No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout27 - US Mayors Climate Protection AgreementCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 27 June 26, 2007 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: City Manager's Office Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager 9491644 -3002 or dkiff @city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: US Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement ISSUE: Should the Mayor of the City of Newport Beach sign the US Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement? RECOMMENDATION: Offer direction regarding the US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. DISCUSSION: Many individuals believe that climate change is both occurring and caused by humans' actions. The preponderance of scientific research supports both these claims. However, some believe otherwise and insist that climate change has occurred throughout Earth's history and is unaffected by human activity. This staff report does not attempt to restate those debates. Newport Beach is a community that would be substantially affected by any climate change that would cause sea levels to rise. In part due to this concern (but also because of a broader concern about greenhouse gasses), Council Member Gardner has asked that the City consider authorizing the Mayor to sign the US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. The Agreement came about in this manner. In February 2005, the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement to address climate disruption, became law for the 141 countries that had ratified it to date. The US is not a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, as the Bush Administration believes, in part, that it unfairly penalizes nations like the US to the economic advantage of some developing countries. In February 2005, the Mayor of Seattle, Greg Nickels launched a signature initiative by the nation's mayors — an initiative he called the US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement — to advance the goals of the Kyoto Protocol by taking at least three actions: US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement June 26, 2007 Page 2 Strive to meet or beat the Kyoto Protocol targets (generally, a 7% or more reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990's levels by the year 2012) in their own communities, through actions like: • Increasing energy efficiency of city buildings; • Reducing vehicle miles traveled; • Maintaining healthy urban forests; • Buying more hybrid cars and CNG trucks for fleets; • Improving bike lanes, bicycle access, and bike commuting support; • Integrating transit with workplaces; • Improving the walkability of the community; • Promoting renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal); • Assisting homeowners, contractors, and businesses with Green Building ideas; and • Incorporating mixed -use development in General Plans; and more. 2. Urge their state governments, and the federal government, to enact policies and programs to meet or beat the greenhouse gas emission reduction target suggested for the United States in the Kyoto Protocol -- 7% reduction from 1990 levels by 2012; and 3. Urge the U.S. Congress to pass the bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation, which would establish a national emission trading system. As of June 21, 2007, 541 mayors have signed the Agreement, including about 87 in California (see attachment). The seven Orange County cities that have signed the Agreement are: • Aliso Viejo • Huntington Beach • Irvine • Laguna Beach • Laguna Hills • Laguna Woods • Santa Ana As the Council considers the Agreement, it is appropriate to note that Newport Beach has done or is doing some of the things that the Agreement suggests, including seven of the ten bulleted items in Action Item #1. As to Action Item #2, Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature have already passed legislation that sets a greenhouse gas reduction goal of 25% statewide by 2020 (that would bring California to the 1990 levels envisioned by the Kyoto Protocol). California is the world's 12th largest producer of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide that are trapping heat in the Earth's atmosphere. Schwarzenegger also issued an Executive Order in 2005 calling for an even more ambitious reduction — cutting the levels of greenhouse gases to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Action Item #3 has bipartisan support in the US Congress – a market -based "cap and trade' of emissions concept (as is done in the European Union, where $23 billion will change hands as a part of their Emission Trading Scheme [ETS]) has been proposed by Senators John McCain (R- Arizona) and Joseph Leiberman (D- Connecticut). US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement June 26, 2007 Page 3 All of that noted, it is somewhat rare that the City would address either Action Item #2 or #3, given its traditional reluctance to get directly involved in debates going on at the federal or international level. One exception to this has been the City's longtime support of the current prohibition against new oil drilling or leasing along the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). Committee Action: This item has not been before any committee. Environmental Review: The City Council's approval of this Agenda Item does not require environmental review. Public Notice: This agenda item may be noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the public meeting at which the City Council considers the item). Submitted by: A�� C, AA Dav <iff Assistant City Manager Attachments: Draft Resolution Signature Page List of California Mayors /Cities that have signed the Agreement ENDORSING THE U.S. MAYORS CLIMATE PROTECTION AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the U.S. Conference of Mayors has previously adopted strong policy resolutions calling for cities, communities and the federal government to take actions to reduce global warming pollution; and WHEREAS, the Inter - Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the international community's most respected assemblage of scientists, has found that climate disruption is a reality and that human activities are largely responsible for increasing concentrations of global warming pollution; and WHEREAS, recent, well- documented impacts of climate disruption include average global sea level increases of four to eight inches during the 20th century; a 40 percent decline in Arctic sea -ice thickness; and nine of the ten hottest years on record occurring in the past decade; and WHEREAS, climate disruption of the magnitude now predicted by the scientific community will cause extremely costly disruption of human and natural systems throughout the world including: increased risk of floods or droughts; sea -level rises that interact with coastal storms to erode beaches, inundate land, and damage structures; more frequent and extreme heat waves; more frequent and greater concentrations of smog; and WHEREAS, on February 16, 2005, the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement to address climate disruption, went into effect in the 141 countries that have ratified it to date; 38 of those countries are now legally required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or. average 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2012; and WHEREAS, the United States of America, with less than five percent of the world's population, is responsible for producing approximately 25 percent of the world's global warming pollutants; and WHEREAS, the Kyoto Protocol emissions reduction target for the U.S. would have been 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012; and WHEREAS, many leading US companies that have adopted greenhouse gas reduction programs to demonstrate corporate social responsibility have also publicly expressed preference for the US to adopt precise and mandatory emissions targets and timetables as a means by which to remain competitive in the international marketplace, to mitigate financial risk and to promote sound investment decisions; and WHEREAS, state and local governments throughout the United States are adopting emission reduction targets and programs and that this leadership is bipartisan, coming from Republican and Democratic governors and mayors alike; and WHEREAS, many cities throughout the nation, both large and small, are reducing global warming pollutants through programs that provide economic and quality of life benefits such as reduced energy bills, green space preservation, air quality improvements, reduced traffic congestion, improved transportation choices, and economic development and job creation through energy conservation and new energy technologies; and WHEREAS, mayors from around the nation have signed the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement which, as amended at the 73�" Annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting, reads: The U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement A. We urge the federal government and state governments to enact policies and programs to meet or beat the target of reducing global warming pollution levels to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, including efforts to: reduce the United States' dependence on fossil fuels and accelerate the development of clean, economical energy resources and fuel- efficient technologies such as conservation, methane recovery for energy generation, waste to energy, wind and solar energy, fuel cells, efficient motor vehicles, and biofuels; B.We urge the U.S. Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation that includes 1) clear timetables and emissions limits and 2) a flexible, market -based system of tradable allowances among emitting industries; and C. We will strive to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution by taking actions in our own operations and communities such as: 1. Inventory global warming emissions in City operations and in the community, set reduction targets and create an action plan. 2. Adopt and enforce land -use policies that reduce sprawl, preserve open space, and create compact, walkable urban communities; 3. Promote transportation options such as bicycle trails, commute trip reduction programs, incentives for car pooling and public transit; 4. Increase the use of clean, alternative energy by, for example, investing in "green tags", advocating for the development of renewable energy resources, recovering landfill methane for energy production, and supporting the use of waste to energy technology; 5. Make energy efficiency a priority through building code improvements, retrofitting city facilities with energy efficient lighting and urging employees to conserve energy and save money; 6. Purchase only Energy Star equipment and appliances for City use; T Practice and promote sustainable building practices using the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED program or a similar system; 8. Increase the average fuel efficiency of municipal fleet vehicles; reduce the number of vehicles; launch an employee education program including anti - idling messages; convert diesel vehicles to bio- diesel; 9. Evaluate opportunities to increase pump efficiency in water and wastewater systems; recover wastewater treatment methane for energy production; IO.Increase recycling rates in City operations and in the community; 11.Maintain healthy urban forests; promote tree planting to increase shading and to absorb CO2; and 12.Help educate the public, schools, other jurisdictions, professional associations, business and industry about reducing global warming pollution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE I Conference of Mayors Protection Agreement Conference of Mayors around the nation to r RESOLVED that Th endorses the U.S. as amended by the meeting and urges join this effort. s U.S. Mayors Climate 73`d annual U.S. mayors from BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, The U.S. Conference of Mayors will work in conjunction with ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability and other appropriate organizations to track progress and implementation of the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement as amended by the 73rd annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting. 'lam ` _....,..,, v The U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement — Signature Page You have my support for the Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. Date: Mayor: Signature: Address: City: Mayor's e-mail: Staff Contact Name: Staff Contact Title: Staff Phone: State: Zip: Staff e -mail: Please add my comments in support of the Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. We will add these to the Website (optional): Please return completed form at your earliest convenience to: The U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Center BV Mail: By Fax (202) 429 -0422 1620 1 Street, NW Washington, DC 20006 By e -mail: brosenberg(t-�,usmayors.or� For more information: (202) 861 -6782 U.S. Mayors Climate Agreement CA 1 Alameda ' 11.11.. ;Beverly J. Johnson ,1 1... ,.. CA 11 :Albany ;Allan Mar i' 1111... .. ..._ CA Aliso Viejo . 'Karl P Warkowmski _,. CA Arcata :Michael Machi ........ _ ... CA Atascadero !Tom OMalley CA _ Atherton Charles E. Marsala CA Avalon -Robert Kennedy _. CA ,. .,.. Berkeley Tom Bates CA Beverly Hills Ste p hen P. Webb CA Burbank Jef Vander Borght . _ ......... CA Capitola Bruce R. Arthur CA Chico Scott Gruendl CA Chino Dennis R. Yates CA :Chula Vista Stephen C. Padilla CA 'Cloverdale Gail Pardini -Plass CA Cotati Lisa Moore CA Cupertino Kris Wang CA Del Mar Jerry Finnell CA Dublin Janet Lockhart CA 'El Cerrito Janet Abelson _1111 __... CA _ ..:. ........... Fairfax ,Larry Bragman __... _. .. CA _ .............. 111_1_ Fremont ?Robert'Bob' Wasserman CA Fresno Alan Autry 1111... CA HaywardRoberta Cooper CA Healdsburg ;Jason Liles CA Hemet _ .. .......... ..... . , Roger Meadows CA Hermosa Beach Sam Y. Edgerton III CA Huntington Beach ..,. Gil Coerper CA Irvine Beth Krom CA Laguna Beach Toni Iseman CA :Laguna Hills :Melody Carruth CA Laguna Woods 'Milt Robbins CA zLakewood ... Joseph Esquivel CA Lemoore John F. Murray CA Long Beach Beverly O'Neill CA Los Altos Hills Breene Kerr CA Los Angeles Antonio Villaraigosa CA Manhattan Beach Nicholas W, Tell, Jr. 1111... _ CA :Mill Valley Anne B. Solem . _:1111 _ _ CA Moorpark Patrick Hunter CA Monterey Park Mike Eng CA Morgan Hill +Dennis Kennedy CA :Morro Bay Janice Peters _1111, - - - - . CA Newark '.David W. Smith ..111.1.. CA Novato Bernard H. CA 1111 Oakland _Meyers ... Jerry Brown Last updated 9/20/05 1 of 4 U.S. Mayors Climate Agreement CA Pacific Grove :Daniel E. Cort CIA Palo Alto . .,,Judy Kle.in-berg CA Pasadena .. ........ . Bill Bo aard - ........... CA .... . Petaluma 1 David Glass . .. .. . . ............................ CA Pleasanton Jennifer Hosterman .... CA, Portola Valley q, Stephen Toben CA Rancho Palos Verdes Thomas D,, Long._ CA R-edwood, City -Barbara -Pierce,,., CA Richmond :Gavle McLaughlin CA Riverside Ronald O. Loveli-idge CA Rohnert Park Jake Mackenzie CA Rollinq Hills Estates ... . ........ . .Susan W. Seamans CA Sacramento Heather Fargo CA .San Bernadino Patrick J. Morris CA Bruno Larry Fra-nze-11,a CA 'San Diego Jerry, Sanders-- CA San Fernando Julie Ruelas CA San Francisco Gavin Newsom CA San Jose Ron Gonzales CA San Leandro Shelia Young CA San Luis Obispo Dave F. Romero CA San Mateo Jan Epstein CA 'San Rafael 7AlbertJ. Boro CA Santa Ana Miguel A. Pulido CA Santa Barbara Marty Blum____ CA Santa Cruz iMike Rotkin CA ]Santa Monica Pam O'Connor CA Santa Rosa :Jane Bender ................ CA Sausalito ,Ronald P. Albert .11,111.11 .... ................. CA 'Sebastopol r- ;Larry Robinson CA ',Sonoma Larry Barnet-- CA So. San Francisco Richard A. Garbarino . ..... .. CA Stockton Edward J. Chavez .......... ....... . .......... . CA Thousand Oaks .Claudia Bill-de la Pena CA Torrance Frank Scotto CA Tulare :Craig yeJvoda---.,. CA Vallejo ,Anthony J. l!n,.tintoli.,-J-r.. CA Visalia Jesus Gamboa CA West Hollywood Abbe Land CA West Sacramento Christopher Cabaldon,,.,,,., CA Windsor ;Steve Allen CA Yucaipa . Richard Riddell Last updated 9120105 2 of 4 p� '•5 t ty L i��l;v ryYKyn GG``� I 3. � f r(f1f 5' w - i��l;v ryYKyn GG``� 3. The Climate Action Handbook is a resource guide on climate protection created by ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability with support from the City of Seattle and the U.S. Conference of Mayors. City of Seattle ( Mayor Greg Nickels Director, Office of Sustainability and the Environment Steve Nicholas U.S. Conference of Mayors Executive Director Tom Cochran President Mayor Michael Guido, Dearborn (MI) Vice President Mayor Doug Palmer, Trenton (NJ) Chair of Advisory Board Mayor Manuel Diaz, Miami (FL) Energy Commission Chair Mayor Will Wynn, Austin (TX) Environment Commission Chair Mayor Patrick McCrory, Charlotte (NJ) U.S. Mayors' Council on Climate Protection Co- chairs Mayor Greg Nickels, Seattle (WA) Mayor James Brainard, Carmel (IN) ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability 436 14th Street, Suite 1520 Oakland, CA 94612 P (510) 844 -0699 F (510) 844 -0698 E iclei- usa@iclei.org FA ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability I! Gaveram hs Executive Director, ICLEI U.SA L for sustainabitity Michelle Wyman City of Seattle ( Mayor Greg Nickels Director, Office of Sustainability and the Environment Steve Nicholas U.S. Conference of Mayors Executive Director Tom Cochran President Mayor Michael Guido, Dearborn (MI) Vice President Mayor Doug Palmer, Trenton (NJ) Chair of Advisory Board Mayor Manuel Diaz, Miami (FL) Energy Commission Chair Mayor Will Wynn, Austin (TX) Environment Commission Chair Mayor Patrick McCrory, Charlotte (NJ) U.S. Mayors' Council on Climate Protection Co- chairs Mayor Greg Nickels, Seattle (WA) Mayor James Brainard, Carmel (IN) ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability 436 14th Street, Suite 1520 Oakland, CA 94612 P (510) 844 -0699 F (510) 844 -0698 E iclei- usa@iclei.org FA tab le-of Purpose................................... ..............................4 Climate Protection Benefits ................... ............................... 5 SECTION I: POLICIES ...................... ..............................6 SECTION II: ACTIONS & TOOLS ........... ............................... 7 Implementing Climate Protection Actions ...... ............................... 7 ICLEI's Cities for Climate Protection® Campaign . ............................... 7 Sample Actions and Measures ............. ............................... 11 • Land Use Management and Urban Forestry . .............................11 • Transportation Planning ................ .............................12 Green Power ........................ .............................13 Energy Efficiency ..................... .............................14 • Green Building ....................... .............................15 • Water and Wastewater Management .... ............................... 15 • Recycling and Waste Reduction ........ ............................... 16 • Education and Outreach .............. ............................... 16 Cost Effective Actions to Reduce Global Warming Pollution ...................... 17 Section III: Best Practices and Resources .. ............................... 19 LandUse ........................... .............................19 • Transportation ....................... .............................20 GreenPower ........................ .............................23 Energy Efficiency ..................... .............................25 • Energy Star Purchasing ................. .............................27 Green Building ....................... .............................28 • Water and Wastewater Management .... ............................... 30 • Recycling and Waste Reduction ........ ............................... 31 Education and Outreach ................ .............................32 Appendix: The U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement ............... 35 References ............................... .............................37 3 p u r_pQse- This handbook contains an abundance of resources and tools, which are marked as follows: For informational Web RESOURCES O For TOOLS that are available to assist you Climate Action Handbook The Climate Action Handbook offers examples of actions that local governments can take to reduce global warming emissions and implement the commitments for climate protection called out in the U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement (MCPA ), The Handbook demonstrates that climate protection does not necessitate entirely new government operations. It is a matter of streamlining and making modifications and improvements to many of the systems and operations a city already has in place. This Handbook offers initial steps a city can take to effectively engage in meeting the 7 percent target set forth in the MCPA and achieve deeper reductions for reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that are global warming pollutants. This guide is separated into three sections that offer simple next steps to advance climate protection in your city: Section 1: Policies Section 2: Actions & Tools Section 3: Best Practices & Resources What Can Local Governments do? Local governments have the power to affect the main sources of pollution directly linked to climate change: energy use, transportation, and waste. Cities control the day - to -day activities that determine the amount of energy used and waste generated by their community - from land use and zoning decisions to control over building codes and licenses, infrastructure investments, municipal service delivery and management of schools, parks and recreation areas. A range of actions can be incorporated into these operations to reduce associated global warming emissions. Local governments are uniquely positioned to influence citizen behaviors that directly affect climate change such as transportation options, energy consumption patterns, and general consumer decisions. The following sections offer the policies, tools and best practices needed to help a city meet the commitments of the MCPA and positively support the path to effectively reducing global warming pollutants and advancing climate protection. 4 c i.mate ..protec.t_i.o.n_- b.en..ef_its __ . 9• Save Taxpayer Dollars Actions that reduce global warming pollution also reduce electricity and fuel use, minimizing energy costs for citizens, businesses and local governments. In 2005, through ICLEI's Cities for Climate Protection''A' (CCP) Campaign more than 160 U.S. local governments reported collective savings of over 23 million tons of global warming pollution and $600 million in related energy and fuel costs. Build the Local Economy and Create Jobs Decreased energy costs and the provision of new energy services and technologies (e.g. energy efficiency and renewable energy) give local government and private firms a competitive edge. Demand for energy efficient products and services and for new or alternative energy technologies expands local business and creates local jobs. :• Improve Air Quality and Public Health Reducing global warming pollutants also helps cities comply with federal air quality regulations and preserves federal funding for local projects. These strategies ultimately create less air pollution, which results in fewer air quality - related public health impacts, such as asthma and other respiratory ailments. :• Improve Community Livability Cutting global warming pollution includes measures that also reduce auto dependency and traffic congestion, clean the air, and contribute to more efficient land use patterns and walkable neighborhoods. In combination, these types of measures can help build a more livable community. ®• Connect Cities with National Leaders and Resources The expanding network of cities committed to advancing climate protection represent U.S. MCPA signatories, CCP cities and member cities of the U.S. Conference of Mayors. :• Create a Legacy of Leadership Taking action on climate change provides tangible benefits for citizens today — and ensures that future generations will have access to the resources that support healthy, prosperous, and livable communities. sectlo-ni_ ___ _____pQ1i c i es For a sample resolution outlining a city's commitment, view the CU of Seattle's Resolution Planning for longterm municipal commitments is the crucial first step for a city engaging in climate protection actions. Policies and resolutions help build political will and ensure that a citys capital investments and operational changes can realize the intended benefits over time. Cities can also enact local, state, and national policies and legislation that build political support for climate protection. Lead Climate Cities: U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement As a signatory to the U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement (MCPA), your city joins a leading group of cities nationwide that have committed to action to advance climate protection at the local level. Led by Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels, the MCPA aims to promote climate protection and the goals of the Kyoto Protocol — an international agreement addressing global warming pollution and ratified by 164 countries — through leadership and action by American cities. On February 16, 2005, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels launched the MCPA. Today it includes nearly 300 signatures from mayors representing over 49 million Americans in 44 states and Washington, D.C. 0 To see the cities that have signed the Agreement, visit: httpa/ www. Seattle .Qc)v /hnayor /climateldefa It.htmihvho To view full text of the MCPA, visit; http�//www.tismayors.QrgLlusciTi/resolutions/73rd conferencelen 01 asp Ensure Your City's Commitment: Pass a Climate Protection Resolution View a sample resolution One of the first steps a city can take towards reducing global warming pollution is to from a city participating pass a local resolution that affirms the city s commitment. Passing a resolution in ICLEI's Cities for highlights the importance elected officials place on climate change and serves as another Climate Protection opportunity to educate the public and the local government staff while securing a path Campaign towards action and implementation far into the future. The sample above can be modified to include language specific to your community. See how the ON of Carbondale. CO has personalized its resolution 6 7 Implementing Climate Protection Actions Cities can implement a range of actions to reduce global warming pollution. These measures can be instituted -ad -hoc or as part of -a comprehensive framework like that offered by ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability's Cities for Climate Protection Campaign (CCP). Since 1993, ICLEI has helped nearly 200 local governments across the U.S. reduce global warming pollution through its CCP Campaign. The information and tools provided both here and in the "Take Action" section can serve as a useful resource for implementing strategies for reducing global warming pollution. After a local government has made a commitment to. addressing climate change, the CCP provides a five -step methodology to reduce global warming pollution. The 5 Milestones articulated by the CCP can be implemented independently or comprehensively - though greater reductions and co- benefits are realized when all of the actions are pursued in coordination. The experience of cities participating in the CCP offers a proven reference point to cities newly engaging in climate protection actions. The 5 Milestones of the CCP Campaign �— -' ICLEI's Cities for Climate Protection - Conduct a baseline inventory of global I Campaign I warming pollutants The CCP's 5 Milestones provides a simple, standardized means to enable your community to Establish a target to effectively reduce the emissions from both lower emissions government operations and the community as a whole. Engaging in the five -step process means that a city is Develop a local Climate making a commitment to reduce global warming Action Plan (CAP) to implement actions that ! emissions as financial and staff resources allow. The reduce global warming process of completing the five milestones is not pollution necessarily linear. The milestones can be undertaken "-- "'---- """-' —" "'- concurrently, and the specific target and contents of the local Climate Action Plan are up to each city to Implement the local i determine. The amount of time needed to complete Climate Action Plan the milestones also depends on the size and complexity of a city, and the availability of data, I staff, and resources. Measure, verify and report performance i seat_10n2 Conduct a baseline inventory i An inventory identifies and quantifies the global warming pollution produced by both .I government operations and the community at large in a particular year. The inventory and forecast provide a benchmark against which the city can measure the progress in j terms of its own operations and that of its citizens. This emissions analysis identifies the activities that contribute to global warming pollution and the quantity of pollution j generated by each of these activities. An inventory is established by collecting data about energy management, recycling and waste reduction, transportation, and land use. A local government can calculate global warming pollution for a base year (e.g. 1990) and for a forecast year (e.g. 2012). Expertise in climate science is not necessary. A wide range of government staff members, from public works to environment and facilities departments, can conduct an inventory. ICLEI also supplies technical training and support - and in some cases can provide specialized. fee - for - service project work as well. © ICLEI's Clean Air /Climate Protection Software: Allows cities to calculate emissions and emissions reductions. The software enables local governments to track and quantify emissions outputs and develop emissions scenarios to inform the planning process. ICLEI's Technical Program Officers provide training and technical expertise to cities using the CACP software and implementing the CCP five milestones. nmahmv a.cacpsoftware.org - httaxiiwvsw.iclei.orC]! usa 0 Sample Inventories: Sonoma County Greenhouse Gas Inventor City of Somerville MA_Gceenhowse-Gas_InventorY Establish a target to lower emissions Setting a reduction target for global warming pollutants creates a tangible goal and metric to guide the planning and implementation of your community's action. The target in the U.S Mavors Climate Protection Agreement is to reduce emissions by a minimum of 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012. Almost all of the local governments participating in ICLEI's CCP Campaign establish reduction targets of global warming pollution at 15 percent or higher to be met within a 10 year period. O The ICLEI network provides access to data and information from both U.S. and international cities participating in the CCP Campaign. The CCP network offers direct access to best practices, technology transfer and cost/benefit analysis of measures. ICI-El's Clean Air /Climate Protection Software also estimates the scale of action needed to achieve a city's target once the inventory is complete. seci o n2.. . _action_ &_to_ol s_. _. Develop a local Climate Action Plan A local Climate Action Plan (CAP) is a customized roadmap to reduce global warming pollution by the target that your city has identified. The CAP includes an implementation timeline for reduction measures, costs and financing mechanisms, assignments to city departments, and actions the city must implement to achieve its target. The inventory and quantification of existing climate protection measures helps guide a city to understand where they can get the largest emissions reductions. The majority of measures in CAPS fall into the following categories: Energy management Transportation Waste reduction Land use As the next section illustrates, common measures include energy efficiency improvements to municipal buildings and water treatment facilities, streetlight retrofits, public transit improvements, installation of renewable power applications, and methane recovery from waste management. © The ICLEI Clean Air /Climate Protection Software assists cities to model potential emissions reduction scenarios. Fact sheets and case studies capture capital investment and probability for return, average global warming pollution reductions, and implementation processes. Toolkits on transportation planning, urban forestry, public outreach and education are also available at http llwww iclei orci/usa Q Sample Action Plans: City of Seattle Green Ribbo Commission Re own Cif of Burlington, VT Climate Action Plan City of Boulder CO Climate Action Plan Implement the local Climate Action Plan Successful implementation of actions identified in the local Climate Action Plan depends on a number of factors including management and staffing, financing, a realistic timeline and stakeholder involvement in appropriate aspects of the Plan to build community support. Q ICLEI best practices and case studies offer snapshots that include information about costs, staffing and benefits as well as lessons learned. The ICLEI network of cities offers immediate access to peers and practitioners that offer informed advice. ICLEI staff also provides ongoing technical expertise to cities participating in the CCP. Measure, verify and report performance Verification of progress ensures integrity and accuracy in the city's efforts to achieve its global warming pollution reduction target. The reductions that a city achieves through implementation of actions to reduce global warming pollution must be monitored to measure progress. Tracking progress builds political support, informs the process and often drives further city investment to advance climate protection. © When the data is maintained, ICLEI Clean Air/Climate Protection Software monitors, verifies and reports results to enable a city to capture quantifiable reductions and the cost savings realized as a result. The ICLEI network of cities offers resources and support to cities working towards setting and achieving their reduction targets. 