HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016.02.17 CEAP Agenda Packet AD-HOC CLIMATE ACTION
AND ENERGY PLAN COMMITTEE
Meeting Agenda
January 20, 2016 — 2:00 PM
Community Development Building, Siskiyou Room
51 Winburn Way
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes
• January 20, 2014
3. Public Forum
4. Ashland's Green House Gas Inventory
• Presentation and Committee Q &A on final inventory results for Ashland
Community, City Operations and Electric Utility GHG Inventories -Aaron Toneys,
Good Company—City consultant
5. Update on Climate and Energy Action Plan RFP Process
• Council approval of Cascadia Consulting Group contract scheduled for 2/16/16
• Review contract scope of work
6. Schedule and Agenda for Upcoming Meetings
• Kick off meeting with consultant - Early/mid March
• Consultant will present proposed work plan and task level timeline
• Future meeting schedule will be discussed and incorporated into work plan/timeline
CITY 0, F
Ad Hoc Committee on Climate Change and Energy Action Plan
Scope of Work, August 19, 2015
The ad hoc Climate Change and Energy Action Plan Committee is charged with making
recommendations to the City Council regarding a climate change and energy action plan intended to
identify existing and potential vulnerabilities and develop an organized and prioritized set of actions to
protect people and resources from the ongoing impacts of climate change. The plan shall include
targets and strategies for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in Ashland. These targets and
strategies may be short- mid-or long-term, and shall consider cost,feasibility, community acceptance
and likelihood of success,with an emphasis on voluntary measures that can be undertaken by different
sectors of the community. The plan shall include specific, measurable actions that citizens and local
institutions can undertake immediately upon adoption of the plan.
The Committee shall review similar plans in comparable communities,consult as necessary with local
subject matter experts in the areas of transportation, energy, land use and infrastructure (and other
areas as the Committee deems advisable), and identify implementation steps as appropriate.
The Committee shall, in consultation with City staff and consultants, determine its own work plan and
project timeline, however while the Committee may consult with and advise on its needs for consultant
services, City staff shall be the sole point of contact for consultants hired to work on the plan or
technical reports associated with the plan. Unless otherwise directed by the City Council,the Climate
Change and Energy Action Plan shall be delivered to the City Council by January 31, 2017.
The Committee shall, in the course of its work:
• Provide ample opportunity for public input and feedback; and
• Present its recommendations in writing so they can be easily shared with the public.
i
i
i
i
C� I T 'Y OF' '
LAN
IIII
Green��house
Gas
III nity
III nity
ni nni III
Co��m��mu��n
��ns
wr
Results Analysis and Recommendations
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
......... ........ ............ ............. . .. .. /
...... ......... .......... .........///////////////////
/
//
/
/
/
/
/
/
/ iii f aaaaaa��
.,M
/
Elm,
/
/
i
/
/ r
/
/
1 /
r//
i
mom,
i
i
i
i
i
,
i
0
p
c
Report prepared by Good Company, February 2016
SO
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 1
lie
TABLE
CONTENTS
���
EXECUTIVESUMMARY................................................................................................................ 3
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 4
2. COMMUNITY INVENTORY................................................................................................... 6
METHDDDLDGYAND/\PPROACH....................................---.......... - .................... ........... 1O
[}ETA|LEDRESULTS .................................................................................................................... 13
3. CITY GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS.... ................-- ..............- .................................... 18
METH[}DOLOGYAND/\PPROACH................................................................................................ 21
[}ETA|LEDRESULTS FOR S|GN|FICANTE[N|SS|ONS.......................................................................... 25
APPENDIX A: ELECTRIC UTILITY SUPPLY PORTFOLIO GH{S INVENTORY...............-........... 29
/\PPEN[}|>( B: COMMUNITY INVENTORY: DATA AND EM|S|[}NS F/\CTORS--------.. 35
APPENDIX C: OPERATIONS INVENTORY: DATA AND EMISSIONS FACTORS................... ................. 36
lie
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United Nations body that
regularly convenes climate scientists, has identified human activity as the primary cause of the
climate change. The IPCC suggests that human-caused emissions must be reduced significantly
— perhaps more than 50% globally, and by 90% in wealthier, developed nations— by mid-
century in order to avoid the worst potential climate impacts on human economies.
The Community GHG Inventory presented in this report follows internationally recognized
protocol and accounts for all significant sources of GHG emissions that are supported by locally
available data or credible estimation methodologies. This report also includes detailed
inventories for City Government Operations (a subset of Community Emissions) and the
Municipal Electric Utility's Supply Portfolio (to provide context about the community's
electricity supply). Additional detail may be found in the following sections of this report.
Figure 1 shows the scale of four categories of greenhouse gas emissions for the City of
Ashland: Buildings, Transportation, Goods and Food, and City Government Operations. The
total emissions associated with these activities comprise Ashland's 2015 community carbon
footprint, which is estimated at about 300,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT
CO2e). This total represents 0.5% percent of Oregon's total GHG emissions (-60 million MT
CO2e per year). An average household in the Ashland area has a footprint of approximately
32.5 MT CO2e per year, less than the average Oregon household footprint of 42 MT CO2e.
Figure 1 : Ashland's 2015 Total GHG Emissions, by Category.
ul Illlllp
dw wuxw uuw IIIIIIII Ww '
W w enuu uu am amu
u
iw mm Mwe � smn smn
IIIIVI "' annu 0 srcm �u w
• ®•, • 1111111111111
Illlli a
V
City Government °
Operations
2%
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality(2012). For details visit
http://www.oregon.gov/deq/AQ/Pages/Greenhouse-Gas-Inventory-Report.aspx#inventory.
Ashland GHG Inventory, 2011 - 2015 3
lie
Findings in Brief
Community GHG Inventory
• Ashland's largest sources of community emissions include residential and commercial
energy use by buildings (24% of total); residential on-road transport (17%); and emissions
from the production of residential goods (22%) and food (15%).
• Ashland's Community GHG emissions have decreased by 6% between 2011
and 2015. This is the result of decreases in electricity and natural gas use in the residential
sector, decreases in natural gas use in the commercial sector, and increased hydro
electricity generation on the regional electricity grid. These effects lower the average
carbon intensity (CI) of grid electricity and the emissions from its use.
• Ashland Community GHG Emissions intensities also declined between 2011 and 2015. On a
per capita basis, emissions have declined by almost 8%. In 2015, the average Ashland
resident's carbon footprint is 16.6 MT CO2e / person. In 2015, average household
emissions equal 36.8 MT CO2e and have declined nearly 6% since 2011.
City Government GHG Operations
• City government operational emissions represent roughly 2% of community emissions.
• The largest emissions sources include production of goods and services purchased by the
City (60%), electricity use in buildings (19%), fuel use in vehicles and equipment (8%), and
landfill disposal of wastewater biosolids (7%).
• City Government's overall emissions have increased by 10% between 2011 and 2015 due to
increases in purchasing. During the same time period building energy related emissions
have decreased by -15% due to warmer winters and the lower carbon intensity of electricity.
Electric Utility Supply Portfolio
• Ashland's contracted and owned-electricity generation supply is very low-carbon compared
to the regional electricity grid. This is overwhelmingly the result of Ashland's long-term
power contract with Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), which is served by hydro and
nuclear resources that do not produce GHG emissions during generation.
• From a community perspective, Ashland's electricity supply is from low-carbon resources,
but the Utility and, by extension, the community does not own the contracted resources or
the associated environmental benefit. Ownership of the environmental benefits associated
with renewable electricity is conveyed contractually with Renewable Energy Certificates
(REC), which are not produced or bundled with contracted BPA electricity. However, in
2015, the Utility, and to a lesser extent, the community voluntarily purchased RECs equal to
5.7% of community grid electricity use from BPA and Bonneville Environmental Foundation.
Therefore the climate impacts of Ashland's grid electricity use are best represented by the
carbon intensity of the region electricity grid, the Northwest Power Pool, adjusted by
community REC purchases.
• From a Utility perspective, this inventory provides a public accounting of the greenhouse
gas emissions associated with Ashland's owned electricity-generation (2% of total) and the
upstream emissions from the community's contracted supply from BPA (remaining 98%).
The Utility's electricity supply is generated almost entirely from low-carbon resources and
therefore risk related to future GHG regulations is likely low. Risk from future climate
conditions— i.e. precipitation for hydropower is not yet known.
Ashland GHG Inventory, 2011 - 2015 4
lie
1. INTRODUCTION
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United Nations body that
regularly convenes climate scientists, has identified human activity as the primary cause of the
climate change that has occurred over the past few decades and quickened in recent years.
Consensus statements from the IPCC suggest that human-caused greenhouse gas emissions
(GHG) must be reduced significantly— perhaps more than 50% globally, and by 80% in
wealthier nations that are the largest emitters— by mid-century in order to avoid the worst
potential climate impacts on human economies and societies that have been projected. The
common international goal often referenced, to mitigate the worst climate impacts, is to limit
average global average temperature increases to no more than 2°C relative to temperatures at
the start of the industrial revolution. As of 2015 —we've already passed the halfway point—
average temperatures have increased by 1°C since the industrial revolution.
It's with this understanding and urgency that the City of Ashland has undertaken its first-ever
suite of greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories. A GHG inventory quantifies the GHG emissions
associated with a specific boundary— such as operational control within and organization or the
geographic boundary of a community—for a specific period of time. By conducting
inventories at regular intervals, GHG inventories can be used to understand trends and
manage emissions from specific emissions sources and activities. The results of the GHG
inventories will be used to support development of Ashland's Community Climate and Energy
Action Plan and provides the foundation for a long-term GHG emissions tracking and
management system.
Project Description
Good Company was contracted by the City of Ashland, Oregon to assist the City staff in
completion of a suite of three (3) annual greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories for the period of
2011 through 2015. The boundaries of these inventories include the Ashland Community; City
Government Operations; and Ashland's Municipal Electric Utility's owned and contracted
electricity supply. This work began in September 2015 and concluded in February of 2016.
Structure of This Report
Following this Introduction, Section 2 details the results of Ashland's Community GHG
Inventory; and Section 3 focused on the detailed results of the City's Government Operational
Inventory. In addition to the primary Sections of the report, there are 3 Appendices. Appendix
A discusses the detailed results of Ashland's Municipal Electric Utility's Supply Portfolio GHG
Inventory. Appendix B and C provide additional details on data, emissions factors and
methodology used in the Community, City Operations, and Electric Utility Portfolio GHG
Inventories. In addition to these Appendix B and C, there is an Audit Trail for each type of
inventory, for each year, which documents in detail the data, calculations, and methodology.
Ashland GHG Inventory, 2011 - 2015 5
lie
2. COMMUNITY INVENTORY
The City of Ashland, Oregon has a population of 22,700 and is located at the southern tip of
the Rogue Valley, approximately 15 miles north of the Oregon-California border. Nestled in the
foothills of the Siskiyou Mountains, Ashland has a nationally recognized and Tony Award-
winning repertory theater company, the Oregon Shakespeare Festival (OSF), and the nearby
Mount Ashland Ski Area provide abundant outdoor recreational opportunities in the region.
Ashland is also home to Southern Oregon University (SOU), with close to 6,000 students.
Figure 2 provides a summary of Ashland's 2015 emissions, by source and sector. As can be
seen the largest sources of emissions include Residential and Commercial Energy use by
buildings and other facilities (24% of total); Residential On-Road Transport (17%); and
emissions from the production of Residential Goods (22%) and Food (15%). Upstream Energy
Production represents the "upstream" energy use and emissions associated with the extraction
and production of final fuel products that used in Ashland's buildings and vehicles.
Figure 2: Summary of Ashland's 2015 Community GHG Emissions.
r Industrial
Energy
City Government 1%
Goods and Construction
r
2%
® I °°°°°°""""""11°0°°liuululiuu�ll�llllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
® Commercial and
Industrial Freight
j
o
Residential
Air Travel
aic of Refrigerant
Solid Waste& Leakage
jj/ro o
Wastewater 2/
2%
Ashland's community greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory includes both "sector-based" and
"consumption-based" emissions. Sector-based emissions include local emissions from building
energy use in residential, commercial and industrial sectors, transportation energy use,
methane emissions from solid waste disposal, wastewater treatment, and fugitive leakage of
refrigerants from cooling systems. Consumption-based emissions are generated outside the
community in order to produce the goods and food consumed by Ashland residents. Together,
they make up a community's total emissions. The community has greater control over the
Ashland GHG Inventory, 2011 - 2015 6
lie
sector-based emissions sources, as well as better data, which is why these emissions are
typically the primary accounting methodology used to set emissions mitigation goals. While
the community does not control the means of production for the majority of goods and food it
consumes, there is local control and choice in the quantity of demand; the types of products;
and vendors who supply the products.
Ashland's sector-based emissions decreased -10% between 2011 and 2015. This decrease is
the result of decreases in electricity and natural gas use in the residential sector, decreases in
natural gas use in the commercial sector, and increased hydro electricity generation on the
regional electricity grid which in turn lowers the average carbon intensity of northwest grid
electricity and the emissions from its use.
Figure 3: Sector-based emissions by year.
2001000 2011 Baseline=195,000 MT CO e
----------------------------------
Sector-Based
180,000 ,m....................
Emissions decreased
by-10%between
2011 and 2015
160,000 ,m.................... .......................................... ........................................ .............................., .......................
140,000 ,m................... .......... .................
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Refrigerant Leakage
(� 120,000 .................... ..................,
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Solid Waste&Wastewater
30 .:::::::: .
� � 100,000IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Transportation
80,000
m. .... .... .... ... .... .... ..................................... ... .... � ..... Industrial
�7 IIIIIIIIIIIIIII commercial
60,000 ....... ...................
Residential
20,000 .m..................... ..................................1
0 .1.................................................. gym..................... gym..................... ..........gym..................... ......gym.....................
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Figure 4 shows the change in total emissions (sector + consumption-based emissions) from
2011 through 2015. Consumption-based emissions double the community's total emissions,
compared to a sector-based only view. Between 2011 and 2015 Ashland's total emissions
decreased by -6%. See Figure 6 for tabular results and additional details about emissions
change over time.
Ashland GHG Inventory, 2011 - 2015 7
lie
Figure 4: Sector-based plus consumption-based emissions, or Total Emissions, by year.
2011 Baseline=365,000 MT CO2e
--------------------------------- Total Emissions
350,000
decreased by-6%
between 2011 and
300,000 015
250 000 ........................ ........................... ............................
