Montgomery County Greenhouse Gas Reduction Task Force

Transcription

1 Montgomery County Greenhouse Gas Reduction Task Force Appendix B Measuring Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania Reduction Analysis Technical Report Introduction: In July of 2006, Sarah Knuth, then a graduate student at Penn State University, completed a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission inventory and draft action plan for Montgomery County for the period of time between 1990 and This greenhouse gas emission inventory was the first step toward developing a climate change action plan for the county, because it established baseline GHG emission levels and identified emission sources and sinks. The baseline levels not only provide known data through 2004, but can also be used to project what anticipated emissions levels will be in the future. Typically the projected baseline assumes that the county will generally continue to grow at similar rates and that the county will not take any action to reduce its GHG levels, as a result this baseline is often referred to as the business as usual trend line. The baseline can then be applied to explore trends, chose and implement reduction strategies, and track progress toward your emission reduction goals. Because the business as usual trend shows that the county s GHG emissions will be increasing in the future, the next step for the county was to identify a set of recommendations to try to reduce future levels of greenhouse gases below predicted baseline levels. Not only did the county need to identify recommendations, but it was critical to quantify the potential GHG reductions that could result from implementing these various recommendations. The Montgomery County Commissioners formed the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Task Force in January 2007 to create a plan for the county. Following months of research, deliberation and public input, a Climate Change Action Plan was prepared by the Task Force, which identifies 105 reduction actions. To understand the potential impact of implementing these reduction actions, analysis was done to estimate the amount of GHG emissions that would result from the 40 actions anticipated not only to have the greatest impact but that also were generally the simplest to quantify. These estimated GHG emission reductions were then applied to the Montgomery County GHG emission baseline to calculate what the projected emission level would be after reduction actions were implemented in future years. Once a reasonable estimate of Montgomery County s reduced emission levels was known, the Task Force was able to evaluate and choose a likely achievable GHG reduction target. The Task Force embraced the idea of a range of targets and chose reduction targets in 2012, 2017 and 2025 to 1 Knuth, Sarah (2006b). Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania Report compiled for the Montgomery County Planning Commission and Knuth, Sarah (2006c). A Global Warming Plan of Action for Montgomery County, Pennsylvania: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Strategies. Report compiled for the Montgomery County Planning Commission. Reduction Analysis Technical Report 1 December 2007

2 address short and long range planning concerns. Additionally, the targets set for each of these three years establish trends that would enable the county to achieve an 80% reduction of 1990 greenhouse gas emission levels by 2050, a reduction target that has been embraced by the scientific community necessary to significantly slow global warming effects. 2 Baseline: A necessary first step in any greenhouse gas planning process is to complete a greenhouse gas inventory, so that a baseline (the measurement used as the basis for comparison) can be established. The Montgomery County Greenhouse Gas Inventory established that the county s GHG emissions in 1990 were 9.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MMCDE), which increased by 36% to 13.2 MMCDE by When setting targets and projected emissions reductions into the future, any annual GHG emissions rate can be chosen as the baseline year for comparison purposes. The baseline may be the most recent year for which there is data, typical when projecting emissions levels into the future, or may be the first year for which there is data (i.e. the oldest year), which is more typical when setting reduction targets. The inventory also revealed that the county s GHG emissions rose consistently in every year since 1990 across nearly all identified GHG emissions sources. 4 However, of the seven emission sources and sinks included in the county inventory (agriculture, forest, wastewater and sludge, municipal solid waste, on-site fuel, transportation and electricity), three GHG emissions sources were identified as predominant: electricity consumption, on-site fuel use and transportation. 5 Following the completion of the county GHG emissions inventory, the Montgomery County Commissioners formed a Task Force in January 2007 to create a plan for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the county. Following months of research, deliberation and public input, a Climate Change Action Plan was prepared by the Task Force, which identifies 105 reduction actions. To understand the potential impact of implementing these reduction actions, analysis was done to estimate the amount of GHG emissions that would come from the 40 actions anticipated not only to have the greatest impact but that also lent themselves as the simplest to quantify. Projections: From the established baseline, it is necessary to calculate three projected emissions trends. The first is the business as usual trend line, which is meant to project what emissions would be in a given year if no actions were taken to curb greenhouse gas emissions. The second projected emissions trend, referred to throughout this plan as the greenprint trend line, is meant to project what emissions would be in a given year if the greenhouse gas emissions reduction actions laid out in this plan were implemented. The final is the projected GHG emissions reduction trend line, which was calculated by estimating action by action the potential for GHG emissions reductions. Each of these three trends will be explained in detail to follow. Business As Usual Trend In order to project the business as usual GHG emissions trend, the average annual percent change in GHG emissions between 1990 and 2004 of 2.27% was applied as the business as 2 Union of Concerned Scientists, How to Avoid Dangerous Climate Change: A Target for U.S. Emissions Reductions, Knuth, Sarah (2006b). Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania Report compiled for the Montgomery County Planning Commission. 4 Knuth, Sarah (2006b). 5 Knuth, Sarah (2006b). Reduction Analysis Technical Report 2 December 2007

