so deeply
efficient that it could generate as much energy as it consumes with on -site renewable energy. The
project has been widely recognized as an example of a successful low- impact deep energy retrofit.'
2 "Green Building Ordinances and Policies." King County Green Tools. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
http: // your. kingcounty .gov /solidwaste /greenbuilding /green - building- ordinances - policies.asp.
3 "City of Issaquah Sustainable Building Incentives." City of Issaquah. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
http: / /issaquahwa.gov /DocumentCenter /View /3096.
"Green Building and Sustainable Development Ordinance." King County. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
http: / /your.kingcounty .gov /solidwaste /greenbuilding /green - building - ordinance.asp.
' "King County Housing Authority." Ecotope. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
http: / /www.ecotope.com /projects /detail /king - county - housing - authority -2/.
6 "NEEC Member Project Spotlight: Ecotope and the King County Housing Authority." Northwest Energy Efficiency
Council. July 31, 2013. Online at: http: / /www.neec. net / news /neec- member - protect - spotlight- ecotope- and -king-
county- housing- authority.
"King County Housing Authority." Mitsubishi Electric. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
http : / /www.mehvaccasestudies.com /king- county - housing- authority /.
s Apfel, Amelia. "Restoring old buildings promotes sustainability, community, and beauty." Seattle Business. May
2014. Online at: http://www.seattlebusinessmag.com/ article /restoring - old - buildings- promotes- sustainability-
co m m u n ity -a n d- beauty ?page =0, 2.
Climate Solutions http: / /climatesolutions.org /programs /NEC 2
2
41111 New Energy Cities
ACCiIEFAI C.7Y ■iJ CANOCN i:i CJC1∎CN IN THE SO M.:AEST
In Tukwila's upcoming facilities plan, the City could set a similarly ambitious energy efficiency goal
for new and remodeled facilities. Utility energy efficiency programs closely track payback of energy -
saving measures, can help accelerate payback through incentives, and would be an excellent
resource to the City to vet specific proposed actions.
• Partnerships to encourage energy efficiency in community projects. Community projects such as
retrofits or new construction on city -owned properties may be eligible for support from the
Washington State Housing Finance Commission or the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development. For example, a project could leverage utility energy efficiency incentives, and the
Commission may be able to cover other significant costs and help to structure on -bill repayment
(i.e., an additional charge on utility bill payments) such that the energy customer has no upfront cost
for energy- saving measures. The Commission can also design loans so that monthly loan repayments
are less than energy savings, and energy customers experience immediate financial savings.
The Commission's Sustainable Energy Trust is available for projects under $1 million that
significantly exceed code or existing conditions, and bond financing options are available for projects
over $1 million.' However, the Commission may prefer to support municipal projects (i.e., projects
on which a city is the lead financial entity) with bond issuance rather than with a Sustainable Energy
Trust loan. The criteria for projects are flexible, but the Commission reportedly prefers to offer
financing to entities that do not have other options. (For example, the City may want to consider the
Sustainable Energy Trust for projects that are directly led by nonprofit entities.)
The KCHA's Pacific Court and Riverton Terrace projects in Tukwila are examples of potential
collaboration with the Commission. In summer 2015, the Housing Authority applied to the King
County Green Community Initiative to support these initiatives, and if successful, forward them on
to the Commission for financing with Qualified Energy Conservation Bond authority at reduced
borrowing cost.'°
The Commission also provides an approved roster of energy modeling consultants, including
engineers, energy consulting firms, and utility consumption analysts to inform organizations seeking
qualified advisors.
• Public building energy benchmarking. In January 2016, the K4C Building Energy Benchmarking
Subcommittee made recommendations for building energy benchmarking including: 1) mandatory
public building energy benchmarking, and 2) voluntary commercial energy benchmarking with public
disclosure of results. Early adopting jurisdictions will be able to receive technical assistance and
support from the Washington State Department of Commerce and Smart Buildings Center.
Adopting a voluntary program for commercial energy benchmarking and targeting outreach to large
building owners could be a valuable way for the City to help the biggest energy users reduce their
9 "Sustainable Energy Programs." Washington State Housing Finance Commission. Accessed December 22, 2015.
Online at: http: / /www.wshfc.org /energy /.
io "Green Community Initiative." King County. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
http: / /www.kingcounty.gov/ environment / stewardship /sustainable- building/green- community- initiative.aspx.
