CITY of SUN VALLEY

Climate Protection Campaign

Carbon Emissions Baseline Inventory

Municipal Analysis

2005, 2007

Compiled by Kyle Livingston

Climate Protection Coordinator

Environmental Resource Center

2

Introduction

In May 2008, the City of Sun Valley, the Mayor and the City Council approved a climate protection resolution and general guidelines to address their energy costs and carbon emissions (i.e. greenhouse gas emissions). In addition, the City committed to reduce their emissions by joining the Cities for Climate Protection Campaign (CCP), a program of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). The ICLEI framework is designed to educate and empower local governments worldwide to take action on climate change.

By becoming an official ICLEI member in October 2008, Sun Valley joined a network of over 1,000 local governments worldwide, all striving toward reducing energy costs and their carbon emissions with the larger goal of combating climate change. Through effective and practical local action, the City will demonstrate how strategies to reduce carbon emissions can help the communities within the Wood River Valley thrive economically while achieving increased livability, sustainability and resiliency.

As part of a regional climate protection effort, the cities of Hailey and Ketchum as well as Blaine County have also become ICLEI members. Each local government has profiled their historic energy costs and carbon emissions in order to identify cost effective ways to reduce those emissions. The following assessment specific to Sun Valley’s government operations has yielded detailed information about the City’s carbon emissions and energy consumption. The City, in the form of an Internal Sustainability Team is now employing tools to explore how various policy and administrative decisions affect energy costs and carbon emissions.

ICLEI Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) Campaign ICLEI uses the performance-oriented framework and methodology of the CCP Campaign's Five Milestones to assist local governments in developing and implementing harmonized local approaches for reducing global warming and air pollution emissions. The milestone process consists of: � Milestone 1: Conduct a baseline emissions inventory and forecast COMPLETE

� Based on energy and waste data, the City has calculated greenhouse gas emissions for a base year (2005) and for the most current year (2007). The inventory captures emissions from all municipal operations and provides a benchmark against which the City can measure progress.

� Milestone 2: Adopt an emissions reduction target � The City adopts an emissions reduction target for a forecast year (e.g. 2015) and possibly a

cumulative emissions reduction target allowing for an annual reassessment of progress. The City Council passes a resolution establishing the emission reduction target or targets for the City’s municipal operations. The target is essential both to foster political will and to create a framework to guide the planning and implementation of measures.

� Milestone 3: Develop a Climate Action Plan for reducing emissions � The City develops a Local Action Plan that describes or lists the policies and measures, both short and

long term, which the City’s government will undertake in order to reduce carbon emissions and achieve its emissions reduction target. Most plans include a timeline, a description of financing mechanisms, and an assignment of responsibility to departments and staff. In addition to directing carbon reduction measures, most plans also incorporate public awareness and education efforts. The development of the Local Action Plan should include strong public input and involvement in order to build the consensus among stakeholders required to implement measures.

� Milestone 4: Implement policies and measures � The City implements the policies and measures contained in their Local Action Plan. Typical policies

and measures implemented by CCP participants 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.

� Milestone 5: Monitor and verify results � Monitoring and verifying progress on the implementation of measures to reduce or avoid carbon

emissions is an ongoing process. Monitoring begins once measures are implemented and continues for the life of the measures, providing important feedback that can be use to improve the measures over time. ICLEI's software provides a uniform methodology for local governments to report on measures.

3

eCO2 = carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases (sulfur hexafluoride, HFCs, and PFCs)

1,339,546 kWh 1,331,617 kWh

420

430

440

450

460

470

480

490

500

eC

O2 (

ton

s)

2005 2007

Total Carbon Emitted and Energy Used

eCO2 (tons)

+1.14%

SUN VALLEY’S MUNICIPAL CARBON EMISSIONS BASELINE INVENTORY

Municipal Sectors Analyzed The following sectors of City’s municipal operations were analyzed for the calendar years of 2005 and 2007 using ICLEI’s Clean Air and Climate Protection (CACP) Software: � Facility energy usage

� electricity (kWh) and natural gas (therms) data for the City’s facilities gathered from Idaho Power and Intermountain Gas records