3 usual annual growth rate between 2004 and (See Figure 4 for summary of data) In other words, the business as usual trend line is the rate at which emissions would increase or decrease (depending on whether the community is gaining or losing population) in the future if no other actions were taken. It is acknowledged that factors beyond the scope of this analysis may influence changes in green house gas emissions even if the county takes no action on the recommendations made by the Task Force. Projected Emissions (Business As Usual) = Baseline Year Emissions *((1+ Projected Annual Rate of Change) ^ Number of Years from Baseline) Greenprint Trend Projecting the greenprint trend, or the GHG emissions after GHG reduction actions are implemented, is not quite as simple as calculating the business as usual projection, because calculating the greenprint greenhouse gas emissions trend requires that the Task Force know what reduction target Montgomery County should try to achieve and that calculations be completed to determine the reductions possible from implementing each individual GHG reduction action. In setting the GHG emissions reduction targets for Montgomery County, the Task Force wanted to be sure to set an attainable goal, while at the same time achieving enough GHG reduction to meet the minimums established in the scientific community necessary to curb the effects of climate change. At the outset, the Task Force sought to set three short terms targets in 2012, 2017 and 2025 that, if possible, could put the county on track to achieve an eighty percent reduction below 1990 emissions levels by However, before the Task Force was willing to finalize these short and long term targets, it was necessary to estimate the GHG emissions reduction potential of the actions in the plan to insure that the proposed short and long term targets were attainable. Potential GHG emissions reductions are calculated by taking estimated levels of reductions in GHG emissions producing actions (or increases in GHG reducing actions) and multiplying these actions by known GHG emissions coefficients. Generally activity data is derived from the extent of participation and level of participation in any measure. GHG Emissions Reductions = Activity Data * GHG Emissions Coefficients The difference between calculating a GHG inventory and calculating GHG emissions reductions lies in the base statistical population used to determine the activity data. When calculating reductions, the base statistical population used to determine the activity data is an estimation of those it would be reasonable to assume could refrain from a GHG emissions producing activity (or engaging in a GHG emissions reducing activity), whereas in an inventory the base statistical population engaging in GHG emissions producing (or reducing) activity is known. Projected Emissions (Greenprint) = (Baseline Year Emissions* Projected Percent Change * Number of Years From Baseline) (Projected GHG Emissions Reduction * Number of Years From Baseline) For comparison purposes, GHG emissions are typically expressed in a common metric. The metric used, throughout this report, will be carbon dioxide equivalent (CDE) expressed in metric tons, or as abbreviated MTCDE. The use of a common metric helps to standardize all of the various greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and fluorocarbons, Reduction Analysis Technical Report 3 December 2007

4 since some gases are more potent (i.e. have a higher global warming potential (GWP)) than others. 6 Figure 1 lists the anthropogenic, or those resulting from human action, greenhouse gases and their respective global warming potentials. For example one ton of Methane gas has 21 times more effective in trapping heat in the atmosphere than one ton of carbon dioxide. Yet, even after taking the relative strengths of the different gases into account, carbon dioxide is the greenhouse gas emission from human activity that has the greatest impact on global warming. Figure 1: Anthropogenic Greenhouse Gases and their Global Warming Potentials 7 Anthropogenic Greenhouse Gases Global Warming Potentials Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) 1 Methane (CH 4 ) 21 Nitrous oxide (N 2 0) 410 Perfluorocarbons (CF 4, C 2 F 6 ) 6,500 / 9,200 Hydrofluorocarbons (HFC-24, etc) 11,700, etc. Sulfur Hexfluoride (SF 6 ) 24,900 Emissions of gases other than carbon dioxide are translated into carbon dioxide equivalents, the international standard metric and the one used in this report, by applying their respective global warming potentials. 8 MTCDE = Metric Tons of a Gas * Global Warming Potential of the Gas Only anthropogenic GHGs, as listed in Figure 1, were considered in the county s inventory and in this reduction analysis. 9 Local level data, however, restricted final calculations to the three GHGs with the largest volumes: carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ) and nitrous oxide (N 2 0). 10 Due to the diversity and specificity of the recommendations proposed by the GHG Task Force, no one reduction analysis methodology could be applied. However, where possible, the reduction analysis drew on the nationally-derived coefficients and standards of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Energy Information Administration (EIA). For all other cases, appropriate coefficients were researched specific to the recommended actions and applied accordingly. Because the GHG reduction methodology is the compilation of many different sources and assumptions, the remainder of this report will serve as a technical guide to the methods used to calculate the reduction potential of each 6 EPA (2005). Emission Facts: Metrics for Expressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Carbon Equivalents and Carbon Dioxide Equivalents. EPA420-F EPA Emissions Inventory Improvement Program (1999). Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions. EIIP Documentation Series, Volume VIII. Washington, DC: Greenhouse Gas Committee, Emissions Inventory Improvement Program and US Environmental Protection Agency. 8 Note: The use of the CDE metric is a switch from the Montgomery County GHG Emission Inventory, which used carbon equivalents as a metric. Because the international standard is moving toward carbon dioxide equivalents and because inventories of adjacent cities and counties have used carbon dioxide equivalents, we felt it was important to use a metric that would permit easy comparison. 9 Knuth, Sarah (2006a). Measuring Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Montgomery County : Technical Report. Report compiled for Montgomery County Planning Commission. 10 Knuth, Sarah (2006a). Reduction Analysis Technical Report 4 December 2007