10 s e_ _ctj o_n 2___..._ _ tt act on_ 8- tools . __ ....... ... ..... Sample Actions and Measures This section provides a carefully selected overview of the types of measures that can make a significant impact on a city or county's emissions profile. The measures are divided into two main categories — government and community. Government measures refer to the actions the local government can take to reduce the emissions associated with their operations and activities while the community measures target the reductions associated with the operations and activities of a city's residents and commercial and industrial operations. Land Use Management and Urban Forestry Increasingly, many communities are designed in such a way that residents are living farther from places of work, school, and services. This growth pattern fosters an increasing dependence on motor vehicles. This community design, commonly know as sprawl, translates into higher air and global warming pollution associated with higher rates of car travel. Development also exerts pressure on a city's open space and urban forest resources. Many scientific studies confirm that trees and vegetation are valuable resources for cooling our communities. Local government, residents and businesses can profit from the development of dense, mixed - use neighborhoods. These measures save green spaces and money by cutting fuel, utility and infrastructure, and service delivery costs. Government Measures Short Term Plant shade trees in and around local • government parking lots and facilities Long Term Co- locate facilities to reduce travel time and maximize building use Utilize brownrield sites where possible Community Measures Short Term : Maintain healthy urban forests and street trees Promote tree planting to increase shading and to absorb CO2 Long term Preserve open space Promote high - density and in -fill development through zoning policies Institute growth boundaries, ordinances or programs to limit suburban sprawl Give incentives and bonuses for development in existing downtown areas and areas near public transit Encourage brownfield development Discourage sprawl through impact, facility, mitigation, and permit fees secti.on2 Transportation Planning Automobiles are a leading cause of global warming. Nationally, the transportation sector is one of the largest sources of U.S. emissions, representing nearly one -third of total emissions. It's hard to visualize, but every gallon of gasoline burned emits 20 pounds of CO? the principal global warming pollutant. Many local governments are increasing their jurisdictions' fuel efficiency by making alternative forms of transportation more accessible to residents and employees. Government Measures Short Term a= Encourage car - pooling, van - pooling, and mass transit use by municipal employees Encourage telecommuting for municipal employees : Restrict idling of municipal vehicles ® Station police officers on bicycles Long Term Retire old and under -used vehicles Use car sharing programs in lieu of a city fleet ,= Purchase fuel efficient (e.g. hybrid) and/or smaller fleet vehicles Utilize fuel - efficient vehicles (e.g. scooters) for parking enforcement Utilize alternative fuel vehicles (biodeisel, ethanol, electric, compressed natural gas) for city fleet Community Measures Short Term Promote commute trip reduction programs, incentives for car and van pooling, and public transit Restrict idling at public facilities Improve traffic signal synchronization Open local government alternative fueling stations to the public Long Term ,+ Promote community Purchases of compact and hvbrid vehicles Help bring car sharing programs to the community Implement bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure programs : Provide electric plug -in stations for freight vehicles at truck stops or boats marinas and ports 12 seatio.n? ..___.__a-cti.-on -. &_tools . 13 Green Power Electricity that is generated from renewable energy sources is often referred to as "green power." Unlike fossil fuel -based power, these sources of energy emit no or low global warming pollutants. Green power can include electricity generated exclusively from renewable resources including wind, hydro - electric or solar power - or electricity produced from a combination of fossil and renewable resources. Cities can source renewable energy through utilities offering green power programs, through the purchase of renewable energy certificates called Green Tags or by installing on -site renewable technologies, such as solar panels. Government Measures Short Term .° Purchase green electricity from solar, geothermal, wind or hydroelect Purchase green tags/renewable energy certificates Long Term Install solar panels on municipal facilities Generate electricity from landfill or wastewater methane or refuse Community Measures Short Term Promote community clean energy use through green power purchasing or on -site renewable technologies Long term Offer incentives to foster solar photovoltaic installations in the community ,a Implement a form of community choice aggregation secti- n -2. _ . __a Ct -Ion & too-is - -- - Energy Efficiency Energy efficiency programs offer one of the best ways to reduce global warming pollutants. A large share of fossil fuel use is dedicated to providing the electricity that powers almost all aspects of our daily lives. Globally, 75 percent of all energy is consumed in cities. In addition, U.S. State and local governments spend upwards of $40 billion a year on energy consuming products and equipment. Government Measures Short Term Install energy - efficient exit sign lighting Perform energy - efficient building lighting retrofits ,• Institute a "lights out at night" policy Institute a "lights out when not in use" policy Install buildingroffice occupancy sensors 1 Purchase only ENERGY STAR equipment and appliances for City use. Negotiate prices by purchasing in bulk where feasible. Long Term „* Conduct an energy audit of municipal facilities Implement an energy tracking and management system Perform heating, cooling and ventilation system retrofits (e.g, chillers, boilers, fans, pumps, belts, fuel - switching from electric to gas heating) Install ENERGY STAR appliances - and require this and the following in specs/purchasing RFPs i Install green or reflective roofing Improve water pumping energy efficiency Install energy - efficient vending machines Install energy - efficient traffic lights Install energy - efficient street lights (e.g. high pressure sodium) Decrease average daily time for street light operation Community Measures Short Term ,* Adopt stringent residential or commercial energy code requirements Promote energy conservation through campaigns targeted at residents and businesses Long Term Implement a low- income weatherization program Implement district heating and cooling Implement time -of -use or peak demand energy pricing ,• Install energy - efficient co- generation power production facilities Launch an "energy efficiency challenge' campaign for community residents Promote participation in a local green business program ;• Promote the purchase of ENERGY STAR appliances ,• Promote water conservation through technological and behavioral modification 14 sexton ..2----- actio_n__8- t_o_ols_ . 15 Green Building Cities across the country are passing ordinances to mandate that municipal buildings meet green.building standards. One of the most frequently cited standards are those set by the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) program of the U.S. Green Building Council and the U.S. EPA and Department of Energy's ENERGY STAR program. This series of programs for new and existing buildings, as well as community design, provides a framework for cities to begin implementing energy efficiency and green building techniques that save thousands of dollars and avert greenhouse gas emissions. Government Measures Short Term Encourage /Sponsor city staff to become LEED Accredited Professionals Long Term Require all new construction projects to be LEED certified Require all retrofit projects to become LEED certified Community Measures Short Term Provide green building information to the public i Share the efforts and knowledge of the city's green building resources Long Term Encourage incentives or mandate developers to construct LEED certified or ENERGY STAR homes 1 Water and Wastewater Management Nationwide, drinking water and wastewater systems cost more than $4 billion a year in energy costs to pump, treat, deliver, collect, and clean water - and the majority of this cost is paid for by municipalities. The energy costs to run drinking water and wastewater systems can represent as much as one -third of a municipality's energy bill and this is often the single largest utility expenditure for a city. Government Measures Short Term Install variable frequency drives for water pumps r Install energy efficient motors into equipment Make heating, cooling, and ventilation improvements in these facilities Long Term Establish methane recovery systems in local wastewater treatment plants Install an anaerobic digester at the wastewater treatment facility and optimize the co- generation potential of this technology secti o n2 . ..... _a action o n _ -& _too.. Recycling and Waste Reduction Waste prevention and recycling eliminates global warming pollution by reducing landfill methane emissions, transportation - related emissions and overall energy savings by reusing items that would otherwise have to be manufactured. Government Measures Short Term Establishlexpand recycling programs 4 Implement organics and yard debris collection and composting Long Term :• Establish system for reuse or recycling of construction and demolition materials for government construction projects „ Implement solid waste reduction programs for facilities Implement environmentally preferable purchasing program Establish a methane collection system for your landfill or consider a waste -to- energy facility for your community Education and Outreach Community Measures Short Term Establishlexpand recycling programs and set aggressive recycling targets /goals :• Educate the public about existing programs to boost compliance :• Implement penalties for non - compliance with recycling programs Long Term Implement organics and yard debris collection and composting Establish system for reuse or recycling of construction and demolition materials Implement solid waste reduction programs From how you heat your home to how you drive your car, the daily choices that every citizen makes can impact both local and global warming pollution. Educating government staff and the public is the crucial first step to changing the behaviors that contribute to climate change. Government Measures Short Term Educate city staff about reducing global warming pollution and its importance to their work and the city's mission Community Measures Short Term & Long Term Help educate the public, schools, other jurisdictions, professional associations, business, and industry about reducing global warming pollution IN sectiar12 ........ __ -- - action.... tools ........... Cost effective actions to reduce global warming pollution Education Effectively communicating to a city's staff the importance and impact of taking actions to reduce global warming pollution is key to the success of the following measures. Motivating staff to partner and pioneer simple energy and water conservation actions and implement complex measures is integral to ensuring the success of programs. See the Education and Outreach page for more information. Clean Fleets and Fuel From restricting the idling of all city staff vehicles or assigning police officers to patrol on bicycles in dense urban areas to purchasing the most fuel efficient vehicles possible or using alternative fuels - cities can reduce emissions and costs from what is often one of the largest sources of global warming pollution - transportation. See the Transportation page for more information. := Recycling Waste prevention and recycling reduces global warming pollution by reducing methane emissions and saving energy. Reducing the waste stream produced by city staff operations cuts the volume of waste disposed, reduces solid waste collection fees and can even generate revenue. In 2001 ICLEI found that more than 70 percent of reported global warming pollution reductions from CCP participants were due to waste - related activities. See the Recycling and Waste Reduction page for more information. Switch to LED's or CFUs Save energy and maintenance costs by switching to LEDs (Light Emitting Diodes) in traffic signals and exit lights. Use CFLS (Compact Fluorescent Lights) to light municipal buildings. LEDs are 90 percent more energy efficient and last 6 -10 times longer than conventional lights and CFLs use up to 66 percent less energy than a standard incandescent bulb and last up to 10 times longer. Both LEDS and CFLs significantly lower both energy and maintenance costs. See the Energy Efficiency page for more information. :a Turn out the lights at night Instituting a "lights out at night" or "while not in use" policy is an easy and effective way to save electricity, reduce global warming pollution, and save municipal dollars. This can be accomplished through educational campaigns and through technology. such as timers and occupancy sensors. See the Energy EfftciPncv page for more information. 17 ecti_Qn2 ___ ___a_cti_on & tool_s Purchase energy efficient equipment Look for ENERGY STAR labeled equipment. ENERGY STAR computers use 70 percent less electricity than non - ENERGY STAR equipment. Some ENERGY STAR copy machines reduce paper costs by $60 a month and reduce energy costs at the same time, and fax machines that have earned the ENERGY STAR label can cut associated energy costs by 40 percent. See the Fnerov Effieiencv page for more information. Lighten Rooftops In warm climates, cool roofs can absorb less solar energy and quickly release any heat that they store. Simply adding a highly reflective /emissive coating to a black or metal roof on a city building can reduce the need for air conditioning and produce huge annual cost and energy savings while decreasing global warming pollution at the same time. See the _<veen 6uildiria page for more information. Encourage Commuters to take Public Transit In cities with public transit systems, providing incentives for employees and commuters in the community to commute via public transit is one way for cities to decrease traffic, free up downtown parking spaces, and reduce emissions. These can include subsidized or free transit passes, parking cash -out programs, coordinated car or van pools, and programs such as a commuter challenge. See the Transportation page for more information. .a Plant Trees Studies have shown that well - landscaped commercial buildings and residential neighborhoods have lower heating and cooling costs. Strategically planted street trees and shrubs can significantly reduce cooling costs around low -rise facilities by providing shade in the summer months. Planting deciduous trees can offers shade in the summer and allows the sun to warm buildings naturally in the winter. See the Land Use page for more information. 18 section3 best pr_actices .... & resources_ .. 19 Land Use Best Practices Sacramento's Transit Village Redevelopment The City of Sacramento's 65th Street/Transit Village redevelopment project provides a 20- 25 year plan for mixed use, transit- oriented development in East Sacramento. The goal of this project is to improve pedestrian and bicycle circulation, increase residents', shoppers', and workers' access to the city's light rail system and strengthen this neighborhood's connection to the nearby California State University, Sacramento. The project was examined using six different scenarios of varying densities and mixed uses. In 2003, the residentially focused, transit - oriented model predicted that households would drive 2,000 miles less per year compared to the existing zoning and existing use scenarios. This reduces each household's emissions by one ton of COz yearly. Newark's Tree Planting Initiative In 2004, Newark undertook a new project to create a more attractive, healthier, energy - efficient city with one simple tool: trees. Utilizing runding from a statewide urban forest energy efficiency initiative called "Cool Cities," Newark planted 500 trees in strategic areas to employ the trees' energy efficiency and air pollution reduction benefits. The City anticipates each tree will reduce heating and cooling costs by up to 12 percent for buildings that are shaded by the trees, which will in -turn, reduce energy use and global warming pollution. 0 Resources Victoria Transport Policy Institute htt[)-'rwww vtpi.c)rg /documents /smart oho Smart Growth Online http / /wvvw srnartgrovvth org CCAP Guidebook httc v / /www_cca��.nrq ICLEI Land Use and Transportation Planning Toolkit http- //www.iclei.org Smartgrowth America http-i /www sm=,owthamerica com EPA Getting to Smart Growth: 100 policies for Implementation: http�-hnwvwsmartartnvth ora /odf /gettosg odf EPA Getting to Smart Growth: II htm / /wvvv smartgro-vth or /pdflgettoca2 odf Smart Growth Toolkit Geared towards MA Municipalities, but generally applicable htto7 / /vvww mass gov'envir /smart ni„_owth toolkit National Governor's Association — Growth and Quality of Life Toolkit http�/ /www naa ora /portal /site/tiga /me.nuitem 9123eB3al f6786440ddcbeeb501010 a0/? vgnextoid= adeb5aa2651b32010VanyC w1000001aD1010aRCRD Transportation Research Board — State by State Smart Growth Resources by State h> to� / /wwwu trb ora /conferences/2DD2$martGrowtli udf American Forests htto //www.aniericanforests,org USDA Urban Forest Research Center htto:/ /vvww.fs.led.us /ne /svracuse /ind . itml section-1--- best__.practi- .ces...& reso..u_r_c.es- _..._.. Land Use "Resources" continued... I Northeast Urban Tree Center - Tools for assessing Urban Tree Health and Establishing Design Guidelines http_ /,V,'W %ra. Limas .edulurbantree /proiects.shtml Air Pollution Removal Calculator: This program is designed to estimate pollution removal and value for urban trees based on basic user inputs about the study area (e.g. a park). This program uses local data analyzed for various cities by the Urban Forest Effects (UFORE) model. httD:,' /www.fs. fed .ushie /syraarseffools/tools.htm Drdinances/Resolutions: Visit the Congress for New Urbanisms Web site for a listing of Model TOO Ordinances, http: /Mry ✓v >>.cnu.oro!gdf`code catalog 8 -1 -01 odf Model Drdinances for Traditional Neighborhood Design and Neighborhood Preservation htto7 /fw•wv✓ smartgrov✓th ofU /Imfary`byldrtype asp ?tvp =1 &res =1400 American Planning Association's Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook: Model Statutes for Planning and the Management of Change h : hvvv a lap nning.org Olowinasniart Guidelines for Developing and Evaluating Tree Drdinances. A website from the USDA Forest Service and the International Society of Arboriculture• which includes information on planning for an ordinance, drafting an ordinance and evaluating an ordinance. ht[ D: 4���wvv. isa- arborrom�DUblicalions /Ufdinal'IC.P, aSDX Transportation Best Practices Honolulu's Bus Rapid Transit Program A steady growth in passengers choosing the bus for their commute has accompanied the expansion of Honolulu's Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) program. Monthly ridership has increased from about 100.000 riders since 1999• when the program began, to over 630.000 in 2005. Assuming that half of BRT ridership represents a shift from trips made in passenger vehicles to trips taken on BRT, this equated to an annual CO2 reduction of approximately 7,000 tons. Portland's Light Rail System The TriMet Metropolitan Area Express (MAX) light rail system, serving 64 stations over 44 miles of track in the Portland metropolitan area, sees 97,000 trips each weekday. More than $3 billion in development has occurred along MAX lines since the decision to build was made in 1978. MAX ridership now eliminates 22.2 million car trips per year, offsetting an estimated 26,400 tons of CO2 annually while reducing traffic, improving air quality, and preserving neighborhood livability - and public transit use has grown 75 percent since 1990. Philadelphia's Carsharing for the City fleet The City of Philadelphia and PhillyCarShare instituted a novel car sharing system that includes both local residents and government employees. The program replaced 330 municipal vehicles and saved the city $2 million each year. In the community, 1,200 citizen vehicles were replaced saving residents $5.5 million in costs and reducing vehicle travel by 8.2 million fewer miles per year. 20 sect on3__- _- ._....- best_ - practices &- .r_es-ources__- -. Transportation "Best Practices" Seattle's Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning continued... A substantial proportion of Seattleites use their bicycles for recreation or transportation. It is estimated that about 36 percent of Seattle's 520,000 citizens engage in recreational bicycling and 11 percent of commute trips are walking and bicycling trips (7 percent j walking and 4 percent bicycling, respectively). In some parts of the city, bicycling and walking make up 20 percent of the commute trips. By cycling, residents avert emissions that would have otherwise been made by car trips. Cyclists and pedestrians are able to take advantage the extensive urban trails network. Seattle has about 28 miles of shared use paths, 22 miles of on- street, striped bike lanes, and about 90 miles of signed bike routes. The City's Department of Transportation has a Bicycle Program that is developing the City's first Bicycle Master Plan to improve and expand the network of shared use paths, bike lanes, signed bike routes, arterials with wide shoulders and pedestrian pathways. Marin County's Safe Routes to Schools Today only 13 percent of children walk or bicycle to school, as opposed to 66 percent in 1970. According to a study by Marin County Safe Routes to School, 21 -27 percent of the county's morning traffic can be attributed to parents driving their children to school. More parents drive their children as a result of increased congestion near schools, further aggravating the problem. These trends have serious implications for both childhood obesity and respiratory problems, which are both rising trends. The Safe Routes to Schools program promotes walking and biking to school in order to reduce pollution and promote children's health and community livability. Since the program was instituted, single student car trips have dropped by 13 percent, saving over 4,250 one -way trips each day. Keene's Conversion to Biodiesel From fire engines to snowplows, all 77 of the vehicles in the City of Keene, New Hampshire's Public Works Department are running smoothly on B20 biodiesel. The fleet is fueled onsite at the department's pump. The biodiesel performs well in cold temperatures and has improved the air quality inside the fleet maintenance facility. The City has burned more than 4,400 gallons of biodiesel since 2002, which prevents an estimated 12 tons of CO2 from entering the atmosphere annually. 0 Resources General Transportation Planning Information: American Public Transportation Association http7 /lwmv.apta.com Transportation Research Board http� / /viww,tib.org Win -Win Transport Emissions Strategies - A paper from the Victoria Transport Policy Institute http i /www vtpi orglwwcl i mare. Ddf Clean Air and Transportation Resources from the U.S. Department of Transportation http�l'www italinddsuo. ov/resources /index asp National Congestion and Travel Time Data from the Texas Transportation Institute's Urban Mobility Report htto:( /mobility.tamu.edu /ums Walking and Bicycle Planning Resources http:pwww vtpi.oi a/documents /walkino.oho ; http Wwwvv bikewalk.ora 21 Saati_0 -n 3... . Transportation "Resources continued... es_ .. Transportation Planning Tools: Travel Matters' Transit Planning Emissions Calculator: Quantify the impact of transit decisions on global warming pollution. An online tool for measuring the emissions impact of making transit buses more fuel efficient. htto:llwtvvd.travelma [ter s. ora Center for Transportation Excellence's Transit Benefits Calculator: Estimate the co- benefits of transit investments. An online tool that focuses on the local economic benefits of transit investments. M=t a /www.cfte Qrgl_a+lcu ator.as EPA's COMMUTER Model: Examining the Benefits of Transportation and Air Quality Programs Focused on Commuting. A model for quantifying the emissions benefits of strategies to reduce solo commuting. htto'I /wwW er)�i.noy /otaNstateresonrcesloolicv'uaa transo htm4co ICLEI Land Use and Transportation Toolkit hug/ /www iclei ora Commute Trip Reduction: Case studies from Best Workplaces for Commuters on creating commute reduction programs from carpooling to parking cash out programs htta� /lwwvd bwc aov /einniov /benefits htm The U.S. EPA has developed a Web -based Calculator to enable an employer considering Best Workplaces for Commuters to estimate the financial, environmental, traffic - related, and other benefits of joining the program, hrto /,Iwww.t)wc.gov/resOLJfCeicalc.htilI Car sharing strategies from the Victoria Transport Policy Institute: htto:i /www. vtpi, oraAdm /td01.I�tN The Car Sharing Library — A listing of resources h[m: /hmLStiv.carsharing .net +libi ary /index.html Commute Trip Reduction - Ord inances/Resolutions: Commute Trip Reduction Model Ordinance from the Washington State Department of Transportation http i /www wsdot wa gov /tdm /tripredur inni dovvnioad /Mo(leIOrdinanceFINAL doc Transportation Demand Management Model Ordinance from the State of Minnesota httpa )'servecadmin state.mn a df /2000.- eqb /ModelOrdWhole.adP Green Fleets: The Clean Fleet Guide features tools to help fleets make "green" vehicle and fuel decisions including specifications on available alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles, tools to perform cost analyses based on specific locations, and information on other technologies that can help improve fuel economy, http�/ /www.eere.energy.dov /fleet4uide Clean Cities is committed to providing coalitions, fleet managers, and the public with accurate, accessible information. Data on purchasing alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles to emissions and fuel information. htt p:// wwva .e.ere.eneray.aov /cle.ancities /tools info.hbnl EPA Green Fleet FAQ h�,o:! /www.e�a,pov /emissweb /fan htr� Green Driving Tips — Driving and maintenance tips for emissions reductions, littoJlwww.[ripoet _ ora/GreenDrivingT ips.PDF 22 section3___ Transportation "Resources continued... 23 best_._pr_a_ctices.._& .r_e.sou.rces -. _. Green Fleet - Ordinances /Resolutions: Model Low Emissions Vehicles Ordinance htto: / /Vyww.a irpuaHty. orar modelord /Episod icModelLF FleetV1 O.Cdf Model Greenfleet Policy Ordinance from ICLEI's Greenfleets Web site httD� / /vinvw QreenFlects oro /MakeltOfficial html#WritO,;,20Your %20Own httD� / / "mww cleanaircounts oro /contenUCreen Fleet Policy Grdinance. f The City of Seattle Green Fleet Policy http�/ /www citvofseattle net)environment/ Don .iment5)'CleanGreenFlertAP.Ddf The City of Seattle Green Fleet Resolution htt :/ ww greenfleets,orn /Seattle.html The City of Denver Green Fleet Resolution httDJ /vvww ciieeiifleets.org/DeiiverRevi5ed.htrDI Alternative & Clean Fuels: National Clean Diesel Campaign htto / /www.cleanfleetsusa.net Alternative Fuels Data Center httlaWwwweere.energy. ov /afdc Biodiesel Board —A national non - profit trade association httD : / /www.biodiesel.org School Bus Toolkit http�/ /www ee.re energy oov /afdc /apps /toolkii!school hus tooikit html Transit VehicleToolkit htto�' /wwweereenercrvciov "afdc /iODS /toolkitltransit bus toolkithtml National Clean Diesel Campaign httn: / /wwwrleanfleetsusa,net Pedestrian /Bicycle Resources: Pedestrian Planning from the U.S. Department of Transportation htto: / /www walkinainfo ora /Dedsafe Walking and Bicycle Planning Resources htto:// v+ wwvtpiora /dOPUmerits /walkinoaho httpjfAwvwbikewalk.ora Safe Routes to Schools YttttpJlwww saferoutestoschoolsora Pedestrian /Bicycle Resources - Ordinances /Resolutions: Exemplary Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans htto•/!vvvvw bicyclin inq fo oro /Dp /exemolarv.htm Green Power Best Practices Montgomery County, Maryland's Green Power Purchasing In 2004, Montgomery County led a group of local governments and local government agencies in a wind energy purchase that represents 5 percent of the buying group's total electricity needs. Under the two -year deal, the buying group will collectively purchase 38 million kWh of wind energy annually, translating into a yearly reduction of 21,000 tons of CO2, 95,000 pounds of nitrous oxides, and 1.4 pounds of mercury. The County demonstrated the benefits of renewable energy in meeting the requirements of the federal Clean Air Act by including the wind energy purchase as a control measure for ozone pollution in a State Implementation Plan for air quality improvement. The County plans to offset the added sectio3_.. -___ _bestpractices &_reso_u_rce_s Green Po over 'Best Practices" expense of the wind power purchase by instituting employee energy efficiency programs cor7tirnred... i such as turning off lights, computers, and office equipment when not is use. District Energy Saint Paul Wood -fired Cogeneration District Energy Saint Paul Inc.'s new $52 million combined heat and power plant uses 275,000 tons of clean wood waste fuel each year. Under a 20 -year agreement with Xcel Energy, the plant generates 25 megawatts of electricity, enough to power 20,000 homes. The plant significantly reduces air pollution by displacing 110,000 tons of coal, reducing S02 emissions by 600 tons per year and fossil fuel derived CO2 emissions by 283.000 tons per year, plus an additional 50,000 tons from efficiencies compared to on -site systems. District Energy heats/cools twice the building area vs. on -site systems with the same fuel input; serves 80 percent of downtown building space, including the State Capitol complex and 300 residences; is the largest hot water district heating and chilled water cooling system in North America. Portland's 100 % Renewable Goal Portland Oregon' Local Action Plan on Global Warming sets aggressive goals for renewable resources, instructing the City to acquire 100 percent of its energy needs from renewable sources by 2010 with an interim target of 10 percent by 2003. Actual renewable energy purchased currently stands at around 11 percent. To meet the long term goal. the City has invested in hydroelectric turbines in its drinking water reservoir system and a fuel cell powered by waste methane. Most significantly, in June 2003, the City purchased green energy certificates representing nearly 44 million kilo watt hours of wind power — enough to supply nearly 4,000 homes for a year. Seattle City Light's Net Zero Emissions Policy In 2000, the Mayor and City Council mandated Seattle City Light to meet all new electrical demand with cost- effective conservation and renewable energy resources and achieve zero net emissions of global warming pollutants. As of 2005, Seattle City Light is reaching both these goals. Seattle has a low baseline of global warming pollution because clean hydropower produces most of the city's electricity. But even with this green power, the utility still produces some emissions from its fleet and building operations, among other examples. To reach zero net global warming pollutant emissions, the utility mitigates for all emissions by purchasing offsets; in 2004 and 2005, City Light paid less than $2 per year per City Light rate payer for offsets through a variety of projects, such as supporting biodiesel in Seattle area fleets and contracting with DuPont Fluorochemicals to install a technology that substantially cut global warming pollution. Maintaining these policies avoids 200,000 metric tons of global warming pollutants being added to the atmosphere. © Resources EPA's Guide to Green Power Purchasing — The Guide includes information about different types of green power products, the benefits of green power purchasing. and how to capture the benefits of green power purchasing. http: //www.er)a.aov/cireE,nt)ower/buvciieeni)ower/QLjide.htin Green Power Partnership — A program that promotes the purchase of green power in the private and public sector. http: /,www.epa.gov /greenpower 24 sectl one__ __ - - -__ -best practices ... & - resources Green Power "Best Practices" continued,.. Green Tags vs. Delivered Products - A primer comparing these two types of programs. http� / /www epa.gov'Q reeningei)a /contentienergy(gdf /greenMs pdf Green Tags hYYg ir/ wwv✓ eereenarcgy- 9nov'femp /technoloyss!renewable ourchasepowercfin Green Pricing utility programs by state hftp' /wwweeceenerov. ov/ areenoov ✓er'markets /pricing..html ?page =1 The Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy (DSIRE) is a comprehensive source of information on state, local, utility, and selected federal incentives that promote renewableenergy. htt07Hwww.dsireusa.org Bonneville Environmental Foundation - Markets green power products to help fund renewable projects. Upo L' /www.b- e -f.org Green Power - Ordinances /Resolutions: City of Albuquerque Renewable Energy Resolution http�li'www.cabu.gov/eiie.rpy/dOCL]rrients!resolutiQo329 . doc City of Seattle City Light Resolution for Net Zero Emissions City Light Net Zero Resolution Energy Efficiency Best Practices Chicago's 15 Million Square Feet Retrofit Program The City began to audit and retrofit 15 million square feet of public buildings with efficient equipment for heating and cooling, lighting and ventilation. The 16 million square feet are made up of police stations, libraries, fire stations, park facilities, transit facilities, health centers. community /cultural centers, colleges and other types of facilities that are owned by the City, the Chicago Park District, the Chicago Transit Authority or the City Colleges of Chicago. As of June 2004, more than 5 million square feet of city -owned facilities had been audited and retrofitted. 