Agenda packet, first session — Glendale City Council, August 12, 2025 (part 2 of 4)

Diabetologia, 66(6), 1003-1015.

Rogers, Tom. Native American Poverty. Opportunity Nation: The Forum for Youth Investment. 2012. Accessed September
2023. https://opportunitynation.org/latest-
news/blog/native-american-poverty/
Rothstein, Richard. The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America. First Edition. New
York. Liveright Publishing Corporation. 2017.

Samuel A. Markolf, Christopher Hoehne, Andrew Fraser, Mikhail V.

Chester, B. Shane Underwood, Transportation resilience to climate change and extreme weather events – Beyond risk and robustness, Transport Policy, Volume 74, 2019, Pages 174-186, ISSN 0967-070X,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.11.003.

Seneviratne, S.I., Et.al. 2012. “Changes in climate extremes and their impacts on the natural physical environment,” In: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance
Climate Change Adaptation. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA, pp. 109-230.
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/SREX-
Chap3_FINAL-1.pdf
Simes, Jack, et al. Summary Report: Los Angeles Basin Study. U.S.

Department of the Interior and County of Los Angeles
Department of Public Works, Nov. 2016, www.
usbr.gov/watersmart/bsp/docs/fy2017/LABasinStudySumm
aryReport.pdf
South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast AQMD).

N.d. About Us. http://www.aqmd.gov/nav/about.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2020.

Southern California Adaptation Planning Guide (APG).
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/socaladaptationplanningguide_oct2020_0.pdf
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2021. Local Housing Data for the City of Glendale.
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/glendale-he-0421.pdf?1620797773.

Swain, Daniel L., et al. 2018. “Increasing Precipitation Volatility in Twenty-First-Century California.” Nature Climate Change, vol. 8, pp. 427–33, www.nature.com/articles/ s41558-018- 0140-y.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). 2022. “The Effects of Climate Change.”
https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/
Tree Equity Score. Tree Equity Score Municipality Report for Glendale, CA.
https://www.treeequityscore.org/reports/place/glendale-ca Ullrich, P. A., et al. 2018. “California's Drought of the Future: A Midcentury Recreation of the Exceptional Conditions of
2012–2017.” Earth's Future, vol. 6, no. 11, pp. 1568–87, agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2018EF00100 7 338 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment

104
United States Census Bureau. 2020. Decennial Census P1 | Race. https://data.census.gov/table?g=160XX00US0630000&tid=
DECENNIALPL2020.P1
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. 2020. “Preparing Wildlife for Climate Change: How Far Have We Come?”
https://www.fs.usda.gov/nrs/pubs/jrnl/2021/nrs_2021_led ee_001.pdf
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. 2002. “The Effects of Urban Trees on Air Quality.”
https://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/units/urban/local-
resources/downloads/Tree_Air_Qual.pdf.

United States Department of Energy. Low-Income Energy
Affordability Data (LEAD) Tool.
https://www.energy.gov/scep/slsc/low-income-energy-
affordability-data-lead-tool
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021a. “Criteria Air Pollutants.” https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air- pollutants (accessed February 2021).

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021b. “Why Wildfire Smoke is a Health Concern.”
https://www.epa.gov/wildfire-smoke-course/why-wildfire- smoke-health-concern
United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP).
2017. Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National
Climate Assessment, Volume. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, 470 pp,
doi: 10.7930/J0J964J6.

Warren, R. (2022). 2020 American Community Survey: Use with Caution, An Analysis of the Undercount in the 2020 ACS
Data Used to Derive Estimates of the Undocumented
Population. Journal on Migration and Human Security,
10(2), 134–145.
https://doi.org/10.1177/23315024221102327
WelfareInfo.2023. Poverty Rate in Glendale, California. https://www.welfareinfo.org/poverty-
rate/california/glendale/
Westerling, A. L., et al. 2006. “Warming and Earlier Spring Increase Western U.S. Forest Wildfire Activity.” Science, vol. 313, no. 5789, pp. 940–43, www.science.org/
doi/full/10.1126/science.1128834
339 of 961

Appendix C
Greenhouse Gas Inventory Analysis Report
340 of 961

Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan
Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report

prepared by
City of Glendale
Office of Sustainability
613 E. Broadway
Glendale, California 91206
Contact: David Jones, Sustainability Officer
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 N. Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
October 2023
341 of 961

Introduction

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 4 2 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Legislative Context .............................................................................................................. 5

2.2 Climate Science Context ..................................................................................................... 6 3 GHG Emissions Inventory - Community ......................................................................................... 8

3.1 Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 8

3.2 2021 Community GHG Emissions Inventory ....................................................................... 9

3.2.1 Energy ................................................................................................................. 9

3.2.2 Transportation .................................................................................................. 15

3.2.3 Solid Waste ....................................................................................................... 20

3.2.4 Water ................................................................................................................ 23

3.2.5 Wastewater ...................................................................................................... 26 2021 Community GHG Emissions Inventory Results .................................................................... 34 4 GHG Emissions Inventory - Municipal .......................................................................................... 38

4.1 Methodology .................................................................................................................... 38

4.2 2021 Municipal GHG Emissions Inventory ....................................................................... 39

4.2.1 Buildings and Other Facilities ........................................................................... 39

4.2.2 Streetlights and Traffic Signals ......................................................................... 41

4.2.3 Water Delivery Facilities ................................................................................... 41

4.2.4 Vehicle Fleet ..................................................................................................... 43

4.2.5 Transit Fleet ...................................................................................................... 43

4.2.6 Solid Waste Facilities ........................................................................................ 44

4.2.7 Wastewater Facilities ....................................................................................... 45

4.2.8 Employee Commute ......................................................................................... 46

4.2.9 Business Travel ................................................................................................. 47 5 GHG Forecast ................................................................................................................................ 48

5.1 Business-as-usual Forecast ............................................................................................... 48

5.2 Adjusted Forecast ............................................................................................................. 50

5.2.1 Legislative Reduction Programs ....................................................................... 50

5.2.2 Legislative GHG Emission Reduction Contribution .......................................... 54

5.2.3 Adjusted Forecast Results ................................................................................ 54 6 Provisional GHG Emissions Targets .............................................................................................. 56

6.1 1990 Level GHG Emissions Back-cast ............................................................................... 56

6.2 GHG Emissions Reduction Target Setting ......................................................................... 57 Tables
Table 1 2021 Inventory GHGs and GWPs ........................................................................................ 7 Table 2 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Electricity Use ........................... 10 Table 3 Community Residential and Nonresidential Electricity Activity Data Adjustment .......... 10 Table 4 Community Residential and Nonresidential Electricity GHG Emissions Calculations ...... 11 342 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

ii
Table 5 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Electricity T&D Loss .................. 11 Table 6 Community Electricity T&D Loss GHG Emissions Calculations ......................................... 12 Table 7 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Natural Gas Use ........................ 13 Table 8 Community Residential and Nonresidential Natural Gas GHG Emissions Calculations ... 14 Table 9 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Natural Gas Leaks ..................... 14 Table 10 Community Natural Gas Methane Leaks GHG Emissions Calculations ............................ 15 Table 11 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community On-road Transportation ........... 16 Table 12 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community On-road Transportation ........... 17 Table 13 Community On-road EV Activity Data Calculations .......................................................... 18 Table 14 Community On-road Transportation GHG Emissions Calculations .................................. 18 Table 15 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Off-Road Equipment ................. 19 Table 16 Community Off-road Equipment Sector Attributions ...................................................... 19 Table 17 Community Off-road GHG Emissions Calculations ........................................................... 20 Table 18 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Solid Waste ............................... 21 Table 19 Community Solid Waste Proportions and Emissions Factors ........................................... 22 Table 20 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Solid Waste ............................... 23 Table 21 Community Solid Waste Tonnage Allocation ................................................................... 23 Table 22 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Water ........................................ 24 Table 23 Community Water Activity Data ....................................................................................... 25 Table 24 Community Water Energy Intensities Per Water District................................................. 25 Table 25 Community Water Emissions Factors Per Water District ................................................. 26 Table 26 Community Water GHG Emissions and Inclusions ........................................................... 26 Table 27 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Wastewater WW.1.(alt) ........... 27 Table 28 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Wastewater WW.2.(alt) ........... 28 Table 29 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Wastewater WW.7 ................... 29 Table 30 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Wastewater WW.12 ................. 30 Table 31 Community Wastewater WW.12 Nitrogen Load Activity Data Calculations.................... 31 Table 32 Community Wastewater WW.12 Percent Attribution Calculations ................................. 31 Table 33 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Wastewater WW.15 ................. 32 Table 34 Community Wastewater GHG Emissions Calculations ..................................................... 32 Table 35 2021 Community GHG Emissions Inventory ..................................................................... 36 Table 36 Municipal Buildings and Facilities Sector Natural Gas GHG Emissions Calculations ........ 40 Table 37 Municipal Buildings and Facilities Sector Electricity GHG Emission Calculations ............ 41 343 of 961

Introduction

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report iii
Table 38 Municipal Streetlights and Traffic Signals Sector Electricity GHG Emission Calculations 41 Table 39 Municipal Water Consumption GHG Emissions Calculations ........................................... 42 Table 40 Municipal Vehicle Fleet Sector GHG Emission Calculations ............................................ 43 Table 41 Municipal Transit Fleet Sector GHG Emission Calculations .............................................. 44 Table 42 Municipal Solid Waste GHG Emission Calculations .......................................................... 44 Table 43 Municipal Wastewater GHG Emissions ............................................................................ 46 Table 44 Municipal Employee Commute GHG Emissions .............................................................. 47 Table 45 Municipal Business Travel GHG Emissions Calculations ................................................... 47 Table 46 GHG Emission Sources and Growth Factors for BAU Scenario Forecast .......................... 49 Table 47 BAU Forecast Demographic and Projection Metrics by Forecast Year ............................ 50 Table 48 BAU Forecast Results Summary by Emission Sector (MT CO2e) ....................................... 50 Table 49 Glendale Forecasted RPS and Electricity Emission Factors .............................................. 53 Table 50 Summary of Legislative GHG Emissions Reductions (MT CO2e) ....................................... 54 Table 51 Adjusted Forecast Results (MT CO2e) ............................................................................... 55 Table 52 990 Back-cast Calculations................................................................................................ 57 Table 53 GHG Emissions Reduction Targets and Gap Analysis ....................................................... 58 Figures
Figure 1 Community Inventory GHG Emissions by Sector.............................................................. 34 Figure 2 Community Inventory GHG Emissions by Sub-Sector ...................................................... 35

344 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

4 1 Introduction
This document presents the data, methods, and results for the 2021 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory and forecast for the City of Glendale (the City). Included is an analysis of findings and trends in the City’s GHG emissions developed to support the City’s GHG emissions reduction targets and ultimately the City’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP).

California (the State) has set statewide GHG emissions reduction goals to mitigate negative climate change impacts and transition the State to a low-carbon economy. In particular, the State has established goals to reduce statewide GHG emissions 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, as established by Senate Bill (SB) 32 and achieve net zero GHG emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, as established by Assembly Bill (AB) 1279.1 The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is the agency responsible for addressing these goals and developing strategies to achieve them. Many local jurisdictions are completing their own GHG inventories, forecasts, and CAPs to align with SB 32 and AB 1279.

Local governments play a fundamental role in reducing local GHG emissions and preparing for a more resilient future. Local government policies can influence high-emissions behavior and mitigate climate change effects.2 To this end, the City is developing a CAAP to align with SB 32 and AB 1279 goals, increase resilience and climate change preparedness, maintain healthy air and water resources, and improve community health and the local economy. The forthcoming CAAP update will include the 2021 GHG inventory for the community (2021 Community GHG Inventory) and the associated GHG emissions forecast, in addition to the municipal operations inventory (2021 Municipal GHG Inventory). Municipal GHG emissions are a subset of community GHG emissions and are therefore included in the community GHG inventory and associated forecast.

The 2021 Community GHG Inventory completed for the City includes GHG emissions from activities within the City’s jurisdictional boundaries during 2021. Based on the inventory, Rincon developed a back-cast of the City’s GHG emissions to 1990 as well as a forecast to 2030, 2035, 2040, and 2045.

The forecast provides an up-to-date projection of how GHG emissions are expected to change for the City in the future based on changes in population and employment, as well as existing State and federal legislation aimed at reducing GHG emissions through 2045. This document also presents provisional GHG targets and a gap analysis, developed to help identify GHG emissions reduction activities that will be needed to achieve the provisional GHG emissions reduction targets. Like all GHG inventories, forecasts, and targets, the analysis in this document relies on the best available data and calculation methodologies currently available.

1 AB 1279 defines net zero GHG emissions as reducing GHG emissions at least 85% below 1990 levels. California also set a goal to reach 1990 levels by 2020, as established by AB 32, The 2020 goal set by AB 32 was achieved by the State in 2016. CARB. Frequently Asked Questions – California’s 2022 Climate Scoping Plan. Accessed November 14, 2022 at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022- 06/2022_Scoping_Plan_FAQ_6.21.22.pdf
2 CARB. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Accessed November 14, 2022 at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf 345 of 961

Background

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 5
2 Background

2.1 Legislative Context
The State has developed statewide legislative goals and programs to reduce GHG emissions. CARB has issued guidance concerning the establishment of GHG emissions reduction targets for local CAPs so local communities can contribute their fair share towards the States achievement of the GHG emissions reductions goals. In the first Climate Change Scoping Plan (hereafter referred to as the 2008 Scoping Plan), CARB encouraged local governments to adopt a reduction target for their own community emissions that parallels the State commitment to reduce GHG emissions.3 In 2017, CARB published the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (hereafter referred to as the 2017 Scoping Plan Update) outlining the strategies the State will employ to reach the additional State targets set by SB

32.4 On May 10th, 2022, the Draft 2022 California Climate Change Scoping Plan Update was published for public comment and includes recommendations for achieving the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 codified by AB 1279.5 Legislative Targets
The State of California has adopted legislation and policies to address climate change, the most relevant of which are summarized below.
▪ Executive Order S-3-05, signed in 2005, establishes statewide GHG emissions reduction goals to achieve long-term climate stabilization as follows: by 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels and by 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels. The 2050 goal was accelerated by the 2045 carbon neutral goal established by EO B-55-18 and AB 1279, as discussed below. ▪ Assembly Bill 32, known as the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, requires California’s GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020 (approximately a 15 % reduction from 2005 to 2008 levels). The 2008 Scoping Plan identifies mandatory and voluntary measures to achieve the statewide 2020 GHG emissions limit.
▪ Senate Bill 32, signed in 2016, establishes a statewide mid-term GHG emissions reduction goal of 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. CARB formally adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan Update in December 2017, laying the roadmap to achieve 2030 goals and giving guidance to achieve substantial progress toward the 2050 State goals. The Draft 2022 Scoping Plan Update provides further guidance for reaching the State’s SB 32 goal.
▪ Executive Order B-55-18, signed in 2018, expanded upon EO S-3-05 by creating a statewide GHG emissions goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. EO S-55-18 identifies CARB as the lead agency to develop a framework for implementation and progress tracking toward this goal in the 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update.

3 CARB. Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. Dec. 2008. Accessed November 14, 2022 at:
ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_scoping_plan.pdf 4 CARB. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Accessed November 14, 2022 at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf 5 CARB. Draft 2022 Scoping Plan Update. Accessed November 14, 2022 at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/2022-draft-sp.pdf 346 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

6 ▪ Assembly Bill 1279, known as the California Climate Crisis Act, signed by the governor in 2022, codifies the GHG emissions reduction goals of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and expands upon this goal to define carbon neutrality as reducing direct emissions 85% below 1990 levels and removing the remaining 15% of emissions via other technologies and practices, like carbon sequestration. The 2022 Scoping Plan Update (November 2022 provides the pathway for reaching the State’s AB 1279 goal.

2.2 Climate Science Context
Greenhouse Gases
GHGs are chemical compounds found in the earth’s atmosphere which affect climate conditions by trapping infrared radiation from sunlight which can serve to raise global temperatures. Emissions can occur from natural processes as well as human activities which release excess GHGs into the atmosphere. GHG emissions quantification frameworks have been developed over the years in an effort to standardize GHG accounting, particularly for those generated from human activities. The ICLEI International Council for Local Government Initiatives (ICLEI) protocols for community and municipal inventories (discussed further in Section 3 and Section 4, respectively) assess GHG emissions associated with the six internationally recognized GHGs, as outlined in Table 1. The 2021 inventories focus on the three GHGs most relevant to the City’s operations: carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen dioxide (N2O), methane (CH4 ). The other gases (hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluorides) are emitted primarily in private sector manufacturing and electricity transmission and are therefore omitted from the inventory. This approach is consistent with typical community and municipal inventory approaches, as industrial emissions are typically outside of the City’s jurisdictional control. Table 1 also includes the global warming potentials (GWP) for each gas.

The 2021 inventories used 100-year global warming potentials (GWP) for each gas that are consistent with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report,6 which were also used by the State in their latest GHG emissions inventory. The GWP refers to the ability of each gas to trap heat in the atmosphere. For example, one pound of methane gas has 28 times more heat capturing potential than one pound of carbon dioxide gas. GHG emissions are reported in metric tons of CO2 equivalent (MT CO2e).

6 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2014. AR5 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2014. Accessed January 5, 2023 at:
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/
347 of 961

Background

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 7
Table 1 2021 Inventory GHGs and GWPs
Greenhouse Gas Primary Source
100-year
GWP
Carbon dioxide (CO2) Combustion 1
Methane (CH4) Combustion, anaerobic decomposition of organic waste (e.g., in landfills, wastewater treatment plants)
28 Nitrous Oxide (N2O) Leaking refrigerants and fire suppressants 265 Hydrofluorocarbons Leaking refrigerants and fire suppressants 4 - 12,400 Perfluorocarbons Aluminum production, semiconductor manufacturing, HVAC equipment manufacturing
6,630 -
11,100
Sulfur Hexafluoride
(SH6)
Transmission and distribution of power 23,500
Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2014. AR5 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2014. Available at:
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/

348 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

8 3 GHG Emissions Inventory - Community
Conducting a GHG emissions inventory serves to provide a comprehensive understanding of a jurisdiction’s GHG emissions, and may be developed to serve the following purposes:
▪ Establishes perspective of GHG emissions conditions in the applicable inventory year. ▪ Provide an understanding of where the highest sources of GHG emissions in the jurisdiction originate and where the greatest opportunities for emissions reduction exist. ▪ Create a GHG emissions baseline from which the jurisdiction can establish a forecast, reduction targets, and track progress over time.

GHG inventories are developed by identifying the sources and sinks (sectors) for GHGs within the geographic or system boundary of interest (e.g., the City of Glendale), establishing activity data for each sector, and applying an emissions factor to determine the carbon dioxide equivalence (CO2e).

On the level of cities or counties, there are often many potential sectors contributing to the jurisdiction’s GHG emissions. However only a select few sectors are typically considered the major contributors to the jurisdiction’s GHG inventory are considered. The GHG emissions sectors used for the City’s GHG inventory are identified in Section 3.

3.1 Methodology
The City’s 2021 Community GHG Inventory was developed in alignment with accounting protocols provided by the International Council for Local Government Initiatives (ICLEI). ICLEI protocols are designed for local-scale accounting of GHG emissions that contribute to climate change and provide authoritative guidance to account for GHG emissions accurately and consistently. The ICLEI U.S.

Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions Version 1.2 (Community Protocol) serves to guide the measurement and reporting of GHG emissions in a standardized way and is used by other jurisdictions to support their own inventory, forecast, and climate action planning efforts. The Community Protocol also includes steps to evaluate the relevance, completeness, consistency, transparency, and accuracy of data used in the GHG inventory.

Emissions Boundary
The City’s community inventory covers the relevant emissions sources within the boundary of the City of Glendale. The inventory thereby reflects emissions over which the City has direct control.

Scope
The Community Protocol recommends reporting GHG emissions from five basic reporting activities in a community inventory, which include:
▪ Use of electricity by the community
▪ Use of fuel in residential and commercial stationary combustion equipment ▪ On-road passenger and freight motor vehicle travel
▪ Use of energy in potable water and wastewater treatment and distribution ▪ Generation of solid waste by the community
349 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 9
The Community Protocol also provides recommendations for additional GHG emissions source reporting for activities that can be influenced by the accounting agency. Based on reporting practices in California, it is recommended that GHG emissions from off-road equipment fuel combustion and wastewater treatment processes are also included in community GHG emissions inventories. The full selection GHG emissions sources can be categorized more generally into the following five activity sectors:
▪ Electricity
▪ Natural Gas
▪ Transportation
▪ Water and Wastewater
▪ Solid Waste
The City’s 2021 Community GHG Inventory includes an assessment of the community-wide GHG emissions associated with these five sectors which serve as the basis for the GHG emissions forecast and target setting.

3.2 2021 Community GHG Emissions Inventory
Generally, GHG emissions were calculated by multiplying the activity data in each GHG emissions sector (e.g., transportation, energy, waste, water) by an associated emission factor. Activity data refer to the relevant measured or estimated energy usage or GHG-generating process data.

Emission factors are observation-based conversion factors used to equate activity data to generated GHG emissions. The 2021 Community GHG Inventory leverages the latest available models and best available data in accordance with the Community Protocol. The inventory serves to provide a comprehensive understanding of the community’s current GHG emissions. The following sections contain further information on the inventory approach, calculation methodologies, data used, and results.

3.2.1 Energy
Energy: Residential and Nonresidential Electricity
The community’s residential and nonresidential sectors source electricity from Glendale Water and Power (GWP) which is owned and operated by the City. GWP provided the activity data through electricity usage reports for the residential sector and nonresidential sector (including commercial, and industrial sectors). In general, industrial GHG emissions are assumed to be covered by the State Cap and Trade program. Therefore, industrial electricity reported by GWP was excluded from the 2021 Community GHG Inventory. GWP also provided information regarding total electricity generation, electricity purchases, and associated GHG emissions which were used to determine GWP’s emissions factor.

Emissions from residential and nonresidential electricity were calculated using Community Protocol Equation BE.2.1. The equation has been adjusted to remove electricity consumed by electric vehicles (EVs) by removing passenger car EV electricity use from residential electricity consumption and commercial and bus EV electricity consumption from nonresidential consumption. Electricity use from passenger, commercial, and bus EVs are added back into the inventory under the transportation sector to provide a more thorough differentiation between building and transportation sector emissions. More information regarding electric vehicle energy use can be 350 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

10 found in Section 3.2.2. Equation 3.1 and Table 2 provide the adjusted equation, associated parameters, and data sources used to quantify GHG emissions associated with community electricity consumption.

EQUATION 3.1
BE.2.1 RESIDENTIAL/NONRESIDENTIAL ELECTRICITY SECTOR EMISSIONS 𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦,𝑗 = ∑(𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑖,𝑗 − 𝐸𝑉𝑖,𝑗) × 𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑖,𝑗
𝑖

3.1 Table 2 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Electricity Use Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Annual GHG emissions from
electricity consumption per
building type
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦,𝑗 See Table 4 MT CO2e/year Calculated
Electricity consumption per
building type per energy
provider
𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑖,𝑗 See Table 3 kWh/year GWP 2021 Electricity Report1 Attributed electric vehicle
electricity consumption
𝐸𝑉𝑖,𝑗 See Table 3 kWh/year EMFAC20212
Electricity emission factor
based on energy provider
𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑖,𝑗 See Table 4 MT CO2e/kWh GWP 2021 Electricity Report Energy Providers 𝑖 GWP Categorical
Building type 𝑗 Residential
Nonresidential3
Categorical
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; MWh = megawatt hour

1. Glendale Water and Power (GWP) 2021 Electricity Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on February 16, 2023

2. California Air and Resources Board. 2023. Emission FACtor (EMFAC2021 v1.0.1) Model. Available at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/5e0cb7d6006cc10661f4b3ffb9c120a486d46ea6

3. Nonresidential includes kWh consumption from commercial sources and excludes energy consumption from industrial sources.

Table 3 below shows the original electricity activity data, allocated electric vehicle adjustment, and subsequent adjusted activity data used to determine GHG emissions for the community’s electricity consumption.

Table 3 Community Residential and Nonresidential Electricity Activity Data Adjustment Sector Provider
Original Activity Data
[kWh]
Attributed EV1
[kWh]
Adjusted Activity Data
[kWh]
Residential GWP 426,523,449 11,350,951 415,172,498
Nonresidential2 GWP 258,150,763 135,816 258,014,947
Notes: kWh = kilowatt hour; MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; EV = electric vehicles

1. EV kWh usage from passenger vehicles are removed from residential electricity, while commercial and bus EV kWh usage is removed from nonresidential electricity. If multiple providers exist for a community, attributed EV allocates electric vehicle kWh consumption to each provider based on the proportion of electricity provided by each provider per building type.

2. Nonresidential includes kWh consumption from commercial sources and excludes energy consumption from industrial and sources. 351 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 11
Resulting activity data, emissions factors, and GHG emissions per building type and provider is summarized in Table 4.

Table 4 Community Residential and Nonresidential Electricity GHG Emissions Calculations
Sector Provider
Adjusted Activity Data
[kWh]
Emission Factor
[MT CO2e/kWh]
GHG Emissions
[MT CO2e]
Residential GWP 415,172,498 0.000218 90,318
Nonresidential GWP 258,014,947 0.000218 56,129
Notes: kWh = kilowatt hour; MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent Energy: Electricity Transmission and Distribution Losses Electricity Transmission and Distribution (T&D) losses arise from electricity lost during delivery to the buildings and associated end-uses in the City. Electricity T&D losses occur in the electricity transmission and distribution system and are therefore upstream of the delivery endpoints located within the City’s jurisdictional boundaries. This means this electricity is lost before it is counted.

However, T&D losses are estimated and included in the 2021 Community GHG Inventory as they are associated with energy usage in the City and thereby directly impacted by the community’s electricity consumption. Additionally, emissions from T&D losses are recommended for inclusions in community GHG inventories by the Community Protocol. Equation 3.2 and Table 5 provide the calculation method, associated parameters, and data sources used to quantify GHG emissions associated with community T&D losses from electricity consumption. As T&D losses associated with EV electricity use are considered negligible and therefore are included in the quantification of residential and nonresidential electricity T&D.

EQUATION 3.2
BE.4 ELECTRICITY T&D LOSS SECTOR EMISSIONS
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑇&𝐷,𝑗 = ∑ 𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑖,𝑗 × 𝐿𝑇&𝐷 × 𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑖,𝑗
𝑖

3.2 Table 5 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Electricity T&D Loss Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Annual GHG emissions from
transmission and distribution
losses per building type
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑇&𝐷,𝑖 See Table 6 MT CO2e/year Calculated
Electricity consumption per
energy provider and building
type
𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑖,𝑗 See Table 6 MWh/year GWP 2021 Electricity Report1 Electricity emissions factor per
energy provider and building
type
𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑖,𝑗 See Table 6 MT CO2e/MWh GWP 2021 Electricity Report Electricity loss factor 𝐿𝑇&𝐷 4.40% Percent EPA eGRID2
Energy Providers 𝑖 GWP Categorical
Building type 𝑗 Residential Categorical
352 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

12 Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Nonresidential3
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; MWh = megawatt hour

1. Glendale Water and Power (GWP) 2021 Electricity Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on February 16, 2023

2. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. eGRID Data Explorer 2021 Western Energy Grid. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/egrid/data-explorer

3. Nonresidential includes kWh consumption from commercial sources and excludes energy consumption from industrial sources.

The activity data, emissions factors, and GHG emissions associated with electricity T&D losses is summarized in Table 4 per building type and provider.

Table 6 Community Electricity T&D Loss GHG Emissions Calculations Sector Provider
Activity Data
[kWh]
T&D Losses
[kWh]1
Emission Factor
[MT CO2e/kWh]2
GHG Emissions
[MT CO2e]
Residential GWP 426,523,449 18,767,032 0.000218 4,083
Nonresidential GWP 258,150,763 11,358,634 0.000218 2,471 Notes: kWh = kilowatt hour; MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

1. T&D losses include the kWh consumption associated with EV charging.

Energy: Residential and Nonresidential Natural Gas
GHG emissions from natural gas result from the stationary combustion of natural gas in both the residential and nonresidential building sectors. Glendale’s natural gas is supplied by Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) which provided activity data through natural gas usage reports.

GHG emission calculations are based on natural gas used in residential and nonresidential buildings (i.e., commercial and industrial). Like industrial electricity use, industrial use of natural gas is excluded from the GHG inventory as these emissions are regulated by the Cap-and-Trade program.

Emissions from residential and nonresidential natural gas use were calculated using Community Protocol Equation BE.1.1. Though the majority of GHG emissions result from the combustion of natural gas, not all the natural gas used is combusted. Natural gas that leaks from pipes and processing plants has a larger GHG impact compared to combusted natural gas due to the higher global warming potential of methane. Some natural gas also leaks from fittings and appliances within a building, after the natural gas meter which is used to quantify total gas usage. Therefore, Community Protocol has been adjusted to remove this small percentage of “behind the meter” natural gas from the combustion calculation, and instead count it as leakage. More information regarding emissions associated with natural gas leaks can be found under “Energy: Natural Gas Methane Leaks” subsection below. Equation 3.3 and Table 7 provide the adjusted equation, associated parameters, and data sources used to quantify GHG emissions associated with community natural gas consumption in residential and nonresidential buildings. 353 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 13
EQUATION 3.3
BE.1.1 RESIDENTIAL/NONRESIDENTIAL NATURAL GAS SECTOR EMISSIONS 𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑁𝑎𝑡𝐺𝑎𝑠,𝑖 = (𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙𝑁𝐺,𝑖 − [1 − 𝐿𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑠𝑒])
× [(𝐸𝐹𝑁𝐺,𝐶𝑂2 × 𝐺𝑊𝑃𝐶𝑂2) + (𝐸𝐹𝑁𝐺,𝐶𝐻4 × 𝐺𝑊𝑃𝐶𝐻4)
+ (𝐸𝐹𝑁𝐺,𝑁2𝑂 × 𝐺𝑊𝑃𝑁2𝑂)] × 10−1 × 10−3

3.3 Table 7 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Natural Gas Use Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Annual GHG emissions from
stationary combustion of
natural gas per building type
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑁𝑎𝑡𝐺𝑎𝑠,𝑖 See Table 8 MT CO2e/year Calculated
Natural gas consumed per
building type
𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙𝑁𝐺,𝑖 See Table 8 therms/year SoCalGas Natural Gas Report1 Percent natural gas lost during
consumer end-use
𝐿𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑠𝑒 0.50% Percent Environmental Defense Fund2
Carbon dioxide emission
factor for natural gas
combustion
𝐸𝐹𝑁𝐺,𝐶𝑂2 53.06 kg CO2/mmBTU
natural gas
EPA Emission Factors Hub3
Methane emission factor for
natural gas combustion
𝐸𝐹𝑁𝐺,𝐶𝐻4 .001 kg CH4/mmBTU
natural gas
EPA Emission Factors Hub
Nitrous oxide emission factor
for natural gas combustion
𝐸𝐹𝑁𝐺,𝑁2𝑂 .0001 kg
N2O/mmBTU
natural gas
EPA Emission Factors Hub
Global warming potential of
carbon dioxide
𝐺𝑊𝑃𝐶𝑂2 1 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report4
Global warming potential of
methane
𝐺𝑊𝑃𝐶𝐻4 28 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Global warming potential of
nitrous oxide
𝐺𝑊𝑃𝑁2𝑂 265 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Conversion factor 10−1 0.1 mmBTU/therm
Conversion factor 10−3 .001 MT/kg
Building type (i.e. residential
or nonresidential)
𝑖 Residential
Nonresidential5
Categorical
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; therms = thermal unit; mmBTU = metric million British thermal unit; kg = kilograms

1. Southern California Gas (SOCALGAS) Natural Gas Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on March 20, 2023

2. Environmental Defense Fund USER GUIDE FOR NATURAL GAS LEAKAGE RATE MODELING TOOL. Available at:
https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/US-Natural-Gas-Leakage-Model-User-Guide.pdf

3. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Emission Factors Hub. April 1, 2022. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/ghg-emission-factors-hub

4. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2014. AR5 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2014. Available at:
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/

5. Nonresidential includes natural gas use from commercial sources and excludes energy consumption from industrial and sources. 354 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

14 The total natural gas consumption, combusted natural gas activity data, emissions factors, and GHG emissions associated with community natural gas use is summarized in Table 8 per building type and provider.

Table 8 Community Residential and Nonresidential Natural Gas GHG Emissions Calculations
Sector
Activity Data
[therms]
End-use Leakage
[therms]
Adjusted Activity
Data
[therms]
Emissions Factor
[MT CO2e/therm]
GHG Emissions
[MT CO2e]
Residential 26,190,181 130,951 26,059,230 0.005311 138,412 Nonresidential 9,862,627 49,313 9,813,314 0.005311 52,123 Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent Energy: Natural Gas Methane Leaks
Natural gas methane leaks occur during delivery to the buildings and during associated end-uses in the community. Gas methane leaks from delivery occur in the pipeline distribution system and are therefore upstream of the delivery endpoints located in Glendale and not reflected in reported total natural gas usage. While natural gas pipeline distribution leakage is technically outside of the City’s jurisdictional boundaries, the leakage is still directly impacted by natural gas consumption in the community. As leakage is directly connected to the community’s natural gas consumption, it is best practice to include leakage as an emissions sector and is therefore included in the City’s 2021 Community GHG Inventory. Methane leaks from end-use discussed previously occur at the point of use in the City and therefore occur within the City’s jurisdictional boundaries. Though a recommended source of emissions, the Community Protocol does not provide a specific calculation methodology for determining GHG emissions from natural gas leakage. Therefore, emissions from natural gas leaks were calculated using Equation 3.4 which estimates emissions in alignment with energy calculation principles set forth by the Community Protocol and the guidance provided under Community Protocol Section BE.5 Upstream Emissions from Energy Use. Table 9 shows the parameters and data sources associated with Equation 3.4 which were used to quantify GHG emissions from natural gas distribution and end-use leakage.

EQUATION 3.4

NATURAL GAS LEAKAGE SECTOR EMISSIONS
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑘,𝑖 = 𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙𝑁𝐺,𝑖 × 𝐸𝐹𝑁𝐺 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑘 × (𝐿𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑠𝑒 + 𝐿𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡) 3.4 Table 9 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Natural Gas Leaks Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Annual GHG emissions from
natural gas distribution
leakage per building type
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑘,𝑖 See Table 10 MT CO2e/year Calculated
Natural gas consumed per
building type
𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙𝑁𝐺,𝑖 See Table 10 therms/year SoCalGas Natural Gas Report1 Emission factor for natural gas
leakage
𝐸𝐹𝑁𝐺 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑘 0.053067 MT
CO2e/therm
Calculated2
355 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 15
Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Percent natural gas lost during
distribution
𝐿𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑡 2.3% Percent Alvarez, Ramón et al. (2018)3
Percent natural gas lost during
consumer end-use
𝐿𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑠𝑒 0.5% Percent Environmental Defense Fund4
Building type (i.e. residential
or nonresidential)
𝑖 Residential
Nonresidential5
Categorical
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; therms = thermal unit

1. Southern California Gas (SoCalGas) Natural Gas Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on March 20, 2023

2. Emission factor is calculated using the following equation:

2.85 𝑐𝑢𝑏𝑖𝑐 𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠
𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑚 ∗ 95% 𝑚𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 ∗ 0.7 𝑘𝑔
𝑐𝑢𝑏𝑖𝑐 𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟 ∗ 28 𝐶𝑂2𝑒
𝐶𝐻4
∗ 0.001 𝑀𝑇
𝑘𝑔

3. Alvarez, Ramón et al. (2018). Assessment of methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain. Science. 361. Accessed January 12, 2023 at: https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.aar7204

4. Environmental Defense Fund USER GUIDE FOR NATURAL GAS LEAKAGE RATE MODELING TOOL. Accessed January 12,2023 at:
https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/US-Natural-Gas-Leakage-Model-User-Guide.pdf

5. Nonresidential includes natural gas use from commercial sources and excludes energy consumption from industrial and sources.

The total natural gas use and resulting leakage activity data, emissions factors, and GHG emissions per building type is summarized in Table 10.

Table 10 Community Natural Gas Methane Leaks GHG Emissions Calculations Natural Gas Sector
Leakage
Source
Activity Data
[therms]
Methane
Leakage
[therms]
Emissions Factor
[MT
CO2e/therm]
GHG Emissions
[MT CO2e]
Residential
Distribution 26,190,181 602,374 0.053067
38,915
End-use 26,190,181 130,951 0.053067
Nonresidential
Distribution 9,862,627 226,840 0.053067
14,655
End-use 9,862,627 49,313 0.053067
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

3.2.2 Transportation
Transportation: On-road
On-road vehicles in the community produce GHG emissions from the mobile combustion of fossil fuels (i.e., internal combustion engines) and up-stream from the production of electricity (i.e., electric vehicles). GHG emissions from the on-road transportation sector were calculated in accordance with Community Protocol TR.1.A and TR.2.B. The methodology leverages on-road transportation data from CARB’s 2021 EMission FACtor (EMFAC2021) model.7 EMFAC2021 provides data on the county-wide data level and does not differentiate data according to cities.

The Community Protocol recommends use of regional travel demand models to differentiate passenger, commercial, and bus vehicle miles travelled activity data. This assessment utilizes data provided by Replica.8 The Replica model uses big data sources such as GPS, cell phone, credit card

7 California Air and Resources Board. 2023. Emission FACtor (EMFAC2021 v1.0.1) Model. Available at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/5e0cb7d6006cc10661f4b3ffb9c120a486d46ea6 8 https://www.replicahq.com/
356 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

16 transactions, real estate data, and ground truthing along with powerful machine learning techniques to generate a statewide land use and VMT model that is then scaled with census data and updated on a quarterly basis. For this assessment, Replica provided origin-destination average daily weekday and weekend VMT for each quarter of the year for the City of Glendale. Quarterly daily VMT provided by Replica was averaged and scaled9 to determine 2021 VMT activity data for the City.

Equation 3.5 and Table 11 define the equations, parameters, and data sources used to convert resulting Replica VMT activity data to GHG emissions from on-road transportation fuel combustion.

EQUATION 3.5
TR.1.A & TR.2.B ON-ROAD TRANSPORTATION COMBUSTION EMISSIONS 𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑜𝑛𝑟𝑜𝑎𝑑,𝑖 = (𝑇𝑖 + 1
2 𝑇𝑂,𝑖 + 1
2 𝑇𝐷,𝑖) × 𝐸𝐹𝑎𝑢𝑡𝑜,𝑖 3.5
Table 11 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community On-road Transportation Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Total annual community on-
road GHG emissions per
vehicle class
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑂𝑛𝑟𝑜𝑎𝑑,𝑖 See Table 14 MT CO2e/year Calculated
VMT occurring within
jurisdictional boundaries per
vehicle class
𝑇𝑖 See Table 14 miles Replica Model1
VMT originating within and
terminating outside of
jurisdictional boundaries per
vehicle class
𝑇𝑂,𝑖 See Table 14 miles Replica Model
VMT originating outside of and
terminating within
jurisdictional boundaries per
vehicle class
𝑇𝐷,𝑖 See Table 14 miles Replica Model
Emissions factor for on-road
vehicles per vehicle class
𝐸𝐹𝑎𝑢𝑡𝑜,𝑖 See Table 14 MT CO2e/mile EMFAC2021 v1.0.12
Vehicle class 𝑖 Passenger
Commercial
Bus
Categorical
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; VMT = vehicle miles travelled

1. Replica VMT data for the City of Glendale provided via email on February 6, 2023.

2. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2023. EMission FACtor (EMFAC2021 v1.0.1) Model. Available at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/5e0cb7d6006cc10661f4b3ffb9c120a486d46ea6 In addition to mobile combustion emissions accounted under Community Protocol Equations TR.1.A and TR.2.B, GHG emissions from electric vehicles were included in the City’s 2021 Community GHG Inventory for more accurate accounting of on-road transportation trends. This was achieved through modifying Equation 3.5 to account for EV modeshare estimates based on total VMT. Note that EV activity data is not deducted from Equation 3.5 due to the use of EMFAC2021 emissions factors which account for EV activity but attribute GHG emissions to be zero, and therefore should

9 Weekend daily VMT is scaled assuming 104 weekends in a year, while weekday daily VMT was scaled assuming 261 weekdays in a year. 357 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 17
not result in double counting. The adjusted equation, parameters, and data sources used to estimate GHG emissions attributable to on-road EV activity is provided in Equation 3.6 and Table 12 below.

EQUATION 3.6

ON-ROAD TRANSPORTATION ELECTRIC VEHICLE EMISSIONS
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑜𝑛𝑟𝑜𝑎𝑑,𝐸𝑉,𝑖 = (𝑇𝑖 + 1
2 𝑇𝑂,𝑖 + 1
2 𝑇𝐷,𝑖) × 𝐸𝑉𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒,𝑖 × 𝐸𝑃𝑀𝑖 × 𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑗 3.6
Table 12 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community On-road Transportation Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Total annual community on-
road EV GHG emissions per
vehicle class
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑂𝑛𝑟𝑜𝑎𝑑,𝐸𝑉,𝑖 See Table 14 MT CO2e/year Calculated
VMT occurring within
jurisdictional boundaries per
vehicle class
𝑇𝑖 See Table 13 miles Replica Model1
VMT originating within and
terminating outside of
jurisdictional boundaries per
vehicle class
𝑇𝑂,𝑖 See Table 13 miles Replica Model
Vehicle miles travelled
originating outside of and
terminating within
jurisdictional boundaries per
vehicle class
𝑇𝐷,𝑖 See Table 13 miles Replica Model
Percent share of VMT
attributable to EVs
𝐸𝑉𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒,𝑖 See Table 13 % EMFAC2021 v1.0.12
Average rate of electricity
consumption per EV-mile per
vehicle class
𝐸𝑃𝑀𝑖 See Table 13 kWh/mile EMFAC2021 v1.0.1
Weighted average electricity
emissions factor per building
type
𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑗 See Table 13 MT CO2e/kWh GWP 2021 Electricity Report3 Vehicle class 𝑖 Passenger
Commercial
Bus
Categorical
Building type 𝑗 Residential
Nonresidential
Categorical
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; EV = electric vehicles; VMT = vehicle miles travelled; kWh = kilowatt hour

1. Replica VMT data for the City of Glendale provided via email on February 6, 2023.

2. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2023. EMission FACtor (EMFAC2021 v1.0.1) Model. Available at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/5e0cb7d6006cc10661f4b3ffb9c120a486d46ea6

3. Glendale Water and Power (GWP) 2021 Electricity Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on February 16, 2023 358 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

18 Table 13 shows the VMT activity data for community vehicles per vehicle class as well as the EV share of VMT and EVMT used to determine EV activity data expressed as electricity consumption.

Table 13 Community On-road EV Activity Data Calculations Vehicle Class
VMT Activity
Data [miles] EV Share [%] EVMT [miles] EPM [kWh/mile]
EV Activity Data
[kWh]
Passenger 1,230,370,632 2.54% 31,251,414 0.36 11,350,951 Commercial 47,569,751 0.00% 0 0.00 0
Bus 12,605,474 0.51% 64,288 2.11 135,816
Notes: VMT = vehicle miles travelled; EV = electric vehicle; EPM = electricity per mile; EVMT = electric vehicle miles traveled; kWh = kilowatt hour
The activity data, emissions factors, and resulting GHG emissions from on-road transportation quantified in accordance with Equation 3.5 and Equation 3.6 is summarized in Table 14 below.

Table 14 Community On-road Transportation GHG Emissions Calculations Sector Activity Data1 Emission Factor
GHG Emissions
[MT CO2e]
Passenger VMT 1,230,370,632 VMT 0.000354 MT CO2e/mile 435,551 Commercial VMT 47,569,751 VMT 0.001198 MT CO2e/mile 56,989 Bus VMT 12,605,474 VMT 0.002123 MT CO2e/mile 26,761
Passenger EVMT1 11,350,951 kWh 0.000218 MT CO2e/kWh 2,469 Commercial EVMT2 0 kWh 0.000218 MT CO2e/kWh 0
Bus EVMT2 135,816 kWh 0.000218 MT CO2e/kWh 30
Total 521,800
Notes: VMT = vehicle miles traveled; EVMT = electric vehicle miles traveled; kWh = kilowatt hour; MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

1. EV activity data does not include kWh associated with T&D losses as these emissions are considered negligible and are included under energy sector emissions.

