HomeMy WebLinkAboutApn H1 - Climate ChangeAPPENDIX H1
Global Climate Change Analysis
Global Climate Change
Analysis for the
Otay Land Company
General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General
Development Plan
Amendment,
Chula Vista, California
Prepared forPrepared by
City of Chula VistaRECON Environmental, Inc.
Public Services Building 2001927 Fifth Avenue
276 Fourth AvenueSan Diego, CA 92101-2358
Chula Vista, CA 92010P 619.308.9333 F 619.308.9334
Contact: StephenPower, AICPRECON Number 4829
May 10, 2012
Karen Bowling, Senior EnvironmentalAnalyst
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary 1
1.0Introduction 2
1.1Understanding Global Climate Change2
1.2Greenhouse Gases of Primary Concern 3
2.0Project Description 4
2.1Development Summary 4
2.2Green Building/Energy Efficiency Standards 8
2.2.1Energy Efficiency 8
2.2.2Water Conservation 8
2.2.3Materials Use and Waste Reduction 9
2.2.4Pollutant Control and Heat Island Reduction 9
3.0Existing Conditions 9
3.1Environmental Setting 9
3.1.1Regional Climate 9
3.1.2State and Regional GHG Inventories 10
3.1.3Consequences of Global Climate Change 12
3.2Regulatory Background 13
3.2.1International 13
3.2.2National 16
3.2.3State 18
3.2.4Local 29
4.0Significance Criteria and Analysis Methodologies 36
4.1Determining Significance 36
4.1.1Business-as-Usual 2020 Emissions 36
4.1.2Scoping Plan Reduction Measures 37
4.1.3Significance Thresholds 38
4.2Methodology and Assumptions 39
4.2.1Estimating Vehicle Emissions 40
4.2.2Estimating Construction Emissions 41
4.2.3Estimating Building Use Emissions 41
4.2.4General Assumptions 44
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
5.0Impact Analysis 45
5.1Project Emissions Relative to BAU 45
5.1.1Impacts 45
5.1.2Significance of Impacts 55
5.2Project Consistency with Adopted Plans, Policies, and Regulations58
5.2.1Impacts 58
5.2.2Significance of Impacts 59
6.0Conclusions and Recommendations60
7.0References Cited 60
FIGURES
1:Regional Location 5
2:Aerial Photograph of Project 6
3:Proposed Land Uses 7
4:City Climate Zones 35
TABLES
1:Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes 3
2:California GHG Emissions in 1990 and 2004 10
3:San Diego County GHG Emissions in 2006 11
4:CARB Scoping Plan Recommended GHG Reduction Measures 21
5:California BAU 2020 GHG Emissions Forecast 37
6:CARB Scoping Plan Recommended GHG Reduction Measures
within City’s Control 38
7:Future(Year 2020) Modeled Land Uses 40
8:GHG Emission Factors 44
9:Summary of Estimated GHG Emissions and Project Reductions from
Non-Transportation Sources 57
ATTACHMENTS
1:Understanding Global Climate Change
2:Chula Vista Green Building Standards and Increased Energy Efficiency
Standards Ordinances
3:GHG Emissions Calculations
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 1
Executive Summary
The proposed Otay Ranch General Development Plan (Proposed Project) is located
south of Olympic Parkway, west and east of State Route 125 (SR-125) in the Otay
Ranch community in the city of Chula Vista (City). The Proposed Project comprises a
General Plan Amendment (GPA) and General Development Plan Amendment (GDPA)
to allow the ultimate buildout of 6,050 residential units,1.8 million square feet of
commercial uses,51.4 acres of schools, 10.8 acres of community purpose facilities,
55.4acres of park, and 2.2 million square feet of industrial uses. The purpose of this
report is to evaluate the significance of the Proposed Project’s GHG emissions that
would occur from the construction and ongoing operation of the maximum allowable land
uses under the proposed plan. The operational GHG emissions evaluated include
emissions from vehicleuse, electricity consumption, natural gas combustion, water use,
and solid waste disposal. Significance was determined based on the City’s threshold
requiring a 20 percent reduction in the Proposed Project’s overall GHG emissions
compared to a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario.
This report concludes that the Proposed Project’s contribution to cumulative greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions would be less than significant. A total of 197,220.66metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2E) of GHG emissions would be emitted by the
Proposed Project each year above existing conditions. This estimate represents a
nearly 29-percent reduction in total GHG emissions compared to the BAU condition,
which would emit 275,971.62MTCO2E of GHG emissions per year above existing
conditions. This reduction is due to the Proposed Project’s incorporation of key vehicle
emission reduction measures as well as increased energy-and water-saving design.
Accounting for statewide regulations being imposed on the auto and fuel industries to
reduce vehicle GHG emissions statewide, and project-specific design that reduces
average vehicle trip lengths, transportation-related BAU emissions would be reduced
nearly 40percentby the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project’s average local daily
trip length would be 4.62 miles for Village 8 West and 5.08 miles for Village 9. This trip
length is less than the regional average trip length of 5.8 miles, and yields a substantially
lesser VMT and total vehicle fuel consumption compared to BAU.
Accounting for the Proposed Project’s increased energy-and water-saving design
requirements, the non-transportation-related BAU emissions (i.e., emissions from energy
and water use, solid waste disposal and construction activities) would be reduced 21
percent by the Proposed Project. This reduction results from substantially reduced BAU
energy and water use as required in the proposed new General Plan (GP) Policy E 7.8
and in existing City ordinances.
Given its vehicle, energy and water use GHG reduction features, the Proposed Project
would generate total GHG emissions 29percent lower than the total emissions projected
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 2
for BAU. The Proposed Project is therefore consistent with the City’s threshold and with
the Scoping Plan and AB 32 year 2020 goals upon which it is based. The Proposed
Project’s Climate Change impacts would be less than significant.
1.0Introduction
This report evaluates the significance of the Proposed Project’s contribution of GHG
emissions to statewide GHG emissions and GHG emissions reduction targets. To
evaluate the incremental effect of Proposed Project development on statewide and
global climate change, it is important to have a basic understanding of the nature of the
global climate change problem.
1.1Understanding Global Climate Change
Global climate change is a change in the average weather of the earth, which can be
measured by wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperature. The earth’s climate
is in a state of constant flux with periodic warming and cooling cycles. Extreme periods
of cooling are termed “ice ages,” which may then be followed by extended periods of
warmth. For most of the earth’s geologic history, these periods of warming and cooling
have been the result of many complicated, interacting natural factors thatinclude
volcanic eruptions which spew gases and particles (dust) into the atmosphere, the
amount of water, vegetation, and ice covering the earth’s surface, subtle changes in the
earth’s orbit, and the amount of energy released by the sun (sun cycles). However, since
the beginning of the Industrial Revolution around 1750, the average temperature of the
earth has been increasing at a rate that is faster than can be explained by natural
climate cycles alone.
With the Industrial Revolution came an increase inthe combustion of carbon-based fuels
such as wood, coal, oil, natural gas, and biomass. Industrial processes have also
created emissions of substances that are not found in nature. This in turn has led to a
marked increase in the emissions of gases that have been shown to influence the
world’s climate. These gases, termed “greenhouse” gases, influence the amount of heat
that is trapped in the earth’s atmosphere. Because recently observed increased
concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere are related to increased emissions resulting
from human activity, the current cycle of “global warming” is generally believed to be
largely due to human activity. Of late, the issue of global warming or global climate
change has arguably become the most important and widelydebated environmental
issue in the United States and the world. Because climate change is caused by the
collective of human actions taking place throughout the world, it is quintessentially a
cumulative issue.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 3
1.2Greenhouse Gases of Primary Concern
There are numerous GHGs, both naturally occurring and manmade. Table 1
summarizes some of the most common. Each GHG has variable atmospheric lifetime
and global warming potential.
The atmospheric lifetime of the GHG is the average time the molecule stays stable in the
atmosphere. Most GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes, staying in the atmosphere
hundreds or thousands of years. The potential of a gas to trap heat and warm the
atmosphere is measured by its global warming potential or GWP. Specifically, GWP is
defined as the cumulative radiative forcing effects of a gas, both direct and indirect,
integrated over a specified period of time resulting from the emission of a unit mass of gas
relative to some reference gas (U.S.EPA 2002). The reference gas for GWP is carbon
dioxide which, as shown in Table 1, thus has a GWP of 1. The GHGs with higher GWPs
have a greater global warming effect than carbon dioxide on a molecule by molecule basis.
TABLE 1
GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS (GWPs) AND ATMOSPHERIC LIFETIMES (YEARS)
Gas
Atmospheric
Lifetime 100-year GWP 20-year GWP 500-year GWP
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)50-200 1 1 1
Methane (CH4)a 12±3 21 56 6.5
Nitrous oxide (N20)120 310 280 170
HFC-23 264 11,700 9,100 9,800
HFC-125 32.6 2,800 4,600 920
HFC-134a 14.6 1,300 3,400 420
HFC-143a 48.3 3,800 5,000 1,400
HFC-152a 1.5 140 460 42
HFC-227ea 36.5 2,900 4,300 950
HFC-236fa 209 6,300 5,100 4,700
HFC-4310mee 17.1 1,300 3,000 400
CF4 50,000 6,500 4,400 10,000
C2F6 10,000 9,200 6,200 14,000
C4F10 2,600 7,000 4,800 10,100
C6F14 3,200 7,400 5,000 10,700
SF6 3,200 23,900 16,300 34,900
SOURCE: U.S.EPA 2002.
aThe methane GWP includes the direct effects and those indirect effects due to the production of tropospheric
ozone and stratospheric water vapor. The indirecteffect due to the production of CO2 is not included.
Of the gases listed in Table 1, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous
oxide(N20) are produced by both biogenic (natural) and anthropogenic (human) sources.
The remaining gases occur solely as the result of human processes.
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are synthetic, made-made chemicals used as substitutes for
ozone-depleting chloroflourocarbons in automobile air conditioners and refrigerants.
Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) such as CF4 are used primarily in aluminum production and
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 4
semiconductor manufacture. Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) is used for insulation in electric
power transmission and distribution equipment. These remaining gases are not of
primary concern to the Proposed Project.
CO2, CH4 andN20 are the GHGs of primary concern in this analysis. Carbon dioxide
would be emitted by uses allowed under the Proposed Project during the combustion of
fossil fuels in vehicles, from electricity generation and natural gas consumption, and from
solid waste disposal. Smaller amounts of methane and nitrous oxide would be emitted
from the same Project operations.
More information on the background of global warming and GHGs can be found in
Attachment 1, Understanding Global Climate Change.
2.0Project Description
2.1Development Summary
The Otay Ranch GPA and GDPA (collectively known as the Proposed Project) is
composed of two parcels of land (Village 8 West and Village 9) located within the Otay
Ranch villages planning area. The intent of the Proposed Project is to redefine village
boundaries to create Village 8 West and Village 9 as cohesive and integrated village
areas which correspond to the City’s General Plan. The Proposed Projectalso includes
an 85-acre Regional Technology Park (RTP) within the Planning Area10/University Site.
The discretionary actions required to implement the Proposed Project include a GPA
and Otay Ranch GDPA.
The Proposed Project is located south of Olympic Parkway, west and east of State
Route 125 (SR-125) in the Otay Ranch community in the eastern part of the City
(Figure1). The proposed GPA and GDPA would revise text and graphics relevant to the
subject village areas in these plansto allow the ultimate buildout of 6,050 residential
units,1.8 million square feet of commercial and 2.2 million square feet of industrial uses,
10.8 acres of community purpose use, 51.4 acres of schools, and 55.4 acres of park use
on currently vacant land (Figure 2). Figure 3shows the land use plan of the Proposed
Project. The Proposed Project’splan of land uses have been guided by principles that
encourage walkability, mixed-use, alternative modes of transportation, and preservation
of a large amount of open space.
FIGURE1
RegionalLocation
Dulzura
Jamul
Jamacha
BlossomValley
San
Diego
San
Diego
Imperial
Beach
Coronado
LakePoway
LaJolla
BrownField
RanchoPenasquitos
CarmelValley
LindberghFieldAirport
MCASMiramar
MiramarReservoir
Solana
Beach
Del
Mar
MissionBay
SanDiegoBay
SweetwaterReservoir
LowerOtayReservoir
ElCapitanReservoir
SanVicenteReservoir
Santee
Lemon
Grove
ElCajon
Poway
La
Mesa
National
City
San
Diego
ChulaVista
UNINCORPORATED
Pacific
Ocean
CALIFORNIA
ME XICO
§¨¦15
£¤67
P o w a y RoadViadelaValle
£¤56
§¨¦5 §¨¦805
£¤52
§¨¦8
£¤94
£¤94
£¤125
Dulzura
Jamul
Jamacha
BlossomValley
San
Diego
San
Diego
Imperial
Beach
Coronado
LakePoway
LaJolla
BrownField
RanchoPenasquitos
CarmelValley
LindberghFieldAirport
MCASMiramar
MiramarReservoir
Solana
Beach
Del
Mar
MissionBay
SanDiegoBay
SweetwaterReservoir
LowerOtayReservoir
ElCapitanReservoir
SanVicenteReservoir
Santee
Lemon
Grove
ElCajon
Poway
La
Mesa
National
City
San
Diego
ChulaVista
UNINCORPORATED
Pacific
Ocean
CALIFORNIA
ME XICO
§¨¦15
£¤67
P o w a y RoadViadelaValle
£¤56
§¨¦5 §¨¦805
£¤52
§¨¦8
£¤94
£¤94
£¤125
M:\JOBS3\4829\common_gis\fig1_tech.mxd11/1/2011
0 4Miles[
ProjectArea
Village8WestandVillage9
RTP
Ae
r
i
a
l
P
h
o
t
o
g
r
a
p
h
o
f
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
A
r
e
a
FIGURE2
LowerOtayReservoir
S R -1 2 5
O
t
a
y
River
BR
O
W
N
F
I
E
L
D
Vil
l
a
g
e
9
Vi
l
l
a
g
e
8
W
e
s
t
TEL
E
G
R
A
P
H
C
A
N
Y
O
N
R
D
04,000Feet
Im
a
g
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
:
C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t
2
0
1
0
A
e
r
i
a
l
s
E
x
p
r
e
s
s
,
A
l
l
R
i
g
h
t
s
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
(
f
l
o
w
n
Fe
b
20
1
0
)
[
M:\
J
O
B
S
3
\
4
8
2
9
\
c
o
m
m
o
n
_
g
i
s
\
f
i
g
2
_
t
e
c
h
.
m
x
d
1
1
/
1
/
2
0
1
1
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
A
r
e
a
Vi
l
l
a
g
e
8
W
e
s
t
a
n
d
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
9
RT
P
ProposedLandUsesFIGURE302,000Feet[
\\
s
e
r
v
e
r0
4
\
g
i
s
\
J
O
B
S
3
\
4
8
2
9
\
c
o
m
m
o
n
_
g
i
s
\
f
i
g
3
_
a
i
r
.
m
x
d
1
/
2
4
/
2
0
1
2
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
Vi
l
l
a
g
e
8
W
e
s
t
a
n
d
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
9
RT
P
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 8
2.2Green Building/Energy Efficiency Standards
The proposed GPA includes the addition of a new energy-related Policy E 7.8 into the
existing General Plan’s Environmental Element to “ensure that residential and non-
residential construction complies with all applicable City of Chula Vista energy efficiency
measures that are in effect at the time of discretionary permit review and approval or
building permit issuance, whichever is applicable.” The residential and non-residential
construction that would be allowed by the Proposed Project would thus be subject to
compliance with all relevant City energy efficiency and green building measures. The
City currently has two key Municipal Code ordinances that require advanced water
conservation, energy efficiency and other measures that would reduce the emission of
GHGs. These ordinances are discussed later in Section 3.2.4.5 and Section 3.2.4.6 and
are attached in their entirety as Attachment 2. An overview of the major GHG reducing
benefits of these existing ordinances is described below.
2.2.1Energy Efficiency
In accordance with the City’s current energy code and Increased Energy Efficiency
Standards (Municipal Code Chapter 15.26, Section 15.26.030), the Proposed Project
developmentshall exceed the current 2008 California Energy Code’s residential energy
efficiency standards by 15 percent. Projects would accomplish this through improved
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning (HVAC)systems and duct seals; enhanced
ceiling, attic and wall insulation; EnergyStar appliances; high-efficiency water heaters;
energy-efficient three-coat stucco exteriors; energy-efficient lighting; and high-efficiency
window glazing. These energy features would undergo independent third party
inspection and diagnostics as part of the City’s verification and commissioning process.
2.2.2Water Conservation
In accordance with the City’s current Green Building Standards (Municipal Code Chapter
15.12), residential and commercial buildings would be required to be designed to use at
least 20 percent less water per unit than buildings compliant with the existing plumbing
code. This would be achieved through advanced plumbing systems such as parallel hot
water piping or hot water recirculation systems, and fixtures such as ultra-low flow
toilets, water-saving showerheads and kitchen faucets, and buyer-optional high-
efficiency clothes washers. As required by the Standards, the 20-percent reduction in
potable water use shall be demonstrated by verifying each plumbing fixture and fitting
meets the 20percent reduced flow rate or by calculatinga 20-percent reduction in the
building water use baseline.
In addition to these indoor water use conservation features, projects would be required
to design outdoor landscaping that minimizes turf, maximizes drought-tolerant plants,
and incorporates weather-based irrigation controllers, multi-programmable irrigation
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 9
clocks, and a high-efficiency drip irrigation system. Also at the time of final inspection, a
manual shall be placed in each building that includes, among other things, information
about waterconservation.
2.2.3Materials Use and Waste Reduction
In accordance with the Green Building Standards and state and local laws, at least
50percent of on-site construction waste and ongoing operational waste would be
diverted from landfills through reuse and recycling. To further minimize waste, the
Standards require projects to incorporate recycled materials for such things as flooring,
and to use certified sustainable wood products and other recycled or rapidly renewable
building materials where possible. Areas for storage and collection of recyclables and
yard waste are also required to be provided for each residence.
2.2.4Pollutant Control and Heat Island Reduction
To maximize shade and reduce heat island effects, the landscape plans of subsequent
projects would be required to include strategic location of deciduous trees and other
vegetation, as well as the possible use of cool or green roofs. Impervious surfaces,
including paved parking areas, are required to be minimized and pervious pavers and
materials used instead where practical. No CFC-based refrigerants are allowed, and
interior finishes, adhesives, sealants, paints and coatings, and carpet systems would be
required to be low in VOCs (volatile organic compounds), and meet the testing and
product requirements of one or more nationally recognized green product labeling
programs. Compliance with these requirements shall be verified through documentation.
3.0Existing Conditions
3.1Environmental Setting
3.1.1Regional Climate
The climate of the region which encompasses the City of Chula Vista is identified as
Mediterranean, which is characterized by warm, dry summers and mild, wet winters.
Clear skies predominate for much of the year due to a semi-permanent high-pressure
cell located over the Pacific Ocean. This high-pressure cell also drives the dominant
onshore circulation and helps to create subsidence and radiation temperature
inversions. Subsidence inversions occur during the warmer months when descending
air associated with the high-pressure cell comes in contact with cool marine air.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 10
Radiation inversions typically occur on winter nights when air near the ground cools by
radiation and the air aloft remains warm.
An average of 10 inches of rain falls each year from November to early April,while the
remainder of the year is typically dry. Typically, measurable rain falls on 20 days per
year, with only six of these days experiencing moderate (0.5 inch in 24 hours) rainfall.
3.1.2State and Regional GHG Inventories
3.1.2.1California GHG Inventory
The CARB performsstatewide inventories. The inventory is divided into nine broad
sectors of economic activity: agriculture, commercial, electricity generation, forestry,high
GWP emitters,industrial, recycling and waste, residential, and transportation. Emissions
are quantified in million MTCO2E. Table 2 shows the estimated statewide GHG
emissions for the years 1990, 2000, 2004, and 2008.
TABLE 2
CALIFORNIA GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR IN 1990, 2000, 2004,AND 2008
Sector
1990
Emissions in
MMTCO2E
(% total)1
2000
Emissions in
MMTCO2E
(% total)1
2004
Emissions in
MMTCO2E
(% total)1
2008
Emissions in
MMTCO2E
(% total)1
Sources
Agriculture 23.4 (5%)25.44 (6%)28.82 (6%)28.06 (6%)
Commercial 14.4 (3%)12.80 (3%)13.20 (3%)14.68 (3%)
Electricity Generation 110.6 (26%)103.92 (23%)119.96 (25%)116.35 (24%)
Forestry (excluding sinks)0.2 (<1%)0.19 (<1%)0.19 (<1%)0.19 (<1%)
High GWP --10.95 (2%)13.57 (3%)15.65 (3%)
Industrial 103.0 (24%)97.27 (21%)90.87 (19%)92.66 (19%)
Recycling and Waste --6.20 (1%)6.23 (1%)6.71 (1%)
Residential 29.7 (7%)30.13 (7%)29.34 (6%)28.45 (6%)
Transportation 150.7 (35%)171.13 (37%)181.71 (38%)174.99 (37%)
Unspecified Remaining2 1.3(<1%)------
Subtotal 433.3 458.03 483.89 477.74
Sinks
Forestry Sinks -6.7 (--)-4.72 (--)-4.32 (--)-3.98 (--)
TOTAL 426.6 453.31 479.57 473.76
SOURCE: CARB 2007, 2010a.
1Percents may not total 100 due to rounding.2The remaining are from unspecified fuel combustion and ozone depleting substance (ODS)
substitute use which could not be attributed to an individual sector.
As shown in Table 2, statewide GHG emissions totaled 433 MMTCO2Ein 1990,
458 MMTCO2E in 2000,484 MMTCO2Ein 2004, and 478 MMTCO2E in 2008.According
to data from the CARB, it appears that statewide GHG emissions peaked in 2004 and
are now beginning to decrease (CARB 2010a). Transportation-related emissions
consistently contribute the mostGHG emissions, followed by electricity generation and
industrial emissions.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 11
The forestry sector is unique because it not only includes emissions associated with
harvest, fire, and land use conversion, but also includes removals of atmospheric CO2 by
photosynthesis, which is then bound (sequestered) in plant tissues. As seen in Table2,
the forestry sector consistently removesmore CO2 from the atmosphere statewide than
it emits. As a result, although decreasing over time, this sector representsa net sink,
removing a net 6.7 MMTCO2E from the atmosphere in 1990,anet 4.7 MMTCO2E in
2000, a net4.3 MMTCO2E in 2004, and a net 4.0MMTCO2E in 2008.
3.1.2.2San Diego County GHG Inventory
A San Diego County regional emissions inventory was prepared by the University of San
Diego that took into account the unique characteristics of the region. The 2006
emissions inventory for San Diego County is duplicated below in Table 3. The sectors
included in this inventory are somewhat different than those in the statewide inventory.
TABLE 3
SAN DIEGO COUNTY GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR IN 2006
Sector
2006 Emissions
in MMTCO2E (% total)1
Agriculture/Forestry/Land Use 0.7 (2%)
Waste 0.7 (2%)
Electricity 9 (25%)
Natural Gas Consumption 3 (8%)
Industrial Processes & Products 1.6 (5%)
On-Road Transportation 16 (45%)
Off-Road Equipment & Vehicles 1.3 (4%)
Civil Aviation 1.7 (5%)
Rail 0.3 (<1%)
Water-Borne Navigation 0.127 (<0.5%)
Other Fuels/Other 1.1 (3%)
Total 35.5
SOURCE: San Diego County Greenhouse Gas Inventory: An Analysis of Regional
Emissions and Strategies to Achieve AB 32 Targets. Prepared by the University of
San Diego School of Law, Energy Policy Initiative Center (EPIC), and available
online at http://www.sandiego.edu/epic/ghginventory/.
1Percents may not total 100 due to rounding.
Similar to the statewide emissions, transportation-related GHG emissions contributed
the most countywide, followed by emissions associated with energy use.
3.1.2.3City of Chula Vista GHG Inventory
As part of monitoring its progress in attaining the goals of its CO2 Reduction Plan (see
Section 3.2.4.2 below), the City of Chula Vista inventoried citywide GHG emissions in
2005 and 2008. The 2005 GHG Emissions Inventory was the first formal evaluation of
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 12
the City’s progress in reaching its emissions goals, and the 2008 GHG Emissions
Inventory was the second formal evaluation (City of Chula Vista 2005, 2008a).
The 2008 GHG Emissions Inventory separates emissions into two major categories,
community and municipal. The community analysis represents the quantity of GHG
emissions produced throughout the entire City in both public and private sectors. The
municipal analysis represents emissions only from City facilities and operations.
In 2008, community GHG emissions in the City totaled 934,630MTCO2E. Transportation
and mobile sourcesaccounted for approximately 44 percent of this total. This is 29
percent higher than 1990 levels and 17percent higher than 2005 levels citywide and is
attributed to population growth.
In 2008, municipal GHG emissions in the City totaled 16,817 MTCO2E. Transportation
and mobiles sources accounted for approximately 46 percent of this total. Emissions
from municipal buildings and the municipal vehicle fleet increased from 1990 levels but
decreased 17 percent from the 2005 levels.
3.1.2.4Project Site GHG Emissions
The Proposed Project site is located in the south central portion of the Otay Ranch GDP
area. The Otay Ranch GDP area is former agricultural ranch land historically used for
ranching, grazing, and dry farming. It is currently vacant of development and is thus not
a source of anthropogenic GHGs.
Disturbed and undisturbed natural vegetation comprise the site’s dominant land cover.
Natural vegetation and soils temporarily store and release carbon as part of the
terrestrial carbon cycle. Plants absorb carbon dioxide through photosynthesis as they
grow, store it in solid form during the life of the plant, and release it again as a gas when
they die and decompose. Soil carbon accumulates from inputs of plants and animal
matter, roots, and other living components of the soil ecosystem (e.g.bacteria, worms).