15 million square feet is roughly equivalent to the size of three Sears towers. When the project is complete, energy savings to the City and its sister agencies are estimated to be $6 million annually, with $2 - 3 million in savings for the City alone. The annual savings upon completion estimates 30,000 tons of CO2, and 84 tons nitrous oxides, and 128 tons of sulfur dioxide. Ann Arbor's Municipal Energy Fund Since 1998 Ann Arbor's Municipal Energy Fund has provided city facilities with a source of capital for energy efficiency retrofits. The Energy Fund provides initial capital for new projects and receives 80 percent of projected annual energy savings from each installed project for five years. The five -year payment plan allows projects that have a shorter payback to help support projects with a longer payback, and all savings accrued beyond the first five years remain with the departments implementing the improvements. The Fund was seeded by the city with five annual investments of $100,000, and quickly became self - sustaining. Most installed measures have had payback periods of three to six years, and projects supported by the Fund have yielded a total of 685 tons of annual eCO2 reductions. Sect►oo.3______best __practi c es. &- . -.reso ur_ce_s.....__ . Energy Efficiency "Best Practices" I Seattle's Energy Conservation Measures continued... In 1998, the City of Seattle dedicated approximately $1 million to pay for cost effective energy and water conservation measures in City buildings and facilities. An Energy Services Company (ESCO) was hired to identify, analyze and install conservation measures. The program was managed by the City's Office of Sustainability and Environment and created incentives for departments to participate by offering them the opportunity to save money on their utility bills - which could then be applied to their programs. Energy efficient lighting and HVAC projects were completed in police and fire stations, community centers, fleet maintenance centers and office building, and red traffic signals and pedestrian walk signs were changed to LEDs. After three years, an independent evaluation of the program concluded that the City's investment was sound: the present value of net benefits to the City for all of the projects was $2.5 million. The internal rate of return to the City for all of these the projects was 14 percent, and the pay -back period is under six years. 0 Resources Background: American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy - General Information. httI2J /www.aceee.ora DOE's Building Energy Codes Program is an information resource on national model energy codes. h[Yp: / /www- eiieraycodes.(iov Energy Star for Government Agencies - ENERGY STAR brings your government agency a proven energy management strategy to save energy and money while demonstrating your environmental I e a d e r s h i p. htto:u' ww.enerav star .00v,!index.cfm ?c= aovernment. bus uovernment ACEEE Buildings Guide promotes the development and widespread adoption of energy efficiency improvements in buildings, appliances, and other equipment used in buildings. http:,'/www.ace.ee.or(i/t)tjildin(isiitidex.litm Energy Savers take you directly to resources available across Federal agencies for homeowners, contractors and builders, building managers, realtors, state agencies, drivers and fleet managers, and industry managers. fitta/,',Ppw,N.eiiergvsavers.gov ENERGY STAR - Delta Score Estimator identifies the relationship between the percent energy saved in a building and the energy performance rating score of a building using ENERGY STAR. httgJ/www.eneruyst sr. aov /index.cfm ?c= delta.index ENERGY STAR - Assess Financial Value by using the Financial Value Calculator to estimate increased earnings from energy reductions. httt :/ /vvww.eneraystaraov /iaLbusinQSs /financial value calculator.xls ENERGY STAR - Use the Cash Flow Opportunity Calculator to help answer critical questions about energy efficiency investments. http-1wwwwenera sy targov /ia /bLisir) ss/ fo calculatorxls Energy Cost Calculators - The calculators below allow users to enter their own input values (e.g. utility rates, hours of use, etc.) to estimate the energy cost savings from buying energy efficient lighting and commercial, residential and office equipment. http: / /www eerP eriergy-.gov /fernpiprocuremenbeep eccalculators cfm 25 Energy Ffficiency "Resources continued... 27 -_re —o r-ces _.. -._ Energy Efficiency - Ordinances /Resolutions: Comprehensive City of Albuquerque: Energy Resources htto ?lwww.caba.ciovlwier Chicago Energy Conservation Code h�:i,eoov cityafchicago arg' city? webport -NportnlEntityHomeAction do'entityName= Construc ti on +and +perm its &e nt i tyName EnumValue =124 California Energy Commission - 2005 Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings Y ip:? ?w:a«,v.enerc, Ica. Qov�tit1e24 12005standards/2005 -11 -03 400- 03- 001F.PDF Energy Star Purchasing Best Practices City of Chicago Housing Authority Buys ENERGY STAR The ENERGY STAR program enables public agencies to purchase large quantities of appliances to help lower both manufacturers and buyers costs. Through a national initiative of the U.S. Department of Energy and the Consortium for Energy Efficiency, public housing agencies and utility companies in 38 cities purchased over 70.000 Maytag brand refrigerators that use energy efficient technology. By purchasing 10,000 of these refrigerators, the Chicago Housing Authority reduced annual electric bills by more than $500,000. Massachusetts Buys ENERGY STAR In 1997, the State of Massachusetts began including ENERGY STAR standards in its procurement specifications for computers, fax machines, copiers, printers, and other office equipment. Energy Star is a voluntary labeling partnership between the U.S. EPA and industry certifying and promoting energy efficient products. The Energy Star label makes it easy to identify products that save money and prevent pollution, and Energy Star products are available from almost all manufacturers at the same cost as more energy- intensive models. Thus the State of Massachusetts' procurement policy protects the environment without compromising quality or price. 0 Resources Green Purchasing: A guide for local communities: htto :l /www state ni usl deo 'dsrlbscillstistainable- comm /epp odf Center for a New American Dream's Procurement Strategies Program Helps U.S. state and local governments and other large purchasers incorporate environmental considerations into their purchasing. Publishes success stories of pioneering efforts and conducts training sessions and conference calls to teach purchasers how to identify and buy greener products. http //v ww.newdream.orglprocure Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Program and Database, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Comprehensive source of information on green Purchasing. Database includes green contract language and specifications, voluntary standards and guidelines, and other practical information. htto7llwvvw.epa.novlopRVWp s .c-t.► o n s _____ _ best.--- r_a.ct- i.- c_e_s -_ &_resources Energy Star Purchasing Massachusetts Environmentally Preferable Products Procurement Program "Resources" continued... Information about state efforts to buy green products, including useful guides and reports as well as contracts for purchasing recycled products and other goods. littr)7//www.state.ma.u&iosdleiiviio,'eii,iiio.hti-n Energy Star Purchasing • Ordinances/Resolutions: City of Honolulu, Energy Star Purchasing Resolution http 7r www.honolu I u. govirerslcdpalig922 5.htm City of Berkeley, Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Resolution - including energy and water conservation specifications: 1. tto: l! www. besatenetcomippc rdor_spiuchasinglPll BPPl)df #search= %22energy %20srar'%20p urchasi ng %20ordi n ance %20%22 Green Building Best Practices Austin Builds Green Whether remodeling a home or building an office tower, the City of Austin's Green Building program helps community members, governments and businesses build more energy efficient, environmentally sound structures. Since 2000. the City Council has mandated that all new municipal buildings achieve a LEED silver rating. LEED accreditation ensures sustainable site development, water savings, energy efficiency and green materials selection. In 2003, 22 percent of new homes and four commercial projects totaling 145,000 sq ft. in the Austin Energy utility district were built in accordance with the program's guidelines. Overall, the program has peak load energy use and the total 21,600 megawatt -hour savings equals a $1.8 million savings for utility customers. In terms of pollution reduction, this means 8.343 tons yearly reduction of CO2. Seattle's Developer Incentives Seattle was the first city in the nation to formally adopt LEED as the design and performance standard for all city projects and today Seattle has also developed strong incentives for the private sector. Developers who pursue and achieve certification at the silver, gold and platinum levels for new projects receive financial incentives and technical assistance. In order to get significant bonuses to increase building height and density, developers building New Construction (LEER -NC) or Core & Shell (LEED -CS) projects in the central city core and adjoining areas must contribute to affordable housing and other public amenities and achieve at least LEED silver certification. The City also offers financial incentives and provides technical assistance on a case -by -case basis. 28 soction3- Green Building 'Best Practices" continued... 29 -_ -- -_best pr.a.ctic.es_ &_reso.ur_c-e.s -_ -_ Chicago's Greening of City Hall Surfacing the roofs of municipal buildings with greenery can not only reduce storm water runoff, but also create large energy savings. The degree of savings depends on the type of roof and the climate. Warmer climates offer greater energy savings because green roofs reduce air conditioning costs more efficiently than they lower heating bills. The City of Chicago found that installing a green roof on city hall lowered the temperature by 3 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit, which translated into a 10 percent reduction in air conditioning requirements. While the city's green roof was 90 degrees on the summer's hottest days, neighboring roofs measured over 160 degrees Fahrenheit. 0 Resources U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) The LEED Green Building Rating SystemT" is a voluntary, consensus - based, market- driven building rating system based on existing proven technology. http:/Iwwm,.usgbc . org Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) is a widely used international method of assessing building quality and performance in terms of energy efficiency, environmental impact, health and operation and management, http7/1w\N%,v.breeain.org Green Building Program - Austin, Texas The City of Austin has promoted green building through a city resolution adopted in 1994. The program has a residential and a commercial component, which rates the following dwelling features for sustainability: water, energy, materials and solid waste. htt{_h wwy%. as a6tyiene.[ gycon 'JFnerzy %20Efficiency/Procynrns (Green °i °20Buildin /ic, iT �dex.htm Scottsdale's Green Building Program - City of Scottsdale, Arizona Program monitors and scores construction projects for approximately 150 green measures. This "yes /no" system is an alternative option to a "multi- star" program like Austin. htW://www.ci.scottsdale.az.us,lciif.,e.ribuildiLIg Green Building Initiative, City of Portland, Oregon Their "Integrated Building Design" provides actions and opportunities from predesign through operations and maintenance. Their "Green Building Guidelines" provide specific opportunities in building design and construction practices. htto:!lwaw. porPlandonlirrP .com /osd /index�fm ?a= 47 487 Building Codes Assistance Project (For State and Local Code Agencies) The Building Codes Assistance Project provides custom - tailored assistance on building energy code adoption and implementation. It assists state and local regulatory and legislative bodies. http4www.bcap- energy.oro Green Building - Ordinances/Resolutions: City of Seattle's Facility Standards for Design, Construction & Operations including LEED specifications http: / /www.cityofseattle net/ facilitydevelopnient /designstandards.htm Arlington County, VA requires a LEED Scorecard for all new projects: httD7 / /www arlingtonva us/ Department s /CPHD /Dlanninci/zonino /pdfs /zoa leeds pdf #search= %22LEED %20ordinance %22 .__._best -_ practi- ces..&-r_es._ources_._. -.. Water and Wastewater Treatment Best Practices Portland Pioneers Waste-to-Energy Generation The City of Portland, Oregon installed the world's first city- sponsored anaerobic digester gas (ADG) fuel cell in its wastewater treatment plant in May 1999. The Fuel Cell Power Plant converts methane into electricity, generating power in a virtually pollution free operation. Added benefits are manifold — methane and criteria air pollutants are reduced, as is the amount of electricity purchased from utilities that operate fossil -fuel burning power plants, and the fuel is free because methane is produced during wastewater treatment. Portland installed a 200 kilowatts hydrogen fuel cell to help utilize its waste methane and reduce power plant air emissions. The result of this pilot installation is a net reduction of 694 tons of CO2 annually — 14,000 tons over the life of the fuel cell. Efficiency for generating electricity using a fuel cell is higher than most regional power plants at about 38 percent and when the usable heat is recovered, the rated efficiency climbs to 78 percent. The fuel cell displaces the need for emergency generators or un- interruptible power supply valued at $150,000. San Diego's Waste-to-Energy The energy savings incurred by the City of San Diego's Metropolitan Wastewater Department help maintain lower sewer rates for citizens while providing renewable electric energy to the region. Fight "digesters" at the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant use heat and bacteria to break down the organic solids removed from the community's wastewater. One of the by- products of this biological process is methane gas, which is collected from the digesters and piped to the on -site Gas Utilization Facility. The methane powers two continuously running generators that can each produce up to 2.25 megawatts of electricity. G Resources ENERGY STAR — Wastewater Focus h[ to�" wwwr �ncrrg„ vstargov/ indexcfm ?c= governmentw'Istewater focus The Integrated Waste Services Association (IWSA) was formed in 1991 to promote integrated solutions to municipal solid waste management problems including waste to energy technologies. http: / /www wte orahwaste litrnl PA Department of the Environment Drinking Water and Wastewater Operators Information Center h[to /!www deo state 3 us /dep,`Sgi [estate /wateroos !redesign /indexgood..htm Online Energy Efficiency Calculators - Pennsylvania Department of the Environment Drinking Water and Wastewater Operators htto: / /wv✓w. rleo.state.pa. us/ deo/ deputaterwateroos /Redesian /PAGES,'F nerovPaoes /EnerovCa Iculators.htm 30 31 practices _ &_r_esources-_- Recycling and Waste Reduction Best Practices San Francisco's Organics Collection Program The City of San Francisco instituted residential curbside collection of organic material as part of its Fantastic Three program. The program provides each household with a green cart for organic waste, a blue cart for commingled recyclables, and a black cart for all remaining trash. Residents and businesses are encouraged to place all food scraps and yard trimmings into the green cart. which is collected for composting at a regional facility. By instituting curbside organics collection, San Francisco became the first large city in the nation to collect food scraps citywide. The Fantastic Three program enabled the City to reach a reported overall 67 percent garbage diversion rate in 2004. The rough outreach and other methods, the City plans to expand the Fantastic Three program and increase both the amount of organics and recyclables collected. The program's expansion is projected to achieve an annual eCO2 reduction of 70,000 tons. Seattle's Ban on Recyclables from Garbage Since January 2005 the City of Seattle has prohibited the disposal of certain recyclables from residential, commercial, and self -haul garbage by law. The new recycling ordinance is aimed at eliminating recyclable or compostable paper, cardboard, aluminum cans, plastic bottles, and yard debris that, until recently, have constituted approximately 25 percent of the city's garbage. The city hopes the new ordinance will save residents and businesses as much as $2 million per year and keep future garbage costs low, as well as help to reverse the recent decline in Seattle's recycling rates. The measure is projected to achieve an annual reduction of 260,000 tons of eCO2. Montgomery County, Maryland Retrofits a Landfill into an Energy Source The County installed a gas collection system for the Gude Southlawn Sanitary Landfill in Rockville, MD. The landfill was open for almost 20 years and collected an estimated 4.8 million tons of waste under 91 acres. Forty -four wells were established to feed an on -site generation facility with two generators to recover the landfill gas and turn it into electricity. The 1.500 kilowatt electrical generators are connected to the local power grid and revenues is generated from selling this electricity to Potomac Electric Power Company untler a 20 -year agreement. To date ratepayers have saved millions of dollars in capital costs after the costs of installing the methane collection system in the landfill; approximately 600 million cubic feet of landfill gas is prevented from going into the atmosphere each year. At 50 percent methane content, that's the global warming polution equivalent of approximately 120,000 tons of CO2 emissions prevented. 20,000 megawatt hours per year are generated-enough to serve an estimated 2,700 homes. Additionally the County makes substantial revenues from the sale of landfill gas rights. best practices--.& res.our_ces____ p Resources EPA created the Waste Reduction Model to help solid waste planners and organizations track and voluntarily report global warming pollutant reductions from several different waste management practices. tt _ .yose_t_ir,ite, $ oovloarlolobaw r in_gnsNconreni(ActionsWaseeWAR .ht_ I EPA's Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP) demonstrates how to put waste to good use. As organic wastes decompose in landfills, they produce methane gas, which contributes to global warming. LMOP shows companies, utilities, and communities how to capture landfill gas and convert it to energy. httu 4W%vvv epa gov'ImQp WasteWise is a free, voluntary, EPA program through which organizations eliminate costly municipal solid waste and select industrial wastes, benefiting their bottom line and the environment. WasteWise is a flexible program that allows partners to design their own waste reduction programs tailored to their needs. tto : / /ega aovhp,aslr� wise Case Study on San Francisco's Food Waste Diversion Program Ctn'flwww clv,mb ca Wvl FQodWaste' CaseStudies /Contracta12000rsmfr2n? pdf National Recycling Coalition resources fiY[ palwww. nrc- rec�le .ora /resourceslresources.htrn Source Reduction Publications from the EPA http:'hnnNW er)a.00vhnsW'sourcpub htm Recycling and Waste Reduction - Ordinances /Resolutions: Seattle Ban on Recyclables in Garbage LL : /lNrn�n�srzCUe_govlutiflAbout SPUIRecyding System/History & Overview Ban on Recyclables in Garbagelindex.asp Aspen's Progressive Waste Reduction Ordinance, which includes a "Pay as You Throw" ordinance that charges citizens for waste disposal by volume. httpa /vvvvw as enpitkin com /pdfsldepts /444ecycling ordinance.pdf Debris Recycling Ordinance, Glendale, CA httpa /www_cLglendale ca.us /public works/Constr Dem Debris Recycling Ord. Education and Outreach Best Practices Burlinton's Community 10percent Challenge The 10 percent Challenge in Burlington, VT is a voluntary program to raise public awareness about global climate change and to encourage households and businesses to reduce their global warming pollution by at least 10 percent. Enlisting innovative outreach methods such as a musical road show called "Beat the Heat," the program is achieving an estimated annual reduction of 1,500 tons of CO2 in the residential sector alone. 32 s.-- & .... r_e s o u rc e s_ Education and Outreach "Best J Vancouver, British Columbia's One Oay Campaign Practices" continued._ One Day is the City of Vancouver's community engagement process in support of its Community Climate Change Action Plan. The process is about taking small steps to reduce energy use, at home and on the road, to make Vancouver the cleanest, greenest, healthiest city in the world. The program emphasizes the small first steps that citizens can take in our every day lives. One Day is working with partners - youth, community groups, business leaders - to start this movement from the ground up, seeding the idea in schools, workplaces, businesses, neighborhoods, coffee shops and more. Seattle's Climate Partnership The Seattle Climate Partnership is a voluntary pact among Seattle -area employers to take action to reduce their own emissions, and to work together to help meet the community - wide goal. An initial group of Seattle -area employers - the Port of Seattle, Recreational Equipment Inc., the University of Washington, Starbucks Coffee Company, Urban Visions, Lafarge Seattle, Shoreline Community College, Mithun, Garvey Schubert Barer, and the City of Seattle - have come together to develop and grow the Partnership. These employers are committing to take actions that will reduce their global warming pollution emissions while at the same time cutting costs, improving the work environment for their employees, and improving their record of corporate responsibility. In exchange for making and keeping this commitment, Partners will receive a host of benefits, including high - quality technical assistance, access to utility incentive programs, opportunities for cost - saving collaborations such as joint purchasing arrangements, and recognition for a job well -done. Salt Lake City's E2 (Environmentally and Economically) Sustainable Citizen & Business Community Programs Salt Lake City's innovative outreach program engages both citizens and businesses to save money, improve the environment, and contribute to the City's livability. The Citizen program challenges residents to commit to at least five things to ensure a sustainable future. The business - oriented program is designed to recognize and support the Salt Lake City business community and economy and provides some of the following benefits; cost savings from reduced resource use; ability to attract new customers and increase customer loyalty; free advertising purchased through grants and other funding sources of the Salt Lake City Green program; earned media; reduced advertising costs in selected publications; free consultation with Salt Lake City staff experts; and finally, the knowledge that their business is contributing in a positive way to the environment and community. Q Resources City Education Campaigns: One Day Vancouver htto ilwww onedavvancouver ca Salt Lake City E2 Program http l'www slccgreen comlpages/e2citizeii htm Seattle Climate Partnership htto /lwww Beattie govidimatergartneishio htm 33 sctoon . _._ be. st_pr_acti_ces &_reso..ur_ces.___.__ Education and Outreach "Resources" continued... City Education Task Forces: Tucson Metropolitan Energy Commission. Tucson, AZ Commissioners representing many sectors of the community promote sustainable development in the Tucson metropolitan area through support of resource- efficient building codes and community education. ht to: / /vvww, t. u csorim e.c. or ci Saint Paul Task Force. Saint Paul, MN 10 different city departments are represented in the task force, which coordinates sustainability decision - making throughout the city. The Task Force followed the success of the group formed to guide the Energy Conservation Project. http: //hwww. c i. stpaul. mn.usldeots /realestate Educational Programs: Education Curricula: ICLEI and the City of Berkeley created this educational brochure about climate change for CCP jurisdictions to download off the web and modify. The City of Burlington, VT also produced a brochure using the template. hU: //www. is lei. orct!u s /brochure.htm Global Warming Education: School Lesson Plans, Global Warming Kids. Web Sire dedicated to: Global Warming Education Climate Change Education Science, Solutions and a Resources Directory. h�:ilwww. cl imatechangeeducation.org City Best Practices: The U.S. Conference of Mayors released a best practices book that covers the topics of air quality, climate change, energy sources, fuels, vehicles and transit, housing, municipal buildings, facilities and operations. http 'rusmavors orarusrm'hest practices /Eiiei,gySummitBP06 Climate Change Educational Information: EPA Global Warming Site:The EPA Global Warming Site htto: / /vosemite ena.go%loar /resources nsfiwebsearch ?onenforrn Frequently Asked Questions about Global Warming From NOAA http:' /ww+u neck noaa gov?oUdiinate /globalwarming htmi Regional Impacts of Global Warming htt p:llw+ row. e�oov/ niobahwarminarimo?cts7index .htrnl Environmental Defense Fund's Global Warming, Myth vs. Fact http i/www edf org!pL b f actSheets /e GWFact2.html Global Warming Explanation h[[p'h +�ww nPwsrien[ist tnmhnpirn /insight/giobal`fa4html Union of Concerned Scientists - Global Warming Science hhto1/www.ucs1jsa.or9 iObal warming /science 34 appendix. The U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement WHEREAS, the U.S. Conference of Mayors has previously adopted strong policy resolutions calling for cities, communities and the federal government to take actions to reduce global warming pollution; and WHEREAS, the Inter - Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the international community's most respected assemblage of scientists, has found that climate disruption is a reality and that human activities are largely responsible for increasing concentrations of global warming pollution; and WHEREAS, recent, well- documented impacts of climate disruption include average global sea level increases of four to eight inches during the 20th century: a 40 percent decline in Arctic sea -ice thickness; and nine of the ten hottest years on record occurring in the past decade; and WHEREAS, climate disruption of the magnitude now predicted by the scientific community will cause extremely costly disruption of human and natural systems throughout the world including: increased risk of Floods or droughts; sealevel rises that interact with coastal storms to erode beaches, inundate land, and damage structures; more frequent and extreme heat waves; more frequent and greater concentrations of smog; and WHEREAS, on February 16, 2005, the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement to address climate disruption, went into effect in the 141 countries that have ratified it to date; 38 of those countries are now legally required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions on average 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2012; and WHEREAS, the United States of America, with less than five percent of the world's population, is responsible for producing approximately 25 percent of the world's global warming pollutants; and WHEREAS, the Kyoto Protocol emissions reduction target for the US would have been 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012; and WHEREAS, many leading U.S. companies that have adopted greenhouse gas reduction programs to demonstrate corporate social responsibility have also publicly expressed preference for the U.S. to adopt precise and mandatory emissions targets and timetables as a means by which to remain competitive in the international marketplace, to mitigate financial risk and to promote sound investment decisions; and WHEREAS, state and local governments throughout the United States are adopting emission reduction targets and programs and that this leadership is bipartisan, coming from Republican and Democratic governors and mayors alike; and WHEREAS, many cities throughout the nation, both large and small, are reducing global warming pollutants through programs that provide economic and quality of life benefits such as reduced energy bills, green space preservation, air quality improvements, reduced traffic congestion, improved transportation choices, and economic development and job creation through energy conservation and new energy technologies: and 35 appendix WHEREAS, mayors from around the nation have signed the U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement which, as amended at the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting, reads: The U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement A. We urge the federal government and state governments to enact policies and programs to meet or beat the target of reducing global warming pollution levels to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, including efforts to: reduce the United States' dependence on fossil fuels and accelerate the development of clean, economical energy resources and fuel- efficient technologies such as conservation, methane recovery for energy generation, waste to energy, wind and solar energy, fuel cells, efficient motor vehicles, and biofuels; B. We urge the U.S. Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation that includes 1) clear timetables and emissions limits and 2) a flexible, market -based system of tradable allowances among emitting industries; and C. We will strive to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution by taking actions in our own operations and communities such as: 1. Inventory global warming emissions in City operations and in the community, set reduction targets and create an action plan. 2. Adopt and enforce land -use policies that reduce sprawl, preserve open space, and create compact, walkable urban communities; 3. Promote transportation options such as bicycle trails, commute trip reduction programs, incentives for car pooling and public transit; 4. Increase the use of clean, alternative energy by, for example, investing in "green tags ", advocating for the development of renewable energy resources, recovering landfill methane for energy production, and supporting the use of waste to energy technology; 5. Make energy efficiency a priority through building code improvements, retrofitting city facilities with energy efficient lighting and urging employees to conserve energy and save money; 6. Purchase only Energy Star equipment and appliances for City use; 7. Practice and promote sustainable building practices using the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED program or a similar system: 8. Increase the average fuel efficiency of municipal fleet vehicles; reduce the number of vehicles; launch an employee education program including anti- idling messages; convert diesel vehicles to bio- diesel; 9. Evaluate opportunities to increase pump efficiency in water and wastewater systems; recover wastewater treatment methane for energy production; 10. Increase recycling rates in City operations and in the community; 11. Maintain healthy urban forests; promote tree planting to increase shading and to absorb COZ; and 12. Help educate the public, schools, other jurisdictions, professional associations, business and industry about reducing global warming pollution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that The U.S. Conference of Mayors endorses the U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement as amended by the 73rd annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting and urges mayors from around the nation tojoin this effort. