Item 18 2023-01045 Public Review Draft of the Sacramento Climate Action & Adaptation Plan Part 2 — Sacramento City Council, August 22, 2023 (part 1 of 2)

2016 Community Inventory

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 21 3 2016 Community Inventory
The methodologies, data sources, calculations, and results associated with the 2016 GHG inventory update are included in this section. Information regarding updates to the 2005 and 2011 inventories and information relating to the emissions forecast is located in Section 2.2 and Section 2.3 of the technical appendix, respectively.

The 2016 GHG inventory is structured based on emissions sectors. The ICLEI Community Protocol recommends local governments examine their emissions in the context of the sector responsible for those emissions. Many local governments will find a sector-based analysis more directly relevant to policy making and project management, as it assists in formulating sector-specific reduction measures for climate action planning. The reporting sectors are made up of multiple subsectors to allow for easier identification of sources and targeting of reduction policies.

The 2016 inventory reports all Basic Emissions Generating Activities24 required by the Community Protocol25 by the following main sectors:
 Energy (electricity and natural gas)
 Transportation
 Water and Wastewater
 Solid Waste
The data used to complete this inventory and forecast came from multiple sources, as summarized in Table 12. Data for the 2016 inventory calculations were provided by the City via personal communication with Helen Selph.

24 Required emissions generating activities include use of electricity by the community, use of fuel in residential and commerci al stationary combustion equipment, on-road passenger and freight motor vehicle travel, use of energy in potable water and wastewater treatment and distribution, and generation of solid waste by the community. 25 ICLEI. 2012. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Section 2.2.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

22 Table 12 Inventory and Forecast Data Sources
Sector Activity Data Unit Source
Inventory
Energy Electricity Consumption kWh Sacramento Municipal Utilities District Natural Gas Consumption Therms Pacific Gas and Electric Transportation Annual Mileage VMT EMFAC2017 Model; Sacramento Area Council of Governments
Water Water Pumping
Electricity Usage
AF
kWh
Sacramento DOU
Wastewater Electricity Consumption,
Water Treated
kWh
MGD
Sacramento DOU; Sacramento Regional County
Sanitation District; City of Sacramento 2011
Climate Action Plan
Solid Waste N/A N/A CalRecycle; Sacramento Public Works Department United States Environmental
Protection Agency Landfill Methane Outreach
Program Reporting
Forecast Growth Indicators
Population Residents Persons City of Sacramento General Plan; California Department of Finance Demographic
Projections
Commerce Jobs Number of
Jobs
City of Sacramento General Plan
Transportation Annual Mileage, Emissions N/A EMFAC2017 Model; Sacramento Area Council of Governments
Building Efficiency Title 24 Efficiency Increases Percent California Energy Commission Electricity Emissions Renewable Portfolio
Standard
Percent Renewable Portfolio Standard; Senate Bill 100
kWh; kilowatt hours; VMT = vehicle miles traveled; AF = acre-foot; MGD = million gallons per day; N/A = not applicable; Sacramento DOU = Sacramento Department of Utilities

3.1 Energy
The energy sector includes GHG emissions resulting from the consumption of electricity and natural gas. Both energy sources are used in residential, commercial, and industrial buildings and for other power needs throughout the City of Sacramento. The following subsections describe the data sources, emission factors and calculation methodologies associated with electricity and natural gas.

Overall, residential and non-residential (commercial and industrial) energy emissions were approximately equal in 2016 at 49 percent and 50 percent respectively (Figure 3). It should be noted that, similar to previous years, this does not include large industrial users’ gas use in the analysis.

Non-residential electricity was reported in aggregate by Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) and included both industrial and commercial data. Due to data availability issues, large industrial gas data were not provided by PG&E and not been included in this inventory. Additional information on why this change was made as well as the methodologies used to estimate 2016 commercial gas data are provided in the natural gas section.

TOC
2016 Community Inventory

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 23 Electricity
Emissions resulting from electricity consumption were estimated by multiplying annual electricity consumption by an electricity emission factor representing the average emissions associated with generation of one megawatt hour (MWh) of electricity. Electricity is supplied to the City by SMUD. In its 2016 report to the verification body, The Climate Registry, SMUD reported an electricity carbon intensity factor of 492.95 pounds CO2e per MWh.26 SMUD also reported to the California Energy Commission, an average of 20 percent renewable energy in its portfolio in 2016.27 From 2005, residential electricity use increased by 116.1 MWh while commercial electricity decreased by 44.7 MWh for a net increase of 71.4 MWh. Therefore, the 181,910 MT CO2e reduction in GHG emissions from electricity between 2005 and 2016 was due to an approximately 20 percent reduction in the SMUD electricity emission factor.

To calculate emissions from electricity, the total electricity use reported by SMUD was multiplied by the carbon intensity factor to determine MT CO2e. This value represents all residential, commercial, and industrial electricity use within the city. Prior to performing this calculation, the electricity use associated with in-boundary water sector activities (42,964 MWh) was removed to avoid double counting water emissions. This is discussed further in the water and wastewater section.

In 2016, a total 808,220 MTCO2e was generated within the community due to residential and commercial electricity use. Table 13 and Table 14 show the breakdown of emissions from electricity by both category (residential, commercial/industrial) and by source.

Natural Gas
In order to calculate emissions from natural gas consumption, the total therms consumed is multiplied by the PG&E reported emissions factor of 11.7 pounds CO2/therm. Due to CPUC privacy regulations, the majority of 2016 industrial therms were not provided.28 This resulted in a substantial decrease in emissions from industrial natural gas use from the 2005 baseline.

Any remaining reported industrial use is from PG&E “district” users, such as fire and school districts.

Industrial emissions removed from the inventories are under the purview of the CARB Cap-and- Trade Program for emissions reductions and are, therefore, already accounted for in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update. The California Supplement does not recommend including these sources unless they are under the direct jurisdictional control of the reporting agency.29 Overall natural gas usage in the commercial sector decreased from 29.8 million therms in 2005 to 29.0 million therms in 2016 while the emission factor remained constant. This means that 100 percent of the 45,063 MT CO2e reduction was attributed to a decrease in gas use.

In 2016, the commercial, district industrial, and residential categories consumed a total of 92,390,976 therms of natural gas, which, based on the emission factor of 0.00531 MT CO2/therm, generated 490,323 MTCO2e. A complete breakdown of natural gas use by category and sector is provided in Table 14.

26 The Climate Registry. 2022 Default Emissions Factors. Accessed at: https://theclimateregistry.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/2022- Default-Emission-Factors-Final.pdf . Accessed on April 18, 2023 27 California Energy Commission. Sacramento Municipal Utility District 2016 Power Content Label. Accessed at:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/526 Accessed April 17, 2023 28 Minor industrial emissions reported through PG&E from the ‘District’ customer class are included in this inventory. 29 Association of Environmental Professionals. 2013. The California Supplement to the United States Community -Wide Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol. Page 9.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

24 Figure 3 Energy Emissions by Category for Year 2016

Table 13 Energy Emissions by Category for Year 2016
Source Activity Data Emission Factor
Total Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Residential 636,578
Natural Gas 59,977,656 therms 0.00531 MT CO2e/therm 318,304 Electricity 1,423,420 MWh 0.2236 MT CO2e/MWh 318,275
Commercial 643,747
Natural Gas 28,980,911 therms 0.00531 MT CO2e/therm 153,803 Commercial and Industrial Electricity 2,191,181 MWh 0.2236 MT CO2e/MWh 489,945 District Industrial 18,216
Natural Gas1 3,432,409 therms 0.00531 MT CO2e/therm 18,216 Total 1,298,542
1 Large industrial natural gas has been removed due to CPUC privacy rules. See Energy Section for discussion.

MWh = megawatt hours; MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent Table 14 Energy Emissions by Energy Source for Year 2016 Source Activity Data Emission Factor
Total Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Natural Gas 92,390,976 therms 0.00531 MT CO2e/therm 490,332 Commercial 28,980,911 therms 0.00531 MT CO2e/therm 153,803 Residential 59,977,656 therms 0.00531 MT CO2e/therm 318,304 District Industrial1 3,432,409 therms 0.00531 MT CO2e/therm 18,216 Electricity 3,581,960 MWh 0.2236 MT CO2e/MWh 808,220
Commercial/Industrial 2,191,181 MWh 0.2236 MT CO2e/MWh 489,945 Residential 1,423,420 MWh 0.2236 MT CO2e/MWh 318,275
Total 1,298,542
1 Large industrial natural gas has been removed due to CPUC privacy rules. See Energy Section for discussion MWh = megawatt hours; MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent TOC
2016 Community Inventory

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 25

3.2 Transportation
Transportation modeling for VMT attributed to the City of Sacramento was completed by Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants using Sacramento Area Council of Government (SACOG) activity- based model, SACSIM.30 The emissions associated with on-road transportation were then calculated by multiplying the estimated daily VMT and the average vehicle emissions rate established by CARB EMFAC2017 modeling for vehicles within the region. In 2016 on-road transportation attributed to the City of Sacramento resulted in 1,935,870 MT CO2e, a 248,747 MT CO2e reduction compared to 2005. During this time VMT increased by 4 percent or 172 million miles traveled. Therefore, the emissions reductions in this sector were driven by an increase in average vehicle efficiency and adoption of electric vehicles which resulted in a 10 percent decrease in average vehicles emissions per mile.

The VMT modeling results allocate VMT derived from the activity-based model to the City of Sacramento using the Origin-Destination (O-D) method. The O-D VMT method is the preferred method recommended by the U.S Community Protocol in on-road methodology TR.1 and TR.2 to estimate miles traveled based on trip start and end locations. Under these recommendations, all trips that start and end within the City are attributed to the City. Additionally, one half of the trips that start internally and end externally and vice versa are attributed to the City. A summary of the VMT results can be found in Table 15.

Table 15 Estimated Transportation Emissions for 2016
Source Activity Data (VMT)2 Emission Factor
Total Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Internal-Internal Daily VMT 3,588,476 0.000445 MT CO2e per VMT 1,598 ½ Internal-External Daily VMT 4,463,016 0.000445 MT CO2e per VMT 1,988 ½ External-Internal Daily VMT 4,475,924 0.000445 MT CO2e per VMT 1,993 Total Daily VMT 12,527,417 0.000445 MT CO2e per VMT 5,579 Yearly VMT1 4,347,013,534 0.000445 MT CO2e per VMT 1,935,870 1 Weekday to annual conversion of 347 is used per CARB guidance on VMT modeling 2 The origin-destination methodology for VMT calculation attributes 100 percent of internal-to-internal daily trips, 50 percent of internal-external and external-internal daily trips, and excludes all pass-through trips. This sum is then multiplied by 347 to get an annual VMT number.

MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; VMT = vehicle miles traveled Transportation emissions are generated by the community of Sacramento through on-road transportation, including passenger, commercial, and heavy machinery. Emissions factors are established using the latest CARB and EPA-approved emissions modeling software, 2017 State EMissions FACtors (EMFAC) Model. Carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and methane emissions from engine combustion are multiplied by their GWP to determine CO2e per VMT. Emissions for both passenger and commercial vehicles were established using the EMFAC2017 GHG module and weighted by VMT to establish an average emissions factor per VMT for the City. Emissions from electricity used by charging of electric vehicles are captured under the electricity sector. In 2016, the average emissions factor for cars on the road in the County of Sacramento was 0.000445 MTCO2e

30 Sacramento Area Council of Governments. SACOG Travel Demand Model. Accessed at: https://www.sacog.org/modeling Accessed on:

October 4, 2019
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

26 per VMT as calculated using the EMFAC2017 model.31 Technical details on the EMFAC2017 modeling tool can be found on the EMFAC Mobile Source Emissions Inventory Technical Support Documentation Portal.32

3.3 Water and Wastewater
Water
Water is supplied to Sacramento by the Sacramento Department of Utilities, primarily sourced from the Sacramento and American rivers and from local groundwater reservoirs. The primary water treatment plant facilities for the community are E.A. Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant and Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant, both located within the city boundaries. Water supplied to the community contributes emissions through the use of energy to extract, convey, treat, and deliver water. The amount of energy required for community water usage was calculated following Community Protocol Method WW.14, where the total emissions are equal to the energy used in each of the four phases above. The energy required for each segment of the water cycle was provided by the Sacramento Department of Utilities or based on phase-specific averages where it was unavailable. SMUD provided the annual electricity use for the water extraction, conveyance, and delivery phases (40,101 MWh),33 while a kWh phase average of 100 kwh/million gallons was used for the treatment phase. As all energy use is in-boundary, total MWh for water transactions has been subtracted from the community energy use total calculated in Section 3.1 to avoid double counting.

SMUD is the electricity provider for the City; therefore, SMUD’s energy emissions factor of 492.95 pounds CO2e/MWh was applied to the calculated electricity used for water consumption in the city.

Energy consumption related to water use in the city of Sacramento resulted in the generation of approximately 9,607 MTCO2e in 2016, or 33 percent of total water and wastewater emissions. In 2016, Sacramento water treatment plants produced 87,811 acre-feet of water. The 2005 water consumption for the City was not recorded in the previous inventory and therefore, a comparison of the methodology was not possible. However, it is likely that emission reductions have been driven in part by a reduced electricity emission factor.

Wastewater
The wastewater generated by community residents and businesses creates GHG emissions during the treatment processes, including process, stationary, and fugitive emissions. The sources and magnitude of emissions depend on the type of wastewater treatment plant and the treatment processes utilized.

Wastewater generated in the city of Sacramento is collected in local sewer lines which ultimately discharge into the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant managed by Regional San in Elk Grove, California. As the wastewater treatment plant treats sewage from multiple jurisdictions, methane and nitrous oxide emissions were allocated to Sacramento on a population basis per Community Protocol Methodology WW.13 shown in Figure 4. Total carbon dioxide emissions from

31 EMFAC2017. Base year 2016, County of Sacramento model run. Accessed at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/emfac/ Accessed on: July 16, 2019
32 California Air Resources Board. EMFAC Software and Technical Support Documentation. Accessed at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our- work/programs/mobile-source-emissions-inventory/msei-modeling-tools-emfac-software-and Accessed on: October 4, 2019. 33 D. Vang, personal communication, August 2018.

TOC
2016 Community Inventory

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 27 the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant were unavailable from the USEPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, the ICLEI-recommended data source. Therefore, separate emissions sources (nitrous oxide, methane, electricity use) were calculated based on the population increase from 2011. In 2016, a total of 40 MT N2O and 32 MT CH4 were emitted from the effluent discharge and stationary sources at the treatment plant. As shown in Table 16 the total process emissions and electricity usage for Sacramento wastewater treatment and disposal resulted in emissions of 19,867 MT CO2e per year, or 67 percent of the water and wastewater emissions.

Table 16 Water and Wastewater Emissions for Year 2016
Source Activity Data Emission Factor
Total Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Water Use 42,963,998 MWh 0.22359 MT CO2e/MWh 9,607
Supply, Conveyance, Distribution 40,101 MWh 0.22359 MT CO2e/MWh 8,967 Treatment 2,863 MWh 0.22359 MT CO2e/MWh 640
Wastewater Generation N/A N/A 19,867
Process Nitrous Oxide Emissions 40 MT N2O 1 N2O to 298 CO2e 11,780 Stationary Methane Emissions 32 MT CH4 1 CH4 to 25 CO2e 804 Electricity Emissions 32,640 MWh 0.22359 MT CO2e/MWh 7,298 29,474
MWh = megawatt hours; MT = metric tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent; CH4 = methane; N2O = nitrous oxide Figure 4 Wastewater Methodology

3.4 Solid Waste
GHG emissions result from management and decay of organic material solid waste. The Community Protocol provides multiple accounting methods to address both emissions arising from solid waste generated by a community (regardless of where it is disposed of) as well as emissions arising from solid waste disposed of inside a community’s boundaries (regardless of where it was generated).

