Thread by @shayshinecastle

It's this one: An update on the Climate Action Plan.

Staff presentation: www-static.bouldercolorado.gov/docs/Climate_A…

LOTS to get into, but the big ones are:
New goals
A new approach boulderbeat.news/2021/06/05/bou…

Basically, Boulder (and a lot of other cities) were taking an approach in which they look at its own emissions that happen within its borders and try to reduce it as much as possible.

The thought was that every city would do the same — or at least enough cities so that states and eventually the national gov't would be pressured to make changes.

But that didn't happen.

Just 8% of U.S. cities have any sort of climate plan. So there's too few people looking out for only "their" emissions — and only ones that happen within their geographic boundaries.

Which, of course, emissions and climate change don't really acknowledge boundaries.

The new approach takes into account the demand side of things: That is, not only the emissions produced by activities HERE, but produced ELSEWHERE bc of activities here.

Like, we buy a lot of stuff. It gets made somewhere, creating GHG, then gets shipped here, creating more GHG.

The old model said those emissions would be counted elsewhere, by other places. The new model will count them as our own.

This will likely increase our carbon footprint by a lot, bc rich people buy a lot of crap. Staff said this new way of accounting (consumptions-based emissions) may more than double our inventory of emissions.

One thing we're gonna start counting: Greenhouse gases created by workers coming in and out each day. boulderbeat.news/2021/06/04/bou…

Some stuff I couldn't fit into the story:
53% waste diversion in 2020 (target 85% by 2025)
Open space preservation: 45,000 acres (will be used for carbon capture)
Per capita electricity use down by 8% past 15 years (despite 55% increase in GDP)

And per person VMT is down from 15 miles per day to 12 in the 90s. (Though total VMT is up from 2.19 million miles per day to 2.49 million)

"We are eager to share our new approach for the next generation" of climate action," says Jonathan Koehn, director of climate initiatives. "We think it's courageous, visionary and collaborative."

Brett KenCairn acknowledging the indigenous peoples of this area and their own historic knowledge about sustainable practices. "There's so much to learn from."

With the climate work we were doing in Boulder, "we thought we were building a movement," that would spread to other places, KenCairn says.

We assumed "that aggregated impact of a growing movement of cities" would lead to a great reduction in GHG, KenCairn says.

"We now unfortunately recognize that several of those assumptions don't appear to be true."

"Our model of how we were doing this, how the beacons on the hill would lead to this movement," didn't pan out, KenCairn says.

Again, only 8% of local gov't with climate plans. They rep about 30% of the population, so that's important, but still.

"Our science is showing us" that the actual impact of this old approach is not having a big impact, KenCairn says.

Another big takeaway from this update: Emissions reduction will not be enough, moving forward. We'll have to start aggressive carbon drawdown.

And prepare our communities for the impacts of climate change, KenCairn says. (Resilience is another big part of the plan)

"We know that, unfortunately, this is creating a climate emergency. We feel it's our responsibility as a dept to share with you where climate change stands and where it's headed. It's literally happening at our doorstep."

Showing pictures of last year's wildfires.

"These are not just temporary inconveniences," KenCairn says. "These cause long-term impacts that we need to start planning for."

Didn't remember this headline, but last fall Boulder had its record low for Oct. 26 (5 degrees) and record high for Nov. 5 (79 degrees). That's 10 days and 74 degrees difference! Wild.

When I joined the climate dept, the work was "entirely about" energy systems, de-carbonizing them, KenCairn says. "But now we also have to prepare for the inevitable climate change that is to come."

And we have to transition in a just and equitable way, KenCairn says. That means costs and benefits equitably distributed, as well as righting historic wrongs. (Low-income and BIPOC tend to bear a higher burden from climate change)

Damn, KenCairn is a great presenter. I keep forgetting to tweet and just listening to him.

KenCairn walking through the old and new systems approach for one particular example: Methane/natural gas. It's kinda hard to convey via tweet.

"This isn't just about the strategy the city uses," KenCairn says. "There's a systems-based approach for every sector of our society."

One of the "game-changing pieces" Boulder and Boulder County initiated was the Colorado Communities for Climate Action, which 40+ municipalities have now joined. "We are having a significant policy influence at the state level."

OK, there is zero way I can convey the amazingness of this graphic on slide 33, but please check it out. It has SO. MUCH. INFO.

Boulder's work with Xcel is really important to systems, KenCairn says. We're pushing for new ways of electrifying homes/buildings AND financing green home improvements. That will have impacts beyond Boulder.

KenCairn: "Land use is one of the favorite contact sports in our community .... We are one the path toward one of the major comprehensive plan updates. This is going to be an extremely important time to look at all the ways land use impacts our ability to draw down carbon."

After that speedy run-through of vision, Yael Gichon is going to talk about progress and goals. So a little more concrete.

Gichon: "The science is clear. The amount of carbon we emit to avoid catastrophic levels of warming.... we will exhaust our carbon budget in 10 years. We must move quickly."

Higher emitters (like the U.S.) must move more quickly, Gichon says. We're not equally responsible. Responsibility should be distributed equally to their emissions.