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, The U.S. Conference of Mayors will work in conjunction with ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability and other appropriate organizations to track progress and implementation of the U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement as amended by the 73rd annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting. M U.S. EPA. Mobile Source Emissions: Past, present and future. August, 2006. Retrieved from: =:/ /www. e,oa. goy/ Otaq/ inyntory /overviewioollutants/iI]dex. ht in U.S. EPA. What is Green Power? August 2006. Retrieved from: tm:hvwweoa. ov/ r.enpower /whatis /index.htm U.S. ENERGY STAR Program. Water and Wastewater Fact Sheet. August 2006. Retrieved from http� / /wwwenecgystargov /ia /business /�overnLnent/wastewatur fspdf Seattle Green Ribbon Commission. Resources for Local Governments: Taking Action. August 2006. Retreived from: h1�� / /wwwseattle aov /climate /takingACtion htm City of Seattle Green Ribbon Commission Report. Maintain Seattle City Light at Net Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions pp. 20. litip://www.seattle.00v/climate/PDFi'SeattlQ,gClimateReport,o(J NYC Waste Less: Energy Efficiency. Caset Studies August 2006. Retrieved from: ht:tD: // www. nvc .00vihtml /nycwasteless /Ihtml /at agencieslenerov efticiency.shtml City of San Diego.Energy Efficiency Initiatives August 2006. Retrieved from: http //www sandiego gov /mwwdTinitiativeslenergy.shtml 37 - 1.0L=E =I Local Covemmmfs for Sustainabilify ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability 436 14th Street, Suite 1520 Oakland, CA 94612 wa wiclei.org/usa Primal[ all(. >U pnsv mrtsvmrzr rrryrlarL procars cfilnrino.. ber paper COOL CITIES TAKE THE LEAD m ommunities all over America are responding to the threat of global warming with smart energy solutions. These "Cool Cities" are taking decisive action to reduce heat - trapping emissions, lower energy bills, save taxpayer dollars, and protect our environment. At a time when the federal government is failing to act, mayors and other local lead- ers are taking the lead to curb global warm- ing. Beginning with Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels, more than 200 mayors represent- ing 42 million Americans in 38 states have signed the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement to reduce global warming car- bon dioxide (CO2) pollution in their cities to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012 (see seattle.gov/mayor/climate). These Cool Cities are working to meet this goal with practical and innovative energy solutions that reduce energy waste and pol- lution, and thereby cut our dependence on oil, benefit public health, and save money. GLOBAL WARMING: NOW IS THE TIME TO ACT Scientists have concluded that burning fossil fuels —like oil, coal, and natural gas —to power our cars, homes, and businesses is causing global temperatures to rise. This heating of the earth poses a serious threat to our health, safety, economy, and environment. The good news is that we have the tools today to reduce global warming pollution, and cities of all sizes are pursuing innovative energy solutions. While every city's energy solutions plan will be unique, there are three key com- mon Cool City strategies: Green Vehicle Fleets, Energy Efficiency, and Renewable Energy. GREEN VEHICLE SOLUTIONS The biggest single step we can take to curb global warming is making our cars, trucks, and SUVs go farther on a gallon of gas. Many cities are cutting their global warming emissions by purchasing gas - electric hybrid cars and SUVs for their city vehicle fleet. By using less gasoline, hybrid vehicles release a fraction of the global warming and air pollution emitted by conventional vehi- cles while saving money at the gas pump. Some cities are also providing incentives, such as free parking and lower registration fees, to encourage the purchase of hybrids by local residents and businesses. ENERGY EFFICIENCY SOLUTIONS Energy efficiency means using less energy through better technology to light streets and power buildings and industrial facilities. Reducing energy use is one of the most cost - effective and fastest ways to meet our energy needs. Lowering energy costs enables communities to invest more in schools,job creation, and new infrastructure. Since fossil fuel power plants account for more than one -third of U.S. global warm- ing emissions, saving energy also means Clean Harvest Waverly Light & Power in Iowa has installed wind turbines on land leased from local farmers, creating clean electricity for the city and additional income forfarmers. Cool Mayor. Mayor Joseph Adams, of University City, Missouri, accepts the Sierra Club's Cool City award for signing the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. less pollution. From high -tech interior and street lighting, energy- efficient building standards and retrofits, to efficient com- bined heat - and - power, cities in every region of the country are modernizing lighting, heating, cooling, and other systems. RENEWABLE ENERGY SOLUTIONS Cities across the nation are investing in clean and renewable power like solar and wind energy to lower global warming emissions and create a reliable source of safe, homegrown electricity. Many cities are adopting "renewable ener- gy standards' that require a specific per- centage of the electricity sold in a city or utility area to come from renewable sources by a specific target date. Other cities are incorporating renewable energy technologies, such as solar photo- voltaic panels, into the design of public buildings. Renewable power and energy efficiency are essential solutions for replac- ing electricity from dirty, fossil- fuel -burn- ing power plants. COOL CITIES: BRINGING COMMUNITIES TOGETHER The most successful Cool Cities are engaging the entire community to help meet the goals of the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. Local businesses, builders, faith groups, environmentalists, and labor unions are working together to make their cities more livable and vibrant while lowering energy bills, creating good jobs, and tackling a global problem. RE- ENERGIZING YOUR CITY As the news of successful city solutions spreads, more cities are joining in the Cool Cities movement to lead our country and our world into a new energy future. Cool Cities are literally re- energizing our nation, proving that we can solve global warming one city at a time. Now it's your city's turn. LEARN MORE: For a list of cities that are becoming "cool," and for resources and specific examples of smart energy city solutions and model action plans, go to s ierraclu b.org /cool cities. SIERRA CLUB HEADQUARTERS: 85 Second St, Second Floor • San Francisco, CA 94105 • (415) 977 -5500 MARCH 2006 SIERRA CLUB LEGISLATIVE OFFICE: 408 C St. NE • Washington, DC 20002 • (202) 547 -1141 • sierraclub.org 5-1 d s N O O Q. C 0 7 O T C O 0 Z 0 O T E If O CL CL O 0 7 0 T Y C m vi d _U z T m 0 C O U O -O T C 7 GamO Y O M O m C O ON l C o 'O s m a o 'd O m d o O m m c 0 t E 0 `m O` o > m E 00 -O c C 'C 'U 7 N > N C 0 d C Ol 0 0 d .T+ O O m I -m Q 0 >' N C d � O m C ai O rn m m .T+ O T E 0) E c 00-'u o N m O E O) O OU U C 0 w 5> 0 N C 0 E T .O `o d E 0 0 O 7 m m 0 E U U 0 a E� F= Ln 0 Ol T T d U -O 00- O Ql -O d d 0 00 q0 7 E N C o- C O.0 C m d vi C C t4 O O 7 m 0 ;� m E °' c 2.E - a> >, m 7 o m c t �m E— T d N U N C - 0 E .d 7 E O V 0 m a 0 Z m O L 7 0) o 0 O 0 L E m= o m o- m m 3 0)- Y 0 o N -3 -o O m 3 a t o C C 0 Y. C O c d o O O 0 m 'UO 7 YL.+ C m C -O m a) 0 (n 0 N O N C 0 m O 0 m C 0 O' 'U L.+ 0 7 LL+ O 'O -O m �L.+ U „O C N U C 0 0 C 0 m N U O a) N m m E O O C E d 0 0 0 7 n a - U O CL C m -0 0 a rn m m vI C 0 .N LL O N m N .0 N O Ln U L Ol 7 0- 5 0 E o m S o m m 0 ai Z' m O C E 0 0 'm E m u CE U -° .M m m> m m a E m o m 0 0 0 T 0 E C U L 0 y 0 0 N .Q U 7 0 W LL+ N o y T U >, 0 0 O O _O O r _- C C 0 T C r .0 c C d m a L U E' L C E-E O -o W o .S o O m E U c 5 E m C (70 = If N m U -O Ol m C 0 d C p 0 O 0 0 0 0 E C a CL C) 0 CL N O O L m O E m m m 0 Y 0 0 0 m rn m °' C m 00 0 m o C c -o E m o -= m d L -° N :. � � 0 0 C 0 C m -- o, m c O 7 a m 0 a0i 'm c E m o o -o -3 '-' 3 0 W v m E" 0 O-E ? `a a� -o o .c O E E z CL c n o d C y m E .E 0 0 =O E d? ° ° E o U N m 0 -00 E 0 .0 a O m OU m m t v s c 0 L+ 0 p- O) m d C 0 C O T U ._ 'i m o C C 0 o t E d m E.0 4> d 0 E j 0° o O 0 y o rn E F- >, 0 0> o c m> m E C U 7 m a� o m -o E -o N .0 L O .j O N N O O U O N E 3 0 0 0 o E E 2 m 0 5° rn ° a vim' T �0o o E° 0 T .. 'j E E m o m c m 0 L 0 o c o 0° o E N o U .'� 0 C o s m C a� y .°- o U. a) O E 'C 'C 0 m -O T _ N j 7 7 O U d m > 0 O 7 o m n- o N c 0 N L Ol -� E U N CY Ln m ¢ O a m, u 0) = m m J» s 2 0 3 7% 5 2//$ 7& g _/ §� _- CD 0 : § - \ ; z / ; ; - \ \ \ \ \ \ / \ » ®\ a 2 \ ° ©G CD % ° \ % \ s CD \ \ \ \ } z \ \ \) y / j 'o \ - - <' _ 0 \ } } i :_& s U 7 O d Z, w O N V N d N A d rye Om. "n vm w 3w > °m"0 =gao.= U; C m o m °_= O c m m m o m m > m CL CL O' �. o. o- -'- 3 m .> ° o. `^ w > 0-0 ° 0 O C d d D F d j CD 3 "O . ° m° a� cn 3' N a o cz d m V coo o° CD n o Np CD O m O d= CD N c c ° 3. m o m O D ° m CD <' m m CD V I O J CL O mio« a �' � _� F z 3. N i� N CO mca d O D CD° CD« 3 m -0-- o �' m (D m CL CL w (D (D - w (D d� 7 ... 3 cn ° m m 3 m m O n o m ° COmm CD a o 3m -O3 = 0 d _0 d o w (D (D W "0 ^ 3 0 0 d d d @ O 3 D) g d' 0 d O W O W l0 O. d .i O_ _ = 0 W d 0 3 d CL O (D m a O ,J D) 0 O' O 30 D CD > > O CC d D "O m ,. N n O (D O' (D (D G (D d O -O O J C 0 =• O 4 C Dt j0 -. 0 ^ d d f O (D d O (D p� O 0 O 0 E O DVI� (D d V (D I N O CD O 0 n 7 d y<G *. w co (D W (D N 0 W 7, (� O N d O� (D I O 0 CD O n. (D 6 U-)--0 t0 n CD O 0 Cr CD N 0 d O 0 7 0 C C X• O j. � I Ej d =co O m J rC cn 0 — CD CO � 3 O� =; � "_j.�g0,= cNd-com�3 ^. (D d = O (D p I « d J„_ CD CD Cr C - (D CD k< W> 0 CD D CO 3 CD a m d n a° 3 N m CD o° O o C d (D w 7 (D N n O w O a d 0 O C O. d 0 CD ^ O O O l 3 CD 0 to w D — D ^ 0 O F. U; d d CL O d N d ^ G - D °O < n 0 j (FD' � N 3 D O' �. V O � d (D D _ (0 _ 3' 0-0 ^ >> D O d D F d C "O Cr CD < CD 0 C < d co N D d CD (D O � < O 0 _ O = - O 3 w O .-.. O O Np O O O O O CO O d= S O C O J CD 0 O D ° 0 0 (CD V °O 3 (D i _� (D ° O O to V ° W CD 3 m -0-- (D 0 O C_ ° (D d� w 3D00-0do. d �^ m °i 0 m n ,v o ° COmm CD a o 3m -O3 =o.�0 o o w O = - o ^ 3 "0 t0 n ^ 3 ° O 0 d (D F N CL w -CD -0 oo m 3 -Z �< o m a 3Q 3 ° _- c 3 3 m (D D o O' O D CD d0 C. Q D "O m 3 F D 3 N O C D, J J C^ O J C O 0 < O C CD 7 CL D j O O d - V (D I :< O (D =! O O (D o w 0 O d - ^ C (OD CD 00 O O CO o D 0 C 0 CL -0 O d0 O no O cr �.o N O C<r � j tCff � �. (D (D C O O C (D N O d (D O CD <d d W C 0 O^ O d D 0 d O C 0 W a -0 S d (D _3 (D <G O' (D Cr O (D < O 0 O d0 � 0 O" O O" C O -. D) 0 0 = 0 (D _ C >> O, d 3 p O C 0 CL O ° f1 0 CD� d = C d C 0 M O O D CL VI CL CD C (ODD n= �' O I CD N O) = 0 Cr W D.f N- O (D -0 O° O J m- N �^ o- m '�. m m N. o d m ° m m m m d o m 0 0 °a cr CD -M CD -. 3 0 m m a CL ° O -1Ti d W- 0 > > C M. O O - (D CD CL < o. ^,C0 0 3 z°0 0 o, 5 < 0 C �. =C0 , O N (D 7 0 l< .0.. (D (D O d ^ (N 3 0 ° 0 3 O O 63 � CD CD (D (D CD 3 0 0 6- « C O m m 3 cD (D O O (D (D "O CD CO 0 l CL OOZ CL O C m m ° m CL m m m CD O d (D CL O d N d ^ << CD O - CD O °O < 0 = d O m FD d N 3 3 w - CL O 0 O - 0 0 O O CD CD �. d w O CD O O N w d < D D O C J O_ 0 3 G W d O w n O D M d "0 O d co ° O CD 0 C < d co N D d CD (D O � < O 0 _ O = - O 3 w O O O O m O O O O' d d d J CD - n (D d 3 7 C) °_ d V °O 3 (D O d 0 D 0 D O 0 O to V ° O CD N d CD 7 - CD O d O d (D CD CD =C0 0-0 V OQ (D (D M p O 0.^ O E. 3 (OD d �n C ° 3 m Q d 3 ° O 'O 0 O N O m C < .�.. O 0 O' .C.. O = O O (D C) V - ^ D 0 X O 0 d O V ° ° X O "0 CO d W O in 3D00-0do. o R a - (D 3 < CD C ^_ CD m CD o m 3 '0 m 3 CD m n 3 ° d -0 F N CL a CD oo m o 0 -Z m C a 3Q 3 cc CD 0 C d O 3 0 Q a m 3 F D 3 N O C D, J J c C d O (D « 7 -'�CDa CL d C J CO O 0 O = _ d --I 00 m m m cD 3 J" ° m a m m o o C C m to O O .J O o _ C (D = d > m O = . m CL ° o CD — O _ CD C 0 CD to < d C ^ 0 O m 3 o m d * j O n Cr (D F 5 O p O w J C - D O ^ O O W CL. CL d 0 "O J C -0 ' V O j O ? 0 CO CD J O = CL O O =;, D) d C, S �O c CD O 7 , d S O d 0-0 -0 -0 C) CD CL -0 O D n J 7 D O D d O « O d d O' 0 (D 5 0 w 0 CL to 0 D C) G O d � 3 3 d D _ 7 CO CD CD W n .00 O j (CD N = (D .C.. W (D (D C d J 0 C d� CD n < 3 CD ID ° ID o d C D d ID J D m ODD^ m m W w Lf D Ol OD OD O D a o -0 0« ° 0 0 n W CD (D D n ° > > o o a i o a CD O O CDD (p 53 -0 O V O L. W < X ° C O 0 ^ N • 11 • • n O a, 0 > a, U Cc: U. �d a) a) O> a) V) O a) OU O O C N (O U 'O ) am _ 7 o C 2 N O- E a) Y ° E °o 0 o m L aN 00 V O E EE rn2O ` a��aa > a000 mCO mv) E° ° m a 0 U o m a Ol Ol N C T O_ 7 -O U O 0.0 U l ° Y O O U C O O d j H 7 ° U U - Ln d O7 t t > d C N T d> 'C m d m E a) C O ° m d L U m O - o m o' 3 m m o a: O O> m aC ) O ° 3 C) taC) -° 0'0 C ,� ° -° o vi `m ° o . C o E ° .N O OO mm. ° °i > O °) NO N E 0)m o ,m m N 6. N 7 o O E C C o E O E o o E E t o ° a E m 9° O o a E o 0 E o o, O O CL N 0 -2 � Ua0g o � o o m � N0 - L U0 UU _ YT CL m °i o d - 7X 7 Ol o d E .0 + (D oo o ° °> E � � o ' ` E o d sv m o o m ) W._ -d Na > > O> C a) O C C� 0) o � V mN O O (O � CL C 0 3 0) O o ° o` E E Vi -`N 0 C °0OM E N0) > o C C m O N C) CL U N � O_ E o m � d d CL m ° u O o o= C 0 O o m E i U U � C C E 0 CM E O d - C O _ m ) U L -O a) -° C C O Y C E o N >, L O t O d E N > O 0 O a) C a) O > O) + O C a) N d 0 O C N 7 7 d O m O_ E C T O L 0) U • • • O OC am ) `T E 0 c C_ ` a > m u w o L a° j 0 0) o > mo ) m m a) O O a O a) N • • • • • • • • • j ^. N 0 0 "0 0-0 O �o-m worm J -mm ^.� �^ <3w DN,0 = �0 m033? 0300: _S m j D j 0 0 0 O_ j j S f _. S C (D J O _- 3 N m J N �' tD 3 .C.. N n 0. -O N. N- 0 3 4 a 3 C 0 a S J ^. O O 0 3 C �. 0 d 0- J m C N m d m �_ m C C m� J 0 J N -0 S C 0 CL N° CD ° m F F (D °' D Cr m '^ r. m m 3 3 m a J O a O J m ' 3 CD CD �G M W I m m d ,�, .< m I m 3 s CD C- S -o_ (D S S m j < l< o- - J N N O O. CL ^� 0 d m O. d d CD f0 C m m (D a d (D CL FD' w 7 CD (D 3 n N D m "O N. O l �' m N C N m d 0-0 m .0.. O O J m p J (D N N C d S 3 J (D (D J m 0 (D N 0 '^[" d <o�' J m d ... J S C J J d 3 S N - 0 m p� m d [O m :+ J m^ 33NnS CD CL .N m �m CD CD CDm0 CL w N m^ 3-0 CD CD j' (D J m J D 3 CD 0 J Ln J (D n J n (D J g 3 3 O S 0 m m N m J 0 0 0 0 (0 - O 0 Q O- a (D LmS -0 O (D OT N (D 0 m [O 0 O d O C C O O 0 O' C� m C O 3 m m = m CD 0 N N d- N J a S 0 n O N N f0 S° CD m N 0 0 a< S c (D N in m - 0 m (D m ° 0 <=CL 0 CD 0a<�00 C`3.3do O - N C N CD X m m in msm O m d CDC�sf° N m m '°°^ in3�� O 3- O (N 0 m m .+ .N.. .N.. m S m C' 0 a - 3 p' 0 O S J S d 3 3 n N (D O m - J W 3-- N J CD J° n 3. N N m N J J S CD N 3 (D �G -�G O m .J.. 0 J -0 - -. O -0 N D W- m 0' G ° m m a 0" 3 m S^ m m 3 O m r' a; CD a< N _O 0 N S pSj d N m 3 m J .+ J CD (D O p' N D N (D ��• (D W J J N d m O (D 0 S m X J S m J J a C N J J a 0 J m m a a K 0 m S -0 O^ m (D m a� m O Cr J D. m (�D 00 m N a 0 C7 CL ° S J (D JC N� N m_ m O m G 3 J 4 O 3 "O d ° d N m J m' CD a,°< m N m m O� m i m CD 3 3 m o " 3a� O0 m d QO[O = ?�m (NDl�G N QO N J ? 3 O �D CL m O O Cr m m 3 Cr a m J, m N S -, - Q m , S CO 0 m 0 CD J m m 3 J G 3" l< 0 w N °-' 3 m W O tD m m J 0 CD O .J.. N J m a C ^ m C m° S C CL J m d CD m a C7 S J 0 J d -f0 t0 (D N J 0 0 C� J m N N C m m m N J [O .J.. a a;, J m f° 0 3 3 m 0 ^. (D Qn_a mt0 -O m%<nm J Cr 0"O am 0 ^.O [O CD J m u, m (D a) J CD (D J W f0 3 Cr O f0 n (D < 0 O C J O d tII m .J.. N i< „ 0 CL T. O O m a S J CD J m tmj J , a C 0 m p 0 a d 0 m m C ^. 3 (D m m T 0 a m a J J N J 3 d° C m 0 W 0 m -0 CD 3 �• m m- N d N m N "O C J m C m m J Vi '^ S m m o CD o- N m N S S d [O m s m J° n m J C j N o ° N N° C- J S 0 J Q m 0 (D m m 0 3't0 tm n 3 C S m m C m .N.. N p O J 0 cr a, tm J _ J .� �„ (D N m J IV N (D 3 m m 3 X f° 0 �G S O 0 3 0 CD m C g 0 (O Q J O N m 0 O J j m a 3 ° J m i a 0 =,< 0 N 3 m 0 (D m C C O a N_ m :+' C 0 J N C m CD O N 0" 0" 0 m 0 G O m m S S "0 tmj 0 J_ m 0 N m t--' (D < C C m M. N a m J J m m 0 - J -O i (D `^ m 3 CD -O m 3 0 m m u 3 m f� CL 0-0 S CL m l< 0° d N N m w n N n (D '- m w CD 3 CD J O m .m.. m J? a S m . J `^ (Jp C m C7 d d � N N N 3 N 00 ,N., m(D * 3 m C = O 0 J d 3 O m 3. 3- 0 [O J .N..a<"O 3 S� 0 a J N C C 3 S N D J m �. m m m W d J m- m -' cr 0 3 m l^ m S a 3 a< m 3 w S N m N (SD (SD d c(JO • • • • • • C ma a) Q) '0 a) a) d U - O _ C °° d U O y a) C C 2i a) C r C Np f0 -O O' 00 N m m O N C O •• C C L p Em >, v) m 0° rn �n c°)i L -o u E v) L L C L m ° cmi -00 ai a) 0 m > C C > "aC 1] a) m 6) CL C O EL .� L O m 0,- N v) 0) E U) r C 0 a) a) n m L 0 E a U n nm m ~ m a 3 O y) > ,.T. L V) O o N m .0- O N n m m O > n o d a) E y L Umo N` V) .� _^ m aai�m aE '- o m aiE�E o mmm o ,5 0 7 p C omo °im E >,u� mEmo -0 rn'- c O - .0 I-0 -- - m 3 U c` CL O corn Eo m C L,,, N ., m a)-0 E_'��v0)° c °I o � E O ° -0 cm 00-00 m m d a) crn `°E -E) C O °oc O 'O U) >' a) n m>, °ovc o. mmcE orn t �0)N' ma 3 mom `0Ec °� _O _ 0 n c m L.+ a) m U N C (0 d co L C a) O J) O .0a) a) W .0 IC E tau) a) .T�°�ja �mrn �maE)n�OEm m- °)nm'UUc m .1 �� rn ° o AMC m °U O m V) c` m O m O N 'O 7 N T d N I=/) U) U U N m M. d N 0) V) m L d° °) C pl O O -' C C C N O>'j U L m a) � n E N m Y lan.,mm' E m m o° L C ` N a) L 0 0 a)- o d m a) o 3C o�.� o m n.E -0) mN --mEm mO)o Co '� a)U 3 oU Q O� .° .o 0 � m N E c 'E c m °' d -' m g a Fm u a a)° U I C C' C m m O V) C E C m O >i >y C X E` m a) E� >1 co E r0 o d _ m U y m a D �' E U � U N N � u °� Oi °, o v rn O N _N a) a) a) c .E C c a a) U vi ° ° O � � E a C n m C� m d�� ° z E° a) a) 'O 0 a) °° t c n t n'� o E o a) Qi 0 m C 0 y m a) a) V) Ol O me aN a) C ° �+ °'� C n-O a) °- m E rn mL. .o m o 'E � ai m O m E d .1, a) C Q) - E 7 m c d m '� j C U 2 `�' '� 'J m a, ya v 0)o 3 m cu u L J21 ._ 7 °) N ° c .- C nL d ° E O rn o L m o .N o, d 'O O 7 n Q) d U U C m n D Q m C O C N U O .N. C mina, 0 V) °) L.. L °�0 a) U O �d�. °�co a,0� 7 U °'Em „O„ �nmg C O d u 3 d E s a 7 a) _ rn o a) Q n p = a) d o L rnul " d c t 0 d m C , d m c V=1 O O E v p E a° N _ Q) �N c N N a> m o ° E E L o d d mC) ��La)ro �'� 41 a) moo 0.5 v° U °' 7 �'U O N -Ern mL off,` L 'EN c :2 E 0, m a '� C .° o E'U N D .° v, o .n._ m OF F 0)m m 0 m `O c M. Xn 0° ='° -0a)_� -D m m y in aa)i E' a) m 'Em °) °) L ° .o �_ " °? o > °U °N E °� n .m. O) O O .: >i O 0 o a C c N N` .� d m'miE �.� �,m 0 m 0�om o�mE� joo 00 ov° oaE a) .50u� 0 M. mu >1 E 0.o Gov 0 E> j -S oU -S � �5 2--5 Q � � ^ c � o c 0) 7) m a>) aa) - o -0 a) Q) '0 d 7 N L Q .c O CL.. n - d y C Np V) a) O m m 0 N C C C L p Em >, v) m 0° rn �n c°)i L -o u E v) m m ° cmi -00 ai a) 0 I E° Eu0O.oa) > "aC 3 I EL O°0omomc v) O„ n m O m m o U n nm m c - O y) > ,.T. L V) O o N U j cD p Uj LO C m V) 0 (0 N` V) .� C N a) C a) =E a) .0 N C`= a) ° n- N N D 0 Y a) p C omo °im E '�mo°) °m C C mEmo -0 rn'- c O - .0 I-0 -- - m 3 U c` CL O corn Eo m C L,,, N ., m a)-0 E_'��v0)° N = E Q) a)¢. .0 C o � 0 n C O ° -0 cm 00-00 mQ) a) crn `°E ooy o? a, E0ommm UCym.m m>, °ovc v orn mEV m ma 3 3��m °L N ~aX O�n °Winn co .0a) ° mm-o :_ E m �maE)n�OEm (O C 0 > V) r m d C m C d °) °) E a V) c` m O O) C ° 0- U Q) O Q) G _>, C coo coo d E m O 0) V) m L Q) 0 m m a y ,O m �'C 0 C O U O C C m N N N °) f a) � n E N m C, -o 0. E m m o° L O u 0 0 a)- o a) m o � c> c m o m n.E N oU 0 .cm 'O O� .° .o 0 E L N inn s o .t Q) co u 0 L m w a) N O V) 3 Vf O d C 'O Q) D Q) U I C C' C m m O V) C C 0 C m O >i >y C X E` m a) d a) 0 E co Q) dL. .m. 73 M r0 a) d L m "- N ai Q) `n E 7 N -V ° j Vin) Q) O" a) �'-^ O N E m °i m L° N C N m o l� N � ° E 0 m 0 2 c- a) '^ -O �n E � I d�� m >, o> a) a) 'O 0 a) O E U C 'O m O d m Qi 0 m C 0 y m a) a) V) Ol O me aN a) C ° �+ °'� C n-O a) °- m E rn mL. o 'E � ai m ma mo C 0 m m E `-^.0 a) 0 C Q) - E 7 m c d m nrn0 a-°i � c CO y 0 U O a) °- o_ m m> L J21 ._ 7 °) 7? E __ y C .- C nL - �L I U N V) m L D UO U -° 2) C Y n Q) n m N 7 Q) m U U T� C 'V a) L a) 0 0 la m N a .E y 0 V) °) L.. L O U O n m 0 0 n n O O N c rn �'� C O Y>' N E s a 7 a) >> 3 OO a c E -^ rno 0 E m° 3 m E vi `Na E a) E am) E a rno �� t 0 O O VL. 0 C O 0 0 �0 0 m C L 0 V=1 O C V) 0 0 O C m d 0 N n C _ Q) °i >' O C O O T _n O C 0 C m 41 a) L '-' ma)LC0m >0a0im 4) `) �Q)C Na)�j'm 'EN ENa)Uj E 0 •° m u 0° a '� Udd n dY y' Y E> 0 c m 0 .0 E -0 L E N" a) U> .O G U F� a) °) °) L a) °U m > °U °N C N F- n .m. O) O O .: >i O m U o ° m no 0 O O N N C ° O) C C N Y C E ° E O N U V O m O CL N O 0 (O L � C c m O 0 C C N c0 N d r U T � a) C m (0 N C 73 O C U v O p m I 11011 m. i? `E R VW tw ID 12 RL O p m I cn m. i? VW tw cn rT fD 0 fill, fD V1 C• tG ID RL mg RUM rT fD 0 fill, fD V1 C• tG C O O O C O O t°O N C _O O O M C Q U O a C -Q ,..0 •O a C O ° t°O OJ t0 C O O O N C O O Lq C r O CL. C m E z, '15: O C q O U N J m C d N CL m L H m U m O .0 9n::p "O N O N N' N U m m E ° E o m O o 0'' '' ° m z m m W E o O_ C k -. U Y fn m to m m U _ 7 C. m° s� F ° a� CO) ° o E m m x C ti {'. m m N m N m� C m_- L 12 U .. CL +„ m �.. W a >° ° E .`o_ a) W m O C U a�� C CO m � J — m "aT: a) O U m m (, "m0 O z ti cl, m C U L N. 0 CL L U W "O Ol N 7 !a 0 'O V . (n U v j2 a) m a) N O m .7+ `a 0 E m N o: m m E E i m N W m a o m a) W C a) E .E a) ° r; m m a) -.ca m 4 ° m `: m U U U U ., t� m t� >, cn m ° O. a) O CL m U ' m- C W C — W m T- O O) m a) -- m T .+ O— .L+tp qm T N i fa7. U U m C U a) _ fn m m m m C m C L C m L N d m .m+ m r m d'r' O m (n W rn ._ m `d o -> o m a N M O ui t0 r� aJ 6 O r c: O U Q y �r V IM i m VI (D d w ro N V CL ro ro of n a - n. n D a U c cr '" n o m-a N m tD -I -' O -i m x FSt U m o n �; m o N, c �' CD CD 3- m rn a�i p� n m N m O C 9� (D N m �' p G: CD m- d t1 Ci (D °n .° o n- m �' �. 3 c m 5 CD o 3 a v n m a o° � a d C to N F CD v> VU'. (O m 3 °- o o c n p o. - -a 3' m ,-'. 3 v n. m N 3 C ° CAD O 3 '6 O m k C.. w 0 n C) C� C� O 3 d n 0 r, O (C m O O .-: O C n CD C m ,m,'t ° m n op = V 3 " CL m (D D 3 a_ o° c° s O o. 3 "' -o p c p _° O m co : O m p M "D co 3 y CD oa m m m Q 0 3 N 0 3 n (� (D N 3 ° O O .'C C) N `m ° N °_ m ro O N CD N m a a o a a c` . (� a F �' m 0_ d w° N m m (D O cc O c -o (D O to ;n f+ t4. ✓� N T IO p O- N— ry C OJ .O (n -O N G k 5 3 Co O N. O ._-� O rL 3 °- �' O O :n (n cCCC [fl (<D O C CD N O S N. t ^0 m C 3 N ID < �. co CL v' n m � o.CD m tcno VI (D d w ro N V CL ro ro of n a Q r O O d L C T O a) > N v) o O 0 E��N of m ° - mE a 0 �3��m� d mC om CL O O U C 0 a) O 0 C O C Q Y m 0= E0� ��m0 oo°> O O a ��ao�°�`U.0 O m Y m 0 Q 0 E .0 m a c c °- - 0 d m m CL a) "O 0 U c >1 3 a m 0 amj d m d m E c an d 0) a 0 E� � .0 v ° U m m m U O C 0 j .E o E rn� CL 0) E a E - 0v a m T C C - m LO L d_ C . _0 O �_ L C C O. C J C C U r O L C � m O Q) y m°° o o v� T m 3 °i C O C O 0 0 0) U - a > O 0 U C d' C .v CA O p L 01 C O cr 0 0) d U .T+ Ol O 7N.� 0) m > O CM >' E a) L U C d j 0 a] J -O L ic a) a] E a] C o m a) '� O C C O ad >> -°' ° ° a ,2 mo E � m 'E o 'C ° F - r °' - m r° � w U � . E y .NT. 00 0_�0 ° ° °o._ a) L N Ad m �a �E m U m -O O` C O C L _oacom° U� CL a] '.' T .> - O 0 "O "O rn C d 0 M C ..+ L M m Ua U �mm ° o0NE mUd�'m00UOU 0) cm 0) �mt�m a] mE`M O N E E d 0 0) m e m CL c oo LL CL ° CL m 7 O d .Etc > o 0) c mmcY CM 0) o>;>,avim C T Qi C T` C) m ° d o U o l � ° m E X 0 U m E C O d c cm C ° L E m > T a nmv°E U-urcio d O L ° 7 T d C d ot =°n U L 0 0— 0 E � m cu am �d m O m Crn mLUu — c m3 ° cN a TL C N TL m a L _O 12 > > T" O 0 �o O C m U o o d l C C o o U m =C CL a t CM-EL � m aE > n N U -'-° 0 o d 0)c`a"0 C -6 12 mE� A - J E m a E ° 0 E .0 0 v > m C 0 ��v oQ 0) 0)0CLca° c d :-.0 -0 • • m :2 o m.0E O O U o > o f m ° - mE a 0> MM0o mC om CL CL 0) O o`m >0U�°n ��ao�°�`U.0 E0) 0 °� CL a) "O 0 a U Y 0 d r.� Y 0 amj d OU .� d m -O c an d OC a L- Q 0 "O 0 T O J O m m m U O C 0 j C d o CL 0) T C 0 4 E � m o o o � v 0 0 0) n - a > C0 � `) c 0) O c m m CM >' E a) m ) m O - 0 C ic a) o > O ad >> ° ° ,2 mo .t E - > E y E 0 a 0) - o � a) L N vi E m o m o 0 d M 0 o ) a N rn u i� m Ua 0 c° ° 3 S cm a� � mE`M O M C E E ,o d a) d m e > LL d O m m O d .Etc > o 0) CM o>;>,avim Qi C y U m m d cv - � °` nmv°E U-urcio ` N0)E OE 0 �� ot =°n 0 d m 0 d O m V Crn mLUu — c � >c � C o=0 m a �o 0) .0 o C,- =C CL m> U d U d ..+ 3 C= aE > a>i°y°3.Ec Y F N U -'-° 0 o d 0)c`a"0 C .z C 0 0 A - J E m a m m -. Y ° o" a- co .0 0 a a m Y d m NTH O O ��v oQ 0) 0)0CLca° c CL -0 av Cm� �m� °a y o.2 m U a) c E �° 3 - m o m° Eoo ° >10 o m m -° y UU° m Um O O U dv L" mOm my a) m o0ocL EU °� -Uc °m ° m 00).0 E o 0.50 CU d d m U d L a� >, `o L c Z C -0 m a� U c d E L o 0-'= H 0 '� H LL U o E m o m o a) e U m 7 fm d -o n w • . • • • . - n° m d p 0 c� o CO = R � 00 R: 0 � o ppj � o C C� � M 00 J f0 O 0. 3 m 0. m�� 0 m M �, m o m 3 m 3 cn m o RD CD CO 0 m o°�'. mf°o<' CD CD �� �� ����n� 0 CO�n��� nm5 <��� Of0 n.0 3o m��0 0m0 o0 00 0 O O nC ' c l O m n n 0' w w 0' UT n m 0 °d n - 0. O - -. 0A 0 o �o' 0 d O . n 3 Q O N VJ I M 0 p O o m < 0 m F O 0 d 3 O O O m O 0 j -O m m -o O -c O (D 0 -o N o n f0 m < Cr VI Cr <O (p 0i me °cNi,m`Dm o?o0,mcr O o� 6Z,d �n �v°'i0 v°'iW 0 0 0 n (D �: T -.0 m O N �� o. ^ n om I -o o. ^ c d p J o �'I M_f° m n `< m N M °'. o m J 0 n m n j O. N ^ -O -O F� O _ m 0 ' N 0 (CD (D m m d O 0 (m/I C J J 0 o CO n 1 VI n N n -O d 3 d VI J .0.. 0 0 VI O 0 d O. CD N- n m O F 3' �j m c v c D n 0* n N n n O . O J = 0 n �3N - J . Q N k< ID= J d f0 0 m 0 CO d / N (D � �< 3 O J-o `w' W j' �G CD O. 00 ✓A ^J f0 0 (n (D < CDD > f0 (OD d 0' - n o o N o n D d n N O iD CD 0 Cr (D N m^ d O j 0 d J (D -O ' N j m m n d O 3 CD 0 Ln J j x -0 G O j 0 m O- O N ( D CD 0 d CD CD w 0^ 0 0 n d m m d 0 d, x O O^ n W O m n d 0 m n ;= F 0 �G 0- -� VI CO D 0 m m p�j C �0 J 0 J O .+ m 0 m< m' 0 O n Q O � O_f0 O N 0 j N N (D .�.. � � c 3 o= �. �� m O O J n �G d pj m N O -O N f0 J J m • • • �o 0 ,Z7 QQLn o d J-00 '0 < = VI D ^ � C a 0- 0 m O 0 � � m m -O - 3 N O _ N f0 N (<D CD (�/I CO (�D �, Vi f0 CD N -� N N .m. OT O n 3 A C a� n CO f0 o n y �- 0- 0 j 00 S m m�f0 « n ID II O. N 0 O - O (D * -O _ p1 m J O" 0 C N O d 0 cr j cr 00 N O O. Nf0' o Cl N ^ N 3 N to (D CD CO CD CD CD ' n CD 0 CO c cr 3 0 N' F d m O C J N (D n J p 0 O • CD 0 j m n j. O. C J CO (<D JO �< n+ 0 ?^ OT N „, N m N O 0 0 n A O J (n �. > J `-< < o - 0 O m O O J cn ^O f0 CO 0 M. O W - m n J J m= d CD o O 0 O D O c 0' 0 CO n J 7 O= Cr m CD �'., N CO _ CD m N N m CD ( c n V CD m D m n 0 �T (D 0 0. n 0 oCO N n j o C) CD CL c 0 n m d M o m o' N d n m n ^ d < m O C c .+ m m N m f0 O < CD <, n n �n V n n A 0 o (D n ' N O o d 3 c 0 m O c d m CD C, I to O J C m- C O N J N -O n d O m O 00 CD CD _ CO N O VI e S < n m e o f0 CO CD N' CD O N O m o o m VI d O d .0.. N d (D CD CD (D W d 7 J m Q J J J o N..N. �.', J 0 cn 3 n0 p, 0 :-O.,< CO � 0.0 fin r''CO m n� O (n0 cr VI J J m j (0 W J m N ^ m -O O O n J m 0- m 3< m > _' (D � 0' CD fin. O m d � (D m O Q VI Q n c .0 m N O 0 m n 0 C 0 T o. N N m CD -Cp c) O o n N O -o O N O N T �. j f0 (D m> j (�D m O m p�j O In O 0 o y N �. 0 cn o CD c m J- CO Q m m 0- d 0^ 0 0 0 n, J n, O ' N '� 0 J �n = VI -O d d 0 = .C.. GS GS J (�iP - O ED O o CO 0 5 m V @ m V m d • • 11 O 0 N N C Y O T E a) ° m `O T c c L rn Y E p m 3 m o T =02 O C_ J-O -O L. M o m--U 01E L 3 y .� L N C 0 0 m m 0) C c m N _T a) m O N L a) O C m -O !m O) O C a) 0 O 6 U C Y 0 0 C m V% .0 C C a) C O a; - O- Q� O O -O .. -O .> C 0 ..- a) 0 � O y .- O N ° C 7- L C ° '.- U 0 T C O 1 C C 0 U C .0 a) 7C m > U d T O m Q a) 0 ` mmmg �.�0 y�E0 o mm° m ° _ m m Tm mm E 1 N O Y T is N U i m O d of a) a) a)m� =mom° Eu OJo V o OM O mo' E m CL Q N o aa)) rn E '� 0� '� m Q aa) o °' a) o -m m .. - m m a) o-- m ML. c L 0 U ° N N C 0 d o m L rnq E-M �.E m- m o E �m N U o_ a) m0 m5 m Nmo c- o O ° i c 0) y m m m 'E U a vi m a c o ° m o m- y m 0 m rn o f Y >° a m m s m 0 O m m °m E° m E o d O >° m a) E c -° s N 5 m m° o m i C° c O = d VI r0 'O 0 U C C ..+ m y C m a) O m N m O C m C Y 0 N tm/) C t. m° 0 O N> d z 0 N U a) tO u m a) ° N C m O d O U O fC E -o u u is '`-° a.0 -o aci v E `O 'm o_ E E N o rn a> d oc�=' m o_ cc m0�mc° o om )a) U m 0 u LO.- mZ) m- d'Um L U� c N o m o m C 0 d O) 0 U C U C O 0 V m O d 0 O) 7 C U L c m° U` N N C '� U a) j 0 °= 0 n ° m m moo >�-�m`oY D- a) m�a-o° 2CL () m a) 0 -0 C O C U IC ,d >' N> C cr m m 3 m y E O Q) m 0 O L .- N > Q) ' C O m N O m 0 0 Qm ) 0 M Q m m Q O Q) E U -0 U N La.+ ) CL T O) a) d Q) _ 'O O 'O 'O -O m 0 0 m Y 0 cu 0 CL U o_ co m 0 E -0 � U 3 .0 1 rn c � 3 m c °'�3 0 fp aci °)d rnm c° m� m m m m c 3. m 30 >, m C Q) w C C Y O= C O 7 N C CL 0 Q) '� Y m L m L C m O L 0 0 2i L m m `�i L~ 0 O Y Q° m o `')-oY 0 o.� c ai p° c n. p° �a m y� m - m U O U - - N Q) - U O Q) t` m o t= � .0 �) E °" 0 -D 6= aa)i � L o m a L E m O am m m NY'c - o = c c> N a m m 00�U -m°"c o .0rn 3CL U� 3 E- 0 O U m 3 '0 O ° UL O' oO . °) O O ) O ° o U c 0) a) �- oa ° ' Ip o C- E- N C o> ° Y° o_ O° o m p m ai ' E m o E U m. U m a) O N 5 a CL C: omLE� O°- m� o`�oX E O U o '� = U L L- m> L Q) m d 3 m v o m L c m .. -° -° n m .'9 C a) m in a m .0 C 0 C C T 2.2 -0 U Q mo ��o�ornE °m?:0 °m>mUm- ° a c m U E > Y O a >°a a° co mmo�o O mE°my oYOO_ Qi om O a) m Y C- O L O C 0 L m v' L CJ (EO N L O m L U- C F- U m Q F- d m m U° N 0 M o o d d E h C °> m • • 0 ° o E° m m o@ '° O n m o °o °@ 3 3 o u_ p o m � °@ ` p_ vCD C - @ C U n ., O f0 r2 O' •^_) O O fn-. CL CD Q Cl)l O @ < -m p 1 v O (D Sc N .a N O @ N @ `^ ID cr O �n rp (D N N d @ O ry O v .2 K c0 a S@� O O "ID ,``�., LL @ ° fD cr m vo k -o CD CL m @ (D 2E �' o ,�� p n �. O (p O s CO p Cp Q 6� ^a•-J CQ (DD O cn '� n N O n' .N-. 6 �C O n < @ (D (n @ ? U N 0 (D n ... (D ,, O .. O D@ cn Ix O d N Q in S. ti. O fn' CD ✓, p� N O tom' N G d @ ;r cn o�o W0 O > E0O� O N O a m 7 T Ol0 7 O_ U ° C _ O c E E rn a- o c r rn m U d p L 7 cr T W 7 U a O U C O N m C L O > m O O U 0.0 p > 5 CL 0) c aN °a.E m - T m a) U m N r m c E 0 >, 3 L E a) a) U 0 � E O op o a-O O) o o 0 0¢ o C U U m N T (a c m U O 7 �Um 0.6 E L -O O d U d ° m a o -O .' - C O no j a) . O C) a) E ¢ .a T N 0� u co d o N o m o m .E N 'c E a c' = ao 0 0 °o `_nrEo a0Ua`mrn .mad '� Ear o d'� > >r EE 0wma'rnE �Ma) a)E,rata -� E m a) m °i 3 O '-' c� m E .. m m C O 'p r> a) m U C U -O !a N m O a) C (tea a T CL C CL C O) p m � (_0)= a) •a) E L m E E o,o o U Y U c a) c m m o c U m U N -O L a) ? O O D U tf m 'C «T. O N .C.. m v) _ a) v) - p- U L L L O a) �m .- aoE cor momo.mNom�Eo U O C Ol ° O a) Y O_ `. a) N O d m 0 .4 .� .t- ate) 3 CL a) m a r a) E a) E� M co 'p E a)-p m, > O C OlUL yL L V L U m a) a) O a c 3 o d v) a 3 3 L `a -O a) > -O a) r o m E c r L vi 5 `n o N` C C m U> m a) L m d C 3> >, U U a E.0 c a) a)� o - -o o w._ c o O `m O r° m o E ° a; r rnE o)o o m a) !E H m U U v) E m H m m m U° a) Z '� 3 c U E E m m o c` cY.N U cn N acio p_°-) 2 o� .J O m 0-2 U N d U U d° m p U C U O E° `o E L °> TL C r °m a) v) o m -oO0 N d C) > a� -ma)o) a) `nom O - �'OF- Z) Eaiao� a) a) NL O aCO�.� L O Q L.. 0)0 -L. O) r J� 5 G'ffi E EE) m E'E co )� E N m d r U L o a o m U O) 'O L oo> 0-a) -> m m d3 d EO V)�_c° o °o E o)O o m m a) 0 O)) M 0 N o)> 0 �' m N a) o - C a) a U 3 V aO a) 'S a N .O U a) E w p 0 0 .? a� E a 0LO _ U � m N m 0 0 2 a) r L CUj a,= p C C O D a) O a) O o a) 0) m m Q'O Q (p 'OLaa)� 2- EO�710 .O R ° N a) O U N Q CD `La E rn o) Y m m o d o� , D 0) o0 00- d �� -�,E R NNo O N N O N N p r J_ O m_ Q ✓� >,E -+ N o .N L ooE m �` ma) d n�co G rn vi zC 'C `0`a) E N �7 E d ` E , U o 6 L p N L `O E> v; ' a) - Z U r O O 0) 0.= .0 C m° 0 3 m V Q U m n OU a N �° E W a m m R J OL.. N N> N to m 0 a° a-0o. -,< S a c o m o a d d s O i �^ M M 0 3 m o ° o_ .-.. -. o o° 3 ou' �D - °3�Dd.<dm3�n"!�o °o ���d< to O –��m CD 0 j d °' O `<jj (�/I. O n 4 m CO O Q -O CD CD cD 3 `< d 3 d °' m _ _ VI. m (D O X d ^<° 'O °^ O a 0 (D O "O N O m- d CL >jMCLW Q0 -coCDCD CO003. O d O a� 3a 0 CD Cr CD G� f° d C m in d m ca -o' °' m o CO o° o. ° H d (D m m 2 0 M> 'o -. O W m 3 0 N o. D C. �'CO ("1 C a d C 0. o- d o. a m m o G�� o �Mm�d °jOS=mM -° wm3o O CD CD CD 3. CD C CO d j CD 1 (OD ° 0 j Cr a ry C d d p `� d 3 CD C "O m° _ 3 m –0 om -o cm���rC <moa0CD am -° fyD �m -m "O m d N '< 0 m n O d 0 0-0 CD --OO ° (D ° N (D d d 0 CD CD vmiMavmam m,0?°3 ° o d O � 0mm CD d° 0 °vmioom° ^�30�� �m x � d °dam N CD CD o D� 3 �n�^d3 m N °d m� 0 (D d - 3 - 9 (D = d m O Vml a J .-. = N -i m w f0 C m CD CD 0 CD 0 0 0 °– �m`<0m3n°m n�0 0 ° �M° CD O m �3o° ID. -o ° 3 m C- j m= 0 d 0 CL C N N C �' O m N O d 0 d ^ m �< < f0 d N -_ O CD CD 0 d O 0 CL M CD cn CO o' ° m ° ° - 2 • CD CO m Q CO Q1 CD = C VI _ 0 Cl m m N m (CD (D O� m C m° m fa � N C (D 3 o O- m (D "O A m O VI "° °' p) O C^ m FD Cr 3' O d C fv d N m < W O a m N N W m d d l m CO O N m d M m d C_ CD cr 0 0 x = d 0 m ° o= o -o= m °n° x1m x1 x1D c0 co m Co °' -cmmo �m am (D-0 VlCD MM 0°003 O wWC. m C.0mm� '!'.3 mn 0 CD n i^-0 �-OO°0'Lnn� 3 '733° H Q��� � �� °�omdOd -o `< m << c O N `< (° 3 3 (D ^: (D 3° 3 3 m ri .. m– o m m 3 °gin' m a a VI d m^ m m O m d m (i/ m m m 0 ° °-' M Q d (D d (D C. = Co = -0 0 CD 0 N O. O .Z- O d m C. C. C. 3 m 0_ d -o O. m ° C O d m C I n-O d d d "O d C m = d m O x f0 L �. N d O (D m O rG ('D N n . C. d CD m o m 0 0 a� o. (D (OD (D d= O n 0 0 0 ? j M= 0 C m= CD n C 3 0 (CD O O �O m. O , N d^ O j O O O (D d =^ m d C 3 -- m o d m s cn j j o o m d o a o c o_ d -o °' a< m co 3 CD CD .-otn�.°�n'd do3mm doom m�m<<��'m 0m3mD o � -o a= -o o o. m C. o m n - d m m m ^. d m n d C o m C. "00 j = N C m C S css o-3° mm3`<D 0 3 r3C. 0 CD 0 1 CD <- nN °a ^..<o �oc0 ^o m3 ��� ���� and dm� CD (D m d° N 0 O D A m C CDD - d 0 C C D- Q O O O C 2 m n ° �" c� -COQ °' ° m cCn 3 vi v°i m m o "m o CD ° o a – CD -o d o'" o << ° cD � � �n onoM O°-' m �cm cr m 0a cr 3 w � j,< m m o m 3 w m CL m m o Cr m m o n0 R �d -o a o 3 ° d M d CO c a d OQ m _• CD __^,�. C' 0 3 -O = VCI O Vml CO `< O a v, -o° m M CD o- oo<-o ?oM N ono C.,2! 0 �00M -o cacc , CD c i –^ d> 'o o c . d �� � m Q m CD 0 x m m d3� ° o. m o N r2 m 0 C. �^`. FI Vi m` O- Q-- -o m O X 0 m O "O (m/I C d ° .0. f0 VI m a 0 -O ° C fa C f0 �' d p C O m 0 m d m C d d to f7i C O O d zx d m d C C O a m o" 0 --o -0 ° °cd m0Cnmm °mo3 °-,mo 3a m C1CDd CD — o- = °o. `<.n3�,� "o duo mini 3CD CL 1 CO CD CD m °' CD '� arc i a� ° UT 0 m m CO w N Y > a) o C m a) m C N a) Q) ° o 0 0 5 N o m E U m ° _ y E � N ° r L N -o ° 3 o 0 i V) -0 > -o -o a) O ° C) - U E U m m O_ o O O C Q) a N a) ai U C ( mC C-o ) �0 C N QE ao > ° M m U U 0 °' ; ° ) i U s a) -O N ! m a) O N C C d U1 C y m C a`) U1 O C O U d O O a m LL U C 4 T o r. rn E o m ° U O .. ° � o o U m — E U `p O N ° C o U - d o o N d (O (a Q. ° m o °O_a o �-o� a0 0C) y5u CmN £ C6 ° _ -c - - L E O > > a) C O` m m m a) °i T a °� Ol N N 1 `o 3� v6) �KrnL U C-- O_- C a) O_ m C d C -o N L— M C C> m C a) a) O T C "O O Ol O a) N U v o m C O m m 'O) N �' U O C U ° "O m H d O C N O C U C O w N ¢_ N N L r iO O O N T O` a) U1 N ` V a) -O U Id o m.E a E a C° ¢ a .� ¢ ° C o ° `o N X00 0 o��m �o �rnm� m�a°C mom �g E 0_ C m o_'3 ) `� a) a ¢ > > o a) a) cTi ° s S Ev ° E i C> Ea) c 0-0 Uaow Ca) 0 A A O_ m C a) -O - O O d C _m )` a) -O 0— N O) > d °o CL m "O O L O N (O O_ > m Q O C m a) O Q � `oV C ooC° Eo -0E E.CL U--oE o�E-0 �� w0 o E. - _ O C a) ,C _° > CML T C d m r m U E .M 6) C O .0 E o E !a m O a) U1 C m N T Q) p C Ol •O• Q' C m T d U �E�o • • • V E�cmi a�2 � U.o ) on a) CL c -° C m L ao m Eu u 0 m H D U U H mN H m N H m L w 0 • • • • T y0 +T' O) O y °-0 O_ X N o °o_ E >-° N ) ooma)Ym "o a° o a `) Y O d U L N U a) a) C O a) >, C Q) d N 2 0 o m> m U C L �.� o m�-° E °° o C m m o> w M° "O L+ O C .