You are on page 1of 86

Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue

Draft Report March 2013

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 4 PROJECT BACKGROUND & CONTEXT............................................................................................. 7 OVERVIEW OF NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS ............................................................. 7 UNDERSTANDING OZONE AND PARTICULATE POLLUTION ...................................................................... 8 THE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF NONATTAINMENT ........................................................................... 8 PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACTS OF AIR POLLUTION IN MINNESOTA ................................................................ 9 IMPROVING MINNESOTAS AIR QUALITY ............................................................................................... 12 PROJECT METHODOLOGY & STAKEHOLDER GROUPS .......................................................... 20 INTRODUCTION TO THE WORK GROUPS RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................... 25 PROTECTING AND IMPROVING MINNESOTAS AIR QUALITY: RECOMMENDED ACTIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 27 AREA SOURCE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS .................................................................................. 27 EDUCATION AND OUTREACH TO REDUCE VOC EMISSIONS FROM SMALL TO MID-SIZED BUSINESSES 27 EQUIPMENT EXCHANGE FOR LANDSCAPING EQUIPMENT WITH SMALL ENGINES ................................ 27 MODEL LANDSCAPING SERVICES CONTRACT ........................................................................................ 28 STATE MATCHING FUND FOR AREA SOURCE REDUCTION PROJECTS .................................................... 29 ENERGY EFFICIENCY & RENEWABLE ENERGY RECOMMENDED ACTIONS ................... 30 AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS AND URBAN HEAT ISLAND MITIGATION THROUGH URBAN FORESTRY ................................................................................................................................................................ 30 EXPAND MINNESOTA GREEN CORPS TO HELP LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ACHIEVE ENERGY CONSERVATION GOALS IN PUBLIC FACILITIES ...................................................................................... 32 MOBILE DIESEL RECOMMENDED ACTIONS ............................................................................... 33 ALTERNATIVE FUEL INFRASTRUCTURE GRANTS ................................................................................... 33 ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLE INCENTIVE FOR FLEETS .......................................................................... 34 EDUCATION AND OUTREACH TO REDUCE TRUCK IDLING ..................................................................... 36 INCENTIVES FOR DIESEL ENGINE RETROFIT/REPOWER/REBUILD/REPLACE ......................................... 36 EMISSIONS REDUCTION GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC FLEETS ..................................................................... 38 MODEL CONTRACT FOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS ............................................................................... 38 POINT SOURCE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS ................................................................................. 39 AIR ALERT EDUCATION AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES OUTREACH.......................................... 39 STATIONARY DIESEL GENERATOR OUTREACH AND EDUCATION .......................................................... 40 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT & LIGHT DUTY VEHICLE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS ................................................................................................................ 41 ACCELERATED HIGH-EMITTING VEHICLE RETIREMENT ........................................................................ 41 DEVELOP THE TRANSIT SYSTEM (BUS AND RAIL) IN THE SEVEN COUNTY METRO REGION................. 42 EXPAND EMPLOYER-SUBSIDIZED TRANSIT PASS PROGRAM ................................................................. 43 HIGH-EMITTING VEHICLE REPAIR REBATES .......................................................................................... 45 INFRASTRUCTURE & OUTREACH TO EXPAND ELECTRIC VEHICLE USE IN MINNESOTA ........................ 46 REGIONAL TELEWORK PROGRAM .......................................................................................................... 47 WOOD SMOKE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS .................................................................................. 48 MODEL ORDINANCE TO REDUCE EMISSIONS IMPACTS FROM HYDRONIC HEATERS ............................. 48 STUDY OPTIONS FOR COORDINATION OF SEVEN COUNTY METRO AREA BRUSH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ................................................................................................................................................. 49 WOOD STOVE/FIREPLACE CHANGE-OUTS .............................................................................................. 50

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

WOOD SMOKE REDUCTION EDUCATION AND OUTREACH ..................................................................... 51 PROTECTING AND IMPROVING MINNESOTAS AIR QUALITY: RECOGNIZING OTHER IMPORTANT INITIATIVES .................................................................................................................. 52 B20 BIODIESEL BLEND MANDATE ......................................................................................................... 52 BENCHMARKING & DISCLOSURE OF ENERGY PERFORMANCE OF BUILDINGS ....................................... 53 CAR SHARING IN THE TWIN CITIES......................................................................................................... 54 CONSERVATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1.5% ENERGY SAVINGS GOAL .......................................... 55 CONVERTING VEHICLE TRIPS TO BICYCLING AND WALKING TRIPS...................................................... 57 FINANCING MODELS TO SCALE UP CLEAN ENERGY PROJECTS IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, INCLUDING PROPERTY ASSESSED CLEAN ENERGY ................................................................................................... 58 NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR WOOD HEATERS ......................................................... 59 PHASE-OUT OF COAL TAR-BASED PAVEMENT SEALERS ....................................................................... 60 STATE ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAMS FOR THE PUBLIC SECTOR ....................................................... 61 UPDATING MINNESOTA STATE POLICY TO FACILITATE DEVELOPMENT OF DISTRIBUTED GENERATION AND COMBINED HEAT AND POWER ........................................................................................................ 63 APPENDIX A: OPTIONS FOR POSSIBLE FUTURE CONSIDERATION ..................................... 65 APPENDIX B: WORK GROUP CHARGE & GROUND RULES ..................................................... 73 APPENDIX C: WORK GROUP ROSTER ............................................................................................ 75 APPENDIX D: TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP ROSTERS ......................................................... 77 APPENDIX E: 2008 EMISSIONS SOURCES BREAKDOWN ........................................................... 80 APPENDIX F: THE SIX RS OF DIESEL EMISSIONS REDUCTION ............................................ 83 APPENDIX G: INDEX OF ADDITIONAL RESOURCES .................................................................. 85

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Executive Summary
Project Context The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) sets health-based National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter (defined as particles less than 2.5 microns in diameter, noted as PM2.5), ground level ozone and four other widespread pollutants and is required by law to periodically reevaluate them. Research suggests air pollution is linked to upper respiratory illness, cardiovascular disease and other human health problems.1 These effects are increasingly being seen at ever-lower levels of pollution. As a result, federal air quality standards have been made more stringent over timea trend that is likely to continue. Minnesota is fortunate to have generally good air quality that has improved over the last decade for most pollutants thanks to advancing technology, voluntary programs, strong regulatory compliance and other factors. Despite Minnesotas emission reduction efforts and cleaner air, uncertainty about where federal standards will be set in the short- and long-term is leading to uncertainty as to whether Minnesota will remain in compliance. If all or part of Minnesota were to violate a federal ambient air standard, the economic costs to state businesses are estimated to be as high as $240 million due to federal regulations that would come into effect. At the same time, reducing fine particles and ozone would result in billions of dollars of health benefits. Minnesota is thus faced with a unique opportunityand strong economic incentiveto proactively develop cost-effective solutions to our air quality challenges, drawing on a long and rich tradition of collaborative action. Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue Between March 2012 and February 2013, Environmental Initiative facilitated a conversation amongst leaders in the business, government and nonprofit sectors to explore new opportunities for emissions reductions, lay the groundwork for future collaboration to improve air quality in Minnesota, and prepare for potential nonattainment designations. This group, the Work Group of Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue, was tasked with identifying the most efficient and effective ways to meet or exceed potential new federal standards through a process of collective problemsolving and consensus decision-making. Work Group members, assisted by additional technical experts, developed and came to consensus on a set of complementary initiatives to voluntarily reduce emissions associated with ozone and fine particle pollution. These recommendations are accompanied by descriptions of additional activities that the Work Group recognizes as playing an important role in ongoing emissions reductions.

U.S. EPA, Ground-level Ozone: Health Effects. http://www.epa.gov/groundlevelozone/health.html U.S. EPA, Particulate Matter (PM): Health. http://www.epa.gov/airquality/particlepollution/health.html

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Recommendations of the Work Group The Work Group recommended, by consensus2, 24 initiatives in six categories to reduce emissions associated with ground-level ozone and fine particle pollution. Area Source Recommended Actions Education and Outreach to Reduce VOC Emissions from Small to Mid-Sized Businesses Equipment Exchange for Landscaping Equipment with Small Engines Model Landscaping Services Contract State Matching Fund for Area Source Reduction Projects Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Recommended Actions Air Quality Improvements and Urban Heat Island Mitigation Through Urban Forestry Expand Minnesota GreenCorps to Help Local Governments Achieve Energy Conservation Goals in Public Facilities Mobile Diesel Recommended Actions Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Grants Alternative Fuel Vehicle Incentive for Fleets Education and Outreach to Reduce Truck Idling Incentives for Diesel Engine Retrofit/Repower/Rebuild/Replace Emissions Reduction Guidelines for Public Fleets Model Contract for Public Works Projects Point Source Recommended Actions Air Alert Education and Best Management Practices Outreach Stationary Diesel Generator Outreach and Education Transportation Demand Management & Light-Duty Vehicle Recommended Actions Accelerated High-Emitting Vehicle Retirement Develop the Transit System (Bus and Rail) in the Seven County Metro Region Expand Employer-Subsidized Transit Pass Program High-Emitting Vehicle Repair Rebates Infrastructure & Outreach to Expand Electric Vehicle Use in Minnesota Regional Telework Program Wood Smoke Recommended Actions Model Ordinance to Reduce Emissions Impacts from Hydronic Heaters Study Options for Coordination of Seven County Metro Area Brush Management Systems Wood Stove/Fireplace Change-Outs Wood Smoke Reduction Education and Outreach
2

Consensus was defined for the purposes of this project as producing recommendations that all participants can live with. The consensus was reached through the Work Groups discussion on the package of recommended initiatives as a whole. The individual initiatives and contents of this report should not be interpreted as having been recommended, accepted, or endorsed by specific individuals or organizations participating in the Work Group. See Page 20 for a full description of the stakeholder process and consensus.

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

In addition, the Work Group officially recognized the long-term role of 10 concurrent activities, listed in the full project report, in maintaining and improving air quality in Minnesota. Next Steps Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue was envisioned to be the first step in catalyzing the implementation and expansion of projects to improve air quality throughout the state. Aided by the recommendations contained in this report, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Environmental Initiative and many of the leaders who participated in Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue will be working to implement a number of high-priority emission reduction activities over the coming months. Ongoing efforts to set priorities for action, request and gather financial resources, and develop plans for implementation of recommended actions will be supported by Clean Air Minnesota, whose steering committee members have worked together for nearly a decade to keep Minnesotas air clean through innovative public-private partnerships. For more information about this ongoing effort or to obtain a full copy of this report, visit the project website at www.environmental-initiative.org. Questions can be directed to Environmental Initiative at info@environmental-initiative.org or 612-334-3388.

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Project Background & Context


Overview of National Ambient Air Quality Standards The federal Clean Air Act requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) at levels requisite to protect public health for pollutants that are both widespread and shown to be harmful to public health and the environment.3 The EPA is required to review the standards for these pollutantsand the science on which those standards are basedevery five years.4 There are currently six pollutants for which the EPA sets NAAQS, particle pollution (particulate matter or PM), ground-level ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxides (NO2), and lead. Of the six pollutants, particle pollution and ground-level ozone are considered to be the most widespread health threats.5 A geographic area with air quality that meets the standard for a given pollutant is called an "attainment" area. Areas that do not meet the standard are thus called "nonattainment" areas. As of the start of the Clean Air Dialogue in early 2012, the EPA was in the process of reviewing the standards for ground-level ozone and particles less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter (PM2.5), and, despite improvements to Minnesotas air quality over time, the threat of tighter standards put the state at risk of falling out of attainment for these pollutants. Chart 1: Minnesotas 2011 Ambient Air Pollutant Concentrations in Relation to Federal Standards6

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Transfer Network: National Ambient Air Quality Standards, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ 4 MPCA. Air Quality in Minnesota 2013 Report to the Legislature. www.pca.state.mn.us/yhizb6a 5 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, The Plain English Guide to the Clean Air Act: Cleaning Up Commonly Found pollutants, http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/peg/cleanup.html 6 MPCA. Air Quality in Minnesota 2013 Report to Legislature. www.pca.state.mn.us/yhizb6a.

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Understanding Ozone and Particulate Pollution One of the challenges of addressing ambient concentrations of ground-level ozone and particulate matter is that both pollutants are formed in the atmosphere as precursor chemicals combine in complex chemical reactions. In the case of ground-level ozone,7 it is formed when NOx and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are found together in the presence of heat and sunlight. Because of the role of heat and sunlight in the formation of ozone, ozone is generally not a problem in Minnesota during the winter months, but on hot sunny summer days ozone concentrations can rise to what are considered to be unhealthy levels.8 Particulate matter is a broad term that refers to any small particles or droplets in the air. These particulates can be liquid or solid, organic or inorganic, and can consist of a variety of substances, including carbon, sulfates, nitrates, ammonium, metals and acids. They can also range in size, with smaller particles (known as fine particulates or PM2.5) posing a greater health risk due to their ability to penetrate deeper into the lungs and respiratory system.9 On a typical day, roughly half of the PM2.5 in urban air is due to directly emitted particles from combustion activitiessuch as operating vehicle engines and burning wood for residential heating. Much of the remaining fine particles form from ammonium sulfate and ammonium nitrate, compounds created when SOx and NOx react with ammonia in the atmosphere. Particle pollution is affected by factors such as temperature, humidity, and wind, which can transport particulates over long distances.10 Because ozone and PM formation are heavily influenced by weather patterns and depend on the ratios of a complex mixture of precursor chemicals that happen to be present in the air at a given time, reductions in precursor emissions do not necessarily have a linear impact on ambient concentrations of these pollutants. This makes it more difficult to translate goals for reductions in ambient concentrations into concrete plans for specific emissions reductions. It also gives special weight to any opportunities to reduce direct emissions of fine particulates, given that these reductions are more straightforwardly linked to reductions in ambient concentrations. The Economic Consequences of Nonattainment If any portion of the state were to be designated as a nonattainment area by the EPA, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) would be held accountable for developing and executing a state implementation plan to bring the state back into compliance. However, it is not only state regulators who would be impacted by a nonattainment designation. When an area is designated as nonattainment, a series of complex regulations come into effect, and complying with these regulations would likely necessitate the imposition of numerous new requirements and
7

Ground-level ozone, which is harmful to human health, should not be confused with ozone found in the upper atmosphere (10 to 30 miles above the Earth's surface), which forms the ozone layer. While both types of ozone are chemically identical, they have separate and distinct impacts on humans and the environment. Ozone formed at ground level does not mix with or contribute to ozone in the upper atmosphere. 8 Minnesota Department of Health. Air Quality: Ozone. http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/air/ozone.htm 9 Minnesota Department of Health. Air Quality: Particles and Your Health. http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/air/pm.htm 10 MPCA. Air Quality in Minnesota 2013 Report to the Legislature. www.pca.state.mn.us/yhizb6a

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

restrictions on Minnesota businesses and citizens. When the state last faced the threat of nonattainment (for ground-level ozone) in 1998, the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce commissioned a study to assess the potential costs to Minnesota businesses of rules that would be similar to those that were instituted in the Milwaukee area when it was designated as nonattainment in 1990. The study found the potential cost of nonattainment for ground-level ozone in the Twin Cities to be anywhere from $189 million to $266 million (in 1998 dollars), depending on the emissions reduction strategies employed.11 These costs do not include the inevitable administrative costs to the state (and by extension to taxpayers) of developing and enforcing a state implementation plan for the required emissions reductions. In 2012 these estimates were updated through graduate research at the University of Minnesotas Humphrey School of Public Affairs. The new estimates for the potential economic impacts to Minnesota businesses of nonattainment were extended to include additional pollutants accounting for the possibility of a nonattainment designation for fine particulates as well as ground-level ozone. The updated estimates were in a similar range, $140 million to $260 million, based on Milwaukees experience as well as those of other areas that have been forced to address nonattainment in recent decades. These costs, it is projected, will fall most heavily on businesses, governments, other fleet owners, and the public in general as a result of having to reinstate the statewide vehicle inspection and maintenance program and the increased cost of reformulated gasoline. Other costs would fall on business and industry due to new restrictions on emissions from existing equipment and on electrical utilities due to new requirements to install best available retrofit technology (BACT) and participate in emissions cap and trade programs. 12 Public Health Impacts of Air Pollution in Minnesota Ground-level Ozone According to the EPA, Breathing ozone can trigger a variety of health problems including chest pain, coughing, throat irritation, and congestion. It can worsen bronchitis, emphysema, and asthma, and increase the frequency of asthma attacks. Over time, repeated exposure to ozone can inflame the linings of the lungs, reduce lung function and even permanently scar lung tissue. This may also make the lungs more susceptible to infection and increase the risk of premature death from lung disease. People who have existing respiratory conditions or who are active outdoors are particularly at risk from ozone exposure. This includes children, because they tend to be more active outdoors when ozone levels are high, they are more likely to have asthma, and their lungs are still developing.13

11

Aulich, Ted R. & Neusen, Kenneth. 1999. Estimated Economic Impact of Twin Cities Ozone Nonattainment. http://environmental-initiative.org/images/files/MnCAD/1999mnchamber_ozonenonattainmentimpacts.pdf This study assumes a 15 percent reduction in volatile organic compounds (VOCs, a precursor involved in atmospheric ozone formation) from 1990 levels. 12 Blankenheim, Courtney. 2013. Estimating the Economic Impact of Ozone and Fine Particulate Nonattainment in the Twin Cities. This study assumes a 15 percent reduction in volatile organic compounds (VOCs), a 15 percent reduction in nitrogen oxides (NOx) and a 20 percent reduction in directly emitted fine particulates (PM2.5) from 2005 levels. 13 U.S. EPA, Ground-level Ozone: Health Effects. http://www.epa.gov/groundlevelozone/health.html