2. Emissions factor for on-road passenger EV electricity use is weighted according to the portion of electricity supplied per provider in the residential electricity sector (see Table 4)

3. Emissions factor for on-road commercial and bus EV electricity use is weighted according to the portion of electricity supplied per provider in the residential electricity sector (see Table 4) Transportation: Off-road
Off-road equipment and vehicles in the community generate GHG emissions from the mobile combustion of fossil fuels. Off-road fuel usage results from equipment operation for sectors such as agricultural, construction, lawn and garden, or recreational equipment. Community Protocol Equation TR.8 was used to quantify GHG emissions from off-road equipment fuel consumption and is shown under Equation 3.7 below. Table 15 lists the parameters, values, and data sources used to quantify emissions in according with the Community Protocol. 359 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 19
EQUATION 3.7
TR.8 OFF-ROAD EQUIPMENT SECTOR EMISSIONS
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑎𝑑,𝑗 = 𝐸𝐹𝑗 × ∑ 𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑎𝑑,𝑖,𝑗
𝑖
× 𝐴𝐹𝑖 3.7
Table 15 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Off-Road Equipment Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Annual GHG emissions from
offroad equipment
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑎𝑑,𝑗 See Table 17 MT CO2e/year Calculated
Annual fuel consumption in
the County per sector per fuel
type
𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑎𝑑,𝑖,𝑗 See Table 17 Gallons/year OFFROAD20211
Fuel attribution factor per
equipment type
𝐴𝐹𝑖 See Table 16 Percent SCAG Growth Forecast2
Emission factor per fuel type 𝐸𝐹𝑗 See Table 17 MT CO2e/gallon EPA Emission Factors Hub3 Equipment Type 𝑖 See Table 16 Categorical OFFROAD2021
Fuel type 𝑗 Gasoline
Diesel
Natural Gas
Categorical OFFROAD2021
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

1. California Air Resource Board (CARB). 2023. Mobile Source Emissions Inventory Off-road (OFFROAD2021 v1.0.3). Available at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/5e0cb7d6006cc10661f4b3ffb9c120a486d46ea6

2. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2023. 2016‐2040 RTP/SCS Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction. Available at: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/2016_2040rtpscs_finalgrowthforecastbyjurisdiction.pdf?1605576071

3. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022. GHG Emission Factors Hub. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/ghg-emission-factors-hub Locally applicable activity data in alignment with ICLEI protocol standards reports off-road equipment fuel consumption on a county-wide basis. Attribution factors per equipment type used to allocate City off-road fuel usage were determined based on demographic data and land use data relating to population size, number of jobs, and agricultural acreage where applicable. The demographic attribution metrics and percent attribution used for each off-road equipment type is shown in Table 16.

Table 16 Community Off-road Equipment Sector Attributions Equipment Type Attribution Metric Attribution Data Source Agricultural Excluded – Other1 0.00% Not Applicable
Airport Ground Support Excluded – Not Under Jurisdictional Control

0.00% Not Applicable
Cargo Handling Equipment Excluded – Not Under Jurisdictional Control

0.00% Not Applicable
Commercial Harbor Craft Excluded – Not Under Jurisdictional Control

0.00% Not Applicable
Construction and Mining Employment 2.56% SCAG Growth Forecast2 Industrial Employment 2.56% SCAG Growth Forecast
360 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

20 Equipment Type Attribution Metric Attribution Data Source Lawn and Garden Population 1.93% SCAG Growth Forecast
Light Commercial Employment 2.56% SCAG Growth Forecast
Locomotive Excluded – Not Under Jurisdictional
Control

0.00% Not Applicable
Ocean Going Vessel Excluded – Not Under Jurisdictional
Control

0.00% Not Applicable
Oil Drilling Excluded – Not Under Jurisdictional
Control

0.00% Not Applicable
Outboard Marine Tanks Excluded – Not Under Jurisdictional Control

0.00% Not Applicable
Pleasure Craft Population 1.93% SCAG Growth Forecast
Portable Equipment Employment 2.56% SCAG Growth Forecast Transport Refrigeration
Unit
Employment 2.56% SCAG Growth Forecast
Recreational Population 1.93% SCAG Growth Forecast
Military Tactical Support Excluded – Not Under Jurisdictional Control

0.00% Not Applicable
Forestry Excluded – Other3 0.00% Not Applicable
Notes:

1. Agricultural off-road equipment was excluded to remain consistent with the scope of the City’s 2021 Community Inventory which excludes agricultural electricity and natural gas sector GHG emissions due to aggregation rules.

3. Though forestry occurs withing the County of Los Angeles, there appears to be minimal opportunity for forestry within the City’s boundaries. Therefore, it is assumed that offroad fuel consumption for forestry activities is negligible and thereby excluded.

The allocated and aggregated activity data by fuel type, emission factors, and emissions results for the inventory’s off-road equipment sector are provided in Table 17.

Table 17 Community Off-road GHG Emissions Calculations
Fuel Type
Activity Data
(gallons)
Emission Factor
(MT CO2e/gallon)1
GHG Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Diesel 2,227,013 0.010470 23,317
Gasoline 2,109,767 0.009189 19,386
Natural Gas 1,369,734 0.005862 8,030
TOTAL 50,732
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; Values may not add due to rounding

1. Emission factors per fuel type represent a weighted average based on the emissions factor and fuel consumption per offroad equipment type as determined according to EPA’s Emissions Factor Hub available at: https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/ghg- emission-factors-hub

3.2.3 Solid Waste
GHG emissions associated with the waste sector result from the decomposition of waste at a landfill as well as landfill operation processes. Scholl Canyon Landfill is the primary landfill utilized by the City of Glendale and is owned and operated by the City. GHG emissions from waste decomposition 361 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 21
were calculated using Community Protocol Method SW.4. Equation 3.8 and Table 18 provide the calculation method, associated parameters, and data sources used to quantify GHG emissions in accordance with Community Protocol SW.4.

EQUATION 3.8
SW.4.1 SOLID WASTE FUGITIVE EMISSIONS
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒,𝑓𝑢𝑔𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 = 𝐺𝑊𝑃𝐶𝐻4 × (1 − 𝐶𝐸) × (1 − 𝑂𝑋) × 𝑀 × ∑ 𝑃𝑖 × 𝐸𝐹𝑖 𝑖

3.8 Table 18 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Solid Waste Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Annual community
generated waste GHG
emissions
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒,𝑓𝑢𝑔𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 75,067 MT
CO2e/year
Calculated
Methane global warming
potential
𝐺𝑊𝑃𝐶𝐻4 28 IPCC Fifth Assessment
Report1
Default LFG collection
efficiency
𝐶𝐸 0.75 Fraction ICLEI Community Protocol
Oxidation rate 𝑂𝑋 0.10 Fraction ICLEI Community Protocol Total mass of waste entering
landfill
𝑀 244,904 Wet short
tons
City of Glendale2
Proportion of total waste
material per material type
𝑃𝑖 See Table 19 Fraction Go2Zero Strategies3
Emission factor per material
type4
𝐸𝐹𝑖 See Table 19 MT CH4/wet
short ton
ICLEI Community Protocol
Material type 𝑖 Multiple Categorical
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

1. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2014. AR5 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2014. Available at:
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/

2. Tons of waste activity data provided by the City of Glendale via SharePoint on March 9, 2023

3. Go2Zero Strategies. 2019. City of Glendale Waste Characterization Study. Provided by the City via SharePoint on March 9, 2023 While the Glendale Waste Characterization Study conducted by Go2Zero10 provides an extensive assessment of the community’s waste, the material types identified do not directly correlate with those identified in the Community Protocol. Default emissions factors provided in the Community Protocol per material type were thus determined by cross-referencing material types between the City’s waste characterization study and the Community Protocol. Where multiple material types were found to be applicable, an average emissions factor was calculated based on Community Protocol default values. Table 19 provides the proportion of solid waste per material type, identified material cross-references, and the resulting average methane emissions factors.

10 https://go2zero.net/
362 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

22 Table 19 Community Solid Waste Proportions and Emissions Factors Glendale
Material Types Proportion Protocol Cross-Reference
Average Methane
Emissions Factor1
[MT CH4/ton]
Green Waste 13.00% Grass
Leaves
Branches
Lumber

0.0433
Compostable Paper 4.00% Newspaper 0.0429
Food 18.00% Food Waste 0.0776
Liquid 2.00% Food Waste 0.0776
Corrugated 3.00% Corrugated Cardboard 0.1200
Mixed Paper 9.00% Office Paper
Coated Paper

0.1257
Plastic Containers 2.00% N/A 0.0000
Durable Plastics 4.00% N/A 0.0000
Glass 3.00% N/A 0.0000
Metal 5.00% N/A 0.0000
Inorganics 4.00% Construction and Demolition 0.0121
Textiles 6.00% Textiles 0.0726
Other Plastics 7.00% N/A 0.0000
Mixed Residue 6.00% Coated Paper
Corrugated Cardboard
Diapers

0.0804
HHW & E-waste 10.00% N/A 0.0000
Bulky & Special Waste 3.00% Medical Waste
Sludge and Manure
Lumber

0.0403
Weighted Average2 0.0487
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

1. Average methane emissions are calculated by cross-refencing material types between Glendale’s Waste Characterization Study conducted by Go2Zero with those identified in the Community Protocol and averaging applicable default emissions factors per material type.

2. The weighted average methane emissions factor is calculated based on the average emissions factor per material type and the proportion of material in the solid waste stream as identified in Glendale’s Waste Characterization Study conducted by Go2Zero.

Landfill process emissions result in GHG emissions due to the consumption of energy to power the equipment necessary to manage the landfill. However, as Scholl landfill is located within the City’s boundaries, energy consumption for landfill processes are anticipated to be included under the nonresidential energy sector of Glendale’s 2021 Community GHG Inventory. To avoid the risk of double counting, GHG emissions associated with energy use at Scholl landfill were not included in the City’s 2021 Community GHG Inventory, but are quantified below for informational purposes.

Landfill process emissions were quantified according to Community Protocol SW.5 which is outlined in Equation 3.10 and Table 19 below.
363 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 23
EQUATION 3.9
SW.5 SOLID WASTE PROCESS EMISSIONS
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒,𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 = 𝑀 × 𝐸𝐹𝑝 3.10
Table 20 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Solid Waste Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Annual landfill process GHG
emissions
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒,𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠 2,694 MT CO2e/year Calculated
Total mass of solid waste that
enters the landfill in the
inventory year
𝑀 244,904 Wet short
tons/year
City of Glendale1

Emissions factor for landfill
process emissions
𝐸𝐹𝑝 0.011 MT CO2e/wet
short ton
ICLEI Community Protocol
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

1. Tons of waste activity data provided by the City of Glendale via Sharepoint on March 9, 2023 The total GHG emissions from solid waste emissions sources is summarized in Table 21.

Table 21 Community Solid Waste Tonnage Allocation
Emissions Source GHG Emissions [MT CO2e/year]
Landfill Fugitive Emissions 75,067
Landfill Process Emissions1 2,694
Total 75,067
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

1. As Scholl Canyon Landfill is within City boundaries and is owned and operated by the City, process related emissions are anticipated to be included under energy sector GHG emissions and thus are excluded from total GHG emissions attributable to the solid waste sector.

3.2.4 Water
Water consumption generates GHG emissions from the electricity used to deliver water to the community, as well as the energy used to treat and convey the water prior to delivery. GWP provides ground water to the City and is classified as locally sourced water in this assessment. The majority of water supplied to the City is imported from Municipal Water District of Southern California (MWD). Table 22 shows the parameters and data sources associated with Equation 3.11 which were used to quantify GHG emissions from local and imported water sources. 364 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

24 EQUATION 3.11
WW.14 WATER SECTOR EMISSIONS
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟,𝑖 = 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑖 × ∑ 𝐸𝐼𝑖,𝑗 × 𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑖,𝑗
𝑗

3.11 Table 22 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Water Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Annual GHG emissions from
water consumption per water
district
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟,𝑖 See Table 26 MT CO2e/year Calculated
Volume of water supplied to
the community per water
district
𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑖 See Table 23 AF GWP 2021 Water Production
Report1
Energy intensity of water
distribution per water district
𝐸𝐼𝑖,𝑗
See Table 24
kWh/AF

1. GWP 2021 Water Production
Report

2. ICLEI Community Protocol

3. GWP 2020 UWMP2

4. MWD 2020 UWMP3
Electricity emissions factor per
water process stage per source
type
𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑖,𝑗 See Table 25 MT CO2e/kWh 1. GWP 2021 Electricity Report4

2. EPA eGRID5
Water district 𝑖 See Table 23 Categorical
Water process stage 𝑗 Extraction
Conveyance
Treatment
Distribution
Categorical
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; AF = acre-feet; kWh = kilowatt hour; UWMP = Urban Water Management Plan

1. Glendale Water and Power (GWP) 2021 Water Production Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on March 8, 2023

2. City of Glendale. 2021. Urban Water Management Plan, Appendices, Table O-1A. Available at:
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/62414/637623899860970000

3. Municipal Water District of Southern California (MWD). 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP)Table A.10-5 2018 Treated and Untreated Water Energy Intensity. Available at: https://www.mwdh2o.com/media/21641/2020-urban-water- management-plan-june-2021.pdf

4. Glendale Water and Power (GWP) 2021 Electricity Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on February 16, 2023

5. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. eGRID Data Explorer 2021 Western Energy Grid. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/egrid/data-explorer
Table 23 shows the total water supplied to the City by each water district or provider and classifies the activity data as local vs imported sources of water. 365 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 25
Table 23 Community Water Activity Data
Water Districts Activity Data [AF]
Local Water Supply
Glendale Water and Power (GWP) 8,586.11
Imported Water Supply
Municipal Water District of Southern California
(MWD) 14,816.00
Notes: AF = acre-feet
The energy intensities and emissions factors per water district or provider are summarized in Table 24 and Table 25, respectively. As MWD’s operations occur outside of the City’s jurisdictional boundaries and is anticipated to be supplied by multiple electricity providers, the CAMX grid mix emissions factor provided by eGRID was used to estimate emissions. However, at the distribution to consumer stage of water management, imported water is managed within the City’s boundaries using Glendale’s water infrastructure and therefore GWP’s emissions factor is utilized.

Table 24 Community Water Energy Intensities Per Water District Energy Intensities [kWh/AF]
Water District Extraction Conveyance Treatment Distribution (Purveyor)
Distribution
(Consumer) All Stages
Local Water Supply
GWP1 309.70 — 120.00 — 384.70 814.40
Imported Water Supply
MWD2 — 1,919.90 69.70 -152.60 384.70 2,221.70
Notes: kWh = kilowatt hour; AF = acre-feet

1. Energy Intensity information for Glendale Water and Power (GWP) was acquired from the following sources:

1.a. Extraction: Calculated based on electricity consumption and AF produced from GWP wells as reported in the GWP 2021 Water Production Report.

1.b. Conveyance: Included under Extraction energy intensity

1.c. Treatment: Based on ICLEI Community Protocol default factor as provided under Appendix F Wastewater and Water Emissions Activities and Sources, Table WW.14.4: Energy Intensities for Water Treatment

1.d. Distribution: Based on the City's 2020 UWMP, Appendix E Table O-1A available at:
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/62414/637623899860970000

2. Energy Intensity information for Municipal Water District (MWD) was sourced from the company’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan available at: https://www.mwdh2o.com/media/21641/2020-urban-water-management-plan-june-2021.pdf

2.a. Distribution: Due to the high elevations from which MWD water is sourced, MWD’s distribution system to purveyors relies primarily on gravity with minimal electricity input. Additionally, MWD’s distribution system is lined with hydroelectric generation plants along the pipelines. Therefore, the energy intensity for MWD distribution to purveyors is negative as the energy input combined with electricity generation results in a net production, rather than consumption, of power. 366 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

26 Table 25 Community Water Emissions Factors Per Water District Emissions Factors [MT CO2e/kWh]
Water District Extraction Conveyance Treatment
Distribution
(Purveyor)
Distribution
(Consumer) All Stages
Local Water Supply
GWP1 0.000218 0.000218 0.000218 0.000218 0.000218 0.000218 Imported Water Supply
MWD2 0.000242 0.000242 0.000242 0.000242 0.000218 0.000238 Notes: kWh = kilowatt hour; AF = acre-feet

1. Emissions factors are sourced from Glendale Water and Power’s (GWP) 2021 Electricity Report

2. As Municipal Water District (MWD) operation are outside of City boundaries, the CAMX grid mix emissions factor provided by eGRID was used to estimate emissions. Information on CAMX emissions factor for 2021 is available at: https://www.epa.gov/egrid/data- explorer
Table 26 shows the City’s water sector GHG emissions and total GHG emissions added to Glendale’s 2021 Community GHG Inventory. MWD imported water is distributed to City residents using water infrastructure, such as pumps, which are owned and operated by GWP. Therefore, the energy used to distribute imported water was accounted for in the energy section and and is thus excluded from total water sector emissions to avoid double counting.

Table 26 Community Water GHG Emissions and Inclusions
Emissions [MT CO2e/year]
Water District

Extraction Conveyance Treatment
Distribution
(Purveyor)
Distribution
(Consumer)
All
Stages
Local Water Supply
GWP
Emissions 578 — 224 — 719 1,521
Inclusion No — No — No No
Imported Water Supply
MWD
Emissions 6,886 — 250 -547 1,240 7,828
Inclusion Yes Yes Yes Yes No1 —
Total Water Supply
Total 6,588
Notes: kWh = kilowatt hour; AF = acre-feet

1. As MWD is distributed to consumers within City boundaries using the City’s water infrastructure, distribution GHG emissions are anticipated to be accounted in energy sector emissions and are thereby excluded from total water sector GHG emissions.

3.2.5 Wastewater
Management of wastewater produces emissions through every stage of the process from collection to final use or discharge. Glendale’s wastewater is treated by the Los-Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant (LAGWRP) which is equitably co-owned by the City of Glendale and the City of Los Angeles, though it lies outside of Glendale’s city boundaries. The wastewater reclamation plant (WRP) uses tertiary treatment nitrification/denitrification processes to produce recycled water for 367 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 27
irrigation and industrial re-use.11 Glendale is entitled to 50% of recycled water produced by LAGWRP but currently only uses 25-33% of the City’s entitlement. Recycled water not utilized by the City is discharged into the Los Angeles River. 12
The LAGWRP is part of an integrated system of wastewater treatment plants (WRP) which include the Tillman WRP, Burbank WRP, and the Hyperion WRP. The four water treatment facilities are known as the North Outfall Sewer (NOS). Biosolids and excess flows from Tillman WRP, LAGWRP, and Burbank WRP are diverted to the Hyperion WRP for treatment and disposal.12 Hyperion WRP utilizes a primary and secondary treatment process using digester tanks to treat wastewater for reclamation purposes or discharge to the Santa Monica Bay.13 Currently, Hyperion WRP processes an average of 260 million gallons (MG) per day with approximately 220 MG being discharged into the sea.14
GHG emissions from LAGWRP operations are a result of process emissions from nitrification/denitrification (see Equation 3.14 and Table 29), excess recycled water discharge into the LA River (see Equation 3.15 and Table 30), and electricity use (see Equation 3.16 and Table 33).

As primarily only biosolids are sent from LAGWRP to Hyperion WRP for treatment, only stationary combustion emissions from combustion of digester gas was included with relation to Hyperion WRP operations in this assessment. The set of methods used to quantify stationary combustion emissions is outlined in Equation 3.12 and Table 27 as well as Equation 3.13 and Table 28 below.

EQUATION 3.12
WW.1.(ALT) WASTEWATER DIGESTER GAS STATIONARY COMBUSTION EMISSIONS (CH4) 𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑊,𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡,𝐶𝐻4,𝑖
= (𝑃𝑖 × 𝐷𝑖𝑔𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝐺𝑎𝑠 × 𝑓𝐶𝐻4 × 𝐵𝑇𝑈𝐶𝐻4 × 10−6 × 𝐸𝐹𝐶𝐻4
× 365.25 × 10−3) × 𝐺𝑊𝑃𝐶𝐻4

3.12 Table 27 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Wastewater WW.1.(alt) Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Total annual GHG emitted by
devices designed to combust
digester gas
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑊,𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡,𝐶𝐻4 See Table 34 MT CO2e/year Calculated
Population served1 𝑃𝑖 320,787 People 1. SCAG Growth Forecast2 Rate of digester gas volume
production
𝐷𝑖𝑔𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝐺𝑎𝑠 1.00 std
ft3/person/day
ICLEI Community Protocol
Fraction of methane in
digester gas
𝑓𝐶𝐻4 0.65 Fraction ICLEI Community Protocol

11 City of Los Angeles Sanitation. 2023. Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant. Available at:
https://www.lacitysan.org/san/faces/home/portal/s-lsh-wwd/s-lsh-wwd-cw/s-lsh-wwd-cw-p/s-lsh-wwd-cw-p-lagwrp?_adf.ctrl- state=t7b1utnjj_5&_afrLoop=12857866421655975#!
12 City of Glendale. 2020. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). Available at:
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/62412/637623898692530000 13 City of Los Angeles Sanitation. 2023. Hyperion Reclamation Plant. Available at: https://www.lacitysan.org/san/faces/home/portal/s- lsh-wwd/s-lsh-wwd-cw/s-lsh-wwd-cw-p/s-lsh-wwd-cw-p-hwrp?_adf.ctrl-state=t7b1utnjj_752&_afrLoop=12859331002222320#! 14 368 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

28 Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Default higher heating value
of methane
𝐵𝑇𝑈𝐶𝐻4 1,028 BTU/ft3 ICLEI Community Protocol
Conversion factor 10−6 0.000001 mmBTU/BTU
Methane emissions factor 𝐸𝐹𝐶𝐻4 0.0032 kg CH4/mmBTU ICLEI Community Protocol Conversion factor 365.25 365.25 Days/year ICLEI Community Protocol Conversion factor 10−3 0.001 MT/kg
Global warming potential of
methane
𝐺𝑊𝑃𝐶𝐻4 25 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Wastewater treatment plant
(WWTP)
𝑖 Hyperion
WRP
Categorical
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; std ft3 = standard cubic feet; BTU = British thermal unit; mmBTU = one million British thermal units; kg = kilograms;

1. Population serviced (or service population) is the sum of population and employment

3.13 Table 28 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Wastewater WW.2.(alt) Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Total annual GHG emitted by
devices designed to combust
digester gas
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑊,𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡,𝑁2𝑂 See Table 34 MT CO2e/year Calculated
Population served1 𝑃𝑖 320,787 People 1. SCAG Growth Forecast2 Rate of digester gas volume
production
𝐷𝑖𝑔𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝐺𝑎𝑠 1.00 std
ft3/person/day
ICLEI Community Protocol
Fraction of methane in
digester gas
𝑓𝐶𝐻4 0.65 Fraction ICLEI Community Protocol
Default higher heating value
of methane
𝐵𝑇𝑈𝐶𝐻4 1,028 BTU/ft3 ICLEI Community Protocol
Conversion factor 10−6 0.000001 mmBTU/BTU
Nitrous Oxide emissions factor 𝐸𝐹𝑁2𝑂 0.0006 kg
N2O/mmBTU
ICLEI Community Protocol
Conversion factor 365.25 365.25 Days/year ICLEI Community Protocol Conversion factor 10−3 0.001 MT/kg
Global warming potential of
nitrous oxide
𝐺𝑊𝑃𝑁2𝑂 265 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Wastewater treatment plant
(WWTP)
𝑖 Hyperion
WRP
Categorical
369 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 29
Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; std ft3 = standard cubic feet; BTU = British thermal unit; mmBTU = one million British thermal units; kg = kilograms;

1. Population serviced (or service population) is the sum of population and employment

2. Southern California Association of Governments. 2023. 2016‐2040 RTP/SCS Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction. Available at:
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/2016_2040rtpscs_finalgrowthforecastbyjurisdiction.pdf?1605576071 EQUATION 3.14
WW.7 CENTRALIZED WWTP W/ NITRIFICATION/DENITRIFICATION
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑊,𝑛𝑖𝑡/𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑡,𝑖 = 𝑃𝑖 × 𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑑−𝑐𝑜𝑚 × 𝐸𝐹𝑛𝑖𝑡/𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑡 × 10−6 × 𝐺𝑊𝑃𝑁2𝑂 3.14 Table 29 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Wastewater WW.7 Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Total annual GHG emitted by
WWTP processes
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑊,𝑛𝑖𝑡/𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑡,𝑖 See Table 34 MT CO2e/year Calculated Population served1 𝑃𝑖 320,787 People 1. SCAG Growth Forecast2 Factor for insignificant
industrial or commercial
discharge
𝐹𝑖𝑛𝑑−𝑐𝑜𝑚 1.25 ICLEI Community Protocol
Emissions factor for a WWTP
without nitrification or
denitrification
𝐸𝐹𝑤/𝑜 𝑛𝑖𝑡/𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑡 7.00 g
N2O/person/year
ICLEI Community Protocol
Conversion factor 10−6 0.000001 mmBTU/BTU
Global warming potential of
nitrous oxide
𝐺𝑊𝑃𝑁2𝑂 265 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Wastewater treatment plant
(WWTP)
𝑖 LAGWRP Categorical
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; std ft3 = standard cubic feet; BTU = British thermal unit; mmBTU = one million British thermal units; kg = kilograms;

1. Population serviced (or service population) is the sum of population and employment

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

30 EQUATION 3.15
WW.12 NITROUS OXIDE EMISSIONS FROM EFFLUENT DISCHARGE
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑊,𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑡,𝑖
= 𝑁 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑 × 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑜𝑙 × 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑡 × 𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑡,𝑖 × 44
28 × 365.25 × 10−3 × 𝐺𝑊𝑃𝑁2𝑂

3.15 Table 30 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Wastewater WW.12 Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Total annual GHG emitted
by WWTP processes
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑊,𝑤/𝑜 𝑛𝑖𝑡/𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑡,𝑖 See Table 34 MT CO2e/year Calculated Average total nitrogen per
day
𝑁 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑 See Table 31 kg N/day LAGWRP Effluent Quality
Report1
Percentage of total
reclaimed water
attributable to the City
𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑜𝑙 See Table 32 % City of Glendale 2020
UWMP2
Percentage of reclaimed
water discharged as
effluent into designated
water body
𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑡 See Table 32 % City of Glendale 2020
UWMP
Emissions factor of
discharge to water body
type (river)
𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑡,𝑖 0.005 kg N2O-N/kg
sewage-N
discharged
ICLEI Community Protocol
Molecular weight ratio of
N2O to N2
44 28

1.57 Fraction
Conversion factor 365.25 365.25 Days/year
Conversion factor 10−3 0.001 MT/kg
Global warming potential
of nitrous oxide
𝐺𝑊𝑃𝑁2𝑂 265 IPCC Fifth Assessment
Report
Wastewater treatment
plant (WWTP)
𝑖 LAGWRP Categorical
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; std ft3 = standard cubic feet; kg = kilograms

1. Los-Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant (LAGWRP) Summary of Overall Treatment Plant Effluent Quality Report provided by the City via email on March 15, 2023

2. City of Glendale. 2020. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). Available at:
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/62412/637623898692530000 The Effluent Quality Report provided by LAGWRP reports the minimum, maximum, and average volume of wastewater effluent processed per day as well as the concentration of NH3-N, NO2-N, and NO3-N in the effluent. Summarized data from this report used to determine the total nitrogen load is provided in Table 31.
371 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 31
Table 31 Community Wastewater WW.12 Nitrogen Load Activity Data Calculations Month
Effluent Processed1
[gal/month]
Nitrogen Concentration2
[kg N/gal]
Nitrogen Load
[kg N/month]
January 498,864,100 0.00002217 11,062
February 438,241,900 0.00001943 8,514
March 503,650,000 0.00002197 11,064
April 515,708,500 0.00002043 10,534
May 527,492,500 0.00002414 12,736
June 501,357,000 0.00002313 11,596
July 500,676,800 0.00002309 11,561
August 492,802,000 0.00002214 10,912
September 472,441,800 0.00002316 10,942
October 485,735,000 0.00002144 10,412
November 468,319,000 0.00002290 10,726
December 483,537,100 0.00002263 10,942
Notes: kg = kilograms; gal = gallons

1. Effluent processed per month was determined by summing the reported daily average volume processed per month in LAGWRP’s Effluent Quality Report.

2. Nitrogen concentration was calculated by averaging LAGWRP’s reported daily average mg N/L to determine a monthly average, summing across NH3-N, NO2-N, and NO3-N chemical constituents, and converting to kg N/gal Table 32 shows the calculation method for the percent LAGWRP treated wastewater attributable to Glendale and the percent recycled water which is released as effluent rather than being recycled for reuse.

Table 32 Community Wastewater WW.12 Percent Attribution Calculations Attribution Metric Total [AF] Community Total [AF] Percent Attribution 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑜𝑙
1 14,983 6,024 40.21%
𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑡
2 8,000 2,000 75.00%
Notes: AF = acre-feet

1. Percent of wastewater attributable to the community is based on the total LAGWRP wastewater processed (14,983 AF) and wastewater produced by Glendale (6,024 AF) in 2020 as reported in the City of Glendale’s 2020 UWMP, available at:
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/62412/637623898692530000

2. Percent of wastewater effluent is conservatively estimated based on Glendale’s current recycled water use (2,000 AF) and the maximum potential recycled water entitlement (8,000 AF) as reported in the City of Glendale’s 2020 UWMP, available at:
https://www.glendaleca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/62412/637623898692530000 Though the City of Glendale co-owns LAGWRP, the facility lies outside of the City’s boundaries which means that electricity used at the WRP is not captured under community nonresidential energy use. Community Protocol Equation WW.15 was used to determine LAGWRP electricity-based emissions and adjusted to allocate emissions attributable to the Glendale community. 372 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

32 EQUATION 3.16
WW.15 ENERGY-RELATED EMISSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT 𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑊𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑖 = 𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑊𝑊,𝑖 × 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑜𝑙 × 𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑖 3.16
Table 33 Emissions Parameters and Data Sources – Community Wastewater WW.15 Definition Parameter Value Unit Data Source
Total annual GHG emitted
by WWTP electricity use
𝐶𝑂2𝑒𝑊𝑊𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑖 See Table 34 MT CO2e/year Calculated
Electricity use of WWTP 𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑊𝑊,𝑖 10,018,136 kWh LAGWRP 2021 Electricity Report2
Percentage of total
reclaimed water
attributable to the City
𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑜𝑙 See Table 32 % City of Glendale 2020
UWMP2
Electricity emission factor
per WWTP
𝐸𝐹𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐,𝑖 0.000242 MT CO2e/kWh EPA eGRID3
Wastewater treatment
plant or (WWTP)
𝑖 LAGWRP Categorical
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; MG = million gallons; AF = acre-feet; kWh = kilowatt hour

1. Los-Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant (LAGWRP) Summary of Overall Treatment Plant Effluent Quality Report provided by the City via email on March 15, 2023

2. Los-Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant (LAGWRP) 2021 Electricity Report provided by the City via SharePoint on April 5, 2023

3. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. eGRID Data Explorer 2021 Western Energy Grid. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/egrid/data-explorer
Table 34 summarizes the City’s wastewater sector activity data, emissions factors, and GHG emissions per WWTP.

Table 34 Community Wastewater GHG Emissions Calculations Emissions Source
Protocol
Equation Activity Data Emissions Factor1
GHG Emissions
[MT CO2e/year]
LAGWRP
Nit/Denit Process
N2O WW.7 320,787 persons 0.0023188 MT
CO2e/person 744
Effluent Discharge WW.12 52,669 kg N/year 0.0020803 MT CO2e/kg N 110 Stationary
Combustion — — — — — —
Electricity Use WW.15 4,027,848 kWh 0.0002421 MT CO2e/kWh 975 Hyperion WRP
Nit/Denit Process
N2O — — — — — —
Effluent Discharge — — — — — —
Stationary
Combustion
WW.1.(alt)
WW.2.(alt) 320,787 persons 0.0000626 MT
CO2e/person 20
Electricity Use — — — — — —
All WWTP
373 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 33
Emissions Source
Protocol
Equation Activity Data Emissions Factor1
GHG Emissions
[MT CO2e/year]
Nit/Denit Process
N2O WW.7 320,787 persons 0.002319 MT
CO2e/person 744
Effluent Discharge WW.12 52,669 kg N/year 0.002080 MT CO2e/kg N 110 Stationary
Combustion
WW.1.(alt)
WW.2.(alt) 320,787 persons 0.000063 MT
CO2e/person 20
Electricity Use WW.15 4,027,848 kWh 0.000242 MT CO2e/kWh 975 Total 1,848
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; kg = kilograms; kWh = kilowatt hour

374 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

34 2021 Community GHG Emissions Inventory Results
The inventory provides the City with current GHG emissions estimates that follow the Community Protocol and current best practices for GHG accounting. The results of the GHG inventory are summarized in Figure 1 and Figure 2 and shown in detail in Table 35.

Figure 1 Community Inventory GHG Emissions by Sector

375 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 35
Figure 2 Community Inventory GHG Emissions by Sub-Sector

376 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

36 Table 35 2021 Community GHG Emissions Inventory
GHG
Emissions
Sector
GHG Emissions
Subsector Activity Data Emission Factor
GHG Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Energy Residential
Electricity
415,172,498 kWh 0.000218 MT
CO2e/kWh
90,318
Residential
Electricity T&D
18,767,032 kWh 0.000218 MT
CO2e/kWh
4,083
Nonresidential
Electricity
258,014,947 kWh 0.000218 MT
CO2e/kWh
56,129
Nonresidential
Electricity T&D
11,358,634 kWh 0.000218 MT
CO2e/kWh
2,471
Residential Natural
Gas
26,059,230 therms 0.005311 MT
CO2e/therm
138,412
Residential Natural
Gas Leaks
733,325 therms 0.053067 MT
CO2e/therm
38,915
Nonresidential
Natural Gas
9,813,314 therms 0.005311 MT
CO2e/therm
52,123
Nonresidential
Natural Gas Leaks
276,154 therms 0.053067 MT
CO2e/therm
14,655
Transportation Passenger VMT 1,230,370,632 VMT 0.000354 MT CO2e/mile 435,551 Commercial VMT 47,569,751 VMT 0.001198 MT CO2e/mile 56,989 Bus VMT 12,605,474 VMT 0.002123 MT CO2e/mile 26,761
Passenger EVMT 11,350,951 kWh 0.000218 MT
CO2e/kWh
2,469
Commercial EVMT 0 kWh 0.000218 MT
CO2e/kWh
0 Bus EVMT 135,816 kWh 0.000218 MT
CO2e/kWh
30 Off-road Diesel 2,227,013 Gallons 0.010470 MT
CO2e/Gallon
23,317
Off-road Gasoline 2,109,767 Gallons 0.009189 MT
CO2e/Gallon
19,386
Off-road Natural
Gas
1,369,734 Gallons 0.005862 MT
CO2e/Gallon
8,030
Solid Waste Landfill Methane 244,904 tons 0.306515 MT CO2e/ton 75,067 Process Emissions - tons - MT CO2e/ton -
Water Local - kWh - MT
CO2e/kWh
-
Imported 27,216,992 kWh 0.000242 MT
CO2e/kWh
6,588
Wastewater Nitrification/
Denitrification
Process N2O
320,787 persons 0.002319 MT
CO2e/person
744
Effluent Discharge
Fugitive N2O
52,669 kg N/year 0.002080 MT CO2e/kg
N
110
377 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Community

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 37
GHG
Emissions
Sector
GHG Emissions
Subsector Activity Data Emission Factor
GHG Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Stationary
Combustion
320,787 persons 0.000063 MT
CO2e/person
20 Energy Use 4,027,848 kWh 0.000242 MT
CO2e/kWh
975
Total 1,053,141
Notes: VMT = vehicle miles traveled; EVMT = electric vehicle miles traveled; kWh = kilowatt hour; MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; gal = gallons
378 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

38 4 GHG Emissions Inventory - Municipal

4.1 Methodology
The City’s municipal GHG inventory (2021 Municipal Inventory) was competed using the Local Government Operations Protocol15 (LGOP) developed by Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI), California Air Resources Board (CARB), California Climate Action Registry, and The Climate Registry (TCR). The LGOP methodology includes the calculation of GHG emissions which can be attributed directly to the City’s operations in the given inventory year. The municipal inventory allows the City to track its GHG emissions resulting from the municipally owned facilities, vehicles, and equipment over which it can exert control with GHG reduction policies and ultimately lead by example.

The results of GHG emission calculations are presented by emissions scope, relating to the degree of control the City has over emissions sources, and the specific sources that the emissions are associated with. Emissions sources are categorized as direct (i.e., Scope 1) or indirect (i.e., Scope 2 or Scope 3), in accordance with the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development’s Greenhouse Gas Protocol Corporate Standard, which are summarized below:
▪ Scope 1: Direct GHG emissions from sources within a local government’s operations that it owns and/or controls. This includes stationary combustion to produce electricity, steam, heat, and power equipment; mobile combustion of fuels; process emissions from physical or chemical processing; fugitive emissions that result from production, processing, transmission, storage, and use of fuels; and other sources.
▪ Scope 2: Indirect GHG emissions associated with the consumption of electricity, steam, heating, or cooling that are purchased from a utility provider that also provides energy to other jurisdictions and/or is located outside City boundaries. ▪ Scope 3: All other indirect GHG emissions not covered in Scope 2, such as emissions resulting from the extraction and production of purchased materials and fuels, transport-related activities in vehicles not owned or controlled by the City (e.g., employee commuting and business travel, outsourced activities, waste disposal, etc.).

Scope
Similar to the community inventory, the GHG emissions sources and sectors for the municipal operations inventory are categorized into various sectors and subsectors to match the GHG emissions reporting of the community GHG emissions inventory, with the granularity required by the LGO Protocol. The primary sectors of GHG emissions sources include:
▪ Electricity
▪ Natural Gas
▪ Transportation
▪ Water and Wastewater

15 ICLEI. May 2010. Local Government Operations Protocol for the quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions inventories. 379 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Municipal

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 39
▪ Solid Waste
Further granularity can be achieved by also reporting GHG emissions sources by the following subsectors when possible:
▪ Buildings and other facilities
▪ Streetlights and traffic signals
▪ Water delivery facilities
▪ Port Facilities
▪ Airport Facilities
▪ Vehicle fleet
▪ Transit fleet
▪ Power Generation Facilities
▪ Solid Waste Facilities
▪ Wastewater facilities
The following LGOP recommended sectors have also been included in the City’s 2021 Municipal Inventory:
▪ Employee commute
▪ Employee business travel
The City’s 2021 Municipal Inventory includes an assessment of the City’s operational GHG emissions according to the above subsectors and categorized to reflect the City’s municipal Scope 1-3 emissions.

Emissions Boundary
The 2021 Municipal GHG Inventory includes all emissions occurring within the City of Glendale’s direct jurisdictional authority (i.e., sources of emissions resulting from facilities that the City owns and/or operates). The City of Glendale operates and maintains multiple buildings and facilities across the City such as Glendale Water and Power and the Scholl Canyon Landfill. The City also co- owns the LAGWRP for wastewater management which is located outside of Glendale’s city boundaries. Though the wastewater reclamation facility lies outside of the Glendale, emissions associated with LAGWRP are included in the 2021 Municipal GHG Inventory as a direct Scope 1 source of emissions in accordance with LGOP as it is under the City’s jurisdictional authority.

4.2 2021 Municipal GHG Emissions Inventory

4.2.1 Buildings and Other Facilities
Buildings and facilities generate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that relate to the stationary combustion of natural gas (i.e., Scope 1) and the use of electricity (i.e., Scope 2) in the City’s facilities.

Natural gas which is used for heating and cooling of buildings and facilities is provided to the City by SoCalGas. However, similar to the community natural gas used, not all the natural gas used is 380 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

40 combusted. It’s estimated that 2.3% of natural gas is leaked through the distribution pipelines,16 while about 0.5% of the natural gas delivered is leaked at end-uses and not combusted.17 The activity data provided by SoCalGas is adjusted to remove end-use leakage and an emission factor from the EPA Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories report is applied to calculate GHG emissions from natural gas combustion.18 Emissions from distribution and end-use methane leaks are calculated separately using the adjusted activity data and a calculated natural gas methane leak emission factor. The GHG emission calculation details associated with the buildings and other facilities sector’s natural gas usage and leakage are provided in Table 36.

Table 36 Municipal Buildings and Facilities Sector Natural Gas GHG Emissions Calculations
GHG Emissions Source
Activity Data
[therms]
Adjusted
Activity Data
[therms]
Emissions Factor
[MT CO2e/therm]
Emissions
[MT CO2e] Scope
Natural Gas
Consumption
347,135
345,399 0.005311 1,835 Scope 1
Natural Gas Methane
Leaks1 9,720 0.053067 516 Scope 1
Total 2,350 Scope 1
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

1. Emission factor is calculated using the following equation:

The City owns and operates Glendale Water and Power (GWP) which provides all of Glendale’s electricity utility services. As the City has direct control over GWP and is thereby responsible for all GHG emissions associated with its operations, GHG emissions associated with GWP supplied electricity is already accounted under the City’s 2021 Community GHG Inventory. Therefore, the City’s 2021 Municipal GHG Inventory only considers the electricity consumed to operate the buildings and facilities that the City owns as a subset of the 2021 Community GHG Inventory and is thereby included as Scope 2 emissions. Additionally, though not recommended under the LGOP, T&D electricity losses are included in the City’s 2021 Municipal Inventory to align with sector inclusions of Glendale’s 2021 GHG Community Inventory.

GWP provided the electricity consumption activity data as well as annual electricity and GHG emissions information used to determine GWP’s emissions factor.19 Electricity T&D loss was calculated based on a 4.40% loss rate as specified by eGRID.20 The GHG emission calculation details associated with buildings and other facilities sector’s electricity usage are provided in Table 37.

16 Alvarez, Ramón et al. (2018). Assessment of methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain. Science. 361. https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.aar7204 17 Environmental Defense Fund USER GUIDE FOR NATURAL GAS LEAKAGE RATE MODELING TOOL. Available at:
https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/US-Natural-Gas-Leakage-Model-User-Guide.pdf 18 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022. GHG Emission Factors Hub. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/ghg- emission-factors-hub
19 Glendale Water and Power (GWP) 2021 Electricity Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on February 16, 2023 20 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. eGRID Data Explorer 2021 Western Energy Grid. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/egrid/data-explorer
381 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Municipal

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 41
Table 37 Municipal Buildings and Facilities Sector Electricity GHG Emission Calculations GHG Emissions Source
Utility
Provider
Activity Data
[kWh]
Emissions Factor
[MT CO2e/kWh]
Emissions
[MT CO2e] Scope
Electricity Consumption2 GWP 30,753,161 0.000218 6,690 Scope 2 Electricity Consumption
T&D2 GWP 1,357,214 0.000218 295 Scope 2
Total 6,985 Scope 2
Notes: kWh = kilowatt hour; MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

1. Excludes electricity used by GWP for water distribution pumping stations.

2. Electricity consumption T&D includes the T&D associated with electric vehicle charging at City buildings and facilities.

4.2.2 Streetlights and Traffic Signals
The City’s buildings and facilities, streetlights and traffic signals generate Scope 2 emissions related to the use of electricity and resulting T&D losses. Activity data and emissions factors were reported in GWP’s 2021 Electricity Report provided by the City.21 Electricity T&D loss was calculated based on a 4.40% loss rate as specified by eGRID.22 The GHG emission calculation details associated with buildings and other facilities sector’s electricity usage are provided in Table 38.

Table 38 Municipal Streetlights and Traffic Signals Sector Electricity GHG Emission Calculations
GHG Emissions Source
Utility
Provider
Activity Data
[kWh]
Emissions Factor
[MT CO2e/kWh]
Emissions
[MT CO2e] Scope
Streetlights & Traffic Signals GWP 9,616,044 0.000218 2,092 Scope 2 Streetlights & Traffic Signals
T&D GWP 423,106 0.000218 92 Scope 2
Total 2,184 Scope 2
Notes: kWh = kilowatt hour; MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

4.2.3 Water Delivery Facilities
Water consumption typically generates Scope 3 GHG emissions from the electricity used to deliver water to the City facilities, as well as the energy used to treat and convey the water prior to delivery. A portion of The City’s water which is purchased from MWD by GWP is considered Scope 3 as GWP does not control the electricity used to extract, convey, treat, and transport MWD’s water prior to delivery into GWP’s local distribution system. However, GWP produced water distributed to the City is considered a Scope 2 emissions source as the facility and distribution infrastructure are owned and operated by the City. As the City’s 2021 Community GHG Inventory water sector includes all GHG emissions associated with GWP water management, the 2021 Municipal GHG Inventory only includes the energy associated with the City’s distribution infrastructure and facility water consumption as a subset of the 2021 Community GHG Inventory. The inventory for wastewater delivery facilities also includes T&D losses associated with the City’s water pump distribution infrastructure to maintain consistency with the community inventory and the buildings

21 Glendale Water and Power (GWP) 2021 Electricity Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on February 16, 2023 22 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. eGRID Data Explorer 2021 Western Energy Grid. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/egrid/data-explorer
382 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

42 and facilities emissions sectors. This will provide the City a better understanding of GHG emissions attributable to its facility and irrigation activities.

Activity data on the City’s water pump station electricity use was provided by the City and excludes the electricity associated with GWP well water extraction and treatment. Electricity T&D loss was calculated based on a 4.40% loss rate as specified by eGRID.23 The City also provided activity data regarding the total volume of water consumed by City facilities and used for irrigation which was apportioned between GWP and MWD supplied water based on the 2021 Water Production Report provided by GWP.24 As the electricity use of the City’s water pump distribution infrastructure is included in the 2021 Municipal GHG Inventory, only the energy intensities associated with the extraction, conveyance, and treatment of the City’s water was included to avoid double counting.

