HomeMy WebLinkAboutOS 02-10
City n Report To
Joint Planning & Executive Committee
IeKERIN Report Number: OS 02-10
Date: September 7, 2010
94
From: Thomas Melymuk
Director, Office of Sustainability
Subject: Partners for Climate Protection Program
- Status Update
- File: D-1100-006
Recommendation:
1. That Council receive Report OS 02-10 providing an update on the City's Partners
for Climate Protection Program.
2. That Council endorse the Five Year Corporate Emissions Reduction Strategy
outlined in Attachment 1 to this Report.and direct staff to proceed as set out in
that Strategy.
3. That a copy of this Report be forwarded to the Federation of Canadian
Municipalities' Partners for Climate Protection Office.
Executive- Summary: In 2007, Pickering completed the first three (of five)
milestones of the Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program. The PCP program is
promoted by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities to help local municipalities
reduce energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In completing the first three
milestones of the program, the City committed to reducing GHG emissions by 50% per
capita for municipal (i.e. corporate) emissions and by 35% per capita for community
emissions. The reductions are to be achieved by 2016 using 1995 as our baseline year.
In late 2009 and early 2010 Durham Sustain Ability (DSA) reviewed the City's progress
in reducing energy consumption and GHG emissions both corporately and on a
community-wide basis. The results of DSA's review for corporate emissions are
presented in this *Report. A staff report on community emissions will be completed
separately and submitted to Council at a later date.
Although the City has made some progress towards achieving our corporate GHG
emissions reduction target, much work remains to be done. To help accelerate and
focus our efforts, it is recommended that Council endorse the Five Year Corporate
Emissions Reduction Strategy outlined in Attachment 1 to this Report and direct staff to
proceed as set out in that Strategy.
Report OS 02-10 September 7, 2010
S b ct: Partners for Climate Protection Program Update Page 2
Financial Implications: There are no new financial implications related to the
recommendations contained in this Report. Many of the Priority Actions included in the
attached Five Year Corporate Emissions Reduction Strategy either have no budget
implications or can be implemented this year in accordance with the Council approved
2010 budget. For those Priority Actions that are not within the existing approved
budget, the financial implications (costs and savings) will be identified for Council's
consideration through future budget submissions.
Sustainability Implications: Energy conservation is one of the cornerstones of the
City's Sustainable Pickering program. Reducing corporate energy consumption
provides economic, social, and environmental benefits. Using less energy saves money,
improves air quality and helps address climate change by reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. By taking action to meet its corporate GHG and energy reduction targets,
the City would also set a positive example for businesses and residents, potentially
resulting in even further energy and GHG reductions across the municipality than might
otherwise be achieved if the City did not lead by example.
Background: The Partners for Climate Protection (PCP) program is supported
and promoted by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. It has been established to
assist municipalities in reducing greenhouse gas emissions from community and
municipal (i.e. corporate) operations. The PCP program has five milestones as follows:
1. Creating a greenhouse gas emissions inventory and forecast
2. Setting GHG emissions reduction targets
3. Developing a local action plan
4. Implementing the local action plan
5. Monitoring progress and reporting results
In 2007, the City.of Pickering became only the fifth municipality in Ontario to complete
milestones 1, 2 and 3 of the PCP Program (there are now over 10 municipalities in
Ontario that have completed at least the first three milestones). The City is now working
through Milestones 4 and 5 of the program.
This Report provides an update on the City's progress in relation to corporate
emissions, and recommends a number of Priority Actions for Council's consideration.
The data gathered for this Report was derived from a review of the City's corporate and
community greenhouse gas emissions completed by Durham Sustain Ability in late
2009 and early 2010 (see Attachment 2).
Report OS 02-10 September 7, 2010
Subject: Partners for Climate Protection Program Update Page 3
96
Through the City's PCP program Council established the following corporate and
community GHG emissions reduction targets.
• 50 percent per capita reduction for corporate emissions by 2016
(from 1995 levels)
• 35 percent per capita reduction for community emissions by 2016
(from 1995 levels)
It should be noted that these emissions targets were determined assuming a constant
relationship between energy use and GHG levels. However, the approved protocol for
measuring GHG emissions under the PCP program requires municipalities to measure
GHG levels on the basis of an annually fluctuating "electricity equivalent carbon dioxide
coefficient" (eC02 coefficient). In Ontario (as in all provinces), the eC02 coefficient
varies from year to year depending on the average annual amount of fossil fuel used to
generate energy in the Province. When power is generated mostly from fossil fuels
such as coal, natural gas and oil, higher levels of GHG emissions are produced. When
power is generated mostly from other sources such as hydroelectric, nuclear and
renewable sources, there are fewer GHG emissions.
Depending on Ontario's fuel mix, GHG emissions in Pickering could drop in a given year
even if the City did nothing to change its energy usage. Likewise, in another year, the
City could complete a number of energy conservation initiatives, but GHG emissions
could still rise if the provincial fuel mix in that year was weighted more heavily toward
the burning fossil fuels. .
In 1995 (our baseline year) the provincial fuel mix was relatively "clean" compared to
subsequent years (i.e. fewer fossil fuels were part of the provincial energy mix). Since
1995 however, Ontario's fuel mix has become slightly "dirtier," raising the provincial
eC02 coefficient. To account for the annual fluctuations in the provincial eC02
coefficient (over which the City has no control), the GHG reduction targets approved by
Council can be "adjusted" and restated as follows:
• 22 percent per capita reduction for corporate emissions by 2016
(from 1995 levels)
• 19 percent per capita reduction for community emissions by 2016
(from 1995 levels)
Corporate Energy Management Priorities
There are a number of possible initiatives the City can implement to reduce energy
consumption and lower greenhouse gas emissions, from the "low hanging fruit" to the
"hard to reach" projects. Given cost and resource limitations, the City needs to be
strategic in selecting projects for future implementation.
Report OS 02-10 September 7, 2010
Subject: Partners for Climate Protection Program Update Page 4
97
To help prioritize projects, the City's potential energy management initiatives have been
grouped and evaluated in relation to Pickering's three broad sustainability objectives, as
shown in Table 1 below.
The Table organizes the City's potential corporate energy management projects into
three categories (municipal facilities, municipal fleet and municipal lighting) and
provides a high-level qualitative assessment of the potential sustainability benefits of the
various projects within each of these categories considering:
• economic objectives (i.e. the likelihood of saving costs)
• environmental objectives (i.e. the potential to reduce GHG emissions)
• social objectives (i.e. the opportunity to enhance municipal service delivery)
Table 1 - Energy Management Projects and Sustainability Objectives
Sustainability Objectives
Energy Management Economic Environmental Social
Projects (cost-savings) (GHG reductions) (service enhancements)
(by category/subcategory)
Municipal Facilities
• City Hall High High High
• Recreation Facilities High High High
• Libraries High High High
• Fire Halls Medium Medium Medium
Municipal Fleet
• Light Duty High High High
• Medium Duty Medium Medium, High
• Heavy Duty Low Low High
Municipal Lighting
• Traffic Lights High High High
• Park/Walkwa Lights Medium Low High
• Street Lights Medium Low High
This high-level analysis shows that Pickering's sustainability objectives would be best
served if the City focuses its corporate energy conservation efforts in the following
areas:
1. Municipal Facilities (especially higher-occupancy/higher-use facilities)
2. Light duty vehicles
3. Traffic lights
Report OS 02-10 September 7, 2010
Subject: Partners for Climate Protection Program Update Page 5
98
Corporate Energy Use and GHG Emissions
A summary of Pickering's corporate energy use and GHG emissions from 1995 through
2008 is provided in Table 2 below. The City's 2016 target for energy use and GHG
emissions is also shown in the Table, as is a "business as usual" (BAU) forecast.