GHG emissions from the decomposition of organic material in this sector are broken down into two parts:

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

28  Community Waste - Lifetime methane emissions from solid waste generated by the community in the year of the inventory, using Community Protocol method SW.434. This methodology attributes 100 percent of lifetime GHG emissions from the tonnage reported in the inventory year.
 Waste-in-Place - Methane emissions from existing solid waste-in-place at landfills located within the community limits using Community Protocol method SW.135 This methodology attributes just the GHG emissions emitted in the inventory year based on the total lifetime tonnage in the landfill.

Due to the slow rate of emissions generation associated with decomposition of solid waste, this two-pronged approach also allows policy makers to target solid waste activity in a particular year, similar to other sectors (e.g., fuel combustion resulting in immediate emissions). Accounting for both of these sources may lead to some double counting in the waste sector as any waste counted in the total tonnage for the year, but also put in the City’s in-boundary landfill would be counted twice. However, the City’s in-boundary landfills are now closed and both methodologies convey different aspects of the solid waste emissions profile and are included for consistency with previous inventories. All emissions from vehicular transport of solid waste are included in the transportation emissions sector.

Two landfills are located within the city; therefore, solid waste emissions were estimated using both SW.1 to calculate the in-boundary landfill emissions and SW.4 to calculate the full methane commitment of solid waste generated by Sacramento in 2016. A summary of waste emissions is provided in Table 17.

Table 17 Summary of Solid Waste Emissions for Year 2016 Source Activity Data (tons) Emission Factor
Total Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Waste-in-Place N/A N/A 26,504
28th Street Landfill N/A N/A 12,027
L & D Landfill N/A N/A 14,478
Waste Disposal 525,968 0.2554 MT CO2e/ton 134,339
Total Waste Emissions 160,843
MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
Waste-in-Place
As a primary data source for waste-in-place emissions, the Community Protocol recommends utilizing data reported from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in accordance with the GHG Mandatory Reporting Rule (MRR; 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] §98). If the facilities are not subject to the USEPA MRR, then the alternate approach SW.1.1 should be used. Method SW.1.1 estimates emissions based on the first order decay (FOD) model and the waste-in-place in the landfill and is summarized in Figure 5. The FOD model is an exponential equation which estimates the amount of landfill gas generated in a municipal solid waste landfill based upon the amount of municipal solid waste in the landfill (or “waste-in-place”) at the point of time for which landfill gas generation is to be estimated, the capacity of that waste to generate

34 https://icleiusa.org/publications/us-community-protocol/ 35 https://icleiusa.org/publications/us-community-protocol/ TOC
2016 Community Inventory

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 29 methane and a methane generation rate constant which describes the rate at which municipal solid waste in the landfill is expected to decay and produce landfill gas.

Figure 5 Waste-in-Place Methodology

The Community Protocol recommends reviewing the Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP) maintained by the USEPA as the first source of emissions verification for landfills.36 As of 2016, no emissions from the 28th Street Landfill or L&D Landfill were reported to LMOP,37 therefore, a FOD modeling tool developed by CARB and recommended by ICLEI was utilized.38 The FOD model outputs emissions in methane and carbon dioxide. However, only methane emissions were accounted for as the carbon dioxide is considered biogenic in origin and not recommended for inclusion per the Community Protocol. Results of the model runs for both 28th Street Landfill and L&D Landfill can be found in the attached documentation and Table 18. A collection efficiency of 75 percent was applied per the Community Protocol for landfills with methane capture. Fugitive methane emissions from existing waste at the L&D and 28th Street landfills were calculated to be 26,504 MT CO2e in 2016. Annual waste-in-place emissions decreased by 23,416 MT CO2e from 2005 to 2016 due to the amount of waste remaining in the now closed landfills as modeled by the FOD modeling tool.

36 United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2016. Landfill Methane Outreach Program. Accessed at:
https://www.epa.gov/lmop/project-and-landfill-data-state . Accessed on: May 15, 2019 37 United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2016. Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. Accessed at:
https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting. Accessed on: May 15, 2019 38 California Air Resources Board. Local Government Operations Protocol for Greenhouse Gas Assessments. Accessed at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/local-government-operations-protocol-greenhouse-gas-assessments. Accessed on: May 20, 2019

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

30 Table 18 Waste-in-Place Summary for Year 2016
Sector
28th Street Landfill Emissions
(MT CO2e)
L&D Landfill Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Methane generated 48,107 57,910
Methane captured (removed) at landfill -36,080 -43,432
Subtotal Waste-in-Place Emissions 12,027 14,478
Total Waste-in-Place 26,504
MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
Community Generated Waste
While communities may want to understand the GHG emissions from landfills located within their boundaries (SW.1.1), they are required to estimate the emissions resulting from waste disposed by the community (SW.4.1), regardless of whether the receiving landfill(s) are located inside or outside of the community boundary. 39
Community Protocol Method SW.4.1 is summarized in Figure 6, utilizing mass of waste being disposed, organic content of waste, methane capture ability of the landfill, oxidation rate, and methane GWP. The 2016 emissions factor for generated waste in Sacramento was derived from the 2014 CalRecycle State Waste Characterization Study shown in Table 19.

39 https://icleiusa.org/publications/us-community-protocol/ TOC
2016 Community Inventory

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 31 Figure 6 Waste Generation Methodology

In 2016, Sacramento produced 525,968 tons of waste.40 A CO2e emissions factor for mixed-waste of

0.2554 MT CO2e/ton was established and multiplied by the total waste disposed of from the community to calculate emissions from waste generated in 2016 of 134,339 MT CO2e. This emission factor includes the expected lifetime emissions associated with the specified tonnage of waste sent to landfill. The emissions factor was developed using SW 4.1 as well as the relative waste stream percentages of different organic materials as shown in Table 19 to establish a methane emissions factor. The efficiency capture used was 75 percent, which was an update from previous inventories which relied on a regional average (42 percent) from the 2005 inventory. CalRecycle and USEPA LMOP data allow for more precise tracking of waste destination and methane capture ability and the majority of Sacramento’s waste in 2016 was transported to L & D Landfill in Sacramento, Kiefer Landfill in Sloughhouse, and Forward Landfill in Manteca, all of which operate landfill gas capture programs.41 From 2005 to 2016 GHG emissions from community waste decreased by 270,963 MT of CO2e. This was due to a combination of factors including a reduced emission factor due to installation of methane capture programs at landfills as well as an overall reduction in waste generation of 158,120 tons.

40 Waste tonnage and destinations from https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral. Accessed on: May 20, 2019 41 Landfill gas capture program data verified from https://www.epa.gov/lmop/project-and-landfill-data-state . Accessed on: May 20, 2019

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

32 Table 19 CalRecycle 2014 Waste Characterization Factor Waste Type WIPFRAC TDOC DANF ANDOC
Weighted
CH4/ton
Weighted MT
CO2e/ton
Newspaper 1.44% 47.09% 15.05% 0.117% 0.000143208 0.003580198 Office Paper 0.73% 38.54% 87.03% 0.617% 0.000344557 0.00861393 Corrugated Boxes 3.13% 44.84% 44.25% 0.952% 0.000872251 0.021806282 Coated Paper 12.10% 33.03% 24.31% 0.721% 0.001366096 0.034152408 Food 18.12% 14.83% 86.52% 1.990% 0.00326912 0.081728001 Grass 1.84% 13.30% 47.36% 0.120% 0.000163279 0.004081975 Leaves 3.52% 29.13% 7.30% 0.069% 0.00010509 0.002627254 Branches 3.27% 44.24% 23.14% 0.200% 0.000470807 0.011770174 Lumber 11.91% 43.00% 23.26% 1.451% 0.00167506 0.041876495 Textiles 5.85% 24.00% 50.00% 0.656% 0.000986758 0.024668962 Diapers 4.29% 24.00% 50.00% 0.520% 0.000723544 0.018088588 Construction/Demolition 2.31% 4.00% 50.00% 0.110% 6.48827E-05 0.001622068 Medical Waste 0.11% 15.00% 50.00% 0.000% 1.19281E-05 0.000298201 Sludge/Manure 0.57% 5.00% 50.00% 0.001% 1.991E-05 0.000497751 MSW Total 0.010216492 0.255412288
WIPFRAC = fraction of waste in waste-in-place; TDOC = total degradable organic carbon; DANF = decomposable anaerobic fraction; ANDOC = anaerobically degradable organic carbon; CH4 = methane; MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent TOC
Forecast

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 33 4 Forecast
A baseline inventory (i.e., the City of Sacramento’s 2016 inventory) sets a reference point for a single year. However, annual emissions change over time due to external factors such as population and job growth. An emission’s forecast accounts for projected growth and presents an estimate of GHG emissions in a future year. Calculating the difference between the GHG emissions forecast and the reduction targets set by the City determines the gap to be closed through City Climate Action Plan policies. This section quantifies the reduction impact State regulations will have on the City of Sacramento’s forecast and presents the results in an adjusted scenario forecast. The adjusted scenario incorporates the impact of State regulations which would reduce the City of Sacramento’s GHG emissions to provide a more accurate picture of future emissions growth and the responsibility of the City and community for GHG reductions once State regulations to reduce GHG emissions have been implemented.

Several indicator growth rates were developed and applied to the various emissions sectors to forecast emissions as shown in Table 22. The growth rates were applied to the most recent inventory year (2016) data to obtain projected activity data (e.g., energy use, waste production).

Growth rates were developed from the 2035 Sacramento General Plan population and job forecasts, EMFAC Modeling, and Department of Finance population forecasts for Sacramento County.

Applicable State and federal regulatory requirements, including Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards, Advanced Clean Car Standards, Renewable Portfolio Standard, and Title 24 efficiencies were then incorporated to accurately reflect expected reductions from State programs.

As the City of Sacramento General Plan Update is completed, population forecasts will shift.

Therefore, the forecast presented in Section 4.1 may be updated over the course of the project to be consistent with the General Plan Update. To deal with these changes, a “model” has been developed which allows for these variables to be easily adjusted as changes occur.

4.1 Forecast Results Summary
Overall emissions in Sacramento are forecast to decrease 35 percent by 2045 under existing programs and regulations (Adjusted Forecast) as shown in Table 20. The adjusted forecast emissions reductions are due to SB 100 requiring 100 percent GHG-free electricity in 2045, electricity-related emissions are expected to reduce to zero. Transportation, natural gas, and waste emissions are expected to constitute the majority of emissions by 2045.

Table 20 Summary of BAU Forecast and Legislative Reductions by Year Emissions Forecast
2020
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2025
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2030
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2040
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2045
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Business-as-usual forecast 3,558,871 3,726,548 3,894,225 4,203,918 4,342,257 Reduction from State measures 344,615 780,096 1,190,660 1,775,373 2,114,935 Adjusted Forecast 3,214,256 2,946,452 2,703,565 2,428,545 2,227,322 MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

34 Waste emissions will likely be lower than the current forecast due to SB 1383 and the requirements for a statewide 75 percent reduction in organic materials being sent to landfill by 2025. Due to the uncertainty of how these requirements will be enacted within the city of Sacramento, the modeling of the change in emissions from SB 1383 was not included and waste-reduction measures identified in the Climate Action Plan will be credited to the City.

As shown in Table 21, State regulations will reduce community GHG emissions substantially by 2045.

However, a substantial gap remains between the adjusted scenario and the targets discussed in Section 5. The required reductions to close the gap will come from existing and newly identified GHG reduction measures included in this and future iterations of the Sacramento Climate Action Plan.

Table 21 Adjusted Absolute and Per Capita Emissions Forecast Year Population
Absolute Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Per Capita Emissions
(MT CO2e/person)
2016 472,692 3,424,729 7.2
2020 507,587 3,214,256 6.3
2025 551,206 2,946,452 5.3
2030 594,824 2,703,565 4.5
2040 668,786 2,428,545 3.6
2045 697,764 2,227,322 3.2
MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

4.2 Business-as-Usual Forecast
The City of Sacramento business-as-usual scenario forecast provides an estimate of how GHG emissions would change in the forecast years if consumption trends continue as in 2016, absent any new regulations which would reduce local emissions. Several indicator growth rates were developed from 2016 activity levels and applied to the various emissions sectors to project future year emissions. Table 22 contains a list of growth factors used to develop the business-as-usual scenario forecast, with a summary of the results in Table 23. The BAU growth factors were then multiplied by the population or service person growth rates to develop the BAU emissions forecast.

TOC
Forecast

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 35 Table 22 Business- as-Usual Growth Factors
Sector Activity Data
Emissions per capita (MT CO2e/capita) 7.25
Residential electricity per capita (kWh/capita) 3,011
Commercial electricity use per job (kWh/employment) 7,098 Residential gas per capita (therm/capita) 127
Commercial gas use per job (therm/job) 93.9
Industrial gas per job (therm/job) 11.1
Per job industrial gas use (therm) 11.1
Waste per service person (tons/SP) 0.67
Per service pop WW GHG (MT CO2e) 0.0254
CO2e per ton waste (MT CO2e/ton) 0.306
Water electricity per service person (kWh/SP) 55.0
Water emissions per capita (MT CO2/capita) 0
Total VMT per service person (VMT/SP) 5,563
kWh = kilowatt hour; SP = service person (sum of population and employment) MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; VMT = vehicle miles traveled Under the business-as-usual forecast scenario, the City of Sacramento’s GHG emissions are projected to continue increasing through 2045 as shown in Table 23. This increase is led primarily by a strong commercial and residential development trend. After the current General Plan horizon year of 2035, major increases in in emissions are largely attributed to the increased population and vehicular traffic from the greater Sacramento County Area traveling into the city. By 2045, the City is expected to produce 4,393,112 MT CO2e under business-as-usual projections, an increase of 42 percent over 2016 emissions.

Table 23 Business-as-usual Forecast by Sector
Sector
2020
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2025
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2030
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2040
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2045
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Residential Electricity 341,770 371,140 400,509 450,309 469,821 Commercial & Industrial Electricity 515,632 547,740 579,848 641,041 668,817 Residential Gas 341,801 371,174 400,546 450,350 469,864 Commercial & Small Industrial Gas 181,037 192,310 203,584 225,068 234,820 Waste 171,357 184,500 197,643 220,803 230,371
Water 10,235 11,020 11,805 13,188 13,759
Wastewater 21,166 22,789 24,412 27,273 28,455
Transportation 1,975,873 2,025,876 2,075,879 2,175,885 2,277,215 Total Emissions 3,558,871 3,726,548 3,894,225 4,203,918 4,393,122 Per Capita Emissions (MT
CO2e/person) 7.01 6.76 6.55 6.29 6.30
MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

36 4.3 State Legislation
The adjusted scenario estimates future City of Sacramento emissions under codified GHG reduction strategies currently being implemented at the State and federal level. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update identified several existing State programs and targets, or known commitments required by statute which can be assumed to achieve GHG reductions without City action, such as increased fuel efficiency standards of mobile vehicles. The following known commitments are factored into the adjusted scenario projection and a summary of the programs can be found in Table 24.

The largest GHG reductions realized by State programs in Sacramento will occur from the increasing decarbonization of the electricity supply due to SB 100 and the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), avoiding over 1,000,000 MT CO2e by 2045. The transportation sector will also experience over 975,000 MT CO2e by 2045 through State and federal fuel efficiency and tailpipe emissions standards.