II�III�III1II City Government Consumption
M Residential Consumption
N
Upstream Energy Production
O 200,000 .
s IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Refrigerant Leakage
W IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Solid Waste&Wastewater
a� ...................
150,000 ��
C7 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Transportation
100,000 w..................
Industrial
IIIIIIIIIIIIIII Commercial
50,000 .��...................�M.... .................................. �.mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..
®Residential
............. .............................
�......................... ........................m.�.�..................� �� m.�.�..................
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Figure 5 shows Sector-based and Total Emissions intensity per capita and per household.
Sector-based emissions per Ashland resident decreased by almost 12% between 2011 and
2015; while total emissions per capita decreased by almost 8%. Sector-based emissions per
Ashland household decreased by almost 10% between 2011 and 2015; while total emissions
per household decreased by almost 6%.
Figure 5: Emissions intensity per capita and per household for sector-based and total emissions.
III IIIII IllllllllAshland Population 20,314 20,465 20,510 20,684 20,684 1.8%
Sector-Based Per Capita(MT CO2e /person) 9.6 8.8 8.9 8.6 8.5 -11.6%
Total Per Capita(MT CO2e /person) 17.9 14.9 15.1 14.7 16.6 -7.7%
IIIII IIIIII IIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIII iIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II III iIIII IIII IIIII IIII IIII IIII II III iIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIII O
Ashland Households 9,339 97325 9,292 91311 9,311 -0.3/o
Sector-Based Per Household(MT CO2e /HH) 20.9 19.4 19.8 19.1 18.9 -9.8%
Total Per Household(MT CO2e /HH) 39.0 32.8 33.2 32.6 36.8 -5.7%
Ashland GHG Inventory, 2011 - 2015 8
111d0alllllAr'F nJU ii
J1AIJl!!f(J1VV� • IIIIIIIII �/� •
phi jU�fffllll�(fJ�'/rr>I�
• f •
® ® J .
® All
o%
lb
m ,
® ® ® • Diu, �
v I
O
O
N04 K N
1 1 �
O _
N
to M O N O O O O O O �
c V 00 V- O c0 00 c0
O M
w t0 w N w w w N w w w w
<F O °'G
f� f�
.. VM Lc)
•Ocf) •
� O O C� O O O O � ������� O O %
con V- M O O O O ����� O O
� .. N IV N O c0 00 c0 N LO
^, � w w w w w w w w w
�
v M N !t N .. � O
cm
0 M 0"
CN
..
(a 00 N O O O O O O J
0o co M O (0 1� c0 tl. O %,,, V
w w w � w w w n n w s
0� 0� N .• ( !r N III hW . d' O
E V M O I� O it
c
O O) O N O O O O O O �„r�� - �
®• N t0 cz N
V O M cF O O O O m O O /
!� 00 M n w w � w �
7 a0 00 N c0 er N tF !F O ////0!i O
4WD1� O N
/
N 'X O
to M � . O O O O . O O O;f J' 0 N
� M COW) (0 CV) O O (0 N LO O
P%w w w (6 w w n n \
L O V O O �
O
j, O O
4-1
V � tu N
cuf) r..
_ Oco
—
,� 1 �7
• U N
LUJ
(ViaLL i�
L L �IIIIIIIIII�I �,,,,� L
LL
uuulllllllllllllllllll > Q
pI % 0
i
plU�I1�U�Wui,�,uuullll��lU��IU)�uiui�i�UwU1�.. �II
II �»��V�l�llllrii fJ g/Jllbiq ,„f.
METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH
Protocols and Tools
This inventory follows ICLEI's U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting Greenhouse Gas
Emissions in conjunction with the more recent Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Inventories by World Resource Institute and ICLEI. The most notable deviation between these
two protocols is the guidance on use of electricity emissions factors. This inventory follows the guidance
of the Global Protocol and uses the regional emissions factor (i.e. location-based emissions factor) to
represent the emissions from community adjusted by voluntary, community purchases of Renewable
Energy Certificates (RECs).
ICLEI'S web-based ClearPath Community-Scale Emissions Management Software was used to calculate
or catalog all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the Ashland's Community Inventory. All data and
calculation files used in the inventory can be found in the Community Inventory Audit Trail 2011 — 2015.
This audit trail is provided to clearly document data sources and methods for replication in future
inventories.
All community GHG emissions presented in this report are represented in metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent (MTCO2e). Quantities of individual GHGs are accounted for in the ICLEI's ClearPath carbon
calculator and include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N20), CFCs, PFCs, and sulfur
hexafluoride (SF6) per the Kyoto Protocol. All GHG calculations use the global warming potentials
(GWP) as defined in the International Panel on Climate Change's 5th Assessment Report (IPCC AR5).
Inventory Boundaries Figure 7: Crosswalk of emission and Scope categories.
There are a core group of emissions sources ®-
and activities required by ICLEI's Protocol61
(see *items on Figure 7). ICLEI's community Electricity
protocol encourages communities to "report 11i I IIIStationary�Iiiiljl 1111!!�pl Com1111iiIII limibustion •
MINIMUM I
on all GHG emissions sources and activities
Electricity • ' ✓
over which they have significant influence, as Stationary Combustion
III EMISSION:
well as community interest, and emissions
• ✓
associated with consumption activities of
Electricity.
(� Stationary Combustion
community households." Ashland's
community inventory follows this guidance
On-Road Passenger Vehicles ✓ ✓
and goes beyond the basic requirements to On-Road Freight Vehicles ✓ ✓
include all emissions sources and activities On-Road Transit Vehicles ✓
that are under the community's influence and Off-Road Vehicles and Equipment ✓
Air Travel ✓ ✓
interest that can be calculated or estimated
C uuuuuuuiuuuuuu=
with ublicall available data models and sold Waste ✓
p y ,
Potable Water Use Energy ✓
tools. Wastewater Treadment ✓
CommunityProtocol asks the user to account Household Consumption ✓
City Government Consumption ✓
for emissions from various emissions sources upstream Energy ✓
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 — 2015) 10
i
lIIU�II�U�Wui,�,uuullll��lU��IU)�uiui�i�UwU1�.. �II
II �»��V�l�llllrii fJ g/Jllbiq ,„f.
and activities and groups emissions into like categories such as built environment, transportation, etc.
This is a departure from the Scope categories used in Operational GHG Protocol, described in Section 3
of this report. The reason for this inconsistency between protocols is that community emissions often
cross politically defined geographic boundaries and therefore do not fit neatly into Scope classifications
based on operational control. Examples of this include transportation, solid waste landfill disposal, and
wastewater treatment emissions. Figure 7 provides a summary of the emissions sources and activities
included in this inventory and a crosswalk to categorize emissions into Scope categories. Those
emissions sources or activities that cross inventory boundaries are those that are applicable to multiple
Scope categories in Figure 7. For example, emissions from on-road transportation are considered
Scope 1 for emissions within the community boundary, while emissions that happen outside of the
community boundary are considered Scope 3.
Exclusions from the Community Inventory
• Consumption-based emissions for local businesses. Like households, businesses consume
materials and, in the case of restaurants, food in order to serve their customers. Those emissions
are not accounted for in this inventory due to a lack of available data from which to estimate
emissions.
Data Collection
Good Company worked with Adam Hanks, Project Manager for the City of Ashland to collect the data
required to calculate emissions. Primary data collection for the 2011 - 2015 inventories was completed
in September 2015 through January of 2016.
Primary, accurate data is available for the Ashland Community's use of electricity, natural gas, gasoline,
and landfilled solid waste quantities. Primary data for all other emissions sources included in the
community inventory required either scaling down state-level data or using Jackson County-level data
within models to estimate primary data per protocol guidance. See Appendix B for more details.
Two data models were used in the course of Ashland's community inventory to estimate primary data
using methods and guidance provided in ICLEI's Community GHG Protocol. These include: Oregon
Department of Transportation's (ODOT) Regional Strategic Planning Model and Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality's (ODEQ) Oregon Household Carbon Calculator. The ODOT model is used to
estimate on-road passenger and freight transport vehicle-miles traveled and associated GHG emissions.
ODOT model results are compared to alternative data sources and emissions calculator methodology.
ODEQ's Oregon Carbon Calculator was used to estimate household consumption-based emissions for
the Ashland community.
Emissions Calculations and Uncertainty
As the previous discussion makes clear, there is some degree of uncertainty in Ashland's community
inventory results. This uncertainty comes from a variety of sources including lack of publically available
data sources or other data issues, but uncertainty can also stem from the calculation methodology or
emissions factors used to calculate emissions from activity data. The relative scale of uncertainty can be
used to inform the reading of the results. It can also helpful in planning the approach to future inventory
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory(2011 — 2015) 11
i
plU�I1�U�Wui,�,uuullll��lU��IU)�uiui�i�UwU1�.. �II
II �»��V�l�llllrii fJ g/Jllbiq ,„f.
and reporting efforts, including prioritization of additional data gathering. The relative scale of
uncertainty may also be useful for goal setting and prioritization of climate actions.
Figure 8 provides a subjective assessment of this uncertainty by emissions source for sector-based (red)
and consumption-based (blue) emissions. Sector-based emissions trend towards lower uncertainty and
have mid-to-low scale while consumption-based emissions trend toward higher uncertainty and are
larger scale. The emissions sources that have mid-to-high levels of uncertainty are rounded in the
presentation of results to convey a higher degree of uncertainty. For example, note the rounded values
in Figure 8.
Figure 8: Assessment of emissions calculation uncertainty for the Community Inventory.
High
I
........ A..............o,.............,o o, o ........o,o......„o,o,
....
m
Consumption-based
C + Sector-Ba�sed
D
CU
......................
................... 0
0
Low ............... ...............
0 KOM
Q a
100,000
Greenhouse Gas Emissions T CO2e
SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE INVENTORIES
• Household Consumption Data and Methodology: Consumption in this inventory was
calculated using the Oregon Carbon Calculator, but in the near future ODEQ will be able to
support communities in completing community household consumption inventories, as they did
for Eugene, by scaling down Oregon's State-Level Consumption Based Model. That approach
was explored for this inventory, but ultimately not used due to project timing and resource
limits. We recommend contacting David Allaway at Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality about a potential collaboration for future updates to the community inventory.
• Refrigerant Data: Establish process to collect more accurate, local refrigerant data. Invite
cooling equipment vendors and services to join the Climate Action Planning process with a
primary goal of establishing voluntary, anonymous data collection methods.
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 — 2015) 12
,
plll�I1�11�Wui,�,!uuulll1;1�1U��IU)�I!ului�Il�U wU1�.. �II I
II 0111
��V�l�llllrii fJ g/Jllbiq ,„f.
DETAILED RESULTS FOR SIGNIFICANT EMISSIONS
IIIIII III II II III I III
Electricity and natural gas use by the
residential and commercial sectors are
the leading sector-based emissions. �m�lr
Ashland's residents homes have a �r
w
d
slightly larger impact than their r
"
commercial business Industrial energy is
small in comparison.
°I 9U
/ r
w warfi By energy typeeIectric electricity aI larger
�yJ l J r
,I
m
w .,.1 �. dl �„k,,, "� 11� ,,. ��" %, l� 'f�� • M'Iy i rl`I'ii'!ui' I, I
impact (-60% of total building energy) in
2015 than natural gas —40% As can be d
r
seen in Figure 9, Ashland's residential
¢ i w n MAW
71LfNl
_.f lA,�" tJ 9rAr(y tNUr mwrr ra
electricity demand declined over 9%
between 2011 and while commercial and
o
governmental demand increased slightly. J };
g
t �
Use of natural gas decreased 13/o
between 2011 and 2014 in all sectors2.
I
Most of this decrease occurred between
2013 and 2014 driven by warmer than
average winter temperatures leading to
I n
lower space heating. This can be seen in
the declining number of heating degree-
days (HDD)' over the same time period � '
(dashed line in Figure 10
Other stationary combustion fuels (fuel
oil and propane) are included in the inventory, but represent a very small source of community
emissions. The remaining significant emissions source related to buildings is escaping refrigerant gases
from air conditioning and refrigeration units. This source represents 5% of Ashland's sector-based
emissions. These refrigerants have global warming potentials that are hundreds to thousands of times
that of carbon dioxide. In other words, losing a little can add up quickly.
2 2015 natural gas data is not available.Available data spans from 2011 —2014.
3 Heating degree days reflect the energy required to heat a building when average outdoor temperatures drop below 65°F.
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 — 2015) 13
Figure 9: Ashland electricity use (in MWh), by sector. Percent change, 2011 — 2015.
===Residentia| �EM11"Commerc a
mom=Governmema|
l0�UUU
9C\OOO
OC\OOO
�
� �
� 7C\OOO
~~
60,000
Jy � 1 11111111111111 nml
� ~~
501000
40,,000
301000
20,000
101000
U
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Figure 1 0: Ashland's natural gas use (in therms), by sector. Percent change, 2011 — 2015.
=MMEMResidentia| ����Commercia|
��Southern Oregon University |ndusma|
~� ~� Heating Degree Days
4`000,000 GOOO
�L
35OOOOO m
'�
0O o
� .. _
� p~
ux ~~ 3,000,000 &�
o
UO
M 2,5UO,OOO
..........
Z �
2,000,000 UO
115001000
oo
110001000
oo
500,000
O D
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015°
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (201 1 — 201 5) 14
i
plll�I1�11�Wui,�,uuullll��lU��II)�uiui�i�UwU1�.. �II
II �»��V�l�llllrii fJ g/Jllbiq ,„f.
I III IIIIIIIIIIIIIII III III IIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Local, on-road transportation of Figure 11 : Distribution of On-Road transport emissions,
passengers is Ashland's leading source of by vehicle category, as estimated by RSPM.
transportation-related emissions. These
emissions originate from residential-owned Commercial
passenger cars and trucks and which 6% Heavy-Duty
v v
primarily use gasoline (E10) and relatively Freight
small quantities of diesel (135). Rou hl hlf III 1%
qRoughly
of these emissions are the result of tri p s / Off-Road
�/
r // Equipment
inside the City s boundaries, while the
3/
remaining half originate inside the City's
boundaries, but have a destination outside Residential'
the City. Air-Travel
18%
The next largest source is air travel by
Ashland households. While Ashland does
have a small airport, the majority of these Transit
p J Y r
emissions are from plans departing from
airports outside of the Ashland community.
Commercial freight vehicles are the next largest source of emissions. These vehicles include local
freight, restaurant delivery, and service providers such as electricians, plumbers, etc. Off-road vehicles
and equipment represent about 3% of transportation emissions for local construction. Heavy-duty
freight vehicles operating within the City limits represent only 1% of transportation-related emissions.