— d T mm T �' 3 O_'O C m— 0.— C O) YO (O N r L ,C P a) C m O O O_ m C y O m S Ol O O Ol .+ C U a) L N O a) T-O E No' C Ua)a)E -0 oo �U� 3 U' m -=o N o 3 C t�`a m I L E d C E 0 N C m OQ aa)) ° . C O. 0 0 a a) -o _ E rn o_ -O .+ m m U 0 0 a) O a) a) m o N Ol C C) ) C r0 3 N R> ,O (n O` (` N _U O Q 0 Q 3 N m N a) C N (m "' a) O O_ a) "O ° N Q L L d O) m 0 0 a) L— a) -0 M C N T w C N N d `I "O U N° f 'O U O O C m U C a) C N y ° a) � m wa -° U T Q) m Ol N C' O_ d m O) o O 0 -C 0 U CL (a Q) T= C L+ L O d O EO w a) a) d a) O O U E Cc m._. y `� ° mm's 3 u m.5 3 ° oU E O-o .5 '- C C E vi m O'm a) `�- n �N'E3Ua o'X0--O00E -o om0aoa °o 0 CO L L A C Q .m C N m a) C d N C C 0 C � L OI U_0 O a) O "O N 0 U C i ..B d o jA ca m "O J = m L T O C N w CO d .� a) N !a m "=O d C N O m C0 d On N y o c r o O `� `�E m vEi °o-.�) 'E o ani L> U o. o O E °. - aa) -o a) E m o'm CO = o a m v_� a o N i o 0 o C o r> c)- r Q o L -o >> a) : o ai m o m m.0 ° m-O .0 C 3 m °_)-0 0 jA — -O d y .` ` a) .0 C N w U '-' O_ a) U m C` J O U M -0 d rnE �,ri °� °� ��-o �-o C 3 0 `�-=o ° 3 m �.C) -o M M `m u 3 to O Q '- -O o m T C) °) o U L W C o o 0 U m y a) N CL ON y °i C r a) L ._' C a) T CL H a) N , .O O_S O a) a) a) L+ a) a) ,C "O a) O mL+ a) N d N a) O � o � o? o � 0 E vNi `° o_E O o,3' ° m o ami ami ° N �ci0 `•aa)a)a)�z�o�a)mmEm.c� Q -j°o_a)0>,E to too 1— tn-o to m.E m 53-6 U a) E �- m • • e ®`/ \ \ } =0MW CL \ \ \ / \/� 0 -0 CD ) 0 CD }i \�00- !a =043= 0 CD CD 0 CD E cD \ \��\ \\ CD �\ \ / \ \\ ¥_:� -`_ CD CD 0 02 CD \ \ \ \0 CL CD 0 0 24 CD { \ CD CD CD \k /)(( \/ C0 CD D \ \\ }3 \\ NE 2 =A `/y34 0- — 0 } [ §Q /`s ; ±#;a ®g 3 > -0 CDM CL CL CD cr CD (\ \0< - /7)G[ \\\\} \ \} ) \ \C�m= CD 0 iL = 0 M CZ =, =C) 0[ CD CD CL / -Mo Co -20 V)3 �� \ \ / \�\ _- y; ;aR )`cr CL CD CD CD }� CD < - CD ,,,mss ,0 a}@[;+ }a {\&} jj / / }§ \\ } \ \\ 2 CD CD \ ®\q& /£ /2\ E {j2) }�, -0 \ }}\\ \ \ \ \\ CL z c CD \eCL M CD \ \\\\ /3 « • C T -O C U N C U O L C m m a) a) O O C m cc (O N O T N C U a) U 3 a) 'O O O N jj <` 7 — A N Im m m O 7 -O m T m U d.0 C C m Q N N E f0 p) �) > L U E U N CO _O 0 U EM a) O N C 0c �)Ca)-0Ca`)w.`3 C 0 -U N U o n 0 C) a N N 0, � O> m 7 E 0 t m N U (O a) a U L a) a) C m U 'O .T+ M '� a) E T C V C N E,> U U d O 2' a) _d CL d C O.D >, O L O a) 7 N m W U N O 7 N d U L U E U a) N 7 C N E r°- o d _� v) C E m Im 3 N .� o v) o m v) pTi-0 "' N U U C C `7 N _.NT+ O ` -O T T L m °" m `Lmi In a) 7 3 C m j� a) C 0 ."N_' C m m = >, °' .T, C U F O C U O 7 C m m a) W )Ln U a) m S`, C C O _� U— O> N O 2i T CO m C> N 'O O .0 010 M .L+ L 0 W L m -O 7> m cD a- -O j 2i C U N a) N a) Q) U 7 N r0 U m C r Q) C Q) a) a 7 N Q) N C 0 m Q) Q) T an d a) U U N N T m .E C O m 'O O U` — C_ 1.0 m 7 V) E 0 (n 7 N U O O U L.+ a) C) 7 CL IOn .0 U ' c C O O m Q) L .0 > N m Q) 3 N O Q) N L 7 L a C d ° O C N a) N U E) C L Ol O_ 0) ml O U L.+ m a) T 0 U O IC C O a N 7 a) a) U. C d C d C Q) dE m ai U=tm 0mL m'_ x�dm CO C6 CL i c) a,a) . - O oCNN C °a;mC 2N ma) Td v) Um -)a vi= in�cLimCO mmoEa°) °°)m -°- w a�v°)it cy a °) 0— ° C N .. O' C 3 0 0 0 7 U V '_ C p .� y o_- U- a) t C m m v) m m Y L u 0 mE U N mv�v_mm°om� °mom m - °E° ���� Umm Q) O N QI C) N L Q) E> E L Q) DIN V7 U m >o oU N a) Nm O y 7 d m> C p) N d C 0 0 'C 7= O a) O L C E U �� a) a) O m a) Gi !a U U m d x O 0 U T-O '7 C a a) (n 'O U Z C N N d 7 a) O_ U DL.+ C0 N U • • • d y d d O p L y H d O d cv cv � m O � L � O d d T� y CD TO O d j O D C d E m C y 0 p d O_ U U O O.- O U ° O M E H O m d O O .N N ) > Q) L O m m . O 0 N N N U d CL'- N C m 0 N a) cv C E N O L O � N O C y y CD TO j O D C d E m C y 0 p d O_ U U O O.- O U ° O M E a) O m C O =O ) .N N ) > Q) L m m . O 0 N N N U d CL'- N C m 0 N a) N O C E N O L O O LC N C v �,'o N aNi '� N ° m> m 0 CL >i C a°�i .-° N` � aNi U m .+ d a) d Im EI'" -O m U 'O U O C N N N L m Cl) C C U L '.' Q) U m -O vUj N d m N r L °_ m m C a) N U C O) m C ( m EE m C NmJca U C 7 moot- C T 0I a) a) L".0 U a) E y v)N.CNa) UMOMa)N .0 3 -0 E N .. >, cm) d � t aa)i o .0 m o m o m .O_ -5 o .0O mtmoU'- -o =x�0 0m U0NOU a)E>, N `% pN 3 U" a) U U L C m N d .0 N r U a) N m °- a) N a) u 0) IM N C'0m o a)- Q1 m a)i m m� C o ° N 0 UO m E o a) a E C 7 m °D O C N .L.a y N U dU 7" O C m U Ll C O) � °° U C U¢ Q) (UO E r L C C (NO a) 0 °° �) 0 N 70 d m C m �, 0- N O v) -0 C �c m a) a) 0_ a) UM N C O m .m ,U )a °) � 0� a) o_ AND N E a) e 7 �� C C 0 0 3:.- a) U EO 0) O 0 o -0 m 3 N m C U N C C 0 m O N D 7 N F— d O_ m (O V N O _N L m m r a) C 0° (a > N m E E g o 7 t o a) .0 m C - m E '� C E N m m m° U° rn p) >, 'O U C U O uj p) L a) U a) 0 L a) m U v C O t QI N U m O aNj .� — C N 7 a) C OU g m m m 0 v) d v) N J O 0 °-o°io0_C m O N U L U 0 Nom_ r CImCE`vo0E��� E ° ° y0 -N U m N L_ N a) U 7 N 0_ x ° N= a) Im ' DI U N ll N N 7 C L E Q) L O O U L L C p) 7 O 0> tt �'N o'E.T� N L oF� J° J 3> E O C "' 7 >> T 7 d m m C. V a) N O 7 C.T. C L E oN o o E o:= a) =�,m> j d a) ) m cL .T+ U,� CD m .T. UU cn U M.0 a0.5m5a>10 Im 0_ i • • 3= m 3 o m K n S 5-0 o cn = g 5-0 o- 3' � o `< o. 0 o (n N O O c � ��o o o om � n C) 3d^ n 3-om m Cr �° CD o O CD m CD N ? O N d O � d O n n N .� < vJin: m n i0 o o Wn2'm 0 „ CD J o 0-omm0 0 0 3 o, O`< o o m- -o c 0 ° c °oo - o- CD aN o � CD J C O CD O J N n � ^ . = Q N O CD d ID CD 0 CD y O Q J m�'0 J o_ D m o D cn° 3 < n J' Co O N CD C) � J n og CD CD N v c d ff 0 n 0 .< . d = _ 3 �m 0 m o 0 ^m ° < � 30 oxc " f °°°. m N 0 C Q m d 0 CD, o m m (D J < -n • � o m Nm w m d m (D 0 o n m o Jm o N N < � 0 d I o CD O, V N^ F. gn Nn dN d oo: = N j o CD V ^ C 2D . o ^ O N CD= CD J - ' 0 CD p_ ? N o o J c (D 0 CD :.. C. N f0 Q7 O CD %J cD d o N J 0 0 CD m -o o Qm O d O J o o 3 0 o N(n m °-J ° 3 ??o J -o O o^^ N N _ "0 N CD j 3 cD Q N 3 CD C N N n N f0 3 �i CD `�- d (D 0 CG CD `•< j CD D ^ A O CD N< n C O 0 n.= @* CD � N �'n °'N N N N G �nO n° CD ID 0 CD 0 c O . - oE �o3 = : Z J �m 0 0 m nos o o. o -o « m 3 o « CD _ �n ° 53 CD � �N mk.< CD o 3 J ^ o CD J N VI O (D O "o 0 S o �° J d♦ O C O iD iD J n Q a c N, o nO O ° nCD w o�.n� 0° m O o, cD,0 0 0< 17 w CD CD �' ^ N "O o d J f0 0 CD O d CD J' n J 3 CD o m ^ O _ d iD VI J N « (M -o 4 � N 3 n N n O O X. ^, _ ° N (p f0 d O_ CD J N S m m N O< d 3 O (D ?. d N J (/� N o _ CD o S d a m 3 N^ N CD o cD d VI O J 3 N (D n N J 3 O d 0 O N C 0 3 (D v o �� ^.nS� o N noon aQ >- O - cD �J <'m "O N o -'m N CD N 3 f7 cD N (D (D 0 = ° O m (/j N a v 3 D 3 N° J 0 o^ C D N O 0 N c o -0 m =Q `ammo°- °(onc`� �c 1.3'n- _d fD -O c°n o m m U. o N `< N d N ^_ N O^ "300 C S C `< (O CD (^ n o 6 �N << D vN N n J 3-0 coo ° o O C O CD ^ d N O N CL N- N O o CD d CD M n O N n CD J O O: N CD O VI n N O o f° n N o O O X° CD Wd (A O J n O N d� 0 c 3° J tome oc °Oo 3D 3.a.�N QoQ (°m ° _0C>CDCDDO3 O <�n �n Mm to N o-CD °' -' $ m N C N J CD _. �. is C O^ CD (M CD m I cr o N C o 3 p° J" O C7 ° O C d d m Z .0.. O 3 -. O� N ^ J C d J CD J p N O O O J J J- A a m o' O O, O 3. C N N O f0 J O o D D co < m 0 0 J n- J 3 CD CD N. Q. J J" .d„ w d C CD o J Cl d N C d to N(n 0 N C J d CD CD o m 0 "o N 00 CD CD N J W O- G7 C 0 uo o< ^. O CL - N O On (O .J.. (� d �. N C N O^ CD N e. fD (D 0 _ N d N N O n _ p O CD 3 J �m ' o O CD n J J n C N N. rL (O D.( 6( VI cD CD N �. "O (D d � '3 Q ^ ^ (D < m J o o m j7 D D �n n J C 0) a) a) O CL E TL O E° ° m ° o o N E m m U ° O o_ o' ° `m m o ��'N'o C E m o CL 00 �°-N cn000z 3 °o. o U mm 0m m m�-00 CC) °� o_ o U0�m -0 d�EN `o_ m c� _00rn c mo_0� O E U c �N Sm 0–°00 Vim– O >, c%) 0 m E o T E 0 o_ a U o °_ 0) m 0UOE V�NU U-05 � o0E)m�� o CD- '0 E U r E' � o 2 E Q E_ o U -°0 c v0i d N m T C N 0 C O_ a) -O .m L U 00 � L.+ m O m O O 0 c" O m N°° L.+ E c O_ . 3 N v r c 0° o a 0 0 a U N °> a) 0r O E Oc E m a 'o_ N'o a) o) r '0 a ' am a '0 " o r, m o 0 m cm N LL o U� j N O O_ � -0o N O N N N m U a) 3 L Ch C d V 0 C C N m C C -D 0� a) � N� O O U _T C - a) r C N O C Q._ O T O C 0 C N L M C a) C N e o,m N E o 0 o > o E a0 0 ' �'N m o 3 m E U m o m m L TO y o 0 0 m N m m C O U `� L.+ O C L 0 U c N 0).� E m a) V m U° a L_ m m O CM 'O mo N .� co �m rnEE'`0_'�cnc `0°Lm0 in >,LC'Eorn.N H m(D `o d O) °i 0) L) ..+ O O C E U E U� U d T U Y U c m m m E m 0 W 0 <o c 3 °� o >>>> m NO E X j d m O Y O L m O m D d a. N LL d d m E U a) o f 5� N O O F N L U 0) • • • • U C y t a) y> cm � °m > U 0 a)— cJ L o -°O C �mm E L a�inLJ N a a) 0) O_ Y m C '- E 'O O C N 'O O m N C C m U d N ,- d -O O N m 00�ma)`a m�maEi3dd'v�'E oo�rnm U N L - 0moHm°o_0 Q = m m E o o m� m m E � vEi ° o .�°.. 'E m -o a�i a) c E-o o .T. EQms`"w EmN..E= I a°))>, moL�NU a) M T G E L m a) C- N M W O C 01 = m m N CC O O m 0> d m o E> E 0) c 0 Nm`o�EE.�m Ln mm��oOVU 0>,—, °,:° O m E � o E c � c L) L a) c o w a– aN ° L.. C -O T 7 >` a) C L j m N 0a) O m L .O y N >m 0 N O 0 C m m d U L 3 '� " U N O'0 - m a) Qi 2 N L =CL .+ °U N` 0) 0 0 N C N U m 0 a) p 0 (U0 3 N C O C d N N E .—° L 0) 0 3 E o -O �C O E cn �' o m' rO O 0 > �° 3 0� c M 00 m°° U � O 0.— a°° m m= E d O_ N U m3 0'� C a) c 0.E c O O cC U? 0 0 O U. _OEoo3 N °joEmmc N N� T o_a�m 0 rn s °) L `m 0. `'' o 0) L u 0' m o o a) c 0 46 0 U 0 o o U °_ c 0 °) n a) Y 00 > N N N O£ O O L —M m° _U LD N CL O O " O 0) N >1 a) O_O U C N m 0 > O O m m C O O O ry c m O 0 N O E O V o_ 3 v° u m 0 ° 0) -0 0 U min m m l< O = 0 (D O O = ^ d 0 a o 0 c« 3> 3 O . c° ,n O O CD °' m S o° 3-o 3 3 cD n a m� 53 n m= m° o 0� O o C m CL CD d� 0 x-0-0 -0-0 0 �� 0 (D 0 d� : 0 N o 3 d C n .N.. n C m o p 0 -o "O �<0�3 OTC - (DSc 3 w- 3'3- < =c od m3.0 m Q_.0 =d Cr « 3 0°l �-3(o(D 0 -03 O. "O O N' _ �_ 0 C O j N N (D N C �o N (D = N (OD �= CD d oo Q c0 0(o CD a3d 3= �m 3 n 0 00 3 G 3 (n C.0 � CD o 3 m 0- 0 0 CD O N cn z3 `< 3 °- C O' N O O' �-O (D C (D 3 3' n 0 0 "O O N^ C 3 (3D (D �- O O� O N C d 0 d 0 `� d N O' `- � d (O kG (3 D 0 CD (3n (O /I 0 N > 0. C 0 (D N O > CD O O O. �`' N -0 O O o �. O 2 0 C Q 3 0. - o. j 3 o j. _� d d o m-= c �? 3 0 d d m 0 c 0 N 0 C C o N �`< = 3 0 3^ -0 3 0 0 cr p 0 (D O N 3 N 0 cr j' m "O (D °. 0 0 O. (D N= `< N O j C d o 30. 0-0. ^W-offc� �0 O -0= n(D m0 WCD m K0 Od °w m°-0N o °°i c o. ° o. n m- dQ o: CL O C 3 O = �. 3 0 m ( D O' ?, -- O d O 0 N 3 Q (D Op_ (o N N N O C O 3 N N 3 C A 0' N 0 (p .+ C O. C Ej- CD N O O O d -0 C (D 3 0 m O G < O> 3 0 0 CD N 30 0 3 o v° C C N o N 3 d 3 0 d N O (D d CD C p O N O 3 d d O O . O 3 "O ° O N 3 d O O d N O O 0 0 0 (D (D (n N O d (D > > n > (o (0-0 N 030 Q <000 CD dN3m vii do:no3 3(°^D 0 ^. (D d d 0 (D O N "O N N O O v C co (D Cr 0 C m Odd mo ma o0a (On c.Q g o_' 0 59 3 0.mC<5, 3 mr m �o FD CD �o -O W O N d N "O N cn (D N 0 N O O" J p (D 1 O N 3 C N o�.cn dod' CD=—.< m0. a CD °� o-' 0 F CD d CD 2 3 3 <c = 0 > > CD n°(o to o. -d° �a On30C- m a °-3 F. 0 vi. CD O j' 3 "O N CO 0 S� M Ci • • = O !'3 -°'�o fD O n� =��Imd3dv°im�'o��3no.o= vm d 0Q .0103-o3-O 0 0.03300 O CD CD 3 ^'-CO (o m CD O 3 0< 3 Q °. d .° m m W 0 o' -n ° m �. 3 w v0i 0 CD S m CD O m (o c CD :E 0 0 3 a m o w o �. 3, m �. 3 25 0 0 0° 3 3 CD N 3° d d O d C O (D p( ° (p C 3. 3 D) d CD O. O N N_ d CD d iG N O O. VOi j (D 0 N d 3 = O. (D d 3 (D 3 I �: X N ^ (D (D O �, 3 N O. O 3 O d _ N O 3 0° 3 O O d — O C d D d 0 (D O' N in �< 0 3 D O' O O O d (D °^ .0 (D 3 3 O O "O O G D) < (D d VI N 'n ° iG O N N O (D C7 n, °^ ^ C 0 O == (D O O `� O N (D D) (D (D 3 3 w N w i< d (D O (D O X O O "O 0 N O C .0., N 3 C O. C d„ °' f° 0 C 3 m O p 3 n(o (n O p' N X C C o a . m 3 m 0 0 CD 3 ' 0 m 0? 0 Q l< d 'COD 0 -O DJ (n 0. 0 m C. � -O -O 0 C m 3 3 0 < 0- (n03o �0 <p°,�aZ00 ^?. --Ln 03m�0 -OCR 0- N is M M CD = 3 m (D (n o' d 3 l< 0 (D c G 3 03. G 3 C- m �1 C O O O 3 6 3 -V O (D O CD I N C to N tD D) (D N Vi ° N C �_ P O. .3. O. M O O d d CD 0 n N In -0 ^ N 3 (j NO p. 3 (3D O N D -O_ cD n p d= 3 3 = CD _. 0 m a o O tD 3 3 0 (C, °. N O= d 3 O O N d 3 0 N N d 3 O' D) O O (D O >• C d 3 0 0 W= C. O (D 3 3 (D N (D d ,< O O O 3 N O. N C CD C d D 3 (lp (D 0< D 0 -+ C^ 3 ^_. (D CD N O° 3 3 0 0, (3D d N N 0 C "O "OO (OD (D N v 3 N p 3 (03 d O N Q O m O N O O 3 C CL ' X O O d O O C D) O. m? C O l< d 0 3 0� ° 0 0 �_ d °O a< d 0 O O 2. CD Ci O ND) "O d (O 3 In Q d p�j O N >• N N °. W 3 ci N O (gyp 3 N j mQ0FE °wi oEF.00 ^3 °o°3 ^3Rm° a O d 5 3 (D (D O d 0 0 O d (D cl N O (D "O d 3 N d Cl CD 3 D p _ M. 0 0 3 3 a°^ 3 o o CD IG d O. 3 3 tD � O N Co N O Q N G U Q) ca f6 G Q to .0 G N m m C h ° O 0 G O N G G y G C 0 .O N G Co g C O a) as 0 °aE° uC:0-0 mEE° .'� •� .o 0 m V o °' b° m o ti ° 4 o a) Cl) ,arn v, Co cu c��ptti nm m mrnoGmt -- C: C: om N 4 co °mom C um3aQ�omaN �o_uoy' 3m °q0 v�E �O ymE C my UNO.�N OJ OC �'�� �fpU °� taU G C fp N m .0 Q Q G b O b Q U p cmv.E-��A maa mo o -oco o�.0 G� C: C: o ° U C: nv ax w o G E S o a�a) L T° ° ° as E m O 7 O N m R m E m` .N G �J ` N. V °� U O °) O O oTv N 3 �b y b.� O QTmc o U.�4 TOQV a s c U N O N N m t r V 1 0 m U m 0 N o �' u u `� a@) N O bL.. o m N a b o m m m .G 0- m x'Q (n %u c4 Gu °�m`� L) ro`3°' -mcb �C -EN mo mmc G .0 .� m-0 c b m .- b c )O y O a) G ° O a s w _m mQ'° -a o c'3 LTG c- ".o 'a _EO o vu co m m G L C c m L m G U 'O m aT Q G O O G C G U O m O ro oma)�30oNa 0a>tm °n (D C:m u._o- �v a N b •� TO V7� N --0 3 u L.Q -0 ° O ic O N O O U m O,- M G -U O) N O U O .N S C) 0 ro y d C v G �. 01 G N Co U G N .0 m _G p 0-0 ` N N M O Q a) L x m L o a p N m N .� Q L O° G 7 O Q. G O '; b) ro O p E Q). -0 N N�� N o m Vii -� G o N' L m C) co N m D E O m O N QG} Ci O a O z U m N .t O O '& y 0 m N m u m O N 0 O m rn.E .ti C� O NL�C Qma� ?� 4 ,Q3`0` m °Na'mu.E �ti6� Qo tc o O 0= o- rnm v E d a)=-E N G G �G °wc 0) 0 m u o � ov'.0 a-0 o m C: U u �.o o 0 0 ° oL C � � 3 � � [p u E c 3 m u 0 m c N 0 m 0- o m u 0)0 -- o '� m m o rn p y = o = N N b 0 a ro a 0 •o m m .a v a) 0 s u m ° m G U `�' c N a� c °- `� b E-C c m a) o m° m o .o a a° c b a) c)... L N U D 'O t O E U b O .- aa)i L_ u ro O cl r a) Q.Q VLj b E Q O N 07 co O O V �L N�vr'mEj U. mj CONL NOQlO Nm O7O) O G Y �.� .E Q G co G m� m _T O) 0 L b G 0 di j m O Og T o am OO L mt m m.O O m G G.O. . QN a1 Q - O N N m° N L ar a) -4 r- m C) O h = ' N '-' L_, O H O C 4� G '- ro 0 Q G -C N NO G m a c .4 4 G u C Q j -_0 .3 O a, G a) _u G 4 .4 0) G m O `b O 0 4 3 N O,Y� Q E O N O .G E� O .4 N q T-0 o o m m G u G a) d O N O N t v ) E rn E Q G •� v€ a' m ro D .o a 0 4 L u O m m G L_. E O G o O V m u Z -[ C: U N C N C N N O O - rn0 a��m m �.E�'o`a ma ETV a jo q� O b '� O `L' v m `m T N O V G O d 4. a) m G m C: C: 3��� ��EbaU°Nm`Q °`)EC6 mom of m .Cl. m mum m -0m 0m a `t° m �"ocm" N N tL O L O G ,,, O V) O, E L G - , y 7 u L O m ii aT L., O CL O O G N N '� Oz 6) U ` C: o` � u` mE Nro._ a.a G ov 0,� O _G m SS N O m L Q_ .0 G 3baN a "� -Q mo°o3N'3� °c� m� o° cY w� t m'o N UL L b G 0.N N _0 a 4 4O N O 0 G G i ° 0 0N Q , m .O O G NL O O G G .0 UO :O O m N a O a) vNj M 0.0 U z N -0 p 0 .� U L -G G C - O O O m 0 N O) ro O m o �➢ �. m h N- V1 U O O M C L V ct',,. vi4._ o4�z m:c o Qo o" mr CL .N OQ 4 v Y '�' U Cu N Q o ~ o 0) m o c o T 0 N 4 ucc ��c aE cE "crn 00 i3 .9 m ° v ° �0 CL -0 tiz u 0 c u ro �7) -c u m _Q m> N a° 3 m L L d E G pb} N) y V U N Q C) m L ¢oQ3L��ea m0-0 OC '30� Q4 O G 4 O G F' • N � �' � � L � m • a s 0 M 0 m D� o -o m �' n s In ID 10 0 CD CD In In CD C>> o m (D`G C J d �D N S �° . •�J n N S G d S j n n N N N J(p `nG S S (D ( (D 3 N (D 0 �N d N d "O ' O S A nS ^ < (D N .JS .. f(0 d .� 7 J D S O N N j N 0 _ In D LO (D (D CC j n O. . Z 0 3 J J d C N a ° N ° EL O. O O O O. (D (A O LA. 3 °- N � N (D -0 D-) O. C .. . M < to 3 O d O O OD (D -'0 (D � O i� 0 an CD o C SD Q C(D an ' O (D O C . S (D (D (D Q N J (D O. 0 0 S D " N J O S O N N < (D n 3 CD 3 C C N (D O O 3 (O n J M p _ C D J N (n O. D O. C') C C CD o J J O O d O. J (D d 0 CL om Q0 N d J m � m ( t S O O d m (D S 3 - CO. n ° m me 3 (D 0 (D 3 O. 0 3 o In vm o.� - - 3 x.m Qmmo^ -0 CD . O 0 0 3 ° N ' � 3 �N C S T N 7 n - 3 Or N S 11 3 (D ° NID d O (p D O. 0 O S ^ � .Z N m 0 0 :E O O 3 0 ^.0' O S In D O -0 � ^ o S f (N D O S d O X N ( 3 J D O C O. _ (D N S ^O-0 d Or O IO O 3 (- d d O d ' D ( oN (D O r - M 0 ;o N O n CD O ' 3 [O D N n n N N . m D 3 d CD n J C J _ :E CD ^ D m J 3 3 N � (D 3 N N -0 C ;z N N 0 3 Q, n D D (D j nD N 3 J J ' J Co d j O. O C (D " ( d ? N O Or Ij J D p n (D = (D O ^,0 N O C D C D D O. O S ^ N CL OL N n 0-0 ^ n . pIC 3 (D (D S Q N d (D 3 I � D ( d S d (n O O C O. N S` nN O. C d N (D (D n N o l p' N (D -0 O [n J J J l Lf) . N 0 0 O (D O 0 2 0 a O CD S N ( J S O N (D ' O n (D a � N C � S D C J �n w 0 d ° N (D / N ^ ^ C i N a o .. Io CD d N 0 0 0 � n - N O � D O d _ C O d o m , N N n ! I0 D n o w IS (D l d C 3 (D (D D D D O 3 D n C ( .. N' . S(D (D � n J J ( ( _ O__J C (D LO NO < d J D J N < < N N (< ( J° 3 D ° d O N J N Q ° -0J J � N N Or = ? N ( N n-O 3 N N N (n N � NN N (D + `< - (CD JC UT 0 O D J 3 (D N N <Nw LA. O " (D O - n D ° C (D CD CD Or (D O. 0 D N "O C ^ N < (D ( J y 0 0. O d S , O -O N D O W N J d N OO O n � - N- ° J (D JN - DJ ID O (D = D° J ( N _ (D (D (D r D- (D N ° N d ( ( N ' N J N (D D - N N O (J CD d < n S J I< - (D 3 O 3 N° J (dn (D < FD' j (D Q "O ( D O . N . (D O. (D N N O d C D (D N (D ° (D ^ f . C ^ N S O + O (D (D d d ? n C O N CD p (D -0 ` G � C N 0 (D 4 N N 0 ^C O N ^ ° c. '-< (D OJ ID O. O O N C (D 0 O O' ( O C CC ' d C D (O N ( I (D n N d J (D d N N n n �* -0 co (D G O < O n n & =. (D N O -O _ LO ? FA N ^ n O - D N O W N or 0 N C d (D O n !(D O O. (D J 0 NC - ( O n N N < O j O JN D E5' O (D 0-0 � d (p CD (D O O 0< 0 L n -D ^ (O n C O O n J — "O S. (D (D O O- 0 C �' 0 - o a N CD IS In - S N O N _ ( d OC C N C d' N S J N O N N n F LO ? ° S D (D n C J S 0.JS O n - d ( 0 (D N (D N O ( S O 0 N O (D S O L O D O LO O ( ( (p _ S ^ I3 "O ° J .NJ .JD .. .. O. o (D N n ( NC 3 0 3 CD -0 0 CD 0 O d J O C . O N (D f0 � CD OS ° � N �OO O d _ ( J.N S�JJd3 (D ¢C (D n (O O . (D n T O 3 (D J (n f0 D d ' O p N CD CD N C S O ( N N .+ (D S _ N (D N ' D D C 3 D O D ( f O n cz J J n 3 D N C ER n (D S (D < N N ° J J (D (Q D O— n `G O or w CD C O ( N O Or d 0 LO ((D J (D N (D N n (D - (D LO Q 7 C O. .N.. 0 m D� o -o m �' n s In ID 10 0 CD CD In In CD C>> o m (D`G C J d �D N S �° . •�J n N S G d S j n n N N N J(p `nG S S (D ( (D 3 N (D 0 �N d N d "O ' O S A nS ^ < (D N .JS .. f(0 d .� 7 J D S O N N j N 0 _ In D LO (D (D CC j n O. . Z 0 3 J J d C N a ° N ° EL O. O O O O. (D (A O LA. 3 °- N � N (D -0 D-) O. C .. . M < to 3 O d O O OD (D -'0 (D � O i� 0 an CD o C SD Q C(D an ' O (D O C . S (D (D (D Q N J (D O. 0 0 S D " N J O S O N N < (D n 3 CD 3 C C N (D O O 3 (O n J M p _ C D J N (n O. D O. C') C C CD o J J O O d O. J (D d 0 CL om Q0 N d J m � m ( t S O O d m (D S 3 - CO. n ° m me 3 (D 0 (D 3 O. 0 3 o In vm o.� - - 3 x.m Qmmo^ -0 CD . O 0 0 3 ° N ' � 3 �N C S T N 7 n - 3 Or N S 11 3 (D ° NID d O (p D O. 0 O S ^ � .Z N m 0 0 :E O O 3 0 ^.0' O S In D O -0 � ^ o S f (N D O S d O X N ( 3 J D O C O. _ (D N S ^O-0 d Or O IO O 3 (- d d O d ' D ( oN (D O r - M 0 ;o N O n CD O ' 3 [O D N n n N N . m D 3 d CD n J C J _ :E CD ^ D m J 3 3 N � (D 3 N N -0 C ;z N N 0 3 Q, n D D (D j nD N 3 J J ' J Co d j O. O C (D " ( d ? N O Or Ij J D p n (D = (D O ^,0 N O C D C D D O. O S ^ N CL OL N n 0-0 ^ n . pIC 3 (D (D S Q N d (D 3 I � D ( d S d (n O O C O. N S` nN O. C d N (D (D n N o l p' N (D -0 O [n J J J l Lf) . N 0 0 O (D O 0 2 0 a O CD S N ( J S O N (D ' O n (D a � N C � S D C J �n w 0 d ° N (D / N ^ ^ C i N a o .. Io CD d N o �^ o a o L ~° L X@ 0-0 @ a O c C = O ` @ > N N CD 0) C a Y O O. U_ C L O O O) O) C .0 O. 0 O a) v) N x N a) j) @ 3coa Y "O E H a N a 3 @ N �> a a) a) E _0y> o0F mm> °� O aNaE > N _0 3 C c@O N @ C O 3 a a) ° E U 0 °mom t o OEoNa 3.� r 0 0 Uca) C E_ U @ E .0 0-0 j C L d 0 U a) f V@ _@ L@ L U N C 3 Y C (n D L 1] o 0 C) @ -@ a) L N @ O` 'm w a) 0 o'- O 3 (NO a) >T L> 2' d 0 0 � � d E 0.0 O C Ff E� N C �o C C U- L C L U> 0 p O O. O 3 a) L @ @@ a C O -� w a) )" o a a) N @ CO v) a) V C E 3 C1 Tw C7 .Jm o N °c 0= C ?o m000@ E� m@ LLrno —0-0a) aw�o Uo °C E E °Ua) a)`OUT do3 0 oda0 Em 00 c)@0d>a�m E� T °aa >@ N L m @CU E '� o a rnE c E a)m' m m - -- U S o 'O " C m N c° @ a) O 'N E a) C DU a) 6) @ O a a) C L a E u _0 .0 C a) �O C C 0 > am Ern 3 °) °- c 'o o ° _ o 0 @ E a L O 0 E 69 C O_ a 3@ O w o.'= a d@ C a m' U 3' @ a p p C O) C@ L O U `O G @ a @ ✓) O C C @ x r- `o E n d o C aa° m a E C m 3 E o o ^ x 0 m E m c d Y v, LL°, = `° a>) a) 5 0 @ o 0) O LL 0 0Uj C N L O E_ U@ O O. N O O C O d C LL. @ C `E'EN L03' °v,c mac) .J@ T E y1)0 .0 n O 0 L .J 0. ° C E U 0@ 3 E a) a C= 0 O a) d O. L J a) a) ° L m a) E Y L 0 O d d° LCdE @mom L E �. >n. C d F-0 tN9 Nw� 1i m E O w N a "o). 0 • . • • o �^ o _0 v 0 C U L 0-0 @ a O Y 0. C a C C C C 3 (D 0 O O U0 O > m a) a> @ U C N a) Q 0 D Ea) odc, _0y> @ @ Tm >Li>�U = E LL c c C a) 3 U C @ o C O M. E U @ ` o "> a d m m' U U t o O` ° a-o o C > O O -a C C O E'= C dOJ L m y E O 0.y C U '" j C L d 0 U a - @ U @L @ a) ° o Z a) o a) E @` C) @ -@ a@) E a@) -2 a> o iva ivE'v o> > ® • • a) O omm_ C Vi T @ N 0 -0 R n a) a E @Y E= C crnv>�oma) -oo a� �° E a) .- C al C C T C @ ?: C y C a) > U E o U E a o U C 2 v a o N U Q) CT N a °> ° a �O o O C O cN0 .o a) = .- a) O a) y0 @ C d V) @ d C L V) 0-0 .r EL o C C O o o E @? 0 3° o@ oEo�>cu Em omEv) cL�v��aa))�� 4) N -_ O N O U a) U@ in C C .G @ O o E,o '� m'm O m O y Em o o m V) Coo 0 N U .� a C N@ E U T E a) C C@ -O O @@ N a U N N N, N a O Y a) o @ O T 3 d O C C° C C@ C U L Q) -@ 0 c E U C O C C@ 02 a) a @a) �cE` aa) CL Cz 3 L m m a p O 0° v) o E 0 C G° 0 C» C @.o- 0. c 3 U v) m o a v)0 `O o a) E @ v)Md vim a)• ° -0a) O 0 0) momma o_`mo_ uEcu-5 -0 aca)E m =m "0 Earo3E @a o•Nia Em° p O �o @ea�aE�aav oM o E T`? C a Q cC0 Qi CO " m o rn L@„ d 0 E� a) N` «^s �� =? rnE Eo v0 0�--s_ b C-0 > aa) aa)) a) M co vim E m � E - @ d 3 a) .�i' W @ a a) 0-.- » Ca N°U 3E0 Qi p �L-�aC NNE,.UYO E N O c @ c E a @ o O d 0 c a a) U O. ° y a)) 3 C X 3 U L V) C @ C C 0. @ O m° ° N N d a) N ���� @�N.oC) v.��mV) o'rnv ° u E >�o� ° -a O� OO �oaNrn>�oEn v d y @ v) @ 3 Ql a) a) Qi L N v) = O_ , C a @ 3 > O C T > �aLna.�v°L°EE �N a°DE0oa "off N N CD j- N -° • • • m s D NmdoCD 'vd� (Md -oLo ��d�^ O CD f0 "D S S pC d fv S C C d^ D f0 "O N C tn_ C (D O O d-0 (D O (D tOjj 0 CD N° n Cj n C N 3 -O n (D O to CD -a n S CO Cl °' to f0 `< O d N D L7 X CD o�4m3 Moan ?oo CD02 =o ��N� d �d�F mm and C Q-O 3 n n to CD C (D .C. j C �' f0 f0 N to Mo Cl CD 0 C, Q_ v Z d sto to s o < cl a o - n o C C d CD CD o o Z CD CD 0 S --o CD m o o C " d =m O m o < 3 O = o CD = d o CD er O < O C S _ C OD N N CO cl O C ' O C CD 5D m < D - d CD O n CD CD CD fO M d d CD �� d °� C CD m O O C 0 CD D A a n !L OT aj (D d S fCD N d o O 3 d O ( + C O cr CD N n cl d 3 O -0 -° (D N 3 D CD -O CD CD CD O CD KY -• O ,a o X- n - o Q -u d N D o oL O ° CO CD CD 0 3 0 3 d o CD s ° 3 CD . N CD N (D n d r ,No i C n C N O CD f^ d (D o o Cl O -0 > O cl — CS O O O O X . C C C � f d (D N ^ p d T ^ ^ CD d . d E T a C1 _. Cl C O O C > Co ° O N _ PL Lo CD O N o S ^ -O N 3 S Nj . O C D m `< f0 f0 �` CD o _0 CD .. CD E; r S N o o O �. N O m � 2.3 d d CD w CD S S= S F .Z- ? O O `G CD " ] -O O d 3 = g m w d CD CD d s Q� d N cl O D� �� <�o acdo ��� CST X CD C CD 0 O (D O C1 m (ND S d n N Cl O. d CD N # `G .n+ N N n _ C1 CD �- N CO CD N CD d CD CD tn_ m CD CD (Cl < CD O n (D j •< n O C f0 _S f0 Cj n N. O d �L _ - CO C CND O n CD CD ^ n to °' n > >. C, to d CD CD d (D n' d (D . f0 N f0 p CD .� to d O ..-O O cl Cv n �_ - N N_ 3 on "G O CO n O n (D 0 C) OS d o C CD C -+. 2 N ci 3 S d d oO C D i d E5' ^ N C N' S CD - CD to 0 0 n to ? 3 °o o CD Cl . p m O 4 d 3 0 CD Cl n Q S s CD CD n N CD O CD CD - cl M N C O T Sj (D •G c CD C = O - o n S C l O j N f0 o ^ CND to 3 O _S d __. cZ d !Z N Cl n d 3 O 0) O^ (D 3 3 N Co .+ 3 C1 CU n O cl - -O .^C- 3 Cn O S CO cD N W n C in p tD CD O 0 �O C 0 CO co a O- 0 0 -° Cy N CD d N Cr CD N d O' -O � N C O O. OT .�^'C- O CD O j (�-D ss CD S d 0. CD. Lo C d (D C p d n d o O d CD d^ 3 `� N .+ CD d O ° 0 3 3_o S -O � 3 cD O -o O fd 0 Cl (D O ( N CO 3 CD Cl C ID 3 CD -O G f0 �_: CO O CD = j (D CD S C7 3. f0 CCD to (D d C '� d 0 ^ O n to cl d CD Cr N a o s cl �'oL N o m FCC o ,>C m 0 CDN�nd O CD aaa CD $ g °- O .< to CD CD n CO t C . ,. m CD m m M 0 ` CD No m �� o °m0 C N o o 0) E ai m mU m m �o E��? -0 o .v O CL o T=1 N d m m V m ) 0_ C m s m COD c E 0 o N M 0 C p C d -p N m m O m Q= m � ° ' E 0 0 � oao�'a m 0 o ?� ° > O cp 0- " --0Nm 0)0)0)0)a) tKon 0 O N O m m m N °Oc '°E 0) d .0 C Q N Z - ° n m c vo 0 O ° Emm O O N 0 n 0 O C C) E ONcd ¢ m o C d m _m d O n 7 N y 0 m U C 0 M U 7 L ~ L E o o 0 m m m m E o d O O' t m m E L 0 m Q U 0 0 C S 3 N C a O C d0 7> d N C > C N N 0 d y o E N U 15 E o s m m E o CL 0) u Y m 7N1 C .� m 0 (O m C C U a) > m t>0 O T N U N T (�O O (O O m "O d m t C C m m m - m m n N O '- c 4) '> w" d c E E CL a1 m O 2r u0 '= IC N n L C n N T L m O 0-00 o C m d c 00 m N 4) (O d 0 'm0 °- C m d t A .Lm+ EO �Lm.. d .d C C V n m ` Y d° N m m> E m N O 3 C U O N m m m y 0 C L+ N n C 7 m .N.�' r0 T C S] Y m m m m c c `O � E E o C N m� � vi m C � m C 0 0)- O-� E co n O N T N QN m U m 7 d m r0 N (O m C m Q- o m 0 P3 CQl d o m rn E N 70 m d m N o d 00 d C an d "T p C C N C m .T.. Lm.. U N N •' I C U Q) > C A T L S m °- N- C N O m° d U p t C U d 7 N d C 0 0 a) CD 2r m U O (� U m m C d m m a U O p V) O N t > N O '(O = C m W O" m 0 E a) °- O 7L U 1 N C C m U m (gym O n U N m 3 S t C .0 M O H n n 0 N¢ m 3 C o d O x N C Y 1 cm o m n Nm 0)C, 0 `0U 1 Q) N Y v N m m .E m 0 d Y m 0 0 T� -0 Q C '> m 3 N N d m pl'0' U n O > m 3-E "' m dy N C �.O 0- - C m U L N y U m m m C m C T d O CL 'o E m `c° a g d° 0� ac) m o° E `� m° o" = s° ms m'0 E'mgmo 3...Em 00Eo °E U d o)„ �n `p m N E o- E ° d N C O m °) O m n a) m ED 0 c0 a) U .3 E p m o m= a) O N m ,C N 3 N y y o C t N'o U a) C O E m o .E 7 ="C= '0 0 L... c E m 0 EO y .o U E � -0 = N ° C C '0 .3 p i2 U O- C a) N C N C C r }> m m 1 3r m— �° m m �� � m ma � C aa) 3 o c E -o N o mss?: a)E Ncmm d mNOa mo omcym r'S N 0 C O y d C O L m t 0 _ �� O N C d C U n m U m> L 0 NN d = oEt °a) m'nm� V) —0C°Nm °- .�o�c3 v E3Foa EL°ao rnaoi =m >t.uU O) C O U E a) y C p vi M O p C O> E C .0 C O Q E0 .0 :° o f° 3 c m U m Y a `o c m N o d m E N m c 0) L ao xOd d UDi m m U mN OC C N N m U m .. -.0 N L.m+ C d c 0 O.0 0)0, 0 m O N a > O) a Z C 0 U m u m) -- L_. N m m > °'° ' Nv C a c E � c d' 0 p O O a O C m 'E m U N `L m p N N C C m U U U j m N d >0 a O 3 3 0) ` C E w 3 o o C C f 3 o c 3'0 @ o a c m o m '@ a) d d rno)u o 0 cE O a) C O O m C O N - > + .. m Na ocm0�E -0 0 .0-0 j L C m m a= O 2 U m L.. U:' ✓0 J 0) H O m¢ 3 H 0)'0,2 n E N �S e N ro 0 0 to ro N c> d ro N 0 0 N N N CD 0 d N d ro ro m d ro ro ro d ro 0 ro ro ro 1 � d ro N 0 0 0 1 N ro ro d i 0 1 0 to ro ro 1 a d d (D (C 3 N (D 6n T`. N D a O 3 ci O O^ A W (O — 0 (D - f0 n O X T d -' <_ O O O S N N(D S (O N (l (1 N d (D .C.. (D y cl V3i (O CD O O m n N O (D (C p C Q O .+ (D S✓ n y o m m� c D -0 CD m H c � (O cr 0 CD _ m o o- D > :E = cr < m O m ? O. N 'O n N I Q S (CD (D O (D (� C d° p s scl p O(O'm 0' n aC 0 S d Q 0 m Vi (D C w -°<dCD < y L= N=D= O j N ( O (O N D = n (D (D Cl d C M d S (D CD u c� (C m 'O Cl C d `GS n d N +O S C �(D C O (D ( (D OC N (D (O - ^ -0 (C c ^ Q S O CD ^ d 0 n O m S O C CD < O (D O (D C (C Cl (D y CS ifn i 0 (D (O CD N N O l d `� O 3 N O O N N CD an 0 CD D N N N S d (l C m W CD CD O- (D (Sp O."O S(p O^ < (p O f/i C N =. — = (D d Q VOi CD (D N C 0 0 ur N O S S d O O C S N (O CD CD CD I CD d X Q C: w (D 0 s (o w' (D ( F ° 'o a m o CD o C N �. (D O W j N S (D = N CD O C C'.< ^ O = S d N F, c> 0 ro 1 0 CD N ro N y 0 n P N 0 .CD 0 ro d c> ro N 0 ro Ci] 0 ro 1 ro N d 0 d ro N N ro ro N 0 ro ro 0 0 Ci] ro N d N ro d N ro E. N d ro 0 P d 0 H 0 ro M) 1 ro 1 c> 6 ro d ro ro ro n d 0 • ro ro N ro 0 N 0 1 d ro 0 p CD 1 0 1 F, c> 0 ro 1 0 CD N ro N y 0 n P N 0 .CD 0 ro d c> ro N 0 ro Ci] 0 ro 1 ro N d 0 d ro N N ro ro N 0 ro ro 0 0 Ci] ro N d N ro d N ro E. N d ro 0 P d 0 H 0 ro M) 1 ro 1 c> 6 ro d ro ro ro n d 0 • ro ro N ro C O V C 3 O LL 7 '� 00 t O U o W U U a T =a C y oa A tCE CL O U 0 O U Y U N a d °O L W U o U .o U c N -0 C N 0 I s CD J _T U d (G N N C N C m C a) d 0 N U `o O U a) E Q t 0 0 Z N rn ti J C CD c C m C t0 a a d N C 0 U O F C O .O 0 O C N C m H O C N E r CL N m zs N m N O C 0 O U o m J T C 0 O U m C Y m C N U Y O U N 5 U X W C ' � C U �C G V U d y LL U t N c O O N a) t0 E U o U E U d a 0 Y N O N N `O a U m g U N U N x W .G d C Q N C C d E E E O U m N Q N C W 0 U m m U X W O Y N O C m U C J N m 0 0 N aa) Q C_ U g N 0 C a .T+ �C E E 0 U m N Q N C W O U a) E m Ql O a O E a) C C O Y C. n O d 7 C A C O -`o (O 0 U U W 3 L N d Y U G N V C V) m V C O C O .N } C O W U N i 0 N C � O Q � U_ t � N O � o C T N N C_ N � C C W m C E @ C N O C > N C U W o C (O m j N t U � o O N U O � a` oa C c N d C Q N b N O r N U O N U X W N U U _T C. N 3 O N m V C J C W m O m 0 C E .= U U Y 3 C M W o KFp�A`- rAW��r -1 Amam��xa3�aQ�c�d d A d d N N 3= d @ d d'O 3 3 d O O O Lam�M @0NC)C)0mom p O N@ TI O3 R m C O n 4 � c?'�� � d a� p n p 6 � @ @ O � CD 3 @ 33 �o C) n N N d d S C @ ° 0 W S O O N N�nmD m fD ss w m D to D D n N @ d R m n _T.N D p. �f^7K co -v D 2zm <3o�C) @xo d 3 0 o S N yN� °nO =< u O D @= 3 N N@ C p c a m @o p n w d @ @ 3 ()m33mdm u, d N n [D > > d @ ° ?I N N X p 0° O ° m @ 0 c d n d m N pf N 3 O O @_ m g Cv+ o N 3 d O_ n 3 C ° N n @ 3 ° m d O @ O � � n . d x pi N d N d 0 0 0 D G d 0 :; jt13 @ Z N N@ d N Z O Z@ N M �D �G tp (D j 0 C m fD N (A n O N r« .�-. c O-p rctC NoOndO�o� M= = @nmin @M� b7d O D n FD S @ c@ D n o n O w uN p N o n o 3 @ m 3 d C7 n m� n �D c N n N d o � � C d n n n 00 c � d m n � 3 � o @ =c Q� @ 'c o -co N m @ C � n o = 3 -o ss @ �^ o n c m 3 0 0 En 6° N N° m d d d d o AmDc� �°i m ° Sa° 3d WCfl d � O N"d0 N 7 O O> O 3 fD 7c LP 3 O d C `< o N C o, a, p@j N p n��c obi F 0 -M nmmm EC)8i m' ? 5 '�" () " m R d's `• d 3 m D m D n O D n p3 O d N 0 9 o O S n � a @ d CD (D 3 a 7J CD �. Q O a3 d 3 N" n N CD _ O O O N cD 0' d � ca d (p � d a CD 3 d d - 3 ° O 3 •V'. d d N d o E CD n (D O O. 3 ° 3 m O n �^ O O^ a - Q 3 c d 0 3 @ CD d CD 0 3 3 O 7 d d d Q a O d d C d or 6 M WAN MMMOR9 2F, M- W-1 µPi 4f state a#swoNoq� Dioxide E ms I 41�1 A-W -rP w P11,11-A ir flks; th Tarbon ince1990 Environment California Research a Policy Center • April 2007 -V state a#swoNoq� Dioxide E ms I 41�1 A-W -rP w P11,11-A ir flks; th Tarbon ince1990 Environment California Research a Policy Center • April 2007 The Carbon Boom State and National Trends in Carbon Dioxide Emissions Since 1990 April 2007 Acknowledgements Written by Alison Cassady of the Environment California Research & Policy Center. Data analysis provided by Tony Dutzik of the Frontier Group. © 2007, Environment California Research & Policy Center Cover photos: NASA (Earth); Alexey Stiop /FOTOLIA (smokestacks); Aaron Kohr /FOTOLIA (traffic); Canadian Arctic Shelf Exchange Study (polar bear). The author would like to thank David Rich at NESCAUNI for reviewing thus report. This report is made possible with funding from The Pew Charitable Trusts and the Energy Foundation for the federal office of Environment California Research & Policy Center. The opinions expressed in thus report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of our funders. For a copy of this report, visit our website or send a check for $30 made payable to Environment California Research & Policy Center at the following address: Environment California Research & Policy Center 3435 Wilshire Blvd. 4385 Los Angeles, CA 90010 (213) 251 -3688 ,kv rv%v.ern =ironmentcalifornia.ors 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary - - - -- Introduction Temperatures Rising: The Consequences of Global Warming ----- ................. Early Signs of Global Warming-------------- - - - - -- Consequences of Increased Warming... -------- Global Warming Pollution in the United States_.__ Sources of Carbon Dioxide ------------------------------- The United States Emits the Most Carbon Dio) U.S. Action to Curb Global Warming The U.S. Government Has Failed to Act ---------------------------- States Take Action to Cut Global Warming Pollution- ......... Report Findings: Global Warming Pollution on the Rise. Carbon Dioxide Pollution is on the Rise, Electric Power Sector Transportation Sector Conclusion and Recommendations -------------------- Methodology .................... Appendices °4 G 7 7 8 9 -----9 .........11 11 11 14 15 18 24 30 .......32 Appendix A. Energy- Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions from All Sources, 1990 - 2004,.•........35 Appendix B. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Coal -Fired Power Plants, 1990 - 2004 ... ............37 Appendix C. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Natural Gas -Fired Power Plants, 1990 - 2004 - - - -38 Appendix D. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Transportation Sector, 1990-2004. ............ 39 Appendix E. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Motor Gasoline Consumption and Trends in Vehicle Miles Traveled, 1990- 2004--------------------------------------------------------- -- ---- -- ---- ------- ------ ----40 End Notes ... ..... ..... .. 