Table 24 Summary of Legislative Reductions
Legislation
2020 Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2025 Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2030 Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2040 Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2045 Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Senate Bill 100 140,172 269,898 437,139 803,480 1,033,535 Title 24 6,127 36,764 67,400 122,084 145,049
Transportation (Pavley, etc.) 198,315 473,434 686,121 849,810 936,351 Total 344,615 780,096 1,190,660 1,775,373 2,114,935
MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
Transportation Legislation
The CARB EMFAC2017 transportation modeling program incorporates legislative requirements and regulations including Advanced Clean Cars program (Low Emissions Vehicles III, Zero Emissions Vehicles program, etc.), and Phase 2 federal GHG Standards. Signed into law in 2002, AB 1493 (Pavley Standards) required vehicle manufactures to reduce GHG emissions from new passenger vehicles and light trucks from 2009 through 2016, with a target of 30 percent reductions by 2016, while simultaneously improving fuel efficiency and reducing motorists’ costs.42 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. The new standards will reduce Californian GHG emissions by 34 percent in 2025.43

42 California Air Resources Board. Clean Car Standards – Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493. May 2013. 43 California Air Resources Board. Advanced Clean Cars Program About. January 2023. Accessed at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our- work/programs/advanced-clean-cars-program Accessed on: April 17, 2023 TOC
Forecast

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 37 Reductions in GHG emissions from the above referenced standards were calculated using the CARB EMFAC2017 model for Sacramento County. The EMFAC2017 model integrates the estimated reductions into the mobile source emissions portion of the model.44 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 will include on- site solar generation and near-zero net energy use. For projects implemented after January 1, 2020, the California Energy Commission estimates the 2019 standards will reduce consumption by seven percent for residential buildings and 30 percent for commercial buildings, relative to the 2016 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. The calculations and GHG emissions forecast assume all growth in the residential and commercial/industrial sectors is from new construction.

The 2017 Scoping Plan Update calls for the continuation of ongoing triennial updates to Title 24 which will yield regular increases in the mandatory energy and water savings for new construction.

Future updates to Title 24 standards for residential and non-residential alterations past 2023 are not taken into consideration due to lack of data and certainty about the magnitude of energy savings realized with each subsequent update.

Renewables Portfolio Standard & Senate Bill 100
Established in 2002 under SB 1078, enhanced in 2015 by SB 350, and accelerated in 2018 under SB 100, California's 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 percent of total procurement by 2026 and 60 percent of total procurement by 2030.

The RPS program further requires these entities to increase procurement from GHG-free sources to 100 percent of total procurement by 2045.

SMUD provides electricity in Sacramento and is subject to the RPS requirements. SMUD forecast emissions factors include reductions based on compliance with RPS requirements through 2045. In 2016, SMUD reported an emissions factor of 492.95 pounds CO2e per MWh.

Assembly Bill 939 & Assembly Bill 341
In 2011, AB 341 set the target of 75 percent recycling, composting, or source reduction of solid waste by 2020 calling for the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (also

44 Additional details are provided in the EMFAC2017 Technical Documentation, July 2018. Accessed at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023-01/emfac2017-volume-iii-technical-documentation.pdf . Accessed on: May 20, 2019. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) regulation is excluded from EMFAC2017 because most of the emissions benefits due to the LCFS come from the production cycle (upstream emissions) of the fuel rather than the combustion cycle (tailpipe). As a result, LCFS is assumed to not have a significant impact on CO2 emissions from EMFAC’s tailpipe emissions estimates.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

38 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 percent waste diversion set by AB 939.

As actions under AB 341 are not assigned to specific local jurisdictions, actions beyond the projected waste diversion target of 5.9 pounds per person per day set under AB 939 for the City of Sacramento will be quantified and credited to the City during the Climate Action Plan measure development process. As of 2016, Sacramento is meeting both the 5.9 pounds per person per day and 9.5 pounds per job per day diversion targets set by CalRecycle under AB 341.

Senate Bill 1383
SB 1383 established a methane emissions reduction target for short-lived climate pollutants in various sectors of the economy, including waste. Specifically, SB 1383 establishes targets to achieve a 50 percent reduction in the level of the statewide disposal of organic waste from the 2014 level by 2020 and a 75 percent reduction by 2025.45 Additionally, SB 1383 requires a 20 percent reduction in “current” edible food disposal by 2025. Although SB 1383 has been signed into law, compliance at the jurisdiction-level has proven difficult. For example, Santa Clara County suggests the 75 percent reduction in organics is not likely achievable under the current structure; standardized bin colors are impractical; and the general requirement is too prescriptive.46 As such, SB 1383 is not included as part of the adjusted forecast. Instead measures addressing compliance with SB 1383 will be addressed through newly identified GHG reduction measures included in the Climate Action Plan.

4.4 Adjusted Scenario Forecast
The adjusted scenario is based on the same information as the business-as-usual scenario but also includes the legislative actions and associated emissions reductions occurring at the State and federal levels. These actions include regulatory requirements to increase vehicle fuel efficiency or standards to reduce the carbon intensity of electricity. The difference between the emissions projected in the adjusted scenario and the GHG reduction targets established for each horizon year is the amount of GHG reductions which are the responsibility of the City. This “gap analysis” provides the City with the total GHG emissions reduction required as well as information on the emissions sectors and sources which have the most GHG reduction opportunities.

The electricity and water/wastewater sectors all experience a strong downward trend, approaching near-zero in 2045 due to extremely stringent RPS from SB 100. Natural gas emissions are expected to continue an upward trajectory until the 2035 due to strong population growth projections in the city. This trend is partially offset due to the increasingly stringent efficiency requirements for new homes in the upcoming Title 24 code cycles. Commercial growth will also lead commercial natural gas emissions on a similar trajectory. Transportation emissions are expected to decrease sharply in the next 10 to 15 years due to existing fuel efficiency requirements and fleet turnover rates. 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 transportation sector.

45 CalRecycle. April 16, 2019. Short-Lived Climate Pollutants (SLCP): Organic Waste Methane Emissions Reductions (General Information).

Accessed at: https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/climate/slcp. Accessed on: Maty 20, 2019 46 Santa Clara County. June 20, 2018. SB 1383 Rulemaking Overview. Accessed at:
https://www.sccgov.org/sites/rwr/rwrc/Documents/SB%201383%20PowerPoint.pdf. Accessed on: May 20, 2019 TOC
Forecast

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 39 A summary of Sacramento’s projected emissions by sector and year through 2045 can be found in Figure 7 and Table 25. Further details on the growth rates and emissions for each sector can be found in the corresponding discussion sections.

Table 25 Adjusted Scenario Forecast Summary by Sector by Target Year Sector
2016
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2020
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2025
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2030
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2040
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2045
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Population 472,692 507,587 551,206 594,824 668,786 697,764 Jobs 308,724 324,910 345,142 365,374 403,933 421,435
Residential Electricity 318,275 283,625 246,723 195,341 77,934 0 Commercial/
Industrial Electricity 489,945 430,228 375,327 297,950 120,298 0 Residential Gas 318,304 341,390 368,706 396,022 442,341 460,488 Commercial + District
Industrial Gas 172,019 180,361 188,252 196,143 211,183 218,009 Waste 160,843 171,357 184,500 197,643 220,803 230,371
Water 9,607 8,572 7,714 6,296 2,638 0
Wastewater 19,867 21,166 22,789 24,412 27,273 28,455
Transportation 1,935,870 1,777,557 1,552,442 1,389,757 1,326,075 1,319,471 Total Emissions 3,424,729 3,214,256 2,946,452 2,703,565 2,428,545 2,256,794 Per Capita Emissions
(MT CO2e/person) 7.25 6.33 5.35 4.55 3.63 3.23
MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
Figure 7 Summary of Adjusted Scenario Forecast by Sector by Year

As shown in Figure 8, without legislative reductions, the City’s emissions would increase proportionally with population and economic growth. In reality, several existing legislative reductions would limit the City’s emissions growth, causing projected emissions to decrease. This scenario is depicted by the Adjusted Forecast. The legislative reductions for each sector and scaling methods used to project emissions are discussed in detail below.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

40 Figure 8 BAU Scenario and Adjusted Scenario Forecast

4.5 Electricity
Between 2016 and 2045, electricity emissions for commercial, residential, and industrial buildings in the city of Sacramento, together representing the building energy electricity sector, are assumed to decrease from 808,220 MT CO2e to 0 MT CO2e, despite steady growth in Sacramento’s population and employment levels due to the adoption of SB 100 and the renewable portfolio standard.

SMUD’s current plan to reach carbon neutral electricity includes the use of offsets. These offsets have not been identified fully and future work will need to ensure no double counting occurs between SMUD and Sacramento’s efforts to reach carbon neutral emissions.

Emissions from future electricity use were forecasted by projecting anticipated growth in residential and commercial sectors and multiplying by expected electricity emission factors. Anticipated growth in the residential sector was projected as a function of population growth within the city while commercial sector electricity use was projected as a function of employment projections. Legislative adjustments included in the electricity sector forecast include RPS of 60 percent by 2030 and 100 percent GHG-free by 2045. Additionally, Title 24 building code efficiency increases for the 2019 code cycle were applied to all new growth within the city. The methodologies for the electricity sector which were forecasted in the adjusted scenario are summarized in Table 26 and Table 27.

Table 26 Electricity Sector Adjusted Scenario Forecast Methodology Source Category
Forecasted Activity
Data (Scaling Factor) Emission Factor Applied Legislative Reductions Residential
Electricity
Population growth in
Sacramento
Assumes an electricity mix of 44
percent, 60 percent, and 100 percent
GHG-free by 2025, 2030, and 2045,
respectively, for SMUD emission
factors per RPS requirements.

Title 24 standards for new
construction in 2019 (53 percent
residential, 30 percent
commercial), RPS requirements Commercial &
Industrial
Electricity
Employment growth
in Sacramento
RPS = Renewable Portfolio Standard; GHG = greenhouse gas; SMUD = Sacramento Municipal Utility District TOC
Forecast

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 41 Table 27 Electricity Adjusted Scenario Forecast Results by Target Year Activity Data 2020 2025 2030 2040 2045
Residential Electricity
Population 507,587 551,206 594,824 668,786 697,764
BAU per capita
kWh 3,011.30 3,011.30 3,011.30 3,011.30 3,011.30
BAU total kWh 1,528,498,898 1,659,848,041 1,791,197,185 2,013,918,450 2,101,180,304 Adjusted kWh
(Title 24) 1,514,575,889 1,576,309,986 1,638,044,083 1,742,723,078 1,783,736,149 Emissions
factor (MT
CO2e/MWH)

0.18726 0.15652 0.11925 0.04472 0.0
Emissions (MT
CO2e) 283,625 246,723 195,341 77,934 0
Commercial Electricity
Employment 324,910 345,142 365,374 403,933 421,435
BAU per job
kWh 7,097.54 7,097.54 7,097.54 7,097.54 7,097.54
BAU total kWh 2,306,059,234 2,449,657,395 2,593,255,556 2,866,927,114 2,991,149,311 Adjusted kWh
(Title 24) 2,297,443,344 2,397,962,057 2,498,480,770 2,690,050,860 2,777,006,398 Factor (MT
CO2e/MWh) 0.18726 0.15652 0.11925 0.04472 0.00000
Emissions (MT
CO2e) 430,228 375,327 297,950 120,298 0
MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; kWh = kilowatt hour; MWh = megawatt hour; BAU = business-as-usual

4.6 Natural Gas
Emissions from projected natural gas use were forecast using a similar methodology to the electricity sector. Anticipated natural gas use was projected for the residential and commercial sectors separately using population change and employment increase as growth indicators respectively. These results were multiplied by a natural gas emission factor of 0.00531 MT CO2e per therm of natural gas.47 Unlike electricity, the natural gas emission factor is based on the quality of the gas and remains relatively constant over time. This analysis did not consider any shift to renewable gas which may become more common over time and the use of which may affect future natural gas emission factors. The methodologies and data used to calculate natural gas emissions over time are summarized in Table 28 and Table 29.

Legislative adjustments applied for the natural gas sector include efficiency increases from Title 24 building code updates for new construction after the 2019 code cycle begins. Specific efficiency increases for new buildings over the previous triennial cycle are discussed in Section 4.3.

47 The Climate Registry. 2022 Default Emissions Factors. Accessed at: https://theclimateregistry.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/2022- Default-Emission-Factors-Final.pdf. Accessed on April 18, 2023 City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

42 Table 28 Natural Gas Adjusted Scenario Forecast Methodology Source Category
Forecasted Activity Data
(Scaling Factor)
Emission
Factor Applied Legislative Reductions
Residential Natural Gas Population growth in
Sacramento 0.00531 MT
CO2e/therm
Title 24 standards for efficiency
in new construction in 2019 (7
percent residential, 30 percent
commercial over 2016 Title 24) Commercial & District Natural Gas Employment growth in Sacramento
MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent
Table 29 Natural Gas Adjusted Scenario Forecast Results by Target Year Activity Data 2020 2025 2030 2040 2045
Residential Gas
BAU therms 64,405,311 69,939,880 75,474,449 84,859,102 88,535,995 Title 24 adjusted
therms 64,327,827 69,474,976 74,622,125 83,349,853 86,769,363 Factor (MT
CO2e/therm) 0.00531 0.00531 0.00531 0.00531 0.00531
Emissions (MT CO2e) 341,390 368,706 396,022 442,341 460,488 Commercial Gas
BAU therms 34,112,675 36,236,869 38,361,064 42,409,385 44,246,958 Title 24 adjusted
therms 33,985,224 35,472,160 36,959,095 39,792,920 41,079,221 Factor (MT
CO2e/therm) 0.00531 0.00531 0.00531 0.00531 0.00531
Emissions (MT CO2e) 180,361 188,252 196,143 211,183 218,009 MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; BAU = business-as-usual

4.7 Waste
The forecast used a baseline emissions rate of 0.7458 tons of waste per service population along with projected growth in Sacramento service population to establish the estimated tonnage of waste being disposed yearly through 2045. As the inventoried waste emissions include both waste- in-place and waste generation, an emissions factor of MT CO2e per ton of waste was used to forecast emissions. An overall 2016 solid waste emissions factor, incorporating both generated waste and waste-in-place emissions, of 0.3058 MT CO2e per ton of municipal solid waste was used to project emissions consistent with service population growth. Emissions from the waste sector will likely be less than the projected totals due to decreasing rates of organic material in the waste stream and recent legislation such as SB 1383 discussed in previous sections. At this time no mandate exists for individual cities and the waste reductions from these bills are incorporated into the Climate Action Plan through City reduction measures to avoid double counting. A summary of the methodologies and data used to model waste emission over time are provided in Table 30 and Table 31.