� Vehicle Fleet fuel consumption � gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel consumed by the City’s vehicle fleet gathered from United Oil,

Brico, Sinclair and Chevron records � Employee Commuter Miles (annual Vehicle Miles Traveled)

� VMT data extrapolated from Employee Commute questionnaires circulated to City employees � Water and Sewage infrastructure energy use NOT INCLUDED

� The City of Sun Valley does not operate or pay for any Water and Sewage infrastructure � Streetlight energy usage

� traffic and street lights’ electricity data gathered from Idaho Power records � Waste volume from City facilities

� waste tonnage based on the size of Clear Creek waste bins at the City’s facilities and frequency of pick-up

Carbon Emissions Figure 1: Total Carbon Emitted and Energy Used

From 2005 to 2007 there was a total increase of 5.6 tons in eCO2 emissions or about 0.57% per year. For the City of Sun Valley, the vast majority of greenhouse gas emissions emitted into the atmosphere are in the form of carbon dioxide from the combustion of fossil fuels, with a small percentage coming from methane (landfill waste). See Appendices 1-3 for ICLEI Reports generated by the CACP Software.

4

2007 Overall City Electricity Usage

63%

20%

12%

4%

1%

<1%

City Hall

Elkhorn Fire Station

Traffic Light

Street Lights

SV Co. Fence Lights

Festival Meadow

2007 Carbon Emissions by Sector

154.9, 32%

150.6, 30%

114.9, 23%

25, 5%51, 10%

Buildings

Vehicle Fleet

Employee Commute

Streetlights

Waste

Figure 2: 2007 Carbon Emissions by Sector

Facility Energy Usage Figure 3a: 2007 City Infrastructure Electricity Usage Figure 3b: Facility Electricity Usage (kWh) and Cost Infrastructure 2005 kWh 2007 kWh % change 2005 $ 2007 $

City Hall 183160 163960 -10.48% $7,967.68 $6,278.38

Elkhorn Fire Station 44654 52482 17.53% $2,146.91 $2,341.47

Traffic Light 31608 31608 0.00% $1,207.47 $1,052.56

Street Lights 9984 9984 0.00% $575.60 $537.88

SV Co. Fence Lights 3590 3102 -13.59% $280.62 $242.40

Festival Meadow 1741 538 -69.10% $156.54 $83.49

TOTAL 274737 261674 -4.75% $12,334.82 $10,536.18 In 2005, the City paid an average price of $0.045 per kWh for electricity while in 2007 the City paid $0.040. Overall electricity usage decreased by nearly 5% between the two years analyzed resulting in a savings of $1,798.64.

In 2007, the most significant eCO2 emitting sectors for the City were: • Building energy usage (32%) • Vehicle Fleet fuel consumption

(30%) • Employee Commuter Miles (23%) For perspective, the average person in the United States emits 20 tons of eCO2 per year (Source: EIA Energy Information Administration). Sun Valley’s municipal government emitted 17.7 tons of eCO2 per employee in 2007 (28 employees).

‘City Hall’ includes the Garage ‘Traffic Light’ is the traffic signal at the corner of Sun Valley Rd. and Dollar Rd. ‘Street Lights’ includes the 10 street lights which the City operates ‘Festival Meadow’ is a general electrical outlet that the City operates and its electricity usage depends on the frequency of events held at the site.

5

Facility Electricty Usage Comparison

17.5%

- 10.5%

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

180000

200000

City Hall Elkhorn Fire Station

kW

h

2005 2007

Monthly City Electricty Usage

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

Oct

Nov

Dec Ja

nFeb

Mar

chApr

ilM

ayJu

ne July

AugSep

t

kW

h

2005 2007

Figure 3c: Facility Electricity Usage Comparison Figure 3d: Monthly Facility Electricity Usage The next steps that the City can take to address its electricity usage include: - scheduling a free Idaho Power energy audit of all of its facilities - analyze the electrical usage per square foot of each City facility in order to judge electrical efficiencies - indentify the facilities or sections of facilities that would realize increased electrical efficiencies from the

installation of fluorescent lighting and motion sensors - increase employee awareness of shutting down electronics at night and when not in use - reduce the total number of pieces of office equipment (i.e. printers, copiers, scanners) and upgrade

existing equipment to more energy efficient models where cost-effective The next steps that the City can take to address its traffic and street lights’ electricity usage: - Identify the incandescent streetlights that have not been upgraded to more energy efficient fluorescents

When comparing the electricity usage between 2005 and 2007 of all of the City’s electrical accounts, the Elkhorn Fire Station was the only facility to see a significant increase in electricity usage.