41 3 Executive Summary he early effects of global warming are already evident across the United States and worldwide. The past nine years have all been among the 25. warmest for the contiguous United States, a streak unprecedented in the historical record. if emissions are left unchecked, temperatures will continue to rise, and the effects of global warming will become more severe. This report examines trends in U.S. global warming pollution nationally and by state and concludes that the failure to limit emissions nationwide has allowed global warming pollution to grow out of control. In February 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change JPCC), a United Nations body charged with assessing the scientific record on global warming, found that the evidence of global warming is "unequivocal" and concluded, with more than 90 percent certainty, that human activities are responsible for most of the observed rise in global average temperatures since the mid -20'h century. If current trends in emissions continue, the IPCC projects that temperatures will increase anywhere from an additional 1.1 ° to 6.4 °C (2° to 11.5 °F). The consequences of this increase in global temperatures will vary from place to place but will include sea level rise, heat waves, drought, increasingly intense tropical storms, loss of plant and animal species, decreased crop yields, decreased water availability, and the spread of infectious diseases. The United States is the largest worldwide contributor to global warming, releasing almost a quarter of the world's carbon dioxide, the primary global warming pollutant. Power plants, cars, and light trucks are the largest U.S. sources of carbon dioxide. Existing technology could substantially reduce global warming pollution by making power plants and factories more efficient, making cars go farther on a gallon of gasoline, and shifting the country to clean, renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar power. Unfortunately, the U.S. government so far has rejected mandatory limits on global warming pollution, allowing carbon dioxide emissions to rise unabated. Using the most recent state fossil fuel consumption data from the Department of Energy, this report examines trends in carbon dioxide emissions nationally and by state for the 15 years spanning 1990 to 2004. Our major findings include the following: Carbon dioxide pollution is on the rise. Carbon dioxide pollution from fossil fuel consumption is on the rise in the United States, increasing by 18 percent between 1990 and 2004. Electric power plants and the transportation sector — particularly cars and fight trucks —drove the increase in emissions nationwide. Between 1990 and 2004, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector jumped by 28 percent and from the transportation sector by almost a quarter (23 percent). Carbon dioxide emissions increased the most in the Southeast, Great Fakes /Kdwest, and Gulf South regions over the 15 year period. The states experiencing the largest absolute increases in carbon dioxide emissions between 1990 and 2004 are Texas, Florida, Illinois, North Carolina, and Georgia. 4 The electric power sector was the primary factor driving the increase in U.S. carbon dioxide emissions between 1990 and 2004. The electric power sector accounted for more than half (55 percent) of the U.S. emissions increase. Rising electricity demand from residential, commercial and industrial consumers spurred this rapid increase in carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector. Coal -fired power plants accounted for most of the increase in carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector. Between 1990 and 2004, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from coal -fired power plants increased by a quarter, accounting for three- fourths of the emissions increase in the electric power sector and 42 percent of the nation's overall increase in carbon dioxide emissions. The states that experienced the largest absolute increases in carbon dioxide emissions from coal -fired power plants between 1990 and 2004 are Illinois, Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, and Indiana. Between 1990 and 2004, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas consumption in the electric power sector increased by more than two thirds (almost 70 percent), accounting for 13 percent of the nation's overall increase in carbon dioxide emissions. The states that experienced the largest absolute increases in carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas -fired power plants between 1990 and 2004 are Florida, Texas, Arizona, California, and Nevada. The transportation sector also played a major role in driving up U.S. carbon dioxide emissions between 1990 and 2004. The transportation sector accounted for 40 percent of the nation's overall increase in carbon dioxide emissions during this time period. Cars and light trucks were responsible for most of the increase in carbon dioxide emissions from the transportation sector. Between 1990 and 2004, carbon dioxide emissions from motor gasoline consumption increased by almost a quarter (22 percent), accounting for more than half of the emissions increase in the transportation sector. The states with the largest absolute increases in carbon dioxide emissions from motor gasoline consumption between 1990 and 2004 include Texas, Florida, California, Georgia, and Arizona. The longer we wait to reduce global warming pollution, the harder the task will be in the future. Many U.S. states have started taking important steps to cut global warming pollution within their borders, but. the global warming problem also demands a national solution. Key components of an action plan to cut global warming pollution include: Establishing mandatory, science -based limits on global warming pollution that reduce emissions from today's levels by the end of the decade, by at least 15 -20 percent by 2020, and by at least 80 percent by 2050. Reducing our dependence on fossil fuels by making our homes and businesses more energy efficient, making our cars and SUVs go farther on a gallon of gasoline, and generating more electricity from renewable energy sources. 5 Science is clear that the world faces dramatic consequences if we fail to rein in global warming pollution from the burning of fossil fuels. Science is also clear that what we do now to reduce emissions can make a difference — not in stopping global warming entirely but in avoiding the worst consequences of a warming world. As dire as the predictions of a warmer world are, the good news is that we have technology at our disposal now to begin making significant cuts in global warming pollution. Automakers have technologies on the shelf to make cars that go much farther on a gallon of gasoline. America has the know -how to build houses, office buildings, and factories that use much less energy. And we know hour to generate electricity from the sun, wind, and other natural forces. The states are beginning to put real muscle behind policies designed to curb global warming pollution. California, which emitted more carbon dioxide in 2004 than all but a dozen countries worldwide,' enacted the first - ever statewide cap on global warming pollution and has committed to reduce its global warming emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. California and other nine states have adopted limits on carbon dioxide emissions from cars and light trucks. In 2005, seven New England states formed the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to cap global warming emissions from the region's power plants at current levels and reduce them by 10 percent by 2019; another three states have committed to join the program. More than 20 states and Washington, DC have committed to obtaining more of their electricity from wind, solar, and other clean, renewable sources. In addition, several states and regions have adopted, or are Introduction considering adopting, long -term goals for reducing global warming pollution. Momentum also is building at the federal level to take serious action to cut global warming pollution and move toward a cleaner energy future. Fresh from his Academy Awards victory for An Inconvenient Trutb, former Vice President Al Gore, in testimony before Congress in March 2007, called for immediately freezing emissions of carbon dioxide and cutting emissions by 90 percent by 20502 Several members of Congress and scientists have issued similar calls to action.' Despite the leadership of the states and a renewed public focus on global warming, we face significant challenges moving forward. The Bush administration has been a staunch opponent of mandatory limits on global warming pollution, domestically and internationally. Many large corporations continue to fight mandatory limits and other common sense clean energy solutions. Utilities and power generators also are proposing to build a vast new fleet of coal - fired power plants across America. If even a fraction of the proposed number is built, it will become far more difficult to achieve reductions in global warming pollution on the scale necessary to avoid the worst effects of global warming. This report shows that U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide have increased steadily since 1990. Until the U.S. government enacts science- based, mandatory limits on global warming pollution and moves us toward a cleaner energy future, emissions will continue to climb, increasing the likelihood that future generations will live with serious — and potentially devastating — impacts of global warming. 6 Temperatures Rising: The Consequences of Global In February 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a United Nations body charged with assessing the scientific record on global warning, found that the evidence of global warming is "unequivocal" and concluded, with more than 90 percent certainty, that human activities are responsible for most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid - 20`r century.' Water vapor, carbon dioxide, and other gases in the atmosphere trap some of the sun's radiation close to the earth's surface, warming the planet enough for life to flourish. Without these gases, the earth would be too cold for life to survive. In the last 150 years, however, human activities — primarily the burning of fossil fuels -- have substantially increased the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere. As a result, more of the sun's heat is being trapped close to the earth's surface, causing global average surface temperatures to rise. Since 1750, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased by 35 percent. Concentrations of other global warming gases have increased as well.5 EARLY SIGNS OF GLOBAL WARMING According to the IPCC, global average surface temperatures increased by more than 1.4 °F (0.8 °C) since the second half of the 19' Warming century' Since 1975, temperatures have been increasing at a faster rate of about 0.36 °F per decade.' The past nine years have all been among the 25 warmest years on record for the contiguous United States, an unprecedented streak in the historical record! Globally, 11 of the last 12 years (1995 -2006) rank among the 12 warmest years in the instrumental record of global surface temperature.' The December 2006 - February 2007 winter season was the warmest on record globally,10 and 2006 was the warmest year on record for the contiguous United States." The early effects of global warming are evident across the United States and worldwide. In September 2006, University of Colorado - Boulder researchers found that between April 2004 and April 2006, the Greenland ice sheet, the Earth's second - largest reservoir of fresh water, lost ice mass at about two and a half times the rate of the previous two -year period.12 Warmer oceans may be contributing to more severe hurricanes. A September 2006 study and others have shown that global warning is the primary cause of rising sea surface temperatures in the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean hurricane formation regions.13 According to a study by the National Center for Atmospheric Research, global warming contributed to the devastating 2005 hurricane season, causing about half of the extra hurricane - fueling warmth in the waters of the North Atlantic in 2005.14 In the western United States, snowpack has declined over the last 50 years, .. threatening the region's scarce water supplies u The World Health Organization estimates that global warming already claims the lives of 150,000 people each year. 16 CONSEQUENCES OF INCREASED WARMING As temperatures continue to rise, the effects of global warming will become more severe. According to the IPCC, if historical trends in emissions continue, temperatures could rise by an additional 1.1° to 6.4 °C (2° to 11.5 °F)." Many scientists and policy- makers (such as the European Union) recognize a 2 °C (3.6 °F) increase in global average temperatures over pre - industrial levels as a rough limit beyond which large - scale, dangerous impacts of global warming would become unavoidable." Even below a 2 °C increase, significant impacts from global warming are likely, such as damage to many ecosystems, decreases in crop yields, sea level rise, and the widespread_ loss of coral reefs.' Beyond 2 °C, however, the impacts of global warming could become much more severe, including eventual loss of the Greenland ice sheet, triggering a sea -level rise of seven meters over the next millennium (and possibly much faster)20 and displacing millions of people?' At temperature increases of 3 °C to 4 °C, far more dramatic shifts could take place, including a potential shutdown of the thermohaline circulation, which carries warmth from the tropics to Europe; melting of the West Antarctic ice sheet, triggering an additional five to six meter rise in sea level; major crop failures in many parts of the world; and extreme disruptions to ecosystems. 22 0 Global Warming Pollution in the United States SOURCES OF CARBON DIOXIDE Burning fossil fuels — coal, oil, and natural gas — produces the majority of U.S. global warming pollution. Carbon dioxide (COQ emissions comprised 84 percent of U.S. global warming emissions in 2005 (Figure A). Other global warming pollutants include methane, nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SFJ 23 Power plants are the nation's largest source of carbon dioxide emissions from energy consumption, contributing 40 percent of emissions from energy sources in 2005 (Figure B). Passenger vehicles are the next largest source, contributing 20 percent of emissions. Other transportation sources contribute an additional 13 percent of emissions. The remaining 27 percent of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from energy sources comes from the direct consumption of fossil fuels in the commercial, industrial, and residential sectors .24 Figure A. U.S. Global Warming Emissions, 200525 Energy - related COP, 83% NO 9% and Figure B. Sources of U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Energy Consumption, 200526 Industrial 17% Commercial 4% .. Residential 6% Electric 40% Transportation 33% THE UNITED STATES EMITS THE MOST CARBON DIOXIDE The United States is the largest global contributor of carbon dioxide emissions, releasing 22 percent of the world's total carbon dioxide emissions in 2004 — more than China and India combined or all of Europe (Figure C)." On a per- capita basis, the United States emits twice as much carbon dioxide as the United Kingdom or Japan, more than five times as much as China, and 19 times as much as India. 28 9 Figure C. Energy- Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Country, 200429 Rest of World 29% India 4% Japan 5 °h RusgaJ 6 °% Europe ll% United States 22% Chino n% Since World War II, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from energy use have increased at a rate of just under two percent per year." The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that U.S. emissions will continue to rise by an average of 1.2 percent per year between now and 2030. Should this occur, in 2030 the United States will release 37 percent more carbon dioxide than it does today." Such an increase in emissions would make it impossible for the world to achieve the emission reductions needed to prevent the worst repercussions of global warming, since at least one - fourth of carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels remains in the atmosphere for more than 500 years." 10 U.S. Action to Curb Global Warming Pollution THE U.S. GOVERNMENT HAS FAILED TO ACT Because carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels can persist in the atmosphere for hundreds of years, the decisions we make today will have ramifications for generations. Leading scientists now indicate that we only have a narrow window of time left — possibly a decade — to reduce emissions below today's levels and start the process of stabilizing concentrations of global warming gases at a level that averts devastating and irreversible impacts.33 Ina December 2005 speech, James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, stated, "The Earth's climate is nearing, but has not passed, a tipping point, beyond which it will be impossible to avoid climate change with far ranging undesirable consequences." These consequences, he said, would "constitute practically a different planet.i34 Despite the urgency to act, the Bush administration has so far rejected mandatory limits on global warming emissions and has pursued an energy policy that commits the United States to an even greater reliance on fossil fuels. The Bush administration's policy on global warming is to allow global warming emissions to continue to increase while committing only to cut the country's "greenhouse gas intensity" —how much we emit per unit of economic activity." STATES TAKE ACTION TO CUT GLOBAL WARMING POLLUTION In the absence of federal leadership, states across the country have taken action to reduce their global warming emissions. These state policies not only will cut global warming pollution but could provide momentum for action at the federal level. For example, key actions include: In September 2006, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law the Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32), the first -ever statewide cap on glohal warming pollution. The law will reduce annual global warming emissions in California by 25 percent by 2020 (equivalent to 1990 levels). Governor Schwarzenegger has further committed the state to reduce its global warming emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. In September 2006, California Governor Schwarzenegger also signed into law a bill (SB 1368) requiring the California Energy Commission to establish a global warming emissions standard for electricity used in California, whether it is generated in -state or imported from power plants in other states. The standard will require that new long -term investments in power generation come from facilities with emissions as low as, or lower than, emissions from a clean and efficient natural gas power plant.37 11 In 2005, the governors of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, and Vermont agreed to the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to cap global warming emissions from the region's power plants at current levels and reduce them by 10 percent by 2019. Former Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich signed legislation requiring the state to join RGGI by June 2007; Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick signed on in February 2007; and Rhode Island Governor Donald Carcieri announced in his 2007 State of the State address that Rhode Island will join RGGI as well. The RGGI states recently finalized a model rule to implement the program, and each of the RGGI states will put the rule in place in 2007.38 In February 2007, the governors of Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oregon, and Washington announced the Western Climate Action Initiative. Within six months, the governors will set a regional global warming emissions - reduction goal; within 18 months, they will develop "a design for a regional market -based multi- sector mechanism, such as a load -based cap- and -trade program" to achieve the emissions - reduction goal.39 Nine states — Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington —have adopted California's clean cars program, which limits carbon dioxide emissions from cars and light trucks. The Maryland State Senate and House of Delegates have passed legislation —which the governor has pledged to sign —to opt in as well. Beginning in model year 2009, California's program will require automakers to reduce the average amount of global warming pollution from their cars, light trucks and SUVs. By 2015, new cars will be required to emit 34 percent and light trucks 25 percent less global warming pollution on average.'o More than 20 states and Washington, DC have committed to obtain a growing portion of their electricity from wind, solar, and other clean, renewable sources. These state renewable electricity standards will reduce total annual carbon dioxide emissions by 105 million metric tons by 2020 —the equivalent of taking 17.1 million cars off the road .41 In addition, several states have adopted, or are considering adopting, long -term goals for reducing global warming emissions. For example: In February 2007, New Jersey Governor John Corzine established a statewide goal to reduce global warming emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and to 80 percent below 2006 levels by 20502 In February 2007, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich announced a statewide goal to reduce global warming emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and to 60 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.43 In February 2007, Washington Governor Christine Gregoire established a statewide goal to reduce global warming emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2035, and 50 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.40 In 2006, Arizona established a statewide goal to reduce global warming emissions to 2000 levels by 2020 and to 50 percent below 2000 levels by 2040.45 In 2005, Oregon established a statewide goal to reduce global warming emissions to 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 12 and 75 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.46 In 2005, New Mexico established a statewide goal to reduce global warming emissions to 2000 levels by 2012, 10 percent below 2000 levels by 2020, and 75 percent below 2000 levels by 2050. In October 2006, Governor Richardson unveiled a roadmap for achieving the 2020 goal.47 In 2001, the New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers established a regional goal to reduce global warming emissions to 1990 levels by 2010, at least 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, and by 75 -85 percent in the long term.48 Despite these state actions, the lack of a national strategy has allowed and will continue to allow U.S. carbon dioxide emissions to rise, as examined in detail in the pages that follow. 13 Report Findings: Global Warming Pollution on the Rise This report examines trends in carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel use for the 15 years spanning 1990 to 2004.' The international community uses 1990 as its emissions baseline from which all emission reduction targets are calculated. Using the most recent state fossil fuel consumption data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (ETA), we estimated U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel consumption nationally and by state, economic sector, and fuel source. Emissions are attributed to the state where fossil fuels were burned; as such, the data do not take into account that some states generate little electricity within their borders and import much from neighboring states' power plants. Emissions from those power plants are attributed to the states in which they are located, rather than the states that consumed the power. ' The carbon dioxide emission estimates included in this report include consumption of fossil fuels for energy use as well as non -fuel uses of fossil fuels (for example, consumption of natural gas in fertilizer manufacturing). The estimates also include energy consumed by airplanes and ships in international travel (international "bunker fuels'). The estimates do not include carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas flaring, emissions from geothermal energy use, emissions from U.S. territories, and emissions not related to fossil fuel consumption (for example, some industrial process emissions and carbon dioxide fluxes from soils). Those comparing emission estimates in this document with those in other published sources should be aware of these differences. For more information, please see "Methodology." Our key findings include: Carbon dioxide pollution is on the rise in the United States, increasing by 18 percent between 1990 and 2004. The electric power sector was responsible for more than half (55 percent) of the U.S. emissions increase during this time period. Coal -fired power plants drove the increase in carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector. The transportation sector also was a significant factor in rising U.S. carbon dioxide emissions, accounting for 40 percent of the increase in U.S. emissions between 1990 and 2004. Rising carbon dioxide emissions from cars and light trucks drove the increase in transportation sector emissions. 14 CARBON DIOXIDE POLLUTION IS ON THE RISE Between 1990 and 2004, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel consumption increased by 18 percent, from 4.98 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide to 5.87 billion metric tons.' During this time period, carbon dioxide emissions from coal consumption increased by more than 17 percent, oil consumption by almost 20 percent, and natural gas consumption by almost 16 percent (Figure D). Oil is used primarily in the transportation sector; the vast majority of coal is used to generate electricity; and natural gas is used mainly for heating and powering our homes and businesses and in industry. Figure D. U.S. Emissions of Carbon Dioxide from Fossil Fuel Consumption, Total and by Fuel Source, 1990 -2004 1,000 6,000 a 5,000 ti 4,000 3,000 E E 2,000 1,000 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 —A— Coal � —oil --*— Nalotal Gas --M— Total b Our national numbers are based on the sum of the 50 states and Washington, DC. Refer to the methodology for a detailed description of what this sum does and does not include. WHAT'S IN A SECTOR? Commercial Sector.. The commercial sector consists of service - providing facilities and equipment belonging to businesses; federal, state, and local governments, including institutional living quart ers and sewage treatment facilities; and other private and public organizations, such as; religious, social, or fraternal groups. This sector uses energy primarily for space: heating,, water heating, air conditioning, fighting, refrigeration, cooking, and Winning a wide variety of other equipment. Electric,Powei Sector: The electric power sector 'consists of electricity, only and combined heat and power plants witli„tlie primary purpose of selling electricity, or electricity and'heat, to the public. Industrial Sector. The industrial sector consists of all facilities and equipment used for producing, processing, or assembling goods. The industrial sector includes manufacturinT,, agriculture, forestry, fislung - and hunting; mining, including oil and gas extraction; and construction. - Energy use in this sector is largely for process heat and cooling: and powering machiney; with lesser amounts used for facility heating, ! air - conditioning, and .fighting. The industrial sector also uses fossil fuels as raw material inputs. R'esid'ential Sector: The residential sector consists of living quarters for private households. This sector uses `energy primarily for space heating, water heating; air conditionng, ,lighting; refrigeration, cooking, and running a variety of other appliances. Transportation, Sector; The ltransportation sector consists of all vehicles with the primary purpose of transporting people and /or goons from one physical location. to another, - including;. automobiles, trucks, buses,' motorcycles,' trains and other rail vehicles, aircraft, and ships; ':barges, and other waterborne. vehicles. Vehicles with a- primary purpose not related to transportation,, - such as construction cranes and. bulldozers, farming, vehicles, and warehouse tractors and fo "fts, fall, in the.sector of their primary use. .Sourxe Em'rgylnfarma nAdminirtration The electric power and transportation sectors drove the increase in carbon dioxide emissions nationwide.` Between 1990 and 2004, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector jumped by 28 percent and from the transportation sector by almost a quarter (23 percent), as shown in Table 1. Regionally, carbon dioxide emissions grew the most in the Southeast over the 15 year period, with emissions increasing by 183 million metric tons (31 percent). In the Great Lakes /Midwest and Gulf South states, carbon dioxide emissions increased by 171 million metric tons and 146 million metric tons, respectively, a 16 percent increase in both regions (Table 2). Texas emitted more carbon dioxide than any other state in 2004 (Table 3). Texas also experienced the greatest absolute increase in emissions between 1990 and 2004. In 1990, Texas emitted 560.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide; by 2004, the state's emissions had grown to 659 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (Table 4). In addition to Texas, the states that experienced the largest absolute increases in carbon dioxide emissions between 1990 and 2004 are Florida, Illinois, North Carolina, Georgia, Missouri, Arizona, Indiana, Virginia, and Alabama (Figure E). It is important to note that there are two ways to account for emissions caused by electric power plants. One way is to allocate emissions to the power plants themselves. Mother way is to split those emissions among the economic sectors that consume electricity - primarily the commercial, residential, and industrial sectors. In this report, we assign ernissions to the power plants themselves. The 28 percent increase in carbon dioxide emissions from power plants would not have occurred without increases in demand from residential, commercial, and industrial consumers. Table 1. Trends in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions, by Sector, 1990 -2004 Commercial 223.6 232.7 9.1 4% Electric 1,808.3 2,312.2 504.0 28% Industrial 1,045.5 1,033.7 -11.8 -1% Residential 339.5 369.4 29.9 9% Transportation 1,567.8 1,924.6 362.8 23% Plains 321.4 398.3 77.0 24% Table 2. Regional Trends in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions, 1990 -20044 Southeast 600.3 7815 183.2 31% Goat Ickes/ Midwest 1,101.2 1272.3 171.1 16% Gulf South 929.0 1,074.8 145.8 16% Mountain West 359.7 471.2 1115 31% Mid-Atlantic 664.0 766.2 102.2 15% Plains 321.4 398.3 77.0 24% Pacific West 513.6 578.4 64.8 13% Northeast 489.6 527.9 38.3 8% Table 3. Top 10 States for Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions, 2004 1 Tx 659.0 2 CA 385.4 3 PA 276.6 4 OH 261.8 5 FL 255.4 6 IN 236.2 7 IL 233.8 8 NY 212.8 9 LA 190.0 10 MI 185.8 a Great Ickes /Midwest-, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin; Gulf South: Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Texas; Mid - Atlantic: Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia; Mountain West: Arizona, Colorado, klaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming; Northeast: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont; Pacific West: Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington; Plains: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota; and Southeast: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and Tennessee. 16 Table 4. Top 10 States for Absolute Increases in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions, 1990 -2004 1 TX 560.5 659.0 98.5 18 2 FL 186.9 255.4 68.5 37 3 IL 191.9 233.8 41.9 22 4 NC 110.0 149.2 39.2 36% 5 CA 138.0 173.7 35.7 W,14 6 Mo 102.6 137.9 35.3 34% 7 AZ 62.4 95.9 33.5 54% 8 IN 203.9 236.2 32.2 16% 9 VA 94.3 126.4 32.1 34 10 AL 109.4 141.2 31.8 29% The regional story changes slightly when we look at carbon dioxide emissions between 2000 (a peak year before emissions declined slightly in 2001) and 2004. The Southeast still comes out on top for the largest absolute increase in carbon dioxide emissions, rising by more than 29 million metric tons over this five year period, or four percent. But the Mountain West and Pacific West also experienced significant increases in carbon dioxide emissions, jumping by 25 million metric tons (six percent) and 20 million metric tons (almost four percent), respectively. In the Twountain West, the transportation and electric power sectors drove this increase. In the Pacific West, however, it was the transportation sector and industrial sector - not the electric power sector -that pushed up carbon dioxide emissions. Appendix A shows trends in carbon dioxide emissions for each state from 1990 to 2004. Figure E. State Trends in Rising Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 1990 -2004 - 17 - 30 mmt increase, - 31- 60 mmt Incres" - 61 mmt increase and up 17 THE ELECTRIC POWER SECTOR ACCOUNTED FOR MORE THAN HALF OF THE INCREASE IN U.S. CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS Between 1990 and 2004, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector jumped by more than a quarter (28 percent), from 1.8 billion metric tons in 1990 to 2.3 billion metric tons in 2004 (Figure F). Overall, the electric power sector was responsible for more than half (55 percent) of the nation's increase in carbon dioxide emissions between 1990 and 2004.