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Fine Particulates (PM2.5) Exposure to particulates, especially very small or fine particles, can have negative impacts on both the heart and lungs. In general, the smaller the particles are, the greater the associated health concerns, since the smallest particles can get deep into lungs, and may even get into the bloodstream. Numerous studies have linked particle pollution exposure to health problems that include respiratory symptoms (such as irritation of the airways, coughing, difficulty breathing, aggravated asthma, and decreased lung function), as well as heart problems (such as irregular heartbeat and nonfatal heart attacks). Particulate exposure as even been linked with premature death in people with heart or lung disease.14 Like in the case of ozone exposure, children, the elderly, people with impaired lung function or anyone who is especially active can be at higher risk of adverse impacts from particulate pollution. Here in Minnesota, a study completed in May 2012 by the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), the MPCA, and Olmsted Medical Center looked at the impacts of reductions in particle pollution between 2003 and 2009 on the risk of hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, and mortality in the seven county metropolitan area and Olmsted County. In the metro region, hospitalizations for certain respiratory problems, including asthma, showed a statistically significant association with PM2.5. One of the two analytical methods used also showed statistically significant associations for asthma ED visits, cardiovascular hospitalizations, and mortality. The proportions of total respiratory, and specifically asthma-related, hospitalizations attributable to short-term PM2.5 exposures15 declined by approximately three to four percent after the 2003 2005 baseline period. A supplemental sub-analysis showed an effect of vehicular traffic on asthma exacerbations in Olmstead County.16 The authors of the study stressed that the indicators developed in this project apply only to acute health effects from short-term exposures, and thus represent only a portion of the total impact of PM.17 The Economic Benefits of Air Pollution Reductions The health impacts of air pollution can come at a high cost in terms of personal and community wellbeing. While not all of these costs can be quantified, the EPA offers a modeling tool known as BenMAP to estimate the health impacts and economic benefits occurring when populations experience changes in air quality.18 In 2012 the MPCA used BenMAP to estimate the economic benefits associated with incremental reductions in Minnesotas fine particulate and ozone pollution. The MPCAs analysis looked at the costs associated with the health impacts of these pollutants (or the benefits of pollution reduction), including premature mortality, nonfatal heart attacks, hospital admissions, emergency room visits, asthma attacks, school absences, and lost workdays. According to this analysis, a 21 percent reduction in average daily concentrations of fine particulates from current levels in the 11-county metro region could result in the order of $4.9 billion in annual economic benefits by 2020. The possible annual benefits to the 11-county
14 15

U.S. EPA. Particulate Matter (PM): Health. http://www.epa.gov/airquality/particlepollution/health.html Above a policy-relevant referent concentration of 5g/m3 16 Poverty was also strongly associated with asthma exacerbations. 17 Johnson, Jean; Pratt, Greg; Yawn, Barbara. 2012. Measuring the Impact of Particulate Matter Reductions by Environmental Health Outcome Indicators. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/display.abstractDetail/abstract/8644/report/F 18 U.S. EPA. Environmental Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program (BenMAP). http://www.epa.gov/air/benmap/

10

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

metro region associated with a 10 percent reduction in average summer-season daily maximum levels of ozone concentrations from current levels was estimated to be in the order of $250 million by 2020.19 The following tables present the approximate economic values for each health incident attributed to fine particulate and ozone pollution and show the estimated annual economic benefits resulting from incremental reductions in ambient concentrations of these pollutants. Table 1: Approximate20 Value per Incident Associated with Each Health Endpoint Included in the Evaluation21 Health Endpoint Value/Incident Valuation Method (2010 US$) Premature Mortality $8,900,000 What EPA currently uses for the value of a statistical life based on willingness-to-pay studies Based on cost-of-illness studies that consider Nonfatal Heart $106,000 medical expenses and lost earnings incurred over Attacks five years from the date of the event Hospital Admissions, $24,000 Respiratory Based on cost-of-illness studies that consider medical costs and lost earnings Hospital Admissions, $33,000 Cardiovascular Acute Bronchitis Derived from several willingness-to-pay studies of $450 (Children) parents to avoid a typical illness for their children Emergency Room $370 Average of estimates from two cost-of-illness Visits, Respiratory studies Work Loss Days $150 Based on county-specific median daily wages Lost School Days $85 Value of lost productivity of parent Acute Respiratory $63 Derived from multiple willingness-to-pay studies Symptoms (Adults) Upper Respiratory $31 Symptoms (Children) Derived from three willingness to pay studies of parents to avoid these outcomes for their children Lower Respiratory $20 Symptoms (Children)

19

The percentage pollutant reduction targets used for this analysis were based on several plausible scenarios for new PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS as described later in this report. This analysis was intended to produce a rough estimate of the potential benefits associated with incremental improvements to air quality and does not take into consideration total costs of current pollution levels or all health and welfare benefits associated with reduced pollution. It is also important to note that these numbers do not consider baseline pollution levels for each part of the statein other words, pollution reductions are assumed to be evenly distributed across the given geographic area. 20 Some economic values of some health impacts vary with location. For example, when lost earnings are part of the valuation, average income levels vary by county. Thus, these estimates are approximate, and represent best estimates for the Twin Cities metro area and the State of Minnesota 21 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency analysis conducted for Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue.

11

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Table 2: Estimated Annual Economic Benefits Resulting from Incremental Reduction in Daily PM2.5 Concentrations22 Geographic Area Total Annual Value per 1g/m3 Reduced in 2020 (2010 US$) State-Wide $1.6 billion 11 County Metro Area $850 million Table 3: Estimated Annual Economic Benefits Resulting from Incremental Reduction in Average Summer-Season Daily Eight Hour Maximum Ozone Levels23 Geographic Area Total Annual Value per 1 ppb Reduced in 2020 (2010 US$) State-Wide $38 million 11 County Metro Area $21 million Improving Minnesotas Air Quality Sources of Emissions in Minnesota Historically, air pollution has been viewed as coming from point source contributors like power plants and other factories with smoke stacks. While they are still important contributors, point sources have decreased their emissions significantly over the past 20 years and, for PM2.5, VOCs, NOx, and SO2, point sources contribute only about one quarter of emissions statewide. In fact, for these pollutants, the majority of emissions come from smaller widespread sources that are not regulated in the way power plants and factories are. These sources include: On-road vehicles, including cars, trucks, and buses Off-road vehicles, such as construction and other heavy equipment, recreational vehicles, trains, planes, and boats Residential wood burning for heat or recreation Residential and commercial fuel combustion Uncontrolled volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from small businesses and consumer products

These sources also produce multiple pollutants of concern in Minnesota. Dealing effectively with the various sources of air pollution must move beyond individual pollutants or individual facilities to include the diverse array of area sources and non-point sources. This is especially true because, while concentrations of PM2.5 and ozone have improved over time, variations in meteorology, movement of air pollution from other states, and reactions in the atmosphere also affect the levels of these pollutants.

22 23

ibid Ibid.

12

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Chart 2: Sources of 2008 Nitrogen Oxide Emissions24


4% 24%
Highway Vehicles-Gas Highway Vehicles-Diesel Electric Utility fuel combustion

3% 5% 7%

11%

Non-road-Diesel Aircraft, marine, railroad, other Metals Processing

18% 12% 16%

*Emissions from wildfires and prescribed burning not included in chart.

Chart 3: Sources of 2008 VOC Emissions25


2% 2% 2% 6% 7% 3%
Highway Vehicles-Gas Non-road-Gas

26%

Solvent Utilization Storage & Transport Residential wood combustion Other Industrial Processes

26% 26%

Highway Vehicles-Diesel Non-road-Diesel Other *Emissions from wildfires and prescribed burning not included in chart.

24

MPCA. 2008 Minnesota Criteria Pollutant Emission Inventory, version 1. Data provided by the Air Data Analysis Unit on March 1, 2013. 25 Ibid.

13

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

While the top three sources of fine particulates in Minnesota are forest and agricultural fires, agricultural tilling, and dust, these sources are of less immediate concern due to the belief that they result in larger particles, tend to settle out of the air more quickly, are difficult or impossible to prevent (e.g. forest wild fires), and are found in less populated areas of the state. The Work Group therefore focused its efforts on reduction of emissions from human combustion sources. Chart 4: 2008 PM2.5 Emissions from Combustion and Metallurgical Processes26
4% 5%
Residential wood combustion Highway Vehicles-Diesel Waste Disposal & Recycling

4% 6% 6% 7% 8%

34%

Non-road-Diesel Electric Utility fuel combustion Highway Vehicles-Gas Metals Processing Industrial Fuel combustion

9% 8% 9%

Other Industrial Processes *Emissions from wildfires and prescribed burning not included in chart

Emissions Trends and Projections Point Sources When identifying opportunities and priorities for emissions reduction, it is important to note that over the past decade emissions from point sourcesthe facilities that we normally associate with air pollutionhave been falling due to new federal regulations and state initiatives. Some of the federal regulations have driven, and will continue to drive, emissions down from larger permitted sources include NAAQS for SO2, NO2 and lead, as well as requirements to use newer pollution control technology (i.e. best available retrofit technology) and rules related to visibility (also known as regional haze) and to the movement of air pollution across state lines. Minnesotas Renewable Energy Standard, enacted in 2007, is also helping to drive emissions from the electric power sector down significantly. Reductions are projected to be even more dramatic for the states and the seven county metro areas top ten emitters.27
26 27

ibid. Hansel, Michael. (October 19, 2012). Point Source Emissions Reductions. Presented to the Work Group of Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue, Edina, MN. http://www.environmentalinitiative.org/images/files/Point%20Source%20Emission%20Reductions%20v_4%2010_31_12.pdf

14

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Chart 5: Point Source Pollutants Declines (2000-2010)28

Mobile Sources Emissions from mobile sources have also been on a downward trend over the last 10 years, thanks to new technologies and a range of federal policies. Since the late 1990s sulfur emissions have decreased significantly due to the introduction of low-sulfur diesel requirements. Nitrogen oxides and particulates have also been declining thanks to new rules for off-road and heavy-duty diesel vehicles and tightened NAAQS. New fuel efficiency standards for vehicles will also continue to drive emissions downwards as the fleet turns over across the state and country. Table 4: Projected Mobile Source Emissions Reductions (Minnesota) 1999 202029 Pollutant 1999 Emissions (tons) Estimated 2020 Emissions (tons) Change NOx 268,642 129,326 -52% VOC 174,340 128,358 -26% PM10 17,581 10,247 -42% SO2 5,006 5,129 2% Chart 6: Projected Mobile Source Emissions Reductions in Minnesota30
500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 1999 Est. 2020 SO2 PM10 VOC NOx

28 29

MPCA. Air Quality in Minnesota 2013 Report to the Legislature. www.pca.state.mn.us/yhizb6a Hansel, Michael. (October 19, 2012). Mobile Source Emissions Reductions. Presented to the Work Group of Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue, Edina, MN 30 Ibid.

15

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Chart 7: Annual Mobile Source NOx Emission Projections (United States) 2002 203031

Area Sources Area sources include small sources like printers, dry cleaners, auto body paint shops, and gas stations. The EPA defines area sources as sources that emit less than 10 tons per year of a criteria or hazardous air pollutant or less than 25 tons per year of a combination of pollutants. The category also includes commercial buildings (heaters, coatings, cooking/fire pits), residential buildings (fireplaces, heaters, consumer solvents), fuel combustion in non-road machinery, boats, railroads, lawn and garden equipment and other forms of burning. Though emissions from individual area sources are relatively small, collectively their emissions can be of concern, particularly where large numbers of sources are located in heavily populated areas. Because area sources are, by definition, smaller, more dispersed and more diverse, they have been less impacted by federal action in recent years. While there have been some likely emissions reductions from these sources due to required control technologies, area sources represent significant opportunities for reductions, particularly in VOCs. Table 5: Area Source Emissions Reductions 2008 202032 Pollutant 1999 Emissions (tons) Estimated 2020 Emissions (tons) NOx 18,139 17,974 VOC 111,470 108,578 PM10 23,209 11,112 SO2 8,045 7,990

Change -1% -3% -52% -1%

Despite these declines, the likelihood that federal standards will continue to be tightened, along with the fact that projected emissions declines do not necessarily match up with the geographic areas where pollutant reductions are most important for public health or other policy reasons, gives value to additional focused emissions reduction efforts.

31 32

MPCA. Air Quality in Minnesota 2013 Report to the Legislature. www.pca.state.mn.us/yhizb6a Hansel, Michael. (October 19, 2012). Area Source Emissions Reductions. Presented to the Work Group of Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue, Edina, MN.

16

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Setting Goals for Air Quality Improvements In order to give additional context to the task of proposing strategies to reduce emissions for Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue, the MPCA estimated the total reduction in ambient pollution concentrations that Minnesota would need to achieve in order to avoid nonattainment and provide a margin of safety for the future under three plausible scenarios of tightened standards. The three scenarios were based on standards that had been indicated or suggested by the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee.33 For ozone, reasonable goals for ambient concentrations assuming a 10 percent margin of safety below likely new standardsranged from 63 to 54 parts per billion (ppb). This would mean a two to 11 percent reduction from a 2011 baseline value. Chart 8: 8-Hour Ozone Concentration Reductions34

For PM2.5, reasonable goals for ambient (daily) concentrationsagain assuming a 10 percent margin of safety below likely new standardsranged from 35 to 30 micrograms per cubic meter (g/m3). This would mean a 15 to 27 percent reduction from a 2010 baseline value.

33

U.S. EPA. Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC). http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabpeople.nsf/Webcommittees/CASAC 34 Cassie McMahon, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency analysis for the MnCAD process.

17

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Chart 9: Daily PM2.5 Concentration Reductions35

Because (with the exception of direct particulate emissions) the relationship between emissions reductions and reductions in ambient ozone and particulate concentrations is not one to one (in scientific terms, it is highly nonlinear), translating these goals for ambient concentrations into goals for emissions reductions would require complex modeling and many assumptions. For the purposes of this project, these goals were used as an aspirational illustration of the degree to which pollution levels may need to be reduced in relation to current levels if Minnesota is to avoid nonattainment over the coming years. Voluntary Emissions Reduction Efforts Concentrations of many air pollutants have decreased in Minnesota over the past decade thanks not only to federal regulations, but also to a number of voluntary efforts to proactively reduce pollution beyond what is required by the federal Clean Air Act. In 2001, state legislation often referred to as the emissions reduction rate rider took effect that has resulted in utilities undertaking large emissions reduction projects in advance of federal requirements.36 Both Xcel Energy and Minnesota Power took advantage of an incentive to recover the costs of emission reductions through use of a rate rider. Since 2000, emissions of NOx and SO2 from in-state power generation sources have declined by 58 percent and 54 percent respectively37.

35
36

Cassie McMahon, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency analysis for Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue. Minn. Stat. 216B.192 37 MPCA. Air Quality in Minnesota 2013 Report to the Legislature. www.pca.state.mn.us/yhizb6a.

18

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Many additional efforts have been organized through Clean Air Minnesota (CAM),38 a partnership of businesses, units of government, and environmental organizations that has been coordinated by Environmental Initiative since 2003. Over the last decade the Clean Air Minnesota Steering Committee has spearheaded projects to reduce emissions from the auto body refinishing and printing industries, as well as from diesel-fueled vehicle fleetswith a special focus on reducing diesel emissions from school buses through Project Green Fleet.39 Emissions reductions have also occurred through the Minnesota Technical Assistance Program, which works with businesses to save money and protect employee health through pollution prevention.40 Ongoing efforts to address vehicle emissions through behavior change41 and transportation planning42 have also helped to reduce pollutant levels, as have numerous MPCA education, outreach, technical assistance and small business grant programs.43

38

Environmental Initiative. Clean Air Minnesota. http://www.environmental-initiative.org/projects/pastprojects/clean-air-minnesota 39 Environmental Initiative. Project Green Fleet. http://www.projectgreenfleet.org/ 40 University of Minnesota. Minnesota Technical Assistance Program. http://www.mntap.umn.edu/ 41 Metro Transit. Outreach. http://metrotransit.org/outreach 42 Metropolitan Council. Transportation Planning. http://www.metrocouncil.org/services/transportation.htm 43 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Preventing Waste and Pollution. http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/topics/preventing-waste-and-pollution/index.html

19

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Project Methodology & Stakeholder Groups


Work Group In 2012 Environmental Initiative formed a 26-member stakeholder Work Group (see Appendix C: Work Group Roster) comprised of leaders from business, state and local government, and environmental organizations. The group was tasked with identifying the challenges we may face in remaining in attainment with federal air quality standards, and developing a set of recommended strategies to address these challenges, and protecting public health, through proactive measures to reduce relevant emissions. Lee Paddock, former director of environmental policy for the Minnesota Attorney Generals Office and currently the associate dean for environmental law studies at The George Washington University School of Law, was retained to facilitate the process. In total, the full Work Group met 10 times between April 13, 2012 and February 8, 2013. The first several Work Group meetings focused on: Developing a common understanding of air quality knowledge amongst Work Group members. Agreeing on a set of goals for the process, including the Work Groups charge and a set of ground rules for the conversation (see Appendix B: Work Group Charge & Ground Rules). Reviewing in-depth information on relevant emissions sources (see Appendix E: 2008 Emissions Sources Breakdown) and the dynamics of ozone and fine particulate formation. Providing an overview of federal air quality policy and standards, as well as state programs to reduce emissions in nonattainment areas. Beginning in July of 2012, the Work Group divided into six Technical Working Groups (TWGs) for the purpose of identifying emissions reduction opportunities and proposing specific emissions reduction initiatives for inclusion in the final recommendations (see below). In September the Work Group began the process of providing feedback on initial emissions reduction proposals developed by the TWGs, and this iterative proposal revision process continued through the remainder of 2012. In January of 2013 the Work Group discussed and agreed on how the recommendations and other proposed emissions reduction initiatives developed by the TWGs would be handled in the final report, and in February the Work Group came to consensusdefined as producing recommendations that all participants can live with. Technical Working Groups Six Technical Working Groups (TWG) were formed during the project in order to focus on areas where specific emissions reduction opportunities existed and to propose concrete initiatives to respond to those opportunities. The TWGs also allowed the Work Group to being in outside technical expertise. Each TWG was charged with proposing emissions reduction activities for their area of focus, spanning the range of reasonable options (based on evaluation criteria provided by the Work Groupsee Appendix B). TWGs were formed based on six distinct emissions sources that contribute to Minnesotas ozone and fine particulate pollution:

20

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Area Sources Smaller, geographically dispersed emissions sources Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Emissions from the energy sector that can be impacted by demand-side/customer activities and programs Mobile Diesel Heavy-duty vehicles and mobile equipment with diesel engines Point Sources Larger permitted facilities, including those using stationary diesel generators, targeting supply-side actions and emissions controls Transportation Demand Management & Light-Duty Vehicles Passenger vehicles with a gasoline engine and emissions reductions through changes to how and when vehicles are operated Wood Smoke From residential burning for heating and recreational purposes, and brush disposal

The organizations represented on the Work Group sat on anywhere from one to five of the TWGs, and a range of additional experts and impacted stakeholders were invited to participate (see Appendix D: Technical Working Groups Rosters). Each TWG met from four to six times between July and December of 2012 in order to develop and refine emissions reduction proposals for the Work Group. TWG members then participated in the process of presenting these proposed emissions reduction initiatives to the full Work Group between September and December of 2012. Planning Team A Planning Team made up of a representative sub-set of eight Work Group members supported Environmental Initiatives staff throughout the process. The Planning Team met via conference call once a month between May 2012 and February 2013 to give feedback on the process and progress of the dialogue, as well as provide input on draft meeting agendas and Work Group materials. Minnesota Pollution Control Agencys Role In addition to their role as funder, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) provided both strategic and technical support throughout the duration of the project via a range of activities. From the beginning of the project, a core team of MPCA staff from across the agency met monthly with Environmental Initiative project staff to provide strategic insight and input into the process overall, as well as the agendas and materials for each Work Group meeting. MPCA staff members also delivered detailed presentations to the Work Group on Minnesota emissions sources, atmospheric processes, economic impacts of air pollution, and federal air quality standards. In addition, MPCAs technical experts served on all six TWGs as technical resources and as links to ongoing and emerging agency activities related to each TWGs focus. Assistant Commissioner David Thornton also participated in the Work Group on behalf of the Agency, supported by Air Policy Unit staff.

