Dan Thiede live-blogs this session at the Minnesota Green Communities third annual statewide GREEN BY DESIGN Conference. View all conference presentations here.
Facilitator: Dane Smith, Growth & Justice, former Star Tribune writer
Panelists: Ellen Anderson, Senator, State of Minnesota | Edward A. Garvey, MN Office of Energy Security, Department of Commerce | Barb Thoman, Transit for Livable Communities
The panel will review the recommendations of the Minnesota Climate Change Advisory Group, provide updates on policy actions responding to those recommendations, and discuss their implementation. There will be plenty of time for discussion!
Legislature Climate Change Agenda
Ellen Anderson
Legislation passed last year: Carbon reduction goals; Renewable Energy Standard of 25% by 2025; Energy efficiency requirement
Green Initiatives this Session:
- Green Solutions Act allows for the study of a state and regional carbon cap and trade policy and its impacts
- Clean Cars legislation was not passed – they tried to pass the California regulations
- Next Generation Biofuels did not get too far
- Green Jobs were looked at to see how we can capture the benefits of the green economy and a carbon-constrained world to promote efficiency and renewables
- Building Standards passed: (1) Loan funds for energy efficiency improvements; (2) All state buildings carbon neutral by 2030
- Annually updated framework for reducing carbon emissions passed
Ellen believes that the legislature moved rather sluggish this year in the face of a crisis, but we are headed in the right direction.
Governor Pawlenty’s Role
Edward A. Garvey, Director of the Office of Energy Security, former director of Office of Environmental Assistance
Edward gives Minnesota an A+ on policies related to Climate Change:
Since 2003 they have passed Prairie Islands, IREE funded at millions, kept up a nuclear plant, Metropolitan emissions reduction plant that upgraded coal plants to natural gas, Community-Based Energy Development, mercury emissions standards, Next Generation Energy Act, demand efficiency program, RES, transportation fuels advancements—all acheived with overwhelming bi-partisan support (more than adopting the honeycrisp apple as the state apple).
There is a lot of progress being made. MCCAG has said that we can acheive what we need to if we implement those policies we have passed, along with a number of other measures, especially in forestry and waste. The work we have done here is now being taken to the regional level with MGA, and across the country with the National Governor’s Association.
MCCAG Recommendations – Transportation
Barb Thoman
One of the things that surprised her was the amount of consensus on the report. She was on the transportation and land use subgroup, and most everything was unanimous. There was an agreement that we have an emergency on our hands and we have to go further than we already have. Barb does not think that there was enough agency involvement in the group. 46 recommendations in 6 sectors came out, and 30 were quantified into GHG emissions reductions.
The estimated costs were much lower than people thought they would be. There are many cost saving as well. Transportation accounts for 25% of state energy use. There are three areas for improvement regarding transportation: (1) low-carbon fuels; (2) VMT; (3) vehicle efficiency
Reducing VMTs is one of the most important, and it seems clear, especially given energy prices these days, that there will be a reduction in VMT.
The actual recommendations are to: (1) Improve land use and development; (2) Expand transit, bicycling and walking; (3) Climate friendly transportation pricing; (4) “Fix it first” transportation infrastucture policy; (5) Workplace tools to encourage carpooling, bicycling, and transit.
Next Steps include implementing programs and requirements to promote changfe within governemnt, at workplaces, and with households.
Discussion continues with audience questions
QUESTION: How much fuel could be saved if people drove the speed limit, or if speed limits were reduced?
Barb: The proposal from MCCAG was to reduce the speed limits slightly to achieve a total of 5% of total transportation emissions reductions. There are obviously reasons to do this for climate, but also to save lives.
QUESTION: Are there any intentional land use planning policies that are being considered at the state level?
Barb: We did discuss development and planning, and they promise some of the greatest emissions reductions. We need to make it easier to do mixed use and dense development, and provide the financial incentives for developments that encourage fewer vehicle miles traveled.
Ellen: I have not heard discussion of smart growth planning recently, though it may be coming back—but we cannot incent that development without the money to do so.
QUESTION: Is natural gas a good solution when it is going down in supply and up in cost?
Edward: We have to think about impacts on four things: reliability, cost, community nature, environmental effect. Natural gas is being used more and more as a replacement for coal as a source of energy production, and it fits better with wind. There has been a dramatic price increase, which was especially felt by lower income Minnesotans this past winter.
Ellen: There are promising renewable alternatives to natural gas in syngas that can be used in its place. We can reach half of our 80% reduction by 2050 with a net profit of 70% if we do it through efficiency. Heavy industry in China was the biggest waster in international studies, and the second was the United States housing sector. We need to improve this building stock, and help people make their homes more efficient. This will mean millions of dollars of investment in our communities, and green jobs.
QUESTION: How can we make efficiency sexy and visible?
Ellen: We have to figure out how to get every home more efficient, and make sure that we are passing policies that help people with these. We need to give everyone financing structures that pay off energy improvements through energy savings, like we just passed for public buildings. The sexiness is a little harder—and may never happen—but the green jobs that are created through this kind of investment is one of the most attractive outcomes.
QUESTION: How can we promote density?
Barb: People are rethinking density now—it is appealing to people, and they can walk to dinner. We need to make sure that these are the preferred developments in a community. We also need to put maximums on parking to encourage walking, biking, and transit.
QUESTION: How can we restart a state planning agency so that more rural municipalities can have access to technical assistance?
Edward: Government cannot make development better on our own—we can help, but we have to decide as a people to make a difference. People have to make it known that they want to live closer to where they work, eat, and play.
Ellen: It is governemnt policy that has created many of these problems, like transportation infrastructure and policies that support fossil fuels.
QUESTION: How can we measure and reward GHG emissions reductions?
Edward: A carbon market planning authority was created to study the impact of monetizing reductions. They have to be quantifiable and permanent, with policing to make sure that they are kept that way.
QUESTIONS: Aggressive goals from MCCAG are visionary, but they need to move forward into a scope of making large-scale societal change. Specifically: (1) How can we limit the impact of new coal plants? (2)How can we limit the impact of climate change on the communities as the greatest risk?
Dane: What really asvances the idea of a shared prosperity? Our Growth & Justice think tank focuses on smart growth in transportation investments and policies.
Ellen: The two coal plants, if they moved forward, would make the other sectors do double the lifting to reach our goals. But the power could be reached with renewables, so let’s hope that the coal plant proposals die of their own weight. In terms of equity, we are looking at auctioning allowances for cap and trade, we can use the proceeds to invest in the public, and direct those funds at those who need it most—without dispraportionate harm to industry. Concrete examples include the Rock-Tenn biomass plant, which is at a standstill—these are obviously difficult decisions.
Edward: In terms of equity, there are several impacts, and as energy prices rise, they dispraportionately impact lower income individuals. We will contantly have to be managing impacts, and keeping a careful eye on not only energy costs, but on health impacts as well.
Barb: As far as transport goes, lower income people spend a much greater percentage of their income on travel. If we are investing in transit, biking, walking, and smarter planning, then lower income people will not have to spend a lot of their money on one—even two—vehicles.
QUESTION: There is a partnership, I think, to bring together the state and cities to work on comprehensive plans—perhaps the state could fund carbon footprint studies
All panelists think that is a great idea—and will think about where to get the money to do it…