` Figure F. Trends in Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Electric Power Sector, 1990 -2004 7,001 6,000 x 5,000 4,000 r 3,000 E 2,000 E 1,000 1990 1991 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 f Elenru �— iof ul (All Senors) The electric power sector releases carbon dioxide primarily by burning coal and natural gas. Emissions from coal- and natural gas- Again, the commercial, industrial, and residential sectors consume the power generated by the electricity sector, but carbon dioxide produced from this electricity generation is attributed to the electric power sector, not the sectors of end use. The increase in carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector would not have occurred without growing demand from residential, commercial, and industrial consumers. burning power plants increased between 1990 and 2004, helping to drive up U.S. carbon dioxide emissions nationwide. - Coal -Fired Power Plants - Coal has the highest carbon content of any fossil fuel per unit of energy, meaning that burning coal for electricity produces more carbon per unit of energy than does burning oil or natural gas, which contain about 25 percent and 45 percent less carbon than coal, respectively.' )Xnbile coal -fired power plants produced 51 percent of U.S. electricity in 2004,50 they emitted 83 percent of carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation.'' Nearly all of the coal burned in the United States fuels coal -fired power plants. The electric pourer sector accounted for almost all (91 percent) of the U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from coal consumption in 2004. As such, coal -fired power plants played a key role in driving up carbon dioxide emissions nationwide. Between 1990 and 2004, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from coal -fired power plants increased by a quarter (25 percent), from more than 1.5 billion metric tons in 1990 to more than 1.9 billion metric tons in 2004 (Figure G). Coal -fired power plants accounted for three - fourths of the carbon dioxide emissions increase in the electric power sector and 42 percent of the nation's overall increase in carbon dioxide emissions between 1990 and 2004. lu Figure G. Trends in Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Coal -Fired Power Plants, 1990 -2004 2,000 6,000 0 5,000 e 4,000 3,000 E 1,000 E 1,000 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 t Cool -Fired Power Ploots -1, Other Ilertrit Sortor --4,,-- totol (A II Sedorsl This increase in carbon dioxide emissions from coal -fired power plants has outpaced the increase in new coal -fired generating capacity in the United States. Between 1990 and 2005, coal -fired power plant operating capacity increased by more than 12,000 megawatts (MW), or four percent, 52 while carbon dioxide emissions from coal -fired power plants increased by a quarter. That said, net electricity generation from coal increased by almost a quarter (24 percent) between 1990 and 2004, suggesting that existing coal -fired power plants operated at a higher capacity over time to meet rising demand (Figure H).53 The Great Lakes /Midwest region (Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Obio, and Wisconsin) experienced the most dramatic increase in carbon dioxide emissions from coal -fired power plants, rising from 450 million metric tons in 1990 to 556 million metric tons in 2004, an increase of 23 percent. Carbon dioxide emissions from coal -fired power plants also increased significantly in the Mid- Atlantic and Southeast regions, rising by a quarter in each region (Table 5). Figure H. Net Electricity Generation from Coal, 1990 -2004 2SCO 2000 1,500 3 E _ 1,000 E 500 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Table 5. Regional Trends in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from Coal -Fired Power Plants, 1990 -2004( Great Lakes/ Midwest 1990 CO. Emissions 450.4 4 Ell'ismons 556.1 Emissions 1990-2004 105.7 pemmt 1990- 23% Mid-Adantic 263.9 329.2 65.2 25% Southeast 238.0 298.4 60.4 25% Plains 141.4 198.4 57.0 40:ti Gulf South 191.7 245.9 54.2 28% Mountain West 186.4 217.8 31A 17 5'0 Pacific West 11,0 18.1 7.1 65% Northeast 48.7 51.0 23 5 0/6 Texas' coal -fired power plants released the most carbon dioxide in 2004 (Table 6), but Illinois ranked highest for the largest absolute increase in carbon dioxide emissions from coal -fired power plants between 1990 and 2004. In 1990, Illinois's coal -fired power plants emitted almost 56 million metric tons of carbon dioxide; by 2004, the state's emissions from coal -fired power plants had grown to more than 91 trillion metric tons, an increase of 64 percent (Table 7). In addition t See note W for a list of the states in each region. 19 to Illinois, the states that experienced the largest absolute increases in carbon dioxide emissions from coal -fired power plants between 1990 and 2004 are Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Indiana, Alabama, Kentucky, South Carolina, Virginia, and Georgia (Figure I)• Table 6. Top 10 States for Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from Coal -Fired Power Plants, 2004 1 TX 146.6 2 OH 121.5 3 IN 117.4 4 PA 111.6 5 IL 91.5 6 KY 84.4 7 WV 81.6 8 GA 74.4 9 Mo 73.4 10 AL 71.1 Not surprisingly, the increase in carbon dioxide emissions from coal -fired power plants in these states correlates strongly with an increase in electricity generation from coal. Appendix B shows trends in electricity generation and carbon dioxide emissions from coal -fired power plants for each state from 1990 to 2004. Utilities and power generators are proposing to build a vast new fleet of coal -fired power plants across America. As of June 2006, utilities had approximately 150 new coal -fired power plants on the drawing board 54 If U.S. power companies build a new fleet of coal - fired power plants -even a fraction of the proposed number -it will become far more difficult to achieve reductions in global warming pollution on the scale necessary to avoid the worst effects of global warming. If all of the planned coal -fired power plants are built, they would increase annual electricity- related carbon dioxide pollution by more than 25 percent above 2004 levels (an increase of 590 million metric tons). This translates to a 10 percent increase in overall U.S. carbon dioxide pollution (compared with 2004) and a 2.4 percent increase in global emissions." Table 7. Top 10 States for Absolute Increases in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from Coal -Fired Power Plants, 1990 -2004 1 IL 55.7 91.5 35.8 64% 55.0 94.4 39.4 72% 2 TX 119.8 146.6 26.8 22% 120.9 148.9 28.0 23% 3 Mo 47.4 73.4 26.0 55% 48.8 75.0 26.2 54% 4 NC 46.1 69.4 233 500/ 49.8 75.5 25.7 52% 5 IN 94.8 117.4 22.5 24% 96.9 120.6 23 -7 24% 6 AL 50.5 71.1 20.5 41% 53.7 74.8 21.2 39 7 KY 67.1 84.4 17.2 26% 70.5 86.1 15.6 22% 8 SC 21.8 36.5 14.8 68% 23.4 38.9 15.5 66% 9 VA 21.8 34.3 12.6 58% 23.9 35.7 11.8 49% 10 GA 61.9 74'.4 12.5 20% 68.5 80.0 11.4 17% 20 Figure I. State Trends in Rising Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Coal -Fired Power Plants, 1990 -2004 M L PAM ® 8.70 mmt 6rcraaa. s - 1 t • 20 mmt laarease - 21 smnl iracraaaa and up - Natural Gas -Fired Power Plants - The electric power sector accounted for only one quarter (25 percent) of the total U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas consumption in 2004, but it drove the nationwide increase in carbon dioxide emissions from burning natural gas between 1990 and 2004. Between 1990 and 2004, carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas consumption in the electric power sector increased from 176 million metric tons to 298 million metric tons, an increase of more than two thirds (almost 70 percent), as shown in Figure J. Overall, natural gas -fired power plants were responsible for 13 percent of the nation's increase in carbon dioxide emissions during that 15 year time period. Figure J. Trends in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from Natural Gas Consumption by Sector, 1990 -2004 600 soo 400 300 r 200 .s E 100 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2800 2002 2004 — rr— Flerld, M Reudenlial L— y— (ommerdal —4D--- Industrial � Tronsportalion 21 The industrial sector accounted for more than one third (36 percent) of carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas consumption in 2004. Carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas consumption in the industrial sector fell slightly (by 2 percent) between 1990 and 2004 after peaking in the mid- 1990s. This drop is likely due to rising natural gas prices that cut consumption. Emissions also increased by 10 percent and 18 percent, respectively, in the residential and commercial sectors, though consumption in these sectors is highly dependent on weather. The increase in natural gas- related carbon dioxide emissions from the electric sector correlates with a boom in building new natural gas power plants, particularly in the 1990s. Between 1990 and 2004, natural gas generation capacity tripled from almost 133,000 MWT to 408,000 MW.56 Net electricity generation from natural gas plants more than doubled over the same time period (Figure K)'' The boom in natural gas power plant construction was in part predicated on the notion that natural gas supplies would remain cheap for the foreseeable future. In recent years, however, natural gas prices have doubled, squeezing the pocketbooks of consumers and the profit margins of industry, both of whom have become increasingly dependent on natural gas for electricity, heat, hot water and as a raw material. Figure K Net Electricity Generation from Natural Gas, 1990 -2004 s 3 E s E 200 600 Soo 400 300 200 loo 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 1000 2001 2004 The Southeast (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and Tennessee) experienced the most dramatic increase in carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas -fired power plants, more than tripling from nearly 11 million metric tons in 1990 to almost 43 million metric tons in 2004. Carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas -fired power plants also increased significantly in the Mountain West and Northeast states. In the Mountain West, carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas -fired power plants increased almost six- fold from nearly 5 million metric tons in 1990 to 28 million metric tons in 2004 (Table 8). Table 8. Regional Trends in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from Natural Gas -Fired Power Plants, 1990 -20048 southeast 10.9 42.9 31.9 292% mountain West 4.8 28.0 23.1 480% Northeast 20.7 41.1 20.4 98% Pacift Wrst 36.5 53.2 16.7 46% G,IfSoh,th 92.7 107.5 14.8 16% Great Ickes/ Midwest 5.0 13.6 8.6 172% Mid- Adandc 3.2 9.4 6.2 196% Plains 2.0 2.6 0.5 26% Texas' natural gas -fired power plants released the most carbon dioxide in 2004 (Table 9), but Florida ranked highest for the largest absolute increase in carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas -fired power plants between 1990 and 2004. In 1990, Florida's natural gas - fired power plants emitted more than 10 million metric tons of carbon dioxide; by 2004, the state's emissions from natural gas - fired power plants had tripled. In addition to Florida, the states that experienced the largest absolute increases in carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas- 4 See note `d' for a list of the states in each region 22 fired power plants between 1990 and 2004 are Texas, Arizona, California, and Nevada (Table 10). As with coal, the increase in carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas -fired power plants in these states correlates strongly with an increase in net electricity generation from natural gas. Appendix C shows trends in electricity generation and carbon dioxide emissions from natural gas -fired power plants for each state from 1990 to 2004. Table 9. Top 10 States for Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from Natural Gas -Fired Power Plants, 2004 TX 75.3 2 CA 42.7 3 FL 32.1 4 NY 14.1 5 LA 13.3 6 AZ 12.9 7 OK 10.9 8 MA 8.6 9 NJ 7.7 10 1,41 7.6 Table 10. Top 10 States for Absolute Increases in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from Natural Gas -Fired Power Plants, 1990 -2004 1 Fl, 10.1 32.1 22.0 218% 18.6 76.6 58.0 311% 2 TX 62.0 75.3 13.3 21% 136.2 186.8 50.6 37% 3 AZ 1.3 12.9 11.6 879% 2.3 28.3 25.9 1111% 4 CA 34.3 42.7 8A 25% 74.2 1W.5 26.3 35% 5 NV 1.3 7.6 6.3 474% 2.2 16.4 14.2 639% 6 AL 0.3 6.3 6.0 2021% 1.0 16.0 15.0 1472/n 7 MA 3.4 8.6 5.3 156% 6.1 21.0 14.9 NY/. 8 OR 0.4 4.8 4.4 10930/- 0.8 13.5 12.7 1545% 9 NI 3.6 7.7 4.1 114% 6.9 16.0 21 131% 10 MI 3.6 7.6 4.0 109% 7.8 15.1 7.3 93% 23 TRANSPORTATION SECTOR ALSO DROVE INCREASE IN U.S. CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS The transportation sector burns the most oil in the U.S. economy, accounting for almost three - fourths (74 percent) of the total U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from oil consumption in 2004. The transportation sector includes all vehicles with the primary purpose of transporting people and /or goods from one physical location to another, including automobiles, trucks, buses, motorcycles, trains and other rail vehicles, aircraft, and ships, barges, and other waterborne vehicles.58 Between 1990 and 2004, carbon dioxide emissions from oil consumption in the transportation sector increased by almost a quarter (24 percent). At the same time, the industrial sector increased its carbon dioxide emissions from oil consumption by almost 63 million metric tons, or more than 17 percent. The residential sector increased its carbon dioxide emissions from oil by just 7.8 million metric tons (8 percent), while emissions from oil consumption in the commercial and electric sectors declined between 1990 and 2004 (Figure L). Emissions from the commercial and residential sectors are highly dependent on weather and can vary from year to year. As a result, the transportation sector was a key factor in driving up carbon dioxide emissions overall. Between 1990 and 2004, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from the transportation sector jumped by almost a quarter (23 percent), from almost 1.6 billion metric tons in 1990 to more than 1.9 billion metric tons in 2004 (Figure N�. Overall, the transportation sector was responsible for 40 percent of the nation's increase in carbon dioxide emissions between 1990 and 2004. Figure L. Trends in Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Oil Consumption by Sector, 1990 -2004 2,000 1,800 v 1,600 v 1,400 a`e 1,200 1,000 800 E 600 E 400 200 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 i—� Industrial f iransponofion x Commercial, Electric &Residential Figure M. Trends in Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Transportation Sector, 1990 -2004 9,000 6,000 9_ % 5,M 9 e 4,000 3,000 E 0 1,000 i= 1,000 0 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 t ironspoAation Sector —F Total )All Sectors) 24 Emissions from the transportation sector increased by double digit percentages in every region of the country. The Southeast (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and Tennessee) experienced the most dramatic increase in carbon dioxide emissions from the transportation sector, rising from 210 million metric tons in 1990 to mote than 285 million metric tons in 2004, an increase of 36 percent. Emissions from the transportation sector ate growing most rapidly in the Mountain West region (Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming), which saw carbon dioxide emissions increase by 45 percent (Table 11). California's transportation sector released the most carbon dioxide in 2004 (Table 12), but Texas' transportation sector tanked highest for the largest absolute increase between 1990 and 2004. In 1990, Texas' transportation sector emitted almost 151 million metric tons of carbon dioxide; by 2004, the state's transpottation- telated emissions had grown to 190 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, an increase of 26 percent (Table 13). In addition to Texas, the states that experienced the largest absolute increases in carbon dioxide emissions from the transportation sector between 1990 and 2004 ate Florida, Georgia, California, Ohio, Illinois, North Catolina, Arizona, Virginia, and Tennessee (Figure N). Appendix D shows trends in carbon dioxide emissions from the transportation sector for each state from 1990 to 2004. Table 11. Regional Trends in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from the Transportation Sector, 1990 -2004h southeast 210.0 285.5 75.4 36% Great Lakes/ Midwest 267.8 333.1 65.3 24° o Gulf South 258.8 317.1 58.3 23% Mid- Adantic 177.3 224.1 46.8 26% Mountain West 93.2 135.6 42.3 45% Noahez,t 183.0 212.9 30.0 16% Pacific West 284.4 313.7 29.3 10% Plains 87.2 102.6 15.3 18% Nad.na[ 1,561.8 1,924.6 362.8 2YA Table 12. Top 10 States for Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from the Transportation Sector, 2004 1 CA 217.9 2 TX 190.2 3 FL 1095 4 NY 73.3 5 PA 70.0 6 OH 69.7 7 II 66.5 8 GA 65.4 9 NJ 63.8 l0 Na 54.8 Table 13. Top 10 States for Absolute Increases in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from the Transportation Sector, 1990 -2004 I TX 150.9 190.2 393 26% 2 FL 805 109.5 29.0 36% 3 GA 47.9 65.4 17.4 36% 4 CA 201.0 217.9 16.9 8% 5 OH 54.8 69.7 14.9 27% 6 IL 53.0 66.5 13.5 26% 7 NC 37.8 51.1 13.3 35% 8 AZ 22.5 35.6 13.1 58% 9 VA 41.1 53.5 12.5 30% 10 TN 32.2 44.4 12.2 38% h See note `d' for a list of the states in each region. 25 Figure N. State Trends in Rising Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Transportation Sector, 1990 -2004 11 -1sm the a" iB mm1 ineraa`a as up. - Passenger Vehicles - The vast majority of motor gasoline goes to power passenger vehicles —cars, SUVs, and other light trucks. Passenger vehicles are responsible for about one -fifth of all carbon dioxide emissions from energy consumption and 60 percent of the carbon dioxide emissions from the transportation sector.59 Between 1990 and 2004, carbon dioxide emissions from motor gasoline consumption increased by almost a quarter (22 percent), rising from 950 million metric tons to 1,159 million metric tons (Figure O). The rise in carbon dioxide emissions from motor gasoline consumption accounted for more than half (58 percent) of the increase in transportation- related emissions between 1990 and 2004 and almost a quarter (23 percent) of the overall increase in U.S. carbon dioxide emissions. Figure O. Trends in Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Motor Gasoline Consumption, 1990 -2004 1,400 1,20 1,000 g 000 600 E 400 E 200 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 Motor vehicles in Texas and California —the two most populous states — released the most carbon dioxide from motor gasoline consumption in 2004 (Table 14). Texas, Florida, California, and Georgia the four states experiencing the largest absolute 26 increases in transportation- related carbon dioxide emissions between 1990 and 2004 - also experienced the largest absolute increases in carbon dioxide emissions from motor gasoline consumption during that time period (Table 15). Table 14. Top 10 States for Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from Motor Gasoline Consumption, 2004 I CA 127.8 2 TX 98.4 3 FL 72.7 4 NY 46.8 5 PA 44.1 6 GA 43.1 7 Oil 43.0 8 MI 41.2 9 11, 41.2 10 N1 375 Table 15. Top 10 States for Absolute Increases in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from Motor Gasoline Consumption, 1990 -2004 I TX 73.4 98.4 25.0 34% 2 FL 51.7 72.7 21.0 41% 3 CA 110.9 127.8 16.9 15% 4 GA 30.0 43.1 13.1 44 5 AZ 14.3 23.3 9.0 63 6 NJ 28.5 375 8.9 31 7 NC 28.1 365 8.4 300/. 8 VA 25.6 33.3 7.7 30% 9 sC 15.6 22.2 6.6 420/- 10 MD 17.4 22.9 5.5 32% Two of the major factors contributing to the rapid rise in carbon dioxide emissions from motor gasoline consumption are a dramatic increase in driving and the stagnating fuel economy of U.S. vehicles. - Americans are Driving More - Americans drove more in 2004 than they did in 1990. Over the 15 year period, the number of miles driven in America increased by more than a third (38 percent), reaching almost three trillion miles in 2004 (Figure P) G0 The reasons for the increase in driving are complex and interrelated but include sprawling development patterns, demographic shifts, low fuel prices for much of this time period, and massive public investment in highways coupled with insufficient investment in public transit, rail travel, bicycling and pedestrian infrastructure, and other transportation alternatives.61 More driving means more carbon dioxide emissions from cars and light trucks. The states experiencing the largest increases in carbon dioxide emissions from motor gasoline consumption also experienced significant increases in vehicle travel (Table 16). Appendix E shows trends in vehicle miles traveled and carbon dioxide emissions from motor gasoline consumption for each state from 1990 to 2004. Figure P. Trends in Vehicle Miles Traveled, 1990 -200461 3.5 3.0 25 E 2.0 Y 1.5 t.o o.s 0.0 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 27 Table 16, Trends in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in States Experiencing the Largest Increase in Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions from Motor Gasoline Consumption, 1990 -2004 TX 25.0 34/0 74,430 48 6/. FL 21.0 41% 86,447 79% CA 16.9 15% 69,991 27% GA 13.1 44% 42,398 60% AZ 9.0 63% 21,881 62% N) 8.9 31% 13,921 24% NC 8.4 30% 33,151 53% VA 7.7 30% 18,699 31% SC 6.6 42% 15,175 44% 1,11) 5.5 32% 14748 36% New York experienced a slight decline in carbon dioxide emissions from motor gasoline consumption between 1990 and 2004 while vehicle miles traveled went up. One potential explanation is the state's increased use of ethanol, which the Energy Information Administration assumes produces zero net carbon dioxide emissions upon consumption! The production of ethanol does generate carbon dioxide emissions (for example, in the operation of tractors on farms and ethanol manufacturing plants), but those emissions are accounted for in the industrial sector. In 2004, ethanol consumption totaled 5 percent of motor gasoline by volume in New York, much higher than at any other point in the 15- year period for that state.63 Ethanol use also may explain a slight decrease in carbon dioxide emissions in several other states between 2000 and 2004. See the report methodology for a more detailed description of this assumption. - The Efficiency of America's Vehicles Stalled in the Late ig8os - The efficiency of America's vehicle fleet was poor in the 1960s and 1970s, until the 1973 oil crisis led Congress to establish the first minimum fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks in order to protect consumers from high gasoline prices and supply vulnerability resulting from U.S. dependence on foreign oil. In 1973, members of the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (consisting of the Arab members of OPEC, plus Egypt and Syria) announced that they would no longer ship petroleum to the United States and other countries that had supported Israel in its conflict with Syria and Egypt, causing oil prices to skyrocket. A second oil shock struck the United States in 1979 in the wake of the Iranian Revolution, causing prices to rise substantially once again. In 1975, in the wake of the first oil shock, Congress established miles- per -gallon (MPG) standards for cars and light trucks. Those standards have proven to be among the most effective steps ever taken to reduce oil consumption. Cars today use 2.8 million fewer barrels of oil per day than they would have without the fuel economy increase. 64 Between 1975 and 1987, the average, real - world fuel economy of new cars and light trucks increased by nearly 70 percent — from 13.1 MPG to 22.1 MPG.GS By 1978, thanks in part to the new standards, gasoline consumption began to fall. It was not until 1993 that the United States again used as much gasoline as it did in the late 1970s.66 Since the late 1980s, however, the fuel economy of America's vehicle fleet has not only stalled but has actually declined. America's vehicle fleet has changed dramatically, with increasing sales of less - efficient vehicles, such as SUVs. By 2004, SUVs and other light trucks accounted for more than half of all light -duty vehicle sales, 28 while the share held by cars had shrunk to less than half. 67 At the same time, Congress and several administrations have not increased fuel economy standards for passenger cars since first implementing the standards in 1975 and have raised light truck fuel economy standards only modestly. As a result, the average fuel economy of new vehicles declined by 5 percent between 1987 and 2005 even though we have witnessed significant improvements in other aspects of vehicle technology, including acceleration and power.G8 In 2005, new cars and light trucks achieved only 21 MPG on average, a lower fuel economy average than the new vehicle fleet achieved in 1982.69 29 Conclusion and Recommendations The longer we wait to reduce global warming pollution, the harder the task will be in the future. Leading scientists say that we have a limited time to act to avoid a climate "tipping point. "70 Key components of an action plan to protect future generations from global warming should include the following priorities: Require Steep Cuts in Carbon Dioxide Emissions The United States should establish science - based, mandatory limits on global warming pollution that reduce total U.S. emissions from today's levels by the end of the decade, by at least 15 -20 percent by 2020 and by at least 80 percent by 2050. These reductions are needed to stabilize concentrations of global warming gases in the atmosphere at a level that averts global warming's most devastating and irreversible impacts. Obtain 2o Percent of our Electricity from Renewable Energy Sources America has virtually limitless potential for the generation of power from natural forces. By ramping up our use of wind power, solar power, and other renewable forms of energy — and using much of that energy to replace power production at dirty, coal -fired power plants — the United States could dramatically reduce global warming emissions from electric power production. Requiring that 20 percent of our electricity come from renewable sources by 2020 —when combined with a strong, mandatory cap on global warming pollution —would save more than 500 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent relative to 2004 emissions levels. This is more than one third of the emissions reductions scientists say we need to achieve by 2020.'' Reduce Energy Consumption in our Homes and Businesses Dramatic improvements in energy efficiency are possible in virtually every aspect of American life. Studies show that we could reduce our electricity consumption by as much as 20 percent at no net cost to the economy. 72 For now, the U.S. can encourage weatherization of buildings, deployment of more efficient appliances and equipment, and efficiency improvements in industry. Soon, using new technologies such as those in zero - energy homes, we can transform the way we consume energy and achieve even larger improvements in efficiency. Stabilize Vehicle Travel Americans are driving more than ever, leading to increased emissions of global warming pollutants. Americans need more transportation choices to reduce and eventually halt this growth in vehicle travel. Policies to provide these choices include encouraging the development of compact neighborhoods with a mix of land uses, where more tasks can be completed by foot, bike or transit; expanding the reach and improving the quality of transit service; and supporting programs to encourage carpooling, vanpooling, telecommuting, and other 30 alternatives to single - passenger car travel. Make Cars and Trucks Go Farther on a Gallon of Gasoline The creation of federal fuel economy standards for cars during the 1970s succeeded in reducing gasoline consumption and oil imports, as well as global warming pollution. But the fuel economy of new vehicles is now lower than it was during most of the Reagan administration. In 2002, the National Academy of Sciences concluded that automakers could use a combination of existing and emerging technologies to achieve 37 MPG within 10 -15 years while improving safety and maintaining performance. 73 The Union of Concerned Scientists has shown that with more aggressive use of high- strength, lighter- weight materials, we could hit the 40 MPG mark in 10 years.74 Similarly, major improvements in fuel economy are possible for heavy -duty trucks, which are currently exempt from fuel economy standards .71 Replace a Portion of Vehicle Fuel with Biofuels or Other Clean Alternatives Ethanol and biodiesel that are produced cleanly and sustainably have the potential to significantly reduce global warming emissions from transportation — especially if these biofuels are produced from plant wastes and cellulose. Other vehicle technologies — like "plug -in" hybrids, electric vehicles, and fuel cell vehicles — have the potential to dramatically reduce global warming emissions in the future .76 31 The carbon dioxide emission estimates in this document reflect only emissions from fossil fuel consumption — including both fossil fuels used for energy and those used for "non- fuel" purposes, such as natural gas consumed in fertilizer production. These estimates also include fossil fuel consumption for international shipping and aviation (`bunker fuels "). The emission estimates in this report do not include carbon dioxide emissions from other sources (such as land use), carbon dioxide emissions from geothermal energy production, emissions from natural gas flaring, or emissions of other global warming pollutants. All estimates are based on state - specific fossil fuel consumption data (in BTU) through 2004 from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), State Energy Consumption, .Price and Expenditure Estimates." In general, we followed the methodology for converting energy use data to carbon dioxide emissions found in U.S. EIA, Documentation for Emissions of Greenbouse Gases in the United States 2004 rpocamentation 2004'), December 2006. The following section describes sources of data used as well as places where we deviated from the methodology or data sources described in Documentation 2004. Emissions are attributed to the state where fossil fuels were burned or sold. In the case of electric power plants, the energy use and emissions data is based on consumption of fuel at the power plant, not consumption of electricity by the end user. As such, the data does not take into account that some states generate little electricity within their borders and import much from neighboring states' power plants. Emissions from power plants are attributed to the states in which they are Methodology located, rather than the states that consumed the power. For petroleum, consumption data is based on sales; therefore, emissions are attributed to the state in which the fuel was purchased. This is particularly salient for the transportation sector, in which mobile sources may purchase fuel in one state and then drive or move out of state. Adjustments to Energy Consumption Data EIA state energy data for gasoline consumption incorporate ethanol used as a blending component. EIA assumes that ethanol produces no net emissions of carbon dioxide. The production of ethanol does generate carbon dioxide emissions (for example, in the operation of tractors on farms and ethanol manufacturing plants), but those emissions are accounted for in the industrial sector. Therefore, the ethanol component of gasoline must be separated from total gasoline consumption and treated separately for the purposes of calculating carbon dioxide emissions. To achieve this, we calculated the percentage of ethanol used in motor gasoline by volume for each state in 1990 -2004 using ETA state energy data. We then reduced consumption of motor gasoline (in BTU) by this percentage, thus reducing estimated carbon dioxide emissions from gasoline use by a corresponding amount. Adjustments Not Made Documentation 2004 calls for several small adjustments to be made with regard to natural gas emissions to avoid double - counting of emissions related to injections of still gas, synthetic gas, and biogas (landfill gas) into 32 natural gas pipelines. The volume of these gases injected into pipelines is very small (EIA estimates that these adjustments are likely to account for, at most, a 0.1 percent difference in national emissions). For the sake of simplicity and to avoid the need to split out emission reductions into various sectors of the economy, we assumed that these reductions would have a minimal impact on total emissions and did not make them. In addition, Documentation 2004, consistent with international norms, treats international bunker fuels as a separate category of emissions that are not attributed to the United States. State -by -state estimates of bunker fuel use for international aviation were unavailable. As a result, we opted not to adjust for bunker fuel use for aviation or shipping. This may result in somewhat higher transportation sector emissions in states with international ports or vigorous international air traffic compared with other analyses. Adjustments for Non -Fuel Use Many fossil energy sources are also used for non -fuel purposes (for example, petrochemicals used in the manufacture of plastics or natural gas used in the production of fertilizer). Energy sources used for non -fuel purposes emit carbon dioxide at different rates than those used as fuels. To account for this, we calculated or obtained the percentage of various energy products used for non -fuel purposes and accounted for the percentage of carbon that is "sequestered" (not emitted) from those uses. State - specific information on the quantity of energy products used for non -fuel purposes is not available. Thus, we used national -level data from Documentation 2004 (with some exceptions, noted below) to estimate the percentage of various fossil energy products used for non -fuel purposes from 2001 -2004. For 1990 through 2000, we used non -fuel percentage estimates from U.S. EIA, Documentation for Emissions of Greenbouse Gases in the United States 2001 (`Documentation 2001'), December 2002. (The earlier data were used to provide a consistent data set for each year in the 1990s, some of which are excluded in later editions of Documentation.) Exceptions to this are as follows: For non -fuel use of distillate and residual fuel oil and liquefied petroleum gases from 2001 -2004, we determined that the data on non -fuel energy consumption provided in Documentation 2004 were likely in error. As a result, we used values from Documentation 2003 instead. For non -fuel use of natural gas, we assumed (per Documentations 2004) that non -fuel use of natural gas for the production of nitrogenous fertilizers was a non - sequestering use (e.g. that all of the carbon in the natural gas is emitted). For the sake of simplicity, we treated use of natural gas in fertilizer production in the same manner as we did use of natural gas for energy purposes. Because a breakout for other non -fuel uses of natural gas was not available in Documentation 2001, we calculated this figure for 1990 to 2000 based on data from Documentation 2000. For all years, we used estimates of the percentage of carbon sequestered for non -fuel uses of energy from Documentation 2004. estimating carbon dioxide emissions from non -fuel uses of energy, we treated differences in the carbon coefficients of fuel and non -fuel uses of liquefied petroleum gases as trivial and used the coefficient for fuel uses for all consumption. Carbon Coefficients and Emission Factors Carbon coefficients for various fuels for 2001- 33 2004 were based on values in Documentation 2004. Coefficients for 1990 through 2000 were based on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of U.S. Grvenbouse Gas Emissions and Sinks, 1990 -2001, April 2003. For "other petroleum products," carbon coefficients for 2005 from Documentation 2004 were used for all years. Weighted emission factors were then calculated for fuel and non -fuel uses of various energy sources. The weighted emission factor for fuel uses was obtained by multiplying the carbon coefficient by the percentage of the source consumed for fuel uses, and then multiplying the product by a combustion factor. It was assumed that 99 percent of solid and liquid fuels were combusted and 99.5 percent of gaseous fuels combusted, per Documentation 2004. For non - fuel uses, the weighted emission factor was calculated by multiplying the carbon coefficient by the percentage of energy used for non -fuel purposes, and then multiplying the product by the percentage of carbon not sequestered. The weighted emission factors for fuel and non -fuel uses were then summed to arrive at an emission factor that, when applied to ETA's estimates of state energy consumption, yielded estimates of carbon dioxide emissions by fuel and by economic sector. We converted emissions from carbon to carbon dioxide by multiplying the resulting figures by 44/12. 