The majority of long-distance freight emissions are accounted for within the consumption-based
emissions for the Goods and Services consumed by Ashland households.
It is acknowledged that Ashland is one of Oregon's premier tourist destinations and that travel-related
emissions may be significant relative to Ashland's other emissions sources. That said, data is not readily
available to calculate or scale these emissions, and this emissions source falls outside the boundaries of
Community GHG Inventory.
u
r
/pier/%//rlr ilrrlNJYrr/iv��/, rtrt �� f n I tndv 1f t r ml
1 7
rffOlJl///�/ ��r N i�r „,, I; �, N"i✓ 1 `i ' N/� �n,,
� r f
f
,r
Y
d
I
City of Ashland —Greenhouse Gas Inventory(2011 — 2015) 15
i
lIIU�II�U�Wui,�,uuullll��lU��IU)�uiui�i�UwU1�.. �II
II �»��V�l�llllrii fJ g/Jllbiq ,„f.
Consumption-based GHG emissions are produced outside of Ashland to manufacture and transport
products and services to meet local consumption of goods. As was previously noted, Ashland's
industrial energy use is small and there isn't any significant agriculture within the City limits. Therefor, it
is reasonable to assume that the Ashland community (i.e. businesses within Ashland city limits) does not
locally produce a significant portion of the goods and food it consumes. Instead it relies almost entirely
on imported goods, food, and energy products to meet the community's needs.
As can be seen in Figure 12, the scale of consumption-based emissions as a category is large relative to
Ashland's sector-based emissions. Consumption-based emissions are also large for City Operations
(presented in the next section). While these emissions are large, they are "indirect" emissions and not
under the same level of community control as the local, sector-based emissions. For example, the
Ashland community could change local development codes to increase the energy efficiency of built
space to address residential or commercial energy emissions. The Ashland community does not have a
same ability to influence production efficiencies or fuel choices for imported goods and services.
The consumption-based emissions are split into four high-level categories in Oregon's Carbon
Calculator, which include':
• Household Goods: Emissions from extraction, manufacture, and transportation of raw
materials into final products such as construction, automobile, furniture, clothing, and other
goods.
• Household Food: Emissions from agricultural (energy for irrigation, production of fertilizers,
methane emissions from livestock, etc.), transportation of raw materials and finished products
emissions. Categories included are cereal, dairy, meat, produce, and other foods.
• City Government Consumption: Emissions from the production of goods (as described
above) and some services purchased in the course of City operations.5
• Energy (Fuel Production: Process and energy emissions from the extraction and production
into usable fuel products (e.g. electricity from household outlets, gasoline pumped into cars,
natural gas combusted by furnaces, etc.). These upstream emissions are considered at the
community-scale for electricity, natural gas, gasoline, diesel, propane, and fuel oil.
In 2011 — 2015, the largest source of consumption-based emissions for Ashland — household
consumption of goods and services - remains relatively stable, increasing by only 1% over the period.
Fuel production emissions for the energy consumed in Ashland decreased by -11% as a result of
increased availability of hydropower on the regional electricity grid, The Northwest Power Pool, as well
as decreased demand for residential electricity and natural gas and commercial natural gas. City
Government consumption represents only a small fraction of Ashland's consumption-based emissions.
4 Please note,services are also included as a category in Oregon's Carbon Calculator.They are not included here because
they are assumed to be equal to commercial energy use and therefore would represent double counting.
5 Note:These supply chain emissions are presented in detail in the next Section of this report,specifically Figure 13. For the
community purposes of including these emissions in the community inventory, energy and community services emissions are
excluded to avoid double counting.
City of Ashland —Greenhouse Gas Inventory(2011 — 2015) 16
i
II 111»
Figure 12: Upstream emissions from the production of the Goods, Foods and Services
2011 Baseline=3651000 MT CO2e
----------------------------------------- Total Emissions
350,000 .............
decreased by-6%
between 2011 and
300,000 .......
.. 2015
N
0
•N 250,000
._
W
a
� �II�II II1 City Government Consumption
,^ .....................
V N 200,000
W0 Household Goods
s I�I�I�
� .......................... Household Food
� ., 150,000
L Upstream Energy Production
Sector-Based Emissions
50,000 .........
1......................................................
�.............................���.�............................�� �.............................���.�............................ �.............................���.�...........................� �.............................�
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Figure 13 provides additional detail for each of the consumption categories. Emissions from household
goods are dominated by home construction, furniture, clothing, and vehicle purchases. For the average
Ashland resident, a large portion of food emissions are from the production of meat, with lesser
contributions by dairy, produce, and cereals.' Upstream energy production emissions are dominated by
the production of transportation fuels (gasoline and jet fuel), electricity, and natural gas. See Section 3
of this report for details about City Government Supply Chain emissions.
Figure 13: FY 2015 consumption-based emissions by category.
90,000 - ....
80,000 ....
70,000
N
0
17
N ._ 60,000
.E a
W
50,000
ai O
'^ V
0 40,000
30,000 a�
Transport
gi
Fuels
20,000
Natural
10,000 Gas.. .... .... .... .... ...
1
Electricity
Household Goods Household Food Energy City Government
Supply Chain
6 Goods and food consumption-based emissions were adjusted to exclude in-state transportation emissions. It is assumed that
100%of the on-road diesel included in the Transportation sector-based emissions is going towards transportation of goods
and foods consumed in the City of Ashland.
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 — 2015) 17
i
3. CITY GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
The City of Ashland's government provides a full range of municipal services including police and fire
protection, parks and recreation facilities and activities, streets, airport, planning, zoning, senior
programs, and general administration services. The City also operates the water, wastewater, and
electrical utility systems.
The City of Ashland's (City) operational emissions from buildings and fleet transportation total 3,016 MT
CO2e, categorized in Figure 14 as Scope 1 and Scope 2. These emissions sources are under the
operational control of City staff and are somewhat comparable to sector-based emissions in a
community inventory. Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions are typically the basis for organizational goal
setting and tracking over time. Scope 3 emissions are more difficult to track, but are large in scale and
serve mission critical activities - and therefore should not be ignored. This inventory includes 7,700 MT
CO2e from Scope 3 emissions sources.
The largest emissions sources in 2015 are electricity use, fuels combustion in vehicles and equipment,
landfill disposal of biosolids, and supply chain (i.e. upstream emissions from the production of mission-
critical goods and services). Operational emissions are a subset of community commissions.
Figure 14: City of Ashland Greenhouse Gas Emissions, FY 2015.
7,000 ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3 6,400
I I
I I
6,000 ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
I I
I I
I I
I I
5,000 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
I I
I I
I I
I I
4,000
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................G...,......,......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
� I I
N
� I I
000 ................................... I I
� � I I
N
N 2,047
ea ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
� 2,000 I I
I I
(D I I
867 I I 874
� 1,000 I I
I I 400
L 97 5 I I 50
uuiuunEffmffffm......................................................................................................................................... ........................=................"I'l""I'll""I'll'll""I'll""I'll",Ill"""r.................................................................. ........... ..............................................................................................
I11M I
Stationary Mobile Combustion Refrigerant Loss Electricity Employee Commute Business Travel Solid Waste Supply Chain
Combustion
rr r r/ r r/ r r/ r r r r//r /
r / r �uiva
r r
r
r
r�� 4 ,rr„r ♦ ,rrr +,,,,,,, , 'S;� /r rrr ':;,,r„ir ,, ,,,,T� n n r`7 �
C0 -��� o c rr
r
r / / /
/ r r /
r r / r r r /r r / / / r r /r r. / , / r r / r r r. / / / r / r r r r / / / r r / r /r / / rii r r / r. /r r / /. r r /r r r / / r r /r r r / / r r / r /=r r r / / r r / r /r r r / / r r r / /r r r. / / r r i r / /r r r. / / r r. r / /r r / / r r. r / /r r / / r r. r / /r / / r r r r / /r r / / r r r r / /r / / r r r r / // / r r r r / /r / / r r r / /r / / r / /r r / / r r r / r /
r / /r r // /.r r / /r r r / /r r r / /r r r. / /i r r r r r. // / r r r r r. / / r r
,.. r. r. rr.... /i rrr r ,.... /.... r /
/... r..r r rs r /. r r r r r r. / r r r r r r.. / r r
r.... ,. r / ,.... „r r.... ,.... rrrr
r r ,..... r r. r ,.... r ,.. /... /
r r... r r... .rrr
/ r... r r /.. .r..
r „rrr
,.. ..,... ,...
,.. ,„r ,, ,. ,, „rrr r, ,,, ,, ,. ,,,,,,..,... „r ,,,,„ ri /,.... ,r ;., r, ,. ,. ,.... „,,.. r r ,r r, rrr rrr,,.. r, ,rr
rr, r," r r, rr ,.,
rr; rr r.. ri'
,,.. ,,. ,,,,, ,,,..,
;rrr ,,, r,,,;, r
,,,,,,::
....,. rrr rrr
l r r r r 6 � � / n r C �3 U c � � /u a set �
/
/ /
r /
r r /
i
r/ ,r r rrr ,r
/
r r
//
rr rrrrrr ,
rr ,
r,r r ,
rrr rr," rrr, r ,
.........rrr
,, rrr .........rrr rrr:
rrrr /// rrr
rrr /rrr„
ee,
/i
,,,...
r,,
riiii ,,,,,,
rill ,,, rrrriiii /
r.>r,,, r r/ ,, rrr
3�3,,,,trev
ed� rrrr f � 1 ,ar
,,rrrrrr
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 — 2015) 18
i
lIIU�II�U�Wui,�,�uuullll��lU���IU)����uiui�i��U�w�U1�.. �II
II 111»
Figure 15 compares Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions over time. Combustion (fleet) has increased 16%
from 2011 and 2015. This increase can be attributed to increased fuel use by the Police and Parks
departments. Electricity emissions declined by -23% in 2012 due to increased low-carbon electricity
availability on the NWPP grid resulting from a particularly good "water year" for hydro power. The
carbon intensity of NWPP grid electricity can fluctuate significantly from year-to-year and will
correspondingly effect the City's operational emissions, positively or negatively.
Figure 15: Comparison of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions, by source, over time.
2011 Baseline=3,016 MT CO2e
Scope 1 and Scope 2
Emissions decreased
by-12%between
3,000
.... 11111112011 and 2015
N2,500 .........................................
o IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Facilities Electricity
2 000 ...........................................................p .............................................................
Refrigerant Loss
Vf
r_
0_
�N
1,500 .�.�w Fleet Fuels
W ...................... IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
1,000 Facilities Natural Gas
500 ......................... ..................
............................�luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu......................................................luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu...................................................... .....................................................luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu.........................................................uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu...........................
0 n � � n u
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
As can be seen in Figure 16, Scope 3 emissions sources represent a large portion of the City's total
operational emissions (-70% of total). Significant Scope 3 sources include supply chain, solid waste
disposal, and employee commute. The largest of these, supply chain, increased significantly post-2012
due to increases in construction projects and vehicle purchases.
Figure 16: Comparison of total emissions, by source, over time.
121,000
Total Emissions
increased by-12%
2011 Baseline=3,016 MT CO e between 2011 and 2015
10 000 ........................................................................................................................................2..........,
-------------- ---- -----
a� ............................
Supply Chain
8,000 �........................
O 11 Solid Waste
V
Business Travel
6000.�
Employee Commute
.N
IIII Electricity... ..����u����������������������������N............................ IIII .................................� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.o...............................w IIIIIIIIII IIIIII IIIIII.................................. .o.
.� 4,000 y
W
Refrigerant Loss
� 2,000
.............. ............... 0 Mobile Combustion
Stationary Combustion
........................... ....................................................NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNu.......................................................0 ...........................
0 � � n �r o
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
7 The most recent eGRID factors available are based on 2012 data and are used to calculate 2012 emissions, but are also used
as a proxy to calculate 2013—2015 emissions, per inventory protocol.
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 — 2015) 19
O
L � N
—0 L a) U O 0 O L N Co a) cn (��--+
O; S� -3
N >1
a U — Z .
Ntj'aof""
m m W O7 �_ >+ Co 0 CU
E C:
U) () C a) •O E O
(D L
o = -b .� E
d, a ate-+ a--
Y lb
U`Illili�l°'rrt }' L L (6 O a-- •� p
U
CU � (6 +r O
• �, ca cn U) (D L \ Mcn
O L E
(D -I-- (a:3 CM —4— a) a) U N — c . � a) �0 � O c
N >'_0 a) a) E L >' N 0 -0 O
M .—
® a) c6 a)
o > (n U c6 a) E C: m
+� j a) U > cn a) w 4-1
® NU)
O C: cn O a) U M m � +� CDL O C
NO O L N > O aN a -0 �O 12 o ozE m
O C �
c ( L - m • 0 C)— —
� cn)(n cn a) a) p s CN cnC
� cn
E L cu
cn � E cn � _ E m m a) CU
o a� a� c o O U) O .�_ O U cn o o O U `�
L EI♦ /E� ��^�' O r rLI) �^�, N cn >, ra^l��' - � cn -r ton �
M a) a) W U L W L C -,.- W Q '(n -0 �--+ U ca
L EL6 + , Q U C-)n n Q
C/) o � � � 64 � o" -0 ° LUa) w0- � U � LUa- > m cno >
O
N
O - \ o 0 0 o 0 0 _®
M M 00
N CO N N N
O
C) U-) CD
E CA 0000 O 00
LU
F N CO
V
• M O N Ln O O co O
� U') CD O LO M O
r • I:*- � 00
N
O
•�"� Ln O CO O O N O
O • CO • O N O ••
.. I- O It 00 N
C\ .. I� N
O 0
U
c0 rn • (0 •• C) C) 00 C)
C) M rn C) LO rn C) •
C) T- _.
CV L +•'
s a) LO
V)
Q O C Y) •• 00 O O CO O • > O
.. C) LON LO C) o C) • •: N
.. r • CO 00 O u I
O N
A CD
U .oCN
C)
s O
O
U
O l-I—
*_p O to
CL to f6
� O
U +-
_U to
W 'L
p +' o
® a,
s
E
N C N
O i
I
cn +�
N � O � � o
E '�' E >
.. O O C L
c� V
0 14-
� 4 O - 0 E 'O
._ Cl) LL W LU m CIOcn �
LL z U
lie
Figure 18 shows emissions intensities metrics— emissions per Ashland resident and emissions
per 1,000 square feet of City-owned facilities. As can be seen, total emissions have increased
per capita, but Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions per capita and per 1,000 square feet of
building space have both decreased.