5 action. All sources are referenced and details are provided regarding what assumptions were built into the various coefficients applied in the reduction calculations. The seven sectors into which Knuth divided Montgomery County s GHG sources and sinks in her inventory were further consolidated in this reduction analysis into just three categories: 1) energy, 2) transportation and land use, and 3) agriculture, forestry and waste. Each of the Task Force s 105 reduction actions fits into one of these three categories. As a result, the reduction analysis was calculated action-by-action in each of the three sectors on a total of 40 actions, identified by the Task Force as quantifiable and most likely to have a significant impact on reducing GHG emissions in Montgomery County. Reduction Analysis by Sector Actions: The Basics The potential GHG emissions reductions for almost all of the 40 actions analyzed have both a County community and a County government component. The distinction between County community is necessary because the baseline emissions are different when considered on a countywide versus county government basis. Additionally, Montgomery County government can directly implement policies relating to its own facilities, fleet and operations whereas the county government can only serve as an educator and advisor to the countywide population. As a result, each of the forty following actions will have both an explanation of the County community and County government GHG emissions reduction calculation. Additionally, because it was not initially known what percent of the base statistical population would need to take each action, calculations were run assuming that ten, five and one percent of the base statistical population would engage in an emissions reduction activity using the follow equation. Potential GHG Emissions Reduction from an Action = GHG Emissions Reduction per Unit * Percent of Base Statistical Population Once enough information was uncovered regarding the current population of people taking actions and current trends in technology and regulation, assumptions were made to set reasonable percentage goals for each action. (See Potential GHG Emissions Reduction for more detailed information) For example, once it was determined that 3% of the current employee population in Montgomery County walks or bikes to work, it was assumed that this base population could increase by 3% in each of the three goal periods. This 3% increase in the number of people walking to work would yield a 9% cumulative increase by 2025, the final goal year, and reduce GHG emissions by just under 525 MTCDE during this time. The cumulative reductions for all 40 actions was added together for each goal year, 2012, 2017 and 2025, and compared to the reductions necessary to achieve the Greenprint goals. Furthermore, where it was appropriate, projected numbers from DVRPC s most recent population and employment forecast were used to change the population baseline in the Montgomery County community calculations accordingly over time to reflect trends. Projected employment numbers for Montgomery County government do not exist and therefore could not be applied. Reduction Analysis Technical Report 5 December 2007

6 Energy 1. Purchase renewable energy in place of conventional energy, including electrical and fossil fuel generated. Electrical Energy: In order to calculate the potential GHG emissions reduction that could result from a percentage of the Montgomery County community electric users switching to renewable energy, whether in the form of wind, hydropower, geothermal, photovoltaic or solar thermal energy, the total annual emissions from all of the residential, commercial and industrial kilowatt hours (kwh) consumed in 2004 in Montgomery County was pulled from the county GHG inventory, which relied on the EPA s Emissions Inventory Improvement Program emissions coefficient to express CO 2 emissions in MTCDE. 11 This number was then divided by the projected 2004 population as established by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) to get MTCDE per capita. 12 The MTCDE per capita number was applied to the forecasted populations from DVRPC for each of the target years to reflect the increases in GHG emissions reductions that could result from a larger population base engaging in reduction actions. Annual CO 2 Emissions Reduction = [(Annual Electricity Use * CO 2 Emitted)/Unit Electricity Generated] * Percent Reduction Because PECO provided the information that approximately one half of one percent of electrical energy in the county is already coming from renewable sources, 0.5% of the total kwh was subtracted from the County community usage number to get the base population who could be converted to renewable energy. In this case, a switch from conventional electric energy consumption to renewable energy consumption means a one hundred percent reduction in GHG emissions per converted kilowatt hour. So by simply applying a ten, five and one percent reduction in the emissions resulting from electric energy consumption, the GHG emissions reduction potential for conversion to renewable energy is determined. The Montgomery County government GHG emissions reduction potential from the purchase of renewable over electric energy was calculated in much the same way as the County community number. However, the County government annual kilowatt hour usage statistic was determined by contacting each department head and requesting their most recent annual kwh usage information for their facilities. At the time this calculation was conducted the County government currently was not purchasing any renewable energy. 13 The Emissions Inventory Improvement Program methodology was applied to convert the total annual kwh usage number for the County government s electricity consumption to MTCDE 11 Knuth, Sarah (2006b). 12 Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. most recent Population and Employment Forecasts for Montgomery County. July st recent.pdf,assetguid,e094d769-cfc1-436f-85b0897b5001e4ec.pdf 13 Although as of September 2007, Montgomery County government facilities were completed powered by wind, a renewable energy source, the county government s contract to be 100% wind will expire after a two year time period if not renewed. As a result, this calculation was not recalculated to reflect a 100% renewable energy source for electricity, as this may not be sustainable for the long term. Reduction Analysis Technical Report 6 December 2007

