GHG Emissions Reduction Strategies: Quantification

Transcription

1 City of Richmond GHG Emissions Reduction Strategies: Quantification APPENDIX D City of Richmond Climate Action Plan

2 CAP Measure Quantification: Common Factors Metric Basic Unit Factors Hours in a year 8,760 Hours of daylight in a year 2,920 Pounds per Metric Ton 2,204.6 Kwh per Mwh 1,000 lbs of CO2 emissions from 1 therm of natural gas GHG Emission Factors 2012 TID Electricity emission factor (lbs/kwh) 2012 TID Emission Factor (MT/MWh) 2012 TID Electricity emission factor (lbs/mwh) 2012 TID Electricity emission factor (lbs/mwh) 2012 Natural Gas emission factor (kg/mmbtu) 2012 Natural Gas emission factor (kg/mmbtu) 2012 Natural Gas emission factor (kg/mmbtu) 2012 Natural Gas emission factor (kg/mmbtu) 2005 Total population 2012 Total population 2020 Total population 2030 Total population 2040 Total population 2005 Total jobs 2012 Total jobs 2020 Total jobs 2030 Total jobs 2040 Total jobs 2005 Service Population 2012 Service Population 2020 Service Population 2030 Service Population 2040 Service Population 2005 Total # of housing units in the City 2012 Total # of housing units in the City 2015 Total # of housing units in the City 2020 Total # of housing units in the City 2030 Total # of housing units in the City 2040 Total # of housing units in the City # Unit lbs CO 2 /kwh MT CO 2 /MWh lbs CH 4 /MWh lbs N 2 O/MWh kg CO2/MMBtu lbs CO2e/Therm kg CH4/MMBTU kg N2O/MMBTu Projected City Growth Factors 101, , , , ,351 37,780 35,778 40,410 61,220 74, % SS buildout 139,450 population + jobs 141,287 population + jobs 152,940 population + jobs 189,220 population + jobs 214,610 population + jobs 35,750 Base Housing Units - from CCTA travel model 36,987 Base Housing Units - from CCTA travel model 37,986 interpolation 39,651 Base Housing Units - from CCTA travel model 46,460 Base Housing Units - from CCTA travel model 51,594 Base Housing Units - from CCTA travel model City Square Mileage City Sphere-of-Influence (SOI) Square Mileage City of Richmond Acres in 2005 City of Richmond Acres in 2020 City of Richmond Acres in 2030 Housing Units per Acre in 2005 Housing Units per Acre in 2020 Housing Units per Acre in 2030 BLS U.S. Department of Labor: Average Contra Costa BLS U.S. Department of Labor: Average Contra Costa 30.1 sq. mile 30.1 sq. mile 19,244 Acres 19,244 Acres 19,244 Acres 1.86 units per acre 2.06 units per acre 2.41 units per acre Cost Factors $ 61, Salary $ Hourly Rate

3 ID # Strategy MT CO2e by 2020 MT CO2e by 2030 Energy Efficiency Strategies 55, ,728 EE.1 Summary of Richmond CAP GHG Reductions Leverage Existing Programs, Rebates, and Incentives to Improve Efficiency of Existing Buildings 43, ,860 EE.2 Leverage Existing Funding Programs and Financing Tools NA NA EE.3 Promote Innovative Design and Enforce Green Building Codes 11, ,867 Renewable Energy Strategies 64, ,520 RE.1 Increase Local Solar Energy Generation 3,074 8,422 RE.2 Promote and maximize utility clean energy offerings 48,610 57,390 RE.3 Electrification and Fuel Switching (non-transportation) 13,043 47,709 Transportation and Land Use Strategies 20,481 55,059 TL.1 Promote Smart Growth and Complete Neighborhoods 3,329 6,820 TL.2 Complete Streets Designs TL.3 Improve Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure 2,419 5,176 TL.5 Expand Public Transit Options and Improve Multi-modal Network Connectivity. 7,496 10,131 TL.6 Promote Car and Bicycle Sharing. 1,726 1,638 TL.7 Promote Low-Carbon Vehicles and Fuels 0 23,770 TL.8 Outreach and Education 1,973 1,530 TL.9 Support Transportation Demand Management 2,796 5,120 Additional Strategies (Solid Waste, Water, Green Infrastructure and Local Agriculture, G 28,808 56,950 SW.1 Establish a Zero Waste Framework 27,040 52,755 WA.1 Promote EBMUD Outreach and Conservation Programs GA.1 Support Urban Tree-Planting Programs and Local Food and Agriculture Programs 375 1,081 GB.5 Reduce Emissions from Goods Movement 1,044 2,315 Total Emissions Reduced through CAP Actions 169, ,257