TOC
Forecast

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 43 Table 30 Solid Waste Adjusted Scenario Forecast Methodology Forecasted Activity Data (Scaling Factor) Emission Factor Applied Legislative Reductions Service population growth 0.7458 tons per service person,

0.3058 MT CO2e/ton of solid waste
N/A
MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; N/A = not applicable Table 31 Waste Emissions Adjusted Scenario Forecast Results by Target Year Activity Data 2020 2025 2030 2040 2045
Service Population 832,497 896,347 960,198 1,072,719 1,119,199 Ton waste per Service Population 0.6731 0.6731 0.6731 0.6731 0.6731 Total tons waste 560,350 603,328 646,306 722,043 753,328 Waste Factor (MT CO2e/ton) 0.3058 0.3058 0.3058 0.3058 0.3058 Emissions (MT CO2e) 171,357 184,500 197,643 220,803 230,371 MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent

4.8 Transportation
Transportation emissions forecasts were developed consistent with the inventory methodology, through the determination of on-road annual VMT multiplied by a year-specific weighted emissions factor for emissions per mile travelled. VMT forecasts for the City of Sacramento were provided by Fehr and Peers Transportation Consultants through the use of SACOG SACSIM software. SACSIM was utilized to model VMT through 2040 with projected annual growth in County VMT as a proxy to extrapolate VMT for the years 2040 to 2045. Emissions factors were established for each year through the use of the EMFAC2017 GHG module, which established VMT and total emissions for each vehicle type in the County. These respective emissions factors were applied in each year to establish transportation emissions forecasts as shown in Table 32 and Table 33.

Table 32 Transportation Adjusted Scenario Forecast Methodology Source
Category
Forecasted
Scaling Factor Emissions Factor Applied Legislative Reductions On-road
Transportation

SACSIM VMT
Modeling1
EMFAC2017 model analyzing light
duty (LDA, LDT1, LDT2, MDV,
MCY) and heavy duty (LHD, T6,
T7, PTO, MH, SBUS, UBUS, OBUS,
Motor Coach, All Other Buses)
vehicles.

EMFAC emission factors account for legislative
reductions from Advanced Clean Cars, Pavley
Clean Car Standards, Tractor-Trailer
Greenhouse Gas Regulation, and adopted fuel
efficiency standards for medium- and heavy-
duty vehicles.
1 SACSIM incorporates data from many sources, including US Census, travel survey, and highway monitoring information. More information can be found on the SACOG SACSIM website at https://www.sacog.org/modeling MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; VMT = vehicle miles traveled City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

44 Table 33 Transportation Adjusted Scenario Forecast Results by Target Year Activity Data 2020 2025 2030 2040 2045
Population 507,587 551,206 594,824 668,786 697,764
VMT 4,436,839,519 4,549,121,999 4,661,404,480 4,885,969,442 4,999,288,804

EMFAC (MT
CO2e/VMT) 0.000401 0.000341 0.000298 0.000271 0.000258
Emissions (MT
CO2e) 1,777,557 1,552,442 1,389,757 1,326,075 1,289,999 MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; VMT = vehicle miles traveled

4.9 Water and Wastewater
Due to the increased use of the water system attributed to increases in job and population growth in Sacramento, service population was used as a scaling metric to determine water and wastewater service emissions through 2045. The Sacramento Wastewater Treatment Plant is currently undergoing renovations and upgrades through 2023 to modernize its facilities. As part of the “EchoWater Project”, future wastewater emissions are expected to be lower than quantified here due to ammonia effluent reductions.

Projections for water used a baseline activity factor of 60.92 kWh per service population per year.

This emissions factor was multiplied by service population growth through 2045 to find total kWh usage. The RPS for electricity generation was then applied to water emissions, as described in the Legislative Adjustment Section, to determine final MT CO2e emissions as shown in Table 35 and Table 36.

Wastewater emissions are calculated from both methane as well as stationary and process nitrous oxide emissions, wastewater projections used an emissions factor of 0.028 MT CO2e per service population per year and a growth indicator of service population to determine future wastewater emissions.

Table 34 Water and Wastewater Adjusted Scenario Forecast Methodology Forecasted Activity Data (Scaling Factor) Emissions Factor Applied Legislative Reductions Service population
(population and employment growth)
SMUD electricity
emissions factors, 60.92
kWh per service
population per year
Assumes an electricity mix of 44 percent, 60
percent, and 100 percent GHG-free by 2025,
2030, and 2045 respectively for SMUD
emission factors per RPS requirements.

Service population
(population and employment growth)

0.0282 MT CO2e per
service person per year
for wastewater
N/A
MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; kWh = kilowatt hour; SMUD = Sacramento Municipal Utility District; N/A = not applicable
TOC
Forecast

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 45 Table 35 Water Adjusted Scenario Forecast Results by Target Year Activity Data 2020 2025 2030 2040 2045
Service
Population
832,497 896,347 960,198 1,072,719 1,119,199
kwh/Service
Person

54.98 54.98 54.98 54.98 54.98
Total kWh 45,772,524.85 49,283,183.92 52,793,842.99 58,980,464.53 61,536,051.96 RPS Electricity
Factor
(MT CO2e/kWh)

0.1872638 0.1565190 0.1192526 0.0447197 0.0000000
Emissions (MT
CO2e)
8,572 7,714 6,296 2,638 0
MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; kWh = kilowatt hour; RPS = renewable portfolio standard Table 36 Wastewater Adjusted Scenario Forecast Results by Target Year Activity Data 2020 2025 2030 2040 2045
Service Population 832,497 896,347 960,198 1,072,719 1,119,199 MT CO2e/Service
Population 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025
Emissions (MT CO2e) 21,166 22,789 24,412 27,273 28,455
MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; kWh = kilowatt hour; City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

46 5 Target Setting
Climate action plan GHG-reduction targets can be set as either an efficiency target (MT CO2e per capita or per service population per year) or as a community wide mass emissions target (total MT CO2e). With CARB’s publication in 2017 of the Scoping Plan Update, the State recommended using efficiency metrics for local targets to incentivize growth in a coordinated manner and not penalize cities which are growing at significant rates.48 Throughout this section, targets are discussed in terms of per capita metrics, however, they must occasionally be translated into absolute emissions reductions to quantify reduction measures and identify the magnitude of reductions required.

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. Furthermore, as mentioned previously, changes to the General Plan Update may impact the forecast results. As such, the targets identified herein should remain provisional until the General Plan Update values are finalized and the quantification and analysis of potential GHG reduction measures completed.

The City of Sacramento has achieved both efficiency and absolute emissions reductions between 2005 and 2016 despite high population growth rates. The purpose of target setting is to develop the trajectory toward achieving the State’s 2030 goal and prepare for the deep decarbonization needed by 2045 in a cost-effective manner by setting an incremental path toward achieving the AB 1279 goals. There are several target pathways available to be consistent with State reduction goals, discussed further below.
 SB 32 Target Pathway is the pathway toward achieving the minimum reductions required by State law. This will require minimal reductions until 2030 and then steep reductions from 2030 to 2045.
 Linear Carbon Neutrality Pathway is an incremental linear pathway from current per capita emissions levels straight to carbon neutrality in 2045. This pathway is also compliant with the 2030 State goal.
 Mass Emissions Reduction Pathway is the pathway determined by reducing mass emissions without consideration to population growth. This pathway will require steep reductions to 2030 and then a slightly more gradual reduction to the 2045 carbon neutrality goal. This pathway is also compliant with the 2030 goal.

At this time, the State has codified a goal of reducing emissions to 40 percent below 1990 emissions levels by 2030 (SB 32) and has developed a Scoping Plan to demonstrate how the State will achieve the 2030 goal and make substantial progress toward the State’s long-term GHG reduction goals.

Sufficient data does not exist to perform a full 1990 inventory, however, as discussed in the Background section, the State has indicated a 15 percent reduction from 2005 GHG emissions levels can be considered equivalent to a 1990 baseline. Consistent with this methodology, a 1990 emissions level of 3,600,213 MT CO2e, or 9.75 MT CO2e per capita was established for Sacramento.

The State recommends utilizing a per capita efficiency metric for SB 32 targets to account for changes in population. Therefore, a minimum target of 5.85 MT CO2e per capita (40 percent reduction from 9.75 MT CO2e per capita in 1990) would be needed to establish an emissions level compliant with SB 32 target levels.

48 California Air Resources Board. 2017. California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan, p. 99-102.

TOC
Target Setting

Appendix A - Community GHG Emissions Inventory and Forecast 47 While no State plan exists to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045, AB 1279 directs CARB to ensure future Scoping Plan updates identify and recommend measures to achieve the carbon neutrality goal. Executive Orders are binding only unto State agencies and are not binding on local governments or the private sector. However, showing progress toward this goal is expected to be a mandatory component of CEQA analyses upon publication of the next Scoping Plan.

Based on this information, establishing provisional targets for the years 2025 (interim target), 2030 (SB 32 target year), 2040 (General Plan horizon year), and 2045 (AB 1279 target year) is recommended. The 2045 target is intended to be a long-term commitment demonstrating the City’s commitment to achieving the long-term goal presented in AB 1279. The City has several potential pathways to show consistency with State targets as shown in Table 37.

Based on the SB32 and AB 1279 State targets, Sacramento has established a 2030 per capita GHG reduction target that exceeds the SB32 minimum and a 2045 target consistent with AB 1279. The City of Sacramento 2030 target of 3.63 MT CO2e per person exceeds the State minimum of 5.85 and is equivalent to a 63% reduction from 1990 levels by 2030.

Table 37 Per Capita Pathway Targets by Target Year
Year Forecast (MT CO2e/person) City of Sacramento Reduction Targets (MT CO2e/person)
2020 6.3 6.0
2025 5.5 4.7
2030 4.8 3.6
2040 3.9 1.0
2045 3.4 0
MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent
The absolute GHG emissions gap in 2030, 2040, and 2045 between each target pathway and the forecast emissions can be found in Table 38. This gap will be bridged by local actions developed in the City of Sacramento Climate Action Plan.

Table 38 Remaining GHG Emissions Gap in 2030 and 2040 by Pathway Year Linear Carbon Neutral Pathway (MT CO2e)
2030 Gap 543,437
2040 Gap 1,708,503
2045 Gap 2,227,322
MT CO2e = metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent

Appendix B - CAAP Regulatory Context
294

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
Appendix B - CAAP Regulatory Context

prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
449 15th Street, Suite 300
Oakland, California 94609
March 2023

TOC
Table of Contents

Appendix B - CAAP Regulatory Context i
Table of Contents
Regulatory Context .................................................................................................................................1 International Climate Action Guidance ..........................................................................................1 California Regulations and State GHG Targets ...............................................................................2

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

This page intentionally left blank.

TOC
Regulatory Context

Appendix B - CAAP Regulatory Context 1
Regulatory Context
As the impacts of climate change are becoming clearer, strategies to address climate change are emerging at all levels of government. This section provides an overview of the regulatory context at the international, state, and local levels relative to Sacramento’s actions toward reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

International Climate Action Guidance
1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change The primary international regulatory framework for GHG reduction is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (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
1997 Kyoto Protocol
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. The second commitment period set new targets and other changes but has not been entered into force (meaning it has not gone into effect).2 2015 The Paris Agreement
The Paris Agreement is the first universal, legally binding global climate agreement that was adopted in 2015 and has been ratified by 191 countries worldwide.3 The Paris Agreement establishes a roadmap to keep the world under 2 degrees Celsius (°C) of warming with a goal of limiting an increase of temperature to 1.5°C. The Paris Agreement does not dictate one specific reduction target, instead relying on individual countries to set nationally determined contributions (NDCs) or reductions based on gross domestic product and other factors. According to the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), limiting global warming to 1.5°C will require global emissions to reduce through 2030 and hit carbon neutrality by mid-century.4

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 UNFCCC. Paris Agreement - Status of Ratification. https://unfccc.int/process/the-paris-agreement/status-of-ratification 4 IPCC. Global Warming of 1.5 C. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/ City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

2 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. By the early 2000’s, California was passing climate change bills including Senate Bill (SB) 1078 and Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 which began to require state agencies and utilities to address climate change. With the passage of Assembly Bill (AB) 32 in 2006, California became the ﬁrst state in the nation 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 Climate Action Plan.
2002 Senate Bill 1078
In 2002, Senate Bill (SB) 1078 established the California Renewables Portfolio Standards (RPS) Program which requires that 20 percent of retail electricity sales be composed of renewable energy sources by 2017 and was accelerated in 2006 by SB 107,5 which requires that 20 percent of retail electricity sales be composed of renewable energy sources by 2010, instead of 2017. 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 requiring 33 percent renewable power by 2020.6 SB 350, discussed further below, further accelerated the program which mandated a 50% RPS by 2030.
2002 Assembly Bill 1493
In 2002, AB 1493, also known as the Pavley Regulations, directed the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to establish regulations to reduce GHG emissions from passenger vehicles to the maximum and most cost-effective extent feasible. CARB approved the ﬁrst set of regulations to reduce GHG emissions from passenger vehicles in 2004, with the regulations initially taking effect with the 2009 model year.
2005 Executive Order S-3-05
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 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. 2006 Assembly Bill 32
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.

5 California Public Utilities Commission.2021. Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/rps/ 6 Executive Order S-14-08. https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=50761 TOC
Regulatory Context

Appendix B - CAAP Regulatory Context 3
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,7 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 (CARB 2014).
2007 Executive Order S-1-07
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.
2007 Senate Bill 97
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 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.
2008 Senate Bill 375
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” that contains a growth strategy to meet these emission targets for inclusion in the MPO’s Regional Transportation Plan.

In March 2018, CARB adopted updated regional targets for reducing GHG emissions from 2005 levels by 2020 and 2035. Each region was assigned a target for 2020 and 2035.8

7 On September 19, 2019, the National Highway Traffic Safety Agency and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 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 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 20 13 as it relates to California’s GHG and zero emission vehicle programs. 8 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/SB375_Final_Targets_2018.pdf City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

4 2009 California Green Building Code
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 higher energy efficiency, better air quality, and improved daylighting. 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.
2009 Senate Bill X7-7
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 by2020.
2011 Senate Bill 2X
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. 2012 Assembly Bill 341
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 are required to recycle, and jurisdictions must implement a program that includes education, outreach, and monitoring. AB 341 also set a statewide goal of 75 percent waste diversion from landfill by the year 2020.
2014 Assembly Bill 32 Scoping Plan Update
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. 2014 Assembly Bill 1826
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.
2015 Senate Bill 350
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 TOC
Regulatory Context

Appendix B - CAAP Regulatory Context 5
double the energy eﬃciency of electricity and natural gas end users through energy eﬃciency and conservation.
2015 Executive Order B-30-15
EO B-30-15 was signed in 2015, 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 to provide a pathway to achieve this goal. 2016 Senate Bill 32
In September 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).
2016 Senate Bill 1383
Adopted in September 2016, SB 1383 requires CARB to approve and begin implementing a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants. SB 1383 requires achievement of 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 CARB, to adopt regulations that achieve specified targets for reducing organic waste in landfills. SB 1383 further requires 20% of edible food disposed of at the time to be recovered by 2025.
2017 Scoping Plan Update
In December 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 approved legislation, 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 (CARB 2017). As stated in the 2017 Scoping Plan, these goals may be appropriate for plan-level analyses (i.e., city, county, subregional, or regional level), but not for specific individual projects because they include all emissions sectors in the state (CARB 2017).

CARB is currently developing the 2022 Scoping Plan Update, which will focus on continuing to work towards the SB 32 target and lay out a path for achieving carbon neutrality by 2045. 2018 Senate Bill 100
Adopted in September 2018, SB 100 supports the reduction of GHG emissions from the electricity sector by accelerating the state’s RPS Program, which was last updated by SB 350 in 2015. SB 100 City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

6 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. 2018 Executive Order B-55-18
In September 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.
2022 Assembly Bill 1279
In September 2022, the governor approved AB 1279 , which codified the statewide goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and maintaining net negative emissions thereafter. In addition, AB 1279 established a GHG emissions reduction minimum of 85% below 1990 levels by 2045. The remaining 15% can be addressed with carbon sequestration.