7 by multiplying the kwh usage number by the carbon content coefficient, converting from tons of carbon to tons of carbon dioxide and finally converting tons to metric tons. 14 Fossil Fuel or On-Site Energy: In order to calculate the potential GHG emissions reduction that could result from a percentage of the Montgomery County community fossil fuel users (including natural gas, petroleum fuels and coal) for on-site energy switching to renewable energy, first the total annual emissions from all of the residential, commercial and industrial British Thermal Units (BTUs) consumed in 2004 in Montgomery County was obtained from the county GHG inventory, which relied on the EIIP emissions coefficient to express emissions in MTCDE. 15 The emissions resulting from on-site fuel consumption was calculated by multiplying the energy source s carbon content coefficient and its proportional oxidization to CO 2 using the EIIP coefficients. 16 Annual CO 2 Emissions Reduction = Annual On-Site Fuel Use * C Content * Oxidation Fraction * Percent Reduction This number then had to be converted from pounds to tons from tons to metric tons and then from metric tons of carbon equivalent (MTCE) to MTCDE to get the total MTCDE emitted from on-site fossil fuel use in Montgomery County. The base population was again adjusted using the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission s most recent population and employment forecast for each of the target years to reflect the increases in GHG emissions reductions that could result from a larger base population engaging in reduction actions. 17 Once again, a switch from fossil fuel on-site energy consumption to renewable energy consumption means a one hundred percent reduction in GHG emissions per converted British Thermal Unit. So by simply applying a ten, five and one percent reduction in the emissions resulting from fossil fuel on-site energy consumption, the GHG emissions reduction potential for conversion to renewable energy was determined. The Montgomery County government GHG emissions reduction potential resulting from the purchase of renewable energy in place of on-site fossil fuels was calculated in much the same way as the County community number. However, the County government annual BTU usage statistic was determined by contacting each department head and requesting their most recent annual BTU usage information for their facilities. At the time this calculation was conducted, the County government currently was not purchasing any renewable energy. The Emissions Inventory Improvement Program methodology was applied to convert the total annual BTU usage number for the County government s on-site fossil fuel consumption to MTCDE by multiplied the energy source s carbon content coefficient and its proportional oxidization to CO 2 using the EIIP coefficients. 18 Because a switch from fossil fuel on-site energy consumption to renewable energy consumption means a one hundred percent reduction in GHG emissions per converted British Thermal Unit, applying a ten, five and one percent reduction in the emissions resulting from fossil fuel on-site energy 14 EPA Emissions Inventory Improvement Program (1999). 15 Knuth, Sarah (2006b). 16 EPA Emissions Inventory Improvement Program (1999). 17 Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. most recent Population and Employment Forecasts for Montgomery County. July st recent.pdf,assetguid,e094d769-cfc1-436f-85b0897b5001e4ec.pdf 18 EPA Emissions Inventory Improvement Program (1999). Reduction Analysis Technical Report 7 December 2007

8 consumption determines the GHG emissions reduction potential for conversion from on-site fossil fuel usage to renewable energy. 2. Reduce energy use in both new construction buildings and in existing buildings through increased energy efficiency and conservation New Construction: Greenprint recommends that new construction buildings reduce energy consumption by roughly 35% when compared to conventionally built new construction. A 35% percent energy reduction is the same energy reduction rate typical in a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified new construction building. 19 Although LEED certification was not required for new buildings in Greenprint, an average 38% energy reduction appeared achievable through various building measures similar to the energy reductions that comprise LEED standards. In order to calculate the greenhouse gas reductions that would result from a 38% decrease in the energy consumption of new construction buildings, the kwh/year and BTU/year consumed by all existing units in the residential, commercial and industrial sectors was taken from the Montgomery County GHG inventory. The next step was to calculate the number of existing residential, commercial and industrial units in the county through an analysis of the Montgomery County Board of Assessments Data land use code data. 20 Once the number of existing units per sector was known, the average kwh/year and BTU/year was calculated per unit by sector, simply by dividing the kwh/year and BTU/year numbers by the number of existing units in each sector. The estimated kwh/year/unit and BTU/year/unit statistics were then multiplied by the average number of new units in each sector, which was calculated by taking the average of the new residential, commercial and industrial units between 2004 and 2006 as reported in the Montgomery County Residential and Nonresidential Construction Reports, determine the GHG emissions produced by all new constructed units in the county in a year. 21 Additionally, to account for the fact that there are new units added in each year during a goal period the emissions from new units in a year was multiplied by the number of years between goal periods (for instance is 5 years). It was assumed that there was no renewable energy being purchased within the Montgomery County. The amount of greenhouse gas reductions resulting from ten, five and one percent of new construction buildings decreasing their energy consumption by 38% was calculated by multiplying the MTCDE created by all of the BTU/year and kwh/year consumed in new construction units by 38% and then multiplied again by the percentage of the units implementing the action (10%, 5% or 1%), since a reduction in a BTU or kwh is a one hundred percent reduction in GHG emissions per reduced unit. Montgomery County government is not currently planning any major construction projects, but it was assumed that one new building might be built between now and Because 19 Personal communication with Jason Hartke, United States Green Building Council. 20 Montgomery County Board of Assessments. Note: The industrial sector data included not only industrial land use codes but also those identified as utility. The commercial sector includes all other nonresidential codes, such as municipal, institution, etc. 21 Montgomery County Planning Commission. Montgomery County Nonresidential Construction Report (2004, 2005 and 2006) and Montgomery County Residential Construction Report. (2004, 2005 and 2006) Reduction Analysis Technical Report 8 December 2007

