50% by 2030 Community Climate Action and Resiliency PlanMasterpiece on the Mississippi
TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Michael C. Van Milligen, City Manager
SUBJECT: 50% by 2030 Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan
DATE: December 11, 2013
Dubuque
band
AI- America City
1
2007 • 2012 • 2013
Commitment to a Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan is an integral step in
moving towards the Sustainable Dubuque vision. Partnering with Greater Dubuque
Development Corporation, the Petal Project, and others, Green Dubuque and City staff
completed data analysis and collected community input to develop an achievable plan
that will help the City to meet the goal of reducing community -wide greenhouse gas
emissions 50% below 2003 levels by 2030.
Sustainable Community Coordinator Cori Burbach recommends City Council approval
of the final 50% by 2030 Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan.
I concur with the recommendation and respectfully request Mayor and City Council
approval.
Michael C. Van Milligen
MCVM:jh
Attachment
cc: Barry Lindahl, City Attorney
Cindy Steinhauser, Assistant City Manager
Teri Goodmann, Assistant City Manager
Cori Burbach, Sustainable Community Coordinator
Masterpiece on the Mississippi
TO: Michael Van Milligen, City Manager
FROM: Cori Burbach, Sustainable Community Coordinator
SUBJECT: 50% by 2030 Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan
DATE: December 11, 2013
Dubuque
band
AI- America City
1
2007 • 2012 • 2013
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memo is to request City Council approval of the final 50% by 2030
Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan.
BACKGROUND
The community's first greenhouse gas inventory was completed with data from 2003,
and updated in 2007. In 2010, the Dubuque Community Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Task Force was assembled by Green Dubuque, Inc. in response to the completion of
these inventories. In July 2011, the City Council held a work session to review the
recommendations made by this Task Force and subsequently approved a target of
reducing community -wide greenhouse gas emissions 50% below 2003 levels by 2030.
In 2012, the Council approved a proposal from Green Dubuque to complete Phase II of
a Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan, including data analysis and community
engagement in order to identify proposed actions to meet that target.
DISCUSSION
Commitment to a Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan is an integral step in
moving towards our Sustainable Dubuque vision. Partnering with Greater Dubuque
Development Corporation, the Petal Project, and others, Green Dubuque and City staff
completed data analysis and collected community input to develop an achievable plan
that will help us to meet our 50% by 2030 goal. Implementation of the Plan is identified
on the 2013 -2015 Management Agenda.
As presented at the December 3 Council work session, the Plan is a non - binding,
voluntary effort to identify opportunities to reduce Dubuque's community GHG
emissions. It can be used in the following ways:
o Informing officials during goal- setting and budget decisions,
o Informing businesses and individuals about potential emission and cost - saving
options,
o Showcasing success stories,
o Providing a roadmap that can be added to or adjusted, and
o Educational piece about where Dubuque's GHG emissions really come from.
As presented, over 75% of the recommended actions are either currently underway or
planned. Please see the attached complete plan for additional information.
Best practices suggest that communities committed to reaching similar GHG reduction
targets update their inventory to determine progress every three to five years.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
I respectfully request City Council approval of the attached 50% by 2030 Community
Climate Action & Resiliency Plan.
2
SUSTAINABLE
DUBUQUE
viable • livable • equitable
Dubuque
All- America City
2012
Dubuque Community
Climate Action & Resiliency Plan
2013
Prepared by: Green Dubuque, Inc. 2013
Jason Schatz (jason @greendubuque.org)
Theothoros Giannakouros (raki @greendubuque.org)
Table of Contents
ACRONYMS 1
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS 2
SUMMARY 3
Background 4
Benefits of GHG Reduction 5
Dubuque Community GHG Inventory 7
GHG Reduction Potential 9
POLICY SUMMARY TABLES 15
POLICY DESCRIPTIONS 25
Waste Reduction & Utilization 26
Local Energy & Renewables 35
Transportation 52
Built Environment 69
Miscellaneous 89
REFERENCES 98
APPENDIX A: Emission Factors & Assumptions 102
APPENDIX B: Emissions Reference Case 105
APPENDIX C: Glossary of Terms 106
APPENDIX D: Outreach & Public Input 108
Community Input 108
Business Input 118
APPENDIX E: Reduction Estimate Ranges and Uncertainty 130
Acronyms
CHP Combined Heat and Power (power generation facility- -see glossary)
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalent (see glossary)
DOE (United States) Department of Energy
DOT Department of Transportation
DMASWA Dubuque Metropolitan Area Solid Waste Agency (see glossary)
ECIA East Central Intergovernmental Agency (see glossary)
EPA (United States) Environmental Protection Agency
GHG Greenhouse gas
GWP Global warming potential (see glossary)
IECC International Energy Conservation Code
kW kilowatts ( =1000 Watts of power)
kWh kilowatt hours (see glossary)
LED Light Emitting Diode based lighting
LEED Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (see glossary)
mt Metric ton ( =1000 kg)
MW Megawatt ( =1000 kW; = 1,000,000 Watts)
VMT Vehicle miles traveled (see glossary)
WRRC Water & Resource Recovery Center (see glossary)
1
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Q: What is the Dubuque Community Climate
Action and Resiliency Plan?
A: A non - binding, voluntary effort to identify
opportunities to reduce Dubuque's community
greenhouse gas emissions 50% below 2003
levels by 2030 while strengthening our economy
and the overall quality of life in the community.
Q: Are the options described in this plan
mandatory?
A: No, none of the options in this document are
mandated in any way. They are not regulations
or requirements; they are options. This
document is a collection of ongoing, planned,
and potential actions that directly or indirectly
affect greenhouse gas emissions in Dubuque.
This document details the impacts of those
strategies to greenhouse gas emissions, as well as
to the economic and social resiliency of the
Dubuque community. It is intended to help local
officials, businesses, and individuals better
understand and prioritize ongoing and future
initiatives.
Q: What happens if Dubuque is unable to
achieve the 50% by 2030 reduction goal?
A: This is a voluntary effort, so there are no
penalties for falling short. Also, the Dubuque
Community Climate Action and Resiliency Plan
focuses on options that maximize co- benefits to
the community at large; so even if Dubuque falls
short of expected greenhouse gas reductions, the
community will benefit economically and
socially from this effort.
2
Q: How will local businesses be affected by the
50% by 2030 goal?
A: Many local businesses will directly benefit
from the reductions options in the Dubuque
Community Climate Action and Resiliency Plan,
and outreach was conducted to local businesses
to identify priorities and barriers to greenhouse
gas reduction in the private sector (See Appendix
D). With those priorities in mind, this document
focuses specifically on business friendly actions
that strengthen the local economy and improve
its resilience. Reduction options that have
perceived negative economic impacts have been
taken off the table.
Q: How will this document be used?
A: There are many potential applications,
including (1) Informing local officials when they
make choices and set City priorities; (2)
Informing businesses and individuals in the
community about potential emission and cost
saving opportunities; (3) Showcasing success
stories in Dubuque; (4) Providing a template for
emerging reduction opportunities that can be
added to the document in the future; and (5)
Serving as an education piece about where
greenhouse gas emissions really come from and
what options local communities have to address
them.
Section I - Summary
Background
Sustainability in Dubuque
Since 2006, the Dubuque City Council
has considered sustainability to be one of their
primary goals. To aid this goal, Dubuque has
adopted a holistic, three part approach to
sustainability that focuses on Economic
Prosperity, Environmental & Ecological
Integrity, and Social/Cultural Vibrancy.
In 2010, Dubuque completed an inventory
of community greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,
which tallied GHG emissions from the
transportation, waste, residential, commercial,
and industrial sectors in 2003 and 2007. This
was followed by an inventory of 2009, 2010, and
2011 emissions completed in 2012.
50% by 2030 - Phase I
The 50% by 2030 GHG reduction
initiative was a grassroots effort to unite
Dubuque, IA in support of 50% local GHG
emissions reduction by 2030 (from 2003 levels).
Phase I of the initiative was to complete
an initial feasibility study of local GHG
reduction actions that could reduce GHG
emissions 50% by the year 2030. This phase was
completed in 2011, during which the 50% by
2030 goal was unanimously endorsed by City
Council while also garnering supportive
signatures from over 700 citizens and local
businesses employing over 400 Dubuque area
residents. Based on initial estimates, GHG
reductions amounting to nearly 200,000 mt CO2e
per year are already planned or in progress in
Dubuque, putting the City over 1/3 of the way
toward its target.
50% by 2030 - Phase II
Phase II of the initiative was to conduct a
formal, comprehensive study of the GHG
reduction options available to Dubuque. The
Phase II study will provide an extensive list of
potential strategies for local climate action. This
study will account for ongoing and prospective
actions and serve as a foundation for regular
4
future updates by City staff. Each recommended
strategy includes a description, anticipated
annual impact on GHG emissions, affected
sectors, timetable, anticipated costs and benefits,
and barriers to implementation.
The strategy also includes the results of
input from citizens, local businesses, City staff,
and other local experts regarding current barriers
to energy efficiency, renewable energy, and other
GHG reduction opportunities. The results of that
input help to identify potential pathways by
which those barriers can be overcome in
Dubuque and is described in detail in Appendix
D.
Phase II culminated with the creation of
the present document, which was presented to
the Dubuque City Council by Green Dubuque,
Inc. in December 2012.
Benefits of GHG reduction
GHG reduction may be the common thread tying all of the proceeding options together, but it is
not the only or even main benefit. The vast majority of options in this document are "no- regret
solutions" that are in the community's interest regardless of climate impact. In other words, the
primary benefits of most recommendations will be to local health, economic prosperity, and quality of
life -- they just happen to have an impact on GHG emissions too.
Health
A Improved air quality. Reducing driving miles and traffic congestion improves local air quality.
Also, lowering electricity use reduces the amount of energy demanded from coal burning power
plants, leading to fewer emissions of particulate matter and other health hazards.
A Physical fitness Improved pedestrian and bicycle travel options will facilitate active transport and
recreation, yielding improvements in physical fitness.
A Safety. Compact infrastructure means more compact coverage areas for police, fire fighters, and
emergency medical services. Also, more - complete, less -busy streets reduce collision rates.
A Local, healthy food. Increased reliance on local, healthy food through the Dubuque Farmer's
Market, Community Supported Agriculture (CSAs), community gardens, and other programs
promotes health, improves food quality, supports local farmers, and decreases "food miles" and
other climate related impacts.
Economic Prosperity
A Local Investment. Since 2006, Dubuque has received over $10 million in grants and investment
because of its sustainability efforts. IBM, which brought 1300 jobs to Dubuque, cited Dubuque's
sustainability vision as a major factor setting it apart from other candidate cities.
A Local businesses. Blue Sky Solar, Solar Planet, Eagle Point Solar, Four Seasons Geothermal, 7th
Power Sustainable, Durrant, IBM, Dittmer Recycling, Gronen Restoration, and many other local
businesses are partially or exclusively focused on sustainability and GHG reduction. Such
businesses will continue to thrive locally if Dubuque remains dedicated to progress and innovation.
A Infrastructure and jobs. The proposed Intermodal Transportation Facility is anticipated to create
over 100 jobs and between $100 and $200 million in benefits over the next 30 years. This is only
one example, but any new infrastructure projects or local initiatives will create jobs.
A Downtown revitalization. The Port of Dubuque and Historic Millwork District are two recent
examples of re- developing existing city space and infrastructure and are responsible for attracting
tourists, residents, and investment dollars into the community.
A Local spending, local prosperity. When energy dollars are spent on locally generated energy, or
when energy efficiency allows consumers to keep more money in their pockets, that money is
retained in the local economy rather than being spent on fossil fuels from outside the city /country.
A Energy efficiency yields sustained savings on utility bills for local residents and business owners.
Basically, Dubuque residents do not have to pay for energy they do not use.
A Transportation. More efficient transportation networks and viable mobility alternatives save
Dubuque residents money by facilitating fewer driving miles, alleviating congestion, and
eliminating the need for as many vehicles as less- expensive travel options continue to develop.
A Reducing local government operating costs. Many of the options in this plan reduce the cost of
local government services, representing significant savings to taxpayers.
A Residential and commercial renewable energy projects give property owners control and
certainty over their energy costs and can yield significant returns on investment.
A Health Benefits. In general, health benefits also yield economic benefits by lowering health care
costs, increasing worker productivity, and reducing absenteeism at schools and workplaces.
5
Quality of Life
A Most of the benefits summarized above also represent improvements in quality of life. Although
health and other benefits can be depicted in economic terms, those dollars and cents represent real
people whose health and quality of life is difficult to put a price tag on.
A Improved mobility. Over 50% of Dubuque residents belong to at least one group that historically
has been poorly- served by conventional transportation systems (those aged 12 -15; senior citizens;
people with disabilities; households with no vehicle or difficulty affording one; and households with
only one vehicle per two or more adults). Transportation policies such as complete streets and
enhanced public transit will improve service to these and other groups.
A Outdoor aesthetics. Natural areas, green space, and city planning will improve the aesthetics of
the local landscape.
A Indoor aesthetics. Many strategies in this document facilitate indoor environmental improvements
in buildings, which can yield fresher air, more comfortable building temperatures, natural lighting,
and other traits that enhance work environments and improve the health, morale, and productivity of
employees.
6
Dubuque Community GHG Inventory (2003 -2011)
Introduction
In order to understand the sources and
trends over time of Dubuque's GHG emissions,
an inventory of GHG emissions in the Dubuque
community in 2003, 2007, 2009, 2010, and 2011
was conducted. The inventory divided emissions
into electricity and natural gas use in the
industrial, commercial, and residential sectors, as
well as emissions from transportation and waste,
which consists of fugitive methane emissions
from Dubuque's DMASWA landfill.
Methods
The inventory included Scope 1
emissions (direct GHG emissions, except for
biogenic CO2) and Scope 2 emissions (indirect
GHG emissions from consumption of purchased
electricity, steam, heating, or cooling). Scope
3 emissions (all other indirect emissions that do
not occur within the community,
emissions from purchased
manufactured elsewhere) are not
such as
products
included.
Emissions factors and other methods are
described in detail in Appendix A.
Results & Discussion
Dubuque generated an average of
1,220,000 mt CO2e of GHG emissions in the five
inventory years, generally varying from this by
no more than about 7% from year to year (Table
1). There is no strong upward or downward
trend overall, and waste is the only individual
sector with a clear trend (downward). This is
generally good news, with emissions holding
steady during a period of significant local
economic expansion and never exceeding the
high -water mark of 1,266,000 mt in 2003. This
suggests that Dubuque is well positioned to
reduce its emissions, and that the strategies it
employs will create a true downward trend rather
than simply counteracting year -to -year increases
in the community's GHG footprint.
1,220,000 mt equates to average per
capita emissions of 20.3 mt CO2e per year, which
is comparable to the 2006 U.S. national average
7
of 19.8 mt CO2e per person per year.
Dubuque's emissions were predominantly
in the form of CO2 (95 %), CH4 (4 %), and N2O
(1 %). This distribution was relatively constant
across the inventory years. The distribution of
emissions across economic sectors was also
similar across years, with most emissions
originating from the transportation (23 %)
residential (24 %), industrial (31 %), and
commercial (17 %) sectors, with 5% coming from
landfill CH4.
Figure 1 provides a comprehensive
overview of the sources, end uses, and flows of
energy and GHG emissions in Dubuque. Coal
for electricity, natural gas for building heat, and
petroleum for automobiles are the major sources
of GHG emissions, with emissions distributed
comparably among the transportation,
residential, commercial, and industrial sectors.
This suggests that it will take a broad suite of
strategies to reduce energy use and costs in
Dubuque.
8
Table 1. Total GHG emissions from various sectors of the Dubuque, Iowa community in 2003, 2007, 2009, 2010, and 2011 expressed in mt CO2e.
Facility
2003
2007
Total Emissions
(mt CQze)
2009 2010
2011
Avg
% (a Total
(ate)
Residential (electric)
216,239
214,422
167,641
182,000
174,935
191,047
16%
Residential (natural gas)
110,513
100,991
95,021
95,247
99,963
100,347
8%
Commercial (electric)
112,183
174,599
147,416
144,268
139,599
143,613
12%
Commercial (natural gas)
51,545
49,831
51,549
80,987
85,505
63,883
5%
Industrial (electric)
414,497
376,187
303,822
340,343
328,697
352,709
29%
Industrial (natural gas)
4,864
1,130
2,054
48,664
48,674
21,077
1.7%
Transportation
289,838
273,644
281,773
281,722
277,703
280,936
23%
Waste
66,555
73,438
77,039
68,657
48,076
66,753
5%
Total
1,266,234
1,264,242
1,126, 315
1,241,888
1,203,152
1,220,366
-
9
Carbon
Emissions
1,242 CO2e
(woos mt)
Source
End Use
Residential
Electricity
Generation
Nuclear
Petroleum
3,578
BBtu
Transportation
69
CO,e
Carbon
Emissions
1,242 CO2e
(woos mt)
Figure 1. 2.010 sources and uses of energy and GHG emissions in Dubuque, Iowa. "COZe" units represent 1000s of mt of COZe. BBtu represents billions of
BTUs. Electric profile data for the state of Iowa is from the Iowa Utilities Board.
10
Results Summary - GHG Reduction Potential in Dubuque
Introduction
This study compiles ongoing and
potential strategies for reducing GHG emissions
in Dubuque, Iowa. It is based primarily on
policies and programs gathered from other U.S.
communities as well strategies already
implemented or under consideration in Dubuque.
The individual strategies are listed in the
summary tables in Section II of this report and
are discussed in greater detail in Section III,
where calculations and assumptions are fully
described.
Each strategy includes an estimate of its
impact on annual GHG emissions by the year
2030. That estimate generally consists of a range
of probable values. The average of that range
is used to estimate the total potential GHG
reduction discussed in this section and displayed
in Table2a and Figures 2 and 3, below. For
instance, a 100 -1,000 strategy would have an
estimate of 550 (the average of 100 and 1,000).
Five sectors were considered:
A Local Energy & Renewables
A The Built Environment
A Waste Reduction & Resource Management
A Transportation
A Miscellaneous Strategies
The following sections summarize GHG
reductions in Dubuque in each of those five
sectors.
I. Waste Reduction & Resource Management
The waste sector accounted for 5% of
Dubuque's 2003 emissions and 11.1% of
estimated reductions by 2030 (57,500 mt CO2e
per year-- Table2a).
50,000 mt of these reductions are from
the capture and destruction of landfill methane,
which began in 2010. The remaining 7,500 mt of
estimated reduction would come from further
expansion of the ongoing food scrap diversion
from the landfill. In summary, 87% of estimated
Scope 1 GHG reductions in the waste sector are
already occurring, but there is significant
potential for expansion.
11
Waste minimization also reduces Scope 3
embodied GHG emissions, which are not
included in the GHG inventory but nonetheless
have a real impact on climate change. As such,
Scope 3 related reductions are estimated in
Section III of this report but do not count toward
the total reductions tallied here.
II. Local Energy & Renewables
Electric and heating/cooling related
emissions accounted for 72% of Dubuque's 2003
emissions and 41.8% of estimated reductions by
2030 (217,437 mt CO2e per year - -Table 2a).
Approximately half of this estimated
reduction (110,500 mt) is from a potential wood
waste CHP facility, which was studied in 2008
but is no longer being considered by Dubuque
due primarily to wood supply and air quality
concerns. As such, the wood waste CHP facility
also accounts for the bulk of the "unlikely"
category in Figure 3, and is not expected to
occur. However, several other renewable energy
opportunities either are already underway or are
strong possibilities.
A methane - gas-to- energy system at the
DMASWA landfill could yield approximately
12,000 mt of reductions, depending on the scale
of the facility. A similar methane -to- energy
facility planned for the WRRC could yield over
3,000 mt of reductions per year.
Based on current trends, solar and wind
installations in Dubuque are expected to yield
10,000- 30,000 mt of annual reductions by 2030.
However, the impact of renewables could be
much higher, and this sector probably has the
greatest potential to exceed expectations.
Various policies listed in the Local
Energy - Policy category could facilitate that
expansion. The impact of policy on behavior is
difficult to predict, so these estimates are given
wide ranges. Nonetheless, the impact of energy
related policies could be in the tens of thousands
of mt CO2e per year by 2030.
An overlooked but very large potential
source of renewable energy is Lock and Dam 11.
Several companies have estimated substantial
hydroelectric capacity at the dam. This report
selected the lowest of these estimates, which still
amounts to over 50,000 mt of annual emissions
reduction (assuming power was used locally).
In summary, the GHG impact of the
Local Energy sector is difficult to predict and
could vary significantly depending on local
policy and market conditions for renewables.
More than the other four sectors, a single action
(e.g. hydroelectricity) can substantially increase
GHG reductions, and there is really no practical
upper limit to how much renewable energy could
be produced locally. As such, this is almost
certainly the most important sector to focus on to
achieve 50% GHG reduction by 2030 and has the
added advantage of very strong co- benefits
(better air quality and health, lower utility costs
for businesses, etc.).
III Transportation
The transportation sector accounted for
23% of Dubuque's 2003 GHG emissions and
10.3% of estimated potential reductions by 2030
(53,444 mt CO2e per year-- Table2a).
These reductions can be divided into two
categories: travel efficiency and mode
availability.
In terms of travel efficiency, complete
streets, the SW Arterial, Smarter City ITS,
roundabouts, and signal optimization account for
approximately 68% of total estimated
transportation reductions (32,591 mt). Most of
these initiatives are already at some stage of
planning or implementation. Idling reduction
and efficient parking policies are not currently
under consideration but could add several
thousand metric tons of reductions by 2030.
In terms of mode availability, ongoing
improvements in the Jule transit system, the
proposed Intermodal Transportation Facility, and
various cycling/active travel initiatives could add
on the order of 2,000 -3,000 mt of reductions,
though aggressive promotion of alternative
modes could increase these reductions several
times over. Electric vehicle (EV) charging
stations could improve the local viability of EVs
and add thousands more mt of reductions.
The impact of infrastructure and policy
on behavior is always uncertain, so the GHG
12
reduction estimates of many transportation
related strategies have wide ranges. However,
the estimates are based on the best available
numbers and are in line with those of other
communities. In any case, most transportation-
related reductions are already underway or
planned, so they are quite likely to accrue by
2030.
IV. The Built Environment
This wide - ranging category covers
everything from lighting efficiency to the form
and function of neighborhoods. Electricity and
heating in the Built Environment sector
accounted for 72% of 2003 emissions and 30.4%
of estimated potential reductions by 2030
(157,946 mt CO2e per year-- Table2a).
Efficiency
Improving energy efficiency is widely
recognized as one of the largest and most cost
effective ways to reduce GHGs and lower energy
costs. In Dubuque, the bulk of likely reductions
will come from the continued timely adoption of
IECC building standards, which is estimated to
yield tens of thousands of mt of GHG reductions
per year by 2030. Dubuque has always adopted
new IECC standards quickly, so these reductions
are quite likely to occur by 2030.
Advanced building efficiency standards
(e.g. LEED) for municipal buildings and large
commercial facilities could have a similar
impact, with the potential for tens of thousands
of mt of additional reductions by 2030.
Voluntary commercial /industrial lighting
efficiency improvements are expected to yield
several thousand mt of additional reductions by
2030, though the actual figure could be higher if
lighting technology continues to improve in
efficiency and cost.
In summary, improvements in the
efficiency of new and (particularly) existing
buildings is expected to yield on the order of tens
of thousands to 100,000+ mt of reductions by
2030, with higher amounts possible if efficiency
is aggressively pursued. Various policies such as
PACE, building/development efficiency
standards, and rental property efficiency could
further enhance these reductions.
Community Planning
The other facet of the Built Environment
sector is the design and function of
neighborhoods, which affect GHG emissions in
many subtle ways. While the layout of streets,
buildings, and neighborhoods does not create
emissions directly, it does affect traffic patterns,
building energy demand, and the extent of city
infrastructure (e.g. sewer, water, emergency
services). Because the impact of urban form on
emissions is indirect, reduction estimates in this
category are highly uncertain. But given the
influence of urban form on such a wide range of
activities, instruments like the Dubuque Unified
Development Code, infill development, historic
building preservation, and other smart growth
policies are likely to have an impact ranging
from thousands to tens of thousands of mt CO2e.
V. Miscellaneous
This category includes activities that do
not fit neatly into other sectors. It accounts for
6.4% of estimated reductions by 2030 (33,444 mt
CO2e per year - -Table 2a).
The main source of reductions in this
category is "Community Based Initiatives,"
which represents a goal for community
organizations to achieve a 2% reduction in
Dubuque's emissions (2% additional to the other
strategies discussed in this plan). Given what
community organizations have already achieved
in Dubuque, 2% appears to be a readily
achievable target.
The switch to industrial refrigerants with
a lower climate impact is estimated to reduce
community emissions by over 10,000 mt by
2030. This switch will primarily be due to
international phase -outs and other factors
external to Dubuque. However, Dubuque could
speed the switch by, for instance, encouraging
local companies to participate in the
Refrigerants, Naturally.; campaign.
The other strategies in this sector are
mainly Scope 3 and land use related (e.g. local
food, urban forestry, and "white roofs ") and
therefore fall outside the scope of the GHG
inventories. Nonetheless, these strategies do
have real influences on GHG emissions and are
included as information items.
13
Total Impact
There is some overlap in these policies,
but except where noted, they are almost all
complementary in nature and would bolster
rather than displace one another.
The estimated total impact of the
reductions outlined in this report is 514,739 mt
CO2e per year by 2030, which is estimated to
bring Dubuque within 0.4% of its 50% reduction
goal (Table 2b). Most of those reductions are
from renewable energy installations and
improvements in building energy efficiency,
which can also yield strong returns -on-
investment for homeowners and businesses.
Not all of these reductions are equally
likely, however. Some have already been
implemented, some are planned, some are merely
possible, and others have been considered and
rejected. Figure 3 shows the breakdown of the
reduction strategies considered in this report.
An estimated 227,247 mt (by 2030) of
GHG reductions are already underway and an
additional 29,390 mt are planned for the near
future. This yields 256,637 mt of reductions
anticipated from current efforts in the community
as of 2012, which is nearly half of necessary
reductions. This leaves approximately 1260,000
mt of reductions yet to be achieved between
2013 and 2030 using other options described in
this plan or other emerging opportunities.
Where will these emerging opportunities
come from? The greatest potential by far lies in
renewables and energy efficiency, though many
other unforeseen opportunities will no doubt
arise between 2013 and 2030. Also, this report is
restricted to actions within the direct power of
the Dubuque community. It does not account for
future state /federal action, technological
innovations, or other outside factors that could
substantially influence GHG emissions by 2030.
It also does not include potential large scale local
actions such as conversion of Alliant Energy's
Dubuque coal plant to natural gas, or other
regional and state level reductions.
# 263,784 mt according to 2030 business -as -usual emission
estimate in Emissions Reference Case (Appendix B)
Table 2a. Potential Scope 1 and 2 GHG reduction emission reductions (by 2030) in Dubuque, Iowa
from select reduction strategies in each of five community sectors.
Sector
Reduction
(mt CO2e /year
by 2030)
% of total
reduction
Waste
Energy
Transportation
Buildings
Misc
Total reductions
57,500
217,437
48,412
157,946
33,444
11.2%
42.2%
9.4%
30.7%
6.5%
100.0%
514,739
Table 2b. Estimated progress toward 50% by 2030 (from 2003 levels) reduction goal using all
potential strategies outlined in this document.
Measure
mt CO2elyr
2030 emissions (pre- reduction BAU)
Total reductions (from Table 2a)
2030 emissions (post - reduction)
Emissions target (50% of 2003 emissions)
Difference (2030 post- reduction emissions vs target)
010 reduction from 2003 by 2030
14
1,153, 538
514, 739
638,800
633,117
5,683
49.6%
Reductions by 2030
• Waste
• Energy
Transportation
• Buildings
• Misc.
Remaining emissions
Figure 2. 2030 GHG reduction summary. Percent of 2003 emissions potentially eliminated by 2030
through the strategies described in this report.
■ Active /planned
• Other options
Unlikely reductions
Figure 3. Status /likelihood of the GHG reductions described in this report occurring by 2030 in
Dubuque, Iowa (mt CO2e per year).
15
Section II - Policy Summary Tables
Policy Summary Tables - Waste Reduction & Resource Management (page 1 of 1)
See page 26 for full discussion. See Appendix E for discussion of estimated impact ranges.
Strategy
Description
Estimated
Impact
(mt CO2e)
Status
DMASWA —
methane capture
and flaring
Capturing and burning methane emitted by organics decomposition at the
DMASWA landfill
50000
Active since
2010
p. 27
Waste diversion &
minimization
Minimizing waste via diversion strategies like those outlined in the 2009 Huls
report, such as resource recovery and organics composting and management
*10, 000s
Planning and
early
implementation
p. 28
Waste diversion —
food scraps
Collecting and diverting organic food waste from landfilling for composting and/or
methane capture
5,000 —10,000
Active /ongoing
p. 29
Waste diversion —
recycling and pay-
as- you -throw
Dubuque's recycling program diverts approximately 40% of landfill waste, while
the Pay -As- You -Throw program is a volume based collection system providing
financial incentives for waste reduction
*100,000+
Active /ongoing
p. 31
Waste diversion —
deconstruction
Reducing unnecessary waste from deconstruction projects, maximizing the
amount of material salvaged and reused, and minimizing the amount
demolished and landfilled.
*10,000s
Active /ongoing
p. 32
Waste diversion —
plastic bag
phaseout
In July 2011, the Dubuque City Council approved an initiative to reduce plastic
shopping bag use by 90% by mid 2017 without a new city ordinance or a ban.
*3'400
Ongoing /early
implementation
p 33
Waste diversion —
zero waste event
guidance
DMASWA's zero waste event planning program provides "event recycling units,"
which provides events with separate containers for trash, compostable
materials, and recycling for easy separation and pickup.
*10s
Active /ongoing
p. 34
*All or part of reduction is Scope 3, and is not counted in GHG inventory or toward 50% by 2030 goal
17
Policy Summary Tables - Local Energy: Infrastructure (page 1 of 1)
See page 35 for full discussion. See Appendix E for discussion of estimated impact ranges.
Strategy
Description
Estimated
Impact
• (mt CO2e)
Status
Wood waste CHP
Using regional wood waste in a combined heat and power (CHP) facility
in downtown Dubuque, which could generate both electricity and waste
heat.
87,000 — 134,000
No longer
under
consideration
p. 36
Wood waste
pyrolysis and
energy recovery
Biochar can be produced from wood waste via pyrolysis, which yields
s n as and bio -oil energy products as well as biochar, which is a highly
stable form of carbon that can remove GHGs from the atmosphere
44 -4,400
Prospective/
not currently
under
consideration
p' 37
DMASWA —
methane gas to
energy
Methane from organics decomposition at the landfill can be captured
and burned for energy.
"61,799
(11 799)
Planning
stages
p. 38
WRRC — methane
CHP
Methane from waste processing at anaerobic digestors can be captured
and burned for energy
3 077
Under
construction
p. 39
Local clean energy
—solar
Solar photovoltaic arrays could generate a significant amount of energy
in Dubuque, particularly at large commercial and industrial facilities
9,618 — 28,854
Active /ongoing
p. 40
Local clean energy
—small wind
Small wind turbines could potentially generate a moderate of energy in
Dubuque, particularly at large commercial and industrial facilities
100s
Active /ongoing
p. 41
Hydroelectricity at
Lock and Dam 11
A hydroelectric facility at Dubuque Lock & Dam 11 could produce a very
significant amount of energy
50,030+
Prospective
p. 42
Dubuque Generating
Station to natural
gas
Alliant Energy's Dubuque Generating Station coal plant is scheduled for
closure, but could potentially be converted to run on natural gas, which
produces fewer GHGs per unit energy output than coal
Significant
generating
capacity
Prospective)
not currently
under
consideration
p. 43
District heating —
natural gas (Millwork
District)
A local energy generation facility could provide electricity and heating to
residents and businesses in downtown Dubuque
Significant
generating
capacity
No longer
under
consideration
p. 44
* *11,799 mt of energy related reductions; 50,000 mt of methane destruction reductions (see section: DMASWA - methane capture and flaring)
18
Policy Summary Tables- Local Energy: Policies & Programs (page 1 of 1)
See page 35 for full discussion. See Appendix E for discussion of estimated impact ranges.
Strategy
Description
Estimated
Impact
(mt CO2e)
Status
Renewable energy
PPAs
PPAs allow businesses to install solar PV arrays without incurring risk or taking
responsibility for equipment maintenance. In PPAs, the installer owns the
equipment (financed by a 3rd party) and sells electricity at a contracted rate to a
business /buyer. Lease agreements can serve a similar function
1 OOOs
Prospective/
not currently
under
consideration
p 45
Distributed energy
policies (residential)
Dubuque can facilitate renewable energy to residential sectors via education,
technical expertise, and adopting best policies and practices such as those
from the DOE Rooftop Solar Challenge program
100s
Pending
p. 46
Distributed energy
policies
(commercial /public
buildings)
Dubuque can facilitate renewable energy to commercial /industrial sectors via
education, technical expertise, and adopting best policies and practices such
as those from the DOE Rooftop Solar Challenge program
1,000s
Pending
p. 47
DOE Rooftop Solar
Challenge
A federal program designed to develop and test local programs and policies that
lower the cost and streamline the process of installing solar PV in residential
and commercial settings.