Soil carbon is released through biological respiration, or through soil erosion and other
forms of soil disturbance. These emissions of carbon dioxide from the Project site are
not readily quantifiable, but are likely small from a regional perspective. Negligible
emissions of methane and nitrous oxides may also be occurring due to on-site
decomposition of wood, or any vegetative matter or waste, or to residue oxidation.
3.1.3Consequences of Global Climate Change
CARB projects a future statewide GHG emissions increase of over 23percent (from
2004) by 2020 given current trends (CARB 2008c). The 2008 EPIC study predicts a
countywide increase to 43 MMTCO2E or roughly 20percent (from 2006) by 2020, given
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 13
a BAU trajectory. Global GHG emissions forecasts also predict similar substantial
increases, given a BAU trajectory.
The potential consequences of global climate change on the San Diego region are far
reaching. The Climate Scenarios report, published in 2006 by the California Climate
Change Center, uses a range of emissions scenarios to project a series of potential
warming ranges (low, medium or high temperature increases) that may occur in
California during the 21st century. Throughout the state and the region, global climate
and local microclimate changes could cause an increase in extreme heat days; higher
concentrations, frequency and duration of air pollutants; an increase in wildfires; more
intense coastal storms; sea level rise; impacts to watersupply and water quality through
reduced snowpack and saltwater influx; public health impacts; impacts to near-shore
marine ecosystems; reduced quantity and quality of agricultural products; pest
population increases; and altered natural ecosystems and biodiversity.
3.2Regulatory Background
In response to rising concern associated with increasing GHG emissions and global
climate change impacts, numerous plans, policies and regulations have been adopted at
the international, national, state and local levels with the aim of reducing GHG
emissions.
3.2.1International
3.2.1.1Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
Layer
Human caused effects on the global atmosphere first became widely known to the public
at large in the mid-1970s when it was discovered that a number of substances,
particularly chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) used in refrigeration, when released into the
atmosphere could cause the breakdown of significant quantities of the earth’s protective
ozone (O3) in the stratosphere (i.e., the “ozone layer”). Somewhat concurrent with this
was the discovery of the now well documented “ozone hole” over Antarctica. The ozone
layer filters out most of the ultraviolet-B (UV-B) radiation reaching the earth. Therefore,
destruction of the ozone layer would allow more UV-B radiation to reach the earth’s
surface potentially leading to increases in skin cancer and other effects such as crop
damage and adverse effects on marine phytoplankton.
In response to these concerns, the Coordinating Committee on the Ozone Layer was
established by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) in 1977, and UNEP's
Governing Council adopted the World Plan of Action on the Ozone Layer. Continuing
efforts led to the signing in 1985 of the Vienna Convention on the Protection of the
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 14
Ozone Layer. This led to the creation of the Montreal Protocol on Substances That
Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol), an international treaty designed to protect
the stratospheric ozone layer by phasing out production of ozone depleting substances.
The Montreal Protocol was adopted on September 16, 1987 and was enacted on
January 1, 1989. The Protocol has been revised five times since 1989,most recently in
1999.
This treaty is considered one of the most successful international treaties on
environmental protection in the world, with ratification by 191 countries including the
United States. By the end of 2006, the 191 parties to the treaty had phased out over 95
percent of ozone depleting substances (UNEP 2007). Because of this success,
scientists are now predicting that the ozone hole will “heal” later this century.
The elimination of these ozone-depleting substances also has benefits relative to global
climate change because most of these substances are also potent GHGs with very high
GWPs, ranging from 4,680 to 10,720 (UNEP 2007, Australian Government 2007).
However, the phasing out of ozone depleting substances has led to an increase in the
use of non-ozone depleting substances such ashydrofluorocarbons(HFCs) which,
although not detrimental to the ozone layer, are also potent GHGs. As shown in
Table1, these substances have GWPs ranging from 140 to 11,700.
3.2.1.2Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
In response to growing concern about pollutants in the upper atmosphere and the
potential problem of climate change, the World Meteorological Organization and the
UNEP established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988. The
IPCC was tasked with assessing the scientific, technical, and socioeconomic information
relevant to understanding the scientific basis for human-induced climate change, its
potential impacts, and options for adaptation and mitigation. The most recent reports of
the IPCC have emphasized the scientific consensus that real and measurable changes
to the climate are occurring, that they are caused by human activity, and that significant
adverse impacts on the environment, the economy, and human health and welfare are
unavoidable.
3.2.1.3United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change
In 1994,the Unites States joined a number of other nations in signing an international
treaty known as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC). The UNFCCC recognized that global climate is a shared resource that can
be affected by industrial and other emissions of greenhouses gases, and set an overall
framework for intergovernmental efforts to tackle the challenges posed by global climate
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 15
change. As with the Montreal Protocol, this treaty was ratified by 191 countries including
the United States. Under this treaty, governments were to (UNFCCC 2007a):
•Gather and share information on GHG emissions, national policies and best
practices;
•Launch national strategies for addressing GHG emissions and adapting to
expected impacts; and
•Cooperate with other nations in preparing for adaptation to the impacts of climate
change.
The UNFCCC divided countries into three main groups according to differing
commitments based on economic strength, vulnerability to adverse climate change
impacts, and capacityto respond or adapt to climate change effects. The stronger
economic nations, including the United States, were to provide financial and
technological support to developing countriesto enable them to undertake emissions
reduction activities and to help them adapt to adverse effects of climate change.
The UNFCCC was enacted in March 1994; however, it generally lacked powerful, legally
binding measures. This led to the development of the Kyoto Protocol.
3.2.1.4Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC
Knowing that theUNFCCC did not contain the legally binding measures that would be
required to meaningfully address global climate change, a conference of the UNFCCC
signatory nations was held in Berlin in 1995 that launched a new round of discussions to
determine more detailed and stronger commitments for industrialized countries (the
Berlin Mandate). After two and a half years of negotiations, the Kyoto Protocol was
adopted in December 1997 (UNFCCC 2007c). While the 1997 Kyoto Protocol shared
the UNFCCC’s objectives, itcommitted signatories to individual, legally binding targets
to limit or reduce their GHG emissions. By March 1999, 84 countries, including the
United States, had signed the Kyoto Protocol (UNFCCC 2009).
Only Parties to the UNFCCC that have also become Parties to the Kyoto Protocol are
bound by the Kyoto Protocol’s commitments. Governments become Parties to the
Protocol by ratifying, accepting, approving, or acceding to it.Because of the complexity
of the negotiations and uncertainty associated with the rules or how they would operate,
several of the signing countries, including the United States, were reluctant to actually
ratify the Protocol. Therefore a new round of negotiations was undertaken to flesh out
the Kyoto Protocol’s rulebook. These negotiations concluded with the adoption of the
Marrakesh Accords in 2001. With the adoption of the Marrakesh Accords, the Protocol
was enacted in February 2005, and by July 2009, 184 governments had become Parties
to the Protocol (UNFCCC 2007c, 2009). In December 2009, a Copenhagen Accord was
held to address global climate change issues in the future;however,no further
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 16
measures were adopted. Another Accord is planned for December 2010 in Cancun,
Mexico.
Although a signer to the Kyoto Protocol, to date theU.S. has not ratified the Kyoto
Protocol,because it does not mandate emissions reductions from all countries, including
several developing countries whose GHG emissions are expected to exceed emissions
from developed countries within the next 25 years (U.S.EPA2007a).
3.2.2National
3.2.2.1Clean Air Act, Title VI -Stratospheric Ozone Protection
Similar to the Montreal Protocol discussed above, Title VI of the Clean Air Act was
established to protect stratospheric ozone by phasing out the manufacture of ozone-
depleting substances, and by restricting their use and distribution (U.S.EPA 2007b).
Also similar to the Montreal Protocol, while successful in phasing out ozone depleting
substances, Title VI has inadvertently led to an increase in the production and use of
non-ozone depleting substitutes such as HFCs that are global warming gases with high
GWPs and relatively long atmospheric lifetimes.
3.2.2.2Climate Change Action Plan
Adopted in 1993, the U.S. Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) consists of voluntary
actions to reduce all significant GHGs from all economic sectors. Backed by federal
funding, the CCAP supports cooperative partnerships between the government and the
private sector in establishing flexible and cost-effective ways to reduce GHG emissions.
The CCAP encourages investments in new technologies, but also relies on previous
actions and programs focused on saving energy, reducing transportation emissions,
improving forestry management, and reducing waste. With respect to energy and
transportation-related GHG emissions reductions, the CCAP includes the following (U.S.
Global Change Research Information Office 1993).
•Energy Demand Actions to accelerate the use of existing energy saving technologies
and encourage the development of more advanced technologies. Commercial
actions focus on installing efficient heating and cooling systems in commercial
buildings and upgrading to energy-efficient lighting systems (the Green Lights
program). The State Buildings Energy Incentive Fund provides funding to statesfor
the development of public building energy management programs. Residential
actions focus on developing new residential energy standards and building codes
and providing money-saving energy efficient options to homeowners.
•Energy Supply Actions to reduce emissions from energy supply. These actions focus
on increasing the use of natural gas, which emits less CO2 than coal or oil, and
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 17
investing in renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power, which result in
zero net CO2 emissions. Energy supply strategies also focus on reducing the amount
of energy lost during distribution from power plants to consumers.
•Transportation Actions to reduce transportation related emissions are focused on
investing in cleaner fuels and more efficient technologies and reducing vehicle miles
traveled (VMT). Also, the U.S.EPA and Department of Transportation (DOT) are to
draft guidance documents for reducing VMTs for us in developing local clean air
programs.
3.2.2.3GHG Emissions Intensity Reduction Programs
The GHG Emissions Intensity is the ratio of GHG emissions to economic output. In
2002, the U.S. GHG Emissions Intensity was 183 metric tons per million dollars of Gross
Domestic Product (U.S.EPA 2007c). In February 2002, the U.S. set a goal to reduce
this GHG Emissions Intensity by 18 percent by 2012 through various reduction
programs. A number of ongoing voluntary programs have thus been instituted to reduce
nationwide GHG emissions. These include (U.S.EPA 2007c):
•Climate VISION Partnership:In 2003, this program established a partnership
between 12 major industries and the U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE), the
U.S.EPA, the DOT and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The involved industries
include electric utilities; petroleum refiners and natural gas producers; automobile,
iron and steel, chemical and magnesium manufacturers; forest and paper producers;
railroads; and cement, mining, aluminum, and semiconductor industries. These
industries are working with the four agencies to reduce their GHG emissions by
developing cost-effective solutions, measuring and reporting emissions, developing
strategies for the adoption of advanced technologies, and implementing voluntary
mitigation actions.
•Cleaner Energy-Environment State Partnership: This program established a
partnership between federal and state agencies to support states in implementing
strategies and policies to promote renewable energy, energy efficiency, and other
cost-effective clean energies. States receive technical assistance from the U.S.EPA.
•Climate Leaders:Climate Leaders is a U.S.EPA voluntary program that establishes
partnerships with individual companies. Together they establish individual corporate
goals for GHG emissions reduction and monitor their emissions to measure
progress. More than 100 corporations that represent 8 percent of U.S. GHG
emissions are involved in Climate Leaders. More than half have reached their
emissions goals so far.
•Energy Star:Energy Star was established in 1992 by the U.S.EPA and became a
joint program with the U.S. DOE in 1996. Energy Star is a program that labels energy
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 18
efficient products with the Energy Star label. Energy Star enables consumers to
choose energy efficient and cost saving products. More than 1,400 manufacturers
use Energy Star labels on their energy efficient products.
•Green Power Partnership:This program establishes partnerships between the
U.S.EPA and companies and organizations that have bought or are considering
buying green power, which is power generated from renewable energy sources. The
U.S.EPA offers recognition and promotion to organizations that replace electricity
consumption with green power.
3.2.2.4Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards
The federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards determine the fuel
efficiency of certain vehicle classes in the U.S. While the standards had not changed
since 1990, in 2007, as part of the Energy and Security Act of 2007, the CAFE standards
were increased for new light-duty vehicles to 35 miles per gallon (mpg) by 2020. In May
2009, President Obama announced further plans to increase CAFE standards to require
light duty vehicles to meet an average fuel economy of 35.5 mpg by 2016. With
improved gas mileage, fewer gallons of transportation fuel would be combusted to travel
the same distance, thereby reducing nationwide GHG emissions associated with vehicle
travel.
3.2.2.5Mandatory Reporting of GHGs Rule
Starting January 1, 2010, large emitters of heat-trapping gases are to begin collecting
GHG data and reporting their annual GHG emissions to the U.S. EPA. Under this
reporting Rule, approximately 10,000 facilities would be covered, accounting for nearly
85 percent of the nation’s GHG emissions. This mandatory reporting applies to fossil
fuel and industrial GHG suppliers, motor vehicle and engine manufacturers, and facilities
that emit 25,000 MTCO2E or more per year. Vehicle and engine manufacturers outside
of the light-duty sector are required to begin phasing in their GHG reporting starting with
engine/vehicle model year 2011.
3.2.3State
The State of California has adopted a number of plans and regulations aimed at
identifying statewide and regional GHG emissions caps, GHG emissions reduction
targets, and actions and timelines to achieve the target GHG reductions.
3.2.3.1EO S-3-05–Statewide GHG Emission Targets
This executive order (EO) signed by Governor Schwarzenegger on June 1, 2005,
established the following GHG emission reduction targets for the state of California:
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 19
•By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels;
•By 2020 reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels;
•By 2050 reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.
This executive order also directs the secretary of the CalEPA to oversee the efforts
made to reach these targets, and to prepare biannual reports on the progressmade
toward meeting the targets and on the impacts to California related to global warming,
including impacts to water supply, public health, agriculture, the coastline, and forestry.
With regard to impacts, the report shall also prepare and report on mitigation and
adaptation plans to combat the impacts. The first Climate Action Team Assessment
Report was produced in March 2006 and has been updated biennially.
3.2.3.2AB 32 –California Global Warming Solutions Act
In response to Executive Order S-3-05,the California legislature passed Assembly Bill
(AB) 32 (Nuñez), the “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006”, which was
signed by the governor on September 27, 2006. It requires the CARB to adopt rules and
regulations that would reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The CARB is also
required to publish a list of discrete GHG emission reduction measures.
Specifically, AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, requires CARB
to (State of California 2006):
•Establish a statewide GHG emissions cap for 2020, based on 1990 emissions by
January 1, 2008.
In December 2007, CARB approved a 2020 emission limit of 427 million metric
tons of CO2 equivalent.
•Adopt mandatory reporting rules for significant sources of GHGs by January 1,
2009.
In December 2007, CARB adopted regulations requiring the largest industrial
sources to report and verify their GHG emissions. Facilities began tracking
emissions in 2008 and reports were due June 1, 2009. Emissions reporting for
2008 was allowed tobe based on best available data. Beginning in 2010,
emissions reports are to be more rigorous and subject to third-party verification.
This action builds on the earlier SB 177 (Sher) enacted in 2000 which
established a nonprofit California Climate ActionRegistry for the purpose of
administering a voluntary GHG emissions registry.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 20
•Adopt a plan by January 1, 2009 indicating how emission reductions will be
achieved from significant GHG sources via regulations, market mechanisms and
other actions.
A ClimateChange Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) was approved on December
12, 2008. The Scoping Plan contains the main strategies California will
implement to achieve a reduction of 174 million MTCO2E GHG emissions, or
approximately 29 percent from the state’s projected 2020 emission level of 596
million MTCO2E under a BAU scenario. The Scoping Plan is discussed in
greater detail in Section 3.2.3.3 below.
•Adopt regulations by January 1, 2011 to achieve the maximum technologically
feasible and cost-effective reductions in GHG, including provisions for using both
market mechanisms and alternative compliance mechanisms.
•Convene an Environmental Justice Advisory Committee and an Economic and
Technology Advancement Advisory Committee to advise CARB.
In January 2007, the CARB appointed a ten member Environmental Justice
Advisory Committee and appointed members to the Economic and Technology
Advancement Advisory Committee.
•Ensure public notice and opportunity for comment for all CARB actions.
A number of CARB documents, including the 2020 Emissions Forecast, the
Scoping Plan, and the Draft Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim
Significance Thresholds, have been circulated for public review and comment.
•Prior to imposing any mandates or authorizing market mechanisms, CARBmust
evaluate several factors, including but not limited to impacts on California's
economy, the environment and public health; equity between regulated entities;
electricity reliability; conformance with other environmental laws; and ensure that
the rules do not disproportionately impact low-income communities.
3.2.3.3Climate Change Scoping Plan
As directed by AB 32, the Climate Change Scoping Plan prepared by CARB in
December 2008 includes the measures in Table 4 to reduce statewide GHG emissions
to 1990 levels by 2020. CARB identified these reductions as necessary to reduce
forecasted BAU 2020 emissions by approximately 174 MMTCO2E. CARB will update the
Scoping Plan at least once every five years to allow evaluation of progress made and to
correct the Plan’s course where necessary.
As shown in Table 4, the majority of the reductions are to come from the two sectors that
generate the most GHG emissions statewide—transportation and electricity generation.
Transportation-related GHG emissions account for approximately 38 percent of the
TABLE 4
CARB SCOPING PLANRECOMMENDED GHG REDUCTION MEASURES
Recommended Reduction Measures
Reductions Counted
Towards 2020 Target
In MMTCO2E
(% subtotal)((% total))2
ESTIMATED REDUCTIONS RESULTING FROM THE COMBINATION OF
CAPPED SECTORS AND COMPLEMENTARY MEASURES
146.7
California Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Standards
•Implement Pavley Standards
•Develop Pavley II light-duty vehicle standards
31.7 (22%)((18%))
Energy Efficiency
•Building/appliance efficiency, new programs, etc.
•Increase CHP generation by 30,000 GWh
•Solar Water Heating (AB 1470 goal)
26.3 (18%)((15%))
Renewables Portfolio Standard (33% by 2020)21.3 (14%)((12%))
Low Carbon Fuel Standard 15 (10%)((9%))
Regional Transportation-Related GHG Targets1 5 (4%)((3%))
Vehicle Efficiency Measures 4.5 (3%)((3%))
Goods Movement
•Ship Electrification at Ports
•System-Wide Efficiency Improvements
3.7 (3%)((2%))
Million Solar Roofs 2.1 (2%)((1%))
Medium/Heavy Duty Trucks
•Heavy-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction
(Aerodynamic Efficiency)
•Medium-and Heavy-Duty Vehicle Hybridization
1.4 (<1%)((<1%))
High Speed Rail 1.0 (<1%)((<1%))
Industrial Measures (for sources covered under cap&trade program)
•Refinery Measures
•Energy Efficiency and Co-Benefits Audits
0.3 (<.5%)((<.5%))
Additional Reductions Necessary to Achieve the Cap 34.4 (23%)((20%))
ESTIMATED REDUCTIONS RESULTING FROM UNCAPPED SECTORS 27.3
Industrial Measures (for sources not covered under cap&trade
program)
•Oil and Gas Extraction and Transmission
1.1 ((<1%))
High Global Warming Potential Gas Measures 20.2 ((12%))
Sustainable Forests 5.0 ((3%))
Recycling and Waste (landfill methane capture)1.0 ((.6%))
TOTAL REDUCTIONS COUNTED TOWARDS 2020 TARGET 1743
SOURCE: Table 2 of the Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. Prepared by the
California Air Resources Board, pursuant to AB 32 the California Global Warming Solution Act of 2006.
December 2008.
1 This number represents an estimate of what may be achieved from local land use changes. It is not the
SB 375 regional target. CARB will establish regional targets for each Metropolitan Planning Organization
following input of the Regional Targets Advisory Committee and a public stakeholders consultation process
per SB 375.
2(Percentages)are relative to the capped sector subtotal of 146.7 MMTCO2E, and ((percentages)) are
relative to the total target reduction of 174 MMTCO2E,and may not total 100 due to rounding.
3 The total reduction for the recommended measures slightly exceeds the 169 MMTCO2E of reductions
estimated in the BAU 2020 Emissions Forecast. This is the net effect of adding several measures and
adjusting the emissions reduction estimates for some other measures.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 22
forecasted BAU 2020 emissions and over 36 percent of the targeted total reductions.
Energy-related emissions (including those from electric power generation, commercial
and residential energy use, and industrial oil and natural gas refineries) account for
approximately 48 percent of the forecasted BAU 2020 emissions and more than
29percent of the targeted total reductions.
As indicated in Table 4 and described in greater detail in the following sections, the
majority of these reductions in transportation-related and energy-related GHG emissions
are to be achieved through statewide regulatory mandates affecting vehicle and fuel
manufacture, public transit, and public energy utilities. The remaining reductions are to
be achieved through direct regulation and price incentive measures affecting oil and gas
extraction industries, forestry practices (including increased tree planting programs),
landfill methane capture, and restrictions on high GWP gases (used in select industries).
The three measures most applicable to the City’s control over land use planning and
development are the Regional Transportation-Related GHG Targets,the Energy
Efficiency, and the Million Solar Roofs measures. Implementing these three measures
accounts for a reduction of 33.4 MMTCO2E emissions, or approximately20percent, of
the total statewide GHG emissions reductions.
CARB also lists several other recommended measures which will contribute toward
achieving the 2020 statewide reductiongoal, but whose reductions are not (for various
reasons, including the potential for doublecounting) additive with the measures listed in
Table 4. These include state and local government operations measures, green building,
mandatory commercial recycling and other additional waste and recycling measures,
water sector measures, and methane capture at large dairies.
The Scoping Plan reduction measures and complementary regulations are described
further in the following sections, and are grouped under the two headings of
Transportation-Related Emissions Reductions and Non-Transportation-Related
Emissions Reductions as representative of the sectors to which they apply.
Transportation-Related Emissions Reductions
Transportation accounts for the largest share of the state’s GHG emissions.
Accordingly, a large share of the reduction of GHG emissions from the recommended
measures comes from this sector. To address emissions from vehicles, CARB is
proposing a comprehensive three-prongstrategy: reducing GHG emissions from
vehicles, reducing the carbon content of the fuel these vehicles burn, and reducing the
miles these vehicles travel.
3.2.3.4AB 1493 –Pavley Greenhouse Gas Vehicle Standards
AB 1493 (Pavley) enacted July 2002, directed CARB to adopt vehicle standards that
lowered GHG emissions from passenger vehicles and light duty trucks to the maximum
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 23
extent technologically feasible, beginning with the 2009 model year. CARB adopted
regulations in 2004 and applied to the U.S. EPA for a waiver under the federal Clean Air
Act to implement them.
Under federal law, California is the only state allowed to adopt its own vehicle standards,
but it cannot implement them until the U.S. EPA grants an administrative waiver. In
December 2004 the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers sued CARB to block
implementation of the new regulations and ultimately, in December 2007, a federal judge
decided the case in favor of the CARB (Sacramento Bee 2007). Despite this ruling, the
U.S.EPA denied CARB’s waiver request in February 2008.In January 2008, the State
of California sued the U.S.EPA in an attempt to overturn the U.S. EPA’s denial (Marten
Law Group 2008).
CARB adopted amendments to its new regulations in September 2009 that would
enforce AB 1493 but provide vehicle manufacturers with new compliance flexibility. On
June 30, 2009, the U.S. EPA rejected its earlier waiver denial reasoning and granted
California the authority to implement these GHG emissions reduction standards for new
passenger cars, pickup trucks, and sport utility vehicles. With this action, it is expected
that the new regulations will reduce GHG emissions from California passenger vehicles
by about 22 percent in 2012 and about 30 percent in 2016 (CARB 2010b) for a total
reduction of 31.7 MMTCO2E counted toward the total statewide reduction target (CARB
2008b) (see Table 4). These reductions are to come from improved vehicle
technologies such as small engines with superchargers, continuously variable
transmissions, and hybrid electric drives.
3.2.3.5EO S-01-07–Low Carbon Fuel Standard
This executive order signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in January 2007, directed that
a statewide goal be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California’s
transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020 through a Low Carbon Fuel Standard
(LCFS). CARB adopted the LCFS as a discrete early action measure pursuant to AB 32
in April 2009 and includes it as a reduction measure in its Scoping Plan (see Table 4).
The LCFS is a performance standard with flexible compliancemechanisms intended to
incentivize the development of a diverse set of clean, low-carbon transportation fuel
options. Its aim is to accelerate the availability and diversity of low-carbon fuels such as
biofuels, electricity and hydrogen, by taking into consideration the full life-cycle of GHG
emissions. A 10 percent reduction in the intensity of transportation fuels is expected to
equate to a reduction of 16.5 MMTCO2E in 2020. However, in order to account for
possible overlap of benefits between LCFS and the Pavley GHG standards, CARB has
discounted the contribution of LCFS to 15 MMTCO2E (CARB 2008b).
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 24
3.2.3.6Regional Transportation-Related GHG Targets
The Regional Transportation-Related GHG Targets measure included in the Scoping
Plan identifies policies to reduce transportation emissions through changes in future land
use patterns and community design, as well as through improvements in public
transportation, that reduce VMT. By reducing the miles vehicles travel, vehicle emissions
will be reduced. Improved planning and the resulting development are seen as essential
for meeting the 2050 emissions target (CARB 2008b p. 20). CARB expects that this
measure will reduce transportation-related GHG emissions by about 5 MMTCO2E or
4percent of the total statewide reductions attributed to the capped sectors (Table 4).
Specific regional reduction targets established through SB-375 will determine more
accurately what reductions can be achieved through this measure.
3.2.3.7SB 375 –Regional Emissions Targets
SB375 was signed in September 2008 and requires CARB to set regional targets for
reducing passenger vehicle GHG emissions in accordance with the Scoping Plan
measure described above. Its purpose is to align regional transportation planning efforts,
regional GHG reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation to reduce GHG
emissions by promoting high-density, mixed-use developments around mass transit
hubs.