Climate Solutions http: / /climatesolutions.org /programs /NEC 3
3
41111 New Energy Cities
ACCiIEFAI C.7Y ■iJ CANOCN i:i CJC1∎CN IN THE SO M.:AEST
consumption. In partnership with utility energy efficiency incentive programs, such a benchmarking
program could build goodwill between the City and commercial /industrial building owners.
III. Renewable Energy
• Clean energy transition plan. In 2016, the K4C will analyze what it will take to achieve a countywide
goal of 90% renewable electricity, and use that as the basis for a countywide clean energy transition
plan. Phasing out fossil fuel in the electricity supply and replacing it with energy efficiency and
renewable energy will directly reduce Tukwila's carbon footprint. The plan may offer opportunities
for Tukwila to partner on local renewable energy programs and projects. K4C cities may choose to
contribute $5,000 - $10,000 each to the development of the plan, to supplement King County's
allocation of $75,000.
• Green power options. Seattle City Light's (SCL) voluntary Green Up program enables residential and
business customers to purchase green power for a portion of their electricity use and show their
support for wind power and other renewable energy projects in Washington.' Note that SCL's
electricity is already virtually carbon - neutral, so the carbon reduction from an SCL green power
collaboration would not be significant.
Puget Sound Energy's (PSE) Green Power Program offers a similar opportunity for homes and
businesses, and a Green Power Challenge for local jurisdictions.12 In each Challenge cycle, PSE offers
a $20,000 to $40,000 grant for a local solar demonstration project to the jurisdiction with the
greatest percentage of new participants enrolled.
• Local solar installation. Bellevue, Kirkland, Mercer Island, Seattle, and Snoqualmie have all pursued
local Solarize campaigns to promote residential solar installation, in partnership with the nonprofit
Northwest SEED.13 Northwest SEED support packages for local jurisdictions range from $5,000 to
$7,500 (or more, depending on level of customization).14 Northwest SEED has a strong interest in
developing solar options for low- income communities.
State solar incentives are currently in flux, however, and the 2016 Washington State Legislature is
likely to address incentive issues to provide more certainty for potential solar purchasers. In addition
to tracking the state solar incentive conversation, the City may want to explore collaboration with
the Washington State Housing Finance Commission regarding ways to finance large -scale solar
projects on City facilities or other properties.
11 "Green Up!" Seattle City Light. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
http: / /www.seattle.gov /light /Green /greenPower /greenup.asp.
12 "Green Power Challenge." Puget Sound Energy. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
https: / /pse.com/ savingsandenergycenter /GreenPower /Pages /Green- Power - Challenge.aspx.
13 "Solarize Northwest." Northwest SEED. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at: http: / /solarizewa.org /.
14 "Northwest SEED Solarize Support Packages." Northwest SEED. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
http: / /www.nwseed.org /wp- content /uploads /NWSEED - Solarize- Support - Packages.pdf.
Climate Solutions http: / /climatesolutions.org /programs /NEC 4
4
41111 New Energy Cities
ACCiIEFAI C.7Yi10 CANOCN i:i CJC1∎CN IN THE Salo:MSi
■ Solar -ready roof policy. In November 2015, the Washington State Building Code Council passed a
package of building code changes that included optional language for local jurisdictions to apply
solar -ready provisions to new residential and non - residential construction.15 The estimated cost to a
developer is $100 per residential, multifamily, commercial /retail, industrial, or institutional building
(i.e., for material and installation costs), which is less expensive than a roof retrofit would be to
accommodate solar in the future. Such a policy would also send an important market signal to
promote local solar installation.
IV. Transportation
• Transit- oriented development, transit service, and commute trip reduction. Tukwila is already
pursuing a tapestry of strategies to reduce congestion and transportation pollution, including:
o Encouraging transit - oriented development in Southcenter and on Tukwila International
Boulevard.
o Building sidewalks and bike lanes with new street projects, and promoting non - motorized
transportation options through the Walk and Roll program.
o Working with King County Metro Transit and Sound Transit on increasing transit service.
o Partnering with employers and other stakeholders on transportation demand management
strategies, supported by a three -year, $500,000 grant to reduce congestion.
These strategies are critical to reduce carbon emissions from transportation, and are consistent with
the K4C goal of reducing vehicle miles traveled.
• Promote the use of cleaner vehicles through fleet purchases and charging infrastructure.