TOC
This page intentionally left blank
Appendix C - Community Measures
GHG Emissions Quantification
306

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
Appendix C – Community Measures GHG
Emissions Quantification

prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
449 15th Street, Suite 300
Oakland, California 94609
March 2023

TOC
Table of Contents

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification i Table of Contents
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 2 GHG Reduction Summary .............................................................................................................. 3 3 Built Environment .......................................................................................................................... 6

3.1 Measure E-1 Quantification ............................................................................................... 6

3.2 Measure E-2 Quantification ............................................................................................... 8

3.3 Measure E-3 Quantification ............................................................................................. 11

3.4 Measure E-3 Supportive Actions ...................................................................................... 12

3.5 Measure E-4 Supportive Actions ...................................................................................... 14

3.6 Measure E-5 Supportive Actions ...................................................................................... 18 4 Mobility ........................................................................................................................................ 19

4.1 Measure TR-1 Quantification ........................................................................................... 20

4.2 Measure TR-1 Supportive Actions .................................................................................... 21

4.3 Measure TR-2 Quantification ........................................................................................... 23

4.4 Measure TR-2 Supportive Actions .................................................................................... 26

4.5 Measure TR-3 Quantification ........................................................................................... 29

4.6 Measure TR-3 Supportive Actions .................................................................................... 31 5 Waste ........................................................................................................................................... 35

5.1 Measure W-1 Quantification ............................................................................................ 36

5.2 Measure W-1 Supportive Actions .................................................................................... 40 6 Carbon Sequestration .................................................................................................................. 42

6.1 Measure CS-1 Quantification ........................................................................................... 42

6.2 Measure CS-1 Supportive Actions .................................................................................... 43 7 Water and Wastewater ................................................................................................................ 44

7.1 Measure WW-1 Quantification ........................................................................................ 44

7.2 Measure WW-1 Supportive Actions ................................................................................. 45

7.3 Measure WW-2 Quantification ........................................................................................ 47 City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

This page intentionally left blank.

TOC
Introduction

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 1 1 Introduction
The CAAP is aligned and linked to pertinent goals and policies of the 2040 General Plan. As a complementary document, the CAAP is a tool that allows the City to consider community and municipal GHG emissions, establish targets for emissions reductions, and identify and implement specific measures that reduce GHG emissions to achieve established targets and consistent with State law.

The CAAP is structured to serve as a programmatic tiering document for the purposes of CEQA, tiering from the Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) developed for the 2040 General Plan.

For future projects that the City determines are not exempt from CEQA and are subject to environmental review (e.g., an initial study/negative declaration or an EIR is required) and that seek to streamline the review process for analysis of GHG emissions impacts, projects can achieve streamlining pursuant to the provisions of Section 15183.5 by including all applicable GHG reduction measures in this CAAP in the project designs and/or as mitigation measures in the environmental document, thus demonstrating that the project would have a cumulatively less than significant impact on the environment.

The City will ensure the appropriate use of the CAAP for CEQA streamlining by maintaining the prerogative to use mandatory and voluntary measures as standards for new developments seeking streamlining as part of the CAP consistency review process, as appropriate. The City will work with applicants seeking GHG streamlining on a project-by-project basis regarding the CEQA benefits of the CAAP, identifying measures to integrate into a project’s design or mitigation measures. This approach allows the City to ensure that new development projects can benefit from CEQA streamlining while also ensuring that the City is on target to achieve the GHG reduction targets established in the CAAP.

This technical appendix provides the information 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 emissions level.” This technical appendix is organized around three levels which include:
 Sectors: Sectors define where the GHG reductions will take place and include Energy and Electrification, Mobility, Waste, and sequestration
▫ Measures: Measures are core strategies that will result in substantial reductions in GHG emissions.
- Actions: Each measure is driven by sets of actions that together support and generate the GHG reductions necessary to achieve the City’s goal Measures and actions can be either quantitative or supportive and are defined as follows:

Quantitative: These measures and actions have substantial evidence including case studies, calculations, or other supporting evidence that prove that the implementation of said measure/action will have a measurable GHG reduction when applied to new development projects.

These measures/actions have been quantified based on this evidence and the reductions summed to show how Sacramento will meets its 2030 and 2045 goals and exceed the with the State target (SB 32) of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

2 Supportive: These measures and actions may also be quantifiable and in most cases have substantial evidence to support their overall contribution to GHG reductions. However, due to one or more factors including low GHG reduction benefits, indirect GHG reduction benefits, potential for double-counting of GHG reductions, or simply a high level of difficulty in quantifying accurate GHG reductions, they have not been quantified and do not contribute directly to the expected GHG reduction goal and consistency with the state targets. However, these measures/actions are critical to the overall success of the CAAP and achieving the established GHG reduction targets.

Together the quantitative and supportive measures and actions listed below will help Sacramento reduce per capita emissions from 9.75 MT CO2e in 19901 to 3.63 MT CO2e by 2030 and net zero by 2045. This equates to a 63% reduction in per capita GHG emissions by 2030. These goals exceed the minimum requirements of SB 32 (a 40% reduction or 5.85 MT CO2e per capita in 2030) and meet the intent of AB 1279. The total mass emissions target which corresponds to this per capita goal (based on current population projections) is 2,160,128 MT CO2e in 2030 and carbon neutrality in 2045. To reach this goal, Sacramento will need to reduce GHG emissions by 543,437 MT CO2e by 2030. This technical report provides the substantial evidence that CAAP measures can be expected to achieve the 2030 goal, if fully implemented, and provide substantial progress toward achieving long-term reduction targets identified in AB 1279. Making substantial progress toward these long-term state targets is important as these targets have been set at levels that achieve California’s fair share of global emissions reduction targets that will stabilize global climate change effects and avoid the adverse environmental consequences described under Section 3.1.3, Potential Effects of Climate Change (Executive Order B-55-18).

The City has also established a goal consistent with AB 1279 of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 with at least an 85% reduction in GHG emissions below 1990 levels. The measures identified in this CAAP will lead to a significant reduction in GHG emissions and provide a foundation for achieving net carbon neutrality. However, achieving carbon neutrality will require significant changes to the technology and systems currently in place including the electrification of all buildings and transportation systems, an increased shift to shared and active mobility, achieving carbon neutral electricity, and waste reduction and diversion. The measures and actions developed to meet the 2030 goals are the foundations and establish the trajectory for this long-term transformation.

However, the 2045 GHG emissions reductions quantified in this CAAP are not yet enough to meet the long term 2045 goal. As the current measures and actions are implemented, the City will gain more information, new technologies will emerge, and current pilot projects and programs will scale to the size needed to reach carbon neutrality. Furthermore, the state is expected to continue providing updated regulations, resources, and financial support once the 2030 target is achieved.

Future CAAP updates will outline new measures needed to reach the ultimate goal of carbon neutrality.

1 Estimated 1990 levels, equivalent to a 15% reduction below baseline 2005 GHG inventory levels, the most recent year for which a complete inventory is available and consistent with state guidance.

TOC
GHG Reduction Summary

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 3 2 GHG Reduction Summary
The City of Sacramento, in coordination with Rincon Consultants, the Mayors’ Commission on Climate Change, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD), the Sacramento Regional Transportation Agency (SacRT), and input from the community have developed a suite of measures and specific actions to reduce GHG emissions over time. Based on these measures, the total GHG emissions reduction is expected to be 1,235,043 MT CO2e by 2030 and 2,060,976 MT CO2e by 2045.

This exceeds the 2030 target but falls short of the 2045 target by 166,345 MT CO2e. This is illustrated below in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Estimated GHG Reduction and Target Pathway

A summary of the GHG emissions reductions by Measure is included in Table 1. For a complete description of each measure and the contributing actions, please refer to the appropriate sector and measure below.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

4 Table 1 Summary of GHG Emissions Reductions by Measure Measure # Measure Name
2030
Reduction MT
CO2e
2045 Reduction
MT CO2e
Built Environment (Energy and Electrification)
E-1 Support SMUD as it implements the 2030 Zero Carbon Plan. 576,225 0 E-2 Eliminate natural gas in new construction. 37,692 134,621 E-3 Transition natural gas in existing buildings to carbon-free electricity by 2045.
119,289 402,468
E-4 Increase the amount of electricity produced from local resources and work with SMUD to install additional local storage by 2030.

Supportive Supportive
E-5 Support infill growth with the goal that 90% of growth is in the established and center/corridor communities and 90% small-lot and attached homes by 2040, consistent with the regional Sustainable Communities Strategy. Project-level VMT should be 15% below (or 85% of) the regional average.

Supportive Supportive
Mobility
TR-1 Improve active transportation infrastructure to achieve 6% active transportation mode share by 2030 and 12% by 2045.
13,509 30,557
TR-2 Support public transit improvements to achieve 11% public transit mode share by 2030 and maintain through 2045.
106,035 122,371
TR-3 Achieve zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) adoption rates of 28% for passenger vehicles and 22% for commercial vehicles by 2030 and 100% for all vehicles by 2045.
212,451 1,137,071
Waste
W-1 Work to reduce organic waste disposal 75% below 2014 levels by 2025.
134,991 160,897
Carbon Sequestration
CS-1 Increase urban tree canopy cover to 25% by 2030 and 35% by 2045.
23,053 61,474
Water and Wastewater
WW-1 Reduce water utility emissions (in MT of CO2e per MG) by 100% by 2030 and maintain that through 2045.
6,296 0
WW-2 Reduce wastewater emissions by 22% by 2030 and 40% by 2045. 5,495 11,517 Reduction Summary
Total Reduction Needed 543,437 2,227,322
Estimated Reductions Achieved 1,235,034 2,060,976
Gap -691,597 166,345
Estimated Reductions Without VMT Reductions 1,115,491 1,908,048 Gap Without VMT Reductions -572,053 319,273
As shown in Table 1, the measures adopted in this Climate Action & Adaptation Plan (CAAP) have the ability when fully implemented to reduce GHG emissions by approximately 1,235,034 MT CO2e by 2030. This exceeds the goal reduction by 691,597 MT CO2e. However, this assumes a very aggressive VMT reduction percentage which currently relies on unfunded transportation infrastructure projects. Furthermore, the State of California has not demonstrated success in achieving VMT reductions historically. Therefore, the most conservative approach to demonstrating TOC
GHG Reduction Summary

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 5 consistency with state reduction targets is to omit VMT reductions from the quantificaiton of the GHG reduction measures when establishing consistency. When omitting the VMT reduction measures the City still exceeds its 2030 target by 572,053 MT CO2e. There is still a gap of 166,345 MT CO2e (with VMT reduction) and 319,273 MT CO2e (without VMT reduction) in 2045. As new technologies develop, and the State pushes further to achieve the 2045 carbon neutrality target, the City of Sacramento will adopt new strategies to acheive this long term goal. Furthermore, the CAAP measures will create the basis for long term carbon neutrality including carbon neutral buildings, electric vehicles, and improved active transportation and transit. The major sectors for GHG reductions are transportation and building energy use. The percent of total reduction generated by each quantifiable measure is shown below in Figure 2.

Figure 2: GHG Reductions in 2030 by Measure

The following section provides the substantial evidence and quantification methodology which provides the reasonable assurance that the GHG reduction strategy adopted by the City of Sacramento will lead to the expected GHG reductions necessary to reach the City’s ambitious GHG reduction goals.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

6 3 Built Environment
Measure E-1:

Support SMUD as it implements the 2030
Zero Carbon Plan
2030 Target
576,225 MT CO2e
2045 Target
0 MT CO2e
Performance Metrics:
 100% carbon free electricity citywide by 2030

3.1 Measure E-1 Quantification
SMUD has adopted the 2030 Zero Carbon Plan which outlines their approach to achieve 100% carbon free electricity by 2030. This is 15 years ahead of the requirements identified by SB 100, which requires all electricity utilities in the state to achieve 100% carbon free electricity by 2030.

Therefore, this measure quantifies the GHG reduction benefits to the City of Sacramento by having 100% carbon free electricity in 2030. To avoid double counting this measure also includes the added benefit of reducing the electricity increase caused by measures E-2, E-3, TR-2, and TR-3.

Action E-1.1
Evidence: SMUD has developed a plan to achieve carbon free electricity by 2030.2 This plan, when fully implemented, would reduce the emission factor for Sacramento’s electricity to zero. It would also reduce the emissions associated with electrified vehicles and buildings to zero. Therefore, the emissions reductions in this measure are estimated by calculating the GHG emissions associated with electricity in 2030 under the SB 100 scenario compared to the SMUD 2030 Zero Carbon Plan scenario. Conversely, GHG emissions from electricity generation will decrease to zero by 2045, due to SB 100. Therefore, the SMUD 2030 Zero Carbon Plan reduces GHG emissions substantially in 2030 but goes to zero by 2045 when it aligns with SB 100.

Quantification Results Summary
Action E-1.1 2030 2045
Total kWh (without electrification measures) 4,136,524,853 4,681,771,641 MT CO2e/kWh (With SB100) 0.0001193 0.0

2 https://www.smud.org/en/Corporate/Environmental-Leadership/2030-Clean-Energy-Vision#Stay-informed Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Actions
E-1.1 Support SMUD in the implementation of the 2030 Zero Carbon Plan. 576,225 MT CO2e (2030) 0 MT CO2e (2045)
TOC
Built Environment

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 7 Action E-1.1 2030 2045
Emissions (MT CO2e) 493,291 0
MT CO2e/kWh (SMUD Zero Carbon Plan) 0 0
MT CO2e savings (without electrification measures) 493,291 0 E-2 Savings (MT CO2e) 10,597.88 0
E-3 Savings (MT CO2e) 33,540.51 0
TR-2 Savings (MT CO2e) 36.13 0
TR-3 Savings (MT CO2e) 38,758.98
Total MT CO2e savings (with electrification) 576,225 0

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

8 Measure E-2:

Eliminate natural gas in new
construction
2030 Target
37,692 MT CO2e
2045 Target
134,621 MT CO2e
Performance Metric(s):
 None (completed)

3.2 Measure E-2 Quantification
In order for Sacramento to reach carbon neutrality, the large majority of the buildings in the City will need to be carbon neutral. Electrification allows buildings to use 100% carbon neutral electricity that will be provided by SMUD by 2030. To avoid double counting with Measure E-1, emissions reductions associated with this measure were quantified by assuming electricity would be GHG-free by 2045, consistent with SB 100. To ensure new buildings won’t need to be retrofitted later, this measure will ensure all new buildings are built to utilize only electricity as an energy source. The emissions savings for this measure were calculated as the difference between the projected therm consumption (based on the 2016 per capita therm usage and Department of Finance population growth) and the expected natural gas use in 2030 and 2045 under baseline conditions and Department of Finance population growth3. The forecast also included expected efficiencies due to upgrades in the Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards.

Action E-2.1
Evidence: Continuing to allow natural gas use in new buildings would result in an increase of GHG emissions through 2045, due to increases in population and residential construction in the city projected through 2045. Conversely, GHG emissions from electricity generation will decrease to zero by 2045, due to SB 100 (which requires 100% renewable electricity by 2045) and SMUD’s 2030 Zero Carbon Plan. The adoption of an electrification ordinance would lead to a mandatory reduction in natural gas consumption compared to baseline projections by replacing natural gas with electricity.