The BAU forecast represents the growth in energy use, and GHG emissions that would
occur to 2016 if the City did not undertake any significant energy management and
GHG emissions reduction efforts. Based on the data, if the City did nothing different,
total corporate energy use and total corporate GHG emissions would rise
between 2008 and 2016 by more than 55 percent.
i
To meet our corporate PCP target, it is estimated that the City's total energy use would
need to be reduced by almost 24% between 2008 and 2016. Accounting for anticipated
population.growth, this would result in a 22% reduction by 2016 in our per capita GHG
emissions from 1995 levels (which matches our "adjusted" GHG target for corporate
emissions). If achieved, it would also result in a savings of more than $2.0 million in
annual energy costs compared to the BAU scenario.
Table 2 - Corporate Energy Use and GHG Emissions
(1995 to 2008 and 2016 BAU1 Forecast and PCP2 Target)
2016 2016
Summary 1995 2004 2007 2008 BAU PCP
Forecast Target
Energy Use
i a'oules) 104,442 116,852 124,471 123,531 191,757 93,957
Per Capita Energy
i a'oules 1.33 1.28 1.36 1.35 1.36 0.67
GHG Emissions
tonnes eC02 5,032 6,865 6,864 6,803 10,575 7,083
Per Capita GHG
tonnes eC02 0.064 0.075 0.075 0.074 0.075 0.050
Energy. Cost
$'000 $1,435' $2,233 $2,478 $2,644 $3,997 $1,958
1. BAU = Business as Usual
2. PCP = Partners for Climate Protection
Also noteworthy from Table 2 is that total energy consumption by the City rose steadily
from 1995 to 2007, generally in line with population growth, before falling slightly as a
result of a variety of corporate energy management initiatives that were undertaken by
the City in late 2007.
i
i
Report OS 02-10 September 7, 2010
Subject: Partners for Climate Protection Program Update Page 6
99
Recent and Planned Energy Management Projects
Between late 2007 and the end of 2010 the City will have completed over 20 energy
management projects. These projects are listed in Appendix B of the June 2010
Durham Sustain Ability Report (see Attachment 2). A summary of the energy and GHG
savings attributable to these projects broken down by facilities, fleet and street lighting
is shown on Table 3 below.
Table 3 - Energy and GHG Savings for Municipal Projects
(from 2007 to end of 2010)
Project Energy GHG Savings Operating Cost Simple Payback
Category Savings (tonnes / year) Savings (in years)
(GJ / ear) per ear)
Municipal Facilities 11,428 609 $249,853 5.4
Municipal Fleet 102 11 $3,233 20.1
Street Lighting 794 40 $23,118 2.2
TOTAL 12,324 660 $276,204 5.3
Collectively, these energy management projects will provide an estimated savings of
approximately $276,000 annually. It should also be noted that:
• facility projects (by far) produce the greatest energy and GHG savings
• fleet savings (both energy and GHG) are due mainly to the replacement of
older City vehicles with five hybrids. However, operating savings for the
City's hybrid vehicles are relatively small, and payback periods relatively
long
• although GHG savings are relatively small, the conversion of the City's
traffic lights to high efficiency LED's provides an excellent payback of just
over 2 years
Figure A on the next page is a trend analysis of the City's GHG emissions between
2007 and 2016, taking into consideration anticipated population increases as well as the
growth in municipal facilities and services expected to occur over this time period. The
figure shows GHG emissions both on an absolute basis (the bars) and per capita basis
(the line).
Report OS 02-10 September 7, 2010
Subject: Partners for Climate Protection Program Update Page 7100
Figure A - GHG Corporate Emissions Trend Analysis
(2007 to 2016)
12,000 0.100
0.090
10,000 By 2011 - 660 t (19%) M'
0.080
0.075 0.074
+772
; 8,000 158 0.066 Target Gap - 2832 t(81%) 0.070
N
v
a 0.060 w
_ a
0.05
0 6,000 0.050
W 2011-2016 Initiatives: 566 t/_ y~
CL
_ 0.040
r- d
m _ Kam- laty. a
4,000 k Y a
0.030 .
E
0.020
r; -
2,000
0.010
0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2016
Target Pre-2007
Buildings Streetlights Q Fleet ■ Waste Bau
A number of conclusions can be reached from Figure A.
1. The City's first major energy management project (re-lamping City Hall) was
completed in late 2007 and began to show an impact on GHG emissions in 2008.
2. The City's initiatives undertaken in 2009 will begin to show an impact on GHG
emissions in 2010, with a total projected GHG savings of 284 tonnes per year.
This corresponds to a 5.4% reduction in GHG emissions compared to 2007.
3. The 2010 approved projects will have a slightly lower impact than the 2009
projects with projected savings of 234 tonnes per year, commencing in 2011.
4. The energy management initiatives through 2010 have reduced the City's
corporate GHG emissions, but in terms of our corporate PCP target, the
reduction in emissions only closes our GHG emissions gap by 19%0.
5. Commencing in 2011, the City will need to enact measures that allow us to close
the remaining 81 % of our GHG emissions gap if we are going to meet our 2016
PCP target for corporate emissions. Annually this translates into a reduction
target of 566 tonnes GHG emissions per year, which is more than double the
annual impact of the initiatives implemented by the City in 2009 and 2010.
Report OS 02-10 September 7, 2010
Subject: Partners for Climate Protection Program Update Page 8
10 i
Toward an Integrated and Sustainable Energy Management Strategy
Although some progress has been made in reducing corporate GHG emissions, much
more work needs to be done. The corporate initiatives undertaken by the City starting
in late 2007'and continuing through 2010 have made a difference. However, in order
to meet our 2016 corporate GHG emissions reduction target, the City will have to
more than double its efforts starting in 2011.
Doubling our efforts could present some challenges. Yet it could also provide significant
benefits, not only in terms of climate change and air quality, but also financially. If we
are successful in meeting our 2016 corporate GHG emissions target, it is estimated that
the City could save over $2.0 million annually in energy costs.
To help focus and direct the City's efforts in this regard, it is recommended that Council
endorse the Five Year Corporate Emissions Reduction Strategy outlined in
Attachment 1 to this Report and direct staff to proceed as set out in that Strategy.
A broad and integrated approach is needed. Below are examples of the types of
Priority Actions that are identified in Attachment 1 as part of our Five Year Strategy.
• Require all new municipal buildings and facilities greater than 500 sq. m. to be
constructed to a minimum LEED silver standard.
• Select through a Request for Proposals process, appropriate business partners
to work with the City on the review. and installation of sustainable energy
technologies on one or more City buildings, such as solar PV panels and
geothermal systems.
• Investigate and report to Council on the use of alternative vehicle fuels, including
natural gas, propane, ethanol, biodiesel and electricity.
• Initiate a pilot/demonstration project involving LED lighting and/or street light
dimming on City roadways to assess the feasibility of implementing these
technologies on a broader scale.
• Launch a "Staff Energy Conservation Campaign" to encourage and promote staff
to reduce their energy use and carbon footprint:
o in the workplace, by turning-off lights, powering off computers, taking stairs
rather than using the elevator, etc.; and
o when driving, by improving driving habits, adopting anti-idling practices,
reducing vehicle trips (especially single occupancy trips), etc.