This figure includes all of the City’s electrical accounts. Note the significantly higher usage in December, January and March 2007. This was primarily due to increased electrical usage at City Hall and the Elkhorn Fire Station.

6

2007 Overall Natural Gas Usage

59%1%

40%

City Hall

City Hall Garage

Elkhorn Fire Station

Facility Natural Gas Usage Comparison

- 43.9%

+2.6%

0.00

500.00

1000.00

1500.00

2000.00

2500.00

3000.00

3500.00

4000.00

4500.00

City Hall Elkhorn Fire Station

therm

s

2005 2007

- Conduct a cost of implementation and payback period analysis for changing the City’s traffic signal from incandescent to LED. � LED Traffic signals consume 85% less energy than incandescent signals and on average have a

payback period of less than seven years for a single signal. � There are significant maintenance and replacement lightbulb costs associated with incandescent

signals whereas LED signals require nearly zero maintenance over their extended lifespan. Figure 4a: 2007 Facility Natural Gas Usage Figure 4b: Facility Natural Gas Usage (therms) and Cost Infrastructure 2005 therms 2007 therms % change 2005 $ 2007 $

City Hall 3191 3266 2.35% $2,853.72 $3,559.36

City Hall Garage 35 30 -14.29% $84.74 $86.08

Elkhorn Fire Station 3850 2160 -43.90% $3,319.55 $2,306.83

TOTAL 7076 5456 -22.89% $6,258 $5,952 In 2005, the average price the City paid for natural gas was $0.88 ($/therm) while in 2007 the average price was $1.09. This was an increase of 23% in natural gas costs. Figure 4c: Natural Gas Usage Comparison

When comparing the natural gas usage between 2005 and 2007, City Hall’s natural gas usage increased slightly while Elkhorn Fire Station’s natural gas usage decreased dramatically. The 22.9% overall decrease in natural gas usage resulted in cost savings of $306.

The City only pays for and operates three natural gas accounts. The primary facilities that use natural gas are City Hall and the Elkhorn Fire Station with a small percentage used by the City Hall Garage.

7

Monthly City Natural Gas Usage

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Oct

Nov

Dec Ja

nFe

b

Mar

chApr

ilM

ayJu

ne July

AugSep

t

therm

s

2005 2007

2007 Fuel Consumption by Department

40%31%

24%5%

Police

Fire

Street

Other

Figure 4d: Monthly Facility Natural Gas Usage The next steps that the City can take to address it natural gas usage include: - indentify the facilities or sections of facilities that would realize increased natural gas efficiencies from the

installation of programmable thermostats and better insulation - conduct a feasibility study, including cost of implementation and payback period, for the installation of

solar pre-heating water systems for one or more of the City’s facilities

Vehicle Fleet Fuel Consumption Figure 5a: 2007 Vehicle Fleet Fuel Consumption by Department Figure 5b: Average Price of Fuel

Note the significantly higher usage in 2005 during every month compared to 2007. The primary uses for natural gas in facilities are for building and water heating systems. On that note, colder temperatures and greater hot water consumption will result in higher natural gas usage.

Type of Fuel 2005 2007 Gasoline $2.20 $2.70 Diesel $2.40 $2.80 This table reflects the average price of fuel that the City paid to operate its Vehicle Fleet. It is fair to assume that the average price of fuel will continue to fluctuate due to market influences that the City cannot control or predict.