21

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Additional Stakeholder Education and Input Air Quality Forums In conjunction with the activities of the Work Group, the project also included a number of events designed to educate a wider audience of stakeholders on the issues of air quality and possible nonattainment in Minnesota and to engage other interested parties in building a common vision for what will be necessary to address air quality challenges. These events included three educational forums, which were held in Minneapolis, Duluth and Rochester during the spring of 2012prior to the first meetings of the Work Group. Each event featured locally relevant speakers who addressed the following questions: What do we know about air quality in Minnesota and its impacts on public health? How might proposed changes to federal air quality standards impact Minnesota industries? What sectors are most likely to be impacted? What can Minnesota businesses and communities do to proactively reduce harmful emissions in order to avoid federal nonattainment designations? Event attendees were given the opportunity to raise concerns and propose solutions that were collected as input into the dialogue. A fourth forum was held in April of 2013 to announce the outcomes of the dialogue, celebrate progress thus far to reduce emissions and inspire engagement in future work to improve Minnesotas air quality. Work Group members presented their recommendations to participants and outlined next steps for funding and either beginning new or expanding existing projects. They also outlined the framework for ongoing stakeholder coordination and leadership on emissions reductions through a reinvigorated Clean Air Minnesota partnership. Public Meeting & Additional Stakeholder Outreach In addition to the air quality forums, the process included a participatory public meeting focused on gathering input from a wider group of stakeholders and interested parties on the emissions reduction options proposed by the TWGs (prior to of the Work Groups decisions regarding final recommendations). The public meeting was held on December 4, 2012 and was attended by more than 60 individuals. Meeting participants were given background information and an update on the process to date, then asked to join one of five break-out groups to discuss the emissions reduction proposals developed by the TWG of their choice: Point Sources and Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Area Sources Mobile Diesel Transportation Demand Management & Light Duty Vehicles Wood Smoke

Participant feedback was documented and given to the Work Group for consideration as the emissions reduction proposals were refined and finalized into recommendations.

22

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Ongoing Partnership to Improve Minnesotas Air Quality While the Work Group completed its charge in February of 2013 when it came to consensus on its recommendations, this report and the project outcomes are intended to be a starting point for ongoing stakeholder collaboration on air quality. After the formal conclusion of the project, Environmental Initiative will continue to convene a cross-sector group of stakeholders with the intention of maintaining momentum for the full range of solutions needed to reduce emissions and maintain Minnesotas position as a leader in environmental quality. Clean Air Minnesota Clean Air Minnesota was first established over a decade ago as a broad partnership between business, environmental organizations, and government. Clean Air Minnesota provided an ongoing opportunity for statewide dialogue on air quality improvement strategies, focusing on projects with potential to reduce air emissions from area and mobile sources. In recent years, the partnership was focused primarily on reducing diesel emissions from mobile sources. Environmental Initiative launched Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue in 2012 to broaden the conversation with a larger group of air quality leaders and to develop a more comprehensive set of strategies to reduce emissions associated with ground level ozone and fine particulate matter. As Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue concludes, Environmental Initiative will work with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to re-establish Clean Air Minnesota as the on-going partnership between business, government, and nonprofit air quality leaders to: Sustain the cross-sector conversation on air quality, in order to identify, evaluate and prioritize viable strategies for emissions reductions. Catalyze partnerships to support and coordinate across organizations that are implementing the recommendations of Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue. Track emissions reductions achieved by the public and private sectors and report those reductions to the community and stakeholders on a regular basis. Serve as the stakeholder group for Minnesotas participation in EPAs Ozone and PM Advance Programs. Ozone and PM Advance In the spring of 2012, as the Work Group was beginning its meetings, the EPA announced a new air quality program designed for geographic areas that, like Minnesota, are currently in attainment with national air quality standards. Known as the Advance program, it is intended to encourage proactive emission reductions in ozone and fine particulate (PM2.5) attainment areas and to efficiently direct technical resources and support in order help these areas continue to meet the NAAQS and protect public health.44 The Work Group endorsed the State of Minnesotas official (statewide) participation in the Ozone Advance program in May of 2012 and the PM Advance program in February of 2013.

44

U.S. EPA. Advance Program. http://www.epa.gov/ozoneadvance/

23

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Ozone and PM Advance are collaborative efforts by EPA, states, tribes, and local governments to obtain emission reductions in attainment areas nationwide to maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone and PM2.5. The stated goals of the programs are: 1) Help attainment areas take action in order to keep pollution levels below the level of the ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS to ensure continued health protection 2) Better position areas to remain in attainment 3) Efficiently direct available resources toward actions to address ozone and PM2.5 problems quickly While there are no promises of regulatory flexibility, actions taken by areas under the PM and Ozone Advance programs that are State Implementation Plan (SIP) applicable45 could potentially be taken into account by the EPA if the area was to fall into nonattainment, either in terms of a lower baseline or as a measure that shows progress towards attainment. Requirements for the EPA Ozone and PM Advance programs include maintaining an ongoing stakeholder group to help inform recommendations and early actions on the part of the advance area. There is also a requirement for the area to submit an action plan that includes a description of the measures and programs, responsible parties, how each measure and program will be implemented (including an implementation schedule), and provisions for public and stakeholder involvement. This report outlines the measures and programs to be implemented. The Clean Air Minnesota (CAM) Steering Committee will be the body for ongoing stakeholder involvement and public engagement.

45

A SIP is a state plan for complying with the federal Clean Air Act. A SIP consists of narrative, rules, technical documentation, and agreements that an individual state will use to clean up polluted areas. In order to receive emission reduction credit as a measure in a SIP, the measure would need to be quantifiable, surplus (in terms of not being double counted both as part of the baseline and as a control measure in the SIP), federally enforceable, and permanent. It would also need to meet any other relevant requirement in CAA section 110 and/or 172, and if the measure is voluntary, the state would need to make an enforceable commitment to ensure that the estimated emissions reductions are achieved (http://www.epa.gov/ozoneadvance/pdfs/2012404guidance.pdf).

24

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Introduction to the Work Groups Recommendations


Interpreting the Recommendations In February 2013 the Work Group of Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue came to consensus on a package of 24 recommended initiatives to reduce emissions associated with ground-level ozone and fine particulate pollution. Consensus as defined in the process: Consensus was defined for the purposes of this project as producing recommendations that all participants can live with. The consensus was reached through the Work Groups discussion on the package of recommended initiatives as a whole. The individual initiatives and contents of this report should not be interpreted as having been recommended, accepted, or endorsed by specific individuals or organizations participating in the Work Group. The group did not prioritize individual recommendations, but recognizes them as a set of complementary approaches that together address emissions from all of the major source sectors in the state. Notably, the Work Groups recommendations focus on voluntary approachescosteffective win-win solutions that will proactively improve air quality and avoid the federal mandates that come with nonattainment. While the recommendations were not evaluated to determine their aggregate potential for reductions (and thus do not necessarily add up to achieve the aspirational goals set for reductions in ambient concentrations), the Work Groups hope is that together they keep Minnesota on a path of improving air quality. A key factor in the recommendations is that, due to existing federal and state policies, many of the states largest emitters are already regulated and will continue to reduce emissions in the coming years. This leaves much of the greatest potential for additional emissions reductions in the hands of consumers, drivers and small businesses. These sources received a significant focus in the Work Groups recommendations, and many of the recommended approaches provide these groups with significant co-benefits by incentivizing, rather than requiring, actions that reduce emissions. The Work Group also made a special point to consider opportunities to strengthen our local economy and promote the creation of future-oriented, well-paying green jobs through air quality improvement initiatives. Many of the recommendations selected by the Work Group are intended to promote a thriving local business community by providing financial support for actions that improve energy and process efficiency, save small and mid-size business owners money, and drive demand for local jobs manufacturing and installing next-generation technologies. Another consideration was how new initiatives to improve air quality could be targeted such that they simultaneously address existing health disparities, help (rather than hurt) those struggling financially, and promote greater equity. While neither the recommended nor recognized actions were defined in a way that is prescriptive of program design, most of the options endorsed by the Work Group are intentionally scoped to allow resources to be focused on low-income individuals, neighborhoods or groups that bear disproportionate impacts from air pollution.

25

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Given limited resources, and recognizing that the ultimate driver of all air quality standards and programs is concern for human healthparticularly that of vulnerable and already overburdened populationsthe Work Group, and the MPCA in particular, expressed a strong commitment to incorporating issues of equity into the implementation of any of the recommendations. The benefits of improving public health and preventing a nonattainment designation from the EPA for any of the NAAQS are the primary intended benefits for which the recommendations were chosen. The Work Group also gave considerable thought and attention to the role of cobenefits in selecting a package of recommended emission reduction actions. The Work Group recognizes that in many cases the co-benefits of the recommended actions are substantial, and may, depending on ones focus and priorities, dwarf the value of the air quality improvements for which they were selected. There are a number of benefits that apply to every (or nearly every) proposed initiative, and are therefore not listed with each one individually. For example, the benefit of reductions in greenhouse gas emissions is not specifically listed, since it comes along with any strategy that reduces combustion of a carbon-based fuel, along with associated reductions in carbon monoxide emissions and other toxic by-products of combustion. The Work Group recognizes these and the listed co-benefits deserve weight in any decisions related to prioritizing actions for funding and implementation, but have focused any quantitative analysis and descriptions on direct reductions in the targeted pollutants (NOx, VOCs and PM). Other Emissions Reduction Options Included in the Report In addition to making recommendations for action, the Work Group officially recognized the long-term role of ten concurrent activities in maintaining and improving air quality in Minnesota. There is both an immediate and a long-term need to reduce air pollution if we are to continue to not only stay in compliance with federal standards, but to provide leadership nationally in addressing air quality challenges in innovative and cost-effective ways. Many of the concurrent initiatives described here are related to tackling the long-term challenges of significantly reducing energy use, switching to cleaner sources of energy, and changing driving habits in a way that reverses prior trends towards ever-increasing vehicle miles travelled. The social and environmental reasons for engaging in these activities are numerous, and in many cases air quality is not the primary driver for action, but over time these types of increasing efficiencies will be necessary components of any strategy to continue to reduce emissions. There were also seven actions, programs or policies that the TWGs developed, but which the Work Group did not come to consensus on. While not recommended at this time, these ideas are included in this report with the understanding that they could be revisited by future stakeholder groups in the event of changes to the severity of our air quality challenges or status in relation to federal standards.

26

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Protecting and Improving Minnesotas Air Quality: Recommended Actions


The Working Group of Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue supports the creation or expansion of the following initiatives for the purpose of directly maintaining and improving Minnesotas air quality and avoiding the costs associated with falling into nonattainment with federal air quality standards for ozone and fine particulates (PM2.5). Area Source Recommended Actions Education and Outreach to Reduce VOC Emissions from Small to Mid-sized Businesses Type of Initiative: Education & Outreach; Technical Support Description: Expand and support existing outreach and education activities aimed at small and medium-sized businesses on the use of low-VOC solvents and products. As an example, coordinate with local governments, chambers of commerce and others to conduct outreach to cleaning companies, encouraging them to switch to cleaning solvents with a lower VOC content. Impacted Sources: Small to medium-sized businesses that use solvents and products that contain VOCs. Pollutants Reduced: VOCs Cost Effectiveness: N/A Co-benefits: Improves indoor air quality Enhances worker safety and health for those using solvents Provides localized benefits to those living near high-emitting commercial and industrial facilities Equipment Exchange for Landscaping Equipment With Small Engines Type of Initiative: Voluntary Incentive Program; Education & Outreach Description: Offer a cash rebate to individuals and services companies to retire and replace old, high-polluting lawn and garden equipment and other small engines with new low- or noemissions equipment. Any financial incentives should be supported by education and outreach activities explaining the importance of limiting combustion activity on air quality alert days and by the promotion of

27

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

model contract language encouraging landscaping services companies to adopt air quality best management practices. Impacted Sources: Users of lawnmowers, leaf blowers, snow blowers, and other landscaping equipment that contains small engines. This includes both residential users and companies that utilize such equipment for commercial landscaping. Pollutants Reduced: VOCs & NOx Cost Effectiveness:46 Assume a $100 credit per piece of equipment changed out (standard for other programs). Reductions range between 8 and 19 lbs VOC/year per piece of equipment (NOx reductions are much lower at ~0.5 lbs/year). The replacement of every 1000 gas mowers with non-motorized mowers would reduce VOC emissions by 9.8 tons (~$10,000/ton VOC). VOCs: $10,000 $25,000/ton NOx: ~$400,000/ton Co-benefits: Creates local manufacturing jobs Enhances worker safety and health for those using equipment for extended periods Model Landscaping Services Contract Type of Initiative: Model Contract or Policy (Voluntary Adoption) Description: Create a state-supported model contract for voluntary use by public or private institutions to reduce the air quality impacts of their landscaping services. The model contract would encourage activities that limit air emissions, such as suggesting a preferred equipment type or age, limiting usage times or days, or providing a menu of air quality best management practices. It would mutually support any equipment exchange and education program(s) targeting the landscaping services sector. Impacted Sources: Commercial service providers that use lawnmowers, leaf blowers, snow blowers, and other landscaping equipment that contains small engines. Pollutants Reduced: VOCs & NOx Cost Effectiveness: N/A Program Costs: <0.5 FTE (to draft and support the model contract)

46

Maryland Department of Environment. 2012. Cash for Clippers and the Great Lawnmower exchange data. http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/

28

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Co-benefits: Enhances worker safety and health for those using equipment for extended periods State Matching Fund for Area Source Reduction Projects Type of Initiative: Voluntary Incentive Program Description: Create a state fund to support the implementation of pollution reduction projects at area sources (small, widespread, stationary sources). The fund would provide financial incentivesin the form of competitively awarded matching grantsfor small businesses to install pollution control equipment or to switch to processes that reduce air pollution. These small sources typically are not required to have a state- or federally-issued air emission permit. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that they are an important part of overall air quality, particularly in urban areas. Impacted Sources: Small businesses would apply for the funding. The types of sources that are envisioned as participating in this program are dry cleaners, restaurants, bakeries, autobody shops, printers/graphic arts services, etc. Other types of projects that could be considered include (but are not limited to) the following: Equipment swaps or emission reduction equipment for combustion devices Boilers Heaters Dehydrators Steam generators Process Heaters Ovens Internal Combustion Engines Dryers Stationary Gas Turbines Process improvement or control equipment for specialized industrial processes Reduction of Animal Matter Asphalt/Concrete Operations Flares Nut Hulling and Shelling Operations Lime Kilns Material Screening/Shaking Operations Glass Melting Furnaces Tub Grinding Brewing Abrasive Blasting Sand and Gravel Operations Fireworks Residential and commercial emissions control equipment or solvent swaps Residential Furnaces Graphic Arts Auto Body Shops Commercial Charbroiling Increased Vapor Recovery at Gas Stations Residential and Commercial Water Heaters

29

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Pollutants Reduced: Depending on the sources, a variety of pollutants could be reduced. This program would particularly target reductions in VOCs, NOx, and direct PM2.5. Cost Effectiveness:47 General facility modernization (ensure facilities upgrade to best available control technology with retrofitting & equipment replacement): NOx: $10,000 $17,000/ton VOCs: $10,000/ton PM: $19,000/ton Install a filter at a restaurant operating an under-fired grill: PM: $8,400/ton Switch any business operating ovens, dryers, furnaces, or incinerators to low NOx burners: NOx: $10,000/ton (average) Change natural gas-fired fan furnaces out for low-NOx burners: NOx: $10,000 $16,000/ton These numbers are based on the full cost of installation, not a specified level of matching funds. Co-benefits: Creates jobs Supports small business Improves indoor air quality Enhances worker safety and health for those using solvents Provides localized benefits to those living near high-emitting commercial and industrial facilities Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Recommended Actions Air Quality Improvements and Urban Heat Island Mitigation Through Urban Forestry Type of Initiative: Infrastructure Investment; Education & Outreach Description: Strengthen and maintain the Twin Cities Metro Areas urban forests (including tree planting, tree maintenance, tree removal, and involvement of community members in preserving and increasing urban trees). Efforts would be most successful if they also include a plan to measure and assess the current state of the Twin Cities Metro Areas urban tree canopy and to model the impact of the current and potential scenarios on air quality and urban temperatures.