Figure 18: Emissions per Ashland resident and per 1,000 sq.ft. of City-owned facilities.
r .
i I IIII iiiilliiiiiiiii I Illliiiiliiiii II Illllllliliiiilllliiiil Illlliiiilllllllliiiiiiiiiillllliiiill�iiii IIII AIIIIIIIshllllllalllnd Population 20,078 20,314 20,465 20,510 20,684 3%
Scope 1&2 Per Capita(MT CO2e /person) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 -17%
Total Per Per Capita(MT CO2e /person) 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 7%
City Government Square Footage 110,589 110,589 110,589 110,589 110,589 00
Facility-Related Per 1,000 sq.ft.(MT COZe /1000 so 25.2 20.0 19.7 20.2 19.4 -23%
METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH
Protocols and Methodology
The City of Ashland's Operational Inventory follows The Local Government Operations
Protocol v1.1 (LGOP) for Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions sources as well as guidance, best
practices, tools and models from a variety of other sources including World Resource Institute's
(WRI) Scope 2 Guidance, EPA's Climate Leaders, EPA's Waste Reduction Model (WARM),
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality's Purchaser Price Model, and others to estimate
Scope 3 emissions sources.
Good Company's Carbon Calculator v3.8 (G3C) was used to calculate all greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions for the City's operations. G3C follows the standards set by the LGOP Protocol
in its methodology and calculation of emissions. Calculations in G3C are fully transparent and
include citations to all resources utilized.
All operational GHG emissions presented in this report are represented in metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e). Quantities of individual GHGs are accounted for in the
G3C file used to calculate emissions for this GHG inventory. The GHG calculations use the
global warming potentials (GWP) as defined in the International Panel on Climate Change's 5th
Assessment Report (I PCC AR5).
Inventory Boundaries
Operational inventory protocols classify emissions sources and activities as producing either
direct or indirect GHG emissions. Direct emissions are those that stem from sources owned or
controlled by a particular organization. Indirect emissions occur because of the organization's
actions, but the direct source of emissions is controlled by a separate entity unless the
organizations negotiates with its purchasing power or procures differently made goods. To
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 21
lie
distinguish direct from indirect emissions sources, three "Scopes" are defined for traditional
GHG accounting and reporting.
r r r/ r /
/ r r
/ r r
r / r r r r / r r r / r r / / r rr r r r /,,, /r r rr r� /r r ; r / /
rr it , „,.. ,.. „,,, //„ ri/.
,,,, ;z, „s,,,,, , „ ,,,"rill;;. /
— I r ,, l"I 1 h ,,rl n I rm c u oe� e I a e u d
r //
r
r g
r ,r
,r
rrrr
rrr
r rrrr iii
r rr
rrr �r
„
r'
rr rrrrr /iiii
r r r /r
r r r /r r /
. r///�. /iiii rr
rr
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrr ,
r r /iii
u I , f �I� „r or �f f Itiv rl e. rat, ////
/ r r r r /r r r r � ,. /r r
r r r �r r i� r r r r r r r rr rr rr r /i � rrr
ri r
r r
r
r r
„.
r �n I r f r m f� I
�t � fed e� r
X �t
r // r r
/ r /
ri ri r.z rr r r „rr rrr
r /ii r
r
/ r
„r rr r/
r „rr r rrrrrri i r
/ I�r n I r / tl t / rr rr ril e" rr,r,ii
/i
rr r r r
ri
///ri
/ r r r r r/ r r r r r/ r r r / rr
/
/ r /
i,
n h I Ir h h rr�m I .
d s ut d orI , t II ;d b of n rt sup a I us
,,,,,,rrrr//� ,,,, � � I
,
trul sI�d wse`d� p °I ;;rI1y Ira in. .
Scope 1 (direct) and Scope 2 (indirect) emissions must be reported for most operational
protocols and registries. Scope 3 emissions are indirect and usually considered optional when
reporting emissions to a registry, but serve to clarify an organization's entire carbon footprint
and illuminate the potential climate, regulatory and financial risks an institution may face due to
its carbon footprint. Ashland's City Operational Inventory follows an Operational Control
approach and covers emissions from fiscal year 2011 through FY 2015. The emissions sources
included in this inventory are summarized and described on Figure 131. The data was collected
for all owned and leased City facilities.
There are three known emissions exclusions in this inventory:
• Scope 1 natural gas emissions from a portion of the City's accounts. Natural gas
consumption for several Parks department accounts due to accounting classification
discrepancies between City master accounts and the Parks department separate
accounts with Avista Utilities (the estimated volumes are not expected to substantially
alter the initial analysis and ratio of carbon emissions by category).
• Scope 1 fugitive refrigerant from buildings. A portion of the data was available and
included, but the data set is assumed to be incomplete.
• Scope 1 fugitive refrigerant from vehicles. These emissions sources are assumed to be
relatively small for the City of Ashland's fleet and do not have readily available data
streams to support emissions calculations.
This inventory includes six "Kyoto gases": carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CI-14), nitrous oxide
(N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). The
City of Ashland does not use PFCs, NF3 or SF6; therefore those gases are not included.
Overwhelmingly, direct and indirect CO2-equivalent (CO2e) emissions consist of CO2 from the
combustion of fossil fuels. Emissions are reported in units of metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent (MTCO2e). See the G3C calculator for details about specific gases.
Data Collection
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 22
lie
Good Company worked primarily with Adam Hanks, Project Manager for the City of Ashland,
to collect the data required to calculate operational emissions for FY2011-2015. Good
Company provided the City with a data collection checklist that specified data types and units.
The City's Project Manager used the checklist to either directly supply data or coordinate data
collection efforts among the appropriate City staff.
After the receipt of an individual data file, Good Company reviewed it for completeness and
asked follow-up questions if necessary. All data source files, answers to follow-up questions,
resulting calculation files, and related resource files are documented and cataloged an Audit
Trail for each inventory year. For more details see Appendix C.
In general, data was available and comprehensive. The two exceptions, a portion of the natural
gas data and refrigerant emissions from buildings, were noted in the previous section. Of these
the priority should be to collect the outstanding natural gas data. Refrigerant emissions are
relatively small for most City governments and other organizations.
Emissions Calculations and Uncertainty
There is some degree of uncertainty in any GHG inventory. This uncertainty can come from
incomplete data, but it can also result from uncertainty in the methodology or factors used in
translating units of activity (e.g. gallon of gasoline, kilowatt-hour of electricity, short ton of solid
waste) into CO2-equivalent emissions. The sources of uncertainty should inform future
inventory and reporting efforts, including prioritization of additional data gathering, framing
inventory results, and in the development of mitigation goals and tracking systems.
Figure 19 provides a subjective assessment of this uncertainty, by emissions source. Later
sections of the report provide additional detail, but the general points are straightforward:
• Stationary and mobile combustion have low uncertainty. Both sources are supported
by good data and the methods for quantifying emissions from them are well-defined
and accepted.
• Purchased electricity, the second-largest emissions source, has well-defined and well-
known units of activity (kWh of electricity consumed) but significant year-over-year
changes in emissions factors (from changes in available renewable electricity) combined
with a 3-year lag in the availability of emissions factors creates "real-time" uncertainty.
Emissions calculations will be more accurate as this data becomes available.
• Several emissions sources are low to moderate in magnitude and have some
uncertainty with their data and methods. These include fugitive refrigerants, air travel,
employee commute, and solid waste.
• Supply chain is the source of the largest emissions and uncertainty. The high degree of
uncertainty related to supply chain emissions, and consumption-based emissions
calculations in general, is that calculation of these emissions require models to
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 23
lie
approximate complex economic interactions and effects for over 400 economic sectors
as well as global trade.
Suggestions for Future Operational Inventories
In general, data availability for City of Ashland Operations is very good and uncertainty is
based more on inherent methodological challenges as opposed to improvements to be made
by the City. There are two exceptions (prioritized by scale of emissions):
• Stationary Combustion: Establish a data collection system that includes all City
accounts, including the excluded Parks accounts previously mentioned.
• Solid waste: Establish a data collection systems that provides annual landfilled biosolids
weights.
• Employee commute: Conduct surveys to coincide with future updates to the
Operational Inventory. The survey should be designed in a way to track and monitor the
effectiveness of any City programs that encourage alternative modes of commute.
Figure 19: Assessment of operational emissions calculation uncertainty.
High ...
IDN
0
O
>t 0
p - - Scope 3
If 4-a N Scope 2
M,M 0 Scope 1
D
CU
M
dui�
µ
Low r- T 1
Greenhouse Gas Emission (MTCO2e)
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 24
lie
DETAILED RESULTS FOR SIGNIFICANT EMISSIONS
IL
Mobile combustion represents emissions from city vehicles and equipment. The data
represents El gasoline (10% Ethanol) and B5 Diesel (5% Biodiesel). Figure 20 shows these
emissions by department. Public Works uses the greatest quantities of these fuels followed by,
Police, Fire &Ambulance, and all others. While overall emissions remained steady between
2011-2014, an increase of 13% was experienced between 2014 and 2015. Over this time
period, Public Works decreased fuel use and emissions compared to the 2011 baseline, while
the largest increases are by Police and Parks'.
Figure 20: Fleet emissions by department, FY2011 - 15.
900 - -------Total Emissions
�■'�ncreased by 16%
2011 Baseline=750 MT COZe between 2011 and
800
2015
c
o
Other
W
c7 a, 500 --- --------- _ ----- -------- - - •Fire&Ambulance
01 O
3 V
----------------- ---------- --------- ----------------- - - 111111111iParks
c �
ar "
� ■Police
c 200 _ _ _
c
a ■Public Works,
100 - -................................._ _.................................- - Streets,&Water
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
1 31, 11111111 Milli,I MENEEMENEEMEM
City electricity use remained relatively stable between 2011 and 2015, decreasing by 2.5%. The
largest electricity use within City operations is the wastewater treatment plant (nearly 50%).
Most City departments decreased electricity use (between -2% and -23% compared to 2011)
except for Parks, which increased use by 5% and the Other category increased (22%).
Presenting the activity data in Figure 21 (in KWh) for operational electricity is important to
clearly show that the operational electricity emissions reductions are primarily the result of a
$ Potential Source of Uncertainty:The change in emissions for Parks may be the result of internal accounting
methodology rather than actual increases in fuel usage.
City of Ashland-Greenhouse Gas Inventory(2011 -2015) 25
lie
significant reduction in the carbon intensity of grid supplied electricity as opposed to electricity
conservation or efficiency efforts. City wide operational electricity use has been stable over the
2011 — 2015 time period.
Figure 21 : Electricity use by departments or activities, FY2011 — 15.
710001000 2011 Baseline=6.9 million kWh ..........................................................................................................-Total electricity use
- �------- ' } decreased by-3%
Illlllluuuuii mipi����^^ ��I�I�I�IIIIIIII ��I�I�I�IIIIIII � between mii and
Illllllllllllllu zois
61000,000 - : : : : - ...................
--
510001000 - ..........
a x 410001000 one.
•W a[er Plan[
Q 31000,000
•Parks
2,000,000
•Service Center
11000,000 •Public Works&
Wastewater
0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
As is described in the Community Figure 22: Average supply chain emissions, 2011
Inventory, consumption-based - 20151 by category.
emissions associated with the City's
supply chain include the upstream
emissions From production of goods and
services consumed in the course of .. Professional
providing community services.
s
e,�
Over half of these emissions between %P9
2011 and 2015 are the result of facility Community
Services
and infrastructure construction and 7%
maintenance. Production of vehicles and -----,__Other Goods
equipment, fuels and energy, chemicals, 3% 1P5 3%
and professional and community
services are all significant contributors as well.
Description of Purchasing Categories:
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 26
lie
• Construction & Maintenance: This category includes construction of infrastructure,
facilities and improvements, and contractual services. Contractual services are services
contracted by the City and performed by third parties and primarily include
construction and professional services. This category also includes small tools, other
maintenance equipment, and safety equipment.
• Office Supplies and Computers: This category includes the office,
communications, audio/visual, computing supplies and software necessary to maintain
the City's operations.
• Chemicals: This category includes chemicals, principally for water treatment.
• Energy: This category includes upstream emissions from the extraction and
processing of fuels prior to combustion.
• Fleet: This category includes vehicle purchases and maintenance.
• Community & Economic Services: This category includes community programs and the
administration of memorials and grants.
• Professional Services: This category includes contractual purchases of professional
and technical services that support the City.
• Other Goods: This category includes goods not included in the above categories.
As can be seen in Figure 23, consumption-based, supply chain emissions from many of these
categories remain consistent. Energy (fuel production), chemicals, services, and office supplies
all have little change over the 2011 — 2015 period. The variability in Ashland's supply chain
emissions is largely the result of significant purchases like construction projects and vehicle
purchases. In addition to being more variable, these emissions are typically the most significant
in terms of scale.
Figure 23: Composition of supply chain emissions over time, by category
8.1000
0 6,000 --- •Construction&Maintenance
Office Supplies&Computers
W y
5,000 - -----------------. - --------- -.... - - Other Goods
� 0 Professional Services
� 41000 - - - - - - - - -- ■Community&Economic Services
� •Water Treatment Chemicals
- ------------------------ ------------------------
000
i ■Energy
2,000 - Fleet
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory(2011 —2015) 27
lie
The City disposes of its mixed solid Figure 24: Share of 2015 solid waste emissions
waste (MSW) and biosolids from by waste category.
wastewater treatment at Dry Creek MSW
Landfill. Once landfilled, solid waste in 3/
general, and specifically organic
wastes,' decompose under anaerobic
conditions (without oxygen) and begin
to produce landfill gas (a mix of
methane and carbon dioxide).
r'
Dry Creek is a modern landfill with
landfill gas capture and electricity
generation.10 It is very difficult to
capture 100% of landfill biogas— a
certain percentage is bound to escape.
According to the EPA's Waste Reduction Model (WARM), approximately 85% of landfill gas is
ca ptu red.
The City's operational solid waste tonnage and associated landfill emissions are dominated by
wastewater biosol ids, which represents 97% of solid waste emissions. Mixed solid waste from
the City's other facilities represent the remaining 3%. Solid waste emissions have stayed
relatively consistent between 2011 and 2015, averaging 830 MT CO2e /year.