The energy intensity for water extraction was provided by GWP and the energy intensity for treatment was estimated based on Community Protocol default values.25 The emissions factor for GWP supplied water was determined based on annual electricity supply and GHG emissions as reported by GWP.26
The energy intensities of MWD’s water management was determined according to the 2020 UWMP27 and emissions factor was approximated according to the eGRID reported CAMX grid mix emissions factor.28 The GHG emission calculations details are provided in Table 39.

Table 39 Municipal Water Consumption GHG Emissions Calculations Water District
Activity
Data [AF]
Energy
Intensity
Factor
[kWh/AF]
Electricity
Usage
[kWh]
Emission
Factor [MT
CO2e/kWh]
GHG
Emissions
[MT CO2e]
Emission
Source
Scope
City Consumption
(GWD)1,2 335.28 429.70 144,070 0.000218 31 Scope 2
City Consumption
(MWD)3 578.56 1,837.00 1,062,807 0.000242 257 Scope 3
Water Pump Stations — — 11,095,371 0.000218 2,414 Scope 2 Water Pump Stations
T&D — — 488,196 0.000218 106 Scope 2
Total 2,551 Scope 2
Total 257 Scope 3

23 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. eGRID Data Explorer 2021 Western Energy Grid. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/egrid/data-explorer
24 Glendale Water and Power (GWP) 2021 Water Production Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on March 8, 2023 25 ICLEI Community Protocol. Appendix F Wastewater and Water Emissions Activities and Sources, Table WW.14.4: Energy Intensities for Water Treatment.
26 Glendale Water and Power (GWP) 2021 Electricity Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on February 16, 2023 27 Municipal Water District of Southern California (MWD). 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP)Table A.10-5 2018 Treated and Untreated Water Energy Intensity. Available at: https://www.mwdh2o.com/media/21641/2020-urban-water-management- plan-june-2021.pdf
28 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. eGRID Data Explorer 2021 Western Energy Grid. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/egrid/data-explorer
383 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Municipal

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 43
Notes: kWh = kilowatt hour; MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; Values may not add due to rounding

1. Activity data for GWP supplied City water was calculated based on the total AF of water consumed by City facilities (914 AF) and the proportion of water produced in 2021 by GWP (8,586 AF, 36.69 %) versus the proportion of water purchased from MWD in 2021 (14,816 AF, 63.31%) as specified in GWP’s 2021 Water Production Report.

2. The energy intensity of GWP provided water is the sum of the energy intensity of GWP’s extraction and conveyance (309.70 kWh/AF) as estimated based on GWP’s 2021 Water Production Report and the energy intensity for treatment (120 kWh/AF) as provided in the Community Protocol.

3. Activity data for GWP supplied City water was calculated based on the total AF of water consumed by City facilities (914 AF) and the proportion of water produced in 2021 by GWP (8,586 AF, 36.69 %) versus the proportion of water purchased from MWD in 2021 (14,816 AF, 63.31%) as specified in GWP’s 2021 Water Production Report.

4.2.4 Vehicle Fleet
Vehicle fleet emissions include Scope 1 sources that relate to the mobile combustion of fossil fuels in the City’s fleet vehicles as well as Scope 2 emissions from the charging of EVs. Fleet vehicles include light and medium-duty vehicles and trucks as well as the use of personal vehicles for work.

The employee commute sector accounts for emissions generated by City employees’ trips to and from work and is treated as separate from the use of personal vehicles for work and is discussed in the section below. The City tracks data for the vehicle fleet including diesel, gasoline, natural gas use, and electricity consumption from vehicle charging which provided the activity data for this sector. Emission factors for diesel, gasoline, and natural gas were obtained from the EPA Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories report.29 The grid emissions factor for vehicle fleet EV charging was determined based on annual electricity supply and GHG emissions as reported by GWP.30 The GHG emission calculation details associated with vehicle fleet sector sources are provided in Table 40.

Table 40 Municipal Vehicle Fleet Sector GHG Emission Calculations GHG Emission Source Activity Data Emissions Factor
Emissions
[MT CO2e] Scope
Diesel 74,050 Gallons 0.01024 MT CO2e/gal 758 Scope 1
Gasoline 294,610 Gallons 0.00881 MT CO2e/gal 2,596 Scope 1 Natural Gas 279,330 Therms 0.00531 MT CO2e/therm 1,484 Scope 1 Electric 92,614 kWh 0.000218 MT CO2e/kWh 20 Scope 2
Total 4,838 Scope 1
Total 20 Scope 2
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; gal = gallons; kWh = kilowatt hour; Values may not add due to rounding

4.2.5 Transit Fleet
Transit fleet emissions include Scope 1 sources that relate to the mobile combustion of fossil fuels in the City’s public transit fleet (e.g., buses and Dial-A-Ride). The City tracks gasoline and natural gas usage for the transit fleet, which provided the activity data for this sector. Emissions factors for gasoline and natural gas were obtained from the EPA Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas

29 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022. GHG Emission Factors Hub. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/ghg- emission-factors-hub
30 Glendale Water and Power (GWP) 2021 Electricity Report provided by the City via Sharepoint on February 16, 2023 384 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

44 Inventories report.31 The GHG emission calculation details associated with transit fleet sector sources are provided in Table 41.

Table 41 Municipal Transit Fleet Sector GHG Emission Calculations GHG Emission Source Activity Data Emissions Factor
Emissions
[MT CO2e] Scope
Natural Gas 307,021 Therms 0.00531 MT CO2e/therm 1,631 Scope 1 Gasoline 14,065 Gallons 0.00881 MT CO2e/gal 124 Scope 1 Total 1,755 Scope 1
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; gal = gallons; Values may not add due to rounding

4.2.6 Solid Waste Facilities
Scholl Canyon Landfill is owned and operated by the City and provides waste disposal services for the City of Glendale as well as other surrounding jurisdictions. Ownership of the solid waste facility places the entirety of its process related energy consumption and fugitive emissions under the City’s control, making it a Scope 1 emissions source. However, as Scholl landfill is located within the City’s boundaries, energy consumption for landfill processes are anticipated to be included under the buildings and facilities energy sector of Glendale’s 2021 Municipal GHG Inventory. To avoid the risk of double counting, GHG emissions associated with Scholl landfill processes have been excluded from the City’s 2021 Municipal GHG Inventory, but are quantified below for informational purposes.

The GHG emissions associated with fugitive emissions from municipal generated waste was also quantified for informational purposes but excluded from the 2021 Municipal Inventory.

GHG emissions from waste decomposition were calculated using Community Protocol Method SW.4.1 based on the waste tonnage processed by the landfill and default factors for landfill gas collection efficiency (i.e., 0.75) and oxidation rate (i.e., 0.1). Similarly, process emissions were calculated using Community Protocol Method SW.5 based on the waste tonnage processed by the landfill and the default factor for compressed natural gas (CNG) fuel use. Total waste tonnage activity data for Scholl Canyon Landfill was sourced from CalRecycle tonnage reports for 2021,32 while municipal solid waste tonnage was provided by the City. A methane emissions factor was developed based on Glendale’s Go2Zero Waste Characterization Study33 and emissions factors per waste material type as provided by the Community Protocol (see Table 19). The GHG emissions calculations for Scholl Canyon process and fugitive emissions as well as municipal solid waste generation are shown in Table 42.

Table 42 Municipal Solid Waste GHG Emission Calculations Sector
Activity Data
[wet short ton]
Emission Factor
[MT CO2e/wet
short ton]
GHG Emissions
[MT CO2e]
Emission Source
Scope
Landfill Decomposition 422,785 0.3065 129,590 Scope 1

31 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022. GHG Emission Factors Hub. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/ghg- emission-factors-hub
32 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019. 2021 Landfill Summary Tonnage Report. Available at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LandfillTipFees/
33 Go2Zero Strategies. 2019. City of Glendale Waste Characterization Study. Provided by the City via SharePoint on March 9, 2023 385 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Municipal

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 45
Landfill Process 422,785 0.0110 4,651 Scope 1
Municipal Decomposition 10,790 0.3065 3,307 Scope 1
Total 129,590 Scope 1

4.2.7 Wastewater Facilities
The LAGWRP produces emissions through every stage of the process and falls under Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions as it is co-owned and operated by the City. Scope 1 emissions result from LAGWRP’s nitrification/denitrification processes and fugitive emissions from discharging treated water into the Los Angeles River. Scope 2 emissions are produced from the wastewater facility’s electricity consumption which are not included under the City’s building and facilities energy use as LAGWRP is located outside of the City of Glendale. Though Scope 3 emissions would as a result of municipal wastewater downstream processing at the Hyperion WRP, these emissions are anticipated to be negligible and are therefore not included in the City’s 2021 Municipal GHG Inventory.

GHG emissions from wastewater treatment were calculated using Community Protocol Methods WW.7 for process emissions and WW.12 for fugitive emissions. Activity data was calculated based on total effluent and nitrogen concentration data provided by LAGWRP34 (see Table 31).

Additionally, activity data was adjusted to reflect the City’s 50% co-ownership of LAGWRP. Default emission factors were applied to the activity data based on guidance from the Community Protocol.35 GHG emissions from electricity use were calculated using activity data provided by LAGWRP and the eGRID reported CAMX grid mix emissions factor.36 The total process and fugitive wastewater emissions generated by the City can be found in Table 43.

34 Los-Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant (LAGWRP) Summary of Overall Treatment Plant Effluent Quality Report provided by the City via email on March 15, 2023
35 See Community Protocol Methods WW.7 and WW.12 for all default inputs including emissions factors used to calculate wastewater emissions.
36 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. eGRID Data Explorer 2021 Western Energy Grid. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/egrid/data-explorer
386 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

46 Table 43 Municipal Wastewater GHG Emissions
GHG Emission Source
Adjusted Activity
Data1 Emissions Factor
Emissions
[MT CO2e] Scope
Nitrification/Denitrifica
tion Process N2O 9,036 AF 0.002319 MT
CO2e/person
21 Scope 1
Effluent Discharge
Fugitive N2O 49,125 kg N/year 0.002080 MT CO2e/kg N 102 Scope 1 Energy Use 5,009,068 kWh 0.000242 MT CO2e/kWh 1,213 Scope 2 Total 123 Scope 1
Total 1,213 Scope 2
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; AF = acre-feet; kg = kilogram; kWh = kilowatt hour; Values may not add due to rounding

1. Adjusted activity data reflects 50% of the total activity data to account for the City’s partial ownership of LAGWRP.

4.2.8 Employee Commute
Emissions from employee commute include Scope 3 GHG emissions sources from the mobile combustion of fossil fuels generated by the City of Glendale’s employee vehicles as employees commute to and from work. The City provided employee commute data in the form of number of employees, peak and off-peak average vehicle ridership (AVR) survey responses, and household zip code data. The zip codes of employees were used to determine an average one-way trip distance to work per work day which was then scaled by 260 days per year to reach an annual number of miles per vehicle. A weighted average AVR based survey responses was then applied to convert the activity data from miles per vehicle to annual miles per employee. This was then multiplied by the number of City employees to determine annual milage activity data. As the AVR factor accounts for and removes public transit, active transport, and zero emission vehicles to determine ridership, a mobile combustion emissions factor for passenger vehicles provided by EMFAC202137 was applied to the activity data to determine GHG emissions from employee commute. The GHG emissions associated with the employee commute sector are provided in Table 44.

37 California Air and Resources Board. 2023. Emission FACtor (EMFAC2021 v1.0.1) Model. Available at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/5e0cb7d6006cc10661f4b3ffb9c120a486d46ea6 387 of 961

GHG Emissions Inventory - Municipal

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 47
Table 44 Municipal Employee Commute GHG Emissions
GHG
Emission
Source
City
Employees
Avg AVR [
trips/vehicle
]1
Avg One-
way
Distance
[mi/vehicle
/day]
Work Days
per Year
Emissions
Factor [MT
CO2e/mi]
Emissions
[MT CO2e]
Emission
Source
Scope
Employee
Commute 1,785.00 1.21 18.90 260.00 0.000363 2,634 Scope 3 Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; mi = miles; Values may not add due to rounding

1. Average vehicle ridership (AVR) reflects the number of commuting employees divided by the number of vehicles commuting employees use to arrive at the work site and is averaged over the survey week. An AVR of 1 signifies commuting employees are driving individually to work, while an AVR greater than 1 signifies employees are engaging in some degree of commute rideshare and are not riding single-occupancy.

4.2.9 Business Travel
Business travel results in Scope 3 GHG emissions from the mobile combustion of fossil fuels by passenger cars, trains, and airplanes for City employee’s work-related travel. Activity data in the form of VMT by mode type was provided by the City and emissions factors were sourced from EMFAC202138 for passenger vehicles, the EPA Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories39 report for train, and the BlueSkyModel for airplane.40 The GHG emission calculation details associated with business travel sector sources are provided below in Table 45.

Table 45 Municipal Business Travel GHG Emissions Calculations GHG Emission Source
Activity Data
[miles]
Emissions Factor
[MT CO2e/mile] Emissions [MT CO2e] Scope
Passenger Car 1,721 0.000354 1 Scope 3
Train 0.00 0.0001513 0 Scope 3
Airplane 0.00 0.0241767 0 Scope 3
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

38 California Air and Resources Board. 2023. Emission FACtor (EMFAC2021 v1.0.1) Model. Available at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/5e0cb7d6006cc10661f4b3ffb9c120a486d46ea6 39 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022. GHG Emission Factors Hub. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/ghg- emission-factors-hub
40 The BlueSkyModel was used to determine the emissions factor of airplane business travel. Available at: https://blueskymodel.org/air- mile#:~:text=On%20average%2C%20a%20plane%20produces,(CO2)%20per%20mile. 388 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

48 5 GHG Forecast
The City’s 2021 Community GHG Inventory establishes a baseline reference point; however, annual GHG emissions change over time. GHG emissions forecasts provide a way to estimate future emission levels based on population and job growth. Forecasts also account for State legislative actions that are anticipated to reduce GHG emissions. Calculating the difference between the forecasted GHG emissions and the reduction target determines the gap to be closed through local policies. This section includes an estimate of the future emissions for the City in the years 2030, 2035, 2040, and 2045 in a business-as-usual scenario (BAU) forecast and an adjusted scenario (adjusted) forecast, which are defined as follows:
▪ Business-as-usual scenario- Provides a forecast of how future GHG emissions would change as population, housing, and job growth occurs and if current activities continued as they did in 2019 absent of any policies or legislation that would reduce local emissions. The BAU forecast is based on growth trends projected in population, housing, employment, and transportation activity over time, consistent with regional projections. ▪ Adjusted scenario- Provides a forecast of how currently adopted legislation would reduce GHG emissions from the business-as-usual scenario. The adjusted scenario represents the State’s contribution to reducing local GHG emissions to meet State goals without any additional contribution from local policies or actions.

5.1 Business-as-usual Forecast
Future GHG emissions for the BAU forecast were calculated using projected demographic data provided by Southern California Association of Government’s (SCAG) 2016-2040 RTP/SCS Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction model.41 The demographic metrics used to project activity data and associated growth factors for each forecasted GHG emission source are provided in Table 46 for each of the GHG emission sources in the 2021 Community GHG Inventory.

41 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2023. 2016‐2040 RTP/SCS Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction. Available at:
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/2016_2040rtpscs_finalgrowthforecastbyjurisdiction.pdf?1605576071 389 of 961

GHG Forecast

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 49
Table 46 GHG Emission Sources and Growth Factors for BAU Scenario Forecast GHG Emissions Source
Demographic
Projection Metric Growth Factor Value
Energy
Residential Electricity Households Electricity Consumption (kWh) per Household
5,502
Non-residential Electricity Employment Electricity Consumption (kWh) per Job 2,148 Residential Natural Gas Households Natural Gas Consumption (therms) per Household
347
Non-residential Natural Gas Employment Natural Gas Consumption (therms) per Job
82 Electricity Transmission and
Distribution Losses (T&D
Losses)
N/A T&D Losses Factor (4.40%) applied to total
Electricity Consumption
N/A
Natural Gas Leakage N/A Leakage Factor (2.30% distribution, 0.50% end-use) applied to total Natural Gas
Consumption
N/A
Transportation
On-Road Passenger Households Vehicle miles travelled (miles) per household
16,306
On-Road Commercial Employment Vehicle miles travelled (miles) per job 396 On-Road Bus Population Serviced Vehicle miles travelled (miles) per population served
39 Off-Road Equipment1 N/A N/A N/A
Wastewater
Wastewater Process and
Fugitive Emissions
Population Serviced Wastewater Process and Fugitive
Emissions (MT CO2e) per population
served

0.0058
Water
Water Consumption Population Serviced Electricity Consumption (kWh) per population served
85 Solid Waste
Solid Waste Disposal Population Serviced Solid Waste Emissions (MT CO2e) per population served

0.2340
Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; kWh = kilowatt-hour; VMT = vehicle miles traveled; N/A = Not Applicable; Population Served = the combined total number of employees and residents in the City

1. Off-road GHG emissions forecasted based on forecasted fuel consumption reported under the CARB OFFROAD2021 Model, available at: https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/5e0cb7d6006cc10661f4b3ffb9c120a486d46ea6 The BAU forecast was calculated using the growth factors in Table 46, the demographic and projection metrics in Table 47, and the 2021 Community GHG Inventory emission factors. In the BAU forecast, GHG emissions are expected to increase through 2045. 390 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

50 Table 47 BAU Forecast Demographic and Projection Metrics by Forecast Year Demographics/
Sector
Data Source 2030 2035 2040 2045
Population SCAG 2016-2040 RTP/SCS
Final Growth Forecast
206,033 209,000 214,000 216,906
Employment SCAG 2016-2040 RTP/SCS
Final Growth Forecast
77,733 79,000 81,100 82,307
Households SCAG 2016-2040 RTP/SCS
Final Growth Forecast
122,733 124,200 127,000 129,946
Population Serviced1 Calculated 328,767 333,200 341,000 346,853

1. Population Serviced1 is calculated as the combined total number of employees and residents in the City.

A summary of the BAU forecast results by GHG emission sector is provided in Table 48.

Table 48 BAU Forecast Results Summary by Emission Sector (MT CO2e) GHG Emissions Sector 2030 2035 2040 2045
Energy 408,073 414,165 424,651 432,074
Transportation 593,032 604,348 621,510 633,037
Waste 76,934 77,972 79,797 81,166
Water 6,752 6,843 7,003 7,124
Wastewater 1,894 1,920 1,965 1,999
Total 1,086,686 1,105,248 1,134,926 1,155,400
Change since 2021 3.19% 4.95% 7.77% 9.71%
Notes: all values are presented in MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

5.2 Adjusted Forecast

5.2.1 Legislative Reduction Programs
Additional legislative programs are expected to reduce GHG emissions in specific sectors throughout California, as identified in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update. Many of these programs were incorporated into the adjusted forecast analysis and are summarized in the subsections below.

Transportation Legislation
Advanced Clean Cars Programs
Prior to 2012, mobile emissions regulations were implemented on a case-by-case basis for GHG and criteria pollutant emissions separately. In January 2012, CARB approved a new emissions-control program (the Advanced Clean Cars program) combining the control of smog, soot causing pollutants, and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package of requirements for passenger cars and light trucks model years 2017 through 2025. The Advanced Clean Cars program coordinates the goals of the Low Emissions Vehicles, Zero Emissions Vehicles, and Clean Fuels Outlet programs, and is more stringent than the federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. The new 391 of 961

GHG Forecast

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 51
standards will reduce California’s GHG emissions by 34% in 2025 which is modeled using the CARB EMission FACtor (EMFAC) Model and included in the GHG forecast.42 Advanced Clean Cars II was approved by CARB in August 2022 and expands the program’s roadmap so that by 2035 all new cars and passenger trucks will be zero-emission vehicles (ZEV). This regulation effectively binds the State to EO N-79-20. The executive order was passed by the governor in 2020 and requires all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be ZEV by 2035.

While these legislations will lead to an expedited timeline for ZEV adoption in California, modeling data is not yet available in CARB’s EMFAC Model, and emissions reductions attributable to the Advanced Clean Cars II program were therefore, excluded from the GHG forecast.

Advanced Clean Trucks was approved by CARB in June 2020 sets a zero emission vehicle (ZEV) percent-of-sales requirement on medium- and heavy- duty vehicle manufacturers to promote increased truck ZEV sale from 2024 to 2035. The standard is intended to reduce NOx pollution and GHG emissions, which are disproportionately high in medium- and heavy-duty vehicle classes compared to passenger vehicles, as well as promote first-wave ZEV truck technology penetration in the market.43 EMFAC models the effect of the Advanced Clean Trucks regulation on ZEV truck penetration and associated GHG emissions and in included in the forecast.

Assembly Bill 1493
Signed into law in 2002, AB 1493 (Pavley Standards) required vehicle manufacturers to reduce GHG emissions from new passenger vehicles and light trucks from 2009 through 2016. Regulations were adopted by CARB in 2004 and took effect in 2009 when the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued a waiver confirming California’s right to implement the bill. CARB anticipates that the Pavley I standard will reduce GHG emissions from new California passenger vehicles by about 30% in 2016, while simultaneously improving fuel efficiency and reducing motorists’ costs.44 The impacts of the Pavley Standards on zero emission vehicle market penetration was incorporated into the EMFAC model starting in 2014 and is included in the forecast assessment.

Innovative Clean Transit
Public transit GHG emissions will be reduced in the future through the Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) regulation, which was adopted in December 2018. It requires all public transit agencies to gradually transition to a 100-percent zero-emission bus fleet by 2040. Under ICT, large transit agencies are expected to adopt Zero-Emission Bus Rollout Plans to establish a roadmap towards zero emission public transit buses.45 The effects of the ICT regulation on GHG emissions are modeled in EMFAC2021 and is therefore included in the forecast.

42 California Air and Resource Board (CARB). 2019. Advanced Clean Cars Summary.. Available at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-12/acc%20summary-final_ac.pdf 43 California Air and Resource Board (CARB). 2023. Advanced Clean Trucks. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our- work/programs/advanced-clean-trucks/about
44 CARB. Clean Car Standards – Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493. May 2013. Accessed November 14, 2022 at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccms/ccms.htm
45 Innovative Clean Transit. Approved August 13, 2019. Accessed November 14, 2022 at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-10/ictfro-Clean-Final_0.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery 392 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

52 Energy Legislation
Title 24
Although it was not originally intended to reduce GHG emissions, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 6: California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, was adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption, which in turn reduces fossil fuel consumption and associated GHG emissions. The standards are updated triennially to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy- efficient technologies and methods. Starting in 2020, new residential developments had to include on-site solar generation and near-zero net energy use. For projects implemented after January 1, 2020, the California Energy Commission (CEC) estimates that the 2019 standards will reduce electricity consumption by 53% for residential buildings and 30% for non-residential buildings, relative to the 2016 standards. The CEC further estimates residential natural gas efficiency increases of 7% for residential end uses.46 No efficiency increases were estimated for commercial natural gas end uses, based on lack of requirements in this sector in the 2019 standards. These percentage savings relate to heating, cooling, lighting, and water heating only and do not include other appliances, outdoor lighting not attached to buildings, plug loads, or other energy uses.

In December 2022 the CEC published the new Title 24 2022 Building Efficiency Standards.47 Due to the complexity of the new code there is currently no available model establishing projected efficiency increase as a result of the standard. Therefore, the updated 2022 code was not included to provide a conservative estimate of forecasted GHG emissions reductions resulting from efficiency increases. Furthermore, the new building electrification ordinance passed by the City of Glendale will be accounted for in the measures and actions in the City’s CAAP.

Renewables Portfolio Standard, Senate Bill 100, & Senate Bill 1020 Established in 2002 under SB 1078, enhanced in 2015 by SB 350, and accelerated for the first time in 2018 under SB 100, California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) is one of the most ambitious renewable energy standards in the country. The RPS program requires investor-owned utilities, publicly owned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 50% of total procurement by 2026 and 60% of total procurement by 2030. The RPS program further that by 2045 that 100% of total energy procured be a combination of eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources.

California’s RPS was further accelerated in 2022 by SB 1020 which established additional requirements that procurement from eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources increase to 90% of total procurement by 2035 and 95% of total procurement by 2040. The requirements of SB 1020 do not affect those previously set forth and are to be considered additional to the existing RPS requirements.

The RPS program and SB 1020 were incorporated into the GHG forecast by adjusting the electricity emissions factors for future years. GWP currently provides electricity in the City and is subject to RPS requirements. GWP’s emissions factor was projected through 2045 assuming compliance with

46 California Energy Commission. 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Frequently Asked Questions. January 1, 2020. Accessed November 8, 2022 at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-03/Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ_ada.pdf 47 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023. 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Available at:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-building-energy-efficiency 393 of 961

GHG Forecast

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 53
the RPS requirements established by SB 100 and SB 1020.48 As GWP currently provides all of Glendale’s electricity at a single supply standard, current and forecasted emissions factors remain the same across residential and nonresidential sectors. As shown in Table 49, the RPS, SB 100, and SB 1020 requirements to reduce overall carbon intensity would reduce the community’s emissions compared to the BAU scenario.

Table 49 Glendale Forecasted RPS and Electricity Emission Factors Metric 2030 2035 2040 2045
GWP Renewables Mix 60% 90% 95% 100%
GWP Emission Factor (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.0001345 0.0000336 0.0000168 0.0000000 Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; kWh = kilowatt hours Waste Legislation
Assembly Bill 939 & Assembly Bill 341
In 2011, AB 341 set the target of 75% recycling, composting, or source reduction of solid waste by 2020 calling for the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (also known as CalRecycle) to take a statewide approach to decreasing California’s reliance on landfills. This target was an update to the former target of 50% waste diversion set by AB 939.

As actions under AB 341 are not assigned to specific local jurisdictions, potential future reductions from the bill were conservatively not included in the GHG forecast analysis.

Assembly Bill 1826
In 2014, AB 1826 set regulations in places requiring California businesses to recycle all of their organic waste starting in April 2016. The bill also required jurisdictions across the State to provide organic waste recycling programs to accommodate diverted waste from local businesses. As the City has already implemented an organics collection program, implementation of AB 1826 compliance is reflected in the City’s community inventory solid waste activity data and is thereby included in the BAU and adjusted forecast
Senate Bill 1383
SB 1383 established a methane emission reduction target for short-lived climate pollutants in various sectors of the economy, including waste. Specifically, SB 1383 establishes targets to achieve a 50% reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75% reduction by 2025.49 Additionally, SB 1383 requires a 20% reduction in “current”50 edible food disposal by 2025. Although SB 1383 has been signed into law, compliance with this Senate Bill

48 CPA provides three electricity services to the community: 100% Green Power, Clean Power, and Lean Power. Since an average emission factor for CPA was not available, emission factors for each service and the proportion of electricity provided through each service were used to calculate CPA-specific emission factors for the residential and nonresidential sectors. 49 CalRecycle. California’s Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy. https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/ 50 SB 1383 does not specify a baseline year for the 20% food recovery target, however, CalRecycle’s 2018 statewide waste characterization studies will be used to help measure the baseline for the State to meet its SB 1383 goals. See CalRecycle FAQ accessed November 14, 2022 for more
information:https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/faq/foodrecovery/#:~:text=SB%201383%20requires%20the%20state,for%20individua l%20jurisdictions%20to%20achieve.
394 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

54 must occur at the jurisdiction-level rather than the state-level. Due to current limitations in local jurisdiction’s ability to comply with organic waste targets set by SB 1383, anticipated emissions reductions attributable to the bill are conservatively excluded from the forecast. However, estimated impacts associated with SB 1383 As such, SB 1383 is not included as part of the GHG forecast analysis and will be included in the GHG reduction measures in the CAAP.

5.2.2 Legislative GHG Emission Reduction Contribution
Based on the above-described legislation and emission reduction potential for each, the City can expect significant help from these State regulations in meeting State GHG emission reduction goals.

These GHG emissions reductions are primarily expected in the energy sector and transportation sectors. In the energy sector, Title 24 reductions were accounted for first, followed by California RPS reductions associated with GWP developments towards renewable electricity. The legislative emissions reductions for Title 24 and California RPS are known to be additive and were calculated separately to avoid double counting. A summary of the reductions from the BAU forecast that can be expected under the adjusted forecast are provided in Table 50.

Table 50 Summary of Legislative GHG Emissions Reductions (MT CO2e) Legislation 2030 2035 2040 2045
California RPS 65,330 148,667 167,261 185,024
Title 24 2,143 3,563 5,745 7,229
Transportation Legislation (Pavley, Innovative Clean Transit, etc.) 86,295 117,697 139,097 149,759 Total 153,768 269,927 312,103 342,012
Notes: all values are presented in MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

5.2.3 Adjusted Forecast Results
In the adjusted forecast, the electricity sector experiences a strong downward trend, approaching zero in 2045 due to stringent RPS requirements from SB 100 and SB 1020. Natural gas emissions are expected to continue on an upward trajectory until 2045 due to housing and employment growth projections. This trend is partially offset due to the increasingly stringent efficiency requirements for new residential construction from Title 24. On-road transportation emissions are expected to decrease through 2045 due to existing fuel efficiency requirements, fleet turnover rates, and increasing vehicle electrification driven by the electric vehicle market. As most current regulations expire in 2025 or 2030, emissions standards will experience diminishing returns while VMT continues to increase, leading to lower rates of emissions reduction in the on-road transportation sector. Wastewater and solid waste emissions are projected to increase through 2045 while water emissions experience a downward trend to zero due to the sector’s direct ties to emissions from electricity consumption. A detailed summary of the projected GHG emissions under the adjusted forecast by sector and year through 2045 can be found in Table 51. 395 of 961

GHG Forecast

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 55
Table 51 Adjusted Forecast Results (MT CO2e)
GHG Emissions Source 2021 2030 2035 2040 2045
Residential Electricity 94,400 59,320 14,955 7,576 0
Non-residential Electricity 58,600 36,830 9,300 4,731 0 Residential Natural Gas 177,328 182,311 185,079 189,669 192,307 Non-residential Natural Gas 66,778 68,246 69,061 70,618 72,256 Energy Sector Total 397,105 346,706 278,396 272,595 264,564 On-road Passenger Vehicles 438,021 378,405 360,764 359,133 359,691 On-road Commercial
Vehicles
56,989 47,255 41,066 37,340 36,082
On-road Buses 26,791 21,608 15,208 9,506 5,288
Off-road Equipment 50,732 56,077 58,974 61,964 64,598
Transportation Sector Total 572,532 503,346 476,012 467,944 465,659 Waste 75,067 76,934 77,972 79,797 81,166
Water 6,588 4,037 1,023 523 0
Wastewater 1,848 1,894 1,920 1,965 1,999
Total GHG Emissions 1,053,141 932,917 835,322 822,824 813,388 Notes: all values are presented in MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent 396 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

56 6 Provisional GHG Emissions Targets
GHG reduction targets are used in climate action planning to establish metrics that guide the community’s commitment to achieve GHG emissions reductions and help gauge progress reducing emissions over time. California has established statewide GHG reduction goals for 2030 and 2045, relative to a baseline emissions level. CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan encourages local agencies to take ambitious, coordinated climate action that is consistent with and supportive of the state’s climate goals51. Thus, local agencies are recommended to establish equivalent reduction targets at the local level by establishing community wide GHG reduction goals for climate action that will help California achieve its 2030 and 2045 goals. CARB has issued several guidance documents concerning the establishment of GHG emission reduction targets for CAAPs to comply with legislated GHG emissions reductions targets and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines § 15183.5(b). Even if a plan is not CEQA-qualified, CARB has long recommended that local targets be a part of the process of developing, monitoring, and updating a CAAP.

In the most recent 2022 Scoping Plan, typical target years listed include 2030 (for Senate Bill 32 consistency) and 2045 (for Assembly Bill 1279 consistency).52 Senate Bill (SB) 32 mandates a reduction of GHG emissions by 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 and Assembly Bill (AB) 1279 mandates a State goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 through a reduction of anthropogenic GHG emissions by 85% below 1990 levels. AB 1279 sets a 15% target for GHG emissions reductions to be achieved through carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) methods, though does not provide a clear pathway as to how CCS technology is to be implemented to achieve said reductions. Therefore, provisional targets established herein align with the carbon neutrality goal set by AB 1279 until a clear mechanism for CCS reductions is established by the State.

Pursuant to the Scoping Plan’s recommendations, the community GHG reduction targets will be developed based on local levels of GHG emissions that would be proportional to the statewide goals, relative to 1990 level emissions.

6.1 1990 Level GHG Emissions Back-cast
The City does not have a 1990 GHG emissions inventory from which to develop GHG reduction targets consistent with SB 32, however, 1990 GHG emissions can be estimated for the community relative to the City’s 2021 Community GHG Inventory using a state-level emissions change metric.

The City’s 1990 GHG emissions have been calculated using the State’s 2020 GHG emissions inventory as compared to the State’s GHG emissions inventory in 1990 to calculate specific percent reduction in the City between 2021 and 1990. This approach assumes that the City’s community GHG emissions have generally tracked with the State’s GHG emissions. The calculation is developed using the published State-wide emissions results from CARB53, after removing emissions from

51 California Air Resources Board. 2022. California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan, p.268. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023-04/2022-sp.pdf 52 California Air Resources Board. 2022. California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan, Appendix D – Local Actions, p. 14. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023-04/2022-sp.pdf 53 California Air Resources Board. 2023. California GHG Emission Inventory Program. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023- 04/2022-sp.pdf
397 of 961

Provisional GHG Emissions Targets

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 57
sectors not included in the City’s inventory (e.g., agriculture, aviation, non-specified, industrial) and excluding GHGs other than CO2, CH4, and N2O consistent with the City’s 2021 inventory scope. The 1990 back-cast for the City is shown in Table 52.

Table 52 990 Back-cast Calculations
1990 Back-cast Calculations
2020 Statewide GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) 219,786,184
1990 Statewide GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) 281,648,899
2020 to 1990 Statewide GHG Emissions Change (%) 22%
2021 City GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) 1,053,141
1990 City GHG Emissions Back-cast (MT CO2e) 1,349,567
1990 City Population 180,038
1990 City Per Capita GHG Emissions Back-cast (MT CO2e/person) 7.50

6.2 GHG Emissions Reduction Target Setting
Target setting is an iterative process which must be informed by the reductions that can realistically be achieved through the development of feasible GHG reduction measures. As such, the targets identified herein should remain provisional until the quantification and analysis of potential GHG reduction measures has been completed. The purpose of target setting is to develop the trajectory toward achieving the State’s 2030 goal (SB 32) and prepare for the deep decarbonization needed by 2045 in a cost-effective manner by setting an incremental path toward achieving AB 1279 targets.

CARB guidance is for jurisdictions to first strive to exceed the SB 32 targets of reducing GHG emissions 40% below 1990 levels, while establishing a policy framework to achieve the long-term target of neutrality 1990 by 2045.

Achieving the established targets will require major shifts in how communities within California obtain and use energy, transport themselves and goods, and how the population lives and builds.

The CEQA Guidelines section 15183.5(b) requires qualified GHG reduction plans (which allow for CEQA streamlining) to “Establish a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to greenhouse gas emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively considerable”.54 A defensible way (shown through litigation) to identify such levels is to demonstrate consistency with State targets. To maintain consistency with State targets, Glendale’s provisional GHG emissions reduction targets are:
• Reduce GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 (SB 32 target year) • Make substantial progress towards carbon neutrality by 2045 (AB 1279 target year) With GHG emission reduction targets in place, the reduction gap that the City will be responsible for through local action can be calculated. The City’s GHG emissions reduction gap is based on the difference between the adjusted forecast, discussed previously, and the established GHG emission reduction targets. Table 53 provides a summary of the GHG emission reduction targets and gap in mass emissions. Although per capita, plan-level GHG emissions targets were recommended in the

54 https://casetext.com/regulation/california-code-of-regulations/title-14-natural-resources/division-6-resources-agency/chapter-3- guidelines-for-implementation-of-the-california-environmental-quality-act/article-12-special-situations/section-151835-tiering-and- streamlining-the-analysis-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions
398 of 961

City of Glendale
Glendale Climate Action / Adaptation Plan

58 2017 Scoping Plan to incentivize growth in a coordinated manner and not penalize cities which are growing at significant rates55, CARB now recommends, in the 2022 Scoping Plan, that jurisdictions focus on developing locally appropriate, plan-level targets (community-wide mass emissions targets) that align with the trajectory to carbon neutrality instead of focusing on a per capita targets56.

Therefore, only mass emissions targets are considered in this analysis as a metric for the City to track progress toward target achievement.

Table 53 GHG Emissions Reduction Targets and Gap Analysis Emissions Forecast or Pathway 2021 2030 2035 2040 2045
Mass Emissions Target Pathway Scenario [MT CO2e]
Adjusted Forecast 1,053,141 932,917 835,322 822,824 813,387 SB 32 Mass Emissions Target Pathway1 1,053,141 809,740 539,827 269,913 0 Remaining Emissions Gap 0 123,177 295,495 552,910 813,387 Notes: MT CO2e = Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent Emissions have been rounded to the nearest whole number and therefore sums may not match.

1. The target pathway is calculated by reducing 1990 mass emissions by 40% in 2030 and to 0 in 2045. This provisional target pathway is consistent with both SB 32 and a trajectory set forth to achieve AB 1279.

2. The target pathway is calculated by reducing 1990 per capita emissions by 40% in 2030 and to 0 in 2045. This provisional target pathway is consistent with both SB 32 and a trajectory set forth to achieve AB 1279.

Figure 3 provides a visual representation of future GHG emissions, with the impacts of State legislation and the remaining gap the City will be responsible for to meet the GHG emission reduction targets set by the State. The figure also includes a linear reduction pathway to neutrality as the City is anticipated to be able to achieve reductions on a mass emissions to meet SB 32 targets.

55 California Air Resources Board. 2017. California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan, p. 99-102. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf 56 California Air Resources Board. 2022. California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan, Appendix D – Local Actions, p.13. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023-04/2022-sp.pdf 399 of 961

Provisional GHG Emissions Targets

Greenhouse Gas Inventory, Forecast, Targets Report 59
Figure 3 GHG Emissions Forecast and Provisional Target Pathways (Mass Emissions)

400 of 961

Appendix D
Climate Change Legislation
401 of 961

Page 1 ends

Climate Change Legislation Summary
As the impacts of climate change become more apparent, numerous strategies to address climate change have emerged across all levels of government. This section provides an overview of international, state, and local legislation relative to the City of Glendale’s actions for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

International Climate Action Guidance
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992) The primary international regulatory framework for GHG reduction is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Paris Agreement (UNFCCC). The UNFCCC is an international treaty adopted in 1992 with the objective of stabilizing atmospheric GHG concentrations to prevent disruptive anthropogenic climate change. The framework established non-binding limits on global GHG emissions and specified a process for negotiating future international climate-related agreements.1 Kyoto Protocol (1997)
The Kyoto Protocol is an international treaty that was adopted in 1997 to extend and operationalize the UNFCCC. The protocol commits industrialized nations to reduce GHG emissions per country-specific targets, recognizing that they hold responsibility for existing atmospheric GHG levels. The Kyoto Protocol involves two commitment periods during which emissions reductions are to occur, the first of which took place between 2008-2012 and the second of which has not entered into force.2 Disaster Mitigation Act (2000)
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)’s Disaster Mitigation Act intends to “reduce the loss of life and property, human suffering, economic disruption, and disaster assistance costs resulting from natural disasters.” 3 Under this legislation, state, tribal, and local governments must develop a hazard mitigation plan as a condition for receiving certain types of non-emergency disaster assistance through the Hazard Mitigation Assistance Program.4
The Paris Agreement (2015)
The Paris Agreement is the first-ever universal, legally binding global climate agreement that was adopted in 2015 and has been ratified by 190 countries worldwide.5 The Paris Agreement establishes a roadmap to keep the world under 2° C of warming with a goal of limiting an increase of temperature to

1.5° C. The agreement does not dictate one specific reduction target, instead relying on individual countries to set nationally determined contributions (NDCs) or reductions based on GDP and other

1 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/background_publications_htmlpdf/application/pdf/conveng.pdf 2 UNFCCC. What is the Kyoto Protocol? https://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol 3 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020- 11/fema_disaster-mitigation-act-of-2000_10-30-2000.pdf
4 FEMA. Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants. https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation 5 UNFCCC. Paris Agreement - Status of Ratification. https://unfccc.int/process/the-paris-agreement/status-of-ratification 402 of 961

Page 2 ends

factors. According to the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) limiting global warming to 1.5° C will require global emissions be reduced through 2030 and hit carbon neutrality by mid-century.6 Glasgow Climate Pact (2021)
The Glasgow Climate Pact7 (Pact) was adopted by nearly 200 nations in 2021 and builds on the 2015 Paris Agreement. The Pact includes an agreement to revisit the emissions reduction plans to keep the

1.5°C target achievable and is the first global climate agreement that commits to phasing down the use of unabated coal. Further, the Pact includes a commitment to provide climate finance to developing countries.

California Regulations and State GHG Targets
California remains a global leader in the eﬀort to reduce GHG emissions and combat climate change through its mitigation and adaptation strategies. With the passage of Assembly Bill (AB) 32 in 2006, California became the ﬁrst state in the United States to mandate GHG emission reductions across its entire economy. To support AB 32, California has enacted legislation, regulations, and executive orders (EO) that put it on course to achieve robust emission reductions and address the impacts of a changing climate. The following is a summary of executive and legislative actions most relevant to the City of Glendale’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP).

Senate Bill 1078 (2002)
In 2002, (Senate Bill) SB 1078 established the California Renewables Portfolio Standards (RPS) Program and was accelerated in 2006 by SB 107, requiring that 20 percent of retail electricity sales be composed of renewable energy sources by 2010. EO S-14-08 was signed in 2008 to further streamline California's renewable energy project approval process and increase the State's RPS to the most aggressive in the nation at 33 percent renewable power by 2020.

Assembly Bill 1493 (2002)
In 2002, the California State Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 1493 (aka “the Pavley Bill”), which directs CARB to adopt standards that will achieve "the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions from motor vehicles," considering environmental, social, technological, and economic factors.

In September 2009, CARB adopted amendments to the “Pavley” regulations to reduce GHG emissions in new passenger vehicles from 2009 through 2016. The Pavley Bill is considered to be the national model for vehicle emissions standards. In January of 2012, CARB approved a new emissions control program for vehicle model years 2017 through 2025. The program combines the control of smog, soot, and GHGs and the requirement for greater numbers of zero emission vehicles into a single package of standards called Advanced Clean Cars.

Executive Order S-3-05 (2005)
EO S-3-05 was signed in 2005 establishing statewide GHG emissions reduction targets for the years 2020 and 2050. The EO calls for the reduction of GHG emissions in California to 2000 levels by 2010, 1990 levels by 2020, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. The 2050 emission reductions target would

6 IPCC. Global Warming of 1.5 C. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ 7 UNFCCC. Glasgow Climate Pact. https://unfccc.int/documents/310475 403 of 961

Page 3 ends

put the State’s emissions in line with the worldwide reductions needed to reach long-term climate stabilization as concluded by the IPCC 2007 Fourth Assessment Report.

Assembly Bill 32 (2006)
California’s major initiative for reducing GHG emissions is outlined in AB 32, the “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” which was signed into law in 2006. AB 32 codifies the statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and requires CARB to prepare a Scoping Plan that outlines the main state strategies for reducing GHG emissions to meet the 2020 deadline. In addition, AB 32 requires CARB to adopt regulations to require reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions.

Based on this guidance, CARB approved a 1990 statewide GHG baseline and 2020 emissions limit of 427 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent (MMT CO2e). The Scoping Plan was approved by CARB on December 11, 2008, and included measures to address GHG emission reduction strategies related to energy efficiency, water use, and recycling and solid waste, among other measures. Many of the GHG reduction measures included in the Scoping Plan (e.g., Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Advanced Clean Car standards,8 and Cap-and-Trade) have been adopted since approval of the Scoping Plan.

In May 2014, CARB approved the first update to the AB 32 Scoping Plan. The 2014 Scoping Plan update defined CARB’s climate change priorities for the next five years and set the groundwork to reach post- 2020 statewide goals. The update highlighted California’s progress toward meeting the “near-term” 2020 GHG emission reduction goals defined in the original Scoping Plan. It also evaluated how to align the State’s longer-term GHG reduction strategies with other State policy priorities, including those for water, waste, natural resources, clean energy, transportation, and land use.

Senate Bill 107 (2006)
SB 107 builds on SB 1078 and requires investor-owned utilities, energy service providers, and Community Choice Aggregations to procure an additional 1 percent of retail sales per year from eligible renewable sources until 20 percent is reached, no later than 2010. The California Public Utilities Commission and California Energy Commission are jointly responsible for implementing the program.

Executive Order S-1-07 (2007)
Also known as the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, EO S-1-07, issued in 2007, established a statewide goal that requires transportation fuel providers to reduce the carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. EO S-1-07 was readopted and amended in 2015 to require a 20 percent reduction in carbon intensity by 2030, the most stringent requirement in the nation. The new requirement aligns with California’s overall 2030 target of reducing climate changing emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, which was set by SB 32 and signed by the governor in 2016.