1,000s
Pending
p. 48
Local green
financing
A reliable source of financing (e.g. banks and financial institutions) for renewable
projects would support/spur demand for energy efficiency and
renewables in Dubuque.
not estimated
Prospective/
not currently
under
consideration
p. 49
EPA Green Power
Community
Dubuque utility customers can voluntarily participate in renewable energy
purchasing programs and purchase a percentage of their power from renewables
1 OOOs
Prospective/
not currently
under
consideration
p. 50
Renewable energy
property tax
exemption
Would provide exemptions from property taxes for certain renewable energy
installations such that assessors would not add the value of renewable energy
systems to the taxable value of a property.
100s
Prospective/
not currently
under
consideration
p. 51
19
Policy Summary Tables - Transportation (page 1 of 2)
See page 52 for full discussion. See Appendix E for discussion of estimated impact ranges.
Strategy
Description
Estimated
Impact
(mt 002e)
Status
Complete Streets
Complete streets is a planning and design process that ensures that
the health, safety, and mobility of all transportation users are
considered in road project planning
9,303 — 27,909
Adopted 2011
p. 53
The Jule — Dubuque
transit system
redesign
Local bus routes and schedules are being redesigned to match the
needs of existing and potential riders, which will improve route
efficiency, cut costs, increase ridership, and bring bus service to
more residents.
100s
Active since
2010
p. 54
The Jule — fuel
efficient buses
In 2011, Dubuque's bus fleet was replaced with newer, more fuel
efficient vehicles equipped with electronic route tracking and
scheduling technology, among other improvements.
1,008
Completed
2011 2012
p. 55
Dubuque Intermodal
Transportation
Facility
The Dubuque Intermodal Transportation Center is a proposed facility
that will connect air, rail, bus, automobile, and river traffic at a single
integrated transportation hub.
2,255
Pending/
planned
p. 56
Southwest Arterial
The Southwest Arterial will be a 6.1 -mile four -lane divided freeway
providing an alternative route for traffic through southwestern
Dubuque.
7,762
Planned/
ongoing
p. 57
Smarter City ITS
The Smarter City Intelligent Transportation Solution partnership
between the City of Dubuque and IBM provides a sophisticated
system for analyzing real -time transportation data to facilitate
improvements in transportation efficiency
4,591
Active /ongoing
p. 58
Particle filters on
diesel City fleet
vehicles
Dubuque could retrofit older municipally owned diesel vehicles with
particle filters in order to decrease black carbon and particulate
matter emissions.
*861
Prospective
p. 59
EV charging
infrastructure
Facilitating the installation of electric vehicle (EV) charging stations
at parking structures, businesses, and other strategic locations.
1,000s
Prospective
p. 60
*Black carbon - not counted in inventory or toward 50% by 2030 goal
20
Policy Summary Tables - Transportation (page 2 of 2)
See page 52 for full discussion. See Appendix E for discussion of estimated impact ranges.
Strategy
Description
Estimated
Impact
(mt CO2e)
Status
Car sharing
Car sharing provides an alternative to car ownership by making vehicles
(usually owned and maintained by a company) available for short term,
easy access rental.
10s
Prospective
p. 61
Parking
Various parking related strategies for improving efficiency, lowering
costs, and reducing GHG emissions
100s
Prospective
p. 62
Transit policies and
programs
Various strategies for reducing GHGs from Dubuque's transit system,
including bus rapid transit, an eco -pass program for local businesses
and institutions, telecommuting, and ridesharing resources
100 — 1,000
Prospective
p. 63
Bicycle policies and
programs
Various policies and programs to facilitate cycling and active
commuting, including bike sharing stations, bicycle boulevards, and
well placed bicycle parking
100 — 1,000
Prospective
p. 64
Safe Routes to
School /Safe Routes
to Play
Safe Routes to School seeks to make walking and bicycling to school
a safe and routine activity for students via safer street crossings,
sidewalks, and other features that create safe and continuous links
between homes and schools.
10 —100
Active/
ongoing
p. 65
Roundabouts
Roundabouts are circular intersections that promote safer and more
efficient traffic flow.
100 — 1,000
Active/
ongoing
p 66
Signal timing
optimization
Software, sensors, and other technology to maximize green light times
and allow timing to adjust based on changing demands during peak
times, such as rush hour.
100 — 1,000
Prospective
p. 67
Idling reduction
Idling consumes costly fuel, lowers air quality, and increases GHG
emissions, and it can be reduced with simple best practice
recommendations and policies
100s
Prospective
p. 68
21
Policy Summary Tables - Built Environment (page 1 of 3)
See page 69 for full discussion. See Appendix E for discussion of estimated impact ranges.
Strategy
Description
Estimated
Impact
(mt CO2e)
Status
mil
p. 70
WRRC — Anaerobic
digestion
Dubuque's wastewater treatment facility was upgraded from an
incinerator to an anaerobic digestion system, which will save
energy and fuel oil costs and is scheduled for completion in
2014
928
Ongoing.
Completed
2014
ECIA Petal Project
The Petal Project provides businesses with a clear
sustainability framework and technical assistance to improve
the environment and the bottom line.
1,000 — 10,000
Active/
ongoing
p. 71
Dubuque Schools
The Dubuque Community Schools continues to cut energy use
and utility costs through simple operational and energy
efficiency solutions.
1,311 —2,500
Active/
ongoing
p. 72
Smarter Sustainable
Dubuque — energy
and water
The Smarter City pilot is a partnership between the City of
Dubuque and IBM to develop smart metering and information
systems that will enable homeowners to identify inefficient or
unintended use of water and energy.
1 671 —19 053
Active/
ongoing
p. 73
22
Policy Summary Tables- Built Environment (page 2 of 3)
See page 69 for full discussion. See Appendix E for discussion of estimated impact ranges.
Strategy
Description
Estimated
Impact
(mt CO2e)
Status
IECC building
standards
The IECC is a model building code standard that can be voluntarily adopted
by state and municipal governments to establish minimum design and
construction requirements for energy efficiency in new residential or
commercial buildings.
10 QOOs
Active/
ongoing
p 74
USGBC — LEED for
Existing Buildings
The LEED for Existing Buildings program addresses cleaning and
maintenance issues, recycling programs, exterior and grounds
maintenance, weatherization and energy savings, HVAC system upgrades,
and other savings opportunities.
1,OOOs
Prospective
p. 75
PACE (and similar
financing programs)
PACE is a tool for local governments to empower community members to
make renewable energy improvements to their homes and property without
the burden of upfront costs and delayed returns on investment by making
high ROI loans available to community members. Similar programs can be
administered by private financial institutions, governments, and non - profits.
100s
Not currently
under
consideration
p. 76
Public building
efficiency standards
(City gov buildings)
Dubuque's new /renovated municipal buildings could be constructed to meet
high efficiency building standards, such as LEED
100 —1 000
Prospective
p. 77
Advanced
commercial building
efficiency standards
Dubuque could adopt a policy facilitating or requiring new buildings to meet
high efficiency building standards, such as LEED
1,000 — 10,000
Prospective
p. 78
Rental housing
energy efficiency
Various programs and policies can be employed to improve rental property
efficiency and reduce costs for owners and tenants
1,000 —10,000
Prospective
p. 79
Ground source heat
pumps (residential)
Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP) systems are central heating and
cooling systems that pump heat to or from the ground, taking advantage of
the relatively constant ground temperature for building heating and cooling
100 —1,000
Active/
ongoing
p. 80
23
Policy Summary Tables - Built Environment (page 3 of 3)
See page 69 for full discussion. See Appendix E for discussion of estimated impact ranges.
Strategy
sr
Description
Estimated
Impact
(mt CO2e)
Status
�
Municipal lighting
and energy
efficiency
There are many opportunities for improved energy efficiency in
municipal operations in Dubuque, including LEDs and
appliance /equipment efficiency.
1,000 -5,000
Active/
ongoing
p. 81
Commercial lighting
and energy
efficiency
Local programs and policies could help local businesses and
institutions save a substantial amount of energy and money
through simple, low cost lighting improvements.
1,000 — 10,000
Prospective
p. 83
State and Federal
programs and
incentives
Many State and Federal incentives for efficiency improvements
in residential, commercial, and government buildings (e.g.
weatherization & renewables) are not discussed elsewhere in
this report and are included here primarily as an information
item.
100s +
Active/
ongoing
p. 84
Dubuque Unified
Development Code
The Dubuque Unified Development Code provides guidance for
planning and development in Dubuque, affecting everything from
transportation and building efficiency to land use and water
quality.
1 000s
Active as of
2009
p. 85
Infill development
Infill development shifts urban growth from outer - suburban and
undeveloped peripheral areas to existing city space with pre-
existing infrastructure
1,000s
Prospective/
part of UDC
p. 86
Historic building
presentation and
revitalization
Historic building preservation entails restoring, revitalization,
and re- purposing historic or neglected buildings in order to save
building materials and utilize existing city infrastructure
100s
Prospective/
part of UDC
p. 87
Smart growth —
miscellaneous
Miscellaneous policies and programs that could encourage
smart growth in Dubuque, including mixed use development,
density bonuses, and brownfield development
100s
Prospective/
part of UDC
p. 88
24
Policy Summary Tables - Miscellaneous (page 1 of 1)
See page 89 for full discussion. See Appendix E for discussion of estimated impact ranges.
Strategy
Description
Estimated
Impact
(mt CO2e)
Status
Urban forestry
Tree planting can reduce GHGs by sequestering carbon in soil and plant
biomass and also by shading buildings during the warm summer
months and acting as a windbreak during the winter.
*100s
Active/
ongoing
p. 90
Local food
Food and dietary choices can significantly impact GHG emissions,
which can be reduced through various policies such as CSAs, farmers
markets, community gardens, and local foods
*1,000s
Some active/
some
prospective
p. 91
Community based
initiatives
Many community organizations and collaboratives are creating an array
of programs designed to engage and educate the community regarding
sustainable lifestyles, including reducing GHG emissions
22,296
Some active/
some
prospective
p. 93
Refrigerants
HCFC refrigerants are synthetic chemicals used for refrigeration. Many
HCFCs hake extraordinarily high global warming potential and can be
reduced through voluntary adoption of alternative refrigerants as well as
scheduled national /global phaseouts that will reduce GHG emissions in
Dubuque
11,148
Active/
ongoing
p. 94
Cool roofs /cool
pavement
White roofs can mitigate climate warming by reducing the amount of
solar radiation absorbed by the earths surface; they can also save
energy by decreasing building temperatures and thus cooling and
refrigeration costs during the summer months.
*100s
Prospective
p. 95
Air quality measures
Air quality and GHG emissions go hand in hand, and several
opportunities exist to improve air quality that have not been discussed
elsewhere in this report.
*not estimated
Prospective
p. 96
*All or part of reduction is Scope 3, and is not counted in GHG inventory or toward 50% by 2030 goal
25
Section III - Policy Descriptions
Policy Descriptions:
I. Waste Reduction & Resource Management
Introduction:
The Dubuque Metropolitan Area Solid Waste Agency (DMASWA) operates the Dubuque
Metropolitan Landfill, which manages solid waste for Dubuque and some surrounding areas. The
DMASWA landfill accounts for 5% of Dubuque's Scope 1 GHG emissions (Table 1). It also relates to
much of Dubuque's Scope 3 emissions, which are not included in the inventory but nonetheless
represent real emissions with a significant climate impact.
Scope 1 emissions at the landfill come from organic materials such as food and yard
waste. When organics are landfilled, they undergo anaerobic (i.e. oxygen free) decomposition, which
produces methane gas as a byproduct. Methane is a potent GHG with over 21 -times the global
warming potential of CO2. Landfill methane can be captured and burned for energy, which reduces its
direct climate impact and generates electricity that replaces fossil fuel sources. Alternatively, diverting
organic materials from the landfill for composting or other beneficial use can prevent these methane
emissions from occurring in the first place.
Scope 3 emissions at the landfill are related to consumption and discards. Every piece of
material entering the landfill represents some amount of embodied emissions, which are the GHG
emissions produced during the creation and transport of a product. By discarding less and
reusing /recycling more, these embodied emissions can be minimized. Embodied emissions comprise
the landfill's Scope 3 emissions, which are not accounted for in the GHG inventory or the GHG
reduction goal, but nonetheless represent real emissions and important reduction opportunities.
This section will describe strategies by which Dubuque can reduce the embodied and methane
emissions associated with solid waste (Table 3).
Table 3. Waste related GHG reduction strategies and their potential impact in Dubuque, IA.
Strategy Estimated GHG reduction
(mt CO2e per year by 2030)
DMASWA — methane capture and flaring
50,000
p. 27
Waste diversion & minimization
*10,000s
p. 28
Waste diversion —food scraps
5,000 — 10,000
p. 29
Waste diversion — recycling and pay -as- you -throw
*100,000+
p. 31
Waste diversion — deconstruction
*10,000s
p. 32
Waste diversion — plastic bag phaseout
*3,400
p. 33
Waste diversion —zero waste event guidance
*10s
p. 34
Total potential impact (scopes 1 and 2)
% total reduction goal (520,000 mt of reductions by 2030)
55,000 — 60,000+
11.1%
*All or part of reduction is Scope 3 and is not counted in GHG inventory or toward 50% by 2030
goal
27
DMASWA — Methane Capture and Flaring
1) Sector: Waste reduction and resource
management
2) Policy name: DMASWA methane capture
and flaring
3) Policy type: Municipal/County
4) Affected entities: DMASWA; City of
Dubuque; Dubuque County; rate payers
5) Current status: Active since 2010
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 50,000 mt CO2e
annually (currently closed cells)
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: In 2010 the
Dubuque Metropolitan Area Solid Waste Agency
(DMASWA) completed installation of a landfill
gas collection system and began flaring the
captured methane. The landfill gas collection
system is estimated to capture about 75% of
emissions from the capped landfill cells. The
flaring process burns methane gas to convert it to
water and CO2, thus reducing its climate impact
by approximately 21- times.
9) Barriers to implementation: None (action
already implemented); future expansion to
currently active cells would entail administrative,
technical, and financial challenges similar to
those encountered in initial capping.
10) Co- benefits: Facilitates methane- gas-to-
energy (see section: DMASWA - Methane gas to
energy)
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
50,000 mt CO2e per year from methane flaring at
landfill. Data from Cornerstone (2008).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: High
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
28
estimate: Capture efficiency of collection
system; time at which cells are capped/flared;
amount of organic waste entering currently active
landfill cells.
Waste Diversion & Minimization
1) Sector: Waste reduction and resource
management
2) Policy name: Waste diversion and
minimization.
3) Policy type: Municipal/County; community
policy
4) Affected entities: DMASWA; City of
Dubuque; Dubuque County; landfill customers.
5) Current status: Planning and early
implementation. Feasibility study completed in
2009. Many actions already underway.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: **10,000s of mt
CO2e annually.
**All or part of reduction is Scope 3, which is not counted
in GHG inventory or toward 50% by 2030 goal
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Primarily
Scope 3 (embodied energy); some Scope 1
(landfill methane)
8) Specific description of policy: Recycling
more and wasting less is one of the fastest,
cheapest, and most effective strategies available
to local governments to reduce both embodied
and local GHG emissions. Large
commercial/industrial customers in particular
represent significant opportunities for diversion,
recycling, and other means of discard reduction.
In 2009, DMASWA contracted Huls
Environmental Management to develop a plan to
divert 50% of the approximately 100,000
tons /year buried at the landfill. Huls produced an
implementation strategy for reaching the 50%
goal within five years (Huls 2009).
The implementation strategy outlined the
potential for sustained revenue from
recovery /reuse of high value discards. For
instance, high value goods such as construction
debris can be collected and marketed in a
29
"resource recovery park." Organic waste can be
converted to high -grade compost and sold at a
premium rate to retail and commercial markets.
Progress to -date on such initiatives is further
discussed in later sections of this report.
9) Barriers to implementation• Infrastructure
and administration of new programs; up front
costs; permitting from State and Federal
agencies; design of programs (e.g. focus on
source diversion, sink diversion, or both);
establishing markets for diverted high value
products.
10) Co- benefits: The full set of
recommendations from the Huls (2009) study
could be fully implemented for an estimated $8.8
million and yield annual costs savings and
revenue of nearly $3 million. Additional benefits
include minimizing landfill expansion needs,
lowering costs of landfill operation, and lowering
the amount of hazardous material entering the
landfill.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
The annual waste stream entering DMASWA
landfill is approximately 100,000 tons (90,744
mt per year). If 2.87 mt CO2e is prevented per
mt of waste recycled or otherwise usefully
diverted from the landfill (EPA 2010a), then 50%
additional diversion could yield over 100,000 mt
CO2e in annual reductions. However, much of
this reduction is from embodied energy (Scope
3), which is not counted in Dubuque's GHG
inventory or toward the 50% by 2030 goal.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Degree of implementation by
DMASWA and partners; behavioral response by
customers and consumers; specific local
emissions factor for diverted waste (assumed
here to be 2.87 mt CO2e per mt waste - EPA
2010a).
Waste Diversion - Food Scraps
1) Sector: Waste reduction and resource
management
2) Policy name: Waste diversion - food scraps
3) Policy type: Municipal/county; community
policy
4) Affected entities: DMASWA; City of
Dubuque; Dubuque County; rate payers; area
businesses, particularly grocers and food service
5) Current status: Ongoing. Dubuque's "Green
Cart" curbside food scrap collection program is
available to all 20,000 DMASWA customers.
However, the landfill is currently limited to
processing 2 tons of compost per week by Iowa
regulations. Expansion of this capacity is
pending changes in Iowa regulations regarding
handling and processing of food waste.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 5,000- 10,000 mt
CO2e annually from two alternatives:
WRRC (50% food scrap diversion to WRRC
methane - gas-to- energy facility): 7,442 mt
CO2e annually
Composting (50% food waste diversion to
composting facility): 9,303 mt CO2e annually
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: Food scrap
diversion will likely take one of two forms:
(a) Composting, where food scraps are
composted on site at the landfill. Composting
prevents methane emissions and yields high
quality compost for sale to horticultural and
commercial/retail landscaping markets.
(b) Concentration and methane capture, where
food scraps are concentrated in a single area and
allowed to undergo anaerobic decomposition.
The resulting methane emissions can be captured
and burned to create energy and eliminate the
methane's climate impact.
Regarding Option (a), the Huls (2009) report (see
30
section: Waste Diversion & Minimization)
discussed various strategies to phase -in an
organics recovery system that could collect up to
30,000 tons per year of organics. These could be
turned into valuable high -grade compost at an
on -site composting facility or off -site through a
contracted private hauler. Some of this compost
could be made available free of charge to
community or school gardens (see section: Local
Food).
Regarding Option (b), organic waste could be
integrated into the Water & Resource Recovery
Center's (WRRC) anaerobic digesters, thereby
boosting the methane and energy output of the
WRRC. Food scraps either could be hauled to
the digesters in trucks or transported through
sewage pipes after being pulverized with sink
disposals (see section: WRRC - methane gas to
energy).
Likely pathways to expand food scrap collection
include contracts with major food vendors (e.g.
restaurants, food processors, cafeterias), which
are likely to provide the biggest "bang for the
buck" in terms of food scrap collection. Also,
Dubuque's curbside Green Cart program could be
expanded, and citizens could be encouraged to
dispose of food waste through sink disposals (for
processing into methane at WRRC), if
applicable.
9) Barriers to implementation• Infrastructure
and administration; State of Iowa regulations on
hazardous materials status of food scraps
(landfill is currently limited to 2 tons per week to
process into compost); State and Federal
permitting for expansion of composting capacity;
establishing markets for compost; personal
participation in programs, use of sink disposals,
etc.
10) Co- benefits: Value of compost; value of
electricity (methane capture); reduced landfill
inputs and costs.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
(a) WRRC with methane capture: Calculations
assume that 11,415 tons of food scraps are
collected per year in Dubuque (IA DNR 2005),
50% of which are assumed diverted to the
WRRC. For emission factors, we assume that
each ton of food scraps landfilled generates 1.43
mt CO2e and each ton diverted to a methane -gas-
to- energy facility generates only 0.33 mt CO2e
(EPA 2010a). This yields 6,278 mt from
methane emission prevention.
In terms of electricity generation, we assume 250
kWh per ton of food waste (EPA 2008).
Assuming projected 2030 grid emission factors
(Appendix A), food scrap methane at WRRC will
offset 1,163 mt CO2e of grid electricity emissions
(waste heat not counted).
Combining the electricity and methane offsets
yields a total reduction of 7,442 mt CO2e per
year by 2030. We assign this option a range of
5,000- 10,000 mt.
(b) Food scrap composting: Calculations
assume 11,415 tons of food scraps collected in
Dubuque each year, 50% of which is diverted to
composting. For emission factors, we assume
that each ton of food scraps landfilled generates
1.43 mt CO2e, while each ton diverted to
composting generates -0.2 mt CO2e due to
carbon sequestration (EPA 2010a). This yields a
reduction of 9,303 mt CO2e per year. We assign
this option a range of 5,000- 10,000 mt.
Therefore, both the composting and methane -to-
energy options for food scraps fall in the 5,000-
10,000 mt impact range.
Notably, food scraps diverted to composting or
the WRRC would not reduce useful methane
emissions at the landfill (i.e. the methane used
for landfill- gas-to- energy). This is because
methane is not captured from active landfill cells.
Those cells will be capped eventually, but
probably not until the 2020s (DMASWA,
personal communication). Therefore, all
diversion represents a net reduction in emissions.
31
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Degree of implementation by
DMASWA and partners; behavioral response by
residents.
Waste Diversion - Recycling & Pay -As- You -Throw
1) Sector: Waste reduction and resource
management
2) Policy name: Waste diversion - recycling &
pay -as- you -throw (PAYT)
3) Policy type: Community Policy
4) Affected entities: DMASWA; City of
Dubuque; Dubuque County; landfill customers.
5) Current status: Ongoing.
6) Estimated GHG reduction:
Recycling: **100,000+ mt CO2e annually
Pay -as -you- throw: **1,000s of mt CO2e
annually.
**All or part of reduction is Scope 3, which is not counted
in GHG inventory or toward 50% by 2030 goal
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Primarily
Scope 3 (embodied emissions); some Scope 1
(landfill methane)
8) Specific description of policies:
(a) Recycling: Dubuque was the first major city
in Iowa to implement curbside recycling.
Dubuque's award winning recycling program
diverts —40% of landfill waste (compared to
1994 base year - Huls 2009), equivalent to
approximately 60,000 mt of waste annually.
(b) Pay-as-you-throw: In 2002, Dubuque
implemented a volume -based collection fees
system, commonly referred to as the "Pay As You
Throw" (PAYT) system. Since then, Dubuque's
refuse tonnage sent to the landfill has decreased
by 28 percent, while the city's recycling
collection tonnage has increased by 37 percent.
The City of Dubuque estimates annual reductions
of 2,722 mt waste per year due to PAYT.
Both PAYT and recycling are ongoing in
Dubuque. Expansion is possible, however,
particularly for large business customers.
9) Barriers to implementation: Changing
32
market prices for recycled products; education;
policy design
10) Co- benefits: Reduced landfill space
demands and costs; community engagement /eco-
literacy; local jobs.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Because these two programs are complementary
(i.e. each facilitates the other), there is significant
overlap in their impacts. However, a baseline
estimate of each can be calculated.
Assuming 2.87 mt CO2e prevented per mt waste
diverted rather than landfilled (EPA 2010a) and
54,446 and 2,722 mt of waste diverted from the
landfill by recycling and pay -as-you- throw,
respectively (Huls 2009; City of Dubuque),
recycling reduces GHG emissions by
approximately 174,000 mt CO2e per year and
pay -as-you -throw prevents 7,887 mt CO2e of
emissions. This puts recycling in the 100,000+
mt CO2e range and pay -as-you -throw in the
1,000s of mt CO2e range.
Many of those emissions are Scope 3 and
resulted from programs implemented prior to the
2003 base year, however. So strictly speaking
they do not count toward the 50% by 2030 goal
but are nonetheless significant achievements.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Calculations were made using a single
emission factor (2.87 mt CO2e per mt waste
recycled rather than landfilled - EPA 2010a),
which may not perfectly apply to Dubuque's
landfill. Also, given the overlap in the programs,
GHG emissions cannot be attributed solely to
one program or the other. Also, other factors
besides the existence of recycling and pay -as-
you -throw contribute to reduced landfill inputs.
Nonetheless, these estimates provide a basic
approximation of the impact of two major waste
diversion and reduction programs in Dubuque.
Waste Diversion - Deconstruction
1) Sector: Waste reduction and resource
management
2) Policy name: Waste diversion -
deconstruction
3) Policy type: Community policy
4) Affected entities: DMASWA; City of
Dubuque; Dubuque County; rate payers; area
businesses; construction firms
5) Current status: Ongoing (since 2003). In
2009, the City removed the demolition option
altogether, increased the diversion mandate to
85 %, and added a requirement that contractors
must provide third -party verification that the
minimum salvage standards have been met (SCN
2011).
6) Estimated GHG reduction: **10,000s of mt
CO2e annually
**All or part of reduction is Scope 3, which is not counted
in GHG inventory or toward 50% by 2030 goal
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Primarily
Scope 3 (embodied emissions); some Scope 1
(landfill methane)
8) Specific description of policy: Dubuque has
worked to reduce unnecessary waste from
deconstruction projects, maximize the amount of
material salvaged /reused, and minimize the
amount demolished/landfilled.
In the early stages of the Bee Branch project, the
City asked for separate deconstruction and
demolition bids so comparisons could be made.
They found that contractors made money at
deconstruction, so deconstruction has since
become standard practice in Dubuque.
98 construction and demolition projects were
administered between 2003 and 2012, with 20
commercial building and 78 housing projects,
generating 175,634 mt of waste. More than 94%
of that waste was diverted, saving a total of $5.9
million in landfill fees (SCN 2011a).
33
9) Barriers to implementation: Educating
developers about best practices; monitoring and
verification.
10) Co- benefits: Lower bids and costs for
deconstruction/demolition projects; lower landfill
inputs /management costs; local jobs.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Taking the average of the past nine years
(175,634 mt waste total) gives 19,515 mt waste
diverted per year. Assuming 2.87 mt CO2e
prevented per mt of waste diverted (EPA 2010a),
deconstruction in Dubuque has prevented up to
52,647 mt CO2e per year, putting deconstruction
well within the 10,000s of mt range.
Many of these reductions are Scope 3, which do
not count toward the 50% by 2030 goal.
However, Scope 1 emissions also are reduced by
minimizing future methane emissions from
landfilled construction/demolition debris.
Notably, deconstruction/diversion will not reduce
useful methane emissions at the landfill (i.e. the
methane used for landfill- gas-to- energy). This is
because methane is not captured from active
landfill cells. Those cells will be capped
eventually, but not until the 2020s (DMASWA
personal communication). Therefore, all
construction diversion represents a net reduction
in emissions.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Degree of implementation by
DMASWA and partners; behavioral response to
programs; overlap between deconstruction
reduction and recycling reduction (see section:
Waste reduction - recycling and pay- as -you-
throw); also, some portion of the 94% diverted
may be landfilled downstream after initial
recovery.
Waste Diversion - Plastic Bag Phase -out
1) Sector: Waste reduction and resource
management
2) Policy name: Waste diversion - plastic bag
phaseout
3) Policy type: Community policy
4) Affected entities: DMASWA; City of
Dubuque; Dubuque County; area retailers and
customers
5) Current status: Ongoing. Goal of 90%
reduction by 2017 (see below)
6) Estimated GHG reduction: * *3,400 mt
CO2e annually
**All or part of reduction is Scope 3, which is not counted
in GHG inventory or toward 50% by 2030 goal
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Primarily
Scope 3 (embodied emissions); some Scope 1
(landfill methane)
8) Specific description of policy: In July 2011,
the Dubuque City Council approved an initiative
to reduce plastic shopping bag use by 90% by
mid 2017 without a new city ordinance or
outright ban.
The plan was developed in consultation with area
grocers and retailers and will take place in
several phases:
July 2012: 25% reduction in chain grocers and
retailers with >40,000 square feet of floor space
July 2013: 50% reduction in chain grocers and
retailers with >40,000 square feet of floor space;
25% reduction in middle -sized businesses
(15,000- 39,999 square ft)
July 2014: 75% reduction in chain grocers and
retailers with >40,000 square feet of floor space;
50% reduction in middle -sized businesses
(15,000- 39,999 square ft); 25% reduction in
34
small businesses ( <15,000 square feet).
July 2015: 75% reduction in businesses >15,000
square feet of floor space; 50% reduction in
businesses <15,000 square feet
July 2016: 75% reduction at all Dubuque
retailers; will assess likelihood of 90% target by
2017 at this time and take action accordingly
July 2017: 90% reduction at all Dubuque
retailers.
9) Barriers to implementation: Education and
participation by Dubuque residents and retailers.
10) Co- benefits: Litter reduction. Reduced
operating costs for local businesses.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Assuming that each of Dubuque's 22,560
households average 2.3 trips to the grocery store
per week, use 7 bags per trip, and each bag
embodies 0.0002 mt CO2e (32.5 g per bag; 6 g
CO2e per g plastic - source: Time for Change
2011), a 90% decrease in bag use in Dubuque
would decrease CO2e by approximately 3,400 mt
CO2e per year.
These embodied emissions are Scope 3 and
therefore not counted in Dubuque's GHG
inventory or toward the 50% by 2030 goal.
Nonetheless, the reductions are significant and
do contribute to the larger goal of GHG reduction
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: The actual number of bags currently
used in Dubuque. Manufacturing/distribution
costs of permanent cloth/paper replacement bags.
Waste Diversion - Zero Waste Event Guidance
1) Sector: Waste reduction and resource
management
2) Policy name: Waste diversion - zero waste
event guidance
3) Policy type: Municipal/County; community
policy
4) Affected entities: DMASWA; Dubuque
residents, visitors, and event planners
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: **10s of mt
CO2e annually.
**All or part of reduction is Scope 3, which is not counted
in GHG inventory or toward 50% by 2030 goal
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(landfill methane); Scope 3 (embodied
emissions)
8) Specific description of policy: DMASWA's
zero waste event planning program provides
events with "event recycling units" with separate
containers for trash, compostable materials, and
recycling for easy separation and pickup.
9) Barriers to implementation: Advertising to
event organizers; education of event patrons
regarding importance of separating discards;
staffing events to prevent cross contamination of
recycling batches.
10) Co- benefits: Reduced litter. Increased
diversion rates and lower landfilling/landfill
management costs. Eco- literacy and community
engagement. Easier event cleanup.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact: As
a rough estimate, we assume a modest diversion
rate of 20 mt waste per year from major events
and 2.87 mt CO2e per mt waste (EPA 2010a),
which yields 57 mt CO2e per year. Hence, lOs of
mt CO2e per year is the estimated impact.
Some of these emissions will be Scope 3, though
35
emissions from organic discards will be Scope 1.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Degree of implementation by
DMASWA and partners. Composition of waste
(e.g. organics vs cans and bottles). Fate of
collected discards (e.g. composting food waste vs
landfilling). Emission factor (2.87) provided by
EPA (2010) may not apply perfectly to these
wastes. However, the range (10 -100 mt) should
be reliable.
Policy Descriptions:
IL Local Energy & Renewables
Introduction
Dubuque produced 877,373 mt CO2e in 2011 (72% of total - -Table 1) due to electricity and
natural gas consumption. This grid and natural gas derived energy can be replaced by renewables, such
as wind, solar, geothermal, and even hydroelectricity. In total, it is estimated that Dubuque has the
capacity to displace at least 45% of its electricity /heating needs with local renewables by 2030.
This section describes several renewable energy related strategies by which Dubuque can
reduce its greenhouse gas emissions (Table 4).
Table 4. Energy related GHG reduction strategies and their potential impact in Dubuque, I_A.