I
Report OS 02-10 September 7, 2010
Subject: Partners for Climate Protection Program Update Page 9I 02
Attachments:
1. City of Pickering Five Year Corporate Emissions Reduction Strategy
2. Durham Sustain Ability report entitled: "City of Pickering, Corporate and
Community Energy Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emission Sustainability
Indicators" dated June 2010
Prepared and Approved/Endorsed By:
J ~
Thomas Mely uk, G. 1. P.
Director, Office of Istainability
TM:ljg
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Directors
Recommend d for the consideration "
of Pickerin ity C it
Tony reve el, P.Eng.
Chief Administrative Officer
i
Attachment No. 1
103 Report OS 02-10
City of Pickering
Five Year Corporate Emissions Reduction Strategy
Priority.Actions
1.0 City 1.01 Require all new municipal buildings and facilities greater than
Facilities 500 sq. m. to be constructed to a minimum LEED silver
standard ("Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design").
1.02 Select through a Request for Proposals process, appropriate
business partners to work with the City on the review and
installation of sustainable energy technologies on one or more
City buildings, such as solar PV panels and geothermal
systems.
1.03 Conduct energy audits of City Hall / Central Library, Petticoat
Creek Community Centre, East Shore Community Centre,
West Shore Community Centre, and Claremont Community
Centre and include for Council's consideration the priority
energy efficiency projects identified in these audits in future
City budget submissions.
1.04 Investigate and where practical install "low-cost" energy
efficiency retrofit devices in all City facilities. Low-cost devices
may include (but are not limited to) motion-detectors,
occupancy sensors, automatic timers, light dimmers, low flow
toilets and showerheads.
1.05 Include in future budget submissions, the energy efficiency
projects identified in the 2008 Recreation Complex Energy
Audit that have not yet been implemented.
2.0 City 2.01 Adopt the principle of "right-sizing" as a basis for future vehicle
Vehicles purchasing decisions (whereby the most fuel efficient vehicle
is used for the assigned job or task requirement).
2.02 Investigate the use of alternative vehicle fuels, including
natural gas, propane, ethanol, biodiesel and electricity.
1
Attachment No. 1
Report OS 02-10
104
City of Pickering
Five Year Corporate Emissions Reduction Strategy (cont'd)
Priority Actions (cont'd)
3.0 City 3.01 Initiate a pilot/demonstration project involving motion sensors,
Lighting solar lighting and/or LED lighting in City parks or walkways to
assess the feasibility of implementing these technologies on a
broader scale.
3.02 Initiate a pilot/demonstration project involving LED lighting
and/or street light dimming on City roadways to assess the
feasibility of implementing these technologies on a broader
scale.
4.0 General 4.01 Launch a "Staff Energy Conservation Campaign" to encourage
and promote staff to reduce their energy use and carbon
footprint:
• in the workplace, by turning-off lights, powering off
computers, taking stairs rather than using the elevator,
etc.; and
• when driving, by improving driving habits, adopting anti-
idling practices, reducing vehicle trips (especially single
occupancy trips), etc.
4.02 Investigate the feasibility of purchasing low or no GHG
emission energy from a recognized and viable provider of
green power.
4.03 Investigate and acquire appropriate energy/GHG emission
management software systems.
4.04 Review the City's purchasing policies and establish explicit
provisions that support energy-efficiency and GHG emission
reductions in all City purchases.
2
1 0 5 ATTACHMENT # LTO REPORT # n S aQ 0
Cafl,
_r
N-'G. Ability
City of Pickering
Corporate and Community Energy
Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emission
Sustainability Indicators
June 2010
Prepared By
Durham Sustain Ability
Email: info -sustain-ability.ca
Website: www.sustain-ability.ca
1709 Highway #7
Brougham, ON LOH 1A0
Phone: 905-427-0061
i
ATTACHMENT # i TO REPORT #L.5~-► a
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
106
Contents
1. Introduction ....................................'................:................................................................3
2. Corporate Operations- ....................................................................................................5
2.1 Energy and GHG Emissions Inventory and Trends Update ......................................5
2.2 Corporate Initiatives ..................................................................................................8
2.3 Energy and GHG Monitoring and Reporting ..........................................................12
3. Community Energy and GHG Inventory Update ..........................................................15
3.1 Community Summary ............:..............................................:..................................15
3.2 Trends By Sector ....................................................................................................17
3.2.1 Residential ........................................................................................................18
3.2.2 Institutional, Commercial and.Industrial (IC&I)
3.2.3 Transportation ...................................................................................................20
3.2.4 Waste ................................................................................................................21
4. Recommendations .........................................................................................................22
4.1 Corporate Actions ....................................................................................................22
4.2 Community Actions .................................................................................................23
Appendix A - Corporate Energy and GHG By Sector ......................................................24
Appendix B - Corporate Initiatives by Facility / Function ...............................................25
2
ATTACHMENT #~TO REPORT # Ls L0-i n
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
107
1. Introduction
In 2007, the City successfully completed milestones 1, 2 & 3 of the Partners for
Climate Protection (PCP) program for both the corporation and the community,
which includes establishing a greenhouse gas (GHG) baseline inventory, setting
reduction targets and developing a local action plan.
The remaining milestones 4 & 5 in the PCP framework ate the implementation of
the local action plan initiatives and development of a monitoring and reporting
system to verify GHG reductions, respectively.
The established local GHG emission reduction targets (milestone 2) are as
follows..
35 percent per capita reduction in community GHG emissions by 2016
(from 1995 community emission levels)
50 percent per capita reduction in municipal operational GHG emissions
by 2016 (from 1995 corporate operational emission levels)
As part of the Sustainable Pickering benchmarking program, 32 community and
corporate sustainability indicators have been developed of which the baseline
analysis of an initial number will be reported in early 2010. Two key sustainability
indicators that are relevant to the PCP program are total and per capita energy
consumption and total and per capita GHG emissions for corporate operations
and the community at large.
Since 2007, the City of Pickering has engaged in several key initiatives within the
corporation to reduce energy consumption and GHG emissions such as
relamping the Civic Complex and implementing a number of energy efficiency
projects at the Recreation Complex and other facilities. These PCP Milestone 4
corporate initiatives need to be documented and quantified (as part of Milestone
5) such that they can be included in future sustainability reports to show how the
City is leading by example.
In 2008, the "Sustainable Pickering Challenge" was created to focus on a number
of broad initiatives including the "Corporate Challenge". The Corporate
Challenge provides an opportunity for the City to lead by example, which
includes the development of an Energy Management Strategy as both a long-
term and short-term decision-making tool with established and focused priorities.
In 2009, the Corporate Challenge gained momentum as a growing number of
corporate energy efficiency and GHG reduction projects have been or are in the
process of being implemented.
3
ATTACHMENT#,Z_.TO REPORT#GLS -to
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators 08
This report provides:
i) an update and discussion of both corporate and community energy
consumption and GHG emissions through 2008 as part of both the
sustainability indicator program and PCP requirements;
ii) a summary of recent and planned corporate sustainability initiatives
with quantified energy consumption and GHG emission savings;
iii) a preliminary assessment of an automated monitoring and reporting
system for corporate energy and GHG emissions; and
iv) a set of recommendations for both corporate and community near term
actions
i
4
ATTACHMENT #-.Q.-TO REPORT#.M W-AD
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
109
2. Corporate Operations
2.1 Energy and GHG Emissions Inventory and Trends Update
As part of the PCP program, the City established a corporate GHG emissions
target of 7,083 t eC02 and 0.050 t eC02 per capita by 2016. The year 1995 was
used as the baseline for measuring progress and converting these targets into
percent changes.