Senate Bill 97 (2007)
Signed in August 2007, SB 97 acknowledges that climate change is an environmental issue that requires analysis in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents. In March 2010, the California

8 On September 19, 2019 the National Highway Traffic Safety Agency (NHTSA) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a final action entitled the One National Program on Federal Preemption of State Fuel Economy Standards Rule. This action finalizes Part I of the Safer, Affordable, Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule. This rule states that federal law preempts State and local tailpipe greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards as well as zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandates. The SAFE Rule withdraws the Clean Air Act waiver it granted to California in January 2013 as it relates to California’s GHG and zero emission vehicle programs. 404 of 961

Page 4 ends

Natural Resources Agency adopted amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions. The adopted guidelines give lead agencies the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the assessment and mitigation of GHG and climate change impacts.

Senate Bill 375 (2008)
SB 375, signed in August 2008, enhances the State’s ability to reach AB 32 goals by directing CARB to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved from passenger vehicles by 2020 and 2035. In addition, SB 375 directs each of the State’s 18 major Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to prepare a “sustainable communities strategy” (SCS) that contains a growth strategy to meet these emission targets for inclusion in the MPO’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).

Executive Order S-14-08 (2008)
EO S-14-08 was issued in 2008 and sets a statewide target of 33 percent renewable energy use by 2020.

California Green Building Code (2009)
The California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) is Part 11 of the California Building Standards Code or Title 24 and is the ﬁrst statewide “green” building code in the nation. The purpose of CALGreen is to improve public health, safety, and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings. Enhancements include reduced negative impact designs, positive environmental impact designs, and encouragement of sustainable construction practices. The ﬁrst CALGreen Code was adopted in 2009 and has been updated in 2013, 2016, and 2019. The CALGreen Code will have subsequent, and continually more stringent, updates every three years.

Senate Bill X7-7 (2009)
In 2009, SB X7-7, also known as the Water Conservation Act, was signed, requiring all water suppliers to increase water use eﬃciency. This legislation sets an overall goal of reducing per capita urban water use by 20 percent by 2020.

Senate Bill 2X (2011)
In 2011, SB 2X was signed, requiring California energy providers to buy (or generate) 33 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources by 2020.

Assembly Bill 341 (2012)
AB 341 directed the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to develop and adopt regulations for mandatory commercial recycling. As of July 2012, businesses were required to recycle, and jurisdictions had to implement a program that includes education, outreach, and monitoring. AB 341 also set a statewide goal of 75 percent waste diversion by the year 2020.

Senate Bill 743 (2013)
SB 743 introduces a new performance metric, vehicle miles traveled (VMT), as a basis for determining significant transportation impacts under CEQA. Projects that are projected to increase VMT may mitigate their impacts through measures such as car-sharing services, unbundled parking, improved transit, and enhanced pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. 405 of 961

Page 5 ends

Assembly Bill 32 Scoping Plan Update (2014)
In 2014, CARB approved the ﬁrst update to the Scoping Plan. This update deﬁnes CARB’s climate change priorities and sets the groundwork to reach the post-2020 targets set forth in EO S-3-05. The update highlights California’s progress toward meeting the near-term 2020 GHG emissions reduction target, deﬁned in the original Scoping Plan. It also evaluates how to align California’s longer-term GHG reduction strategies with other statewide policy priorities, such as water, waste, natural resources, clean energy, transportation, and land use.

Assembly Bill 1826 (2014)
AB 1826 was signed in 2014 to increase the recycling of organic material. GHG emissions produced by the decomposition of these materials in landfills were identified as a significant source of emissions contributing to climate change. Therefore, reducing organic waste and increasing composting and mulching are goals set out by the AB 32 Scoping Plan. AB 1826 specifically requires jurisdictions to establish organic waste recycling programs by 2016, and phases in mandatory commercial organic waste recycling over time.

Senate Bill 350 (2015)
SB 350, the Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015, has two objectives: to increase the procurement of electricity from renewable sources from 33 percent to 50 percent by 2030 and to double the energy eﬃciency of electricity and natural gas end users through energy eﬃciency and conservation.

Executive Order B-30-15 (2015)
In 2015, EO B-30-15 was signed, establishing an interim GHG emissions reduction target to reduce emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The EO also calls for another update to the CARB Scoping Plan.

Senate Bill 32 (2016)
On September 8, 2016, the governor signed SB 32 into law, extending AB 32 by requiring the State to further reduce GHGs to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (the other provisions of AB 32 remain unchanged). The bill charges CARB to adopt the regulation so that the maximum technologically feasible emissions reductions are achieved in the most cost-effective way.

Senate Bill 1383 (2016)
Adopted in September 2016, SB 1383 requires CARB to approve and begin implementing a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants. The bill requires the strategy to achieve the following reduction targets by 2030:
▪ Methane – 40 percent below 2013 levels
▪ Hydrofluorocarbons – 40 percent below 2013 levels
▪ Anthropogenic black carbon – 50 percent below 2013 levels SB 1383 also requires CalRecycle, in consultation with the CARB, to adopt regulations that achieve specified targets for reducing organic waste in landfills. The bill further requires 20 percent of edible food disposed of at the time to be recovered by 2025.
406 of 961

Page 6 ends

Scoping Plan Update (2017)
On December 14, 2017, CARB adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan, which provides a framework for achieving the 2030 goal set by SB 32. The 2017 Scoping Plan relies on the continuation and expansion of existing policies and regulations, such as the Cap-and-Trade Program, as well as implementation of recently adopted policies, such as SB 350 and SB 1383 .

The 2017 Scoping Plan also puts an increased emphasis on innovation, adoption of existing technology, and strategic investment to support its strategies. As with the 2014 Scoping Plan Update, the 2017 Scoping Plan does not provide project-level thresholds for land use development. Instead, it recommends that local governments adopt policies and locally appropriate quantitative thresholds consistent with statewide per capita goals of six metric tons (MT) CO2e by 2030 and two MT CO2e by 2050. As stated in the 2017 Scoping Plan, these goals may be appropriate for plan-level analyses (city, county, subregional, or regional level), but not for specific individual projects because they include all emissions sectors in the State (CARB 2017).

Senate Bill 100 (2018)
Adopted on September 10, 2018, SB 100 supports the reduction of GHG emissions from the electricity sector by accelerating the state’s RSP Program, which was last updated by SB 350 in 2015. SB 100 requires electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045.

Executive Order B-55-18 (2018)
On September 10, 2018, the governor issued Executive Order B-55-18, which established a new statewide goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and maintaining net negative emissions thereafter. This goal is in addition to the existing statewide GHG reduction targets established by SB 375, SB 32, SB 1383, and SB 100.

Assembly Bill 2127 (2018)
AB 2127 directs the California Energy Commission (CEC) to prepare and biennially update a statewide assessment of the electric vehicle charging infrastructure needed to support the levels of electric vehicle adoption for the state to meet its goal of putting at least five million zero-emission vehicles on California roads by 2030.

Innovative Clean Transit Rule (2018)
The Innovative Clean Transit Rule, adopted by CARB in 2018, requires public transit agencies to gradually transition to 100% zero-emissions bus fleets by 2040. This regulation applies to all transit agencies that own, operate, or lease buses with gross vehicle weight rating above 14,000 pounds.

Executive Order N-79-20 (2020)
On September 23, 2020, the governor issued EO N-79-20, which sets new statewide goals for phasing out gasoline-powered cars and trucks in California, which is applicable to state agencies. The EO requires 100% of in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks to be zero-emission by 2035; 100% of in-state sales of medium- and heavy-duty trucks and busses to be zero-emission by 2045, where feasible; and 100% of off-road vehicles and equipment sales to be zero-emission by 2035, where feasible. 407 of 961

Page 7 ends

Advanced Clean Trucks Rule (2020)
The Advanced Clean Trucks Rule, adopted by CARB in June 2020, requires manufacturers of heavy-duty, on-road trucks to sell an increasing number of zero-emission trucks. By 2035, zero-emission truck/chassis sales would need to be 55% of Class 2b to 3 truck sales, 75% of Class 4 to 8 vocational truck sales, and 40% of Class 7 to 8 truck tractor sales.

Senate Bill 27 (2021)
Adopted on September 23, 2021, SB 27 requires the state Natural Resources Agency to establish carbon sequestration goals for natural and working lands by July 2023. SB 27 also requires the Natural Resources Agency to create a registry of projects for public and private investment and track the carbon benefits of each project. The projects that would be part of this program may not generate compliance offsets under California’s Cap-and-Trade program. Additionally, as part of the next Scoping Plan Update, CARB is required to establish specific CO2 removal targets starting in 2030.

Senate Bill 379 (2022)
Adopted September 16, 2022, SB 379 requires cities and counties to implement an online, automated permitting platform to verify solar installation code compliance and issue permits in real time for residential solar energy systems no larger than 38.4 kilowatt hours.

Senate Bill 1020 (2022)
Adopted September 16, 2022, SB 1020 expedites the previous goals established by SB 100, by establishing a clean electricity goal for end-use customers of 90% by 2035, and 95% by 2040.

Additionally, SB 1020 requires 100% of all electricity procured to serve all state agencies to be clean energy by December 31, 2035.

Senate Bill 1063 (2022)
Adopted September 16, 2022, SB 1063 creates appliance efficiency standards set by the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, which may now take effect sooner than one year after their adoption/revision. SB 1063 builds on Title 20 efficiency standards enforced through the California Energy Commission and first adopted in 1977.

Assembly Bill 1909 (2022)
Adopted September 16, 2022, AB 1909 removes prohibition of operating motorized electric bicycles or Class 3 bikes on bicycle paths or trails, bikeways, or bicycle lanes. However, the bill also includes an exemption for the Department of Parks and Recreation, which may prohibit these classes of bicycles on any bicycle path or trail within the department’s jurisdiction, where appropriate.

Assembly Bill 1857 (2022)
Adopted September 16, 2022, AB 1857 amends various sections of the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, which required jurisdictions to divert 50% of solid waste through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities, with no more than 10% through transformation. AB 1857 repeals the provision that jurisdictions may divert 10% through transformation (e.g., incineration).

Additionally, AB 1857 requires the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery to establish the Zero-Waste Equity Grant Program to support targeted strategies and investments in communities transitioning to zero-waste circular economies.
408 of 961

Page 8 ends

Assembly Bill 1985 (2022)
Adopted September 16, 2022, AB 1985 establishes penalties applied to jurisdictions for not meeting SB 1383 requirements. Penalty will be based on the percentage of the target the jurisdiction was able to achieve.

Assembly Bill 1279 (2022)
In September 2022, AB 1279 (e.g., the California Climate Crisis Act) was approved, which established a legally binding requirement for California to achieve and maintain carbon neutrality no later than 2045.

Assembly Bill 1279 also established the requirement to achieve a Statewide reduction in GHG emissions of 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045. This indicates that the remaining 15 percent to achieve carbon neutrality can be achieved via carbon sequestration and other non-direct-GHG-emissions-reductions techniques.
2022 Scoping Plan Update (2022)
In response to the passage of AB 1279 and the identification of the 2045 GHG reduction target, CARB adopted the Final 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan in November 2022. The 2022 Update builds upon the framework established by the 2008 Climate Change Scoping Plan and previous updates while identifying new, technologically feasible, cost-effective, and equity-focused paths to achieve California’s climate goals. The 2022 Update includes policies to achieve a significant reduction in fossil fuel combustion, further reductions in short-lived climate pollutants, support for sustainable development, increased action in natural working lands to reduce emissions and sequester carbon, and the capture and storage of carbon. The 2022 Update assesses the progress California is making toward reducing its GHG emissions by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, as called for in SB 32 and laid out in the 2017 Scoping Plan, addresses recent legislation and direction from Governor Newsom, extends and expands upon these earlier plans, and implements a goal of reducing anthropogenic emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045, as well as taking an additional step of adding carbon neutrality as a science-based guide for California’s climate work.9
Advanced Clean Cars II (2022)
By 2035 all new passenger cars, trucks and SUVs sold in California will be zero emission vehicles. The Advanced Clean Cars II regulations take the state’s already growing zero-emission vehicle market and robust motor vehicle emission control rules and augments them to meet more aggressive tailpipe emissions standards and ramp up to 100% zero-emission vehicles.

Senate Bill 1020 (2022)
SB 1020, also known as the Clean Energy, Jobs, and Affordability Act of 2022, would build off of existing laws and require that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon resources supply 90% of all retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers by December 31, 2035, 95% of all retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers by December 31, 2040, 100% of all retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers by December 31, 2045, and 100% of electricity procured to serve all state agencies by December 31, 2035, as specified.

9 CARB. 2022. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/2022-sp.pdf 409 of 961

Page 9 ends

Assembly Bill 2684 (2024)
Adopted September 30, 2024, AB 2684 requires cities and counties to update the Safety Element chapter of the general Plan after January 1, 2028, to address extreme heat hazards.

Senate Bill 1221 (2024)
Adopted September 25, 2024, SB 1221, also known as Empowering neighborhood-scale decarbonization for a cleaner, safer future, will create long-term energy affordability for Californians, reduce emissions from the state’s building stock, and create an equitable transition toward carbon neutrality by 2045.

Signed by Governor Gavin Newsom, this legislation authorizes the California Public Utilities Commission to create up to 30 “neighborhood decarbonization zones.” In these zones, communities can transition from gas to zero-emissions alternatives, such as electric heating and cooking appliances.

Regional Regulations and Sustainability Plans
South Coast Air Quality Management District Rules and Regulations The SCAQMD implements rules and regulations for emissions that may be generated by various uses and activities. The rules and regulations detail pollution-reduction measures that must be implemented during construction and operation of projects. Rules and regulations relevant to the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) include the following:
▪ Rule 2202 (On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options): This rule promotes strategies to reduce vehicle emissions, improving air quality and reducing urban heat island effects. ▪ Rule 2702 (Greenhouse Gas Reduction Program): This rule encourages emission reductions, supporting CAAP measures on climate resilience and carbon sequestration.

Air Quality Management Plan (2022)
SCAQMD’s 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) is the region’s comprehensive strategy to meet federal air quality standards by reducing emissions from transportation, industry, and other sources. The plan focuses on reducing nitrogen oxides (NOx), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and particulate matter (PM), which contribute to poor air quality and climate change.

Connect SoCal 2024 (2024)
Connect SoCal 2020 is SCAG’s Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS)/ RTP. Connect SoCal is a long- term plan for the Southern California region that details investment in our transportation system and development in our communities to meet the needs of the region both today and tomorrow. The horizon year for Connect SoCal is 2050. Connect SoCal identifies strategies for improving the transportation system such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) through investment in clean transportation infrastructure, improving the multimodal transportation system, providing equitable access to transportation options, and connecting communities.

Regional Climate Adaptation Framework (2021)
SCAG developed the Regional Climate Adaptation Framework to provide Southern California cities with tools and strategies to build resilience against climate change impacts such as extreme heat, wildfires, and flooding. The framework offers data resources, best practices, and policy guidance to help local jurisdictions integrate adaptation into planning efforts. 410 of 961

Page 10 ends

Los Angeles County Sustainability Plan (2019)
The OurCounty Plan is Los Angeles County’s long-term sustainability framework, establishing goals for achieving carbon neutrality by 2045, improving air and water quality, increasing renewable energy use, and enhancing climate resilience. It includes ambitious targets for electrification, sustainable land use, and equitable climate action.

Metro Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (2019)
Metro’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan sets a roadmap to reduce emissions from public transit operations and transportation projects. The plan establishes strategies for transitioning Metro’s fleet to zero-emission vehicles, expanding sustainable mobility options, and integrating climate resilience into transportation infrastructure.

Los Angeles County Climate Vulnerability Assessment (2021) The Los Angeles County Climate Vulnerability Assessment examines the region's susceptibility to various climate hazards, including extreme heat, wildfires, flooding, and drought. The assessment evaluates both social and physical vulnerabilities, highlighting how these climate impacts disproportionately affect different communities and sub-populations within the county. The report emphasizes the importance of equity in addressing these challenges, noting that certain areas and groups are more susceptible due to factors such as socioeconomic status, existing health disparities, and infrastructure quality. The findings aim to identify strategies to enhance the County's resilience against the increasing severity and frequency of climate-related events.

City of Glendale Sustainability Plans and Policies
The City of Glendale has established initiatives related to increasing adaptive capacity and reducing GHG emissions and the potential impacts of climate change. These initiatives are primarily detailed through the City’s Office of Sustainability, Greener Glendale Plan, General Plan (Open Space and Conservation Element, Air Quality Element), Bicycle Transportation Plan, Pedestrian Plan, Glendale Water and Power (GWP)’s Integrated Resource Plan (IRP), and the City’s Sustainability Commission, each of which is discussed in detail below.

Office of Sustainability
The City has an Office of Sustainability dedicated to promoting sustainable practices and policies. This office oversees the development and implementation of the CAAP and other environmental initiatives.

Greener Glendale Plan
Adopted in 2012, the Greener Glendale Plan is a comprehensive sustainability initiative aimed at reducing the city's environmental impact and fostering a greener future. It focuses on energy efficiency, renewable energy, and waste diversion to cut greenhouse gas emissions and reduce reliance on fossil fuels. The plan includes initiatives such as improving public transit, expanding green infrastructure, and encouraging sustainable building practices. It also emphasizes community engagement and education to foster local support and participation in sustainability efforts. Overall, the plan outlines a strategy for making Glendale a climate-resilient, environmentally-friendly city by 2035. 411 of 961

Page 11 ends

General Plan – Open Space and Conservation Element
Glendale's Open Space and Conservation Element aims to protect and enhance the city's natural resources and open spaces for future generations. It focuses on preserving the ecological integrity of parks, wildlife habitats, and riparian corridors, while promoting sustainable land use practices. The element also emphasizes the importance of conserving water, energy, and other resources to support the community's long-term environmental health. It seeks to increase public access to open space through improved trails, parks, and recreational opportunities. Ultimately, the element serves as a guide to maintaining Glendale's environmental balance while fostering a connection between residents and the natural environment.

General Plan – Air Quality Element
Glendale's Air Quality Element focuses on improving and maintaining the city's air quality to protect public health and the environment. It outlines strategies to reduce emissions from transportation, industrial sources, and residential activities, with an emphasis on promoting cleaner energy and sustainable transportation options. The element also highlights the importance of monitoring air quality and collaborating with regional agencies to address air pollution issues. It includes measures to mitigate the impacts of climate change, such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing energy efficiency. Overall, the element seeks to create a healthier, cleaner environment for Glendale residents by reducing air pollution and improving air quality management practices.

Bicycle Transportation Plan
The Bicycle Transportation Plan aims to create a safer, more accessible environment for cyclists in Glendale. It focuses on expanding the city's bike lane network, improving bike safety infrastructure, and promoting cycling as an alternative mode of transportation. The plan includes initiatives to integrate biking with public transit options, making it easier for residents to use bicycles for commuting. It also addresses bike parking and storage needs to encourage greater bike use throughout the city. Ultimately, the plan strives to increase cycling ridership, reduce traffic congestion, and contribute to the city's sustainability goals.

Glendale's Pedestrian Plan
Glendale's Pedestrian Plan seeks to enhance pedestrian safety, accessibility, and mobility throughout the city. It focuses on creating a network of safe, walkable routes that connect key destinations, such as schools, parks, and commercial areas. The plan includes recommendations for improved sidewalks, crosswalks, and traffic calming measures to protect pedestrians. It also prioritizes addressing barriers to mobility for people with disabilities and enhancing pedestrian-friendly urban design. The overall goal is to promote walking as a healthy, convenient, and sustainable transportation option for all residents.

Glendale Water and Power’s Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) Glendale Water and Power’s Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) outlines strategies for ensuring a reliable, affordable, and sustainable supply of water and energy for the city’s residents. The IRP includes measures to reduce the environmental impact of energy generation and water use by increasing the adoption of renewable energy sources and water conservation practices. It emphasizes long-term planning to address challenges such as population growth, climate change, and aging infrastructure. The plan also sets goals for improving energy efficiency, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and enhancing 412 of 961

Page 12 ends

the resilience of the city's water and power systems. By implementing the IRP, Glendale aims to create a more sustainable and resilient utility system for the future.

Sustainability Commission
Glendale’s Sustainability Commission is responsible for advising the city on policies and initiatives that promote environmental sustainability and climate resilience. The commission works to support the development of programs focused on energy efficiency, waste reduction, water conservation, and green building practices. It also plays a key role in fostering community engagement and educating residents about sustainable practices. The commission collaborates with local agencies and organizations to implement sustainability goals and monitor progress. Through its efforts, the Sustainability Commission aims to make Glendale a leader in environmental stewardship and sustainability. 413 of 961

Appendix E
Measure Substantial Evidence Report
414 of 961

Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions
Technical Report
prepared for
City of Glendale
Office of Sustainability
613 E. Broadway
Glendale, California 91206
Contact: David Jones, Sustainability Officer
prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 N. Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
December 2024
415 of 961

Table of Contents

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 GHG Emission Reduction Targets........................................................................................ 1

1.2 Implementation Measures and Actions Organization ........................................................ 2

1.3 GHG Emissions Reductions ................................................................................................. 3 2 Social and Governance Systems ..................................................................................................... 7 3 Building Systems ............................................................................................................................. 8 4 Mobility and Land Use Systems ....................................................................................................30 5 Urban Eco-Systems .......................................................................................................................48 Figures
Figure 1 City of Glendale’s GHG Emissions Reductions Pathway ...............................................6 Tables
Table 1 Glendale CAAP GHG Emission Reduction Summary by Implementation Measure ......3 Table 2 City of Glendale’s GHG Emissions Reductions Pathway ...............................................5 Table 3 Social and Governance Systems GHG Emission Reduction Summary ..........................7 Table 4 Building Systems GHG Emission Reduction Summary ..................................................8 Table 5 GWP Clean Energy Parameters and Data Sources ..................................................... 10 Table 6 GWP Clean Energy GHG Emission Reduction Calculations ........................................ 11 Table 7 All-electric New Construction Parameters and Data Sources .................................... 14 Table 8 All-electric New Construction GHG Emission Reduction Calculations ....................... 16 Table 9 Existing Building Electrification Ordinance Parameters and Data Sources ................ 19 Table 10 Existing Building Electrification Ordinance GHG Emission Reduction Calculations ... 21 Table 11 Existing Building Voluntary Replacement Parameters and Data Sources ................. 24 Table 12 Existing Building Voluntary Replacement GHG Emission Reduction Calculations ..... 28 Table 13 Mobility and Land Use Systems GHG Emission Reduction Summary ........................ 30 Table 14 Active Transportation Mode Share Parameters and Data Sources ........................... 34 Table 15 Active Transportation Mode Share GHG Emission Reduction Calculations .............. 35 Table 16 Public Transit Mode Share Parameters and Data Sources ........................................ 37 Table 17 Public Transit Mode Share GHG Emission Reduction Calculations ............................ 38 Table 18 Publicly Accessible Electric Vehicle Charger Parameters and Data Sources .............. 40 Table 19 Publicly Accessible Electric Vehicle Charger Parameters and Data Sources .............. 41 Table 20 Electric Vehicle Adoption Parameters and Data Sources .......................................... 42 Table 21 Electric Vehicle Adoption GHG Emission Reduction Calculations.............................. 44 416 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

ii
Table 22 Off-road Decarbonization Parameters and Data Sources .......................................... 46 Table 23 Off-road Decarbonization GHG Emission Reduction Calculations ............................. 47 Table 24 Urban Eco-Systems GHG Emission Reduction Summary ........................................... 48 Table 25 Landfilled Organics Reduction Parameters and Data Sources ................................... 50 Table 26 Landfilled Organics Reduction GHG Emission Reduction Calculations ...................... 50 Table 27 Compost Procurement Parameters and Data Sources .............................................. 51 Table 28 Compost Procurement Reduction GHG Emission Reduction Calculations ................ 52 Table 29 Tree Plantings Parameters and Data Sources ............................................................ 54 Table 30 Tree Plantings Reduction GHG Emission Reduction Calculations .............................. 54

417 of 961

Introduction

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 1
1 Introduction
This technical report presents the quantification and substantial evidence that supports the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction potential of the City of Glendale’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP). This report also supports the CAAP’s classification as a qualified GHG reduction plan. The CAAP is Glendale’s plan to reduce GHG emissions and address climate change. It includes Implementation Measures to reduce GHG emissions within the community and adapt the community to climate change. This report focuses on the Implementation Measures that specifically reduce emissions, their associated actions, and the substantial evidence that points to their ability to allow Glendale to meet their GHG reduction targets. The Implementation Measures include numeric targets to reduce GHG emissions and the Actions under each Implementation Measure represent the steps the City will implement through 2045 to reduce GHG emissions.

Section 15183.5(b)(1) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines establishes several criteria which a plan must meet to be considered a qualified GHG reduction plan and allow for programmatic CEQA streamlining of project GHG emissions. This report details the evidence substantiating the GHG emissions reductions associated with the CAAP’s Implementation Measures pursuant to Subsection (D) which requires measures or a group of measures, including performance standards, that substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project-by-project basis, would collectively achieve the specified GHG emissions level. This report demonstrates the Implementation Measures in the CAAP provide the GHG emission reductions necessary to meet Glendale’s 2030 GHG emission reduction target, which aligns with the State’s GHG emission reduction goal established by Senate Bill (SB) 32 and make substantial progress towards Glendale’s 2045 target which aligns with the State’s goal established by Assembly Bill (AB) 1279.1 Mechanisms to monitor the implementation of the CAAP and its progress toward achieving Glendale’s GHG emission reduction targets are included in the CAAP, as required in CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b)(e). If, based on the tracking of community GHG emissions, Glendale is not on track to reach the 2030 GHG emission reductions specified in this report, the CAAP as a whole or specific Implementation Measures and Actions will be amended. Based on these amendments, a CAAP Update will be prepared that includes altered or additional Measures and Actions, with evidence that their implementation can achieve Glendale’s 2030 GHG emission reduction target and make substantial progress towards Glendale’s 2045 target.

1.1 GHG Emission Reduction Targets
Glendale’s GHG emission reduction targets align with California’s goal to reduce GHG emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (SB 32) and California’s goal to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 (AB 1279) defined as reducing GHG emissions at least 85 percent below 1990 levels and removing or sequestering the remaining GHG emissions.

Glendale’s short- and long-term GHG emission reduction targets are:
▪ Reduce GHG emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030; and

1 SB 32 established the State goal to reduce GHG emission 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. AB 1279 established the State goal to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The State defines carbon neutrality as net zero carbon emissions, which is achieved by reducing GHG emissions at least 85 percent below 1990 levels and removing the remaining emissions. 418 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

2 ▪ Achieve carbon neutrality by 2045.

1.2 Implementation Measures and Actions
Organization
As part of the CAAP process, the City of Glendale has developed a comprehensive set of Implementation Measures and Actions to reduce communitywide GHG emissions to achieve Glendale’s 2030 GHG emission reduction target and make substantial progress towards Glendale’s 2045 target. For the purposes of the CAAP, Measures focus on decarbonization strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and are not related to CEQA compliance. The Implementation Measures are organized around a set of four Systems to reduce GHG emissions. Each Measure is then supported by a set of Actions. The structure of the Systems, Measures, and Actions are as follows:
▪ Systems: A group of related elements that can be directly influenced by the City of Glendale. ▪ Measures: Approaches and associated goals that the City has established to reduce emissions and/or improve resilience in line with the State emission reduction goals and local resilience goals.
▪ Actions: Discrete steps the City will take to achieve the measures. Over time, the CAAP will be reviewed, and additional actions will need to be added to make greater progress on the established measures.

The Measures and Actions can be either quantitative or supportive, defined as follows:
▪ Quantitative: Quantitative Measures result in direct and measurable GHG emissions reductions when their Actions, backed by substantial evidence, are implemented. GHG emissions reductions from these Measures and Actions are justified by case studies, scientific articles, calculations, and other third-party substantial evidence that establish the effectiveness of the reduction Actions. Quantitative Measures can be summed to quantify how Glendale will meet its 2030 GHG emission reduction target and demonstrate progress towards the 2045 target. ▪ Supportive: Supportive Measures may also be quantifiable and have substantial evidence to support their overall contribution to GHG emission reductions. However, due to one of several factors – including a low GHG emission reduction benefit, indirect GHG emission reduction benefit, or potential for double-counting– they have not been quantified and do not contribute directly to achieving and making progress towards Glendale’s GHG emission reduction targets.

Despite not being quantified, supportive Measures are nevertheless critical to the overall success of the CAAP and provide support so that the quantitative Measures will be successfully implemented.

This report identifies both the quantitative and supportive Implementation Measures and provides a complete description of their contribution to achieving Glendale’s 2030 GHG emission reduction target and making substantial progress towards Glendale’s 2045 target. This report, however, only details the quantitative Actions that enable each Implementation Measure. The supportive Actions are excluded from this report because they do not contribute directly to achieving and making progress towards Glendale’s GHG emission reduction targets. Detail on these supportive Actions can be found in the CAAP. Furthermore, this report presents the adaptation-related Implemtentation Measures of the CAAP, but excludes detail in these Measures as they do not directly result in GHG emissions reductions and are therefore considered supportive. Details on these supportive adaptation-related Implementation Measures can be found in the CAAP. 419 of 961

Introduction

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 3

1.3 GHG Emissions Reductions
Table 1 summarizes the Implementation Measures and the GHG emission reductions they would achieve in 2030 and 2045 upon the implementation of their Actions.

Table 1 Glendale CAAP GHG Emission Reduction Summary by Implementation Measure
Measure ID Measure Text
2030 GHG Emission
Reduction Potential
(MT CO2e)
2045 GHG Emission
Reduction Potential
(MT CO2e)
Social and Governance Systems
Measure SG-1 Provide evacuation and health alert messaging in English, Spanish, Armenian, and Korean, and in
multiple forms (e.g., online, brochure, radio) to
amplify the Glendale community’s awareness of
extreme weather and events (including wildfires,
landslides, extreme heat events, and poor air
quality days).

Supportive Supportive
Measure SG-2 Establish three resilience centers by 2030 in high social sensitivity areas that provide refuge for
vulnerable populations from poor air quality and
extreme heat conditions that serve as year-round
community resource centers.

Supportive Supportive
Measure SG-3 Change internal protocols and procedures to incorporate a climate and equity lens into all
government operational decision-making to
increase investments in CAAP implementation for
vulnerable populations.

Supportive Supportive
Measure SG-4 Formalize City and community-based relationships to create meaningful and long-lasting relationships
with non-profit organizations and increase
engagement of vulnerable communities and Tribal
governments in local government decision-making
processes.

Supportive Supportive
Measure SG-5 Increase community capacity to better withstand climate shocks and stresses.

Supportive Supportive
Building Systems
Measure BLD-1 Increase carbon-free electricity procurement to provide 100% carbon-free electricity community-
wide by 2035 and improve electrical system
resiliency through additional distributed energy
resources, transmission capacity, and demand
response.
37,227 0
Measure BLD-2 Require healthy, safe, decarbonized, and resilient new buildings by 2026.
2,175 16,031
420 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

4 Measure ID Measure Text
2030 GHG Emission
Reduction Potential
(MT CO2e)
2045 GHG Emission
Reduction Potential
(MT CO2e)
Measure BLD-3 Retrofit 20% of existing buildings by 2030 and 95% by 2045 to be zero-carbon and resilient to extreme
heat and wildfires.
40,906 214,303
Measure BLD-4 Decarbonize and make municipal buildings resilient by 2035.

Supportive Supportive
Mobility and Land Use Systems
Measure MLS-1 Reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles by promoting increased residential densities along
transit and commercial corridors, increasing mix of
land uses and expanding the range of attainable
housing choices.

Supportive Supportive
Measure MLS-2 Increase active transportation mode share to 3% by 2030 and 10% by 2045 by increasing the safety
and availability of the transportation system to
support walking and biking for all members of the
community.
1,839 7,516
Measure MLS-3 Enhance the transit system to be more resilient, accessible, and convenient to increase mode share
to 5% by 2030 and 10% by 2045.
6,929 16,882
Measure MLS-4 Increase passenger and commercial zero-emission vehicle use and adoption to 25% by 2030 and 90%
by 2045, respectively.
60,885 290,572
Measure MLS-5 Electrify or otherwise decarbonize 30% of community-operated off-road equipment (e.g.,
lawnmowers, leaf blowers, and chainsaws)
operations by 2030 and 100% by 2045.
4,206 16,149
Measure MLS-6 Transition to 45% zero-emission municipal fleet by 2030 and 100% by 2040.

Supportive Supportive
Urban Eco-Systems
Measure UE-1 Increase organics diversion through SB-1383 to divert 75% of organic material by 2025.
59,899 63,190
Measure UE-2 Increase tree canopy to 25% by 2030 and 30% by 2045 by focusing on communities most vulnerable
to extreme heat.
149 1,635
Measure UE-3 Reduce the potential for wildfire to spread in Glendale by actively managing 50-75 acres of land
annually through prescribed burns, brush
clearance, grazing, and building hardening.

Supportive Supportive
Measure UE-4 Increase access to affordable and fresh produce through partnerships and technical assistance.

Supportive Supportive
421 of 961

Introduction

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 5
Measure ID Measure Text
2030 GHG Emission
Reduction Potential
(MT CO2e)
2045 GHG Emission
Reduction Potential
(MT CO2e)
Measure UE-5 Reduce per capita water use to 48 gallons per day by 2030 and 42 gallons per day by 2045 by
enhancing water conservation and water quality
and increase the Glendale water system's
resilience to climate extremes by upgrading water
and stormwater facilities.

Supportive Supportive
Measure UE-6 Showcase municipal leadership through increased landfill diversion rates, climate-smart food and
purchasing behavior, and enhanced water
efficiencies.

Supportive Supportive
Total 214,216 626,277
Together, the Implementation Measures and Actions in the CAAP provide Glendale with the GHG emission reductions necessary to achieve Glendale’s 2030 GHG emission reduction target (see Table 2). However, the 2045 GHG emissions reductions quantified in this report are not currently enough to meet Glendale’s 2045 target of carbon neutrality. Achieving carbon neutrality will require new technologies, new State regulations, and additional Measures and Actions that incorporate lessons learned from implementing this CAAP. Future CAAP updates will account for these emerging technologies and new State regulations and include new Measures and Actions that Glendale will implement to close the remaining gap to achieve carbon neutrality.

Table 2 City of Glendale’s GHG Emissions Reductions Pathway GHG Emission Forecast or Reduction Target
2030 GHG Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2045 GHG Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Business-as-usual Forecast 1,086,686 1,155,400
Adjusted Forecast 932,917 813,387
GHG Emissions Reductions (from full implementation of Measures) 214,216 626,277 GHG Emissions Remaining (after Measure reductions) 718,702 187,110 GHG Emission Target 809,740 0
GHG Emissions Gap (between remaining GHG emissions and target) (91,039) 187,110 Target Anticipated to be Met? Yes No
Notes: Numeric numbers donated in parathesis represent negative numbers.

Figure 1 shows Glendale’s GHG emission reduction targets in relation to Glendale’s GHG emissions after implementation of the Implementation Measures and Actions included in the CAAP. A complete description of each Measure and the quantitative Actions is included in the remainder of the report.
422 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

6 Figure 1 City of Glendale’s GHG Emissions Reductions Pathway

423 of 961

Social and Governance Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 7
2 Social and Governance Systems
The City of Glendale’s Social and Governance Systems focuses on building a more resilient and equitable community by prioritizing the well-being of vulnerable populations in the face of climate impacts. This system addresses the social dimensions of climate resilience, including public health, community engagement, and equity in decision-making processes. Measures within this system aim to enhance communication about extreme weather events, establish resilience centers in socially sensitive areas, incorporate a climate and equity lens into City operations, foster long-lasting partnerships with community organizations and Tribal governments, and strengthen community capacity to better withstand climate shocks and stresses. Through these efforts, the Social and Governance System seeks to safeguard that Glendale is prepared to support its residents, especially those most at risk, in the face of climate-related challenges. While GHG emissions benefits within this system have not been quantified, social and governance systems which are effective, equitable, and transparent will be key to implementing the rest of the CAAP. Based on this approach, the CAAP’s Social and Governance Systems consists of the following Measures presented in Table 3.

Table 3 Social and Governance Systems GHG Emission Reduction Summary Measure
ID Measure
2030 GHG Emission
Reductions
(MT CO2e)
2045 GHG Emission
Reductions
(MT CO2e)
Social and Governance Systems
Measure
SG-1
Provide evacuation and health alert messaging in English, Spanish, Armenian, and Korean, and in multiple forms
(e.g., online, brochure, radio) to amplify the Glendale community’s awareness of extreme weather and events
(including wildfires, landslides, extreme heat events, and poor air quality days).

Supportive Supportive
Measure
SG-2
Establish three resilience centers by 2030 in high social sensitivity areas that provide refuge for vulnerable
populations from poor air quality and extreme heat
conditions that serve as year-round community resource
centers.

Supportive Supportive
Measure
SG-3
Change internal protocols and procedures to incorporate a climate and equity lens into all government operational decision-making to increase investments in CAAP
implementation for vulnerable populations.

Supportive Supportive
Measure
SG-4
Formalize City and community-based relationships to
create meaningful and long-lasting relationships with
non-profit organizations and increase engagement of
vulnerable communities and Tribal governments in local
government decision-making processes.

Supportive Supportive
Measure
SG-5
Increase community capacity to better withstand climate shocks and stresses.

Supportive Supportive
Total 0 0
424 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

8 3 Building Systems
The City of Glendale’s Building Systems focuses on electrifying residential and commercial buildings to leverage the GHG reduction benefits associated with replacing natural gas with increasingly carbon-free and renewable electricity provided by Glendale Water & Power (GWP). Electrifying Glendale’s building stock consists of transitioning natural gas appliances—the equipment that traditionally heats our water, conditions the spaces we live and work in, cooks our food, and dries our clothes —to efficient electric alternatives. When coupled with renewable and zero-carbon electricity, all-electric buildings eliminate GHG emissions and transition the building system to a zero-emission operational energy footprint. Based on this approach, the CAAP’s Building Systems consists of the Measures presented in Table 4. The table also indicates which Measures are quantitative and which Measures are supportive. The following subsections detail the substantial evidence and calculation methodologies of the quantitative Measures and the role of the supportive Measures.

Table 4 Building Systems GHG Emission Reduction Summary Measure
ID Measure
2030 GHG Emission
Reductions
(MT CO2e)
2045 GHG Emission
Reductions
(MT CO2e)
Building Systems
BLD-1 Increase carbon-free electricity procurement to provide 100% carbon-free electricity community-wide by 2035
and improve electrical system resiliency through
additional distributed energy resources, transmission
capacity, and demand response.
37,227 0
BLD-2 Require healthy, safe, decarbonized, and resilient new buildings by 2026.
2,175 16,031
BLD-3 Retrofit 20% of existing buildings by 2030 and 95% by 2045 to be zero-carbon and resilient to extreme heat and wildfires.
40,906 214,303
BLD-4 Decarbonize and make municipal buildings resilient by 2035.

Supportive Supportive
Total 80,308 230,334
425 of 961

Building Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 9
BLD-1: Increase carbon-free electricity procurement to provide 100% carbon-free electricity community-wide by 2035 and improve electrical system resiliency through additional distributed energy resources, transmission capacity, and demand response.

Measure BLD-1 aims to increase the share of electricity supplied to Glendale that is sourced from renewable and carbon-free sources such that 100 percent of all electricity consumed is carbon-free by 2035. As an intermediary step to achieving the 2035 target, Measure BLD-1 sets a target for GWP, the City-owned electric utility and singular electric utility provider to the community, to achieve an emissions factor of 0.00009 MT CO2e per kilowatt-hour (kWh) by 2030. The primary Actions that enable this Measure are:
▪ Action BLD-1.1 which directs the City to streamline battery storage and solar permitting requirements;
▪ Action BLD-1.3 which aims to provide incentives which facilitate installing 34 MW of solar within the community by 2030;
▪ Action BLD-1.5 which directs the City to set up Purchase Power Agreements (PPA) to increase the City's renewable energy sources to 100 percent by 2035; and, ▪ Action BLD-1.7 which directs GWP to install 75 MW of local battery storage.

GWP’s 2024 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) sets the same goal as Action BLD-1.5 and outlines how they plan to achieve 100 percent carbon-free electricity by 2035.2 GWP currently relies on a combination of both local and remote generation sources, including power plants owned by GWP and power purchase agreements (PPAs) of thermal, renewable, and zero-carbon resources, as well as spot purchases, to meet RPS requirements. Currently, natural gas is 32 percent of GWP’s grid mix, and the largest non-renewable contributor. The modeled scenario plan chosen in the IRP would result in either transitioning natural gas generation to green hydrogen or retiring natural gas generation plants for carbon-free sources by 2035. GWP also plans to integrate more wind, solar, and geothermal energy into its system to fully decarbonize its resource mix by 2035.

The construction of the Grayson Power Plant Repowering Project, the emissions from which were specifically accounted for in the forecast, is key to maintaining local energy reliability while meeting the City's decarbonization goals. The repowered facility will be equipped with flexible capacity to support renewable integration and is designed to operate with alternative fuels like green hydrogen. Even with the repowering project, the City remains on track to meet its carbon-free electricity target, as the plant will be transitioned to carbon-free operations by 2035, in line with the IRP.

Table 5 shows the parameters and data sources that support these clean energy GHG emission reductions and Table 6 shows the calculations as outlined in Equations 4 through 4.1.

2 Glendale Water & Power (GWP). 2024 Integrated Resource Plan (2024). Accessed at:
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=256053&DocumentContentId=91820. 426 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

10 GWP Clean Energy Equations
Equation 4 CO2e ReductionElec,y,i=Total Elecy,i*Supply Ratei*(EFelec,y,i-EFCF,y) Equation 4.1 Total Elecy,i=(Elecy,i+Total Elec Convertedy,i)*(1+LT&D) Table 5 GWP Clean Energy Parameters and Data Sources
Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 4
CO2e
ReductionElec,y,i
Electricity GHG emission
reductions
See calculation
table
MT CO2e Calculated
Total Elecy,i Total electricity
consumption
See calculation
table
kWh Calculated
Supply Ratei Target supply rate
community-wide
100% percentage GWP supplies all electric utility in
Glendale
EFelec,y,i Forecasted electricity
emission factor
See calculation
table
MT
CO2e/kWh
See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
EFCF,y Electricity emission
factor of carbon-free
electricity
– – –
EFCF,2030 – 0.00009 MT
CO2e/kWh
Measure BLD-1 2030 target EF
EFCF,2045 – 0.00 MT
CO2e/kWh
Measure BLD-1 target, carbon-free
by 2035; GWP 2024 IRP1
i Subsector Residential or
Nonresidential
– –
Equation 4.1
Elecy,i Forecasted electricity
consumption
See calculation
table
kWh See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
Elec Convertedy,i Total electricity usage
from conversions
See calculation
table
kWh Measures BLD-2, BLD-3
LT&D Electricity transmission
and distribution loss
percentage

4.40% Percentage See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
Notes: “–“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows 1 Glendale Water & Power (GWP). 2024 Integrated Resource Plan (2024). Accessed at:
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=256053&DocumentContentId=91820. 427 of 961

Building Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 11 Table 6 GWP Clean Energy GHG Emission Reduction Calculations Definition Definition Units Sector 2030 2045
Equation 4.1
Elecy,i Forecasted electricity
consumption
kWh Residential 454,363,905 479,571,171
Nonresidential 269,527,606 307,150,329
Elec Convertedy,i Total electricity usage
from conversions
kWh Residential 47,430,948 261,001,785
Nonresidential 17,198,201 95,434,726
Total Elecy,i Total electricity
consumption
kWh Residential 523,873,826 773,158,167
Nonresidential 299,341,742 420,298,798
Equation 4
Supply Ratey,i Percent of electricity
supplied by GWP
percentage Residential 100% 100%
Nonresidential 100% 100%
EFelec,y,i Forecasted electricity
emission factor
MT
CO2e/kWh
Residential 0.0001345 0.00
Nonresidential 0.0001345 0.00
CO2e
ReductionElec,y,i
Electricity GHG emission
reductions
MT CO2e Residential 23,309 0
Nonresidential 13,319 0
428 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

12 BLD-2: Require healthy, safe, decarbonized, and resilient new buildings by 2026.

Measure BLD-2 commits the City to electrify new construction in the community. The primary Action that enables this Measure is:
▪ Action BLD-2.1 which directs the City to implement a new building electrification ordinance by 2026 which limits the installation of new natural gas infrastructure to improve health, safety and reduce costs associated with new construction.