47

South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2007. Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan. http://www.aqmd.gov/aqmp/

30

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

The annual mean air temperature of a city with 1,000,000 people or more can be 1.8 5.4F (1 3C) warmer than its surroundings. In the evening, the difference can be as high as 22F (12C). Increased air temperature can have a significant impact on air quality by increasing formation of ozone and particulate matter. Higher air temperatures can also lead to increased demand for air conditioning, resulting in greater air emissions from electricity generation. Trees can also remove air pollutants already emitted/formed. Opportunities to reduce the urban heat island through the use of green roofs, cool roofs, and cool pavements should also be assessed, including the role of state and local governments in promoting this type of infrastructure through incentives, policies and ordinances. Impacted Sources: Electric utilities and their customers (through reduction in summer energy use) Pollutants Reduced: A 2010 USDA Forest Service study,48 which includes Minnesota, reports the following air quality benefits for the estimated 137,000,000 existing urban or community trees in Minnesota: Air Pollutant O3 NO2 PM10 SO2 CO Total Quantity Removed 8,160 metric tons/year 3,555 metric tons/year 3,063 metric tons/year 486 metric tons/year 500 metric tons/year 15,760 metric tons/year

Another recent USDA Forest Service study, Assessing Urban Forest Effects and Values: Minneapolis Urban Forest, estimates that the urban forest (trees and shrubs) in the City of Minneapolis alone removes 384 tons of air pollutants each year. According to the study, pollution removal was greatest for PM10, followed by O3, NO2, SO2, and CO. 49 Cost Effectiveness: Over the lifetime of the trees:50 PM10, O3, NO2, SO2 (aggregated): ~$6,600/ton Co-benefits: Reduces energy use (and associated benefits)
48

Nowak, David J.; Greenfield, Eric. 2010. Urban and Community Forests of the North Central West Region. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/gtr/gtr_nrs56.pdf
49

Nowak, David J.; Hoehn, Robert E. III; Crane, Daniel E.; Stevens, Jack C.; Walton, Jeffrey T. 2006. Assessing urban forest effects and values, Minneapolis' urban forest. Resour. Bull. NE-166. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station. http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/23593
50

Based on ibid. and assuming that trees live an average of 50 years and cost $100 each to plant. This looks only at the benefit of pollutant deposition and removal and does not count any urban heat island mitigation benefits.

31

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Lowers risk of heat-related illnesses and deaths Controls and retains storm water (and associated improvements to water quality) Improves aesthetics and quality of life Increases property values Reduces noise levels Provides wildlife habitat Sequesters/stores carbon Reduces crime

Expand Minnesota Green Corps to Help Local Governments Achieve Energy Conservation Goals in Public Facilities Type of Initiative: Education & Outreach; Technical Support Description: Increase the number of Minnesota GreenCorps members who are placed with Minnesota local governments to carry out energy conservation projects for non-residential buildings. Minnesota GreenCorps is an AmeriCorps program coordinated by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Members conduct focused and measurable activities over an 11month period at competitively selected host sites. Each Minnesota GreenCorps Energy Conservation member provides benchmarking data entry and analysis for the host sites facilities and/or those of related entities, and helps to institutionalize the benchmarking process within the organization. Buildings that consistently benchmark energy performance save energy, according to an analysis by the EPA Energy Star Program. Public sector buildings present an important opportunity to improve energy efficiency and conservation. A key barrier is that local government personnel often lack the time to advance energy projects that involve benchmarking past energy usage, seeking bids from qualified energy service providers, arranging financing, awarding contracts, and monitoring project implementation. Minnesota GreenCorps Energy Conservation members can add capacity to local governments with limited staffing resources. Impacted Sources: Local government buildings and the electricity generation facilities and other utilities that serve them. Pollutants Reduced: NOx & SO2 Cost Effectiveness: Energy projects implemented during a Minnesota GreenCorps service year provide ongoing annual savings for the host site. Estimates of cost per ton assume: 1. The additional cost incurred by the State is $20,000 for each member service term (therefore the given cost effectiveness is for State of Minnesota costs only). 2. An effective useful life (EUL), the point at which half the installed measures are assumed

32

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

to have failed, of seven years.51 3. Each Minnesota GreenCorps Energy Conservation member will save a host site 100,000 KWh (100 MWh) per year (on average) over the effective useful life. 4. This energy would not otherwise be saved because it is unlikely that local government staff would be available to benchmark historical energy use or move projects forward. 5. Emissions rates are the 2009 Regional Average Emission Rates for the Midwest Reliability Organizations service region.52 SO2: ~$6,500/ton NOx: ~$13,000/ton PM2.5: ~$261,000/ton Aggregated: ~$4,300/ton Co-benefits: Reduces energy use and associated benefits Saves host local governments money on staffing and ongoing energy savings Provides experiential training and mentoring to a new generation of energy conservation and environmental professionals Increases public sector employee knowledge of and engagement in energy conservation and efficiency Keeps more Minnesota taxpayer dollars in the local economy Helps expedite needed local government infrastructure projects Mobile Diesel Recommended Actions Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Grants Type of Initiative: Voluntary Financial Incentives Description: Offer a rebate to cover a portion of the costs associated with the installation of infrastructure to dispense alternative fuels53, provided that the equipment is available to the
51

Roberts, John and Tso, Bing, SBW Consulting, Inc. 2010. Do Savings from Retro-commissioning Last? Results from an Effective Useful Life Study. Presented at the 2010 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings.
52

RE: In the Matter of Disclosure of Environmental Information to Utility Customers MPUC Docket No.: E,G999/CI-00-1343; Updated Emission Averages letter from Anne Claflin to Dr. Burl W. Haar, Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, May 22, 2012.
53

The following fuels are defined as alternative fuels by the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 1992: pure methanol, ethanol, and other alcohols; blends of 85 percent or more of alcohol with gasoline; natural gas and liquid fuels domestically produced from natural gas; liquefied petroleum gas (propane); coal-derived liquid fuels; hydrogen; electricity; pure biodiesel (B100); fuels, other than alcohol, derived from biological materials; and P-Series fuels. In addition, the U.S. Department of Energy may designate other fuels as alternative fuels, provided that the fuel is substantially nonpetroleum, yields substantial energy security benefits, and offers substantial environmental benefits. For more information, see the EPAct website. (Reference 42 U.S. Code 13211)

33

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

public. The expense of installing refueling infrastructure has the potential to inhibit adoption of alternative fuel vehicles or to diminish the associated return on investment for fleet operators. Decreasing infrastructure costs and increasing the number of publicly available refueling sites reduces this barrier to adoption for fleet operators and makes alternatively fueled options more feasible for anyone purchasing a vehicle. Impacted Sources: Owners of vehicle fleets containing diesel and/or gasoline-powered vehicles and (to a lesser extent) individual vehicle owners. Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & NOx (see relative reductions by fuel type under Alternative Fuel Vehicle Incentive for Fleets) Cost Effectiveness: Estimated infrastructure costs (installed) vary greatly by fuel type: Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE): $5,000-10,000 Biofuel Blender Pump (ethanol or biodiesel): $50,000 Propane site: $40,00054 Natural Gas site: $400,000 $1,500,000 For alternative fuel non-transit vehicles including electric, CNG, LPG vehicles and fueling stations (assuming a 4:1 weighting of NOx to VOCs):55 Median cost: $20,800 Range: $4,700 $37,000 It is important to note that these numbers are estimated for a combination of vehicle and infrastructure subsidies working in tandem to boost alternative fuel use by fleets, and do not represent estimates related to incentivizing personal ownership or use of alternative fuel vehicles. In addition, cost per ton varies significantly depending on the type of fuel converted from and to, the vehicle weight class, age/condition of the replaced engine, the amount of the rebate and many other factors. Co-benefits: Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Supports markets for Minnesota biofuels industries (local economy) Alternative Fuel Vehicle Incentive for Fleets Type of Initiative: Voluntary Financial Incentives
54 55

Some propane providers will lease or install the equipment at low or no cost in exchange for the fuel contract.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. The Cost-Effectiveness of Heavy-Duty Diesel Retrofits and Other Mobile Source Emission Reduction Projects and Programs. http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/documents/420b07006.pdf

34

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Description: Offer a rebate to cover a portion of the incremental costs associated with purchasing new fleet vehicles that use alternative fuels. Incremental costs for purchasing alternatively fueled vehicles can range from a few thousand dollars for a light- or medium-duty vehicle to $40,000 or more for a heavy-duty vehicle. A rebate could be used to reduce cost as a barrier to broader adoption of alternative fuel vehicles. The rebate could also apply to engine conversions, if desired. Several other states including Illinois, Texas and Oklahoma have implemented rebate programs of this type, which could be used as models.56 Impacted Sources: Owners of vehicle fleets containing diesel and/or gasoline-powered vehicles. Such a rebate could also be made available to individual vehicle owners. Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & NOx Tailpipe Emission Changes with Alternative Fuels Fuel Type Ethanol (E85)57 Biodiesel (B20)58 Natural Gas59 Propane60 Electric NOx Emissions Reductions 19% to 28% 0% 17% to 80% 20% Up to 100% PM Emissions Reductions 34% 12% 60% to 96% 80% Up to 100%

Cost Effectiveness: For alternative fuel non-transit vehicles including electric, CNG, LPG vehicles and fueling stations (assuming a 4:1 weighting of NOx to VOCs):61
56

A program in Illinois offers an incentive (for fleets and individuals) of up to 80 percent of the incremental costs, with a maximum amount of $4,000 (or if no comparable vehicle model exists, 10 percent of the vehicle cost). Texas has a variety of rebate programs, depending on fuel type, location and other criteria. Rebates appear to range from 50 to 90 percent of incremental costs. Rebates are capped to limit the amount to no more than $10,000/ton of NOx reduced (based on vehicles replaced and expected use). Incentives also exist for offsetting refueling infrastructure costs (for example, $100,000 for installing a natural gas refueling site, but it must be available in some way to the public). Oklahoma has a rebate for 50 percent of the incremental costs of a natural gas, propane or hydrogen vehicle (or if no comparable vehicle model exists, 10 percent of the vehicle cost, with a cap of $1,500). They also have a zero interest loan available, up to $300,000, for the installation of refueling infrastructure, repayable over seven years.
57

National Renewable Energy Lab. 2009. Effect of E85 on Tailpipe Emissions from Light-Duty Vehicles. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/pdfs/technical_paper_feb09.pdf
58

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, October 2002, A Comprehensive Analysis of Biodiesel Impacts on Exhaust Emissions Draft Technical Report Assessment and Standards Division Office of Transportation and Air Quality. EPA420-P-02-001.
59

M. Rood Werpy, D. Santini, A. Burnham, and M. Mintz Center for Transportation Research Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory. August 2010 Natural Gas Vehicles: Status, Barriers and Opportunities. Argonne National Lab, compared with 2007 or older engines. According to the Natural Gas Vehicle Association, natural gas in newer vehicles reduces emissions by 8 54 percent, depending on class, etc.
60

Roush CleanTech: http://www.roushcleantech.com/content/emissions

35

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Median cost: $20,800 Range: $4,700 $37,000/ton Cost per ton varies significantly depending on the type of fuel converted from and to, the vehicle weight class, age/condition of the replaced engine, the amount of the rebate and many other factors. Rebates can be limited to projects that come in under a specified cost per ton of NOx threshold. Co-benefits: Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Supports markets for Minnesota biofuels industries (local economy) Reduces operating costs (depending on the fuel switched from/to) Education and Outreach to Reduce Truck Idling Type of Initiative: Education & Outreach Description: Develop an educational campaign to reduce truck idle time during loading and unloading periods. Materials would target fleet/truck owners and operators, in addition to owners/managers of retail stores that have loading docks or receive major shipments by truck. Impacted Sources: Private fleet operators/fleets, retail stores that have loading docks or receive major shipments by truck Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & NOx Cost Effectiveness: N/A Program Costs: <.5 FTE (to develop materials and conduct outreach) Co-benefits: Saves money spent on fuel Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children) Provides health benefits for truck drivers and workers at retail facilities where significant amounts of loading or unloading takes place Incentives for Diesel Engine Retrofit/Repower/Rebuild/Replace Type of Initiative: Voluntary Financial Incentives
61

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. The Cost-Effectiveness of Heavy-Duty Diesel Retrofits and Other Mobile Source Emission Reduction Projects and Programs. http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/documents/420b07006.pdf

36

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Description: Create a fund to provide financial incentives to fleet and equipment owners to invest in pollution control or reduction equipment or to replace older equipment with newer, less-polluting technology. This includes retrofits for a wide range of diesel engines (private, government, on-road, off-road, stationary, etc.), as well as engine improvements or replacement with newer, cleaner equipment. A retrofit typically involves the addition of an after-treatment device to remove emissions from the engine exhaust, improving the engine to meet newer emission standards, or replacement. Retrofits can be very effective at reducing emissionseliminating up to 90 percent of pollutants in some cases. Many of the effective after-treatment devices require use of ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD). Impacted Sources: Owners/operators of equipment with diesel engines Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & NOx Cost Effectiveness:62 Based on the EPA report, The Cost-Effectiveness of Heavy-Duty Diesel Retrofits and Other Mobile Source Emission Reduction Projects and Programs, which focused primarily on NOx reductions: NOx: $1,900 $19,000/ton (median of $5,950/ton) Study examples included engine upgrades, engine repowers or replacements, cleaner fuels (early use of ultra-low sulfur diesel), emission control technologies, and idle controls. Program Costs: A minimum of $500,000 program funding would justify approximately .75 FTE; funding exceeding $1,000,000 would necessitate approximately 1.25 FTE; every successive $500,000 would add approximately .25 FTE. Co-benefits: Saves vehicle owners money when using technologies that improve engine efficiency Provides localized health benefits to drivers, passengers, and neighborhoods surrounding operating equipment Creates jobs (installing and manufacturing)

62

The Cost-Effectiveness of Heavy-Duty Diesel Retrofits and Other Mobile Source Emission Reduction Projects and Programs, EPA420-B-07-006, May 2007; An Analysis of the Cost-Effectiveness of Reducing Particulate Matter Emissions from Heavy-duty Diesel Engines Through Retrofits, EPA420-S-06-002, March 2006; An Analysis of the Cost-Effectiveness of Reducing Particulate Matter and Nitrogen Oxides Emissions from Heavy-duty Nonroad Diesel Engines Through Retrofits, EPA420-R-07-005, May 2007; U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, SAFETEA-LU Evaluation and Assessment Phase 1, 4 Project Support and Selection Practices that Support Effectiveness, updated May 31, 2012.

37

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Emissions Reduction Guidelines for Public Fleets Type of Initiative: Education & Outreach Description: Develop materials and conduct outreach to state and local government agencies, transit operators, and school districts on how they can reduce emissions from their vehicle fleets (including transit and school buses). Materials would include information on idle-reduction best management practices, suggested idling time limits for drivers, template retrofit/clean diesel fleet standards, etc. Impacted Sources: All public-sector fleet operators/fleets, including transit and school bus fleets Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & NOx Cost Effectiveness: N/A Program Costs: <.5 FTE (to develop materials and conduct outreach) Co-benefits: Saves money spent on fuel Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children) Provides health benefits for bus and equipment operators Model Contract for Public Works Projects Type of Initiative: Model Contract or Policy (Voluntary Adoption); Education & Outreach Description: Develop a model contract for use by public agencies containing emissions performance specifications for projects above a certain size/cost threshold. The model contract could include specifications such as:63 Emissions limits Equipment & vehicle performance requirements A points system that rewards clean diesel equipment & vehicles (which could include alternative fuel options) while remaining consistent with the requirements of best-value contracting Impacted Sources: Public works departments and contractors serving public agencies Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & NOx
63

Cook County Board of Commissioners. 2009. Chapter 30 Environment, Article IX Green Construction, Sections 30-950 through 30-955 http://www.suffredin.org/legislativelibrary/Legislation.asp?LegislationID=475&Library=cook

38

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Cost Effectiveness: N/A Program Costs: <.5 FTE (to develop model policy and conduct outreach) Co-benefits: Savings vehicle owners/operators money when using technologies that improve engine efficiency Provides health benefits for equipment operators Point Source Recommended Actions Air Alert Education and Best Management Practices Outreach Type of Initiative: Education & Outreach Description: Initiate a coordinated outreach and education campaign to promote awareness of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agencys air alert system and increase adoption of emissionsreduction best management practices on air quality alert days. The outreach and education campaign will target major employers, major emissions sources, and property management organizations. The goals are to increase the number of people receiving and acting upon the air alerts and to educate and encourage more organizations to voluntarily implement various emissions-reduction best management practices. Examples of actions that organizations and individuals can take include: Distribute information to citizens and employees via local government/company websites and text alert systems Enable employees to drive less (walk, bike, telecommute, take the bus, car pool, van pool, combine trips and eliminate unnecessary trips, etc.) Refuel vehicles after 6:00 p.m. and do not top off (stop at the click) Avoid use gasoline-powered lawn equipment Keep vehicles and lawn equipment maintained; use the cleanest fuel available Avoid using oil-based paints and stains Save electricity by turning off lights and other equipment Keep electrical equipment clean and maintained (especially refrigerators and freezers) Dont use your fireplace, have bonfires, or burn lawn waste Keep your furnace and other space heaters clean and maintained Impacted Sources: Best management practices can be implemented by both organizations and individuals and can include a variety of behavior changes related to mobile, area and point sources. All actions (as well as program participation) would be voluntary.

39

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Pollutants Reduced: Potential for VOC, NOx, and/or PM reductions from a wide range of activities Cost Effectiveness: N/A Program Costs: <.5 FTE (to develop materials and conduct outreach) Co-benefits: Saves money (and potentially time) for individuals who elect not to engage in certain fuel-consumption activities on air alert days Provides localized heath benefits for vulnerable populations (depending on the practices voluntarily adopted) Stationary Diesel Generator Outreach and Education Type of Initiative: Education & Outreach Description: Establish an outreach and education campaign focused on minimizing stationary diesel generator emissions from routine maintenance testing and operation. This campaign would utilize materials developed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) which provide an overview of environmental and health concerns and recommended management practices for stationary diesel engines. These materials focus on management practices because add-on controls may not be feasible for many facilities because of space constraints or pollutant concentrations emitted by older units. Campaign materials could be distributed through utilities and generator vendors, as well as online through the MPCAs website. Diesel engines used in electricity generation can be large sources of NOx and particulates relative to other types of generation (in terms of lb/MWh).64 In addition, they often have low stacks and poor dispersion. Some of these units are used to ensure a fully redundant power supply, such as at data centers. Many others are for emergency use only or are located at facilities that have a load shedding contract with their local utility in which they agree to reduce their demand for electricity from the grid during peak times. Other uses of stationary diesel engines include fire pumps, water or sewage pumps, and compressors. Because many stationary engines operate during a limited number of hours per year, they tend to last a very long time compared to other types of process equipment. Emissions from routine testing may be the largest volume of pollutants from these units. In January 2013, the EPA finalized amendments to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE), which govern emissions from stationary diesel engines, but these standards may have a limited impact on much of the current fleet of generators. Impacted Sources: Owners and operators of buildings/facilities with diesel generators, including those in the commercial and industrial sectors
64

Depending on patterns and frequency of use.