9 Examples include paper,wood,food waste, biosolids,etc.
10 Dry Creek has also been proactive in exploring use of landfill biogas as a low-carbon fuel for collection trucks.
City of Ashland —Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 28
lie
APPENDIX A: ELECTRIC UTILITY— ELECTRICITY SUPPLY PORTFOLIO GHG INVENTORY
In addition to the Ashland's Community and City Government Operations GHG Inventories
already presented, Good Company calculated another GHG inventory focused on emissions
associated with Ashland Municipal Utility's Electricity Supply Portfolio. The purpose of the
Portfolio inventory is to examine the direct GHG emissions associated with Ashland's Municipal
Utility's-owned electricity generation resources as well as the indirect emissions from power
contracts with regional suppliers.
Ashland has owned its Municipal Electric Utility since 1909. It is the second oldest Municipal
Utility in Oregon. The majority (-98%) of the electricity resources that serve the City of Ashland
are purchased from the Bonneville Power Administration, with the majority of the remaining
(2%) generated by City-owned hydro facilities and a very small fraction of the City's owned
community solar project, Solar Pioneer II (a 63.5kW PV solar installation). All electricity is
distributed through city-owned distribution lines to the City Utility's customers.
The Portfolio GHG Inventory is focused on the carbon intensity of the BPA power contracts and
local hydro generation used to serve the Ashland community's retail electric load. This
inventory is not meant to consider operational emissions from the Utility's services (e.g. Utility-
owned building or fleet vehicles). Those emissions are included in the City Government
Operational Inventory presented in Section 3 of this report.
This inventory is meant to inform two primary audiences and perspectives.
• Ashland Municipal Utility: The City's Electric Utility staff may use this inventory to
understand and share the direct and indirect emissions associated with its owned-
generation and contracted power supply. This understanding is meant to inform
potential supply-side GHG mitigation opportunities from a Utility power purchasing
perspective, as well as a cost-of-carbon risk perspective related to future regulations,
such as the Clean Power Plan, to the Utility and its customers.
• Community-at-Large: The Community may use this inventory to better understand
the GHG impacts of the resources currently used to supply community electricity
demand and the interaction of those resources with larger regional electricity grid.
As of this writing, Ashland is about to embark on developing its first Community Climate and
Energy Action Plan. This process is generating interest from the public for information on the
"carbon footprint" of their electricity use. The City of Ashland's Electric Utility has both an
opportunity and a responsibility to provide information on the impacts of electricity generation
and use in order to enable its customers and the community-at-large to make informed
decisions related to its use of electricity and the carbon consequences of using electricity.
City of Ashland —Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 29
lie
INVENTRORY RESULTS
Because BPA electricity supplies the Al : Sources of electricity supply for
Figure y ppy
majority Of the City sdemand — the I I I 'I'Ashland Municipal Electric Utility. BPA Other
results of this inventory are fairly
(Average
straightforward. Regional
Electricity)
• The carbon intensity— as defined
. ? ' 5.46%
by The Climate Registry's Electric Ashland
Hydro
Power Sector Protocol - of °"°'"
iuiuuuiul� '�`� 0J6
Ashland's Municipal Utility's Ashland
supply is very small (0.039 MT solar
CO2e / MWh) relative to the
0.05
Northwest Power Pool (NWPP)
regional grid (0.30 MT CO2e /
MWh), as a result of the
following;
O BPA's electricity generation, which supplies 98% of the community's demand, is
dominated by low-carbon hydro and nuclear resources (90% of total), which do
not emit GHGs.11 See Figure Al for details on BPA resource mix.
O The remaining 10% of BPA generation is served by the average regional
electricity supply, which includes coal and natural gas generation. It's these
purchases -made by BPA to serve the requirements of its contracts with Ashland
- that result in the only source of GHG emissions in Ashland's Utility's supply
portfolio.
O The City of Ashland's owned-generation hydro resources provide the remaining
2% of the City's demand, which do not emit GHGs.
• While Ashland is served by BPA power via long-term contracts for electricity, the
environmental benefits of BPA power are shared and accounted for in the average
carbon intensity of our regional electricity grid, the Northwest Power Pool.
• While BPA resources are low-carbon, they do not generate Renewable Energy
Certificates (REC)12, nor is any ownership of the low-carbon of benefits from BPA
transferred to Ashland's Municipal Utility or the Ashland Community, except for the
following exception:
o On behalf of the community, The City of Ashland does purchase BPA's
Environmentally Preferable Product for a premium at a quantity equal to 5% of
the Ashland community's annual consumption. The Environmentally Preferable
11 Hydro and nuclear power generation do not produce any emissions at the point of generation. That said they do
produce upstream emissions, in the gathering of the uranium for nuclear power; methane emissions from dam
reservoirs.These upstream emissions are not included in TRC's Electric Sector Protocol.
12 Renewable Energy Certificates or RECs are a contractual means of transferring ownership of the environmental
benefit associated with qualifying renewable electricity generation.
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 30
lie
Product is wind-generated electricity bundled with wind generated RECs that
are retired on behalf of the Ashland community.
• Because the Ashland community does not own the environmental benefits of BPA
power, the best representation of the GHG consequences of Ashland's electricity use is
the carbon intensity (ie. emissions factors) of the regional NWPP electricity grid,
adjusted downward for voluntary community purchases of RECs.
• From a Utility perspective, this inventory provides a public accounting of the
greenhouse gas emissions associated with Ashland's owned electricity-generation (2%
of total) and the upstream emissions from the community's contracted supply from BPA
(remaining 98%). The Utility's electricity supply is generated almost entirely from low-
carbon resources and therefore risk related to future GHG regulations is likely low.
• In addition, it's important to note that BPA contracted power is one of the lowest-cost
power resources available in our region.
Figure A2 shows the results of the 2015 inventory by emissions source and Scope category.
Scope 1, or direct emissions, for the Utility's owned hydro-electricity generation are 0 MT
CO2e. Scope 2 emissions from line loss total 126 MT CO2e. These emissions account for the
inherent loss of energy as you transmit electricity over distribution lines. Scope 3 indirect
emissions are the largest sources within the Utility inventory equal 2,912 MT CO2e. These
emissions are the result of BPA's "spot market" purchases of power or average grid electricity
(roughly 10% of BPA's generation resources). Average grid electricity in our region does
include emissions from combustion of coal and natural gas to generate electricity.
Figure A2: Ashland Utility emissions by source and Scope category.
31500 Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3
3 000 2,912
CA 2 500
2,000
s Ov �
H
i 2 1,500
Ln
N 11000
500
126
0
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................����11111\1\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\..........................................................................................................
Owned Resources Distribution Line Loss Contracted BPA Power
(Hydro)
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 31
lie
Figure A3 compares the carbon intensity (MTCO2e / MWh) of Ashland Utility's supply portfolio
to the regional electricity grid (Northwest Power Pool), and regional grid adjusted for Ashland's
REC purchases. Notably, the electricity emissions factors can fluctuate significantly from year to
year based on the amount of hydroelectric power generated by BPA, as is seen between 2011
and 2012.
The Ashland Utility emissions factors show that the Ashland's electricity supply contracts and
owned-generation are low-carbon, even if the Utility or the Community does not own those
environmental benefits. Because Ashland does not own the environmental benefits of BPA
power, a better representation of the climate consequences of Ashland's electricity use is
Regional Grid, NWPP. The best representation of is use of NWPP adjusted to account for the
REC's purchased voluntarily by Ashland's Utility on behalf of the community from BPA and
voluntary, community-at-large REC purchases from Bonneville Environmental Foundation.
Ownership of the community-at-large RECs remains with the households and businesses
making these purchases, but are included in this inventory so as not to overestimate emissions
from grid electricity.13 For more details and a description of issues with using the TCR protocol
for BPA supplied public utilities, see the following Methodology section.
The NWPP Grid (REC adjusted) emissions factor is used to calculate emissions for the Ashland
Community and City Government Operations GHG Inventory. It is recommended that a
market-based calculation methodology using the regional grid factor (NWPP) adjusted by total
community REC purchases is used to calculate emissions in Ashland operational and
community inventories.
Figure A3: Comparison of Utility-Specific and Regional Grid emissions factors.
Ashland Utility 0.080 0.039 0.044 0.039 0.039*
Regional Grid (NWPP) 0.373 0.304 0.304* 0.304* 0.304*
NWWP Grid (REC adjusted) 0.355 0.288 0.288* 0.288* 0.288*
*Indicates previous year's factor used as proxy. Most recent EPA eGRID factor for NWPP is 2012.
Likewise 2015 data from BPA for Ashland's inventory is not available.
METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH
Protocols and Methodology
This inventory follows The Climate Registry's Electric Power Sector Protocol. Calculations used
the Bonneville Power Administration's (BPA) 12-month average firm energy resources as
reported in BPA's Annual Facts Reports. BPA resources defined as "other" sources of energy
13 Community-at-large purchases REC data was received late in the process. This data is included in the Audit Trail
for the Community inventory, but was only included in the accounting for the 2015 inventory.
City of Ashland-Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 -2015) 32
lie
were assigned the average Northwest Power Pool (NWPP) energy generation GHG intensity.
NWPP emissions factors are provided by the EPA eGRID data tables. All utility GHG emissions
presented in this report are represented in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e).
The GHG calculations use the global warming potentials (GWP) as defined in the International
Panel on Climate Change's 5th Assessment Report (IPCC AR5).
There are inherent problems with TCR's Electric Power Sector Protocol accounting
methodology when it's applied to publically-owned utilities in our region because of the scale
of BPA power generation and the way in which BPA power is preferentially distributed to
publically-owned utilities. This inventory for Ashland mostly represents an inventory of BPA
power. Therefore it is not recommended that Ashland continue to conduct this inventory in the
future. It is clear from this accounting that Ashland's owned and contracted-electricity supply
resources are low-carbon. The results of this inventory for Ashland's Electric Utility will not
change significantly over time, and will always be correlated with BPA's electricity generation
resource mix.
The TCR protocol focuses on emissions from generation of electricity supply, which is
appropriate for many electric utilities around the country and around the globe as they move
towards renewable electricity generation and away from fossil fuels. Focusing on supply is not
as appropriate or useful for small, publically owned utilities served by BPA. For these utilities, it
could be argued that the focus should be on energy efficiency and conservation, and cost
effective, local renewable generation. In other words - efforts to reduce peak and overall
demand by Ashland for grid generated electricity. By reducing demand for grid power, low-
carbon BPA electricity can be redirected back to the regional grid to reduce the need for
generation from fossil fuels; thereby lowering emissions from the regional electricity grid.
It is anticipated that in the future, Oregon's Clean Power Plan will provide additional guidance
on how to best account for climate impacts and help define the most effective means of
mitigation for specific communities.
Inventory Boundaries
The boundary of the Utility Inventory is defined by a) sources of power generation owned by
Ashland's Municipal Electric Utility and b) the electricity, from any source, distributed,
transmitted and delivered by the Utility. Together these sources are comprised of electricity
generated and delivered by the Utility's hydro plant and community solar installation and BPA
electricity delivered to Utility customers. The Utility also distributes electricity directly to some
Pacific Power customers under an agreement with Pacific Power and emissions associated with
these deliveries are within this inventory's boundaries.
Data Collection
Good Company worked with Adam Hanks, Project Manager for the City of Ashland to collect
the data required to calculate emissions. Primary data collection for the FY2011-2015
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 33
lie
inventories was completed in September through December of 2015. Good Company
provided the City with a data collection checklist that specified data types and units. The City's
Project Manager used the checklist to either directly supply data or coordinate data collection
efforts among the appropriate City staff and external parties. After the receipt of a data file,
Good Company reviewed it for completeness and asked follow-up questions if necessary. All
data source files, answers to follow-up questions, resulting calculation files and related
resource files are documented and cataloged an Audit Trail for each inventory year.
Inconsistencies in reported line loss numbers, reported by the City, required Good Company
to make assumptions related to line loss effects for several years. The percentage of electricity
lost in distribution in 2012 and 2014 was the calculated average of the reported values from
20101 2011 and 2013. This was necessary because the reported line losses for 2012 and 2014
were unrealistically low and high respectively, and the city could not provide further insight into
the methodology used in calculating these values.
Suggestions for Improvements to Future Inventories
As previously mentioned, it is not recommended that Ashland update this inventory in the
future, using the TCR protocol. If Ashland does decide to update the inventory, the following
suggestions are provided to improve the accuracy:
• Pass through electricity delivery for Pacific Power is tracked separately but is accounted
for in Line Loss in the Utility's power generation and consumption reporting. It is
recommended that this value be fully split out into a pass-through or V party delivery
category.
• Reported Utility Line loss values fluctuate significantly over the FY 2010 — 2014 time
period without any indication as to the cause. It is recommended that the values used
to calculate line loss be separated and accounted for to better understand the cause of
these fluctuations.
• Community owned solar generation is not included in the Utility's generation and
delivery report. It is recommended that this be included, especially as this source may
grow in the future.