The 1995 baseline year GHG emissions were calculated using two methods due
to issues regarding the electricity equivalent carbon dioxide (eC02) coefficient.
This coefficient for electricity is based on the annual average amount of fossil fuel
(coal, natural gas, oil) used at Ontario's electricity power plants. Other sources
such as hydropower, nuclear and renewable energy do not directly produce
eC02 emissions. As Ontario's electrical generation mix changes from year to
year so does the eC02 electricity coefficient. This means that the GHG
emissions associated with electricity consumption in Pickering can vary year to
year even if there is no significant change in energy usage, in fact when a
municipality reduces its energy consumption, its GHG emissions may even
increase if the provincial fossil fuel mix significantly increases. All municipalities
participating in the PCP program use this GHG calculation methodology (PCP
Protocol) in Canada and throughout the world.
The following two methods were used for calculating the 1995 baseline GHG
emissions inventory:
i) PCP Protocol method - based on absolute changes in GHG emissions
with annually fluctuating provincial eC02 electricity coefficients. This
was required for PCP approval.
1995 Baseline: 5,032 t eC02 (using 1995 eC02 coeff.)
% Absolute Change: 41 % increase between 1995 and 2016
% Per Capita Change: 22% reduction between 1995 and 2016
ii) Constant eC02 electricity coefficient - this provides consistency in
comparing the baseline with the target year as well as intermediate
years.
1995 Baseline: 7,874 t eC02 (using then latest eC02 coeff. for 2000)
Absolute Change: 10% reduction between 1995 and 2016
Per Capita Change: 50% reduction between 1995 and 2016
The second method has been the preferred way of referencing the corporate
target as a 50% per capita reduction, however it is becoming clear that the first
method is preferable for several reasons:
5
ATTACHMENT #-61-TO REPORT O
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators 0
It is the only method approved by PCP and if the City wishes to continue
with the PCP framework and milestones 4 & 5, it will need to comply with
this method of measuring GHG emissions.
• Using the year 2000 electricity coefficient is becoming less relevant as
more current annual coefficients become available.
• As the City is tracking energy consumption as well, this is a means by
which one can remove the affect of annually fluctuating coefficients as a
complimentary measure to GHG emissions.
Table 1 provides a summary of energy and GHG emissions on an absolute and
per capita basis from 1995 baseline through 2008 based on the PCP protocol for
GHG emissions inventory. The 2016 target for energy and GHG emissions and
the pre-2007 "Business As Usual" (BAU) forecast is also included. The 2016
BAU forecast provides the energy use and GHG emissions that would occur
through normal growth of services if there were no concerted focus on
sustainable initiatives (as per pre-2007 outlook).
The difference between the 2016 target and the 2016 BAU forecast is the gap
that needs to be met through these initiatives: 3,492 t of eC02 emissions. By
meeting the 2016 target, it is forecasted that the City would save over $2.0
million per year in energy costs.
Table 1 - Corporate Energy and GHG Inventory, Forecast and Target
Summary 1995 1999 2004 2007 2008 2016 2016
BAU Target
Forecast
Pre-2007
Energy Use 104,442 104,414 116,852 124,471 123,531 191,757 93,957
(GJ)
Per Capita 1.33 1.21 1.28 1.36 1.35 1.36 0.67
Energy GJ
GHG
Emissions 5,032 7,252 6,865 6,864 6,803 10,575 7,083
(t eC02
Per Capita
GHG t eC02 0.064 0.084 0.075 0.075 0.074 0.075 0.050
Energy Cost $1,435 $1,487 $2,233 $2,478 $2,644 $3,997 $1,958
($'000
6
ATTACHMENT #--a_ TO REPORT #DS-JD0 -P
Ci s f Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
Figure A provides the GHG emissions by sector (facilities, streetlights, fleet and
.waste) and the per capita trend line. The sector data is provided in Appendix A.
The BAU forecast is based on the per capita emissions level of 0.075 t/person in
2006 and 2007. The gap of 3,492 t of eC02 between the 2016 BAU forecast and
2016 target is also shown schematically.
Figure A - GHG Emissions By Sector with Per Capita Trend Line
12,000 0.100
i
0.084 0.090
~ i
10,000 •
.075 0.075 0.075 0.080 0.074 • - 3,492 t
0.070
N 8,000 0.064
N
o 0.060 0u
d
a
0.050
6,000 i 0.050
E t ±o
i a
4,000 k
0.030
t
i
~ 0.020
2,000 v
0.010
0 . _ -.i- 0.000
1995 1999 2004 2007 2008 2016 2016
Pre-2007 BAU Target
Buildings Streetlights Fleet ■ Waste
The GHG emissions for 1995 through 2008 use fluctuating annual electricity
eC02 coefficients to correspond with each year as per the PCP protocol. Using
this method, the per capita GHG reduction target of 0.050 t eC02 corresponds to
a 22% per capita GHG reduction and a 50% per capita energy consumption
reduction from 1995.
The trends show that both streetlights and fleet vehicles have used more energy
both on an absolute basis and on a per capita basis in 2008 versus the baseline
of 1995, although streetlight energy consumption was reduced by about 10%
from 2007 to 2008 partially as a. result of a traffic light relamping program started
in 2008.
7
ATTACHMENT #__R_)_-_T0 REPORT
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
112
Facility energy use has fared better on a per capita basis in comparison to 1995,
yet is showing a trend towards higher per capita consumption since 1999. This
trend should reverse by 2010 based on the energy efficient projects being
completed in 2009.
Total corporate energy. consumption has increased steadily from 1999 to 2007 on
both an absolute and per capita basis. In 2008, this trend has reversed as both
absolute and per capita energy usage has been reduced slightly.
Total corporate GHG emissions have been declining on an absolute and per
capita basis from 1999 through 2008 mainly as a result of declining provincial
electricity pC02 coefficients through 2007. The reduction in GHG emissions in
2008 was mainly due to energy reductions from corporate initiatives.
2.2 Corporate Initiatives
As part of the "Corporate Challenge" to lead by example, an increasing number
of energy efficiency and GHG reduction projects have been initiated. The slightly
better performance in 2008 in terms of both energy consumption and GHG
emissions is a result of corporate initiatives in late 2007 and throughout 2008.
Table 2 provides a summary of projects by sector that have been implemented
since late 2007 including those in the planning stages for implementation in
2010. Twenty-six initiatives have been quantified for energy, cost and GHG
savings, % GHG savings versus 2007 baseline, incremental capital cost of
energy/GHG elements of projects, and simple payback and ROI to measure
financial returns.
These initiatives provide an estimated annual savings of $276K/y with an
average return of 19%. Its environmental performance includes GHG emissions
savings of 660 t/y corresponding to a 12.5% savings of total 2007 emissions.
