Rhode Island Greenhouse Gas

Action PlanSteve Bernow

Tellus Institute

Presentation at STAPPA AND ALAPCO2002 FALL MEMBERSHIP MEETING

September 28 – October 2, 2002The Stoweflake Conference Center

Stowe, Vermont

Developed by The Rhode Island Greenhouse Gas Stakeholder

Process

Convened byRhode Island Department of Environmental

ManagementRhode Island State Energy Office

FacilitatorRaab Associates, Ltd.

Technical/Policy ConsultantTellus Institute

Stakeholder MembersRI Economic Development Corporation RI House, Policy Office (ex officio)RI League of Cities and TownsRI Petroleum InstituteRI Public Interest Research GroupRI Public Transit AuthorityRI Division of Public Utilities and CarriersRI Senate, Policy Office (ex officio)RI Society of Environmental ProfessionalsRI State Energy OfficeRI Statewide PlanningSave The BaySierra ClubSustainability CoalitionThe Energy Council of Rhode IslandUS EPA (ex officio)US DOE (ex officio)

Associated Builders and ContractorsAudubon Society of Rhode IslandBrown UniversityBusiness RoundtableConservation Law FoundationDepartment of AdministrationGovernor's Policy Office (ex officio)Narragansett ElectricNat. Fed’n of Independent BusinessesNew England Gas CompanyNorthern RI Chamber of CommerceOil Heat InstituteProvidence Chamber of CommerceRI Builder's AssociationRI Dept. of Environmental ManagementRI Dept. of Transportation

Phase I Process

Stakeholder Steering Committee

Met 5 times

Three Working Groups-- over 60 participants --

1. Buildings and Facilities2. Transportation and Land Use3. Energy and Solid Waste

Met three times each

14 meetings held between October 2001 and July 2002

Phase I Process cont’d

Working Groups discussed multiple greenhouse gas reduction initiatives, programs, and policy options.

Tellus Institute analyzed options in Scoping Papers, detailing potential carbon emissions reductions, net costs and savings, and other benefits.

Working Groups made recommendations to the Stakeholders regarding the prioritization of the options, as well as additional comments and considerations for certain options.

Stakeholders shaped Plan with the assistance of the consultants and facilitator.

Baseline Electric/Fossil Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector (Carbon Equivalent)

-

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Mill

ion

Tonn

es C

arbo

n Eq

uiva

lent

Transport Electric

Transport Fossil

Industrial Electric

Industrial Fossil

Residential Electric

Residential Fossil

Commercial Electric

Commercial Fossil

Residential Sector Energy Consumption by End-Use

Water HeatingSpace HeatingSpace CoolingSecondary HeatingRefrigerationOther Electric AppliancesOther AppliancesLightingFreezingDish WashingCookingClothes WashingClothes Drying

1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019

trilli

on b

ritis

h th

erm

al u

nit

52504846444240383634323028262422201816141210

86420

Commercial Sector GHG Emissions By Building Type (Carbon Equivalent)

WarehouseOther BuildingOffices SmallOffices LargeNon BuildingMerc & ServiceLodgingHealth CareFood ServiceFood SalesEducationAssembly

1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019

thou

sand

tonn

e

360

340

320

300

280

260

240

220

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

Industrial Sector GHG Emissions by Subsector (Carbon Equivalent)

PaperOther AgricultureNon Intensive IndustriesMetalsGlass

ConstructionBulk ChemicalsAgricultural Crops

1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019

thou

sand

tonn

e

210

200190180

170160

150140

130120

110100

9080

7060

5040

3020

100

Food

Electric Sector Energy GHG Emissions by Technology (Carbon Equivalent)

Oil Steam TurbinesNatural Gas Steam TurbinesNatural Gas Combustion TurbinesNatural Gas Combined CycleMSWImports DomesticDistillate Steam TurbinesDistillate Combustion TurbinesDistillate Combined CycleCoal

1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019

thou

sand

tonn

e

1,1501,1001,0501,000

900850800750700

650600550500450400

350300250200150

100500

950

Nitrogen Oxide Emissions by Sector

TransportResidentialIndustryIndustrial SteamElectric GenerationCommercial

1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019

thou

sand

tonn

e

3230

2826

24

2220

1816

1412

10

86

42

0

Particulate (PM10) Emissions by Sector

TransportResidentialIndustryIndustrial S teamElectric GenerationComm ercial

1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019

tonn

e

2 ,600

2,400

2,200

2,000

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

Sulfur Dioxide Emissions by Sector

TransportResidentialIndustryIndustrial SteamElectric GenerationCommercial

1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019

thou

sand

tonn

e

32302826

22201816141210

86420

24

VOC Emissions by Sector

TransportResidentialIndustryIndustrial SteamElectric GenerationCommercial

1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019

thou

sand

tonn

e

1716151413121110

9876543210

New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers

Climate Action Planfor New England

and Eastern CanadaAugust 2001

Short-term: Reduce regional GHG emissions to 1990 level by 2010.