CARB, in consultation with statewide Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), is to
provide each affected region with passenger vehicle GHG emissions reduction targets
for 2020 and 2035 by September 30, 2010. The San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG) is the San Diego region’s MPO. On August 9, 2010 CARB released the staff
report on the proposed reduction targetfor San Diego County, which was subsequently
approved by CARB on September 23, 2010. The San Diego region will be required to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks 7percent per capita by
2020 and 13percent by2035 (SANDAG 2010a). The reduction targets are to be
updated every 8 years, but can be updated every 4 years if advancements in emissions
technologies affect the reduction strategies to achieve the targets.
Once reduction targets are established, SB 375 requires MPOsin California to prepare
andadopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that demonstrates how the region
will meet itsgreenhouse gas reduction targets through integrated land use, housing, and
transportation planning. Enhanced public transit service combined with incentives for
land use development that provides a better market for public transit willplay an
important role in the SCS. After the SCS is adopted by theMPO, theSCS will
beincorporated into that region's federally enforceable RTP.SANDAG hascompleted
work on the 2050 RTP, the first such plan in the state that will include an SCS (CARB
2010c; SANDAG 2010a). CARB is also required toreview each finalSCS to determine
whether it would, if implemented, achieve the greenhouse gas emission reduction target
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 25
for its region. If the combination of measures in the SCS will not meet the region’s target,
the MPO must prepare a separate Alternative Planning Strategy (APS) to meet the
target.The APS is not a part of theRTP.
As an incentive to encourage implementation of the SCS and APS, developers can
obtain relief from certain requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) for those projects that are consistent with either the SCS or APS (CARB 2010c).
3.2.3.8EO S-7-04/SB 1505 –California Hydrogen Highway
Network
This executive order signed in 2004 designated California’s 21 interstate freeways as the
“California Hydrogen Highway Network”, and directed the California Environmental
Protection Agency (CalEPA) andall other relevant state agencies to plan and build a
network of hydrogen fueling stations along these roadways and in the urban centers.
This EO also called for the rapid transition to a hydrogen economy in California by
January 1, 2005.
In response to this EO, SB 1505 (Lowenthal) was passed a year later requiring the
CARB to adopt regulations to ensure that the production and use of hydrogen for
transportation purposes contributes to the reduction of GHGs and other air
contaminants (Union of Concerned Scientists 2007).
a.Non-Transportation-Related Emissions Reductions
In the energy sector, Scoping Plan measures aim to provide better information and
overcome institutional barriers that slow the adoption of cost-effective energy efficiency
technologies. They include enhanced energy efficiency programs to provide incentives
for customers to purchase and install more efficient products and processes; and
building and appliance standards to ensure that manufacturers and builders bring
improved products to market. Over the long term, the recommended measures will
increase the amount of electricity from renewable energy sources and improve the
energy efficiency of industries, homes and buildings. While energy efficiency gains the
largest emissions reductions from this sector, other land development applicable
measures such as water conservation, materials use and waste reduction, and green
building design and development practices, achieve additional emissions reduction.
3.2.3.9Renewables Portfolio Standard
The Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) promotes diversification of the state’s
electricity supply. Its purpose is to achieve 33 percent renewable energy mix statewide;
providing 33 percent of the state’s electricity needs met by renewable resources by2020
(CARB 2008b). The RPS is included in CARB’s Scoping Plan list of reduction measures
(see Table 4). Increasing the RPS to 33 percent is designed to accelerate the
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 26
transformation of the electricity sector, including investment in the transmission
infrastructure and systems changes to allow integration of large quantities of intermittent
wind and solar generation. Renewable energy includes (but is not limited to) wind, solar,
geothermal, small hydroelectric, biomass, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas.
Increased use of renewables would decrease California’s reliance on fossil fuels, thus
reducing emissions of GHGs from the electricity sector. CARB estimates that full
achievement of the RPS would decrease statewide GHG emissions by 21.3 MMTCO2E
(CARB 2008b).
3.2.3.10Million Solar Roofs Program
The Million Solar Roofs Program was created by SB 1 in 2006 and includes the CPUC’s
California Solar Initiative and California Energy Commission’s (CEC)New Solar Homes
Partnership. It requires publicly owned utilities to adopt, implement and finance solar
incentive programs to lower the cost of solar systems and help achieve the goal of
installing 3,000 MW of new solar capacity by 2020. The Million Solar Roofs Program is
one of CARB’s GHG reduction measures identified in the 2008 Scoping Plan (see
Table4). Achievement of the program’s goal is expected to equate to a reduction of 2.1
MMTCO2E in 2020 statewide BAU emissions, as counted toward the total statewide
reduction of 173 MMTCO2E (CARB 2008b).
3.2.3.11 SB 1368 –Public Utility Emission Standards
SB 1368 (Parata), passed in 2006, requires the CEC to set GHG emission standards for
entities providing electricity in the state. The bill further requires that the California Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC) prohibit electricity providers and corporations from entering
into long-term contracts if those providers and corporations do not meet the CEC’s
standards (Union of Concerned Scientists 2007).
3.2.3.12Title 24, Part 6 -California Energy Code
The California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6 is the California Energy Code. This
code, originally enacted in 1978 in response to legislative mandates, establishes energy
efficiency standards for residential and non-residential buildings in order to reduce
California’s energy consumption. The Code is updated periodically to incorporate and
consider new energy efficiency technologies and methodologies as they become
available. The most recent amendments to the Code, known as Title 24 2008, or the
2008 Energy Code, became effective January 1, 2010. Title 24 2008 requires energy
savings of 15–35percent above the former Title 24 2005 energy code. At a minimum,
residential buildings must achieve a 15percent reduction in their combined space
heating, cooling andwater heating energy compared to the Title 24 2005 standards.
Incentives in the form of rebates and tax breaks are provided on a sliding scale for
buildings achieving energy efficiency above the minimum 15percent reduction over
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 27
Title24 2005. The reference to Title 24 2005 is relevant in that many of the State’s long-
term energy and GHG reduction goals identify energy saving targets relative to Title 24
2005. By reducing California’s energy consumption, emissions of statewide GHGs may
also be reduced.
New construction and major renovations must demonstrate their compliance with the
current Energy Code through submission and approval of a Title 24 Compliance Report
to the local building permit review authority and the CEC. The compliance reports must
demonstrate a building’s energy performance through use of CEC-approved energy
performance software that shows iterative increases in energy efficiency given selection
of various HVAC, sealing, glazing, insulation, and other components related to the
buildingenvelope. Title 24 governs energy consumed by the built environment and by
the major building envelope systems such as space heating, space cooling, water
heating, some aspects of the fixed lighting system, and ventilation. Non-building energy
use or “plug-in” energy use (such as appliances, equipment, electronics, plug-in lighting)
is independent of building design and not subject to Title 24.
3.2.3.13Title 24, Part 11 –California Green Building Standards
In 2007, Governor Schwarzenegger directed the California Building Standards
Commission to work with state agencies on the adoption of green building standards for
residential, commercial and public building construction for the 2010 code adoption
process. A voluntary version of this California Green Building Standards Code, referred
to as CALGreen, was added to Title 24 as Part 11 in 2009. The 2010 version of
CALGreen tookeffect January 2011 and institutedmandatory minimum environmental
performance standards for all ground-up newconstruction of commercial, low-rise
residential, and state-owned buildings; as well as schools and hospitals. It also includes
voluntary tiers (I and II) with stricter environmental performance standards. Local
jurisdictions must enforce the minimum mandatory requirements and may also adopt the
Green Building Standards with amendments for stricter requirements.
The mandatory standardsrequire:
•20percent mandatory reduction in indoor water userelative to specified baseline
levels;
•50percent construction/demolition wastemust be diverted from landfills;
•Mandatory inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency;
and
•Low-pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish materials such as paints,
carpets, vinyl flooring and particle boards.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 28
The voluntary standards require:
•Tier I –15 percent improvement in energy requirements, stricter water
conservation requirements for specific fixtures, 65 percent reduction in
construction waste, 10 percent recycled content, 20 percent permeable paving,
20 percent cement reduction, cool/solar reflective roof.
•Tier II –30 percent improvement in energy requirements, stricter water
conservation requirements for specific fixtures, 75 percent reduction in
construction waste, 15 percent recycled content, 30 percent permeable paving,
30 percent cement reduction, cool/solar reflective roof.
Similar to the compliance reporting procedure described above for demonstrating energy
code compliance, compliance with the CALGreen water reduction requirements must be
demonstrated through completion of water use reporting forms for both commercial and
low-riseresidential buildings. The water use compliance form must demonstrate a
minimum 20 percent reduction in indoor water use by either showing a 20 percent
reduction in the overall baselinewater use as identified in CALGreen or a reduced per-
plumbing-fixture water use rate.
Related to CALGreen are the earlier Sustainable Building Goal (EO D-16-00) and Green
Building Initiative (EO S-20-04). The 2000 Sustainable Building Goal instructed that all
state buildings be constructed or renovated and maintained as models of energy, water
and materials efficiency.The 2004 Green Building Initiative recognized further that
significant reductions in GHG emissions can be achieved through the design and
construction of new green buildings as well as the sustainable operation, retrofitting, and
renovation of existing buildings.
The CARB Scoping Plan includes a Green Building Strategy with the goal of expanding
the use of green building practices to reducethe carbon footprint of new and existing
buildings. Consistent with CALGreen, the Scoping Plan recognized that GHG reductions
would be achieved through buildings that exceed minimum energy efficiency standards,
decrease consumption of potable water, reduce solid waste during construction and
operation, and incorporate sustainable materials. Green building is thus a vehicle to
achieve the Scoping Plan’s statewide electricity and natural gas efficiency targets and to
lower GHG emissions from waste and watertransport sectors.
In the Scoping Plan, CARB projects that an additional 26 MMTCO2E could be reduced
through expanded green building (CARB 2008b, p.17). However, this reduction is not
counted toward the BAU 2020 reduction goal to avoid any double counting, as most of
these reductions are accounted for in the electricity, waste, and water sectors. Because
of this, CARB has assigned all emissions reductions that occur as a result of green
building strategies to other sectors for the purpose of meeting AB 32 requirements, but
will continue to evaluate and refine the emissions from this sector.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 29
3.2.3.14SB 97 –CEQA GHG Amendments
SB 97 (Dutton) passed by the legislature and signed by the governor on August 24,
2007 required the office of Planning and Research (OPR) on or before July 1, 2009, to
prepare, develop, and transmit to the Resources Agency amendments to the CEQA
guidelines to assist public agencies in the mitigation of GHGs or the effects of GHGs as
required under CEQA, including the effects associated with transportation and energy
consumption, and required the Resources Agency to certify and adopt those guidelines
by January 1, 2010. Proposed amendments to the state CEQA Guidelines for GHG
emissions were submitted on April 13, 2009,adopted on December 30, 2009, and
became effect March 18, 2010.
Section 15064.4 of the amended Guidelines includes the following requirements for
determining the significance of impacts from greenhouse gas emissions. While the
amendments require calculation of a project’s contribution they clearly do not establish a
standard by which to judge a significant effect or a means to establish such a standard.
(a) The determination of the significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a
careful judgment by the lead agency consistent with the provisions in section
15064. A lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based to the extent
possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the
amount of GHG emissions resulting from a project. A lead agency shall have
discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to:
(1) Use a model or methodology to quantify greenhouse gas emissions
resulting from a project, and which model or methodology to use. The
lead agency has discretionto select the model or methodology it
considers most appropriate provided it supports its decision with
substantial evidence. The lead agency should explain the limitations of
the particular model or methodology selected for use; and/or
(2) Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based standards.
3.2.4Local
Since the early 1990s, Chula Vista has been engaged in multiple climate change forums
including the UNFCCC, the International Cities for Climate Protection campaign and the
U.S. Conference ofMayor’s Climate Protection Agreement. The key plans and
ordinances that the City has adopted and implemented to achieve citywide GHG
emissions reductions are summarized below.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 30
3.2.4.1ICLEI Cities for Climate Protection
In 1992, the City participated ina program aimed at developing municipal action plans
for the reduction of GHGs. This program—the Cities for Climate Protection Program—
was sponsored by the International Council of Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) and the
UNEP. This program was developed by ICLEI and the UNEP in response to the
UNFCCC, and in recognition that all local planning and development have direct
consequences on energy consumption and cities exercise key powers over urban
infrastructure, including neighborhood design and over transportation infrastructure such
as roads, streets, pedestrian areas, bicycle lanes and public transport.
3.2.4.2Chula Vista CO2 Reduction Plan
Each participant in the ICLEI program was to create local policy measures to ensure
multiple benefits to the city and at the same time identify a carbon reduction goal through
the implementation of those measures. The carbon reduction goal was to fit within the
realm of international climate treaty reduction goals. In its CO2 Reduction Plan
developed in 1996 andofficially adopted in 2000, Chula Vista committed to lowering its
CO2 emissions by diversifying its transportation system and using energy more efficiently
in all sectors. To focus efforts in this direction, the City adopted the international CO2
reduction goal of returning to pre-1990 levels (i.e. 20percent below) by 2010. In order to
achieve this goal, eight actions were identified, which when fully implemented, were
anticipated to save 100,000 tons of CO2 each year.
As a result of the 2005 GHG Emissions Inventory Report, in May 2007 staff reported to
City Council that citywide greenhouse gas emissions had increased by 35percent
(mainly due to residential growth) from 1990 to 2005, while emissions on a per capita
basis and from municipal operations decreased by 17percent and 18percent,
respectively. As a result, the City Council directed staff to convene a Climate Change
Working Group (CCWG) to develop recommendations to reduce the community’s GHGs
in order to meet the City’s 2010 GHG emissions reduction targets.
3.2.4.3Climate Change Working Group
The CCWG, which is composed of residents, businesses, and community organization
representatives, helps the City in developing climate-related programs and policies. In
2008, the CCWG reviewed over 90 carbon reduction measures and ultimately chose
seven measures to recommend to City Council, which the Council subsequently
adopted. The measures were designed to reduce or mitigate climate change impacts by
reducing GHG emissions within Chula Vista to 20percent below 1990 levels in keeping
with its CO2 Reduction Plan and UNFCCC goals, but the horizon date was delayed to
2012 instead of 2010. The measures are described below in the following section.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 31
In October 2009, the City Council directed the CCWG to evaluate how the City could
"adapt" to potential climate change impacts.The group will be meeting throughout 2010
to develop recommendations based on the City’s vulnerabilities and risks to climate
change.
3.2.4.4Chula Vista Climate Protection Measures
On July 10, 2008, the City Council adopted implementation plans for seven climate
protection measures to reduce GHG emissions to 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2012.
Since the adoption of these measures, the CARB published its BAU 2020 forecast and
ScopingPlan described in Section 3.2.3.3, which established statewide reduction
measures necessary to achieve the AB 32 goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990
levels by 2020. This goal is reflected in the City’s adopted GHG significance thresholds
for project-specific analysis under CEQA (see Section 4.1)
Nonetheless, the implementation plans outline the detailed strategy for initiating, funding,
and tracking the following measures (City of Chula Vista 2008b):
1.Clean Vehicle Replacement Policy for City Fleet: When City fleet vehicles are
retired, they will be replaced through the purchase or lease of alternative fuel or
hybrid substitutes. In addition, the City fleet will begin to pursue installing new
fuel tanks to allow heavy-duty vehicles to convert to biodiesel fuel immediately.
2.Clean Vehicle Replacement Policy for City-Contracted Fleets: As contracts for
City-contracted fleet services (such as transit buses, trash haulers and street
sweeper trucks) are renewed, the City will encourage contractors to replacetheir
vehicles with alternative fuel or hybrid substitutes through the contract bid
process. In addition, the City will pursue implementing two hydrogen vehicle
demonstration projects.
3.Business Energy Assessments: Although not mandatory, businesses will be
encouraged to participate in a no cost energy assessment of their facilities to
help identify opportunities for them to reduce monthly energy costs. The business
assessment will be integrated into the existing business licensing process and
codified through a new municipal ordinance.
4.Green Building Standard: Chula Vista will implement a citywide, mandatory
green building standard for new construction and major renovations. The new
standard will have 3 main components: (1) a minimum energy efficiency (carbon
equivalent) requirement of 15 percent above the 2005 Title 24, (2) the early
adoption of the new California Green Building Codes for all residential and
commercial projects, and (3) a Carbon Offset Fee available for projects not
meeting the 15 percentabove Title 24 threshold.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 32
5.Solar and Energy Efficiency Conversion Program: The City will create a
community program to provide residents and businesses a streamlined, cost-
effective opportunity to implement energy efficiency improvements and to install
solar/renewable energy systems on their properties. The City will develop a
funding mechanism to allow program participants to voluntarily choose to place
the improvement costs on their property’s tax rolls, thereby avoiding large upfront
capital costs. In addition, the program will promote vocational training, local
manufacturing, and retail sales opportunities for environmental products and
services. To help stimulate the private-sector renewable market and lower the
cost for installing renewable energy systems on new homes, the City will require
all new residential buildings to include pre-wiring and pre-plumbing for solar
photovoltaic and solar hot water systems, respectively.
6.Smart-Growth Around Trolley Stations: The City will continue to implement the
“Smart-Growth” design principles, which promote mixed-use and walkable and
transit-friendly development, particularly in and around the E, H, and Palomar
trolley stations. These principles were emphasized in the revised Chula Vista
General Plan and the Urban Core Specific Plan. In particular, the City will initiate
site planning, design studies and Specific Area Plan development to further
support “Smart-Growth” development that complements greenhouse gas
reductions.
7.Turf Lawn Conversion Program: The City will create a community program to
provide residents and businesses a streamlined, cost-effective opportunity to
replace their turf lawns with water-saving landscaping and irrigation systems.
Some municipal turf lawn areas (such as medians, fire stations and non-
recreational park areas) will also be converted to act as public demonstration
sites and to reduce monthly water costs. The City will establish the model for
water-wise landscaping for new development through an update of its Municipal
Landscape Ordinance and Water Conservation Plan Guidelines.
An Implementation Progress Report, published in February 2010, reports the
implementation status and milestones for each measure. Most measures are meeting
milestones outlined in their original implementation plans (City of Chula Vista 2010).
3.2.4.5Chula Vista Green Building Standards
Consistent with measure 4above(Section 3.2.4.4), the City Counciladopted the Green
Building Standards ordinance (GBS ordinance) (Ordinance No. 3140) on October 6,
2009, whichbecame effective November 5, 2009. This represents early adoption of the
California Green Building Standards discussed in Section 3.2.3.13, with amendments to
include major remodels (not just ground-up new construction) and all residential (not just
low-rise single-family residential). Permit applications for all new/remodel residential and
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 33
non-residential projects submitted on or after November 5, 2009 are required to comply
with the GBS ordinance. Through adherence to the GBS ordinance, new residentialand
non-residential construction, additions, remodels and improvements will benefit from
enhanced energy efficiency, pollutant controls, interior moisture control, improved indoor
air quality and exhaust, indoor water conservation, storm water management,and
construction waste reduction and recycling. The complete Green Building Standards
and Ordinance are included in Attachment 2.
As required by the GBS ordinance, as part of the application for a building permit,
construction plans and specifications shall indicate in the general notes or individual
detail drawings the Green Building Standards and product specifications and methods of
construction that are required. The Building Official may require the applicant to retain
the services of a consultant having expertise in Green Building and or energy efficiency
techniques to review and evaluate complex systems and/or alternate methods or
materials of construction and provide recommendations as to compliance with the
requirements of the ordinance. No building permit shall be issued for any project subject
to the Standards until the Building Official has determined that the plans and
specifications submitted for the building permit are in compliance with the requirements.
Compliance verification shall be performed by the Building Official, who shall verify that
the green building measures and specifications indicated on the permitted plans and
construction documents are being implemented at foundation, framing, electrical,
plumbing, mechanical, and any other required inspections, and prior to issuance of a
final certificate of occupancy. Additional inspections may be conducted as needed to
ensure compliance, and during the course of construction and following completion of
the project, the City may require the applicant to provide information and documents
showing use of products, equipment and materials specified on the permitted plans and
documents.
If at any stage of construction the Building Official determines that the project is not
being constructedin accordance with the permitted plans and documents, a Stop Order
may be issued pursuant to CVMC Section 15 06 060 D. At the discretion of the Building
Official, the stop work order may apply to the portion of the project impacted by
noncompliance or tothe entire project. The stop work order shall remain in effect until
the Building Official determines that the project will be brought into compliance with the
permitted plans and documents.
Prior to final building approval or issuance of a certificate of occupancy the Building
Official shall review the information submitted by the applicant and determine whether
the applicant has constructed the project in accordance with the permitted plans and
documents. If the Building Official determines that the applicant has failed to construct
the project in accordance with the permitted plans and documents, then the final building
approval and final certificate of occupancy may be withheld until the Building Official
determines that the project is in compliance with the GBS ordinance.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 34
3.2.4.6Chula Vista Increased Energy Efficiency Standards
On January 26, 2010, the City Council adopted the Increased Energy Efficiency
Standards ordinance (Ordinance No. 3149). This ordinance became effective February
26, 2010 as section 15.26 of the Municipal Code, and permit applications submitted on
or after this date are required to comply with these new energy efficiency standards.
The ordinance is included in Attachment 2.
Section 15.26.030 of the Municipal Code requires permit applications to comply with
increased energy efficiency standards that achieve 15 to 20 percent greater efficiency
than the requirements of the 2008 California Energy Code, Building Energy Efficiency
Standards (Title 24, Part 6), depending on climate zone. As shown in Figure 4, the City
falls within two climate zones, zone 7 and zone 10.
For climate zone 7, the Code requires:
•All new low-rise residential building or additions, remodels or alterations to existing
low-rise residential buildings where theadditions, remodels or alterations are greater
than 1,000 square feet of conditional floor area, shall use at least 15percent less
energy than the 2008 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards allow; and
•All new non-residential, high-rise residential or hotel/motel buildings, or additions,
remodels or alterations to existing non-residential, high-rise residential or hotel/motel
buildings where the additions, remodels or alterations are greater than 10,000
square feet of conditioned floor area, shall use at least 15percent less energy than
the 2008 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards.
Most of the City lies within climate zone 7 (including the Proposed Project), as shown in
Figure 4. For areas further east in climate zone 10, the Municipal Code requires projects
to use 20percent less energy than the 2008 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency
Standards allow. This is to address the higher energy demands typically associated with
warmer, inland locations that use more cooling and air conditioning systems.
No City building permit shall be issued unless the permit application demonstrates to the
Building Official compliance with the requirements of Section 15.26.030. Compliance is
to be demonstrated based on a performance approach, using a CEC-approved energy
compliance software program, as specified in the Title 24 2008 Building Energy
Efficiency Standards.
3.2.4.7Regional Climate Action Plan
The SANDAG Regional Climate Action Plan (RCAP) is a long-range policy (year 2030)
that focuses on transportation, electricity and natural gas sectors. It complements the
Regional Energy Strategy 2030 Update and feeds into the SANDAG Regional
CO
U
N
T
Y
O
F
SA
N
D
I
E
G
O
COUNTYOF SANDIEGO
CIT
Y
o
f
SA
N
D
I
E
G
O
NA
T
I
O
N
A
L
C
I
T
Y
IM
P
E
R
I
A
L
BE
A
C
H
CO
U
N
T
Y
O
F
SA
N
D
I
E
G
O
CI
T
Y
o
f
SA
N
D
I
E
G
O
Ota
y
R
a
n
c
h
RollingHillsRanch
Su
n
b
o
w
I
I
Ea
s
t
L
a
k
e
I
Ea
s
t
l
a
k
e
G
r
e
e
n
s
Ra
n
c
h
o
\
D
e
l
R
e
y
I
GolfCourse
Ota
y
\
L
a
n
d
f
i
l
l
Sa
n
M
i
g
u
e
l
R
a
n
c
h
Te
r
r
a
\
N
o
v
a
Bo
n
i
t
a
\
L
o
n
g
\
C
a
n
y
o
n
Ota
y
R
a
n
c
h
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
1
Ot
a
y
R
a
n
c
h
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
5
Ra
n
c
h
o
D
e
l
R
e
y
I
I
I
Eastlake\Woods
Ra
n
c
h
o
\
D
e
l
R
e
y
I
I
Bella\Lago
Su
n
b
o
w
I
Otay\Ranch Eastlake\VistasEastlake\Trails
Mid
-
\
B
a
y
f
r
o
n
t
Ea
s
t
l
a
k
e
\
B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
\
P
a
r
k
Am
p
h
i
t
h
e
a
t
e
r
\
a
n
d
\
W
a
t
e
r
P
a
r
k
Olympic\Training\CenterEastlake\Land\Swap Eastlake
Vil
l
a
g
e
\
C
e
n
t
e
r
Te
l
e
g
r
a
p
h
\
C
a
n
y
o
n
\
E
s
t
a
t
e
s
Eastlake\Business\Center\II Eastlake\Woods\West
Au
t
o
\
P
a
r
k
J
H
I
L
E
F
G
MA
I
N
K
PA
L
O
M
A
R
BAY
THIRD
O
L
Y
M
P
I
C
D
OT A Y L A KES
I-5 FREEWAY
N
A
P
L
E
S
I-805 F R E E W A Y
BROAD
W
A
Y
B
O
N
I
T
A
S
R
-54
FR
E
E
W
A
Y
ORANGE
SECON
D
O
X
F
O
R
D
HUNTE
FIRST
MOSS
C
H I LL T O P
M E LRO SE
F I F TH
TELEGRAPHCANYO
N
NACIO N
LAMED IA
LANE W U ESTE
IN D US TR I AL
C O R R A L C A NYO N
BEYER
BRANDYWINE
FOURT
H
BUEN A V I S TA
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
RANCHODEL
REY
P L A Z A B O NIT A
MOUNTMIG U EL
3
0
T
H
K
S
R
-
5
4
F
R
E
E
W
A
Y
T H I R D
I-805FREEWAY
C
FIF TH
I -5 F RE E WAY
H IL LT O P
5
Vil
l
a
g
e
1
Villa
g
e
5
EU
C
Vil
l
a
g
e
2
Village11
Vil
l
a
g
e
8
Vil
l
a
g
e
6
Vil
l
a
g
e
7
Vil
l
a
g
e
1
W
e
s
t
University\WestUniversity\West
Vil
l
a
g
e
7
Vil
l
a
g
e
4
Vil
l
a
g
e
2
Vil
l
a
g
e
3
Fw
y
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
Vil
l
a
g
e
4
Vil
l
a
g
e
2
Vil
l
a
g
e
4
Vil
l
a
g
e
4
Pla
n
n
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
1
8
B
Vil
l
a
g
e
4
Ba
y
f
r
o
n
t
(Fu
t
u
r
e
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
)
Fu
t
u
r
e
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
Cl
i
m
a
t
e
Z
o
n
e
7
Cl
im
a
t
e
Z
o
n
e
1
0
FIGURE 4 City Climate Zones
Ma
p
S
o
u
r
c
e
:
C
i
t
y
o
f
C
h
u
l
a
V
i
s
t
a
G
e
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
S
y
s
t
e
m
,
F
e
b
ru
a
r
y
2
0
0
6
M:
\
J
O
B
S
3
\
4
8
2
9
\
G
C
C
\
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
f
i
g
4
.
a
i
1
0
/
1
8
/
1
0
Cl
i
m
a
t
e
Z
o
n
e
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
80
5
04800Feet
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
12
5
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 36
Transportation Plan (RTP) and Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP). It is currently in
process of being prepared and no regional GHG emissions caps or reduction targets
have been identified.
