11.3 Sustainable energy practices: climate action planning  (Page 2/17)

Who is doing climate action planning?

In absence of federal regulation, cities, states, government institutions, and colleges and universities, have all taken climate action initiatives. In Massachusetts entities that generate more than 5,000 metric tons per year of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO ₂ e) began in 2010 with 2009 emissions. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires facilities that emit more than 25,000 metric tons CO ₂ e per year to start reporting in 2011 for 2010. Many cities have developed Climate Action Plans that set greenhouse gas reduction goals and lay out pathways to achieve them. Chicago launched its plan in 2008 and reports annually on its progress. President Obama signed White House Executive Order 13514 , in October 2009 requiring all federal agencies to appoint a sustainability director, take inventory of greenhouse gas emissions, and work to meet sustainability targets. Over 670 American colleges and universities have signed the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC) that requires them to develop climate action plans. Private industries also develop climate action plans.

The National Wildlife Federation suggests that there are six steps to reduce carbon emissions at universities – this could be similar for any other entity:

1. Commitment to emissions reduction
2. Institutional structures and support
3. Emissions inventory
4. Developing the plan
5. Launching the plan
6. Climate action planning over the long haul

Based on the climate change scenarios calculated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , it is recommended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below the 1990 levels, whether or not there is continued growth. This is an absolute reduction to prevent greenhouse gases from reaching levels that will have severe effects. A climate action plan is made of a number of strategies to achieve that goal. To examine the impact of each strategy the wedge approach is used. Developed by two professors at Princeton, Socolow and Pacala, the approach proposes that in order to reach those levels, emissions must be decreased globally by seven gigatons of carbon (not carbon dioxide) compared to "business as usual" (BAU) scenarios which would increase emissions over time due to growth and increased demand for energy ( Figure The Wedge Approach (a) . These professors identified 15 proposed actions that could each reduce emissions by 1 gigaton, and if we could enact seven of them we would achieve the goal ( Figure The Wedge Approach (b) . Each of those technologies is represented by a "wedge" of the triangle, hence the designation of the "wedge approach."

Sustainable solutions

All of the proposed solutions in Sokolov and Pacala’s proposal are existing technologies. However, for a solution to be sustainable it must be economically viable. Another aspect of developing a plan is the cost of the solutions. Figure Global GHG Abatement Cost Curve Beyond Business-As-Usual – 2030 shows the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that can be abated beyond "business as usual" in 2030, along with the costs of different abatement strategies. Those technologies that fall below the 0 line will actually have a negative cost or positive economic benefit. Those technologies that rise above the 0 line will have positive cost associated with them which could be offset by the technologies that fall below the line.