Since the 2023 ordinance would not completely ban natural gas in new buildings, an estimate of the number of 4+ story buildings permitted in Sacramento each year was made. This estimate was developed by looking at the total 4+ story buildings permitted in the 2018 and 2019 calendar year and developing a CalEEMod4 model for each construction project. The resulting calculations

3 See Appendix A for complete population projection numbers 4 CalEEMod is the State’s California Emissions Estimator Model, accessed at: https://www.caleemod.com/ Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Measures
E-2.1 Develop and adopt an electrification ordinance that requires all new construction under four stories to be all-electric by 2023 and all construction to be all-electric by 2026.
37,692 MT CO2e (2030)
134,621 MT CO2e (2045)
TOC
Built Environment

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 9 estimated that in both 2018 and 2019 ten projects were permitted. This equated to an estimated increase in natural gas demand by 61,078 therms per year from projects completed in 2018 and 64,598 therms per year in 2019. Assuming similar construction trends, an average of 62,838 therms or 333 MT of CO2e will be added to Sacramento’s total natural gas consumption from new buildings 4 stories or taller from 2023 to 2026 for a total increase in emissions of approximately 1,000 MT CO2e. It should be noted that emissions from construction between 2020 and 2023 are already included in the calculation by using the forecasted natural gas consumption in 2023 as the basis for the calculation.

Based on the GHG emissions forecast which is predicated on Department of Finance Population Growth and current per capita natural gas consumption, banning gas in new construction under four stories by 2023 will save an estimated 9.1 million therms of natural gas by 2030 and banning all natural gas use in buildings in 2026 will save 25.4 million therms by 2045. However, these ordinances will lead to an increase in electricity consumption because calculations assume natural gas use will be replaced by electric appliances. The conversion also assumes a 300% appliance efficiency increase due to the inclusion of modern heat pump technologies.5 By 2045, all emissions from electricity are eliminated by the use of 100% carbon free electricity.6 In spring of 2021, the City of Sacramento successfully adopted the new building electrification ordinance in line with Measure E-1. The calculation used to estimate these emissions are included below.

Quantification Results Summary
Action E-2.1 2030 2045
Total therms saved 9,099,205 25,366,596
MT CO2e/therm 0.00531 0.00531
Emissions reductions MT CO2e 48,290 134,621
Emissions from electricity conversion 10,598 0
Net MT CO2e savings 37,692 134,621

5 https://tristate.coop/advantages-heat-pumps-energy-
efficiency#:~:text=What's%20the%20efficiency%20performance%20of,coefficient%20of%20performance%2C%20or%20COP. 6 Measure E-2 includes reductions associated with SMUDs accelerated decarbonization schedule.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

10 Measure E-3:

Transition natural gas in existing buildings to
carbon-free electricity by 2045
2030 Target
119,289 MT CO2e
2045 Target
402,468 MT CO2e
Performance Metrics:
 Develop and pass ordinance
 Reduce natural gas use by 28% by 2030
 Reduce natural gas use by 100% by 2045

Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Actions
E-3.1 Develop a comprehensive existing building electrification strategy that identifies associated costs and addresses potential equity impacts prior to implementation of mandatory requirements.
119,289 MT CO2e (2030)
402,468 MT CO2e (2045)
E-3.2 Develop an electrification ordinance for existing buildings/construction that will be implemented through the building permit process to transition away from fossil fuels to electric at time of replacement following adoption of Measure E3.1. The existing buildings ordinance would include the following elements:
• No new expansions of fuel gas piping at existing buildings/sites. • Require HVAC system replacements and new water heaters to be all-electric or utilize other low-carbon technologies as the market evolves.

Supportive Actions
E-3.3 Work with SMUD to expand existing low-income programs within the City to weatherize and retrofit/electrify existing buildings, with the goal of reducing energy consumption, decreasing utility bills, and converting to carbon-free energy use by 2040.

Supportive
E-3.4 Promote and educate the community about existing programs and expand electrification retrofit incentives for space and water heating to support the electrification ordinances.

Supportive
E-3.5 Provide electrification retrofit incentives and financing for space and water heating.

Supportive
TOC
Built Environment

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 11 Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
E-3.6 Continue to promote and incentivize electrification supportive energy efficiency in existing buildings including lighting, insulation, and air sealing upgrades through programs and financing mechanisms.

Supportive

3.3 Measure E-3 Quantification
SMUD incentives will support the transition of existing buildings away from fossil fuels, including significant rebates on electric appliances and infrastructure. By 2025 the city may need to adopt a mandatory phase out of gas appliances depending on the success of the voluntary program. Action E-3.2 outlines the expected sequence for phasing out gas appliances in existing buildings.

Actions E-3.1 and E-3.2
Evidence: When adopting the new building electrification strategy, Sacramento City Council directed staff to develop an existing building electrification plan to ensure that the transition to a carbon free building stock did not come at the expense of the community, particularly those community members who are most vulnerable. Building electrification has the potential to improve health outcomes, reduce energy burden, and enhance resilience within the City.7 However, it also comes with up-front investments that must be financed or funded in an equitable manner to avoid negative impacts. 34% of natural gas use in buildings is from residential and commercial water heating. 40% of natural gas use in buildings is from space heating.8 Natural gas hot water heater life expectancy is approximately 10 years.9 Therefore, under this ordinance the City should see a 34% decrease in natural gas use from hot water heater electrification in existing buildings by 2035.

Natural gas furnace lifecycles are expected to be between 15-20 years with an average of 18 years.10 Therefore, under this program the City would expect to see an additional 40% reduction in natural gas consumption in existing buildings by 2043. Assuming a linear replacement of existing HVAC and hot water heating equipment starting in 2025, the City should expect to see a 28% decrease in natural gas emissions by 2030 and a 74% decrease by 2045 from this mandatory ordinance. This equates to approximately 25 million therms by 2030 and 72 million therms by 2045, calculated as the corresponding percent reduction from 2016 therm use.

7 https://berkeleyca.gov/your-government/our-work/adopted-plans/berkeley-existing-buildings-electrification-strategy 8 https://www.synapse-energy.com/sites/default/files/Decarbonization-Heating-CA-Buildings-17-092-1.pdf 9 https://www.lowes.com/n/how-to/when-to-replace-a-water-heater 10 https://www.thisoldhouse.com/21018361/how-long-things-last City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

12 Quantification Results Summary
Action E-3.1 and E-3.2 2030 2045
Total Therm Reduction from Electrification 28,797,447 75,836,692 MT per Therm 0.00531 0.00531
Gas Savings MT CO2e 152,829 402,468
Emissions from electricity conversion (MT CO2e) 33,540.51 0 Net MT CO2e Savings 119,289 402,468

3.4 Measure E-3 Supportive Actions
Action E-3.3
Evidence: According to SMUD, the low-income programs are expected to reduce GHG emissions by 33,200 MT11 of CO2e by 2040 by electrifying and upgrading 100% of low-income single-family homes. However, these reductions are not applied to the overall emissions reductions (to eliminate double counting issues) and are considered supportive of the overall community electrification efforts.

Electrification programs that target low-income residents are the most cost-effective and potentially successful approach for equitable decarbonization to combat climate change. 12 For example, the Low-Income Weatherization Program (LIWP) is the state’s first energy efficiency program that targets low-income Californians and has reduced energy bills in participating multifamily buildings by 30 percent and overall energy usage by an average of 40 percent.13 A case study on a major energy retrofit in a Lancaster 100-unit low income multifamily complex resulted in a one-third reduction in natural gas use (approximately 145 therms per apartment).14 SMUD’s programs, which focus on electrification, could be expected to have even more pronounced GHG reduction benefits.

The study also showed that such retrofits can result in increased tenant retention, improved health and comfort, and better ability to afford necessities like food, medicine, health care, and rent.

Action E-3.4
Evidence: Electrification of space and water heaters is the best and cheapest way to reduce emissions from California’s existing buildings through 2045 due to SB 100.15 The largest barrier to implementation of this is high up-front capital costs.16 Utility-offered incentives to offset these costs for the end-user are therefore among the most promising opportunities for updating this technology.17
The impacts associated with promotional and educational outreach for electrification have not been well documented due to the cutting-edge nature of the strategy. Electrification has only begun to gain popularity in California mostly due to the implementation of SB 100 and the expansion of community choice aggregations. While it is not clear how the community will respond to

11 Scott Blunk - SMUD
12 http://greenlining.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Greenlining_EquitableElectrification_Report_2019_WEB.pdf 13 California Housing Partnership Corporation and Association for Energy Affordability (2018). California’s Cap- and-Trade-Funded Low Income Weatherization Program Multifamily: Impact Report, 3. 14 https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2018/lancaster-advanced-energy-community 15 https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/10/8/435/htm
16 California Center for Sustainable Energy. 2009. Solar Water Heating Pilot Program: Interim Evaluation Report. 17 https://www.synapse-energy.com/sites/default/files/Decarbonization-Heating-CA-Buildings-17-092-1.pdf TOC
Built Environment

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 13 electrification, energy efficiency outreach has been conducted since as early as the 1970’s and some research has been conducted on the effects of outreach and education on energy. One study in New York showed that out of the 8,991 people who participated in informational programs, 69% implemented the recommended practices.18 Another research meta-analysis reviewed dozens of papers covering various energy efficiency, water efficiency, and waste outreach and found that education-only campaigns could produce between 10-12% energy savings.19 Electrification is a new idea and not well understood by the community. The education associated with this action as well as the CAAP itself will facilitate adoption of all-electric technologies. The City will conduct a CAAP update between 3 and 5 years to check progress and adopt more voluntary or potentially mandatory measures if necessary.

Action E-3.5
Evidence: This measure is considered supportive to the overall electrification goals. However, using financing programs to fund energy-saving retrofits has demonstrated energy savings results in the past. A meta-analysis on the use of heat pump water heaters found that energy savings significantly increased from installation with notable annual energy use savings of up to 40.2% in cooler regions and 63.7% energy savings in warmer regions of the United States.20 Action E-3.6
Evidence: While the use of carbon neutral electricity by 2045 due to SB100 ensures all-electric buildings have zero energy emissions, there is still a need to reduce energy consumption within Sacramento. Reducing energy consumption will reduce stress on the electricity grid, require less renewable energy generation to meet needs thereby saving resources, and help reduce energy bills within the community.

18 https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/joe/vol47/iss6/6/
19 https://aceee.org/files/proceedings/2000/data/papers/SS00_Panel8_Paper10.pdf 20 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378778817304760 City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

14 Measure E-4:

Increase the amount of electricity
produced from local resources and work
with SMUD to install additional local storage
by 2030
2030 Target
Supportive
2045 Target
Supportive
Performance Metrics:
 Complete a pilot local renewable energy project by 2030

Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
E-4.1 Continue to promote and support local energy generation and storage resources.

Supportive
E-4.2 Work with SMUD to site storage and renewable generation at locations in the City which would best support overall grid functionality while electrifying the building stock and maximizing the utilization of existing electrical infrastructure.

Supportive
E-4.3 Work alongside SMUD to promote and further incentivize battery storage as a means to maximize electrification benefits and improve resiliency.

Supportive
E-4.4 Develop a community solar and storage project of at least 1 MW as a pilot project collaboration between SMUD and the City with SMUD leading project development and the City supporting by providing a location and permitting support.

Supportive

3.5 Measure E-4 Supportive Actions
The actions in Measure E-3 have not been quantified but are key strategies in electrifying the City of Sacramento as well as allowing SMUD to reach their 2045 target of carbon neutral electricity. These actions will help SMUD balance the grid, generate more renewable electricity, harness the benefits of distributed battery storage, and create more resiliency around the electricity grid in general.

Without these actions, the GHG reductions associated with E-1 and E-2 are more difficult to achieve.

Action E-4.1
Evidence: While difficult to directly quantify the effects of this action on community-wide emissions, on-site energy generation and storage can help local governments and their communities achieve substantial energy, environmental, resilience, and economic benefits.25 For example, the City of Sacramento has already installed 4.9 MW of on-site solar at City owned facilities. This results in the production of over 7,000,000 kWh of electricity per year. The City also offsets an additional 29,000,000 kWh’s of electricity through SMUD’s SolarShares program. In 2018, the San Francisco airport installed 72 kWh of solar photovoltaic (PV), which became the world’s first Zero Net Energy certified facility at an airport, helping campus-wide electricity to decline 4.7% since 2013 and

25 https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/02/f34/onsiterenewables508.pdf TOC
Built Environment

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 15 supporting their goal of a Zero Net Energy campus by 2021.26 The school district of Spirit Lake, Iowa currently operates and uses two wind turbines to power its elementary, middle, and high schools, and administrative buildings, meeting 46% of the district’s needs.27 Projects like these can also indirectly reduce community emissions by creating publicity and awareness around the issue. In 2003, Lenox, Iowa installed a 750-kW wind turbine to produce electricity for its own facilities at about the same time that the town’s municipal electric utility began offering customers the option to purchase renewable energy. The opt-in response rate was 13%, almost double the typical opt-in rates seen in other jurisdictions. The success of the program was attributed to the increased public awareness generated by the new turbine.28
Action E-4.2
Evidence: Distributed battery storage and renewables can be used instead of traditional transmission and distribution infrastructure upgrades to help meet the increasing demand that electrification will put on the grid. While this action will not directly reduce GHG emissions, it will support the overall transition to an electrified building stock at the lowest cost and with the most resilience.

Action E-4.3
Evidence: While it’s hard to know exactly how effective promotion and incentives for residential battery storage will be, trends across the country indicate that these options are desirable for homeowners. Coupled with renewable energy, battery storage greatly maximizes emissions reductions and enhances community resilience. A recent 2019 study from the University of Michigan found that in California as a whole, adding 60GW of renewables could achieve 72% CO2 reductions with close to one third curtailment.31 Adding energy storage technologies could increase this to 90% reduction and only 9% curtailment, under one modeled scenario. 32 While industrial and commercial battery storage will drive these reductions, residential energy storage will also play an important part in the effort to increase battery storage across the state. Residential energy storage is often more flexible and resilient than larger utility-owned systems because the network is well- distributed and has buy-in from both the utility and the owners/residents. 33 Residential energy storage exceeded utility-scale storage installations in the U.S. in 2018, reflecting the high value customers are placing on having their own storage systems.34 Action E-4.4
Evidence: A one megawatt solar array would generate an estimated 1.5 MWh of electricity per year in Sacramento. The GHG emissions reduction from this array would vary depending on the GHG emissions factor of SMUD electricity it was offsetting. In 2030, 1.5 MWh is estimated to reduce GHG emissions by 188 MT CO2e.35 However, in 2045 when SMUD’s electricity would have an emission factor of zero due to SB100, GHG reduction benefit would be zero. However, local solar projects will

26 https://www.flysfo.com/environment/zero-net-energy
27 https://siouxcityjournal.com/news/local/spirit-lake-iowa-school-district-honored-for-wind-turbines/article_055c6490-cb1f-51f8-b47e- 6681825de968.html
28 https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/02/f34/onsiterenewables508.pdf 31 Curtailment occurs when more power is produced than needed at a given time, leading to energy losses 32 http://css.umich.edu/publication/role-energy-storage-deep-decarbonization-electricity-production 33 https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/electric-power-and-natural-gas/our-insights/how-residential-energy-storage-could-help- support-the-power-grid
34 Ibid
35 https://pvwatts.nrel.gov/pvwatts.php
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

16 make SB100 a reality and provide additional co-benefits, including cost savings and resiliency, to the community.

In 2012, SMUD completed a 12-month 300kW microgrid demonstration and research project that involved the design, construction, and demonstration of a microgrid that was integrated with SMUD’s central heating and cooling equipment.36 A microgrid can operate while connected to the main utility grid and it can immediately disconnect (“island mode”) if isolated from the utility, providing heightened reliability for users. SMUD’s microgrid was able to successfully power AC, heating, and hot water in “island mode”. According to the report, “successfully deploying microgrids could help…enable the integration of an unlimited quantity of distributed energy resources into the electricity grid. Many of these distributed resources would be renewable energy sources that would reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases.”