Opportunities continue to expand for cities to upgrade fleet vehicles to hybrid or electric options
and promote electric vehicle (EV) charging stations at municipal facilities. In addition, cities can also
promote EV charging in workplaces through the U.S. Department of Energy Workplace Charging
Challenge, which the K4C is pursuing in partnership with Western Washington Clean Cities.15
Western Washington Clean Cities is a nonprofit membership organization, supported by the U.S.
Department of Energy, focused on expanding the use of alternative fuels and advanced vehicle
technologies.17 Staff provide education, technical expertise, networking opportunities, and funding
assistance to help members invest in local, clean transportation solutions, including clean vehicle
purchase options for government fleets. The annual membership fee for a government entity is
$350.
Zs The proposal for optional residential code provisions is online at: http: / /tinyurl.com /h9o46gp. The proposal for
optional non - residential building code provisions is online at: http: / /tinyurl.com /hpgfz73. Although the code has
not been published as of December 2015, the official state rulemaking document with the relevant language is
available at: https: / /fortress.wa.gov /ga /apps /SBCC /File.ashx ?cid =5583. (See Appendix U on page 36.)
16 "Workplace Charging Challenge." U.S. Department of Energy. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
http: / /energy.gov /eere /vehicles /workplace- charging - challenge - join - challenge.
17 Western Washington Clean Cities information packet. Accessed December 22, 2015. Online at:
http: / /wwcleancities.org /wp- content /uploads/ 2015 /06 /WWCC- Information - Packet- 2015.pdf.
Climate Solutions http: / /climatesolutions.org /programs /NEC 5
5
41111 New Energy Cities
ACCiIEFAI C.7Y ■iJ CANOCN i:i CJC1∎CN IN THE SO M.:AEST
V. Conclusion
The City of Tukwila has a number of promising opportunities for near -term and no- or low -cost action to
reduce community and municipal carbon emissions. The strategies outlined in this document build on
existing City activities, reinforce partnership with the K4C, and align with state policies. The next crucial
step will be to identify top - priority action items for 2016 to add to Tukwila's existing work plan.
New Energy Cities deeply appreciates the opportunity to work with the City of Tukwila on strategies to
cut carbon emissions. Thank you very much for your leadership and collaboration.
Attachments
A. Deep Carbon Reduction in Tukwila WA — Power Point
B. Joint Letter of Commitment: Climate Change Actions in King County
Climate Solutions http: / /climatesolutions.org /programs /NEC 6
6
0.414 New Energy Cities
VI. Appendix: Estimated Timelines, Costs, and Agency Leads for Recommended Near -Term Action Items (In Order of Timeline)
Action Item
Estimated Timeline
Cost
Potential Agency Lead
Adopt Living Building Challenge
Demonstration Ordinance
Research, wait for
Shoreline's example
Staff time. Shoreline staff are adapting the Seattle ordinance for
smaller city use. The Riverton Cottages could be a pilot project.
Planning /Building
Adopt solar -ready roof policy as
part of code amendment
package
Adopt with Building
Code Updates in June
Staff time. Commerce and WSU staff are developing training
resources on the solar -ready roof option and energy code in
general, including a webinar in March 2016.
Planning /Building
Encourage community projects
to include energy efficiency
Ongoing
Staff time. Opportunity to partner with /seek funding from
Washington State Housing Finance Commission.
Planning
Implement public building
energy benchmarking
6 mos to begin, 1 year to
operationalize
Staff time. Costs will be offset by technical assistance from WA
Department of Commerce.
Planning /Building
Adopt internal green building
standard for municipal projects
1 year, depending on
design /planning horizon
Staff time for design /planning. Cost differential depends on
nature of project.
Public Works /Building
Develop green building
incentives for private
construction
Research in 2016, Begin
development in 2017
Staff time for ongoing outreach and implementation.
Building
Partner with utilities to market
green power purchasing
1 year
Mercer Island staff spent 2 -3 hours a week for a year. However,
Mercer Island was the inaugural city partner, and city staff time
has declined in subsequent years of the program.
TBD
Partner with community groups
to promote solar installations
1 year
Support packages from NW SEED range from $5,000 to 7,500.
Staff hours depend on how much support the City gets from an
outside partner.
TBD
Partner with King County on
clean energy transition plan
1 year
In 2016 K4C cities may opt to contribute $5,000- 10,000 to the
funding of a countywide clean energy transition analysis /plan.