8

Vehicle Fleet Fuel Cost Comparison

22.2%35.5%

14,113 gal14,819 gal

$0.00

$10,000.00

$20,000.00

$30,000.00

$40,000.00

$50,000.00

$60,000.00

2005 2007

Cost $ Cost $3.50/gal

Figure 5c: Vehicle Fleet Fuel Cost The next steps that the City can take to address its Vehicle Fleet’s fuel consumption include: - Assign each City vehicle with its own credit card to allow for more accurate fuel consumption tracking (i.e. link the fuel consumption to the actual vehicle consuming the fuel)

- Consolidate the City Vehicle Fleet under one administrative authority in order to increase employee accountability and the accuracy of fuel consumption tracking. The bulk of the City’s vehicles and fuel consumption are in emergency services (Police and Fire Departments) and maintenance (Street Department) which require specific forms of management. Tasking each department with finding ways to decrease their fuel consumption without impeding their services to the City and its citizens is an appropriate first step.

- Encourage employees to use video-conferencing and webinars in lieu of traveling - Responsible vehicle purchasing in the future including considerations of Hybrid, fuel-efficient and alternative fuel vehicles o The City’s Vehicle Fleet primarily consists of SUVs, light trucks, heavy trucks and other heavy

equipment. Considering smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles in future purchasing decisions will not limit City employees from completing their assigned tasks.

o Considering Hybrid Escapes for the Police Department. The City of Seattle owns and operates 24 hybrids, many of them Hybrid Escapes, for their inner-city patrols.

o Alternative fuels � Use of Biodiesel by all City diesel vehicles when convenient. B-5 Biodiesel offered at the Hailey

Chevron only. The City could encourage north-valley gas stations to offer biodiesel. � Vegetable-oil conversion opportunities (any diesel vehicle) including partnering with local

businesses to form a vegetable oil fuel co-op

When comparing 2005 to 2007, the Vehicle Fleet actually consumed 706 less gallons of gasoline and diesel. Despite this slight decrease in consumption, the City spent over $4,900 more on fuel in 2007 than in 2005. With gas prices at $3.50 per gallon, the City’s Vehicle Fleet fuel cost would have been over $10,940 more in 2007.

9

Fuel Cost per Week ($3.50/gallon gas)

$0.00

$10.00

$20.00

$30.00

$40.00

$50.00

5 10 20 50 100 200

commuter miles per week

$ s

pe

nt

on

fu

el e

ac

h w

ee

k

auto full (20 mpg)

auto compact (27 mpg)

auto mid (22 mpg)

Light truck/SUV (14 mpg)

Sun Valley Employee Commute

+ 24%

9.1%

7.4%

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

180000

200000

2005 2007

Mil

es T

ravele

d

Miles driven Alt Transport

Employee Commuter Miles Figure 6a: Sun Valley Employee Commute Trends from the Employee Commute Questionnaire: - lack of bus service, carpool opportunities and personal obligations keeps City employees from using

alternative transportation methods - employees desire alternative transportation incentives from the City Figure 6b: Fuel Cost per Week at $3.50/gallon for gas Figure 6c: 2007 Commuting VMT and Number of Employees

In 2007, on average City employees commuted 6000 miles annually or 130 miles per week. This is roughly equivalent to commuting from Hailey to Sun Valley five days per week. Compared to 2005, there was a 24% increase in annual VMT. 2005: 19 questionnaire respondents out of 27 employees (70%) remaining 8 non-surveyed employees' VMT based on 2005 averages 2007: 28 questionnaire respondents out of 28 employees (100%)

Annual VMT Weekly VMT # employees

over 3000 63.8 14

over 5000 106.4 10

over 7000 148.9 7

over 20000 425.5 4

Alternative Transportation methods include walking, biking, public transportation and carpooling

10

Figure 6d: Employee Cost Savings from Carpooling (assumes $3.50/gallon for gas)

auto mid (22 mpg) annual cost of 5 day commute

Carpool 1 day per week

Carpool 3 days per week

from E. Fork Rd. $598.18 $119.64 $358.91

from Hailey $1,046.82 $209.36 $628.09

from Bellevue $1,420.68 $284.14 $852.41

from Fairfield/Shoshone $4,112.50 $822.50 $2,467.50

from Carey $3,439.55 $687.91 $2,063.73

Light truck/SUV (14 mpg)

from E. Fork Rd. $940.00 $188.00 $564.00

from Hailey $1,645.00 $329.00 $987.00

from Bellevue $2,232.50 $446.50 $1,339.50

from Fairfield/Shoshone $6,462.50 $1,292.50 $3,877.50

from Carey $5,405.00 $1,081.00 $3,243.00 The next steps that the City can take to encourage its employees to commute by alternative methods: - Change in work schedules to 10-hour work days, 4-day work week

