19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Recommended GHG Emission Reduction Pathway The Committee recommended the City adopt the B-55-18 Linear Pathway illustrated in Figure 3 above. This pathway sets a long-term (2045) target based on the State's Executive Order B-55-18 target (i.e., carbon neutrality by 2045); and a short-term (2030) target based on a linear trajectory of emissions reductions from 2045 back to 2020. As seen in Figure 3 above, this pathway achieves slightly greater emissions reductions than required by SB 32 in 2030 (i.e., 4.11 MT CO2e equivalent per capita vs 5 MT CO2e per capita). The Committee recommended this pathway for a variety of reasons including aligning with state targets to have a Qualified GHG Reduction Plan and the preference for metered/linear emissions reductions over time (i.e. consistent reductions over time, versus slower reductions today, followed by more dramatic reductions and actions required in the future). The Committee recommendation would also align with the more recent legislation for the long-term target (EO B-55-18 passed in 2018 versus EO S-03- 05 passed 2005), which appears more likely to be codified by the legislature. Carbon neutrality will take years to achieve and the Committee discussed that aligning with that trajectory earlier rather than later will help the community progress toward that goal and take some early actions that make achieving the goal more realistic in 25 years. They noted it would also help inform infrastructure investment decisions and help avoid developing "stranded assets" that subsequently cause higher retrofit costs in the future (e.g., if developers build out new projects today using a predominance of natural gas, but eventually natural gas becomes infrastructure that has to be retrofitted in old projects, it will be more costly to residents in 15-years to retrofit than if developers considered this today and built projects accordingly). Of note, the linear pathway recommended by the Committee is also the target pathway identified in the City of Dublin's recently adopted CAP and is the proposed target in the City of Livermore's draft CAP (Livermore is at a similar stage in their CAP update as Pleasanton). If all three cities in the Tri-Valley are aligned in the selected pathway, this could allow for greater regional collaboration toward achieving outcomes. CAP 2.0 Framework As noted, the CAP 2.0 will include various actions to reduce Pleasanton's emissions from the adjusted forecast to the established emission reduction target pathway. There can be an endless quantity of actions selected for inclusion in the CAP 2.0 but some may be prohibitively expensive (costs to residents or the City) and others may not be feasible or appropriate to our community's context. Further, Pleasanton has several environmental priorities beyond reducing greenhouse gas emissions including clean water, protecting habitats, and resilience in the face of wildfires. These priorities may not be quantified in the same way GHG emissions can be, but should be considered qualitatively, nonetheless. For example, while water quality may not directly reduce emissions, more weight may be given to an action that reduces emissions and has the Page 7 of 10