Browse
Recent Submissions
Item Carbon Free Boston: Summary report 2019(Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy, 2019) Boston University Institute for Sustainable EnergyPROJECT OVERVIEW: In 2016, Mayor Martin J. Walsh signed the Metro Mayors Climate Mitigation Commitment, pledging to make Boston carbon neutral by 2050, and asked the Boston Green Ribbon Commission (GRC) to establish a Working Group to support the City in the development of strategies to achieve carbon neutrality. In response to the Mayor’s request, the Green Ribbon Commission collaborated with the Institute for Sustainable Energy at Boston University to develop Carbon Free Boston, a long-term framework for a carbon-neutral Boston that also supports short- and medium-term action.2 Carbon Free Boston was developed through comprehensive engagement with City staff, utilities, neighboring municipalities, regional authorities, state agencies, industry experts, and community representatives, among others, and was supported by comprehensive analysis using models that project feasible pathways to carbon neutrality by 2050. To ensure meaningful and actionable outcomes, we looked across scales and considered opportunities and challenges associated with specific actions at the city, state, and regional levels. We also addressed disparities in communities’ capacity both to mitigate climate damages and to benefit from the transition to a carbon-neutral city. The Fourth National Climate Assessment by the U.S. Global Change Research Program reports that the northeast will be especially hard-hit by climate change. By mid-century, there will be 20 to 30 more days per year with a maximum temperature of more than 90°F (32°C), and the amount of precipitation in extreme events will increase by as much as 20 percent. The projected increases in extreme heat, intensive storms, and flooding will impact people’s health, property, and livelihoods, especially in socially vulnerable communities. To avoid the worst of these impacts, climate scientists call for a reduction in the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that drive climate change to a pace that keeps global temperature increases below 1.5°C, the highest increase that the Earth’s natural systems can tolerate before severe and irreversible changes occur. Meeting this commitment will require cities, including Boston, to achieve carbon neutrality, which means a 100 percent reduction in net GHG emissions by 2050.Item Carbon Free Boston: Social equity report 2019(Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy, 2019) Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy; Cleveland, Cutler J.; Stanton, Liz; Woods, Bryndis; Martin, Atyia; Fortune, D’Janapha; Walsh, Michael; Castigliego, Joshua R.; Perez, Taylor; Galante, EmmaOVERVIEW: In January 2019, the Boston Green Ribbon Commission released its Carbon Free Boston: Summary Report, identifying potential options for the City of Boston to meet its goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2050. The report found that reaching carbon neutrality by 2050 requires three mutually-reinforcing strategies in key sectors: 1) deepen energy efficiency while reducing energy demand, 2) electrify activity to the fullest practical extent, and 3) use fuels and electricity that are 100 percent free of greenhouse gases (GHGs). The Summary Report detailed the ways in which these technical strategies will transform Boston’s physical infrastructure, including its buildings, energy supply, transportation, and waste management systems. The Summary Report also highlighted that it is how these strategies are designed and implemented that matter most in ensuring an effective and equitable transition to carbon neutrality. Equity concerns exist for every option the City has to reduce GHG emissions. The services provided by each sector are not experienced equally across Boston’s communities. Low-income families and families of color are more likely to live in residences that are in poor physical condition, leading to high utility bills, unsafe and unhealthy indoor environments, and high GHG emissions.1 Those same families face greater exposure to harmful outdoor air pollution compared to others. The access and reliability of public transportation is disproportionately worse in neighborhoods with large populations of people of color, and large swaths of vulnerable neighborhoods, from East Boston to Mattapan, do not have ready access to the city’s bike network. Income inequality is a growing national issue and is particularly acute in Boston, which consistently ranks among the highest US cities in regards to income disparities. With the release of Imagine Boston 2030, Mayor Walsh committed to make Boston more equitable, affordable, connected, and resilient. The Summary Report outlined the broad strokes of how action to reach carbon neutrality intersects with equity. A just transition to carbon neutrality improves environmental quality for all Bostonians, prioritizes socially vulnerable populations, seeks to redress current and past injustice, and creates economic and social opportunities for all. This Carbon Free Boston: Social Equity Report provides a deeper equity context for Carbon Free Boston as a whole, and for each strategy area, by demonstrating how inequitable and unjust the playing field is for socially vulnerable Bostonians and why equity must be integrated into policy design and implementation. This report summarizes the current landscape of climate action work for each strategy area and evaluates how it currently impacts inequity. Finally, this report provides guidance