Planning
Purchase additional EV /hybrid
vehicles for City fleet
Continuous
Upfront cost of EV /hybrid vehicles may be higher, with long -term
fuel savings. Western Washington Clean Cities membership for
government entities costs $350 in annual fees.
Public Works
Climate Solutions http: / /climatesolutions.org /programs /NEC
7
Deep Carbon Reduction
in Tukwila, WA:
Developing an
Tukwila CAP Committee Discussion
February 8, 2016
ClimateSolutions.
PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS TO GLOBAL WARMING NM
CO
E+17,1
�0�
Agenda
• Background & Review of Analysis
• Potential Carbon Reduction
Strategies
• Questions /Discussion
1
Tukwila Climate Commitments
Res 1649: US Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement
(2007)
• Municipal emissions of carbon dioxide reduced 50%
by the year 2020
Res 1747: Tukwila Joins the King County - Cities
Climate Collaboration (2014)
• Joint letter of Commitment for Climate Change
Actions in King County
• GMPC Greenhouse Gas reduction Targets
1
King County Carbon Reduction Goal:
80% below 2007 level by 2050
• Avoid most devastating impacts of climate
change (2 °C /3.6 °F)
• Regional leadership and collaboration
— King County Growth Management Planning Council
(GMPC) adopted targets: 80% below 2007 level by
2050, 50% below 2007 level by 2030
What will it take to get on the path
to deep carbon reduction?
1
Climate and Energy Goals in the
Tukwila Comprehensive Plan
CHAPTERTWELVE
UTILITIES ELEMENT
CHAPTER FIFTEEN
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
• Utilities Element 12.1.42
through 12.1.46
• Transportation Element
13.5.1 and 13.5.2
• Roles and Responsibilities
15.1.9 and 15.1.10
• Natural Environment Element
4.1.1
1
Ongoing City Climate Leadership
• All traffic signals
converted to LED
• Complete streetlight
LED conversion
• Increased City fleet
efficiency
• 2010 Energy Upgrades
to City Hall, 6300 and
Fort Dent Park
• CTR Program
IALL
Tukwila King County
New Energy Cities Partnership
• New Energy Cities contract
— Enabled by K4C membership and philanthropic grant,
kicked off on 9/1/15
Community energy and carbon analysis completed
10/1/15
Briefing to Tukwila Council Committee on 2/8/16
What are Tukwila's high - priority
carbon reduction strategies?
1
KING CdLINTy- Clues
CLIMATE COLLABORATION
1
Carbon Emissions
Reduction Taskforce
Convene a taskcforce io make
recommerdaeons for a
carbon emissions redlclioi
program for consideration
during 2015 legislative
session
Coal-Fired Electricity
Transition
Wort wail private unities and
- federal agencies to faclh1ale the
transition Irorn coal 10 cleaner
electricity sources
..,,„,„...,...„:„...„,„.
Energy Efficiency
Focus an saving costs and
reducing emissions from
buildings by improving they
efficiency and taking
advantage of clean power
Governor Inslee's
Climate Executive Order
This is the right time
to act. This is the
right place. And we
are the right people
to make this happen:
- are 051. . .+p r 29.20
Clean Transportation
Decide how to accelerate
our use of clean cars and
clean fuels. and reduce
trannportanon emiss,onrn
*A*1
-
dirM
Clean Technology
Develop a new state
provam to scpport
renewaole energy and
energy el fnlency
technology innovation In the
point and private sectors
#ActOnCllmate
bit.ly /Climate WA
CLIMATE ACTION PLRN Q
Powering the New Energy Future
From the Ground Llp
Profiles in City -Led Energy Innovation
Mir
AL 1 i iv
Breaking Down Barriers to Deep
Energy Efficiency in King County
1019
PiperSao. clam. peel,
s+spAracerasr.rou
r..ey on
yi curaresaurwn
4i110
Olt New Energy Cities
ACCELERATING CITY -LEA .;::JON ION IN THE NORTHW.
Tukwila 2012 Energy and Carbon Footprint
Carbon
Emissions
339
KT CO2e
75 KT CO2e
109 KT CO2e
155 KT CO2e
Source
Hydro
5631 BBTUs
Renewables55 BBTUs
"1
256
Nuclear
785 BBT
1
405 BBTUs
Natural Gasi
Petroleum
Electricity
Generation
260 BBTUs
End Use
489 BBTUs
(4% Industrial)
Residential
143 BBTUs 1515 BBTUs
(61% Industrial)
1/"/
2169 BBTUs
Commercial
15 KT CO2e
169 KT CO2e
4
155 KT CO2e
Transportation
Carbon
Emissions
339
KT CO2e
00
500,000
O 550,000
a 500,000
O
V 450,000
0
400,000
f▪ 1;
350,000
O 300,000
.N
E
0 250,000
c
0
▪ 200,000
V
150,000
50x2030 Reduction: What Will It Take?