City of Ashland—Greenhouse Gas Inventory (2011 —2015) 34
CIO L CIO
� a) cn X Q m
O a) p cn N L m >I° 0 a) Q°
0
CIOo ° o Q cn ' '
O nO� m 70
c � mv > > D �
O N cn
2 � � �Co U_0
o a) .o L -
' 0 CIO
U`boo�N L 'CL co
Q
0 QiE . W )
° Lo (� °a) a La)
>mom WE o o2 u
_CIO U O r U a) C —C-cu � co 4—
' ca a) N (U U cn m o'� a) U a)
o m NNN U p -° �'c.o E a� Q cnIt >
C: cn cma) C 1 o a) � ° L� � ca � � L � L � U cn 0 a) i >'
� c O c6 M.U) L o O o ° � o uo) o �'� � a o �a
w ° ° Q r O �, OC L N4-1
d N a) .� U O, c
a; o N E cn ° L Co o 0 `� a)Q ° Q O E U c- 4-1
o
o
W N a) cn (n a) -,� cn > .- v cn � > CD �(n cu U 70 CO �
co Q E L � ov c � Co -� a) cn m p O .� J p 0 0 W Ov
° W 0 H M a) �� �N � a) - O N= �N � � N— � 0-0 O O o O Q
U 0 +� O > L o a) `� L o C cn L (� O U C � Q N�_O
U ) j,a) ca a) -0 0 L 70 Co m o 70 a) �' O m L m u (n — -0
0 o O.� o a) o o 0.� w >,o r o o w E �>1 o
0 a c� cn N CO ) p o a) (n cn co °� N a) (n M a) C) W Ov U 70
� +J 4-•co � "- N L E V 0 a) a) a) M UCIO -0 a) °
CIO 0
a) N • CIO
oO0 E m ) o a Q o > (nU m
n a -0cn ` U _ � Uco O O(D a a o ca cn c (n p�
C > D n o - � a) c m co a) '0O 0 a) ) c
CO 0 a)` oU w 0 m a > — L O> ca U) N`~ 0 U ate) cn o � a)2 cn
-0 co tY o m m w A- o o o f (n CL( o Co' U �, — cn �CIO o cn m OL m .
o o n `� 0 o w a) Co o IM aa)) m cn a) a)m a)`u w n o
a) = a) U N m Q E �CID•O a) x p N co C Q O L >' .o+r
O �U - a)'o � W N U a) O 0 E U) I Z Co U o W a) N — m N u_j
a) p o o p � 0 0 O Q = Co N (n O o m N a)U o
>> C O �_ m U U L L
U a) cq a) (6 a) � 0 O > o � a) 0 cn -0 -0 L- a) Q
� N o L R coO O O U C -0 N m a) Q•—0 U) co L O Co
Q a)0 ° p a) 0 �� 0 � (� > Co a)� Co o �LL D 0 � OL � -0-C— � '� � > n U) �
LL j a) a, a) c o � o c cn m a) �' a)
0 a) U m } 0 O "= a) OL_� c N U a) �'ca ca
Q U a C D N Co C� cn a) m rn a) p o 0 - c -C _o cn� = a) -0 - p a)
Z m L 0 o — O -�•— LR o a) +r c m o (n m U}
m +, � CL a) m cn E E > c6 >,— a) Q m O N m c 0 E cn
O � Q N i .0)NO cn U .� +a)) O O }' N>� m O L N a) ° cn m E Q
a) cn a) (n > a) U a) }.0 co E a) ca E o m
G _ 0
0 L tl o o U `� a) L a) � a) vi (� ° �' cn o o L U) a) m > U
L.L.I a) m a) U O O E O ca 0)m� o �0 a) U o Co U 0) 0 W cn a)
Q >, o o L o — U) C o 0
c co
o U m-0 co � a) .N m w o o c c n ca >Q ° a, o ca a)
Q m Q m cn E o cn = cn m e
° E � o .(n o o a)-0 a) cn— cn a) a�- 0 m L m > U o
a) vi m ° ° E E ° E a) X X ° °� a) a L ; a) 'c� E
w a �° n w w.(n ° Q.� p ° E a) m U w z° Q p a.� � p
Q L
C) o E �o CD cn o a)
_
LL �.ca—voi N " -0 a)�_ cu °
O v Q _0L E
co 2
` a) J c6 LL a- X o
O -0-0 cn O)E N a) O U >,
C a)
Q 0 � a)CIO U) •Q' U ) 0)O;� L o 0) 0 Ln
c E ° �� > �0 c�a c� � E E a� - O
EL ° o °° �° m E
m L
oO cn (nE +) � c �U ° M m 0) a)o � o C: cLf � ) 0 a E on m- -0 o C- o w o a a oa) C a � c
�
cn CU
Fn cn
L �
I E ate)`n Eo� c > °= U cn a) o ai Q O N
: o CIOE o -0 0 o o a) a)CD a a) -� a) a) � .�
U a) m cn 1E a) O O L N ca `� cn cn cn o cn >
O 0 L O cv `� cn cp a N O 0 o L
® Q U c°n o c Q C 0 U) E v,� v v 0) v
o .� o c� C °= E v a) c a) c 0 0 0 -t 0 U) 0 p
z - �° E a) 0)Co cL° (n °�-0-0 o c� a CLo D-m ° DL
LJJ o U °� 0 ° L E -- cn cm.- � C C c o
- a) E ,� � E a) - X� ca-0 m m m � c ca
cn ° L m cn o co U o o f >'m ca L >'
z ° cn c m 4— � L C cn 0 a' �'-0 C C o 0'
_ p� .� O o � ° co m m U � a) a) C a) >, a) m f6
cm E }, co > 2 o c c c m o c
a) O� L 1 p 0) O O J W.cn(� _ a).L a) a) U O U
co U ° o.� E (a) c� c c m E E .� E .o °� E
°' ° 0 W
ZC ao) cn cn po) o U a) o a)� ° o CD c Com Co U)
CIO CU 0-a � a) ^) ^' a)
m LL
Q � CQo� M U 0)U U) cn cn Z
oCL) oa o o ca Qo m ° ° L ° u O
-LL U L p E a U o U 0 D E D 0 D
OOp D 0 s
c = N
o N
O
E
>' 0 � . +�
o
W W
(o OX c c � C
a E N
�_' � • uuu fn m
L Co III 0 �
cn
Z • a) m m O c � °� L-
a)
LJJ a o � • „' m o co 0 $ >% 0 O
`^ L
U O O vJ
as � 4-j
Q ®. w V U
10
m m O >, L o Q
O L D 70 W a) �' p in a)
0 73O U) O a)
O
a
'
m m°
m o O
> ocm a o v �
En -0+p co N a) -Fo U� _o > ° O n m aO E U o °)a) ) m O a — ° m a) OE > E
En E
Co
(� • UN L cn -
E L_ � (cn E ) m - � O_ OO m U O0 E o N O o 0M
O U Q-CUO a) � cn C: E C Oa) U cn -0 cn O LE
OQaQ)
Fn
oU+fLc>Qan
O NC C 0 p }Q m a) cn0O n L U o n Q �
" )-0 cn a) u 0 EW > m-0 m m ° ° Ev E XiE > > cn>, U O
U Q 3 U a)>� N p CO(� �0 a) � °
a) 0- 0 0 a) = Q> Q O ~ m o 0�
mo0) o >, O n � ° oNm L,0 a) an))o � OU oCo >, Q n N O > in 4- o -0
0 _0 L = 0 > Q O W Nm O CD OOU.- o � U (n �
O >� m O>. -0 C Q � o> O - m
:E O U) On O � . tO N =
)E U ° _ a
E C CLU
m L O o o >'a) a) LQ U ,o °�U 0� ca > E cn m `- cn
o E U O
a) m .L= = m >, Q o m Q cn U U) O
} O EQ E ) OO O p a)Ma a)4- > m O ) co
O E o O 0 - U
0 QNO C O m a) > c cn U ONW m NQQ �� m _ >'Cn= � AN
aj U) > O O M m � � Q U
o N m c o o aU)n � �U 0 >, cn m co
+
cu
O U UQ U F o E m HL c U
U) cm n
o UE m m O ca Q ° >+ m O >
m >, O > o Co mm �, w Q a a QO Em � a'Q •E E E Qc
Co 0) o ca a a �,om }�,
° m E �
U n ECn � O cnn o
}, a >, a) �L _ > Q a '
LL -0 cm 0 L
03 a)
Oz • • m � ) a) Lm En U m a) O O p >
m om o 0F ° Q o
m a m ° U) o o
o L
Nom U- UF m O
im>i, E - m �o o}'oo �o-
-o 0 a) cn s o 0 U cn a) Q O U U +c
LL LO � La) ° _�
cz) `n a a a o,M >0Om�
mm cncn a) ) Qm m— 6
Em aa
.+�
O +r Cn mN
co
0- 0
0 0
o E � m c o 0 o — U . � nQ ° E OC O > > o o o >co cn �` n m = .`n O ' ° ° �JW 0 D '� N oo � m� QO Q � a E a a)1 N O u p O E> U -0 a) p m mo-0 EU a) cn o ao 0 0 CQ � E O ° o a) O o cn m a) cn U o m a) m amE�
CD
co 0 o
cn
OQQQ Lm m>(U)+ o �m Q a — aa m a) a E m E (on a
m E - a) � > > O � °aD � mo Z0 > m a �O m CO Q n C O }n m
°
L Q 0) m : : Q c o m m n n
U . 0 o O � E O a c ) o m E -0 p -0 aN°
cEan
-0 O ° >,0 O =
M CDOC - a)Q ) a) m Q oa) o Om N � aam, a) -0 m E n> - O _ ^0 a) m" a) cn cn- cn} > c N U a N m'n >U) _0 ) -0 ocn cn m � m U �. � a) a) a)a) LU m m m O > C U 0 La) O .�Q m -0 a) o E
CDL
-0 cm
>, m o>, ° �o ) Co > o cn
LL 0 O > a) o Q� > oC
Om o Z c m cn
Ev O ° a)
W L m )
L > Q —w a)4- ) o 00 m � �� os= -a
L
>,Co o a) na o m a)
° > m a -cin, CD 0) 'nIC m U om N nmE _ a) 'Qcaa7
� O a cD O O a) N cuO N
-0m �-00 co _ o UQO� on o o � U >))
0 0) O�cuow T, m OQo
_0 0) ° -0 LO ° O m a) o , Q E
-0 0 N a a N ) a) O- -
m a a o U) QC 0N x N
(n p m c >, O Q =
L m = m
m U m 4- L cn EE Q Eco , >) a u) c o a� a �0c OO m ' m}• _ o M O } N p Q Q a
_ ° Qo (n cm :zz r t m U m a)Lcu
O c o o Q U) a > O a) N
cn cmO - V
m ) 0 > o ao � � Q
� �
Z a. Q4 o m >, QU V > E Q mm _
QoZ N
OO o— O -a c: 0
-
E LE
_ LO o M
°a) a -0M cn a)
Q >
OQ •• cao'' o Q Lo E U) N �
a)
O> o N omo U c o
o a) )
a _� 0 ) ° Em 0 �z o a) (D Q
fQtOn
o Mo m-0 o -0 p
cn � CD o � o
Ln O o - L Q Q� > a) c - -C o
U U n U � U >, nZ E U C Z O p0 = .-p : cnO O a 60 v i p o
m
n W c: o u) a) , a) o -
m O � .- E � m °,= a)-0 � cn-00) 0 • ° cu o lE° a) o o a) o `)Z E > 0 U Q >, M )
Co
� o Oo U co m Na) n o m c-0 (n E >W o7 ° ° 7a) > QU 0 C a -5 E Ez C o6)
CL O o I
U °
o E
E •N m
X 0 N O —
0 LLI � V Q
z U
W o y 0 a >+ 14-
ca
o as CL
can U • w CL w m co in 4-j
Q U
CITY OF
AS H L.AN D
Council Communication
February 16, 2016, Business Meeting
Climate and Energy Action Plan — Consultant Services Contract
FROM:
Adam Hanks, Management Analyst, Administration—adam@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
A key component of the Climate and Energy Action Plan project is retaining a consultant team to
guide the project plan development and public engagement process. A request for proposals was issued
late last year and seven responses were received.
With extensive input and review from the Climate and Energy Action Plan ad-hoc Committee and City
staff, Cascadia Consulting Group was the proposer recommended by the eight-member selection panel.
Staff is requesting Council, as the local contract review board, direct the City Administrator to execute
the attached $129,000 contract with Cascadia Consulting Group.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
In March of 2015, the Conservation Commission presented the Council with a proposed framework for
a community climate action plan. Through the 2015-2017 budget process, $120,000 was appropriated
to fund the effort. In June of 2015, a Mayor appointed Ad-Hoc Climate and Energy Action Plan
committee was formed. The ad-hoc committee began meeting in the fall of 2015 with two initial
priorities; coordinate efforts and outcomes with a City grant funded Climate Kick-off community event
and assist City staff in the development, review and selection for the project consultant team.
Climate Kick-off
The Climate Kick-off was held on November 15, 2015 with a total attendance of approximately 400
community members and a menu of climate related events throughout the week leading up to the
formal kick-off event. Preliminary results of the discussions, table brainstorming and participant
feedback have been provided by the grant recipients to the ad-hoc committee for future use as the
formal planning process unfolds.
Consultant Selection
City staff worked with the ad-hoc committee on the development of a request for proposals (RFP) for
the development of the formal plan document as well as for development and implementation of a
strong public engagement effort with the community. The RFP was released November 4, 2015 with
submittals due December 15, 2015.
A selection panel made up of six ad-hoc committee members and two City staff individually reviewed
each of the seven qualified responses and followed up with a lengthy full panel group meeting to
review individual results and determine the final rankings of each of the proposals. Below is a
summary of the selection panel recommendation.
Page 1 of 3
CITY OF
AS I 1� L.AN D
Rank Proposer,, ,, Paints
1 Cascadia Consulting Group 1049.92
2 Michael Baker International 982.25
3 Geos Institute 979.415
4 ESA 965.97
5 Good Company 932.10
6 Perkins +Will 726.79
7 Sharpe Energy Solutions 724.75
The RFP process resulted in market based bids for services at a level to adequately complete the
project as anticipated by City staff and the ad hoc committee. The bids ranged from a low of$60,000
to a high of over $300,000, with the top four ranked responses averaging just over$110,000.
As part of the selection panel group deliberation, ranking averages were calculated in addition to the
points calculation method and Cascadia was the top proposer using that method of evaluation selection
as well.
COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED:
22.1 Develop and implement a community climate change and energy plan
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The preliminary project funding was estimated and approved prior to the Council determining whether
the project would be managed in house with the addition of a limited duration contract staff person or
be done through a professional services contract with a consultant team. The estimate was based on
the equivalent of a 0.50 FTE using the salary schedule of an associate planner wage &benefit; $60,000
for each year of the biennium for a total of$120,000.
In support of the overall Climate and Energy Action Plan project, a greenhouse gas inventory for the
community and City operations was also anticipated to be completed utilizing the $120,000 budget.
This component of the project was solicited with an RFP process in August of 2015, with the
consultant selection and contract approved by Council on September 15, 2015 with a maximum
amount of$46,319.
Cascadia Consulting has offered two options from their original bid. The full bid price of$129,000
includes the full scope of their proposed public engagement services. The second option is a reduced
bid of$120,000, which removes one site visit by the consultant team and also reduces the number of
consultant team members for the remaining site visits.
Utilizing the $120,000 appropriation for the GHG inventory leaves a balance of$73,681 available for
the climate and energy action plan consultant, resulting in a deficit of$55,319 (or $46,319 using the
second Cascadia bid option).
Staff proposes to cover this deficit by using funds currently budgeted in the Conservation program for
technical assistance, energy efficiency incentives and energy efficiency loans. Recent changes to
implementation practices for ductless heat pump incentives and loans make it virtually certain that
Page 2 of 3
R 11 I�
CITY OF
AS I 1� L.AN D
these funds will be underspent in the remainder of the current budget cycle. In addition, given that
City operations benefit directly from the greenhouse gas inventory, the Facilities Division has agreed
to offset by$10,000 the cost of the inventory.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of the contract with Cascadia Consulting Group for the Climate and
Energy Action Plan.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
I move to authorize the City Administrator to execute a contract not to exceed $129,000 with Cascadia
Consulting Group.