to the City and partners on how to do better; it lays out the attributes of an equitable approach to carbon neutrality, framed around three guiding principles: 1) plan carefully to avoid unintended consequences, 2) be intentional in design through a clear equity lens, and 3) practice inclusivity from start to finish.Item Carbon Free Boston: Technical Summary(2019-05-15) Walsh, Michael J.; Kinney, Patrick L.; Levy, Jonathan I.; Tallon, Lindsay; Skipper, Nash; Russell, Armistead; Castigliego, Joshua R.; Pollack, Adam; Zheng, Kevin; Cleveland, Cutler J.OVERVIEW: This technical summary is intended to argument the rest of the Carbon Free Boston technical reports that seek to achieve this goal of deep mitigation. This document provides below: a rationale for carbon neutrality, a high level description of Carbon Free Boston’s analytical approach; a summary of crosssector strategies; a high level analysis of air quality impacts; and, a brief analysis of off-road and street light emissions.Item Carbon Free Boston: Offsets Technical Report(2019-05-15) Maron, Ariella; Zheng, Kevin; Walsh, Michael J.; Fox-Penner, Peter; Cutler, Cleveland J.OVERVIEW: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency defines offsets as a specific activity or set of activities intended to reduce GHG emissions, increase the storage of carbon, or enhance GHG removals from the atmosphere [1]. From a city perspective, they provide a mechanism to negate residual GHG emissions— those the city is unable to reduce directly—by supporting projects that avoid or sequester them outside of the city’s reporting boundary. Offsetting GHG emissions is a controversial topic for cities, as the co-benefits of the investment are typically not realized locally. For this reason, offsetting emissions is considered a last resort, a strategy option available when the city has exhausted all others. However, offsets are likely to be a necessity to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 and promote emissions reductions in the near term. While public and private sector partners pursue the more complex systems transformation, cities can utilize offsets to support short-term and relatively cost-effective reductions in emissions. Offsets can be a relatively simple, certain, and high-impact way to support the transition to a low-carbon world. This report focuses on carbon offset certificates, more often referred to as offsets. Each offset represents a metric ton of verified carbon dioxide (CO2) or equivalent emissions that is reduced, avoided, or permanently removed from the atmosphere (“sequestered”) through an action taken by the creator of the offset. The certificates can be traded and retiring (that is, not re-selling) offsets can be a useful component of an overall voluntary emissions reduction strategy, alongside activities to lower an organization’s direct and indirect emissions. In the Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories (GPC), the GHG accounting system used by the City of Boston, any carbon offset certificates that the City has can be deducted from the City’s total GHG emissions.Item Carbon Free Boston: Energy Technical Report(2019-05-15) Walsh, Michael J.; Fox-Penner, Peter; Zheng, Kevin; Pollack, Adam; Cleveland, Cutler J.INTRODUCTION: The adoption of clean energy in Boston’s buildings and transportation systems will produce sweeping changes in the quantity and composition of the city’s demand for fuel and electricity. The demand for electricity is expected to increase by 2050, while the demand for petroleum-based liquid fuels and natural gas within the city is projected to decline significantly. The city must meet future energy demand with clean energy sources in order to meet its carbon mitigation targets. That clean energy must be procured in a way that supports the City’s goals for economic development, social equity, environmental sustainability, and overall quality of life. This chapter examines the strategies to accomplish these goals. Improved energy efficiency, district energy, and in-boundary generation of clean energy (rooftop PV) will reduce net electric power and natural gas demand substantially, but these measures will not eliminate the need for electricity and gas (or its replacement fuel) delivered into Boston. Broadly speaking, to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, the city must therefore (1) reduce its use of fossil fuels to heat and cool buildings through cost-effective energy efficiency measures and electrification of building thermal services where feasible; and (2) over time, increase the amount of carbon-free electricity delivered to the city. Reducing energy demand though cost effective energy conservation measures will be necessary to reduce the challenges associated with expanding the electricity delivery system and sustainably sourcing renewable fuels.Item Carbon Free Boston: Waste Technical Report(2019-05-15) Castigliego, Joshua R.; Walsh, Michael J.; Pollack, Adam; Cleveland, Cutler J.OVERVIEW: For many people, their most perceptible interaction with their environmental footprint is through the waste that they generate. On a daily basis people have numerous opportunities to decide whether to recycle, compost or throwaway. In many cases, such options may not be present or apparent. Even when such options are available, many lack the knowledge of how to correctly dispose of their waste, leading to contamination of valuable recycling or compost streams. Once collected, people give little thought to how their waste is treated. For Boston’s waste, plastic in the disposal stream acts becomes a fossil