• The {…} Departments currently allow their employees to operate on a 4x10 work week. • Next Step: conduct a survey to gauge interest followed by a feasibility trial of 4x10 work weeks for

City Hall employees - Note: 4x10 work weeks will result in Facility energy cost savings if City Hall was open only four

days per week. This would require an increase in e-Government services to the public through the City’s website in order to compensate for City Hall being closed an extra day each week.

- More benefits for alternative transportation • Implement a complimentary bus pass program for City employees but refine it in order to insure that

employees with passes are using them consistently and appropriately • Organizing a carpooling database of City employees in order to coordinate carpooling opportunities

for interested employees (especially for employees commuting long distances from the South). Partnering with the City of Ketchum in order to increase the size of the database would be beneficial.

Important Note on Employee Commuting The data extrapolated from the employee commute questionnaires, particularly for 2005, is partially based on VMT averages due to the absence of data from former City employees. This brings into question the overall accuracy of the City’s employee commuting trends. At the same time, the City has a picture and analysis of where and how its employees commute to work. Using a web-based questionnaire to better track and compile commuter miles and commuting trends in the future would be beneficial. Also, fuel cost savings associated with commuting by alternative methods are realized by the individual employees who choose to change their personal commuting habits. Although these costs savings are not directly associated with the City’s municipal budget, by encouraging employees to commute by alternative methods the City will demonstrate leadership in its goal of reducing carbon emissions on both the personal level of the employee in addition to the organizational level of the municipal government.

11

Waste Volume Figure 7a: City Facilities’ Waste Volumes and Cost

Location Address annual (tons)

City Hall 81 Elkhorn Rd. 70.27 Elkhorn Fire Station

Morningstar & Arrowleaf 17.57

TOTAL 87.84 tons

Figure 7b: City Facilities’ Recycling Volumes Material Annual (tons)

Plastic 0.73

Office/Mixed Paper 4.93

Glass 9.18

Aluminum 0.64

Magazines 9.66

Newspaper 7.49 Cardboard 15.60

TOTAL 48.2 tons

Annual tonnage estimates based on Clear Creek bin volumes and frequency that they are picked-up. Bin volumes (both waste and recycling) are based on estimates taken by Street Maintenance Worker Terence Davitt in November 2008. Also, the City does not pay Clear Creek for its trash or recycling services. The City operates community recycling centers at City Hall and the Elkhorn Fire Station that recover the listed materials above for recycling at the Ohio Gulch Recovery Center. In 2007, Sun Valley’s recycling efforts prevented over 100 tons of eCO2 from emitting into the atmosphere. Figure 7c: City Waste Composition Breakdown by Type Waste Type Waste Share Paper Products 38% Food Waste 13% Plant Debris 10% Wood/Textiles 4% All Other Waste 35%

Waste share percentages based on ICLEI general waste breakdown The next steps that the City can take to address its waste volumes: - Refining and expanding the recycling program at City Hall and Elkhorn Fire Station. In addition to the

materials currently recycled by Sun Valley, the Ohio Gulch Recovery Center recycles alkaline batteries, toner cartridges, computer equipment and fluorescent light bulbs.

