1. Strategies for Achieving Low-Carbon Cities A Pittsburgh’s Case Study
Sep 10, 2009
Mike Blackhurst
Carnegie Mellon University

2. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory (“Footprint”)
Background
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory (“Footprint”)
Accounting of GHGs from a specified boundary
Performed for a benchmark year
Climate Action Plan (CAP)
Outlines GHG reduction opportunities
May include reduction targets and schedule
500 US Mayors committed to
Greenhouse gas inventories
Climate action plans (CAPs)
Climate Action Plan (CAP)
Establish emissions inventory
Set future CO2 reduction goals
Identify mitigation strategies
Pittsburgh developed a CAP in 2008
Reduce text
Re-organize slide caps – what is an action plan? Inventory, goals, mitigation
Second bullet – pittsburgh did one
-remove how can we help…
Put numbers on slides

3. Pittsburgh’s Inventory & CAP (v1.0)
CMU Class Project
Pittsburgh’s Inventory & CAP (v1.0)
Completed in 2008
2006 benchmark year
Class Project
Review Pgh inventory & CAP
QA/QC inventory
Outline analytical framework
Provide supporting analysis
Provide recommendations for future versions
Climate Action Plan (CAP)
Establish emissions inventory
Set future CO2 reduction goals
Identify mitigation strategies
Pittsburgh developed a CAP in 2008
Reduce text
Re-organize slide caps – what is an action plan? Inventory, goals, mitigation
Second bullet – pittsburgh did one
-remove how can we help…
Put numbers on slides 3

4. Inventory QA
Average = 15
Point of this slide – comparing pittsburgh to other cities
Note on the Average – this is the average of just the cities on the graph. It is too complicated to do national average (includes agriculture, and is about 24 tons)

5. Inventory QA 25 23 21 18 14 13 12 12 12 10 7

6. Quantify action items (~38 out of 360)
Analytical Approach
Quantify action items (~38 out of 360)
Initial cost (inc labor)
Service life
O&M cost
Effectiveness
Total stock estimate
Capital cost
Annual cost effectiveness
Total potential effectiveness
Used public data sources and Pittsburgh-specific estimations
All data sources and estimates are documented and calculations are transparent
Options reported in annualized cost/annual ton reduced to normalize project lifetimes

7. Mitigation Alternatives: 38 Quantified Action Items for Modeling
$37,000
Log Total Effectiveness (CO2e mitigated)
Relative Initial Cost (log scale)
Various dimensions
Hybrid electric bus
Weatherstripping doors
$0.15
Bath Faucet - Total (fixture)
Kitchen Faucet - Total (fixture)
Showerhead - Total (fixture)
LED Exit Signs (Exit Sign)
Commercial CFL lighting (CFL)
Resid - Weatherstrip Doors (HH)
Vending Misers - Drink (miser)
Resid - Caulking (HH)
LED Traffic Lights (3 bulbs)
Vending Misers - Snack (miser)
Resid - Water Heater Insulation (HH)
Hybrid City Fleet - trucks (truck)
Resid - Hot water pipes Insulation (HH)
Comm Water Cooler (Water Cooler)
Resid - Weatherstrip Windows (HH)
Resid - Attic Floor Insulation (HH)
Smaller capacity buses (bus)
Renewable - Purchase (REC) (MWh)
LED Street Lights (Street Light)
Urban Forestry (tree)
Monitor (Monitor)
Hybrid City Fleet - SUVs (SUV)
Renewable - Build Wind (MWh)
Green Roofs - Multi Family (HH)
Hybrid City Fleet - sedans (sedan)
Washer (appliance)
Green Roofs - Comm (sq ft floor space)
Computer (Computer)
Dishwasher (appliance)
Dishwasher - Total (fixture)
Green Roofs - Single Family (HH)
Refridgerator (appliance)
Printer (Printer)
Renewable - Build Solar Thermal (MWh)
Clothes Washer - Total (fixture)
Hybrid electric bus (bus)
Scanner (Scanner)
Toilet - Total (fixture)

8. Using cost mitigation curves (previous slide)… Identify policy goals
Analytical Approach
Using cost mitigation curves (previous slide)…
Identify policy goals
Minimize initial cost
Minimize lifetime cost
Maximize reductions
Scenario analyses and modeling
Used public data sources and Pittsburgh-specific estimations
All data sources and estimates are documented and calculations are transparent
Options reported in annualized cost/annual ton reduced to normalize project lifetimes

9. CAP Modeling Results
CAP Scenario Analysis – Maximize Emission Reductions Given Initial Budget Constraint
20-year planning horizon; 4% discount rate; costs do not inc. labor or admin.

10. CAP Modeling Results
CAP Scenario Analysis – Minimize Lifetime Costs Given Target GHG Reduction
20-year planning horizon; 4% discount rate; costs do not inc. labor or admin.

11. CAP Modeling Results
20-year planning horizon; 4% discount rate; costs do not inc. labor or admin.

12. CAP Modeling Results
Annual GHG Reduction (% Relative to 2003 Inventory)
Annual GHG Reduction (% Relative to 2003 Inventory)
20-year planning horizon; 4% discount rate; costs do not inc. labor or admin.

13. Summary Expect regional inventory variation
Carbon mitigation cost planning requires
Initial cost (inc labor)
Service life
O&M cost
Effectiveness
Total stock estimate
Program design & goals significantly affect outcomes
Significant reductions are…
Expensive
Demonstrate significant returns
Consider rollback financing for long-term planning

14. QUESTIONS?