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.