On Sept. 5, the Boulder Carbon Tax Tracker project held a workshop to hear perspectives on the carbon tax from a range of local stakeholders. This is the second in a series of video interviews with stakeholders done at this event.

Karen Worminghaus is Executive Director of Boulder CarShare, a local nonprofit transportation program. Highlights from her views on how Boulder’s carbon tax is working out:

• “I don’t believe we’re on track for meeting our initial goals [for the carbon tax].”
• “The city’s initial goals weren’t even sufficient for what needs to be done.”
• “Personally I’ve reduced my energy demand as much as I can. Haven’t owned a car for seven years now.”

On Sept. 5, the Boulder Carbon Tax Tracker project held a workshop to hear perspectives on the carbon tax from a range of local stakeholders. This is the first in a series of video interviews with stakeholders done at this event.

Dan Powers is Community Affairs Manager for the Boulder Chamber of Commerce. Here are some key points he raised in this interview:

• Boulder’s carbon tax “Still has a way to go.”
• The most difficult challenge about the carbon tax: “Convincing some people that climate change and energy efficiency are as important as city council believes.”
• Another challenge: “Measuring how [carbon tax-funded] programs affect carbon emissions.”

Last October, the city of Berkeley, CA voted to allow property owners to pay for energy efficiency improvements and solar systems through long-term assessment on their individual property tax bills. Now Boulder County may try something similar. If it passes, this might be welcome news to local property owners who won’t do energy efficiency and renewable energy projects without up-front funding assistance.

Earlier this month, Boulder County Commissioners agreed to put Issue 1A on the Nov. 4 ballot. This would which would allow the county to sell up to $40 million in bonds to support a loan program for “clean energy options.”

Here’s how the county explains it would work…
(more…)

Here’s an upcoming event we’re hosting. It’s free, and breakfast is included.

If you want to attend: Please e-mail amy@gahran.com for an invitation by Aug. 29, 2008. Seating is limited to facilitate a constructive discussion, so please respond soon!

This half-day guided discussion will address the city’s progress in addressing climate change, as well as what Boulder can do next in this effort. We also want to put Boulder’s efforts in a broader context: How this might tie into other climate change efforts around the state?

WHO WILL ATTEND? We will include key players in the Boulder and Colorado energy and climate change scene. Attending will be a carefully selected mix of representatives from local and state government (including Sarah Van Pelt and Jonathan Koehn from the city Dept. of Environmental Affairs), area businesses, research institutes and media, along with local residents and homeowners, students, community groups and environmental organizations from Boulder and around the state.

WHY YOU SHOULD COME? Our primary goal is to encourage ways that people in Boulder (as well as Denver and throughout the state) can share ideas and information about addressing climate change. This ongoing dialogue can happen online, in public meetings, and through other means. We’re inviting you because we want to hear your ideas, preferences, and needs for that sort of discussion.

Group size is limited to facilitate an open, constructive discussion.

Questions? Contact I,Reporter’s Amy Gahran or Adam Glenn for further information.

We’ll look forward to hearing from you and having you participate.

Getting a conversation going has been a major challenge for this site. We’ve put a lot of energy into that effort, but that just doesn’t seem to be the right direction for this topic in this community.

So for the rest of the summer, we’re taking a different tack. We’ll be working with some local videobloggers to allow community members’ voices to be heard via video interviews.

I’ll be meeting with those videobloggers next week after I return from a business trip, and we should be up and running soon.

Who would you like to see interviewed here? Please comment below or e-mail me.

This week the Boulder-based marketing communications firm Sterling Rice Group announced that it’s offsetting 100% of its electricity use by purchasing renewable energy credits (RECs) from Renewable Choice Energy, also based in Boulder.

RECs are a popular way for people and organizations to shrink their carbon footprint. One reason why RECs (and a similar kind of offering, carbon offsets, which help fund other kinds of projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions) are popular is that all the buyer has to do is write a check. That’s certainly much easier and faster than trying to make your home or building more energy efficient, or rearranging your life so you can drive less. And if these programs are properly audited (for instance, Green-E certifies the RECs sold by Renewable Energy Choice), chances are good that buyers’ dollars are yielding measurable greenhouse gas reductions.

