metropolitan ghg target rule review march 12, 2015 land conservation and development commission

Metropolitan GHG Target Rule Review

March 12, 2015

Land Conservation and Development Commission

Target Rule (660-044)- By June 2015

- Evaluate target rule - Decide whether revisions to targets are

“warranted”

March 2015Target Rule Review

For year 2035 “light vehicle

travel in metropolitan areas”

Per capita above and

beyond fleet, fuels & technology

Background

Metropolitan GHG Targets(HB 2001/ SB 1059 – 2009-2010)


Background

State Greenhouse Gas Goal(HB 3543 – 2007)

by 2050: 75% below 1990 levels


Evaluation Factors Results of scenario planning New information about future light vehicle

emissions State plans to reduce GHG emissions Statewide Transportation Strategy (STS) Changes in metropolitan area population,

development, boundaries Local efforts to reduce GHG emissions Input from local governments, MPOs Land use feasibility/ economic studies State support for scenario planning Emissions from travel from outside MPOs


Results of Scenario Planning


Scenario Planning Results

Targets are achievable

Metro –29% reduction

Central Lane – 14% reduction

Corvallis – 18% reduction



What will it take?

A comprehensive, coordinated set of actions that reduce the need for driving More transit Pricing– shift to pay by the mile road user fees and

PAYD insurance Improved infrastructure for biking, walking Compact, mixed use development Parking management Incentives – employee commute options, eco-

driving



What will it take?

Key land use/transportation actions Limited UGB expansion – 15% rate of population

growth More mixed use development - 30% of households Much more transit – 2 to 4x current service levels More investments in walking/cycling infrastructure Expanded transportation options/ incentives,

commute options - 30% of employees, residents Parking management Limited roadway expansion



What will it take?

Supporting state actions Pay-as-you-drive insurance Funding for transit Support for transportation options Incentives – employee commute options, eco-

driving

Status Statewide Transportation Strategy (STS) identifies

key actions, calls for further study ODOT working on short-term implementation plan



What will it take?

FundingNew investments are needed - Mostly transit - but also walking, biking and new programs to

support transportation options- Expanded options are needed to realize potential

from more compact, mixed use development



Actions that reduce GHG have other important benefits

Reduced household transportation and energy costs, Improved air quality Improved public

healthReduced congestion


New Information about Technology, Fleet and Fuels


Expected changes in vehicle technology, fleet and fuels are key to reducing GHG Emissions

New Information

Fuel Economy/Vehicle Technology

Target Rule New Information On Track?

Auto: 68 mpg

• Feds adopt new motor vehicle standards in 2012

• DEQ adopts California’s updated zero emission vehicle (ZEV) rules in 2013

Yes


New Information

Hybrid and Electric Vehicles


8% of new car sales by

2035

• STS anticipates much more rapid adoption of EV and PHEV:

-23% of new cars-20% of new trucks

• California AB 32 estimates more than 40%+ of new cars in 2035 may be Zero Emission vehicles (ZEV)

Yes(Ahead of

2011 estimates)


Battery electrics (EVs) and Plug-in Hybrids (PHEVs) generate much lower carbon emissions

New Information

Fleet Turnover


8 year turnover

• STS anticipates 9 year turnover

• Studies indicates vehicle lasting longer, slower turnover

Not quite


Replacement of older vehicles brings new low-emission vehicles on-line

New Information

Fleet Mix


2035 Fleet will

be:Auto: 70%Light Truck: 30%

• STS and recent trends anticipate much slower shift to light trucks

• STS estimates 60/40 in 2035

Not quite


Long-term shift from pickups and SUVs to passenger cars reduces average emissions per mile

New Information

Low Carbon Fuels


-20% in carbon

intensity of fuels by 2035

• State continuing implementation of Clean Fuels Program

• Oil is getting “dirtier” – sources of oil (shale, fracking) have higher CO2 emissions

Close


Reducing carbon content of fuels directly reduces CO2 emissions

State Plans

Progress Global Warming Commission 2014

Report Statewide Transportation Strategy

(STS) Governor’s 10-Year Energy Action Plan

But No state plans or policies setting GHG

targets for other sectors


State Plans

Additional reductions are needed to meet 2050 goal

January 2015Target Rule Review

Targets based on a steady 5.1% per year reduction in emissions 2010-2050

Metropolitan Growth & Development

State population forecast for 2035 is down slightly

5.9 million to 5.4 million Two new MPOs

Albany Area Middle Rogue (Grants Pass)


Local efforts to reduce emissions

A few notable efforts Portland/Multnomah County Climate

Action Plan – Goal is 30% reduction in VMT per capita

Eugene Climate Recovery Ordinance – Goal is to reduce fossil use by 50% by 2030


Input from MPOs, local governments

Continue voluntary approach and address a full range of outcomes

Concern about limited resources for metropolitan planning; other obligations

Scenario planning shows need for Increased transportation funding New programs to expand options State leadership

More work needed to translate high level, scenario “strategies” into land use and transportation plans


Land use feasibility and economic studies Few studies Available information

Growing market for compact, mixed use development

Metro reports high rates of infill, redevelopment Demographic and market shift favor multifamily

housing Surveys show increasing market preference for

walkable neighborhoods


State support for scenario planning

Funding and technical support for scenario planning strategic assessments

New analysis tools (GreenSTEP, RSPM) ODOT, OSTI commitment to continue to

support metropolitan efforts


Implications

Are changes to targets warranted?

New technical information is mixed More and better electrics and plug-ins

sooner than expected Fleet will turnover more slowly More pickups/SUVs


Implications

Are changes to targets warranted?

Metropolitan areas are updating plans to 2040 and beyond

Additional reductions will be needed to meet 2050 goal

March2015Target Rule Review

Metropolitan Area Next RTP Update Next RTP Planning Horizon

Portland Metro December 2018 2040

Salem-Keizer May 2015 2035

Central Lane December 2015 2040

Corvallis Area March 2017 2041-2042

Rogue Valley March 2017 2042

Bend September 2015 2040

Preliminary Recommendation

Amendments to targets are warranted

Update targets to 2040 based on new technical information from ODOT, DEQ, Energy

Explore ways to integrate GHG reduction and scenario planning with metropolitan plan updates


May LCDC Meeting

Revised Target Review report Options for commission action

Target amendments warranted or not? If yes, direction for next steps


January 2015Target Rule Review

metropolitan ghg target rule review march 12, 2015 land conservation and development commission

Documents

target rule review slide

scenario planning emissions

results of scenario

development commission

ghg emissions input

ghg emissions state

ghg emissions local

mixed use development