- By creating a central recycling station for each City Department and office: � City employees can more easily recycle all appropriate materials � transportation of those materials to the proper waste receptacles and Ohio Gulch can be better

coordinated and routed � the overall waste tonnage generated by City employees and City facilities taken to the landfill will

be reduced - Reevaluate the City’s contract with Clear Creek Disposal when it comes up for renewal with an emphasis

on expanded recycling of additional materials (i.e. Plastic #1-#7) and community-wide organic waste composting

Important Note on Waste Volumes

The City’s waste volumes are a significant part of Sun Valley’s overall municipal carbon emissions (10%) but not all of the tonnage can be attributed to the City’s employees and facilities. Sun Valley’s waste and recycling bins are also used by the City’s residents and businesses. The carbon emissions associated with waste are primarily due to methane emissions of the waste when it is put into the landfill. There does not seem to be a more accurate method to measure waste volumes or better track waste share percentages on a municipal level the size of Sun Valley’s City government. The first step the City should take is to expand its recycling program to include all the materials that are currently recycled at Ohio Gulch. There are additional benefits to recycling besides offsetting methane emissions in the landfill including natural resource savings as well as energy and carbon emission savings from source reduction and reuse. By showing leadership in expanding its recycling program on a municipal level the City will demonstrate its commitment to smart practice and the

12

overall success of its climate protection campaign. Like Employee Commuting, the real habitual change has to occur on the personal level of the employee or the citizen although the incentive can come from the organizational level of the municipal government.

Water and Sewage Infrastructure Energy Usage As noted before, the City of Sun Valley does not operate or pay for any water and sewage infrastructure. A private company, the Sun Valley Water and Sewer District, operates all of the water and sewage infrastructure (wells, pumps, regulators etc.) required for Sun Valley’s community. The City, however, can have a direct influence on the energy costs, water use, and carbon emissions associated with the Sun Valley Water and Sewage District. The next steps the City can take to address the energy and water usage of its community include:

� encourage the Sun Valley Water and Sewer District to identify their facilities that would realize increased electrical and natural gas efficiencies due to the installation of fluorescent lighting, motion sensors, programmable thermostats and better insulation. Also, encourage the Sewer District to evaluate the energy efficiencies of its water and sewage infrastructure, including wells, lifts, pumps and regulators.

� encourage Sun Valley Company to take a detailed look at their water consumption, especially for irrigation, in order to identify ways to curb that consumption. Over 211,000 kWh were used for irrigation in the City of Sun Valley during 2007.

� implement a water conservation campaign directed at Sun Valley City residents and businesses, including a pay-as-you-use payment program. Although the amount of water used by City residents does not have an exact correlation to the amount of energy required to treat water at the Ketchum Sewer Plant, it is true that the less water that is treated the less energy is required. This campaign becomes even more important considering the projected growth of both Sun Valley and Ketchum.

� encourage the City of Ketchum to evaluate alternative energy options for offsetting some or all of the electricity used by the Sewer Plant complex including wind turbines, solar panels, and/or an aerobic bio-digester for solid waste.

13

CARBON EMISSIONS FORECAST AND REDUCTION GOAL Figure 8a: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Targets: Context

Note the significant decrease in emissions required by the scientific imperative (green line). Types of Goals ICLEI recommends a long-term carbon emissions reduction of at least 15% below baseline year emissions within a 15 to 20 year period (brown line in Figure 8a). There are few different types of goals that Sun Valley might choose to adopt to reduce its municipal carbon emissions: � Outright Goal

– Setting an outright goal should reflect a long-term target of at least 15-20 years – Example: 50% reduction from 2005 levels by 2050

� Cumulative Goal

– Setting a cumulative goal will allow the City to reevaluate its progress annually and keep the City on track to meet its outright goal as well as any interim goals it chooses to adopt

– Example: Reduce emissions 2% per year until 2005 levels met � Interim Goals

– Setting interim goals will allow the City to reevaluate its progress every five to six years and keep the City on track to meet its Outright Goal

– Example: 15% reduction from 2005 levels by 2015 It is important to note that the goals that Sun Valley chooses to adopt will be refined as the City continues to develop its Climate Protection Action Plan and implement specific measures and policies that address carbon emissions and energy costs. It is not imperative, but strongly recommended, that the City and the City Council officially adopt a reduction goal before drafting a Climate Protection Action Plan specific to Sun Valley’s municipal operations. Figure 8b: Three General Reduction Scenarios LOW