4 STRATEGY EE.1 - Leverage Existing Programs, Rebates, and Incentives to Improve Efficiency of Existing Buildings Supporting Data Leverage Existing Programs, Rebates, and Incentives to Improve Efficiency of Existing Buildings Quantification assumes the actions under strategy, in conjunction with the financing tools in EE.2, will enable the City improve the energy efficiency of all (existing) buildings by 50% by 2030 (consistent with SB 350 goal), and an interim result of 15% efficiency performance by Strategy E3 accounts for Title 24 impact on new construction. Notes: RE strategies account for impact of renewable on future sales after accounting for efficiency gains). Energy savings are "negawatts" that reduce emissions from the BAU curve (Not affected by change in utility EF; Renewable strategy RE2 accounts for utility energy sales after efficiency gains PG&E Green Communities, Energy, Savings ; MCE Integrated Resource Plan; MCE Implementation Plan. From MCE's 2015 Integrated Resource Plan: MCE has set a goal to reduce annual energy and capacity requirements by 2% through energy efficiency and an additional 5% through demand response programs. Assumptions and Quantification Table below assumes 15% reduction in energy use by 2020 and 50% reduction by 2030 (per SB 350) Table EE.1-3 Utility Energy Efficiency Program Reduction Quantification Energy Provider PG&E Electricity MCE Electricity PG&E Natural Gas TOTAL Year Existing 2015 Estimated kwh Estimated Therms BAU lbs CO2 per Reductions Energy Use Reduced Reduced kwh or Therm MT CO2e/yr ,473, ,649,247 33,854,524 83,268,379 15,820,992 67,447,387-43, ,078, ,193 13,614 26, ,473, ,649,247 33,854, ,561,263 52,736, ,824, , ,927, ,645 45,381 89,834

5 STRATEGY EE.2 - Leverage Existing Funding Programs and Financing Tools Third party funding programs and financing tools Reductions accounted for in EE1: energy savings attributed to third party energy conservation programs in 2020 and HERO Residential PACE was rolled out in Richmond in the summer of 2015; For illustration of third party program effectiveness, future participation and energy savings were estimated by averaging participation and savings data for Walnut Creek, Brentwood, Antioch, and Concord which are also located in Contra Costa County (includes kwh reduced through solar photovoltaics). Data for historic program participation and energy savings was provided by individual program administrators. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Weatherization Assistance Program Technical Memorandum Background Data and Statistics, March California Department of Community Services & Development, Statewide Weatherized Homes Breakout. Accessed at: on August 7, No Quantification associated with this strategy