40

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & NOx Cost Effectiveness: N/A Program Costs: <.5 FTE (to develop additional materials and conduct outreach) Co-benefits: Saves money spent on fuel Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children) Transportation Demand Management & Light Duty Vehicle Recommended Actions Accelerated High-Emitting Vehicle Retirement Type of Initiative: Voluntary Financial Incentives Description: Create a program to identify older high-emitting vehicles and offer cash rebates to retire, scrap and replace them. The effort could include a means test that limits the offer to persons with a household income below a specified level. Given that Minnesota does not have an inspection and maintenance program in place, vehicles can be identified using the on-board diagnostics (OBD II) check engine light, visible emissions (generally a reliable indicator of high emissions rates65), and vehicle age. The program could target low-income drivers and allow participants to self-identify at scheduled events and/or could use a list of candidate vehicles and state-sanctioned salvage yards. Other means of high-emitting vehicle identification, such as a smoking vehicle complaint hotline or remote sensing, would require further exploration and analysis. This program is intended to accelerate fleet turn-over and would eventually result in diminishing returnsonce the majority of vehicles produced prior to the adoption of current emissions standards had been retired it would no longer result in significant reductions. It would therefore have a limited useful life Impacted Sources: Passenger vehicle owners (gasoline-powered) Pollutants Reduced: Emission reduction estimates for the Carl Moyer Voluntary Accelerated Vehicle Retirement (VAVR) program (California) are 78 lb/car VOC, 67 lb/car NOx and 1.1 lb/car PM10 over the assumed 3-year remaining life of each vehicle purchased.66

65

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008. Analysis of Particulate Matter Emissions from Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles in Kansas City. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/emission-factors-research/420r08010.pdf
66

Mark Sulzbach, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency analysis for the MnCAD process.

41

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Number of Vehicles Purchased 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Annual Tons Removed VOCs 7 13 20 26

Annual Tons Removed NOx 6 11 17 22

Annual Tons Removed PM10 0.09 0.18 0.28 0.37

Annual Tons Removed VOC + NOx + PM 14 28 42 56

Total Tons Removed VOC + NOx + PM (3 years) 42 83 125 167

Cost Effectiveness:67 Purchase Price per Vehicle $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 Cost Effectiveness ($/ton NOx) $24,470 $47,999 $71,528 Cost Effectiveness ($/ton VOC) $25,675 $50,363 $75,050 Cost Effectiveness ($/ton PM) $3,710,293 $7,277,883 $10,845,472 Cost Effectiveness ($/ton VOC + NOx + PM) $12,500 $24,500 $36,500

Program Costs: ~.5 FTE per 1000 cars purchased/retired (depending upon how vehicles are identified), plus the cost of promoting the program Co-benefits: Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children) Provides job training opportunities (at state-sanctioned scrap/recycling facilities) Develop the Transit System (Bus and Rail) in the Seven County Metro Region Type of Initiative: Infrastructure Investment Description: Given that approximately a quarter of all NOx and human-caused VOC emissions in Minnesota currently come from gasoline-powered vehicles, decreasing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the metro area will almost certainly be essential to improving and protecting regional air quality over the long-term. Developing a robust local and regional transit system that is both convenient and affordable is a critical component of any strategy to reduce VMT within the region. Impacted Sources: Owners/operators of personal passenger vehicles (light-duty vehicles) Pollutants Reduced: NOx & VOCs Assuming the full build-out of the regional transit system according to the Metropolitan Councils 2030 Transportation Policy Plan*:68
67

Mark Sulzbach, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency analysis for the MnCAD process.

42

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Air Pollutant NOx VOCs PM10 PM2.5

Annual Emissions Reductions (tons)69 412.9 80.4 6.0 5.7

Estimated Annual Emissions Reductions (tons)70 Arterial Bus Transitway Corridors NOx 52.6 VOCs 78.5 PM2.5 0.3 *These numbers are meant to be illustrative of the emissions reduction potential associated with transit, not prescriptive of system design. Cost Effectiveness: N/A The costs associated with transit construction and operations are substantial, and attributing a subset of that cost to the goal of air quality improvement is beyond the scope of this report. Co-benefits: Stimulates local economic development Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country and associated energy security benefits Reduces road congestion, if resulting in significant behavior changes Saves users money on gas, parking and vehicle maintenance Improves public health through increased walking and bicycling to transit Reduces drive time and associated quality of life benefits Expand Employer-Subsidized Transit Pass Program Type of Initiative: State Policy

68

Metropolitan Council. 2030 Transportation Policy Plan. http://www.metrocouncil.org/planning/transportation/TPP/2010/index.htm


69

Assumes an 80 percent increase in annual transit ridership from 91 million rides in 2011 to 164 million rides in 2031 (based on Metropolitan Council research and personal communication from M. Filipi, October 18, 2012, Change in Annual Emissions for Transit Initiative).
70

Assumes that, on average, the arterial bus rapid transit corridors reduce daily (weekday) VMT by 25,500 vehiclemiles each and uses an annualization factor of 300 (as opposed to 365, to account for the lower ridership on weekends) to estimate an annual VMT reduction of 68,850,000 (based on Metropolitan Council research and personal communication from M. Filipi, November 15, 2012, Re: Transit Initiative). Emissions calculations are based on average emissions factors given in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008. Average Annual Emissions and Fuel Consumption for Gasoline-Fueled Passenger Cars and Light Trucks (EPA-420-F-08-024). http://www.epa.gov/otaq/consumer/420f08024.pdf

43

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Description: Convert the existing transit pass tax credit to a quarterly refund mechanism in order to enable program participation by all employers in the private sector and allow more employees to benefit from discounted transit passes. Metro Transits Metropass Program, along with similar programs, allow employers to buy discounted transit passes and sell them to their employees at the discounted cost. Some employers also cover a portion of the discounted cost of the transit passes for their employees. In 2000, the Legislature established a tax credit for businesses that help their employees with the purchase of transit passes. Under the Transit Pass Credit for Employers, businesses can deduct 30 percent of what they contribute to the purchase of the passes from the amounts they owe for individual or corporate income tax. By changing the tax credit to a quarterly rebate you enable program expansion in two ways: First, it would allow government and nonprofit employers (which do not pay income tax) to take advantage of the program. At present, nonprofits in Minnesota employ more than 298,000 individuals, almost 12 percent of the states total workforce, and just over 50 percent of them are located in the Twin Cities, including four of the five largest private sector employers in Saint Paul. Second, the incentive for employers to participate would be increased because they could receive the rebate on a quarterly basis, rather than only when tax returns are filed. Impacted Sources: Individuals who commute by passenger vehicle (light-duty vehicle) Pollutants Reduced: VOCs & NOx A 20 percent increase in employee participation would mean an additional 6,700 riders in the Metropass Program and would result in a daily reduction of about 400 pounds of VOCs, about 450 pounds of NOx, and 1.5 pounds of PM2.5.71 On an annual basis, this would amount to reductions of 50 tons of VOCs, 56 tons of NOx, and 0.19 tons of PM2.5. Cost Effectiveness: Based on the assumption that the change from a tax credit to a refund mechanism results in a 20 percent increase in participation: VOCs: $10,000/ton NOx: $8,930/ton Co-benefits: Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country and associated energy security benefits
71

If each new riders daily home-to-work commute trip were assumed to be 10 miles in length, a 20 percent increase in program participation would result in a reduction of 134,000 vehicle miles/day. Applying a factor of 1.05, the average number of people in vehicles making commute trips, drops the reduction to about 127,500 vehicle miles/day and almost 32,000,000 fewer vehicle miles traveled. This also assumes per mile emission rates of 0.049383 ounces/mile for VOCs, 0.056438 ounces/mile for NOx, 0.000192 ounces/mile of PM2.5, and 1.033 pounds/mile for CO2.

44

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Reduces road congestion if widely adopted Saves employees money on gas, parking and vehicle maintenance

High-Emitting Vehicle Repair Rebates Type of Initiative: Voluntary Financial Incentives Description: Create a program to identify likely high-emitting vehicles and offer cash rebates to repair emissions-related malfunctions. The effort could include a means test that limits the offer to persons with a household income below a specified level. Given that Minnesota does not have an inspection and maintenance program in place, vehicles can be identified using the on-board diagnostics (OBD II) check engine light and/or visible emissions (generally a reliable indicator of high emissions rates72), particularly for vehicles older than 1996 which are not equipped with OBD II capabilities. The program could allow participants to self-identify at scheduled events and/or could use a list of candidate vehicles and state-sanctioned repair facilities. Other means of high-emitting vehicle identification, such as a smoking vehicle complaint hotline or remote sensing, would require further exploration and analysis. Impacted Sources: Passenger vehicle owners (gasoline-powered) Pollutants Reduced: VOCs & NOx The total quantity of emission reductions achieved would be dependent upon the system for identifying candidate vehicles through remote sensing and or complaint follow-up and rate of participation, which will be dependent upon reimbursement amount and the level of promotion of the effort. Cost Effectiveness:73 NOx: $37,125/ton HC (including VOCs): $20,048/ton Aggregated: $12,948/ton This is based on the cost of rebates for participants and does not include program costs or reductions for evaporative or particulate emissions due to the inability to quantify those emissions.
72

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008. Analysis of Particulate Matter Emissions from Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles in Kansas City. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/emission-factors-research/420r08010.pdf
73

San Joaquin Valley Clean Air Now. 2007. The Valley Clean Air Now Tune In & Tune Up 2007 Program Final Report. Calculations used in this report assume average emissions reductions per repaired vehicle of 27 pounds (0.0135 tons) and that the repairs were effective for 10,000 miles. http://www.valleycan.org/_pdfs/titu_2007_ArvinFinalReportJuly10-2008.pdf

45

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Program Costs: ~.5 FTE Co-benefits: Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children) Provides job training opportunities (within state-sanctioned repair programs) Infrastructure & Outreach to Expand Electric Vehicle Use in Minnesota Type of Initiative: Infrastructure Investment; Technical Assistance; Education & Outreach Description: Install more electric vehicle charging stations at public facilities such as park and rides, libraries, parks, stadiums, parking ramps/lots, etc. and provide technical assistance to public and private organizations in support of electric vehicle adoption and charging. Outreach and technical assistance can be targeted to promote installation of charging stations at retail and food & beverage establishments and local government facilities, as well as support other organizations wishing to offer workplace charging. It can also include outreach to public and private sector fleet managers, targeted business clusters (delivery businesses, parts runners, etc.), and those serving the personal vehicle sector such as auto dealers and car-sharing programs. The goal of this enhanced public charging capacity, technical assistance and outreach would be to help the state reach a greater level of electric vehicle use compared to what the market will produce on its own. Impacted Sources: Owners of passenger vehicles (light-duty) that could be replaced by EVs Pollutants Reduced: VOCs & NOx According to the Electric Power Research Institute, the air quality benefits of hitting high-end estimates of electric vehicle market penetration versus the low-end estimates scenario:74 Year 2015 2020 2025 Annual Air Pollutant Emissions Reduction (in tons) No. of EVs NOx PM2.5 SO2 VOCs 15,000 (low) 289 10 2 241 30,000 (high) 578 21 3 481 62,000 (low) 1,194 43 6 995 190,000 (high) 3,658 133 20 3,048 165,000 (low) 3,177 115 17 2,647 572,000 (high) 11,013 399 60 9,178 GHG 29,700 59,400 122,760 376,200 326,700 1,132,560

74

The GREET Model was used to determine greenhouse gas emissions calculations based on the current grid mix in Minnesota. Additional reductions due to use of solar or 100 percent wind-generated electricity for powering stations were not factored in. The 2008 EPA National Emissions Inventory Database was used for NOx, PM, SO2, and VOC reduction measurements. Potential increased emissions at utility power plants due to more electricity use were not factored in. Charging stations powered by solar or 100 percent wind generated electricity would not increase utility emissions. Projected vehicle numbers are from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).

46

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Cost Effectiveness:75 N/A Co-benefits: Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Regional Telework Program Type of Initiative: Education & Outreach Description: Implement a regional telework program through a public-private partnership that provides education, training, legal advice, and other support (such as small grants for equipment) to employers to implement or expand telework programs at their workplace. Approximately 2,100 employees from 48 Minnesota employers participating in a telework program in the Twin Cities region (between 2009 and 2011) worked remotely between one and two days per week, which avoided over 7,000,000 vehicle miles travelled per year.76 With the investment of additional resources this program could potentially be expanded to other employers in the area. Impacted Sources: Individuals who commute by passenger vehicle (light-duty) Pollutants Reduced: VOCs & NOx The estimated emissions reductions per vehicle mile avoided are as follows:77 VOCs: 1.034 g/mi NOx: 0.693 g/mi PM2.5: 0.0041 g/mi Cost Effectiveness: Based on the results of past programs and estimates of emissions reduced per avoided vehicle mile travelled: NOx: $40,650/ton VOCs: $46,300/ton Aggregate: $21,600/ton
75

No studies could be found that estimate cost-effectiveness of publically accessible infrastructure alone or effects of public charging stations on private vehicle ownership. For alternative fuel non-transit vehicles including electric, CNG, LPG vehicles and fueling stations (assuming a 4:1 weighting of NOx to VOCs), median cost is $20,800, with a range of $4,700 to $37,000. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. The Cost-Effectiveness of HeavyDuty Diesel Retrofits and Other Mobile Source Emission Reduction Projects and Programs. http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/documents/420b07006.pdf
76

University of Minnesota, Humphrey School of Public Affairs, E-Workplace Exceeding Expectations: A New Way to Stimulate the Economy. http://www.eworkplace-mn.com/
77

U.S. EPA. Sample Calculation of Emission Reductions and Fuel Savings from a Carpool Program. EPA420-F08-028

47

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Co-benefits: Societal Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Reduces road congestion (if widely adopted) Increases economic opportunity for people with disabilities Employers Increases employee productivity Enhances recruitment and retention Employees Reduces drive time Saves money (on gas, parking and vehicle maintenance) Enhances quality of life and better work/life balance Wood Smoke Recommended Actions Model Ordinance to Reduce Emissions Impacts from Hydronic Heaters Type of Initiative: Model Contract or Policy (Voluntary Adoption) Description: Develop a model ordinance for local governments to voluntarily adopt that addresses emissions from hydronic heaters (wood-burning heaters used for space and water heating). As traditional sources of fuel have increased in price, the purchase and use of wood-fired hydronic heaters (also called outdoor wood boilers or outdoor wood heaters, although they can be located inside) has increased.78 Hydronic heaters can be highly polluting and are currently unregulated on a statewide level in Minnesota. To control emissions from these units, a dozen or so states and many local governments (at least 40 in Minnesota) have passed regulations outlining emissions limits, set-back distances from property lines or buildings, and stack height. EPA supported the development of a model rule/ordinance for hydronic heaters.79 The EPA recommends that areas consider adopting the model rule or a more stringent approach tailored to the specific needs of the community. Impacted Sources: Anyone using or considering using a hydronic heater within a local jurisdiction adopting the model ordinance Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & VOCs

78

MPCA, DNR, and USFS. 2008. Residential Fuelwood Assessment for the State of Minnesota (2007 2008 Heating Season). http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/forestry/um/residentialfuelwoodassessment07_08.pdf
79

Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) Model Rule http://www.nescaum.org/topics/outdoor-hydronic-heaters

48

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

MPCA estimates of annual average statewide emissions of VOCs, NOx and PM2.5 from residential outdoor hydronic heaters. The estimated numbers of hydronic heaters used in each of the five forest survey regions of the state are also shown in this table:80
Minnesota Residential Wood Burning - Equipment Used and 2008 Emissions (Draft) Statewide Annual Emissions Numbers of Equipment Used Statewide and per Forest Region (Tons in 2008) State Aspen Central Northern Total Birch Hardwoods Metro Pine Prairie PM2.5 NOx VOC 29,000 1,200 13,000 NA 8,300 7,100 3,800 250 1,600

Equipment Category

Outdoor Hydronic Heaters

Cost Effectiveness: N/A Program Costs: ~.5 FTE Co-benefits: Reduces hazardous air pollutants Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children) Study Options for Coordination of Seven County Metro Area Brush Management Systems Type of Initiative: Model Contract or Policy (Voluntary Adoption); Outreach & Education Description: Study and develop a plan for possible coordination of brush management systems and resident education with the goal of reducing back yard brush burning. One of the drivers for back yard burning may be the lack of a coordinated and flexible system around brush collection. Impacted Sources: Any person removing and disposing of residential brush or wood waste Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & VOCs It is unknown how much backyard burning is due to inadequate or poorly utilized local brush management systems. Cost Effectiveness: N/A Program Costs: ~1 FTE (for program coordinationmore would be needed if new collection systems were established) Co-benefits: Reduces hazardous air pollutants Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children)

80

Calculated by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency based on ibid.