Strategy Estimated GHG reduction
(mt CO2e per year by 2030)
Local energy- infrastructure
Wood waste CHP
87,000 -134,000
p. 36
Wood waste pyrolysis and energy recovery
44 -4,400
p. 37
DMASWA – methane gas to energy
**61,799 (11,799)
p. 38
WRRC – methane CHP
3,077
p. 39
Local clean energy – solar
9,618 – 28,854
p. 40
Local clean energy – small wind
100s
p. 41
Hydroelectricity at Lock and Dam 11
50,030+
p. 42
Dubuque Generating Station to natural gas
see description
p. 43
District heating – natural gas (Millwork District)
see description
p. 44
Subtotal (scopes 1 and 2 – average of range)
194,337
Local energy– policy***
Renewable energy PPAs
1,000s
p. 45
Distributed energy policies (residential)
100s
p. 46
Distributed energy policies (commercial /public buildings)
1,000s
p. 47
DOE rooftop solar challenge
1,000s
p. 48
Local green financing
-
p. 49
EPA Green Power Community
1,000s
p. 50
Renewable energy property tax exemption
100s
p. 51
Subtotal (scopes 1 and 2 – average of range)
23,100
Total potential impact (Scopes 1 and 2 - average of range)
% total reduction goal (520,000 mt of reductions by 2030)
217,437
- 41.8 %I
**11,799 mt of energy related reductions; 50,000 mt of methane destruction reductions (see section:
DMASWA - methane capture and flaring)
** *Significant (complementary) overlap in these policies, so reduction totals overlap somewhat.
36
Wood Waste CHP
1) Sector: Local energy - infrastructure
2) Policy name: Wood waste CHP
3) Policy type: Municipal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; Dubuque
community
5) Current status: Feasibility study completed;
no longer under consideration as of 2012
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 87,000 -
134,000 mt CO2e annually. However, black
carbon emissions should also be considered.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 2
8) Specific description of policy: A 2008 study
from the Midwest CHP Application Center at the
University of Illinois — Chicago (Haefke 2008)
studied the availability of wood waste from
forestry residue, mill waste, and clean urban
wood waste within 50 and 100 miles of Dubuque
(Iowa only). This wood waste could be used in a
combined heat and power (CHP) facility that
could generate a significant amount of energy.
CHP facilities are power generators that both
produce electricity and utilize the resulting waste
heat in surrounding buildings.
9) Barriers to implementation: Up front
financial costs; securing sustainable and reliable
sources of biomass; air quality concerns; black
carbon emissions; competition with Cassville
power facility for biomass feedstock.
10) Co- benefits /Costs:
Benefits: Possible reduced energy costs in a
district heating system.
Costs: Air quality could be negatively affected
by a local biomass burning facility. Air quality is
of particular concern in Dubuque (see section:
Air quality measures). Also, indirect CO2
emissions from biomass sources, particularly
forests, should be considered. The GHG
reduction estimates above assume that only wood
37
waste would be utilized in the facility, and that
whole trees would not be used as a supplement or
substitute. With the possible exception of short-
rotation plantations, harvesting whole trees for
biomass energy is not recommended from the
standpoint of GHG emissions (see biogenic in
glossary for explanation of carbon debt) or long
term forest health and productivity.
Because combustion of biomass is a major
potential contributor to black carbon emissions,
proper emissions controls would be necessary to
maximize GHG reductions and ensure healthy air
quality. Sustainable forestry practices should
also be emphasized in the acquisition of wood
waste.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact: If
the facility pays $40 per dry ton wood, available
wood waste could power up to a 27.6 MW
facility. At $70 per dry ton, available wood
waste could power up to a 43 MW facility
(Haefke 2008). Our estimate assumed a facility
equipped to utilize 50% of currently available
wood waste from Iowa only using our projected
2030 grid emission factor (Appendix A). This
yields reductions of 87,405 mt CO2e annually at
$40 /ton wood; 134,054 mt at $70 /ton wood (as of
2008).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Price of wood and alternatives (e.g.
natural gas); size of system; sources of biomass
and reliability /abundance of supplies; black
carbon emissions and emission controls (when
size of system is established, however, reductions
should be easy to calculate)
Wood Waste Pyrolysis and Energy Recovery
1) Sector: Local energy - infrastructure
2) Policy name: Wood waste pyrolysis and
energy recovery
3) Policy type: Municipal; Private Business
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque
5) Current status: Prospective; not under
consideration
6) Estimated GHG reduction: *44 -4,400 mt
CO2e annually (most likely scale), plus
significant carbon sequestration (see explanation)
Reduction per mt of wood waste: 1.18 mt
CO2e annually (this breaks down to: 0.51
mt CO2e from bio -oil; 0.66 mt sequestered
in biochar; 0.01 mt CO2e offset by waste
heat)
*sequestration related emissions not counted in GHG
inventory or toward reduction goal.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 2 (bio -
oil /waste heat);
8) Specific description of policy: Biochar
provides an alternative use for available wood
waste in the Dubuque area (see section: Wood
Waste CHP). Biochar is created through
pyrolysis, which is the thermal decomposition of
organic matter in an oxygen -free environment.
Pyrolysis produces liquid and gas products
known as syngas and bio -oil, which can be used
to displace fossil fuels. The process also yields a
type of charcoal known as biochar, which can be
a valuable soil amendment.
Biochar sequesters carbon in a highly stable form
that can remain stable for hundreds or thousands
of years. This can make pyrolysis a carbon
negative process, meaning that it takes more
carbon out of the atmosphere than it puts in.
9) Barriers to implementation: Up front costs;
infrastructure and administration; establishing
markets for bio -oil and biochar products.
38
10) Co- benefits: Based on mean estimates from
a study of the value of pyrolysis products
(Coleman et al. 2010), value of bio -oil and
biochar products is approximately $116 per ton
of wood waste. This assumes that bio -oil will be
used as a replacement heating oil, but several
studies suggest that bio -oil is more valuable as a
substitute for petro - chemicals in manufacturing,
particularly for 'natural' or 'green' products (e.g.
plastics, soaps, cleaning products).
Air quality concerns are not a major issue with
biochar, because the pyrolysis reaction is almost
fully contained.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
We assume that 1 mt of wood waste will produce
120 gallons of bio -oil, 0.25 mt of biochar, and
0.167 MMBTUs waste heat (Coleman et al.
2010) and that each gallon of bio -oil produces
80,000 BTUs. If bio -oil and waste heat offset
natural gas (emission factor 0.05306 mt
CO2e /MMBTU), they will offset 0.52 mt CO2e
per mt wood. The 0.25 mt of biochar will offset
0.66 mt CO2e (sequestration factor of 2.93 mt
CO2e per mt biochar). In total, this yields 1.18
mt CO2e reduction per dry mt wood waste, 44%
of which is scope 1 via bio -oil and waste heat.
The most likely scale is probably more on the
order of 100 - 10,000 mt CO2e annually, which
represents approximately 0.1 -10% of available
wood waste (Haefke 2008). For scope 1
emission reductions only, 44% of 100 - 10,000 is
44 -4,400 mt.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Per mt estimates of GHG reductions
should be relatively accurate; scale of facility is
the major uncertainty. Also, hauling, sustainable
forestry, and other life cycle costs and emissions
should be considered.
DMASWA - Methane Gas to Energy
1) Sector: Local energy - infrastructure
2) Policy name: DMASWA methane gas to
energy
3) Policy type: Municipal/County
4) Affected entities: DMASWA; City of
Dubuque; Dubuque County; landfill clients and
customers.
5) Current status: Early planning
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 61,799 mt CO2e
annually (11,799 mt from electricity /waste heat
in addition to 50,000 mt from captured methane- -
see section: Methane capture and flaring at
DMASWA). Future expansions at currently
active /uncapped cells could expand this capacity
in the future.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(methane combustion); Scope 2 (electricity /heat
generation)
8) Specific description of policy: In 2007,
Dubuque commissioned a study from
Cornerstone Environmental Group, LLC, which
identified the potential for a 2 MW Combined
Heat and Power (CHP) landfill- gas-to- energy
facility (Cornerstone 2008). This facility would
capture methane and burn it to create energy
equivalent to powering over 1,000 homes. CHP
facilities produce electricity and also utilize
resulting waste heat in surrounding buildings.
9) Barriers to implementation: Finding
buyer(s) for electricity /heat; up front costs;
transmission of heat /energy; permitting and
siting of facility.
10) Co- benefits: Based on estimates from
Cornerstone (2008), the landfill- gas-to- energy
project could yield a high rate of return, with a
net present value of approximately $1,909,431.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
39
50,000 mt CO2e per year from methane flaring
plus 11,799 mt from electricity and waste heat
from 2 MW landfill- gas-to- energy facility
(Cornerstone 2008) using projected 2030
emission factors (Appendix A).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: High
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Capture efficiency of collection
system; capacity of CHP facility.
WRRC - Methane CHP
1) Sector: Local energy - infrastructure
2) Policy name: WRRC - Methane CHP
3) Policy type: Fiscal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Under construction
(completion 2014)
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 2,367 mt CO2e
annually at a 250 kW facility; 3,787 mt CO2e
annually at a 400 kW facility (in addition to 928
mt from facility conversion to anaerobic
digestion - -see section: WRRC- Anaerobic
Digestion).
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1 (fuel
oil and natural gas heating) ; Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: Anaerobic
digestion at the WRRC will produce methane, an
odorless GHG that can be captured and burned
for energy. If methane from the WRRC were
utilized in a co- generation system, that system
could meet the WRRC's heat and power
requirements and reduce the facility's GHG
emissions
Methane from wastewater treatment could be
supplemented with methane from food - scraps,
which either could be transported to the WRRC
by haulers or sent down sink disposals with other
kitchen wastewater (see section: Waste Diversion
- Food Scraps).
9) Barriers to implementation: Up front cost;
design and construction
10) Co- benefits: With the continued rise in fuel
and energy costs, these upgrades to the WRRC
could significantly reduce annual operating costs
by up to $750,000 per year (Strand 2008). Also,
the lack of incineration will improve local air
quality both directly and by reducing demand for
40
fossil fuel intensive energy from the electric grid.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Estimates from Strand Consultants report (Strand
2008) were used with projected 2030 grid
emission factor (Appendix A). We assumed a
250 -400 kW generation capacity. Estimate
includes both electricity and waste heat.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: High
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: No major uncertainties, but reduction
depends on facility demand by community,
efficiency of facility, size of facility, and
utilization of waste heat.
Local Clean Energy — Solar
1) Sector: Local energy - infrastructure
2) Policy name: Local clean energy - solar
3) Policy type: Municipal; Private Business;
Utility; State /Federal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; utility
companies; local businesses; individuals
5) Current status: There are several installed
and planned solar energy projects, including a
200 kW installation on the City of Dubuque
Municipal Services Center. There are two locally
owned and operated solar energy companies in
Dubuque as of 2012.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 9,618- 28,854
mt CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(offset natural gas heating); Scope 2 (offset
electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: The current
economics and incentives surrounding solar PV
create rapid returns on investment for business
and commercial customers. Also, solar panels
generate the most electricity in the middle of the
day, when electricity demand typically is greatest
and energy from the grid is most expensive to
purchase. Also, solar systems are modular and
can be expanded over time.
There are many opportunities for solar energy in
Dubuque. One current project is a 200 kW
facility installed on the Dubuque Municipal
Services Center (the 3`d largest solar installation
in Iowa as of 2011). The project is set up as a
lease agreement, where the City owns the
property and has agreed to pay 11 cents per kWh
to Eagle Point Solar, who maintains the
equipment and is responsible for lease payments
to the bank that financed the equipment. Eagle
Point Solar can utilize state and federal
renewable energy incentives because it is a tax-
paying entity. In total, grants and incentives have
41
reduced capital costs for the project from an
initial $1 million to $350,000 (SCN 2011b).
Financing and cost offsets like this are typical for
commercial scale solar systems.
9) Barriers to implementation: Iowa utility
monopoly rights and regulations; securing
renewable energy grants /incentives; siting;
securing financial backing.
10) Co- benefits: As grid electricity rates
continue to rise, businesses that utilize
PPAs /lease agreements will enjoy stable long
term energy costs because energy generated is
often sold at a flat, contracted rate. Other
benefits include local jobs and economic growth,
improved air quality, and reduced grid demand at
peak loading times, when prices can be highest
and less efficient power facilities are brought into
operation. Reduced peak loads also can lower
costs for utilities, allowing them keep rates low.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Eagle Point Solar, Blue Sky Solar, and Solar
Planet (all of Dubuque) project the installation of
750 kW /year of solar PV for commercial sites
and 50 kW /year at residential sites in Dubuque.
We also project the installation of an average of 5
solar hot water systems per year between 2010
and 2030. At projected 2030 emission factors
(Appendix A) this will reduce 19,236 mt CO2e
per year, with over 19,000 mt of this coming
from solar PV. We assume a large margin of
uncertainty (50 %), yielding a range of 9,618-
28,854 mt CO2e per year.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: GHG reduction per kW solar capacity
is well known. However, future incentives for
solar, future grid rates, and declines in the price
of solar PV create uncertainty in future
projections. Ultimate scale of solar installations
by 2030 will vary significantly depending on
these factors.
Local Clean Energy — Small Wind
1) Sector: Local energy - infrastructure
2) Policy name: Local clean energy - small
wind
3) Policy type: Municipal; Private Business;
Utility; State /Federal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; utility
companies; local businesses; individuals
5) Current status: Prospective
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100s of mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(offset natural gas heating); Scope 2 (offset
electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: Small wind
refers to wind turbines scaled for on site
generation at homes, businesses, and public
facilities. Most are on the scale of 10 kW or less
(1 kW yields 720 kWh per month, which is
comparable to electricity demand of a small
home). Average energy costs of individual
turbine models over 20 years range from $0.13-
0.38 per kWh (not counting rebates and
subsidies, which can significantly reduce costs
and improve ROI) (AWEA 2011).
According to the American Wind Energy
Association, in 2010 alone the U.S. added 26%
to its small wind capacity to reach 179 MW and
144,000 turbines nationally, and growth
continues to accelerate (AWEA 2011). Smaller
roof -top "urban turbines" grew faster than any
other sector, with a 430% increase in sales from
2009 to 2010. In Iowa, over 100 small wind
turbines were installed in 2010 alone, and this
state is among the national leaders in small wind.
Tax credits and utility rebates are available for
funding.
9) Barriers to implementation: Iowa utility
grid connection rates and policies; securing
42
renewable energy grants /incentives; siting; up
front costs; local permitting.
10) Co- benefits: Stable electric rates for those
installing turbines; local jobs and economic
growth; improved air quality; reduced grid
demand at peak loading times, when prices can
be highest and less efficient power facilities are
brought into operation.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
We project the installation of an average of 40
kW of micro -wind systems per year between
2010 and 2030. At projected 2030 emission
factors (Appendix A) this will reduce 792 mt
CO2e per year, putting small wind in the 100s of
mt impact range.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: GHG reduction per kW of wind
turbines is well known. However, future
incentives, future grid rates, and rate of decline
in the price of wind systems and their
alternatives (e.g. solar PV) create uncertainty in
future projections. Ultimate scale of installations
by 2030 will vary significantly depending on
these factors.
Hydroelectricity at Lock and Dam 11
1) Sector: Local energy - infrastructure
2) Policy name: Hydroelectricity at Lock and
Dam 11
3) Policy type: Utility; Municipal; Community
Policy; Businesses
4) Affected entities: Individual residents and
business owners; utility companies
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 50,030 mt CO2e
annually (5,000 mt CO2e per MW)
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 2
8) Specific description of policy: Proposed
hydroelectricity projects at Lock and Dam 11 are
mostly low impact hydro facilities that utilize
existing infrastructure while adding generating
turbines. Facilities ranging in size from 10 -27
MW have been proposed. Other Lock and Dam
facilities along the Mississippi have successfully
implemented hydroelectricity generation and
Lock and Dam 11 also appears to be a suitable
site. Flow and water levels would have to be
maintained per U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
regulations (HG Energy, personal
communication).
9) Barriers to implementation: Dubuque
currently does not hold the permit for
hydroelectricity development, and the current
permit holder shows no immediate signs of
developing the Dubuque hydro site. Even if the
project could be administered as a PPA, local
entities would be unlikely to demand such a large
amount of renewable energy in the near term. A
large business or coalition of businesses
demanding large amounts of energy could
facilitate such a project but would have to be
established/administered.
Another potential avenue is for Alliant Energy or
another regional energy company to develop the
site and add it to their capacity. However, for
43
this to happen the project would have to prove
cost competitive with their current pricing and
energy sources. An expanded renewable energy
portfolio standard in Iowa and/or the state joining
the REC (renewable energy credit) market could
motivate this.
10) Co- benefits: Air quality; local jobs.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
According to HG energy, a 10 MW hydroelectric
facility is feasible at Dubuque Lock and Dam 11,
which would produce 61,362 MWh/year (HG
Energy 2011). Under projected 2030 emission
factors (Appendix A), this would reduce
Dubuque's GHG emissions by approximately
50,030 mt CO2e per year.
Other energy developers have estimated higher
capacity at the Lock and Dam. For instance, the
current preliminary permit holder (Western
Minnesota Municipal Power Agency — through
2014) proposed a 27 MW project, while another
2011 applicant proposed an 18 MW project
(FERC 2011). Respectively, these would yield
140,000 and 93,400 mt CO2e annual reduction.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Ultimate size of project. However,
given a project of a particular size, the GHG
reduction can be calculated easily (5,000 mt
CO2e per MW).
Dubuque Generating Station to Natural Gas
1) Sector: Local energy - infrastructure
2) Policy name: Dubuque Generating Stat
Natural Gas
natural gas is 50% that of coal (36.7% lower than
estimated 2030 grid emissions factors from
on to Appendix A; DOE 2010), and that the plant runs
at 50% capacity, the total reduction is estimated
at 78,460 mt CO2e per year, though it could be
up to twice that at full capacity.
3) Policy type: Utility
4) Affected entities: Utility
5) Current status: Not under consideration
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 78,460 mtCO2e
annually by 2030 (but see explanation in item 11,
below)).
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 2
8) Specific description of policy: It is feasible
that Alliant Energy's Dubuque Generating station
coal plant could eventually be converted to
burning natural gas after its scheduled shutdown
in 2014. Natural gas prices have declined in
recent years (DOE 2011e) and natural gas based
generation is replacing coal in many parts of the
country (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel 2012).
Also, energy generated from natural gas typically
has a lower GHG intensity than energy generated
from coal, so if natural gas replaces coal it can
reduce the carbon intensity of electricity.
At this time there is no indication that Alliant
Energy is considering a plant conversion.
However, it is technically possible and, given the
continued favorable prices of natural gas, was
included in this report as an information item.
9) Barriers to implementation: Technical; cost
of conversion; efficiency /inefficiency of older
plant infrastructure.
10) Co- benefits: Air quality; local jobs
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
The Dubuque Generating Station had a
nameplate capacity of 81.2 MW as a coal plant.
We assume a similar capacity for a natural gas
fired plant. Assuming that the carbon intensity of
44
Most of this energy probably would be used
locally in Dubuque, but not all of it. So the
precise impact of such a facility on Dubuque's
GHG emissions cannot be determined precisely.
Also, uncertainties in the carbon intensity of non -
conventional natural gas should be considered.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: There are currently no plans to
repower the plant with natural gas, so the scale of
the project is speculative and based solely on
historic capacity at the plant. Also, the energy
generated at this plant is unlikely to all be used
locally, so the impact on Dubuque's GHG
emissions is difficult to estimate.
District Heating - Natural Gas (Millwork District)
1) Sector: Local energy - infrastructure
2) Policy name: District Heating - Natural Gas
(Millwork District)
3) Policy type: Utility
4) Affected entities: Utility
5) Current status: Not currently under
consideration; prospective.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 119,330
mtCO2e annually by 2030 (but see explanation)
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(offset natural gas heating); Scope 2 (offset
electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: While a wood
waste CHP facility is not likely to be pursued, a
natural gas based district heating system could
still potentially be pursued. Natural gas prices
have declined in recent years (DOE 2011e) and
natural gas based generation is replacing coal in
many parts of the country (Milwaukee Journal
Sentinel 2012). Also, energy generated from
natural gas typically has a lower GHG intensity
than energy generated from coal, so if natural gas
replaces coal it can reduce the carbon intensity of
electricity.
At this time a natural gas CHP system in the
Millwork District (or elsewhere in Dubuque) is
not under consideration. However, it is
technically feasible and, given the continued
favorable prices of natural gas, was included in
this report as an information item.
9) Barriers to implementation: Initial cost;
technical barriers; infrastructure challenges
10) Co- benefits: Energy costs; air quality
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Heafke and Associates (2008) assessed a 43 MW
wood waste CHP facility, so these estimates
assume a similar generating capacity. Assuming
45
that the carbon intensity of natural gas is 50%
that of coal (36.7% better than estimated 2030
grid emissions factors from Appendix A; DOE
2010), and that the plant runs at full capacity, the
total electricity - related reduction is estimated at
81,888 mt CO2e per year.
Additional emissions reductions can be derived
from waste heat from the CHP facility. As a
rough estimate of this reduction, we assumed
captured waste heat would increase system
efficiency by 25 %, which would yield 37,441 mt
CO2e per year by offsetting natural gas heating.
In total, heat and power could reduce GHG
emissions by approximately 119,330 mt CO2e
per year.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Size of system; efficiency of
generators; efficiency of heat capture.
Assumption that electricity is used locally rather
than sold into grid.
Renewable Energy PPAs
1) Sector: Local energy - policy
2) Policy name: Renewable energy PPAs
3) Policy type: Municipal; Private Business;
Utility; State /Federal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; utility
companies; local businesses; individuals
5) Current status: Some implementation
6) Estimated GHG reduction: fi 1,000s of mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
tMuch of this reduction is already assumed in the section:
Local Clean Energy - Solar, so adding the two directly
would double -count reductions
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(offset natural gas heating); Scope 2 (offset
electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: Renewable
energy partner purchase agreements (PPAs)
provide a pathway for Dubuque businesses to
install renewable energy without incurring risk or
taking on responsibility for equipment
maintenance. PPAs are set up so that the installer
is also the owner of the generating equipment.
The owner then sells electricity at a fixed
contracted rate to a business or buyer. Financing
for the project is built into the contract between
the two parties along with a maintenance
schedule and insurance.
Solar PV systems are often the object of PPAs
because the current economics and incentives
surrounding solar PV are attractive. Also, solar
panels generate the most electricity in the middle
of the day, when electricity demand is greatest
and energy from the grid is most expensive to
purchase. Also, solar systems are modular and
can be expanded over time.
9) Barriers to implementation: Iowa utility
monopoly rights and regulations; securing
renewable energy grants /incentives; siting;
46
securing financial backing.
10) Co- benefits: As grid electricity rates
continue to rise, businesses that utilize PPAs will
enjoy stable long term energy costs because the
energy generated from the PAA is sold at a flat,
contracted rate. Other benefits include local jobs
and economic growth, improved air quality, and
reduced grid demand at peak loading times,
when prices can be highest and less efficient
power facilities are brought into operation.
Reduced peak loads can lower variable costs for
utilities, allowing them keep rates low.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
PPAs are typically larger commercial scale
projects, so their GHG impacts can be
significant. Assuming an additional 50 -150 kW
of installed capacity per year due to PPAs, and
1,460 kWh per year per kW solar in Dubuque,
this could yield 1,000 to 3,200 mt CO2e annually
by 2030 under assumed 2030 emission factors
(Appendix A). This puts the potential impact of
renewable PPAs in the 1,000s of mt impact
category.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: GHG reduction per kW installed solar
is well known. However, future incentives for
solar, future grid rates, and rate of decline in the
price of solar PV create uncertainty in future
projections. Likely scale of solar installations by
2030 could vary significantly depending on these
factors.
Distributed Energy Policies (residential)
1) Sector: Local energy - policy
2) Policy name: Distributed energy policies
(residential)
3) Policy type: Community policy; Utility;
State /Federal; Individuals
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; utility
companies; local businesses; individuals
5) Current status: Pending.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100s of mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(offset natural gas heating); Scope 2 (offset
electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: Distributed
energy refers to energy created at or near the site
of use. For example, homeowners getting a
portion of their energy from rooftop solar panels
instead of getting all electricity from the grid.
Several distributed renewable energy systems are
available to homeowners, including solar PV,
solar thermal water heaters, small wind systems,
and geothermal (see section Ground source heat
pumps).
There are several ways for local governments to
facilitate the expansion of distributed energy in
the community. Options include:
A Adopt recommendations of DOE Rooftop
Solar Challenge program (see section: DOE
Rooftop Solar Challenge)
A Work with local/regional financial
institutions to develop loans, mortgages, and
other financing options that support and
encourage distributed energy. See section:
Local Green Financing section for additional
discussion.
A Adopt City policy or recommendation to
make new homes 'solar ready.' Pilot projects
47
could be conducted in partnership with select
developers /developments, offering incentives
for them to create 'solar neighborhood'
demonstration projects.
A Provide incentives and technical support for
homeowners installing renewable energy
systems, including free technical assistance
and rebates.
9) Barriers to implementation: Up front cost;
siting and retrofitting; education.
10) Co- benefits: Reduced energy demand and
energy costs.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Based on recent solar installation trends in
Dubuque, residential installations are anticipated
to be on the order of 50 kW installed per year
between 2010 and 2030. This is equivalent to
nearly 1,190 mt CO2e per year using projected
2030 grid emission factors (Appendix A). We
assume that policies streamlining and
incentivizing residential solar could increase
solar installs by 10 -100% of current anticipated
amounts, which falls near the range of 100s of mt
CO2e per year.
Notably, if small scale renewables become much
less expensive and /or enjoy significant
incentives, maximum impact of residential solar
could be much higher.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: It is simple to calculate the CO2e
offset of an individual system but very difficult
to predict renewable energy market forces,
government incentives, and economic conditions.
Distributed Energy Policies (commercial and public buildings)
1) Sector: Local energy - policy
2) Policy name: Distributed energy policies
(commercial and public buildings)
3) Policy type: Community policy; Utility;
State /Federal; Businesses
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; utility
companies; local businesses
5) Current status: Pending
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000s of mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(offset natural gas heating); Scope 2 (offset
electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: Distributed
energy refers to energy created at or near the site
of use. In other words, commercial and
municipal entities can generate their own energy
on site to offset their electric grid demand.
There are several policy options available to
facilitate renewables on commercial and public
buildings:
A Provide incentives such as fee
reduction/waivers, expedited permitting,
grants, awards, and free technical assistance
to developments and buildings that
incorporate renewable energy
A Work with local /regional financial institutions
to develop loans, mortgages, and other
financing options that support and encourage
distributed energy. See section: Local Green
Financing section for additional discussion.
A Adopt policy or recommendation that re-
roofing projects on City or publicly financed
buildings must be solar ready, except where
additional cost exceeds a certain threshold.
48
A Lobby state and federal agencies to create tax
exemptions, tax rebates, and other financial
rewards and incentives that support
distributed energy.
A Adopt best practices from DOE Rooftop Solar
Challenge (see section: DOE Rooftop Solar
Challenge)
9) Barriers to implementation: Up front cost;
siting and retrofitting; policy design and
adoption.
10) Co- benefits: Reduced energy demand and
ongoing energy costs
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Based on recent solar installation trends in
Dubuque, residential installations are anticipated
to amount to 21,900,000 kWh per year by 2030
(750 kW installed per year on average). This is
equivalent to around 17,856 mt CO2e per year
under projected grid emission factors by 2030
(Appendix A). The 1,000s of mt range roughly
corresponds to a potential gain of 5 -50% due to
local policies discussed in this section.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: It is easy to calculate the CO2e offset
of an individual systems, but very difficult to
predict renewable energy market forces,
government incentives, and economic conditions.
DOE Rooftop Solar Challenge
1) Sector: Local energy - policy
2) Policy name: DOE Rooftop Solar Challenge
3) Policy type: Community Policy; Utility;
Businesses; Individuals
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; utility
companies; local businesses; individuals
5) Current status: Pending conclusion of
Rooftop Solar Challenge program.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000s of mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(offset natural gas heating); Scope 2 (offset
electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: The U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) administers several
programs relevant to Dubuque's local energy
efforts. Foremost among them is the DOE's
Rooftop Solar Challenge, which has awarded $12
million in grants to 22 local and regional teams
to improve market conditions for rooftop solar
photovoltaics (PV) in their communities and
throughout the United States. DOE is funding
the awardees to address key market barriers to
local solar PV, emphasizing streamlined and
standardized permitting in particular (DOE
2011a).
In other words, the goal is to develop and test
local programs and procedures that lower the
cost and streamline the process of installing solar
PV in residential and commercial settings.
These so- called "soft costs" of solar systems,
such as permitting, zoning, and hooking up to the
grid, can comprise up to 40% of a given solar
project (DOE 2011). So identifying paths around
those barriers holds significant promise for
boosting rooftop solar in local communities,
particularly for homeowners.
49
9) Barriers to implementation: Barriers (and
ways around them) will likely be identified in the
final results /reports of the program. Appropriate
and expedient implementation will be the main
challenges. Administrative and technical
expertise also will be necessary.
10) Co- benefits: Reduced cost and streamlined
regulatory process of solar energy systems (and,
by proxy, other distributed renewable energy
systems); greater renewable energy capacity
increases long term stability of business and
homeowner energy costs; indirectly improves air
quality by reducing grid demand.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
We assume that anticipated scale of solar PV in
Dubuque by 2030 (see section: Local Clean
Energy - Solar) could be increased by up to 50%
in Dubuque. However, the impact of policy
measures on market behavior is uncertain, so we
assign a broad range of 100 - 10,000 mt CO2e per
year by 2030.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Without knowing the specific
recommendations coming from this program, it is
impossible to predict their impact. However,
given that projected solar capacity by 2030 under
current market and regulatory conditions is
nearly 20,000 mt CO2e per year (see section:
Local Clean Energy - Solar), 1,000- 10,000 mt
would represent a roughly 5 to 50%
improvement due to Rooftop Solar Challenge
recommendations.
Notably, there is significant overlap between the
impact of these policies and those outlined in the
sections: Distributed Energy Policies
(residential) and Distributed Energy Policies
(commercial and public buildings), so future
updates of this report should be wary of double
counting.
Local Green Financing
1) Sector: Local energy - policy
2) Policy name: Local green financing
3) Policy type: Businesses; Municipal;
Community policy; Individuals
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; financial
institutions; business and homeowners
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: No separate
estimate given, but important for all
aforementioned business and homeowner related
energy programs to reach full potential.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(offset natural gas heating); Scope 2 (offset
electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: Local 'green
financing' has been mentioned elsewhere in this
report but is important to so many potential
actions that it is given its own section.
Renewable energy and efficiency improvements
can pay for themselves within a few years and
afterwards lead to significant savings on energy
costs. Despite the excellent long -term financial
prospects, up -front cost is often a significant
barrier. A reliable source of financing for such
projects could significantly boost demand for
energy efficiency and renewables in Dubuque.
Working with local and /or regional financial
institutions to encourage them to facilitate low
interest loans for such projects could be one way
for Dubuque to achieve this. Green financing
options could then be promoted to developers,
real estate agencies, and individual
homeowners /buyers. As of 2012, several
financial institutions including Dutrac, Premier
Bank, and Dubuque Bank & Trust independently
offer such "green loans" to commercial and /or
residential customers. The availability of these
loans could be promoted by the City and other
50
community organizations to help connect
institutions with potential customers.
Babylon, NY, Berkeley, CA, Cambridge, MA,
Sonoma County, CA, and Milwaukee, WI all
have well developed local green financing
programs. The Milwaukee Me2 program in
particular is a public /private partnership that
could provide ideas for Dubuque.
9) Barriers to implementation: Program
design; developing partnerships with financial
institutions; advertising to customers
10) Co- benefits: Deferred up front cost of
renewable energy system installation. Stable
long term energy costs for homes and businesses.
Improved air quality. Removal of barriers to
renewable energy and efficiency installations
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact: No
separate estimate provided. See previous
sections regarding business /home related
renewable energy programs for potential scale of
impact
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: N/A
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: N/A
EPA Green Power Community
1) Sector: Local energy - policy
2) Policy name: EPA Green Power Community
3) Policy type: Businesses; Individuals; Utility
4) Affected entities: Individual residents and
business owners; utility companies
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000s of mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 2
8) Specific description of policy: EPA Green
Power Communities (GPCs) are towns, villages,
cities, counties, or tribal governments in which
the local government, businesses, and residents
collectively buy green power in amounts that
meet or exceed EPA's Green Power Community
purchase requirements, which is 5% for a
community of Dubuque's size and electricity use.
Between local renewables (see previous sections)
and voluntary renewable energy purchasing
programs, Dubuque seems well positioned to
achieve the GPC designation.
Second Nature and Watts Green are voluntary
renewable energy purchasing programs offered
by Alliant Energy and Maquoketa Valley
Cooperative, respectively, through which
customers can purchase a percentage of their
power from renewable sources. Standard levels
are 25 %, 50 %, 75 %, and 100 %, though
businesses can select their own level.
Essentially, choosing a level creates a specified
surcharge on a customer's monthly utility bill, the
proceeds of which go to renewable energy
purchase (80 %) and education/administration
(20 %).
9) Barriers to implementation: Cost;
awareness by consumers.
51
10) Co- benefits: Air quality; community
engagement and eco- literacy.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact: In
2012, Alliant Energy estimated that 402
households in Dubuque were enrolled in 2nd
Nature; approximately 200 of those households
enrolled between 2007 -2009, for an average of
67 per year (Alliant Energy, personal
communication 2010). Assuming that 50 new
households using 1,200 kWh per month enroll
each year at an average level of 30 %, this would
yield 4,250 mt CO2e reduction per year by 2030
( -2.94 mt per household per year), putting the
impact of the program in the 1,000s of mt CO2e
annually range.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Individual behavior; utility rates;
general health of economy (i.e. recession vs
growth).