Growth Scenario / •
/
GHG Emissions
To Avoid
/
2012 GHG Emissions
GHG Emissions
To Reduce
100,000
2012 2017
'Yea' r
2022 2027
A 50% Carbon Reduction
)" by 2030
. r New Energy Cities
600,000
i
CU 550,000
ea
500,000
Q450,000
0
▪ 400,000
L
E 350,000
O 300,000
V)
CD 250,000
d
200,000
[0
V
150,000
Reductions due to
Existing Federal and State Laws
/
2012 GHG Emissions
• Federal Fuel Economy
State Clean Energy Standard
State Energy Code
Remaining Reductions
Needed
100,000
2012
CO
•
2017
Year
2022
2027
gay
50% Carbon Reduction
by 2030
New Energy Cities
50 Percent Reduction by 2030:
What Will It Take?
Level
Federal
State
State
We estimated the carbon emissions reduction due to
three existing federal & state laws
Sector
■
Transportation
Energy supply
Energy
consumption
Law or Policy
Corporate Average Fuel
Economy Standard
Renewable Portfolio
Standard (RPS)
Washington State Energy
Code
What the Law or Policy Requires
Analysis assumes 2030 avg. fuel
economy of 27.3 miles per gallon
At least 15 percent of total fuel mix
must come from renewable energy by
2020
New buildings constructed in 2031
must use 70 percent less energy than
new buildings constructed in 2006
1
1
500,300
CD • 550,300
co
a 500,000
N
0
V 450,000
0
400,000
u
• L
E 350,000
300,000
. N
I1
W 250,000
0
200,000
150,000
Solutions in Transportation,
Buildings, and Energy Supply
Federal Fuel Economy
State Clean Energy Standard
State Energy Code
15% Cleaner Vehicles
20% Vehicle Miles Traveled
Reduction
25% Building Energy Use
Reduction
90% Renewable
Electricity & No More Coal
100,000
2012
50% Carbon Reduction
by 2030
2017
Year
2022
2027
• New Energy Cities
Building Energy Efficiency
Carbon emissions (metric tons CO2 equivalent)
600,000
550,000
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
2012 2017 Year
50% Carbon Reduction
by 2030
2022
2027
State Energy Code
25% Building Energy Use
Reduction
Possible City Actions
• Pass a Living Building Demonstration Ordinance
• Create a Tukwila green building standard, including:
Permitting incentives & technical assistance options
Recognition of businesses making energy efficient upgrades
Technical assistance, funding, & utility incentives to help high energy
users become more efficient
• Prioritize energy efficiency in City Facilities Plan (target LEED Silver rating)
Carbon emissions (metric tons CO2 equivalent)
Renewable Energy
600,000
550,000
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
2012 2017
Year
State Clean Energy Standard
90% Renewable
Electricity & No More Coal
50% Carbon Reduction
by 2030
2022
2027
Possible City Actions
• Partner with K4C on Clean Energy Transition Plan
• Partner with utilities to promote green power option in Tukwila
• Partner with community groups & building owners to promote
local solar installation
• Adopt solar -ready roof policy per new State regulations
Transportation and Land Use
Carbon emissions (metric tons CO2 equivalent)
600,000
550,000
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
2012
2017
Year
50% Carbon Reductiorliiii
by 2030
2022
2027
20% Vehicle Miles Traveled
Reduction
City Actions
• Continue to encourage transit - oriented development in Southcenter and TIB
• Continue to build sidewalks and bike lanes with new street projects
• Continue to work with Metro and Sound Transit on transit service
Business Outreach
• Partner with employers & other stakeholders on transportation demand
management strategies
— 3 -yr. $500,000 grant to reduce congestion in South King County
Cleaner Vehicles
Carbon emissions (metric tons CO2 equivalent)
600,000
550,000
500,000
450,000
400,000
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
2012 2017 Year
50% Carbon Reduction
by 2030
2022
2027
Federal Fuel Economy
15% Cleaner Vehicles
Possible City Actions
• Upgrade to hybrid /electric City vehicles as possible
• Future EV charging stations at City facilities
• Encourage EV charging facilities in new residential buildings
Business Outreach
• Promote electric vehicle workplace charging (e.g., BECU)
2016 Work Plan
• Transportation
ST3 Advocacy for BAR Link /Sounder Station
Expanded Grant funded regional Commute Trip Reduction efforts
Transit Plan Update to advocate for improved service
Walk & Roll Plan Update
• Energy efficient buildings
Living Building Demonstration Ordinance
Incorporate green elements into new City facilities & TIB motel sites
Explore Green Building Program
Public and Private Energy Benchmarking
• Renewable Energy
— Solar demonstration project
• Recycling program
• Landscape code update with tree canopy goals
• K4C participation & advocacy
1
Summary of Findings
• Existing laws are important, but they alone will not
achieve the goal
• State, regional, and local levers of change are all
essential —and available —to meet 2030 & 2050 goals
• Bold action, partnerships, and proactive planning are
needed to meet ambitious carbon reduction targets
Achieving 50x2030 and 80x2050 requires bolder action
and planning with a carbon reduction lens
or
Thank you
Elizabeth Willmott
New Energy Cities Program Manager
ley
oicio
phi Climate Solutions
PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS TO GLOBAL WARMING
*11 I. r1,...