Mid-term: Reduce regional GHG emissions by at least 10% below 1990 level by 2020; establish iterative five-year process, starting in 2005, to adjust goals if necessary.

Long-term: Reduce regional GHG emissions sufficiently to eliminate any dangerous threat to climate; current science suggests this will require reductions of 75–85% below current levels.

Baseline Emissions Scenario Compared to Governors’/Premiers’ Target

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Years

Mill

ion

Ton

nesC

arbo

n E

quiv

alen

t BaselineGovernors' Premieres' Target

Recommended Program and Policy Options

524661125Total

3111Regional/ National

492561024Sub-Total

22Priority Study

312Non-Consensus

1514415Lower

29312617Higher

In State

TotalSolid WasteEnergy Supply

Land Use

TransportationBuildings/Facilities

# N a m e S a v e d C a r b o n 1

C S C 2 C o -B e n e f i t s 3

B u i l d i n g s a n d F a c i l i t i e s 1 C o m m e r c i a l / I n d u s t r i a l F o s s i l F u e l R e t r o f i t I n i t i a t i v e 1 0 0 - 2 0 0 - 1 3 t o – 1 92 C o m p a c t R e s i d e n t i a l A p p l i a n c e s I n i t i a t i v e 8 0 - 5 5 0 - 4 3 t o – 6 13 E n e r g y E f f i c i e n c y T a r g e t i n g I n i t i a t i v e ( I n d u s t r i a l ) 4 0 - 1 8 0 - 3 2 t o – 4 64 C o m b i n e d H e a t & P o w e r ( C H P ) I n i t i a t i v e ( I n d u s t r i a l ) 3 5 - 7 0 - 5 1 t o – 7 25 E l e c t r i c E n e r g y E f f i c i e n c y R e t r o f i t i n N o n - R e s i d e n t i a l B u i l d i n g s

a n d F a c i l i t i e s 3 0 - 2 0 0 - 5 1 t o – 7 2

6 E f f i c i e n t R e s i d e n t i a l F o s s i l F u e l H e a t i n g I n i t i a t i v e 2 5 1 0 - 1 3 t o – 1 97 T a x C r e d i t s F o r E n e r g y E f f i c i e n c y 1 5 - 1 5 0 - 3 2 t o – 4 68 C o m b i n e d H e a t & P o w e r ( C H P ) I n i t i a t i v e ( N o n - I n d u s t r i a l ) 1 5 - 9 0 - 5 1 t o – 7 29 E f f i c i e n t R e s i d e n t i a l E l e c t r i c C o o l i n g I n i t i a t i v e 1 0 0 - 5 1 t o – 7 21 0 R e t r o f i t P r o g r a m F o r E l e c t r i c a l l y H e a t e d R e s i d e n c e s 9 - 7 - 5 1 t o – 7 21 1 R e t r o f i t I n i t i a t i v e F o r F o s s i l H e a t e d R e s i d e n c e s 6 - 7 - 1 3 t o – 1 91 2 E l e c t r i c E q u i p m e n t R e t r o f i t P r o g r a m ( S m a l l C o m m e r c i a l &

I n d u s t r i a l ) 5 - 1 5 0 - 3 6 t o – 5 1

1 3 P u b l i c F a c i l i t i e s E f f i c i e n c y I n i t i a t i v e 5 - 1 6 0 - 2 5 t o - 3 61 4 E f f i c i e n t R e s i d e n t i a l L i g h t i n g a n d A p p l i a n c e s P r o g r a m s 5 - 2 2 6 - 5 1 t o – 7 21 5 E f f i c i e n t N o n - R e s i d e n t i a l C o n s t r u c t i o n 5 - 2 0 0 - 3 6 t o – 5 11 6 E n e r g y S t a r H o m e C o n s t r u c t i o n P r o g r a m 1 0 - 2 7 t o - 3 81 7 U s e o f L o w e r C a r b o n F o s s i l F u e l s T B D 4 T B D T B D T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 1 8 L o c a l F u e l E c o n o m y I m p r o v e m e n t s ( F e e b a t e ) I n i t i a t i v e 1 2 5 - 3 0 0 - 2 2 t o – 3 21 9 T r a n s i t O r i e n t e d D e v e l o p m e n t A n d E n h a n c i n g T r a n s i t O p t i o n s