Renewable Energy Property Tax Exemption
1) Sector: Local energy - policy
2) Policy name: Renewable energy property tax
exemption
3) Policy type: Community policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; homeowners
5) Current status: Not currently under
consideration
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100s of mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(offset natural gas heating); Scope 2 (offset
electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: This program
would provide exemptions from property taxes
for certain renewable energy installations,
including solar PV, solar thermal (e.g. solar hot
water heaters), wind, and ground source heat
pumps. In other words, assessors would not add
the value of renewable energy systems to the
taxable value of a property. This exemption is
generally applied to both residential homeowners
and commercial/industrial facilities.
Iowa Code §441.21(8) already exempts solar and
wind energy systems from state property taxes
for five full assessment years and provides local
governments with a local option to exempt wind
energy systems from local property taxes.
Dubuque has no such a policy, but adoption
could enhance the financial incentives for
investing in renewable energy systems. With
rising conventional energy prices and the falling
cost of renewable energy, renewables are poised
to grow significantly over the coming years.
A policy could be structured in other ways as
well. For instance, municipal utility bills could
be discounted based on the value of
commercial/residential renewable systems. Such
52
a program also has the potential to expand to
include all major renewable energy systems (e.g.
geothermal) and even certain major home energy
efficiency improvements (e.g. Energy Star
HVAC systems, window and door installations)
in order to facilitate the growth of all effective
clean energy and efficiency technologies.
Expanding system eligibility would require
changes in current state law, but demand from
local governments could catalyze those changes.
9) Barriers to implementation: State of Iowa
Code for inclusion of broader suite of energy
saving measures beyond solar and wind; tax
revenue concerns.
10) Co- benefits. Improved air quality; lower
energy costs; greater certainty of future energy
costs; remove barriers to renewable energy and
efficiency installations
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Based on estimated local renewable energy by
2030 (20,000 mt CO2e per year; see sections:
Local Clean Energy -Solar and Ground Source
Heat Pumps), 100s of mt CO2e annually would
represent a 0.5 to 5% increase in renewable
installation due to a renewable energy property
tax exemption.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Individual system installations have
relatively well established impacts on efficiency.
However, the number of installations spurred by
such a policy by 2030 will depend on demand
saturation, energy prices, incentives, system
costs, and the suite of qualifying energy use
reduction measures.
Policy Descriptions:
III. Transportation
Introduction:
Transportation accounted for 277,703 mt CO2e in 2011, or 23 %, of Dubuque's total emissions
(Table 1). As such, efforts to streamline and improve the efficiency of Dubuque's transportation system
could yield significant reductions in the community's GHG emissions. However, the primary benefits
of enhancing Dubuque's transportation system are the convenience, safety, cost, and efficiency for users
of Dubuque's roadways and travel corridors.
This section will describe transportation related strategies by which Dubuque can reduce its
greenhouse gas emissions (Table 5).
Table 5. Transportation related GHG reduction strategies and their potential impact in Dubuque, IA.
Strategy Estimated GHG reduction
(mt CO2e per year by 2030)
Complete Streets
9,303 — 27,909
p. 53
The Jule — Dubuque transit system redesign
100s
p. 54
The Jule —fuel efficient buses
1,008
p. 55
Dubuque Intermodal Transportation Facility
2,255
p. 56
Southwest Arterial
7,762
p. 57
Smarter City ITS
4,591
p. 58
Particle filters on diesel City fleet vehicles
*861
p. 59
EV charging infrastructure
1,000s
p. 60
Car sharing
10s
p. 61
Parking
100s
p. 62
Transit policies and programs
100 — 10,000
p. 63
Bicycle policies and programs
100 —1.000
p. 64
Safe Routes to School /Safe Routes to Play
10 —100
p. 65
Roundabouts
100 —1,000
p. 66
Signal timing optimization
100 —1,000
p. 67
Idling reduction
50 — 500
p. 68
Total potential impact (scope 1— average of range)
% total reduction goal (520,000 mt of reductions by 2030)
47,944
I 9.2%
*Black carbon - not counted in inventory or toward 50% by 2030 goal
53
Complete Streets
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Complete streets
3) Policy type: Local policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
residents; visitors; businesses; commuters;
commercial drivers
5) Current status: Policy adopted by City
Council in 2011; supported by DMATS
resolution in 2010. Demonstration project in
Historic Millwork District completed in 2012,
supported by $5 million TIGER grant.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 9,303- 27,909 mt
CO2e annually.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: Complete
streets is a planning and design process that
ensures that the health, safety, and mobility of all
transportation users are considered in all phases
of road project planning, including motorists,
pedestrians, bicyclists, public transit users,
commercial vehicles, and people of all ages and
abilities.
Complete streets does not mean "all modes on all
roads," nor does it require specific design
features like sidewalks, bicycle lanes, or transit
stops on any particular street. For each project,
planners evaluate the current and future needs of
all users and design accordingly. Complete
streets also does not require immediate
reconstruction of roads, but is implemented
during regularly scheduled road construction,
reconstruction, and maintenance. This allows
planners and engineers to implement complete
streets one project at a time, gradually piecing
together a complete transportation network that
efficiently serves the needs of all users.
9) Barriers to implementation: Planning
54
standards and design manual; congruity with
state and county roadways.
10) Co- benefits: The GHG reduction from
complete streets is important but is not its
primary benefit. The main benefit is bringing
safe and convenient mobility options to citizens
who are poorly served by conventional
transportation and struggle every day to reach
workplaces, shopping, medical care, and other
essential destinations. Complete streets also can
boost local commerce, improve health and
fitness, and improve air quality, thereby saving
money on preventable health care costs and lost
work productivity. Additionally, complete streets
can reduce traffic volume and congestion within
the city, minimize travel times, lower fuel costs
and consumption for drivers, and improve traffic
safety. The full suite of potential benefits are
detailed in Green Dubuque's 2010 report on
complete streets in Dubuque (Schatz 2010).
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
According to several studies (Bartholomew
2009; CCAP 2010; Winkelman et al. 2009),
comprehensive policies like complete streets can
typically reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by
10% or more. That 10% reduction is considered
a baseline around which actual reductions will
vary. 9,303- 27,909 mt CO2e per year represents
a 5 -15% decrease (assuming a 33% improvement
in overall fleet fuel economy from 2007 to 2030 -
-see section Baseline Scenario).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Uncertain impact on individual
behavior. Higher oil prices by 2030 could
significantly increase demand for alternative
modes and GHG impact of complete streets.
The Jule - Dubuque Transit System Redesign
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: The Jule - Dubuque transit
system redesign
3) Policy type: Municipal; Community policy;
Individuals
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
DMATS /ECIA, residents; businesses; visitors
5) Current status: Ongoing implementation
during 2010 -2012. In 2010, ridership increased
by 10.7% and cost per ride decreased by 14.5%
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100s of mt
CO2e annually
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: In 2009, the
City of Dubuque and ECIA rebranded the former
Keyline transit system and improved the design
and overall management of routes and
operations, creating the new "Jule" transit
system. Routes and schedules are being
carefully redesigned to match the needs of
existing and potential riders, which will improve
route efficiency, cut costs, increase ridership, and
bring bus service to more people who demand it.
The new transit system includes a new fleet of
fuel efficient buses (see section: The Jule - Fuel
efficient buses) that will utilize electronic fare
boxes (rather than, for instance, punchcards),
automated announcement systems, and online
scheduling and tracking software that will allow
transit users to more easily find their routes and
track bus arrivals and departures.
9) Barriers to implementation: Attracting
ridership; educating Dubuque community about
changes; getting current/prospective bus riders to
try /adopt the system.
10) Co- benefits: Improved route efficiency,
convenient transportation options for those who
choose public transit and those who have no
55
choice, reduced roadway congestion, increased
traffic safety, improved health and air quality,
increased commerce /labor opportunities as more
people can reach workplaces and shopping
destinations, and lower individual transportation
costs.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Assuming: (1) a single bus trip reduces GHG
emissions by 10 lbs CO2
(publictransportation.org); (2) 276,342 trips per
year on the Jule (LCS Transportation Consultants
2009); (3) a 50% increase in ridership due to the
efforts described above, the GHG impact is
estimated at 460 mt CO2e annually, which puts
this in the 100s of mt per year range. 50%
increase in ridership by 2030 appears
conservative considering that ridership increased
over 10% in 2010 alone.
These estimates assume that people riding the
bus would otherwise drive the same distance in
an average automobile.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Uncertain effects on individual
behavior. Oil prices, if significantly higher by
2030, could increase demand for alternative
modes. The intermodal transportation facility
could also bolster the impact of complete streets
significantly.
The Jule - Fuel Efficient Buses
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: The Jule - Fuel efficient buses
3) Policy type: Municipal; Community policy;
Individuals
4) Affected entities: The Jule; DMATS /ECIA;
City of Dubuque; residents; businesses; visitors
5) Current status: Ongoing implementation in
2011 -2012.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,008 mt CO2e
annually by 2030
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: In 2010,
ECIA and the City of Dubuque received grants to
replace the Keyline (now known as the Jule) bus
fleet and equip the new buses with intelligent
transportation system (ITS) technology. Through
these grants, the City acquired $3.8 million for
fleet replacement. The ITS system includes
electronic fare boxes (rather than, for instance,
punchcards), automated announcement systems,
and scheduling and tracking software that will
allow transit users to more easily find their routes
and track bus arrivals and departures. The buses
will consist of clean diesel vehicles that will
significantly improve fuel economy and air
quality.
9) Barriers to implementation: Attracting
ridership; educating Dubuque community about
changes; getting current/prospective bus riders to
try the system, then adopt it.
10) Co- benefits: Lower maintenance costs and
longer lifespan of new buses; lower transit
system operating costs due to greater fuel
efficiency; reduced traffic volume and congestion
within the city; improved health and air quality;
reducing travel times; lower fuel use and cost for
drivers; and improved traffic safety.
56
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact: If
ridership remains the same, the fleet upgrades
will prevent approximately 1,008 tonnes of CO2e
emissions per year based on recent mileage and
fuel use totals (City of Dubuque 2010).
However, if the redesign of the Jule transit
system (see section: The Jule - Dubuque Transit
System Redesign) increases ridership, these
savings will be higher (e.g. a 30% increase in
ridership would increase this by 30 %). In any
case, the reduction is almost certain to be in the
range of a few thousand mt CO2e per year. For
instance, if ridership remains static, the reduction
will be 1,000 mt. If ridership increases by, say,
50 %, then it will be 1,500 mt per year.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Ridership response to new
buses /transit system.
Dubuque Intermodal Transportation Center
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Dubuque Intermodal
Transportation Center
3) Policy type: Municipal; Community policy
4) Affected entities: The Jule; DMATS /ECIA;
City of Dubuque; residents; businesses; visitors
5) Current status: Planning largely complete.
Construction pending grants /funding.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 2,255 mt CO2e
annually by 2030
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: The Dubuque
Intermodal Transportation Center (DITC) is a
proposed facility that will connect air, rail, bus,
automobile, and river traffic at a single integrated
transportation hub. Dubuque currently has no
facility where all travel and mobility options are
linked in a convenient, central location. For
instance, local and interstate bus services, airport
shuttle services, long and short term vehicle
parking, and boat traffic all require users to travel
to different locations across the city, making it
challenging to effectively move from one mode
to another, or even to effectively utilize a single
mode (e.g. local buses). This limits demand for
alternative transportation modes as well as
decreasing the convenience and efficiency of the
overall transportation network. The benefits of
the facility would be further enhanced by the
proposed Amtrak route between Dubuque and
Chicago.
The proposed facility would be located near the
Port of Dubuque and Historic Millwork District,
with convenient access to surrounding
businesses, tourist attractions, the Mississippi
River, and U.S. Highways 20, 52, 61, and 151,
which link Dubuque to other cities while serving
as arterials to all parts of the community.
57
9) Barriers to implementation: Securing
funding.
10) Co- benefits: Direct benefits include
enhanced convenience for all transportation
modes, increased parking in the downtown and
Port of Dubuque areas, and enhanced tourism
and commerce. Other benefits include improved
air quality, decreased traffic congestion, and
improved transportation safety. Significant
numbers of construction related and permanent
jobs would also be created. The City of Dubuque
anticipates the creation of over 100 jobs and
between $100 and $200 million in cumulative
benefits over the next 30 years.
The DITC is also an example of infill
development (see section: Infill Development), as
the proposed site is on an existing brownfield in
a central downtown location.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
The City of Dubuque estimated that over 30
years, 102 tonnes of NQ (310 times the global
warming potential of CO2) and 45,088 mt CO2e
will be prevented by the intermodal facility by
2030 (total), which equates to 2,255 tonnes CO2e
per year (City of Dubuque 2011).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Uncertain effects on individual
behavior. Oil prices, if significantly higher by
2030, could increase demand for alternative
modes. Fate of passenger rail line to Chicago.
Southwest Arterial
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Southwest Arterial
3) Policy type: Municipal
4) Affected entities: DMATS /ECIA; City of
Dubuque; residents; businesses; visitors;
commercial vehicles.
5) Current status: As of 2012, the preliminary
engineering design phase is completed and the
Southwest Arterial project is now proceeding
with the final engineering design phase, right -of-
way property acquisition, and archaeological and
cultural resource phase III mitigation work. The
first phase of construction began late 2010.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 7,762 mt CO2e
annually
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: The
Southwest Arterial will be a 6.1 -mile four -lane
divided freeway that will provide an alternative
route for traffic through southwestern Dubuque.
It will connect the Dubuque Technology Park on
Dubuque's SW side, the new Dubuque Industrial
Center West, and the existing Dubuque Industrial
Center on Dubuque's NW side. The Southwest
Arterial will provide an alternate, direct, and
efficient route for traffic through southwestern
Dubuque, which will avoid the numerous
signalized intersections on Hwy 61/151, Hwy 20,
and Central Avenue (Hwy 52/3). The Southwest
Arterial will provide an efficient bypass around
the City, thereby reducing travel times and
minimizing delay by reducing traffic volumes
and congestion on the local street system.
In addition, the City is considering a cutting edge
'green streets' initiative for the project, which
would minimize construction waste and
landscape impact of the SW Arterial and
incorporate sustainable design and 'complete
streets' related features.
58
9) Barriers to implementation: Securing full
funding.
10) Co- benefits: Reduced traffic volume and
congestion within the city, improved health and
air quality, reducing travel times, lower fuel use
and cost for drivers, and improved traffic safety.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Estimate taken from the 2010 City of Dubuque's
Federal TIGER Grant application (City of
Dubuque 2010b).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Uncertain effects on individual
behavior and traffic patterns within City.
Smarter City ITS
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Smarter City ITS
3) Policy type: Municipal; Community policy;
Individuals
4) Affected entities: Residents; visitors; IBM;
City of Dubuque
5) Current status: Pilot study underway. In
2012, Dubuque received a $1.6 million ICAAP
(Iowa Clean Air Attainment Program) grant for
the SmartTransit component of its Smarter Travel
Pilot Study.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 9,040 mt CO2e
annually
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: The Smarter
City Intelligent Transportation Solution (Smarter
City ITS) is a partnership between the City of
Dubuque and IBM to provide a sophisticated
system for analyzing real -time transportation
data that will facilitate data -based improvements
in overall travel efficiency in Dubuque.
9) Barriers to implementation: Data analysis
and implementation; participant recruitment.
10) Co- benefits: Reduced traffic congestion
within the city, improved health and air quality,
reducing travel times, lower fuel use and cost for
drivers, and improved traffic safety.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Estimate came from Dubuque's 2009 Federal
Tiger Grant application for the program
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate. Impact/implementation of data
analysis results.
59
Particle Filters
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Particle filters on diesel City
fleet vehicles
3) Policy type: Municipal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
residents
5) Current status: Not currently under
consideration as of 2012. However, Dubuque is
currently incorporating biodiesel into its fuel
mix, which will also mitigate black carbon
emissions. Also, newer vehicles have better
emissions controls
6) Estimated GHG reduction: *861 mt CO2e
annually.
*black carbon not counted in inventory or toward GHG
reduction goal
7) Scope of emissions reduction: * Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: Black
carbon is essentially soot produced by the
combustion of fossil fuels and biomass. The
majority of black carbon emissions in the US
come from diesel engines as well as wood
burning stoves and other unfiltered biomass
burning. Black carbon has long been regulated
for its negative air quality and health impacts
but has recently drawn attention for its climate
impacts.
For diesel vehicles in particular several
mitigation technologies are available. Most
diesel engines can be easily and inexpensively
retrofitted with diesel particle filters to
eliminate over 90% of black carbon emissions.
The City of Dubuque could retrofit municipally
owned diesel vehicles with particle filters.
Newer vehicles tend to be more efficient, so
older vehicles should be prioritized.
60
9) Barriers to implementation: Up front costs
10) Co- benefits. Improved air quality and
local health.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Numbers are based on diesel fuel use in 2003
and 2007 by City fleet vehicles of various
model years (oldest being 1971; newest being
2008). We use an emission factor of 0.002 kg
black per gallon of diesel and a GWP of 2,200
mt CO2e per mt black carbon (Bond and Sun
2005).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Estimates of GHG reduction per
gallon fuel should be reliable (assuming GWP
for black carbon is accurate), so number of
vehicles will determine impact. Since 1988,
diesel engines have had to meet increasingly
stringent emissions standards. Particle filters
are not explicitly required, but more stringent
requirements are making them standard
features, and by 2030 most operational diesel
vehicles in the Dubuque fleet will undoubtedly
have particle filters installed. Still, particle
filters are often low cost, so they may be a good
solution in the interim.
EV Charging Infrastructure
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: EV charging infrastructure
3) Policy type: Business; Individual;
Community policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
residents; businesses
5) Current status: Not currently under
consideration.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000s of mt
CO2e annually.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: Current plug
in electric vehicles (EVs) have the potential to
cut vehicle fuel costs by 70% or more. For
instance, the Tesla Model S has a range of over
250 miles and an EPA rated economy of 38 kWh
per 100 miles. At $0.10 per kWh, that translates
to $3.80 per 100 driving miles, comparable to the
current price of a single gallon of gasoline.
The US has set a goal of one million electric
vehicles on American highways by 2015. With
the 12th lowest electricity rates in the country,
Iowa consumers are positioned to significantly
benefit from affordable EVs and accessible
vehicle charging infrastructure.
EVs also have the potential to serve as energy
storage units for the regional electric grid. Bi-
directional charging stations can allow EV
owners to sell excess energy in the vehicle's
battery back to, for instance, their employers
during the workday in order to offset costly peak
energy demand.
Possible implementation strategies in Dubuque
include working with local businesses and
Alliant Energy to implement EV Charging
infrastructure and using resources at ECIA and
the Dubuque Smarter Cities - Transportation
program to optimize potential charging station
61
locations.
9) Barriers to implementation:
Locating/establishing local markets. Initial costs.
Administration, outreach, and education.
10) Co- benefits. Improved air quality and local
health. Reduced VMTs and cost of auto
ownership. Viability of emerging vehicle
technologies in Dubuque for residents, visitors,
businesses, and commercial traffic. Local jobs
for installers, electricians, etc (e.g. Crescent
Electric)
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact: To
get a baseline estimate of the impact of car
sharing on GHG emissions, it was assumed that
EVs would account for 5% of the VMTs in
Dubuque by 2030, and that EVs would be 50%
less carbon intensive than conventional vehicles
operating at estimated 2030 average fuel
economy (Appendix B). With estimated
transportation emissions of 186,061 mt CO2e in
2030 (Appendix B), EVs would yield 4,652 mt
CO2e of reductions by 2030, putting EV charging
infrastructure in the 1,000s of mt range.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low.
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Degree of adoption; behavior in
response to EV charging infrastructure; gasoline
and electricity prices; emissions intensity of EVs
vs displaced vehicles in 2030.
Car Sharing
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Car sharing
3) Policy type: Business; Individual;
Community policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
residents; businesses
5) Current status: Not currently under
consideration.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: lOs of mt CO2e
annually.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: Car sharing
provides an alternative to car ownership by
making vehicles (usually owned and maintained
by a company) available to be used and reserved
by car share members. In general, those driving
fewer miles per year (6,000 is a commonly cited
threshold) can save money with car sharing. The
largest car share company is Zipcar, which
operates a fleet of nearly 10,000 vehicles in 28
states with over 650,000 members, including
many college campuses (Zipcar.com, Jan. 2012).
Car sharing schemes can reduce GHG emissions
by providing more explicit and immediate
financial feedbacks on driving miles compared to
long term vehicle ownership. For instance, if
you own a car, you are likely to use it at every
possible convenience. If you share a car and
have to arrange and pay for every use, you are
more likely to prioritize and only use it when
necessary.
Possible implementation strategies in Dubuque
include:
A Work to bring car sharing companies to
Dubuque
A Place car share pods adjacent to existing
transit network and in neighborhoods under-
62
served by public transit, including low
income residents and college students
A Conduct community surveys on level of
probable use in different areas of Dubuque
in order to facilitate market entry for car
share companies
A Employers and others could provide car
share subsidies for low income residents,
college students, and others with financial
impediments to independent mobility.
A Facilitate car share company market entry
by modifying business license and zoning
requirements to allow siting in residential
areas and designated private driveways.
A Designate priority /free /discounted parking
for car share vehicles.
A Make all car share vehicles in Dubuque
hybrid, electric, or high efficiency vehicles.
9) Barriers to implementation:
Locating/establishing local markets;
advertising/buy in by community
10) Co- benefits. Improved air quality and local
health. Reduced VMTs and cost of auto
ownership.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact: To
get a baseline estimate of the impact of car
sharing on GHG emissions, it was assumed that
car sharing could reduce driving miles by
100,000 miles per year altogether (equal to about
eight average people's annual driving miles) at a
fuel economy of 32 mpg by 2030, yielding 28 mt
CO2e per year reduction. This falls in the lOs of
mt range.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low. Range of lOs of mt should
be fairly reliable, however.
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Scale of program; degree of adoption;
behavior in response to disincentive to drive; fuel
economy of car share vehicles vs displaced
vehicles.
Parking
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Parking
3) Policy type: Business; individual; community
policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; residents
5) Current status: Not currently under
consideration.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100s of mt
CO2e annually
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: Municipal
parking design is widely recognized as costly and
inefficient in most cities (Shoup 2011). Instead
of maximizing available parking, the goal should
be to optimize parking fees and infrastructure in
Dubuque to equitably account for and capture the
true cost and market rate for parking.
There are many options for improving parking
efficiency and concurrently reducing GHG
emissions. Options include:
A Parking meter air quality surcharge, with
half of additional funds going to local health
and air quality initiatives
A Preferential parking for efficient modes.
This could be: parking garage passes with
prices scaled to the fuel efficiency of the
make /model; a particular level of fuel
efficiency or vehicle type could be made
eligible for stickers that exempt them from
most public parking fees and meters; priority
parking spaces (e.g. adjacent to handicapped
parking spaces) for fuel efficient, shared, or
carpool/vanpool vehicles.
A Charging stations for electric and plug -in
hybrid vehicles. Study efficient placement
for charging stations for plug in hybrid and
electric vehicles (See section: EV charging
63
infrastructure).
A Parking cash out programs. Encourage
businesses to create parking cash out options.
Essentially, if an employer pays for all or part
of employee parking, make it possible for the
employee to "cash out" of their parking space
and receive equivalent cash value instead.
Structure in such a way as to avoid negative
tax implications.
A Discontinue/phase out subsidized parking
for City employees
9) Barriers to implementation: Policy
development and implementation; resident and
business education and participation.
10) Co- benefits. Improved air quality and local
health. Reduced VMTs and cost of auto
ownership since rental provides a more explicit
and immediate financial feedback on usage than
long -term vehicle ownership can.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
100s of mt CO2e per year would represent an
approximately 0.05 -0.5% reduction in VMTs
ranging from parking related policies. This item
has a large range of uncertainty because the
impact of parking policies on GHGs has not been
explicitly studied.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Actual suite of policies adopted;
strength of incentives /disincentives; behavior
changes in response to policies. We are aware of
no studies that quantify the GHG impact of
parking policies.
Transit Policies and Programs
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Transit policies and programs
3) Policy type: Businesses; Individuals;
Community policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; residents
5) Current status: Not currently under
consideration.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100 - 10,000 of
mt CO2e annually
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: Dubuque's
transit system is undergoing a host of
improvements, but several complementary
policies could further enhance the GHG
reduction of Dubuque's transit system:
A Bus rapid transit. Bus rapid transit entails
identifying high use, high priority transit
corridors and finding ways (e.g. designated
lanes) to enhance transit flow down those
corridors. This is already occurring through
the Smarter City ITS program.
A Chicago regional passenger rail connection.
Continue lobbying for increased regional
connectivity, including the proposed
Dubuque -to- Chicago passenger rail line.
Eco-pass. Implement an "eco -pass" program
for businesses, institutions, city employees,
and low income residents. This could consist
of mass purchasing of discounted bus passes
by businesses and institutions. The passes
are then made available to employees,
students, and other eligible groups at no
explicit charge. Such a program has been
very successful in Boulder, CO, where people
with eco -passes are 5 -9 times more likely to
ride buses. Each eco -pass holder is
responsible for 1.19 mt CO2e less than other
residents (this number includes eligible
64
people who either do not get or do not use
eco -passes - source: Boulder 2011).
A Flexible Spending Accounts for Transit.
City, businesses, and institutions could offer
pre -tax subsidies for transit passes, car
sharing, cycling, etc.
Telecommuting and, flexible employee
schedules. Work with businesses to
implement policies that facilitate carpooling
A Visitor transportation option kiosks. Partner
with hotels /motels /airports /visitor
destinations to provide information about
public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian
facilities
Ridesharing /carpooling electronic resource.
Set up a ridesharing/carpooling website for
the community (example:
www3.drcog.org/RideArrangers). Could be
integrated with The Jule transit website.
9) Barriers to implementation: Policy
development and implementation. Resident and
business education.
10) Co- benefits. Improved air quality and local
health. Reduced VMTs and cost of auto
ownership.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
100 - 10,000 of mt CO2e per year would
represent approximate reductions in VMTs
ranging from 0.05 -5% due to transit related
policies.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Actual suite of policies adopted;
strength of incentives /disincentives enacted
through policies; behavior changes in response to
policies. Therefore, we have assigned the wide
range of 100 - 10,000 mt.
Bicycle Policies and Programs
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Bicycle Policies and Programs
3) Policy type: Business; individual; community
policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; residents
5) Current status: Prospective; some initiatives
in early planning stages.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100 -1,000 mt
CO2e annually.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: Bicycle
transport has received extensive attention in
Dubuque over the past decade, with a significant
number of trails, signage, and bicycle lanes
creating safe and convenient routes for recreation
and commuting via bicycle. Dubuque is
planning and studying many other options,
however, and there are several others that could
be incorporated into Dubuque's transportation
system, including:
A Bike sharing stations/libraries (e.g. the
"Bike Coop" volunteer group starting a bike
library in Dubuque as of late 2012; also B-
Cycle or other comparable bike check -out or
rental station) in high use areas, such as the
Millwork District and Riverfront. Could be
purely local endeavor where City provides
siting/infrastructure /permitting while a
private entity or volunteer group administers
the sharing station.
A Bicycle boulevards. Create designated
bicycle boulevards in high use areas where
design features and signage are centered
around facilitating safe bicycle travel
A New parking lots include bicycle
parking /racks. City ordinance /resolution to
require all new parking lots to provide a
65
certain ratio of car to bicycle spaces (with
exception of some minimum lot size).
9) Barriers to implementation: Funding;
bicycle network design/planning;
administration/staff time
10) Co- benefits. Improved air quality and local
health; reduced VMTs, traffic congestion, and
cost of auto ownership; improved fitness
opportunities.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
100 -1,000 mt CO2e per year would represent
approximate reductions in VMTs ranging from
0.05 -0.5% due to bicycle related policies.
Bicycle travel typically constitutes 1 -2% of
commuting in most communities (US
DOT/FHWA 2011), so 0.05-0.5% of total VMTs
seems to be a reasonably inclusive range.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low, but range should be reliable
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Actual suite of policies adopted;
strength of incentives /disincentives enacted
through policies; behavior changes in response to
policies.
Safe Routes to School /Safe Routes to Play
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Safe Routes to School /Safe
Routes to Play
3) Policy type: Businesses; Individuals;
Community policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
residents; children
5) Current status: Ongoing. Dubuque is in the
process of applying Safe Routes to School
principles to local schools. Through ECIA,
grants are pending for 11 walking school bus
routes and 108 crosswalks on roadways around
Dubuque's public and parochial schools (as of
early 2012).
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 10 -100 mtCO2e
annually.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: The Safe
Routes to School program seeks to make walking
and bicycling to school a safe and routine
activity for students by, for instance, designing
safer street crossings, sidewalks, and other
features that create safe and continuous links
between homes and schools.
Over 50% of children arrive at school via private
automobiles (US DOT/FHWA 2011). This is less
important to GHGs than it is to child
health/safety, air quality, and traffic congestion.
Improving infrastructure and programs for
children to get to and from school under their
own power can help improve childhood fitness
and lower the risk of health problems later in life.
Safe Routes to Play is a similar program that
seeks to create links between where children live
and where they play, such as parks and
playgrounds.
66
9) Barriers to implementation:
Implementation; funding; education and
encouragement of parents, students, and schools.
10) Co- benefits: The primary benefits are to the
health and safety of children in Dubuque and
include increased physical activity and health
among children as well as improved air quality
and lower traffic congestion.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Reducing GHG emissions are not the most
important impact of these programs. However,
reducing the trips necessary to take children to
and from school will reduce GHG emissions.
To get a baseline estimate of GHG reduction, we
assume a 2 mile average distance from home to
school and 2 roundtrips per day for a total of 8
miles.
Over 50% of children arrive at school via private
automobiles (US DOT /FHWA 2011), though we
conservatively assume 25 %. There are roughly
10,000 public school students in Dubuque,
suggesting 20,000 miles per day, equivalent to a
total of around 5 mt CO2e per day (assuming
33% improvement in fuel economy by 2030 -
Appendix B). For the entire 180 day school year,
this is around 1,000 mt annually.
If Safe Routes to School /Play could reduce this
by 1 -10 %, that would be equivalent to 10 -100 mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Degree of implementation; response
to program by students /parents; effectiveness of
education about the program and availability of
'safe routes.'
Roundabouts
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Roundabouts
3) Policy type: Municipal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
residents; visitors; commercial drivers
5) Current status: Several roundabouts are
being studied and considered as part of proposed
"east -west corridor" through the City.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100 -1,000 mt
CO2e annually.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: Roundabouts
are circular intersections that promote safe and
efficient traffic flow. The main benefits of
roundabouts are improvements in traffic flow,
efficiency, and safety. They have been found to
decrease collision rates, travel times, and fuel
use, thereby lowering the cost of vehicle
operation. Where they have been installed,
roundabouts have decreased crashes by an
average of 40% and crashes involving injuries by
80% (Persaud et al. 2001).
9) Barriers to implementation: Capital costs;
initial acceptance by drivers.
10) Co- benefits: Improved air quality and local
health; reduced fuel consumption/cost. Reduced
travel times; improved traffic safety.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Based on the averages of Bergh et al. (2005),
who studied ten intersections in Virginia,
roundabouts can be expected to save 0.85 gallons
of gas and 7.52E -3 mt CO2e annually per
weekday traffic count through a given
intersection. For instance, installing a roundabout
at a 10,000 vehicle per day intersection would be
expected to save approximately 8,500 of gallons
of fuel each year, equivalent to around 75 mt
67
CO2e per roundabout (this assumes a 250 day
work - year -- weekends and holidays not counted).
As such, we estimate the potential GHG impact
of roundabouts in Dubuque to be on the order of
100 -1,000 mt CO2e per year (this is equivalent to
between one and thirteen 10,000 vehicle /day
intersections by 2030)
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Traffic volume of intersections
replaced; number of intersections replaced.
Signal Timing Optimization
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Signal timing optimizat
3) Policy type: Municipal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
residents; visitors; commercial drivers
5) Current status: Not currently under
consideration
corridor (Sunkari 2004). Even a 10,000 gallon
improvement in fuel efficiency (at the low end of
on observed values across the country) would yield
an 89 mt CO2e per year reduction in GHG
emissions.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100 - 1,000 mt
CO2e annually
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: Traffic signal
optimization entails using smart sensors and
advanced technology to maximize green light
times for the heaviest traffic flows and allow
signal cycle time to adjust based on changing
demands during peak times, such as rush hour.
Doing so can significantly decrease delays,
reduce travel times, and save fuel, with
benefit:cost ratios often on the order of 60:1 or
higher (US DOT 2012).
The primary benefits of signal optimization are
improvements in safety, time savings during
driving and commuting, improved air quality,
and fuel savings. Via that fuel savings, GHG
emissions are reduced.
9) Barriers to implementation: Up front cost;
adjustment, maintenance, and continued
optimization of signals and software (work hours
and personnel).
10) Co- benefits: Improved air quality and local
health; reduced fuel consumption/cost. Reduced
travel times; improved safety and crash
reduction; reduced travel time loss
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
With signal optimization, fuel consumption can
typically decrease by tens of thousands of gallons
per year for a moderate -to -heavy use optimized
68
This is only a baseline estimate, but it suggests
that through advanced signal optimization,
Dubuque has the capacity to reduce GHG
emissions on the order of 100 - 1,000 mt CO2e
per year (i.e. between 1 and 11 optimized
corridors by 2030).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Number of corridors optimized; traffic
volume through those corridors; delays before
and after optimization.