The City of Glendale fully intends to limit new natural gas developments in the community where feasible. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s decision to overturn the City of Berkeley’s natural gas regulation—which prohibited the installation of natural gas piping within newly constructed buildings—limits the City of Glendale’s ability to establish regulations to ban new natural gas construction.3 This decision resulted in the City of Glendale pausing their existing building reach code which eliminated natural gas in new construction since it followed a similar approach to the City of Berkeley ordinance. Action BLD-2.1 directs the City to adopt a new ordinance which follows Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) compliant pathways to further incentivize new all-electric construction. Local precedent and support for this type of action was established by The City and GWP 2024 IRP which adopted a Building Electrification Reach Code requiring that all newly constructed residential and nonresidential buildings be all-electric buildings, with commercial kitchens being the exemption.4 Action BLD-2.1’s ordinance will be designed to strongly encourage electrification of new construction through a single margin energy threshold which is lower than the current Title 24 standards. This approach will further increase the energy efficiency of all existing buildings, incentivize all-electric construction, but maintain a cost-effective pathway for mixed fuel buildings as required by EPCA.

As a single margin source energy score, the ordinance would establish a new Source Energy Design Rating (EDR) score threshold —a scoring metric that determines a building’s compliance with California’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards—that new residential buildings in the applicable jurisdiction would need to meet. Having a lower EDR score requires mixed-fuel homes to add additional energy efficiency attributes to the project including solar, battery storage, or additional insulation to meet the standard. All-electric buildings would already meet the efficiency standard due to their overall higher performance. Since the ordinance would not ban natural gas infrastructure outright, this type of ordinance may permit some new construction to be built with natural gas. These exceptions are expected to be minimal because of the cost effectiveness of new building electrification and the available incentives in the region that will help continue the natural growth in electric space and water heater installations seen in California over the past decade.

According to a recent market share study, electric space heaters have grown to a 20 percent market share in 2019, while electric water heaters have grown to an 11 percent market share in 2019.5 This trend is not only expected to continue through 2030 because all-electric new construction has

3 CRA V. City of Berkeley, No. 21-16278. Accessed at: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca9/21-16278/21-16278- 2023-04-17.html
4 GWP. 2024 Integrated Resource Plan (2024). Accessed at:
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=256053&DocumentContentId=91820. 5 Opinion Dynamics. California Heat Pump Residential Market Characterization and Baseline Study (2022). Accessed at:
https://pda.energydataweb.com/#!/documents/2625/view
429 of 961

Building Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 13 proven to be cost-effective in the region for most all buildings types,6,7 but also be accelerated when coupled with the large amount of funding available for community members to install electric or heat pump space and water heating appliances. While the total amount of funding available will change with sunset dates and budget cycles, the currently available federal (i.e., High Efficiency Electric Home Rebate [HEEHRA], Homeowner Managing Energy Savings [HOMES] Rebate, Inflation Reduction Act), State (i.e., TEHC Clean California), and local (i.e., GWP’s Home Energy and Water Saving Rebates Program) funding makes it so that low- and middle-income residents in the region can install electric or heat pump space and water heaters at no additional cost compared to gas space and water heaters. In some cases, such customers will even be able to install the heat pump water heaters for free.8
For those minimal cases where construction with natural gas may still occur under an ordinance, such as a single margin source energy score, despite cost effectiveness and incentives, this Measure relies on CEQA mechanisms to require such buildings to mitigate the GHG emissions from natural gas construction. This can be assumed because the CAAP assumes 95 percent of new construction will be all-electric or otherwise decarbonized. This assumption is then incorporated into the regional CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds and CEQA GHG Emissions Analysis Compliance Checklist. The checklist requires new construction to be all-electric in order to utilize the more streamlined CEQA approach. Otherwise, projects will need to undergo a full GHG emissions analysis. As a result, new construction utilizing natural gas will need to identify other ways to mitigate GHG emissions to meet the GHG emission threshold of an all-electric building. Moreover, Action BLD-2.1 also allows the City to adopt a more stringent ordinance that effectively bans new natural gas construction. This option may be feasible as more jurisdictions across the State explore pathways for all-electric new construction after the Berkeley case. With limited exemptions, this option would also allow for 95 percent electric-preferred or decarbonized new construction.

Thus, the GHG emissions reduction from this Measure are based on the forecasted residential building growth and the assumption that 95 percent of new buildings will be all-electric or otherwise decarbonized. Table 7 shows the parameters and data sources that support these electrification ordinances GHG emissions reduction and Table 8 shows the calculations as outlined in Equations 1 through 1.3.

All-electric New Construction Equations
Equation 1 CO2e ReductionNG,y,i=(Fuel AvoidedNG,y,i*EFNG)+( Fuel AvoidedNG,y,i*EFNGL)-(Elec Converty,i*EFelec,y,i*(1+LT&D))
Equation 1.1 Fuel AvoidedNG,y,i=(FuelNG,y,i-FuelNG,imp.y,i)* %Impi Equation 1.2 Fuel AvoidedNGL,y,i=(Fuel AvoidedNG,y,i*(1+LEnd-use NGL))*(LPipeline NGL +LEnd-use NGL) Equation 1.3 Elec Convert,y,i = Fuel AvoidedNG,y,i*CFelec/Effelec

6 California Energy Codes and Standards. Cost Effectiveness Explorer (2024). Accessed at:
https://explorer.localenergycodes.com/jurisdiction/eureka-city/study-results/1-PGE?only_study_type=new-buildings 7 According to the California Energy Codes and Standards’ Cost Effectiveness Explorer, all-electric construction is cost effective for all residential building types.
8 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Installation Costs for Zero-NOx Space and Water Heating Appliances (2024). 430 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

14 Table 7 All-electric New Construction Parameters and Data Sources Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 1
CO2e
ReductionNG,y,i
Natural gas GHG
emission reductions
See calculation table MT CO2e Calculated
Fuel AvoidedNG,y,i Natural gas consumption
avoided
See calculation table therms Calculated
EFNG Natural gas emission
factor

0.005311 MT CO2e/therm See references in
Appendix GHG Inventory,
Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
EFNGL Natural gas leakage
emission factor

0.053067 MT CO2e/therm See references in
Appendix GHG Inventory,
Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
Elec Convertedy,i Electricity usage from
conversion
See calculation table kWh Calculated
EFelec,y,i Forecasted electricity
emission factor
See calculation table MT CO2e/kWh See references in
Appendix GHG Inventory,
Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
LT&D Electricity transmission
and distribution loss
percentage

4.40% Percentage See references in
Appendix GHG Inventory,
Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
y Year 2030 or 2045 year –
i Subsector Residential or
Nonresidential
– –
Equation 1.1
FuelNG,y,i Forecasted natural gas
consumption
See calculation table therms See references in
Appendix GHG Inventory,
Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
FuelNG,imp,i Forecasted natural gas in
implementation year
See calculation table therms Calculated
Ordtarget,i Effective percent of
ordinance
implementation
– percentage –
Ordtarget,res – 95% percentage Assumed due to electric
ordinance target, market
trends, cost-
effectiveness, incentives,
and inclusion of all-
electric assumption in
CEQA documents.

Ordtarget,nonres – 95% percentage
imp.y Ordinance
implementation year
– year –
imp.y,res – 2026 year Building code adoption
cycle
431 of 961

Building Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 15 Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
imp.y,nonres – 2026 year Building code adoption
cycle
Equation 1.2
LPipeline Natural gas pipeline
leakage percentage

2.3% kWh/therm Metric Conversions2
LEnd-use Natural gas end-use
leakage percentage

0.5% unitless Leonardo Energy3 and
European Copper
Institute4
Equation 1.3
CFelec Electricity to therms
conversion factor

29.3 kWh/therm Metric Conversions2
Effelec Efficiency factor of
electric equipment
relative to natural gas
equipment
3 unitless Leonardo Energy3 and
European Copper
Institute4
Notes: “-“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows 1 Glendale News Press. City’s EV, Solar Standards Surpass State’s (2022). Accessed at:
https://outlooknewspapers.com/glendalenewspress/news/city-s-ev-solar-standards-surpass-state-s/article_2798f892-0fad-5678-85da- 1fd9e0eb1472.html
2 Metric Conversions. Therms (US) to Kilowatt-hours. Available at: https://www.metric-conversions.org/energy-and-power/therms-us- to-kilowatt-hours.htm
3 Leonardo Energy - Knowledge Base. 2023. How efficient is a heat pump?. Available at: https://help.leonardo-energy.org/hc/en- us/articles/203047881-How-efficient-is-a-heat-pump
4 European Copper Institute. 2018. Heat Pumps: Integrating technologies to decarbonise heating and cooling. Accessed at:
https://www.ehpa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/White_Paper_Heat_pumps-1.pdf

432 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

16 Table 8 All-electric New Construction GHG Emission Reduction Calculations Variable Definition Units Sector 2030 2045
Equation 1.1
FuelNG,y,i Forecasted natural gas
consumption
therms Residential 26,791,550 28,260,577
Nonresidential 10,029,039 10,618,433
imp.y Ordinance
implementation year
year Residential 2026 2026
Nonresidential 2026 2026
FuelNG,imp,i Forecasted natural gas
in implementation year
therms Residential 26,466,075 26,466,075
Nonresidential 9,933,161 9,933,161
%Impi Effective percent of
ordinance
implementation
% Residential 95.00% 95.00%
Nonresidential 95.00% 95.00%
Fuel
AvoidedNG,y,i
Natural gas
consumption avoided
therms Residential 309,202 1,704,777
Nonresidential 91,084 651,008
Equation 1.2
Fuel
AvoidedNGL,y,i
Natural gas leakage
avoided
therms Residential 8,701 47,972
Nonresidential 2,563 18,319
Equation 1.3
Elec Converty,i Electricity usage from
conversion
kWh Residential 3,019,871 16,649,990
Nonresidential 889,586 6,358,178
Equation 1
EFelec,y,i Forecasted electricity
emission factor
MT CO2e/kWh Residential 0.0001345 0.00
Nonresidential 0.0001345 0.00
CO2e
ReductionNG
Natural gas GHG
emission reductions
MT CO2e Residential 1,680 11,601
Nonresidential 495 4,430
433 of 961

Building Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 17 BLD-3: Retrofit 20% of existing buildings by 2030 and 95% by 2045 to be zero- carbon and resilient to extreme heat and wildfires.

Measure BLD-3 puts Glendale on a path to reduce residential and commercial natural gas consumption 20 percent by 2030 to reduce GHG emissions through both mandatory and voluntary actions. The primary Actions that enable this level of adoption include:
▪ Actions BLD-3.1 which directs the City to complete an existing building electrification study to identify costs and benefits associated with retrofitting residential and commercial building systems, and based on the findings of the report, adopt additional cost effective, equitable, and implementable building electrification requirements for existing buildings; ▪ Action BLD-3.4 which commits the City to adopt an electrify-on-replacement ordinance for residential hot water heaters and HVAC systems by 2027; ▪ Action BLD-3.6 which requires the City to update permitting requirements to require same-day single permit processing for heat pump water heaters and HVAC units; ▪ Action BLD-3.9 which commits the City to adopt commercial building performance standard which requires buildings to report energy consumption by 2026, complete a building retro- commissioning by 2027, identify a GHG emissions reduction target, and reduce GHG emissions below the identified threshold by 2030;
▪ Action BLD-3.11 which establishes an infrastructure upgrade cost sharing program to mitigate service panel upgrades for the purposes of electrification; ▪ Action BLD-3.12 which seeks to develop a water heater loan program for residents to acquire temporary water heaters when replacing their natural gas water heater with an electric alternative;
▪ Action BLD-3.13 which commits the City to developing an electrification and weatherization concierge service that provides building owners with technical support, educational resources on the benefits of electrification, and funding resources (e.g., rebates, subsidies and tax credits); ▪ Action BLD-3.17 which directs the City to establish a local weatherization assistance program, through a partnership with Southern California Edison (SCE), by creating a local program that provides energy efficiency and weatherization support for all residents; and, ▪ Action BLD-3.18 which directs the City to establish an incentive program to connect residents to technical and financial support including direct install, incentives, and information on the benefits of electrification.

Mandatory Electrification Actions
Action BLD-3.4 commits Glendale to adopt an electrify-on-replacement ordinance for residential hot water heaters and HVAC systems by 2027 and is supported by Action BLD-3.6 and Action BLD-3.9.

These Actions will be complemented by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) zero-nitrogen oxides (zero-NOx) rules, which require the electrification of existing residential water heating and space heating and cooling appliances in Glendale and reduce the associated GHG emissions from natural gas consumption.9 Since the City is going to adopt the ordinance ahead of the SCAQMD rules (which begin in 2029), the measure quantification is based on Action BLD-3.4’s target adoption year of 2027. However, the rules mentioned above help drive alignment with the Measure and will bolster regional support. The only technologies currently available that meet the

9 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). South Coast AQMD Approves Rule to Accelerate the Transition to Zero- Emission for Water Heaters (2024). https://www.aqmd.gov/home/research/pubs-docs-reports/newsletters/aug-sep-2024/water-heaters. 434 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

18 amended rules are electric space and water heating systems. Although there are a range of electric alternatives (e.g. electric resistance space heating, heat pumps), heat pump HVAC and heat pump water heaters are the most cost-effective option on the market due to their significantly higher efficiency (300 to 400 percent) and resulting lower operating costs. Action BLD-3.4 is thus assumed to target electric HVAC and water heater replacements specifically to prepare contractors for the SCAQMD rules and require electrification to save homeowners and property owners costs from duplicative or future infrastructure upgrades.

In addition to adding requirements for electrification of appliances Measure BLD-3 will work to increase compliance with the electric replacements required by the ordinances. Although permits are required for many energy efficiency improvements (e.g., water heaters, insulation, HVAC systems, duct replacement) many jurisdictions face permit evasion issues, with permitted HVAC systems only accounting for eight to about 30 percent of total installations.10 This trend in permit evasion means jurisdictions face issues achieving compliance with building ordinances and codes.

Strategies that have proven effective at improving permit compliance in various states and local jurisdictions include streamlining the compliance process, improving third-party enforcement, and advanced training for enforcement staff—all actions Glendale will implement as part of Action BLD-

3.6 and Action BLD-3.9 to compliment the Action BLD-3.4 electrify-on-replacement ordinance.11 This Measure assumes the permit compliance initiatives will increase permit compliance to 85 percent. Glendale will monitor compliance rate, and if the 85 percent compliance rate isn’t met, then the City will update the permit compliance program to meet that rate.

Together, these Actions will reduce residential natural gas consumption 12 percent and commercial natural gas consumption 11.8 percent by 2030 through the electrify-on-replacement ordinances.

Table 9 shows the parameters and data sources that support this Action’s GHG emission reductions and Table 10 shows the calculations as outlined in Equations 2 through 2.6.

Existing Building Electrification Ordinance Equations
Equation 2 CO2e ReductionNG,y,i=(Fuel AvoidedNG,y,i*EFNG)+(Fuel AvoidedNGL,y,i*EFNGL)-(Elec Convertedy,i*EFelec,y,i*(1+LT&D))
Equation 2.1 Fuel AvoidedNG,y,i=FuelNG,y,i*ReductionNG,y,i Equation 2.2 ReductionNG,y,i=(EOLNG,y,i,wh*Fuel ShareNG,i,wh)+(EOLNG,y,i,HVAC*Fuel ShareNG,i,HVAC) Equation 2.3 EOLNG,y,i,wh=1/LSPi,wh*(y-imp.yi)*(1-NCRi) Equation 2.4 EOLNG,y,i,HVAC=1/LSPi,HVAC*(y-imp.yi)*(1-NCRi) Equation 2.5 Fuel AvoidedNGL,y,i=Fuel AvoidedNG,y,i*(LPipeline NGL+LEnd-use NGL) Equation 2.6 Elecconvert,y,i = Fuel AvoidedNG,y,i*CFelec/Effelec

10 California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Final Report: 2014-16 HVAC Permit and Code Compliance Market Assessment (Work Order 6) Volume I – Report (2017). Accessed at:
http://www.calmac.org/publications/HVAC_WO6_FINAL_REPORT_VolumeI_22Sept2017.pdf 11 Ryan Meres et al. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). Successful Strategies for Improving Compliance with Building Energy Codes (2012). Accessed at: https://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2012/data/papers/0193-000112.pdf 435 of 961

Building Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 19 Table 9 Existing Building Electrification Ordinance Parameters and Data Sources Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 2
CO2e
ReductionNG,y,i
Natural gas GHG emission
reductions
See calculation
table
MT CO2e Calculated
Fuel
AvoidedNG,y,i
Natural gas consumption
avoided
See calculation
table
therms Calculated
EFNG Natural gas emission factor 0.005311 MT
CO2e/therm
See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
Fuel
AvoidedNGL,y,i
Natural gas leakage avoided See calculation
table
therms Calculated
EFNGL Natural gas leakage emission
factor

0.053067 MT
CO2e/therm
See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
Elec
Convertedy,i
Electricity usage from
conversion
See calculation
table
kWh Calculated
EFelec,y,i Forecasted electricity
emission factor
See calculation
table
MT CO2e/kWh Forecast
LT&D Electricity transmission and
distribution loss percentage

4.40% percentage See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
y Year 2030 or 2045 year –
i Subsector Residential or
Nonresidential
– –
Equation 2.1
FuelNG,y,i Forecasted natural gas
consumption after new
building electrification
See calculation
table
therms See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
ReductionNG,y,i Natural gas reduction percent See calculation table
percentage –
Equation 2.2
EOLNG,y,i,wh Percent of water heaters
reaching end-of-life
See calculation
table
percentage –
Fuel
ShareNG,i,wh
Percent of sector natural gas
consumption from water
heaters
– – –
Fuel
ShareNG,Reside
ntial,wh
Percent of residential natural
gas consumption from water
heaters
38% percentage Decarbonization of Heating
Energy Use in California
Buildings1
Fuel
ShareNG,Nonres
idential,wh
Percent of nonresidential
natural gas consumption from
water heaters
28% percentage Decarbonization of Heating
Energy Use in California
Buildings1
EOLNG,y,i,HVAC Percent of HVAC units
reaching end-of-life
See calculation
table
percentage –
Fuel
ShareNG,i,HVAC
Percent of sector natural gas
consumption from HVAC
units
– – –
436 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

20 Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Fuel
ShareNG,i,HVAC
Percent of residential natural
gas consumption from HVAC
units
39% percentage Decarbonization of Heating
Energy Use in California
Buildings1
Fuel
ShareNG,i,HVAC
Percent of nonresidential
natural gas consumption from
HVAC units
42% percentage Decarbonization of Heating
Energy Use in California
Buildings1
Equation 2.3
LSPi,wh Average water heater lifespan
in sector
– – –
LSPresidential,wh Average residential water
heater lifespan
13 years EIA2
LSPnonresidential,
wh
Average nonresidential water
heater lifespan
10 years EIA2
imp.yi Ordinance implementation
year
– – –
imp.yresidential Ordinance implementation
year for residential buildings
2027 year Measure BLD-3 target
imp.ynonresiden
tial
Ordinance implementation
year for nonresidential
buildings
2027 year Measure BLD-3 target
NCRi Ordinance noncompliance
rate
15% percentage Estimate based on permit
evasion rates and strategies to
increase building code
compliance2
Equation 2.4
LSPi,HVAC Average HVAC unit lifespan in
sector
– – –
LSPresidential,HV
AC
Average residential HVAC unit
lifespan

21.5 years EIA3
LSPnonresidentia
l,HVAC
Average nonresidential HVAC
unit lifespan
23 years EIA3
Equation 2.5
LPipeline NGL Natural gas pipeline leakage
percentage

2.3% percentage See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
LEnd-use NGL Natural gas end-use leakage
percentage

0.5% percentage See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
Equation 2.6
CFelec Electricity to therms
conversion factor

29.3 kWh/therm Metric Conversions4
Effelec Efficiency factor of electric
equipment relative to natural
gas equipment
3 unitless European Copper Institute5
Notes: “-“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows 1 Synapse Energy Economics, Inc. Decarbonization of Heating Energy Use in California Buildings (2018). Accessed at:
https://www.synapse-energy.com/sites/default/files/Decarbonization-Heating-CA-Buildings-17-092-1.pdf 2 8-29% of HVAC projects are permitted, but implementing certain strategies can help increase permit compliance rate. Actions BLD-

3.6 and BLD-3.9 address permit compliance. Assumption is set to 15% non-compliance. See above for further explanation. 437 of 961

Building Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 21 Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
3 EIA. Updated Buildings Sector Appliance and Equipment Costs and Efficiencies (2023). https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/buildings/equipcosts/pdf/full.pdf 4 Metric Conversions. Therms (US) to Kilowatt-hours.
5 European Copper Institute. Heat Pumps: Integrating technologies to decarbonise heating and cooling (2018). Accessed at:
https://www.ehpa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/White_Paper_Heat_pumps-1.pdf Table 10 Existing Building Electrification Ordinance GHG Emission Reduction Calculations
Variable Definition Units Sector 2030 2045
Equation 2.1
FuelNG,y,i Forecasted natural gas
consumption after new
building electrification
therms Residential 26,482,348 26,555,800
Nonresidential 9,937,955 9,967,425
ReductionNG,y,i Natural gas reduction
percent
percentage Residential 12.08% 60.05%
Nonresidential 11.80% 51.74%
Fuel AvoidedNG,y,i Natural gas consumption
avoided
therms Residential 3,198,916 15,947,684
Nonresidential 1,172,333 5,157,059
Equation 2.3 & Equation 2.4
EOLNG,y,i,wh Percent of water heaters
reaching end-of-life since
ordinance implementation
percentage Residential 19.62% 85.00%
Nonresidential 25.50% 85.00%
EOLNG,y,i,HVAC Percent of HVAC units
reaching end-of-life since
ordinance implementation
percentage Residential 11.86% 71.16%
Nonresidential 11.09% 66.52%
imp.yi Ordinance implementation
year
year Residential 2027 2027
Nonresidential 2027 2027
Equation 2.5
Fuel AvoidedNGL,y,i Natural gas leakage avoided Therms Residential 89,570 446,535 Nonresidential 32,825 144,398
Equation 2.6
Elec Converted y,i Electricity usage from
conversion
kWh Residential 31,242,747 155,755,715
Nonresidential 11,449,786 50,367,275
Equation 2
EFelec,y,i Forecasted electricity
emission factor
MT
CO2e/kWh
Residential 0.0001345 0.00
Nonresidential 0.0001345 0.00
CO2e ReductionNG Natural gas GHG emission
reductions
MT CO2e Residential 17,357 108,402
Nonresidential 6,361 35,054
Voluntary Electrification
The remaining 8 percent of residential natural gas consumption and 8.2 percent of nonresidential natural gas consumption that is planned to be reduced by 2030 will occur through voluntary replacements of gas appliances with electric appliances due to a combination of factors.

First, currently available incentives will help continue the natural growth in electric space and water heaters seen in California over the past decade. According to Opinion Dynamics’ California Heat 438 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

22 Pump Residential Market Characterization and Baseline Study (2022), electric space heaters have grown from a five percent market share in 2009 to a 20 percent market share in 2019. Likewise, electric water heaters have grown from a six percent market share in 2009 to an 11 percent market share in 2019.12 This market trend is not only expected to continue through 2030 as electric appliances become more efficient and more cost-effective, but also be accelerated when coupled with the large amount of funding available for Glendale community members to replace their space and water heating appliances with electric or heat pump alternatives. While the total amount of funding available will change with sunset dates and budget cycles, the currently available federal (i.e., High Efficiency Electric Home Rebate [HEEHRA], Homeowner Managing Energy Savings [HOMES] Rebate, Inflation Reduction Act), state (i.e., TEHC Clean California), regional (i.e., Southern California Regional Energy Network [SoCalREN] Home Upgrade Program, SoCalREN Multifamily Program), and local (i.e., GWP’s Home Energy and Water Saving Rebates Program) funding makes it so that low- and middle-income residents in Glendale can install heat pump space and water heaters at no additional cost compared to gas space and water heaters. In some cases, such customers will even be able to install the heat pump water heaters for free.13 This substantial amount of funding available to Glendale residents and businesses will help drive the voluntary market trend for electric space and water heating appliances through 2030.

Second, voluntary replacements will also be supported by new SCAQMD rules that mandate the transition to zero-NOx emissions for key appliances in both new and existing buildings.14 The SCAQMD rules were not quantified directly as they do not begin until 2029, however, they do support the overall market trend towards all-electric space and water heating. Rule 1146.2 requires larger water heaters to comply with zero-emission standards, with a phased schedule beginning January 1, 2029, for units under 200,000 Btu/hr in existing buildings. Rule 1111 targets natural gas- fired furnaces used for interior space heating, requiring fan-type central furnaces in existing residential and commercial buildings to comply by January 1, 2028. Rule 1121 focuses on residential natural gas-fired water heaters, setting zero-emission compliance dates for units installed in new and existing buildings, with the deadline for existing buildings being January 1, 2027. To help alleviate the upfront costs associated with transitioning to zero-emission technologies, the 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) includes proposed incentive programs aimed at encouraging early adoption of these appliances.14
As discussed in the first point, market trends are moving rapidly toward electrification, and Glendale is well-positioned to align with these trends due to ongoing electrification initiatives. With the introduction of this CAAP and the implementation of zero-NOx emission standards, Glendale is expected to further accelerate this transition. Many of Glendale's actions (listed above), which support voluntary adoption of electric appliances, are expected to be implemented in phases 1 and 2 of the CAAP, or between the years 2025-2030. Assuming full implementation of these approaches occur during the 2027-2030 implementation years, approximately 12 percent of residential and nonresidential natural gas consumption from these appliances is estimated to reach end-of-life (EOL). For the purposes of quantification, a conservative estimate of seven percent reduction of residential and nonresidential natural gas consumption was applied, resulting in a total of 20 percent natural gas consumption between Glendale's ordinance and voluntary replacement methods. This is supported by the phased implementation of SCAQMD rules, along with Glendale's

12 Opinion Dynamics. California Heat Pump Residential Market Characterization and Baseline Study (2022). Accessed at:
https://pda.energydataweb.com/#!/documents/2625/view.
13 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Installation Costs for Zero-NOx Space and Water Heating Appliances (2024). 14 SCAQMD. Residential and Commercial Building Appliances (2024). Accessed at: https://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules- compliance/residential-and-commercial-building-appliances. 439 of 961

Building Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 23 outreach and funding actions, which will help increase electrification of this equipment ahead of the compliance deadlines. Current analyses determine that the City will not achieve its 2045 goal, and instead will achieve 88 percent reduction for residential, and 81 percent reduction for nonresidential. The City will find ways to get closer to their goal, through future CAAP updates, and technology developments.

Third, Glendale will support these trends to accelerate electrification by supporting a series of technical assistance programs and direct incentives to achieve early retirement of natural gas equipment. Action BLD-3.11 and Action BLD-3.12 focus on developing programs that mitigate logistical barriers to aligning with market trends. Action BLD-3.9 directs the City to develop a Building Performance Standard for large, existing commercial buildings that requires electrification before 2030 by setting GHG emissions requirements (e.g., GHG emissions per square foot) in line with the City’s GHG emissions reductions targets. Action BLD-3.13 establishes additional funding, education and technical support for aligning with electrification market trends. Lastly, Action BLD-

3.18 directs the City to work with local community organizations to establish an incentive program to stack existing incentives from TECH Clean California and the Inflation Reduction Act funding mechanisms. This Action sets to implement community-support programs that provide the technical assistance and incentives needed to make residential building electrification accessible and affordable to the community.

Additionally, the emissions associated with natural gas consumption from Southern California Gas (SCG) are expected to decrease due to Senate Bill 1440, which mandates gas utilities, including SCG, to replace pipeline-supplied natural gas with renewable natural gas (RNG). In 2022, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) set RNG supply requirements for California utilities, requiring them to increase the amount of RNG in the pipeline supplied to residential and commercial customers by 12 percent by 2030.15 RNG is derived from organic waste materials, such as landfill waste, sewer, and agricultural waste through processes like anaerobic digestion. Because organic waste naturally releases biogenic carbon dioxide during decomposition, conversion of organic waste into RNG means that any carbon dioxide released during combustion of RNG is considered part of the natural carbon cycle and does not contribute a net increase in carbon dioxide emissions to the atmosphere like combustion of fossil derived natural gas does. Production and consumption of RNG still releases non-biogenic GHG emissions, but to a lesser extent than extraction and consumption of fossil derived natural gas.16 The information on SB 1440 provided here is for informational purposes only. The potential GHG emissions reductions associated with SB 1440's RNG procurement requirements are not quantified in this CAAP as it is unclear how extensively SB 1440 might affect emissions linked to natural gas sourced from pipelines.

These Actions, along with SCAQMD rules, the existing market trends and available incentives, will help capture the remaining equipment replacements needed to reduce GHG emissions from natural gas consumption that the electrification ordinances do not cover (i.e., replacements before equipment reaches end-of-life). Because early retirement of natural gas appliances and equipment is more aggressive than actions needed to align with state goals and regulations, the City will need to monitor and scale their level of effort over time to meet the ambitious targets of this Measure.

Table 11 shows the parameters and data sources that support the existing building voluntary

15 Natural Gas intelligence. California Natural Gas Utilities Requried by 2030 to Supply 12% RNG (2022). Accessed at:
https://www.naturalgasintel.com/news/california-natural-gas-utilities-required-by-2030-to-supply-12- rng/#:~:text=California%27s%20natural%20gas%20utilities%20are%20mandated%20to%20supply,and%20other%20pollutants%20to%20 meet%20state%20emission%20goals
16 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2021). An Overview of Renewable Natural Gas from Biogas. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-02/documents/lmop_rng_document.pdf 440 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

24 replacement GHG emission reductions and Table 12 shows the calculations as outlined in Equations 3 through 3.4.

Existing Building Voluntary Replacement Equations
Equation 3 CO2e ReductionNG,y,i=Σ((Fuel Avoidedj,y,i*EFNG)+(Fuel Avoidedj,y,i*(LPipeline+LEnd- use)*EFNGL))-(Elec Convertedy,i*EFelec,y,i*(1+LT&D))
Equation 3.1 Elec Converty,i = Σ (Fuel Avoidedj,y,i*CFelec/Effweighted,i) Equation 3.2 Effweighted,y,i = Σ(Effelec,j*(EOLNG,j,y,i/(EOLNG,y,i,wh+EOLNG,y,i,HVAC) Equation 3.3 Fuel Avoidedj,y,i=Fuely,i*(EOLNG,j,y,i*Fuel Sharej,i*MSelec,j,y) Equation 3.4 EOLNG,j,y,i=1/LSPj,i*(y-imp.yi)
Equation 3.5 Effelec,j = Σ Effelec,j,k * Propelec,j,k
Table 11 Existing Building Voluntary Replacement Parameters and Data Sources Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 3
CO2e
ReductionNG,y,
i
Natural gas GHG emission
reductions
See calculation
table
MT CO2e Calculated
Fuel
Avoidedj,y,i
Natural gas consumption
avoided
See calculation
table
therms Calculated
EFNG Natural gas emission factor 0.005311 MT
CO2e/therm
See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report
EFNGL Natural gas leakage emission
factor

0.053067 MT
CO2e/therm
See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report
Elec
Convertedy,i
Electricity usage from
conversion
See calculation
table
kWh Calculated
EFelec,y,i Forecasted electricity emission
factor
See calculation
table
MT CO2e/kWh See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report
Lpipeline Natural gas pipeline leakage
percentage

2.3% percentage See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report
LEnd-use Natural gas end-use leakage
percentage

0.5% percentage See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report
LT&D Electricity transmission and
distribution loss percentage

4.40% percentage See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report
y Year 2030 or 2045 year —
i Subsector Residential or
Nonresidential
— —
j Electric equipment type HVAC or water
heater
— —
Equation 3.1
441 of 961

Building Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 25 Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
CFelec Electricity to therms
conversion factor

29.3 kWh/therm Metric Conversions1
Effelec,j Efficiency factor of electric
equipment relative to natural
gas equipment
See calculation
table
unitless Calculated
Equation 3.2
Effweighted,i,y Weighted average efficiency
factor
See calculation
table
unitless Calculated
Equation 3.3
Fuely,i Forecasted natural gas
consumption after new
building electrification
See calculation
table
therms See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report
EOLNG,j,y,i Percent of equipment reaching
end of life
— — —
EOLNG,y,i,wh Percent of water heaters
reaching end-of-life
See calculation
table
percentage Calculated
EOLNG,y,i,HVAC Percent of HVAC units
reaching end-of-life
See calculation
table
percentage Calculated
Fuel Sharej,i Percent of sector natural gas
consumption
— — —
Fuel
Sharewh,Res
Percent of residential natural
gas consumption from water
heaters
38% percentage Synapse2
Fuel
Sharewh,Nonr
es
Percent of nonresidential
natural gas consumption from
water heaters
28% percentage Synapse2
Fuel
ShareHVAC,Re
s
Percent of residential natural
gas consumption from HVAC
units
39% percentage Synapse2
Fuel
ShareHVAC,N
onres
Percent of nonresidential
natural gas consumption from
HVAC units
42% percentage Synapse2
EOL_Reduced
NG,y
EOL natural gas reductions — — —
EOL_Reduce
dNG,2030
EOL natural gas reductions by
2030
70% percentage Assumption
EOL_Reduce
dNG,2045
EOL natural gas reductions by
2045
100% percentage Assumption
MSelec,j,y Market share of electric
equipment
— — —
MSelec,wh, 2045 Market share of electric water
heaters
95% percentage Assume domination of market
by 2045
MSelec,HVAC,20
45 Market share of electric space
heating units
95% percentage Assume domination of market
by 2045
Equation 3.4
LSPi,wh Average water heater lifespan
in sector
— — —
442 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

26 Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
LSPresidential,
wh
Average residential water
heater lifespan
13 years EIA5
LSPnonresident
ial,wh
Average nonresidential water
heater lifespan
10 years EIA5
LSPi,HVAC Average HVAC unit lifespan in
sector
— — —
LSPresidential,
HVAC
Average residential HVAC unit
lifespan

21.5 years EIA5
LSPnonresident
ial,HVAC
Average nonresidential HVAC
unit lifespan
23 years EIA5
imp.yi Ordinance implementation
year
— — —
imp.yresidenti
al
Implementation starting year 2027 year Assuming BLD-3 ordinance implementation year as
conservative estimate of local
alignment with voluntary
replacement trends
imp.ynonresid
ential
Implementation starting year 2027 year Assuming BLD-3 ordinance implementation year as
conservative estimate of local
alignment with voluntary
replacement trends
Equation 3.5
Effelec,HVAC Efficiency factor of HVAC
systems relative to natural gas
equipment
See calculation
table
unitless —
Effelec,HVAC,H
P
Efficiency factor of heat pumps 3 unitless Leonardo Energy6 and European Copper Institute7
Effelec,HVAC,ER Efficiency factor of heat pumps 3 unitless Leonardo Energy6 and European Copper Institute7
Effelec,wh,ER Efficiency factor of heat pumps
relative to natural gas
3 unitless Leonardo Energy6 and
European Copper Institute7
Propelec,HVAC,k Proportion of electric
equipment types making up
the electric HVAC market
— — —
Propelec,HVAC
,HP
proportion of heat pump
technology for HVAC systems
18% percentage Calculated based on the
combined market share of
heat pumps and electric
resistance heaters for space
heating4
Propelec,HVAC
,ER
proportion of electric
resistance technology for
HVAC systems
82% percentage Calculated based on the
combined market share of
heat pumps and electric
resistance heaters for space
heating4
443 of 961

Building Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 27 Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Propelec,wh,ER Electric HVAC technology
proportion of electric
resistance space heaters
100% percentage As high efficiency technology
(i.e. solar and heat pumps) is
1% of the market, assume all
water heaters are electric
resistance as a conservative
estimation3
k types of options for a given
electric equipment system
e.g. heat pumps,
electric
resistance
— —
Notes: “—“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows 1 Metric Conversions. Therms (US) to Kilowatt-hours. Available at: https://www.metric-conversions.org/energy-and-power/therms-us- to-kilowatt-hours.htm
2 Synapse Energy Economics, Inc. 2018. Decarbonization of Heating Energy Use in California Buildings, Figure 2. Available at:
https://www.synapse-energy.com/sites/default/files/Decarbonization-Heating-CA-Buildings-17-092-1.pdf 3 Opinion Dynamics. 2022. California Heat Pump Residential Market Characterization and Baseline Study, Figure 34. Available at:
https://pda.energydataweb.com/api/view/2625/OD-CPUC-Heat-Pump-Market-Study-Report_Final.pdf 4 Opinion Dynamics. 2022. California Heat Pump Residential Market Characterization and Baseline Study, Figure 21. Available at:
https://pda.energydataweb.com/api/view/2625/OD-CPUC-Heat-Pump-Market-Study-Report_Final.pdf 5 U.A. Energy Information Administration (eia). 2023. Updated Buildings Sector Appliance and Equipment Costs and Efficiencies.

Available at: https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/buildings/equipcosts/pdf/full.pdf 6 Leonardo Energy - Knowledge Base. 2023. How efficient is a heat pump?. Available at: https://help.leonardo-energy.org/hc/en- us/articles/203047881-How-efficient-is-a-heat-pump
7 European Copper Institute. 2018. Heat Pumps: Integrating technologies to decarbonize heating and cooling. Accessed at:
https://www.ehpa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/White_Paper_Heat_pumps-1.pdf 444 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

28 Table 12 Existing Building Voluntary Replacement GHG Emission Reduction Calculations Definition Definition Units Sector 2030 2045
Equation 3.5
Effelec,wh Efficiency factor of water heaters
relative to natural gas
unitless Residential 3.00 3.00
Nonresidential 3.00 3.00
Effelec,HVAC Efficiency factor of HVAC systems
relative to natural gas equipment
unitless Residential 3.00 3.00
Nonresidential 3.00 3.00
Equation 3.4
EOLNG,y,i,wh Percent of water heaters reaching
end-of-life since ordinance
implementation
percentage Residential 23.08% 100.00%
Nonresidential 30.00% 100.00%
EOLNG,y,i,HVAC Percent of HVAC units reaching
end-of-life since ordinance
implementation
percentage Residential 13.95% 83.72%
Nonresidential 13.04% 78.26%
imp.yi Ordinance implementation year year Residential 2027 2027 Nonresidential 2027 2027
Equation 3.3
Fuely,i Forecasted natural gas
consumption after new building
electrification and existing
building ordinance
therms Residential 23,283,432 10,608,116
Nonresidential 8,765,622 4,810,366
EOL_NGy,i Natural gas consumption reaching
end of life
therms Residential 3,308,830 7,494,757
Nonresidential 1,216,516 2,928,049
EOL_ReducedNG
,y
Target natural gas reductions percentage — 70.00% 100.00% Fuel Avoidedy,i Natural gas consumption avoided therms Residential 2,316,181 7,494,757 Nonresidential 851,561 2,928,049
Equation 3.2
Effweighted,y,i Weighted average efficiency factor unitless Residential 3.00 3.00 Nonresidential 3.00 3.00
Equation 3.1
Elec Convertedi Electricity usage from conversion
of water heater & HVAC systems
kWh Residential 22,621,366 73,198,794
Nonresidential 8,316,914 28,597,276
Equation 3
EFelec,y,i Forecasted electricity emission
factor
MT
CO2e/kWh
Residential 0.0001345 0.0000000
Nonresidential 0.0001345 0.0000000
CO2e
ReductionNG,y,i
Natural gas GHG emission
reductions
MT CO2e Residential 12,568 50,944
Nonresidential 4,621 19,903
445 of 961

Building Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 29 BLD-4: Decarbonize and make municipal buildings resilient by 2035.

Measure BLD-4 commits Glendale to decarbonize municipal buildings and facilities City-wide. While the strategies to decarbonize municipal buildings and facilities will reduce GHG emissions, emissions from municipal building energy are included as a subset of the nonresidential building energy sector in the Glendale 2021 Community GHG Inventory. This means the associated GHG emission reductions are included within the community Implementation Measures (i.e., BLD-1 through BLD3).

Thus, to avoid double counting, reductions from this municipal implementation measure are not counted towards the 2030 and 2045 targets. However, the City intends to lead on building decarbonization in order to reduce GHG emissions and as a demonstration of decarbonization within the community.
446 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

30 4 Mobility and Land Use Systems
The City of Glendale’s Mobility and Land Use System Measures and Actions aim to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and leverage renewable and carbon-free electricity to reduce GHG emissions from the transportation system. Reducing VMT consists of transitioning Glendale residents and visitors out of single-occupancy vehicles and into active transportation mode options (i.e., walking and biking) and public and shared transit options (e.g., public buses, rail, carpools) by both improving the safety and convenience of these modes and adopting policies to discourage single- occupancy vehicle commutes. The remaining VMT will then be decarbonized by increasing the adoption of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs). When combined with renewable and carbon-free electricity, electric vehicles (EVs) eliminate GHG emissions from fossil fuel combustion and transition commutes to a zero-emission operational footprint. Additionally, under this System Measures and Actions also target off-road equipment and vehicles for decarbonization. Based on this approach, the CAAP’s Mobility and Land Use System consists of the following Measures presented in Table 13.

The table also indicates which Measures are quantitative and which Measures are supportive. The following subsections detail the substantial evidence and calculation methodologies of the quantitative Measures and the role of the supportive Measures.

Table 13 Mobility and Land Use Systems GHG Emission Reduction Summary Measure
ID Measure
2030 GHG Emission
Reductions
(MT CO2e)
2045 GHG Emission
Reductions
(MT CO2e)
Mobility and Land Use Systems
MLS-1 Reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles by
promoting increased residential densities along transit and commercial corridors, increasing mix of land uses and expanding the range of attainable housing choices.

Supportive Supportive
MLS-2 Increase active transportation mode share to 3% by 2030 and 10% by 2045 by increasing the safety and availability of the transportation system to support walking and
biking for all members of the community.
1,839 7,516
MLS-3 Enhance the transit system to be more resilient,
accessible, and convenient to increase mode share to 5% by 2030 and 10% by 2045.
6,929 16,882
MLS-4 Increase passenger and commercial zero-emission vehicle use and adoption to 25% by 2030 and 90% by 2045,
respectively.
60,885 290,572
MLS-5 Electrify or otherwise decarbonize 30% of community- operated off-road equipment (e.g., lawnmowers, leaf
blowers, and chainsaws) operations by 2030 and 100% by
2045.
4,206 16,149
MLS-6 Transition to 45% zero-emission municipal fleet by 2030 and 100% by 2040.

Supportive Supportive
Total 73,859 331,119
447 of 961

Mobility and Land Use Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 31 MLS-1: Reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles by promoting increased residential densities along transit and commercial corridors, increasing mix of land uses and expanding the range of attainable housing choices.

Measure MLS-1 directs Glendale to promote increased residential densities along transit and commercial corridors. Although this Measure may not be quantified in this CAAP due to the potential to double-count GHG emission reductions with Measures MLS-2 and MLS-3, it plays a critical role in reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and supporting the overall success of the program. Increasing residential density and adding diversity to neighborhoods near transit are key actions in reducing VMT, as they create more opportunities for people to live closer to jobs, services, and public transportation, reducing the need for single-occupancy vehicle trips. Studies show that higher densities and mixed-use developments near transit corridors are essential for achieving significant VMT reductions.17 By encouraging compact development and a wider range of housing options along transit routes, this Measure can reduce reliance on cars, facilitate shorter trips, and support a shift to more sustainable modes of transportation like walking, biking, and public transit.

Action MLS-1.3 leverages the Land Use Element update as part of the General Plan update to identify strategic zoning opportunities. Action MLS-1.5 prioritizes infill development around transit hubs to enhance accessibility. Action MLS-1.6 directs the City to update existing residential zoning districts to remove barriers and promote the development of ‘middle-housing’ along transit and commercial corridors. By increasing density and diversity in land use, this Measure helps lay the foundation for achieving Glendale’s VMT reduction goals and complements the active transportation and public transit mode share targets set by Measures MLS-2 and MLS-3.

17 Center for Transit-Oriented Development. Transit Oriented Development and the Potential for VMT-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Growth Reduction (2010). Accessed at: https://cnt.org/sites/default/files/publications/TOD-Potential-GHG-Emissions- Growth.FINAL_.pdf.
448 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

32 MLS-2: Increase active transportation mode share to 3% by 2030 and 10% by 2045 by increasing the safety and availability of the transportation system to support walking and biking for all members of the community.

Measure MLS-2 aims to increase Glendale’s active transportation mode share to 3 percent by 2030 and to 10 percent by 2045. The primary Actions that enable this Measure include:
▪ Action MLS-2.2 which directs the City to review and amend the existing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) ordinance and require specific employers to include money-based incentives for employees to take alternative modes of transportation; ▪ Action MLS-2.6 which directs the City to pursue finding to improve their long-range active transportation plans, including the Bicycle Transportation Plan, Circulation Element, Land Use Element Updates, and the Safe and Healthy Streets Plan; ▪ Action MLS-2.10 which directs the City to complete and implement the Vision Zero Action Plan by 2030, which includes a holistic realignment of traffic safety priorities, protocols and procedures;
▪ Action MLS-2.11 which leverages insights and best practices from successful initiatives in other jurisdictions to build on their experiences and implement a comprehensive Shared Bike program;
▪ Action MLS-2.12 which directs the City to implement the Bicycle Transportation Plan by 2045; ▪ Action MLS-2.21 which commits the City to completing the traffic calming strategies along San Fernando Road by 2030; and,
▪ Action MLS-2.25 which implements fortified street crossings with heightened safety measures at high-traffic or traditionally dangerous intersections to enhance road safety.