4.0Significance Criteria and Analysis
Methodologies
4.1Determining Significance
To date, there have been no regional, state, or federal regulations establishing a
threshold of significance to determine project-specific impacts of GHG emissions. As
allowed by the CEQA Guidelines, after considering the thresholds of significance
adopted or recommended by other public agencies and experts, including those adopted
by the Bay Area and San Joaquin Air Quality Management Districts and the various
options reviewed by the CARB, the City has developed its own significance thresholds.
The City’s thresholds are grounded in statute (AB 32) and executive order (EO S-3-05)
and offer away to achieve the 2020 goal of AB 32. The 2020 goal of AB 32 is to return
statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The City’s threshold was established
based on this goal of AB 32 and the reduction measures needed to achieve it as
identified inthe CARB Scoping Plan and as shaped by the assumptions of the business-
as-usual (BAU) 2020 statewide forecast.
4.1.1Business-as-Usual 2020 Emissions
As described above in Section 3.2.3.2, AB 32 directed the CARB to develop a Scoping
Plan that identifiedthe reduction measures needed to achieve the targets established in
AB 32/EO S-3-05. In order to assess the scope of the needed reductions, CARB first
estimated BAU 2020 GHG emissions, as shown below in Table 5.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 37
TABLE 5
CALIFORNIA BAU 2020 GHG EMISSIONSFORECAST
Sector
Projected 2020 Emissions
in MMTCO2E (% total)
Transportation 225.4 (38%)
Electric Power 139.2 (23%)
Commercial and Residential 46.7 (8%)
Industry 100.5 (17%)
Recycling and Waste 7.7 (1%)
High GWP 46.9 (8%)
Agriculture 29.8 (5%)
Forest Net Emissions 0.0
TOTAL 596.4
SOURCE: California 2020 GHG Emissions Forecast. Prepared by the CARB. Last
updated October 2008; last reviewed May 28, 2010. Available at
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/forecast.htm. Accessed May 28, 2010.
Table 5 represents the statewide GHG emissions that would be expected to occur in the
absence ofthe GHG reduction measures identified in the Scoping Plan. This forecast
also assumed energy efficiency in commercial and residentialbuildings in accordance
with the 2005 Title 24 energy code, water conservation in accordance with the 2006
plumbing code, and waste diversion in accordance with the 1989 Integrated Waste
Management Act. In its transportation-related emissions forecast, CARB assumed that
total statewide VMT would increase based on growth in statewide population and fixed
average trip lengths and vehicle fleet mix. Based on these assumptions, CARB
estimated that statewide BAU 2020 GHG emissions will be 596.4MMTCO2E.
4.1.2Scoping Plan Reduction Measures
As discussed in Section 3.2.3.3, the Scoping Plan identifies 16 measures that would
provide reductions allowing the state to achieve a total GHG emissions reduction of
174MMTCO2E by 2020 (see Table 4). Of these measures, three are measures that are,
to some extent, within the control of the City. The Scoping Plan reduction measures the
City has control over are listed in Table 6 below and include the Energy Efficiency,
Regional Transportation-Related GHG Targets, and the Million Solar Roofs measures.
Full statewide implementation of these three measures is projected to result in a
33.4MMTCO2Ereduction in GHG emissions by 2020, for a 19.2 percent reduction in
forecasted BAU 2020 emissions.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 38
TABLE 6
CARB SCOPING PLAN RECOMMENDED GHG REDUCTION MEASURES
WITHIN CITY’S CONTROL
Recommended Reduction Measures
Reductions
Counted Towards
2020 Target in
MMTCO2E
Percentage of
Total Reductions
Counted Towards
2020 Target
REDUCTIONS COUNTED TOWARDS 2020 TARGET
WITHIN CITY CONTROL
33.4 19.2%1
Energy Efficiency 26.3
Regional Transportation-Related GHG Targets 5.0
Million Solar Roofs 2.1
REDUCTIONS COUNTED TOWARDS 2020 TARGET
NOT WITHIN CITY CONTROL (see Table 4)
140.6 80.8%
TOTAL REDUCTIONS COUNTED TOWARDS
2020TARGET
174 100%
Based on Table 2 of theClimate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. Prepared by the
California Air Resources Board, pursuant to AB 32 the California Global Warming Solution Act of 2006.
December 2008.119.2% is relative to the targeted total reduction of 174 MMTCO2E.The BAU 2020 forecast initially
projected a targeted reduction of 169 MMTCO2E. The proportion of these three Scoping Plan measures
would be 19.8percent relative to that number.
To conform to the Scoping Plan, a proposed project would have to provide thesame
proportional reduction relative to BAU that the Scoping Plan identifies for these three
measures. Rounding this number up to the nearest whole number results in a
20percent proportion. As allowed in the Scoping Plan, project reductions could come
from any one or combination of the three identified measures or complementary
measures. For example, energy-related reductions could come from improved building
energy efficiency, advanced water conservation measures, or solid waste reduction
measures. Transportation-related reductions could come from project features that
encourage alternate travel choices, such as through public transportation proximity,
subsidized transit passes, preferential parking for carpool vehicles and low-carbon
vehicles, bicycle facilities, walking paths; or shorter vehicle trip lengths, such as through
the integration of housing proximate to employment, recreation, and community
services. In this latter regard, vehicle trip lengths associated with a given project would
have toalter the average regional trip length in order to be sufficient enough to change
the statewide VMT assumptions in the BAU emissions forecast and associated Scoping
Plan vehicle emissions reduction estimates.
4.1.3Significance Thresholds
Based on theScoping Plan and its associated BAU 2020 emissions forecast
assumptions, the City has established the following City GHG thresholds of significance
for land development projects. The City has determined that a project would have
significant global climate change effects if it would:
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 39
•Conflict with or obstruct the achievement of the Scoping Plan reduction
measures by not reducing its GHG emissions by at least 20percent over that
which would have been expected to occur in the BAU condition; or
•Conflict withany other applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose
of reducing the emissions of GHGs.
These thresholds are grounded in statute (AB 32) and executive order (S-3-05), and
supported by substantial evidence in the CARB’s BAU 2020 Forecastand Climate
Change Scoping Plan. In addition, these thresholds areconsistent with the amended
CEQA Guidelines which state that cumulative impacts may be measured relative to a
cumulative baseline that includes a
…summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or
statewide plan, or related planning document, that describes or evaluates
conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. Such plans may include:
a general plan, regional transportation plan, or plans for the reduction of
GHG emissions.
4.2Methodology and Assumptions
Emission estimates were calculated for the three GHGs of primary concern (CO2, CH4,
and N2O) that would be emitted from the Proposed Project’s construction and five
sources of operational emissions: on-road vehicular traffic, electricity generation, natural
gas consumption, water usage, and solid waste disposal. The method of quantifying
GHG emissions in this analysis was based on methodologies recommended and used
by several California air quality management districts (AQMD), including the South
Coast and Bay Area AQMDs; as well as by the CARB.
To evaluate the Proposed Project relative to the BAU 2020 Forecast, emissions of each
source of GHGs were estimated first for a project-equivalent under BAU conditions,
assuming building energy efficiency in accordance with the 2005 Title 24 energy code,
water conservation in accordance with the current plumbing code, and solid waste
disposal quantities in accordance with current statewide legislation. A 20 percent
reduction of this amount was then calculated in order to identify the targeted cap in GHG
emissions attributable to the Proposed Project. Lastly, emissions of each source of
GHGs were estimated for the Proposed Project assuming building energy and water
efficiencies required in City ordinances and General Plan policy. This methodology
allows for a comparison between the Proposed Project and BAU 2020 relative to the
identified significance determination thresholds. These scenario analyses are included
in Sections 5.1.1.1 and 5.1.1.2. Emissions calculations for all of these scenarios started
with the following identical land use assumptions:
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 40
TABLE 7
FUTURE (YEAR 2020) MODELED LAND USES
Land Use Quantity
Residential 6,050 dwelling units
Commercial 1,800,000 square feet
Industrial 2,200,000 square feet
Park 55.4 acres
School 51.4 acres
Community Purpose Facility 10.8acres
The land use assumptions in Table 7 reflect the total allowable buildout as envisioned in
the Proposed Projectfor Village 8 West,Village 9and the 85-acre RTP. By multiplying
the GHG emissions calculated for the Proposed Project by a factor of 1.5, an expanded
cumulative projects area can be accounted for that includes the Village 8 East and the
Planning Area 10/University Siteprojects. This analysis is provided in Section 5.1.1.3.
Complete emissions calculations are contained in Attachment3.
4.2.1Estimating Vehicle Emissions
Vehicle emissions were estimated using emission factors developed by the Bay Area
AQMD and EPA in a fuel-based methodology using the following equation:
E = EF X Fuel X C X GWP
Where E is emission in metric tons per year; EF is an emission factor normalized for
engine fuel consumption and expressed in units of pounds of GHG per gallon of
transportation fuel; Fuel is the total quantity of fuel consumed per year; C is a constant
reflecting the conversion of pounds to metric tons; and GWP is the global warming
potential of each GHG. This fuel-based method is based on the equation used in
CARB’s OFFROAD2007 and EMFAC2007 models to estimate off-and on-road vehicle
emissions:
E = EF X Pop X AvgHp X Load X Activity
where E is emission in tons per day; EF is an emission factor expressed in units of work
done by the engine (e.g., g/bhp-hr); Pop is the engine population (number of engines in
use); AvgHp is the average rated power of these engines; Load is the load on the
engines relative to their average rated power; and Activity is the average annual hours of
use per engine. However the fuel-based method simplifies the equation by using
emission factors normalized for fuel consumption and allows the use of readily available
and accurate regional fuel sales data. This method of calculating vehicle emissions also
has the advantage of being able to estimate emissions for all three primary GHGs, while
some computer models such as URBEMIS2007 can only directly estimate CO2
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 41
emissions. The fuel-based calculation is thus commonly used to estimate regional
emissions from the transportation sector (UCTC 1996, 2000), and is similar to the
method CARB used in their BAU 2020 emissions forecast, which used statewide fuel
sales data and statewide average VMT.
In this analysis, annual fuel consumption is obtained by multiplying the Proposed Project
ADT obtained from the traffic study (LLG 2011) by the local (for the Proposed Project)
andregional average(for BAU)trip lengthsdetermined by SANDAG (2009, 20010b).
The total VMT derived from this calculation is then multiplied by average vehicle mileage
as identified by Caltrans to obtaintotal fuel consumption. This value is then multiplied by
the emission factors in Table 8 to estimate GHG emissions.
4.2.2Estimating Construction Emissions
Construction activities emit GHGs primarily though combustion of fossil fuels in the
engines of off-road construction equipment (mostly diesel) and in the on-road vehicles of
the construction workers. Smaller amounts of GHGs are also emitted through the
energy use embodied in any water use (for fugitive dust control) and lighting for the
construction activity. Construction emissions are not accounted for in the BAU 2020
forecast, and reductions in construction emissions are not specifically identified in the
CARB Scoping Plan. However, the Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP)
has recently recommended that total construction emissions be amortized over 30 years
and added to operational emissions (AEP 2010).
Typically, project-level information is used to calculate construction emissions. In this
analysis, given lack of project-specificinformation, construction emissions were
estimated by multiplying the proposed land uses (Table 7, above) by annual construction
emission rates of 0.077 MTCO2E per residential dwelling unit and 0.006 MTCO2E per
square foot of non-residential use. Thesevalues were obtained through review of other
project-level analyses (City of San Diego 2010a, 2010b).
4.2.3Estimating Building Use Emissions
For estimates of non-transportation related operational emissions, total projected
energy, water, and waste demandswere multiplied by emission factors for each
emission source and each GHG.
4.2.3.1Electricity and Natural Gas Estimates
GHG emissions associated with electricity use were calculated by multiplying the total
number of dwelling units,commercial and industrial square footage, and park, school,
andcommunity purpose facilityacreagesby the average electricity consumptionrates
used in CARB’s 2011 California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) obtained from
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 42
the CEC end-use surveys for residential and non-residential uses(CEC;2004 and
2006). These values were then multipliedby the electricity generation GHG emission
factors contained in Table 8.
For the BAU calculations, 2006 statewide average electricity consumption rates of
590.88kilowatt hours (kWh) per single-family residential unit per month,360.39kWh per
multi-family residential unit per month,14.10 kWh per commercial square foot per year,
17.60kWH per industrial square footper year, 6.35 kWh per school square foot per
year, and 9.38 kWh per square foot per year of park and community purpose useswere
used, consistent with the BAU 2020 forecast assumption of building energy efficiency in
accordance with the Title 24, Year 2005 energy code.
For the Proposed Project calculations, a 30percent improvement in residentialand non-
residentialbuilding energy efficiency was assumed based on the requirements of the
Increased Energy Efficiency ordinance of the City’s Municipal Code. This ordinance is
described in Section 3.2.4.6 and would achieve a 15 percent reduction in building energy
use compared to the existing 2008 Title 24 energy code and thus a 30percent reduction
in building energy use compared to BAU assumptions.
GHG emissions associated with natural gas were also calculated using rates obtained
from CalEEMod/the CECandthe natural gasgeneration GHG emission factorsshown in
Table 8.Statewide monthly average natural gas consumption rates of 5,198.70 cubic
feet per single-family residential unit, 3,128.97 cubic feet per multi-family residential unit,
2.90 cubic feet of natural gas per square foot of commercial space, 1.29 cubic feet per
square foot of school space, 2.77 cubic feet per square foot of community purpose
facility, 0.25 cubic feet per square foot of active park use,and 241,611 cubic feet per
industrial consumer (assuming aminimum 2-acre lot size)were used to calculate BAU
emissions.
For the Proposed Project calculations, a 30percent improvement in building energy
efficiency was assumed based on the requirements of the Municipal Code as described
above. These values were then multiplied by the emission factors in Table 8 for natural
gas consumption to obtain estimated quantities of GHG emissions.
4.2.3.2Water Use Emissions Estimates
The GHG emissions associated with water use are calculated by multiplying the
embodied energy in a gallon of potable water by the total number of gallons projected to
be consumed by the project and then by the electricity generation GHG emission factors.
For these estimates, it is assumed that water delivered to the Project site would have an
embodied energy of 2,779 kWh/acre foot or 0.0085 kWh/gallon (Torcellini2003).
To calculate the projected water demand of the Project and BAU, water demand ratesby
land use typewere obtained from the October 2008 Otay Water District Water
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 43
Resources Master Plan Update (WRMP) and multiplied by the proposed quantities of
residential units and non-residentialsquare footageprojected for buildout of the
Proposed Project.
BAU water use assumptions based on the 2008 WRMPwould be as follows:single-
family residential unitswould consume 500gallons per day (gpd) per unit;multi-family
residential would consume 2551gpdper unit;schools would consume 1,785gpd per
acre,parks would consume approximately 2,155gpd per acre,community purpose
facilities would consume approximately 893 gpd per acre, commercial useswould
consume 0.14 gpdper square foot;and industrial uses would consume 0.07 gpd per
square foot.
Applying conservation measures required in the City’s GBS Ordinance, described in
Section 3.2.4.5,the Proposed Project’s water use would achieve a 20percent reduction
in water consumption (and associated embodied energy) compared to BAU
assumptions. Therefore, accounting forthe advanced conservation measures of the
Proposed Project, BAU/WRMP water consumption rates were adjusted as follows:
single-family residential units would consume 400 gpdper unit; multi-family residential
units would consume 204 gpd per unit; schools would consume 1,428gpd per acre;
parkswould consume approximately 1,724gpd per acre, community purpose facilities
would consume 714.4 gpd per acre, commercial uses would consume 0.11 gpd per
square foot; and industrial uses would consume 0.06 gpd per square foot.
4.2.3.3Solid Waste Emissions Estimates
For both the BAU calculations and the Proposed Project calculations, a countywide
average waste disposal rate was used and was obtained from the California Department
of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle)as included in CalEEMod. While the
Proposed Project would implement lumber and other materials conservation in
accordance with the City’s Green Building Standards (see Section 3.2.4.5) and likely
generate less landfill waste than average, these savings cannot be estimated at this
time.
CalRecycle maintains a list of different waste generation rates for residential,
commercial, and other uses. The multi-family residential waste generation rates range
from 3.6 to 8.6 pounds per unit per day,the single-family residential waste generation
rates ranged up to 11.4 pounds per unit per day,and the commercial generation rates
range from 0.0025 to 0.046 pounds per square foot per day (CalRecycle 2009). To be
conservative, the higher generation rates of 11.4 pounds daily per single-family dwelling
unit, 8.6 pounds per unit per day for multi-family residential,2.60 pounds per square foot
1Recommended rate of 300 gpd/unit reduced by 0.85 to account for reclaimed water use.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 44
per day for schools, 11.4 pounds per square foot per day for community purpose
facilities, 4.76 tonsper acre per year for park uses, and 0.046 pounds per square foot
per day for commercial and industrial uses were used to determine the total volume of
waste by weight. These values were then multiplied by emissions factors used in the
EPAWaste Reduction Model (WARM) for the different material classes (glass, metal,
plastic, etc.) and two different waste streams (to landfill or to recycling). For the landfill
estimates, landfill gas recovery for energy was assumed, and for both the landfill and
recycling estimates, a truck haul distance of 20 miles and frequency of once per week.
Local recycling and disposal (to landfill) percentages (of total waste generated) were
also obtained from CalRecycle and reflect current waste disposal practice in accordance
with the statutory 50percent diversion mandate.
4.2.4General Assumptions
The emission factors used to calculate vehicle, electricity and natural gas GHG
emissions are shown below.
TABLE 8
GHG EMISSION FACTORS
Gas
Vehicle Emission
Factors
(pounds/gallon gas)1
Electricity Generation
Emission Factors
(pounds/MWh)2, 3
Natural Gas Combustion
Emission Factors
(pound/million ft3)4
Carbon Dioxide 19.564 1,340 120,000
Methane 0.00055 0.0111 2.3
Nitrous Oxide 0.0002 0.0192 2.2
1SOURCE: BAAQMD 2006.2SOURCE: U.S. DOE 2002.3Emissions associated with water use are calculated from the embodied energy in a gallon of water
multiplied by the same emissions factors for electricity generation. Waste emissions were similarly
calculated using the U.S. EPA WasteReduction model (WARM) emission factors specific to eachwaste
type (e.g., glass, metal, plastic).
4SOURCE: U.S. EPA 1998.
Emissions estimated for each of the five emission sources are summed and expressed
in terms of total metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent or MTCO2E.CO2-equivalent
emissions are the preferred way to assess combined GHG emissions because they give
weight to the GWP of a gas. The GWP, as described above in Section 1.1, is the
potential of a gas to warm the global climate in the same amount as an equivalent
amount of emissions of CO2. CO2 thus has a GWP factor of 1. Methane (CH4) has a
GWP factor of 21 and nitrous oxide (N20) has a GWP of 310, which means they have a
greater global warming effect than CO2.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 45
5.0Impact Analysis
5.1Project Emissions Relative to BAU
5.1.1Impacts
To evaluate the significance of the Proposed Project’s contribution of GHG emissions
relative to statewide emissions and BAU reductions, GHG emissions from transportation,
electricity, natural gas and water consumption, solid waste disposal, and construction
activities, were estimated first for BAU, then for the Proposed Project. The Proposed
Project calculations account for GHG emissions reductions from project-specific design
features as well as applicable statewide emissions reduction programs.
5.1.1.1BAU Emissions
a.Transportation-Related Emissions
Transportation-related GHG emissions comprise the largest contributor to existing and
forecast GHG emissions, accounting for 38percent of the total statewide forecasted
BAU 2020 emissions (CARB 2008c). On-road vehicles alone account for 35percent of
the total forecasted BAU 2020 emissions. Transportation-related GHG emissions are
generated from the combustion of fossil fuels (primarily gasoline and diesel) in vehicle
engines. The quantity and type of transportation fuel consumed determines the amount
of GHGs emitted from a vehicle. Therefore, not only are vehicle engine and fuel
technologies of importance, but so too are the amount of vehicle trips and trip distances
that motorists travel.
The traffic study projects that the proposed buildout of Villages 8 West,9and the 85-
acre RTP would generate 113,073ADT (LLG 2011). Based on the regional average trip
length of 5.8miles (SANDAG 2009) and an average fuel economy of 18.80mpg for
2020 (Caltrans2009), a total of 655,823vehicle miles would be traveled each day and
34,884gallons of vehicle fuel would be consumed each day under BAU conditions.
Using the vehicle emissions factors contained in Table 8, the combustion of this fuel
would result in the emission of113,416.15MTCO2E each year assuming BAU.
b.Electricity Emissions
Electric power generation accounted for the second largest sector contributing to
existing and projected statewide GHG emissions, comprising 24percent of the total
statewide BAU 2020 emissions (CARB 2008c). Buildings use electricity for lighting,
heating and cooling. Electricity generation entails the combustion of fossil fuels,
including natural gas and coal, which are then stored and transported to end users. A
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 46
building’s electricity use is thus associated with the off-site or indirect emission of GHGs
at the source of electricity generation (i.e. the power plant).
Based on 887 single-family residences, 5,163 multi-family residences,51.4 acres of
schools, 10.8 acres of community purpose use, 1.8 million square feet of commercial,
2.2 million square feet of industrial space, and 55.4 acres of park space, buildout under
BAU assumptions would annually consume 134,364MWh of electricity. The residential
uses would consume approximately 28,618MWh,the school uses would consume
approximately 14,218 MWh, the community purpose space would consume 4,413 MWh,
the commercial uses would consume a maximum of 25,380 MWh, and the industrial
uses would consume a maximum of 27,320 MWheach year. The park acreage could
consume up to 15,845 MWh annually if developed into active recreational facilities such
as a health or racquet club. Passive park space would consume less electricity. These
estimates are based on average electricity consumption rates for southern Californiaas
identified by the CEC in the URBEMIS 2007 and 2011 CalEEModair emissions models
(CEC; 2004 and 2006). This quantity of electricity consumption equates to the emission
of 17,474.49MTCO2E each year from residential uses,15,497.51 MTCO2E each year
from commercial uses, 8,681.51 MTCO2E each year from schools, 2,694.54 MTCO2E
each year from community purpose uses, 13,822 MTCO2E each year from active park
uses, and23,874.88MTCO2E each year from industrial uses; totaling 82,044.93
MTCO2E each year.
c.Natural Gas Emissions
Buildings combust natural gas primarily for heating and cooking purposes, resulting in
the emission of GHGs. GHG emissions associated with natural gas combustion are
estimated by multiplying the total number of dwelling units by average residential natural
gas consumption rates and then by their respective GHG emissions factors.
Based on 887single-family residences, 5,163multi-family residences, 1.8million square
feet of commercial space,51.4 acres of schools, 10.8 acres of community purpose use,
55.4 acres of park space, and 2.2 million square feet of industrial space, buildout under
BAU assumptions would annually consume 492.62million cubic feet of natural gas. The
residential uses would consume approximately249.19million cubic feet,the commercial
uses would consume approximately 62.64 million cubicfeet,the schools would consume
approximately 34.70million cubic feet, community purpose uses would consume
approximately 15.62million cubic feet, park uses would consume up to approximately
7.24 million cubic feet, and the industrial uses would consume approximately 123.22
million cubicfeet each year. This equates to the emission of 13,646.41MTCO2E GHG
emissions each year from residential uses,3,430.31 MTCO2E each year from
commercial uses, 1,900.49MTCO2E each year from schools, 855.33MTCO2E each
year from community purpose facilities, 396.46MTCO2E each year from park uses, and
6,747.90 MTCO2E each year from industrial uses; totaling 29,976.90MTCO2E GHG
emissions each year.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 47
d.Water Use Emissions
The provision of potable water consumes large amounts of energy associated with
source and conveyance, treatment, distribution, end use, and wastewater treatment.
This type of energy use is known as embodied energy. Water delivered to the site would
have an embodied energy of 2,779 kWh/acre foot or 0.0085 kWh/gallon.
Multiplying the proposed 887single-family residential units, 5,163multi-family residential
units, 51.4 acres of school use, 55.4acres of parks,10.8 acres of community purpose,
1.8 million square feet of commercial space, and 2.2 million square feet of industrial
space, by the WRMP daily water demand rates of 500 gpdper single-family residential
unit, 255 gpdper multi-family unit, 1,785gpd per school acre, 2,155gpd per park acre,
893 gpd per community purpose acre, 0.14 gpdper commercial square foot, and 0.07
gpdper industrial squarefoot, yields a total daily combined water demand of 2,388,355
gallons under BAU assumptions. Annual BAU water demand wouldtotal approximately
871,749,429 gallons. Of this annual total, approximately 642,423,725gallons would be
associated with residential uses, 33,488,385gallons would be associated with school
uses, 43,576,255 gallons would be associated with park uses, 3,520,206 gallons would
be associated with community purpose uses, 91,980,000 gallons with commercial uses,
and 56,760,858 gallons would be associated with industrial uses.The embodied energy
demand associated with this total water use would equate to 7,409.87MWh per year.