49

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Wood Stove/Fireplace Change-outs Type of Initiative: Voluntary Financial Incentives; Education & Outreach Description: Create a program to provide incentives for homeowners to replace their old, high polluting wood stove, fireplace, fireplace insert, pellet stove, hydronic heater or forced air furnace with a natural gas or propane alternative. In other states this has generally been accomplished by offering a direct subsidy, in the form of a rebate, for the purchase of new natural gas or propane equipment. This program can be supported by an education and outreach campaign that encourages using clean-burning alternatives to wood and raises awareness about the health concerns of wood smoke. Impacted Sources: Anyone using residential wood-burning equipment covered by the changeout program Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & VOCs MPCA estimates of annual average statewide emissions of VOCs, NOx and PM2.5 from all types of residential wood burning equipment are shown in this table. The estimated numbers of each category of equipment used in each of the five forest survey regions are indicated in the table:81
Minnesota Residential Wood Burning - Equipment Used and 2008 Emissions (Draft) Numbers of Equipment Used Statewide and per Forest Region State Total 160,000 110,000 55,000 37,000 7,700 35,000 36,000 14,000 29,000 14,000 410,000 910,000 Aspen Birch 7,300 26,000 4,300 4,700 1,200 13,000 1,600 790 1,200 790 22,000 82,000 7,700 6,400 12,000 13,000 6,400 81,000 200,000 220,000 420,000 23,000 Central Hardwoods 22,000 30,000 23,000 3,900 Northern Pine 5,200 19,000 3,900 2,600 870 7,400 4,400 1,300 8,300 3,000 50,000 110,000 7,100 4,100 41,000 100,000 3,800 970 2,400
17,000

Statewide Annual Emissions (Tons in 2008)

Equipment Category Fireplace Non-Certified Woodstove Non-Certified Fireplace Insert EPA-Certified Catalytic Woodstove EPA-Certified Catalytic Fireplace Insert EPA-Certified Non Catalytic Woodstove EPA-Certified Non Catalytic Fireplace Insert Pellet Stove Outdoor Hydronic Heater Indoor Forced Air Furnace Fire Pit/Chimenea/Fire Ring Grand Total

Metro 110,000 18,000 14,000 23,000 4,600

Prairie 9,100 18,000 10,000 3,000 1,000 7,100 1,000

PM2.5 1,400 5,000 1,100 1,200 100 1,000 310 36

NOx 160 450 100 110 10 120 36 45 250 63 270


1,600

VOC 1,100 8,600 2,000 850 76 620 190 0.48 1,600 410 1,900
17,000

81

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 2012. As calculated with data from Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and U.S. Forest Service (USFS). 2008. Residential Fuelwood Assessment for the State of Minnesota (2007 2008 Heating Season). http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/forestry/um/residentialfuelwoodassessment07_08.pdf

50

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Emissions avoided for every 100 stoves replaced with a cleaner burning stove:82 VOCs: 7 tons/year (7.79 tons/year by MPCA Estimate) PM2.5: 3.5 tons/year (4.50 tons/year by MPCA Estimate) Cost Effectiveness:83 Put a gas fireplace insert into a wood-burning fireplace PM2.5: >$11,000/ton (2012 dollars) Replace an uncertified wood stove with a new gas stove PM2.5: $7,200/ton (2010 dollars) Co-benefits: Reduces hazardous air pollutants Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children) Wood Smoke Reduction Education and Outreach Type of Initiative: Education & Outreach Description: Create an educational campaign to motivate behavior change to reduce emissions from wood smoke. The campaign should focus on the negative health impacts of wood smoke and encourage usage of alternative fuels. Such a campaign would mutually reinforce a wood stove change-out and incentive program. Impacted Sources: Anyone using residential wood-burning equipment or engaging in open burning of wood Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & VOCs Residential wood smoke contributes approximately 28 percent of direct combustion PM2.5 emissions (2005, both metro and statewide) or 8.4 percent of total PM2.5 emissions (18,103 ton/yr, 2008). This would address an unknown portion of this total. Cost Effectiveness: N/A Program Costs: ~.75 FTE Co-benefits: Reduces hazardous air pollutants Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children)
82

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. Guidance for Quantifying and Using Emission Reductions from Voluntary Woodstove Changeout Programs in State Implementation Plans. http://www.epa.gov/burnwise/pdfs/guidance_quantfying_jan.pdf
83

Strategies for Reducing Residential Woodsmoke, Appendix D, EPA-456/B-13-001, revised March 2013. http://www.epa.gov/burnwise/pdfs/strategies.pdf

51

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Protecting and Improving Minnesotas Air Quality: Recognizing Other Important Initiatives
The Work Group of Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue agreed by consensus to recognize the importance of the following concurrent initiatives in maintaining and improving air quality. The Work Group understands that maintaining and improving air quality in Minnesota is both a short-term and long-term process. The group recognizes the avoided costs and public health benefits associated with the following initiatives due to their impact on air quality. B20 Biodiesel Blend Mandate Type of Initiative: State Policy (Existing) Description: Minnesota lawmakers have set the state on a path of increasing use of biodiesel blended into all on-road diesel fuel sold in the state. Currently all #2 diesel fuel sold in Minnesota contains a blend of five percent biodiesel (B5); use of biodiesel in #1 diesel is waived until 2015. By 2015, Minnesota vehicles are scheduled to be using 20 percent biodiesel (B20) from April through October, returning to B5 during colder months. Impacted Sources: Owners of diesel vehicles or vehicle fleets containing diesel vehicles Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & VOCs Assuming an estimated 600,000,000 gallons annual use in Minnesota: Annual Emissions Reductions from Biodiesel (tons)84 Air Pollutant B5 B10* B20* B100 101 159 271 1,512 PM 3.1% 5.0% 8.5% 47.2% 137 214 357 1,691 Hydrocarbon 5.4% 8.5% 14.2% 67.4% 1,120 1,769 3,007 16,682 CO 3.2% 5.1% 8.7% 48.1% 66 106 185 1,323 SO2 5.0% 8.0% 14.0% 100.0% * B10 and B20 assume a return to B5 from November through March Cost Effectiveness: N/A Biodiesels impact on the price of diesel is heavily influenced by a variety of factors, including on-and-off again federal tax incentives and the Renewable Fuels Standard. Provisions in the law enable state agency commissioners to delay implementing an increase in the biodiesel blend if there are concerns about economic impacts or the availability of biodiesel.
84

National Biodiesel Board, U.S. EPA http://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/state

52

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Co-benefits: Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Supports markets for Minnesota biofuels industries (local economy) Benchmarking & Disclosure of Energy Performance of Buildings Type of Initiative: Model Contract or Policy (Voluntary Adoption) Description: Benchmarking provides a mechanism for measuring how efficiently a building uses energy relative to the same building over time, other similar buildings, or modeled simulations of a building built to a desired code or standard. Building energy use is typically measured in energy use per square foot. Commercial buildings comprise nearly half of building energy use and roughly 20 percent of total energy consumption in the United States.85 Benchmarking building performance is an important first step in identifying energy efficiency opportunities, helps to prioritize energy efficiency projects (including targeting public funds), and encourages building owners and operators to take action.86 Disclosure of building energy performance can improve information available for market transactions, which can then further motivate building owners and operators to make improvements. The greatest impact from disclosure will come when all parties understand that the data is available, where to access it and how to compare buildings. This can be accomplished through incorporation of the data into county and city property information searches, real estate databases and lease agreements. Benchmarking and disclosure policies should be supported with education, outreach, and technical assistance. Since disclosure of building energy use is intended to drive energy efficiency improvements, building owners should also be connected with audit, commissioning and financing tools available from utilities and vendors. Likewise, barriers and other costs to

85

Department of Energy. 2012. Existing Commercial Buildings Working Group, Energy Benchmarking, Rating, and Disclosure for State Governments Fact Sheet. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/seeaction/pdfs/commercialbuildings_factsheet_benchmarking_stategovt.pdf http://www1.eere.energy.gov/seeaction/pdfs/commercialbuildings_benchmarking_policy.pdf
86

Based on recent U.S. Environmental Protection Agency research, buildings that entered complete energy data in Portfolio Manager and received ENERGY STAR scores for 2008 through 2011 realized savings every year, as measured by average weather-normalized energy use intensity and the ENERGY STAR score (which accounts for business activity). Their average annual savings was 2.4 percent. This suggests that when building managers consistently track and benchmark energy consumption there is a tendency to increase building efficiency. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ENERGY STAR PortfolioManager Data Trends Benchmarking and Energy Savings. http://www.energystar.gov/ia/business/downloads/datatrends/DataTrends_Savings_20121002.pdf?bb67a147

53

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

benchmarking should be identified. The increase in building retrofits should be tracked through surveys, energy use analysis and other methods. Benchmarking is already required for public buildings in Minnesota. Several major cities and states have required or are considering requiring private sector benchmarking (e.g. California, New York City, San Francisco, District of Columbia, Seattle, Minneapolis). Impacted Sources: Private buildings that consume energy and electric generation facilities Pollutants Reduced: NOx & SO2 Cost Effectiveness: N/A Co-benefits: Reduces energy use (and associated benefits) Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Saves building/facility owners, operators and tenants money on energy costs Car Sharing in the Twin Cities Type of Initiative: Infrastructure Investment Description: Car sharing makes life without car ownership possible and, for some individuals, even preferable. Shared cars are available at all times, extending the travel ranges, cargo capacities, and overall flexibility of people who do not own cars. By providing an auto for this occasional but critical demand, car sharing allows households to sell or reduce the number of vehicles they own. This discourages unnecessary driving and reduces overall household travel by single occupancy vehicle. In addition, employers of all kinds seek ways to minimize expenditures on employee travel and parking accommodation. Car sharing serves organizations by offering corporate and nonprofit member plans that include preferential rates and clear account tracking for departmental cost allocation. An on-site or nearby shared vehicle gives employees the flexibility to commute using transit, bicycles, or carpools, while accessing the shared vehicle for off-site work appointments or errands. This supports right-sized company fleets where the high fixed costs of fleet vehicle ownership and management are minimized. Impacted Sources: Owners/operators of personal passenger vehicles (light-duty vehicles) Pollutants Reduced: NOx & VOCs

54

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Car sharing has been shown to result in an average annual vehicle miles travelled (VMT) reduction of 27 percent per user.87 Drivers in Minneapolis and St. Paul (where new car-sharing hubs would most likely be located) drive an average of 9,205 miles per year.88 This would amount to an average annual reduction of 2,485 VMT per member/driver. With approximately 46 members served per car,89 this works out to be a reduction of 114,310 VMT per car, per year. Cost Effectiveness: Air Pollutant VOCs NOx PM2.5 Total (VOCs + NOx + PM2.5)

Annual Tons Reduced/Car 0.18 0.20 0.0007 0.38

Cost/Ton Reduced $141,699.11 $123,986.10 $36,445,454.42 $66,006.31

Co-benefits: Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Reduces road congestion (if widely adopted) Saves users money (on gas, parking and vehicle maintenance) Reduces drive time (and associated quality of life benefits) Supports wealth retention in low-income households Conservation Improvement Program 1.5% Energy Savings Goal Type of Initiative: State Policy (Existing) Description: The Next Generation Energy Act of 2007 established a statewide energy conservation goal of 1.5 percent of annual retail electric and gas sales.90 Utilities in the state of Minnesota file either a triennial Conservation Improvement Program (CIP) plan or an annual CIP plan, depending on the type of utility. These plans include a wide variety of programs that help promote/incentivize energy efficiency projects throughout Minnesota. Many utilities are on track to meet their goals through direct conservation improvement programs that meet the needs of their customer bases. Some of these programs include:
87

Elliot Martin & Susan Shaheen, Greenhouse Gas Emission Impacts of Carsharing in North America, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 73 (December 2011): 1074-1086.
88

Personal communication from M. Filipi, November 26, 2012, RE: Q for Mark: Revised proposal from HOURCAR (based on data from Metropolitan Council. 2000 Travel Behavior Inventory. http://www.metrocouncil.org/planning/transportation/TBI_2000.htm)
89 90

Personal communication from M. Morse, November 20, 2012, RE: Revised proposal from HOURCAR

Minnesota House of Representatives. Next Generation Energy Act (HF436/SF145/CH136). http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hinfo/newlawsart2007-0.asp?yearid=2007&storyid=608

55

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

New construction design assistance Lighting efficiency rebates Process efficiency assistance Custom efficiency project analysis Assistance focused on low-income multi-family housing Industrial systems (e.g. compressed air, motors, variable frequency drives, etc.) efficiency incentives Public-private partnerships to provide low interest commercial and industrial loans (e.g. the Saint Paul Port Authoritys Trillion BTU Energy Efficiency Improvement Program91) Residential ENERGY STAR home certification Building envelope improvement incentives Heating efficiency for natural gas and electric customers Air conditioning efficiency for residential and commercial customers Recommissioning study subsidizations Compressed air leak repair Dust collection and vacuum system studies Domestic hot water for commercial and residential customers

In 2010, through the Minnesota Environmental Initiative 1.5% Energy Efficiency Solutions Project,92 several barriers that pose challenges and opportunities for achievement of the goal were identified as follows: Behavioral Programs Low-Income Conservation Programs Codes and Standards Electric Utility Infrastructure Improvements The Department of Commerce, in collaboration with utilities and other industry stakeholders, has actively been working on reducing these barriers through additional stakeholder meetings, commissioned studies, additional policy guidance, and a variety of other mechanisms. As these barriers are reduced, the opportunities for energy savings and sustained achievement of the 1.5 percent energy savings goal increase, resulting in reduced air emissions. Impacted Sources: Private buildings and facilities that consume energy and electric generation facilities Pollutants Reduced: NOx & SO2

91

Saint Paul Port Authority. Trillion BTU Energy Efficiency Improvement Program. http://www.sppa.com/wpcontent/uploads/2011/03/SPPA_Trillion_Brochure8.pdf 92 Minnesota Environmental Initiative. 2011. 1.5% Energy Efficiency Solutions Project. http://www.environmental-initiative.org/images/files/1_5EESolutionsFinalReportwithoutAppendices.pdf

56

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

2013-2015 Average Annual Additional Avoided Emissions Electricity Saved (MWh) 861,774 SOx avoided (tons) 1,854 NOx avoided (tons) 950 PM10 (primary) avoided (tons) 70 The estimated energy savings for a three-year period starting in 2013 will be over 2.5 billion kWh of electricity and over 8 million decatherms (Dth) of natural gas. The numbers above are for the electricity savings only, due to the complexity of estimating NOx emissions reductions from natural gas savings. CIP assumes a 15-year measure-life for all energy efficiency measures. This figure is important to note because, while the energy savings goal tracks only first-year savings to achieve the 1.5 percent, there are ongoing savings throughout the life of the efficiency measure that are no longer counted toward the goal. Assuming a 15-year measure-life and ongoing energy savings as a result of the efficiency measure provides a more accurate estimate of the emissions reduced as a result of the energy savings. It should be noted that these emissions savings are emissions avoided, not necessarily emissions reduced below a baseline. Because of this, achieving the 1.5 percent annual savings goal does not automatically translate into decreased total emissions of criteria air pollutants. The intention is to recognize the role of avoided emissions from energy consumption in supporting an overall downwards, rather than upwards, trend in criteria air pollutants. Cost Effectiveness: N/A Co-benefits: Reduces energy use (and associated benefits) Saves building/facility owners, operators and tenants money on energy costs Avoids generation, transmission, and distribution costs Converting Vehicle Trips to Bicycling and Walking Trips Type of Initiative: Infrastructure Investment; Education & Outreach Description: Targeted infrastructure and outreach investments between 2007 and 2011 contributed to reductions in motor vehicle trips in the Twin Cities by increasing bicycling and walking. In 2011, people in Minneapolis made an estimated 7.7 million trips by walking or bicycling rather than by motor vehicle, resulting in an estimated 8.4 million miles not driven and 354,000 gallons of gasoline not burned.93 Coordinated investments in planning, infrastructure, communications, and education contributed to the increases in walking and bicycling trips. Impacted Sources: Owners/operators of personal passenger vehicles (light-duty vehicles)
93

US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. The Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program: 2012 Progress Update. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/ntpp/2012_update/

57

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Pollutants Reduced: NOx & VOCs Many of these investments (totaling approximately $4 million annually) were made through Bike Walk Twin Citiespart of the federal Non-motorized Transportation Pilot Program (NTPP), which focused on four pilot communities nationwide, including the City of Minneapolis with connections to adjoining municipalities. Funded projects included Nice Ride bike sharing, three Bike/Walk Centers, on and off-road trails, new sidewalk segments, and many outreach and educational efforts. Funding for the federal pilot program ends in December 2013. Annual estimates for the NTPP Minneapolis pilot (2010 and 2011):94 Air Pollutant 2010 Reduction/Savings (tons) 2011 Reduction/Savings (tons) NOx 7.6 8.8 Hydrocarbons 10.9 12.6 PM 0.04 0.05 CO 99.2 115.3 CO2 2,950 3,431 Cost Effectiveness: N/A Co-benefits: Improves public health through increased walking and bicycling Stimulates local economic development Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Reduces road congestion (if resulting in significant behavior changes) Saves users money (on gas, parking and vehicle maintenance) Reduces drive time (and associated quality of life benefits) Financing Models to Scale Up Clean Energy Projects in the Private Sector, Including Property Assessed Clean Energy Type of Initiative: Voluntary Financial Incentives; Local/State Policy Description: The Department of Commerce (DOC) is currently leading an initiative to scale up energy efficiency and renewable energy projects in Minnesota by identifying the most effective financing models for Minnesotas commercial and industrial sectors and working with stakeholders to develop a plan of action to overcome barriers and address identified gaps. The energy financing models being evaluated include commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE), on-bill financing, energy services and managed energy services agreements, and equipment lease and master lease arrangements. Successful models will provide convenient, lowcost, contractor-centric, and secure financing that does not impinge on borrowing capacity of

94

Ibid.

58

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

property owners (off-balance sheet) and will match financing repayment with realized energy savings. Taking full advantage of the opportunities that PACE presents will require reducing transaction and first cost for all program participants and making PACE an easier opt-in opportunity for Minnesota local governments with assessment authority, as well as creating a structure that will facilitate participation by the investment community. This will likely involve developing a unified PACE platform that relies on standardized forms, legal documents, program design and guidelines, and a centralized approach to marketing, intake and project approval. Impacted Sources: Private buildings and facilities that consume energy and electric generation facilities Pollutants Reduced: NOx & SO2 Cost Effectiveness: N/A Co-benefits: Reduces energy use (and associated benefits) Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Saves building/facility owners, operators, and tenants money on energy cots (over the long term) New Source Performance Standards for Wood Heaters Type of Initiative: Federal Policy Description: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA) New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for wood heatersthe standards that govern allowable emissions from new residential wood-burning appliances used for space heatingare currently undergoing their first update in over 20 years. The wood heater standard revisions will likely be proposed during 2013 and the revisions under consideration include:95 Strengthening particulate emission limits to reflect current demonstrated best systems of emissions reductions (taking costs into account) Adding efficiency reporting or standards to also reduce carbon monoxide emissions Including pellet stoves and single-burn rate appliances explicitly Including indoor and outdoor wood boilers (hydronic heaters) and wood-fired furnaces Revising testing methods (as appropriate)

95

Wood, Gill. Residential Wood Heaters: New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). Presentation delivered via webinar on February 9, 2012. http://www.epa.gov/burnwise/ordinances.html

59

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Initiated in 1988 under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, the standards impact the manufacturing and import of wood heaters by defining what equipment can be legally sold in the U.S. The NSPS for wood-burning residential heaters require manufacturers to design new residential wood heaters to meet specific particulate emission limits, have representative samples from each model line tested by an EPA-accredited lab, and attach an EPA label to each unit (certifying approval by the Agency of that particular model line).96 Impacted Sources: Anyone making a future purchase of new residential wood-burning equipment Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & VOCs New performance standards would reduce the future VOC and PM2.5 and additional pollutant emissions from the fleet of residential wood heating equipment added to Minnesota in the future. It would also increase the energy efficiency of residential wood heating. This NSPS for consumer products has not targeted emissions or maintenance of existing equipment; therefore any resulting emissions reductions would occur as older equipment is voluntarily replaced. Cost Effectiveness: N/A Co-benefits: Reduces hazardous air pollutants Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children) Phase-Out of Coal Tar-Based Pavement Sealers Type of Initiative: Model Contract or Policy (Voluntary Adoption) Description: The 2009 Legislature enacted a bill that restricts state agencies from purchasing undiluted coal tar-based sealant and directed the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to study its environmental effects and to develop management guidelines and a model ordinance for cities considering local restrictions on coal tar-based sealants. In addition, since 2011 the MPCA has been promoting the phase-out of coal tar-based seal coats in Minnesota through a grant awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. To date, 17 municipalities in Minnesota have banned the use of coal tar-based pavement sealers, mainly for water quality concerns. Impacted Sources: Individuals or facility owners with paved surfaces (using pavement sealers) Pollutants Reduced: VOCs There is significant evidence that there is a contribution from coal tar-based pavement sealers to air pollution due to their high VOC content. Sealcoat products containing coal tar have been
96

Ibid.