Idling Reduction
1) Sector: Transportation
2) Policy name: Idling reduction (general)
3) Policy type: Community policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
residents; visitors; commercial drivers
5) Current status: Not currently under
consideration
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100s of mt
CO2e annually.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: According to
the DOE, unnecessary idling wastes 1.4% of
annual US fuel consumption, not to mention
harming local air quality.
To mitigate these issues, many cities nationwide
have instituted idling reduction ordinances, with
signage and/or penalties designed to prevent
idling for longer than a specified period of time
(e.g. 3 minutes) with exemptions for traffic jams,
emergency vehicles, auxiliary vehicle equipment,
the health and safety of the driver, and other
reasonable exceptions.
9) Barriers to implementation: Policy
development; education of drivers; enforcement
10) Co- benefits. Improved air quality and local
health; reduced fuel consumption/cost.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
According to the DOE, unnecessary idling
wastes 1.4% of annual US fuel consumption
(Gaines and Levinson 2011), which would be
equivalent to approximately 4,000 mt CO2e for
Dubuque. Reducing this by just 10 -25% would
reduce GHG emissions by 400 -1,000 mt CO2e
per year, putting the impact of idling reduction in
the 100s of mt CO2e per year range.
69
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Actual degree of idling in Dubuque
currently. Response to policy.
Policy Descriptions:
IV. Built Environment
Introduction:
The built environment influences everything from building energy use to transportation. In
other words, the built environment affects every sector accounted for in Dubuque's GHG inventory
(with the exception of the waste sector). As such, building design /operation and urban planning has a
significant impact on local GHG emissions and overall quality of life.
This section will describe built environment related strategies by which Dubuque can reduce its
GHG emissions (Table 6). These strategies are divided into two subcategories: (1) Facility and
building efficiency, containing strategies that affect building energy use, and (2) Planning and urban
efficiency, containing strategies related to urban planning that affect transportation and energy use via
the use and arrangement of buildings.
Table 6. Building and planning related GHG reduction strategies and their potential impact in
Dubuque, IA.
Strategy Estimated GHG reduction
(mt 002e per year by 2030)
Built environment - facility and building efficiency
WRRC - Anaerobic digestion
928
p. 70
ECIA Petal Project
1,000 - 10,000
p. 71
Dubuque Schools
1,311 —2,500
p. 72
Smarter Sustainable Dubuque — energy and water
1,671 — 19,053
p. 73
IECC building standards
10,000s
p. 74
USGBC — LEED for Existing Buildings
1,000s
p. 75
PACE (and similar financing programs)
100s
p. 76
Public building efficiency standards (City gov. buildings)
100 —1,000
P. 77
Advanced commercial building efficiency standards
1,000 — 100,000
P. 78
Rental housing energy efficiency
1,000 — 10,000
P. 79
Ground source heat pumps (residential)
100 -1,000
p. 80
Municipal lighting and energy efficiency
1,000 -5,000
p. 81
Commercial lighting and energy efficiency
1,000 — 10,000
p. 83
State and Federal programs and incentives
100s +
p. 84
Subtotal (scopes 1 and 2 — average of range)
145, 896
. ' im`■
Built environment — planning and urban efficiency •
Dubuque Unified Development Code
1,000s
p. 85
Infill development
1,000s
p. 86
Historic building preservation and revitalization
100s
p. 87
Smart growth — miscellaneous
100s
p. 88
Subtotal (scopes 1 and 2 - average of range)
12,050
Total potential impact (scopes 1 and 2 - average of range) 157,946
total reduction goal (520,000 mt of reductions by 2030) 30 4%
70
WRRC - Anaerobic Digestion
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: WRRC - anaerobic digestion
3) Policy type: Municipal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Under construction
(scheduled completion 2014)
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 928 mt CO2e
annually
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1 (fuel
oil); Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: Dubuque's
Water & Resource Recovery Center (WRRC) is a
secondary wastewater treatment facility
responsible for treating and disposing of the
community's sewage and wastewater. The old
facility incinerated waste solids and was
designed in the 1970s, upgraded in the early
1990s, and in the most recent review proved
insufficient to continue to meet Dubuque's
growing needs.
Various options were considered for replacing
the existing facility before the City selected
anaerobic digestion as the best option to meet
Dubuque's future needs. This upgrade is
scheduled for completion in 2014.
9) Barriers to implementation: None.
10) Co- benefits: In a presentation given by
Strand Consultants in February 2008, it was
indicated that the transition from waste
incineration to anaerobic digestion (with land
application) would reduce electricity use by
928,172 kWh/year and fuel oil consumption by
16,972 gal /year, saving significantly on yearly
operating costs as compared to incineration.
Also, replacing incineration with anaerobic
digestion will improve local air quality and
71
health.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Based on Strand Consultants estimates (Strand
2008), anaerobic digestion (compared to
incineration) will reduce electricity demand by
928,172 kWh/year and fuel oil consumption by
16,972 gal/year. Assuming 2030 emission factor
projections for electricity (Appendix A) and
22.29 lbs CO2e per gallon fuel oil, anaerobic
digestion will yield 928 mt CO2e reduction per
year.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: High
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: No major uncertainties. Depends on
facility demand by community
ECIA Petal Project
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: ECIA Petal Project
3) Policy type: Voluntary
4) Affected entities: Businesses
5) Current status: Ongoing since 2009. As of
fall 2012, Petal certified businesses include The
Finley Hospital, Loras College, Dubuque Bank
& Trust, Premier Bank, River Lights Book Store,
Premier Tooling and Mfg, Inc, and Dubuque
Data Services.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000- 10,000 mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(natural gas heating); Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: The award
winning Petal Project is a voluntary green
business certification program developed and
administered by ECIA. The Petal Project
provides businesses with a clear sustainability
framework and technical assistance to improve
the environment and the bottom line. The Petal
Project covers a broad spectrum of
environmental impacts, including a strong energy
savings component that relies on the EPA's
Energy Star standards for energy efficient
workplaces.
The Petal Project began in 2009 and has
expanded every year since. As of fall 2012, 6
businesses /institutions representing over 2,000
employees have been certified, and another 23
businesses /institutions are working toward full
Petal certification.
9) Barriers to implementation: Continuing
business enthusiasm and participation;
administration and/or expansion by ECIA;
funding of program.
10) Co- benefits: The primary benefits of the
72
program are to the bottom line, image, and work
environment of participating businesses. The
program also builds a robust, voluntary "green
business" culture in Dubuque and helps to
enhance the health and productivity of
employees.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Total 2009 commercial/industrial emissions were
441,392 mt CO2e from electricity and 50,961 mt
from natural gas. To calculate future reductions,
projected 2030 electric emission factors
(Appendix A) were used; natural gas emission
factors were assumed to remain at 0.05306 mt
CO2e per MMBTU between 2009 and 2030.
Upper bound (10,000 mt) assumes that 1 in 10
average businesses in the Dubuque commercial
and industrial sectors will attain Petal Project
certification over the next 20 years (this need not
be 1 in 10 by number, but 1 in 10 by size if larger
businesses /institutions are first to be certified).
We also assume that certified businesses on
average will decrease their electricity and natural
gas use by 20 %. Lower bound (1,000 mt)
assumes 1 in 100 average businesses achieve
these gains.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Number of successful participants;
other forces on energy use (energy prices, etc);
overlap with other programs in this study make it
difficult to allocate GHG reductions to a single
program, but the range (1,000- 10,000 mt)
appears reasonable.
Dubuque Community Schools
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: Dubuque Community Schools
3) Policy type: Fiscal; administrative; cost
reduction
4) Affected entities: Dubuque community
school district
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,311 mt CO2e
annually in anticipated actions through 2013
alone. Achievable amount is almost certainly on
the order of 2,500+ mt.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(natural gas heating); Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: The Dubuque
Community School District is working to cut
energy and utility costs through a variety of
simple operational and energy efficiency
solutions. According to Mark Henning of 7th
Power Sustainable, the Dubuque Community
School District achieved 11% energy reduction
in the 2009 -10 school year compared to the
previous two years, saving more than $212,600.
The next goal is to achieve a 25 to 30% reduction
in the next three to five years.
9) Barriers to implementation: None;
continued availability of energy efficiency and
reduction opportunities.
10) Co- benefits: According to Mark Henning of
7th Power Sustainable, the Dubuque Community
School District has achieved 11% energy
reduction in the 2009 -10 school year compared
to the previous two years, saving more than
$212,600. The next goal is to achieve a 25 to
30% reduction in the next three to five years. In
other words, the program saves the District
money and indirectly improves regional air
73
quality by lowering demand for grid energy.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Estimates based on GHG reductions to date and
anticipated through 2013 (Mark Henning,
personal communication 2011).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: High
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: No major uncertainties in near future.
However, Mr. Henning's estimates only extended
through 2013, leaving another 16 years of
potential efficiency improvements to bolster
these numbers. As such, this should be
considered a low baseline estimate.
Smarter Sustainable Dubuque - Energy and Water
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: Smarter Sustainable Dubuque
Initiative
3) Policy type: Voluntary; administrative
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; IBM;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Pilot programs and data
analysis ongoing since 2010.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,671 mt CO2e
annually from pilot program (31 mt from water
efficiency; 1,640 mt from reduced energy
demand).
If extended to 50% of Dubuque households,
reductions could be on the scale of 19.053 mt
CO2e annually.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 2
(electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: The Smarter
Sustainable Dubuque project is a partnership
between the City of Dubuque and IBM to
develop smart metering and information systems
that will enable homeowners to identify
inefficient or unintended use of water and energy.
The pilot project of 1,000 homes includes
information for water, transportation, and
electricity.
9) Barriers to implementation: For pilot study,
none. For expansion, up front costs, education,
garnering community participants.
10) Co- benefits: Improved efficiency and lower
water /electricity costs for consumers. Indirectly
improves regional air quality by lowering
demand for grid energy.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Estimates based on EPA Showcase Communities
74
Grant submitted by City of Dubuque on 7/19/10
(City of Dubuque 2010c).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate -low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Primary uncertainties include impact
of participation on consumption patterns and the
degree to which the program is expanded in the
future.
IECC Building Standards
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: IECC building standards
3) Policy type: Community policy; Municipal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: The City of Dubuque
Building Services Dept. has consistently adopted
new IECC standards and currently uses the 2009
version, which is the most recent available.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 10,000s of mt
CO2e per year by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(natural gas heating); Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: The
International Energy Conservation Code (IECC)
is a building code standard created by the
International Code Council. It is a model code
that can be voluntarily adopted by state and
municipal governments to establish minimum
design and construction requirements for energy
efficiency in new residential or commercial
buildings. Every three years the IECC is
reviewed by the International Code Council to
align with current best practices in the industry.
The 2009 IECC contains several major
improvements in energy efficiency over the 2006
IECC, which is the current state code of Iowa.
The 2012 IECC standards are expected to
represent a 30% increase in building energy
savings over the 2006 standards, and the 2015
standards are expected to yield 50%
improvement over 2006 (DOE 2011b).
9) Barriers to implementation: Education;
verification and enforcement of standards.
10) Co- benefits: Improved energy efficiency,
reduced energy costs, improved regional air
quality by reducing fossil fuel demand.
75
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Residential: Over the last ten years Dubuque
averaged 183 new residential buildings /year
(Rich Russell, Dubuque Building Service
Manager, personal communication) with a
relatively stable population around 60,000. We
assume that: (1) these trends will continue; (2)
the average single family home emitted 12.07 mt
CO2e per year (EPA 2012); (3) new versions of
the IECC yield 16.7% average improvements in
efficiency per three year period (this is in line
with IECC /DOE projections - DOE 2011b).
Based on these assumptions and projected 2030
emission factors (Appendix A), IECC standard
adoption will save the residential sector
approximately 31,184 mt CO2e annually.
Commercial: Assuming commercial building
efficiency improves at the same rate as
residential, we estimate 60,497 mt CO2e
reduction by 2030 in the commercial/industrial
sectors due to IECC code updates.
Combined, this yields 91,682 mt CO2e per year
in the residential, commercial, and industrial
sectors combined, putting GHG emission
reductions from IECC standard adoption at the
upper end of the 10,000s of mt range.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low - medium
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Residential estimates are based on
long term trends and are probably reliable.
Commercial estimates, however, simply apply
the residential sector rate of improvement to the
commercial/industrial sectors. While this
probably gets us roughly in the right range, the
estimates are of low confidence. However, the
10,000s of mt range should be reasonable, (or
low if the DOE continues to pursue its goal of
zero - net - energy building standards by 2030).
Other modifying factors include construction
rates in Dubuque; incentives for retrofitting; and
novel/lower cost energy efficiency technologies.
USGBC - LEED for Existing Buildings
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: U.S. Green Building Council -
LEED for existing buildings
3) Policy type: Voluntary
4) Affected entities: Businesses
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000s of mt
CO2e annually
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(natural gas heating); Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: LEED is a
U.S. Green Building Council program providing
building owners and operators with a clear
framework for identifying and implementing
practical and proven green building design,
operations, and maintenance solutions.
LEED is most prominently applied to new
construction projects, which re -use, recycle, and
minimize construction materials while creating
buildings designed to maximize water and energy
efficiency, minimize GHG emissions, and
improve the indoor environment of the building
itself. Examples of LEED certified facilities in
Dubuque include the new Hormel Foods
processing facility and McGraw -Hill Publishing.
The LEED for Existing Buildings program
extends LEED to existing - building owners and
operators. LEED for Existing Buildings
addresses cleaning and maintenance issues,
recycling programs, exterior and grounds
maintenance, weatherization and energy savings,
HVAC system upgrades, and other cost saving
and sustainable operations opportunities. In
many cases, innovative use and management of
existing facilities may be more economically
attractive than constructing entirely new
facilities. According to Yudelson (2009),
existing building upgrades are the fastest
76
growing sector of the green building movement,
with over 450 million square feet of buildings
signing up for the LEED for Existing Buildings
program in 2008 alone. Yudelson (2009) reports
that the LEED program generates more than 50%
annual cash -on -cash returns for building owners,
yielding rapid return on investment.
9) Barriers to implementation: Participation
by businesses; initial business capital costs and
financing; business staff time and expertise.
10) Co- benefits. Improved energy efficiency,
reduced energy and operation costs.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Based on case studies from other communities
(Yudelson 2009) and the amount of
commercial/industrial emissions in Dubuque
(over. 500,000 mt CO2e in 2011 alone), there is
potential for major reductions in Dubuque.
Without more specific data, however, and
considering the slight overlap with the Petal
Project's mission, we make a more conservative
estimate of 1,000s of mt CO2e annually. 1,000
mt represents 20% emissions reduction for 1% of
Dubuque businesses (i.e. 1% of 500,000 mt is
5,000 mt; 20% of 5,000 mt is 1,000 mt), so this
constitutes a basic lower bound; the upper bound
obviously depends on how many businesses
participate & what average reductions are.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Estimates are based on total current
energy demand of Dubuque businesses and case
studies of potential impact from other
communities. Estimate may be low, but without
data on likely program demand from Dubuque
businesses, higher estimates are not justified.
Also, there is some difficulty in crediting
emissions reductions to this program due to
overlap (complementary, not redundant) with
other programs, such as the ECIA Petal Project.
PACE (and similar financing programs)
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: PACE
3) Policy type: Municipal; Businesses;
Individuals; Financial Institutions; State /Federal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Not currently available or
under consideration
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100s of mt CO2e
annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(natural gas heating); Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: Property
Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) is a tool for local
governments to empower community members
to make renewable energy improvements to
homes and businesses without the burden of
upfront costs and delayed returns on investment.
In typical PACE programs, cities set up special
"clean energy finance districts" capable of
issuing low- interest bonds to residential or
commercial property owners. Participating
property owners use available bond money to
pay for renewable energy and energy efficiency
improvements. Property owners then pay the
loan back through a long -term (15 -20 year)
assessment on their property taxes.
These programs are generally structured to
ensure that: (1) the amount of money property
owners save on monthly utility bills from PACE -
funded improvements exceeds the amount they
pay back to PACE on property taxes, ensuring a
sustained net savings for property owners, (2)
payback to the issuing body occurs at a low rate
of interest such that the assets of the program
grow over time. So, both homeowners and
municipalities profit from the program (shared
77
profit from avoided energy cost). Notably, PACE
is strictly voluntary and imposes no direct cost
on those choosing not to participate
Under current Iowa law, PACE programs are
prohibited, so PACE currently is unavailable to
Dubuque in its most common form. However,
similar arrangements are available via private
financial institutions offering low interest "green
loans" for commercial and/or residential
customers, including DuTrac, Premier Bank, and
Dubuque Bank & Trust. It is also available via
'performance contracting' and other similar
financing programs. As such, connecting
potential customers to financial institutions may
be the best way to facilitate PACE style loans.
9) Barriers to implementation: Legal status;
administration; financing and initial funding;
connection of customers to financial institutions.
10) Co- benefits. Improved energy efficiency,
reduced energy costs, improved regional air
quality by reducing fossil fuel demand.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Assuming:100 total participating households;12
mt CO2e annual emissions per household (EPA
2012); and a 25% reduction in GHG footprint
due to participation, a PACE style program in
Dubuque could save >300 mt CO2e annually by
2030, putting PACE in the 100s of mt category.
Notably, this assumes only residential
participants; business participants would likely
yield a much greater reduction. Also, 100
participants is conservative estimate, as
participation rates for similar programs (HPRC
2010a; HPRC 2010b) suggest peak participation
could reach 100 homeowners per year in a
community of Dubuque's size.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Participation; fund availability; legal
status of PACE; private bank loan availability
Public Building Efficiency Standards (City Gov. Buildings)
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: Public building efficiency
standards (City gov. buildings)
3) Policy type: Community policy
4) Affected entities: Municipal
5) Current status: Prospective
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100 -1,000 mt
CO2e per year.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(natural gas heating); Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: The City of
Dubuque could adopt a policy that requires all
new or significantly reconstructed City -owned
buildings; buildings developed by private
developers on City -owned and controlled land;
and/or projects that the City finances to meet at
least LEED Silver certification standards. This
would essentially be a step beyond adoption of
current IECC standards (see section: IECC
Building Standards).
9) Barriers to implementation: Policy
development; financial.
10) Co- benefits: Improved energy efficiency,
reduced energy and operation costs.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Current municipal building GHG emissions are
around 5,000 mt CO2e per year. 100 -1,000 mt
represents 2 -20% of this total, which captures
both modest and significant efficiency gains for
City buildings.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Depending on rate of
replacement/refurbishment of public buildings
78
between now and 2030, LEED standards could
fall anywhere in the 100 -1,000 mt range. If a
significant number of low performing buildings
are replaced, the reduction could conceivably be
>1,000 mt per year.
Advanced Commercial Building Efficiency Standards
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: Advanced commercial building
efficiency standards
3) Policy type: Community Policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Prospective
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000s of mt
CO2e per year.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(natural gas heating); Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: To enhance
efficiency of new commercial developments,
Dubuque has several options.
Requiring/encouraging LEED in new buildings
would be a strong step beyond adopting the most
current IECC standards (see section: IECC
Building Standards). LEED would not
necessarily have to be required for new
commercial developments, though that could be
an option in the future. The following is a
selection of actions that have been employed by
other communities.
A Streamlined/preferential permitting and
zoning for LEED buildings . This would
provide an incentive for developers to build
LEED buildings in Dubuque.
A Local LEED ordinance or recommendation
The City could adopt an ordinance or
recommendation setting minimum standards
of LEED Silver certification for new
commercial, industrial, and high rise
residential building projects, or those meeting
certain criteria.
GreenPoint Rated Checklist Adopt a green
79
building checklist and require a certain point
total for residential/commercial buildings
(this would essentially be analogous to the
LEED ordinance, above)
A Minimize unnecessary obstacles to energy
efficiency in residential areas such as, for
instance, not allowing neighborhoods to
forbid outdoor clothes drying to residents
9) Barriers to implementation: Policy design,
administration, and implementation; verification;
engaging builders, businesses, and developers.
10) Co- benefits. Improved energy efficiency;
reduced energy and operational costs.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Commercial emissions in Dubuque were over
200,000 mt CO2e in 2011, and there is potential
for major efficiency related reductions on the
order of tens of thousands of mt CO2e. Without
more specific data, however, we assign an order
of magnitude of 1,000s of mt CO2e annually
(0.5% of total commercial building related
emissions), though an impact on the order of
10,000s of mt is possible depending on the nature
of the standards and the year in which they are
implemented (i.e. how many new buildings are
built under the standards by 2030).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Uncertainty regarding scope and
effectiveness of program and year of
implementation; lack of data; overlap with other
policies in this document.
Rental Housing Energy Efficiency
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: Rental housing energy
efficiency
3) Policy type: Community policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
landlords; tenants
5) Current status: Not currently under
consideration
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000- 10,000 mt
CO2e per year.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(natural gas heating); Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: Improving
the efficiency of rental properties can be a
difficult challenge. Landlords typically do not
pay utility bills and therefore do not directly
benefit from lower energy costs, and tenants may
hesitate to invest in home improvements that
they will leaves behind at the end of their lease.
However, many programs can help to overcome
these barriers. A selection from other
communities includes:
A Renter efficiency program.
Create /administer efficiency /weatherization
program focused on renters and the aspects of
their home they can easily affect, such as low
flow shower heads, weather stripping, plastic
on windows, lighting, thermostat
management (smart thermostats), etc.
A Landlord energy efficiency incentives
Provide incentives for landlords to make
energy related improvements.
A Energy efficiency lease provisions. Explore
ways in which energy /water efficiency
improvement costs can be shared between
tenants and owners (e.g. lease provisions).
80
A Rental unit energy rating Rate the energy
use of rental units to inform current /future
occupants of comparative energy costs per
square foot of living space.
A Green landlord database. Create online
database of 'green landlords,' consisting of
landlords who provide some kind of
verifiable evidence of energy efficiency in
their properties.
9) Barriers to implementation: Policy design,
administration; implementation; verification;
engagement and outreach to landlords and
tenants.
10) Co- benefits. Improved energy efficiency,
reduced energy costs; rental units more attractive
to and less expensive to tenants
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
15.6% of residential energy is consumed in rental
housing, nationally (HUD 2011). That suggests
that 42,884 mt CO2e per year were consumed in
rental properties in 2011 in Dubuque. The 1,000-
10,000 range captures 2.5 -25% improvement in
rental property energy efficiency, which would
reflect very modest and very significant gains in
building energy efficiency.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Scope and effectiveness of program;
overlap with other policies in this document.
Ground Source Heat Pumps (residential)
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: Ground source heat pumps
3) Policy type: Individual residents.
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque; utility
companies; local businesses; individuals
5) Current status: Ongoing by private
residences and businesses
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100 -1,000 mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(offset natural gas heating); Scope 2 (offset
electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: Ground
Source Heat Pump (GSHP) systems are central
heating and cooling systems that pump heat to or
from the ground, taking advantage of the
relatively constant ground temperature for
building heating and cooling. GSHPs can
improve the efficiency and significantly reduce
operational costs of conventional heating and
cooling systems.
Depending on the building and type of system, a
GSHP can save anywhere from 20 -50% of the
energy required to heat and cool a building. With
recent fluctuations in energy prices, GSHP
systems have been gaining popularity as way for
homeowners to take control of their energy bills.
In Dubuque, 17 GSHPs were installed in 2010
(Iowa DNR, personal communication).
9) Barriers to implementation: Up front cost;
challenges of siting and retrofitting.
10) Co- benefits: Reduced energy demand and
costs.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Based on current trends (17 /year), we assume
300 total installations between 2010 and 2030
81
(15 /yr). According to the EPA, energy
consumption in a typical single family home in
the MROW region produces 12 mt CO2e per year
(EPA 2012). A typical GSHP system will
decrease home energy demand by 20 -50%
(average 35 %), yielding an average CO2e
reduction of 4.2 mt per year per home. If 300
units are installed, this yields 1,260 mt CO2e per
year. Commercial/industrial systems can have a
larger impact, but there is far less local data on
them and estimates are not provided.
This calculation neglects improvements in home
energy efficiency over the 2010 -2030 time
period, but the GHG impact is nonetheless likely
to fall into or a near the 100 -1,000 mt CO2e per
year range.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Individual system installations have
relatively well established impacts on home
energy demand (20 -50 %). However, the number
of installations by 2030 will depend on demand
saturation, energy prices, incentives, and system
costs. Also, this analysis only includes small
residential systems, whereas larger commercial
or business scale systems could yield a
significantly greater impact.
Municipal Lighting and Energy Efficiency
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: Municipal lighting and energy
efficiency
3) Policy type: Municipal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000 -5,000 mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 2
8) Specific description of policy: There are
many opportunities for improved energy
efficiency in municipal operations in Dubuque.
Many have already been implemented and others
are ongoing, but there are several remaining
opportunities.
The following is a list of ongoing and potential
efficiency improvements in municipal
operations. This list is by no means exhaustive.
ALEDs in streetlights, stoplights, and
municipal buildings /offices. Status: ongoing.
Dubuque is in the process of replacing City
lights with high efficiency LEDs. LED
lighting is up to twice as efficient as
fluorescents and 10 -times more efficient than
incandescents. They also last 6+ times longer
than fluorescents and 40+ times longer than
incandescents (DOE 2011c; DOE 2011d). As
such, LEDs can significantly reduce energy
and maintenance costs of municipal lighting.
Up front costs can be intimidating for LEDs,
but net cost savings for replacing an ordinary
60W incandescent with an LED are >$250
over the lifetime of the LED. Savings are
much higher for higher- wattage lights.
Municipal street/traffic lights alone comprised
2,000 mt of emissions in 2007 in Dubuque. In
early 2013, Alliant Energy began a program to
82
replace HPS street lamps with efficient LED
lamps for all of its Iowa customers (including
Dubuque) within 5 -7 years. LED streetlights
are 50 -70% more efficient than HPS, so LED
replacement of street lights could yield on the
order of 1,000 mt CO2e per year in reductions.
'LEDs in exit signs in all city buildings.
Status: ongoing. According to the US DOE,
LED bulbs in exit signs can save 100 or 300
kWh when replacing fluorescent/CFL or
incandescent bulbs, respectively. This equates
to $10 -30 savings per year, not counting the
fact that LED bulbs last 6 -40 times longer than
conventional lighting.
In terms of GHG emissions, replacing
fluorescents /CFLs with LEDs reduce GHG
emissions by 0.08 or 0.25 mt CO2e per year
per sign. Replacing 100 exit sign bulbs with
LEDs would therefore reduce CO2e emissions
by 8 -25 mt CO2e per year and save thousands
of dollars in operating/maintenance costs over
the life of the bulbs (EPA 2010b).
AEnergy Star equipment given priority in
purchasing for municipal facilities. Status:
ongoing. This could yield an estimated 10 -100
mt CO2e per year in reductions, which is 0..2-
2% of municipal building energy use.
AReduced water waste in City Hall. Status:
completed. A significant amount of water
(millions of gallons annually) was lost
annually via an inefficient heating/air
conditioning system in City Hall. The system
has since been replaced, reducing water use in
City Hall by over 90 %. This reduces demand
from the water treatment plant and yields
concomitant decreases in GHG emissions.
A Dubuque Eagle Point Water treatment
facility efficiency upgrade. Status: completed.
Various significant efficiency upgrades were
completed in 2008 -2009 at the Water
Treatment Facility. Precise impact is unknown
but given the amount of emissions from the
facility (6000 -7000 mt/year), estimated GHG
impact is likely to be 100 -1,000 mt CO2e per
year.
AOccupancy sensor lights. Status: ongoing.
Occupancy sensors have been installed in
some City buildings, which power down when
surrounding area is vacant. Photocells can
also be used to adjust lightings to fluctuations
in ambient daylight.
Dubuque municipal buildings are responsible
for around 5,000 mt CO2e per year. According
to the DOE, lighting typically constitutes —1/3
of building energy use (15 -50 %), so improving
lighting efficiency by 50% could yield
reductions on the order of 100 -1,000 mt CO2e
annually, as well as thousands of dollars in
operating costs.
AComputer power -down settings in City
buildings. Status: ongoing. Computer energy
management settings have been proven to
reduce energy use and costs significantly. At
Dell, for instance, a power management
scheme implemented in 2008 reduced GHGs
by an estimated 0.2 mt per PC per year. If
even half of this were achieved on the 100s of
City computers, it would achieve a GHG
reduction of at least 10 -100 mt CO2e annually.
AEnergy miser vending machines in City
buildings. Status: prospective. Energy miser
vending machines power down when the
surrounding area is vacant. This can reduce
energy consumption per machine by nearly
half and save up to $200 per year per machine
in maintenance and operation costs (USA
Technologies 2012). Up front cost is typically
<$200, making for rapid return on investment.
Impact is likely on the order of 1 -10 mt CO2e
per year.
9) Barriers to implementation: Up front cost.
10) Co- benefits: Reduced energy demand and
energy /maintenance costs.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
83
Described in each individual section. Total
impact will likely be on the order of 1,000-
10,000 mt CO2e per year based on the likely
impact of ongoing actions (described above) and
the total amount of GHG emissions from lighting
and other energy use in City facilities ( <10,000
mt CO2e total annually as of 2007).
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Exact amount depends on current
usage, which is based on 2007 Dubuque
municipal GHG inventory, and prospective
efficiency gains from each action, which are
based on large scale national averages. These
averages will probably apply to Dubuque well
enough for a reasonably accurate estimate,
however.
Commercial Lighting and Energy Efficiency
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: Commercial lighting and
energy efficiency
3) Policy type: Community policy; Businesses
4) Affected entities: Businesses; City of
Dubuque; GDDC; Schools
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000- 10,000 mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 2
8) Specific description of policy: Local
businesses and institutions can save a substantial
amount of energy an money through simple, low
cost lighting improvements. Possibilities
include:
AHigh efficiency lighting and energy
efficiency retrofits in local businesses,
hospitals, schools, hotels, and other facilities.
City, non - profits, ECIA, or others could work
with local institutions to encourage energy
miser vending machines; LEDs in exit signs,
offices, and hallways; light occupancy sensors;
etc. to reduce energy cost and demand. Work
to secure /provide rebates and other incentives
to mitigate up front costs.
ACreate an "indoor lights out at night"
program for businesses and institutions to
encourage saving energy and money when no
one is in the building.
9) Barriers to implementation: Up front cost;
education; incentives.
10) Co- benefits: Reduced energy demand and
ongoing energy costs
84
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Based on total electricity emissions in Dubuque's
commercial sector (139,599 mt CO2e in 2011)
and the fact that lighting can take up 1/3 of a
typical building's energy use, 1,000- 10,000 mt
CO2e annually would constitute 2 -20% of total
lighting demand, making this a realistically
conservative range for the potential gains from
such programs.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Impact of individual
installations /retrofits is relatively easy to
calculate, but degree of implementation (as well
as the efficiency of current lighting systems
relative to high efficiency systems) are highly
uncertain between now and 2030.
Notably, by 2030, LED bulb costs are likely to
decrease significantly, and even more efficient
lighting alternatives could arise between now and
then. This suggests that LEDs and high
efficiency lighting are almost certain to become
ubiquitous. As such, by 2030 reduction due to
commercial lighting improvements could end up
being well over 10,000 mt CO2e, due simply to
market forces and rational business decisions.
State and Federal Programs and Incentives
1) Sector: Built environment - facility and
building efficiency
2) Policy name: State and Federal Programs and
Incentives
3) Policy type: State /Federal; Businesses;
Individuals; Municipal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100s of mt CO2e
annually
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(natural gas heating); Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: There are
many State and Federal incentives for efficiency
improvements in residential, commercial, and
government buildings (e.g. weatherization).
These incentives help property owners take
advantage of the rapid payback periods of
efficiency improvements by mitigating the up
front costs of those improvements. An
exhaustive list of available programs is beyond
the scope of this document, but up to date details
can be found at: http: / /www.dsireusa.org/
9) Barriers to implementation. Financial; State
and Federal policy changes and barriers.
10) Co- benefits: Improved energy efficiency;
reduced energy costs; improved regional air
quality by reducing fossil fuel demand.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Simple baseline estimate of anticipated scale of
GHG impacts of Federal and State
weatherization, renewable energy, and related
programs in addition to impacts discussed in
context of previous policies.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
85
estimate: Very low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Depends entirely on future State and
Federal policies, which cannot be predicted.
Dubuque Unified Development Code
1) Sector: Built environment - planning and
urban efficiency
2) Policy name: Dubuque UDC
3) Policy type: Community policy; Municipal;
Business; Individual
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Implemented /ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000s of mt
CO2e annually.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(transportation); Scope 2 (electricity)
8) Specific description of policy: The City of
Dubuque Unified Development Code (UDC) was
created in 2009 to provide guidance and
standards for planning and development in the
Dubuque community. Dubuque's UDC will
advance the long term sustainability of the
community's built environment, which underlies
so much of the city's environmental impact -
from transportation and building efficiency to
land use and water quality. For instance, studies
have found that buildings constitute up to 40% of
GHG emissions (DOE 2008), while
transportation accounts for 21% of Dubuque's
emissions. That suggests that over 60% of
Dubuque's GHG emissions are influenced by
development, making smart development one of
the most significant components of local
sustainability.