6 STRATEGY EE.3 - Promote Green Building Key assumption Assumptions and Supporting Calculations Table EE.3-1 Existing and Projected Households in Richmond Data Households 36,987 37,986 39,651 46,460 Residential Electricity Use 171,774, ,144, ,675, ,050,262 Residential Natural Gas Use 16,038,780 16,446,779 17,149,973 19,799,379 ` 2012 kwh Therms Notes Energy Use per Home in , Efficiency New Homes to , Efficiency New Homes to , Annual Saving by ,159, ,300 Annual savings by ,783, ,920 Annual savings by ,405,977 3,212,526 Table EE.3-3 Commercial and Industrial Energy associated with New Construction Sector Commercial and Industrial Electricity Commercial and Industrial Natural Gas Cumulative Metric BAU Total Energy Use (kwh) 362,065, ,940, ,340, ,533,009 BAU increase for segment 46,874,827 94,400, ,192, ,467,475 Average % Energy Savings (5-year period) 40% 70% 100% 78% kwh reduced (annual) - 18,749,931 66,080, ,192, ,022,420 BAU Natural Gas Use 16,630,879 18,783,996 23,120,128 28,457,220 BAU Therms increased 2,153,117 4,336,132 5,337,092 11,826,341 Avg % Energy Savings (period) 50% 75% 100% 82% Therms reduced (annual) - 1,076,559 3,252,099 5,337,092 9,665,749 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Quantification Table EE.3-4 GHG Reduction from Title 24 Imlementation toward Net Zero Energy Energy Provider Year kwh Reduced Therms Reduced PG&E Electricity MCE Electricity PG&E Natural Gas TOTAL Quantifies the energy saved through implementation of the CalGreen Building Code (Title 24). Residential assumes Title 24 standards follow linear progression towards Zero Net Energy by Commercial and Industrial assumes Title 24 standards follow linear progression towards Zero Net Energy by Energy savings are "negawatts" that reduce emissions from the BAU curve (Not affected by change in utility EF; Renewable strategy RE2 accounts for utility energy sales only after efficiency gains) If Title 24 does not establish requirements for requiring ZNE for residential buildings by 2020 and ZNE for commercial buildings by 2030, the City will pass a green ordinance establishing similar requirements Richmond 2005 and 2012 GHG inventory; City of Richmond, Richmond General Plan 2030, Housing Element Update, title 24 is 25% more effriciency than 2008 standard Assumes 2016 title 24 is 28% more efficient than savings plus 1,665 new Title 24 (2016 version) new homes by savings +4,249 new net zero households by 2030 BAU EF (lbs CO2e/kWh or therm) Horizon Year EF (lbs CO2e/kWh or therm) Reductions: Adjusted EF (MT CO2e/yr) ,660, ,605, , ,872, , ,822, , ,336, , ,878, , ,533,655 1,336, , ,428,397 12,878, ,867

7 STRATEGY RE.1 - Increase Local Solar Energy Generation Quantifies the energy saved from installing solar photovoltaic (PV) systems through California Solar Initiative Program. Energy Savings (kwh)=average System Size x # New Systems x Hours of Daylight per Year x Performance Ratio x RPS Adjustment Factor; Savings are "negawatts" that reduce emissions from the BAU curve (Not affected by change in utility EF; Renewable strategy RE2 accounts for energy sales only after efficiency gains) California Solar Initiative, Working Data Set for City of Richmond; California Solar Initiative Average Solar Installation Size: (pg. 8); Solar capacity factor Solar insolation chart: Assumptions and Supporting Calculations Table RE.1-1 Solar PV System Generation Assumptions Average solar installation size Number of New Solar PV Systems by 2020 Number of New Solar PV Systems by 2030 Average (over year) solar insolation (full sun hours) per day - Zone 3 Hours of daylight in a year Performance Ratio Total Solar PV electricity generated by 2020 Total Solar PV electricity generated by 2030 Table RE.1-2 HERO Residential Solar Installations Program/Sector HERO Solar PG&E by 2020 HERO Solar PG&E by 2030 HERO Solar MCE by 2020 HERO Solar MCE by 2030 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Quantification Table RE.1-3 GHG Reductions from Solar Energy Generation Residential Commercial Unit kw/system systems 1, systems 5 5 hours per day 1,935 1,935 hrs/yr 80% 80% Percent 3,984,141 10,740,800 kwh/yr 6,255,134 18,412,799 kwh/yr kwh generated 118, , ,767 2,041,124 Energy Provider Year Annual kwh generated PG&E Electricity MCE Electricity TOTAL 2012 EF (lbs CO2e/kWh or therm) Horizon Year Utility EF (lbs CO2e/kWh or therm) EF of Installed PV Reductions from BAU systems (MT CO2e/yr) ,523, ,246, ,703, , ,236, , ,227, , ,483, ,422