9 the County government s buildings are mainly used as office space, it was assumed that this new building would be commercial in its use. The average kwh/year/unit and average BTU/year/unit were applied to one new commercial building to determine how many MTCDE could be saved if the new County government building were built to decrease its energy consumption by roughly 35% over a conventional commercial building. Existing Buildings: Greenprint recommends that existing buildings reduce energy consumption by 30% when compared to the average existing building. A 30% percent energy reduction is the same energy reduction rate typical in a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified existing building. 22 Although the specific recommendation that existing buildings earn the LEED certification was excluded from Greenprint because of the cost associated with the certification, the Greenprint recommendation of a 30% energy reduction over conventionally operating existing buildings should produce the same results as if the homes were LEED certified. In order to calculate the greenhouse gas reductions that would result from a 30% decrease in the energy consumption of existing buildings, the kwh/year and BTU/year consumed by all existing units in the residential, commercial and industrial sectors was obtained from the Montgomery County GHG inventory. Additionally, to account for the fact that there are units built in the prior year that add to the number of existing units, the emissions from all of the previously new construction units that were not yet converted (90%) were added into the existing building emissions total, once the yearly existing building emissions total was multiplied by the appropriate number of years between goal periods (for instance is 5 years) to reflect total emissions in a goal period. It was assumed that there was no renewable energy being purchased within the Montgomery County. The amount of greenhouse gas reductions resulting from ten, five and one percent of existing buildings decreasing their energy consumption by 30% was calculated by multiplying the MTCDE created by all of the BTU/year and kwh/year consumed in existing buildings by 30% and then again by the percentage of the units implementing the action (10%, 5% or 1%), since a reduction in a BTU or kwh is a one hundred percent reduction in GHG emissions per reduced unit. The potential greenhouse gas savings that could result from Montgomery County government existing buildings reducing their energy consumption by 30% was calculated by taking the number of existing Montgomery County government buildings (141) and multiplying by the average per unit kwh/year and BTU/year to get total energy consumption per year in County government existing buildings. The amount of greenhouse gas reductions resulting from ten, five and one percent of government existing buildings decreasing their energy consumption by 30% was calculated by multiplying the MTCDE created by all of the BTU/year and kwh/year consumed in government existing buildings by 30% and then again by the percentage of the units implementing the action (10%, 5% or 1%), since a reduction in a BTU or kwh is a one hundred percent reduction in GHG emissions per reduced unit. Transportation and Land Use 22 Personal communication with Jason Hartke, United States Green Building Council. Reduction Analysis Technical Report 9 December 2007