Multiplying this value by the electricity emission factors for the three primary GHGs of
concern in Table 8 yields an estimated annual emission associated with BAU water use
of 4,524.61MTCO2E.
e.Solid Waste Emissions
The disposal of solid waste produces GHG emissions from anaerobic decomposition in
landfills, incineration, and from the combustion of transportation fuel in the haul trucks
that transport waste.
Based on 6,050 residential units,1.8 million square feet of commercial space,2.2million
square feet of industrial space,10.8 acres of community purpose facilities, 51.4 acres of
schools, and 55.4 acres of park space, buildout under BAU assumptions would annually
generate approximately 49,566tons of solid waste each year. The residential uses
would generate approximately 9,948tons,the commercial uses would generate
approximately 15,111 tons,the school uses would generate approximately 2,911tons,
the community purpose facility would generate approximately 2,682tons, the park would
generate approximately 264tons, and the industrial uses would generate approximately
18,650 tonseach year. GHG emissions associated with the disposal or diversion of this
waste would equal approximately 7,918.07MTCO2E per year.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 48
f.Construction Emissions
Based on estimates of construction-related emissions for typical residential and non-
residentialprojects, approximate annual emission rates of 0.077 MTCO2E per residential
dwelling unit and 0.006 MTCO2E per non-residentialsquare foot were determined.
Multiplying these values by the proposed 6,050 residential units,4million square feet of
commercial/industrialuse, and 51.4 acres of schools (converted to 1.79million square
feetbased on a conservative coverage ratio of 0.80:1), 10.8 acres of community purpose
facility (converted to 376,358square feetbased on a conservative 0.80:1coverageratio)
and 55.4 acres of park use (converted to 603,306square feet of park structure space
based on aconservative structure/park acre ratio of 0.25:1)results in annual
construction emissions of 41,090.96MTCO2E.
5.1.1.2Proposed Project Emissions
a.Transportation-Related Emissions
Proposed Project Average Trip Length Relative to Regional VMT
The BAU 2020 forecasted increase in transportation-related GHG emissions is
dominated by an increase in emissions from on-road passenger vehicles; hence the
emphasis in the CARB Scoping Plan on measures to reduce GHG emissions from on-
road passenger vehicles (refer to Table 4).
CARB’s estimated growth in vehicle emissions resulted from projected growth in
statewide VMT due primarily to statewide population growth as projected by the
Department of Finance. CARB’s statewide VMT projections held average vehicle trip
length and vehicle fleet mix constant. The BAU trip length for the San Diego region
would thus be 5.8 miles, as currently reported by SANDAG (2009).
If a plan or project were to add motorists or to increase local trip lengths to such a
degree that the regional average trip length was increased, regional and potentially
statewide VMT could be increased. The project would thus be considered to generate
vehicle GHG emissions in excess of those accounted for in the BAU 2020 Emissions
Forecast. By extension, it would also be considered to generate vehicle emissions
beyond those accounted for in the Scoping Plan reduction measures.
Patterns of development can increase, decrease, or have no effect at all on travel
choices, depending on their location and design. For example, through provision of
public transit, carpooling, and walking and biking amenities, and by bringing more people
closer to more destinations, the City can increase low carbon travel and decrease on-
road VMT. These are the types of strategies identified in the Scoping Plan’s Regional
Transportation-Related GHG Targets measure. CARB expects that this measure will
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 49
reduce transportation-related GHG emissions by about 5 million MTCO2E, or 3percent
of the total statewide GHG reductions (see Table 4).
The Proposed Project is surrounded by existing or planned residential and mixed-use
development to the north and west, with some neighborhood-serving commercial uses in
the vicinity. Within the Proposed Project, a mix of residential, commercial, and
recreational uses would be provided. These proximities would encourage walking and
biking and relatively short local vehicle trips, as reflected in the shorter-than-regional-
average trip lengths SANDAG identified for Villages 8 West and 9(SANDAG 2010b).
Compared to the regional average daily vehicle trip length of 5.8 miles, the average daily
trip length for Village 8 would be 4.62 miles and the average daily trip length for Village 9
would be 5.08 miles. The average daily trip length for the RTP in the Planning
Area10/University Sitewas not determinedbut industrial park trip lengths are typically
shorter than residential trip lengths and the same as commercial trip lengths (Institute of
Transportation Engineers 2008).Because the Proposed Project would not increase the
regional trip length, itsprojected vehicle-emissions would be consistent with forecasted
vehicle emissions, and its cumulative contribution to statewide vehicle emissions would
be less than significant.
According to the traffic analysis, the Proposed Project would generate 113,073ADTat
buildout (LLG 2011). Of this total ADT, 43,564 ADT would be associated with Village 8
West,56,123 ADT would be associated with Village 9,and the remaining13,386 ADT
would be associated withthe RTPin the Planning Area10/University Site.Average
local trip length data provided by SANDAG for the traffic analysis zones (TAZs) for
Villages 8 West and 9 identify an average daily trip length of 4.62 miles for TAZ #4391
(i.e., Village 8 West) and 5.08 miles for TAZ #4373 (i.e., Village 9) (SANDAG 2010b).
The RTP and Planning Area10/University Sitefall within TAZ #4353. This TAZ was not
included in the SANDAG trip length model. Therefore, the SANDAG regional average
trip length of 5.8 miles was used to estimate VMT for the RTP. Multiplying thesetrip
length averages by their associated ADTs results in a daily VMT for the Proposed
Project of 564,010; with 201,266 daily VMT resulting from Village 8 West,285,105daily
VMT resulting from Village 9,and77,639 daily VMT resulting from the RTP.
Overall Transportation Emissions
Using the same fuel economy figure used in the above paragraph to estimate BAU
vehicle emissions, the projected daily VMT of 564,010would result in an annual vehicle
emissions generation of 97,538.09MTCO2E. However, as identified in the Section 3.2
Regulatory Background, there are several plans and regulations aimed at reducing
transportation-related GHG emissions nationally and statewide by 2020, by increasing
average vehicle fuel economy, decreasing average engine combustion emissions, and
decreasing average VMT and trip length.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 50
The key regulations affecting vehicle emissions include the national CAFE Standards
which would increase average vehicle fuel economy to 35 mpg by 2020; the state Pavley
GHG Vehicle Emissions Standards which set increasingly stringent emissions limits on
vehicles, requiring improvement in vehicle engine technologies; and the state LCFS
which reduces the carbon content of vehicle fuels. All of these actions have been
approved by either the national or state legislatures and are coming into effect on a
staggered timeline, with 2016 being the earliest vehicle model year affected. As shown
in Table 4, CARB estimates that an approximate 46.7 MMTCO2E reduction, or
32 percent of the reduction target for cappedsources and 27percent of the total 174
MMTCO2E reduction target, would be achieved through full implementation of just the
Pavley and LCFS transportation-related regulatory actions. A third action, the Vehicle
Efficiency Measure, is estimated by CARB toadd another 4.5 MMTCO2E, or 2.5percent,
to the total statewide reductions. The national CAFE Standards, while not quantified in
the CARB Scoping Plan, would likely contribute to further reductions in statewide vehicle
GHG emissions.
It can be assumed that newer vehicles associated with the Proposed Project would
benefit from these regulations, and estimated vehicle emissions would accordingly
decrease. By accounting for the Scoping Plan measures already adopted, and the
reduced vehicle trip lengths, theestimated vehicle emissions associated with the
Proposed Project would decrease by 40percent (with approximately 10percent coming
from the reduced vehicle trip lengths and nearly 30percent from the state regulations),
resulting in GHG emissions of 68,276.67MTCO2E (compared to the 113,416.15
MTCO2E estimated for BAU).
In order to fully evaluate the significance of the Proposed Project’s vehicle emissions
reductionsrelative to the BAU 2020 vehicle emissions forecast and the Scoping Plan’s
vehicle emissions reductions, it is necessary to look at the Proposed Project in terms of
its average trip length and effects on regional VMT.
b.Electricity Emissions
Buildout of the Proposed Project would be subject to the Chula Vista Green Building and
Increased Energy Efficiency ordinances of the City’s Municipal Code. These two
ordinances are described in Section 3.2.4.5 and Section 3.2.4.6 and would achieve a 30
percent reduction in building energy (electricity and natural gas) use compared to BAU
assumptions and a 20 percent reduction in potable water consumption (and associated
embodied energy) compared to BAU assumptions.
Based on the energy savings required in the City’s Increased Energy Efficiency
ordinance, the proposed 6,050 residential units,1.8 million cubic feet of commercial
space,10.8 acres of community purpose facility use, 51.4 acres of schools, 55.4 acres
of park space, and 2.2 million square feet of industrial spacewould annually consume
94,054.45MWh of electricity. The residential uses would consume approximately
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 51
28,617.65MWh,the commercial uses would consume approximately 17,766 MWh,the
school uses would consume approximately 9,952 MWh, the community purpose space
would consume 3,089 MWh, active park uses would consume approximately maximum
of 15,845 MWh, and the industrial uses would consume approximately 19,124 MWh
each year. This equates to the emission of 12,232.14MTCO2E each year from
residential uses,10,848.26 MTCO2E each year from commercial uses, 6,077.06
MTCO2E each year from school uses, 9,675.40 MTCO2E each year from active park
uses, 1,886.18 MTCO2E each year from community purpose facilities, and16,712.41
MTCO2E each year from industrial uses; totaling 57,431.45MTCO2E each year.
As shown in Table 4, the CARB Scoping Plan includes a Renewables Portfolio Standard
which requires public utilities to acquire an increasing proportion of their energy supply
from renewable energies. By 2020, 33percent of all statewide electricity generation is to
come from renewable energies. This wouldresult in a statewide emissions reduction of
26.3 MMTCO2E and is a reduction that is counted toward the total 2020 emissions
reduction target. As a result of implementation of the Renewables Portfolio Standard,
GHG emissions from electricity generation needed to supply the Project would likely
decline as energy supply shifts from fossil-fuel based energies to renewable energy.
Renewable energies have zero to little carbon content and their use in electricity
generation emits fewer GHGs.
c.Natural Gas Emissions
Buildout of the Proposed Project would be subject to the Increased Energy Efficiency
ordinance of the City’s Municipal Code. This ordinance is described in Section 3.2.4.6
and would achieve a 15 percent reduction in building energy use compared to the
existing energy code (Title 24, Year 2008), which equates to a 30 percent reduction in
building energy and natural gas use compared to BAU assumptions.
Based on the energy savings required in the City’s Increased Energy Efficiency
ordinance, the proposed 6,050 residential units,1.8 million square feet of commercial
space,10.8 acres of community purpose facility, 51.4 acres of schools, 55.4 acres of
parks, and 2.2 million square feet of industrial use would annually consume 344.83
million cubic feet of natural gas. The residential uses would consume approximately
174.44million cubic feet,the commercial uses would consume approximately 43.85
million cubic feet,the community purpose facility would consume approximately 10.93
million cubic feet, the schools would consume approximately 24.29 million cubic feet, the
park uses would consume approximately 5.07 million cubic feet, and the industrial uses
would consume 86.25 million cubic feeteach year. This equates to the emission of
9,552.49MTCO2E of GHGs each year from residential uses,2,401.22 MTCO2E each
year from commercial uses, 598.73 MTCO2E each year from community purpose
facilities, 1,330.34 MTCO2E each year from schools, 277.52 MTCO2E each year from
park uses, and 4,723.53 MTCO2E each year from industrial uses; totaling 18,883.83
MTCO2E of GHG emissions each year.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 52
d.Water Use Emissions
Buildout of the Proposed Project would be subject to the Green Building Standards in
the City’s Municipal Code. This ordinance is described in Section 3.2.4.5 and would
achieve a 20 percent reduction in water use compared to the existing plumbing code
(year 2006) and BAU assumptions. An adjustment to the WRMP daily water demand
rates identified above for BAU were thus made to account for the City’s more stringent
water conservation design requirements.Multiplying the proposed 887single-family
residential units, 5,163multi-family residential units,51.4 acres of schools, 54.4acres of
park use, 10.8 acres of community purpose, 1.8 million square feet of commercialspace,
and 2.2 million square feet of industrial space, by adjustedWRMP daily water demand
rates of 400 gallons per single-family residential unit, 204gallons per multi-family unit,
1,428 gallons per school acre, 1,724gallons per park acre, 714.4 gallons per community
purpose acre, 0.11gallon per commercial square foot, and 0.06gallon per industrial
squarefoot, yields a total daily combined water demand of 1,910,684gallons for the
Proposed Project. Annual project water demand wouldtotal approximately
697,399,543gallons. Of this annual total, approximately 513,938,980gallons would be
associated with residential uses, 26,790,708 gallons would be associated with school
uses, 34,861,004gallons with park uses, 2,816,165 gallons would be associated with
community purpose uses, 73,584,000gallons withcommercial uses, and 45,408,686
gallons would be associated with industrial uses. This water usage amounts to
approximately 20 percent less than the average water use for residential and non-
residential uses built to the current plumbing code. The embodied energy demand
associated with the Proposed Project’s total water use would equate to 5,927.90MWh
per year. Multiplying this value by the electricity emission factors for the three primary
GHGs of concern in Table 8 yields an estimated annual emission associated with water
use of 3,619.69MTCO2E.
While not shown in Table 4, the CARB Scoping Plan includes other reduction strategies
not counted toward the 2020 target reduction of 174 MMTCO2E statewide. CARB
estimates that their recommended water sector measures would reduce an additional
4.8 MMTCO2E by 2020. These are measures required of water suppliers that would
improve energy and other efficiencies associated with water supply. Thus, it is possible
that the embodied energy and resulting GHG emissions associated with supplying
potable water to the Proposed Project would decrease somewhat by 2020.
e.Solid Waste Emissions
While the Proposed Project would implement lumber and other materials conservation in
accordance with the City’s Green Building Standards (see Section 3.2.4.5) and likely
generate less landfill waste than average BAU, these savings cannot be estimated at
this time. Therefore, for purposes of this program-level estimation, the Proposed Project
is considered to generate the same amount of waste and associated GHG emissions as
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 53
that under BAU: 49,565.66tons of solid waste each year, resulting in 7,918.07MTCO2E
of GHG emissions each year.
Future development in accordance with the Proposed Project would be required to
implement lumber and other materials conservation in conformance with the Green
Building Standards in effect at the time of project submittal that would likely exceed
average or BAU practice. The importance of this action is revealed in CalRecycle’s
annual Statewide Waste Characterization Study (2008), which noted that inerts and
other materials accounted for nearly one-third (29 percent) of the statewide waste
stream, with lumber representing nearly 15 percent. The largest change inthe overall
waste stream was an increase, from 22 percent to 29 percent, in this materials class,
largely due to an increase in lumber.
As shown in Table 4, the CARB Scoping Plan includes Recycling and Waste measures
that would reduce statewide emissions by roughly 1.0 MMTCO2E by 2020. This is to be
achieved through improved landfill methane capture. Also, while not shown in Table 4,
the CARB Scoping Plan includes other waste sector reduction strategies not counted
toward the statewide 2020 emissions reduction target. CARB estimates that these
additional waste and recycling sector measures would provide up to an additional
10MMTCO2E reduction by 2020. Thus, it is possible that the embodied energy and
emissions resulting from disposing of the Proposed Project’s solid waste may decrease
somewhat by 2020 due to these measures.
f.Construction Emissions
The Proposed Project would generate the same approximate amount of construction
emissions as BAU, 41,090.96MTCO2E per year.
The Scoping Plan does not identify any measures specific to reducing GHG emissions
from construction activities. However, the reduction measure affecting heavy-duty
vehicle emissions would potentially encompass off-road construction equipment and
reduce emissions through improved engine technology and conversion to non-diesel,
low carbon fuels. Thus, as with the majority of the Scoping Plan’s transportation-related
reduction measures, reductions in construction emissions would have to come from
emissions limits on construction equipment, redesign of construction equipment
technology, and/or conversion to low carbon fuels. These measures are outside the
control of the City or project-specific design.
5.1.1.3Cumulative Projects GHG Emissions
While the GHG analysis for the Proposed Project is, in consideration of the global nature
of climate change, a cumulative analysis, an additionaldetailed cumulative analysis is
provided based on probable future projects (foreseeable) projects within the Project
Area. These projects include Village 8 East and Planning Area 10/University Site. This
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 54
quantitative analysis of the potential cumulative impacts is based on the ratio of ADTs
attributed to the foreseeable projects compared to ADTs from the Proposed Project.
Specifically, total project generated ADTS(113,073) were divided into total ADT for the
cumulative study area (174,700) resulting in a coefficient of 1.5. This coefficient is
applied to all GHG emission factors to estimate cumulative emission levels.
a.Transportation-Related Emissions
The Cumulative Projects transportation-related GHG emissions would amount to
approximately 102,415.00MTCO2E per year, or 1.5times the 68,276.67MTCO2E per
year projected for the Proposed Project. This emissions estimate takes into account a
less-than-regional-average local trip length and state regulations affecting vehicle engine
and fuel manufacture. The reduction in BAU vehicles emissions from these GHG-
reducing aspects of the Cumulative Projects would be approximately 40 percent; with
approximately 10 percentresulting from smart-growth circulation patterns and 30
percent resulting from statewide regulations.
b.Electricity Emissions
Buildout of Cumulative Projects would be subject to the ChulaVista Increased Energy
Efficiency Standards ordinance of the City’s Municipal Code. Individual developments
would thus be required to achieve at least a 30 percent reduction in building energy
(electricity and natural gas) use compared to BAU assumptions.Based on the
cumulative coefficient of 1.5,, Cumulative Projects would emit approximately 86,147.18
MTCO2E each year.
c.Natural Gas Emissions
As stated above in buildout of Cumulative Projects would be subject to increased energy
efficiency requirements that would save 30 percent building energy and natural gas use
compared to BAU assumptions. Based on the cumulative coefficient of 1.5,Cumulative
Projects would emit approximately 28,325.75MTCO2E of GHG emissions each year
associated with natural gas combustion.
d.Water Use Emissions
Buildout of Cumulative Projects would also be subject to the water saving requirements
of the City’s Green Building Standards ordinance. Individual projects would thus be
required to achieve a 20 percent reduction in potable water consumption (and
associated embodied energy) compared to BAUassumptions. This water usage
amounts to approximately 20 percent less than the average water use for residential and
commercial uses built to the current plumbing code. Based on the cumulative coefficient
of 1.5,the estimated annual emissions associatedwith Cumulative Projects water use
would be 5,429.53MTCO2E.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 55
e.Solid Waste Emissions
While Cumulative Projects would implement lumber and other materials conservation in
accordance with the City’s Green Building Standards (see Section 3.2.4.5) and likely
generate less landfill waste than average BAU, these savings cannot be estimated at
this time. Therefore, for purposes of this program-level estimation, buildout of
Cumulative Projects is based only on the multiplier of 1.5, without additional credit for
conservation measures, amounting to approximately 11,877.11MTCO2E of GHG
emissions each year.
f.Construction Emissions
Approximately 61,636.44MTCO2E per year of construction emissions would be
generated by construction of the Cumulative Projects, based onthe 1.5multiplier relative
to the Proposed Project.
5.1.2Significance of Impacts
5.1.2.1Target Emissions
Based on the calculated BAU project-equivalent emissions and the goal of a 20 percent
reduction in BAU 2020 emissions, an emissions cap for the Proposed Project can be
determined. As shown in the Table 9 in Section 5.1.2.3 below, the total estimated BAU
emissions would be 275,971.62MTCO2E each year. A 20 percent reduction in this
amount would equal 220,777.29MTCO2E each year. Therefore, the Propose Project
would be considered to be consistent with the Scoping Plan and AB 32 Year 2020 goals
if it were to emit total annual emissions resulting from electricity, natural gas and water
use, solid waste disposal and construction activities, equal to or less than
220,777.29MTCO2E.
5.1.2.2Proposed Project GHG Reduction Features
As described in Section 2.1, the Proposed Project is a GPA and GDPA to allow the
ultimate development of up to 6,050 residential units,1.8 million square feet of
commercial and2.2 million square feet of industrial uses, 10.8 acres of community
purpose use, 51.4 acres of schools,and 55.4 acres of park use.As part of the GPA,
proposed text revisions to the GP’s Environmental Element, Objective E7would include
the following newPolicy E 7.8:
Objective E 7
Promote energy conservation through the efficient use of energy and through the
development of local, non-fossil fuel-based renewable sources of energy.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 56
Policy
E 7.8: Ensure that residential and non-residential construction complies with all
applicable City of Chula Vista energy efficiency measures that are in effect at the time of
discretionary permit review and approval or building permit issuance, whichever is
applicable.
This new policy would ensure that all subsequent projects comply with, at a minimum,
the existing GBS ordinance and Increased Energy Efficiency Standards ordinance.
These two City ordinances are included as Attachment2 and are hereby incorporated by
reference. As described in Sections3.2.4.5 and 3.2.4.6 respectively, these two
ordinances require all new development and redevelopment or remodels over a
threshold size to incorporate design that achieves at least 20percent greater water
conservation than the current plumbing code and 15percent greater energy efficiency
than the current 2008 Title 24 energy code (i.e., 30percent greater energy efficiency
than the 2005 Title 24 energy code).
As required in the ordinances, building permits for subsequent development in
accordance with the Proposed Project would be thoroughly reviewed by the Building
Official for compliance with the ordinances prior to approval. As part of the building
permit application, project construction plans and specifications shall indicate the energy
and GBS standards, product specifications, and method of construction, in the general
notes or individual drawings. No building permit shall be issued for any project until the
Building Official has determined that the plans and specifications are in compliance with
the requirements of the ordinances. Additional inspections may be conducted as
needed to ensure compliance and if at any stage of construction the Building Official
determines that the project is not being constructed in accordance with the permitted
plans and documents, a stop order may be issued that will remain in effect until the
Building Official allows. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the Building
Official shall review all relevant information and determine whether the project has been
built in accordance with the permit. If the Building Official determines that a project
applicant has failed to construct the project in accordance with the permitted plans and
documents, then the final building approval and certificate of occupancy may be
withheld.
5.1.2.3Proposed Project GHG Reductions Relative to BAU 2020
The total GHG emissions attributed to vehicle use and building occupancies for BAU and
the Proposed Project are summarized below in Table 9. The Proposed Project is
estimated to generate a total of 197,220.66MTCO2E GHG emissions (68,276.67from
vehicle use and 128,944MTCO2E from non-transportation-related sources) each year
above existing conditions. BAU is estimated to generate a total of 275,971.62MTCO2E
of GHG emissions each year above existing conditions (113,416.15MTCO2E from
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 57
vehicle use and 162,555.47MTCO2E from non-transportation-related sources). This
Proposed Project total reduction of 78,750.95MTCO2E equates to a 29percent
reductionin BAU emissions, and results from the Proposed Project’s incorporation of
smart-growth vehicle circulation patterns, lower-emitting vehicles given state regulations,
and advanced energy efficiency and water conservation design that would reduce GHG
emissions associated with energy and water use. Of the totalProposed Project
reduction, a 33,611.47MTCO2E, or 21percent,reduction in non-vehicular BAU would
result from the advanced energy efficiency and water conservation design alone. Other
Proposed Project features that may reduce GHG emissions, such as landscaping, heat
island reduction, lumber conservation, and other actions required in the City’s Green
Building Standards were not readily quantifiable and are not included in the Proposed
Project’s emissions estimate.
TABLE 9
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED GHG EMISSIONS AND
PROJECT REDUCTIONS RELATIVE TO BAU
(MTCO2E)
Emission Source
BAU Project-
Equivalent
Target
Emissions
Proposed
Project
Percent
Reduction
Vehicles Use 113,416.15 --68,276.67 40
Electricity Use 82,044.93 --57,431.45 30
Natural Gas Use 29,976.90 --18,883.83 30
Water Consumption 4,524.61 --3,619.69 20
Solid Waste Disposal 7,918.07 --7,918.07 0
Construction 41,090.96 --41,090.96 0
TOTAL 275,971.62 220,777.29 197,220.66 29
As shown in Table 9, a 20 percent reduction in BAU GHG emissions would equal
220,777.29MTCO2E per year. The Proposed Project would generate an estimated
197,220.66MTCO2E per year. Based only on increased energy and water savings
afforded by the proposed General Plan Policy 7.8 and existing City ordinances, the
Proposed Project would reduce non-transportation-related BAU emissions by
21percent. Factoring in vehicle emissions reductions, the Proposed Project would
reduce overall BAU emissions by 29percent, thereby exceeding the City’s significance
threshold of a 20percentreduction in GHG emissions relative to BAU 2020. Impacts
associated with the Proposed Project’s contribution of GHGs to cumulative statewide
emissions would therefore be less than significant.
5.1.2.4Cumulative Projects GHG Emissions
The Cumulative Projects annual GHG emissions would total approximately
295,831.00MTCO2E per year. Under BAU, annual GHG emissions would approximate
413,957.43MTCO2E per year. These quantities were derived by multiplying the
estimates derived through the above BAU and Proposed Project emissions calculations
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 58
by a factor of 1.5to reflect the proportionally greater intensity of development allowed
through buildout of projects in an expanded cumulative projects area or that includes
Village 8 East and Planning Area10/UniversitySite.
These calculations provide a cursory estimate of the magnitude of GHG emissions that
would occur under Cumulative Projects buildout. Given that individual projects within the
Cumulative Projects area would be subject to the City’s existing Green Building
Standards and Increased Energy Efficiency Standards ordinances, and the proposed
GPA new policy E.7.8, future emissions from these projects would be ensured to be at
least 20 percent below BAU GHG emissions; and would more likely, as is the case with
the Proposed Project, provide reductions in BAU GHG emissions ranging from 21to 29
percent.