8 STRATEGY RE.2 - Promote and Maximize Utility Clean Energy Offerings. MCE's 2015 Integrated Resource Plan MCE, Understanding MCE GHG Emissions Factor, MCE, Revised Implemenatation Plan, correspondance with Alice Stover from MCE, dated MCE, Integrated Resource Plan, California Climate Action Registry The Climate Registry GHG Emission Factors: Guidance for PG&E Customers, November 2015 RPS Quarterly Report; Q Assumptions and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Quantification Table RE.2-1 GHG Reductions From Increasing Renewables in Utility Portfolio Utility Year kwh sales RPS Carbon Free EF (lbs/kwh) PG&E MCE Direct Acess Total By 2030, by partnering with the City, MCE will be supplying approximately 87% of the City's purchased electricity from sources that MCE is committing to be 95% zero carbon (by 2025), while PG&E will be supplying electricity the remainder from sources that are at least 50% zero carbon to be in compliance with the state RPS. Quantifies the GHG emissions difference in supplying electricity with a 2012 carbon content with the lower carbon electricity expected in MCE's and PG&E's supply for the horizon years 2020 and 2030 due to higher percentages of renewables. Note that we are accounting for impact of renewables on future sales after accounting for efficiency gains; annual electricity sales go down between 2020 and 2030 as the effect of efficiency measures outpaces growth of energy use. MT CO2e Reduced MT CO2e footprint Notes ,101,675 19% PG&E ,839,988 19% PG&E ,277,237 33% ,644 10,563 state mandate (RPS); published PG&E EF forecast ,662,706 40% ,665 7,178 state mandate RPS (SB 350); published PG&E EF forecast ,836,500 50% ,490 4,149 state mandate RPS (SB 350); published PG&E EF forecast NA NA % 60% RPS and EFnumbers from MCE reports ,649,247 54% 60% ,036 68, ,941,806 63% 76% ,835 40, ,478,878 80% 95% ,647 6, ,213,499 80% 95% ,690 5, ,021,290 19% ,756,228 33% ,131 7, ,014,013 50% ,210 9, ,991, , ,566, ,390 RPS and EF from MCE reports & correspondence on 11/19/15 and 11/20/15 RPS and EF from MCE reports & correspondence on 11/19/15 and 11/20/15 RPS and EF from MCE reports & correspondence on 11/19/15 and 11/20/15

9 STRATEGY RE.3 - Promote Switching From Natural Gas to Clean Electricity Assumptions Table RE.3-1 Projected Energy Savings from Residential Electrification Quantifies the impact of converting residential and commercial natural gas systems to electric systems powered by renewable energy or solar thermal systems. Assumes reductions are not double-counted in EE1 (50% energy efficiency improvement in buildings by 2030) as this strategy is about fuel switching, not efficiency. Residential: assumes 6.3 percent of existing homes replace natural gas water heaters each year, and 57% of replacements are electric models, consistent with NEEA Report. Commercial: assumes 6 percent of total natural gas use is electrified by 2020, and 13% by 2030, supporting a study by Wei et al that concludes that by 2050 electrification of 39 percent of commercial and industrial gas use is needed to meet the State's 2050 GHG reduction target. CEC, Statewide Appliance Saturation Survey, 2009; Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA), Water Heater Market Update, January 16, 2012; PG&E Energy Use Data; Wei, et all. Deep carbon reductions in California require electrification and integration across economic sectors, 12 March, Data Activity Data Total Use (therms) Therms for Water Heating State Average Natural Gas Consumption (therms) Richmond Natural Gas Consumption (therms) Richmond Total Households 36,987 16,038,780 7,859,002 Annual # of households replacing water heater 2,330 1,010, ,117 Annual # of households installing electric model 1, , ,641-1,411, ,923-4,233,252 Table RE.3-2 Projected Energy Savings from Commercial and Industrial Electrification Data Commercial and Industrial Natural Gas 16,630,879 18,783,996 28,457,220 Percent NG Use remaining Natural Gas Use after Electrification - 17,737,459 23,700,799 Natural Gas Savings (delta from BAU 2012) - 1,046,537 4,756,421 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Quantification RE.3-3 Electrification and Fuel Switching Reduction Quantification Sector and Year Therms Reduced EF (lbs CO2e/therm) Reductions (MT CO2e/yr) Residential Natural Gas Reduced ,411, ,489 Residential Natural Gas Reduced ,233, ,466 Commercial Natural Gas Reduced ,046, ,554 Commercial Natural Gas Reduced ,756, ,243 Total Natural Gas Reduced ,457, ,043 Total Natural Gas Reduced ,989, ,709

