Loading...
2018-11-01 Mayor's Climate Protection Committee MinuCitizens Committee on U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement Mission: 1. Encourage citizens to be a part of the solution 2. Encourage City staff and citizens to conserve current resources 3. Work with the City Council to implement ideas 4. Effectively address the future impacts of climate change Climate Protection Committee (CPC) November 1, 2018 - Meeting Minutes In Attendance: Steve Fisher, Cynthia Pruitt, Hank Landau, Shane Hope, Mayor Dave Earling, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Mark Johnson (consultant), Lisa Conley, Larry Pierce, David Schaefer, Kernen Lien Call to Order and approval of minutes: The meeting was called to order at 8:45 am. The motions to approve CPC meeting minutes from October 4, 2o18 were unanimously approved. City's Climate Goals project update: Mark Johnson, a member of the consultant team working on the Climate Goals project, spent the entire meeting giving an update on the progress made so far on a community -wide greenhouse gas inventory and discussing the methodology and assumptions made from the data gathered. There had been a lag in getting the best data on the transportation sector and other ways to pursue that were still being sought. The first task for the consultant team was compiling the inventory. Task z is focused on setting targets: the topic of today's meeting. Under the 2015 Paris agreement, there is a goal to hold the rise in global mean temperature to less than z degrees Celsius, and try for less than 1.5 degrees (from pre -industrial levels). A recent United Nations report from October says that the Earth will hit +1.5 degrees by the year 204o and aggressive measures are needed to keep from going beyond +1.5 degrees. This would require net zero carbon emissions by 205o. Edmonds goals are tracking well for near -term, but by 2035 - 2040, they would need to become more aggressive. A list of many options and carbon capture and sequestration and offsets was presented. Task 3 will delve into analyzing policies and gap analysis: Soo actions of the city are being analyzed, what's missing, process improvement, etc. This will all be in a spreadsheet for sharing (a memo will be ready later this month) and the City Council will be briefed early December. Cynthia asked for clarification as to what is the target vision that is do -able or what could Edmonds do. Lisa asked about the use and disposal of batteries. Mark Johnson responded that batteries have a very high carbon footprint for their production and that much of the Northwest has much lower coal consumption in their energy mix. Councilmember Buskshnis mentioned that daylighting Willow Creek would return its original marsh function and could then act as a carbon sink. Lisa wondered about the impact of new development around the perimeter of the marsh. Mark said they needed to investigate how much of a carbon sink the marsh could become. Mark offered observations and examples of sustainable activities that directly lead to reduction of emissions. After the mention of capturing methane from landfills which is used for generating electricity, Steve stated that the Cedar Grove commercial compost facility was seeking permits to install anaerobic composting vessels that do not emit any odors, but was ultimately denied due to pressure from the neighboring community. David asked if there was a way to write in realistic technical goals rather than to speculate on "pie -in -the -sky" tech. Mark replied that many existing technologies can already be promoted such as heat pumps, electric versus gas heating, efficient water heaters, furnaces, etc. David then asked if we can incentivize existing technologies and said that these would need market -based incentives. Mark stated that utilities cannot incentivize or promote one fuel over another for legal competition reasons. This means that cities would have more of an impact than utility companies in promoting alternative fuel sources. Hank asked if it is feasible for Edmonds to impose a carbon fee over what is given at the state or federal level. Councilmember Buskshnis wondered what the limits of mayoral power in this regard and how much can be imposed. Mark replied that they would need to look into the appropriate policies and regulations. Mark then said that there would be a presentation at the City Council meeting December 4 and this would be an initial overview to highlight findings of the community -wide greenhouse gas inventory. Shane stated that in our region that transportation is a major emission factor, and we would need to change lifestyles to aid in climate protection goals. Hank added that any such promotion would need to be politically correct as well as scientifically correct. Lisa said that if busses were more convenient in the area, people would likely use them more. Cynthia asked about "Our Vision for Edmonds 2050" in the Climate Action Plan: "What is workable end state? We would want consensus of the city, the utilities and other players as an end -goal. Where are they all willing to be in the end? What end - state is passable to your neighbors? Lisa asked how we can convince citizens that are resistant, that perhaps we could use positive messages rather than "you can't do..." language. People don't like being told what to do, or not to do. Mark stated that electric cars are gaining in popularity and public perception plays a big role in what gets adopted. Autonomous cars need to be considered and would likely have a major impact. Mark reiterated that the big target is "What is the goal for Edmonds?" and that there has been a list created of many individual actions that move toward that goal. Hank said that measuring carbon reduction per capita is do -able, but how does that compare to the gross measure. He also asked how those numbers get relayed to the public. Mark replied that there will be many caveats regarding how the data is collected, measured and presented. Newly added data doesn't have a baseline measure, so tracking improvements can be difficult. Mark and Hank then discussed technical issues with how data can be measured. Cynthia asked the group to take a moment to give feedback to Mark: What do we think our neighbors will accept? Lisa offered that it could be less about climate change and more about saving money for individuals ("what's in it for me?"). There followed a general discussion on to how to address neighbors, economics, property values, possibility for alternative mobility, incremental approaches and successes for incremental goals. Mandatory waste and recycling was mentioned and each member added about thoughts about what their neighbors would accept. Shane added that LEED certification for buildings was becoming more attractive and acted as a financial incentive for builders. Adjourn: The meeting is adjourned at 10:05 am.