The Proposed Project’s contribution to these Cumulative Projects GHG emissions would
not be significant; and climate change impacts associated with the Cumulative Projects
buildout is anticipated to be less than significant.
5.2Project Consistency with Adopted Plans,
Policies, and Regulations
5.2.1Impacts
The regulatory plans and policies discussed extensively in Section 3.0 above aim to
reduce national, state,and local GHG emissions by primarily targeting the largest
emitters of GHGs: the transportation and energy sectors. Plan goals and regulatory
standards are thus largely focused on the automobile industry and public utilities. For the
transportation sector, the reduction strategy is generally three pronged: to reduce GHG
emissions from vehicles by improving engine design; to reduce the carbon content of
transportation fuels through research, funding and incentives to fuel suppliers; and to
reduce the miles these vehicles travel through land use change and infrastructure
investments.
For the energy sector, the reduction strategies aim to: reduce energy demand; impose
emission caps on energy providers; establish minimum building energy and green
building standards; transition to renewable non-fossil fuels; incentivize homeowners and
builders; fully recover landfill gas for energy; expand research and development; and so
forth.
5.2.1.1Local Plans
As discussed above in Section 5.2.2, the Proposed Project would achieve substantial
GHG reductions through green building design that includes increase energy efficiency
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 59
and improved water conservation, sustainable materials use, waste reduction, lumber
conservation, indoor air quality, and heat island reduction. TheseGHG-reducing design
features would be incorporated into subsequent projects as required in the City’s Green
Building Standards and the Increased Energy Efficiency Standards adopted by
ordinance into the Municipal Code. Verification and commissioning of these features
would occur through independent third party inspection and diagnostics as part of
development permit review and approval.
The Proposed Project would thus be consistent with the City’s CPAP and Climate
Protection Measures relevant to private land use and development.
5.2.1.2State Plans
EO S-3-05 established GHG emission reduction targets for the state, and AB 32
launched the Climate Change Scoping Plan that outlined the reduction measures
needed to reach these targets. The Scoping Plan and its implementing and
complementary regulations are discussed at length in Section 3.2. Also, in Sections 5.1
and 5.2 above, the Project’s consistency with the state reduction targets for
transportation, energy and other emissions associated with land use and development,
is demonstrated. In short, the Proposed Project was shown to provide a 21percent
reduction in non-transportation-related BAU emissions, and a 29percent reduction in
overall BAU emissions, consistent with the percent reduction targeted in the Scoping
Plan for land development-related emissions. In addition, the Proposed Project was
demonstrated in Section 5.1 to not increase regional VMT, and is therefore consistent
with recommendations in the Scoping Plan and assumptions in the BAU 2020 Forecast
pertaining to transportation-related emissions. The Proposed Project is also consistent
with state goals regarding climate change adaptation and the Scoping Plan’s
recommendation to expand the use of green building practices in order to reduce the
carbon footprint of new buildings and better adapt them to climate change.
The Proposed Project, by providing a 21percent reduction in non-transportation-related
GHG emissions compared to BAU, may be seen to exceed its fair share in achieving the
state’s reduction target given that the reduction measures and quantities identified in the
Scoping Plan that relate specifically to land development (the Regional Transportation-
Related Measure, the Building Energy Efficiency measure, and the Million Solar Roofs
measure) add up to approximately 20percent of the total reduction needed statewide.
5.2.2Significance of Impacts
The Proposed Project is consistent with the goals and strategies of local and state plans,
policies, and regulations aimed at reducing GHG emissions from land use and
development. Impacts would be less than significant.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 60
6.0Conclusions and Recommendations
Assuming full implementation of statutory regulations establishing vehicle and fuel
emissions limits and technology improvements and shorter thanaverage trip lengths,
ADT associated with buildout of the Proposed Project would result in approximately
68,276.67MTCO2E of GHG emissions each year above existing conditions. This
estimate represents a nearly 40percent reduction in vehicular GHG emissions
compared to the BAU condition which would result in 113,416.15MTCO2E of
transportation-related GHG emissions per year above existing conditions. Because the
Proposed Project’s average local trip length would not be large enough to increase the
regionalaverage vehicle trip length or regional VMT, its vehicle emissions are consistent
with the state’s forecasted 2020 BAU vehicle emissions and sector-wide reductions. The
Proposed Project’s contribution to cumulative transportation-related GHG emissions is
therefore less than significant.
The Proposed Project is estimated to generate 128,944MTCO2E of non-transportation-
related GHG emissions each year above existing conditions, and BAU is estimated to
generate 162,555.47MTCO2E of non-transportation-related GHG emissions each year
above existing conditions. Implementation of the Proposed Project would thus result in a
21percent reduction in BAU 2020 non-transportation-related emissions,thereby
exceeding the 20percent reduction target established by the City consistent with AB 32
and the CARB Scoping Plan. The Proposed Project’s non-transportation-related
emissions reduction of approximately 33,611.47MTCO2Ewould result from design
features required to be incorporated into subsequent development proposals that
substantially reduce energy and water use.
The Proposed Project’s overall contribution to cumulative GHG emissions would
therefore not be significant and would not conflict with or obstruct the goals and
strategies of local and state plans, policies, and regulations aimed at reducing GHG
emissions from land development.
7.0References Cited
American Water Works Association
2001Handbook of Water Use and Conservation.Amy Vickers. August.
Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP)
2010Spring2010 Advanced CEQA Workshop. San Diego Chapter. May 13.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 61
Australian Government
2007 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer.Department
of the Environment and Water Resources (DEWR). Obtained from the DEWR
website at http://www.environment.gov.au/atmosphere/ozone/legislation/
montp.htmlon July 27, 2007.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
2006Source Inventory of Bay Area Greenhouse Gas Emissions. November.
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA)
2008CEQA & Climate Change: Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas
Emissions from Projects Subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.
January.
2007California 1990 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Level and 2020 Emissions Limit.
November 16.
California Air Resources Board (CARB)
2007California 1990 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Level and 2020 Emissions Limit.
November 16.
2008aRecommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for
Greenhouse Gases under the California environmental Quality Act.
Preliminary Draft Staff Proposal. October 24.
2008bClimate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. Accessed from the
CARB website April 15,2010 at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/
document/adopted_scoping_plan.pdf. December.
2008cCalifornia 2020 GHG Emissions Forecast. Accessed June 1, 2010 from the
CARB website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/forecast.htm. Last
updated October 2008; last reviewed May 28, 2010.
2010a Greenhouse Gas Inventory Data –2000 to 2008. Obtained from the CARB
website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm (last updated
May12, 2010) on December 28.
2010b Climate Car Standards –Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493. Obtained from the
CARB website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccms/ccms.htm, last reviewed
March 10, 2010, on April 22.
2010c Senate Bill 375 –Regional Targets. Obtained fromthe CARB website at
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/sb375.htm on October 29.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 62
California Clean Cars Campaign
2006Fact Sheet: California’s Vehicle Global Warming Pollution Reduction
Regulations: How it Works.http://www.calcleancars.org/factsheets/
staffproposal.pdf.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
20092008 California Motor Vehicle Stock, Travel and Fuel Forecast. Division of
Transportation System Information Program. June.
California Energy Commission (CEC)
2009California Energy Commission website, http://www.energy.ca.gov/
ab118/index.html, accessed on August 5.
2006Commercial End-Use Survey (CEUS). 2006 (as cited in the California
Emissions Estimator Model, v1.1, 2011). Available online at
http://www.energy/ca/gov/ceus.
2004Residential Appliance Saturation Survey (RASS). 2004 (as cited in the
California Emissions Estimator Model, v1.1, 2011). Available online at
http://www.energy/ca/gov/rass.
California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA)
2005California Hydrogen Blueprint Plan. Volume 1 Draft Final Report. March.
California, State of
2004 Climate Change Emission Control Regulations –Fact Sheet.Obtained from
the CARB website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/factsheets/cc_newfs.pdfon May
24, 2007.
2005 Regulations to Control Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles;
Request for Waiver of Preemption Under Clean Air Act Section 209(b).
California Air Resources Board. December 21. Obtained from the CARB
website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/docs/waiver.pdfon May 24, 2007.
2006 Press Release -Gov. Schwarzenegger Signs Landmark Legislation to Reduce
Greenhouse Gas Emissions.Office of the Governor. September 27. Obtained
from the Governor’s website at http://gov.ca.gov/index.php?/press-
release/4111/on May 24, 2007.
2009bNews Release: California Adopts Low Carbon Fuel Standard. Accessed from
the CARB website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/nr042309b.htm. April 23.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 63
CalRecycle (California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery)
2008Statewide Waste Characterization Study. Contractors Report to the California
IntegratedWaste Management Board. April.
2009Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates for Residential and Commercial
Establishments. Accessed from the CalRecycle website at http://www.
calrecycle.ca.gov/wastechar/wastegenrates. Updated December 30.
Chula Vista,City of
2005Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory. Accessed June 23 from the Chula Vista
city government website at http://www.chulavistaca.gov/clean/conservation/
Climate/documents/GHG_2008InventoryReport_FINAL.pdf. September 18.
2006Climate Zones Map. City of Chula Vista Geographic Information System.
Accessed June 10, 2010 from the Chula Vista city government website at
http://www.chulavistaca.gov/city_services/development_services/planning_buil
ding/Development_Services_Center/documents/climateZonesSm2_000.pdf.
February.
2008aGreenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory. Accessed June 23 from the Chula Vista
city government website at http://www.chulavistaca.gov/clean/conservation/
Climate/documents/GHG_2008InventoryReport_FINAL.pdf. September 18.
2008bCity of Chula Vista Climate Protection Measures.
2010Climate Protection Measures: Implementation Progress Report. Accessed
June 23 from the Chula Vista city government website at
http://www.chulavistaca.gov/clean/conservation/Climate/documents/
CCWGClimateMeasures_18-MonthProgressReport_FINAL.pdf. February.
Institute of Transportation Engineers
2008Trip Generation: An Informational Report.8thEdition.December.
Linscott, Law and Greenspan Engineers
2011Traffic Impact Analysis [for the] Chula Vista General Plan & General
Development Plan Amendment[s] for Otay Land Company. February.
Marten Law Group
2008 California Sues EPA over Vehicle Emissions Standards. Accessed May 19,
2008 at: http://www.martenlaw.com/news/?20080109-calif-sues-epa.
Otay Water District
2008Otay Water District Water Resources Master Plan Update. October.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 64
Rimpo and Associates
2007URBEMIS 2007 for Windows, Version 9.2.4.
Sacramento Bee
2007“California gets a win on emissions-cut law,”by Dale Kasler, December 13.
Accessed May 19, 2008 at: http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?
action=detail&pk=CAL-EMISSIONSCUT-12-13-07.
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)
2009Transportation: Roads and Highways. Accessed from the SANDAG website at
http://www.sandag.org/index.asp?subclassid=10&fuseaction=home.subclassh
ome. November 13.
2010aGreenhouse Gas Reduction Targets Set. Accessed from the SANDAG
website at http://www.sandag.org/index.asp?newsid=666&fuseaction=news.detail
on October 29.
2010bAverage Trip Length By Mile for TAZ 4391 and TAZ 4373. Obtained by City of
Chula Vista staff from SANDAG staff via personal communications on July 12.
San Diego, City of
2010Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis Technical Report for the Nakano Project.
May 24.
2010aHeritage Bluffs Climate Change Analysis. Prepared by Urban Crossroads.
April.
2010bGlobal Climate Change Analysis for Las Casitas, City of San Diego. Prepared
by RECON Environmental Inc. July.
Torcellini, P., Long, N., and Judkoff, R.
2003Consumptive Water Use for U.S. Power Production. Technical Report # NREL-
TP-550-33905. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Golden, CO.
Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS)
2007 SB 1368 (Perata) Greenhouse Gas Emissions Performance Standard for
Major Power Plant Investments –A Fact Sheet of the Union of Concerned
Scientists. Obtained from the UCS web site at http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/
documents/global_warming/SB-1368-Perata-fact-sheet.pdfon June 7, 2007.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 65
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
2007 Achievements in Stratospheric Ozone Protection, The Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, Progress Report 1987–2007.
Obtained from the UNEP website at http://ozone.unep.org/
Publications/MP_Acheivements-E.pdfon May 23, 2007.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
2007a The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Obtained
from the UNFCCC website at http://unfccc.int/essential_background/
convention/items/2627.phpon May 23, 2007.
2007b Parties & Observers. Obtained from the UNFCCC website at
http://unfccc.int/parties_and_observers/items/2704.phpon May 24, 2007.
2007c Kyoto Protocol. Obtained from the UNFCCC websiteat
http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.phpon May 24, 2007.
2009 Status of Ratification. Obtained from the UNFCCC website at
http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/background/status_of_ratification/items/2613.p
hpon July 24, 2009.
University of California Transportation Center (UCTC)
1996A Fuel-Based Motor Vehicle Emission Inventory. Brett Singer and Robert
Harley. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. University of
California Berkeley. Reprinted from the Journal of Air and Waste Management
Association.
2000A Fuel-Based Assessment of Off-Road Diesel Engines Emissions. Andrew
Kean, Robert Sawyer and Robert Harley. Departments of Mechanical, Civil
and Environmental Engineering. University of California Berkeley. Reprinted
from the Journal of Air and Waste Management Association. Journal of Air and
Waste Management Association. November.
U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE)
2002 Updated State-level Greenhouse Gas Emission Coefficients for Electricity
Generation 1998-2000. Energy Information Administration, Office of
Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, Energy Information Administration. April.
Obtained from the DOE website at http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/FTPROOT/
environment/e-supdoc-u.pdfon February 16, 2007.
Global Climate Change Analysis for the Otay Land Company General Plan Amendment
and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment
Page 66
U.S Energy Information Administration (EIA)
20062003 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey: Consumption and
Expenditures Tables. Table C14. Electricity Consumption and Expenditure
Intensities for Non-Mall Buildings.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA)
1998AP 42,Fifth Edition, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume 1:
Stationary Point and Area Sources, Section 1.4, Natural Gas Combustion.
July.
2002 Greenhouse Gases and Global Warming Potential Values –Excerpt from the
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2000. U.S.
Greenhouse Gas Inventory Program, Office of Atmospheric Programs. April.
2007a International Cooperation. Obtained from the EPA Climate Change website at
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/policy/internationalcooperation.html on May
24, 2007.
2007b Ozone Depletion Rule and Regulations. Obtained from the EPA Ozone
Depletion website at http://www.epa.gov/ozone/title6/index.htmlon May 23,
2007.
2007c U.S. Climate Policy and Actions. Obtained from the EPA Climate Change
website at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/policy/index.html on May 25,
2007.
2008a California Greenhouse-Gas Waiver Request. Obtained from the EPA website
at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ca-waiver.htm on May 19, 2008.
2008bWaste Reduction Model. Obtained from the EPA website at
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/wycd/waste/calculators/Warm_home.html.
2009Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United
States. Detailed Tables and Figures for 2008. Office of Resource Conservation
and Recovery. November.
United State Global Change Research Information Office (GCRIO)
1993U.S. Climate Change Action Plan. Obtained from GCRIO website at
http://www.gcrio.org/USCCAP/toc.html on May 31, 2007.
ATTACHMENT 1
Understanding Global Climate Change
Understanding
Global Climate
Change
Prepared by
RECON Environmental, Inc.
1927 Fifth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101-2358
P 619.308.9333 F 619.308.9334
FIGURE 1 Greenhouse Effect
So
u
r
c
e
:
U
N
E
P
/
G
R
I
D
–
A
d
r
e
n
a
l
2
0
0
2
a
FIGURE 2
Te
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
a
n
d
C
O
2
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
So
u
r
c
e
:
U
N
E
P
/
G
R
I
D
–
A
d
r
e
n
a
l
2
0
0
0
FIGURE 3
Co
m
p
a
r
i
s
o
n
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
M
o
d
e
l
e
d
an
d
O
b
s
e
r
v
e
d
Temperature
So
u
r
c
e
:
U
N
E
P
/
G
R
I
D
–
A
d
r
e
n
a
l
2
0
0
2
b
FIGURE 4
The Main Characteristics of the Four
SRES Storylines and Scenario Families
Source: IPCC 2000
Schematic illustration of SRES scenarios. Four qualitative storylines yield four sets of scenarios called "families": A1, A2, B1,
and B2. Altogether 40 SRES scenarios have been developed by six modeling teams. All are equally valid with no assigned
probabilities of occurrence. The set of scenarios consists of six scenario groups drawn from the four families: one group each
in A2, B1, B2, and three groups within the A1 family, characterizing alternative developments of energy technologies: A1FI
(fossil fuel intensive), A1B (balanced), and A1T (predominantly non-fossil fuel). Within each family and group of scenarios,
some share "harmonized" assumptions on global population, gross world product, and final energy. These are marked as
"HS" for harmonized scenarios. "OS" denotes scenarios that explore uncertainties in driving forces beyond those of the
harmonized scenarios. The number of scenarios developed within each category is shown. For each of the six scenario
groups an illustrative scenario (which is always harmonized) is provided. Four illustrative marker scenarios, one for each
scenario family, were used in draft form in the 1998 SRES open process and are included in revised form in this report. Two
additional illustrative scenarios for the groups A1FI and A1T are also provided and complete a set of six that illustrate all
scenario groups. All are equally sound.
By 2100 the world will have changed in ways that are difficult to imagine - as difficult as it would have been at the end of the
19th century to imagine the changes of the 100 years since. Each storyline assumes a distinctly different direction for future
developments, such that the four storylines differ in increasingly irreversible ways. Together they describe divergent futures
that encompass a significant portion of the underlying uncertainties in the main driving forces. They cover a wide range of key
"future" characteristics such as demographic change, economic development, and technological change. For this reason,
their plausibility or feasibility should not be considered solely on the basis of an extrapolation of current economic,
technological, and social trends.
The A1 storyline and scenario family describes a future world of very rapid economic growth, global population that peaks in
mid-century and declines thereafter, and the rapid introduction of new and more efficient technologies. Major underlying
themes are convergence among regions, capacity building, and increased cultural and social interactions, with a substantial
reduction in regional differences in per capita income. The A1 scenario family develops into three groups that describe
alternative directions of technological change in the energy system. The three A1 groups are distinguished by their
technological emphasis: fossil intensive (A1FI), non-fossil energy sources (A1T), or a balance across all sources (A1B)3 .
The A2 storyline and scenario family describes a very heterogeneous world. The underlying theme is self-reliance and
preservation of local identities. Fertility patterns across regions converge very slowly, which results in continuously increasing
global population. Economic development is primarily regionally oriented and per capita economic growth and technological
change are more fragmented and slower than in other storylines.
The B1 storyline and scenario family describes a convergent world with the same global population that peaks in mid-century
and declines thereafter, as in the A1 storyline, but with rapid changes in economic structures toward a service and
information economy, with reductions in material intensity, and the introduction of clean and resource-efficient technologies.
The emphasis is on global solutions to economic, social, and environmental sustainability, including improved equity, but
without additional climate initiatives.
The B2 storyline and scenario family describes a world in which the emphasis is on local solutions to economic, social, and
environmental sustainability. It is a world with continuously increasing global population at a rate lower than A2, intermediate
levels of economic development, and less rapid and more diverse technological change than in the B1 and A1 storylines.
While the scenario is also oriented toward environmental protection and social equity, it focuses on local and regional levels.
FIGURE 5 CO2 Scenarios
So
u
r
c
e
:
U
N
E
P
/
G
R
I
D
–
A
d
r
e
n
a
l
2
0
0
5
a
FIGURE 6
Su
r
f
a
c
e
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
S
c
e
n
a
r
i
o
s
So
u
r
c
e
:
U
N
E
P
/
G
R
I
D
–
A
d
r
e
n
a
l
2
0
0
5
b
FIGURE 7 Persistence Effect
So
u
r
c
e
:
I
P
C
C
2
0
0
1
Af
t
e
r
C
O
2 e
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
r
e
d
u
c
e
d
a
n
d
a
t
m
o
s
p
h
e
r
i
c
c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
st
a
b
i
l
i
z
e
,
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
a
i
r
t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
t
o
r
i
s
e
b
y
a
f
e
w
t
e
n
t
h
s
o
f
a
d
e
g
r
e
e
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
u
r
y
fo
r
a
c
e
n
t
u
r
y
o
r
m
o
r
e
.
T
h
e
r
m
a
l
e
x
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
o
c
e
a
n
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
s
l
o
n
g
a
f
t
e
r
C
O
2 e
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
h
a
v
e
b
e
e
n
r
e
d
u
c
e
d
,
a
n
d
m
e
l
t
i
n
g
o
f
i
c
e
s
h
e
e
t
s continues to contrib-
ut
e
t
o
s
e
a
-
l
e
v
e
l
r
i
s
e
f
o
r
m
a
n
y
c
e
n
t
u
r
i
e
s
.
T
h
i
s
f
i
g
u
r
e
i
s
a
g
e
n
e
r
i
c
i
l
l
u
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
a
t
a
n
y
l
e
v
e
l
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
4
5
0
a
n
d
1
,
0
0
0
p
p
m
,
a
n
d
t
h
e
r
e
f
o
r
e
h
a
s
n
o
un
i
t
s
o
n
t
h
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
a
x
i
s
.
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
s
t
o
s
t
a
b
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
t
r
a
j
e
c
t
o
r
i
e
s
i
n
t
h
i
s
r
a
n
g
e
s
h
o
w
b
r
o
a
d
l
y
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
t
i
m
e
c
o
u
r
s
e
s
,
b
u
t
t
h
e
i
m
p
a
c
t
s
b
e
c
o
m
e
p
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
i
v
e
l
y
la
r
g
e
r
a
t
h
i
g
h
e
r
c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2.
Understanding Global Climate Change
Page 19
Land-use change and forestry often act as sinks, thus reducing a nation’s total GHG
emissions. Because nations that are not included in Annex I to the Convention (Non-Annex I
Parties comprised of 122 nations) are largely developing countries, emissions data for these
countries are more sporadic and incomplete. The most recent emissions data from non-
Annex I Parties indicate that total emissions from these nations were approximately 11,931
Tg CO2 equivalent, including land use-change and forestry (UNFCCC 2005). As such,
using the most recent data available for Annex I and Non-Annex I Parties, 2004 global
emissions of GHGs were approximately 28,008 Tg CO2 equivalent, including land-use
change and forestry.
Each year, the U.S. EPA prepares an inventory of GHG emissions and sinks report. The
report provides information on GHG emissions and sink sources and is used to develop
policies and track progress. Inventories are submitted to the UN. The most recent final
report,Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2007, was
completed in April 2009 (U.S. EPA 2009). The 2010 update is currently undergoing public
review. The U.S. EPA also provides guidance for states to develop GHG inventories. The
Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 to 2004 completed in
December 2006, including subsequent revisions to the in-state electricity production
estimates, is the most recent report for California (State of California 2006b, 2007). Tables 3
and 4 summarize the national GHG emissions in 1990, 1995, 2000, and 2005 through 2007,
and State GHG emissions from 1990 through 2004, respectively.
TABLE 3
NET NATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS
(Tg CO2 Equivalent)
Year CO2 CH4 N2O
HFCs,
PFCs,
and SF6
1 Total2
National
Population3
Total (Mg CO2
Eq) per
Capita
1990 4,235.3 616.6 315.0 90.5 5,257.3 249,464,396 21.1
1995 4,556.9 615.8 334.1 105.5 5,612.3 262,803,276 21.4
2000 5,237.7 591.1 329.2 132.8 6,290.7 282,194,308 22.3
2005 4,968.1 561.7 315.9 140.2 5,985.9 295,895,897 20.2
2006 4,964.4 582.0 312.1 142.1 6,000.6 298,754,819 20.1
2007 5,040.8 585.3 311.9 149.5 6,087.5 301,621,157 20.2
SOURCE: U.S. EPA 2009 1Hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride
2Totals may vary from the sum of the sources due to independent rounding 3U.S. Census Bureau 2009
Tg = terragrams = one million metric tons; Mg = megagrams = one metric ton
FIGURE 8
CO2 Emissions from
Fossil Fuels per Capita (2001)
Source: State of California 2006b
FIGURE 9
Global Greenhouse Gas
Emission Comparison (2002 data)
Source: State of California 2006b
ATTACHMENT 2
Chula Vista Green Building Standards and
Increased Energy Efficiency Standards
Ordinances
Chula Vista Green Building Standards
Per Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 15.12, Green Building Standards, the following green
building measures shall apply to all new residential construction, remodels, additions, and alterations, and
to all new nonresidential construction, remodels, additions, and tenant improvements.
Definitions
“Building Official” means the officer or other designated authority charged with the administration and
enforcement of this chapter, or duly authorized representative.
“Composite wood products” include hardwood plywood, particleboard, and medium density fiberboard.
Composite wood products does not include hardboard, structural plywood, structural panels, structural
composite lumber, oriented strand board, glued laminated timber as specified in “Structural Glued
Laminated Timber” (ANSI A190.1-2002) or prefabricated wood I-joists.
“Energy Code” means the California Energy Code, as adopted and amended by the City in Chapter 15.26
of the Municipal Code.
“Green Building” means a holistic approach to design, construction, and demolition that minimizes the
building’s impact on the environment, the occupants, and the community.
“Infiltration” means an uncontrolled inward air leakage from outside a building or unconditioned space,
including leakage through cracks and interstices, around windows and doors and through any other exterior
or demising partition or pipe or duct penetration.
“MERV” means filter minimum efficiency reporting value, based on ASHRAE 52.2-1999.
“Moisture content” means the weight of the water in wood expressed in percentage of the weight of the
oven-dry wood.
“Outdoor Air” (Outside air) means air taken from outdoors and not previously circulated in the building.