Table 2 - Impact of 26 Initiatives To-Date plus Budgeted for 2010
Sector Energy GHG Total GHG % GH Op. Cos Increment Simple Simpl
Saving Saving Emissions Saving Saving Capital Co Faybac ROI
(G7/y) (t/y) 2007 Baseli Within ($/y) (years]
(t eC02) Sector
Facilities 11,428 609 4,176 14.60$249,85 $1,341,717 5. 18.60
Fleet 102 11 1,221 0.90/ $3,23 $64,97 20. 5.00
Streetligh s 794 40 1,107 3.60/ $23,11 $50,53 2. 45.8°
Total 12,32 660, 5,283 12.50/,)$276,204 $1,457,2 4 5. 19.00
8
ATTACHMENT #_sQ,._TO REPORT #-10
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
113
The facility projects have produced the majority of the energy and GHG savings
impact to-date accounting for 92% of GHG savings, while providing good
economic returns averaging an estimated ROI of 18.6%.
The conversion of traffic lights to high efficiency LED's provides an excellent
payback of 2.2 years although GHG savings impact of 11 t/y is relatively small.
Fleet energy and GHG savings is mainly due to the replacement of older vehicles
with 5 hybrids, however the economic performance is relatively poor with an
estimated 5% ROI to-date.
Table 3 provides the impact of the initiatives by year starting with a large impact
project: the relamping of the Civic Complex in late 2007 with first full year impact
in 2008. The initiatives ramped up in 2009 (first full year impact in 2010) with a
total GHG savings of 284 t/y corresponding to a 5.4% reduction versus the 2007
GHG baseline. The 2010 budgeted projects (first full year impact in 2011) have a
slightly lower impact than 2009 projects with projected savings of 234 t/y of GHG
corresponding to a 4.4% reduction from 2007 baseline.
Table 3 - Impact of Corporate Initiatives by Year
First Full Energy Cost GHG % GHG
Year . Savings Savings Savings Savings
impact G)/ / t/ from 2007
Initiatives by Year 2008 2,106 $36,668 107 2.00/0
2009 640 $17,335 34 0.7%
2010 5,543 $139,593 284 5.4%
Initiatives To-date 8,289 $193,597 426 8.1%
Projects in 2010 2011 4,035 $82,607 234 4.4%
Total Projects thru 2010 12,324 $276,204 660 12.5%
Figure B shows the impact of the 26 initiatives on both an absolute basis (bars)
and a per capita basis (red trend line). The full impact of the initiatives by 2011 is
a reduction 660 t eC02/y which corresponds to a 14% per capita reduction from
0.075 t in 2007 to 0.064 t/capita in 2011.
The figure shows a trend line that is likely to meet the 2016 target, however it
does not take into account the adverse effect of growth in facilities and services
as population grows.
9
ATTACHMENT#-s3-kTO REPORT#D2Laa-i C>
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators 114
Figure B - GHG Emissions Impact of Initiatives Only in Meeting Target
8,000 _ 0.100
0.090
7,000
~r_ _ _ ~
0.075` 0.07 660 t 0.080
6,0001 0,072
N 0.068 0.070
o 0.0 4
V 0,
5,000 { 0.060 a"+
.0 0.
4,000 0.050
W ~
G
i - 0.040
ID 3,000
m a
0.030
2,000
0.020
1,000
0.010
p 0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Target
12 Buildings StreOtlights 10 Fleet ■ Waste
Figure C provides a more realistic picture with the impact of growth in municipal
facilities and services and therefore growth in energy consumption and GHG
emissions as provided in the BAU forecast.
In 2011, the impact of the'Recreation Complex expansion in 2010 is taken into
account, which increases the per capita GHG emissions from 0.064 t as shown in
Figure B to 0.066 t as shown in Figure C. The slope of the per capita trend line
starts to flatten in 2011 as a result of this expansion.
I
I
10
ATTACHMENT #_a.-TO REPORT #DSW -10
City1of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
15
Figure C - GHG Emissions - Meeting the Target with Growing Municipal
Operations (BAU Effect)
12,000 _ 0.100
0.090
10,000 By .2011. 6.6.0. t (19%0)
0.080
0.075 0.074
0.072
0.068
0.066 Target Gap - 218,32 t (81%) 0.070
0.060
6,000 0.051
> 0.050
W 2011-2016 Initiatives: 566 Vy
a
v
0.040
`rr ! i a
0 4,000
0.030
0.020
2,000
0.010
0 0.000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 ' 2014 2015 2016 2016
Target Pre-2007
Buildings Streetlights Fleet ■ Waste Bpu
The initiatives through 2010 have reduced the target gap of 3492 t of GHG
emissions by 19%. The remaining gap of 2832 t of GHG emissions corresponds
to an annual reduction target of 566 Vy from 2011 to 2016. This is over double
the annual impact of the initiatives being implemented in. 2009 and 2010 (260
by).
By 2011, the Corporation will need to step-up its corporate sustainability
initiatives to a new level to meet its 2016 target.
One missing element that is crucial in supporting this new level of attention and
focus is an automated energy and GHG emission monitoring and monthly
reporting system.
I
11
E
ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
116
2.3 Energy and GHG Monitoring and Reporting
It is recommended that the City utilize an energy management system that
accurately monitors and reports corporate energy consumption -and
corresponding GHG emissions on a monthly bas.is. This reporting will provide
the operational and management information required to bring the needed
attention to this crucial corporate challenge and to support decision-making
utilizing a sustainability lens.
An energy and GHG management system can provide additional benefits for the
City including:
• Automated comparison of facility energy performance and potential
benchmarking to other similar municipal facilities
• Monthly reports to both Operations staff and management provides the
visibility and attention required-to ignite a sense of urgency to reduce
energy and operating costs and to improve processes
• Savings verification of energy efficiency and GHG reduction projects
• Baseline data for calculating energy savings for obtaining government and
utility incentives
• Third party data entry of invoices (as well as interface with smart meter
data and electronic invoices) to ensure accurate and detailed energy
information is in the system.
• Meets future requirements of the Green Energy Act that require all public
agencies including municipalities to prepare energy plans including annual
progress updates
• Meets requirements of PCP Milestone 5
There are several software packages available from private contractors, which
tend to be very costly (over $100k) and may have risks concerning future service
and support.
There are at least two options that are more economical and are backed by
secure organizations.
Option 1 - "Energy and Environment Management System" (EEMS)
developed, licensed and supported by. York Region
This software was developed by a municipality for municipalities. York Region
and a network of GTA municipal licensees (including Markham, Oakville, Halton)
regularly share best practices.
The program provides comprehensive coverage of all energy consumption
including facilities, streetlighting, and fleet fuels along with performance
indicators.
12
ATTACHMENT #--a.-TO REPORT # - i v
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
117
Its major disadvantage is that it has no benchmarking capability for similar
facilities at other municipalities, so there is no automated mechanism for
comparing energy performance such as energy use per square foot to other
similar facilities.
Option 2 - LAS Energy Management Tool (EMT) - developed and supported
by. AMO
Pickering was part of their pilot program last year. Software is newer and is
currently focused on facilities only. It has drastically improved its service
capability from a year ago and now has a viable product and service including
extensive benchmarking capability.
Table 4 - Cost Comparison Between EEMS and EMT Systems
System Purchase Annual Option 1 Option 2 Option 2 Total Total
Price Fee Third Third Optional Annual Annual
(capital Party Party Account Costs - Costs -
cost) Electronic Paper Maintenance Self- Full
Inputting Invoice.' and Report Service Service
Fee Inputting Generation (option (option,
Fee 1 2
York $20,000 $2,000 $3,600 $5,400 Not offered $ 5,600 $ 7,400
EEMS
LAS Nil $3,600 $3,600 $5,400 $9,000 $ 7,200 $18,000
EMT
Table 4 shows that the EMT "self-service" option (option 1) is an "apples to
apples" comparison to EEMS. The EMT self-service option is more economically
attractive as the simple payback on the EEMS capital outlay is prohibitively high
at 12.5 years in comparison to EMT.