fuel used to generate electricity. Organics in the waste stream have the potential to be used to generate valuable renewable energy, while metals and electronics can be recycled to offset virgin materials. However, challenges in global recycling markets are burdening municipalities, which are experiencing higher costs to maintain their recycling. The disposal of solid waste and wastewater both account for a large and visible anthropogenic impact on human health and the environment. In terms of climate change, landfilling of solid waste and wastewater treatment generated emissions of 131.5 Mt CO2e in 2016 or about two percent of total United States GHG emissions that year. The combustion of solid waste contributed an additional 11.0 Mt CO2e, over half of which (5.9 Mt CO2e) is attributable to the combustion of plastic [1]. In Massachusetts, the GHG emissions from landfills (0.4 Mt CO2e), waste combustion (1.2 Mt CO2e), and wastewater (0.5 Mt CO2e) accounted for about 2.7 percent of the state’s gross GHG emissions in 2014 [2]. The City of Boston has begun exploring pathways to Zero Waste, a goal that seeks to systematically redesign our waste management system that can simultaneously lead to a drastic reduction in emissions from waste. The easiest way to achieve zero waste is to not generate it in the first place. This can start at the source with the decision whether or not to consume a product. This is the intent behind banning disposable items such as plastic bags that have more sustainable substitutes. When consumption occurs, products must be designed in such a way that their lifecycle impacts and waste footprint are considered. This includes making durable products, limiting the use of packaging or using organic packaging materials, taking back goods at the end of their life, and designing products to ensure compatibility with recycling systems. When reducing waste is unavoidable, efforts to increase recycling and organics diversion becomes essential for achieving zero waste. [TRUNCATED]Item Carbon Free Boston: Transportation Technical Report(2019-05-15) Porter, Christopher; Milkovits, Martin; Chang, Xiao Yun (Jane); Boone, Scott; Walsh, Michael J.; Castigliego, Joshua R.; Cleveland, Cutler J.OVERVIEW: Transportation connects Boston’s workers, residents and tourists to their livelihoods, health care, education, recreation, culture, and other aspects of life quality. In cities, transit access is a critical factor determining upward mobility. Yet many urban transportation systems, including Boston’s, underserve some populations along one or more of those dimensions. Boston has the opportunity and means to expand mobility access to all residents, and at the same time reduce GHG emissions from transportation. This requires the transformation of the automobile-centric system that is fueled predominantly by gasoline and diesel fuel. The near elimination of fossil fuels—combined with more transit, walking, and biking—will curtail air pollution and crashes, and dramatically reduce the public health impact of transportation. The City embarks on this transition from a position of strength. Boston is consistently ranked as one of the most walkable and bikeable cities in the nation, and one in three commuters already take public transportation. There are three general strategies to reaching a carbon-neutral transportation system: • Shift trips out of automobiles to transit, biking, and walking;1 • Reduce automobile trips via land use planning that encourages denser development and affordable housing in transit-rich neighborhoods; • Shift most automobiles, trucks, buses, and trains to zero-GHG electricity. Even with Boston’s strong transit foundation, a carbon-neutral transportation system requires a wholesale change in Boston’s transportation culture. Success depends on the intelligent adoption of new technologies, influencing behavior with strong, equitable, and clearly articulated planning and investment, and effective collaboration with state and regional partners.Item Carbon Free Boston: Buildings Technical Report(2019-05-15) Hatchadorian, Rebecca; Best, Rob; Wholey, Katie; Calven, Alexandra; Levine, Erica; Tepfer, Sara; Swett, Brian; Walsh, Michael J.; Pollack, Adam; Perez, Taylor; Castigliego, Joshua R.; Cleveland, Cutler J.OVERVIEW: Boston is known for its historic iconic buildings, from the Paul Revere House in the North End, to City Hall in Government Center, to the Old South Meeting House in Downtown Crossing, to the African Meeting House on Beacon Hill, to 200 Clarendon (the Hancock Tower) in Back Bay, to Abbotsford in Roxbury. In total, there are over 86,000 buildings that comprise more than 647 million square feet of area. Most of these buildings will still be in use in 2050. Floorspace (square footage) is almost evenly split between residential and non-residential uses, but residential buildings account for nearly 80,000 (93 percent) of the 86,000 buildings. Boston’s buildings are used for a diverse range of activities that include homes, offices, hospitals, factories, laboratories, schools, public service, retail, hotels, restaurants, and convention space. Building type strongly influences energy use; for example, restaurants, hospitals, and laboratories have high energy demands compared to other commercial uses. Boston’s building stock is characterized by thousands of turn-of-the-20th century homes and a postWorld War II building boom that expanded both residential buildings and commercial space. Boston is in the midst of another boom in building construction that is transforming neighborhoods across the city. [TRUNCATED]