KING COUNTY- CItICS
CLIMATE COLLABORATION
ATTACHMENT B
Joint Letter of Commitment: Climate Change Actions in King County
Climate change is a paramount challenge of this generation and has far - reaching and fundamental
consequences for our economy, environment, public health, and safety.
Across King County and its cities, we are already experiencing the impacts of climate change:
warming temperatures, acidifying marine waters, rising seas, decreasing mountain snowpack, and
less water in streams during the summer.
WARMING���
TEMPERATURES
RISING
SEA
LEVELS
DECREASING MTN.
SNoWPACK
Air
SUMMER
> LESS
WATER
IN
'TRE.AFIS
These changes have the potential for significant impacts to public and private property, resource based
economies like agriculture and forestry, and to residents' health and quality of life.
The decisions we make locally and regionally, such as where our communities will grow and how they will
be served by transportation, will set the stage for success or failure in reducing carbon pollution, making
sound long -term investments, and ensuring our communities are livable and resilient to climate change
impacts.
Current science indicates that to avoid the worst impacts of global warming we need to reduce global
greenhouse gas emissions sharply. The King County Growth Management Planning Council - a formal
body of elected officials from across King County - voted unanimously on July 23, 2014 to adopt a
shared target to reduce countywide sources of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, compared to a 2007
baseline, by 25% by 2020, 50% by 2030, and 80% by 2050.
Based on our shared assessment of emissions in King County, and review of potential strategies to
reduce emissions, we believe that these targets are ambitious but achievable.
Building on the work of the King County- Cities Climate Collaboration (K4C) - a partnership between the
County and cities to coordinate and enhance local government climate and sustainability efforts - more
than a dozen cities and the County came together in the first half of 2014 to chart opportunities for joint
actions to reduce GHG emissions and accelerate progress towards a clean and sustainable future.
The attached Principles for Collaboration and Joint County -City Climate Commitments are
focused on practical, near -term, collaborative opportunities between cities and King County. These
shared commitments build on the significant work that many of our cities and County are already taking.
By signing this letter, we pledge our support for the shared vision that these principles and actions
represent. Our cities commit to actively pursue those strategies and catalytic actions where our
jurisdictions can make the most impact given our size, location, and development patterns.
Through focused, coordinated action, we will maximize the impact of our individual and shared efforts.
fff
444 ell"
444
40 14.
29
KING couNTy-Cities
CLIMATE COLLABORATION
Elected Officials of King County and King County Cities
Dow Constantine
King County Executive
Bruce Bassett
Mayor, City of Mercer Island
/JD5
Shari E. Winstead
Mayor, City of Shoreline
Edward B. Murray
Mayor, City of Seattle
/L
Amy Walen
Mayor, City of Kirkland
Fred Butler
Mayor, City of Issaquah
30
Larry Phillips
King County Council Chair
Matthew Larson
Mayor, City of Snoqualmie
Jim Haggerton
Mayor, City of Tukwila
)6,
Denis Law
Mayor, City of Renton
John Marchione
Mayor, City of Redmond
e da r4�
Claudia Balducci,
Mayor, City of Bellevue
KING COUNTY- CIt12S
CLIMATE COLLABORATION
Principles for Collaboration
O Climate change is the paramount challenge of our generation, and has fundamental and
far - reaching consequences for our economy, environment, and public health and safety.