ATTACHMENTS:
Climate and Energy Action Plan—RFP November 4, 2015
Climate and Energy Action Plan— Selection Panel scoring summary
Cascadia Consulting Group Inc—Proposed contract agreement
Links
March 16, 2015 Council Study Session— Conservation Commission report
http://www.ashland.or.us/SIB/files/031615 Climate Energy Plan CC.pdf
June 2, 2015 Council Business Meeting—Formation of Ad-Hoc Committee
http://www.ashland.or.us/SIB/files/This-l—Climate—Energy Plan_CC.pdf
September 15, 2015 Council Business Meeting—Award of GHG Inventory contract
http://www.ashland.or.us/SIB/files/091515 GHG Inventory Contract Award CC.pdf
Page 3 of 3
M 0
The consultant team of Cascadia Consulting Group and its partners Oregon Climate Change Research Institute
(OCCRI) at Oregon State University,Jeff Golden of Golden Communications,Jill Simmons,and David Van't Hof
will undertake the following activities to create an actionable Climate and Energy Action Plan for the City of
Ashland.
This scope of work consists of the following tasks, detailed below:
1. Scoping and Public Engagement Plan
2. Public Engagement
3. Mitigation Analysis and Prioritization
4. Adaptation Analysis and Prioritization
5. Report and Monitoring and Evaluation(M&E) Plan
6. Project Management
T Scoping and Public Engagement Plan February—March
This task consists of two subtasks: 1) Project Scoping and Kick-off and 2) Public Engagement Plan Development.
Subtask 1: Project Scoping and Kick-off
The consultant team will begin by engaging in one to two planning/scoping calls with City of Ashland staff to
solidify a common understanding of the following:
■ Project and City goals and expectations, including any overarching climate mitigation goals
■ Final report formats and contents, including desired sectors to be covered
■ Key stakeholders and their interests
■ Overall breadth and depth of the planning effort, including public engagement components
Following the discussion,we will prepare a revised project work plan and task-level timeline.The consultant
team will present the revised work plan to the ad-hoc committee members at a kick-off meeting.The meeting
will allow committee members to review and provide feedback on the project work plan, arrive at a common
understanding of expectations, and share lessons learned from previous engagement efforts in order to inform
the Public Engagement Plan.
Subtask 2: Public Engagement Plan Development
Based on these inputs and a review of relevant existing information and initiatives, the consultant team will
complete a draft Public Engagement Plan that builds from existing knowledge to map out a plan for optimal
engagement.The plan will establish outreach and communications goals and define strategies, key messages,
types of stakeholders to be engaged, and anticipated outreach activities tailored for the City of Ashland. The
plan will define the consultant team's level of effort as well as contributions from city of Ashland staff and the
ad-hoc committee under two scenarios: 1)within budgeted resources and 2)with an expanded consultant level
of effort thereby reducing the need for City in-kind support.
V
As part of this process,the consultant team will work closely with City staff to design a series of workshops,
including proposed invitees, agendas,exercises,and preparatory materials.The team will also seek to align the
approach with existing City frameworks and planning processes.
Based on input from the City project team,the consultant team will refine and finalize the Public Engagement
Plan before the end of March.
In-person, 2 to 4-hour ad-hoc committee kickoff meeting attended by Marc and Andrea;other planning
meetings will be done by phone or videomnference.
Kick-off meeting with relevant City staff and committee members (agenda and summary notes)
Final project work plan and timeline
Draft and final Public Engagement Plan
Task 2 Public Engagement April—November
As informed by the Public Engagement Plan,the consultant team will employ public engagement methods to
ensure widespread, diverse stakeholder participation within the allocated Budget. Options could include open
houses,workshops,surveys, social media,and community ambassadors. For example,within the allocated
budget,the consultant team could plan and lead the following public engagement activities:
Two public forums to introduce the project, clarify our approach and opportunities for public input, and
discuss findings from the mitigation and adaptation analyses
Four workshops with City staff and ad-hoc committee members to review analysis findings; brainstorm and
screen mitigation/adaptation strategies; review shortlisted strategies and set priorities; and present and
solicit feedback on the draft final plan
One open house with stations to solicit public feedback on identified actions and strategies
Attendance at relevant ad-hoc committee meetings,to ensure that we remain informed of local
developments and to answer questions about plan progress as needed
Jeff Golden will serve as the consultant team's on-the-ground, local resource for public engagement and
communications in Ashland, under the guidance of Gretchen Muller,Cascadia's public involvement specialist.
Jeff Golden will help share information and will serve as a consistent presence to ensure that we understand
local dynamics as they evolve.
If desired by the City,the consultant team could plan and engage in additional public engagement activities for
an additional fee. See the Budget section for more information.
Joint determination of specific public engagement methods and schedules to be specified in the Public
Engagement Plan
Planning assistance and attendance of at least one City staff person at every public engagement event
llllui��iilliiilllluw� . lu puu��..
llllllllli llllllllllllllliuuu�� °°" IIIVIIVuumu!!! °° iiui��
IIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUU p��� �u ;;
IIIIIIIIIIU ,,
IIIIIIIIIIII, IIIIIIU � ,,,
i �� �iiiiulUlilllllll IIIIIIIIIIIIIII. °; iiu
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ����l�l�l�l�l�l�l�lililililililililililihhhlllllilili�i�i�l�l'�I'I'll
Planning, preparation,and implementation of public engagement events, as defined by the Public
Engagement Plan
Collection, compilation,and summary of all feedback/input received from community participants
T as k 3 Mi t igation Analysis and Prioritization April—October
The consultant team will review the City's GHG inventory,anticipated to be completed in February, and position
it to serve as the baseline for the mitigation component of this climate action planning effort.The consultant
team will then work with the City and stakeholders during the initial planning and kickoff meetings to clarify the
overarching mitigation goal,which will inform GHG reduction targets,as well as to identify Ashland's unique
challenges and opportunities.
The consultant team will develop a list of targets and potential implementation actions,drawing on best
practices from other relevant communities.This list will focus on the sectors identified as of particular interest in
the initial planning and kick-off meetings(in Task 1), as well as on the particular opportunities identified in
Ashland. The consultant team will facilitate a workshop with the City and ad-hoc committee members (among
the workshops listed in Task 2)to conduct an initial screening of these options to identify a shortlist of potential
measures that can be analyzed in more detail and could contribute to meeting specified targets.
Using a customized methodology to evaluate costs and benefits—not just financial, but also social and
environmental—the consultant team will estimate the cost as well as the feasibility of shortlisted actions, as well
as review other applicable City plans and polices to identify areas of alignment or potential conflict.
The results of this analysis will be presented to the City project team and the public for review and discussion in
the fall (among the workshops listed in Task 2).That discussion will inform the team's consolidation of final
actions and targets for inclusion in the Climate and Energy Action Plan.
Planning assistance of at least one City staff person for the public forum, open house,and City workshops
Attendance of ad-hoc committee members and relevant City staff at workshops
Assistance from City staff in compiling relevant documentation, reviewing identified actions, and addressing
questions as needed regarding cost, feasibility, and alignment with City goals and priorities
Summary of baseline conditions and projections, presented in graphical, narrative, and tabular format
PowerPoint presentation or Word document summarizing most important challenges and opportunities to
achieve Ashland's goals and targets
Brief PowerPoint presentation or Word document of selected implementation actions and their evaluation
against agreed-upon criteria, in tabular and graphical format,with short explanatory narratives providing
additional detail
i�iiiiii,i� iiiiiiiiii��� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIU ��
IIIIUI
� l
� l
� l
it
it
u � l
,��IUIII�
1
111
Task 4 1 Adaptation Analysis and Prioritization April-0cto ber
The adaptation planning process will be conducted in parallel with the mitigation planning process,taking
advantage of opportunities to identify measures that have both resilience-building and emissions-reduction
benefits.
This process will begin with an analysis of climate trend data specific to Ashland and the surrounding region.This
work will be conducted by scientists at Oregon State University's Oregon Climate Change Research Institute
(OCCRI). Using best available science,OCCRI will provide local information about climate trends and projections
for the Rogue Valley,for readily available climate metrics such as extreme heat or daily precipitation. Sources of
such information will include observed climate records from the US Historical Climate Network,Version 2;
downscaled data from the CMIPS archive, developed by OCCRI and its partners using the Multivariate Adaptive
Constructed Analogs data for RCP8.5 and RCP4.5 (ht[p;//naca,.no.r$hwestl<now.ledge..net). OCCRI will provide
graphs and narratives covering local, historical, current, and projected climate data in sufficient detail for setting
short-, mid-,and long-range targets and to support action planning to achieve these targets. OCCRI will also
contribute as appropriate to the development of science-based climate adaptation strategies.
The consultant team will then develop a list of potential implementation actions, referring to best practices from
other communities in the Pacific Northwest and across the country that face similar challenges. In addition to
considering particular opportunities in Ashland,the consultant team will identify assets,systems, resources, and
neighborhoods that are projected to be particularly vulnerable to climate change impacts.
The consultant team will facilitate a workshop with the City and ad-hoc committee members(among the
workshops listed in Task 2)to conduct an initial screening of these options to select a shortlist of potential
measures that can be analyzed in more detail.Typical criteria used for screening at this stage include
affordability,technical feasibility,flexibility, effectiveness in addressing the climate impacts of concern,and
mitigation co-benefits.The consultant team will review the proposed screening criteria with the City before
conducting the analysis.
Based on feedback,the consultant team will further investigate costs and feasibility of the shortlisted actions,
and will present the findings to the City project team and the public for review and discussion in the fall (among
the workshops and forums listed in Task 2).That work will include a workshop for City staff to select among
possible actions, as well as an open house with stations to collect public feedback on proposed mitigation and
adaptation actions.
Input from City staff regarding desired climate metrics,such as average versus extreme temperature and
precipitation projections
Planning assistance of at least one City staff person for the public forum, open house,and City workshops
Attendance of ad-hoc committee members and relevant City staff at workshops
Assistance from City staff in compiling relevant documentation, reviewing identified actions, and addressing
questions as needed regarding cost, feasibility, and alignment with City goals and priorities
Summary of climate trend data analysis
l iiii�i�i�i iiii,i llllllllllllllllllllll����u II�IIIIIIIIIU IIII� „lu, ,,,,,,
IIIIIII��91�I�IIII������������������� �000n����� III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIU ,, ,,,,,,
�i�iiiiii�i iiiiiiiiii������� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIU.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ���������u�I�GGlililililililihhhhhhhhhh�i�i�l'�I'�i�i�i�illl
Brief PowerPoint presentation or Word document of selected adaptation actions and their evaluation
against agreed-upon criteria, in tabular and graphical format,with short explanatory narratives providing
additional detail
Task 5 � Report and Mo nito ng ri and Evalu at ion (M&E) Plan October 2016—January 2017
The consultant team will prepare the following reporting and final deliverables:
A draft and final Climate and Energy Action Plan, which summarizes climate trend data and vulnerabilities,
current emissions,target reductions, and prioritized adaptation and mitigation actions.This Plan will also
refer to the goals and targets of other community partners, in the main body or in an appendix,for a
comprehensive view of relevant efforts underway in Ashland.
A graphics-rich implementation plan to clarify the schedule and responsible parties.
A monitoring, evaluation, and reporting plan for use by City staff, which includes metrics, methods,and
tools for tracking progress against the actions in the Climate and Energy Action Plan.
A four-page,visually appealing flyer, to clearly communicate Ashland's goals and planned actions to the
public.
At the planning and kick-off meetings in Task 1,the consultant team will work with the client and ad-hoc
committee members to envision what the final Climate and Energy Action Plan document will look like and
consist of. We will discuss such questions as:who are key audiences and what are their critical needs, how long
the report should be, how it should be formatted,and what deliverables to include in the main report versus
incorporated as attachments.The consultant team will establish expectations at this point but review and
discuss these and make adjustments as appropriate before preparing the draft and final report.
The consultant will provide Word and/or Adobe-based document design and production services for the Climate
and Energy Action Plan and four-page flyer.These services could include development of infographics and
compelling data displays,as determined through the initial report drafting process.All written work products
and deliverables will undergo a rigorous quality control processes that involve editorial board review and senior-
level oversight.
City will provide feedback on draft Plan within two weeks
Climate and Energy Action Plan will be 40-50 pages long
Draft and final Climate and Energy Action Plan and accompanying implementation plan
Draft and final monitoring, evaluation, and reporting plan
Four-page public-facing flyer
Task 6 Project Management Ongoing
The consultant team project manager will use the DeltekT'" project management system to monitor and assess
current budget and cast status for each phase and task of the project.The project manager will communicate
regularly with the City project manager to ensure that work progresses according to the agreed-upon timeline
llllllllli llllllllllllllliuuu�� °°" IIIVIIVuumu!!! °° iiui��
IIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUU p��� �u ;;
IIIIIIIIIIU ,,
IIIIIIIIIIII, IIIIIIU � ,,,
Illllllllllliii ��iiiiiii uu�lllllllllll uuuuui„,,, ���� � i i
i ii ,,,,,W. ��; uWillllllll
i
i
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ���i�l�l�l�l�l�l�l�lilililililililililihhhhlllllilili�i�i�l�l'�I'I'll
and quality standards.The project manager will be available for bi-monthly check-in calls to ensure clear and
consistent communication on progress.
City staff will be available for check-ins as needed
Bi-monthly check-in calls
Monthly invoices and activity reports
ESTIMATED TIMELINE AND SCHEDULE IO R COMPLETION
The schedules on the following two pages summarize the consultant teams estimated timeline for completing
major tasks and deliverables on this project.They are consistent with the City's target completion date of
January 2017.The schedules also lists team members that are responsible for each of the tasks. Dates could be
adjusted based on discussions with the City project team during the initial planning meetings.
The consultant team will aim to complete the plan within 11 months of the contract start date (January 2017 if
contract start date is beginning of February 2016).The schedule and work plan accounts for anticipated levels of
public involvement, availability of City staff, ad-hoc committee members,and the public over the spring,
summer and fall,and the consultant team members'other commitments. Once the work plan is agreed and
committed to at the conclusion of sniping, it will be the project manager's responsibility to manage to that
schedule. City staff and members of the ad-hoc committee will have dearly established expectations for
participation, including a schedule of meetings and decision-making.The consultant team's project manager will
monitor and report on progress relative to the initial plan.Any schedule or other work plan adjustments will be
made inclose coordination and with the approval of the client.