Measure % eCO2 $

Facility Energy Efficiency 5 9 $942.00

Streetlight Energy Efficiency 5 1 $112.00

EC Alt. Transportation 3 3 $712.00

Fuel Use Reduction 5 8 $1,920.00

TOTAL 4.2% 21 $3,686.00 MMOODDEERRAATTEE

14

Carbon Emissions w/Reduction Scenarios

+1.14%

- 4.2%

- 8.9%

- 13.7%

400

420

440

460

480

500

520

2005 2007 2008 2009

eC

O2 (

ton

s)

Business as Usual LOW MODERATE HIGH

Measure % eCO2 $

Facility Energy Efficiency 10 19 $1,884.00

Streetlight Energy Efficiency 10 2 $223.00

EC Alt. Transportation 8 8 $2,099.00

Fuel Use Reduction 10 15 $3,839.00

TTOOTTAALL 88..99%% 4444 $$88,,004455..0000 AGGRESSIVE

Measure % eCO2 $

Facility Energy Efficiency 15 28 $2,826.00

Streetlight Energy Efficiency 15 3 $335.00

EC Alt. Transportation 13 14 $3,485.00

Fuel Use Reduction 15 23 $5,758.00

TOTAL 13.7% 68 $12,404.00 As noted before, the cost savings associated with employees commuting by alternative methods is realized by those individual employees who change their habits not by the City government. In 2007, City employee commuter VMT from alternative methods of transportation was 7.4% of total employee commuter VMT. The percentage change noted in Figure 8b is in addition to that 7.4% of VMT already offset by employees commuting by alternative methods. These Reduction Scenarios are based on general percentage changes in four sectors of Sun Valley’s municipal carbon emissions that might be addressed within the next year: Buildings and Facilities’ energy usage (32%), Vehicle Fleet fuel consumption (30%), Employee Commuter VMT (23%) and Streetlight energy usage (5%). By developing a Climate Protection Action Plan, the City can identify and implement specific measures and policies to address all of these sectors. The CACP software has the ability to function as an action planning tool and quantify prospective measures in terms of carbon emissions and cost including payback periods. By using the CACP software the City will able to choose those measures and policies that are most cost effective and keep the City on track to meet its carbon emissions reduction goals. Figure 8c: Sun Valley Municipal Carbon Emissions Forecast with Reduction Scenarios

These reduction scenarios might be implemented over multiple years and their success depends on the specific measures and policies that the City chooses to implement as part of its Climate Protection Action Plan. It is not enough to expect the City’s municipal carbon emissions to decrease on their own or due to simply raising employee awareness surrounding climate change, carbon emissions and energy use.

15

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022

2024

23%

38%

50%0

100

200

300

400

500

eC

O2 (

ton

s)

Carbon Emissions with Reduction Goals

Recommended Goals Based on the preceding baseline carbon emissions inventory and the analysis of prospective measures that are realistic for the City to pursue and adopt within the next year, the following reduction goals are recommended (assuming eCO2 emissions increased by 0.67% or 3.3 tons in 2008): � SHORT TERM Goal: 25% reduction from 2005 baseline levels by 2015

– This goal is attainable under the LLOOWW reduction scenario (see Figures 8b and 8c) � LONG TERM Cumulative Goals

– 4% reduction until 50% from 2005 baseline levels reached � If these cumulative goals are met, the City will meet its short term goal of reducing carbon emissions

25% by 2015 and realize a 50% reduction from 2005 levels by 2025. � By adopting cumulative goals with a long term goal to strive for, the City will be able to reassess its

progress annually and stay on track to meet its outright goals, both short and long term.

Figure 8d: Sun Valley Municipal Carbon Emissions with Reduction Goals The next steps that the City of Sun Valley can take to further its Climate Protection Campaign: � Solicit representation from every department on a Sun Valley Internal Sustainability Committee in order to

build the consensus among all the stakeholders required to implement measures and policies. Considering the small size of Sun Valley’s municipal government it might be more effective to work with the City of Ketchum on a joint Climate Protection Campaign. This would curb costs associated with the ICLEI program ($600 per year for the CACP software and technical support) and save staff time for both municipalities.