O Strong action to reduce GHG emissions is needed, and the time is now.
O Local governments can reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through many decisions
related to transportation and land use, energy and green building, forests and farms, and
consumption and materials management.
O Many cities in King County have set individual climate goals and are taking steps to reduce
local GHG emissions, and we need to build on this leadership.
O Local solutions need to be implemented in ways that build a cleaner, stronger and more
resilient regional economy.
• Progress will require deeper engagement with communities of color and low income,
immigrant, and youth populations. These communities can be more vulnerable to the
impacts of climate change -from increasing flood risks to rising costs of fossil fuels - and
historically less likely to be included in community -scale solutions or as leaders. We are
committed to work in ways that are fair, equitable, empowering, and inclusive and that also
ensure that low income residents do not bear unfair costs of solutions.
O Federal and state policies and laws can help us achieve our goals, but countywide and local
policy, programs and partnerships are needed to fill the existing gap to achieve local GHG
targets.
O Progress will require deep partnerships between the County, cities, utilities, businesses,
nonprofit organizations, and other public sector agencies.
O King County and nine cities have formed the King County- Cities Climate Collaboration
(K4C), and we will work to build on this initial pledge, both in increased action and increased
participation from additional cities.
• We can accomplish more with a shared vision and coordinated action; collaboration will
increase the efficiency of our efforts and magnify the impact of our strategies beyond what
each of us could achieve on our own.
® Our cities support the shared vision that the Joint County -City Climate Commitments
represent, but it is not the intention that each city will pursue every catalytic action. Cities
and King County will actively pursue strategies where they have the most impact and
influence.
e We will reconvene at least annually to share progress. We also dedicate a staff point person
from our cities and from the County to help coordinate implementation of the following Joint
County -City Climate Commitments, and to serve as a point person to the K4C.
31
KING COUNTY - CItIPS
CLIMATE COLLABORATION
Joint County -City Climate Commitments •000
I. Shared Goals
Pathway: Adopt science -based countywide GHG reduction targets that help ensure the region is
doing its part to confront climate change.
Catalytic Policy Commitment: Collaborate through the Growth Management Planning Council,
Sound Cities Association, and other partners to adopt countywide GHG emissions reduction
targets, including mid -term milestones needed to support long -term reduction goals.
Catalytic Project or Program: Build on King County's commitment to measure and report on
countywide GHG emissions by sharing this data between cities and partners, establishing a
public facing dashboard for tracking progress, and using the information to inform regional
climate action.
II. Climate Policy
Pathway: Support strong federal, regional, state, countywide and local climate policy.
Catalytic Policy Commitment: Advocate for comprehensive federal, regional and state
science -based limits and a market -based price on carbon pollution and other greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions. A portion of revenue from these policies should support local GHG reduction
efforts that align with these Joint County -City Climate Commitments, such as funding for transit
service, energy efficiency projects, and forest protection and restoration initiatives.
III. Transportation and Land Use
Pathway: For passenger vehicles and light trucks, reduce vehicle miles traveled by 20% below
2012 levels by 2030 and GHG emissions intensity of fuels by 15% below 2012 levels by 2030.
Catalytic Policy Commitment: Partner to secure state authority for funding to sustain and grow
transit service in King County.
Catalytic Policy Commitment: Reduce climate pollution, build our renewable energy economy,
and lessen our dependence on imported fossil fuels, by supporting the adoption of a statewide
low carbon fuel standard that gradually lowers pollution from transportation fuels.
Catalytic Policy Commitment: Focus new development in vibrant centers that locate jobs,
affordable housing, and services close to transit, bike and pedestrian options so more people
have faster, convenient and low GHG emissions ways to travel.
Catalytic Project or Program: As practical, for King County and cities developing transit
oriented communities around high capacity light rail and transit projects, adopt the Puget Sound
Regional Council's Growing Transit Communities Compact. For smaller cities, participate in
programs promoting proven alternative technology solutions such as vehicle electrification, as
well as joint carpool and vanpool promotional campaigns.
32
KING COUNTy- Citios
CLIMATE COLLABORATION
Joint County -City Climate Commitments o•oo
fff
IV. Energy Supply
Pathway: Increase countywide renewable electricity use 20% beyond 2012 levels by 2030;
phase out coal -fired electricity sources by 2025; limit construction of new natural gas based
electricity power plants; support development of increasing amounts of renewable energy
sources.