The EMT "full-service" option (option 2) provides an important service that EEMS
does not in that it verifies data accuracy and generates and distributes different
levels of reports depending on the needs of operations and management. On an
economic basis, the EEMS system has a payback of less than 2 years when
compared to the full service LAS EMT option however the service levels are quite
different.
A problem with the self-service option is that manual invoice copies cannot be
processed so electronic information needs to be sent by the City's accounting
department. There were a number of problems arising from this method during
the pilot project, which include information accuracy and limited information (only
energy consumption and cost data are available electronically). Other relevant
information on the invoice is not inputted into the accounting system such as the
invoice period start and end dates and electricity power/demand information.
13
ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT #,-~0
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators 18
With this preliminary analysis it's not fully apparent which system will best meet
the needs of the corporation. It is recommended that both systems be further
investigated by Operations and that they recommend the best option taking into
economic considerations, operational decision-making and data verification
requirements, and management reporting needs. Key considerations between
the two systems include whether facility benchmarking capability and reporting
beyond facilities (i.e. fleet software replacement) are important needs of the
corporation.
14
ATTACHMENT #,a-TO REPORT # - i 0
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
119
3. Community Energy and GHG Inventory Update
3.1 Community Summary
In 2006, the Pickering community GHG inventory was developed for the years
1995 and 2004. In 2009, as part of a Durham Region wide initiative, community
energy and GHG inventories have been gathered for the years 2005 through
2008. This data has been segregated by municipality at the request of Pickering
and other Durham municipalities.
Table 3 summarizes the annual energy consumption, energy cost and GHG .
emissions on an absolute and per capita basis from the 1995 baseline to 2008 as
well as the original PCP targets for 2016. The 2016 per capita targets for GHG
emissions and energy consumption are reductions of 19% and 35%,
respectively, from the 1995 baseline.
The GHG emissions have been calculated for each year with corresponding
eC02 electricity coefficients as per PCP protocol.
Table 5: Community Energy Consumption, Cost and GHG Emissions
Target
Summary 1995 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2016
Energy Use
(GJ) 9,264,042 9,786,980 10,562,086 10,278,757 10,793,743 10,652,834 10,948,967
Per Capita
Energy 118.3 107.6 116.1 112.5 117.9 114.8 77.60
Energy
Cost
($'000) N/A $170,444 $224,401 $224,490 $231,163 $246,852 $261,124
Per Capita
Energy
Cost N/A $1,874 $2,466 $2,456 $2,524 $2,660 $1,851
eC02
Emissions
(t) 511,839 597,821 632,930 586,779 611,092 604,436 744,634
Per Capita
eC02 6.54 6.57 6.96 6.42 6.67 6.51 5.28
From 1995 to 2008, absolute GHG emissions have, risen by 18% while per capita
emissions have fluctuated without a clear trend. The 2008 per capita emissions
are essentially the same as the baseline year of 1995 at 6.5 t/person, and per
capita energy consumption has declined slightly by 3% from 118 GJ/person to
115 GJ/person. This difference quantifies the effect of the variable eC02
electricity coefficient.
15
I
ATTACHMENT #-j;I) :TO REPORT#IrLc4D-4-~O
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
120
Although per capita energy consumption has declined slightly, the per capita
energy cost has risen significantly from $1874/person in 2004 to $2660/person in
2008, a 42% increase.
Figure D provides total GHG emissions by sector with the total per capita GHG
emissions trend line in red. Section 3.2 will provide further discussion on each
sector.
The GHG emission targets in 2016 of 744,634 t eC02 and 5.28 t eC02 per
capita correspond to a 45% absolute increase and a 19%. per capita reduction
from the 1995 baseline.
Figure D: Absolute GHG Emissions by Sector and Per Capita Trend Line
800,000 10.0
700,000 _ 9.0
0 8.0 a
600,000 3.. 7.0
4 \
500,000 c - 6.0 0
0
400,000 _ 5.0 u
v
4.0
300,000
a 3.0 f°
200,000 S x
2.0 a
100,000 _ 1.0
0 0.0
1995 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2016
Baseline Target
Waste 1116 Residential IC&I Transportation
16
ATTACHMENT #-a-TO'REPORT #D -10
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
121
3.2 Trends By Sector
Table 6 provides a summary of absolute and per capita GHG emissions by
sector. Each sector will be discussed in the following sections.
Table 6 - GHG Emissions by Sector
GHG Target
Emissions t 1995 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2016
Residential 203,900 208,306 212,239 187,801 195,897 183,433 226,938
Residential Per
Capita 2.60 2.29 2.33 2.05 2.14 1.98 1.61
IC&I 127,020 171,437 228,462 217,037 234,773 238,640 261,507
IC&I Per Capita 1.62 1.88 2.51 2.37 2.56 2.57 1.85
Transportation 150,048 183,591 166,760 160,872 161,203 163,338 227,904
Transportation
Per Capita 1.92 2.02 1.83 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.62
Waste 30,872 34,487 25,469 21,069 19,219 19,026 28,285
Waste Per
Capita 0.39 0.38 0.28 .0.23 0.21 0.21 0.20
Total eC02
Emissions 511,839 597,821 632,930 586,779 611,092 604,436 744,634
Total eC02
Per Capita 6.54 6.57 6.96 6.42 6.67 6.51 5.28
Figure E provides the per capita GHG emissions by sector. Yearly fluctuations in
all sectors have essentially cancelled each other out as the 2008 total per capita
GHG emissions is the same as the 1995 baseline emissions at 6.5 t/capita.
Figure E - Per Capita GHG Emissions By Sector
8.0 - -
7.0
0.39 n 0.38, "s 0.23 0.21
6.0 _
1.83 1.76 1.76 0.20
1.92 2.02 1.76
5.0 N ,
4.0 .1.62.
' 2.Sf
a 3.0 1.62 +1 88 37 56 57
2.0
a : t
k2.60
1.0 .'Z.29 2-33 2.05 2.14 ' .98
H6
.......0.0 1995 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Target
2016
r Residential lul u Transportation 12 Waste
17
ATTACHMENT #-2L-TO REPORT # -10
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
122
3.2.1 Residential
The residential sector for purposes of this analysis is comprised of single-family
detached and semi-detached homes. Condominiums and apartments are
generally on single meters and as such are regarded by the electricity local
distribution companies (LDC's) as commercial accounts and cannot be readily
segregated from other IC&I customers.
The residential sector accounted for 30% of total community GHG emissions in
2008. Table 7 shows the residential energy consumption, energy cost and eC02
emissions on an absolute and per capita basis.
From 1995 to 2008, the population grew by 19% while the number of households
increased by 20%. Despite the increase in population and households, the
energy consumption has.dropped by 15% and the eC02 emissions have
decreased by 10%. The difference between the two measures can be attributed
to the change to the provincial electricity eC02 coefficient from 1995 to 2006.
The eC02 coefficient for the year 2006 has also been used for the years 2007
and 2008 as it's currently the last published figure.
Changes in annual weather will also effect annual energy consumption and
eC02 emissions. Drops in per capita energy consumption from 2005 to 2006 and
from 2007 to 2008 may be partially due to relatively warmer winters in 2006 and
2008 versus 2005 and 2007, respectively.