Currently, Glendale has low bicycle and walking mode shares. In 2021 (i.e., Glendale’s inventory year), Glendale’s bicycle and pedestrian mode shares were 0.7 percent and 12.1 percent, respectively.18 However, studies show that investments in active transportation infrastructure, such as those directed by this Measure, have demonstrated significant improvements in active transportation mode shifts and GHG emissions reductions.19 For example, urban cities that make a strong commitment to bicycle travel can see up to an 11 percent reduction in vehicle miles traveled and associated GHG emissions.20 Such reductions can be reasonably expected because in 2017, about 16 percent of vehicle trips made nationally were one mile or less—a distance easily travelled by foot or bicycle.21 In 2021, about 41 percent of vehicle trips were one mile or less in Glendale, and the average vehicle trip distance was 1.8 miles.22 Action MLS-2.6 supports this Measure by directing the City to improve its long-range active transportation plans. An improved, safer, and expanded pedestrian and bike network is the most effective and direct approach for shifting those shorter vehicle trips to walking, and studies show that distance to destinations is one of the strongest predictors of walking as a mode choice. Action MLS-2.12 also supports the implementation of active transportation infrastructure, as it addresses Glendale’s Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP)

18 Replica. Dashboard (2024). Accessed at: https://studio.replicahq.com/trends/dashboard/14/186640 19 Glazener, Andrew and Khreis, Haneen. Transforming our Cities: Best Practices Towards Clean Air and Active Transportation (2019).

Accessed at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40572-019-0228-1 20 Jacob Mason et al., Institute for Transportation & Development Policy and the University of California, Davis. A Global High Shift Cycling Scenario (2015). Accessed at: https://itdpdotorg.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/A-Global-High-Shift-Cycling- Scenario_Nov-2015.pdf
21 National Household Travel Survey. Population Vehicle Trips Statistics (2021). Accessed at: https://nhts.ornl.gov/vehicle-trips 22 Replica. Glendale VMT Study Fall 2021 (2024). Accessed at: https://studio.replicahq.com/places/studies/j14ivw9/map 449 of 961

Mobility and Land Use Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 33 specifically. The City is in the process of updating their 2012 BTP, with plans of constructing 90 miles of additional bike lanes by 2045.23
To estimate the mode shift potential of improving the City’s long-range active transportation plans, other cities’ bicycle and road networks were analyzed. The City of Davis leads the state with a 20 percent bicycle mode share24 and 9.2 miles of bike lane per square mile of the city.25 The City of Berkeley has a 9.7 percent bicycle mode26 with approximately 4.8 miles of bike lane per square mile of the city.27 Glendale’s current bicycle mode share is 0.7 percent according to Replica data,28 and has approximately 1.66 miles of bike lane per square mile of the City.29 With the City adding an additional 90 miles of bike lanes through implementation of the BTP, there would be approximately

4.61 miles of bike lane per square mile of City. Given that Glendale’s projected 4.61 miles of bike lane per square mile closely aligns with the bike lane networks in cities like Berkeley and Davis, where bicycle mode shares have reached 9.7 percent and 20 percent respectively, achieving a four percent bicycle mode share by 2030 is a realistic and attainable goal. This assumption provides a conservative and reasonable estimate of bike mode share increase that lies well below similar city references (City of Davis and City of Berkeley, see above), and is supported by the City of Glendale’s efforts to implement 90 miles of new bike lanes in the next 20 years, with 25 miles being implemented in the first phase of development. Additionally, the key actions associated with this Measure (listed above) will support this increase in mode share by prioritizing efforts to implement bike share programs, enhance safety, increase access, and incentivize mode shifts.

Table 14 shows the parameters and data sources that support the GHG emission reductions from active transportation mode shifts and Table 15 shows the calculations as outlined in Equations 5 through 5.2.

Active Transportation Mode Share Equations
Equation 5 CO2e Reductioni,y= VMT Reducedi,y*VMT EFi,y
Equation 5.1 VMT Reducedi,y= (( VMTi,y*TPMi,y)/MSpass,by)*TLi*MS IncreaseBike,y Equation 5.2 MS IncreaseBike,y=MS TargetActive,y -MSBike,by

23 Draft Bicycle Transportation Plan (2024). Provided by the City via SharePoint on 09/04/24. More information regarding the Plan provided at: https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/community-development/planning/plans-for-mobility/bicycle- transportation-plan
24 The Guardian. Davis, California – the American city which fell in love with the bicycle (2015). Accessed at:
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/aug/03/davis-california-the-american-city-which-fell-in-love-with-the-bicycle 25 City of Davis. Accessed at: https://www.cityofdavis.org/city-hall/public-works-engineering-and-transportation/bike-pedestrian- program/davis-bike-and- pedestrian-
infrastructure#:~:text=4%20miles%20of%20buffered%20bike,and%20twenty%2Done%20underpass%20crossings 26 City of Berkeley. City of Berkeley Bicycle Plan (2017). Accessed at:
https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Public_Works/Level_3_-_Transportation/Berkeley-Bicycle-Plan-2017- Executive%20Summary.pdf
27 Visit Berkeley. Fact Sheet. Accessed at: https://www.visitberkeley.com/media-press/press-kit/fact-sheet/ 28 Replica. Dashboard (2024). Accessed at: https://studio.replicahq.com/trends/dashboard/14/186640 29 Per data provided by the City, Glendale currently has 50.5 miles of bike lanes. Glendale land area in square miles is 30.48, according to US Census data. Accessed at: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/glendalecitycalifornia/LND110220#LND110220 450 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

34 Table 14 Active Transportation Mode Share Parameters and Data Sources Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 5
CO2e Reduction VMT GHG emission
reductions
See calculation
table
MT CO2e Calculated
VMT Reduced VMT reduced See calculation
table
miles Calculated
VMT EF VMT emission factor See calculation
table
MT CO2e/mile See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
Equation 5.1
VMT Forecasted VMT See calculation
able
miles See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
TPM Forecasted trips per
mile
See calculation
table
trips/mile See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
MSpass,by Passenger trip mode
share in baseline year

83.27% percentage Replica Glendale Dashboard
TL Average bicycle trip
length

1.5 miles CARB Quantifying Reductions in
Vehicle Miles Traveled from New
Bike Paths, Lanes, and Cycle Tracks:

Technical Documentation1
MS IncreaseBike Bicycle mode share
increase
See calculation
table
percentage Calculated
i VMT type Passenger – –
y Year 2030 or 2045 – –
Equation 5.2
MS TargetActive,y Active transportation
mode share target
See calculation
table
Percentage --
MS Target Active,
2030
3% percentage Conservative estimate based on
bicycle mode shares currently seen in
Davis and Berkeley2
MS Target Active,
2045
10% percentage Measure MLS-2 reach goal
MSBike,by Bicycle mode share in
baseline year

0.73% percentage Replica Glendale Dashboard
by Baseline year 2021 year See references in Appendix GHG Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
Notes: “–“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows 1 CARB. Quantifying Reductions in Vehicle Miles Traveled from New Bike Paths, Lanes, and Cycle Tracks: Technical Documentation (2019). Accessed at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/auction-proceeds/bicycle_facilities_technical_041519.pdf 2 US Census Bureau. 2021: ACS 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables. S0801|Commuting Characteristics by Sex. 451 of 961

Mobility and Land Use Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 35 Table 15 Active Transportation Mode Share GHG Emission Reduction Calculations Variable Definition Units VMT Type 2030 2045
Equation 5.2
MS TargetActive Active transportation mode
share target
percentage Passenger 3.00% 10.00%
MS IncreaseBike Bicycle mode share increase percentage Passenger 2.27% 9.27% Equation 5.1
VMT Forecasted VMT miles Passenger 1,267,549,175 1,342,128,958 TPM Forecasted trips per mile trips/mile Passenger 0.120091 0.125075 VMT Reduced VMT reduced miles Passenger 6,233,801 28,043,007 Equation 5
VMT EF VMT emission factor MT CO2e/VMT Passenger 0.000295 0.000268 CO2e Reduction VMT GHG emission
reductions
MT CO2e Passenger 1,839 7,516
452 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

36 MLS-3: Enhance the transit system to be more resilient, accessible, and convenient to increase mode share to 5% by 2030 and 10% by 2045.

Measure MLS-3 aims to increase Glendale’s transit mode share to 5 percent by 2030 and to 10 percent by 2045. The primary Actions that enable this Measure include:
▪ Action MLS-3.2 which directs the City to coordinate with Metro, BurbankBus, La Canada Flintridge (LCF) Shuttle, Metrolink, and Amtrak, to increase convenient and safe access to the transit system. It also emphasizes working with L.A. Metro and Glendale Beeline to identify opportunities to increase transit options in Glendale;
▪ Action MLS-3.4 which commits the City to partnering with Metro to provide qualifying low- income residents of Los Angeles County with monthly free regional rides as part of the Low Income Fare is Easy Program, as well as exploring additional partnerships with Metrolink, Amtrak, and potentially rideshare companies to create a centralized program; ▪ Action MLS-3.6 which directs the City to utilize Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) grant and local transportation sales tax measure funds to improve transit system amenities and features; and
▪ Action MLS-3.10 which directs the City to continue to partner with Metro to complete the North Hollywood to Pasadena Transit Corridor project to connect the cities of Los Angeles (North Hollywood and Eagle Rock communities), Burbank, Glendale, and Pasadena.

In 2021 (i.e., Glendale’s inventory year), Glendale’s public transit mode share was 1.6 percent.30 However, other cities in Los Angeles County exhibit higher public transit mode shares. In 2021, the City of Pasadena had a public transit mode share of about 5 percent and the City of Los Angeles had one of about 8 percent.31, 32 Key strategies employed by cities looking to increase public transportation mode share include significant expansions of public transportation service lines, designated streets or lanes for bus lines to decrease headways, implementation of taxes to support transit, and reduced parking availability. Studies have shown that expanding transit coverage through service routes and schedules can increase public transit mode share in a city. Specifically, studies which incorporated factors such as elasticity of transit demand and average mode shift factors have estimated that doubling transit coverage in a city can reduce VMT—and associated GHG emissions—up to 4.6 percent.33 With the focus of Action MLS-3.2 and Action MLS-3.10 on creating a more connected and reliable network of transit, it is reasonable to estimate that Glendale can expect a 1.82 percent reduction in passenger VMT in the City which would result from a 3.4 percent increase in mode share.34 Furthermore, Action MLS-3.4 and Action MLS-3.6 provide local funding opportunities and establish a tax revenue which will support transit infrastructure and operations. Quantification estimates suggest that a realistic goal set forth by this measure is a public transit mode share of 5 percent by 2030 and 10 percent by 2045. For the purpose of estimating GHG reductions, these percentages are made under the conservative assumption that the VMT reduction

30 Replica. Dashboard (2024). Accessed at: https://studio.replicahq.com/trends/dashboard/14/186640 31 US Census Bureau. 2021: ACS 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables. S0801|Commuting Characteristics by Sex. Accessed at:
https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST5Y2021.S0801?t=Commuting&g=160XX00US0656000 32 US Census Bureau. 2021: ACS 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables. S0801|Commuting Characteristics by Sex. Accessed at:
https://data.census.gov/table/ACSST5Y2021.S0801?t=Commuting&g=160XX00US0644000 33 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (2021). Accessed at:
https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Final%20Handbook_AB434.pdf 34 VMT reduction related to transit measures was quantified using CAPCOA T-24, T-25, and T-26 methodology that quantified VMT reduction for the extension of transit network coverage or hours, increase in transit service frequency, and implementation of transit- supportive roadway treatments, respectively.
453 of 961

Mobility and Land Use Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 37 from public transit actions would occur after the active transportation actions with diminishing returns rather than have an aggregated effect on total VMT.

Table 16 shows the parameters and data sources that support the GHG emission reductions associated with reducing vehicle miles traveled through public transit mode share and Table 17 shows the calculations as outlined in Equations 6 through 6.2.

Public Transit Mode Share Equations
Equation 6 CO2e Reductioni,y= VMT Reducedi,y*VMT EFi,y
Equation 6.1 VMT Reducedi,y= (VMTi,y-VMTactive,y)*TPMi,y )/MSpublic,by)*TLi*MS Increasepublic,y Equation 6.2 MS IncreasePublic,y=MS TargetPublic,y-MSPublic,by Table 16 Public Transit Mode Share Parameters and Data Sources Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 6
CO2e Reduction VMT GHG emission
reductions
See calculation
table
MT CO2e Calculated
VMT Reduced VMT reduced See calculation
table
miles Calculated
VMT EF VMT emission factor See calculation
table
MT CO2e/mile See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
Equation 6.1
VMT Forecasted VMT See calculation
table
miles See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
VMT Active,y Forecasted VMT after
active transportation
reductions
See calculation
table
miles Calculated
TPM Forecasted trips per
mile
See calculation
table
trips/mile See references in Appendix GHG
Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
MSpass,by Passenger trip mode
share in baseline year

83.27% percentage Replica Glendale Dashboard
TL Average public
transit trip length

3.8 miles Used regular bus trip to remain
conservative from American Public
Transportation Association’s Public
Transportation Fact Book1
MS
IncreasePublic
Public transit mode
share increase
See calculation
table
percentage Calculated
i VMT type Passenger — —
y Year 2030 or 2045 — —
Equation 6.2
MS Target Public,
y
Public transit mode
share target
— — —
454 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

38 Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
MS Target
Public,2030
— 5% percentage Conservative estimate based on
public transit mode shares currently
observed in Pasadena and Los
Angeles2
MS Target
Public,2045
— 10% percentage Measure MLS-3 reach goal
MSPublic,by Public transit mode
share in baseline year

2.60% percentage US Census Bureau. 2017: ACS 5-Year
Estimates Subject Tables3
by Baseline year 2021 year See references in Appendix GHG Inventory, Forecast, and Targets
Technical Report
Notes: “–“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows 1 American Public Transportation Association. Public Transportation Fact Book (2022). Accessed at: https://www.apta.com/wp- content/uploads/APTA-2022-Public-Transportation-Fact-Book.pdf 2 See footnotes 31 and 32.
3 US Census Bureau. 2021: ACS 5-Year Estimates Subject Tables. S0801|Commuting Characteristics by Sex.

Table 17 Public Transit Mode Share GHG Emission Reduction Calculations Variable Definition Units VMT Type 2030 2045
Equation 6.2
MS TargetPublic Public transit mode share
target
percentage Passenger 5.00% 10.00%
MS
IncreasePublic
Public transit mode share
increase
percentage Passenger 3.40% 8.40%
Equation 6.1
VMT Forecasted VMT after active
transportation reductions
miles Passenger 1,267,549,175 1,342,128,958
VMT Active VMt reduction from active
transportation targets
miles Passenger 6,233,801 28,043,007
TPM Forecasted trips per mile trips/mile Passenger 0.120091 0.125075 VMT Reduced VMT reduced miles Passenger 23,489,480 62,992,390 Equation 6
VMT EF VMT emission factor MT
CO2e/VMT
Passenger 0.000295 0.000268
CO2e Reduction VMT GHG emission
reductions
MT CO2e Passenger 6,929 16,882
455 of 961

Mobility and Land Use Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 39 MLS-4: Increase passenger and commercial zero-emission vehicle use and adoption to 25% by 2030 and 90% by 2045, respectively.

Measure MLS-4 aims to increase passenger and commercial zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) adoption in Glendale to 25 percent by 2030 and 90 percent by 2045. The state has established a goal of putting 5 million ZEVs on the road by 2030 and, according to executive order N-79-20, 100 percent of passenger vehicle sales are to be zero emission by 2035. This new executive order puts the total number of ZEVs on the road by 2035 at approximately 15 million.35 Based on the current number of vehicles registered in California and a 2 percent growth rate per year, 15 million ZEVs accounts for 35 percent of total passenger vehicles in 2035. Currently, the State is anticipated to reach 26 percent ZEV adoption across all vehicles by 2030.36,37 In recognition of the pressing need to decarbonize the transportation sector, Measure MLS-4 sets a goal of 25 percent ZEV adoption by 2030 and 90 percent by 2045 through ample public and private investments in electric vehicle charging infrastructure. The primary Actions that are designed to drive these investments and enable this Measure include:
▪ Action MLS-4.2 which directs the City to continue implementing the Glendale Electric Vehicle Reach Code;
▪ Action MLS-4.4 which directs the City to engage large employers and parking structure owners, as well as provide support to install public, shared, and private DC fast charging infrastructure; ▪ Action MLS-4.7 which directs the City to install at least 25 level II chargers per year, through public-private partnerships and on City-owned properties; ▪ Action MLS-4.8 which directs the City to incentivize residential electric vehicle charger installations and panel upgrades; and,
▪ Action MLS-4.9 which directs the City to continue working with SCAQMD to identify and provide funding for electric vehicles and charging infrastructure for disadvantaged business owners.

These actions enable zero-emission vehicle adoption because studies have consistently found that limited charging infrastructure is one of the primary barriers to electric vehicle adoption.38, 39 Publicly accessible electric vehicles chargers make owning an electric vehicle convenient for all drivers—including those who cannot charge at home or drive daily distances longer than their electric vehicle battery range. To this point, it is expected that 20 percent of electric vehicle charging nationally will occur at publicly accessible chargers in 2030.40 Estimation of EV infrastructure necessary to meet this Measure’s goal is based on the U.S. Department of Energy’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Projection Tool outputs for the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim Metropolitan

35 Susan Carpenter. Spectrum News 1. October 2020. What it will take to get 100% EV sales in California. Accessed at:
https://spectrumnews1.com/ca/la-west/transportation/2020/10/05/what-it-will-take-to-sell-100--evs-in-california 36 Crisostomo, Noel et al. Assembly Bill 2127 Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Assessment: Analyzing Charging Needs to Support Zero-Emission Vehicles in 2030. Accessed at: https://calmatters.org/environment/2023/03/california-electric-cars- demographics/?utm_id=91724&sfmc_id=4863450
37 Based on the zero-emission vehicle goals for passenger vehicles established by Executive Order N-79-20, eight million zero-emission vehicles are anticipated statewide by 2030. Glendale calculated that these eight million zero-emission vehicles represent 26 percent of the total passenger vehicles expected statewide by 2030 (based on statewide passenger car and light-duty truck counts in 2016 and population estimates for 2016 and 2030).
38 Kumar, Rajeev Ranjan and Kumar Alok. Adoption of Electric Vehicle: A Literature Review and Prospects for Sustainability (2020).

Accessed at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S095965261934781X 39 Winjobi, Olumide and Kelly, Jarod. Used Plug-in Electric Vehicles as a Means of Transportation Equity in Low-Income Households (2021). Accessed at: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1658592 40 Kampshoff, Philipp et al. Building the Electric-Vehicle Charging Infrastructure America Needs (2022). Accessed at:
https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-sector/our-insights/building-the-electric-vehicle-charging-infrastructure-america-needs 456 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

40 Area.41 The tool is used to calculate the number of publicly accessible EV chargers needed in Glendale to support a 25 percent ZEV adoption in 2030 and a 90 percent ZEV adoption in 2045. The quantification assumes all ZEVs will be EVs to remain conservative in the plan for EV chargers.

Table 18 shows the parameters and data sources used to calculate the publicly accessible EV chargers needed in 2030 and 2045 with the Department of Energy’s Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Projection Tool and Table 19 shows the calculations as outlined in Equations 8 through 8.2.

Publicly Accessible Electric Vehicle Chargers Equation
Equation 8 PEV Chargersy = Region PEV Chargersy*(EVsy/(Region EVsy))-Existing PEV Chargersby
Equation 8.1 EVsy=Populationy*(Vehiclesby/Populationby)*EV Target Pass,y Equation 8.2 Region EVsy=Region Vehiclesy* EV Target Pass,y Table 18 Publicly Accessible Electric Vehicle Charger Parameters and Data Sources Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 8
PEV Chargers New publicly accessible
electric vehicle chargers
needed in Glendale
See
calculation
table
chargers Calculated
Region PEV
Chargers
Regional electric vehicle
chargers needed
— — Estimated using the Electric
Vehicle Infrastructure
Projection Tool public
charger outputs for the Los
Angeles-Long Beach-
Anaheim Metropolitan Area
with the Region EVs2030 value
as the input.1
Region PEV
Chargers2030
Regional electric vehicle
chargers needed in 2030
90,660 electric vehicles
Region PEV
Chargers2045
Regional electric vehicle
chargers needed in 2045
646,755 electric vehicles
EVs Electric vehicles targeted in
Glendale
See
calculation
table
electric vehicles Calculated
Region EVs Regional electric vehicles
targeted
See
calculation
table
electric vehicles Calculated
Existing PEV
Chargersb
Existing publicly accessible
electric vehicle chargers in
Glendale
232 chargers PlugShare2
y Year 2030 or
2045
year –
by Baseline year 2021 year –
Equation 8.1
Populationy Forecasted population in
Glendale
See
calculation
table
people See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast,
and Targets Technical
Report

41 U.S. Department of Energy. Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Projection Tool (EVI-Pro) Lite. Accessed at: https://afdc.energy.gov/evi-pro- lite
457 of 961

Mobility and Land Use Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 41 Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Vehiclesby Vehicles in baseline year in
Glendale
132,112 vehicles California Department of
Motor Vehicles3
Population Population in baseline year
in Glendale
200,693 people See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast,
and Targets Technical
Report
EV Target
Pass,y
Electric vehicle adoption
target
— — —
EV Target
Pass,2030
Electric vehicle adoption
target (2030)
25% percentage State Goal based on AB 2127
EV Target
Pass,2045
Electric vehicle adoption
target (2045)
90% percentage Measure MLS-4 target
Equation 8.2
Region
Vehiclesy
Regional vehicles 10,518,600 vehicles Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Projection
Tool value for the Los
Angeles-Long Beach-
Anaheim Metropolitan Area1
Y Year 2030 or
2045
year –
Notes: “–“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows 1 U.S. Department of Energy. Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Projection Tool (EVI-Pro) Lite. 2 PlugShare. EV Charging in Glendale, CA. Accessed at: https://www.plugshare.com/directory/us/california/glendale 3 California Department of Motor Vehicles. Fuel Type by County as of 1/1/2020. Accessed at:
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/uploads/2020/09/MotorVehicleFuelTypes_City_01012020.pdf Table 19 Publicly Accessible Electric Vehicle Charger Parameters and Data Sources Variable Definition Units 2030 2045
Equation 8.2
EV Target Pass,y Electric vehicle adoption target percentage 25% 90% Region EVsy Regional electric vehicles targeted electric vehicles 2,629,650 9,466,740 Equation 8.1
Populationy Forecasted population in Glendale people 206,033 216,906 EVsy Electric vehicles targeted in Glendale electric vehicles 33,907 128,506 Equation 8
PEV Chargersy New publicly accessible electric
vehicle chargers needed in Glendale
chargers 937 8,547
Through public-private funding and partnerships, such as those specified in Action MLS-4.8 and Action MLS-4.9, Glendale will facilitate the installation 937 publicly accessible EV chargers by 2030 and 8,547 publicly accessible EV chargers by 2045 at prioritized locations on City-owned properties and across the community. While the City will play a key role in identifying strategic sites and providing support, the majority of these installations will be carried out by private companies, which will also maintain the chargers.42 The City will focus on installing chargers in locations not well served by market forces including in disadvantaged communities and areas with low, but increasing,

42 Public-private funding and partnerships are expected due to the large amount of state and federal funding available to support California’s need for over one million public and shared chargers by 2030 to meet Executive Order B-48-18’s ZEV goals. 458 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

42 EV adoption. Additionally, these ZEVs will be supported by private electric vehicle chargers in new developments and existing buildings.

Action MLS-4.2 directs the City to continue implementing the Tier 2 voluntary measures of the California Green Building Standards Code—Part 11, Title 24, California Code of Regulations—known as CALGreen, through the Glendale Electric Vehicle Reach Code.43 While these Tier 2 requirements are already mandatory for new commercial, single-family, and multifamily construction in Glendale, the City will need to update its ordinance by 2026 to align with the new Title 24 standards. The current requirements mandate that 20 percent of total parking spaces in new developments be equipped for EV charging, and this action ensures that the reach code will be updated every three years to stay in alignment with the latest standards. Action MLS-4.8 directs the City to incentivize residential vehicle charger installations, and Action MLS-4.9 directs the City to continue working with SCAQMD to provide funding for EV charging infrastructure for businesses. These funding options, along with new federal and State funding (e.g., Inflation Reduction Act) will help cover the upfront costs to purchasing an EV and installing the equipment or infrastructure upgrades needed to charge the EV at home as high costs are one of the barriers to EV adoption for low-income households.44 These Actions will enable Glendale to install as many privately owned EV chargers in existing buildings and new developments as practical to support a 25 percent ZEV adoption by 2030 and a 90 percent ZEV adoption by 2045.

Table 20 shows the parameters and data sources that support GHG emission reductions from the zero-emission vehicle adoption and Table 21 shows the calculations as outlined in Equations 7 through 7.2.

Passenger Electric Vehicle Adoption Equations
Equation 7 CO2e ReductionVMT,i,y=(VMT ReducedICE,i,y*EFVMT,i,y)-(Elec Convertedi,y*EFelec,i,y*(1+LT&D)) Equation 7.1 Elec Convertedi,y =VMT ReducedICE,i,y*EPMZEV,i,y Equation 7.2 VMT ReducedICE,i,y=(VMTi,y-VMTalt,i,y)*(ZEV Adoptioni,y-ZEV Adoption Baselinei,y) Table 20 Electric Vehicle Adoption Parameters and Data Sources Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 7
CO2e
ReductionVMT
VMT GHG emission reductions See calculation
table
MT CO2e Calculated
VMT ReducedICE Internal combustion engine
VMT reduced
See calculation
table
miles Calculated
EFVMT,y Forecasted VMT emission
factor
See calculation
table
MT CO2e/mile See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast,
and Targets Technical
Report
Elec Converted Electricity from zero-emission
vehicle conversion
See calculation
table
kWh Calculated

43 City of Glendale. New Building Electrification Ordinance (2023). Accessed at:
https://www.glendaleca.gov/government/departments/office-of-the-city-manager/new-building-electrification-ordinance 44 Gaillard, Isa. Ingredients for Equitable Electrification: Analyzing Equity in Statewide Electric Vehicle Rebate Programs (2022). Accessed at: https://greenlining.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Greenlining-Ingredients-Equitable-Transportation-WebFINAL.pdf 459 of 961

Mobility and Land Use Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 43 Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
EFelec Forecasted residential
electricity emission factor
See calculation
table
MT
CO2e/kWh
See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast,
and Targets Technical
Report
LT&D Electricity transmission and
distribution loss percentage

4.4% percentage See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast,
and Targets Technical
Report
i VMT type Passenger — —
y Year 2030 or 2045 — —
Equation 7.1
EPM ZEV,I,y
Forecasted electricity usage
per mile of zero-emission
vehicles
vehicles See
calculation
table
kWh/mile
Equation 7.2
VMTi,y Forecasted total VMT See calculation
table
miles See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast,
and Targets Technical
Report
VMTalt,I,y VMT reduction from
alternative transit methods
See calculation
table
miles Calculation
ZEV Adoptioni,y Zero-emission vehicle
adoption target
— — —
ZEV
Adoptionpass,203
0 — 25% percentage State Goal based on AB 2127
and enabled by new public
charger target installation
(see Table 19)
ZEV
Adoptionpass,204
5 — 90% percentage Measure MLS-4 target
ZEV
Adoptioncom,203
0 — 25% percentage State Goal based on AB 2127
and enabled by new public
charger target installation
(see Table 19)
ZEV
Adoptioncom,204
5 — 90% percentage Measure MLS-4 target
ZEV Adoption
Baseline
Zero-emission vehicle
adoption baseline
See calculation
table
percentage See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast,
and Targets Technical
Report
Notes: “–“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows 460 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

44 Table 21 Electric Vehicle Adoption GHG Emission Reduction Calculations Variable Definition Units VMT Type 2030 2045
Equation 7.2
VMTi,y Forecasted total VMT miles Passenger 1,267,549,175 1,342,128,958 Commercial 48,615,472 51,472,541
VMTalt,I,y VMT reduction from
alternative transit methods
miles Passenger 19,754,187 70,526,770
Commercial 0 0
ZEV Adoptioni,y Electric vehicle adoption
target
percentage Passenger 25.00% 90.00%
Commercial 25.00% 90.00%
ZEV Adoption
Baselinei,y
Electric vehicle adoption
baseline
percentage Passenger 7.14% 9.43%
Commercial 7.64% 33.39%
VMT ReducedICE,I,y Internal combustion engine
VMT reduced
VMT Passenger 222,856,185 1,024,529,883
Commercial 8,439,646 29,138,606
Equation 7.1
EPMZEV,I,y Forecasted electricity usage
per mile of electric vehicles
kWh/mile Passenger 0.3679 0.3688
Commercial 0.8773 0.9094
Elec Convertedi,y Electricity from electric
vehicle conversion
kWh Passenger 81,986,339 377,830,228
Commercial 7,404,296 26,499,172
Equation 7
EFelec,I,y Forecasted electricity
emission factor
MT
CO2e/kWh
Passenger 0.0001345 0.0000000
Commercial 0.0001345 0.0000000
EFVMT,I,y Forecasted VMT emission
factor
MT
CO2e/mile
Passenger 0.0002950 0.0002680
Commercial 0.0009630 0.0007010
CO2e ReductionVMT VMT GHG emission
reductions
MT CO2e Passenger 53,798 270,146
Commercial 7,088 20,426
461 of 961

Mobility and Land Use Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 45 MLS-5: Electrify or otherwise decarbonize 30% of community-operated off- road equipment (e.g., lawnmowers, leaf blowers, and chainsaws) operations by 2030 and 100% by 2045.

Measure MLS-5 creates a goal for Glendale to decarbonize 30 percent of community-operated small off-road engines (SORE) equipment by 2030 and 100 percent by 2045. The primary Actions that enable this Measure include:
▪ Action MLS-5.2 which commits the City to establishing a phased series of ordinances to ban local operation of gasoline and diesel-powered off-road vehicles and equipment by type; ▪ Action MLS-5.3 which directs the City to continue conducting at least two annual zero-emission vehicle education events for residents;
▪ Action MLS-5.5 which directs the City to create an enforcement and implementation program to track the community's transition to electric off-road equipment and use of biofuels; and, ▪ Action MLS-5.6 which directs the City to partner with surrounding jurisdictions and SCAQMD to create a financially viable rebate program that focuses on upgrading off-road equipment and switching to electric or biofuels.

The phased ordinance will first ban the operation of off-road vehicles and equipment with gasoline- and diesel-powered SORE equipment by no later than 2027. As defined by CARB, SORE are those equipment types with rated power at or below 19 kilowatts (i.e., 25 horsepower). Typical off-road vehicle and equipment types that use these engines include lawn and garden equipment, portable generators, and pressure washers.45 SORE equipment comprise approximately 25 percent of Glendale’s total off-road fuel consumed within the community.46 By applying a phased ordinance, the City aims to reduce community-operated SORE equipment fuel consumption, and associated GHG emissions, by 30 percent by 2030. This equates to approximately an 8 percent reduction in the community’s overall off-road fuel usage, which will be bolstered by promoting State regulations for limiting the sale of gasoline- and diesel-powered SORE. Additionally, compliance with the ordinance will be supported by a communication and outreach program (MLS-5.3). The program will raise awareness of the ordinance, provide resources for residents and businesses to replace their existing SORE equipment and educate community members on the benefits of and funding opportunities for offroad decarbonization (e.g., CARB’s Clean Off-road Equipment Voucher Incentive Program).

This ordinance aligns with the State’s goals and regulations on off-road equipment and vehicles. The ordinance exceeds CARB’s SORE regulations which ban the sale (not operation) of off-road vehicles and equipment with gasoline- and diesel-powered SOREs starting in 2024 and bans the sale of gasoline- and diesel-powered portable generators starting in 2028. The ordinance also aligns with EO N‑79‑20’s statewide goal to transition off-road vehicles and equipment operations to 100 percent zero-emission by 2035.

While only CARB’s SORE regulations were quantified, other regulations will support the reduction in overall off-road vehicle use and emissions. For example, in 2022, CARB approved amendments to the In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation that incorporates new requirements to use renewable diesel. Beginning January 1, 2024, all California fleets subject to this regulation are

45 California Air Resources Board. SORE Applicability Fact Sheet (2021). Accessed at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/sore- applicability-fact-sheet
46 Glendale’s SORE fuel usage in 2030 was estimated by filtering CARB OFFROAD2021 model outputs (for Los Angeles County in 2030) for horsepower ratings less than or less than 25 and attributing the resulting County-level annual fuel usage to Glendale based on the attribution methodology used in the GHG inventory and forecast. The results were divided by the total estimated off-road fuel usage in Glendale in 2030 to estimate the share, or percentage, of fuel usage attributable to SOREs. 462 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

46 required to procure and only use R99 or R100 renewable diesel fuel in all vehicles subject to the Off‑Road Regulation, with some limited exceptions. This regulation applies to all self-propelled off- road diesel vehicles 25 horsepower or greater used in California and applies to vehicles that are rented or leased. Exceptions to the regulation include locomotives, commercial marine vessels, marine engines, recreational off-highway vehicles, combat and tactical support equipment, stationary equipment, portable engines, equipment used exclusively for agricultural operations, implements husbandry, and off-road diesel vehicles owned and operated by an individual for personal, non-commercial and non-governmental purposes.47 Renewable diesel that meets the required standards has an emissions factor that is approximately 70 percent lower than fossil-fuel diesel.48 As renewable diesel has a lower emissions factor, the increased use required by CARB will help drive down off-road emissions in the Glendale community.

Table 22 shows the parameters and data sources that support off-road ordinance GHG emission reductions and Table 23 shows the calculations as outlined in Equations 9 through 9.2.

Off-road Decarbonization Equations
Equation 9 CO2e Reductiony = Fuel AvoidedSORE,y * Weighted Efy Equation 9.1 Weighted EFy = CO2e Emissionsy/(FuelGas, y + FuelDiesel, y + FuelNG, y) Equation 9.2 Fuel AvoidedSORE,y = (FuelGas, y + FuelDiesel, y + FuelNG, y) *TargetSORE,y Table 22 Off-road Decarbonization Parameters and Data Sources Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 9
CO2e
Reductionoffroad,y
Offroad fuel GHG emission
reductions
See calculation
table MT CO2e Calculated
Fuel AvoidedSORE,y
Off-road fuel avoided from
applicable SORE equipment
See calculation
table gallon Calculated
Weighted EFy
Weighted emission factor for
all off-road fuels
See calculation
table
MT
CO2e/gallo
n
See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report
Equation 9.1
CO2e Emissionsy
Forecasted off-road GHG
emissions
See calculation
table MT CO2e
See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report
FuelGas, y
Forecasted gasoline fuel
usage
See calculation
table gallon
See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report
FuelDiesel, y Forecasted diesel fuel usage
See calculation
table gallon
See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report

47 California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2022). Final Regulation Order Amendments to Sections 2449, 2449.1, and 2449.2 Title 12, California Code of Regulations. Accessed at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/barcu/regact/2022/off-roaddiesel/froa-1.pdf 48 CARB staff has reached out to several renewable diesel fuel producers and as of February 2023, is aware that renewable diesel produced by Neste meets the regulatory requirements and standards. Estimates in GHG emission reductions based on emission factors provided by Neste accessed at: https://www.neste.com/en-us/products-and-innovation/neste-my-renewable-diesel/product-information 463 of 961

Mobility and Land Use Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 47 Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
FuelNG, y
Forecasted natural gas fuel
usage
See calculation
table gallon
See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast, and
Targets Technical Report
Equation 9.2
PropSORE
Proportion of fuel
attributable to SORE
equipment 25% percentage OFFROAD2021 model
TargetSORE,y
Fuel reduction target for all
off-road fuels — percentage —
TargetSORE,2030 — 30% percentage
State goals (EO N-79-20) and
share of small off-road engines
in the region1
TargetSORE,2045 — 100% percentage
State goals (EO N-79-20) and
share of small off-road engines
in the region1
Notes: “–“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows 1 State of California. Executive Order N-79-20 (2020). Accessed at: https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/9.23.20-EO- N-79-20-Climate.pdf
Table 23 Off-road Decarbonization GHG Emission Reduction Calculations Variable Definition Units 2030 2045
Equation 9.1
CO2e Emissionsy Forecasted off-road GHG emissions MT CO2e 56,077 64,598 FuelGas, y Forecasted gasoline fuel usage gallon 2,286,601 2,468,893 FuelDiesel, y Forecasted diesel fuel usage gallon 2,509,331 3,075,020 FuelNG, y Forecasted natural gas fuel usage gallon 1,500,082 1,657,503 Weighted EFy Weighted emission factor for all off-road
fuels MT CO2e/gallon 0.008907 0.008970
Equation 9.2
PropSORE
Proportion of fuel attributable to SORE
equipment percentage 25% 25%
TargetSORE,y Fuel reduction target for all off-road fuels percentage 30% 100% Fuel AvoidedSORE,y
Off-road fuel avoided from applicable
SORE equipment gallon 472,201 1,800,354
Equation 9
CO2e ReductionOffroad,y Offroad fuel GHG emission reductions gallon 4,206 16,149 MLS-6: Transition to 45% zero-emission municipal fleet by 2030 and 100% by 2040.

Measure MLS-6 aims to increase Glendale’s municipal fleet zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) adoption to 45 percent by 2030 and 100 percent by 2040. While the strategies to increase ZEVs in Glendale’s municipal fleet will reduce GHG emissions, emissions from municipal transportation are included as a subset of the commercial transportation sector in the Glendale Community GHG Inventory. This means the associated GHG emission reductions are included within the community Implementation Measures (i.e., MLS-4). Thus, to avoid double counting, this municipal implementation measure emissions reductions are not counted towards the 2030 and 2045 targets. 464 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

48 5 Urban Eco-Systems
Measures and Actions within the City of Glendale’s Urban Eco-System focus on optimizing the use of resources and enhancing the City’s natural services to increase resilience in the community while reducing GHG emissions. The strategy aims to accomplish these goals by reducing and diverting organic waste, conserving and reusing water, enhancing natural ecosystems, and reducing the consumption of carbon-intensive consumer goods and food.

Some of these actions will increase community resilience and reduce personal carbon footprints rather than have a significant impact on GHG emissions in Glendale. However, reducing and diverting solid waste will significantly reduce GHG emissions in Glendale by preventing organic waste from reaching the landfill. In the landfill, organic waste decays without access to light or oxygen and produces methane (CH4) gas. Reducing the occurrence of this anaerobic decomposition serves as an important opportunity for Glendale to reduce GHG emissions.

Based on this approach, the CAAP’s Urban Eco-Systems consists of the Measures presented in Table

24. The table also indicates which Measures are quantitative and which Measures are supportive.

The following subsections detail the substantial evidence and calculation methodologies of the quantitative Measures and the role of the supportive Measures.

Table 24 Urban Eco-Systems GHG Emission Reduction Summary Measure
ID Measure
2030 GHG Emission
Reductions
(MT CO2e)
2045 GHG Emission
Reductions
(MT CO2e)
Urban Eco-Systems
UE-1 Increase organics diversion through SB-1383 to divert 75% of organic material by 2025.
59,899 63,190
UE-2 Increase tree canopy to 25% by 2030 and 30% by 2045 by focusing on communities most vulnerable to extreme heat. 149 1,635
UE-3 Reduce the potential for wildfire to spread in Glendale by actively managing 50-75 acres of land annually through
prescribed burns, brush clearance, grazing, and building hardening.

Supportive Supportive
UE-4 Increase access to affordable and fresh produce through partnerships and technical assistance.

Supportive Supportive
UE-5 Reduce per capita water use to 48 gallons per day by 2030 and 42 gallons per day by 2045 by enhancing water
conservation and water quality and increase the Glendale water system's resilience to climate extremes by upgrading water and stormwater facilities.

Supportive Supportive
UE-6 Showcase municipal leadership through increased landfill diversion rates, climate-smart food and purchasing behavior, and enhanced water efficiencies.

Supportive Supportive
Total 60,048 64,825
465 of 961

Urban Eco-Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 49 UE-1: Increase organics diversion through SB-1383 to divert 75% of organic material by 2025.

Measure UE-1 aims for Glendale to meet SB 1383 requirements to recover 20 percent of disposed edible food for human consumption and reduce landfilled organic waste – and its associated GHG emissions – by 75 percent by 2025. The primary Actions that enable this Measure include:
▪ Action UE-1.1 which commits the City to supporting the implementation of data management systems for managing refuse, recyclables, organics and edible food to maximize diversion of waste streams;
▪ Action UE-1.2 which directs the City to estimate the amount of edible food that will be disposed of by organics generators in Glendale, work regionally to establish a full list of food recovery organizations that can receive edible food from Glendale businesses, and optimize edible food collection and distribution logistics in the City;
▪ Action UE-1.3 which directs the City to establish and maintain an ongoing education program informing the community about compostable materials;
▪ Action UE-1.4 which directs the City to implement an equitable inspection and compliance program for the edible food recovery program and organics procurement program with equitable and clearly defined enforcement mechanisms and penalties, as required by Article 16 in SB 1383;
▪ Action UE-1.5 which directs the City to work with Los Angeles County Department of Public Health to develop and pass an ordinance requiring organics diversion from businesses; and, ▪ Action UE-1.9 which directs the City to develop and manage an edible food recovery program based on food insecurity in Glendale that identifies and assists Tier 1 and Tier 2 generators with SB 1383 implementation.

These Actions encompass the activities the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) requires for compliance with SB 1383.49 Continuing to implement these activities is expected to provide the levels of diversion, composting, and food donations needed to reduce Glendale’s landfilled organic waste 75 percent by 2025. This level of landfilled organic waste reduction is expected to directly reduce solid waste disposal GHG emissions 75 percent because nearly all GHG emissions result from the anaerobic decay of organic waste in landfills.50 Table 25 shows the parameters and data sources that support the GHG emission reductions associated with organics diversion and Table 26 shows the calculations as outlined in Equation 10.

49 CalRecycle. SB 1383 Jurisdiction Responsibilities. Accessed at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/Docs/Web/119160#:~:text=Beginning%20in%202022%2C%20SB%201383,is%20automatically%20provide d%20the%20service
50 According to the Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI) U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Appendix E – Solid Waste Emission Activities and Sources, GHG emissions are generated by non-biologic wastes only if they are combusted.
466 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

50 Landfilled Organic Waste Reduction Equations
Equation 10 CO2e ReductionLOW,y= CO2e Emissionsy*Reduction TargetLOW,y Table 25 Landfilled Organics Reduction Parameters and Data Sources Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 10
CO2e ReductionLOW,y Landfilled organic waste
GHG emission reductions
See calculation
table
MT CO2e Calculated
CO2e Emissionsy Landfilled organic waste
GHG emissions
See calculation
table
MT CO2e Calculated
Reduction Target
LOW,y
Landfilled organic waste
reduction target
— — Estimated based on
compliance with
CalRecycle’s required
activities for SB 1383
compliance and GHG
emission factors for solid
waste.1, 2
Reduction Target
LOW,2030
— 75% percentage
Reduction Target
LOW,2045
— 75% percentage
y Year 2030 or 2045 – –
Notes: “–“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows 1 CalRecycle. SB 1383 Jurisdiction Responsibilities.
2 According to the ICLEI U.S. Community Protocol, Appendix E, GHG emissions are generated by non-biologic wastes only if they are combusted.

Table 26 Landfilled Organics Reduction GHG Emission Reduction Calculations Variable Definition Units 2030 2045
Equation 10
CO2e Emissionsy Landfilled organic waste GHG emissions MT CO2e 76,934 81,166 Reduction Target LOW,y Landfilled organic waste reduction target percentage 75% 75% CO2e ReductionLOW,y Landfilled organic waste GHG emission reductions
MT CO2e 57,701 60,875
Measure UE-1 also puts Glendale on a path to meet the City’s SB 1383 procurement target by 2030 and maintain it thereafter. SB 1383 requires each jurisdiction in California to procure recovered organics waste products to meet annual procurement targets developed by CalRecycle.51 Recovered organic waste products include compost, mulch, renewable energy generated from anaerobic digestion (e.g., transportation fuel, electricity, and gas for heating), and electricity generated from biomass conversion. While a jurisdiction has the option to procure any combination of recovered organic waste products to fulfill 100 percent of its procurement target, Glendale aims to meet their procurement target primarily through the procurement of compost to leverage the carbon sequestration benefits it provides when applied to community lands. The primary Actions that enable this part of the Measure include:
▪ Action UE-1.4 which directs the City to implement an equitable inspection and compliance program for the edible food recovery program and organics procurement program, as well as develop an organics procurement tracking program;

51 CalRecycle. Procurement Targets and Recovered Organic Waste Products. Accessed at:
https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/procurement/recoveredorganicwasteproducts/ 467 of 961

Urban Eco-Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 51 ▪ Action UE-1.7 which commits the City to procure 16,000 tons of organics per year; and, ▪ Action UE-1.11 which directs the City to develop community compost giveaway sites to provide a constant resource to the community and education about how to reduce pests and potential odor and other relevant concerns.