Catalytic Policy Commitment: Build on existing state renewable energy commitments
including the Washington State Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) to partner with local
utilities, state regulators and other stakeholders on a countywide commitment to renewable
energy resources, including meeting energy demand through energy efficiency improvements
and phasing out fossil fuels.
Catalytic Project or Program: In partnership with utilities, develop a package of county and
city commitments that support increasingly renewable energy sources, in areas such as
community solar, green power community challenges, streamlined local renewable energy
installation permitting, district energy, and renewable energy incentives.
V. Green Building and Energy Efficiency
Pathway: Reduce energy use in all existing buildings 25% below 2012 levels by 2030; achieve
net -zero GHG emissions in new buildings by 2030.
Catalytic Policy Commitment: Join the Regional Code Collaboration and work to adopt code
pathways that build on the Washington State Energy Code, leading the way to "net -zero
carbon" buildings through innovation in local codes, ordinances, and related partnerships.
Catalytic Project or Program: Develop a multi -city partnership to help build a regional energy
efficiency retrofit economy, including tactics such as: collaborating with energy efficiency and
green building businesses, partnering with utilities, expanding on existing retrofit programs,
adopting local building energy benchmarking and disclosure ordinances, and encouraging
voluntary reporting and collaborative initiatives such as the 2030 District framework.
33
KING COUNTY - Ctios
CLIMATE COLLABORATION
Joint County -City Climate Commitments oo•o
VI. Consumption and Materials Management:
Pathway: By 2020, achieve a 70% recycling rate countywide; by 2030, achieve zero waste of
resources that have economic value for reuse, resale and recycling.
Catalytic Policy Commitment: Partner through the Metropolitan Solid Waste Management
Advisory Committee on policy, projects and programs focused on (1) waste prevention and
reuse, (2) product stewardship, recycling, and composting, and (3) beneficial use.
Catalytic Project or Program: Develop a regional strategy through the Comprehensive Solid
Waste Management Plan process to reach 70% recycling through a combination of education,
incentives and regulatory tools aimed at single - family, multi- family residents, businesses, and
construction projects in King County.
44 eirt
4444
VII. Forests and Farming
Pathway: Reduce sprawl and associated transportation related GHG emissions and sequester
biological carbon by focusing growth in urban centers and protecting and restoring forests and
farms.
Catalytic Policy Commitment: Partner on Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) initiatives to
focus development within the Urban Growth Area, reduce development pressure on rural
lands, and protect our most valuable and important resource lands.
Catalytic Project or Program: Protect and restore the health of urban and community trees
and forests, for example through public - private- community efforts such as Forterra's Green
Cities Partnerships.
Catalytic Project or Program: Partner on collaborative efforts to expand forest and farm
stewardship and protection, for example through King Conservation District's farm
management planning, landowner incentive, and grant programs.
Catalytic Project or Program: Expand our local food economy, for example by supporting
urban and community farming, buying locally produced food, and participating in the Farm City
Roundtable forum.
34
KING COUNTY- CItICS
CLIMATE COLLABORATION
Joint County -City Climate Commitments 000•
VIII. Government Operations
Pathway: Reduce GHG emissions from government operations in support of countywide
goals.
Policy Commitment: Develop and adopt near and long -term government operational GHG
reduction targets that support countywide goals, and implement actions that reduce each local
government's GHG footprint.
Catalytic Project or Program: In support of the Section V. Green Building and Energy
Efficiency pathway targets to reduce energy use in existing buildings 25% below 2012 levels by
2030 and achieve net -zero GHG emissions in new buildings by 2030: execute energy
efficiency projects and initiatives at existing facilities, measure existing building performance
through EPA's Energy Star or equivalent program, implement high- efficiency street and traffic
light replacement projects, and construct new buildings to LEED or Living Building Challenge
standards and infrastructure to equivalent sustainability standards.
swe
l �, � IX. Collaboration
it
Policy Commitment: Participate in or join the King County- Cities Climate Collaboration (K4C)
- focused on efforts to coordinate and enhance city and County climate and sustainability
efforts - to share case studies, subject matter experts, resources, tools, and to collaborate on
grant and funding opportunities.
Catalytic Project or Program: Engage and lead government- business collaborative action
through efforts such as the Eastside Sustainable Business Alliance.
35