“VOC” means volatile organic compound and is broadly defined as a chemical compound based on carbon
chains or rings with vapor pressures greater than 0.1 millimeters of mercury at room temperature. These
compounds typically contain hydrogen and may contain oxygen, nitrogen and other elements. See
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 17, Section 94508(a).
Standards
Buildings and building sites shall be designed to include the following green building measures:
A. Storm Water Management and Discharge Control. Municipal Code Section 14.20
B. Construction Waste Reduction, Disposal and Recycling. Municipal Code Section 8.25.095
C. Energy Efficiency. Buildings shall meet the requirements of the Chula Vista Municipal Code
Section15.26
D. Air Sealing.
1. Joints and openings. Openings in the building envelope separating conditioned space from
unconditioned space must be sealed by a method acceptable to the building official.
2. Other openings. Whole house exhaust fans shall have insulated louvers or covers that
close when the fan is off. Covers or louvers shall have a minimum insulation value of R-
4.2.
1
E. Water Use
1. Indoor Water Use
a. 20% Savings. A schedule of plumbing fixtures and fixture fittings that will reduce the
overall use of potable water within the building by 20% shall be provided. The
reduction in potable water use shall be demonstrated by one of the following methods.
i. A calculation demonstrating a 20% reduction in the building “water use baseline”
as established in Table 1 shall be provided, or
ii. Each plumbing fixture and fitting shall meet the 20% reduced flow rate specified
in Table 2
b. Multiple showerheads serving one shower shall not exceed the maximum flow rates
specified in the 20% reduction column contained in Table 2 or the shower shall be
designed to only allow one showerhead to be in operation at a time.
TABLE 1
WATER USE BASELINE
Fixture Type Flow-rate2 Duration DailyusesOccupants 3,4
Showerheads 2.5 gpm @ 80 psi 8 min. 1 X
Showerheads
Residential
2.5 gpm @ 80 psi 8 min. 1X
Lavatory Faucets
Residential
2.2 gpm @ 60 psi 0.25 min. 3 X
Kitchen Faucets 2.2 gpm @ 60 psi 4 min. 1 X
Replacement Aerators 2.2 gpm @ 60 psi X
Wash Fountains 2.2[rim space (in.) / 20
gpm
@ 60 psi]
X
Metering Faucets 0.25 gallons/cycle .25 min. 3 X
Metering Faucets for Wash
Fountains
.25 [rim space (in.) / 20
gpm
@ 60 psi]
.25 min. X
Gravity tank type
Water Closets
1.6 gallons/flush 1 flush 1 male1
3 female
X
Flushometer Tank
Water Closets
1.6 gallons/flush 1 flush 1 male1
3 female
X
Flushometer Valve
Water Closets
1.6 gallons/flush 1 flush 1 male1
3 female
X
Electromechanical
Hydraulic Water Closets
1.6 gallons/flush 1 flush 1 male1
3 female
X
Urinals 1.0 gallons/flush 1 flush 2 male X
Fixture “Water Use” = Flow rate x Duration x Occupants x Daily uses
1 Except for low-rise residential occupancies, the daily use number shall be increased to three if urinals
are not installed in the room.
2 The Flow-rate is from the CEC Appliance Efficiency Standards, Title 20 California Code of
Regulations; where a conflict occurs, the CEC standards shall apply.
3 For low rise residential occupancies, the number of occupants shall be based on two persons for the
first bedroom, plus one additional person for each additional bedroom.
4 For non-residential occupancies, refer to Table A, Chapter 4, 2007 California Plumbing Code, for
occupant load factors.
2
TABLE 2
FIXTURE FLOW RATES
Fixture Type Flow-rate Maximum flow rate at
20% Reduction
Showerheads 2.5 gpm @ 80 psi 2 gpm @ 80 psi
Lavatory Faucets Residential 2.2 gpm @ 60 psi 1.8 gpm @ 60 psi
Kitchen Faucets 2.2 gpm @ 60 psi 1.8 gpm @ 60 psi
Wash Fountains 2.2 [rim space (in.) / 20 gpm @
60 psi]
1.8 [rim space (in.) / 20 gpm @
60 psi]
Metering Faucets 0.25 gallons/cycle 0.2 gallons/cycle
Metering Faucets for Wash
Fountains
0.25 [rim space (in.) / 20 gpm @
60 psi]
0.20 [rim space (in.) / 20 gpm @
60 psi]
Gravity tank type Water Closets 1.6 gallons/flush 1.28 gallons/flush1
Flushometer Tank Water Closets 1.6 gallons/flush 1.28 gallons/flush1
Flushometer Valve Water Closets 1.6 gallons/flush 1.28 gallons/flush1
Electromechanical Hydraulic
Water Closets
1.6 gallons/flush 1.28 gallons/flush1
Urinals 1.0 gallons/flush 0.8 gallons/flush
1 Includes water closets with an effective flush rate of 1.28 gallons or less when tested per ASME
A112.19.2 and ASME A112.19.14.
F. Pollutant Control
1. Covering of duct openings and protection of mechanical equipment during construction.
At the time of rough installation until final startup of the heating and cooling equipment,
all duct and other related air distribution component openings shall be covered to reduce
the amount of dust or debris which may collect in the system.
2. Finish material. Finish materials shall comply with the following:
a. Adhesives and sealants. Adhesives used on the project shall meet the following
requirements:
i. Aerosol adhesives shall meet the requirements of California Code of
Regulations, Title 17, commencing with Section 94507.
ii. Adhesives, adhesive primers, and bonding primers shall comply with Table 3
Table 3
Adhesive VOC Limit. Less Water and Less Exempt Compounds in Grams per Liter
Architectural Applications VOC Limit
Indoor Carpet Adhesives 50
Carpet Pad Adhesives 50
Outdoor Carpet Adhesives 150
Wood Flooring Adhesive 100
Rubber Floor Adhesives 60
Subfloor Adhesives 50
Ceramic Tile Adhesives 65
VCT and Asphalt Tile Adhesives 50
Dry Wall and Panel Adhesives 50
Cove Base Adhesives 50
Multipurpose Construction Adhesives 70
Structural Glazing Adhesives 100
Single Ply Roof Membrane Adhesives 250
3
b. Paints and coatings. Architectural paints and coatings shall comply with Table #4
Table 4
Coating VOC Limits
Grams of VOC Per Liter of Coating, Less Water and Less Exempt Compounds
Coating Category Limit
Bond Breakers 350
Clear Wood Finishes
Varnish
Sanding Sealers
Lacquer
275
275
275
275
Clear Brushing Lacquer 275
Concrete-Curing Compound 100
Dry-Fog Coatings 150
Fire-Proofing Exterior Coatings 350
Flats 50
Floor Coatings 50
Graphic Arts (Sign) Coatings 500
Industrial Maintenance (IM) Coatings
High Temperature IM Coatings
Zinc-Rich IM Primers
100
420
100
Japans/Faux Finish Coatings 350
Magnesite Cement Coatings 450
Mastic Coatings 300
Metallic Pigmented Coatings 500
Multi-Color Coatings 250
Nonflat Coatings 50
Pigmented Lacquer 275
Pre-Treatment Wash Primers 420
Primers, Sealers, and Undercoaters 100
Quick-Dry Enamels 50
Quick-Dry Primers, Sealers, and Undercoaters 100
Recycled Coatings 250
Roof Coatings
Roof Coatings, Aluminum
50
100
Roof Primers, Bituminous 350
Rust Preventative Coatings 100
Shellac
Clear
Pigmented
730
550
Specialty Primers 100
Stains
Interior
100
250
Swimming Pool Coatings
Repair
Other
340
340
Waterproofing Sealers 100
Waterproofing Concrete/Masonry
Sealers
100
Wood Preservatives
Below-Ground
Other
350
350
4
Verification of compliance with this section shall be provided at the request of the building
official. Documentation may include, but not limited to, the following:
a. Manufacturers product specification.
b. Field verification of on-site product containers.
3. Carpet systems.
a. All carpet installed in the building interior shall meet the testing and product
requirements of one of the following:
i. Carpet and Rug Institute’s Green Label or Green Label Plus Program.
ii. CA Dept. of Public Health Standard Practice for the testing of VOCs (Specification
01350).
iii. Department of General Services, California Gold Sustainable Carpet Standard.
iv. Scientific Certifications Systems Indoor AdvantageTM Gold.
b. Carpet cushion. All carpet cushion installed in the building interior shall meet the
requirements of the Carpet and Rug Institute Green Label program.
c. Carpet adhesive. All carpet adhesive shall meet the requirements of Table 3.
4. Composite wood products. Hardwood, plywood, particleboard, and medium density fiberboard
composite wood products used on the interior or exterior of the building shall meet the
requirements for formaldehyde as specified in Table 5.
Table 5
Formaldehyde Limits
Maximum formaldehyde emissions in parts per million
Phase 1 Phase 2
Product Current
Limits Jan 1, 2010 Jan 1, 2011 Jan 1, 2012 Jul 1, 2012
Hardwood Plywood
Veneer Core 0.08 0.05
Hardwood Plywood
Composite Core 0.08 0.05
Particle Board 0.18 0.09
Medium Density Fiberboard 0.21 0.11
Thin Medium Density
Fiberboard(max. thickness of
8 mm)
0.21 0.13
Documentation. Verification of compliance with this section shall be provided as requested by the building
official. Documentation shall include at least one of the following.
a. Product certifications and specifications.
b. Chain of custody certifications.
c. Other methods acceptable to the building official.
G. Indoor Moisture Control
1. Moisture content of building materials. Building materials with visible signs of water damage
shall not be installed. Wall and floor framing shall not be enclosed when the framing members
exceed 19% moisture content. Moisture content shall be verified in compliance with the
following.
a. Moisture content shall be determined with either a probe-type or a contact-type moisture
meter.
5
b. Moisture readings shall be taken at a point 2 feet to 4 feet from the grade stamped end of
each piece to be verified.
c. At least three random moisture readings shall be performed on wall and floor framing with
documentation acceptable to the building official provided at the time of approval to enclose
the wall and floor framing.
H. Indoor Air Quality and Exhaust
1. Bathroom exhaust fans. Mechanical exhaust fans required in rooms containing a bathtub,
shower, or tub shower combination shall be ENERGY STAR compliant and shall terminate
outside the building.
2. Filters. Heating and air conditioning filters shall be rated at MERV 6 or higher. Duct system
design shall account for pressure drop across the filter.
I. Operation and Maintenance manual.At time of final inspection of a new residential or commercial
building, the builder shall place in the building an Operation and Maintenance manual that is
acceptable to the Building official. It shall contain directions to the owner or occupant that the
manual shall remain with the building throughout the life cycle of the structure.
6
ATTACHMENT 3
GHG Emissions Calculations
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
G
H
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
GH
G
_
C
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
_
O
t
a
y
R
a
n
c
h
_
R
E
V
w
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
.
x
l
s
Su
m
m
a
r
y
BA
U
G
H
G
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
(
i
.
e
.
,
W
I
T
H
O
U
T
R
E
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
M
E
A
S
U
R
E
S
)
Em
i
s
s
i
o
n
S
o
u
r
c
e
CO
2
N2
0
C
H
4
T
o
t
a
l
C
O
2
E
q
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
(
m
e
t
r
i
c
t
o
n
s
/
y
e
a
r
)
Ve
h
i
c
u
l
a
r
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
11
2
,
9
9
1
.
3
6
3
5
8
.
0
8
6
6
.
7
1
11
3
,
4
1
6
.
1
5
El
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
U
s
a
g
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
4
9
,
4
2
5
.
7
8
2
1
9
.
5
4
8
.
6
0
49
,
6
5
3
.
9
2
Na
t
u
r
a
l
G
a
s
U
s
a
g
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
2
3
,
6
8
0
.
5
1
1
3
4
.
5
8
9
.
5
3
23
,
8
2
4
.
6
3
Wa
t
e
r
U
s
a
g
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
4,
2
9
8
.
4
3
0
.
0
4
0
.
0
6
4,
3
1
8
.
2
7
So
l
i
d
W
a
s
t
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
4,
0
5
4
.
4
0
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
24
,
4
6
5
.
8
5
Glo
b
a
l
W
a
r
m
i
n
g
P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
1.
0
0
3
1
0
.
0
0
2
1
.
0
0
To
t
a
l
C
O
2
E
q
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
21
9
,
7
3
3
.
2
2
TA
R
G
E
T
:
2
0
P
E
R
C
E
N
T
R
E
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
I
N
B
A
U
17
5
,
7
8
6
.
5
8
PR
O
J
E
C
T
R
E
D
U
C
E
D
G
H
G
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
Em
i
s
s
i
o
n
S
o
u
r
c
e
CO
2
N2
0
C
H
4
T
o
t
a
l
C
O
2
E
q
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
(
m
e
t
r
i
c
t
o
n
s
/
y
e
a
r
)
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
i
n
B
A
U
:
Ve
h
i
c
u
l
a
r
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
68
,
0
2
0
.
9
4
1
.
9
1
0
.
7
0
68
,
2
7
6
.
6
7
39
.
8
0
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
El
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
U
s
a
g
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
3
4
,
5
9
8
.
0
5
1
5
3
.
6
8
6
.
0
2
34
,
7
5
7
.
7
5
30
.
0
0
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
Na
t
u
r
a
l
G
a
s
U
s
a
g
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
1
6
,
5
7
6
.
3
6
9
4
.
2
1
6
.
6
7
16
,
6
7
7
.
2
4
30
.
0
0
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
Wa
t
e
r
U
s
a
g
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
3,
2
6
9
.
9
9
0
.
0
3
0
.
0
5
3,
2
8
5
.
0
8
23
.
9
2
6
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
So
l
i
d
W
a
s
t
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
4,
0
5
4
.
4
0
0.
0
0
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
24
,
4
6
5
.
8
5
0.
0
0
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
Glo
b
a
l
W
a
r
m
i
n
g
P
o
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
1.
0
0
3
1
0
.
0
0
2
1
.
0
0
To
t
a
l
C
O
2
E
q
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
15
1
,
5
1
6
.
9
8
31
.
0
4
5
pe
r
c
e
n
t
T
O
T
A
L
68
,
2
1
6
.
2
4
M
T
C
O
2
E
T
O
T
A
L
10
6
,
3
1
7
.
0
7
(
B
A
U
n
o
n
-
v
e
h
i
c
u
l
a
r
)
83
,
2
4
0
.
3
2
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
n
o
n
-
v
e
h
i
c
u
l
a
r
23
,
0
7
6
.
7
5
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
i
n
B
A
U
n
o
n
-
v
e
h
i
c
u
l
a
r
21
.
7
1
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
n
o
n
-
v
e
h
i
c
u
l
a
r
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
BA
U
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Pa
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
F
u
e
l
E
c
o
n
o
m
y
:
18
.
8
0
m
i
l
e
s
p
e
r
g
a
l
l
o
n
(
m
p
g
)
Av
e
r
a
g
e
D
a
i
l
y
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
(
A
D
T
)
:
1
1
3
,
0
7
3
.
0
0
t
r
i
p
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
T
r
i
p
L
e
n
g
t
h
:
5.
8
0
m
i
l
e
s
(
S
A
N
D
A
G
2
0
0
9
)
VM
T
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
65
5
,
8
2
3
.
4
0
m
i
l
e
s
VM
T
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
23
9
,
3
7
5
,
5
4
1
.
0
0
m
i
l
e
s
To
t
a
l
G
a
l
l
o
n
s
o
f
F
u
e
l
(
p
e
r
d
a
y
)
:
34
,
8
8
4
.
2
2
To
t
a
l
G
a
l
l
o
n
s
o
f
F
u
e
l
(
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
)
:
12
,
7
3
2
,
7
4
1
.
5
4
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
F
a
c
t
o
r
s
(
p
o
u
n
d
s
/
g
a
l
l
o
n
)
CO
2
19
.
5
6
4
0
0
CH
4
0.
0
0
0
5
5
N2
O
0.
0
0
0
2
0
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Po
u
n
d
s
P
o
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
G
W
P
C
O
2
E
q
CO
2
24
9
,
1
0
3
,
3
5
5
.
5
4
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
11
2
,
9
9
1
.
3
6
1
.
0
0
1
1
2
,
9
9
1
.
3
6
CH
4
7,
0
0
3
.
0
1
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
3.
1
8
2
1
.
0
0
6
6
.
7
1
N2
O
2,
5
4
6
.
5
5
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
1.
1
6
3
1
0
.
0
0
3
5
8
.
0
8
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
113,416.15
PR
O
J
E
C
T
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Ac
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
f
o
r
S
t
a
t
e
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
-
S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
T
r
i
p
L
e
n
g
t
h
s
Pa
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
F
u
e
l
E
c
o
n
o
m
y
:
18
.
8
0
m
i
l
e
s
p
e
r
g
a
l
l
o
n
(
m
p
g
)
Av
e
r
a
g
e
D
a
i
l
y
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
(
A
D
T
)
-
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
8
W
e
s
t
:
43
,
5
6
4
.
0
0
t
r
i
p
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
T
r
i
p
L
e
n
g
t
h
-
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
8
W
e
s
t
:
4.
6
2
m
i
l
e
s
(
S
A
N
D
A
G
2
0
1
0
b
)
VM
T
p
e
r
D
a
y
-
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
8
W
e
s
t
:
20
1
,
2
6
5
.
6
8
m
i
l
e
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
Av
e
r
a
g
e
D
a
i
l
y
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
(
A
D
T
)
-
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
9
:
56
,
1
2
3
.
0
0
t
r
i
p
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
T
r
i
p
L
e
n
g
t
h
-
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
9
:
5.
0
8
m
i
l
e
s
(
S
A
N
D
A
G
2
0
1
0
b
)
VM
T
p
e
r
D
a
y
-
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
9
:
28
5
,
1
0
4
.
8
4
m
i
l
e
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
Av
e
r
a
g
e
D
a
i
l
y
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
(
A
D
T
)
-
R
T
P
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
1
0
:
13
,
3
8
6
.
0
0
t
r
i
p
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
T
r
i
p
L
e
n
g
t
h
-
R
T
P
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
1
0
:
5.
8
0
m
i
l
e
s
(
S
A
N
D
A
G
2
0
0
9
)
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
VM
T
p
e
r
D
a
y
-
R
T
P
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
1
0
:
77
,
6
3
8
.
8
0
m
i
l
e
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
To
t
a
l
A
D
T
(
c
o
m
b
i
n
i
n
g
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
8
W
,
9
a
n
d
R
T
P
)
11
3
,
0
7
3
.
0
0
T
o
t
a
l
A
D
T
To
t
a
l
V
M
T
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
56
4
,
0
0
9
.
3
2
m
i
l
e
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
To
t
a
l
V
M
T
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
20
5
,
8
6
3
,
4
0
1
.
8
0
m
i
l
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
To
t
a
l
G
a
l
l
o
n
s
o
f
F
u
e
l
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
30
,
0
0
0
.
5
0
To
t
a
l
G
a
l
l
o
n
s
o
f
F
u
e
l
:
10
,
9
5
0
,
1
8
0
.
9
5
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
F
a
c
t
o
r
s
(
p
o
u
n
d
s
/
g
a
l
l
o
n
)
CO
2
19
.
5
6
4
0
0
CH
4
0.
0
0
0
5
5
N2
O
0.
0
0
0
2
0
Ve
h
i
c
l
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
(
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
f
o
r
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
t
r
i
p
l
e
n
g
t
h
s
)
Po
u
n
d
s
P
o
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
G
W
P
C
O
2
E
q
CO
2
21
4
,
2
2
9
,
3
4
0
.
0
4
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
97
,
1
7
2
.
7
8
1
.
0
0
9
7
,
1
7
2
.
7
8
CH
4
6,
0
2
2
.
6
0
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
2.
7
3
2
1
.
0
0
5
7
.
3
7
N2
O
2,
1
9
0
.
0
4
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
9
9
3
1
0
.
0
0
3
0
7
.
9
5
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
97,538.09
Re
d
u
c
e
d
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
(
a
c
c
o
u
n
t
i
n
g
f
o
r
S
t
a
t
e
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
i
n
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
t
o
s
h
o
r
t
e
r
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
t
r
i
p
l
e
n
g
t
h
s
)
Lo
w
C
a
r
b
o
n
F
u
e
l
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
Re
d
u
c
e
e
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
f
u
e
l
s
b
y
1
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
AB
1
4
9
3
P
a
v
l
e
y
I
Re
d
u
c
e
e
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
a
c
o
r
s
s
p
a
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
f
l
e
e
t
b
y
1
8
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
Po
u
n
d
s
P
o
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
G
W
P
C
O
2
E
q
CO
2
14
9
,
9
6
0
,
5
3
8
.
0
3
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
68
,
0
2
0
.
9
4
1
.
0
0
6
8
,
0
2
0
.
9
4
CH
4
4,
2
1
5
.
8
2
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
1.
9
1
2
1
.
0
0
4
0
.
1
6
N2
O
1,
5
3
3
.
0
3
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
7
0
3
1
0
.
0
0
2
1
5
.
5
6
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
68,276.67
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
i
n
B
A
U
0.
3
9
7
9
9
8
7
2
3
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
El
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
EL
E
C
T
R
I
C
I
T
Y
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
BA
U
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Sin
g
l
e
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
M
o
n
t
h
:
59
0
.
8
8
k
W
h
p
e
r
c
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
p
e
r
m
o
n
t
h
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
Sin
g
l
e
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
7,
0
9
0
.
5
6
k
W
h
p
e
r
c
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
S
i
n
g
l
e
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
U
n
i
t
s
:
88
7
.
0
0
u
n
i
t
s
Sin
g
l
e
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
T
o
t
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
k
W
h
)
:
6,
2
8
9
,
3
2
6
.
7
2
k
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Sin
g
l
e
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
T
o
t
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
M
W
h
)
:
6,
2
8
9
.
3
3
M
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
M
o
n
t
h
:
36
0
.
3
9
k
W
h
p
e
r
c
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
p
e
r
m
o
n
t
h
a
v
e
r
a
g
e
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
4,
3
2
4
.
6
8
k
W
h
p
e
r
c
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
M
u
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
U
n
i
t
s
:
5,
1
6
3
.
0
0
u
n
i
t
s
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
T
o
t
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
k
W
h
)
)
:
22
,
3
2
8
,
3
2
2
.
8
4
k
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
T
o
t
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
M
W
h
)
:
22
,
3
2
8
.
3
2
M
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Co
m
b
i
n
e
d
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
T
o
t
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
k
W
h
)
:
28
,
6
1
7
,
6
4
9
.
5
6
k
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Co
m
b
i
n
e
d
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
T
o
t
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
M
W
h
)
:
28
,
6
1
7
.
6
5
M
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
20
,
0
3
2
.
3
5
M
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
An
n
u
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
:
14
.
1
0
k
W
h
p
e
r
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
o
o
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
e
e
t
:
1,
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
To
t
a
l
k
W
h
:
25
,
3
8
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
k
W
h
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
M
W
h
:
25
,
3
8
0
.
0
0
M
W
h
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
17
,
7
6
6
.
0
0
M
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Av
e
r
a
g
e
M
o
n
t
h
l
y
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
:
53
,
5
6
8
.
0
0
k
W
h
p
e
r
c
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
p
e
r
m
o
n
t
h
An
n
u
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
:
64
2
,
8
1
6
.
0
0
k
W
h
p
e
r
c
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
To
t
a
l
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
e
e
t
:
2,
2
2
1
,
5
6
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
Min
i
m
u
m
L
o
t
A
r
e
a
:
52
,
2
7
2
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
*
*E
X
A
M
P
L
E
:
F
o
r
l
o
t
a
r
e
a
=
2
a
c
r
e
s
(
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
)
Ma
x
i
m
u
m
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
s
:
42
.
5
0
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
s
FA
R
=
0
.
6
To
t
a
l
k
W
h
:
27
,
3
1
9
,
6
8
0
.
0
0
k
W
h
(
2
a
c
r
e
s
)
(
4
3
,
5
6
0
s
q
f
t
p
e
r
a
c
r
e
)
(
0
.
6
)
=
5
2
,
2
7
2
s
q
f
t
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
M
W
h
:
27
,
3
1
9
.
6
8
M
W
h
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
19
,
1
2
3
.
7
8
M
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
A
n
n
u
a
l
M
W
h
:
81
,
3
1
7
.
3
3
M
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
56
,
9
2
2
.
1
3
M
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
El
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
F
a
c
t
o
r
s
(
p
o
u
n
d
s
/
M
W
h
)
CO
2
1,
3
4
0
.
0
0
0
0
CH
4
0.
0
1
1
1
N2
O
0.
0
1
9
2
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
E
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Po
u
n
d
s
P
o
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
G
W
P
C
O
2
E
q
CO
2
38
,
3
4
7
,
6
5
0
.
4
1
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
17
,
3
9
4
.
2
0
1
.
0
0
1
7
,
3
9
4
.
2
0
CH
4
31
7
.
6
6
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
1
4
2
1
.
0
0
3.
0
3
N2
O
54
9
.
4
6
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
2
5
3
1
0
.
0
0
7
7
.
2
6
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
17
,
4
7
4
.
4
9
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
12
,
2
3
2
.
1
4
M
T
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
E
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Em
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Po
u
n
d
s
P
o
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
G
W
P
C
O
2
E
q
CO
2
34
,
0
0
9
,
2
0
0
.
0
0
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
15
,
4
2
6
.
3
1
1
.
0
0
1
5
,
4
2
6
.
3
1
CH
4
28
1
.
7
2
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
1
3
2
1
.
0
0
2.
6
8
N2
O
48
7
.
3
0
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
2
2
3
1
0
.
0
0
6
8
.
5
2
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
15
,
4
9
7
.
5
1
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
10
,
8
4
8
.
2
6
M
T
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
El
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
E
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Em
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Po
u
n
d
s
P
o
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
G
W
P
C
O
2
E
q
CO
2
36
,
6
0
8
,
3
7
1
.
2
0
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
16
,
6
0
5
.