Task-level responsibilities for the consultant team, City staff, and ad-hoc committee members are summarized in
the table below.
Feb— - Organize and conduct - Attend planning calls and - Committee members to
March kick-off meeting kick-off meeting attend kick-off meeting
- Develop final work plan& Provide input Provide input
schedule - Approve work plan &
- Develop public engagement plan
engagement plan
April— - Implement public - Attend relevant events - Attend events
Nov engagement plan— Assist with Provide leadership at
events,social media, implementation per plan public processes per plan
presentations,etc.
- Facilitate stakeholder
meetings
� lllli���lllllllllllluu�� . lu iiiw��..
llllllllli llllllllllllllliuuu�� °°" IIIVIIVuumu!!! °° iiui��
IIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUU p��� �u ;;
IIIIIIIIIIU ,,
IIIIIIIIIIII, IIIIIIU � ,,,
�Illiiiiii��,,, ' IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIU.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �;�������������uu����l�l�lililihhhhhhhhhhlilililililililiill
April— - Develop draft targets, Provide relevant - Agree on goals&targets
Oct strategies and actions information (GHG - Provide input on possible
- Develop/applyinventory) actions
methodology for decision - Decide on goals&
making targets
- Facilitate decision making - Provide input
- Participate in meetings
April— - Conduct science - Provide relevant - Attend meetings
i Oct assessment information - Provide input on possible
Develop draft strategies Provide input actions
&actions,and conduct - Participate in meetings
analysis of shortlisted
actions
- Facilitate decision making
Oct— Develop draft report, Provide input Provide input
Jan monitoring Provide comments on Provide comments on
methodologies,& report report
reporting process - Approve final report& - Approve final report&
plan plan
lan— - Manage team,schedule, - Provide oversight - Provide oversight of
Jan budget, &tasks Participate in regular content and serve as
- Provide monthly project check in calls sounding board
reporting&invoices - Assist with maintaining - Provide leadership to
- Participate in check-in schedule attain goals and maintain
calls - Approve invoices schedule
- Provide troubleshooting - Provide troubleshooting
&problem solving &problem solving
- Coordinate with ad-hoc
committee
i�iiiiii,i� iiiiiiiiii��� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIU ��
II Il
iillU
1111
E
E
4- Mw
0
t
0
0
Z
+
4-J
s: Q) ()
. 'If
�Q ;3 =
l 61�1 ra. C74 U
ij -M
'D LLI
cz 0
7E 0
E E bo
0 Ln tau
U) 4-J
0 0
I
4-J w
2
Q. 7,71 CA
tt w
73 to Up
Q). T,
o o 4,111
C ITJ S-11 ITID
V I c 6ri
IIBIIII
>
Lin Lq
4-A
Flo-
UQ 7 Olo
IF CL
CL c 72 0 c
4-J ri �n LF1
Ln a-_ m
11111111111111111111111111111- jjj=l uwmlllllllllllllllllillillillillillillilliillillillillillillilliilI OR,c OJ LD
Vill
Ln 0 uq
M Ln VI
4-J
Qj ro
Ln rip
7,D
—01 Qj
L-
m
14 E E,
(Ij VIIII E 5 U11111M
4 J 4---1 ............................................................
L.......................................
0
73 o j4
, L ,
E IM
4-
C, 0
a
kA
;E
CA.
E
75 ;p 1 -73 9,77,
Iz
4-J 4-J
.....................,
V CL
H
i
„ r—
tLo --4 --4
0
4� 4�
bb
VII j
lim -o
UJ
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiillillililiiiiiI 1111111� WWWROW)
CL
aw
73 "m
V�
d>jwn
6-
U) MI
2
LEIu
4-J
Z
tIO bb et"
2:! . 773
ru 6- T .....
�13
LL- t 61.
a)
iiiiiiii M IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiillillillillillillilliillilliillillillillillillilliillillillillillillillillilliillillillillillillilliillillillillillillillill�0 HIM
06 Olt)
4-0
4-0
cu C:
m
Ln m
6.
Ln
CL p.n V Wa
�V, v
61.
uu
uw
...................................................................................................................................................................
Qj
CL 1111, p sr—
Till —
(3?
C
4-j
m
U.
FL 11 1111, bb,
....................................................................................................................................................................... +
1 II
rH
11,
11,
11,
11,
11,
11
11,
Il
Il
II
Il
11 ra
Ilk Ilk
B U D GET
Budget Option A:
The base budget for this project is$129,900(summarized in the "Option A"table on the following page).The
key variable in this budget is the extent and cost of the public engagement process,which will not be fully
determined until after Task 1 planning is complete.The budget allotted for the public engagement process is
$47,070,for a base level of effort to support two public forums,one open house,and a workshop to present the
plan.This budget also supports the in-person kick-off meeting and an additional mid-project workshop with the
City.The budget assumes in-kind involvement by the City helping with logistics and dissemination of
information.
Budget Option B:
The$129,900 budget could be reduced to$120,000 by making the following changes to the scope of work
(summarized in "Option B"table, changes highlighted in yellow):
■ Allowing City staff to review shortlisted actions and analysis remotely, as opposed to in-person during a
third workshop
■ Reducing participation in the kick-off meeting to only two traveling consultants
■ Eliminating consultant attendance at ad-hoc committee meetings
■ Reducing on-site facilitation of the open house and third workshop to only two traveling consultants
Optional Amendment:
Upon written approval of the City,the consultant team could provide additional public involvement services
beyond the agreed-upon fee of$47,070 to more fully satisfy public and stakeholder interests and achieve City
goals. Potential additions include hiring an Ashland-based intern to provide additional local outreach and
coordination, providing additional consultants at public workshops, regular attendance at ad-hoc committee
meetings, and expanded community engagement.The scope of work and budget associated with this additional
engagement will be mutually agreed upon in writing by the City and consultant.
0000 0000000 00000 00000 000 000 0000
M.-!O N N It O O;;r r-i O 00 l0 00 N N I\Ln r-I It N M.--I N N N O p O M N
CO C) O O.-!Ln M 0� O O O p O N M M N W 0 0 0 O O I�N
M It 1 d>O 0 N lD N I T M It It I M M M IT �,--I CO ,M I It It l0 V
rl V +-I N N iir +�
• iA iif ifs ff� ifs
p 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 p o 0 0 o p 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 p 0 o p 0 0 0
.--1 N 00 O It 00 It i!l- O o fPr It 74 O'� 1
41 01 Ln Ln M Ln M N N T„l+ N C ipr
rl N N,N! N
it} 74
to
p 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 p 0 0 p 0 0 0
IyOON LntDNqTtDNc) 001D00NN P,U)r-iqt� mr-iN 00000 01 NN
0 00(1 0'O p O Ln N l-tD 00�"O 0� N 00 N r)M N O0" p W O n Lv, N
•
N n V 00 00 Lf)C)It N T M�� M M� O,--I 00 ,N"TM
rl M rl rl N ifF i!r
f!� tiF i!r ifs Mr
Ln Ln%.O v- f\O m 00 M Ln.D rl%-0 00 It M rl,--!0)0)N (4 o N N It 00 M 0 It 0) ••
41Ln (M �1D00Md>Nt i �MNM�t tD0NN't 00 r� LANN ^ NN
Ca
• •
Q
4--)
t0 �D O o N N
>
• O
O 00 co O T O O se
�
U
• • 00co O CNN O tO-'I-N p p ®• ^�
u I
•
O O COCL
O NNo O O Illllllllll
�i
O
•
' • 00 I'D N M 00 00 00 N O O O ID LD N N ' h^ •�
• wU
co
Q
® v O
- N Ln M M rM M M O O 00 00 00 O f\
� .•
C)
V!
V!
• - >
' , O O O O O 00 00
- !A
• ' V l/
O V/'�'�
r
U
' - O %D 00 N N 0 0 O O N 00 C) 0 0 0 O ®®
. - rl 1A M N ! N N N �[
'0 L •L
O>> O
o 0 0 0 0 0
O
O
4-
O
O (�
• ® 1 ``+
• -
000�N N ON N
- O O 00 re) O Ni00 O4-1
O
• ;5-
a--+ L
• O
-_ cn Q
� IA N I�l0 l0 O l0
• N,-i N+--! O 01 Ln,--!N.--! �N lD lD co O •� �
a
Gr1� O � ��N co�N o 0 000- N �
LZ
1-4 1-4 N M,-4,-4 M N
•
°;,;;;��r,illllllllllll
II�
M O 1A LD tD
- N M N N N M N 00 l0 N 4T It 00 00
M IVUUJ
• �t�IIJ
�, � N C6 m'io������IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII��i�iiiiii�
� �������r'r�«rr�llllllllllllllllllll
— u Illjl��r�°I111r1
aU o L a
• O C a o ,� to O dff'ff��l
Jam' C C Q) N L 0) L
_ L. U fu O 70 +' O ' "���IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
O C �a 0 � 3
=3 CA
d C _a
.�
U V) o cE � u
_0 EL cN o o Ln a
1!
�����l�trl IIIIIIIII
• C E
• •d�"VS��
ivra`m~ LO L O -
ul L.
i+C C) (O C
-C V 4J O a (O +C+aCQ C O
= Q O
L ZO V) J+ Q aA No N 0 ro U)o (d LC (a -
0- LL OO OL U 0) v p O . C
O v `au C- � Oa
o O m v O a)0 LnMa °
crno C .,C6 aS U 3+ 4 � rj � E
fl
_ !N ' O •
i c
O L.
O O O O v E E U L
•� OLn 1i a1 t L -O
oo 3 +-+
0 C ON Oj M M 0�
v u � �
° `°c c ��O o
IIIII pIYIbu IIItlirI uIIDIIIoII�II�mrIml�IilIIiuIIi,oIIl'"I�uI�1IIu'(,����I@r
�IIl�IfI
IJr
�
�I1I��II�J III IIIIIII IIIIII
01.V C d W 7 O Q C 4 2 cn N C ++ - cn N C L E .!0�, W p X
c1l�a aa�OL�Q *'C���Q �U��Q *'C), �m �Qw
_
c 1. IIIIII
•� i N M !N M I Ln lD i N M't !N M 0.,!N 0 i N !N M
U 7 'Q w L. 3 U 1uuuuuui�
■ (A.�-1.--1 a N N N N N N M M M M Q Lr)Ln a tD 0 a n n n r , C6 `
V hh�� purl°1 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
rl N M LA lD Imo • N UI.ii
�Jl�lllld'�
p o 0 o 0000000 00000 p 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 000
O I�O N �„� O N E i 00 l0 00 N N N Ln.--i Itr*� M-1 N N N O
NMD>O OtD i�llO 00"`10a1 mONMM NOZ"' pC 0
• I, I O O lD N<D I�M M M M� i a0 M U
rl M 1-I N N {E}
• f!� fif ifs f� ii� � {i
p 0 0 0 p o 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 o p O o 0 0 p 0 0 p 0 0
� N 0000It00It OO iol- I
M M Lfl Ln M Ln M N N �,•�.-I
• �r-i ^ i i i i i N N
•
LU
0000 p O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 000 p 0 0 ('6
M O N 01 lD N O lD r� 00 lfl 00 N N ^Ln,-I�� M,--1 N O 00 O
• O O Cn 0 O Ln O CO lD 00 0 Q1 N CO N M M N C' O CO O
• • O l0 N 00 CO Ln Ln� M� M M O i CO N
• h n
1-1 M 1-4TAN� fi} WJ
"t lD qt M lD m lfl r�m 0 rl lD 00 1-M rl r-i 01 61 N N O N N IT CO
00't M O0 lD O M t t 't M N M�t O lD N N It O0 i I*� Ln N N
N rl rl rl •
•
Q
W l0 co N N
rl i O rl i O
•
• O
O 00 00 O � IT O '®
U
•
• M00 O CNN O 0:1-N p •® - �
Q
O O OO co
IIIIIIIIII°III
F—
• O bbn
• _
• 00 lD N N 00 00 00 N NCL
•�
Ln
CD b-0
Q
U O
L.
• N-1 ,--i M M M.--i rf1 M O O 00 0 0� O
..
•— a--�
C6
4-1 _ ro
Z •
O
• U txo
• 0 lD 00 O O N O 0 0 0 ®•
• rl NIt N N N O O N N N
cz 'o •L
p O
• L O
O O O O O O
CL
• - N
• 1
• O O 00o'tNrV O ONE O ®® (V bn
• 00 N i N M N rI
l n
v4--JI
C6 O
tA Ln
• .o _ ^'
• �,q N,� M�N� I-i O C%Ln.i N,� �N� lC lD •(/y �
•
■
LL
cc
ca
• 1
N ItOON M ID ID M N�O N 00 N
' ^
Ln
m 6.9Q
- ` IIIIIIII�
• o
- II�
- • M O 01 lD O �� �IIIlU9lll��• iN i r-i r-i G1NNNM N+ +11 00lDN � �
• N • IIIIIIIII�IIIIIIII��
• - ��t�l�� IIIIII
Uz,
a f �lllllllllll
> rr��IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
o IIIII;��r��°I111�1I
c� q- V) W a O �IltltlflClllll
� Ullllllllllllll
a E a+' U c1 vi u
Q ��' a Ln u �
d C O C C
N C C
E �� c-a� E C6 � O O L0 - O
O — � L Lf) L u u a—
o_ +� U 4 E � r0E� (A � r0E m � C V) o N ��lff�f
C,--1N� C LU+, - U) fU 4� - O N
�„� _ Q Vl - O_ O J
01 CE. hiYtlIIIVIIIJI�����IIIIIII I II�+� +�as O E �' -�+� � a ro;�, � c 1
to U u N 0)-C N 01 C �,L
cc E•r,u w L L c-C L p1 f0 0�' cn C a- +' O cn 0� 0 C a1- O
3� O w cno O O O O C C_0 QO N QO O x C �+�+ O ��11IIIIIII
d L (d m w w L QJ O N � O N ru E C C u rGllllll
CC E ° °ca -0G1.0.0� c c r L 0 0 > O ° 2' C w ° a�
�,�� a EE
p a LU O 0-c =n a CO +� m W c rL. E �, '- S
=YiLa �aa�OiLQ mC7��Q QU��Q o�� ��00 _ IIIIII��
.O m m 0. ilfliuuif jlllll 111
a cm .r.,
- V i N(%) �4 N rM It Ln lD *�.--1 N M I N M I N 0 i N r ,
N N N M M 6V N N N M M Q Ln Ln d LD r , (� `
V hh�� pur11° IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
O
�Jl�lllli�'