Table 7: Residential Energy Consumption, Cost and GHG Emissions
Target
Residential 1995 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2016
Energy Use
(GJ) 4,258,460 3,988,936 4,024,425 3,705,436 3,877,248 3,630,088 3,780,860
Per Capita
Energy 54.4 43.8 44.2 40.5 42.3 39.1 26.8
Energy
Costs
($'000) N/A $63,702 $70,522 $68,457 $66,931 $65,441 $68,159
Per Capita
Energy
Costs N/A $700 $775 749 $731 $705 $483
eC02
Emissions
(t) 203,900 208,306 212,239 187,801 195,897 183,433 226,938
Per Capita
eC02 2.60 2.29 2.33 2.05 2.14 1.98 1.61
18
ATTACHMENT# A TO REPORT# 3-lD
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
123
3.2.2 Institutional, Commercial and Industrial (IC&I)
The IC&I sector comprises of institutions (government, schools, hospitals,
churches, museums, and other public buildings), office buildings, retail and food
service establishments, and industrial facilities. It also includes apartments and
condominiums in this analysis for reasons discussed in residential Section 3.2.1.
This sector accounts for the largest portion of total community GHG emissions. In
2008, it generated 40% of emissions. Table 8 shows the IC&I energy
consumption, energy cost and eC02 emissions on an absolute and per capita
basis.
From 1995 to 2008, total energy consumption and eC02 emissions have
significantly increased by 65% and 88%, respectively. As in the residential
sector, the difference between the two measures can be attributed to the change
to the provincial electricity eC02 coefficient from 1995 to 2006.
Per capita energy consumption and GHG emissions seems to have leveled out
between 2007 and 2008. This may be due to the effects of the recession starting
in 2008 when some businesses started to reduce production and occupancy
rates for commercial space declined, all of which affect energy consumption.
Table 8: IC&I Energy Consumption, Energy Cost and GHG Emissions
Target
IC&I 1995 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2016
Energy Use
(GJ) 2,824,208 3,129,453 4,116,109 4,237,261 4,575,631 4,650,879 3,855,410
Per Capita
Energy 36.1 34.4 45.2 46.4 50.0 50.1 27.3
Energy
Costs
($'000) N/A $50,790 $93,297 $94,532 $100,659 $106,403 $88,204
Per Capita
Energy
Costs
/ca ita N/A 558 $1,025 $1,034 $1,099 $1,147 625
eC02
Emissions
(t) 127,020 171,437 228,462 217,037 234,773 238,640 261,507
Per Capita
eC02 1.62 1.88 2.51 2.37 2.56 2.57 1.85
19
ATTACHMENT# EZE pndRT# 0-S06-'D
City of Pickering = Energy and GHG Sus-&Ii ity In ica 6?_
124
3.2.3 Transportation
The transportation sector includes travel by all Pickering residents in personal
vehicles and public transportation vehicles, but not rail, marine or air
transportation as per PCP protocol. It also includes commercial vehicles used by
Pickering businesses and institutions based on provincial proxy data. The total
vehicle kilometers traveled is then used to calculate fuel and emission data
based on average fuel efficiencies for different classes of vehicles.
In 2008, transportation. accounted for the third largest portion of total community
GHG emissions generating 27% of emissions. Table 9 shows the transportation
consumption, energy cost and eC02 emissions on an absolute and per capita
basis.
From 1995 to 2008, total transportation fuel consumption and eC02 emissions
increased by 9%. However, on a per capita basis, energy and eC02 emissions
declined by 8% showing a reversal of an increasing per capita trend from 1995 to
2994.
Total energy costs in the transportation sector have risen significantly. On a per
capita basis, costs have risen by 31 % from 2004 to 2008, a large portion of which
is attributable to the high fuel prices in the first three quarters of 2008.
Table 9: Transportation Energy Consumption, Cost and GHG Emissions
Target
Transportation 1995 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2016
Energy Use (GJ) 2,181,374 2,668,590 2,421,552 2,336,059 2,340,864 2,371,867 3,312,696
Per Capita
Energy 27.9 29.3 26.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 23.5
Energy Costs
($1000) N/A $55,952 $60,582 $61,501 $63,573 $75,008 $104,761
Per Capita
Energy Costs
/ca ita N/A 615 666 673 694 808 742
eC02 Emissions
(t) 150,048 183,591 166,760 160,872 161,203 163,338 227,904
Per Capita eC02 1.92 2.02 1.83 1.76 1.76 1.76 1.62
20
ATTACHMENT#-z -TO REPORT -10
City of Pickering Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
125
3.2.4 Waste
The community waste sector includes all waste collected by Durham Region from
residents, institutions and businesses within Pickering. It also includes waste
collected by private companies from institutions and businesses except industrial
waste and construction and demolition waste as very little of the organic portion
of this waste ends up in municipal landfills and industrial landfill conditions do not
foster decay. As little data is available on private collection, provincial proxy data
was used to add to Durham Region records.
In 2008, waste accounted for 3% of total community GHG emissions. Table 10
shows the waste tonnage to landfill and eC02 emissions on an absolute and per
capita basis.
From 1995 to 2008, total waste to landfill and eC02 emissions were reduced by
38% through successful diversion programs. The improvements in this sector are
generally permanent systemic changes based on improvements in diversion
rates.
Table 10 - Waste to Landfill and eC02 Emissions
Target
Waste 1995 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2016
Waste to
Landfill (t) 64,089 71,594 52,873 43,740 39,899 39,498 60,054
Per Capita
Waste 0.82 0.79 0.58 0.48 0.44 0.43 0.43
eC02
Emissions (t) 30,872 34,487 25,469 21,069 19,219 19,026 28,285
Per Capita
eC02 0.39 0.38 0.28 0.23 0.21 0.21 0.20
I
21
ATTACHMENT# a TOREPORT#Dc"~9-10
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
126
4. Recommendations
4.1 Corporate Actions
The key initiatives starting in late 2007 and continuing through 2010 have been a
good start for the Corporation. However, in order to meet its 2016 target the City
will need to more than double its annual GHG emissions reduction efforts starting
in 2011.
In order to meet its 2016 target, it is recommended that the City of Pickering:
i) Conduct a detailed assessment of the operational and reporting
functionality of the two leading energy/GHG emission management
software systems (LAS EMT and York Region's EEMS) and acquire
such software by mid-2010 (in order to be used for 2011 budget
prioritization and decision making).
ii) Designate responsibility for the energy/GHG emission coordination
function.
iii) Conduct full energy audits in 2010 and 2011 on 7 key facilities as
identified in the 2009 Energy Management Strategy.
iv) Prioritize Recreation Complex projects identified in the audit yet to be
implemented and include remaining priority projects in 2011 budget.
V) Conduct sustainability assessment of light duty fleet vehicles, fleet
management software, and fleet procurement policies in 2010.
vi) Develop a detailed PCP submission report that meets the
requirements of PCP milestones 4 & 5 for corporate operations. This
will. include the corporate section of this report plus the following:
a. For milestone 4, a detailed assessment of corporate actions in the
Local Action Plan including what has been completed, what needs
to be done, and changes in focus.
b. For milestone 4, a detailed plan on how to narrow the gap between
current status and the 2016 target.
c. For milestone 5, a detailed plan for future monitoring and reporting
and how this integrates with the sustainability indicators. The
submission would be significantly strengthened by the City's
commitment to energy and GHG management software.
i
22
ATTACHMENT# Q TO REPORT
#I -Its
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
127
4.2 Community Actions.
Over the last 15 years, the per capita GHG emissions have fluctuated up and
down between 6.4 and 7.0 t/person without any sign of real progress. In fact, the
2008 GHG emissions are the same as the 1995 baseline year at 6.5 t/person.
Per capita energy consumption shows similar fluctuations with a small reduction
in 2008 energy consumption of 3% from the 1995 baseline of 118 GJ/person.