While SB 1383 sets a procurement target of 0.08 tons of organic waste per resident per year, Action UE-1.7 sets the City target to 16,000 tons of organics procurement per year. Based on forecasted population estimates for 2030, this target aligns with SB 1383's procurement requirement.

Specifically, with a projected population of 206,693 residents in 2030, the target of 16,000 tons of organics procurement per year directly corresponds to the 0.08 tons of organic waste per resident per year mandate. Action UE-1.4 and Action UE-1.7 ensure the City will establish sufficient supply and procurement processes to meet these targets.

Table 27 shows the parameters and data sources that support the annual procurement targets and landfilled organic waste reduction GHG emission reductions associated with this Action. Table 28 shows the calculations as outlined in Equation 13 through 13.1.

Compost Procurement Equations
Equation 13 CO2e Sequestrationy = (Composty * CSFCompost) * Compliance Targety Equation 13.1 Composty = Populationy * (Ratioprocure * CFcompost) Table 27 Compost Procurement Parameters and Data Sources Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 13
CO2e Sequestrationy Carbon sequestered from
compost procurement
and application
See calculation
table
MT CO2e Calculated
Composty Compost procurement
required to meet organic
waste procurement target
See calculation
table
tons Calculated
CSFcompost Carbon sequestration
factor for mixed organic
compost application

0.23 MT CO2e/ ton CARB’s Method for
Estimating Greenhouse Gas
Emission Reductions from
Diversion Of Organic Waste
from Landfills to Compost
Facilities1
Compliance Targety Compliance target with
procurement requirement
100% percentage State required compliance2
y Year 2030 or 2045 year –
Equation 13.1
Populationy Forecasted population See calculation
table
people See references in Appendix
GHG Inventory, Forecast,
and Targets Technical
Report
Ratioprocure Organic waste
procurement required per
capita

0.08 tons/people CalRecycle, SB 1383
Procurement2
468 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

52 Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
CFcompost Conversion factor of
organics to compost tons

0.58 compost
tons/organic
waste tons
CalRecycle Procurement
Calculator Tool3
Notes: “–“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows 1 CARB. Method for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions from Diversion Of Organic Waste from Landfills to Compost Facilities (2017). Accessed at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/waste/cerffinal.pdf. 2 CalRecycle. Procurement Targets and Recovered Organic Waste Products. Accessed at:
https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/procurement/recoveredorganicwasteproducts/ 3 CalRecycle. Procurement Calculator Tool. Accessed at: https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/reporting/ Table 28 Compost Procurement Reduction GHG Emission Reduction Calculations Variable Definition Units 2030 2045
Equation 13.1
Populationy Forecasted population people 206,033 216,906 Ratioprocure Organic waste procurement required per
capita
tons/people 0.08 0.08
CFcompost Conversion factor of organics to compost
tons
compost
ton/organic waste
ton

0.58 0.58
Composty Compost procurement required to meet
organic waste procurement target
ton 9,560 10,064
Equation 13
Compliance Targety Compliance target with procurement
requirement
percentage 100% 100%
CSFcompost Carbon sequestration factor for mixed
organic compost application
MT CO2e/ton 0.23 0.23
CO2e Sequestrationy Carbon sequestered from compost
procurement and application
MT CO2e 2,199 2,315
469 of 961

Urban Eco-Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 53 UE-2: Increase tree canopy to 25% by 2030 and 30% by 2045 by focusing on communities most vulnerable to extreme heat.

Measure UE-2 aims for Glendale to increase tree canopy to 25 percent by 2030 and 30 percent by 2045. Carbon sequestration quantification and tracking is a relatively new field of study with extensive science to be done. Therefore, even though carbon sequestration will play large role in meeting state and the City’s carbon neutrality goals, communities are taking a conservative approach to carbon sequestration quantification as a starting point while the state develops more specific goals and guidance. Passed in 2022, AB 1757 directs the California Natural Resource Agency to determine carbon sequestration reduction targets by 2024 and develop a methodology to track them by 2025.52 Once that is completed, the City will integrate those goals and tracking methods within this measure and its associated actions and update them as needed. The primary Actions that enable this measure include:
▪ Action UE-2.3, which directs the City to prioritize planting 200 trees annually in high sensitivity census tracts, given that the carbon sequestration potential for seedlings averaged over 40 years is about 0.0354 MT CO2e per tree per year;
▪ Action UE-2.4 which directs the City to implement and regularly review and update the Community Forest Management Plan using the best available data to support the decision- making process and include parks and City open space;
▪ Action UE-2.5 which directs the City to re-evaluate the “Designated Street Tree List” for canopy potential and future climate conditions;
▪ Action UE-2.8 which commits the City to continue pursuing and obtaining grant funding for tree planting and urban forest management;
▪ Action UE-2.11 which directs the City to update the municipal code shade tree requirements for new developments, greening of parking lots, planting replacement trees, and increasing permeable surfaces in new developments; and,
▪ Action UE-2.19 which directs the City to establish a Tree Trust or Tree Endowment where the interest on the principal can be used for purchasing and planting trees in prioritized areas, paying for tree maintenance in high social sensitivity census tracts in the City, supporting tree management in City-owned parks, or supporting staff resources for the Urban Forest Management Program.

Table 29 shows the parameters and data sources that support GHG emission reductions from the zero-emission vehicle adoption and Table 30 shows the calculations as outlined in Equations 14 through 14.2.

Tree Plantings Equations
Equation 14 CO2e Sequestration = Ratetrees * CSFTree* Ne Equation 14.1 Ne = (Yn *(Yn + 1))/2
Equation 14.2 Yn = (YearT - Yearb)+1

52 CARB. Assembly Bill 1757 (2022). Accessed at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/2022-assembly-bill-1757-garcia-cristina-california-global- warming-solutions-act-2006-climate-goal
470 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

54 Table 29 Tree Plantings Parameters and Data Sources
Variable Definition Value Unit Data Source
Equation 14
CO2e Sequestrationy Carbon sequestered from
tree plantings
See calculation
table
MT CO2e Calculated
Ratetrees
Rate of trees planted per
year 200 trees/year Measure UE-2
CSFTree
Carbon sequestration
factor for tree seedlings 0.035
MT
CO2e/tree/ye
ar CAPCOA1
Equation 14.1
Ne
Effective number of years
carbon is being
sequestered
See calculation
table years Calculated
Equation 14.2
Yn
Total number of years in
which trees are planted
See calculation
table years Calculated
Yearb Baseline tree planting year 2025 year
Assume tree planting starts
next year
YearT
Target emissions
reduction year
See calculation
table year –
Notes: MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide; “–“ means either reference not applicable or see references for disaggregated parameter in the following table rows.
1 Default annual CO2e sequestration per tree per year with a maximum lifespan of 20 years per tree is 0.0354 MT CO2e/tree/year was obtained from CAPCOA. 2010. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures.

Table 30 Tree Plantings Reduction GHG Emission Reduction Calculations Variable Definition Units 2030 2045
Equation 14.2
Yearb Baseline tree planting year year 2025 2025
Yn
Total number of years in which trees are
planted years 6 21
Equation 14.1
Ne
Effective number of years carbon is being
sequestered year 21 231
Equation 14
Ratetrees Rate of trees planted per year trees 200 200
CSFtree
Carbon sequestration factor for tree
seedlings MT CO2e/tree 0.0354 0.0354
CO2e Sequestration Carbon sequestration from tree plantings MT CO2e 149 1,635 471 of 961

Urban Eco-Systems

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Technical Report 55 UE-3: Reduce the potential for wildfire to spread in Glendale by actively managing 50-75 acres of land annually through prescribed burns, brush clearance, grazing, and building hardening.

Measure UE-3 aims to reduce the potential for wildfire in Glendale. This adaptation-related measure focuses on adjusting the community to climate impacts and increasing the community’s ability to anticipate, prepare for, and recover from hazardous events strengthened and made more frequent by climate change. While this Measure will not result in direct GHG emission reductions, it will support the implementation measures by building a strong, connected community that can implement them.

UE-4: Increase access to affordable and fresh produce through partnerships and technical assistance.

Measure UE-4 aims to increase access to fresh produce in Glendale by developing new community gardens through partnerships and technical assistance. While this Measure will increase community engagement and knowledge on gardening, healthy food and reduced meat consumption, it will not result in direct GHG emission reductions, and therefore cannot be quantified. This Measure does still, however, directly support Glendale’s CAAP in increasing community engagement and awareness.

UE-5: Reduce per capita water use to 48 gallons per day by 2030 and 42 gallons per day by 2045 by enhancing water conservation and water quality and increase the Glendale water system's resilience to climate extremes by upgrading water and stormwater facilities.

Measure UE-5 aims to reduce per capital water use to 48 gallons per day by 2030 and 42 gallons per day by 2045 by enhancing water conservation and water quality. The Center for Water-Energy Efficiency has begun demonstrating the quantifiable value of water conservation for GHG emission reductions. Specifically, the Center found that during the Governor’s Mandate (i.e., between June 2015 and May 2016), California saved 524,000 million gallons of water which translated to 1,830 gigawatt hours of electricity savings and 521,000 MT CO2e of GHG emission reductions.53 While this demonstrates how reducing water consumption can reduce the electricity used to distribute and treat water in Glendale, these GHG emission reductions are not quantified under this Measure due to the high potential to double count with Measure BLD-1’s GHG emission reductions for renewable and carbon-free electricity. This Measure does still, however, directly support Measure BLD-1 by reducing the amount of energy used to distribute water and treat wastewater.

UE-6: Showcase municipal leadership through increased landfill diversion rates, climate-smart food and purchasing behavior, and enhanced water efficiencies.

Measure UE-6 aims to showcase the City’s leadership through increased landfill diversion rates, climate-smart food and purchasing behavior, and enhanced water efficiencies. While increased landfill diversion rates can reduce GHG emissions in the community, there is a high potential for

53 Center for Water-Energy Efficiency, University of California, Davis. Impact of Water Conservation on Electricity Consumption and GHG Emissions. Accessed at:
https://cwee.ucdavis.edu/research/waterconservation_energyghg/#:~:text=The%20study%20showed%20the%20state,tons%20of%20car bon%20dioxide%20equivalents
472 of 961

City of Glendale
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

56 double counting reductions as solid waste reductions are quantified in UE-1. Furthermore, enhancing water efficiencies can also reduce GHG emissions in the community, as discussed above (under UE-5). However, these reductions aren’t quantified due to the high potential to double count with Measure BLD-1’s GHG emission reductions for renewable and carbon-free electricity. This Measure will also help reduce residents’ personal carbon footprints by encouraging climate-smart food and purchasing behavior (lower upstream GHG emissions). These potential GHG emission reductions cannot be counted towards the City’s GHG emission reduction target because upstream GHG emissions from the consumption of products are excluded from Glendale’s GHG inventory, but they can be influenced by the City through creative policies. 473 of 961

Appendix F
Consumptive-Based Emissions Inventory
474 of 961

City of Glendale
Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory
prepared for
City of Glendale
Office of Sustainability
County of Los Angeles
613 E. Broadway
Glendale, California 91206
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
250 East 1st Street, Suite 1400
Los Angeles, California 90012
October 2023
475 of 961

City of Glendale
Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory

prepared for
City of Glendale
Office of Sustainability
County of Los Angeles
613 E. Broadway
Glendale, California 91206
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
250 East 1st Street, Suite 1400
Los Angeles, California 90012
October 2023
476 of 961

This report prepared on 50% recycled paper with 50% post-consumer content.

477 of 961

Table of Contents

Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of Consumption Inventory.................................................................................... 2 2 Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 3 CoolClimate Model ............................................................................................................. 3 3 Consumption Emissions Inventory ................................................................................................. 6 Consumption Scenarios ...................................................................................................... 6 4 Consumption Results Analysis ...................................................................................................... 12

Tables
Table 1 CoolClimate Calculator Sectors and Subsectors ........................................................... 4 Table 2 CoolClimate Calculator User Activity Data ................................................................... 4 Table 3 Average Household Consumption per Glendale Zip Code ......................................... 10 Table 4 Average Household Emissions Comparison ............................................................... 12 Table 5 Average Household Emissions Comparison ............................................................... 16

Figures
Figure 1 Glendale 2021 Consumption Inventory Summary ................................................................... 2 Figure 2 United States Average Household Emissions ........................................................................... 7 Figure 3 Glendale Per Person Single-Occupancy/Average Income Emissions ....................................... 8 Figure 4 Glendale Average Household Emissions by Subsector ............................................................ 9 Figure 5 Glendale Consumption By Zip Code ....................................................................................... 11 Figure 6 Glendale 2021 Consumption Inventory ................................................................................. 14 Figure 7 Glendale 2021 Subsector Consumption Inventory ................................................................ 15

478 of 961

City of Glendale

This page intentionally left blank.

479 of 961

Introduction

Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory 1
1 Introduction
This document presents the data, methods, and results for the 2021 consumption-based greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory (2021 CBI) for the City of Glendale (the City). Included is an analysis of findings and trends in the City’s 2021 CBI which was constructed to support the creation of GHG related policies and measures to be included in the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) being developed by the City.

Consumption-based inventories estimate the GHG emissions associated with the purchase and use of products and services, such as the fuels used in buildings or transportation, food production, household furniture, electronics, clothes, and more. These types of inventories are typically based on a full lifecycle analysis of the emissions generated from the production, transport, use, and disposal of each product or service consumed in a given region.

Community-wide GHG emissions inventories such as that developed for the City’s CAAP generally focus on emissions released or produced from sources located within a community’s geo-political boundary and for which the City has jurisdictional control. Consumption-based inventories on the other hand cover emissions associated with the lifecycle stages of a utility, good, or service regardless of whether emissions occur within a community’s geo-political boundary. Consumption- based inventories acknowledge that a community’s GHG emissions contributions are not restricted by jurisdictional boundaries and provide individuals within the community a better understanding of the full impact of their consumptive behaviors. Additionally, consumption-based inventories acknowledge the potential for “leakage” in which emissions sources from one community are transferred to another due to the relocation of industrial or commercial facilities. For instance, the relocation of a manufacturing plant originally located within the City of Glendale would result in a GHG emissions reduction in a community-wide inventory, but would not impact the consumption- based inventory as the goods and services from the manufacturing plant are still being consumed.

Due to this expanded scope of GHG accounting, consumption-based inventories tend to be larger than community-wide inventories. In this way, though community-wide inventories help target emissions over which the community has direct control, consumption-based inventories provide a more complete picture of emissions associated with community consumption of utilities, goods, and services. However, as some consumption-based inventory emissions sources overlap with those which are included in community-wide inventories (e.g., electricity consumption, natural gas, transportation) the two inventories cannot be added together. Rather, the inventories provide two distinct frameworks by which to consider a community’s emissions contributions and thereby broadens understanding of the community’s GHG emissions impacts on a local and global scale.

Consumption-based inventories are typically applied at the household level so that individuals within the community – or the primary consumers – may understand the GHG impact associated with their household’s consumption, often referred to as the “carbon footprint.” A household consumption inventory on the community scale is simply the sum of all the carbon footprints for all households in the community. Glendale’s 2021 CBI is based on the average household conditions in Glendale which were then multiplied by the number of households in the inventory year. Figure 1 below summarizes the total GHG emissions results of Glendale’s 2021 CBI. Further information regarding the methodology used to determine Glendale’s 2021 CBI is detailed in the sections below. 480 of 961

City of Glendale

2 Figure 1 Glendale 2021 Consumption Inventory Summary

Purpose of Consumption Inventory
Consumption of goods and services is the root cause of many environmental impacts as it influences economic development and drives commercial and industrial activities. Conducting a consumption- based GHG emissions inventory serves to connect the community’s consumption with GHG emissions and provides an understanding of a community’s emissions contributions on a global scale. Furthermore, reporting emissions on a consumption basis can help identify additional opportunities for achieving GHG emissions reductions, particularly on an individual basis. Glendale’s 2021 CBI was developed for the following purposes:
▪ Help the City engage households through outreach programs to reduce GHG emissions related to household consumption by shifting from more carbon-intensive to less carbon-intensive household activities.
▪ Enable the City to develop policies and measures which address systemic drivers of emissions, such as transportation infrastructure, the built environment, and the emissions embedded in food and consumer goods.
▪ Identify decarbonized systems that eliminate emissions without significant economic impacts. 481 of 961

Methodology

Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory 3
2 Methodology
The 2021 CBI for Glendale was developed in alignment with accounting protocols provided by the International Council for Local Government Initiatives (ICLEI). Though ICLEI protocols are primarily designed for local-scale accounting of GHG emissions that contribute to climate change, ICLEI also provides guidance on consumption-based GHG emissions accounting which expands beyond the scope of local emissions. Appendix I of the U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions Version 1.2 (Community Protocol), known as Consumption-Based Emissions Activities and Sources (Consumption Protocol), serves to guide the measurement and reporting of GHG emissions resulting from a community’s consumption habits in a standardized way.

The Consumption Protocol recommends using the CoolClimate1 calculator created by University of California, Berkley for conducting a streamlined assessment of a community’s consumption GHG inventory. The CoolClimate Calculator provides an estimate of household carbon footprints for nearly every populated zip code, city, county, and state within the United States (U.S.). According to the Consumption Protocol, household consumption emissions for the whole community can be estimated by simply multiplying the average household footprint against the number of households in the community. This approach was used in the following assessment to determine the average consumption GHG emissions per household for Glendale and estimate the 2021 CBI.

CoolClimate Model
The CoolClimate calculator quantifies emissions associated with 5 major sectors per household:
▪ Travel: The CoolClimate calculator takes into account the emissions associated with the lifecycle of several modes of transportation including individual vehicles, buses, rail, and airline transit. ▪ Home: This sector includes the emissions attributable to the construction of a household as well as the emissions resulting from annual electricity, natural gas, and water use. ▪ Food: Emissions from the production, distribution, use, and disposal of food products are dependent on the daily serving size consumed per person. The CoolClimate calculator categorizes food emissions based on meat, dairy, fruits & vegetables, cereals, and “other” products.
▪ Goods: This sector includes the emissions associated with the use of various household items and is categorized based in clothing, furniture, and other goods such as entertainment, personal care, stationary and reading materials, auto parts, and medical supplies. ▪ Services: The CoolClimate calculator takes into account emissions attributed to a variety of services such as household maintenance and repair, healthcare, information and communication, vehicle service, organizations and charity, and more.

A summary of the emissions sectors and subsectors as reported by the CoolClimate calculator is provided in Table 1 below.

1 University of California, Berkley. 2023. CoolClimate Household Calculator. Available at: https://coolclimate.berkeley.edu/calculator 482 of 961

City of Glendale

4 Table 1 CoolClimate Calculator Sectors and Subsectors Travel Home Food Goods Services
Car Fuel Electricity Meat Clothing All
Car MFG Natural Gas Dairy Furniture
Public Transit Water Fruits & Vegetables Other
Air Travel Construction Cereals
Other
Note: MFG = manufacturing
The CoolClimate calculator relies on available consumption data at the zip code level to estimate consumption trends using a linear multivariate regresson model. The calculator links user input regarding core consumption information to average econometric data and applies average emissions factors for each subsector to estimate GHG emissions. For example, the model requests information from users regarding their miles travelled per year per transportation mode, fuel type used, number of vehicles, and miles per gallon efficiency for travel-related data and links the information to econometric data and emissions factors to determine the lifecycle GHG emissions for the household’s travel behavior. The model additionally links consumption trends to income and household size which may be used as core indicators and estimates of changes in consumption behaviors. As the CoolClimate calculator is a proprietary model with limited public access, this report does not review the back-end econometric data used to quantify household emissions. An example set of primary consumption data and value assumptions for an average income and occupancy household in the U.S. (the default conditions in the CoolClimate calculator) is summarized in Table 2 below. The set of data assumptions in Table 2 are subject to change based on adjustments to income and occupancy in the CoolClimate calculator and serve as an example of activity data used to determine consumption GHG emission inventories.

Table 2 CoolClimate Calculator User Activity Data
Sector Subsector Activity Data Value Unit
Travel
Car Fuel/MFG
Vehicle Miles Travelled
Vehicle 1 10,900 miles
Vehicle 2 8,900 miles
Fuel Type
Vehicle 1 Gasoline
Vehicle 2 Gasoline
Vehicle fuel efficiency
Vehicle 1 22 mpg
Vehicle 2 22 mpg
Price of Gasoline 3.50 $/gal
Public Transit1
Distance travelled
Bus 152 mi/yr
Transit Rail 114 mi/yr
Commuter Rail 76 mi/yr
Inter-City Rail 38 mi/yr
Flights per year
483 of 961

Methodology

Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory 5
Sector Subsector Activity Data Value Unit
Short (<400mi/yr) 8 flights/yr
Medium (400-1500 mi/yr) 1 flights/yr
Long (150-3000 mi/yr) 0 flights/yr
Extended (>3000 mi/yr) 0 flights/yr
Home
Electricity
Annual Purchases 750 $/yr
Electricity Price 12.5 cents/kWh
Natural Gas
Annual Purchases 360 $/yr
Natural Gas Price 1.19 $/therm
Heating Oil & Other
Fuels Annual Purchases 0
Water2 Percent Consumption compared to
similar homes2 100 % of similar
households
Construction Living Space Area 1,850 ft2
Food
Meat Daily Servings per person 2.6 Servings PPPD
Dairy Daily Servings per person 4.5 Servings PPPD
Fruits & Vegetables Daily Servings per person 2.4 Servings PPPD Cereals Daily Servings per person 3.9 Servings PPPD
Other Daily Servings per person 3.7 Servings PPPD
Goods Average spending per month 1,089 $/month
Services Average spending per month 1,976 $/month
Notes: mpg = miles per gallon; gal = gallons; mi = miles; yr = year; ft = feet; kWh = kilowatt hour; PPPD = per person per day

1. Input data is based on the advanced setting of the CoolClimate calculator

2. Water utility consumption is based on a comparison of usage to that of the liters per day usage dependent on the number of residents in the household. The CoolClimate calculator estimates a consumption of 242 liters/day for the average 2.5 person household, while a single-occupancy household is estimated to consume 148 liters/day.

484 of 961

City of Glendale

6 3 Consumption Emissions Inventory
The 2021 CBI was conducted using default user input assumptions provided by the CoolClimate calculator (see Table 2) and adjusting the income and household occupancy selections to assess a set of household condition scenarios. The following scenarios were analyzed in this report to provide an understanding of per household consumption GHG emissions in Glendale:
▪ Average household occupancy and income in the U.S.
▪ Single-occupancy Glendale household with U.S. average income ▪ Average household occupancy and median income in the City of Glendale ▪ GHG emissions for an average Glendale household per zip code The final 2021 CBI results were determined based on the GHG emissions per household attributable to the average household occupancy and income conditions in Glendale and the total estimated number of households in the inventory year. This method follows the recommended methodology using the CoolClimate calculator as specified by the Consumption Protocol. Results of the scenario assessments are summarized in the sections below.

Consumption Scenarios

3.1.1 United States Households
The consumption GHG emissions for an average household in the United States was developed to provide a comparison of consumption behaviors in the City compared to that of the national average. According to the CoolClimate calculator, the average United States household consists of

2.5 occupants. The CoolClimate calculator only provides an “Avg” setting and does not specify the value designated as the average nation-wide income. Therefore, the income of the “Avg” setting was estimated for reporting purposes based on a linear interpolation of CoolClimate Calculator income and resulting changes in total GHG emissions per household. This resulted in an estimated average nationwide income of approximately $36,700. Using the 2.5 occupancy and average income inputs results in a total of 39 tons CO2e per household, of which car fuel combustion accounts for the greatest source of GHG emissions. Figure 2 provides the breakdown of GHG emissions attributed to consumption at the sector and subsector level for an average United States household as defined by the CoolClimate calculator.
485 of 961

Consumption Emissions Inventory

Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory 7
Figure 2 United States Average Household Emissions

3.1.2 Glendale Households
Single Occupancy
The GHG emissions for single-occupancy household were determined to serve as a base metric of emissions per household in the City. Single-occupancy GHG emissions per household were estimated by adjusting the number of household residents to a value of one in the CoolClimate calculator. Additionally, it was assumed that the average single-occupancy household gross annual income in Glendale is the same as the average single-occupancy household nation-wide. This results in a total of 22 tons CO2e per household for a single-occupancy household in Glendale with car fuel combustion and services being the major sources of GHG emissions. Figure 3 provides the resulting per household emissions for a single-occupancy household by sector and subsector, respectively. It should be noted that natural gas and electricity consumption have similar GHG emissions due to electric grid emissions factor assumptions used by the model that do not necessarily align with local conditions.2 Therefore, the City’s 2021 CBI results provided by CoolClimate calculator should be considered as general estimates, with the City’s community-wide inventory providing a more accurate report of direct emissions for relevant sectors.

2 CoolClimate calculator uses a grid emissions factor of 444 g CO2 per kWh for the City of Glendale and 310 g CO2 per kWh for the state of California. Comparatively, the emissions factor provided by EPA’s eGRID reports California’s electric grid mix to have an emissions factor of approximately 241 g CO2 per kWh. More information on eGRID emissions factors is available at: https://www.epa.gov/egrid/data- explorer
486 of 961

City of Glendale

8 Figure 3 Glendale Per Person Single-Occupancy/Average Income Emissions

Average Household
According to the 2017-2021 American Community Survey (ACS) census data provided by the U.S.

Census Bureau, the average Glendale household has an occupancy of 2.65 people and a median household income of $74,488.3 Due to specificity limitations with regards to income and per person inputs in the CoolClimate Calculator, the average Glendale household consumption emissions were estimated based on 2.5 person per household occupancy and $80,000 household income input conditions. This results in a total of 52.52 tons CO2e per household with car fuel combustion contributing the greatest GHG emissions per residence. Figure 4 shows the resulting per household emissions for an estimated average Glendale household by sector and subsector, respectively.

3 United States Census Bureau. 2023. QuickFacts, Glendale City, California. Available at:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/glendalecitycalifornia/INC110221 487 of 961

Consumption Emissions Inventory

Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory 9
Figure 4 Glendale Average Household Emissions by Subsector

To provide an understanding of how consumptive emissions change within City boundaries, consumption GHG emissions per average household were collected for Glendale zip codes that were available in the CoolClimate calculator. Table 3 summarizes the results of consumption emissions per zip code based on average Glendale household input conditions. Figure 5 provides a comparison of total average household consumption emissions per zip code. 488 of 961

City of Glendale

10 Table 3 Average Household Consumption per Glendale Zip Code Emissions (tons CO2e/household)
Sector Subsector 91201 91202 91203 91204 91205 91206 91207 91208 Travel Car Fuel 15.50 16.37 13.11 12.20 11.89 14.89 19.87 21.45 Travel Car MFG 1.71 1.80 1.44 1.34 1.31 1.64 2.19 2.36
Travel Public Transit 0.12 0.17 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.14 0.22 0.26 Travel Air Travel 2.19 3.08 1.92 1.79 1.52 2.59 3.84 4.64 Home Electricity 2.41 2.44 2.07 1.93 1.93 2.16 2.99 3.25 Home Natural Gas 2.21 2.26 1.95 1.84 1.89 2.00 2.63 2.74 Home Water 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42
Home Construction 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.85 Food Meat 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74
Food Dairy 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04
Food Fruits & Vegetables 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 Food Cereals 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89
Food Other 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50
Goods Clothing 2.63 2.75 2.34 2.51 2.33 2.49 3.10 3.54
Goods Furniture 2.70 3.30 2.38 2.40 2.15 2.86 3.96 4.69 Goods Other 3.95 4.49 3.63 3.66 3.42 4.08 5.13 5.83
Services All 8.53 10.07 7.72 7.75 7.11 8.97 11.77 13.63 Total 52.22 57.00 46.94 45.79 43.91 52.09 65.97 72.66

489 of 961

Consumption Emissions Inventory

Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory 11
Figure 5 Glendale Consumption By Zip Code
490 of 961

City of Glendale

12 4 Consumption Results Analysis

4.1.1 National vs Glendale Average Household Emissions
Based on the CoolClimate calculator results, the average Glendale household emits 34.3% more emissions from consumption behaviors than the U.S. average household. This is primarily due to larger travel-based activity and increased goods and services consumption in Glendale. Table 4 provides a detailed comparison of emissions per subsector for average United States and Glendale households. Additionally, an overview of emissions drivers and key emissions reduction actions based on the results of GHG emissions per household is provided below.

Table 4 Average Household Emissions Comparison
Emissions (tons CO2e/household)
Sector Subsector
United States Average
Household
Glendale Average
Household Difference
Travel Car Fuel 10.06 14.99 49.01%
Travel Car MFG 1.11 1.65 48.65%
Travel Public Transit 0.09 0.14 55.56%
Travel Air Travel 1.52 2.45 61.18%
Home Electricity 2.16 2.3 6.48%
Home Natural Gas 1.89 2.1 11.11%
Home Water 1.25 1.42 13.60%
Home Construction 1.72 1.85 7.56%
Food Meat 2.74 2.74 0.00%
Food Dairy 1.04 1.04 0.00%
Food Fruits & Vegetables 0.83 0.83 0.00%
Food Cereals 0.89 0.89 0.00%
Food Other 1.5 1.5 0.00%
Goods Clothing 1.86 2.63 41.40%
Goods Furniture 1.84 2.88 56.52%
Goods Other 2.85 4.11 44.21%
Services All 5.76 9 56.25%
Total 39.11 52.52 34.29%
491 of 961

Consumption Results Analysis

Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory 13
TRAVEL
Emissions from transportation are highly dependent on aspects such as vehicle fuel efficiency, fuel composition, and typical commuting distances of residents. As witnessed by the results of the assessment scenarios, the combustion of car fuel is a leading driver of GHG emissions per household in Glendale as well as nationwide. Emissions from operating a vehicle exceeds the emissions associated with manufacturing a vehicle, a key reason why electric vehicles reduce lifecycle emissions even if their upfront emissions from manufacturing are slightly higher. Significant reductions in travel related emissions can thereby be achieved by facilitating a transition to electric fueled passenger vehicles.

HOME
The emissions per household are relatively similar between Glendale and the U.S. average household. The majority of GHG emissions result from the consumption of electricity and natural gas used for powering lights, electronics, heating and cooling, cooking appliances, etc. By promoting and prioritizing utility services which source renewable energy and electrifying the community’s appliances and built environment households can move toward reducing emissions and creating more sustainable homes.

FOOD
The GHG emissions from the food sector are primarily driven by the consumption of meat and dairy products. The lifecycle of livestock production is a highly GHG intensive process and is largely subject to difficult to manage emissions sources such as the methane produced from enteric fermentation.4 Based on the results of this analysis, reducing meat consumption behaviors provides the most direct route to reducing GHG emissions per household.

GOODS AND SERVICES
The consumption of goods and services is closely tied with household income which facilitates increased necessary and recreational spending.5 As Glendale has a higher average income compared to the nationwide average, it is expected that the region would experience increased spending behaviors on average. While mitigating this source of emissions in a community can be complicated to manage, some available goods and services have lower emissions impacts compared to their competitors. Communities can achieve reduced emissions from the consumption of goods and services by supporting those with lower lifecycle emissions and promoting system transitions to zero carbon.

4.1.2 Glendale Consumption Inventory
According to demographic assessment data provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), there were 75,453 households in the City of Glendale in the 2021 inventory

4 Rotz, C. A., Asem-Hiablie, S., Place, S., & Thoma, G. 2019. Environmental footprints of beef cattle production in the United States.

Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X18305675?via%3Dihub 5 Jones, C. 2020. Consumption Based Greenhouse Gas Inventory of San Francisco from 1990 to 2015. Available at:
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4k19r6z7
492 of 961

City of Glendale

14 year.6 Based on the number of households and emissions per average household, the 2021 CBI for Glendale resulted in a total of 3,962,809 tons of CO2e. As is expected, Glendale’s 2021 CBI resulted in significantly higher GHG emissions compared to its community inventory. According to the City’s 2021 Community Inventory, Glendale emits a total of 1,053,141 metric tons CO2e, or approximately 1,160,889 tons annually. The results of the 2021 CBI per sector and subsector is summarized in Figure 6 and Figure 7 below. Table 5 provides a detailed summary of the emissions inventory per subsector for Glendale.

Figure 6 Glendale 2021 Consumption Inventory

6 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2023. 2016-2040 RTP/SCS Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction. Provided by the City of Glendale via Sharepoint on March 10, 2023
493 of 961

Consumption Results Analysis

Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory 15
Figure 7 Glendale 2021 Subsector Consumption Inventory

494 of 961

City of Glendale

16 Table 5 Average Household Emissions Comparison
Sector Subsector Tons CO2e Percent Contribution
Travel
Car Fuel 1,131,045 28.54%
Car MFG 124,498 3.14%
Public Transit 10,563 0.27%
Air Travel 184,861 4.66%
Home
Electricity 173,543 4.38%
Natural Gas 158,452 4.00%
Water 107,144 2.70%
Construction 139,589 3.52%
Food
Meat 206,742 5.22%
Dairy 78,471 1.98%
Fruits & Vegetables 62,626 1.58%
Cereals 67,153 1.69%
Other 113,180 2.86%
Goods
Clothing 198,442 5.01%
Furniture 217,306 5.48%
Other 310,113 7.83%
Services All 679,080 17.14%
Total 3,962,809 100%

495 of 961

Appendix G
Cost and Funding Analysis
496 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
1 M E M O R A N D U M
Date: May 22, 2025
To: City of Glendale
Via: Email – Jones, David [email protected]
From: Rincon Consultants
Subject: Glendale GHG Reduction Measures Cost Range Analysis The City of Glendale is developing a Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) that establishes a roadmap to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in line with the State’s goals and increase the City’s adaptive capacity, or ability to cope with and adjust to the impacts of climate change . Making progress on Glendale’s 2030 GHG reduction target and 2045 reduction target, while becoming more resilient, will require strategic investments in infrastructure, technology systems, policies and programs. The CAAP emphasizes the need to blend climate action and adaptation, recognizing that a comprehensive approach is essential to addressing both the root causes and effects of climate change, thereby creating more resilient systems and other co-benefits. The systems approach adopted for this CAAP is based on natural systems, where the outflows of one system serve as inputs to another, fostering interconnectedness and sustainability. This approach promotes a holistic view, recognizing that each action or change in one area can positively or negatively impact other parts of the community, encouraging solutions that benefit multiple sy stems simultaneously. By reducing GHG emissions, promoting sustainable practices, and building resilience to climate-related impacts, we can safeguard our quality of life today and for future generations.

Thoughtfully investing in our communities today can significantly reduce the long -term impacts and monetary costs of climate chang e. According to the United States Chamber of Commerce, for every dollar invested in resilience/preparedness, we save $13 in economic costs, damages, and clean-up.1 For areas that benefit from hospitality and/or tourism, this impact could be even greater than we know.

For example, in Maui, Hawaii, after the devastating wildfires, tourism remains down over a year later– with a decrease of 24% in both visitor numbers, and in visitor spending.2 With the recent fires in Los Angeles, the hospitality industry is still struggling, however, the exact reach of the impact is still playing out. The hotel, travel, and tourism industries employ more than half a million people in Los Angeles and generate billions of dollars each year. This is just one example of why it is more important than ever to be intentional about how we can adapt, prepare, and overcome the impacts that we face from climate change. To develop transparency around the prioritization of these investments, Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) has prepared this analysis that estimates the cost tiers (i.e., no -cost/cost savings, low cost, moderate cost, or high cost) and major cost variables (what decisions can impact final costs and savings) associated with the implementation of each Phase I action.

Climate action and adaptation plans exhibit variability in implementation costs depending on the measures identified, how those measures are implemented , and the accompanying funding and financing strategies. For example, costs may vary from capital -intensive investments like the installation of bike infrastructure to encourage alternative means of transportation to less capital - intensive but more city st aff-intensive investments to conduct outreach and educational campaigns.

The intent of this analysis is to distill and analyze these considerations to provide a clear understanding

1 United States Chamber of Commerce. The Preparedness Payoff: The Economic Benefits of Investing In Climate Resilience. Accessed May 2025 at: https://www.uschamber.com/security/the-preparedness-payoff-the-economic-benefits-of-investing-in-climate-resilience 2 Habtemariam, Dawit. August 7, 2024. Maui One Year After the Wildfires: Tourism Recovery Still Far Off. Accessed May 2025 at:
https://skift.com/2024/08/07/maui-one-year-after-the-wildfires-tourism-recovery-still-far- off/#:~:text=Tourism%20to%20Maui%20continues%20to,billion%2C%20also%20down%2024%25. 497 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
2 of the potential costs and the primary variables that drive cost for each measure to help the City prioritize implementation.

This memorandum assigns cost tiers to each action to guide the City’s decision -making on measure implementation, as seen in Figure 1 below. These tiers, ranging from no cost/cost savings to high cost, reflect financial investment and staff time requirements. While this analysis does not provide detailed cost estimates for each action or identify specific funding sources, it offers a practical framework to assess the relative level of effort needed for each measure. Developing precise cost estimates or funding strategies would require further analysis once project details are finalized during implementation. With this framework, the City can prioritize high-impact measures while aligning with available resources and long-term climate goals.
498 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
3 Figure 1 Cost Summary

499 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
4 Benefits of the CAAP
While the GHG reduction measures will require City and community costs to implement, adopting and implementing the CA AP will provide significant financial and social benefits that cannot be ignored.

First, the CA AP will serve as a qualified GHG reduction plan from which new development can streamline their CEQA GHG analysis.3 Once adopted, the CAAP will align with the State’s GHG reduction goals and funding strategies to position Glendale to receive potentially significant funding. California’s recently adopted Proposition 4 establishes a $10 Billion dollar climate bond which will go towards funding water, wildfire, and other climate projects including green energy.4 Second, the CAAP focuses on proactive, long-term investments to encourage the City and community to spend a little more now to save a lot more later. For example, adding conduit and panel capacity for electric vehicle (EV) chargers during new construction increases upfront costs by only a few hundred dollars; however, retrofitting EV infrastructure after construction can cost ten times more, around $3,000 per space.

With the growing adoption of EVs, delaying this investment could place a much heavier financial burden on the community in the future. Likewise, while retrofitting existing buildings to replace gas appliances with electric alternatives increases upfront costs, it provides long-term energy bill savings and reduces the risk of leaving community members who can least afford it with significantly higher gas utility bills needed to support aging infrastructure and stranded assets as the rest of the region electrifies.5 Additionally, investing in adaptation strategies such as tree planting and installing microgrids require initial investments today to prepare Glendale to face more extreme heat events, wildfires, and rising energy demands, all of which would require expensive emergency responses or infrastructure upgrades. The World Resources Institute estimates a benefit-cost ratio between 2:1 and 10:1 for such investments, meaning that for every dollar spent on resilience, we could see $2 to $10 in benefits. 6 The financial and social benefits of the CA AP, along with the additional co -benefits to public health and the direct impact on reducing GHG emissions, make the benefits of the CA AP outweigh the implementation costs outlined in this memorandum.

Long Term Cost Savings
Many GHG reduction measures would not only reduce emissions but also generate long -term cost savings for both the City and the community over the life of the C AAP. While some measures require additional upfront investments, they often lead to operational efficiencies, lower energy consumption, and avoided future costs. For example, increasing the adoption of passenger and municipal fleet zero- emission vehicles (ZEVs) offers substantial savings through reduced fuel and maintenance expenses compared to gasoline-powered vehicles.7 Additionally, the City, residents, and businesses can further benefit from off -peak EV charging, driving down energy costs over time. 8 These operational and

3 A qualified CAP is a qualified GHG reduction strategy under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 4 CalMatters (2024). Prop. 4 passes: Californians approve $10 billion for water, wildfire, climate projects. Accessed April 2025 at:
https://calmatters.org/politics/elections/2024/11/california-election-news-proposition-4-environment/ 5 Greenlining Institute and Energy Efficiency for All. Equitable Building Electrification: A Framework for Powering Resilient Communities.

Accessed April 2025 at: https://greenlining.org/wp-
content/uploads/2019/10/Greenlining_EquitableElectrification_Report_2019_WEB.pdf . 6 World Resources Institute (2019). Global Leaders Call for Urgent Action on Climate Adaptation; Commission Finds Adaptation Can Deliver $7.1 Trillion in Benefits. Accessed April 2025 at: https://www.wri.org/news/release-global-leaders-call-urgent-action-climate-adaptation- commission-finds-adaptation-can
7 Petek, G. Legislative Analysist Office (2023). Assessing California’s Climate Policies—Implications for State Transportation Funding and Programs. Accessed April 2025 at: https://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2023/4821/ZEV-Impacts-on-Transportation-121323.pdf. 8 Stewart, S. National Bureau of Economic Research (2024). Shifting Electric Vehicle Owners to Off-Peak Charging. Accessed April 2025 at:
https://www.nber.org/digest/202401/shifting-electric-vehicle-owners-peak-charging. 500 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
5 maintenance cost savings offset the higher upfront costs to purchase a ZEV compared to a conventional internal combustion engine upon replacement.

Additionally, the CAAP measures focus on transitioning to ZEVs, electric building appliances, and zero- emission off-road equipment at the time -of-replacement or at the end of the existing equipment’s useful life. This timing not only reduces waste and avoids additional manufacturing emissions but also allows for cost savings. For example, while the total upfront costs of a heat pump water heater are higher than those of a gas replacement, the incremental costs, or differential costs, are only slightly higher when comparing the two. These incremental costs can then be offset to produce incremental cost savings (i.e., making a heat pump water heater installation cheaper than a gas water heat er installation) using available federal, State, and regional incentives. Currently, federal programs such as the High Efficiency Electric Home Rebate (HEEHRA), the Homeowner Managing Energy Savings (HOMES) Rebate, and the Inflation Reduction Act, along with State programs like Clean California offer significant funding to support the installation of electric heat pump appliances in Glendale. These cost- saving opportunities are supported by current market trends. In California, the market share for heat pump space heaters has grown from five percent in 2009 to 55 percent in 2023, while heat pump water heaters increased from six percent to 16 percent over the same period.9,10 By prioritizing such time-of-replacement measures, Glendale could position itself for sustainable growth, aligning financial savings with environmental resilience.

The Cost of Doing Nothing
Unfortunately, it’s challenging to predict the real cost that climate change will have on the world and specifically the City of Glendale and our community. Despite the complexity of understanding the true impact of climate change and the cost to both mitigate and adapt, economists and scientists around the world recognize that the cost is already high and will continue to increase the longer we wait to act.11 The current numbers are already staggering. According to the United States Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), extreme weather events conservatively cost the United States approximately $150 billion each year (over $17 million per hour) , a figure that does not account for loss of life, healthcare-related costs, or damages to ecosystem services.12 Numbers in the billions and trillions are hard to conceptualize . However, when talking about the impacts of climate change, it is anticipated that damage from climate change could cost $38 trillion per year by the middle of the century (2050).13 For perspective, to save one billion dollars at a rate of $100 per day, it would take over 27 thousand years. 14 To save one trillion dollars at that same $100 per day rate , it would take over 2.7 million years. In October 2024, the United States Department of Treasury released a report titled The Impact of Climate Change on American Household Finances, which states that 13 percent

9 California Energy Commission (2023). Top Global Building Appliance Manufacturers and Distributors Commit to Help California Achieve Six Million Heat Pump Goal. Accessed April 2025 at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/news/2023-10/top-global-building-appliance- manufacturers-and-distributors-commit-
help#:~:text=The%202022%20Energy%20Code%20established%20heat%20pumps%20as,and%2016%20percent%20for%20heat%20pu mp%20water%20heaters.
10 Opinion Dynamics (2022). California Heat Pump Residential Market Characterization and Baseline Study. Accessed April 2025 at:
https://pda.energydataweb.com/#!/documents/2625/view.
11 European Environmental Agency (2023). Assessing the costs and benefits of climate change adaptation. Accessed April 2025 at:
https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/assesing-the-costs-and-benefits- of#:~:text=Key%20messages,the%20implementation%20of%20adaptation%20measures. 12 United States Global Change Research Program (2023). The Fifth National Climate Assessment. Accessed April 2025 at:
https://nca2023.globalchange.gov/
13 Alkousaa, Riham (2024). Climate change damage could cost $38 trillion per year by 2050, study finds. Accessed April 2025 at:
https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/climate-change-damage-could-cost-38-trillion-per-year-by-2050-study-finds-2024-04-17/ 14 University of California, Berkeley. How Big is a Billion? Accessed April 2025 at:
https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/education/explorations/tours/geotime/guide/billion.html 501 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
6 of Americans reported economic hardship from disasters or severe weather events in the previous year.15 Recent analysis also shows that for every increase in global temperatures of 1°C, we will experience a 12 percent loss in global gross domestic product (GDP), with losses peaking only six years after the higher temperature is recorded.

