Cities are Tip of Spear for Paris Agreement

Cities are the tip of the spear when it comes to meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement. It has been recognized by the global community that most national governments lack the resources, know-how and/or willingness to implement effective policies and programs to lead to any meaningful decrease in global greenhouse gas emissions.

Mayors are Leading the Way

City mayors understand their important role in leading the charge for greenhouse gas reductions. The Global Covenant of Mayors and the Climate Mayors, demonstrate global mayors’ dedication and commitment to help the global community meet and exceed the Paris Agreement. Fortunately, they are pushing to exceed Paris as it has been demonstrated that although Paris was a great step forward, it is not enough to get us to where we need to be.

In any case, Mayors are leading the way. The task in front of mayors and their teams is to identify and implement effective, greenhouse gas reducing programs and policies that will get us to where we need to be. Fortunately, many cities have already created climate action plans that are setting big goals toward carbon reduction.

More Cities are continuing to get on board the climate action planning wagon, with the City of Houston being on the most recent cities to commit to a climate action plan and carbon neutrality by 2050. This is quite a statement made by the energy capital of the world. Energy in Houston typically means, energy from oil and natural gas. So the leadership to decide to implement a climate action plan in partnership with the energy industry in Houston is a significant step forward and only indicates that there is growing consensus across all sectors that something needs to be done to reduce greenhouse gases.

As more Cities get on board with climate action planning, and those already with plans work to improve and adjust their existing plants, it is imperative that the focus be on cost-effective, highly impactful strategies. There are a lot of ways to go to reduce greenhouse gases, many of them are likely to be a waste of time and effort, or just would take too long to make a difference.

“ UNLESS someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.” — The Lorax

Fortunately, a lot of thought has gone into climate action planning in the last few years and effective strategies have been identified that if implemented will move the needle and lead to a significant decrease in greenhouse gas emissions. A recent study by C40 and McKinsey finds there are really 12 actions, if given focused attention, can get cities to where they need to be. Without focus, cities will not reach GHG goals because limited resources of time and money, will be spent on less effective actions.

Key Focus Areas for Success

• Building Energy Efficiency — There has not been as much focus as needed for improving the water and energy efficiency of buildings. Although there has been some great efforts and success stories, much work can still be done. For many Cities, providing an opportunity for building owners, operators and tenants to better understand their energy and water use, through building benchmarking and energy/water audits, could go a long way in driving action. Without this information, owners, operators and tenants do not know that energy and water saving opportunities are available to reduce resource consumption and save money. Cities also play a large role in energy code adoption and energy code compliance. With the current and expected future growth of urban areas, it is key cities adopt and enforce the latest energy building codes, i.e. the 2018 International Energy Conservation Code.

• Decarbonizing the power sector — Cities are large utility customers. Some cities operate their municipal power system and can play a direct role in driving the municipal utility to be more green. The City of Austin, operating Austin Energy, has demonstrated some leadership in this space. Many cities do not have direct access to the electric utility, so they must work with the utility and regulators to push for a reliable, resilient decarbonized power system. In many cases, large cities have a sizable role and clout with utilities and should leverage this role to push a greener grid. A study by McKinsey and Company estimates that with common sense greenhouse gas reduction goals, programs and policies, the overall grid would see a 35–40% reduction in GHG, and keep power costs low, at $0.04 to $0.08 per kWh.
• Transportation — There is a growing number of low-carbon mobility options and cities need to take advantage of this diversity. Cities must adopt policies that allow for the development of affordable, accessible mobility options that benefit the entire community. Forward looking cities will consider and adopt transportation policies that facilitate the deployment of electric vehicles, autonomous vehicles and ride-share programs. There are also mass transit options, that are less expensive and

resource intensive, such as bus rapid transit (BRT) that can more easily be integrated into existing city roadways. Further, cities have significant control of land-use, even without zoning in one particular city, and must make smart policy decisions to promote transit-oriented development and densification of cities. Both of these options allow for more efficient, affordable mobility. Improved mobility, decreases congestion, which can result in significant reduction in community GHG.

• Improving Waste Management— The trend in waste management is to taking a “highest and best use” approach. This includes reducing waste upstream, repurposing as much of the useful finished product as possible, then recycling, recovering, or composting the end-product. Anything that must go to the landfill must then be properly managed to lessen emissions. Cities, in collaboration with companies, are actively finding ways to create a more circular economy that minimizes waste.

Two Key Factors for Climate Action Planning

First, cities will not be able to find success with city resources and staff alone. To make such a dramatic reduction in GHG will require participation from all key stakeholders such as utilities, transportation providers, land developers, building owners, research organizations and community based organizations.

Related to this is that any actions take by cities is that the planning efforts and the outcomes must be seen as inclusive, equitable and fair. By not taking an approach that ensures that allow residents have an opportunity to benefit, the city’s planning efforts will fall short and goals will not be met.

Second, Cities will not be able to mandate their way to GHG reductions, particularly in the redder states. In some instances mandates work and in some cities mandates are acceptable. In Houston, where I am writing from, mandates are not going to work. Houston and other similar cities are going to have to develop incentive-based, market-focused programs and initiatives that make a strong business case for reducing GHG. Cities must partner with the business community to ensure cities can meet their goals while at the same time maintaining economic growth and development. A weak economy or a ticked-off business community will not lead to optimal results.

The potential exists to meet the GHG reduction targets. Existing technology today and strategies have demonstrated their ability to make significant reductions. It is now up to leadership and all of us to participate, take action and work toward the development and implementation of these plans. Because “ UNLESS someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.”