Dubuque's UDC makes sustainable design the
new standard and inefficient development the
exception. In terms of economic and social well-
being, the code ensures that Dubuque's built
environment supports mobility, healthy lifestyles,
and economic prosperity by facilitating compact
and mixed use development in urban and
86
suburban settings. In terms of environmental
sustainability, the code promotes floodplain
management BMPs, healthy urban ecosystems
and greenspace, and LID standards for
stormwater management by minimizing the
extent and impacts of impervious surfaces,
among other advanced design standards.
9) Barriers to implementation: Education;
staff training; proper implementation; monitoring
and verification of results.
10) Co- benefits: Reduced VMTs; improved
traffic flow, safety, and efficiency; energy
efficient buildings; improved air quality and
aesthetics; time savings for residents /commuters;
cost savings on energy and transport.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Studies have found that buildings constitute up to
40% of GHG emissions (DOE 2008), while
transportation accounts for 23% of Dubuque's
emissions. Given the significant share of
emissions affected by Dubuque's development
code, but without specific data on impacts, we
assign a conservative, broad range of 1,000s of
mt.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: The 1,000s of mt figure is probably a
low estimate because of the wide scope of the
UDC (the wide scope of UDC is also the main
source of uncertainty). Also, the UDC overlaps
and relates to many other policies outlined
elsewhere in this document, so it is difficult to
assign emissions reductions solely to it.
Infill Development
1) Sector: Built environment - planning and
urban efficiency
2) Policy name: Infill development
3) Policy type: Community policy; Municipal;
Business; Individual
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Not yet an official policy,
but successful local examples exist, including the
Historic Millwork District, Washington
neighborhood revitalization, riverfront
revitalization, historic building preservation
efforts, and other downtown development
projects.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 1,000s of mt
CO2e annually.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(transportation); Scope 3 (embodied emissions of
building materials) - -only Scope 1 calculated
8) Specific description of policy: Infill
development policies vary in form and
application but share the goal of shifting urban
growth from outer suburbs and undeveloped
peripheral areas to existing downtowns and inner
suburbs. In other words, the focus of infill is on
the development rather than expansion of
existing city space. For the past several decades,
much of Dubuque's growth has occurred in
outlying areas (e.g. new suburbs) requiring costly
expansion and maintenance of city infrastructure
to those new areas, including streets, sewers,
utilities, schools, emergency medical services,
fire protection, and law enforcement. Infill
development, on the other hand, shifts growth
into established city boundaries, which helps to
ensure that development is spread evenly within
the city and takes advantage of existing
infrastructure, thus limiting costs to taxpayers.
Infill development can be achieved by
87
encouraging retail in residential neighborhoods
(e.g. corner stores), preservation and reuse of
historic buildings, and brownfield development.
In terms of GHG emissions, infill development
can significantly limit VMTs by encouraging
compact development and mixed use
neighborhoods with residences, workplaces,
shopping facilities, schools, and other daily
destinations located closer to one another.
9) Barriers to implementation: Policy design;
administration; education; lack of available sites.
10) Co- benefits: Infill can facilitate the
revitalization of downtown areas. The Port of
Dubuque, Historic Millwork District, and
proposed Intermodal Transportation Center are
all prominent local examples of re- developing
existing space and infrastructure and are
responsible for attracting countless tourists,
residents, and investment dollars to Dubuque.
Other infill benefits include reducing commute
times and improving the efficiency of the
transportation network, which will consequently
improve local air quality. Infill also limits the
cost of development/infrastructure expansion to
taxpayers.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Given the potential scope of infill development
and its capacity to reduce VMTs, we estimate
roughly that the impact will be on the order of
1,000s of mt CO2e per year, though this should
only be considered a rough baseline estimate. To
our knowledge, no communities have collected
data regarding the impact of infill development
policies on GHG emissions
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: No data; significant overlap with other
policies, including Dubuque UDC.
Historic Building Preservation and Revitalization
1) Sector: Built environment - planning and
urban efficiency /facility and building efficiency
2) Policy name: Historic building preservation
and revitalization
3) Policy type: Community policy; Municipal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Ongoing in Dubuque.
Examples include Historic Millwork District and
various buildings and businesses downtown and
on the Dubuque Riverfront.
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100s of mt CO2e
per year.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(natural gas heating); Scope 2 (electricity); Scope
3 (embodied emissions of building materials)- -
only Scopes 1 and 2 calculated
8) Specific description of policy: Dubuque is
one of the oldest settlements west of the
Mississippi and boasts a rich history. Some of
the most prominent symbols of Dubuque's late
19th and early 20th century manufacturing
prowess are the historic brick streets,
warehouses, factories, and other structures that
remain in Dubuque's downtown and Riverfront
districts. These towering vestiges of a bygone
era not only represent Dubuque's rich cultural
history, but also opportunities to develop a smart
and sustainable community that embraces its
history.
Historic building preservation involves restoring,
revitalization, and re- purposing historic or
neglected buildings. Doing so utilizes existing
developed lands and infrastructure instead of
throwing away and replacing old structural
materials (and all the embodied energy and waste
that would entail). Historic building preservation
88
also ensures that development occurs where city
infrastructure already exists (e.g. streets, sewers,
utilities, schools, emergency medical services,
fire protection, and law enforcement), which
limits costs of new development to taxpayers.
In terms of GHG emissions, historic building
preservation directly saves energy that would
have gone into construction and building
materials. It also reduces GHGs in more subtle
ways, including reducing VMTs by concentrating
development in more central areas of the
community.
9) Barriers to implementation: Funding;
procurement of property; education and outreach
to builders, developers, and residents
10) Co- benefits: Same as section: Infill
Development
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact: It
is difficult to estimate GHG impact of historic
preservation/revitalization without knowing the
scale of preservation as well as the alternatives.
As such, we conservatively estimate that 100s of
mt of GHGs can be saved simply by reducing
additional infrastructure and transportation
associated with outlying versus centralized
development.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: No data; significant overlap with other
policies in this document, particularly infill
development.
Smart Growth - Miscellaneous
1) Sector: Built environment - planning and
urban efficiency
2) Policy name: Smart growth
3) Policy type: Community Policy; Municipal
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status:
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 100s of mt CO2e
per year.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
(transportation); Scope 3 (embodied emissions of
building materials) - -only Scope 1 calculated
8) Specific description of policy: In addition to
infill development, the Dubuque UDC, complete
streets, and other smart growth initiatives,
several other policies and programs could
encourage smart growth in Dubuque. The
following is a list of actions that have been
employed by other communities.
AMake infrastructure costs of development
explicit Extending City services and
infrastructure to outlying developments can be
costly. Compact growth (infill) can reduce
these costs by developing existing areas of the
City. To encourage this, codes could be
amended to require new developments to pay
a share of the infrastructure costs of new
developments, including through private
financing or assessment districts (e.g.
transportation fee; city services fee) in order to
incentivize compact development.
A Density bonuses: Incorporate positive
incentives, such as density bonuses, near
existing commercial centers, to developers
who comply with, exceed, or otherwise meet
specific smart growth objectives.
89
A Mixed use development incorporated into
City transit. Facilitate and encourage
placement of new residential developments
(particularly apartments and other high density
residential buildings) at mixed use locations
that will increase potential ridership on
planned /existing transit system.
A Brownfield inventory and development
Inventory brownfield and potential infill
development sites in Dubuque and advertise,
facilitate and incentivize development of those
areas.
9) Barriers to implementation: Policy design;
administration; education.
10) Co- benefits: Reduced VMTs; improved
traffic flow, safety, and efficiency; energy
efficient buildings; improved air quality and
aesthetics; time savings for residents /commuters;
cost savings on energy and transport.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact: It
is difficult to estimate GHG impact of planning
policies given that the impacts of urban form on
GHG emissions are indirect. As such, we
conservatively estimate that 100s of mt of GHGs
can be saved simply by improving the efficiency
of transportation and urban design.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: No data; significant overlap with other
policies in this document, particularly Dubuque
UDC and Infill Development.
Policy Descriptions:
V. Miscellaneous
Introduction:
This section discusses reduction strategies that do not fit neatly into the major categories and
includes tree planting, local food, and other miscellaneous community initiatives that impact GHG
emissions (Table 7).
Table 7. Miscellaneous GHG reduction strategies and their potential impact in Dubuque, IA.
*GHG reductions not counted in inventory or toward 50% by 2030 goal.
90
Estimated GHG reduction
(mt CO2e per year by 2030)
Urban forestry
*100s
p. 90
Local food
*1,000s
p. 91
Community based initiatives
22,296
p. 93
Refrigerants
11,148
p. 94
Cool roofs /cool pavement
*100s
p. 95
Air quality measures
*not estimated
p. 96
Total potential impact (scopes 1 and 2)
% total reduction goal (520,000 mt of reductions by 2030)
33,444
6.4 %1
*GHG reductions not counted in inventory or toward 50% by 2030 goal.
90
Urban Forestry
1) Sector: Miscellaneous
2) Policy name: Urban forestry
3) Policy type: Fiscal; Administrative;
Voluntary
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: *100s of mt
CO2e annually by 2030
7) Scope of emissions reduction: *N /A
Biogenic emissions and ecosystem sequestration
not counted in inventory or toward 50% by 2030
goal. Energy savings from shade trees would be
counted, but that is not estimated here.
8) Specific description of policy: Tree planting
can reduce GHGs by sequestering (absorbing)
carbon in plant biomass and the soil. However,
the greatest impact of urban trees on energy
comes via well placed trees shading and
sheltering buildings. Carefully positioned trees
can reduce air conditioning costs by up to 25%
and can decrease heating costs by acting as
windbreaks and insulators. There are several
policy options available:
A Municipal tree planting program, focusing, if
possible, on deciduous shade trees for south
facing walls
A Residential 'shade your house' initiative
offering educational outreach and /or
inexpensive trees for property owners to
decrease their energy costs. This could be
administered as a partnership between city,
utilities, and tree planting/conservation
organizations.
A Shade trees part of development review. As
part of standard permitting/development
review, require evaluation of sites for
efficiency, including shading of parking lots
91
and south facing windows.
A Tree BMPs for builders Through resolution
or program, encourage builders to follow Tree
Best Management Practices for Contractors
and Builders or other comparable BMP guide.
9) Barriers to implementation: Cost; pests and
pathogens; education; administration
10) Co- benefits: Aesthetics and beautification;
comfort; reduced energy costs for
homeowners /businesses
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Assumes that a net of 1,000 new trees will be
planted citywide for the next twenty years, and
that each tree will sequester approximately 16 kg
of CO2e per year (DOE 1998). This yields 320
mt per year, which falls within the 100s range.
Including the shading/sheltering impact of trees
could significantly increase this number.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: No major uncertainties. Estimated
range should be sound but depends on type of
tree, where the trees is planted (i.e. previous land
cover and placement relative to buildings), and
number of trees planted.
Local Food
1) Sector: Miscellaneous
2) Policy name: Local food
3) Policy type: Fiscal; administrative; voluntary
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: **1,000s of mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
* *Scope 3 emissions, so not counted in inventory or
toward 50% by 2030 goal.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 3
8) Specific description of policy: Global food
production and agriculture has been estimated to
have a global GHG impact comparable to
transportation (FAO 2006), so the impact of our
food choices on climate is substantial. There are
several local options by which communities and
individuals can reduce the climate impact of their
food choices, many of which are already
underway in Dubuque.
A Community supported agriculture (CSAs).
CSAs are contracts between local growers and
residents to provide regular (weekly /biweekly)
deliveries of produce or other farm products in
exchange for a seasonal membership fee.
Since 2010, the Dubuque CSA Coalition has
facilitated contracts between Dubuque
residents and several local and regional
growers.
A Farmer's market. Since 1845 Dubuque has
hosted a summer Farmer's Market offering
handgrown or handmade farm products to
local residents. Dubuque's farmer's market
hosts over 150 vendors and attracts many
hundreds of patrons every weekend from
Dubuque and the surrounding region to
partake in local food. The farmer's market
also runs indoors during the winter.
92
A Community gardens City owned lots (or
other vacant lots) could be set aside for
community gardens or greenhouses. To date,
eight community gardens are active in the
community.
A Employee gardens. Employers could be
encouraged to offer garden space on
workplace grounds to employees.
A Local food at major grocers The City could
facilitate contracts between local and regional
growers and local grocery chains.
A Compost to community garden program.
Provide free compost from DMASWA for
community food projects such as community
and school gardens.
A Community fruit and nut trees. A partnership
with a tree planting/conservation organization
could provide low cost nut/fruit trees that
residents would be encouraged to plant.
A Lower meat consumption. Animal products
are significantly more carbon intensive than
plant based foods. Personal choices to replace
animal with plant based foods can
significantly reduce an individual's carbon
footprint.
A Dubuque Food Co -op: The Dubuque Food
Co -op, scheduled to open in 2013, promises a
strong focus on local foods and will provide a
new market for local farmers.
9) Barriers to implementation: Education;
organization and administration.
10) Co- benefits: Boosted local economy;
supporting local farmers; healthier diets /lower
healthcare costs
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Food consumption in the US is estimated to
comprise at least 15% (roughly 3.1 mt CO2e) of
per capita GHG emissions (Weber and Matthews
2008). If this is applied to Dubuque's population
of 57,250, it suggests that approximately 175,000
mt of CO2e per year in Dubuque come from food
consumption. These are primarily Scope 3
emissions and are not counted in the GHG
inventory nor toward the 50% by 2030 goal.
Nonetheless, these numbers suggest that our food
sources and choices could significantly effect
local GHG emissions. For instance, a 1 -5%
decrease in the carbon intensity of Dubuque's
food would reduce annual CO2e emissions by
approximately 1,800 -9,000 mt. This puts the
impact of local food conservatively in the 1,000s
of mt range, though it could be substantially
higher.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Individual choices and personal
93
behavior. No existing reliable estimates of
carbon intensity of current food sources /systems
vs alternatives. However, the general order of
magnitude of GHG impact of food choices
should be sound.
Community Based Initiatives
1) Sector: Miscellaneous
2) Policy name: Community based initiatives
3) Policy type: Voluntary; grassroots
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents.
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 22,296 mt CO2e
annually by 2030 (goal)
7) Scope of emissions reduction: All scopes
8) Specific description of policy: Several City
and community organizations have created
sustainability- related programs that will reduce
GHG emissions. In the past three years alone,
these organizations have instituted the following
programs, among many others:
A Dubuque 2.0 Community Sustainability
Game
A Green Dubuque 2012 by 2012 program
A Green Asset Map
A Green Drinks
A Four Mounds Energy Center
A Energy auditor training
A Green Iowa project
A Rebate and incentive compilation
CFLs /weatherization materials
A Annual Growing Sustainable Communities
conference
A Sustainable City Network news and
magazine
A Informative newsletters, events, websites,
and materials
A Dubuque CSA promotion program
A Etc. (for more information on these and
other programs, visit the organizations'
respective websites)
94
These organizations have already established
presence and momentum in the community. It is
difficult to project what programs these and other
organizations will come up with over the next
twenty years, let alone what GHG impacts those
programs will have. As such, instead of
speculating on the GHG impact of the myriad
existing and possible future initiatives, we
propose a modest goal of a combined 2%
reduction in community emissions between these
organizations (i.e. 2% beyond what is achieved
through the other options discussed in this plan).
This amounts to just over 0.1% of additional
reductions each year for the next 18 years.
9) Barriers to implementation: Funding;
opportunities; availability of volunteers
10) Co- benefits: All previously mentioned
benefits, depending on mix of programs
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
See above narrative. Assumes community based
initiative impact of 0.1% per year beyond what is
achieved in other options discussed in this plan
by 2030.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Could be much higher or lower
depending on nature of and opportunities for
initiatives.
Refrigerants
1) Sector: Miscellaneous
2) Policy name: Refrigerants
3) Policy type: Voluntary; global/national policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: No precise
estimate given, but could be on the order of
11,148 mt CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: Scope 1
8) Specific description of policy: HCFC
refrigerants are synthetic chemicals that can have
extraordinarily high global warming potential.
Pound for pound, some HCFCs have over
10,000 -times the warming potential of CO2.
Studies have estimated that HCFCs constitute
approximately 2% of national GHG emissions in
the US, and that this percentage could double by
2050 under a business -as-usual scenario (EPA
2010c; Velders et al. 2009).
HCFC -22, one of the most common refrigerants
in commercial use, is scheduled to be phased out
from 2010 -2030 as agreed to in the 1987
Montreal Protocol. This is being done to prevent
further degradation of the ozone layer, but it is
also expected to have significant climate benefits
by substituting substances with a lower GWP
than HCFC -22 (and HCFC -23, which is emitted
during the production of HCFC -22). In 2010, the
EPA began implementation of the HCFC
Allocation Rule and the Pre - Charged Appliances
Rule, which together impose quotas on HCFC-
22, ban the sale of new air - conditioning units
containing the gas, and promote recycling of the
gas from old units. These actions are designed to
reduce HCFC emissions in the US by 75% below
baseline levels.
In addition, the Federal government is working
95
to implement a global framework for reducing
HCFCs by approximately 50 -70% by 2030 (90%
by 2050). The focus of this framework goes
beyond ozone depletion to consider the climate
and human health impacts of refrigerants.
These various elements of the global phase -out
of HCFC refrigerants will require little action on
the part of Dubuque, though local businesses
could help to accelerate this process by joining
other corporations in voluntarily adopting
alternative refrigerants (e.g. Coca -Cola,
McDonalds, PepsiCo, and others in the
"Refrigerants, Naturally!" partnership). Also,
outreach to air - conditioning businesses and
service technicians regarding the importance of
recycling HCFC -22 refrigerants is crucial (NY
Times 2012).
9) Barriers to implementation: Cost;
education; approval of low cost alternatives;
development, implementation, and enforcement
of global and national policies and frameworks.
10) Co- benefits: Potentially financial
(depending on relative cost of alternative
substances /practices prove)
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
Given the high number of food and beverage
processing, storage, and other industrial facilities
in Dubuque, we conservatively assume that
national averages apply to Dubuque and that
approximately 2% of our emissions are
constituted by refrigerants. The phaseout of
HCFC -22 should therefore yield at least a 50%
reduction in local refrigerant emissions. This
would yield a 1% reduction in total emissions by
2030 (equal to 11,148 mt CO2e)
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Moderate
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: More precise estimates cannot be
produced without detailed emissions of current
refrigerant usage and turnover in Dubuque.
Cool Roofs /Cool Pavement
1) Sector: Miscellaneous
2) Policy name: Cool roofs /cool pavements
3) Policy type: Fiscal; administrative
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Prospective not currently
under consideration)
6) Estimated GHG reduction: *100s of mt
CO2e annually by 2030.
7) Scope of emissions reduction: *Indirect GHG
mitigation, not counted in GHG inventory or
toward 50% by 2030 goal. However, some scope
1 and 2 reductions could occur through
electricity /heating savings.
8) Specific description of policy: Compared to
dark colored roofs and blacktop, lighter colored,
more reflective roofs and pavement absorb less
energy from the sun and decrease the amount of
warming near earth's surface. White roofs are
widely recognized as one of the simplest,
cheapest, and most immediate climate stabilizing
solutions. White roofs can also affect energy use
by decreasing building temperatures and thus
cooling/refrigeration costs during summer
months (though this can be offset somewhat by
increases in heating demand in winter). Making
roofs and pavements less absorptive also can
reduce the urban heat island effect (UHI), which
is the local "island" of elevated temperatures that
occurs in cities due to heat retention by urban
landscapes. Cool roofs /pavement can minimize
this effect and reduce heat stress and levels of
temperature- sensitive air pollutants (e.g. smog).
Cool roofs can be created using, for instance,
waste paint or whitewash. New York City,
Chicago, and many other cities are implementing
cool roof programs. Cool pavement (a thin,
tough, road -ready coating) also has been used in
many cities, particularly in crosswalks, bike
96
lanes, and blacktopped parking lots or
playgrounds where high summer temperatures
often occur. White roofs also tend to have longer
lifespans than black roofs, all else being equal.
9) Barriers to implementation: Cost;
calculating costs of winter in addition to summer
cooling effects; materials and training.
10) Co- benefits: Human comfort, roof lifespan,
and potential reduced energy cost
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
2010 study from Berkeley National Laboratory
(Menon et al. 2010) indicated that painting 1 m2
of rooftop is equivalent to reducing CO2
emissions by 8.9 kg/yr, while putting a thin "cool
pavement" coating on 1 m2 of pavement (parking
lots, playgrounds, driveways, crosswalks, streets,
etc.) is equivalent to reducing CO2 emissions by
2.45 kg/yr (building heating/cooling savings not
included in these estimates).
Conservative estimates of the amount of roofed
and paved area in Dubuque (17.5% paved; 12.5%
roofed, which are half what was estimated in the
Berkeley study) indicates that increasing the
reflectivity of all roofs and paved surfaces in
Dubuque would offset approximately 100,000
mt/year of CO2e. So there is clearly significant
potential for this in Dubuque. For our estimates,
we assumed that 1% of roofs and paved areas
could be coated in the next 20 years, yielding
around 1,000 mt CO2e in annual reductions.
Focusing on large commercial and industrial
buildings using waste paint could be a
particularly simple and inexpensive way to
achieve this. This could also be facilitated by
requiring/encouraging certain types of new
commercial developments to have cool roofs.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: Very low
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: Participation by residents and
businesses; impact on building energy demand.
Air Quality Measures
1) Sector: Miscellaneous
2) Policy name: Air quality measures
3) Policy type: Voluntary; global/national policy
4) Affected entities: City of Dubuque;
businesses; residents
5) Current status: Ongoing
6) Estimated GHG reduction: No estimate
provided
7) Scope of emissions reduction: N/A
8) Specific description of policy: Air quality
and GHG pollutants go hand in hand, and
improved air quality is one of the primary
benefits of most of the actions described in the
previous sections. Afew additional opportunities
exist that have not yet been discussed, however,
including:
A Limit VOC coatings in Dubuque. VOCs are
minor in terms of GHG emissions but can
significantly impair local air quality via the
formation of ground level ozone.
A Work with Dubuque County to limit biomass
burning. Biomass burning can significantly
impair local air quality. It can also contribute
to climate change (see section: Particle filters
on diesel vehicles). As such, the regulation
of biomass burning can significantly improve
local air quality while also limiting GHG
emissions. Public parks and other facilities
are one opportunity (except in the case of
long -term carbon sequestering ecosystems
such as prairies for which burning is
essential).
9) Barriers to implementation: Education,
outreach and administration; policy design,
implementation, and enforcement; verification
and monitoring
97
10) Co- benefits: Health; air quality
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact: No
estimate provided. Most emissions in this
category are not GHG emissions, but rather
traditional criteria air pollutants.
12) Relative confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: N/A
13) Sources of uncertainty in GHG reduction
estimate: N/A
- -- This page left intentionally blank - --
98
References
Anderson, Y., C.C. Glencross, T. Rudisill. 2010. School bus idling reduction - project report and
implementation guide for Oklahoma school districts. Association of Central Oklahoma
Governments.
AWEA. 2011. 2010 U.S. small wind turbine market report. American Wind Energy Association.
Bartholomew, K. 2005. Integrating land use issues into transportation planning: scenario planning.
Summary Report. 34pp.
Bergh, C.; Retting, R.A.; and Myers, E.J. 2005. Continued reliance on traffic signals: the cost of missed
opportunities to improve traffic flow and safety at urban intersections. Arlington, VA: Insurance
Institute for Highway Safety.
Bond TC, H Sun. 2005. Can reducing black carbon emissions counteract global warming.
Environmental Science and Technology 39: 5921 -5926.
Boulder. 2011. Community guide to Boulder's climate action plan: 2010/2011 progress report. City of
Boulder, CO. September 2011.
CCAP. 2010. CCAP transportation emissions guidebook. Center for Clean Air Policy Transportation
and Climate Change Program.
City of Dubuque 2009. Dubuque Regional Sustainable Transportation Initiative - TIGER grant
analysis. http:// www. cityofdubuque .org/DocumentView.aspx ?DID=1722 (accessed 02/12).
City of Dubuque. 2010. Memo: Bus replacement recommendation using grant funding. November 9,
2010. http: // weblink. cityofdubuque .org /WebLink8 /1 /doc /284988 /Pagel7.aspx (accessed 02/12).
City of Dubuque. 2010b. Dubuque regional sustainable transportation initiative. TIGER proposal, City
of Dubuque, IA.
City of Dubuque. 2010c. Smarter, sustainable Dubuque. EPA Climate Showcase Federal grant
application. http: // weblink .cityofdubuque.org /WebLink8 /1 /doc /266264 /Page3.aspx (accessed
02/12).
City of Dubuque. 2011. City of Dubuque, Iowa Intermodal Transportation Center. Transportation,
Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies appropriations act for 2011 - Tiger III
Discretionary Grants application. Transportation.
Coleman M, Page - Dumroese D, Archuleta J, Badger P, Chung W, Venn T, Loeffler D, Jones G, and
McElligott K. 2010. Can portable pyrolysis units make biomass utilization affordable while using
bio -char to enhance soil productivity and sequester carbon? USDA Forest Service Proceedings
RMRS -P -61. lOpp.
Cornerstone 2008. Dubuque sanitary landfill energy recovery potential. Cornerstone Environmental
Group, LLC.
DOE 1998. Method for calculating carbon sequestration by trees in urban and suburban settings. US
DOE EIA. April 1998.
DOE 2008. Buildings Energy Databook, 2006. US Department of Energy and Annual Energy Review
2007. DOE /EIA -0384 (2007). Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy.
June 2008. http: / /www.eia.doe.gov /aer /pdf /aer.pdf (accessed 02/12).
DOE 2010. Cost and performance baseline for fossil energy plants volume 1: Bituminous coal and
99
natural gas to electricity. DOE /NETL- 2010/1397. pg. 458.
DOE. 2011a. DOE awards $12 million to spur rapid adoption of solar energy with the Rooftop Solar
Challenge. http: / /energy.gov /articles/ doe - awards -12- million- spur - rapid - adoption- solar- energy-
rooftop- solar - challenge (accessed 02/12).
DOE. 2011b. Residential building energy codes - IECC 2012 and beyond.
www. buildings .energy.gov /webinars.html (accessed 02/12).
DOE 2011c. Energy efficiency of white LEDS. US Department of Energy Building Technologies
Program fact sheet. 2pp.
DOE 2011d. Lifetime of white LEDS. US Department of Energy Building Technologies Program fact
sheet. 2pp.
DOE 2011e. Annual Energy Outlook 2011. DOE /EIA -0383.
http: / /www.eia.gov /forecasts /archive /aco11 /source natural gas.cfm (accessed 08/22/2012).
EPA 2008. Anaerobic digestion of food waste - final report. Gray, D.M.D., P. Suto, C. Peck. Prepared
by: East Bay Municipal Utility District. Funding opportunity no. EPA-R9-WST-06-004.
EPA 2010a. EPA Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases. Documentation for greenhouse gas
emission and energy factors used in the waste reduction model (WARM).
EPA 2010b. Save energy, money, and prevent pollution with light- emitting diode (LED) exit signs. Fact
sheet. 2pp.
EPA 2010c. Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990 -2008. US. EPA. EPA 430 -R-
10 -006.
EPA. 2012. Calculations and references - greenhouse gas equivalencies calculator.
http: / /www.epa.gov /cleanenergy /energy- resources /refs.html (accessed 02/12).
EPRI. 2009. Assessment of achievable potential from energy efficiency and demand response
programs in the U.S. (2010- 2030). Electric Power Research Institute.
FAO. 2006. Livestock's long shadow. Environmental issues and options. Rome: FAO.
FERC. 2011. Order issuing preliminary permit, denying competing applications, and granting priority
to file license application [Lock and Dam 11]. 136 FERC ¶62,006.
Gaines, L., and T. Levinson. 2011. Idling - cruising the fuel inefficiency expressway. Argonne National
Laboratory. Argonne National Laboratory. ANL- 11/08.
Hacfke C. 2008. The Use of Wood Biomass for Distributed Energy Generation in Iowa. Midwest
CHP Application Center, U. of Illinois Chicago. Available at:
http://www.chpcentermw.org/pdfs/080717 Haefke2.pdf (accessed 02/12).
HPRC. 2010a. Case study: Sonoma county energy independence program. Best practices for energy
retrofit program design - Home Performance Resource Center. March 2010.
HPRC. 2010b. Case study: Boulder, CO. Best practices for energy retrofit program design - Home
Performance Resource Center. March 2010.
Huls Environmental Management, LLC. 2009. Waste diversion options study. Presented to DMASWA.
IA DNR. 2005. Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources Waste Sort Results - DMASWA, Dubuque.
100
LCS Transportation Consultants. 2009. Dubuque Keyline comprehensive operational analysis.
Menon et al. 2010. Radiative forcing and temperature response to changes in urban albedos and
associated CO2 offsets. Environmental Research Letters 5 (1): 014005 (llpp).
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. 2012. We Energies converting Valley power plant. August 17, 2012.
New York Times. 2012. Effort to Curb Coolant Falters, Sometimes at Home by E. Rosenthal and A.W.
Lehren. November 22, 2012.
NHTSA/EPA. 2011a. NHTSA and EPA propose to extend the national program to improve fuel
economy and greenhouse gases for passenger cars and light trucks. NHTSA Fact Sheet.
NHTSA/EPA. 2011b. FACTSHEET: paving the way toward cleaner, more efficient trucks. NHTSA
Fact Sheet.
Persaud, B.N.; Retting, R.A.; Garder, P.E.; and Lord, D. 2001. Safety effect of roundabout conversions
in the United States: empirical Bayes observational before -after study. Transportation Research
Record 1751:1 -8.
SCN 2011a. City takes crash course in deconstruction. Randy Rogers, Sustainable City Network, Dec.
2011.
SCN 2011b. Utility fights power purchase agreement in Iowa. Julianne Couch, Sustainable City
Network. November 2011.
Schatz, J.D. 2010. The Cost of Incomplete Streets in Dubuque, IA. Green Dubuque.
Shoup, D.C. 2011. The high cost of free parking, updated edition. American Planning Association.
Strand. 2008. Report: Dubuque Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) facilities plan. City of Dubuque,
IA. May 2008. 172pp.
Sunkari. 2004. The benefits of retiming traffic signals. ITE Journal, April 2004.
Time for Change. 2011. Plastic bags and plastic bottles - CO2 emissions during their lifetime
http: / /timeforchange.org/plastic -bags- and - plastic - bottles -CO2- emissions (accessed 02/12).
USA Technologies 2011. http:// www. usatech. com/ energy_management/energy_vm.php (accessed
02/12)
U.S. DOT. 2011a. Research and Innovative Technology Administration. Bureau of Transportation
Statistics. National Transportation Statistics.
http: / /www.bts.gov /publications /national transportation statistics/ (accessed 02/12).
U.S. DOT. 2011b. Summary of fuel economy performance. October 28, 2011
U.S. DOT 2012. Arterial Management, Traffic Control, Advanced Signal Systems - Benefit
Documents. US DOT Research and Innovative Technology Administration.
http: / /www.itscosts.its.dot.gov (accessed 02/12).
U.S. DOT /FHWA. 2011. 2009 National household travel survey.
Velders, G.J.M., D.W. Fahey, J.S. Daniel, M. McFarland, S.O. Andersen. 2009. The large contribution
of projected HFC emissions to future climate forcing. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences 106(27): 10949 - 10954.
101
Weber, C.L., Matthews, H.S., 2008. Food -Miles and the Relative Climate Impacts of Food Choices in
the United States. Environmental Science & Technology 42(10): 3508-3513.
Winkelman, S., A. Bishins, C. Kooshian. 2009. Cost effective GHG reductions through smart growth
and improved transportation choices. A report by the Center for Clean Air Policy Transportation
and Climate Change Program. June 2009.
Yudelson, J. 2009. Greening existing buildings. McGraw -Hill. 308pp.
102
Appendix A - Emission Factors and Assumptions
Natural as
For natural gas, a standard emissions factor of 0.05302 mt CO2e /MMBTU was used for all
inventory years.
Transportation
Transportation emissions were calculated using standard data from ICLEI and local VMT data
from Dubuque. Specifically, if we know how many VMTs there were in Dubuque each year (ECIA
2012); what percentage of those VMTs carne from different classes of vehicles (ICLEI), how many
miles - per - gallon each of those vehicle classes gets on average, and how much CO2e is released per
gallon of fuel, total transportation related GHGs can be calculated. This data is compile in the tables
below.
Table Al. Vehicle mix (i.e. percent of total miles driven for each vehicle class and fuel type), fuel
emissions factors, and average fuel efficiency for vehicles in Dubuque, 2002 -2011.
Table A2. Vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) in Dubuque from 2002 -2011.