10 Transportation and Land Use Strategies TL.1-TL.9 Overvie Quantifies the reduction in vehicle emissions attributed to reductions in vehicle miles traveled for seven different VMT reduction strategies Assumptions Table TL.2-1 Emissions Factor for VMT Reductions Shared accounting method for VMT using Contra Costa County Transportation Authority (CCTA) Travel Demand Model; VMT reduction estimates converted to GHG based on EMFAC 2014 results for annual MT CO2e per daily VMT ; For Low Carbon Vehicle uptake: Assumes EV population increase trend continues after 2025 through 2030 See Fehr and Peers memos of 8/19/15 (RICHMOND VMT CALCULATIONS SHARED ACCOUNTING METHOD) Table 2, and 1/12/16 (City of Richmond CAP Reduction Strategy Quantification) Table 4; EMFAC2014 Web Database, Contra Costa County, 2005, 2012, 2020 and 2030 Calendar Years, USEPA, Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Typical Passenger Vehicle, February For the strategies that are not quantifiable in the regional model, used the Quantifying Greenhouse Mitigation Measures report authored by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), ENVIRON, and Fehr & Peers Year Source Daily VMT Daily MTCO2 Daily MTCO2e Annual MTCO2 Annual MTCO2e Annual MT CO2e/ daily VMT 2012 EMFAC ,366, , , EMFAC ,498, , , EMFAC ,820, , , Greenhouse Gas Reduction Quantification Table TL.2-2 Projected GHG Reductions from Transportation Emissions Reductions in 2020 Reductions in CCTA Projection Reductions in 2030 from South Shoreline Increment (100%) Total Reductions in 2030 = CCTA + South Shoreline Increment (80%) ID # Strategy daily VMT Annual MT CO2e daily VMT Annual MT CO2e daily VMT Annual MT CO2e daily VMT Annual MT CO2e TL.1 Promote Smart Growth and Complete Neighborhoods 20,230 3,329 31,460 3,827 30,930 3,763 56,064 6,820 TL.2 Complete Streets 4, , , , TL.3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure 14,700 2,419 30,250 3,680 15,460 1,881 42,548 5,176 TL.4 Improve Signal Timing TL.5 Expand Public Transit Options and Improve Connectivity 45,550 7,496 74,840 9,104 10,610 1,291 83,280 10,131 TL.6 Expand Car and Bicycle Sharing 10,490 1,726 11,010 1,339 3, ,468 1,638 TL.7 Promote Low-Carbon Vehicles and Fuels ,399 23, ,399 23,770 TL.8 Outreach and Education 11,990 1,973 12,580 1, ,580 1,530 TL.9 Transportation Demand Management 16,990 2,796 17,840 2,170 30,480 3,708 42,086 5,120 Total 124,450 20, ,099 45,996 93,660 11, ,603 55,059

