RES 221271 - Laserfiche WebLink

GHG Reduction Strategies Quantification and Evidence Page 3 Overview This document summarizes findings from a quantitative assessment of the prioritized shortlist of actions for inclusion in the draft Pleasanton CAP 2.0. The quantitative assessment provides high‐level estimates of the costs and emission reductions associated with each action (detailed below), to provide a defensible plan for meeting the City’s emission reduction goals. Some actions in the CAP are directly quantifiable, while others are not. Many of the actions in the prioritized shortlist may not be readily quantifiable, may result in inconsequential GHG reductions, or may have indirect benefits that do not result in emissions reductions as calculated in the City’s inventory. These actions, often defined as “supportive,” may be critical for implementation success even if they are not quantified. For example, actions to enhance energy battery storage are crucial for large‐scale implementation of renewable energy and electrification, but do not themselves reduce GHG emissions. Another example is education and incentive programs, which can encourage reductions but do not necessarily result in significant reductions, depending on the reach, efficacy, and permanence of the implemented changes. In contrast, an ordinance to require all‐electric new construction is a quantifiable action that carries a very high and defensible likelihood of significant and measurable emissions reductions. Some proposed CAP 2.0 actions are focused on improving community resiliency to climate change impacts rather than reducing GHG emissions. While the resilience benefits of these “climate adaptation” actions were not quantified, taking action to build climate resiliency and preparedness are nonetheless critical for addressing climate change in the Pleasanton community and should be considered as an important part of Pleasanton’s climate action strategy. The project team took an action quantification approach like that taken by the City of Dublin for their recent CAP, which provided quantitative estimates for CAP measures (see table on the following page). The approach of quantifying actions ensures that the package of measures in the Pleasanton CAP 2.0 will result in sufficient emissions reductions needed to meet short‐term goals and establish a strong foundation for meeting long‐term goals. Action impact was explicitly modelled based on available information and case studies, including data on historic and projected energy usage, population and development trends, and technology and policy impact. The consultant drew from literature and expert opinion—including studies done by the U.S. Department of Energy and California Air Resources Board—as well as from available City data and staff input. Actions were analyzed based on predetermined implementation timeframes, which were categorized as follows:  Near‐term (1‐3 years); 2022 to end of 2024  Mid‐term (4‐7 years); 2025 to end of 2028  Long‐term (8‐10 years); 2029 to end of 2031