More recently, the City of Los Angeles Fires have caused an expected $250 Billion in damages.16 Even a 1% decrease in the chance of a fire of this size occurring would save Californian’s $2.5 Billion.

Cost Considerations
For each strategy, the cost description focuses on both internal costs (municipal -focus) and external costs (community-focus) and provides insight into the variability of these costs, including the primary variables that determine cost effectiveness. These considerations include:

Upfront versus Lifecycle Costs
When discussing how much a strategy or action costs , it is important to differentiate between the upfront costs, the cost of an LED light bulb, versus the lifecycle costs of purchasing, operating, maintaining, and ultimately disposing of that lightbulb. While LED lightbulbs may be more expensive up front when compared to an incandescent bulb, the lifecycle costs of owning an LED lightbulb are lower, providing a significant return on investment.

Incremental Costs
When discussing costs, it is important to specify the difference between how much a strategy costs overall and what the incremental or marginal cost is. The incremental or marginal cost is the difference in cost between the new action and the old or standard action. For example, purchasing a new electric vehicle could cost $30,000 , which could be considered a high cost. However, the marginal cost of purchasing an electric vehicle versus purchasing a new internal combustion vehicle may be only a few thousand dollars or less after rebates and incentives. This incremental cost can then be further erased by considering the lifecycle cost savings including lower fuel costs and lower maintenance costs. It is important to consider what the incremental/marginal costs are for each strategy by keeping in mind what the alternative costs are. In many cases, the difference is negligible.

Financing and Funding Availability
One of the major financial tools available to make large investments in infrastructure, vehicles, or buildings is financing. Financing allows us to leverage the time value of money and put future expected money flows to use today. For example, a solar array may cost $20,000 and result in an energy bill that is $200 less per month. The cost of the solar array could be considered high. However, the loan for the solar array requires a monthly payment of $150 dollars, resulting in a net monthly savings of $50 dollars. Under this scenario the solar array does not carry a high cost, rather it provides overall savings. The ability to finance can make seemingly high-cost investments low to no cost over time.

Understanding the ranges of cost savings and revenue streams, and how those costs and revenues accrue over time into a payback or return on investment ( ROI) calculation, are prudent factors to structuring partnerships, engaging interested parties, and making optimal financial decisions. For

15 United States Department of Treasury. The Impact of Climate Change on American Household Finances. Accessed April 2025 at:
https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Climate_Change_Household_Finances.pdf 16 Vincent, Roger (2025). Estimated cost of fire damage balloons to more than $250 million. Accessed April 2025 at:
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2025-01-24/estimated-cost-of-fire-damage-balloons-to-more-than-250-billion 502 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
7 example, energy efficiency retrofits can generate cost savings of more than 30% for 15 to 20 years. If external partners are involved, such as with an energy savings performance contract (ESPC), cities may not need to provide any upfront capital, but the project’s cost savings would accrue with a private third party and be lost by the city. An anaerobic digester may need $5M to $10M in upfront capital but could also generate $1 to $2M annually in natural gas delivery revenue over 20 years, which can be an attractive financial investment for a city. Cities must consider the estimated ROI, how project costs and revenues balance out over the useful life of the project, and whether they are willing to forego long-term cost savings or revenue generation capacity by partnering with a private third party.

In addition, cities are often able to fund significant infrastructure projects with grants or other funding sources. Large infrastructure projects like bike lanes or pedestrian bridges can be funded through state and federal grant monies. While matching funds or other costs can be incurred by the City, these funding strategies can significantly reduce the upfront costs of larger infrastructure projects.

Cost Tier Considerations
In summary, t his document considers several types of cost when assessing each GHG reduction measure. First, internal and external costs are considered. Internal costs are those experienced by the City (i.e. City staff time and capital costs) while external costs are th ose felt by the community (i.e. residents and businesses). Cost tiers for each measure are assessed separately for both the City and community. Second, the analysis considers upfront and lifecycle costs. Upfront costs include the costs associated with purchasing and installing an item, including any City staff time spent on related activities like procurement, planning, or ordinance development. Lifecycle costs refer to the ongoing expenses or cost savings generated from the operating, maintaining, and disposing of that item, and can also include City staff time spent on enforcement, monitoring, and compliance over the item’s lifespan.

The assumptions associated with the four different cost tiers are presented in Figure 2.

503 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
8 Figure 2 Cost Tiers, Ranges, and Assumptions
Cost Tier Cost and Staff Time2 City Cost Assumptions Community Cost Assumptions No Cost/
Cost
Savings
City Costs:
• $0 or cost savings
• 0 hours – negligible
additional City staff time
needed.

Community Costs:
• $0 or cost savings
Measures associated with
operational changes that do not
include upfront costs or lifecycle
costs, and/or may result in cost
savings, such as:
• Partnering with local
community-based
organizations to promote new
initiatives.
• Charging an electric vehicle
fleet during off-peak hours.

Measures associated with changes
that do not include upfront costs or
lifecycle costs, and/or may result in
cost savings, such as:
• Switching transportation modes
from single occupancy vehicles
to active transportation.
• Electrifying new single-family
and multi-family building
construction.

Low Cost City Costs:
• $1 – $50,000
• 0-250 hours – a
maximum of 250 hours
of existing City staff time
needed per year.1
Community Costs:
• $1 – $1,000
Measures associated with low
upfront costs, and only require
staff and/or consultant time to
implement, such as:
• Preparing and adopting policy
updates.
• Conducting community
outreach.

Measures associated with low
upfront costs compared to existing
alternatives, such as:
• Switching from a fossil fuel-
based electricity option to a 100
percent renewable electricity
option.

Moderate
Cost
City Costs:
• $50,000 -- $500,000
• 250+ hours – more than
250 hours of an existing
City staff person’s time
per year; including
needing to hire new full-
time City staff (~2,000
hours per year).1
Community Costs:
• $1,000 – $5,000
Measures associated with
moderate upfront costs to the City
and require moderate capital costs
and/or consultant time along with
staff time, such as:
• Preparing feasibility studies.
• Implementing incentive and
compliance programs.
• Conducting pilot projects.

Measures associated with moderate
upfront costs that are not
comparable to existing costs nor are
they offset over lifetime, such as:
• Introducing new fees.
• Paying upfront costs that are
partially offset by rebate
opportunities.

High Cost City Costs:
• $500,000+
Community Costs:
• $5,000+ per household
Measures associated with high
upfront costs and require
substantial investments in
infrastructure and technology
system upgrades, such as:
• Building bike lanes.
• Installing energy storage
systems.
• Expanding EV charging
networks.

Measures associated with high
upfront costs that are not
comparable to existing cost nor are
offset over lifetime, such as:
• Purchasing a new electric
vehicle prior to existing vehicle
replacement.

Notes:
1 Staff time estimated by dividing the cost range values by an assumed average $100 per hour City staff hourly rate.

2. While the costs shown reflect expected expenditures, they may not represent the long term savings, future incentives, and financing available to reduce impacts on the community. As each policy is further developed and implemented, the City will strive to reduce costs as feasible through continued community engagement, continued cost tracking, and policy development. 504 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
9 Cost Tier and Range Results
Figure 3 presents the cost analysis tier and range determination for the City and community for each Phase 1 action. As noted above, each of these costs is estimated and the way in which each action is implemented, funded, and financed, can impact the overall cost category.

505 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
10 Figure 3 CAAP Update GHG Emissions Reduction Measures and Cost Ranges Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
Strategy: Social Governance
Measure
SG-1
Provide evacuation and
health alert messaging in
English, Spanish, Armenian,
and Korean, and in multiple
forms (e.g., online,
brochure, radio) to amplify
the Glendale community’s
awareness of extreme
weather and events
(including wildfires,
landslides, extreme heat
events, and poor air quality
days).

Low Cost • Staff time to develop
regional partnerships and
establish coordinated
notification and response
services with a feedback
loop mechanism included
for continuous refinement
(low cost)
• Staff time to conduct
multi-lingual emergency
alert notifications (low
cost)
• Saff time to promote the
existing CERT and
Neighborhood Watch
programs (low cost)
No Cost/
Cost Savings
• Establishes improved notification
for community safety. Potential
cost savings/health benefits due
to early notification across the
community.
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive

Measure
SG-2
Establish three resilience
centers by 2030 in high
social sensitivity areas that
provide refuge for
vulnerable populations
from poor air quality and
extreme heat conditions
that serve as year-round
community resource
centers.

Low Cost • Staff time to complete
analysis of existing
physical locations and
assets in the City for use
as a resilience center (low
cost)
• Staff time to audit existing
HVAC systems at City-
owned buildings (low
cost)
• Staff time and cost of
MERV 11 rated filters to
maintain systems
effectively (low cost)
• Staff time to identify and
apply for funding, as well
No Cost/Cost
Savings
• Health and safety benefits to
community
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive
506 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
11 Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
as partner with local
entities to establish
resilience centers on
privately-owned land (low
cost)
Measure
SG-3
Change internal protocols
and procedures to
incorporate a climate and
equity lens into all
government operational
decision-making to increase
investments in CAAP
implementation for
vulnerable populations.

High Cost • Staff time to develop
capital improvement
checklist, identify
financing processes and
potential pathways to
implement CAAP actions,
participate in a Climate
and Equity Core Team,
and draft language for
inclusion in City job
postings (low cost)
• Staff and consultant time
to develop a climate-
driven training course
(low cost)
• Create 5 new City
positions to support the
implementation of the
CAAP ($600,000 in 2025,
with a ~3% increase
annually). These
additional staff resources
are assumed to cover the
increased staff time
identified throughout the
CAAP. (high cost)
Low Cost • If community taxes paid for each
position, it would cost each
household $7.50 per year.
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive
Measure
SG-4
Formalize City and
community-based
relationships to create
meaningful and long-lasting
Low Cost • Staff time to coordinate
with local organizations
and working groups, and
create a formalized
No Cost • Creates stronger, more sustainable
relationships with the community
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive
507 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
12 17 California Energy Commission (2024). Energy Commission Adopts Updated Building Standards Expanding Requirements for Heat Pumps and Electric-Ready Buildings. Accessed April 2025 at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/news/2024-09/energy-commission-adopts-updated-building-standards-expanding-requirements-heat Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
relationships with non-profit
organizations and increase
engagement of vulnerable
communities and Tribal
governments in local
government decision-
making processes.
consultation policy with
local Tribes (low cost)
• Staff time and capital
costs to create a
community-based
organization partnership
program that includes
criteria for partnership
participation, funding for
participant compensation,
and a memorandum of
understanding (low cost)

Measure
SG-5
Increase community
capacity to better withstand
climate shocks and
stresses.

Low Cost • Staff time to prepare
equitable community,
engagement guidelines,
to facilitate and support a
Cool Block Program, and
update existing City-run
educational programs
(low cost)
No Cost/
Cost Savings
to Low Cost
• Creates a stronger, more
sustainable and resilient
community.
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive

Building Systems
Measure
BLD-1
Increase carbon-free
electricity procurement to
provide 100% carbon-free
electricity community-wide
by 2035 and improve
electrical system resiliency
through additional
distributed energy
resources, transmission
Moderate Cost • Staff time to prepare
standards and permit
requirements, and any
future ordinances17 (low
cost)
• Staff/consultant time to
investigate the ability to
pay customers for load
shifting (low cost)
Low Cost • Ascend Analytics study found an
increase in operating cost for GWP
of $60M, though offset by
increased revenue and paid by
community (high cost)
• Translates to $285 per year
increase in electricity bills based
on 100% renewable by 2030,
2030:
37,227MT
CO2e
2045: 0
MT CO2e
508 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
13 18 Ascend Analytics. 100% Clean Energy by 2030 Feasibility Study. Accessed April 2025 at:
https://glendaleca.primegov.com/meeting/attachment/2735.pdf?name=CC_03302021_Exhibit%201_8a Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
capacity, and demand
response.
• Increased GWP staffing
requirements as needs
grow (assumed to be
100k per year) (moderate
cost)
• Grayson Power Plant
Repowering Project
(Already Implemented)
• Staff time to provide
education and develop
rebates or incentives then
connect home and
business owners to these
programs. Program cost
partially offset by
increased electricity sales
(moderate cost).
• Staff and consultant time
to update the Wildfire
Mitigation Plan Estimated
$250,000 consulting fees
(moderate cost)
• Staff time to continue
developing power
purchase agreements or
other contracts for
renewables and working
with regional partners to
increase transmission
capacity (low cost)
lower than that for 100%
renewable by 2035.18
Measure
BLD-2
Require healthy, safe,
decarbonized, and resilient
new buildings by 2026.

Low Cost • Staff/consultant time to
prepare standards and
permit requirements,
No Cost/
Cost Savings
to Low Cost
• Upfront cost savings of building all-
electric homes and buildings saves
2030:
2,175 MT
CO2e
509 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
14 19 Ibid. California Energy Commission (2024). Energy Commission Adopts Updated Building Standards Expanding Requirements for Heat Pumps and Electric-Ready Buildings. Accessed April 2025 at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/news/2024-09/energy-commission-adopts-updated-building-standards-expanding-requirements-heat 20 U.S. Department of Energy (2022). Customer Engagement and Electrification. Accessed April 2025 at: https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-04/04-04-2024-oe-voe-customer- engagement-and-electrification.pdf
21 All-electric new construction of single-family and multi-family buildings in Glendale is cost-effective compared to gas and mixed fuel. Cost Effectiveness Explorer for City of Glendale. Accessed April 2025 at: https://explorer.localenergycodes.com/jurisdiction/glendale-city/building-estimates 22 Peninsula Clean Energy (2023). Joint Analysis Shows On-Bill Savings By Switching From Gas To Electric Appliances. Accessed April 2025 at: https://www.peninsulacleanenergy.com/news- releases/savings-switching-gas-to-electric/#:~:text=REDWOOD%20CITY%2FSUNNYVALE%2C%20CA%20%E2%80%93,appliances%20to%20standard%20electric%20equipment.

Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
updated building codes,
and draft any future
ordinances.19 Estimated
$50,000 consulting fees.
(low cost)
• Staff time to develop
partnerships and perform
outreach, engagement,
and educational
campaigns20 (low cost)
$2,441 per unit upfront (after
added solar + energy efficiency).21
• Long-term energy bill savings of
$63 per year (no cost/cost
savings).
• Heat pump providing both heating
and cooling saves upfront and on
bill compared to separate AC and
furnace. (cost saving)
• Potential training costs for local
installers and contractors (low
cost).
2045:
16,031 MT
CO2e
Measure
BLD-3
Retrofit 25% of existing
buildings by 2030 and 95%
by 2045 to be zero-carbon
and resilient to extreme
heat and wildfires.

Moderate Cost • Consultant and staff time
to conduct residential
existing building
electrification feasibility
analysis estimated
$150,000 (moderate
cost).
• Staff time to partner with
jurisdictions in Los
Angeles County and local
experts to create a
building electrification
resource center
(moderate cost).

High Cost • Long-term energy bill savings from
electrification shown to be $380
annually in regions with higher
electricity costs.22 Additional cost
savings long term as natural gas
rates increase (no cost/cost
savings).
• Additional cost from installation of
electric appliance compared to
installation of natural gas-powered
appliance. Costs depend on
replacement timing, appliance,
electric infrastructure, and
incentives. Costs to be first
2030:
40,906 MT
CO2e
2045:
214,303
MT CO2e
510 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
15 23 TTRC Solutions, Inc. (2016). Title 24 Codes and Standards Local Ordinances: Cost-Effectiveness Study for Cool Roofs FINAL Report for All Climate Zones.

Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
• Staff/consultant time to
prepare standards and
permit requirements, and
any future ordinances
$50,000 - $100,000 (low
- moderate cost).
• Staff time to perform
engagement, outreach,
and educational
campaigns (low cost).
determined through in-depth study
(BLD-3.1) (moderate/high cost).
• Installation of a 2-way heat pump
instead of a traditional AC provides
low incremental cost and on-bill
savings, low cost)
• Furnace replacement with a heat
pump could result in high upfront
community costs without program
support/incentives (high cost))
• Potential opportunity to mitigate
costs with available rebates and
incentives (no cost/cost savings).
• Cool roof installation is found to
have between a $1,800 and
$10,000 lifecycle savings in
climate zone 9 (cost savings).23
• Lower permit costs/streamlined
timelines for electric equipment
installations (cost savings)
Measure
BLD--4
Decarbonize and make
municipal buildings resilient
by 2035.

Moderate to
High Cost
• Consultant and staff time
to complete current
energy audit (low cost,
already underway).
• Capital cost to install
solar and energy storage
(e.g., batteries) on
municipally owned land
and buildings (high cost).

Financing could lower
costs to no cost/cost
savings.

No Cost N/A – measure relates to municipal
operations and does not have a
community cost.
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive
511 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
16 Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
• Incremental costs to
upgrade new equipment
installations to all-electric
(low to high). Variable
costs associated with
electrification. The City
should focus on cost
effective approaches such
as rooftop package units
first which have low-cost
impacts.
• Staff time to continue
implementing policies,
utilize demand
management technology
on all applicable systems,
and develop and
implement new standards
for City operations (low
cost)
• Staff time to develop an
electrification first policy
for City-owned fossil fuel
equipment (low cost)

Mobility and Land Use Systems
Measure
MLS-1
Reduce reliance on single-
occupancy vehicles by
promoting increased
residential densities along
transit and commercial
corridors, increasing mix of
land uses and expanding
Low Cost • Staff time to perform
engagement, outreach,
and educational
campaigns (low cost)
• Staff time to establish
partnerships and create a
network of information
sharing related to
No Cost/
Cost Savings
• Potential decrease in
transportation costs due to better
proximity to public transit and
active transportation options for
those reducing single-occupancy
vehicle use (no cost/cost savings).
• Potential increase in developer
revenues to lower parking costs
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive
512 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
17 Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
the range of attainable
housing choices.
affordable housing to
address collective
challenges (low cost)
• Staff time to conduct a
comprehensive zoning
review as part of the Land
Use Element update (low
cost, already underway)
• Staff and consultant time
to study possible
elimination of parking
minimums and inclusions
of parking maximums (low
cost)
• Staff time to identify
locations to increase
density near transit hubs
and update local codes,
zoning districts, and
design standards (low
cost)
and increased unit density (no
cost/cost savings).
• Increased parking costs (low cost).

Measure
MLS-2
Increase active
transportation mode share
to 3% by 2030 and 10% by
2045 by increasing the
safety and availability of the
transportation system to
support walking and biking
for all members of the
community.

High Cost • Staff time to prepare
standards, update the
municipal code, permit
requirements, and any
future ordinances (low
cost)
• Staff time to continue and
maintain and enhance
partnerships to expand
existing rebate programs
and complete currently
planned projects and
leverage insights and best
practices (low - moderate
cost)
No Cost/
Cost Savings
to Low Cost
• Upfront costs for new equipment
like bikes or micromobility devices,
offset by reduced transportation
costs over time for those reducing
single occupancy vehicle use (no
cost/cost savings to low cost).
• Short-term disruption from
construction but long-term
economic benefits for businesses
and residents adjacent to new
corridors (no cost/cost savings).

2030:
1,839
2045:
7,516
513 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
18 Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
• Staff time to identify
locations to install
additional bike repair
stations (low cost)
• Staff time to pursue and
obtain grants (low cost)
• Staff and consultant time
to re-evaluate the City’s
Safe Routes to School
Program (moderate cost)
• Staff time, contractor
time, and capital costs to
complete the Doran
Street Grade Separation
Project (high cost,
however, already included
in budget projections)
• Staff time and capital
costs to formalize a
transit to trails program
(moderate cost)
• Staff and consultant time
as well as capital costs to
complete and implement
the Vision Zero Pedestrian
Plan (high cost)
• Staff time to evaluate and
if feasible design and
implement a Shared Bike
program (low – moderate)
• Capital costs to
implement (e.g., construct
bicycle lanes in the public
right-of-way) the Bicycle
Transportation Plan and
514 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
19 Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
install public bike parking
facilities (high cost)
Measure
MLS-3
Enhance the transit system
to be more resilient,
accessible, and convenient
to increase mode share to
5% by 2030 and 10% by
2045.

Moderate Cost • Staff time and capital
costs to complete the
current Bus Stop
Improvement Program
(high cost, however
already included in
budget projections)
• Staff and consultant time
to evaluate the existing
Beeline route and
coordinate with Metro,
BurbankBus, La Canada
Flintridge (LCF) Shuttle,
Metrolink, and Amtrak as
part of the ongoing
Comprehensive Transit
Operations Analysis
(moderate cost)
• Staff time to partner with
Metro and provide
updated community
education and continue to
provide qualifying low-
income residents with
monthly free regional
rides (low cost)
• Staff time to actively
engage with community
members (low cost)
No Cost/
Cost Savings
• Long-term savings for those who
shift from single-occupancy
vehicles to transit (no cost/cost
savings).7
• Long-term economic benefits for
residents adjacent to new routes
(no cost/cost savings).
2030:
6,929
2045:
16,882
Measure
MLS-4
Increase passenger and
commercial zero-emission
vehicle use and adoption to
Moderate Cost • Staff time to continue to
leverage feasibility study
information to evaluate
opportunities for
Low Cost • Additional cost from purchasing a
ZEV compared to a fossil fuel-
powered car slightly offset by
rebates (low cost when considering
2030:
60,885
2045:
290,572
515 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
20 24 United States Department of Energy. Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. Alternative Fuels Data Center. Accessed April 2025 at: https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity-infrastructure- development
25 Alternative Fuel Data Center. Vehicle Cost Calculator. Accessed April 2025 at: https://afdc.energy.gov/calc/ Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
25% by 2030 and 90% by
2045, respectively.
installation of EV charging
stations (already
underway, low cost)
• Staff time to continue to
implement the Glendale
Electric Vehicle Reach
Code (already underway,
low cost)
• Staff time to continue
conducting at least two
annual ZEV events for
residents (already
underway, low cost)
• Staff time to engage with
large employers and
owners of parking
structures (low cost)
• Staff time to prepare a
commercial vehicle fleet
summary (moderate cost)
• Staff time to develop
outreach and educational
materials (low cost)
• Capital costs to install at
least 25 level II chargers
per year, alternatively the
City can pursue a public
private partnership to
lower costs. Estimated
$3,500 per connector for
Level 2 chargers.24
(moderate costs)
replacement cost) For example the
2025 Chevy Blazer 4cyld is
approximately $10,000 less than
the Blazer EV. However, even
before the $7500 tax credit the EV
becomes cheaper to own within 7
years. After the tax credit it is
cheaper in a year (low cost/cost
savings).25
• Cost savings from long-term fuel
and maintenance expenses as well
as cost savings from off-peak
charging plans (no cost/cost
savings).11
• Capital costs for residents and
property owners related to EV
charger installation and necessary
electrical upgrades slightly offset
by rebates (low cost).
• Possible increase in property
values for locations with improved
EV infrastructure access (no
cost/cost savings).
516 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
21 26 Greenworks North America LLC (2025). 80V 800 CFM Brushless Leaf Blower w/ 2.5Ah Battery & Charger (Renewed). Accessed April 2025 at:
https://www.greenworkstools.com/products/80v-800-cfm-brushless-leaf-blower-w-2-5ah-battery-charger-open- box?variant=52121849987441&country=US&currency=USD&utm_medium=product_sync&utm_source=google&utm_content=sag_organic&utm_campaign=sag_organic&utm_source=Google %20Ads&utm_medium=Shopping&utm_campaign=15990624702&utm_content=&device=c&j_source=Google%20Ads&j_medium=Shopping&j_campaign=15990624702&j_content=&gad_s ource=1&gad_campaignid=16000844783&gbraid=0AAAAAC27RlQgeI2CE8o60hcuKRlLELQFs&gclid=Cj0KCQjwlMfABhCWARIsADGXdy9n8nCzMVR2tngVr8Vbn8h0oV6tObAUrKOj_JWPO8D7iyt eSX-68oAaAiqpEALw_wcB
27 Ace Hardware. STIHL BR 600 238 mph 677 CFM Gas Backpack Leaf Blower. Accessed April 2025 at: https://www.acehardware.com/departments/lawn-and-garden/outdoor-power- equipment/leaf-
blowers/7000429?irclickid=XXhWZY2iaxycUw3TC3Tvd1sRUksRuwU3I1oAz80&irgwc=1&utm_medium=Affiliate&utm_source=Impact&utm_campaign=29332&utm_term=611504 Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
Measure
MLS-5
Electrify or otherwise
decarbonize 30% of
community-operated off-
road equipment (e.g.,
lawnmowers, leaf blowers,
and chainsaws) operations
by 2030 and 100% by
2045.

Low -
Moderate Cost
• Staff and consultant time
to conduct the off-road
equipment assessment
and outreach. Estimated
<$50,000 (low cost).
• Staff time to draft any
future ordinances (low
cost)
• Staff time to promote the
multi-lingual Off-road
Equipment Replacement
Outreach Campaign (low
cost)
• Staff time to require zero-
emission off-road
equipment as a mitigation
measure (low cost)
Low Cost to
Moderate Cost
• Cost of replacing off-road
equipment with zero-emission
alternatives, partially offset by
rebates and incentives and a
reduction in long-term operational
costs. In some cases, electric
equipment can be less expensive.

An electric 800 CFM leaf blower is
$20026 while a gas 600 CFM leaf
blower is $549.27 (low cost when
considering replacement costs).
2030:
4,206
2045:
16,149
Measure
MLS-6
Transition to 45% zero-
emission municipal fleet by
2030 and 100% by 2040.

Moderate Cost • Staff and consultant time
to review and update the
Fleet Electrification Study
and an impact and risk
assessment for power
outages (moderate cost)
• Staff time to continue
highlighting the City’s
zero-emission vehicle
No Cost • N/A – measure relates to
municipal operations and does not
have a community cost.
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive
517 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
22 29 CalRecycle. Appendix A: Cost Estimate (for SB 1383). Accessed April 2025 at: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/Docs/Web/115980 Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
fleet at community events
(low cost)
• Staff and consultant time
to develop an impact and
risk assessment for power
outages and development
of risk mitigation
strategies and a
resilience plan (moderate
cost)
• Staff time and capital
costs to implement the
Zero-Emission Transition
Bus Rollout plan by 2035
and install battery backup
and solar to provide
resilience to the
municipal fleet (high cost)
Urban Eco-Systems
Measure
UE-1
Increase organics diversion
through SB-1383 to divert
75% of organic material by
2025.

Moderate Cost • Staff time to implement
data management
systems (low cost)
• Staff time to engage in
edible food recovery
capacity planning
(moderate cost)
• Staff time to establish
and maintain an
education program
around composting (low
cost)
Low Cost • Potential rate increases from
waste haulers. CalRecylce
estimates $2.69 per month for
households and $72 per month for
businesses. (low cost).29
2030:
59,899
2045:
63,190
518 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
23 28 CalRecycle. SB 1383 Education and Outreach Resources. Accessed April 2025 at: https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/education/; Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
• Staff time to implement
an equitable inspection
and compliance program
for the edible food
recovery program and
organics procurement
program (moderate cost)
• Staff time to partner with
the Los Angeles County of
Public Health to develop
new ordinances (low cost)
• Staff time to work with
waste hauler to provide
clear and consistent
composting education
materials28 (low cost)
• Staff time to meet the
procurement targets of
SB 1383 and work with
regional partners to
create a compost
application trading
program (low - moderate
cost)
• Staff time to work with an
entity to manage a
comprehensive edible
food waste recovery
program (low cost)
• Staff time to work with
school organizations to
implement organics
collection programs (low
cost)
519 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
24 30 United States Department of Energy. Landscaping for Shade. Accessed April 2025 at: https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/landscaping-shade Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
• Staff time and capital
costs to develop compost
giveaway sites (moderate
cost)
• Staff time to develop a
multi-family outreach
program (low cost)
• Staff time to review and
amend waste hauler
franchise agreement(s),
as needed (low cost)
Measure
UE-2
Increase tree canopy to
25% by 2030 and 30% by
2045 by focusing on
communities most
vulnerable to extreme heat.

Moderate Cost • Staff and contractor time
to complete analysis on
success rates for trees
planted (low cost)
• Staff time and contractor
to implement and update
the Open Space
Management Plan and
Community Forest
Management Plan (high
cost)
• Contractor time and
resources to plant 200
trees annually (moderate
cost)
• Staff time to re-evaluate
the “Designated Street
Tree List” and regularly
review, enhance, and
update the City’s existing
“Public Tree” webpage
(low cost)
Low Cost • Tree planting and maintenance
costs for property owners to
comply with the Tree Preservation
and Protection ordinance (low
cost).
• Property value appreciation from
increased tree canopy (no
cost/cost savings).3
• Potential energy bill savings from
tree shade (no cost/cost savings)30
2030:
149
2045:
1,635
520 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
25 Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
• Staff and consultant time
to complete site
assessments of parks
(moderate cost)
• Staff time to pursue and
obtain grant funding (low
cost)
• Staff time to partner with
a non-profit and enhance
and promote existing
programs (low cost)
• Staff time to contract with
local nurseries (low cost)
Measure
UE-3
Reduce the potential for
wildfire to spread in
Glendale by actively
managing 50-75 acres of
land annually through
prescribed burns, brush
clearance, grazing, and
building hardening.

Moderate Cost • Staff and consultant time
to conduct analysis to
identify high risk and high
fuel load areas (moderate
cost)
• Staff and contractor time
to apply vegetation
management and
establish implementation
schedule (moderate cost)
• Staff time to seek and
apply for funding to
prepare a Community
Wildlife Protection Plan
and to fund wildfire
vegetation management
(low cost)
• Staff time to partner with
local Tribes to conduct
study on feasibility of
prescribed burns and
increase Tribal
No Cost/
Cost Savings
• Potential cost savings/health
benefits due to land management.
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive
521 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
26 31 The Economic Value of Efficiency for California Water Service: Lower Water Bills. Accessed April 2025 at: https://www.calwater.com/docs/conservation/Economic-Value-of-Water-Efficiency- Lower-Water-Bills.pdf
Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
coordination (moderate
cost)
• Staff and contractor time
to implement the
Vegetation Management
Program (moderate cost)
Measure
UE-4
Increase access to
affordable and fresh
produce through
partnerships and technical
assistance.

Low Cost • Staff time to continue
partnering with Glendale
Unified School District to
create school community
garden programs and
provide education (low
cost)
Low Cost to
Moderate Cost
• Increased access to affordable and
fresh produce
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive
Measure
UE-5
Reduce per capita water
use to 48 gallons per day
by 2030 and 42 gallons per
day by 2045 by enhancing
water conservation and
water quality and increase
the Glendale water
system's resilience to
climate extremes by
upgrading water and
stormwater facilities.

Moderate Cost • Staff time to develop and
enforce new ordinances
(low cost)
• Staff and consultant time
to update the Urban
Water Management Plan
(moderate cost)
• Staff and consultant time
to conduct a
water/energy nexus study
to inform future water
rate structure (moderate
cost)
• Staff time to continue to
partner with local
jurisdictions (low cost)
• Staff time to partner with
Metropolitan Water
Low Cost • Savings from water-efficient
fixtures and practices, reducing
utility bills in the long term (no
cost/cost savings)31
• Upfront costs for implementing
water-saving measures, offset by
available incentives and rebates
(low cost)
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive
522 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
27 Measure
ID Measure Text
City Cost
Categorization City Cost Variables
Community
Cost
Categorization Community Cost Variables
Direct
Benefit
District of Southern
California to expand the
rain barrel program (low
cost)
Measure
UE-6
Showcase municipal
leadership through
increased landfill diversion
rates, climate-smart food
and purchasing behavior,
and enhanced water
efficiencies.

Moderate Cost • Staff time to evaluate
existing custodial
contracts (low cost)
• Staff and consultant time
to complete annual waste
audits (low cost)
• City Staff time and capital
costs to enhance and
maintain free bin program
(low cost)
• Staff time to create a Buy-
Nothing group for City
staff (low cost)
• Staff time to establish
updated City policies for
City events (low cost)
• Staff and consultant time
to complete a municipal
water audit (moderate
cost)
N/A • N/A – measure relates to
municipal operations and does not
have a community cost.
2030:

Supportive
2045:

Supportive
523 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
28 Phase I Estimated Cost Range
Based on the results of the cost analysis above , Figure 4 was developed to quickly identify the most cost-effective measures/actions within Phase 1 of the CAAP implementation. This table provides a quick reference to help guide implementation, but it has several limitations that should be considered as well. Many of the resilience focused measures have unknown lifecycle savings. This is due to the unknown risk associated with increased natural disasters like fire. If a resilience action has even a 5% chance of reducing a major fire (like those in LA) , then they would be cost effective. Therefore, while these measures are likely all cost effective, they are listed as unknown for this reason. Additionally, some measures like increasing transit could result in lifecycle savings over time and at buildout where the increased costs are offset by lower vehicle ownership costs, improved air quality and health benefits, and lower road maintenance costs. However, since there are no direct cost savings in the short-term, these have been listed as “no” lifecycle savings. Finally, some measures and actions like water conservation and recycled water may never result in full pay back on a dollar and cents basis, but due to climate change they are mandatory for providing reliable drinking water. As climate change intensifies, more and more of these actions will become requirements to adapt to increasing hazards regardless of cost effectiveness.
524 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
29 Figure 4 Cost Summary

525 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
30 Funding and Financing Opportunities
Not all the costs identified above will be covered by the City or the community and they will not necessarily need to be paid for up front. The following funding and financing options can help reduce overall costs (like through grants generated by California’s Pr op 4 climate bond) or help spread out upfront costs to take advantage of long-term savings (such as switching to an EV or financing a solar photovoltaic system). This list is ordered by the increasing amount of debt load that would be incurred by the City (or other project lead): starting with free capital from grants and partnerships, continuing to capital borrowed from loans and bonds, and concluding with city funding from budget, taxes, and fees.

1. Grants can provide a substantial source of ‘repayment-free’ capital if cities have the capacity for staff to invest in grant management. Grants make the most sense for cities with the necessary staff capacity (1-2 full-time equivalents, either internal or external experts) to track grant opportunities, craft meaningful proposals that link to the goals and mission of the donors, submit applications, and track results required for ongoing reporting. • Pros:
o Grants do not have to be repaid.
o Grants can support purchases that enable cities to be the sole owner and operator of a project and maintain city control over project details. o It can attract media and generate credibility and prestige when awarded by national institutions, which helps promote cities’ climate leadership and innovative projects
• Cons:
o Often competitive
o Effort spent applying not always rewarded.
o Grants from federal, state, and other government sources tend to have strict limitations on what funds can be spent on, as well as burdensome reporting requirements.
o Not sustainable, have to reapply often with uncertain outcomes. o Can sometimes come with ‘match’ requirements, where the grantee has to come up with ~10-50% of the project budget and the grant will cover the rest.

2. Partnerships often tap resources, and secure capital, from non-governmental and corporate actors, which can spread the financial risk of a project across multiple public, private, and/or nonprofit entities. Partnerships are well-suited for cities who cannot or do not want to own their project outright, and who are willing to share possible cost savings and revenue generation with a third-party. Examples of partnerships include Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESCOs), Sponsorships, Public-Private Partnerships, and Power Purchase Agreements.
• Pros:
o Private partners can expedite project design, initial implementation, and ongoing management.
o Can leverage private sector expertise to spark innovation, and better design, build, and manage projects.
o Can enable public sector to capture tax incentives and other private market benefits.
o Private actors may fully fund the initiative

526 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
31 • Cons:
o City may not have ultimate ownership of project and may lose operational control.
o City may not have access to cost savings or revenue generated from project. o Negotiations can be complex, lengthy, and difficult, and tensions can arise between parties given their divergent operational speeds, with public parties prioritizing safety and durability, and private partners preferring quick decision making and maximizing efficiency and profits.
o Partnerships are less transparent than budget, bonds, and other mechanisms.

3. Loans give cities access to upfront capital, whose principal and interest must be repaid over the duration of the loan. While cities should first consider grants and private partners that can provide repayment-free capital, when those pathways are unavailable loans are a dependable alternative. In many cases, municipal borrowers and impact-driven projects can find financing with low-interest rates. Loans can also include Lease-Purchase Agreements which defer upfront costs but require more total capital over the life of the payment. • Pros:
o Provides upfront capital on short notice with predictable terms and contracts. o Spreads the cost of a project across the useful life of the asset, and thus allocates costs to current and future users

• Cons:
o Loans add debt to the balance sheet.
o Lenders may have stipulations on what the borrowed capital can be spent on (assets vs. wages, etc.)
o Private investor and bank loans are usually offered with higher interest rates than municipal bonds.
o Loans are less transparent than budget, bonds, and grants, unless cities pursue extraordinary levels of disclosure.

4. Bonds provide dependable, predictable financing for cities looking to capitalize large infrastructure projects ranging from the millions to billions of dollars. A city can issue a bond directly or apply for funds from a state bonding program. These bonds can be backed either by general city funds, or specific revenue sources. There are multiple types of bond structures including general obligation, revenue, and conduit bonds, as well as certifications like “green” bonds for climate and sustainability that communicate what types of projects bond proceeds are being used for.
• Pros:
o Bonds enable cities to borrow large amounts of up-front capital with fixed low interest rates and long repayment periods.
o Bonds spread out costs over useful life of project, which can be decades, and allocate costs to current and future users of the project. o Tax-exempt municipal bonds can attract capital from high-net-worth investors, especially local wealthy individuals and families who benefit from tax deductions on bond interest if they live in your city’s county or state.

527 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
32 • Cons:
o Issuing general obligation bonds can be a politically charged process if your city requires voter approval.
o Bonds cannot be repaid through cost savings from a project, they must be repaid through additional topline revenues coming from a project or from reallocated funds within the municipal budget.
- If a third party is generating revenues from the installation or operation of a project, those revenues can be used to support the bond. When combined with an Energy Savings Performance Contract, this is called a Morris Model Bond.
o City bond ratings affect the interest rates of municipal bonds, with poorly rated cities having to pay higher interest rates on their bonds. This can pose as a challenge to lower income cities, and in cities that face frequent flooding, fires and other climate threats that threaten financial solvency — as all of these factors can depress city bond ratings.

5. Budget refers to using money in a city’s general fund to capitalize projects. Every year cities collect tax revenue and other fees to populate their general funds, portions of which are appropriated to new capital projects and infrastructure investments. As the inability of city budgets to cover the expansive list of new costly climate projects in CAPs is a primary motivation for this project, financial mechanisms beyond budget must begin covering a larger share of the load, and other financial mechanisms should be fully explored before cities turn to budget funding. Yet, opportunities remain for climate action to take higher priority in cities’ budgeting processes and for city budgets to fund appropriate climate-related expenditures. If using city budget is an option, well-suited projects tend to have total costs that are small enough to fit into 1 to 3 years of the city’s budget, and/or have costs incurred in a dispersed manner, ideally evenly distributed over several years or decades, like the costs of staffing for a new program.
• Pros:
o City budget funds are available immediately and thus can respond to pressing time-sensitive funding needs.
o City budget funds come with few restrictions and can be tailored to match project needs exactly.
o Funding from the city budget does not increase debt burden and frees up future budget that would otherwise be spent servicing debt payments with interest.
o Budget funding utilizes existing contractual relationships, and does not require creating new partnerships or entering into new legal arrangements

• Cons:
o The amount of funding available each year is limited, so large projects can exhaust an agency's entire capital budget for the year. o Similarly, it can take decades to accumulate enough to pay upfront costs of major infrastructure projects. If cities do save portions of the budget for several years in order to have enough capital to cover the upfront costs of a project, cities can end up paying more for the project due to inflation.

6. New taxes and fees, as well as cost savings and other revenues, can create new flows of capital to fund climate action. Most often, however, ongoing revenue generation is not earmarked for a particular project and accumulated in a savings account. Rather, new 528 of 961

City of Glendale
GHG Reduction Measures Cost Analysis
33 revenue flows are funneled into cities’ general funds, or leveraged through financing, as is the case with revenue bonds. Revenue generation via new taxes and fees makes sense for cities that have not significantly raised taxes or fees on residents in the past year or two, for projects that do not need immediate upfront capital, or for cities pursuing a revenue bond that needs a source of project-based revenues.
• Pros:
o New or raised taxes and fees provide cities with stable sources of ongoing revenue that can provide consistency and budget flexibility for decades. o With adequate political support and restrictive legislation, revenues from taxes and fees can be set aside to create funds for very specific purposes, with revenues generated from specific interested party groups

• Cons:
o New or raised taxes and fees require significant political capital and community support to implement.
o There may be state-level regulation affecting which tax and fee structures a city can use.
o Certain tax structures can be regressive, placing a higher burden on low- income communities.
o Revenues generated from specific taxes and fees can fluctuate based on economic conditions and personal behavior, which can create last-minute budget shortfalls.

Climate Action Finance Map
To provide the City of Glendale with not only a climate smart, but also economically smart Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, Rincon and HIP Investor created a Climate Action Finance Map (Attachment 1). This map highlights the various options available for the City to help fund or finance some of its most impactful climate actions. The map provides links to programs as well as case examples which shows how other cities have implemented similar strategies.

Limitations
This analysis was developed based on the best publicly available data and Rincon’s anecdotal evidence. Rincon is not liable for any outcomes related to changes or errors in the information provided. The analysis is meant to be used for internal purposes fo r estimating the general cost associated with the specific measures referenced above. Rincon is not liable for outcomes related to future implementation of the City’s measures or future alterations or modifications encountered during measure implementation over time. Actualized cost will depend on the implementation approach, as well as the technologies and incentives leveraged to achieve the intended outcomes of each measure.

529 of 961

34 Attachment A: Climate Action Finance Map
530 of 961

34 Attachment A: Climate Action Finance Map
531 of 961

City Climate Action Strategy Capital Types Top Funding and Finance PathwaysPrograms and Partners Case Examples

MOBILITY & LAND USE SYSTEM
Measure BLD-1
Carbon-free Electricity
Procurement
GRANT Federal Grant via Department of Energy River Falls & Madison, WI
PARTNER Power Purchasing Agreement ENGIE, Ameresco Glendale / SCPPA San Jose, CA
LOAN Tax-Exempt Lease Purchase AgreementGS $mart DGS Building Retroﬁts BOND General Obligation Bond (Green) California iBank Lakeport, CA LOAN On-Bill Financing Glendale Water & Power EESI Case Studies Grand Valley, CO
LOAN Green Bank or Revolving Loan Fund Coalition For Green Capital San Antonio, TX LOAN State Revolving Loan Fund Infrastructure State Revolving Fund (ISRF) Program
Orange County
Library
PARTNER Utility-Led Incentives * Green Mnt Power, VT
LOAN Private Investment Firm Loan NYC Hudson,
Hillsborough, FLGenerate Capital
PARTNER Collaborative Community Ownership Clean- Coalition Boardman Hill, VT Urban and Community
Forestry Program
Urban Forestry
GRANT Foundation Grants
PARTNER Government Program Participation Cook County, IL LOAN Federal Loans Clean Water State
Revolving Fund Brookhaven, GA
BOND Environmental Impact Bond Quantiﬁed Ventures SW Colorado National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation
Resilient Communities
Program
BLD-1 Increase carbon-free
electricity procurement to
provide 100% carbon-free
electricity community-wide by
2035 and improve electrical
system resiliency through
additional distributed energy
resources, transmission
capacity, and demand response.

S-1:1: Implement Chico’s Urban
Forest Revitalization Program
(4,500 trees by 2030)
Biodigester
GRANT State and Foundation Grants EPIC Grant,
CPUC-SGIP Escondido, CA
PARTNER Power Purchasing Agreement ENGIE, Ameresco Woodland, MI BOND General Obligation or Revenue Bond California iBank Grand Rapids, MI LOAN Government Loan Program CalRecycle GHG
Reduction Loan
North Star
(previous
recipient)
W-1:4: Partner with North State
Rendering to expand use of the
digester
Enhanced Infrastructure Financing
District
Butte County
Economic
Development
Company
West Carson, LA
(consideration)TAX
Developer Impact Fee or Stormwater
Utility Fee TreePAC Portland, ORFEE
GRANT CA State Grants CNRA Environmental
Enhancement + Mitigation 2020 Awardees
GRANT CA State Grants CNRA Urban Greening 2020 Awardees GRANT CA State Grants CAL FIRE Urban
Forestry 2020 Awardees
GRANT CA State Grants Transformative Climate
Communities (TCC) San Fernando, CA
Cool CalRecycle Grant from
2018 in chico related to food
waste recovery
GRANT Federal Grant via Department of Energy
State Grants via CA Energy Commission
Entergy New Orleans
Clean, Dispatchable
Generation, CERRI Form EnergyGRANT
Ratepayer Surcharge or Utility Fee * Glendale Water & Power Hawaii Microgrid TariffFEE
Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District * SCAG ProposedTAX PARTNER Energy Saving Performance Contract ENGIE, Ameresco Philadelphia, PA

Page 1 ends

Glendale City CouncilAugust 12, 2025

Glendale City Council
August 12, 2025