36 https://www.smud.org/-/media/Documents/Corporate/About-Us/Energy-Research-and-Development/research-microgrid- demonstration-project.ashx
TOC
Built Environment

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 17 Measure E-5:

Support infill growth with the goal that 90%
of growth is in the established and
center/corridor communities and 90%
small-lot and attached homes by 2040,
consistent with the regional Sustainable
Communities Strategy. Project-level VMT
should be 15% below (or 85% of) the
regional average.
2030 Goal
Supportive
2045 Goal
Supportive
Performance Metrics:
 90% of infill growth occurs in established and center/corridor communities and 90% small lot and attached homes by 2040
 30% of region’s new living-wage jobs and 30% of region’s new housing units accommodated by 2040

Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Supportive Actions
E-5.1 Adopt and implement policies, land use designations, and implementation programs which provide a framework to:
 Accommodate 30% of the region's new living-wage jobs and 30% of the region's new housing units by 2040.
 Focus 90% of the city's infill growth into established and center/corridor communities with the goal of achieving 90% small-lot single family and attached homes by 2040.
 Prioritize construction of lower-cost workforce and affordable housing through modifications of land-use designations and zoning, offering ministerial/staff-level review of infill housing and continue to reduce fees and the time and expense of planning approval and building permit processes.
 Include anti-displacement policies and programs.

Supportive
E-5.2 Enable development of 29,000 new multi-unit dwellings that are public transit accessible (i.e., within 0.5 mile of public transit) by 2040 through the continuation of the City’s ministerial/staff-level review of infill housing, reduced fees, and identification of local funding sources.

Supportive
E-5.3 Enable the development of 8,700 new missing middle and affordable by design housing types (such as dormitories and smaller units) by 2040 within 0.25 mile of public transit by updating the City Code to allow and reduce barriers to these housing types. Couple with anti-displacement policies and programs.

Supportive
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

18 Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
E-5.4 Permit a greater array of housing types in existing single-family neighborhoods citywide by allowing missing middle housing types such as accessory dwelling units (ADUs), duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes, and bungalow courts in single-family and duplex dwelling zones. Develop tools, resources and educational materials to promote and facilitate the development of ADUs in
neighborhoods throughout the City.

Supportive

3.6 Measure E-5 Supportive Actions
The City will utilize available regulatory tools to encourage compact infill development, including 2040 General Plan policies and land-use designations, ministerial/staff-level review to streamline ADU’s, and reduced fees as appropriate. Encouraging infill development in the City of Sacramento will support overall VMT reduction and energy savings. According to the book Growing Cooler, The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change, compact development has the potential to reduce the total U.S. VMT by 10 to 14 percent and total U.S. transportation CO2 emissions by 7 to 10 percent37. Compact development reduces the distance traveled to access jobs and services and shifts travel to active and transit modes. In addition, compared to detached single-unit dwellings, multi-unit dwellings consume 35% less energy for space heating and 21% less energy for space cooling38, decreasing per capita energy use by the built environment.

Action E-5.1 through E-5.4
Evidence: While not easily quantifiable, infill growth that increases density within areas of the community that provide multiple services and better access to jobs can help reduce per capita emissions in those areas due to reduced VMT and energy savings. This is especially effective if paired with affordable housing options such as ADUs, which allow a greater portion of the population to access high density areas and reduce their emissions. Affordable housing can therefore also help reduce suburban sprawl. A Berkeley study on carbon footprint planning suggests that a 10-fold increase in population density in central cities corresponds to 25% lower GHG emissions39 due mostly to decreases in VMT. This can be substantially increased if efforts are additionally made to reduce suburban sprawl. Another study conducted by UC Davis found that a 10% increase in residential density would reduce VMT by 1.9%.40 University of Waterloo performed a case study in Toronto to determine how quickly existing areas could be densified to meet minimum transit supportive density thresholds. The study found that 3.8 million additional residents could be residing in transit supportive environments if about 1.2 million units were added with current unit densities between 5 and 20 units per hectare. Given historic growth rates, units could be built within 34 to 95 years. Multi-unit rental units are typically more affordable than detached single-unit dwellings, and the co-benefits include increased access to services for disadvantaged communities.

37 Growing Cooler: The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change https://uli.bookstore.ipgbook.com/growing-cooler- products-9780874201789.php
38 Growing Cooler: The Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change https://uli.bookstore.ipgbook.com/growing-cooler- products-9780874201789.php
39 https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/1218/1218 40 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191261510000536 TOC
Mobility

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 19 4 Mobility
Measure TR-1:

Improve Active Transportation
Infrastructure to Achieve 6% Active
Transportation Mode Share by 2030 and
12% by 2045
2030 Target
13,509 MT CO2e
2045 Target
30,557 MT CO2e
Performance Metrics:
 Achieve 6% active transportation mode share by 2030 and 12% by 2045  Deploy 30 miles of new bike lane by 2030
 Deploy 20,000 feet of new/repaired pedestrian infrastructure by 2030  Install or improve at least 70 new pedestrian crossings by 2030  Implement the 2016 Bicycle Master Plan by constructing 40 miles of bike lanes, 48 miles of bike routes, 40 miles of buffered bike land, 18 miles of separated bikeway, and 127 miles of shared-use paths, by 2045
 Construct the pedestrian network in the 2006 Pedestrian Master Plan by 2045  Collectively reduce VMT to 6,393 miles per person per year in 2030 (25% below 2016 per capita VMT levels) and to 5,625 miles per person per year in 2045 (34% below 2016 per capita VMT levels) between measure TR-1 and TR-2

Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Actions
TR-1.1 Implement the 2016 Bicycle Master Plan by constructing a comprehensive, connected network of safe and accessible (low-stress) bikeways, on- and off-street, within and across neighborhoods totaling 40 miles of bike lanes, 48 miles of bike routes, 40 miles of buffered bike lanes, 18 miles of separated bikeways, and 127 miles of shared-used paths.
13,509 MT CO2e (2030)
30,557 MT CO2e (2045)
Supportive Actions
TR-1.2 Implement the improvements in the 2006 Pedestrian Master Plan by providing a connected, safe and accessible (low-stress) pedestrian network, prioritized based on High Injury Network (crash data), school access, equity and community needs. Low-stress pedestrian network includes crossings, sidewalks, and other paths.

Supportive
TR-1.3 Conduct a study to identify the physical barriers to active transportation by 2025 and remove them by 2030 to support local partners and community groups.

Supportive
TR-1.4 Conduct a study to identify educational barriers and provide education and outreach to the community on active transportation options in the City including a travel training program and incentivize a spectrum of transportation options that includes public and private shared and active services.

Supportive
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

20 Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
TR-1.5 Identify and secure ongoing funding for and then implement active transportation programs (open streets, pilot projects, classes, etc.).

Supportive

4.1 Measure TR-1 Quantification
Reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) means reducing the number of miles and trips taken by on- road vehicles both intercity and intracity. One-way Sacramento will reduce VMT is by moving from single occupancy vehicles to active transportation, like bicycling and walking. To do this the City must provide low stress and convenient infrastructure and prioritize active transportation movement. Infrastructure needs including bikeways, sidewalk improvements, and expansions of both kinds of infrastructure to all areas of the City. Once the infrastructure is available and stress/comfort is not an issue, comparison with other cities around the world suggest more people will choose active transportation. The following actions outline the infrastructure and supportive actions the City will take to increase bike/ped mode share. Each action is supported by case studies from other cities in California, other US states, and abroad.

Action TR-1.1
Evidence: The Bicycle Master Plan would result in a total of 464 miles of bikeways within 100 square miles for an estimated 500,000 residents. Comparably, the City of Antwerp, in Belgium, had similar bikeway buildout, with 435 miles of bike lanes within 79 square miles serving a population size of approximately 500,000 residents in 2014. The City of Antwerp reported 29% mode share for bicycles in 2014. Assuming that bike lane mileage, density, and city population are directly correlated with bicycle mode share, Sacramento could expect to see a similar level of bicycle mode share that Antwerp saw in 2014. Furthermore, the City of Copenhagen, the gold standard for bicycle use saw a 26% increase between 2012 and 2019 from 36% mode share to 62% as a direct result of a 14-year plan to improve the quality, safety and comfort of cycling.41 However, it should be noted that these European cities do not just build infrastructure. They also require car drivers to pay their own way with higher parking fees, gas taxes, and excise taxes on new vehicles. These cities also incentivize dense multifamily development. Similarly, the 2040 General Plan and implementing actions will encourage compact infill development. In the US, nearby Davis reports 15.5% of commuters get to work by bike. Santa Cruz, CA, reports 13.2% and Boulder, CO, reports 10.7% according to the Census.42 If Sacramento achieves an increase of 4% bicycle mode share (6% total mode share in 2030) the estimated VMT reduction in passenger VMT would be approximately 52 million VMT in 2030. By 2045 a 12% mode share (10% increase over baseline) would decrease 139 million VMT.43 Quantification Results Summary
Action TR-1.1 2030 2045
Total Passenger VMT Decrease 56,188,570 148,448,882
MT CO2e/VMT 0.0002404 0.0002058
Emissions reductions MT CO2e 13,509 30,557

41 https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2019-08-07/copenhagen-has-taken-bicycle-commuting-to-a-new-level 42 https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/Where_We_Ride_2017_KM_0.pdf 43 VMT savings for increasing bicycle mode share were only taken from internal-internal (trips within the City).

TOC
Mobility

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 21

4.2 Measure TR-1 Supportive Actions
Action TR-1.2
Evidence: Improving pedestrian networks is an important part of building Complete Streets – streets that accommodate bikes, cars, shared transit, and pedestrians in an accessible way. Nationally,

16.4% of vehicle trips were one mile or less in 2017, a distance easily travelled by foot or bicycle.44 An improved and expanded pedestrian 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.45 However, not much research has been conducted to determine quantitatively how improving the pedestrian network translates to increased pedestrian mode share. This is further complicated by the fact that while improved pedestrian networks almost always have a positive correlation with increased walking, that does not always translate to decreased VMT. In other words, increased walking does not mean that walking trips are replacing driving trips. One study from 1993 looked at how improving a pedestrian network affected the number of vehicle miles travelled in Portland, OR in 1985 and found that a 1% increase in the pedestrian network was associated with a 0.14% decrease in number of vehicle trips travelled.46
Action TR-1.3
Evidence: By leveraging community groups and local partners to get firsthand feedback from the community the City will be able to better identify and eliminate the hurdles which keep people from walking and biking. The benefits of this action will support overall VMT reduction.

Action TR-1.4
Evidence: Providing education on the benefits of active transportation as well as technical information such as trip planning, incentives and other programs will help generate momentum around active transportation and support overall VMT reduction.

Action TR-1.5
Evidence: The funding to execute Measure TR-1 related actions have not been identified by the City and current public works budget does not allow for these projects. This measure would require the City and its partners to identify and secure funding to implement these actions. A description of funding and financing strategies can be found in Appendix E.

44 https://nhts.ornl.gov/vehicle-trips
45 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-
06/Impacts_of_Pedestrian_Strategies_on_Passenger_Vehicle_Use_and_Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_Policy_Brief.pdf 46 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-
06/Impacts_of_Pedestrian_Strategies_on_Passenger_Vehicle_Use_and_Greenhouse_Gas_Emissions_Policy_Brief.pdf City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

22 Measure TR-2:

Support Public Transit Improvements to
Achieve 11% Public Transit Mode Share by
2030 and Maintain Through 2045
2030 Target
106,035 MT CO2e
2045 Target
122,371 MT CO2e
Performance Metrics:
 Implement new parking minimums and maximums by 2022
 Collaborate with SacRT to achieve an 11% transit mode share by 2030 and maintain this through 2045
 Continue to achieve at least 2 million miles taken by shared transportation  Collectively reduce passenger VMT to 6,393 miles per person per year in 2030 (25% below 2016 per capita VMT levels) and to 5,625 miles per person per year in 2045 (34% below 2016 per capita VMT levels) between measure TR-1 and TR-2

Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Actions
TR-2.1 Update and implement the City’s Transportation System Management Plan (TSMP) ordinance to shift travel behavior away from the single-occupancy vehicle.
105,581 MT CO2e (2030)
121,951 MT CO2e (2045)
TR-2.2 Eliminate parking minimums Citywide, develop parking maximums and require parking management and transportation demand management plans for all areas of the City based on available transportation options, travel patterns, and land use.

TR-2.3 Encourage SacRT to provide frequent, reliable transit in the City’s priority corridors to reduce VMT and support SacRT in
implementing priority transit corridors. Coordinate transit priority corridors with consideration of transportation needs as well as land use planning to provide transit-supportive land uses.

Encourage the expansion of frequent, reliable transit services throughout the City.

TR-2.4 Collaborate with SacRT in planning and implementing increased transit services with reduced headways and expanded service lines to support an 11% public transit mode share by 2030.

TR-2.5 Work with SacRT to identify changes to signals and other technological enhancements for transit prioritization and faster transit travel times.

TR-2.6 Continue to support electric car sharing options to offset at least 1 million VMT per year in the City through 2030. 454 MT CO2e (2030) 420 MT CO2e (2045) TR-2.7 Continue to support shared rideables (bikes and scooters) to enable a reduction of 1 million VMT per year.

Supportive Actions
TR-2.8 Support SacRT efforts to secure funding to support improved service/communications such as interactive service maps, app payments, and real time arrival info.

Supportive
TOC
Mobility

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 23 Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
TR-2.9 Continue to implement and improve curbside management strategies to better manage and price curb space, manage transportation network companies (TNC) and prepare for
autonomous vehicles.

Supportive
TR-2.10 Remove barriers to access transit stops and stations (provide low- stress connectivity) and provide enhanced, comfortable stops and stations.

Supportive
TR-2.11 Implement the City’s adopted plans including modal/Citywide plans and corridor/area plans (such as the Bicycle Master Plan, Broadway Complete Streets, and 65th Street Area Plan).

Supportive
TR-2.12 Identify an Employee Transportation Coordinator and establish an employee commute program for City staff that includes provisions for telecommuting and encourage other public and private agencies located within the City to do the same using
requirements and/or incentives.

Supportive
TR-2.13 Investigate and lobby for the development of a TNC user tax which would put a small fee on the use of Uber, Lyft, and others and generate funds to pay for transit and transportation infrastructure and related programs.

Supportive

4.3 Measure TR-2 Quantification
Reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) means reducing the number of miles and trips taken by on- road vehicles both intercity and intracity. One-way Sacramento will reduce VMT is by moving from single occupancy vehicles to shared mobility like trains and buses. To do this the City must work with its partners including the Sacramento Regional Transportation District (SacRT) to expand service lines and increase the convenience of transit by reducing the time it takes to reach a destination via transit as well as reducing wait times (headways) for transit. Some of the changes Sacramento will make to prioritize transit including coordinating with SacRT to plan and implement dedicated transit lanes and setting parking maximums will also make driving single occupancy vehicles less convenient to drive. By making transit more convenient and making decisions to prioritize transit over single occupancy vehicles Sacramento will begin to shift VMT towards shared transit and significantly decreasing GHG emissions. Together these strategies are expected to decrease total VMT by 9.5% by 2030 and 9.5% by 2045. Actions TR-2.1 through TR-2.6 provide quantifiable emissions reductions due to the expected shift to transit based on available information.