11 O STRATEGIES TL7: Promote Low-Carbon Vehicles and Fuels - effective VMT reduction calculations Richmond is committed to supporting the proliferation of plug-in electric vehicles(pevs) and other zero emissions vehicles (ZEVs), and is actively seeking funding to expand programs for supporting and expanding PEV infrastructure, and incenting the purchase and and sharing of PEVs. Potential sources of funding inlcude the Chevron ECIA and CEC grants. The EMFAC2014 model accounts for the GHG emissions standards in future years that will reduce emissions as cleaner vehicles increase their penetration rates into the fleet. The Pavley standard determines the fleet average fuel economy of vehicles sold in California. The penetration of ZEV vehicles is one of many ways in which these standards may be met. Assumptions of ZEV penetration are built in to EMFAC 2014 at the county level. Currently the assumption in EMFAC is that ZEV sales as percent of total vehicles sold remain constant after Quantifcation for this measure is based on the assumption that EV sales continue to accellerate after 2025 esitmates built into EMFAC, but assumes the EV population increase rate in Contra Costa County continues through 2030, and in Richmond the EV population is 25% higher than the County average by On March 23, 2012, Governor Brown issued Executive Order B to encourage ZEVs in California and set a long term goal of reaching 1.5 million ZEVs on California s roadways by The Executive Order established milestones for three periods: 2015, 2020, and Infrastructure goals include by 2015, California s major metropolitan areas will be able to accommodate ZEVs through infrastructure plans; by 2020, California s ZEV infrastructure will be able to support up to 1 million vehicles; and by 2025, 1.5 million ZEVs will be on California s roadways with easy access to infrastructure. The metropolitan areas of Los Angeles, San Diego region, and the San Francisco Bay Area lead the State in PEV sales. EV data source: EMFAC2014 Web Database ( EMFAC2014 Volume III - Technical Documentation EV Population Summary by County Jurisdiction EV Year Population Total Population % EV EV Sales in year as % of total Estimated % EVs in CC County Estimated % EVs in CIty of Richmond Contra Costa County , , % 4.9% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% , , % 9.7% 3.8% 3.8% 5.3% , , % 9.7% 13.8% 17.3% 9.0% , , % 9.7% , , % 9.7% Alameda County ,188 1,086, % 4.9% ,863 1,124, % 9.6% ,709 1,191, % 9.6% ,839 1,253, % 9.6% ,729 1,306, % 9.6% Statewide ,181 27,165, % 4.9% Governor's order ,500,000 28,500, % from EMFAC 2014 tech documentation - vol III ,829,868 31,500, % from EMFAC 2014 tech documentation - vol III ,133,990 36,804, % 9.6% % EVs in CIty of Richmond based on Gov Order City of Richmond Estimates No. Units 2020 EV population - EMFAC 2014 estimate 793 EVs 2025 EV Population - City of Richmond - EVs 2030 EV Population - City of Richmond 14,132 EVs 2020 Richmond total vehicles 70, BAU Daily Richmond VMT 1,498,344 miles 2020 miles/vehicle/day miles/vehicle 2020 City VMT from EVs 16,948 EV daily VMT 2020 City VMT from EVs (EMFAC baseline) 16,948 EV daily VMT Reduction = 2020 VMT from EVs over EMFAC - daily VMT 2030 Richmond total vehicles 81, BAU Richmond Daily VMT 1,820,496 miles 2030 miles/vehicle/day miles/vehicle 2030 City VMT from EVs with increased sales assumption 314,498 daily VMT 2030 City VMT from EVs (EMFAC baseline) 119,099 daily VMT Reduction VMT from EVs over EMFAC 195,399 daily VMT

12 STRATEGY SW.1 - Establish a Zero Waste Framework Reduction in emissions from landfill methane due to reduction of waste sent to landfill with adoption of Zero Waste Ordinance and achieving 75% diversion by 2020, and 90% diversion by Baseline diversion rate for 2005 = 49%. Top down quanitficaiton method assumes methane production from unit waste volume remains constant as diversion rate increases CalRecycle Jurisdiction Diversion/Disposal Progress Report for West Contra Integrated Waste Management Authority, 2005 report available at: (accessed March 2016) Assumptions and GHG Reduction Quantifiation Table SW.1 Solid Waste GHG Reductions Year MT CO2e Diversion Rate Percentage 53, BAU landfill emissions from waste (49% diversion) 65, BAU landfill emissions from waste (49% diversion) 26, CAP Landfil Emissions (25% going to landfill instead of 51%) 12, CAP landfill Emissions (10% going to landfill instead of 51%) , Reduction from BAU , Reduction from BAU

13 STRATEGY WW.1 - Promote EBMUD Outreach and Conservation Programs Assumes compliance with State's SB 7x Regulation to reduce percapita water consumption by 20 percent. Assumes 30% reduction in water consumption by Percent reduction in emissions from reduced treatment and delivery. Richmond GHG Inventory Assumptions Table WW.1-1 Assumptions for SB 7x Reductions Data Unit Total GHG Emissions in ,484.0 MT CO2e Total GHG Emissions in ,616.0 MT CO2e Water Total GHG Emissions ,295.0 MT CO2e Percent Reduction in Water Consumption % % Percent Reduction in Water Consumption % % Total GHG Emissions in MT CO2e Total GHG Emissions in MT CO2e Wastewater Total GHG Emissions MT CO2e Percent Reduction in Water Consumption % % Percent Reduction in Water Consumption % % Greenhouse Gas Reduction Quantification Table WW.1-2 GHG Reductions from Water Strategies Total GHG Savings by MT CO2e Water Total GHG Savings by MT CO2e Wastewater Combined Total GHG Savings by MT CO2e Total GHG Savings by MT CO2e Total GHG Savings by MT CO2e Total GHG Savings by MT CO2e