60

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

shown to have an average of 66,000 mg/kg of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), a type of VOC.97 A different study estimates that up to half of the PAHs contained in the product volatize into the atmosphere within 45 days of application.98 There is no current estimate for Minnesota specifically, but one national estimate for the PAHs released in the US from coal tarbased pavement sealers is 1000 Mg per year.99 A rough conversation would suggestion that PAH releases in Minnesota would be in the order of 20 tons per year. Cost Effectiveness: N/A Co-benefits: Prevents water pollution Reduces hazardous air pollutants State Energy Efficiency Programs for the Public Sector Type of Initiative: State Policy (Existing); Education & Outreach Description: Energy efficiency and renewable energy projects in the public sector are being identified and implemented through three current initiatives occurring within the state of Minnesota: Public Building Enhanced Energy Efficiency Program (PBEEEP) Local100 Targets newer buildings and/or systems Goal is to make existing systems more efficient Includes retro-commissioning, controls, lighting and other less-equipment-intensive energy saving retrofits Comprehensive projects that are too small for GESP Guaranteed Energy Savings Program (GESP)101 Targets older buildings and/or systems Goals are to address deferred maintenance and renew building infrastructure, in addition to making existing systems more efficient

97

Mahler BJ, Metre PC, Crane JL, Watts AW, Scoggins M, Williams ES. 2012. Coal-tar-based pavement sealcoat and PAHs: implications for the environment, human health, and stormwater management. Environ Sci Technol. Mar 20;46(6):3039-45. doi: 10.1021/es203699x. Epub 2012 Feb 13.
98

Van Metre, P. C.; Majewski, M. S.; Mahler, B. J.; Foreman, W. T.; Braun, C. L.; Wilson, J. T.; Burbank, T. 2012. PAH volatilization following application of coal-tar-based pavement sealant. Atmos. Environ.
99

Ibid.

100

Minnesota Department of Commerce. 2012. PBEEEP Report: Local Government Public Enhanced Energy Efficiency Program Report. http://mn.gov/commerce/energy/images/PBEEEP-Report-2011.pdf
101

Minnesota Department of Commerce. Energy Savings Program. http://mn.gov/commerce/energy/topics/financial/Energy-Savings-Program/

61

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Deep energy efficiency retrofits (i.e. redesigns & replacements), in addition to PBEEEP type retrofits (i.e. modifications)

Sustainable Building 2030 (SB 2030)102 Outlines specific performance targets (energy standards) for energy use in buildings until 2030 Standards are required for all state bonded buildings that have started Schematic Design after Aug.1, 2009 Offers voluntary, cost-effective energy efficiency performance standards for new and substantially reconstructed commercial, industrial, and institutional buildings Every five years, the total carbon emissions from the operations of buildings is to be reduced so that in 2030 a 100 percent reduction (net zero carbon) is achieved Energy Savings Partnership (ESP) Partnership between Saint Paul Port Authority and U.S. Bank Offers 100 percent financing for any public project that provides energy efficiencies, energy savings, or renewable energy Minimum loan size is $50,000 with no maximum Impacted Sources: Public buildings and electric generation facilities Pollutants Reduced: NOx & SO2 The following table demonstrates potential savings based on the existing goal of 20 percent aggregate energy reduction by public agencies by 2020 (Executive Order 11-12): Branch of B3 Baseline Energy Usage Annual Savings Goal SO2 NOx 103 104 Government (MMBTU) (MMBTU) (tons) (tons) City 2,298,688 459,738 67.1 53.4 County 1,467,779 293,556 42.8 34.1 Higher Ed 6,171,425 1,234,285 180.0 143.4 Public Schools 8,723,799 1,744,760 254.5 202.7 State 2,034,093 406,819 59.3 47.3 Total 20,695,784 4,139,157 603.7 480.8 Cost Effectiveness: N/A Co-benefits: Reduces energy use (and associated benefits) Saves government agencies (i.e. taxpayers) money on energy costs
102 103

Minnesota Sustainable Building 2030. http://www.mn2030.umn.edu/

Only 80 percent of buildings have 12 consecutive months of utility data in B3. Therefore the numbers in this column represent 80 percent of total square footage.
104

This assumes that energy savings performance contract projects achieve a savings of 1/9th of the 20 percent total energy reduction goal each year over the nine-year term from 2012 to 2020.

62

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Avoids generation, transmission, and distribution costs

Updating Minnesota State Policy to Facilitate Development of Distributed Generation and Combined Heat and Power Type of Initiative: State Policy Description: Most electricity is generated in large centralized facilities that require electricity to be transmitted over long distances. Distributed generation (DG) is the generation of electricity on-site, or close to where it is needed, in small facilities designed to meet local needs. DG is sometimes referred to as on-site generation, dispersed generation, or decentralized generation and can include both renewable power sources like wind and solar and combined heat and power (also known as co-generation) facilities. Distributed generation may result in lower environmental impacts and improved security of supply. Advances in technology and current economic conditions are contributing to increasing interest in DG in Minnesota. In response, the Department of Commerce, Division of Energy Resources (DER) is conducting an initial assessment of Minnesota distributed generation. This initial assessment will include determining a baseline (historical and current) for Minnesota DG and net metering installations; benchmarking Minnesota practices and installations against other states and national best practices; reviewing the current Minnesota DG interconnection process and requirements; and identifying DG impacts on energy costs, benefits, and reliability. This assessment is informed and guided by an ongoing dialogue with stakeholders. Key initial findings have included: Customer requests for DG have increased in recent years and are expected to increase even more in future years. Minnesotas grid is evolving to a more distributed system as DG technologies continue to mature. By all measures, only a small amount of DG has been developed to date in Minnesota; net metering generation is less than 0.03 percent of retail electricity sales in the state. The Minnesota interconnection process and requirements provides the needed tools to address reliability and safety. DG levels are not currently causing reliability and/or safety issues and are not anticipated to in the near term, but some updating may be needed to incorporate current standards and certifications and to incorporate more explicit tiers. As of late-2012 the DER has identified several key areas that need to be addressed in Minnesota: Development of a shared understanding of the range and complexity of Minnesota DG and net metering impacts (values and costs) Identification of needs for long-term solutions to align DG values and costs to the system with customer choices Development of options for near-term improvements to policies (e.g. updated net metering or alternatives, provisions for solar gardens, stand-by/demand/solar rates, etc.) Identification of knowledge gaps

63

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Impacted Sources: Private buildings and facilities that consume energy and electric generation facilities Pollutants Reduced: NOx & SO2 Cost Effectiveness: N/A Co-benefits: Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Saves building/facility owners, operators, and tenants money on energy cots (over the long term)

64

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Appendix A: Options for Possible Future Consideration


The Working Group of Minnesotas Clean Air Dialogue recognizes the following initiatives as options that may warrant future consideration for the purpose of maintaining or improving air quality, but reached no consensus supporting these initiatives at this time. Encourage Local Land Use and Zoning Choices that Reduce Vehicle Miles Travelled No Consensus Reached Type of Initiative: Infrastructure Investment; Local Policy Description: Encourage and incentivize local governments, which control land use decisions, to make land use and zoning choices that decrease vehicle miles travelled (VMT) and reduce associated emissions. This would include the following components: 1. Reorienting the development projections and goals as stated in the Metropolitan Councils Regional Development Framework such that a greater proportion of new development would be directed to Developed Communities. Associated incentives and guidance would need to be realigned accordingly, including criteria for the Sustainable Communities Grants program. 2. Outside of the seven county metropolitan area there should be efforts to educate and support local governments in making land use decisions that reduce VMT. There are a number of existing efforts, including the GreenStep Cities program. The state of Minnesota is projected to add over 878,000 residents between 2010 and 2030 and almost 1,234,000 by 2040. In the Twin Cities metropolitan region, population is forecast to grow by 597,000 residents (346,000 households) between 2010 and 2030 and 893,000 residents (458,000 households) by 2040.105 The pattern in which this new growth occurs, along with the opportunities offered through the redevelopment of existing land uses, can significantly affect the driving habits of the regions residents. Studies of alternative land development and zoning around the country have quantified these potential VMT impacts. Changes in VMT are most strongly related to the accessibility of destinations and to street network design variables.106 The potential to influence travel demand through changes to the build environment have been found to fall broadly into five categories: Density Destination Accessibility Diversity Distance to Transit Design The Metropolitan Council has developed a spreadsheet-based analysis tool to provide local decision makers with information on the potential impacts of their land use and development
105 106

Minnesota Department of Administration. State Demographic Center. http://www.demography.state.mn.us/

Ewing, Reid and Cervero, Robert. 2010. Travel and the Built Environment. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 76, No. 3

65

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

decisions on air quality. The elasticities of the strategies selected for inclusion in the tool (shown below) are additive. Strategy Density (Concentration of Population and Households) Diversity of Land Uses Design of Street Network Destination Accessibility Distance to Transit Built Environment Variable Population and/or Household Density Land Use Mix Jobs/Housing Balance Intersection/Street Density Percent 4-Way Intersections Job Accessibility by Automobile Job Accessibility by Transit Distance to Nearest Transit Stop Elasticity -0.04 -0.09 -0.02 -0.12 -0.12 -0.20 -0.05 -0.05

Impacted Sources: Owners/operators of personal passenger vehicles (light-duty vehicles) Pollutants Reduced: NOx & VOCs If the density of the 458,000 new households to be created by 2040 were increased by 50 percent this would result in an estimated reduction of over 467,000 daily vehicle miles travelled (based on a regional average of 51 VMT per household for home-based trips). The annual reduction in air pollutants would be as follows: Air Pollutant NOx Total Gaseous Hydrocarbons PM10 Total PM2.5 Total Ammonia SO2 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Atmospheric CO2 CO2 Equivalents Cost Effectiveness: N/A Co-benefits: Improves public health through increased walking and bicycling Stimulates local economic development Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Reduces road congestion (if resulting in significant behavior changes) Saves users money (on gas, parking and vehicle maintenance) Reduces drive time (and associated quality of life benefits) Reduction (tons/year) 463.1 188.8 14.3 13.8 9.0 9.0 1,689.7 93,120.2 94,879.4

66

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Limit the VOC Content of Select Consumer Products No Consensus Reached Type of Initiative: State Policy Description: Limit the legal VOC content of select VOC-emitting consumer products. Highemitting product categories include paints, cosmetics, cleaners, and adhesives. There are standard VOC content limits for consumer products set in the states of California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington D.C. These regulations are virtually the same for every state that adopts the limits and cover over 150 different product types (some states exempt certain product types from their VOC limit rules). Impacted Sources: Anyone selling or seeking to purchase products with a high-VOC content Pollutants Reduced: VOCs Solvents are responsible for 7.5 percent of Minnesota VOC emissions (82,841 tons). A New Jersey study looking at the potential impacts of implementing consumer product VOC content limits on 45 consumer product categories estimated a reduction potential of 14.6 percent. For Minnesota this would mean a reduction of 12,080 tons of VOCs.107 Cost Effectiveness:108 VOCs: $2,300/ton Co-benefits: Improves indoor air quality Protects the health of consumers and manufacturers of impacted products Model Recreational Wood Burning Nuisance Ordinance No Consensus Reached Type of Initiative: Model Contract or Policy (Voluntary Adoption) Description: Develop and support a model ordinance that restricts the acceptable conditions and hours during which recreational wood burning is legally permitted and that allows for more
107

The State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. 2003. Estimated VOC Emission Reductions and Economic Impact Analysis for Proposed Amendments to Chemically Formulated Consumer Products. www.nj.gov/dep/aqm/BBattCP3.pdf
108

Ibid.

67

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

rigorous enforcement of burning restrictions, including the use of first responders to address citizen complaints regarding violations. Examples of possible restrictions on recreational wood burning include: Restrictions in the hours during which wood burning is legally permitted Prohibition of wood burning on days when an air quality alert is in effect Restrictions on or prohibition of recreational wood burning when warnings are in effect due to dry conditions Prohibition of wood burning when wind speeds exceed a specified threshold Impacted Sources: Anyone engaging in recreational burning of wood Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & VOCs Cost Effectiveness: N/A For local governments implementing such an ordinance, there could be considerable costs associated with the additional deployment of first responders in non-emergency situations. Co-benefits: Reduces hazardous air pollutants Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children) Model Transportation Demand Management Planning Requirement No Consensus Reached Type of Initiative: Model Contract or Policy (Voluntary Adoption) Description: Develop and promote a model ordinance based on the City of Bloomingtons Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance, which requires employers to submit a TDM plan to the local government with strategies to reduce single occupant vehicle trips by seven to ten percent below their baseline mode split. Employers would also submit a financial guarantee that is held by the local government (or could be held by the Metropolitan Council), which would be refunded after a set number of years if they have achieved the goals outlined in their TDM plan. If, after the specified deadline, there has not been a good faith effort toward trip reduction and strategy implementation, the financial guarantee could be used to purchase transit passes or provide a financial incentive for non-drive alone commuters. Many areas that have fallen into non-attainment have implemented a state-, metro-, or countywide TDM plan requirement as a way to engage employers in peak-period trip reduction. Areas on the east coast have implemented a retroactive TDM plan requirement (without a financial guarantee) whereby area businesses must work with their transportation management organization/association (TMO/TMA) to implement TDM strategies to achieve trip reduction.

68

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

The compliance rate is approximately 50 percent.109 Generally there are not penalties for noncompliance, however, the Cities of Bloomington and Eden Prairie require the TDM plan and financial guarantee as a condition of approval for new and redevelopments. Companies that implement TDM plans are generally able to triple the mode split for alternative transportation options (modes other than driving alone) over companies that do not implement TDM plans. For example, the drive alone rate for commuters along I-494 is 95 percent, but when a TDM plan is required, companies typically reduce their drive alone rate to 85 percent.110 Impacted Sources: Major employers (with over 250 employees) in the Twin Cities metro area and their employees that commute by personal passenger vehicle (light-duty vehicle) According to the Department of Employment and Economic Development, in 2011 there were 730 companies in the seven county metro area with over 250 employees, representing a total of 493,548 employees.111 Size of Firm Number of Firms Total # of Employees in Firms 100 249 1,596 244,035 250 499 442 150,074 500+ 288 343,474 Pollutants Reduced: NOx & VOCs In 2011, 494 Commuter Services converted 5,300 drive alone commuters into an alternative mode (three or more days per week) resulting in 29 million vehicle miles avoided*.112 Air Pollutant Emissions Reduction (tons) NOx 51 VOCs 45 PM10 0.19 PM2.5 0.17 CO 12,429 CO2 14,979 *Note that these are results based on past efforts to demonstrate the scale of potential emissions reductions, not estimated reductions associated with implementation of the proposed policy. Cost Effectiveness: N/A
109 110

National Association for Commuter Transportation.

Personal communication from M. Madison, November 5, 2012, Revised vanpool and TDM Requirement proposals.
111

Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development. Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages. http://www.positivelyminnesota.com/Data_Publications/Data/All_Data_Tools/Quarterly_Census_of_Employment_ Wages_%28QCEW%29.aspx
112

Personal communication from M. Madison, September 27, 2012, two commuter strategies attached.