10 1. Reduce both the number of vehicles on the road as well as the vehicle miles traveled. Telecommuting/Flex Time: First it was determined what percent of people travel to work via the various modes of transportation and applied these percentages to the number of employees, as estimated by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission s most recent population and employment forecast, in Montgomery County in the various goal years. Only those people who drive to work alone, carpool or take mass transit are included in this calculation, as these are the only modes emitting greenhouse gases. Once it was established how many people traveled by these modes to work, a reduction of ten, five and one percent of these commuters was applied, assuming that the ten, five or one percent of the population telecommuting or using flex time to stay home from work would do so one day a week and that they would each reduce greenhouse gases by the amount emitted from an average commute. An average commute was estimated to be 12 miles and 53 minutes in total for travel both to and from work. 23 Additionally, because travel to work is done during rush hours, a congestion factor of 1.38 was applied to the distance traveled to account for the greenhouse gas emissions that occur when idling in traffic. 24 Using the EPA statistic that a typical passenger car is driven 12,000 miles in a year and emits 1.5 MTCE while doing so, it was determined that typically MTCE are emitted per mile traveled. 25 This emission coefficient was then applied to the total miles traveled per commuter and then multiplied by the reduction percentages to calculate the estimated greenhouse reductions that could come from telecommuting or flex time, before finally being converted to MTCDE. CO 2 Emissions Reduction = Forecasted Employment Population * Mode Percentages * Emissions from Average Commute *Days of Week * Congestion Coefficient * Percent Reduction While the Montgomery County government greenhouse gas reduction potential applied the same formula to determine GHG savings possible from a telecommuting program, the base population used the current employee total and was not forecasted into the future. Mass Transit: In order to calculate the potential GHG reduction that could come from more people traveling to work via mass transit, the DVRPC s most recent employment forecast estimates were again applied to the 2000 Census Journey to Work mode choice percentages to determine the number of people who drove alone to work and carpooled. Beyond the exclusion of the people already taking mass transit, the remainder of the mass transit calculations were the same as the telecommuting calculations for the Montgomery County community. 23 Clark, William and et al. Commuting Distance Sensitivity by Race and Socio-Economic Status. University of California, Los Angeles and University of New York, Albany. May and 2000 Census Journey to Work data TTI (2007) Urban Mobility Report. Texas Transportation Institute. Texas A&M University EPA (2005). Emission Facts: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Typical Passenger Vehicle. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA420-F Reduction Analysis Technical Report 10 December 2007

11 The Montgomery County government reduction was calculated in a slightly different way because of the information collected in a Montgomery County Planning Commission Transit Survey, completed in November This survey revealed that of the sixty five percent of Montgomery County government employees, whose addresses could be matched to a parcel, 709 employees live within three quarters of a mile of a bus stop or 3 miles from a train station. This means that on average approximately thirty nine percent of Montgomery County government employees could take mass transit to work. In other words, among the 3,100 full time county workers, roughly 1,210 people could take mass transit. Using the EPA statistic that a typical passenger car is driven 12,000 miles in a year and emits 1.5 MTCE while doing so, it was determined that typically MTCE are emitted per mile traveled. 26 This emission coefficient was then applied to the total miles traveled per commuter and then multiplied by the reduction percentages to calculate the estimated greenhouse reductions that could come from telecommuting, before finally being converted to MTCDE. Walking: In order to determine the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that could be reduced if Montgomery County community members began to walk to work instead of using a mode of transportation that emits GHGs, the 2000 Census Journey to Work modes of transportation were applied to the DVRPC s most recent employee forecast for the county to determine the number of people currently walking or biking to work (3%). Because walking and biking is reported in the Census Journey to Work information as one mode, an assumption was made that 75% of people who bike or walk to work are in fact walking. It was assumed that people would not walk a distance greater than a half of a mile for their daily commute, meaning their walk to and from work is no greater than a half of a mile. Additionally, it was assumed that people would only walk to work one day a week. Using the EPA statistic that a typical passenger car is driven 12,000 miles in a year and emits 1.5 MTCE while doing so, it was determined that typically MTCE are emitted per mile traveled. 27 This emission coefficient was then applied to the total miles traveled per commuter and then multiplied by the reduction percentages to calculate the estimated greenhouse reductions that could come from increasing the population of people employed in Montgomery County to walk to work one day a week, before finally converting to MTCDE. The Montgomery County government reduction possible from an increase in the population of people living within a quarter of a mile from their office walking to work was calculated in the same way as the County community reductions were calculated. However, the number of people living within a quarter mile of their office was pulled from the Montgomery County Planning Commission 2006 Mass Transit Survey. Biking: 26 EPA (2005). Emission Facts: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Typical Passenger Vehicle. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA420-F EPA (2005). Emission Facts: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Typical Passenger Vehicle. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA420-F Reduction Analysis Technical Report 11 December 2007

12 The reductions possible from increasing the number of people who bike to work was calculated in the same way as the reductions from walking were calculated in the community. The only difference is that instead of the base statistical population being 75% of 2000 Census reported 3% who currently bike/walk to work, the base population for biking was the remaining 25% of the base statistical population, calculated by applied 3% to the DVRPC s most recent employment forecast for that target year. By multiplying by 3.67, the reductions for biking were converted from MTCE to MTCDE. The only difference for the County government biking calculations was the base population, which because we had not surveyed Montgomery County government employees to determine if they lived within 2.5 miles of their office, we had to estimate. It was estimated that double the amount of people who lived with a quarter of mile of their office lived with 2.5 miles. Working with this base population, calculations were the same. Carpooling: Carpooling greenhouse gas emissions reductions for the County community again were calculated with only a few minor differences from the way in which the other transportation calculations have been completed so far. The first difference is that the base population, while again applied 2000 Census Journey to Work mode choice percentages to DVRPC s most recent employee forecast data, includes only the population of people who drove alone to work, as this is the only population of people that would result in a GHG reduction if they were to carpool. The only other difference in this calculation is that the congestion coefficient was not applied here, because the carpooling cars will still be on the road during rush hour, experiencing heavier volumes of traffic. With significant use of alternative transportation, some reduction in congestion is possible, though it is not assumed in this analysis. The county government reductions from carpooling were calculated by applying the number of Montgomery County government employees and applying the percentage of people driving alone to work (80.5%) from the 2000 census. An average commute was estimated to be 12 miles and 53 minutes in total for travel both to and from work. 28 In this calculation the congestion coefficient was not applied, because carpooling vehicles will still be on the road during rush hour experiencing heavier volumes of traffic. Using the EPA statistic that a typical passenger car is driven 12,000 miles in a year and emits 1.5 MTCE while doing so, it was determined that typically MTCE are emitted per mile traveled. 29 This emission coefficient was then applied to the total miles traveled per carpooler and then multiplied by the reduction percentages to calculate the estimated greenhouse reductions that could come from carpooling, before finally being converted to MTCDE. Mixed Use and Transit-Oriented Developments: 28 Clark, William and et al. Commuting Distance Sensitivity by Race and Socio-Economic Status. University of California, Los Angeles and University of New York, Albany. May and 2000 Census Journey to Work data EPA (2005). Emission Facts: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Typical Passenger Vehicle. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. EPA420-F Reduction Analysis Technical Report 12 December 2007