Dubuque
Diesel
Gasoline V
Year
Heavy
trucks
Light
trucks
Cars
i
Light
trucks
Cars
Vehicle Mix
5.4%
1.3%
0.3%
32.4%
60.6%
CO2 (mtlga I)
0.0102
0.0102
0.0102
0.0088
0.0088
MPG 2002
5.63
16.80
19.38
13.34
18.08
MPG 2003
5.63
16.82
19.38
13.49
18.25
MPG 2004
5.63
16.84
19.38
13.61
18.43
MPG 2005
5.63
16.86
19.38
13.72
18.61
MPG 2006
5.64
16.87
19.38
13.80
18.79
MPG 2007
5.64
16.93
19.38
13.87
18.97
MPG 2008
5.64
16.93
19.38
13.92
19.14
MPG 2009
5.64
16.93
19.38
13.96
19.32
MPG 2010
5.64
16.93
19.38
13.99
19.50
MPG 2011
5.64
16.93
19.38
14.01
19.68
MPG 2012
5.64
16.93
19.38
14.03
19.85
Table A2. Vehicle miles traveled (VMTs) in Dubuque from 2002 -2011.
Dubuque
VMT
Year
Total VMT
2002
462,721,406
2003
464,145,712
2004
467,905,465
2005
460,177,587
2006
457,071,423
2007
453,536,220
2008
446, 402, 396
2009
472,108,493
2010
474,369,522
2011
469, 813, 814
103
Electricity
Baseload vs non - baseload emission factors:
Electricity grid emission factors describe the amount of GHGs produced per unit of electricity.
Iowa is part of the Midwest Regional Organization West (MROW) region, which in 2007 (the most
recent data available) had a baseload emission factor of approximately 7.86E -4 mt CO2e per kWh, as
reported in the EPA's eGRID 2010 v1.1. This is the emission factor used to calculate emissions in
Dubuque's 2009 -2011 GHG inventories (earlier emission factors were used for 2003/2007 inventories).
A second emission factor, called the "non - baseload output emission rate" is used to calculate the
GHG impact of energy saving actions. This emission factor differs from the baseload emission factor,
above, because when energy demand decreases, the least efficient forms of energy (e.g. older coal
plants) tend to be taken offline first. As such, the non - baseload emission factor is higher than the
baseload emission factor. For MROW in 2007, the non - baseload emissions factor is approximately
9.07E -4 mt CO2e per kWh.
As an example of how these are used, assume that a city uses 1,000,000 kWh of energy per
year. To calculate the GHGs produced by generating this much energy, we use the baseload emission
factor of 7.86E -4 as follows:
7.86E -4 mt CO2e /kWh * 1,000,000 kWh = 786 mt CO2e
Now assume that an energy efficiency program saves 10% of that 1,000,000 kWh (= 100,000
kWh). To calculate the GHG impact of this reduction, we use the non - baseload emission factor of
9.07E -4 as follows:
9.07E -4 mt CO2e /kWh * 100,000 kWh = 90.7 mt CO2e
Dubuque's Emissions Factors -- Factoring in the Coal Plant
Alliant Energy's Dubuque Generating Station coal fired power plant lies within Dubuque's city
limits. Although the electric grid the is regional, the power plant and its impacts are primarily local,
giving Dubuque a far greater stake in (e.g. air quality) and influence on its operation than any other part
of the electric grid.
Although the plant is not owned and operated by the City of Dubuque, the vast majority of the
energy gene generated at the facility is used locally (Alliant Energy, personal communication). The
regional grid and the local power plant have quite different emissions factors (Table A3, below); to
reflect these differences, and the importance of the coal plant to Dubuque's power consumption, a
weighted average of coal plant and grid emissions factors (EFs) was used to calculate the carbon
footprint of electricity in Dubuque.
Table A3. Emissions factors and weighting factors for calculation of final, weighted electric emissions factor for Dubuque
in 2003 -2011.
wr
Total kWh used in Dubuque
Grid kWh
Coal plant kWh
Grid EF (mt /kWh)
Coal plant EF
Weighted Average EF
104
2003
689, 934, 710
348,761,530
341,173,180
0.000831
0.001328
0.001077
2007
737, 973, 696
396, 250,105
341,723,591
0.000786
0.001328
0.001037
715, 388, 872
565, 906, 872
149,482,000
0.000743
0.001328
0.000865
2010
777, 509, 953
625, 311, 953
152,198, 000
0.000743
0.001328
0.000857
773,125, 642
655, 308, 642
117, 817, 000
0.000743
0.001328
0.000832
The weighted average approached is illustrated as follows. In 2003, the coal plant produced
around 341,000,000 kWh of electricity, which amounts to nearly half of the 689,000,000 kWh used in
the community that year. Assuming that virtually all of the coal plant's energy was used in Dubuque
(Alliant Energy, personal communication), this suggests that in Dubuque in 2003, 341,000,000 kWh
came from the coal plant and 348,000,000 kWh came from the grid. So, the final 2003 emission factor
for Dubuque is the weighted average of the emissions factors for the coal plant and the grid, as follows:
(348,761,530 * 0.000831 + 341,173,180 * 0.001328) / 689,934,710 = 0.001077
- -- -Grid kWh - - -- -- -Grid EF - -- -Coal plant kWh- -Coal plant EF- -- -Total kWh - -- -- Weighted avg EF --
A similar weighting procedure was used for all years. Because coal plant production declined
between 2003 and 2011, a greater and greater proportion Dubuque's energy is now being derived from
the grid, which has a lower EF than the coal plant. Therefore, Dubuque's overall EF has improved at a
significant rate, and will further improve when the coal plant shuts down entirely (expected 2014, but
appears likely to be earlier). When the coal plant shuts down, Dubuque's overall EF will simply match
the regional grid EF which, in 2011, represented a 10.7% improvement in carbon intensity.
2007 vs 2030 emission factors
In order to predict the impact of energy related GHG reduction actions on GHG emissions in
2030, we need to know what the emission factor will be in 2030. Why do we need to know this?
Assume the installation of 1 kW of solar panels that produce 2,000 kWh of electricity per year. If we
use the 2007 emission factors (above), then replacing 2,000 kWh of grid electricity with solar power
will reduce present day GHG emissions by:
9.07E -4 mt CO2e /kWh * 2,000 kWh = 1.81 mt CO2e
However, emissions factors will almost certainly be different in 2030 than in 2007. What
exactly they will be cannot be predicted, but the U.S. DOE publishes energy projections in EIA's
Annual Energy Outlook reports. In the Electricity Generation & Renewable Resource supplemental
table of their 2010 report, they list energy generation and GHG emission data from 2008 -2035. From,
this, the energy intensity (GHGs per unit energy generated) can be calculated. 2007 data is not
available, but if 2008 data is used, MROW grid emissions factors are expected to improve by
approximately 10.1% by 2030. If we assume that this applies to both baseload and non - baseload
emission factors, then based on 10% improvement on 2007 emission factors, this gives us:
Baseload 2007 emission factor:
Baseload 2030 emission factor:
Non - baseload 2007 emission factor:
Non - baseload 2030 emission factor:
7.86E -4 mt CO2e /kWh
7.06E -4 mt CO2e /kWh
9.07E -4 mt CO2e /kWh
8.15E -4 mt CO2e /kWh
These are the 2030 electricity emission factors we use in our calculations (there is no need to include
coal plant EFs, because these numbers already assume only grid energy). Notably, given the rate of
growth of renewable energy in Iowa and the Midwest, these estimates are probably conservatively low.
However, they are based on the best available data and serve the purposes of this report.
105
Appendix B - Emission Reference Case
Electricity and Natural Gas
According to a 2009 study by the Electric
Power Research Institute, energy demand is
expected to increase by approximately 1.07% per
year between 2010 and 2030 (EPRI 2009). This
estimate includes projected business -as -usual
improvements in appliance, building, and power
plant efficiency but does not include any
additional measures such as federal climate
policy or energy efficiency programs. In order to
model future GHG emissions in Dubuque, this
1.07% annual increase was applied to electricity
and natural gas consumption in Dubuque
between 2011 and 2030.
A projected 10.1% decrease in grid
electricity GHG intensity between 2008 and
2030 (see Appendix A) was applied to these
figures to calculate total electricity related GHG
emissions in Dubuque in 2030. In addition, the
planned shutdown of the Dubuque coal plant will
yield an estimated 10.7% immediate
improvement in the carbon intensity of
Dubuque's energy (see Appendix A), meaning
that emissions factors should decrease by an
additional 10.7% between 2011 and the year in
which the coal plant is no longer operating
(scheduled for 2014, but anticipated to be
earlier).
Natural gas emission factors were held
constant between 2011 and 2030.
Transportation
VMTs in Dubuque were assumed to stay
constant between 2011 and 2030 under the
baseline scenario. A growing population could
increase VMTs while rising oil prices could
reduce VMTs, but the assumption of constant
VMTs greatly simplifies our baseline scenario.
In terms of fuel economy, we assumed
that the median age of vehicles on the road will
continue to be approximately 10 years (US DOT
2011a). As such, we assume that in 2030, the
average fuel economy of vehicles on the road
will be equivalent to the average fuel economy of
model year 2020 vehicles.
106
New fuel economy standards announced
in 2011 and finalized in 2012 will increase fuel
economy to 54.5 mpg by 2025 for cars and light
trucks (which comprise over 80% of VMTs on
US roadways - US DOT 2011a) and improve
heavy truck fuel economy by 10 -20% by 2018
(NHTSAIEPA 2011b).
EPA projections indicate that combined
car /light truck fuel economy by 2020 will be
over 38.8 mpg (NHTSA/EPA 2011a) compared
to 23.1 mpg in 2009 (US DOT 2011b), a 68%
improvement. For our analysis, we very
conservatively assume a 33% improvement in
overall fuel economy above 2011 levels for our
baseline scenario.
Waste
Methane emissions from the waste sector
were held constant between 2011 and 2030.
Baseline scenario: 2011 -2030
For the baseline reference case scenario,
we assume that Dubuque's population will
remain constant between 2011 and 2030.
Under these assumptions, we predict that
Dubuque total community emissions will be
approximately 49,614 mt CO2e lower in 2030
than in 2011, a 4.1% decrease (Table B1). This
assumes no population change; for any
population change, anticipated emissions imply
should be scaled proportionally.
Cable Bl. Baseline reference
case for
2011
GHG emission
2030
Electricity total
' 643,231
632,784
Natural gas total
' 234,142
286,617
Transportation
277,703
186,061
Waste
48,076
48,076
Total
1,203,152
1,153, 538
2011 and 2030 (mt CO2e per year).
s in
Appendix C - Glossary of Terms
Albedo — The reflectivity of a surface. High albedo surfaces are more "mirror- like" and tend to reflect
solar radiation without absorbing it; examples of high albedo surfaces include ice, snow, and other light
colored or shiny surfaces. Low albedo surfaces tend to be darker in color and absorb more solar
radiation, converting it to thermal or heat energy. Examples of low albedo surfaces include soot, dark -
shingled rooftops, blacktop, plants, and the ocean.
Biogenic — GHG emissions from a biological or organic source. For example, when wood waste is
burned for energy, it will only release CO2 that it absorbed during the lifetime of the tree. As such, the
wood waste produces no net emissions and is often considered to be carbon neutral (see below).
However, it is notable that many long -lived bioenergy feedstocks, such as trees harvested solely for
bioenergy generation, take decades to regrow and reclaim the GHG emissions they released when
burned. This creates a temporary (up to 50 years or more) increase in atmospheric carbon
concentrations before new trees re- absorb that carbon (Walker, T., P. Cardellichio, A. Colnes, J. Gunn,
B. Kittler, B. Perschel, C. Recchia, and D. Saah. 2010. Biomass sustainability and carbon policy study.
Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences.). This temporary increase in GHG concentrations can
have significant impacts on climate change by pushing the climate beyond certain thresholds (see
ripping points, below) that cannot be undone, even when GHGs are eventually drawn back down by
regrowing forests.
Biomass - Any organic matter derived from plants. Examples include trees, wood waste, switchgrass
and other perennial grassland plants, and crop residuals.
Black carbon - Black carbon is essentially "soot" produced by incomplete combustion of fossil fuels
and biomass. The majority of black carbon emissions in the U.S. come from diesel engines used for
transportation and industrial use as well as wood burning stoves and other unfiltered biomass burning.
Black carbon has been estimated to be the second largest contributor to climate change, second only to
CO2 (Ramanathan V. and Carmichael G. 2008. Global and regional climate changes due to black
carbon. Nature Geoscience 221 -22). Black carbon has a direct warming effect by absorbing solar
radiation and converting it to heat in the atmosphere, as well as an indirect warming effect by
decreasing the albedo of snow and ice.
Carbon intensity — The amount of CO2e emitted during the production of a unit of energy. For
instance, if a particular coal plant emits 2 lbs of CO2e per kWh of electricity, then the carbon intensity
of electricity from that plant is 2lbs /kWh. This is equivalent to an emissions factor.
Carbon negative — A process that results in a net decrease in atmospheric GHGs. In other words, a
process that removes more carbon from the atmosphere than it puts into the atmosphere.
Carbon neutral — Any energy source or process that absorbs or sequesters the same amount of carbon
it releases, causing no net increase in atmospheric GHG concentrations.
Carbon sequestration — Uptake and storage of carbon. For instance, trees store carbon in its wood
and other tissues, and this carbon can then be sequestered in the soil when roots and other parts of the
plant decompose. Depending on conditions, soils, oceans, and other ecosystems can act as net carbon
sources or carbon sinks depending on the net balance of carbon loss and carbon sequestration.
Carbon sink — A system that sequesters more carbon than it emits. For instance, prairies act as carbon
107
sinks by sequestering carbon in the soil by producing extensive root systems year after year. If that
prairie is plowed and converted to agricultural land, it will often become a carbon source as the carbon
accumulated belowground is exposed to the surface, broken down, and emitted to the atmosphere.
Oceans, forests, and other natural ecosystems generally are significant carbon sinks.
CO2e - The amount of CO2 that would cause the same amount of warming as a given amount of
another greenhouse gas. For example, each molecule of methane (CH4) causes 21 -times more warming
than 1 molecule of COz, so 1 kg of CH4 is equal to 21 kg CO2e. CO2e is a useful way to combine all
GHG emissions into a single unit of measurement.
CHP - Combined Heat and Power, a power generation facility in which both electricity and waste heat
are utilized.
ECIA — East Central Intergovernmental Association, an organization of local governmental bodies in
Cedar, Clinton, Delaware, Dubuque and Jackson Counties. Provides an advisory and administrative
role for local member governments on a wide range of issues.
DMATS - Dubuque Metropolitan Area Transportation Study. A Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO) located at the boundary intersections of Iowa, Illinois, and Wisconsin. Responsible for
approving goals and plans for the development of the Dubuque area transportation system.
DMASWA — Dubuque Metropolitan Area Solid Waste Agency. DMASWA is the entity responsible for
solid waste management in Dubuque (and Delaware county). The Agency's municipal solid waste
landfill is located on Dubuque's west side along U.S. Highway 20. Its service area is Dubuque and
Delaware counties. The Agency owns 460 acres of property, of which 80 are permitted for landfill use.
DOE - U.S. Department of Energy. Federal agency whose mission is to advance energy technology
and promote related innovation in the United States.
Embodied Energy — The energy required to make any product, bring it to market, and dispose of it.
Embodied Energy is a Scope 3 emission (see Scope 3 Emissions).
Emission factor - The amount of CO2e emitted during the production of a unit of energy. See carbon
intensity.
EPA — U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Federal agency whose mission is to protect human
health and the environment.
Fossil fuel — Geological deposits of carbon formed by the burial and decomposition of ancient
organisms, including plants, phytoplankton, and zooplankton. So fossil fuels are literally made of
decomposed fossils. The age of organisms and resulting fossil fuels ranges from tens- to hundreds -of-
millions of years. Fossil fuels includes coal, oil, and natural gas.
Greenhouse gas (GHG) — A gas that absorbs and traps heat in the atmosphere. The principle
anthropogenic (human generated) greenhouse gases are CO2, CH4, and N20.
IPCC — Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. From the IPCC website "[the IPCC] reviews
and assesses the most recent scientific, technical and socio- economic information produced worldwide
relevant to the understanding of climate change" The IPCC convenes approximately twice per decade
to assess the scientific literature underpinning climate science and produces synthesis reports reflecting
this body of knowledge. Working strictly on a voluntary basis, hundreds of leading scientists from
108
around the world prepare the report, and thousands more scientists review their work. The IPCC
produced synthesis reports in 1990, 1995, 2001, and 2007. The Fifth Assessment Report is scheduled
for completion in 2014.
kWh -- Average power consumption (kW) per hour. For example, 100 kWh is equivalent to 100 kW of
power being used for 1 hour.
LEED -- A rating system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council for the design, construction,
and operation of energy efficient buildings and neighborhoods.
PPM — Parts per million. For instance, if 1 cup of salt is mixed with 999,999 cups of sugar, the
resulting solution will have a salt concentration of 1 part per million (ppm).
Scope 1 Emissions - All direct GHG emissions. For instance, from burning natural gas to heat a home,
from a community operates its own power plant, or from fugitive methane emissions at local landfills.
Scope 2 Emissions - Indirect GHG emissions from consumption of purchased electricity, heat, or
steam.
Scope 3 Emissions - Other indirect emissions. Common examples include emissions from extraction
and production of purchased materials and fuels (i.e. embodied energy), transport- related activities in
vehicles not owned or controlled by the reporting entity, electricity - related activities not covered by
Scope 2 emissions (e.g. transmission and distribution losses), outsourced activities, waste disposal, etc.
Tipping point - A threshold beyond which further changes trigger abrupt and often irreversible
consequences for human or natural systems. In other words, once a certain climatic threshold is
reached, rapid changes occur that are unlikely or impossible to be reversed. For instance, pushing
temperatures beyond certain limits can cause species to become extinct. The cascading effects of
losing a keystone species can degrade an entire ecosystem and the services it provides; this is
effectively irreversible since the species in question no longer exists.
USGCRP — U.S. Global Change Research Program. USGCRP provides "a comprehensive and
integrated United States research program which will assist the Nation and the world to understand,
assess, predict, and respond to human- induced and natural processes of global change."
VMT — Vehicle miles travelled. The number of miles travelled by a given vehicle or set of vehicles.
WRRC -- Dubuque's Water & Resource Recovery Center (WRRC) is a secondary wastewater
treatment facility responsible for treating and disposing of the community's sewage and wastewater.
The facility formerly incinerated waste solids and was designed in the 1970s and upgraded in the early
1990s. To more efficiently meet the growing needs of the Dubuque community, the WRRC is being
upgraded to an anaerobic digestion system scheduled for completion in 2014.
109
Appendix D - Outreach and Public Input
Community Input
Various public outreach and input sessions were held throughout 2012 and are described in the
sections below.
Clarke University "Connect" sessions
In August 2012, incoming Clarke University students participated in discussions and workshops
regarding sustainability in Dubuque. Green Dubuque led a session describing the 50% by 2030
initiative and engaging students on how it relates to them. 12 students attended the session and
participated in an excellent and energetic discussion.
Green Drinks
Since 2008, Green Dubuque has organized Dubuque Green Drinks, which is a monthly social
event designed for anyone interested in sustainability or green issues. It is informal, open, inclusive,
and dedicated to fostering conversation, connections, and action in Dubuque, Iowa.
A speaker or topic is designated each month to kick things off and generate discussion. Many
of the themes are related to or directly address the Dubuque Community Climate Action & Resiliency
Plan. These are the themes from 2012:
A January 2012: General Discussion
A February 2012: Keystone XL Pipeline
A March 2012: Dubuque Food Coop ( http: / /www.dubuquefoodcoop.com/)
A April 2012: Plastic Bag Reduction
A May 2012: Green Roofs presented by Roof Top Sedums, LLC (www.rooftopseedums.com/)
A June 2012: Iowa Renewable Energy and Jobs Agenda 2020
(http ://iowarenewableenergyj obs2020. org/)
A July 2012: Catfish Creek Watershed Management Authority, led by Eric Schmechel and Dean
Mattoon ( http : / /catfishcreek.cdmeyer.com/)
A August 2012: Bicycle Library in Dubuque, with Rob Williams presenting on his experience
with the Iowa City Bike Library.
A September 2012: Updates on the Bike Coop group launched at August Green Drinks.
Session culminated in creation of "The Bike Coop," a volunteer -run bicycle cooperative in
Dubuque. Also, received an update on local composting developments from Paul Schultz and
Chuck Goddard
A October 2012: 50% by 2030 Dubuque Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan input
session
A November 2012: Bicycle safety and infrastructure in Dubuque, led by Urban and Regional
Planning students from the University of Iowa who are working with the City of Dubuque
Sustainable Dubuque Collaboration
The Sustainable Dubuque Collaboration is a committee of City officials, community
organizations, and individuals working on sustainability issues. In November 2012, Green Dubuque
presented a draft of the Dubuque Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan to representatives of
the Collaboration and incorporated their feedback into the final report.
110
Collective Social Learning Workshop with Greg & Candia Bruce
In October 2012, noted sustainability experts Greg and Candia Bruce held a collective social
learning workshop for the Dubuque Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan. The workshop
addressed the following question:
How will we define and implement the necessary actions
to meet Dubuque's greenhouse gas and resiliency goals?
What is Collective Social Learning?
Collective social learning (CSL) is a method for creating actionable ideas from groups with
diverse perspectives, values, and knowledge. By combining small group brainstorming sessions with
reporting/discussion in the larger group, CSL takes workshop participants from creative vision to
concrete action. This is achieved by addressing the following four questions:
(1) What should be? (sharing ideals and building a vision)
(2) What is? (establishing facts and assessing whether each fact enables or disables progress
toward vision outlined in question 1)
(3) What could be? (creative ideas)
(4) What can be? (translating ideas into collaborative action)
For each question, smaller groups of 2 or 3 individuals (typically based on specialty or sector of
the community) brainstorm on each question and then report back to the larger group (importantly,
there are no 'wrong answers'; see rules below).
First the groups piece together an ideal vision. Second, groups discuss what current realities aid
or impede those ideal visions. Third, creative ideas to reach these goals and overcome those obstacles
are discussed, after which those ideas are boiled down to consistent emergent themes. Finally, those
ideas, themes, and goals are translated into a list of action items. The end goal of CSL is to have each
workshop participant walk away with a positive action to take that (1) they are capable of, (2) they are
accountable for, (3) keeps them excited /engaged. The overall process is probably best understood
through example, so the results of this workshop are included on the following pages.
The following rules were followed in the CSL workshop:
• No right or wrong tonight - only ideas
• Used colored pens
• Exercise your rights and write your own thoughts
• Please draw pictures
• There is no scribe
• Please present by standing up
• One group member holds paper up to audience to show your work; other member presents
• Write anywhere on your paper
111
Collective Social Learning - Results
The following are the 'raw' results of the workshops; these were incorporated as appropriate in the policy
options throughout the report but are included here in raw form.
I. What Should Be? (Group 1)
A Future generations are considered in public decision making
▪ The whole community has been involved in some way such that they feel connected to it
A No externalities in cost/benefit analyses - -all impacts considered
A Everyone is healthy, happy, and at peace
A Zero waste
A Economic social environmental goals align
I. What Should Be? (Group 2)
• Buy Local
• Conserve water
• Discourage lawns, plant more shrubs and trees
• Teach all of this in community college
• Cut energy needs
• Grow more food locally
• Build up soil, carbon, organic matter
• Insulate, solar, wind energy
• Mass transit biking
• Produce fuels locally, methane, wood alcohol
• Parks and green areas
• Utilize local businesses as much as feasible
• More locally grown food
• Back to more of a barter system
• Less packaging
• Educate school
• Promote vegetation
• Get kids involved, start while young
• Community gardens
• Promote /Create incentives for organic farms and gardens
• Have fairs and seminars
• Create local focus groups
I. What Should Be? (Group 3)
• Grocery stores that let us reuse refill containers, glass ok like in Europe
• Bike lanes on every street
• Pair students with senior citizens
• Fresh local food at school lunch
• Curbside food waste collect for all residences and businesses
• Community gardens in every neighborhood, front yards
• Composting in all schools
• Easy renting bikes
• Charge for plastic bags at schools
• Educate in schools about composting and how to be sustainable
• Info signs throughout city
• More bulk buying at stores = less plastic
• Neighborhood champions to educate on greenhouse gas /climate change issues and policy
• Support for Neighborhood Champions
112
• Errand planning education
• More CSL take to neighborhoods
• Easy public transportation
• Facilitate carpooling with background checks
• Warming up ideas for winter to keep thermostats down
I. What Should Be? (Group 4)
A Should support business /industry and community
A Timeline: actions at 1 -12 months, 1 -2 years, 3 -4 years, 4 -5 years
▪ Should we define short long, big small?
▪ All of us able to make small steps know what to choose to do by education
▪ The whole community should be involved and get it, not through preaching, common sense
▪ We should know what the greenhouse gas targets are and where to focus for best effect
▪ Should not mention greenhouse gas, should be "normal way"
▪ Should be a whole community approach
▪ Should build on other success and knowledge
A People learning about the unsustainable trend, impacted by climate destruction
A People supporting good science and fact checking
A People gathering in small support and empowerment synergy groups
A People encouraging developing milestones and measurements
A Lessen the dis- empowerment of "I don't understand enough"
A Validate participatory democracy, need input from all
▪ Accessible, relevant
A Build a framework that encourages input collaboration
A Build portfolio of community successes
A Measure all the costs and impacts that affect the climate
▪ Gather input from a wide variety of stake holders in the community
A Creative
I. What Should Be? (Group 5)
• Build visual reminders in prominent locations to keep community in the mindset of achieving goals and
create public works of art that can also be used to teach/educate
• Host events in the community that get people out of their houses and talking to each other, events based
around specific goals and projects, see results!
• Get students involved, they are already immersed in an environment of learning, get them educated
about the issues and build involvement and energy in the schools and environment
• I think it is important to involve college students why not develop clubs or courses for credit, the city
could be involved with facilitating this.
• It is also important to develop an environment in which climate action is not threatening or partisan but a
net gain for everyone
• If climate action is aesthetically and visually pleasing, it is easier to get behind
113
II. What Is? (Group 1)
Enabling
Disabling
Solar and wind cost is decreasing
Partisan politics
Fuel efficiency standards
Fear
City of Dubuque staff are awesome and connected to
community and environment
Special Interest Money
Youth involvement -- Green Vision Education program
Misinformation (Group Think)
Local solar energy companies
Language of GHG /Climate Change
Grassroots democracy
Different views in world/Dubuque
Processes exist (e.g. Collective Social Learning)
Remove woodland for corn
Energy in this community to make it happen
Individuals feeling they alone won't make a difference
Knowledge exists
Political headbutt ing
II. What Is? (Group 2)
Enabling
Disabling
Farmers Market growing
Businesses going more global (less caring)
School's conservation clubs
Deniers
City building trails, working on bus lines
High Cost of Organic Food
Increasing number of organic farms
Lack of local processing
City tree planting
Old fashioned views
US fuel standards going up
Slow rate of cars /miles per gallon
Alternative forms of energy
Remove woodland for corn
Individuals feeling they alone won't make a difference
Political headbutt ing
II. What Is? (Group 3)
Enabling
Disabling
Complete Streets policies
Money
Green Dubuque and other local advocates /champions
Att itude, "I won't make a difference"
Supportive mayor, council, small but supportive
citizens
Lack of people participating
Farmer's market, CSAs getting stronger, more
successful
Belief there are plentiful resources
Local pride in our community, river
Terrain
Momentum has started
State and federal barriers
Incentives
Lazy, not motivated
114
Internet education
Someone else's problem
Health education
The false ideas and misunderstanding of groups
Community conversations (Collective Soc. Learn)
The waiting game
Creative energy e.g. Bike Coop
Complacency and privilege
Composting infrastructure now available
Surrender philosophy (giving up)
II. What Is? (Group 4)
Enabling
Disabling
Food Coop developing
Partisan politics
Community conversations (Collective Soc. Learn)
Powerlessness
Creative energy e.g. Bike Coop
Greenhouse gas issues has a bad reputation
Composting infrastructure now available
People think it will cost $, business opportunities
Business opportunities, new industries
Concentrated decision making
Dubuque, perfect "community" is go for it
Some not empowered
Makes sense
Some don't know/ No choice
Humans are creative and inventive
Perceived as middle class liberal issue
Religious community support leadership
Too much fighting over stats and numbers gets stuck
because cause for no action
Technology
Inertia
History of sustainability success in Dubuque
Lack of confidence and knowledge
Evidence that people have /are making a difference
Fear of embarrassing ones self
Believe Yes
Lack of mentoring /empowering young people about
their future
II. What Is? (Group 5)
Enabling
Disabling
Millwork district/historic conservation
Enormity of Climate Issues
Complete Streets
Not enough bike racks
DBQ Bike Coop
Not enough awareness regarding complete streets
GHG Initiative
Urban sprawl
Phasing out plastic bags
Rivers, streams, and drinking water in danger
The Jewel Bus / Transit system
Stream cleanup
Solar
115
III. What Could Be? (Group 1)
• Reduce food miles
• Food Coop, FM, Backyard Gardens, Edible landscaping
• Distributed Energy Incentives
• Bike opportunities for all, Bike Coop, complete streets, trail vision expanded
• White, green, solar roof
• Report matters, Build a framework that involves community based on CSL results tonight
III. What Could Be? (Group 2)
A Kids should be taught and shown different examples so they can decide Public areas should become
positive examples
▪ True cost analyze factoring all long term cost
▪ Teach kids how to compost and recycle properly
A Incentive for producing locally grown foods at schools, hospitals, nursing homes, etc.
A Budget more to these efforts or add incentives
▪ Create ongoing focus groups to deal with each issue
III. What Could Be? (Group 3)
• Incentives/ property value increase if have a garden on property
• Surplus donated to coop to give people with special diet needs or to schools
• Free Jump on /off business
• Incentives, coupons, vouchers for biking /walking
• Have volunteers who are educated on sustainability pass knowledge on to students
• After school snacks are grown not from plastic bag!
• Year round youth environment group /club
• Incorporate into L.E.A.P. Grant
• Artsy Tip Sheet
• Green concerts in public venue and town clock square for celebration and education
III. What Could Be? (Group 4)
• That the city has an integrated transport plan that includes safe bike paths and buses to our appropriate
areas
• The plan incorporates the vision of a variety of background (youths, seniors, various economic
backgrounds, etc.)
• Empower, mentor, and help develop new leaders, communicators, and strategic organizers
• That the strategic plan is lead by the community and everyone wanting to help carry the load
• Synergy between points of energy = coops and faith groups and advocates, etc.
• Express a vision and suggest actions that can be understood by almost all Dubuquers
• Integrate art, culture, city events, in communications and actions...
• Small Groups Meeting Everywhere
• Zero Waste
III. What Could Be? (Group 5)
• Gardening clubs
• Bush craft/wildlife groups
• Activities in the summer, live music, share ideas about climate action
• Public Art/Whitespace mural
• Involves artists in the community
• Teaching tool /visual regarding climate issues
• Cooling space where there was blacktop, now a whiteshade mural
• Involve students in grant writing process
116
• Grant writing powerful skill to be used in additional future projects
• Public unveiling, DBQ likes to party
• Involve local musicians, involve local food
• Involve historical district, location?
• Total community involvement
III. What Could Be? Group 4 (2id Groups)
• Food = coop and more locally produced and increased use of local food and farmers market
• Arts and Culture life = Music and Local Artists
• Local Festivals
• Web of Capacity Building small powerful groups
• Whole or County and art events cultural activity integrated
• Integrated transport
• Grow Youth Capacity
• Food/energy /Transportation /Art
• Leadership Development
• Cross Cultural Tool Box
• Projects empowering more engagement and more projects
• Reporting outcomes and measurements
III. What Could Be? -- THEMES
• Money — incentives, funding, creating value
• Education outreach to targeted populations (esp. youth)
• Transportation bus bike trail;
• Food Edible Landscaping, Gardens, Trees
• Fun
Seek more opportunities to make it fun (should NOT be a drag)
Celebrate small steps with events, parties, etc.
• Integration of all age groups (opinions; opportunities for participation/action /benefit)
• Support for many small community organizations to build an entire community working successfully
toward improvement
• ENERGY
° Different forms: Social momentum, Renewables, Fossil Fuels, Food, Heating, Transportation
IV. What Can Be? (action steps)
117
Name
Commitment or action
By when/date of action
Resources
Participant 1
Develop tip sheet on
common GHG sustain for
use in NBHD education
Tip Sheet printed, donated to
and give to Green Dubuque
60 days
Names redacted for report;
but resources typically
consist of key contacts,
individuals, organizations,
volunteers, and individual
skills that can move these
goals forward
Participant 2
Suggest youth club in school,
implement
Within two years
Participant 3
Reduce energy use by being
less indulgent, mow, planting
a garden
Participant 4
Connect with other workshop
participants to continue
discussion/flow of ideas
2 months
Participant 5
4 CSL for community
improvement
Before Greg and Candia
return
Participant 6
Contact schools if they
support conservation
05/30/13
Participant 7
Support local effort to copy
growing power
This winter
Participant 8
Attend community activity
By Spring
Participant 9
Whitespace Mural Continue
to raise awareness for bike
coop through designing
merchandise, logos and
brochures
Now...