While the emphasis has been placed on corporate initiatives over the last two
years, the community requires dedicated focus in order to catalyze and support
initiatives to significantly reduce energy consumption and GHG emissions.
In order to successfully engage the community, it is recommended that the City
of Pickering:
i) Research and develop refined performance indicators within each key
sector (residential, IC&I, transportation, and waste) in order to measure
meaningful performance.
ii) Report sector performance indicators as part of the community energy
and GHG emission sustainability indicator report.
iii) Develop and prioritize key sector energy and GHG reduction initiatives
as part of the Community Challenge.
iv) Develop a PCP submission report that meets the requirements of PCP
milestones 4 & 5 for the community. This will include:
a. For milestone 4, a detailed assessment of community actions in the
Local Action Plan (milestone 3) including what has been completed,
what needs to be done, and changes in focus.
b. For milestone 4, a detailed plan on how to narrow the gap between
current status and the 2016 target including quantification of major
initiatives in (ii) above.
c. For milestone 5, a plan for continual future monitoring and reporting
and how this integrates with the sustainability indicators report.
23
i
ATTACH MENT#-a_TOREPORT #,5a.,c )-lo
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
128
Appendix A - Corporate Energy and GHG By Sector
Sector Energy and GHG Year
Parameters 1995 1999 2004 2007 2008 2016 2016
BAU Target
Forecast
Buildings Energy Use (GJ) 74,981 69,943 79,509 83,810 85,087 129,117 67,509
Per Capita Energy 0.96 0.81 0.87 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.48
GHG (t eC02) 3,242 4,421 4,198 4,176 4,239 6,433 4,694
Per Capita GHG 0.041 0.051 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.033
% Per Capita Change 24% 11% 10% 10% 10% -20%
Streetlights Energy Use (GJ) 16,599 18,165 20,224 22,146 20,395 34,118 14,930
Per Capita Energy 0.21 0.21 0.22 0.24 0.22 0.24 0.11
GHG (t eC02) 585 1,352 1,124 1,107, 1,020 1,706 1,304
Per Capita GHG 0.007 0.016 0.012 0.012 0.011 0.012 0.009
% Per Capita Change 110% 65% 62% 47% 62% 24%
Fleet Energy Use (GJ) 12,862 16,306 17,118 18,514 18,050 28,523 11,518
Per Capita Energy 0.16 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.19 0.20 0.08
GHG (t eC02) 897 1,137 1,199 1,293 1,259 1,992 807
Per Capita GHG 0.011 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.006
% Per Capita Change 15% 15% 23% 18% 23% -50%
Corporate Waste to Landfill (t) 641 710 716 598 592 922 576
Waste GHG (t eC02) 309 342 345 288 285 444 278
Per Capita GHG 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.002
% Per Capita Change 1% -4% -20% -22% -20% -50%
Total Energy Use (GJ) 104,442 104,414 116,852 124,471 123,531 191,757 93,957
% Change from 1995 0.0% 11.9% 19.2% 18.3% 83.6% -10.0%
Per Capita Energy 1.33 1.21 1.28 1.36 1.35 1.36 0.67
% Per Capita Change -9% -4% 2% 1% 2% -50%
Total GHG (t eC02) 5,032 7,252 6,865 6,864 6,803 10,575 7,083
% Change from 1995 44.1% 36.4% 36.4% 35.2% 110.2% 40.8%
Per Capita GHG 0.064 0.084 0.075 0.075 0.074 0.075 0.050
% Per Capita Change 31% 17% 17% 16% 17% -22%
Total Energy Costs ($'000) $1,436 $1,487 $2,233 $2,478 $2,645 $3,997 $1,959
Est. Savings ($'000) $2,039
24
ATTACHMENT #_a-_T0 REPORT #D -I0
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
129
Appendix B - Corporate Initiatives by Facility / Function
Location/ Initiative First Full Energy Cost GHG Total % GHG
Function Year Savings Savings Savings GHG in Savings
Impact (GJ/y) ($/y) (t/y) 2007 from 2007
t/
Facilities
Civic Relamping 2008 1,830 $31,375 91.7
Complex HVAC upgrades (3) 2010 1,122 $35,605 55.9
HVAC upgrades (3) 2011 1,068 $16,964 82.7
Total 4,020 $83,944 230.3 810 28.4%
Recreation Auto. Systems (2) 2009 232 $4,663 11.5
Complex Catalytic converters 2010 - $0 4.8
HVAC upgrades (2) 2010 1,602 $33,220 79.1
HVAC upgrades (3) 2011 402 $11,711 20.1
Total 2,236 $49,594 115.6 1,654 7.0%
Don Beer Catalytic converters 2010 - $0 4.8
HVAC Upgrades 2011 1,448 '$33,357 71.7
Green roof 2011 559 $12,990 27.9
Total 2,007 $46,347 104.4 508 20.6%
i
West Shore HVAC upgrade 2008 174 $2,060 8.6
Building upgrade 2011 56 $1,663 2.8
Total 231 $3,723 11.4 27 42.0%
East Shore Relamping 2010 17 $432 0.9
Building upgrade 2011 502 $5,922 24.7
Total 519 $6,354 25.6 157 16.4%
Greenwood Fuel switch 2009 34 $1,771 4.2 7 56.1%
Library
Dunbarton Building upgrade 2010 2,381 $58,120 117.5 235 50.00/0
Pool
Total Initiatives By Year 2008 2,004 $33,435 100 2.4%
Facilities 2009 265 $6,434 16 0.4%
2010 5,123 $127,377 263 6.3%
Initiatives To-date 7,393 $167,246 379 4,176 9.10/0
Projects in 2010 2011 4,035 $82,607 230 5.50/0
Total thru 2010 11,428 $249,853 609 4,176 14.6%
25
r
ATTACHMENT#_a__.TO REPORT#bS.Da -10
City of Pickering - Energy and GHG Sustainability Indicators
130
Location/ Initiative First Full Energy Cost GHG Total % GHG
Function Year Savings Savings Savings GHG in Savings
Impact (GJ/y) ($/y) (t/y) 2007 from 2007
(t/y)
Fleet
Fuel Efficient Hybrid Ford Escape-5 2008 102 .$3,233 6.9 0.6%
Vehicles
Emissions Lawn mowers & Snow 2011 4.2 0.3%
Controls
Total thru 2010 102 $3,233 11 1,221 0.90/0
Streetli hts
Traffic Relamp with LED's 2009 374 $10,901 19 40%
Lights Relamp with LED's 2010 420 $12,217 21 45%
Total Traffic Lights 794 $23,118 40 47 850/0
Total Total Streetlights 794 $23,118 40 1107 3.6%
Grand Total.
Grand Total Initiatives by Year 2008 2,106 $36,668 107 2.0%
2009 640 $17,335 34 0.7%
2010 5,543 $139,593 284 5.4%
Initiatives To-date 8,289 $193,597 426 5,283 8.10/0
Projects im2010 2011 4,035 $82,607, 234 4.4%
Total Projects thru 2010 12,324 $276,204 660 5,283 12.5%
i
26