2
8
1
.
0
0
1
6
,
6
0
5
.
2
8
CH
4
30
3
.
2
5
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
1
4
2
1
.
0
0
2.
8
9
N2
O
52
4
.
5
4
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
2
4
3
1
0
.
0
0
7
3
.
7
6
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
16
,
6
8
1
.
9
2
M
T
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
11
,
6
7
7
.
3
4
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
E
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
To
t
a
l
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Po
u
n
d
s
P
o
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
G
W
P
C
O
2
E
q
CO
2
10
8
,
9
6
5
,
2
2
1
.
6
1
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
49
,
4
2
5
.
7
8
1
.
0
0
4
9
,
4
2
5
.
7
8
CH
4
90
2
.
6
2
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
4
1
2
1
.
0
0
8.
6
0
N2
O
1,
5
6
1
.
2
9
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
7
1
3
1
0
.
0
0
2
1
9
.
5
4
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
49
,
6
5
3
.
9
2
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
34
,
7
5
7
.
7
5
MT
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
34
,
7
5
7
.
7
5
PR
O
J
E
C
T
G
H
G
R
E
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
Ex
c
e
e
d
T
i
t
l
e
2
4
Y
e
a
r
2
0
0
5
b
y
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
:
30
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
i
n
B
A
U
C
O
2
E
q
34
,
7
5
7
.
7
5
M
T
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Co
n
s
u
m
e
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
l
e
s
s
e
n
e
r
g
y
t
h
a
n
B
A
U
56
,
9
2
2
.
1
3
M
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Na
t
u
r
a
l
G
a
s
NA
T
U
R
A
L
G
A
S
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
BA
U
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Sin
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
M
o
n
t
h
:
5,
1
9
8
.
7
0
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
m
o
n
t
h
Sin
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
62
,
3
8
4
.
4
0
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Sin
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
U
n
i
t
s
:
88
7
.
0
0
u
n
i
t
s
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
M
o
n
t
h
:
3,
1
2
8
.
9
7
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
m
o
n
t
h
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
37
,
5
4
7
.
6
4
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
U
n
i
t
s
:
5,
1
6
3
.
0
0
u
n
i
t
s
To
t
a
l
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
)
:
24
9
,
1
9
3
,
4
2
8
.
1
2
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
To
t
a
l
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
)
:
24
9
.
1
9
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
17
4
.
4
4
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Re
t
a
i
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
M
o
n
t
h
:
2.
9
0
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
m
o
n
t
h
Re
t
a
i
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
34
.
8
0
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Re
t
a
i
l
A
m
o
u
n
t
:
1,
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
Of
f
i
c
e
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
M
o
n
t
h
:
2.
0
0
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
m
o
n
t
h
Of
f
i
c
e
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
24
.
0
0
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Of
f
i
c
e
A
m
o
u
n
t
:
0.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
To
t
a
l
O
f
f
i
c
e
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
)
:
62
,
6
4
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
To
t
a
l
O
f
f
i
c
e
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
)
:
62
.
6
4
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
43
.
8
5
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Co
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
p
e
r
M
o
n
t
h
:
24
1
,
6
1
1
.
0
0
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
c
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
p
e
r
m
o
n
t
h
Co
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
p
e
r
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
2,
8
9
9
,
3
3
2
.
0
0
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
c
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
A
m
o
u
n
t
2,
2
2
1
,
5
6
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
Min
i
m
u
m
L
o
t
A
r
e
a
:
52
,
2
7
2
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
*
*E
X
A
M
P
L
E
:
F
o
r
l
o
t
a
r
e
a
=
2
a
c
r
e
s
(
Z
o
n
i
n
g
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
)
Ma
x
i
m
u
m
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
s
:
42
.
5
0
C
o
n
s
u
m
e
r
s
FA
R
=
0
.
6
To
t
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
)
:
12
3
,
2
2
1
,
6
1
0
.
0
0
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
2
a
c
r
e
s
)
(
4
3
,
5
6
0
s
q
f
t
p
e
r
a
c
r
e
)
(
0
.
6
)
=
5
2
,
2
7
2
s
q
f
t
To
t
a
l
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
(
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
)
:
12
3
.
2
2
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
86
.
2
6
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
A
n
n
u
a
l
C
o
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
:
43
5
.
0
6
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
30
4
.
5
4
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
30
4
.
5
4
Na
t
u
r
a
l
G
a
s
C
o
m
b
u
s
t
i
o
n
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
F
a
c
t
o
r
s
(
p
o
u
n
d
s
/
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
c
u
b
i
c
f
e
e
t
)
CO
2
12
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
CH
4
2.
3
N2
O
2.
2
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
N
a
t
u
r
a
l
G
a
s
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Po
u
n
d
s
Po
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
GW
P
CO
2
E
q
CO
2
29
,
9
0
3
,
2
1
1
.
3
7
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
13
,
5
6
3
.
8
7
1.0
0
13
,
5
6
3
.
8
7
CH
4
57
3
.
1
4
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
0.2
6
21
.
0
0
5.4
6
N2
O
54
8
.
2
3
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
0.2
5
31
0
.
0
0
77
.
0
9
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
13
,
6
4
6
.
4
1
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
9,5
5
2
.
4
9
M
T
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
N
a
t
u
r
a
l
G
a
s
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Em
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Po
u
n
d
s
Po
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
GW
P
CO
2
E
q
CO
2
7,
5
1
6
,
8
0
0
.
0
0
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
3,
4
0
9
.
5
6
1.0
0
3,4
0
9
.
5
6
CH
4
14
4
.
0
7
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
0.0
7
21
.
0
0
1.3
7
N2
O
13
7
.
8
1
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
0.0
6
31
0
.
0
0
19
.
3
8
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
3,4
3
0
.
3
1
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
2,4
0
1
.
2
2
M
T
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
N
a
t
u
r
a
l
G
a
s
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Em
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Po
u
n
d
s
Po
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
GW
P
CO
2
E
q
CO
2
14
,
7
8
6
,
5
9
3
.
2
0
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
6,
7
0
7
.
0
8
1.0
0
6,7
0
7
.
0
8
CH
4
28
3
.
4
1
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
0.1
3
21
.
0
0
2.7
0
N2
O
27
1
.
0
9
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
0.1
2
31
0
.
0
0
38
.
1
2
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
6,7
4
7
.
9
0
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
4,7
2
3
.
5
3
M
T
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Na
t
u
r
a
l
G
a
s
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
N
a
t
u
r
a
l
G
a
s
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
To
t
a
l
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Po
u
n
d
s
Po
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
GW
P
CO
2
E
q
CO
2
52
,
2
0
6
,
6
0
4
.
5
7
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
23
,
6
8
0
.
5
1
1.0
0
23
,
6
8
0
.
5
1
CH
4
1,0
0
0
.
6
3
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
0.4
5
21
.
0
0
9.
5
3
N2
O
95
7
.
1
2
2,2
0
4
.
6
2
0.4
3
31
0
.
0
0
13
4
.
5
8
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
23
,
8
2
4
.
6
3
[P
r
o
j
e
c
t
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
=
16
,
6
7
7
.
2
4
M
T
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
]
PR
O
J
E
C
T
G
H
G
R
E
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
Ex
c
e
e
d
T
i
t
l
e
2
4
Y
e
a
r
2
0
0
5
b
y
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
:
30
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
i
n
B
A
U
C
O
2
E
q
16
,
6
7
7
.
2
4
M
T
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Co
n
s
u
m
e
3
0
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
l
e
s
s
e
n
e
r
g
y
t
h
a
n
B
A
U
60
.
3
8
M
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Wa
t
e
r
U
n
i
t
B
A
U
WA
T
E
R
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
BA
U
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Si
n
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
50
0
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
Si
n
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
18
2
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
Si
n
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
U
n
i
t
s
:
88
7
.
0
0
u
n
i
t
s
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
25
5
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
93
,
0
7
5
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
U
n
i
t
s
:
5,
1
6
3
.
0
0
u
n
i
t
s
To
t
a
l
D
a
i
l
y
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
1,
7
6
0
,
0
6
5
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
64
2
,
4
2
3
,
7
2
5
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
64
2
,
4
2
3
,
7
2
5
.
0
0
c
h
e
c
k
Sc
h
o
o
l
/
E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Sc
h
o
o
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
A
c
r
e
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
1,
4
2
8
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
Sc
h
o
o
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
A
c
r
e
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
52
1
,
2
2
0
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
Sc
h
o
o
l
A
c
r
e
s
A
m
o
u
n
t
:
54
.
4
0
a
c
r
e
s
To
t
a
l
D
a
i
l
y
S
c
h
o
o
l
s
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
77
,
6
8
3
.
2
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
S
c
h
o
o
l
s
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
28
,
3
5
4
,
3
6
8
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
28
,
3
5
4
,
3
6
8
.
0
0
c
h
e
c
k
Pa
r
k
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Pa
r
k
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
A
c
r
e
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
64
3
.
6
9
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
Pa
r
k
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
A
c
r
e
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
2
3
4
,
9
4
6
.
8
5
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
Pa
r
k
A
c
r
e
s
A
m
o
u
n
t
:
53
.
1
0
a
c
r
e
s
To
t
a
l
D
a
i
l
y
P
a
r
k
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
34
,
1
7
9
.
9
4
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
P
a
r
k
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
12
,
4
7
5
,
6
7
7
.
7
4
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
12
,
4
7
5
,
6
7
7
.
7
4
c
h
e
c
k
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
0.
1
4
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
51
.
1
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
A
m
o
u
n
t
:
1,
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
To
t
a
l
D
a
i
l
y
C
o
m
m
e
r
i
c
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
25
2
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
91
,
9
8
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
91
,
9
8
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
c
h
e
c
k
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Wa
t
e
r
U
n
i
t
B
A
U
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
0.
0
7
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
25
.
5
5
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
A
m
o
u
n
t
2,
2
2
1
,
5
6
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
To
t
a
l
D
a
i
l
y
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
15
5
,
5
0
9
.
2
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
56
,
7
6
0
,
8
5
8
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
56
,
7
6
0
,
8
5
8
.
0
0
c
h
e
c
k
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
D
a
i
l
y
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
:
2,
2
7
9
,
4
3
7
.
3
4
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
A
n
n
u
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
:
83
1
,
9
9
4
,
6
2
8
.
7
4
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
83
1
,
9
9
4
,
6
2
8
.
7
4
c
h
e
c
k
Pa
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Da
i
l
y
W
a
t
e
r
U
s
e
:
2,
2
7
9
,
4
3
7
.
3
4
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
An
n
u
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
U
s
e
:
83
1
,
9
9
4
,
6
2
8
.
7
4
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
Em
b
o
d
i
e
d
E
n
e
r
g
y
R
a
t
e
:
0.
0
0
8
5
k
W
h
p
e
r
g
a
l
l
o
n
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
E
n
e
r
g
y
U
s
e
(
i
n
k
W
h
)
:
7,
0
7
1
,
9
5
4
.
3
4
4
2
k
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
E
n
e
r
g
y
U
s
e
(
i
n
M
W
h
)
:
7,
0
7
1
.
9
5
M
W
h
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
7,
0
7
1
.
9
5
c
h
e
c
k
El
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
F
a
c
t
o
r
s
(
p
o
u
n
d
s
/
M
W
h
)
CO
2
CH
4
1,
3
4
0
.
0
0
0
0
N2
O
0.
0
1
1
1
0.
0
1
9
2
Wa
t
e
r
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
CO
2
Po
u
n
d
s
P
o
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
G
W
P
C
O
2
E
q
CH
4
9,
4
7
6
,
4
1
8
.
8
2
2
,
2
0
4
.
6
2
4,
2
9
8
.
4
3
1
.
0
0
4
,
2
9
8
.
4
3
N2
O
78
.
5
0
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
0
4
2
1
.
0
0
0
.
7
5
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
13
5
.
7
8
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
0
6
3
1
0
.
0
0
1
9
.
0
9
4,318.27
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Wa
t
e
r
U
n
i
t
P
R
O
J
WA
T
E
R
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
PR
O
J
E
C
T
G
H
G
R
E
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
S
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Si
n
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
40
0
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
Si
n
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
14
6
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
Si
n
g
l
e
F
a
m
i
l
y
U
n
i
t
s
:
88
7
.
0
0
u
n
i
t
s
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
20
4
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
74
,
4
6
0
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
Mu
l
t
i
-
F
a
m
i
l
y
U
n
i
t
s
:
5,
1
6
3
.
0
0
u
n
i
t
s
To
t
a
l
D
a
i
l
y
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
1,
4
0
8
,
0
5
2
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
51
3
,
9
3
8
,
9
8
0
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
Sc
h
o
o
l
/
E
d
u
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Sc
h
o
o
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
A
c
r
e
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
1,
1
4
2
.
4
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
Sc
h
o
o
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
A
c
r
e
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
41
6
,
9
7
6
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
Sc
h
o
o
l
A
c
r
e
s
A
m
o
u
n
t
:
54
.
4
0
a
c
r
e
s
To
t
a
l
D
a
i
l
y
S
c
h
o
o
l
s
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
62
,
1
4
6
.
5
6
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
S
c
h
o
o
l
s
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
22
,
6
8
3
,
4
9
4
.
4
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
22
,
6
8
3
,
4
9
4
.
4
0
c
h
e
c
k
Pa
r
k
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Pa
r
k
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
A
c
r
e
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
51
4
.
9
5
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
Pa
r
k
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
A
c
r
e
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
1
8
7
,
9
5
7
.
4
8
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
Pa
r
k
A
c
r
e
s
A
m
o
u
n
t
:
53
.
1
0
a
c
r
e
s
To
t
a
l
D
a
i
l
y
P
a
r
k
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
27
,
3
4
3
.
9
5
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
P
a
r
k
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
9,
9
8
0
,
5
4
2
.
1
9
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
9,
9
8
0
,
5
4
2
.
1
9
c
h
e
c
k
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
0.
1
1
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
40
.
8
8
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
A
m
o
u
n
t
:
1,
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
To
t
a
l
D
a
i
l
y
C
o
m
m
e
r
i
c
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
20
1
,
6
0
0
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
73
,
5
8
4
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Wa
t
e
r
U
n
i
t
P
R
O
J
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
0.
0
6
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
D
e
m
a
n
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
20
.
4
4
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
A
m
o
u
n
t
2,
2
2
1
,
5
6
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
To
t
a
l
D
a
i
l
y
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
12
4
,
4
0
7
.
3
6
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
(
g
p
d
)
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
(
g
a
l
)
:
45
,
4
0
8
,
6
8
6
.
4
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
(
g
p
y
)
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
D
a
i
l
y
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
:
1,
7
3
4
,
0
5
9
.
3
6
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
d
a
y
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
A
n
n
u
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
D
e
m
a
n
d
:
63
2
,
9
3
1
,
6
6
6
.
4
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
63
2
9
3
1
6
6
6
.
4
Pa
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Da
i
l
y
W
a
t
e
r
U
s
e
:
1,
7
3
4
,
0
5
9
.
3
6
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
An
n
u
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
U
s
e
:
63
2
,
9
3
1
,
6
6
6
.
4
0
g
a
l
l
o
n
s
Em
b
o
d
i
e
d
E
n
e
r
g
y
:
0.
0
0
8
5
k
W
h
p
e
r
g
a
l
l
o
n
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
E
n
e
r
g
y
U
s
e
(
i
n
k
W
h
)
:
5,
3
7
9
,
9
1
9
.
1
6
k
W
h
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
E
n
e
r
g
y
U
s
e
(
i
n
M
W
h
)
:
5,
3
7
9
.
9
2
M
W
h
El
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
F
a
c
t
o
r
s
(
p
o
u
n
d
s
/
M
W
h
)
CO
2
1,
3
4
0
.
0
0
0
0
CH
4
0.
0
1
1
1
N2
O
0.
0
1
9
2
Wa
t
e
r
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
Po
u
n
d
s
P
o
u
n
d
s
p
e
r
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
M
e
t
r
i
c
T
o
n
s
G
W
P
C
O
2
E
q
CO
2
7,
2
0
9
,
0
9
1
.
6
8
2
,
2
0
4
.
6
2
3,
2
6
9
.
9
9
1
.
0
0
3
,
2
6
9
.
9
9
CH
4
59
.
7
2
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
0
3
2
1
.
0
0
0
.
5
7
N2
O
10
3
.
2
9
2,
2
0
4
.
6
2
0.
0
5
3
1
0
.
0
0
1
4
.
5
2
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
3,285.08
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
So
l
i
d
W
a
s
t
e
SO
L
I
D
W
A
S
T
E
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
BA
U
/
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Po
u
n
d
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
8.
6
0
p
o
u
n
d
s
Po
u
n
d
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
U
n
i
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
3,
1
3
9
.
0
0
p
o
u
n
d
s
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
U
n
i
t
s
:
6,
0
5
0
.
0
0
u
n
i
t
s
To
t
a
l
P
o
u
n
d
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
18
,
9
9
0
,
9
5
0
.
0
0
p
o
u
n
d
s
To
t
a
l
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
T
o
n
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
9,
4
9
5
.
4
8
t
o
n
s
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Po
u
n
d
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
0.
0
4
6
p
o
u
n
d
s
Po
u
n
d
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
16
.
7
9
p
o
u
n
d
s
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
e
e
t
:
1,
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
To
t
a
l
P
o
u
n
d
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
30
,
2
2
2
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
p
o
u
n
d
s
To
t
a
l
O
f
f
i
c
e
T
o
n
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
15
,
1
1
1
.
0
0
t
o
n
s
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Po
u
n
d
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
D
a
y
:
0.
0
4
6
p
o
u
n
d
s
Po
u
n
d
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
16
.
7
9
p
o
u
n
d
s
To
t
a
l
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
e
e
t
:
2,
2
2
1
,
5
6
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
To
t
a
l
P
o
u
n
d
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
37
,
2
9
9
,
9
9
2
.
4
0
p
o
u
n
d
s
To
t
a
l
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
T
o
n
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
18
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
t
o
n
s
To
t
a
l
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
T
o
n
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
43
,
2
5
6
.
4
7
Ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
WA
R
M
I
n
p
u
t
C
a
t
e
r
g
o
r
y
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
e
d
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
L
a
n
d
f
i
l
l
e
d
Pa
p
e
r
Mi
x
e
d
P
a
p
e
r
(
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
)
3
1
.
0
%
55
.
5
%
44
.
5
%
Gl
a
s
s
Gla
s
s
4.
9
%
23
.
1
%
76
.
9
%
Me
t
a
l
s
Mi
x
e
d
M
e
t
a
l
s
8.
4
%
34
.
6
%
65
.
4
%
Pl
a
s
t
i
c
s
Mix
e
d
P
l
a
s
t
i
c
s
12
.
0
%
7.
1
%
92
.
9
%
Ru
b
b
e
r
a
n
d
L
e
a
t
h
e
r
Mix
e
d
M
S
W
3.
0
%
14
.
3
%
85
.
7
%
Te
x
t
i
l
e
s
Mix
e
d
M
S
W
5.
0
%
15
.
3
%
84
.
7
%
Wo
o
d
Di
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
a
l
L
u
m
b
e
r
6.
6
%
9.
6
%
90
.
4
%
Ot
h
e
r
Mix
e
d
M
S
W
1.
7
%
25
.
6
%
74
.
4
%
Fo
o
d
S
c
r
a
p
s
Fo
o
d
S
c
r
a
p
s
13
%
2.
5
%
97
.
5
%
Ya
r
d
T
r
i
m
m
i
n
g
Ya
r
d
T
r
i
m
m
i
n
g
s
13
.
2
%
64
.
7
%
35
.
3
%
Mis
c
e
l
l
a
n
e
o
u
s
I
n
o
r
g
a
n
i
c
W
a
s
t
e
Mix
e
d
M
S
W
1.
5
%
0.
0
%
10
0
.
0
%
TO
T
A
L
10
0
.
0
%
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
So
l
i
d
W
a
s
t
e
En
t
e
r
T
h
e
s
e
V
a
l
u
e
s
I
n
t
o
t
h
e
E
P
A
W
A
R
M
M
o
d
e
l
Ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
WA
R
M
I
n
p
u
t
C
a
t
e
r
g
o
r
y
T
o
n
s
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
T
o
n
s
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
e
d
T
o
n
s
L
a
n
d
f
i
l
l
e
d
Pa
p
e
r
Mi
x
e
d
P
a
p
e
r
(
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
)
13
,
4
0
9
.
5
7,
4
4
2
.
3
5,
9
6
7
.
2
Gl
a
s
s
Gla
s
s
2,
1
1
9
.
6
48
9
.
6
1,
6
2
9
.
9
Me
t
a
l
s
Mi
x
e
d
M
e
t
a
l
s
3,
6
3
3
.
5
1,
2
5
7
.
2
2,
3
7
6
.
3
Pl
a
s
t
i
c
s
Mi
x
e
d
P
l
a
s
t
i
c
s
5,
1
9
0
.
8
36
8
.
5
4,
8
2
2
.
2
Ru
b
b
e
r
a
n
d
L
e
a
t
h
e
r
Mi
x
e
d
M
S
W
1,
2
9
7
.
7
18
5
.
6
1,
1
1
2
.
1
Te
x
t
i
l
e
s
Mi
x
e
d
M
S
W
2,
1
6
2
.
8
33
0
.
9
1,
8
3
1
.
9
Wo
o
d
Di
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
a
l
L
u
m
b
e
r
2,
8
5
4
.
9
27
4
.
1
2,
5
8
0
.
9
Ot
h
e
r
Mi
x
e
d
M
S
W
73
5
.
4
18
8
.
3
54
7
.
1
Fo
o
d
S
c
r
a
p
s
Fo
o
d
S
c
r
a
p
s
5,
4
9
3
.
6
13
7
.
3
5,
3
5
6
.
2
Ya
r
d
T
r
i
m
m
i
n
g
Ya
r
d
T
r
i
m
m
i
n
g
s
5,
7
0
9
.
9
3,
6
9
4
.
3
2,
0
1
5
.
6
Mis
c
e
l
l
a
n
e
o
u
s
I
n
o
r
g
a
n
i
c
W
a
s
t
e
Mi
x
e
d
M
S
W
64
8
.
8
0.
0
64
8
.
8
TO
T
A
L
43
,
2
5
6
14
,
3
6
8
28
,
8
8
8
43,256
4,
8
4
4
.
7
70
4
.
7
4,
1
4
0
.
0
En
t
e
r
W
A
R
M
V
a
l
u
e
H
e
r
e
:
TO
T
A
L
m
e
t
r
i
c
s
t
o
n
s
o
f
C
O
2
E
q
p
e
r
Y
e
a
r
:
4,
0
5
4
.
4
0
CO
2
E
q
OT
A
Y
R
A
N
C
H
GH
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
CO
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
BA
U
a
n
d
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
G
H
G
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Em
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
p
e
r
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
U
n
i
t
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
:
0.
0
7
7
M
T
C
O
2
E
p
e
r
u
n
i
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
U
n
i
t
s
b
e
i
n
g
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
:
6,
0
5
0
.
0
0
u
n
i
t
s
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
:
46
5
.
8
5
M
T
C
O
2
E
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Em
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
p
e
r
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
:
0.
0
0
6
M
T
C
O
2
E
p
e
r
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
o
o
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
Co
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
A
m
o
u
n
t
B
e
i
n
g
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
:
1,
8
0
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
C
o
m
m
e
r
i
c
a
l
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
:
10
,
8
0
0
.
0
0
M
T
C
O
2
E
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
Em
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
p
e
r
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
:
0.
0
0
6
M
T
C
O
2
E
p
e
r
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
o
o
t
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
A
m
o
u
n
t
B
e
i
n
g
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
:
2,
2
0
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
:
13
,
2
0
0
.
0
0
M
T
C
O
2
E
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
To
t
a
l
A
n
n
u
a
l
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s
:
24
,
4
6
5
.
8
5
MT
C
O
2
E
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
OTAY RANCH GHG CALCULATIONSGHG_Calculations_OtayRanch_REVwIndustrial.xls
Cumulative
CUMULATIVE PROJECT EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS:
BAU GHG EMISSIONS SUMMARY
Emission Source Total CO2 Eq Emissions (metric tons/year)
Vehicular Emissions 113,416.15
Electricity Usage Emissions 49,653.92
Natural Gas Usage Emissions 23,824.63
Water Usage Emissions 4,318.27
Solid Waste Emissions 4,054.40
Construction Emissions 24,465.85
Total CO2 Eq Emissions 219,733.22
PROJECT REDUCED GHG EMISSIONS SUMMARY
Emission Source Total CO2 Eq Emissions (metric tons/year)
Vehicular Emissions 68,276.67
Electricity Usage Emissions 34,757.75
Natural Gas Usage Emissions 16,677.24
Water Usage Emissions 3,285.08
Solid Waste Emissions 4,054.40
Construction Emissions 24,465.85
Total CO2 Eq Emissions 151,516.98
CUMULATIVE PROJECTS GHG EMISSIONS SUMMARIES
ASSUMING BAU ASSUMPTIONS - Multiply BAU Emissions by 1.5
Emission Source Total CO2 Eq Emissions (metric tons/year)
Vehicular Emissions 170,124.22
Electricity Usage Emissions 74,480.88
Natural Gas Usage Emissions 35,736.94
Water Usage Emissions 6,477.41
Solid Waste Emissions 6,081.60
Construction Emissions 36,698.78
Total CO2 Eq Emissions 329,599.83
ASSUMING PROJECT REDUCTIONS - Multiply Propoposed Project Emissions by 1.5
Emission Source Total CO2 Eq Emissions (metric tons/year)
Vehicular Emissions 102,415.00
Electricity Usage Emissions 52,136.62
Natural Gas Usage Emissions 25,015.86
Water Usage Emissions 4,927.62
Solid Waste Emissions 6,081.60
Construction Emissions 36,698.78
Total CO2 Eq Emissions 227,275.47
Percent Reduction in BAU 31.04502659percent