Gichon: "Those most responsible must support those most vulnerable."

In 2018, U.S. carbon footprint was 16.2 metric tons pwer person

Boulder (from 2019) was 13.7 — way above Europe and China (7) and the global average (4.8)

Boulder also below some bigger cities like Denver (11.6) and NYC (6.1) but better than Colorado as a whole (21. DAMN) bouldercolorado.gov/climate/boulde….

"Change should really yield the greatest systems-scale impact rather than the biggest impact" within the city boundaries, Gichon says. "This is a big shift in the paradigm."

Gichon: It's not about reducing our emissions. Adaptation is a core pillar.

"The city will make more headway toward systemic change" if we look at consumptive AND productive emissions, Gichon says.

Gichon going over the new focus areas for Boulder's climate action plan: Regenerative ecosystems, Energy systems, Circular materials economy (for which goals have been ID'd) land use, and financial systems.

There are also overarching goals related to equity and resilience (the ability to adapt in a changing climate)

The Environmental Advisory Board weighed in on the Climate Action Plan update (slide 52).
Some highlights: Don't totally discount individual action
"Align major decisions" on policies like land use and building regs with climate work

That was a quick presentation for such a heavy topic. Council has to answer a few qs: Do you approve of the new approach? Do you have any recommendations? Do you want a formal resolution and vote in August?

Brockett asking about a specific goal on having materials that can be reused/recycled by 2030. How much control do we have over that, really? he asks.

Gichon: As a city ourselves, we don't have a whole lot of control. But through regional partnerships and lobbying the state "there are levers we can pull. ... When you start to look globally, it starts to feel overwhelming."

"I don't think it's an easy one to tackle," Gichon says. "It's one we see as necessary, but we don't see a lot of pathways."

Jamie Harkins: I think we'll target policy first, try to influence some state bills around the right to repair and end-market development.

Joseph: Is there a requirement right now for new construction to use heat pump technology? Is that something we're considering?
Elam: We've been very cautious in our code development to not dictate the technology solution but set performance standards.

Elam: Heat pumps tend to be the technology of choice, but they are not mandated through our code.

Weaver: Why did we shift our baseline year (what we're comparing to for reduction in emissions) from 2005 to 2018?

Lauren Tremblay fielding that one: The recommendation (from some international org) is to shift away from 2005 to somewhere between 2016-2019, with 2018 as the ideal, since cities are just now starting to get into this work. It was an opportunity to align.

It's part of the Race To Zero campaign. unfccc.int/climate-action…

Weaver: We've been telling them we were at 21% carbon reduction. If we move the baseline, we'll be at a few % at best. How do we bring the community along?

Weaver: When we start counting embodied emissions and consumptions-based emissions, it may double our emissions. How do we square that change (and the baseline change) with previous progress?

"All the sudden, we reset the 0 to 2018 and we have double emissions," Weaver says.

"It's extremely daunting."

Tremblay: It's going to be a lot of learning. We'll work with the inventory so it's comparable to previous years.

Basically, applying the new method to past years, so it will show trends over time.

Weaver asking about divestment (taking your $$ out of fossil fuels): How is the city going to do that?

The city doesn't directly invest in fossil fuels, but it banks / does biz with financial institutions that do.

KenCairn: "We have power through procurement. ... We need to normalize this as being a legit part of our strategies."

Reminder: The specific goals for the "financial systems" focus area are TBD, pending more community feedback. As are goals for the land use focus area.

Nagle: "My biggest takeaway is how urgent this is."

Basically asks if climate staff is going to recommend against cattle grazing on open space (and therefore stop killing prairie dogs) and to ag uses like hemp.

KenCairn: It's one of those things we're going to need to be looking at. We have actually started down this path. We are supporting a community collaboration to look at how we manage lands in the context of agriculture.

"We're just starting to move that work forward," KenCairn says.

I missed Friend's q, but it was about state legislature. They passed a bill that allows local gov't to ban plastic and other materials, and works to phase out single-use plastics.

Of course, local gov'ts have to wait until mid 2024 to be able to pass materials bans, Koehn says.

10% or less of plastic waste we generate societally gets recycled property, Koehn says. (We do a bit more in Boulder)

Boulder has long wanted to ban styrofoam and single-use plastics, but hasn't been allowed bc state law wouldn't let them.

"We are absolutely on that," Koehn says. "Our zero-waste approach is a key component of our climate effort."

Friend: Given the urgency here, I'm assuming we want to make sure our decisions are going to be impactful and replicable. Looking at our building codes, are we setting standards that will be affordable?

If they're not, Friend says, other cities won't follow. And it may burden middle- and low-income ppl.

Elam: We're aligning our building code updates with what's happening nationally and internationally. We had the most aggressive in the country for some time, but others are catching up.

And we will do an extensive analysis before the next update.

Update of the building codes, that is. Boulder just did one in 2019. Next one is 2023. boulderbeat.news/2019/04/21/bou…

Friend: If repair costs go up bc we require ppl to buy products that are more expensive and built to last, how do we consider regular homeowners that are stretched just to make mortgage payments in this town?