Participant 10
Happy to volunteer my time,
clean up wildlife project
June 13th
Participant 11
Help maintain Greg Bruce
Always
Participant 12
Get an assessment of solar
potential at our house
Suse Get a deskside
composter
2012
Participant 13
Support more CSL
Next 3 months
118
Business Input
Petal Connect
Business input was collected in face -to -face events, such as Petal Connect sessions, and an
online survey. Petal Connect sessions are regular meetings held by the Petal Project (see p. 71 for
description of Petal Project) with participating businesses. Green Dubuque was invited to present at a
Petal Connect session in June 2012, where the Dubuque Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan
was presented and discussed.
Online Survey
A survey of local businesses /institutions in Dubuque was conducted to understand sustainability
related trends, barriers, and opportunities in the private sector. The survey was administered with the
following goals:
A Receive 2 -3 responses from all major business sectors
A Receive responses from businesses representing cumulative 25% of employment in Dubuque
A Identify private sector priorities regarding sustainability
A Identify barriers to energy use and GHG reduction in the private sector
A Incorporate existing private sector successes, barriers, and ideas into Dubuque Community
Climate Action and Resiliency Plan
The survey was designed not to require extensive expertise in sustainability to complete and
was intended to be completed in 15 -20 minutes (survey text included below). As of November 30,
2012, 21 area businesses representing well over 3,000 Dubuque area employees had responded to the
survey. We thank the respondents sincerely for their help in gathering this important data.
119
Survey Text
Dubuque Community Climate Action & Resiliency Pius: Business Survey - 2012
Thank you for sharing your input regarding the Dubuque Community Climate Action Plan. Private
sector leadership and innovation are an important component of community resiliency and adaptation.
Your thoughtful input in the following survey will help give a better perspective of what is important to
our local businesses as well as the obstacle that you may face in your efforts to improve your corporate
sustainability. Individual answers will be kept confidential. Only aggregate data will be utilized/shared
to understand local trends. If you would prefer that your business not be listed as a participant, please
indicate "(anonymous)" after your business name and your business will not be listed. Thank you again
for your input.
*1. Name of your business?
*2. Number of employees?
Q < 10
Q 10 -50
Q 50 - 100
Q 100 - 500
Q > 500
*3. Type of Business?
Retail
Q Office
Q Food Service
Q Industrial/Manufacturing
Q Public Service
Q Construction
Q Health Care
Q Financial
Q Education
Q Recreation
Q Warehouse/Distribution
Other (please specify)
120
*4. Does your business have a corporate vehicle fleet?
Yes
I o
*5. Has your company developed a corporate sustainability strategy?
`, Yes
Q No
Q I don't know
* 6. What are the driving factors behind your organization's sustainability initiatives?
End - Consumer Environmental Concerns/Pressure From Customers
Cost Reduction
✓ Investors
✓ Government Compliance
• Corporate Image /Brand Reputation
• Employee Interest
• Community Environmental Concern
▪ Supply Chain Pressure/Interest
Other (please specify)
* 7. What are the significant barriers that your company faces in developing and
implementing sustainable strategies?
Lack of adequate sustainability education /training
• Cost/perceived lack of retum on investment
— Senior management indifference
Lack of staff/insufficient staff time
✓ No significant business driver
• Complexity of implementation
• Availability of funds /prioritization of funds
Other (please specify)
121
* 8. Which of the following are current (implemented) sustainability initiatives at your
company?
▪ Sustainability reporting
▪ Green fleet changes to conserve fuel
▪ Engagement of customers or community
▪ Product life cycle analysis
▪ Recycling and waste reduction
▪ Water conservation
▪ The Petal Project (green business certification)
▪ Product take -back initiatives, such as product stewardship or extended producer responsibility
▪ Construction of "green facilities"
▪ Carbon footprint analysis /greenhouse gas inventory
▪ Composting of organics (either curbside or on site)
▪ Energy efficiency
▪ Renewable energy
▪ Product redesign to improve energy efficiency of product
Other (please specify)
*9. Which of the following is your company interested in education/technical assistance
for? (choose top three)
▪ Life Cycle Assessment
▪ Sustainabilty Reporting
fl Energy Efficiency
▪ Green Buildings
Carbon Foctprint Analysis
• Renewable Energy
• Corporate Sustainability Strategy
• Community /Conoumcr Engagement
n Waste Stream Management
• Lower Emissions
Development of Sustainability Me:rics
Climate Disruption and Adaptation
Other (please specify)
122
Survey results and discussion
(1) Name of business
Respondents consenting to be named include:
A Eagle Point Solar
• Gronen Restoration, Inc.
A Clarke University
• Loras College
A St. Joseph the Worker Catholic Church
A American Trust and Savings Bank
A Dubuque Bank and Trust
• DuTrac Community Credit Union
A Premier Bank
• Jitterz Coffee + Cafe
A The Food Store
A Finley Hospital
A Unified Therapy Services
• Welu Printing Company
• Cottingham & Butler
A Dubuque Data Services
• IIW, P.C.
A City of Dubuque Public works
A Community Foundation
A East Central Intergovernmental Association
A River Lights Bookstore
123
(renewable energy /construction)
(construction)
(education)
(education)
(religious)
(financial)
(financial)
(financial)
(financial)
(food service)
(food service)
(health care)
(health care)
(industrial/manufacturing)
(office)
(office)
(office)
(public service)
(public service)
(public service)
(retail)
(2)
<10-
10 -50-
1
50 -100-
100 -500-
>500-
Number of employees?
1
1
7
8
0 2 4 6 8 10
The survey received responses from a strong sample of small, medium, and large businesses and
institutions, including 10 businesses with fewer than 50 employees and 13 with more than 50
employees (weighted somewhat toward larger institutions/businesses with 100 - 500+ employees).
124
(3)
Financial -
Education —
Office —
Public Service —
Retail —
Food Service —
Construction —
Health Care —
Industrial /Manufacturing —
Recreation —
WarehouselDistribution —
Type of Business?
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
4
2
3 4 5 6
This chart shows that the survey largely met its goal of sampling a wide variety of sectors,
though we would still like to gather more responses from, in particular, the Industrial/Manufacturing,
Warehouse/Distribution, Retail, and Recreational (e.g. casinos) sectors.
(4) Does your business have a corporate vehicle fleet?
A Yes (10)
A No (8)
A No response (3)
(5) Has your company developed a corporate sustainability strategy?
A Yes (77.8 %)
A No (22.2 %)
77.8% of respondents had already developed a corporate sustainability strategy, indicating that
institutional sustainability has permeated much of the private sector but that there is still significant
room to grow (22.2% in our sample). Notably, however, it was almost exclusively smaller businesses
that have not yet developed a sustainability strategy, possibly related to staff limitations (see response
7, below)
125
(6)
What are the driving factors behind your organization's sustainability initiatives?
Community _
Environmental Concern
Employee Interest—
Corporate Image/Brand
Reputation
Cost Reduction
End-Consumer
Environmental Concems /Pressure 16.7
From Customers
Supply Chain 11.1 %
Pressure/Interest
Government Compliance 1 5.6 4
Investors-
61.1 7.
77.84
72.2 4
94.44
0 5 10 15 20
There are several interesting results in this section. First, 'cost reduction' (via improved
energy /water /materials efficiency for most survey respondents) was cited by 61% of
businesses /institutions with sustainability initiatives. This indicates that cost reduction is an important
factor but is not the exclusive or even primary driver of voluntary corporate sustainability.
Second, only 1 respondent named 'government compliance' as a driving factor, indicating that
corporate sustainability in Dubuque is primarily a voluntary, internally driven process. Related to this,
very few respondents indicated that explicit external pressure from investors, customers, or
upstream /downstream links in the supply chain drove their current sustainability initiatives. This again
suggests that private sector sustainability in Dubuque is primarily driven by companies and institutions
themselves. Consistent with this, nearly 78% of respondents cited 'employee interest' as a driving
factor in their pursuit of sustainability.
There were some external pressures companies did respond to, however. 94% of respondents
cited 'community environmental concern' as a driving factor, and 72% cited 'corporate image/brand
reputation.' This indicates that companies are motivated to support and participate in the culture and
priorities of the communities where they live and do business, and that this is supported at least in part
by 'soft pressures' such as a building and maintaining strong reputations as sustainable, responsible
companies.
126
(7)
What are the significant barriers that your company faces in developing and
implementing sustainable strategies?
Lack of staff /insufficient
staff time
Cost/perceived lack of
return on investment
Availability of
funds /prioritization of funds
Complexity of
implementation
Lack of adequate
sustainability
education /training
Senior management
indifference
No significant
business driver
33.3 %
16.7
556::
10 12 14
None of the respondents indicated that they did not pursue sustainability because there were 'no
significant business drivers.' This indicates that they all believed that, whether for cost reduction,
image, or other factors, sustainability made good business sense. Also, none cited 'senior management
indifference' as a barrier, again suggesting that corporate interest in sustainability is strong.
The most common barriers cited fall into two categories: cost and implementation. In teens of
cost, 44% of respondents indicated that they would pursue more sustainability initiatives if more
funding were available. This is a large percentage, but it is somewhat striking that it is not higher. 56%
of respondents indicated that perceived lack of ROI was a significant barrier. This suggests two
important things: (1) sustainability initiatives with good ROI are most amenable to businesses (or
perhaps initiatives with good ROIs just need to be better marketing), and (2) 44% of respondents do
not see lack of ROI as aproblem, either because they are willing to incur the costs or because they
perceive sustainability as ultimately good for business.
So cost can be an important barrier, but in our survey, implementation was more important. 72%
of respondents cited 'lack of staff/staff time' as significant barriers. Implementing sustainability
initiatives, even the most cost effective ones, requires some measure of expertise and staff time. In our
survey, it appears that staff time outweighs expertise as abarrier, with 33% of respondents citing
'complexity of implementation' as a barrier and 17% citing 'lack of training.' So while expertise and
education are important, they are not as significant as simple staff availability (also, sustainability
outreach is strong in Dubuque, so this may also explain some of these results).
Other barriers cited (not shown in this graph) include 'not owning their facility'. It is also
notable that several respondents stated that they saw no significant barriers.
127
(8)
Which of the following are current (implemented) sustainability initiatives at your
company?
Energy efficiency —
Recycling a nd —
waste reduction
Water conservation —
Engagement of customers
oroommunity
The Petal Project (green —
business certification)
Sustaina Wiry reporting —
Composting of_
organics (either_
Renewable energy—
Construction of J
'green faci@ies'
Product take -back initiatives.
such as product
Carbon footprint
analysts greenhouse_
Green fleet changes
to conserve fuel
Product life
cycle analysis
16.7
16.7
16.7
22.2
38.9
38.9
38.9
55.6 e
72.2 %
72.2 %
72.2 %
100.0 %
94.44
5 10 15 2]
Question 8 indicates that respondents are implementing a broad portfolio of sustainability
initiatives. In particular, energy efficiency (a notable cost saving measure) and recycling were nearly
ubiquitous. Water conservation was also a common practice, and those who did not cite water
conservation were typically smaller businesses for which water use was probably not very high to
begin with. So water conservation is also probably pretty ubiquitous.
72% of respondents were participating in the Petal Project, indicating that they are particularly
focused on sustainability. 72% of respondents also reached out to customers and the community to
publicize their efforts, which is identical to the percentage citing concern for corporate image/brand
reputation in question 6. 56% of respondents formally reported their sustainability efforts and trends,
either through third party programs, the web, or corporate reports, though only 17% had conducted a
GHG inventory or analysis of any kind (larger companies were the ones conducting GHG inventories).
Somewhat surprisingly, nearly 39% of respondents were engaged in some sort of
composting /organics separation. There is certainly room for growth in that regard, but those numbers
are encouraging. Also, 39% of respondents employed renewable energy of some kind in their
operations. Again, there is tremendous room for growth in this regard, but these figures indicate that
local renewables are spreading and working for local businesses. 39% also had constructed 'green
facilities', which are more energy efficient and widely recognized as saving money in the long term
(and often the short term); as such, it is likely that this number will grow as more companies
expand/update their facilities in the future.
Other efforts had lower levels of implementation but were still cited by several respondents.
17% of respondents had replaced fleet vehicles with more fuel - efficient models (notably, most smaller
128
businesses do not have fleets, so this figure is higher among large companies). 22% of respondents
engaged in product take back initiatives, such as recycling and management of products they
sell /manufacturing, indicating that these respondents were engaged with the downstream fate of their
products. Related to this, 17% of respondents had engaged in product life - cycle- analyses to improve
the efficiency / sustainability of their products and supply chains. Though not shown in the graph, 11%
of respondents had redesigned their products or materials to be more energy efficient and sustainable.
(9)
Which of the following is your company interested in education /technical assistance for?
(choose top three)
Energy Efficiency -
CommunityJConsumer —
Engagement
Development of _
Sustainability Metrics
Life Cycle Assessment —
Cot _�
Sustainability Strategy
Renewable Energy —
Waste Stream Management —
Carbon Footprint _
Analysis
Green Buildings-
Sustainability Reporting—
Lower Emissions 5.6
Climate Disruption 5.6
and Adaptation
16.7 %
22.2 %
22.2 %
27.8%
27.8%
27.8 %
27.8 %
33.3 %
50.0%
50.0%
0 2 4 6 8 10
This question was restricted to the top -3 priorities in order to better understand where
respondents most wanted more knowledge or technical assistance. In our sample, energy efficiency
and ways of communicating sustainability efforts to the public were the strongest performers; given
their relationship to cost savings, corporate image, and community concern (see question 6), this is not
surprising.
After the top two priorities, the spread of companies' top -3 priorities is striking. Roughly 1/4 of
respondents stated that they would like technical assistance on nearly every type of sustainability
option listed. These generally fell into three categories: (1) Product - related (life -cycle analysis, waste
stream management); (2) Energy (green buildings; renewables); (3) Strategies and measures of
sustainability (metrics; corporate sustainability strategy; carbon footprint analysis; sustainability
reporting). Priorities differ by the size and sector of the respondents, but it is clear that a wide variety
of technical assistance would facilitate private sector sustainability and that it is important to gear that
assistance specifically to the needs and concerns of a given business. With the variety of responses
above, clearly one -size does no fit all (except perhaps energy efficiency). This also highlights the
129
responses we received in question 7, indicating that lack of staff/staff time was a very common barrier
to pursuit of additional sustainability initiatives.
Perhaps most interesting for this report, GHG emissions and explicit climate concern was only
cited by a little over 5% of respondents, though 22% did cite a GHG inventory as a top -3 priority. This
suggests that the companies we surveyed are motivated more by proximate and community concerns
than global concerns, and that the best way encourage corporate GHG reduction may be indirect, such
as by emphasizing waste reduction (e.g. on -site recycling and product/material life cycle efficiency)
and energy (efficiency, renewables, and green buildings). As discussed above, helping to bring
expertise in these areas to interested companies /institutions may be an important way to drive those
changes.
130
Appendix E - Reduction Estimate Ranges and Uncertainty
As discussed in the summary section of this report, each strategy includes an estimate of its
impact on annual GHG emissions by the year 2030. That estimate generally consists of a range of
probable values. The average of that range is used to estimate the total potential GHG reduction
discussed in this section and displayed in Table2a and Figures 2 and 3. For instance, a 100 -1,000
strategy would have an estimate of 550 (the average of 100 and 1,000). A range of 100s would also
have the same estimated average of 550, though with less certainty, as discussed below.
The specific GHG reduction estimates for individual strategies are discussed in the description
sections for each those strategies. This section is more of a general discussion of the estimate ranges- -
what they mean, why one type of estimate goes with a particular strategy, etc.. In general, there are
three types of estimates provided, from most certain to least certain: (1) A single estimated number; (2)
A range of reductions; (3) A magnitude of reductions. These are discussed in detail below.
1. A single estimate, such as 928 mt for the WRRC anaerobic digestion conversion. A single
estimate indicates that the GHG impacts of these actions are relatively certain and
straightforward to calculate. Examples include methane capture and flaring at the landfill,
anaerobic digestion at the WRRC, improved fuel efficiency for The Jule buses, and methane -to-
energy projects at the WRRC and DMASWAfacilities. The impact of these actions on electric
demand, fuel consumption, or methane emissions is well known and can be computed using
standard emissions factors, which minimizes uncertainty and generally justifies using a single
number.
Other GHG reduction strategies are given a single number despite their having somewhat higher
uncertainties. These include the Dubuque Intermodal Transportation Facility, the Southwest Arterial,
and Smarter City ITS. These items already had been given GHG reduction estimates in previous City
documents and studies and appeared to be reasonable to the authors of this study. Therefore, they were
retained to ensure consistency between City documents, though they should be understood to actually
have a range of uncertainty around them.
2. A range of reductions, such as 10 -100, 100 - 1,000, or 1,000- 10,000 mt. Actions in these
categories typically include policy measures, whose impact on behavior is always difficult to
predict. For instance, it is very straightforward to calculate the impact of reducing VMTs by
100,000 miles per year, because we know how many GHGs are emitted per mile driven.
However, it is difficult to know exactly what impact a given transportation - related strategy will
have on VMTs (e.g. the Southwest Arterial, route improvement on the Jule, Complete Streets, or
the Intermodal Transportation Facility ). Similarly, it is very easy to calculate the GHG impact
of a solar panel or a hydroelectric facility of a given size, but it is impossible to predict exactly
what scale renewable energy will achieve in Dubuque by 2030
These are not exhaustive ranges, and the actual reductions could fall short of or surpass expectations.
However, the upper and lower bounds of these ranges do cover the wide middle range of reasonable
expectations. These expectations are based on the impact of similar actions in other communities,
academic studies, and (most importantly) detailed knowledge of the GHG characteristics of each sector
in Dubuque. For instance, if Dubuque's transportation related emissions amount to 200,000 mt per
year, then clearly no action can exceed 200,000 mt, nor is anything likely to reduce transportation
131
emissions by 100,000 or even 50,000 mt. This puts an upper bound on emissions reductions estimates.
The lower bound is technically zero, but actions with no expected impact on GHGs were not included
in this document.
Compared to making precise estimates (or the illusion of precise estimates), it is much more reliable to
calculate that a given strategy could reduce GHG emissions by hundred, thousands, or tens of
thousands of metric tons.
3. A magnitude of reductions, such as 10s, 100s, or 1,000s of mt. These are essentially
equivalent to the ranges described above (i.e. (10s = 10 -100; 100s = 100 - 1,000; etc.); except
that for these strategies, there is less of a firm basis for the upper and lower bounds. To reflect
this greater uncertainty, they are not given a range, but rather an order of magnitude. These
actions are typically actions with broad but diffuse impacts (e.g. the Dubuque UDC) where
making precise predicts is impossible. Still, these broad orders of magnitude provide a useful
baseline for comparing emissions impact and are based primarily on the amount of emissions
currently occurring in a given sector (e.g. energy, transportation, lighting within buildings) and
the amount of those emissions that can reasonably expected to be impacted by a given reduction
strategy.
These estimates are mainly intended to give a sense of their relative likely impact on emissions. For
example, a reduction in the 1,000s category is likely to have a greater impact than a reduction in the
100s category. But again, due to inherent uncertainty, a 100s action could very well exceed
expectations, while a 1,000s could fall short.
As an example, consider IECC building standards. This strategy has a range of 10,000s of mt. This
estimate is based on (1) the amount of electric /heating related emissions in Dubuque; (2) The % of
Dubuque buildings represented by new constructions each year; (3) Past and planned impact of IECC
standards on building energy use. We then calculate a number, which in this case was 91,682 mt of
reduction by 2030. This falls on the upper end of the 10,000s order of magnitude, but there are a lot of
uncertainties like the number of new constructions in Dubuque by 2030, the form of IECC standards,
etc. So the estimate is conservative, but the authors judged it better to be somewhat conservative than
to risk overselling reduction potential in Dubuque. In general, we were most conservative in our
estimates for strategies in this category.
132
1
SUSTAINABLE DUBUQUE
WORK SESSION
12.2.13
AGENDA
FOCUS: Environmental Integrity
50% by 2030 Community Climate Action & Resiliency Plan
Catfish Creek Watershed Management Authority
UPDATE: Sustainable Dubuque Collaboration
50 2030
11, dubuque
GHG REDUCTION PLAN
Non - binding, voluntary effort to identify opportunities to reduce Dubuque's community GHG
emissions
How can it be used?
Informing officials during goal- setting and budget decisions
Informing businesses and individuals about potential emission and cost - saving options
Showcasing success stories
Providing a roadmap that can be added to or adjusted
Educational piece about where Dubuque's GHG emissions really come from
SFs CH4 NCO NFCs PFCs
l
SCOPE 2 SCOPE
INDIRECT IIAPL4["
LrpLOYQ NS IYLSh TRXVLI
A3r0 ELECTIICTTY
FOR Oval USt
r10 MET ON of
rU1KHA5EG
Inkl 004
ITINS/OfAI
USi
CUTSOURCEU ACTTYTTIES
CONTAA+CTOR OWIdiI
VEHICLES
alsEM IN
uoi.ZJodsuE.J j ■
(siS luu) rupisnpui
(Dada) rupisnpui
(sa Teu) rEPJaWWoD
(Dp.Daia) rEPJaWWoD
(si l 'Eu) rup.uapisa d
(D!J Dada) rup.uap!sa d
aZOD 1ua
EOOZ :3NFI3Sb'8
UPDATE
Waste
5/
2003
0%
Res Elec
Transp 17%
23%
Waste 2011
4% -0°�
Res NG
9%
Transp
3%
Res
Elec
15%
Res NG
8%
Indus NG
0%
Indust
Elec
33%
Indus
Comm NG,
Elec 4%
Comm 9%
NG
4/
Indust
Elec
27%
—Comm
Elec
\_Comm 12%
NG
7%
Total: 1,266,234 mt CO2e
Total: 1,203,152 mt CO2e
PROCESS
Data Collection & Sources
Community Input
Sustainable Dubuque Collaboration
Community CSL Workshop: How will we define and implement the necessary actions to meet Dubuque GHG and
resilience goals?
Green Drinks
College student discussions
Business Input
Meetings arranged in partnership with GDDC
Petal Connect sessions
Online survey representing 25% of employment in Dubuque
Type of Business?
Financial —
Education —
Office
Public Service
Retail
Food Service
Constriction 1
Health Care
Industrial/Manufacturing
Recreation —
Warehouse /Distribution —
2
2
2
2
0
What are the driving factors behind your organization's sustainability initiatives?
Community _
Environmental Concern
Employee Interest
94.4 0
__AI ISM 77.8
Corporate Image /Brand
Reputation 72.2
Cost Reduction —
End - Consumer
Environmental Concerns /Pressure 16.7 %
From Customers
Supply Chain 11.1 e
Pressuref l nterest
GovernmentCompliance1 5.6 %
Investors —
61.1
0
11
20
Which of the following are current (implemented) sustainability initiatives at your
company?
Energy efficiency
Rd on
waste te reduction
Water conservation
72.2 4
Engagement of customers 722 4
or community
i
The Petal Project (green 72.2
>,a
business certification)
Sustanability repotting
Composting of
organics (either_
Renewable energy
Construction of
'green facilities'
Product take -back initiatives.
such as product
Carbon fhouse . 16.7
analysis/ reenhcse_
Green fleet changes 163 '.0
to conserve fuel
Product life Al= 16.7';
cycle analysis
1
22.2 %
38.9 %
38.9 %
38.9 4
55.E
100.0 4
94.4 %
0
10
20
What are the significant barriers that your company faces in developing and
implementing sustainable strategies?
Lack of staff /insufficient
staff time
Cost/perceived lack of
return on investment
Availability of
funds/prioritization of funds
Complexity of
implementation
Lack of adequate
sustainability
education /training
Senior management
indifference
No significant
business driver
72.2 %
16.7
33.3 %
44.4 %
55.6
10
12
14
Carbon
Emissions
1,242 CO2e
(1000s mt)
Carbon
Emissions
1,242 CO2e
(1000s mt)
Source End use
2
282
�2e
69
C2e
Wind
Other
Renewables
Nuclear
Natural gas/
fuel oil
Petroleum
Landfill
methane
423
BBtu
53
BBtu
3,578
BBtu
2012
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Transportation
277
CO2e
CO2e
Carbon
Emissions
1 ,242 COe
(1 000s mt)
Carbon
Emissions
1,242 CO.e
(1000s mt)
Source End use
Wind
Other
Renewables
Nuclear
423
BBtu
53
BBtu
205
BBt
643
CO-,e
225
CO -e
282
;CO., e
69
CO -.e
Natural gas/
fuel oil
Petroleum
Landfill
methane
69
BBtu
Electricity
Gene ration
3,578
BBtu
2012
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Transportation
277
COe
cote
Carbon
Emiss ions
1,242 CO2e
(1000s mt)
L
Carbon
Emissions
1,242 CO,e
(1000s mt)
Source
643
CO,e
225
CO_e
282
CO,e
2e
Wind
Other
Renewables
Nuclear
Natural gas/
fuel oil
Petroleum
Landfill
methane
423
BBtu
53
43-Btu-
Electricity
Generation
724
BBtu
1,796
BBtu
1,527
BBtu
Or
918
BBtu
3,578
BBtu
2012
End use
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Transportation
CO2e
22
CO2e
389
CO,e
282
CO2e
C 2e
Carbon
Emissions
1,242 CQ2e
(1000s mt)
Source
643
CO,e
225
CO_e
282
COZe
Wind
Other
Renewables
Nuclear
oal
Natural gas/
fuel oil
Petroleum
Landfill
methane
423
BBtu
53
BBtu
Electricity
Generation
724
End use
69
BBtU
1,796
BBtu
1,527
BBtu
918
BBtu
1.357
BBt
3,578
BBtu
2012
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Transportation
277
C 2
225
CQ2e
389 i COQ®
282e
2e
Carbon
Emissions
1,242 CQ2e
(1000s mt)
Ca rbon
Emissions
638 CO2e
(1000s mt)
Source
308
CO2e
195
1
4
CO2e
Wind
Other
Renewables
Nuclear
Natural gas/
fuel oil
200
BBtu
25
BBtu
340
End use
Residential
168
CO2e
Electricity
Generation
Commercial
1,567
BBtu
Petroleum
La ndfi l l
methane
28
BBtu
787
BBtu
1,162
BBtu
2030
Industrial
Transportation
19
CO2e
1
C. -,e
4
CO2e
•
Sector
Reduction
ear
by 20301
% of total
reduction
Waste
Energiy,
Transportation
Buildings
[disc
Total reductions
67,500
217,437
48,412
167,946
33A44
514,739
11.2%
42.2%
9.4 %
30 7 %
6 6%
100.0%
■ Active /planned
Other options
Unlikely reductions
•
Sector
Reduction
ear
by 20301
% of total
reduction
Waste
Energiy,
Transportation
Buildings
[disc
Total reductions
67,500
217,437
48,412
167,946
33A44
514,739
11.2%
42.2%
9.4 %
30 7 %
6 6%
100.0%
Strategy
RECOMMENDED POLICIES & PROGRAMS:
LOCAL ENERGY: INFRASTRUCTURE
Description
Estimated
Impact
(mt CO2e)
Status
Wood waste CHP
Using regional wood waste in a combined heat and power (CHP) facility No longer
in downtown Dubuque, which could generate both electricity and waste 87,000 — 134,000 under p. 36
heat consideration
Wood waste
pyrolysis and
energy recovery
Biochar can be produced from wood waste via pyrolysis. which yields
syngas and bio -oil energy products as well as biochar, which is a highly
stable form of carbon that can remove GHGs from the atmosphere
44 — 4,400
Prospective/
not currently
under
consideration
p_ 37
DMASWA —
methane gas to
anarrry
WRRC — methane
CHP
— solar
Local clean energy
— small wind
Hydroelectricity at
Lock and Dam 11
Methane from organics decomposition at the landfill can be captured
and burned for energy.
Methane from waste processing at anaerobic digestors can be captured
and burned for energy
n ar n n nvnair arrava rnu_- nanora o a ainni ran- amniin- n anorm,
n Dubuque. particularly at large commercial and industrial facilities
"61,799 (11,799)
3.077
9.618 — 28.854
Planning
stages
Under p 39
construction
p. 38
Active/ongoing
p. 40
Strategy
Description
Estimated
Impact
mt C ?2e:
Status
Renewable energy
PPAs
PPAs allow businesses to install solar PV arrays without incurring risk or taking
responsibility for equipment maintenance_ In PPAs, the installer owns the
equipment (financed by a 3ro party) and sells electricity at a contracted rate to a
business /buyer. Lease agreements can serve a similar function
1.000s
Prospective/
not currently
under
consideration
P-
Distributed energy
policies (residential)
Dubuque can facilitate renewable energy to residential sectors via education.
technical expertise. and adopting best policies and practices such as those
from the DOE Rooftop Solar Challenge program
100s
Pending
P
Distributed energy
policies
(commercial /public
Small wind turbines could potentially generate a moderate of energy in
Dubuoue. oarticularlaroe commercial and industrial facilities
A hydroelectric facility at Dubuque Lock & Dam 11 could produce a very
significant amount of energy
100s
50.030+
Active/ongoing
Prospective
p- 41
p 42
Dubuque Generating
Station to natural
gas
District heating —
natural gas (Millwork
District)
Alliant Energy's Dubuque Generating Station coal plant is scheduled for
closure. but could potentially be converted to run on natural gas, which
produces fewer GHGs per unit energy output than coal
A local energy generation facility could provide electricity and heating to
residents and businesses in downtown Dubuque
Significant
generating
capacity
Significant
generating
capacity
rrospective/
not currently P 43
under
consideration
No longer
and er
consideration
P . 44
Dubuque can facilitate renewable energy to commercial /industrial sectors via
education. technical expertise, and adopting best policies and practices such
as those from the DOE Rooftop Solar Challenge program
1.000s
Pending
P-
OE Rooftop Solar
hallenge
A federal program designed to develop and test local programs and policies that
lower the cost and streamline the process of installing solar PV in residential
and commercial settings.
1.000s
Pending
Local green
financing
A reliable source of financing (e.g. banks and financial institutions) for renewable
energy projects would support/spur demand for energy efficiency and
renewables in Dubuque.
not estimated
not currently
under
consideration
P.
EPA Green Power
Community
Dubuque utility customers can voluntarily participate in renewable energy
purchasing programs and purchase a percentage of their power from renewables
1 000s
Prospective/
not currently
under
consideration
P- `•
Renewable energy
property tax
exemption
Would provide exemptions from property taxes for certain renewable energy
installations such that assessors would not add the value of renewable energy
systems to the taxable value of a property.
100:
Prospective/
not currently
under
consideration
P- !
DMAS A - Methane Gas to Energy
C1) Sector: Loci end- - infinstrnotare
2) Policy name: DMASWA methane gas to
energy.
3) Palm type: Muni€ipaL. County
4) Affected entities: DMASW.A: City of
Dubuque; Dubuque Coumy; landfill clients and
cushy.
)) Current status: EarLyplarming
6) Estimated GHG reduction: 61.799 tut CO:e
=ally (11,799 mt from electcidty R'sste he`:
in additban to 50,000 tut from captured methsne-
see section: Afilditale caprov andfa roger
D?f4SWA). Future expansions at amend)
active capped cells could expand this capacity
in the future.
7) Scope of missions reduction: Scope 1
(methane combustion); Scope? (elecnicityleat
getieration)
1
8) Specific description of policy: In 2007.
Dubuque commissioned a study from
Cori rstane Entironnie ml. Group, LrC, which
ide-irified the potential for a 2 MW Combined
Heat and power (CHP) landfill-gas—to—energy
faciti:v (Cornerstone 2008). This facility would
caprice metre and Man it m create energy
equivalent :o powering over 1,000 homes CEP
facilities produce elertridty and also utilize
resulting waste heat in surrounding buildings_
9) Barriers to implematatiian: Finding
buyer(s) for electricity neat; up front costs~
transmission of heatenerey, peunitting permitting and
siting of facility
10) Co- benefits: Bred on estimates from
Cornerstone (2004), the landfill €y
project could yield a high rate of retna A-ith a
net present -value of appro au itelv S1.909,431.
11) Explanation of GHG reduction impact:
50,000 tut COI per }mar from methane flninf
plus 11.799 met from electricity and waste hea:
from 2 MW 1��d7ll -to-ea orgy �cility
',Cornerstone 2003) using projected 2030
emission Mc:ors (Appendix .4)
12) Motive confidence of GHG reduction
estimate: High
13) Sources of uncertainty in CMG reduction
estimate: Captrire efficiency of collection
system; capacity of CTS facility.
pDEduai 2uynsEaw )8 sapols ssappns 2uisEDMogs
o� suopdo lEuopippe ppe o� a�e�duaa� y
2upiEua -Awoud 'S 2uplas -bilod 2uiva.aojui
suopdo 2uI■Es 1SOD puE suoissiwa iEpualod lnoge sienpinipui pine sassauisnq 2uivaJo}ui
4unwwoD Dip 2uReDnP3
.fr
7
•I
GRSfl 38 1N3Wf1DO4 SIHI11IMMOH
Questions?