A n d O p e r a t i o n s I n i t i a t i v e 5 1 9 - 5 0 0 - 2 2 t o – 3 2

2 0 B i c y c l e a n d P e d e s t r i a n I n f r a s t r u c t u r e s I n i t i a t i v e 1 9 - 5 0 0 - 2 2 t o – 3 22 1 C o m m u t i n g E f f i c i e n c y P r o g r a m 1 9 - 5 0 0 - 2 2 t o – 3 22 2 C o m m u t i n g T r i p R e d u c t i o n I n i t i a t i v e 1 8 - 5 0 0 - 2 2 t o – 3 22 3 G o v e r n m e n t O w n e d A n d P r i v a t e F l e e t - V e h i c l e E f f i c i e n c y < 2 . 5 - 3 0 0 - 2 2 t o – 3 2L a n d U s e 2 4 U r b a n / S u b u r b a n F o r e s t r y P r o g r a m < 1 2 0 ~ 0 N S B 6 2 5 O p e n S p a c e P r o t e c t i o n P r o g r a m 6 0 ~ 0 N S B E n e r g y S u p p l y 2 6 R e n e w a b l e P o r t f o l i o S t a n d a r d s 1 4 0 4 6 & 2 3 0 7 - 3 0 t o - 7 5S o l i d W a s t e 2 7 R e s o u r c e M a n a g e m e n t ( R M ) C o n t r a c t i n g I n i t i a t i v e 7 0 < 0 T B D 2 8 P a y - A s - Y o u - T h r o w ( P A Y T ) I n i t i a t i v e 5 5 < 0 T B D

Higher Priority Consensus In-State Options

# N a m e S a v e d C a r b o n

C S C C o -B e n e f i t s

B u i l d i n g s a n d F a c i l i t i e s 3 0 C o m p a c t F l o o r s p a c e I n i t i a t i v e 5 - 4 0 0 - 1 7 t o – 2 43 1 S w i t c h i n g F r o m E l e c t r i c i t y T o F o s s i l F u e l H e a t i n g 1 1 7 0 - 4 0 t o – 5 03 2 S o l a r P h o t o v o l t a i c ( P V ) B u y d o w n P r o g r a m 1 1 2 0 0 - 1 3 t o – 1 93 3 A c t i v e S o l a r H o t W a t e r H e a t i n g I n i t i a t i v e 1 1 1 0 0 - 2 0 t o – 3 03 4 N o n - R e s i d e n t i a l N a t u r a l G a s A i r C o n d i t i o n i n g I n i t i a t i v e < 1 3 0 0 - 4 0 t o - 5 0T r a n s p o r t a t i o n 3 5 F l e e t F u e l G H G C o n t e n t M a n d a t e 4 0 1 0 0 - 2 2 t o – 3 2L a n d U s e 3 6 C o n v e r s i o n o f M a r g i n a l C r o p l a n d t o F o r e s t I n i t i a t i v e 4 0 2 5 N S B 3 7 C o n v e r s i o n o f M a r g i n a l C r o p l a n d t o W e t l a n d s I n i t i a t i v e < 1 . 5 2 5 N S B 3 8 L o w I n p u t A g r i c u l t u r e a n d I m p r o v e d C r o p p i n g S y s t e m s

I n i t i a t i v e 0 . 4 2 - 6 N S B

3 9 F o r e s t M a n a g e m e n t I n i t i a t i v e N R A 0 - 4 0 N E B 1 E n e r g y S u p p l y 4 0 P r o m o t e N e w R e n e w a b l e E l e c t r i c i t y S u p p l y U s i n g S y s t e m

B e n e f i t C h a r g e F u n d s 8 2 5 0 - 3 0 t o - 7 5

4 1 P r o m o t e G r e e n P o w e r P u r c h a s e s U s i n g S y s t e m B e n e f i t C h a r g e F u n d s

1 3 3 0 0 - 3 0 t o - 7 5

4 2 I n c e n t i v e P a c k a g e I n i t i a t i v e • P r o d u c t i o n t a x c r e d i t 2 4 1 7 - 3 0 t o - 7 5 • I n v e s t m e n t t a x c r e d i t 2 4 1 7 - 3 0 t o - 7 5 • N e t m e t e r i n g 0 . 2 2 9 4 - 3 0 t o - 7 5 • B a c k u p r a t e s T B D T B D T B D 4 3 D i r e c t G o v e r n m e n t I n v e s t m e n t s O r E x p e n d i t u r e s i n