Like me. Super bummed to replace my furnace and water heater ~4 years ago (Xcel blew them both out when they turned the pressure up too high) with regular ol' gas-powered units. Couldn't afford something more sustainable :(

Friend: What sort of policies are we looking at outside of planting and transportation to encourage individual change and get at consumption-based emissions? (I think I missed part of that question)

Koehn: I don't think we really thought far enough along about the policies that might get us there. We might look at targeting higher carbon industries or activities. The city could promote, fund, educate, demonstrate with our own practices. "This is an emerging body of work."

"It's yet to be determined on the policy side," Koehn says.

Young: "This was probably the most riveting memo I've read, at least in this term. It was fascinating and exciting."

It WAS a great memo. There was so much to pull from that I got a little overwhelmed. Def didn't capture it all (much to the dismay of climate staff, I'm sure)

Wallach: The new targets you're setting include emissions from consumptions?
Tremblay: We're aiming to focus our targets on the historic accounting, but we do have new targets for consumption-based emissions. We'll be addressing those in a little bit of a separate way.

Wallach: I was struck by the strong sense of urgency in the memo. Do you think Xcel's plan is equally urgent?

LOL long-ass silence from staff follows that one. Koehn is going to take it.

"I don't want to deflect," Koehn says. "De-carbonizing our energy supply remains a critical factor in our ability to address the climate crisis, not just here locally but globally."

"We need to continue to push," Koehn says. "We have played that role as a community with our utility provider."

Koehn: "I would say it is absolutely a step in the right direction. We're having a dif convo today with Xcel than we were just two years ago. ... We've come a long way, but we have to continue to push."

Some questions remain about the pace at which they're closing coal plants, how much natural gas they continue (and plan) to source, Koehn says.

OK, so those were council ASKING questions. Now they're going to ANSWER staff's qs for them. (which I listed earlier but an also be found on slide 53)

Basically, how they feel about staff's proposed plan.

Young: The richest communities have the most emissions and the poorest have the lowest. In looking at how to develop systems that work, look to the ppl that have the lowest emissions for solutions. "Instead of going out and playing savior."

"They have a lot to offer in terms of solutions bc they've already had to do a lot with very little," Young says.

Suggests materials that display the carbon footprint of various materials, like the way the anti-sugar nutrition materails show how much sugar was in various foods/drinks.

You could show the petroleum involved in ordering something from Amazon vs. purchasing it locally, Young says. Raise awareness about how the simple things we do every day have impacts.

Idk that Young actually answered the questions, but she seems supportive of the new approach.

Weaver: I think the answer is pretty much yes to all of these, the most important being the systems-based approach.

"I think it is time for a reset. I think we're behind where we need to be."

Weaver: Yes to systems-based approach, yes to bringing it back to us in August for a resolution (and formal vote), yes to the way equity is embedded. "It extends to everything. It's not just class, it's race as well."

Weaver: It's more than emissions. "Emissions has been the way we've approached this historically," and obviously that isn't enough.

One concern Weaver has is not to discount things we don't have influence over. "We can't let the fact that we don't control the whole financial system to stop us from doing what we can."

Let's make sure we don't "shirk some direct actions, which might be hard and controversial," Weaver says.

We're going to have to bring in other dept, like finance, which has "very good reasons for being conservative," but we need to move that dept forward, Weaver says. Like utilities: How do we build the greenest possible flood mitigation at CU South?

Brockett: Amazing work. "You're looking at this from a visionary perspective."

Brockett: "When you come back to us with targets, I'd like to hear a little more about how. ... We can say yes to it, but I'd feel a little uncomfortable. ... I would hope we'd have some sense of how we get there."

"We can be more aggressive in the areas we do have control over," Brockett says. If we have aggressive targets for things we don't have control over, we're gonna not meet those.

Koehn: "We tried to move in that direction."

Friend: "I agree land use is a big deal as we move forward with this. We shouldn't shy away from this." The Comp Plan says that it guides land use decisions; should we expend that? It seems "like a 20th Century approach"

I *think* she's saying that maybe more than just the Comp Plan should guide land use decisions; maybe the Climate Action Plan should, too. But idk. It was kinda vague.

Joseph: "My only advice would be to keep on leaning into collaborative efforts between the city and other surrounding cities."

She said more but I had difficulty following.

Nagle: "I completely support the work you're doing and would like to see this move forward" with as much support as the city can provide.

Nagle suggests WWII wartime propaganda tactics to get ppl to buy into the climate fight like they did the war effort.

"My only framework is I hope instead of killing animals we can adjust the way we do things," she says. "With things this dire, killing animals to grow grass seems ludicrous to me."

Wallach: I would urge you to focus first on what we can do by ourselves, then what we can do with our sister cities, with our neighbors and peer cities, and then work outward from there.

Not a single comment on this from Yates or Swetlik. Odd.

Anyway, that's the end of this topic and the study session. So early!

@threadreaderapp please unroll. Thank you!