 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Georgetown Climate Center Events
|
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
States in the Lead A Workshop Co-Sponsored by the The workshop explored innovative approaches that states and cities have taken to curb emissions and energy use, and the implications for emerging federal policy. Participants also examined opportunites for states to continue to lead, drawing on best practices from around the country. Lessons Learned, AM Session Jay Fisette, Vice Chairman, Arlington County Board, explained how the Arlington County Board set a goal in 2007 to reduce county government emissions by 10% from 2000 by 2012. The county is on path to meet its goal through a combination of building retrofits, “greening” the county vehicle fleet, tree planting and other actions, and is expanding its focus community-wide. (Presentation in PDF) Kurt Karperos, Chief of the Air Quality and Transportation Planning Branch, California Air Resources Board (CARB), explained how CARB will implement S.B. 375, a statute passed on Sept. 30, 2008, that aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. The legislation requires CARB to set regional vehicle emissions reductions goals; to work with regional and metropolitan planning organizations to integrate transportation and land-use plans to reduce vehicle emissions; and provides incentives for developers and localities that create emissions-reducing developments. (Presentation in PDF) Laurie Burt, Commissioner, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, described the planned Northeast Regional Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), which seeks to extend the collaboration among states involved in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to the transportation sector. The RGGI state commissioners and the state of Pennsylvania are working on a draft Memorandum of Understanding, scheduled to be completed in December 2009, which would create a regional, market-based LCFS that would gradually require a reduction in the carbon intensity of vehicle fuels. (Presentation in PDF) Isaac Kos-Read, Senior Director of Government Affairs, Port of Los Angeles, described the actions taken by the Port of Los Angeles to reduce direct and indirect GHG emissions of both the port and its tenants. The port expects to meet its own near-term emissions reduction goals through projects such as requiring ships to use shore power; developing and purchasing electric trucks; and partnering with a tug operator to fund a hybrid tug. At the same time, reducing tenant direct and indirect emissions will be a much larger challenge, and will require substantial long-term investment and innovation, such as the deployment of zero-emissions container movement systems. (Presentation in PDF)
Keynote address: Gina McCarthy, Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation, US EPA, recognized the important contributions states have been making in climate and energy policy, particularly when the federal government was less active in climate change. Now the federal government is a full partner for climate action, but McCarthy stressed the need for continued movement by the states. States can be especially effective by continuing to take action now, moving the targets higher, and showing that climate protection works on-the-ground.
How States Can Continue to Lead, PM Session Will Schroeer, State Policy Director, Smart Growth America, noted that many states are already moving forward—particularly with creating climate action plans—and are recognizing that reducing transportation demand must be a part of the climate solution for transportation. However, much of the discretionary stimulus funding was not directed towards solving the problem; instead significant amounts are funding new roads. Moving forward, there is no guarantee that a particular level of government (states or local governments) will make better choices; instead the incentives must be adjusted to encourage better behavior at all levels of government. Focusing on the job creation aspects of transportation funding may be one way to do this. (Presentation in PDF) Brian Taylor, UCLA Professor and Chair of Urban Planning, Director of UCLA’s Institute of Transportation Studies, discussed how to increase the benefits of transportation while decreasing the actual amount of travel. By focusing on the reasons people travel, and providing incentives to reduce the number of trips people need to take, states can significantly reduce the total miles traveled while increasing accessibility. Taylor also discussed the reasons for the dramatic growth in private vehicle usage compared to transit over the past few decades. To decrease travel demand, states should decrease wait times for transit, and increase the ease of walking and biking. (Presentation in PDF) Brandon Hofmeister, Special Counsel for Energy and Climate Policy, Office of Governor Jennifer Granholm, Michigan, described Michigan’s focus on advanced technology vehicles, particularly electric batteries. Michigan is spending millions of dollars to become the world leader in advanced battery technology. One of the main benefits is the ability to create green jobs in the short term. Still unresolved is how electricity should fit into a low carbon fuel standard. (Presentation in PDF)
Panel 2: Electricity/renewables/efficiency Henry Durrwachter, President, Utility Wind Integration Group, cited transmission policy in Texas, along with the state renewable portfolio standard (RPS), and Texas’s unique regulatory structure as reasons why wind power has been so successful in the state. Transmission from the windy areas to the urban load centers remains a challenge, although the lines are in the process of being greatly expanded. Additionally the state needs to shift away from older baseload plants to more flexible turbines that can more easily move up and down to compensate for changes in the wind resource. (Presentation in PDF) Malcolm Woolf, Director, Maryland Energy Administration, outlined Maryland’s aggressive energy goals and comprehensive plans to meet them. Woolf sees opportunities in promoting renewable energy, creating innovations in renewable and efficiency finance, and increasing information available to consumers. So far one of Maryland’s greatest successes has been in encouraging demand-reduction devices, which allow utilities to construct fewer power plants. Maryland has also entered power purchase agreements to guarantee a market for new renewables, although the state hopes to bring in other buyers once the facilities are constructed. (Presentation in PDF) Deborah Erwin, Renewable Energy Advisor, Wisconsin Public Service Commission, discussed Wisconsin’s RPS, solar collaborative, and renewable tariffs. Wisconsin is focusing on how to capture the value of renewables, while simultaneously addressing their weaknesses. Coordination between the federal and state RPS, if one is passed, will be crucial to that success; ideally the states should not have to reinvent the wheel. (Presentation in PDF)
|
|
|||
 |
||||||