� Task each department with identifying and implementing the first steps (i.e. the ‘low-hanging fruit’) they

can take to address carbon emissions, energy usage and smart practices. � Develop a Sun Valley Municipal Climate Protection Action Plan with short and long term reduction goals, a

timeline for implementation of prospective measures and policies, a description of financing mechanisms, and an assignment of responsibility to departments and staff.

� Draft a resolution for the City Council to officially adopt a carbon emissions reduction goal or goals. � Continue to monitor the required data and refine data gathering methods where it is appropriate.

16

� Participate in the Wood River Valley Regional Climate Protection Partnership � Currently, Ketchum, Hailey and Blaine County are all participating members of the ICLEI Climate Protection Campaign and are in various stages of the five milestone process. Specifically, it is hoped that by collaborating on a regional level, these local governments as well as interested community groups, organizations, and citizens can more effectively:

- Exchange local best practices, opportunities and challenges - Disseminate and analyze the Blaine County Community Carbon Emissions Baseline Inventory - Carry out a series of community meetings involving the key stakeholders - Identify key issues and strategies that might necessitate or benefit from regional collaboration - Work toward building more sustainable and resilient communities within the Wood River Valley while improving the quality of life for residents and visitors alike

17

Data Sources and Locations Idaho Power, Intermountain Gas, United Oil, Brico, Sinclair and Chevron records supplied by: City Clerk Kelly Ek kek@svidaho.org 208.622.4438 Waste volume data supplied by: Street Maintenance Worker Terence Davitt tdavitt@svidaho.org 208.622.4438 All data files and CACP software stored on the computer of: Principal Planner Diane Shay dshay@svidaho.org 208.622.4438 Carbon Emissions data stored in Excel file “Sun Valley ICLEI Analysis.xls” Electricity data stored in Excel file "Facility Elec & Gas 2005, 2007.xls" Natural Gas data stored in Excel file "Facility Elec & Gas 2005, 2007.xls" Vehicle fleet fuel data stored in Excel file "SV Vehicle Fleet 2005, 2007.xls" Employee Commute questionnaire data stored in Excel file "SV Employee Commute 2005, 2007.xls" Employee Commute questionnaire stored in Word file 'Employee Commute Template - SV' hard copies of questionnaires stored in Diane Shay’s office Waste volume data stored in Excel file "Sun Valley Municipal Waste 2007.xls" Figure 1: stored in Excel file “Sun Valley ICLEI Analysis.xls” Figure 2: stored in Excel file “Sun Valley ICLEI Analysis.xls” Figure 3a: stored in Excel file "Facility Elec & Gas 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 3b: stored in Excel file "Facility Elec & Gas 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 3c: stored in Excel file "Facility Elec & Gas 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 3d: stored in Excel file "Facility Elec & Gas 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 4a: stored in Excel file "Facility Elec & Gas 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 4b: stored in Excel file "Facility Elec & Gas 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 4c: stored in Excel file "Facility Elec & Gas 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 4d: stored in Excel file "Facility Elec & Gas 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 5a: stored in Excel file "SV Vehicle Fleet 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 5b: stored in Excel file "SV Vehicle Fleet 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 5c: stored in Excel file "SV Vehicle Fleet 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 6a: stored in Excel file "SV Employee Commute 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 6b: stored in Excel file "SV Employee Commute 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 6c: stored in Excel file "SV Employee Commute 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 6d: stored in Excel file "SV Employee Commute 2005, 2007.xls" Figure 7a: stored in Excel file “Sun Valley Municipal Waste 2007.xls" Figure 7b: stored in Excel file "Sun Valley Municipal Waste 2007.xls" Figure 7c: stored in Waste tab of Government Analysis section of CACP Software Figure 8a: stored in Powerpoint file “Sun Valley Baseline Presentation.ppt” Figure 8b: stored in Excel file “Sun Valley ICLEI Analysis.xls” Figure 8c: stored in Excel file “Sun Valley ICLEI Analysis.xls” Figure 8d: stored in Excel file “Sun Valley ICLEI Analysis.xls”

18

Appendix 1: CACP Software Time Series Report

19

Appendix 2: CACP Software 2005 GHG Emissions Report

20

Appendix 3: CACP Software 2007 GHG Emissions Report