69

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Program Costs: ~14 FTE (outreach staff to serve all 730 companies in the metro area with over 250 employees in a single year) There would be a cost to employers to develop and implement TDM plans, but this cost would vary significantly depending on the level of effort dedicated to plan implementation. The average current employer expenditure on a conversion from driving a single occupant vehicle to taking another mode of transportation is $1,400.113 Co-benefits: Societal Reduces dependence on fuels imported from out-of-state/country (and associated energy security benefits) Reduces road congestion (if widely adopted) Increases economic opportunity for people with disabilities Employers Increases employee productivity Enhances recruitment and retention Employees Reduces drive time Saves money (on gas, parking and vehicle maintenance) Enhances quality of life and better work/life balance Improves public health through increased walking and bicycling Prohibit Wood Burning on Days When an Air Quality Alert Is in Effect No Consensus Reached Type of Initiative: State Policy Description: Prohibit the burning of wood days when an air quality alert is in effect. This ban should be paired with an improved system of forecasting and public notification on days with poor air quality and include limited enforcement activities. There would be exemptions for burning wood for cultural purposes or for essential heating. Impacted Sources: Anyone using residential wood-burning equipment or engaging in open burning of wood Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & VOCs Cost Effectiveness: N/A

113

Personal communication from M. Madison, November 5, 2012

70

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Co-benefits: Reduces hazardous air pollutants Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children) Prohibition of Recreational Wood Burning No Consensus Reached Type of Initiative: Model Ordinance or Policy (Voluntary Adoption) Description: Develop resources to support local governments in implementing wood burning bans. The list below describes the types of bans that could be instituted to address emissions from residential wood burning: Require that the cleanest fuel available be used for home heating and recreational purposes Prohibit all recreational wood burning Prohibit outdoor wood boilers Prohibit all outdoor wood appliances Prohibit wood burning in parks and at public events Prohibit wood burning within a one mile radius of health care facilities and hospitals Prohibit the use of wood and coal as cooking fuels in commercial kitchens Impacted Sources: Anyone engaging in recreational or home heating burning of wood Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & VOCs Residential wood smoke contributes approximately 28 percent of combustion-generated PM2.5 emissions (2005, both metro and statewide) or 8.4 percent of total direct PM2.5 emissions (18,103 ton/year, 2008). This would address an unknown portion of this total. Cost Effectiveness: N/A Co-benefits: Reduces hazardous air pollutants Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children) Remove Wood-Burning Equipment on Resale of Properties No Consensus Reached Type of Initiative: Model Contract or Policy (Voluntary Adoption); State Policy Description: Develop and support a model ordinance for local governments to adopt that would mandate the removal and destruction of any wood stove or outdoor wood boiler that is not EPA

71

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

certified on the resale of homes/residential property. Alternately, a provision could be inserted into the Minnesota State Building Code. Old wood stoves are often made of metal, weigh hundreds of pounds and last for decades, causing many homeowners to continue to use high-polluting outdated models. To help get these older stoves out of use some municipalities have instituted such a policy.114 Impacted Sources: Anyone buying or selling property that contains residential wood-burning equipment Pollutants Reduced: Direct PM2.5 & VOCs Residential wood smoke contributes approximately 28 percent of combustion-generated PM2.5 emissions (2005, both metro and statewide) or 8.4 percent of total direct PM2.5 emissions (18,103 ton/year, 2008). This would address an unknown portion of this total. Cost Effectiveness:115 Costs would be borne by property buyers and sellers. Cost effectiveness would be greater if equipment was not replaced. Co-benefits: Reduces hazardous air pollutants Provides localized health benefits for vulnerable populations (including children)

114

For example Mammoth Lakes, CA requires all non-EPA-certified wood burning appliances to be removed or rendered inoperable on the sale of a dwelling. Between 1990 and 2008 this resulted in the removal of 2,400 units and the retrofitting of 2,500 units. See http://www.arb.ca.gov/pm/pmmeasures/ceffect/rules/gbuapcd_431.htm
115

Calculated based on MPCA, DNR, and USFS. 2008. Residential Fuelwood Assessment for the State of Minnesota (2007 2008 Heating Season). http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/forestry/um/residentialfuelwoodassessment07_08.pdf and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. Guidance for Quantifying and Using Emission Reductions from Voluntary Woodstove Changeout Programs in State Implementation Plans. http://www.epa.gov/burnwise/pdfs/guidance_quantfying_jan.pdf

72

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Appendix B: Work Group Charge & Ground Rules


Work Group Charge Members of the Work Group were invited to participate in a process in which they would: Identify and articulate challenges associated with potential nonattainment issues, Identify what will be necessary to address these challenges; Explore new opportunities for emissions reductions and; and Develop strategies to implement identified actions and lay the groundwork for future collaboration to improve air quality in Minnesota. Work Group Membership, Expectations and Participation Environmental Initiative, in consultation with the Planning Team, is responsible for selecting members for the Work Group. New individuals may be added to the Work Group throughout the course of the project if it is determined that there are essential stakeholder interests that are not represented by the existing participants. Environmental Initiative will make the final determination if and when new members should be added. Should a member choose to vacate their seat in the Work Group, Environmental Initiative may seek a replacement. Work Group participants are expected to attend all Work Group meetings, make every effort to be on time, participate in conversations with Environmental Initiative staff between meetings, review documentation prior to meetings, and actively participate in the meetings. Work Group members are asked to keep their member organizations and constituencies informed about the project proceedings, and to bring views of constituent members to the Work Group discussions. All participants agree to act in good faith in all aspects of the process. The participants are expected to present their own opinions based on their experience, perspective and training, and agree to participate actively, constructively and cooperatively in the process. Debate and discussions in the Work Group should be based on shared facts. Facilitation and Environmental Initiatives Role Environmental Initiative is responsible for the design, management and facilitation of the project. Environmental Initiative will schedule and convene meetings, compile members input, and work with the Work Group to develop final project recommendations documents. Environmental Initiative will distribute correspondence regarding meeting announcements, agenda and other information related to the project via email. Lee Paddock of Environmental Initiative will facilitate the process. He will assist in focusing discussions, assure a fair opportunity for members to participate, draw out participants perspectives as necessary, work to resolve conflicts, and assist in designating tasks to sub-groups as needed.

73

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Conflicts and Communications All participants are expected to act as equals during the process and will respect the experience and perspectives of other participants. Participants should refrain from characterizing the viewpoints of others during discussions. Personal criticisms of other stakeholders will not be tolerated. Participants agree to be forthcoming about potential conflicts with the proceedings and with decisions that are developed by the group. Disagreements should be identified and shared with the group as early as possible. When making statements about the process or its outcomes in public, Work Group participants agree to make clear that they speak on their own behalf, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of other participants, nor Environmental Initiative. Work Group members will give at least 48 hours notice to Environmental Initiative and to other participants before communicating with the media about the process. Decisions Decisions of the Work Group will be made based on consensus of the group, generally defined as reaching an agreement that all participants can live with. Technical Working Group Charge The Technical Working Groups (TWGs) are charged with developing the full range of proposals for the Minnesota Clean Air Dialogue Work Group to discuss and debate. The TWGs are not responsible for coming to consensus on any of the proposals, rather, they are only responsible for developing the range of reasonable options based on the agreed upon evaluation criteria for how emissions from the various sources may be reduced. Evaluation Criteria: 1. Cost 2. Benefits (reduces risk of non-attainment) 3. Co-benefits (including public health) 4. Ease of implementation 5. Political concerns/constraints 6. Upcoming regulations

74

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Appendix C: Work Group Roster


*Denotes Planning Team members Alternates listed in italics American Lung Association of Minnesota *Kelly Marczak, Director, Clean Air Choice Bob Moffitt, Communications Director Association of Minnesota Counties Abbey Bryduck, Transportation & Energy Policy Analyst Barr Engineering *Mike Hansel, Senior Chemical Engineer & Vice President City of Minneapolis Dan Huff, Manager, Environmental Management and Safety Patrick Hanlon, Environmental Services Supervisor City of Richfield/Regional Council of Mayors Debbie Goettel, Mayor City of Saint Paul Anne Hunt, Environmental Policy Director, Office of Mayor Chris Coleman Samantha Henningson, Legislative Aide to Councilmember Russ Stark Downtown Minneapolis Transportation Management Organization (TMO) Dan MacLaughlin, Executive Director Flint Hills Resources Lucinda Legel, Environmental Director Kari Lorch, Senior Environmental Technical Advisor - Air Regulations Fresh Energy J. Drake Hamilton, Science Policy Director Hennepin County Carl Michaud, Director, Environmental Services Alene Tchourumoff, Director, Strategic Planning & Resources League of Minnesota Cities Craig Johnson, Intergovernmental Relations Representative Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe *Charles Lippert, Air Quality Technician Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy Jim Erkel, Director, Land Use & Transportation Program 75

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

*Scott Strand, Executive Director Minnesota Department of Health Jim Kelly, Manager, Environmental Surveillance & Assessment Hillary Carpenter, Toxicologist Metropolitan Council Mark Filipi, Manager, Technical Planning Support Minnesota Chamber of Commerce *Mike Robertson, Consultant, Environmental Policy Minnesota Power *Mike Cashin, Environmental Policy Manager Minnesota Trucking Association *John Hausladen, President Minnesota Department of Transportation *Mark Nelson, Director, Office of Statewide Multimodal Planning Marilyn Jordahl Larson, Supervisor, Environmental Modeling & Testing Unit Minnesota Technical Assistance Program Laura Babcock, Director Minnesota Pollution Control Agency *David Thornton, Assistant Commissioner for Air Policy Catherine Neuschler, Air Policy Specialist Mary Jean Fenske, Supervisor, Air Policy Unit Saint Paul Port Authority Lorrie Louder, Director of Business & Intergovernmental Affairs Sierra Club Karen Monahan, Community Organizer, Minnesota Environmental Justice Program Michelle Rosier, Senior Regional Organizing Manager Transit for Livable Communities Barb Thoman, Executive Director Dave van Hattum, Senior Policy Advocate Wenck Associates Ed Hoefs, Principal Lori Bartels, Senior Chemical Engineer Xcel Energy Rick Rosvold, Manager, Air Quality 76

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Appendix D: Technical Working Group Rosters


Area Sources: Name Mike Hansel Patrick Hanlon Tony Hainault Charlie Lippert Robert Sip Troy Johnson Catherine Neuschler Laura Babcock Ed Hoefs Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy: Name Nancy Lange Nick Mark Brendon Slotterback Lissa Pawlisch Jessica Burdette J. Drake Hamilton Tony Hainault Eric Jensen Bill Sierks & Tim Nolan Mike Cashin Laura Babcock Jill Curran Mary T'Kach Karen Monahan & Michelle Rosier Rick Rosvold Mobile Diesel: Name Kelly Marczak Abby Ferri Organization American Lung Association Associated General Contractors of Minnesota Organization Center for Energy & Environment CenterPoint Energy City of Minneapolis Clean Energy Resource Teams Department of Commerce, Division of Energy Resources Fresh Energy Hennepin County Izaak Walton League of America Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota Power Minnesota Technical Assistance Program Minnesota Waste Wise / Minnesota Chamber of Commerce Ramsey County Sierra Club Xcel Energy Organization Barr Engineering City of Minneapolis Hennepin County Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Minnesota Department of Agriculture Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota Technical Assistance Program Wenck Associates

77

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Abbey Bryduck John Sharffbillig Lucinda Legel Mike Judkins Jim Erkel Mark Nelson & Marilyn Jordahl Larson Mark Sulzbach John Hausladen Rick Rosvold Point Sources: Name Bob Moffitt Mike Hansel Kari Lorch J. Drake Hamilton Andy Leith Scott Strand Mike Robertson Mike Nelson Mike Cashin Ed Hoefs Rick Rosvold

Association of Minnesota Counties City of Minneapolis Flint Hills Resources Hennepin County Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy Minnesota Department of Transportation Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota Trucking Association Xcel Energy

Organization American Lung Association Barr Engineering Flint Hills Resources Fresh Energy Hennepin County Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy Minnesota Chamber of Commerce Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota Power Wenck Associates Xcel Energy

Transportation Demand Management & Light-Duty Vehicles: Name Kelly Marczak Abby Ferri Abbey Bryduck Anne Hunt Melissa Madison Joe Gladke & Brent Rusco Mark Filipi Jim Erkel Kevin Hennessy Jim Kelly David Thornton, Innocent Eyoh, Kevin McDonald, & Mike Mondloch John Hausladen Organization American Lung Association Associated General Contractors of Minnesota Association of Minnesota Counties City of Saint Paul Commuter Services Hennepin County Metropolitan Council Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy Minnesota Department of Agriculture Minnesota Department of Health Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota Trucking Association

78

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Mark Nelson & Marilyn Jordahl Larson Minnesota Department of Transportation Mary T'Kach Ramsey County Barb Thoman Transit for Livable Communities Wood Smoke: Name Jon Hunter Mike Hansel Farhiya Farah Hillary Carpenter Lisa Herschberger & Mary Jean Fenske Mary T'Kach Allen Frenchette Julie Mellum David Huss Organization American Lung Association Barr Engineering City of Minneapolis Minnesota Department of Health Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Ramsey County Scott County Take Back the Air

79

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Appendix E: 2008 Emissions Sources Breakdown116


Table 6: Statewide sources of Nitrogen Oxides, 2008 Source On-road gasoline vehicles On-road diesel vehicles Electric utility fuel combustion Non-road diesel Aircraft, marine, locomotives, other Metals processing Industrial fuel combustion Other residential & commercial fuel combustion Non-road gasoline Waste disposal & recycling Other industrial processes Residential wood combustion Petroleum refining Solvent utilization Chemical manufacturing Storage & transport of petroleum and solvents Total* NOx (tons) 98,262 70,810 63,812 49,372 42,789 27,242 19,796 13,188 7,409 3,480 3,045 1,626 715 295 104 39 401,983 Percentage 24% 18% 16% 12% 11% 7% 5% 3% 2% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

*Does not include miscellaneous (mostly agricultural, prescribed burning and wildfires) Table 7: Statewide sources of Volatile Organic Compounds, 2008 Source On-road gasoline vehicles Non-road gasoline Solvent utilization Storage & transport of petroleum and solvents Residential wood combustion Other industrial processes On-road diesel vehicles
116

VOCs (tons) 81,088 80,012 79,857 20,286 17,355 5,452 5,402

Percentage 27% 26% 26% 7% 6% 2% 2%

MPCA. 2008 Minnesota Criteria Pollutant Emission Inventory, version 1. Data provided by the Air Data Analysis Unit on March 1, 2013.

80

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Non-road diesel Aircraft, marine, locomotives, other Waste disposal & recycling Industrial fuel combustion Petroleum refining Chemical manufacturing Other residential & commercial fuel combustion Electric utility fuel combustion Metals processing Total*

4,968 2,869 1,999 1,208 1,118 884 873 744 625 304,741

2% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

*Does not include miscellaneous (mostly agricultural, prescribed burning and wildfires) Table 8: Statewide sources of direct fine particulate (PM2.5) emissions, 2008 Source PM2.5 (tons) Fires (wildfire, agricultural, prescribed) Agricultural tilling Fugitive dust Residential wood combustion Metals processing On-road diesel vehicles Waste disposal & recycling Non-road diesel Other industrial processes Electric utility fuel combustion On-road gasoline vehicles Industrial fuel combustion Non-road gasoline Aircraft, marine, locomotives, other Other residential & commercial fuel combustion Storage & transport of petroleum and solvents Petroleum refining Solvent utilization Chemical manufacturing Total 65,130 54,096 38,243 17,255 4,656 4,538 4,483 4,216 3,760 3,755 3,510 3,120 1,769 1,268 744 734 506 387 15 212,185

Percentage 31% 25% 18% 8% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%

81

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Table 9: Statewide sources of direct fine particulate (PM2.5) emissions excluding wildfires, agricultural sources, and prescribed burning, 2008 Source Residential wood combustion On-road diesel vehicles Waste disposal & recycling Non-road diesel Electric utility fuel combustion On-road gasoline vehicles Metals processing Industrial fuel combustion Other industrial processes Non-road gasoline Aircraft, marine, locomotives, other Other residential & commercial fuel combustion Petroleum refining Total PM2.5 (tons) 17,255 4,538 4,483 4,216 3,755 3,510 3,210 3,120 2,091 1,769 1,268 744 380 50,337 Percentage 34% 9% 9% 8% 7% 7% 6% 6% 4% 4% 3% 1% 1% 100%

82

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Appendix F: The Six Rs of Diesel Emissions Reduction117


Retrofit A retrofit typically involves the addition of an after-treatment device to remove emissions from the engine exhaust. Retrofits can be very effective at reducing emissionseliminating up to 90 percent of pollutants in some cases. Many of the effective after-treatment devices require use of ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD). Repower Repowering involves replacing an existing engine with a new engine, usually an engine meeting a more stringent EPA tier emissions level. This strategy is most effective for use in equipment with a useful life longer than that of the engine. Repowering provides an opportunity to install a new engine that meets much lower emission standards than the original engine, often in conjunction with fuel economy benefits and lower maintenance costs. Repowering can also include converting diesel-powered equipment (such as port cranes) to electrical power. Rebuild Regular engine maintenance plays a critical role in maintaining emissions performance while engine rebuilding can upgrade emissions performance of older engines. Some engine manufacturers have EPA-approved engine rebuild kits that meet newer, more stringent EPA tier emission levels. Replace Selectively replacing older vehicles/equipment can sometimes be the most cost-effective way to reduce the emissions of a fleet. In this way, older, higher polluting equipment is retired from service before it would otherwise be retired. Newer equipment that meets more stringent emission standards is purchased to replace the retired equipment, sometimes in conjunction with retrofit devices or alternative fuels. These programs are sometimes called scrappage or fleet renewal programs. Such programs often include procedures to ensure that the retired equipment is destroyed in order to prevent re-sale and continued use. Fleet owners often benefit from improved fuel economy and performance, as well as lower maintenance costs. Refuel A variety of alternative fuels can be used in diesel vehicles and equipment. Some require little or no modification to the engine (such as emulsified diesel or biodiesel) while others (such as natural gas) require engine conversion or replacement. Many alternative fuels can reduce emissions from many types of diesel engines, although some come at a price of lower fuel efficiency, power, and trade-offs of higher emissions in one pollutant with lower emissions for another pollutant.

117

Definitions from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Transportation

83

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Reduce Idling Reduced idling can be achieved by employing both technology (heaters, auxiliary power units (APUs), automatic shutoff device, etc.) and by operational strategies, which improve the use of the equipment or vehicle (idle reduction policies).

84

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

Appendix G: Index of Additional Resources


Public Health Impacts of Fine Particulates & Ground Level Ozone

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Particulate Matter (PM) Health Effects Minnesota Department of Health (MDH): Particles and Your Health MDH: Measuring Health Impacts of Fine Particles in Air Project EPA: Ground-level Ozone Health Effects MDH: Air Quality: Ozone

Federal Air Quality Standards & Regulations


EPA: National Ambient Air Quality Standards EPA: The Plain English Guide to the Clean Air Act: Cleaning Up Commonly Found Air Pollutants EPA: Particulate Matter Regulatory Actions EPA: Ground-level Ozone Regulatory Actions EPA: Ozone Advance EPA: Ozone Advance introductory webinar slides (PDF)

Minnesota's Air: Emissions, Policies & Programs


Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA): Air Quality in Minnesota: 2013 Report to the Legislature MPCA: Annual Pollution Report to the Legislature: A summary of Minnesota's air emissions & water discharges (April 2011) (PDF) MPCA: Minnesota Criteria Air Pollutant Emission Inventory EPA: 2008 National Emissions Inventory Data Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO): Preliminary Assessment of Ozone Air Quality Issues in the Minneapolis/St. Paul Region (2002) (PDF) Minnesota Chamber of Commerce: Estimated Economic Impact of Twin Cities Ozone Nonattainment (1999) (PDF) University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies (CTS): The Full Cost of Transportation in the Twin Cities Region (2000) MPCA: Minnesota State Air Rules MPCA: Preventing Waste and Pollution: Assistance & Resources

Strategies & Solutions


EPA: Tips to Reduce Ozone National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACCA): Controlling Fine Particulate Matter Under the Clean Air Act: A Menu of Options (2006) (PDF) EPA: Policy & Guidance for controlling emissions from the transportation sector

85

INITIATIVE
Powerful Partnerships, Effective Solutions

Environmental

LADCO: Approaches for Attaining the PM2.5 Daily Standard White Paper (2009) (PDF) CTS: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transportation Sources in Minnesota (2008) Minnesota Climate Change Advisory Group (MCCAG): MCCAG Final Report Appendix H: Transportation and Land Use Policy Recommendations (2008) (PDF)

86

You might also like