14 STRATEGY GA.1 - Support Urban Tree Planting Programs Projected Residential Electricity Use in 2020 Projected Residential Natural Gas Use in 2020 Number of Housing Units in 2020 Number of Housing Units participating in program by 2020 (4%) 5% Reduction in energy use for residences Projected Residential Electricity Use in 2030 Projected Residential Natural Gas Use in 2030 Number of Housing Units in 2030 Quantifies the energy savings associated with planting shade trees on residential properties. For household energy savings calculations (shade trees), assumes 4% of households plant a tree by 2020 and 10% by 2030; emission reductions associated with local food and agriculture are not quantified McPherson, E. G., Simpson, J. R., Xiao, Q. F. and Wu, C. X. (2011) Million Trees Los Angeles canopy cover and benefit assessment. Landscape and Urban Planning 99, 1, Rosenfeld, A.H., Romm, J.J., Akbari, H., Pomerantz, M., Cool communities: strategies for heat island mitigation and smog reduction. Energy and Building 28, Nowak et al - Carbon storage and sequestration by trees in urban and community areas of the United States SMUD Shade Tree Benefit Calculator EPA Carbon Dioxide Sequestration, Storage, and Offsets by Gainesville's Urban Forest - Assumptions Table GA1-1 Assumptions for Shade Tree Planting Carbon sequestration rate (McPherson et al, and Resenfeld, et al) Number of Housing Units participating in program by 2030 (10%) Number of trees in Richmond counted in 2013 Urban Tree Inventory Number of additional tree planting sites identified in 2013 Urban Tree Inventory Avg Annual tree planting target over 14 years 2020 tree planting target 2030 tree planting target 2012 Electricity emission factor (PG&E) 2020 Electricity EF (aggregate PG&E and MCE) 2030 Electricity EF (aggregate PG&E and MCE) Natural Gas emission factor (kg CO2/MMBtu) # of trees planted per year Greenhouse Gas Reduction Quantification Table GA1-2 GHG Reductions from Shade Tree Planting Sequestration by 2020 Sequestration by 2030 Total residential electricity savings by 2020 Total residential natural gas savings by 2020 Total residential electricity savings by 2030 Total residential natural gas savings by 2030 Total GHG Emissions Savings by 2020 Total GHG Emissions Savings by 2030 # Unit 18 kg CO2e per tree annually 183,675,267 kwh/year 17,149,973 therms/year 41,303 housing units 1,652 housing units ,050,262 kwh/year 19,799,379 therms/year 46,460 housing units 4,646 housing units 22,051 trees 13,000 sites 332 trees 1,652 trees 4,646 trees Metric Tons/MWh Metric Tons/MWh Metric Tons/MWh 53 kg CO2/MMBtu 332 # Unit 30 metric tons CO2 84 metric tons CO2 367,351 kwh/year 34,300 therms/year 1,060,251 kwh/year 98,997 therms/year 375 metric tons CO2 1,081 metric tons CO2

15 STRATEGY GB.5 - Reduce Emissions from Goods Movement and Assumptions and GHG Reduction Quantifiation Year Year MT CO2e Percent Notes Reduce Port Emissions Reduces industrial emissions, beyond those emissions reduced by other measures in the CAP. This measure accounts for reductions in carbon emissions by 2020 estimated for the Port of Richmond Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP), and assumes the Port will reduce its emissions to 20 percent by 2030, consistent with similar efforts by Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. Port of Richmond Clean Air Action Plan (2010), Port of Long Beach Emissions Inventory (2014), and Port of Long Beach Emissions Inventory (2014) ,573 - Baseline Emissions (BAU) ,044 9% ,315 20% = Emissions reduced from implementation of CAAP (Port of Richmond Clean Air Action Plan (2010) Table 5, Page 20. Assumes scenario with "implementation of 0.1 [or 0.5] percent sulfur fuel requriements along with [vessel speed reduction] program and truck program.") = Emissions reduced from continued implementation of CAAP. Assumes Port of Richmond achieves up to 20 percent reduction in emissions, or double the estimated emissions savings, similar to that achieved by the Port of Long Beach by 2014 (see Emissions Factcard and Emissions Inventory 2014) and the Port of Los Angeles [see Port of Los Angeles Air Emissions Inventory (2010) Table ES.6 on page ES-11].