13 Although the impacts of land use on greenhouse gas emissions are somewhat difficult to quantify, vehicle miles traveled were used as a proxy to gain a sense of how much greenhouse gas emissions could be reduced if mixed use or transit-oriented developments were built instead of conventional auto-oriented developments. To start, the average annual number of approved developments with 10 or more units in Montgomery County between 2000 and 2006 from the Montgomery County Planning Commission s database was calculated. 30 During this time period, 41 developments met the minimum units criteria and averaged 63 units per development. The average number of units, 63, was then multiplied by the assumed average number of cars per household of 2 (estimated based on the statistic that the average household size in Montgomery County is 2.54 people). The average number of cars associated with new units in the county on an annual basis was then multiplied by the EPA statistic that the average passenger vehicle travels 12,000 miles in a year to determine how many vehicle miles traveled are related to new development. Transit-oriented and mixed use developments, according to a factsheet from the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership Action Network, typically reduce vehicles miles traveled by twenty to forty percent. For this calculation, a 30% reduction was applied to the vehicle miles traveled related to 10%, 5% and 1% of the new developments during each goal period. The greenhouse gas emissions decreased by the lowered vehicle miles traveled, calculated again using the EPA statistic that 12,000 miles equates to 1.5 MTCE, was then adjusted for the impact of congestion and finally converted to MTCDE. The County government does not build housing developments and thus this calculation does not apply. 2. Improve the efficiency and cleanliness of all vehicle emissions through hybrid or biofuel technologies. Conversion of Vehicle to Hybrid Car at time of Vehicle Replacement: In order to estimate the greenhouse gas emissions reduction potential from converting a certain percentage of vehicles to hybrids at the time of replacement, the number of gasoline powered vehicles in Montgomery County needed to be established. The number of gasoline and diesel powered vehicles by vehicle type in 2007 was applied as reported in the Energy Information Administration s (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook. 31 The next step was to determine how many vehicle replacement transactions typically occur annually. While the EIA provides forecasts of the number of new vehicle purchases through 2030, which is an average annual increase of about 1%, the information reported by CNW Marketing Research s Automotive News that the number of used vehicle purchases in a year is 2.6 times the number of new vehicle purchases was necessary to determine the total number of vehicle transactions in a year. 30 Residential developments with less than 10 units were excluded from consideration due to the limitations of small developments supporting mixed or transit-oriented design. 31 EIA (2008) Annual Energy Outlook Transportation (Early Release). Energy Information Admistration. U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC. DOE/EIA-0383(2008). Reduction Analysis Technical Report 13 December 2007