34 M� W 0 0 N p'1 fA v U 0 �i W Q y ..mj W b .H A W v v W �.1 M U Ar M O u E E 0 C e v e e v e e p e v e e v o o e e v e e M a a a M wV P m� V P V r M P r N N Q M N M .- V Q N r N �< VI N r N � ✓� � N O y. 1� N P 1� P M V m M V' P (.1 V •- r^ N N r P yJ m r N� P � V M Jl P .N.. r' � u'f N 1-. M M V N m 1 d �A G\ m P_ P NM Nj f0 N r M P_ V1 1` N 1� P P h h C' (T N aI1 N M P M N M N N W N n'I M1 N M1 w O hl O M1 (V r} hl C N � O O h 6 V M vi M1 m H Q .V d' h m P Y .il rl Y; ^ O h N_ V O w OV O C• 1 O N 1` ON O m h j CN MV c P N M m h 0 O c p 2 P^ M VV P M P m 'hA yh. 6 6 O� O O a S C g C X Q 5_ 2 pp Z Z Z d cai Z. M M D e v e v o v e e e v e e v e e e h p N N O 4 N •-. O � N�� N YJ h 0�� �Mh M O C C n h M O � N W OJ W V h O O JWl N N N v9 h C N� W N O G� Lyys ✓i `f N Nl � P h� vI C m P O M t4 � V CI W h y NO C Jj h� C h m P JNi c� b C MV N V h" OV h W L� h N M W N d d M W V FF cV C yM, m M O�_ g N P� W P ✓i tpn'v N VV�I F V a. G. Jl N F JI N W e"1 C CO u'1 IV I 6 eat O V G� o b W W o O b rri J1 d' G1 M C F V W CV v1 N N NV N Appendix B. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Coal -Fired Power Plants, 1990 -2004: By State czrbon dioxide emissions million metric tons) electric i eration million me watt - hours) State AK 1990 COZ 2004 COz Lougsions Fmiss'i.rls (inno) (nunt) 0.4 0.6 Emissions Increase, 1990-2004 rolol) 0.2 Percent Increase ill CO2, 1990-2004 38% Net Electricity G�neoain fnno Coal, 1990 (million MWh) 0.5 Net Electriciv, Gmeo�lio &0;', Coal, 2004 (million AIXN"h) 0.6 GCDQ.,i.n lorr.s'-' 1990- 2004 (raffli'llt NIWII) 0.1 Percent ln�orae i. Generation, 1990-2004 27% AL 50,5 71.1 20.5 41% 53.7 74.8 21.2 39% AR 19.5 24.5 5.0 26% 19.2 25.4 6.1 32% AZ 31.1 38,6 7.5 24"/0 31.9 39.8 7.9 25% CA 1.8 2.1 0.4 20% 2.6 2.2 -0.4 -15% CO 30.2 35.7 5.5 180/ 29,8 35.8 6.0 200/. CT 3.6 4.1 0.5 15% 3.6 4.3 0.7 18% DC 0.0 1 0.0 n/a n/a 0.0 0.0 0.0 o/a DE 5.0 4.8 -0.3 -6 °/ 5.1 4.8 -0.4 -70/. FL 56.8 63A 6.6 12% 60.1 64.9 4.8 8% GA 61.9 74.4 125 20% 68.5 80.0 11.4 17% HI 0.002 1.7 1.7 691919/. 0.002 1.6 1.6 67259% IA 26.0 35.8 9.8 38/0 25.6 35.3 9.5 37% ID a/a n/a n/a n/a 0.04 OA 0.1 126% IL 55.7 91.5 35.8 64% 55.0 94.4 39.4 72% IN 94.8 117.4 22.5 24% 96.9 120.6 23.7 24% KS 25.2 35.9 10.6 42% 23.7 34.6 10.9 46% KY 67.1 84.4 17.2 26% 70.5 86.1 15.6 22°/ LA 18.2 24.0 5.8 32% 17.9 23.7 5.8 32% MA 10.4 9.7 -0.7 -7% 11.4 10.5 -0.8 -7°/ MD 27.5 j 27.5 6.0 28% 23.5 29.2 5.7 24% ME 0.4 0.4 0.05 13% 0.5 0.4 -0.1 -20°/ MI 62.5 65.2 2.7 4% 67.1 68.6 1.6 2% h1N 28.1 33.4 5.3 19% 28.2 34.0 5.8 21% MO 47.4 73.4 26.0 55% 48.8 75.0 26.2 54% MS 9.2 17.1 7.9 86% 9.5 175 8.0 83% MI 15.4 18.1 2.7 18% 15.1 17.4 2.3 15% NC 46.7 69.4 23.3 50% 49.8 75.5 25.7 52 % ND 27.0 1 29.2 2.2 B/ 25.2 28.1 1 2.9 11% NE 12.9 20.4 7.4 57% 12.7 20.5 7.8 62% NH 2.9 4.1 1.2 42% 3.0 4.1 1.1 NI 69 10.6 3.7 53% 7.1 10.3 3.3 46% NM 25.9 29.0 3,1 12% 25.8 29.3 3.4 13% NV 15.2 17.8 2.6 17% 15,1 18.3 3,2 21% NY 24.5 22.0 -2.5 -10°/ 25.9 22.9 -3.1 -12% OH 109.4 121.5 12.1 11% 115.8 128.2 72.4 11 V. OK 25.1 33.7 8.6 34% 25.7 33,8 8.1 32% OR 1.3 3.3 2.0 147% 1.3 3.6 2.2 170% PA 99.4 111.6 12.3 12% IM.7 1172 10.5 10% RI 0.0 0.0 n/a n/a 0.0 0A 0.0 n/a SC 21.8 36.5 143 68% 23.4 38.9 15.5 66% SD 2,9 3.7 0.8 28% 2.5 3.6 1.1 46% 'IN 46.9 53.0 6.1 13% 51.8 58.3 6.5 13% TX 119.8 146.6 26.8 22% 120.9 148.9 28.0 23% UT 29.4 34.6 5.2 18% 31.5 36.6 5.1 16% VA 21.8 34.3 12,6 58% 23.9 35.7 11.8 49% VT 0.0 0.0 n/a n/a 0.0 0.0 0,0 n/a WA 7.4 10.4 3.0 40% 7.4 10.4 3.0 41% 11 32.7 4 -9 10.2 31 % 33.2 42.1 9.0 27% WV lit 81.6 11.4 16% 77.6 87.6 9.9 13% WY 39.2 44.0 4.8 ]2% 38,9 43.3 4.4 11% 37 Appendix C. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Natural Gas -Fired Power Plants, 1990 -2004: By State AK Lmissions 1.9 Emission, 2.0 1990-2004 0.1 in CO2, 7% NAtotftl Gas, 1990 3.5 Natural Gis, 2004 3.6 2004 (tnilljon 0.2 5% AL 0.3 6.3 6.0 2021% 1.0 16.0 15.0 1472% AR 1.7 2.2 0.5 26% 3.6 5.1 1.5 41;0 AZ 1.3 12.9 11.6 879% 2.3 28.3 25.9 1111% CA 34.3 42.7 8.4 25% 74.2 100.5 26.3 35% CO 0.7 4.6 3.9 547% 1.3 10.7 9.5 733% CT 0.7 3.2 25 357% 1.3 8.1 6.9 548% DC 0.0 0.0 0.0 n/a 0.0 0 OA n/a DE 0.6 0.7 0.1 17% 0.8 1.7 1.0 125% FL 10.1 32.1 22.0 218% 18.6 76.6 58.0 311% GA 0.1 2.5 2.4 2291% 0.8 6.2 5.4 646% HI 0.0 0.0 0.0 n/a 0.0 0.1 0.1 n/a IA 0.2 0.4 0.2 98% 0.3 0.8 0.5 147% ID 0.0 0.6 0.6 n/a 0.1 1.7 1.7 2970% IL 0.5 1.7 1.2 238% 1.4 3.4 2.0 138% IN 0.4 1.2 0.9 2500/. 1.5 2.4 1.0 66% KS 1.4 0.6 -0.9 -61% 2.5 0.8 -1.7 -67% KY 0.02 0.3 0.2 1613% 0.03 0.6 0.6 1984% LA 15.8 133 -2.5 -16;0 39.5 45.8 6.3 16% NIA 3.4 8.6 5.3 156% 6.1 21.0 14.9 243% MD 1.1 0.7 -0.5 -42% 1.5 1.2 -0.3 -224/. ME 0.01 3.5 3.5 33424% 0.1 9.8 9.8 19248% N4 3.6 7.6 4.0 109% 7.8 15.1 7.3 930A MN 0.3 0.7 0.4 143% 0.5 1.5 1.0 119% MO 0.2 1.3 1.1 598% 0.3 2.9 2.6 8230A Nis 3.6 5.8 2.3 64% 5.9 11.6 5.7 96% MT 0.03 0.01 -0.02 -59% 0.1 0.03 -0.02 -42% NC 0.2 1.2 1.0 657% 0.2 2.5 2.3 1150% ND 0.0001 0.0002 0.0001 91% 0.1 0.01 -0.04 -870 NE 0.2 0.2 -0.02 -9% 03 0.3 -0.01 .3% NH 0.0 2.1 2.1 n/a 0.0 5.4 5.4 n/a NJ 3.6 7.7 4.1 114% 6.9 16.0 9.1 131% NM I A 1.7 0.3 20% 2.7 3.0 0.3 9 °( NV 1.3 7.6 6.3 474% 2.2 16.4 14.2 639% NY 12.5 14.1 1.6 13% 22.7 27.3 4.6 20°/ OH 0.1 1.0 0.9 1379% 02 1.4 1.1 474% OK 9.7 10.9 1.2 12% 18.2 23.3 5.0 28% OR 0.4 4.8 4.4 1093% 0.8 13.5 12.7 1545% PA 0.7 4.2 3.4 4650K 2.8 9.8 7.0 247% RI 0.5 L9 1.4 293% 0.9 4.8 3.9 4450A Sc 0.4 1.8 1.4 367 % 0.8 3.8 3.0 382% SD 0.01 0.1 0.7 5870/. 0.01 0.1 0.1 805% TN 0.03 0.1 0.1 300% 0.2 0.3 0.1 340/. TX 62.0 755 13.3 21% 136.2 186.8 50.6 37% UT 0.05 0.5 0.4 912% 0.1 0.9 D.B 521'A VA OS 2.6 2.7 397% 1.7 G.4 5.3 466% VT 0.04 0.003 -0.03 -930/. 0.1 0.003 -0.1 J50/. WA 0.01 3.8 3.8 36579 % 0.3 8.5 8.2 2844% Arl 0.1 1.1 LO 679% 0.3 2.4 2.0 590% IXN 0.01 0.1 0.1 975% 0.1 0.3 0.2 181% \COY 0.004 0.03 0.02 608% OS 0.1 .0.2 -G8°/ W] Appendix D. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Transportation Sector, 1990 -2004: By State carbon dioxide emissions (million metric tons) carbon dinnide emissions (million meuic tons) AK 1990 Co Emissions 11.9 2004 CO2 Emis,im's 18.6 Fmi8sicms Increase, 1990-2004 6.7 Percent in Co" 56% AL 27.7 34.4 6.7 24% AR 15.8 20.3 4.4 28% AZ 22.5 35.6 13.1 58% CA 201.0 217.9 16.9 8% CO 18.8 28.5 9.6 51% CT 14.5 18.5 4.0 281A DC 1.8 1.6 -0.2 -9% DE 4.5 4.9 0.4 9% FI, 80.5 109.5 29.0 36% GA 47.9 65.4 17.4 36% HI 11.0 12.2 1.1 10% lA 15.9 19.8 3.9 24% ID 6.2 8.5 2.3 37% IL 53.0 663 13.5 26% IN 40.0 43.9 3.9 10% KS 18.9 19.1 0.2 1% KY 25.9 33.6 7.8 30% IA 48.7 52.7 4.0 8% MA 28.5 33.0 4.4 16 % MD 23.3 30.7 7.3 31°! ME 8.2 8.6 0.4 5% MI 47.0 54.8 7.8 17 MN 233 34.6 11.3 48% MO 33.1 39.9 6.7 2VI ills 20.0 25.4 5.5 28% MT 1990 CO, Lunissions 5.7 2004 Coz E.Issim's 7.6 Emissions Increase, 1990-2004 1.9 pe'�ejn increase in C.02, 33% NC 37.8 51.1 13.3 35% ND 4.5 6.2 1.6 36% NH 10.2 11.9 1.7 160/. NH 5.1 7.7 25 49% NJ 5664 63.8 7.4 13% NM 14.6 15.4 0.8 b% NV 9.3 15.7 6.4 69% NY 63.2 73.3 10.1 16% OH 54.8 69.7 14.9 27% OK 23.5 28.5 5.1 22% OR 19.8 22.4 2.7 14% PA 58.7 70.0 11.3 19% RI 4.1 4.3 0.2 b% SC 21.7 31.7 10.1 46% SD 4.6 5.8 1.2 27% TN 32.2 44.4 12.2 38% TX 150.9 190.2 393 26% Vl' 10.4 16.3 5.8 56% VA 41.1 53.5 12.5 30% VT 3.0 3.8 0.8 27% WA 40.8 42.5 1.8 40/. NI 23.9 29.9 6.0 25% WV 10.2 12.3 2.1 21% WY 5.7 8.0 2.3 41% 39 Appendix E. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Motor Gasoline Consumption and Trends in Vehicle Miles Traveled, 1990 -2004: By State ...;,..., A-1Aa Imilli,..,- r..,ar,,... m „m mhide miles gaveled AK Emissions 2.1 2,4 Emissions 1990-2004 0.3 CO, 14% 1990 3,910 2004 4990 i,� VMT 1,080 V.MT increase, 28% AL 17.8 22.0 4.2 24% 42,347 59,035 16,688 39% AR 10.5 12.2 1.7 16% 21,011 31,648 10,637 51% A2 14.3 233 9.0 63% 35,455 57,336 21,881 62% CA 110.9 127.8 16.9 15% 258,926 328,917 69,991 2"i% CO 128 17.4 4.5 35% 27,178 45,891 18,713 69% CT 11.4 14.3 3.0 26% 26,303 31,608 5,305 20% DC 1.4 1.2 -0.2 -16% 3,407 3,742 335 10`!° DE 2.9 3.6 0.7 24% 6,548 9,301 2,753 420/. FL 51.7 12.7 21.0 41% 109,997 196,444 86,447 79% GA 30.0 43.1 13.1 44% 70,222 112,620 42,398 60% HI 3.1 3.9 0.7 23% 8,066 9,725 1,659 21% IA 11.0 125 1.5 14% 22,993 31,538 8,545 370A ID 4.0 5.2 1.2 31% 9,849 14,729 4,880 50% IL 37.3 41.2 3.8 10% 83,334 109,135 25,801 31% IN 21.9 26.4 4.5 20% 53,697 72,713 19,016 35% KS 10.2 11.1 0.9 9% 22,849 29,172 6,323 28% KY 15.1 19.0 3.8 25% 33,639 47,322 13,683 41% LA 16.0 18.9 2.9 18% 37,963 44,607 6,644 18% MA 20.6 24.5 3.9 19% 46,177 54,771 8,594 19% MD 17.4 229 55 32% 40,536 55,284 14,748 36% ME 5.2 6.1 1.0 19% 11,871 14,948 3,077 26% Nil 35.9 41.2 5.3 15% 81,091 103,326 22,235 27% MN 16.5 20.8 4.4 27/° 38,946 56,570 - 17,624 45% MO 23.1 26.4 3.3 140,'° 50,883 68,994 18,1.11 36% MS 10.5 13.8 3.3 32% 24,398 39,431 15,033 62% bfr 3.6 4.1 0.5 15% 8,332 11,207 2,875 35% NC 28.1 36.5 8.4 30% 62,752 95,903 33,151 53% ND 2.7 2.8 0.1 5% 5,910 7,594 1,684 28% NE 6.2 6.8 0.6 10% 13,958 19,171 5,213 37% NH 4.3 6.1 1.8 420A 9,844 13,216 3,372 34% NJ 28.5 37.5 8.9 31% 58,923 72,844 13,921 24% NM 6.6 8.1 1.5 23% 16,148 23,942 7,794 48% NV 5.4 8.9 35 660/. 10,205 19,354 9,149 90% NY 50.6 46.8 -3.8 -8% 106,902 137,898 30,996 29% OH 39.2 43.0 33 10% 91,303 111,654 20,351 22% OK 14.0 15.9 1.9 14% 33,141 46,443 13,302 40% OR 11.5 12.8 1.4 12% 76,738 35,598 8,860 33% PA 39.1 44.1 5.0 130/. 85,708 108,070 22,362 26% RI 3.2 3.2 0.001 0.04% 7,364 8,473 1,109 15% SC 15.6 212 6.6 42% 34,376 49,881 44 ",'° SO 3.1 3.3 0.2 7% 6,989 8,784 26% TN 20.9 26.2 5.4 26% 46,710 70,943 52% TX 73.4 98.4 25.0 34% 156,578 231,008 K12,01 48% UT 6.0 8.8 2.8 46% 14,646 24,696 69% VA 25.6 33.3 7.7 30% 60,178 78,877 31% VT 2.4 3.0 0.6 23% 5,838 7,855 35% WA 19.4 22.8 3.4 17% 44,695 55,673 25 % W1 17.7 20.8 3.1 18% 44,277 60,399 16,122 36% WV 7.0 7.1 U 1 1 % 15,418 20,302 4,884 32°/ WY 2.4 2.G 0.2 8% 1 5,833 9,261 3,428 59% 40 End Notes 1 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Internakona/EnergAnnual2004, July 2006. 2 Testimony of Former Vice President Al Gore before the U.S. Senate Environment & Public Works Committee, March 21, 2007. 3 Jim Hansen, Global Warming: Connecting the Dots fmm Causes to Solution{ Presentation to the 1Vational Pmss Club and American University, 26 February 2007; see also Office of Rep. Henry Waxman, "Rep. Waxman Introduces the Science -Based `Safe Climate Act, "' press release, March 20, 2007. 4 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2007: The Physical.Sdence Basis, Summary far Polity iMakers, February 2007. 5 World Meteorological Organization, First WMO Greenhouse Gar Bulletin: Greenhouse Gas Concentrations Reach Neu, Highs in 2004 (press release), 14 March 2006; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, C &mate Change 2007: The Physical Science Bans, Summary, fbr Pohcy Makers, February 2007, 6 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Summary for Polity Makers, February 2007. 7 J. Hansen, et al., NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, GISS Surface Temperature Analysis: Global Temperature Trends: 2005 Summation, downloaded from littp,Z/data.giss.nasa.gov/`pistemp/2005/­ March 27, 2007. 8 National Climatic Data Center, C &mate o(2006 in Historical Perspective: Annual Report, January 2007. Accessed March 20, 2007 at http: //wwAxw.ncdc noaa..ov /oa/ climate /research /2006 /ann /ann06 html. 9 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Summary for Polity Makers, February 2007. 10 National Climatic Data Centcr, Climate of 2007: February in Historical Perspective, March 2007. Accessed March 20, 2007 at hap, / /wnvwncdc noaa my /oa /climate /research /2007 /feb /feb07 html. 11 National Climatic Data Center, Climate of 2006 in Historical Perspective: Annual Report, January 2007. Accessed March 20, 2007 at http: / /wtvw.ncdc.no,ao,i,ov /oa /climate /research /2006 /ann /ann06 html. 12 Isabella Velicogna and John Wahr, "Acceleration of Greenland ice mass loss in spring 2004," Nature 443, 329 -331 (21 September 2006). 13 B.D. Santer, T.M.L. Wigley, et al, "Forced and unforced ocean temperature changes in Atlantic and Pacific tropical cyclogenesis regions," Proceedings of the National Academy of Science{ September 11, 2006; Michael Mann and Kerry Emanuel, "Atlantic hurricane trends linked to climate change," EOS, volume 87 (24): 233 -244, June 13, 2006. 14 Trenberth, K. E., and D. J. Shea (2006), "Atlantic hurricanes and natural variability- in 2005," Geophysical Research Letters, 27 June 2006, 33,L12704. 11 Rocky Mountain Climate Organization, Less Snow, Less Water. Climate Disruption in the West, September 2005. i6 World Health Organization, The World Health Report 2002, 2002, chapter 4, 71 -72. See also Jonathan A. Patz et al, "Impact of Regional Climate Change on Human Health," Nature 438, 310 -317 (November 2005). 17 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2007 The Physical Saence Basi, Summary far Pohry Makers, February 2007. 16 Malte Meinshausen, "What Does a 2' C Target Mean for Greenhouse Gas Concentrations? A Brief Analysis Based on Multi -Gas Emission Pathways and Several Climate Sensitivity Uncertainty Estimates," in Hans Joachim Schnellnbuber, ed., Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 2006. 19 Rachel Warren, "Impacts of Global Climate Change at Different Annual Mean Global Temperature Increases," in Hans Joachim Schnellahuber, ed, Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 2006. 2U James Hansen, "A Slippery Slope: How Much Global Warming Constitutes `Dangerous Anthropogenic Interference ? "' Chmadc Change, 68:269 -279, 2005. 21 Rachel Warren, "Impacts of Global Climate Change at Different Annual Mean Global Temperature Increases," in Hans Joachim Schnellnhuber, ed., Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 2006, and Malte Meinshausen, `What Does a 2' C Target Mean for Greenhouse Gas Concentrations? A Brief Analysis Based on Multi - Gas Emission Pathways and Several Climate Sensitivity Uncertainty Estimates," in Hans Joachim Schnellnhuber, ed., Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 2006. 22 Ibid. 23 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Emissions f Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2005, November 2006. 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid. 26 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Emissions of Greenhouse Gares in the Unitd States 2005, 41 November 2006, chapter 2. The numbers for the residential, commercial and industrial sectors only include direct fossil fuel use, not electricity consumed in those sectors. 27 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Intemakonal Energy Annua12004, July 2006. 28 Ibid. 29 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, International EnergyAnnual2004, "World Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Use of Fossil Fuels," Table H.1, "World Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Consumption and Flaring of Fossil Fuels (Million Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide), 1980 - 2004," July 2006. Accessed March 20, 2007 at httla://w unv .cia.doe.eocliea/carbon.html. 30 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Emissions ofGreenbouse Gases in the United Stater 2004, Table B3, December 2005. 31 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2006, February 2006. 32 Jim Hansen, Global Warming: Connecting the Dots from Causer to Solutions, Presentation to the National Press Club and American Unieerriry, 26 February 2007. 33 James Hansen et al, "Earth's Energy Imbalance: Confirmation and Implications," Science, 308 (5727), 2 June 2005, 1431 -1435; Brian C. O'Neill and Michael Oppenheimer, "Dangerous Climate Impacts and the Kyoto Protocol," Science, 14 June 2002; Mike Meinshausen, "What Does a 2 °C Target Mean for Greenhouse Gas Concentrations? A Brief Analysis Based on Multi-Gas Emission Pathways and Several Climate Sensitivity Uncertainty Estimates," in Hans Joachim Schellnhuber et al. (eds.), Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 266 -279. 34 James E. Hansen, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute, Is There Sri!! Time to Avoid `DangerousAnibropogenie Interference "with Global Climate, presentation to the American Geophysical Union, 6 December 2005, opening remarks. 35 The White House, "Open Letter on the President's Position on Climate Change," February 7, 2007, accessed March 21, 2007 at http: / /www whitehouse.gov /news / releases /2007/02/20070207- S.hunL 36 State of California, Office of the Governor, "California Leading the Way on Fight Against Global Warming," press release, June 1, 2005; text of AB 32 available on the California Air Resources Board "Climate Change" website, accessed April 2, 2007 at http: //Nsly ,.arb.ca.Lov/cc/docs/ab32text.[)d f. 37 State of California, Office of the Governor, "Gov. Schwarzenegger Signs Biomonitoring, Greenhouse Gas and Other Important Environmental Legislation," press release, September 29, 2006. 38 Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, "Model Rule & Memorandum of Understanding," accessed March 23, 2007 at littD://www.rggi.org/modelnile.htni. 39 Offices of the Governors of Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oregon and Washington, "Five Western Governors Announce Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Agreement," press release, February 26, 2007. 40 California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board, Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed Rulemakul* Public Heating to ConsiderAdoptiion of Regulations to Contra! Greenbouse Gar Emissions from Motor Vebieles, 6 August 2004. 41 Union of Concerned Scientists, "Renewable Electricity Standards, Renewable Energy — Mitigating Global Warming," fact sheet, accessed Much 23, 2007 at htt1)://www.ucsusa.orsz/cIean enerev /clean energy policies/RES-chmate- strategy.hmil. 42 State of New Jersey, Office of the Governor, "Governor Corzine Calls for Sweeping Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in New Jersey," press release, February 13, 2007. 43 State of Illinois, Office of the Governor, "Gov. Blagojevich sets goal to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Illinois," press release, February 13, 2007. 44 State of Washington, Office of the Governor, "Governor Gregoire Takes Action on Climate Change, Announces `Washington Climate Change Challenge, "' press release, February 7, 2007. 45 State of Arizona, Office of the Governor, Executive Order 2006 -13. 46 State of Oregon, Advisory Group on Global Warming, Oregon Strategy for Greenbouse Gas Reductias, December 2004. 47 State of New Mexico, Office of the Governor, Executive Order 05 -033; see also "Governor Bill Richardson Proposes Far - Reaching Actions on Energy /Environmental Issues," press release, October 31, 2006. ' Conference of New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers, Climate CbangeAction Plan 2001, August 2001, accessed March 23, 2007 athttp,//vtv ,.negc.org/documents/NEG-ECP°/ 20CCAP PDF. 49 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gar Emissions and Sinks: 1990 — 2001, April 15, 2003. 10 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Annual Energp Review 2005, July 2006, Table 8.2b. Accessed March 21, 2007 at http,l /w eia doe.gov /emeu /aer /elect.html. 51 Based on our analysis of state - specific fossil fuel consumption data (n BTU) through 2004 from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, State Energy Consumption, Price and Expeneitare Estimates. Seethe methodology for a detailed description of how we conducted this analysis. 52 U.S. Energy Information Administration, Eled&PonerAnnual, October 2006, Existing Capacity by Energy Source, M Table: "Existing Electric Generating Units in the United States, 2005," accessed March 21, 2007 at http :llum�, eia doe goy /cneaf/ electricity /page /capacity /exisdnamits2005 xls. The total capacity only includes (1) plants where coal (anthracite, bituminous, lignite, subbituminous, waste /other coal, and coal -based synfuel) is listed as the primary energy source, and (2) plants listed as operating (not standby, backup, or out of service /retired). 53 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Review 2005, July 2006, Table 8.2b. Accessed March 21, 2007 at httn: /Jwww.eia.doe.eov /emcu /aer /electhunl. 54 U.S. PIRG Education Fund, Making Sense of the Coal Rush: The Consequences of Expanding America's Dependence on Coal, July 2006. 55 Ibid. 56 U.S. Energy Information Administration, Electric Power Annual, October 2006, Existing Capacity by Energy Source, Table: "Existing Electric Generating Units in the United States, 2005," accessed March 21, 2007 at http //­m x x, eia d ie pov /cneaf /electricity / page /capaciiy /exisdngmits2005 xls. The total capacity only includes plants listed as operating (not standby, backup, or out of service /retired). 57 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, AnnualEnegy Review 2005, July 2006, Table 8.2b. Accessed March 21, 2007 at http, / /aR m,- eia.doe.goN,/emeu /aer /elect.litrnl. 58 U.S. Energy Information Administration, "Glossary," accessed Much 26, 2007 at httl3://wwim.eia.doe.gov/glossaryfglosslry t htm. Vehicles with a primary non - transportation purpose (construction cranes, bulldozers, farming vehicles, warehouse tractors and forklifts) are classified in the sector of their primary use. 59 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the Umted States 2005, November 2006, chapter 2. 60 1990 data: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Higbway Statistics Summary to 1995, 1995, Section V, Table VM -203, available at wn ,.fhm,a. dot. gov /ohim /su=ary95 /section5.htnil; 2001 data: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Highway Suz6stics 2001, 2002, Section V, Table VIA-3, available at vw .fhwa.dot.gov /olim /hs0l /re.htm. 61 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of U.S. Grenbouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 - 2001, April 15, 2003. 6z 1990 -1995 data: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Higbway Statistics Summary to 1995, 1995, Section V, Table VM -203, available at www.fhwa. dot. gov /ohim /summary95 /section5.html; 1996 -2004 data: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Higbway Statistics, 1995 -2004, Section V, Table VM -3, available at http: / /wm�v.fhwa. dot .govZpobcy/(.)hl2i /lissZhsspLibs htm. 63 Based on our analysis of state - specific fossil fuel consumption data (in BTU) through 2004 from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, State Energy Consumption, Price and Expenditure Estimates. See the methodology fora detailed description of how we conducted this analysis. 64 National Research Council, Effectiteness and Impact of Corporate Amrage Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards, 2002. 65 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Light -Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 Through 2005, July 2005. Based on adjusted lab numbers. 66 See U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Review 2004,15 August 2005, Chapter 5. 67 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Llgbt -Duty Automotive "Technology and Fuel Economy Trends, 1975 Tbmugh 2004, April 2004. 69 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Light- DutyAaermoiive Technology and Fuel EmnomyTrends. 1975 Through 2005, July 2005. Based on adjusted lab numbers. 69 Ibid. 10 James E. Hansen, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University Earth Institute, Is There Still Time to Arvid `DangerousAntbropogenic Interference "witb Global Climate, presentation to the American Geophysical Union, 6 December 2005, opening remarks. 71 U.S. PIRG Education Fund, Rising to the Challenge:.f w Steps to Cut Global Warming Pollution in the United States, Summer 2006. 72 Steven Nadel, Anna Shipley and R. Neal Elliott, American Council for an Energy- Efficient Economy, The Tecbmca4 Economic and Achiesable Potential for Energy+ - Efficiency in the U.S. -A Meta Analysis of Recent Studies, 2004. 73 National Research Council, F.f ctimness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Emnomy (CAFE) Standards, 2002. 74 Union of Concerned Scientists, Fearihility ofFuelEmnomy Improvements A UCS letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 20 April 2005. J5 U.S. PIRG Education Fund, Rising to the Challenge: Six Steps to Cut Global Warming Pollution in the United States, Summer 2006. ]6 Ibid. 71 U.S. Energy Information Administration, "State Energy Consumption, Price, and Expenditure Estimates," downloaded February 26, 2007 at btt42: / /3&-ww eia doe goy /emeu /states/ reds updates html. 43 ENDORSING THE U.S. MAYORS CLIMATE PROTECTION AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the U.S. Conference of Mayors has previously adopted strong policy resolutions calling for cities, communities and the federal government to take actions to reduce global warming pollution; and WHEREAS, the Inter - Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the international community's most respected assemblage of scientists, has found that climate disruption is a reality and that human activities are largely responsible for increasing concentrations of global warming pollution; and WHEREAS, recent, well- documented impacts of climate disruption include average global sea level increases of four to eight inches during the 20th century; a 40 percent decline in Arctic sea -ice thickness; and nine of the ten hottest years on record occurring in the past decade; and WHEREAS, climate disruption of the magnitude now predicted by the scientific community will cause extremely costly disruption of human and natural systems throughout the world including: increased risk of floods or droughts; sea -level rises that interact with coastal storms to erode beaches, inundate land, and damage structures; more frequent and extreme heat waves; more frequent and greater concentrations of smog; and WHEREAS, on February 16, 2005, the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement to address climate disruption, went into effect in the 141 countries that have ratified it to date; 38 of those countries are now legally required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or average 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2012; and WHEREAS, the United States of America, with less than five percent of the world's population, is responsible for producing approximately 25 percent of the world's global warming pollutants; and WHEREAS, the Kyoto Protocol emissions reduction target for the U.S. would have been 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012; and WHEREAS, many leading US companies that have adopted greenhouse gas reduction programs to demonstrate corporate social responsibility have also publicly expressed preference for the US to adopt precise and mandatory emissions targets and timetables as a means by which to remain competitive in the international marketplace, to mitigate financial risk and to promote sound investment decisions; and WHEREAS, state and local governments throughout the United States are adopting emission reduction targets and programs and that this leadership is bipartisan, coming from Republican and Democratic governors and mayors alike; and WHEREAS, many cities throughout the nation, both large and small, are reducing global warming pollutants through programs that provide economic and quality of life benefits such as reduced energy bills, green space preservation, air quality improvements, reduced traffic congestion, improved transportation choices, and economic development and job creation through energy conservation and new energy technologies; and WHEREAS, mayors from around the nation have signed the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement which, as amended at the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting, reads: The U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement A. We urge the federal government and state governments to enact policies and programs to meet or beat the target of reducing global warming pollution levels to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, including efforts to: reduce the United States' dependence on fossil fuels and accelerate the development of clean, economical energy resources and fuel- efficient technologies such as conservation, methane recovery for energy generation, waste to energy, wind and solar energy, fuel cells, efficient motor vehicles, and biofuels; B. We urge the U.S. Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation that includes 1) clear timetables and emissions limits and 2) a flexible, market -based system of tradable allowances among emitting industries; and C. We will strive to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution by taking actions in our own operations and communities such as; 1. Inventory global warming emissions in City operations and in the community, set reduction targets and create an action plan. 2. Adopt and enforce land -use policies that reduce sprawl, preserve open space, and create compact, walkable urban communities; 3. Promote transportation options such as bicycle trails, commute trip reduction programs, incentives for car pooling and public transit; 4. Increase the use of clean, alternative energy by, for example, investing in "green tags ", advocating for the development of renewable energy resources, recovering landfill methane for energy production, and supporting the use of waste to energy technology; 5. Make energy efficiency a priority through building code improvements, retrofitting city facilities with energy efficient lighting and urging employees to conserve energy and save money; 6. Purchase only Energy Star equipment and appliances for City use; 7. Practice and promote sustainable building practices using the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED program or a similar system; 8. Increase the average fuel efficiency of municipal fleet vehicles; reduce the number of vehicles; launch an employee education program including anti - idling messages; convert diesel vehicles to bio- diesel; 9. Evaluate opportunities to increase pump efficiency in water and wastewater systems; recover wastewater treatment methane for energy production; 1O.Increase recycling rates in City operations and in the community; I1.Maintain healthy urban forests; promote tree planting to increase shading and to absorb CO2; and 12.Help educate the public, schools, other jurisdictions, professional associations, business and industry about reducing global warming pollution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that The U.S. Conference of Mayors endorses the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement as amended by the 73�d annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting and urges mayors from around the nation to join this effort. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, The U.S. Conference of Mayors will work in conjunction with ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability and other appropriate organizations to track progress and implementation of the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement as amended by the 73rd annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting. US Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Agreement — Signature Page You have my support for the US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. Date: Mayor: Signature: Address: City: Mayor's Email: Staff Contact Name: Staff Contact Title: Staff Phone: Staff Email: State: Zip: Please add my comments in support of the US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. We will add these to the Website (optional): Please return completed form at your earliest convenience to: US Mayors Climate Protection Agreement By Mail: c/o City of Seattle Office of Sustainability and Environment Seattle Municipal Tower PO Box 94729 Seattle, WA 98124 -4729 By Fax: (206) 684 -3013 By Email: ieanie.boawn{cilseattle.gov For more Information: (206) 615 -0817