R e n e w a b l e E n e r g y 0 . 5

2 0 0 - 3 0 t o - 7 5

S o l i d W a s t e 4 4 D e p o s i t B o t t l e S y s t e m ( “ B o t t l e B i l l ” ) 1 9 > 0 T B D

Lower Priority Consensus In-State Options

Rhode Island GHG Emissions Scenarios Compared to Governors’/Premiers’ Target

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

1990 2000 2010 2020

Mill

ion

Tonn

es C

arbo

n Equ

ival

enBaseline

Consensus

Consensus + Non-Consensus

Governors'/Premiers'Target

In State Consensus +Federal/Regional

Consensus + Non-Consensus +Federal/Regional

Contribution of Options to GHG Savings vs. Baseline Scenario: Consensus/Non-Consensus

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020Years

Mill

ion

Tonn

esC

arbo

n Eq

uiva

lent

Baseline

+Buildings & Facilities

+Transport & Land-Use

+Energy Supply and Solid Waste =Consensus & Non-Consensus

Contribution of Options to GHG Savings vs. Baseline in 2020 in Scenario: Consensus & Non-Consensus

State Incentives for Fuel Economy9%

VMT-based Insurance8%

Renewable Portfolio Standard7%

Industrial Energy Efficiency7%

Fossil Energy Efficiency6%

Urban & Suburban Forestry5%

Upgrade Building Codes5%

Pay as You Throw4%

Non Industrial CHP3%

Elec Eff in Non-ResFacilities

3%

Convert Cropland to Forestry

3%

Compact Appliances3%

Transit Oriented Development5%

Resource Management Contracting5%

Increase Gas Tax3%

Open Space Protection4%

Industrial CHP4%

All Others5%

Fleet Fuel GHG Content3%

Bottle Bill1%Efficient Heating

2%

Fuel Switch Oil to Gas1%Building Shell Retrofits

1%

Tax Credits for Energy Efficiency1%

“All Other” MeasuresDesign 2000Efficient Residential CoolingTax Credits for Energy EfficiencyRetrofit ProgramEfficient Lighting & AppliancesCompact Floor SpaceFuel Switching: Electric to FossilPublic Facilities InitiativeLocal Govt. Vehicle Fuel EfficiencyConvert Croplands to WetlandsSolar Water HeatingSolar Water HeatingLow Input AgricEnergy Star HomesSolar PV Cells ProgramGas Air Conditioning

Energy Supply &

Solid Waste18%

Transport & Land-

Use40%

Buildings and

Facilities42%

Scenario Net Economic Benefits and GHG Savings vs. Baseline

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Con

sens

us

Con

sens

us &

Non

- C

onse

nsus

Con

sens

us +

Non

- C

onse

nsus

+

Reg

iona

l/Nat

iona

l

Mill

ion

Tonn

es C

Equ

ival

ent

-

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

Mill

ion

Dis

coun

ted

1999

$

Cumulative GHG SavingsCumulative Net Economic Benefit

Costs and Benefits of Scenarios vs. Baseline

-600 -400 -200

0 200 400 600 800

1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

Consensus Consensus + Non Consensus

Consensus, Non- Consensus +

Regional/National

Mill

ion

Cum

ulat

ive

Dis

coun

ted

199$

Avoided Environmental Externalities

Avoided Transport Fuel Costs

Avoided Buildings & Facilities Fuel Costs

Avoided Electric Generation Fuel Costs

Energy Supply & Solid Waste Capital & O&M Costs

Buildings & Facilities Capital & O&M Costs

Transport & Land-Use Capital & O&M Costs

Benefits

Costs

Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen (Nox)

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Years

Thousand Tonnes

Baseline

Consensus

Consensus + NonConsensus

Consensus, Non-Consensus + Regional/National

Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

33

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Years

Thou

sand

Ton

nes

Baseline

Consensus

Consensus + NonConsensus

Consensus, Non-Consensus + Regional/Nat

PM10 Emissions from Scenarios

1.7

1.9

2.1

2.3

2.5

2.7

2.9

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Years

Thou

sand

Ton

nes

Baseline

Consensus

Consensus + NonConsensus

Consensus, Non-Consensus + Regional/National

SO2 Emissions from Scenarios

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Years

Thou

sand

Ton

nes

Baseline

Consensus

Consensus + NonConsensus

Consensus, Non-Consensus + Regional/National

Rhode Island DEM, Office of Strategic Planning & Policy:

http://www.state.ri.us/dem/programs/bpoladm/stratpp/index.htm

RI GHG Project Process Documentationat Website of facilitator and project manager:

http://righg.raabassociates.org/

Tellus Institute website:http://www.tellus.org/

LEAP model:http://www.tellus.org/seib/leap

THANK YOU