14 Once it had been established how many gasoline powered vehicle transactions occur in a year (which was then multiplied by the appropriate number of years to get a goal period transaction total), it was necessary to calculate and apply the hybrid vehicle greenhouse gas reduction to those vehicles that would be converted. To determine the difference in GHG emissions from a conventional vehicle to a hybrid gasoline powered vehicle the average annual emissions from nine hybrid vehicles available as of 2006 was determined to be 0.81 MTCE, as reported by the U.S. Department of Energy s Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center, compared to the emissions from a conventional vehicle of 1.5 MTCE. The GHG emissions reduction that would result from 10%, 5% and 1% of the gasoline powered vehicle transactions that take place in a goal year converting at the time of the transaction to a hybrid was then determined by applying this difference in emissions, before converting MTCE to MTCDE by multiplying by The GHG emissions reductions that could come from the County government fleet vehicles being converted at the time of replacement to hybrid vehicles was calculated by taking the number of new vehicles purchased by the County government in a typical year, which is about six vehicles, from a personal communication with Rich Flood, who is in charge of the county motor pool. If six vehicles were purchased each year between 2008 and 2025, the end year of the reduction measurements, a total of 102 new vehicles could be converted to hybrid. As was previously established, a hybrid vehicle emits only 0.81 MTCE per year while a conventional vehicle emits 1.5 MTCE per year. The reductions were calculated from 10%, 5% and 1% of the new vehicles purchases by the County government being converted to hybrid vehicles and the reductions were then converted from MTCE to MTCDE. Biofuels: The Energy Policy Act of 1992 defines the following seven fuel sources as alternative fuels that have or are now commercially available for use in vehicles: biodiesel, electricity, ethanol, hydrogen, methanol, natural gas and propane. Using the Alternative Fuel Station Locator from the Department of Energy s Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center, there are currently only biodiesel and ethanol available for public purchase for vehicles within and adjacent to Montgomery County. Therefore, these are the only two alternative fuels for which an estimated GHG reduction potential was calculated. Fuel blends, such as E10 (10% ethanol/90% gasoline), B5 (5% biodiesel/95% diesel), and B2 (2% biodiesel/98% diesel), are another popular alternative fuel option, which consist of two types of fuels most commonly one alternative and one conventional, although some are blends of two alternative fuels. Low-level biodiesel and ethanol fuel blends, like those described above, are the most widely available on the market currently, as they do not typically require any physical upgrades to the vehicle and do not compromise fuel economy. 32 Currently, blends of up to 10% ethanol, which is made from renewable agricultural resources like corn, and gasoline (E10), the fuel found at most US pumps today, are approved for use in all gasoline vehicles. 33 Ethanol blends over 10% however require vehicles to be flexible fuel capable, or a vehicle that has special controls and materials to accommodate higher levels of ethanol. Flexible fuel, or flex fuel, vehicles are sold as the 32 EPA (2006). E85 and Flex Fuel Vehicles. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C. EPA 420-F DOE (2005). Clean Cities Fact Sheet: Low-Level Ethanol Fuel Blends. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. U.S. Department of Energy. DOE/GO April Reduction Analysis Technical Report 14 December 2007

15 standard model by many automakers today, although station locations offering ethanol blends of over 10% are still limited. Biodiesel, a registered alternative fuel with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency made from agricultural resources like vegetable oils, is legal for use in both on and off road diesel vehicles at any blend level. 34 Additionally, most diesel vehicles can run on biodiesel of any blend level without the need for special equipment. However, the fact that biodiesel and ethanol are the only alternative fuels examined in this reduction analysis in no way implies that they should be pursued exclusively to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles or that they do not have further improvements that could enhance their overall performance. To the contrary, it is the hope that advances continue in fuel efficiency and GHG emissions reductions in all of the above identified alternative fuels, and any others identified in the future. Biodiesel (B20): According to the Alternative Fuel Station Locator provided by the Department of Energy, there are currently two biodiesel, including B20, B2-B5, and B99-B100, stations within 25 miles of the Norristown zip code that are open to the public. Although it is common for many stations to have only one diesel storage tank and therefore not to have yet converted to offering a biodiesel blended fuel, PA DEP notes that most station tanks in PA were last replaced in the late 1980 s and will need replacement in the next five years. It is likely that at this time gas stations will convert their diesel storage tank(s) to offer a biodiesel, particularly in light of the recently passed Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 s mandatory Renewable Fuel Standard. 35 However, to be sure that our reduction estimates tended toward the conservative side, the reduction analysis for biodiesel was done assuming a conversion to a blend of 20% biodiesel and 80% gasoline, B20 as opposed to a higher blend level. 36 To calculate the potential GHG emissions reduction from the County community switching a portion of the diesel vehicles to use B20 fuel began with calculating the number of diesel vehicles in the county (which includes light duty vehicles, buses and freight trucks) by applying the national percentages from the Energy Information Administration to the county s vehicle total to get diesel vehicles by vehicle type. 37 The EIA also provided the typical annual mileage by vehicle type (light duty vehicle- 12,000 miles, buses- 40,000 and freight trucks- 82,000 miles). A standard mile per gallon of 25 was then applied to MTCDE emitted per gallon of distillate fuel. This conversion factor of MTCDE per gallon of distillate fuel was calculated by converting lbs of CO2 per gallon (the amount of GHG emissions resulting from distillate fuel as reported by the Energy Information Administration to MTCE by multiplying lbs by to convert it to metric tons of carbon dioxide emitted, MTCDE per gallon. According to the 1998 study by the 34 EPA (2006). Biodiesel. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington D.C. EPA 420-F The White House (2007). Fact Sheet: Energy Independence and Security Act of Office of the Press Secretary. December 19, 2007 Press Release According to the EPA s SmartWay Grow & Go program, B20 will reduce GHG emissions by at least 10% where B100 reduces GHG emissions by more than 50%. 37 EIA (2008) Annual Energy Outlook Transportation (Early Release). Energy Information Admistration. U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC. DOE/EIA-0383(2008). Reduction Analysis Technical Report 15 December 2007