Still, some people question whether buying RECs and carbon offsets are the best use of the money people want to spend to help mitigate climate change.

Here are some issues commonly raised by critics of RECs and carbon offsets…
(more…)

On Tuesday, April 8, the Boulder city council held a study session to get up to date on the city’s progress toward meeting the goals of the Kyoto Protocol and Boulder’s climate action plan.

This was a great opportunity to see what each council member thinks of how Boulder’s doing so far on addressing climate change. I took lots of notes, and will be presenting in a series of posts what each council member had to say at this meeting.

First, here’s the big picture:

Falling far short, so far. According to presentations by Jonathan Koehn and Sarah Van Pelt of the Dept. of Environmental Affairs (backed up by the memorandum they submitted with the study session materials), as things now stand Boulder will not meet the Kyoto Protocol goals by 2012. In fact, at this pace we’ll miss it by nearly half (48%).

That explains why the council has been nudging the Climate Smart program team to get more aggressive.

Memorandum, Boulder city council study session, Apr. 8, 2008

At the current pace, Boulder will fall short of its Kyoto Protocol goal by 48%.

The good news is, DEA staff presented a catch-up plan intended to bring the city much closer to meeting the Kyoto goals, and council seemed mostly supportive…

(more…)

This evening the Boulder City Council will hold a study session on the city’s climate action plan, transportation and renewable energy strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I’ll be attending.

A study session is a meeting of city council members and staff to go over current and upcoming issues, discuss topics, and give staff/consultants direction. The public is welcome to observe, but no public comments, questions, or statements are taken. However, the public may be asked questions. No formal voting takes place.

According to the 65-page memorandum from the Boulder Dept. of Environmental Affairs to the City Council, this session will provide an update on initiatives undertaken as part of Boulder’s Climate Action Plan (CAP, see backgrounder), and the Transportation Master Plan’s FasTracks Local Optimization (FLO) initiative (a planned transportation system in Boulder that will integrate regional rail and bus rapid transit, expected to be implemented around 2014-16).

Also tonight, Environmental Affairs will introduce its draft renewable energy strategy for the city.

Apparently, council has been pushing the city’s Climate Smart program to pursue emissions cuts more aggressively….

(more…)

Yesterday I wrote about how a remark at a meeting by Boulder Environmental Affairs spokesperson Beth Powell implied that the city might be considering options for not meeting the Kyoto Protocol goals. I called Powell to ask for clarification on this.

In a voice mail, Powell explained that in fact the Climate Smart team is still committed to its original plan of meeting the Kyoto Protocol goals:

“There is definitely no intention to backpedal at all. We want to increase our aggressive approach to cutting greenhouse gas emissions. That said, the Climate Smart team doesn’t have any unilateral decisionmaking power. We aren’t necessarily even going to recommend to council a new goal. We’re just going to ask them if they would like to see another goal. The study session is when all the details will be revealed. We’re writing that council memo now, and are willing to share information on that.”

…I’m relieved to learn that I misunderstood Powell’s remarks in the context of that event — and to get a clear statement that the city (at least at this point) does not intend to take advantage of the apparent wiggle room in the language of the 2002 council resolution that committed the city to meeting the Kyoto goals. Clarity about targets and achievements would seem to benefit everyone involved in this issue, in Boulder and elsewhere.

Many thanks to Powell for clarifying this matter.

(UPDATE Mar. 21: The city has clarified that it does not intend to backpedal on Kyoto.)

Last night’s Climate Smart community meeting at the West Boulder Senior center was well attended, energetic, and constructive. Over 40 community members and city and county employees attended. I took extensive notes and will be writing much more about the event later.

But first, I was a bit surprised to hear city Environmental Affairs spokesperson Beth Powell note that her department may recommend to the City Council, “that we go beyond Kyoto to a 2020 or 2050 goal.”

…A little bit of background: Boulder’s major municipal efforts to address climate change began in 2002, when the City Council passed resolution 906 adopting the goals of the Kyoto Protocol — which would require the city to cut its greenhouse gas emissions reducing greenhouse gas emissions 7% below the estimated 1990 level. The Kyoto Protocol calls for that goal to be met by 2012 — which is when the current carbon tax sunsets.

Actually, the wording of the resolution included some wiggle room…

(more…)