Action TR-2.1 through TR-2.5
Evidence: The transportation system management plan (TSMP) is a wholistic look at how mobility is achieved in the City of Sacramento. Through Action TR-2.1, the TSMP will investigate opportunities for shifting demand away from single occupancy vehicles and may include parking pricing and availability strategies, incentives for alternative commutes, requirements for large employers and other approaches.

The Fehr and Peers Transportation Model for Sacramento suggests Action TR-2.2 will yield a 30%- 50% reduction in VMT of new development for which the ordinance covers depending on reduction in parking and whether it is a suburban or urban area (or how good the alternative options are). This equates to a 2%-3.1% reduction in citywide passenger vehicle emissions compared to the 2030 City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

24 forecast and a 4%-6% reduction compared to the 2045 forecast. Conservatively, a citywide VMT reduction of 2% in 2030 and 4% in 2045 is expected due to the implementation of this measure which equates to a VMT reduction of 86,881,896 miles in 2030 and 180,256,184 miles in 2045.

The recent free student ridership program demonstrated that there is an existing strong need for public transportation in Sacramento. Through the program, SacRT student ridership doubled over the course of a few months, including during weekends and after school. SacRT also saw an overall 6% increase in system-wide ridership in 2020. These trends not only suggest that SacRT service improvements would fill a real transportation gap in Sacramento, resulting in actual VMT reductions, but also those VMT reductions would be maximized through the other incentives and programs that SacRT offers.

In general, increases and improvements to public transportation systems reduce a city’s dependence on fossil fuels and reduce VMT. The best ways to improve a transit system and reduce driving is to expand its geographical reach and increase the frequency and reliability of transit service. Each new mile of transit usage replaces VMT on much more than a 1:1 basis. Approximately 1% increase in transit frequency saves 0.5% in VMT.47 Bus Rapid Transit can also yield a corridor- level VMT reduction of 1-2%.48 Sacramento currently has a transit mode share of 1.5%. Oakland CA, by contrast has achieved a 21% mode share. Oakland also has a low difference in income between transit and non-transit users of 2%.49 SacRT has a service area of 400 square miles (1.4 million people) and includes 80 bus routes. In comparison, AC Transit (which serves Oakland) has a service area of 368 miles (1.5 million people) and has nearly double the bus lines with 158. Ridership on AC Transit was 53 million in 2018-2019 compared to 21 million on SACRT. An increase of SACRT service of the magnitude to match AC Transit which serves a similar size and population could reasonably result in a 21% transit mode share. To be conservative, a transit mode share increase of 10% above baseline by 2030 and maintaining that increase through 2045 was estimated for Sacramento. This increase in mode share is expected to reduce VMT by 10% or 399,424,427 miles per year in 2030 and 412,188,607 miles per year in 2045.

Quantification Results Summary
Actions TR-2.1 through TR-2.5 2030 2045
Total Passenger VMT Decrease due to Actions
TR-2.1 – TR-2.5
486,306,323 592,444,792
MT CO2e/VMT 0.0002171 0.0002058
Emissions Reductions MT CO2e 105,581 121,951
Actions TR-2.6 and TR-2.7
Evidence: Research from the Transportation Sustainability Research Center at the University of California – Berkeley shows that car share programs like in Action TR-2.6 lower vehicle ownership and overall VMT.50 While a majority of car share members use the program to add or replace vehicle trips (leading generally to small VMT increases), a minority of members (2-5%) use car share as a replacement for vehicle ownership (leading generally to larger VMT reductions). The net effect

47 https://www.ncdot.gov/initiatives-policies/environmental/climate-change/Documents/vehicle-miles-traveled-reduction-study-tool- kit.pdf
48 https://www.ncdot.gov/initiatives-policies/environmental/climate-change/Documents/vehicle-miles-traveled-reduction-study-tool- kit.pdf
49 https://smartasset.com/mortgage/best-cities-for-public-transportation 50 http://innovativemobility.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Impactsofcar2go_FiveCities_2016.pdf TOC
Mobility

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 25 is overall decrease in vehicle ownership, VMT, and ultimately GHG emissions. Approximately one car share vehicle replaces seven to eleven cars and VMT is reduced, on average, between 6% to 16% per car share household assuming one-way usage. In approximately one year, Sacramento’s Gig electric car share program hit over 1 million miles driven providing GHG reductions as well as air quality and mobility benefits.

Shared rideables51 (Action TR-2.7) are also demonstrated to reduce VMT. In 2019, a total of 1,060,405 trips were taken on shared rideables (shared bikes and scooters) in the City of Sacramento. Success of shared rideables in replacing vehicle use is not known in Sacramento, but a 2019 report from the City of Santa Monica found that 49% of shared rideable trips replaced vehicle trips based on answers to survey questions.52 A 2014 study from Utrecht University suggests that the car substitution rate of shared rideables is dependent on what proportion of trips are already taken by car in a city.53 In the study, Minneapolis and Melbourne had between 70% and 76% vehicle mode share in 2014 and showed high rates of car mode substitution (19% to 21%) after shared rideables were introduced. On the other hand, London and Washington DC had between 36% and 46% vehicle mode share in 2014 and showed much lower rates of car mode substitution (2% to 7%) after shared rideables were introduced. Sacramento and Santa Monica both had high vehicle mode share (83% and 72% respectively) before shared rideables were introduced, suggesting that Sacramento would see a similar if not higher car substitution rate of shared rideables as Santa Monica. Both studies previously mentioned suggest that average trip duration of shared rideable trips is about 2 miles (this is seen consistently across the six diverse cities mentioned above) and appears to be largely independent of other city metrics. VMT reductions from introduction of shared rideables in 2019 in Sacramento were therefore estimated to be approximately 1 million miles, or 342 MT CO2e. This assumes an average trip distance of 2 miles and a car substitution rate of 49% along with the total trips recorded in 2019.

Quantification Results Summary
Actions TR-2.6 through TR-2.7 2030 2045
Total VMT reduction from shared mobility 2,039,197 2,039,197 Passenger vehicle emission factor (MT CO2e /VMT) 0.000240 0.000206 Electric car emission factor (kWh/mile) 0.29 0.29
Scooter emission factor (kWh/mile) 0.0125 0.0125
Electric car share kWh used 290,000 290,000
Scooter kWh used 12,990 12,990
SMUD emission factor (MT CO2e /kWh) 0.0001193 0.0000
Emissions avoided (MT CO2e) 490 420
Emissions from electricity (MT CO2e) 36 0.0000
Emissions saved 454 420

51 Shared rideables generally refer to rentable bicycles and scooters. 52 https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/PCD/Transportation/SantaMonicaSharedMobilityEvaluation_Final_110419.pdf 53 http://mobility-workspace.eu/wp-content/uploads/Bike-shares-impact-on-car-use-3.pdf City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

26 4.4 Measure TR-2 Supportive Actions
Action TR-2.8
Evidence: This is supportive to Actions TR-2.5 through TR-2.7 and the overall measure. Effective communication, especially communication that takes advantage of new and emerging technologies to accurately and easily disseminate trip planning and real-time status information, is a strong factor in helping customers decide to use transit for business or leisure trips.54 Action TR-2.9
Evidence: Curbside management strategies can help shift cities towards sustainable citywide mobility without compromising space and business needs.55 Sacramento has already made great strides in curbside management with their innovative dynamic parking program. In San Francisco, a parking pilot program called SFPark instituted dynamic parking pricing for on-street parking and experienced a 30% drop in VMT for the area, 8% drop in traffic volume, and improved meter compliance and parking turnover.56 In general, increasing the price to park is one of several related factors that can reduce VMT and promote mode switching.57 This approach is more effective when combined with infill development, investments in alternative transportation, and travel demand management programs.

Action TR-2.10
Evidence: Improving transit access has the potential to shift trips from cars to transit, which may reduce vehicle trips, VMT, and greenhouse gas emissions, with time spent getting to a transit stop being the key indicator of transit access.58 While difficult to directly quantify, improving access to transit stops and stations can contribute to improved transit access, and is therefore an important component of this strategy to reduce VMT.

Action TR-2.11
Evidence: The City has adopted plans and strategies to increase transit use through planning efforts.

These actions will support the overall VMT reduction quantified under Measure TR-2.

Action TR-2.12
Evidence: In light of the recent changes made to combat the spread of COVID-19, telecommuting has proven to be an implementable and effective strategy for reducing VMT. Continuing to leverage the telecommuting and remote work lessons learned during the pandemic will allow the City of Sacramento to reduce VMT well into the future.

Action TR-2.13
Evidence: The City of San Francisco was given a special variance by the State of California to implement a Traffic Congestion Mitigation tax on private transit service vehicles. The revenues of

54 https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trnews/trnews303rpo.pdf 55 https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/NACTO-Curb-Appeal-Curbside-Management.pdf 56 https://www.ite.org/pub/?id=C2D66E96%2DFF01%2D0BA8%2D68C3%2D65CC9116A5AE 57 https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/research-innovation-system-information/documents/preliminary- investigations/final-pricing-parking-management-to-reduce-vehicles-miles-traveled-pi-a11y.pdf 58 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-
06/Impacts_of_Transit_Access_%28Distance_to_Transit%29_Based_on_a_Review_of_the_Empirical_Literature_Policy_Brief.pdf TOC
Mobility

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 27 this tax go to offsetting the emissions from these services through the funding of transit and VMT reducing projects.59 The City of Sacramento will pursue a similar tax in order to help offset the impacts of Transportation Network Companies in Sacramento.

59 https://sftreasurer.org/business/taxes-fees/traffic-congestion-mitigation-tax- tcm#:~:text=The%20City%20imposes%20a%20Traffic,or%20private%20transit%20services%20vehicle.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

28 Measure TR-3:

Achieve Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV)
adoption rates of 28% for passenger
vehicles and 22% for commercial vehicles
by 2030 and 100% for all vehicles by 2045
2030 Target
212,451 MT CO2e
2045 Target
1,137,071 MT CO2e
Performance Metrics:
 11% of all vehicles are ZEVs and 3,230 public EV chargers in Sacramento by 2025  28% of all vehicles are ZEVs and 8,150 public EV chargers in Sacramento by 2030  100% EVs by 204560

Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Actions
TR-3.1 Amend City Building Code to require at least 20% EV-capable charging spaces and at least one installed, operational Level II EV charger in new multifamily and nonresidential development. Amend the Planning and Development Code to incentivize charging in both existing and new developments.
212,451 MT CO2e (2030)
1,137,071 MT CO2e (2045)
TR-3.2 Continue to install and provide EV charger access at City-owned facilities and parking garages.

TR-3.3 Continue to support a variety of public and public/private partnerships to provide more publicly accessible chargers throughout the City. Examples include public/private partnerships on private property (Electrify America), public/private partnerships on public property (EVgo), and public investment (SMUD).

Supportive Actions
TR-3.4 Pursue affordable, zero-emission car share expansions to serve affordable housing, such as the Sacramento Metropolitan Air District’s Our Community Carshare program to more locations, contingent on funding.

Supportive
TR-3.5 Collaborate on e-mobility hub pilot efforts, in partnership with other agencies and local groups, with special consideration for proximity to low-income/disadvantaged communities and multifamily housing.

Supportive
TR-3.6 Continue to maintain a highly streamlined EV infrastructure permit process.

Supportive
TR-3.7 Develop and implement a fee for use of City-owned parking facilities and EV chargers to promote more efficient use and turnover and increase EV availability for people who really need it, including those without access to home charging.

Supportive
TR-3.8 Work and collaborate with major employers including the State of California and Sacramento County to promote ZEV adoption, programs, and improvements to ZEV infrastructure.

Supportive

60 The number of chargers needed to meet 100% EV’s is not yet known. New technologies could significantly alter the current land scape by this time. This will be addressed in upcoming CAAPs.

TOC
Mobility

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 29 Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
TR-3.9 Continue to provide information and education about currently available incentives for expansion of Level II chargers on private property.

Supportive
TR-3.10 Coordinate with community-based organizations, agencies, and non- profits to conduct EV education events with would include information on costs/benefits of owning EVs, steps on how to receive incentives for EV chargers, as well as other benefits. Events will be equitably distributed across the City, focusing on disadvantaged communities.

Supportive
TR-3.11 Because zero-emission technology is improving/changing at a rapid pace, continue to monitor, test, and adapt to new and emerging zero- emission technologies and solutions.

Supportive

4.5 Measure TR-3 Quantification
The State of California has a goal of putting 5 million EVs on the road by 2030. This is approximately 1/3 of the vehicles currently on the road. Forecasting to 2030 given today’s rate of vehicle ownership, 5 million EVs in 2030 would be approximately 30% of the vehicle fleet. Therefore, the level of electrification proposed for this measure is in line with the state’s. The City of Sacramento will support the necessary infrastructure to support a fleet with 28% EV’s by 2030, with a long-term target of 100% EVs by 2045. This is equivalent to approximately 65,000 EVs in Sacramento by 2025 and 163,000 by 2030. As of October 2018, the City had 4,849 EVs registered, with 3.3% of new vehicle sales in Sacramento being EVs.61 While the City cannot require residents to buy and use ZEVs, the City will take actions to encourage this behavior change and support this level of EV adoption by improving the availability of EV charging infrastructure. The City’s primary target to achieve this measure is to provide one public EV charger for every 20 EVs, or 3,231 EV chargers by 2025 and 8,158 by 2030.62 The ratio of one charger per 20 EV’s is in line with the leading Cities in California (San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Jose) when it comes to EV infrastructure and aligns with recent charging infrastructure studies through 2025. The need for charging infrastructure may change over time depending on new technologies such as smart chargers and trends in personal EV adoption. The City will continue to monitor the most recent research on EV infrastructure needs and update long term goals as necessary. The following actions are a combination of expanded public EV chargers and incentives for EV adoption.

Action TR-3.1
Evidence: This action will account for the majority of the targeted number of EV chargers in 2025 and 2030. EV-ready building codes are one of the most effective and low-cost strategies for states and local governments to encourage consumers to buy or lease electric vehicles, and can save consumers thousands of dollars in installation costs.63 However, new development is not projected to occur at a scale sufficient to meet the City’s charging goals. EV charger installation will therefore need to occur in existing buildings as well. Sacramento is currently 5th in the nation for the number of public chargers per million population (Level II and DCFC), with a total of 682 public EV connectors, including 129 public fast chargers, as of January 2020.64 This ordinance would be in

61 Data provided by the City of Sacramento
62 https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/US_charging_Gap_20190124.pdf 63 https://studylib.net/doc/25931357/cracking-the-code-to-ev-readiness-in-new-buildings 64 Data provided by the City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

30 addition to Sacramento’s substantial ongoing EV programs contained in the 2017 EV Strategy and 2019 EV Blueprint.

Action TR-3.2
Evidence: As of 2020, the City of Sacramento currently operates 120 chargers at City-owned facilities, 48 of which serve the City fleet and 72 of which are available for public or employee charging. Patrons of City parking facilities can currently charge their EV at no additional cost, except when using the DCFC at the Sacramento Valley Station. The City is currently completing replacements of City-owned chargers to upgrade to newer, networked electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) and increase charging connector availability at City facilities. This investment will nearly double the number of Level II EVSE connectors in the first phase, going from 61 to 103 at the first seven sites by spring of 2020.65 The next phases for City-owned EVSE expansion will support planned EV purchases in the City’s fleet and will likely include many public-facing community locations. A key priority for the EVSE expansion plan is to increase charging access in low income and disadvantaged communities. Providing public charging in these communities will help to increase the viability of EV technologies, improve consumer awareness, and ensure charging options for a range of housing types.

Action TR-3.3
Evidence: The City of Sacramento has been a state and national leader in building electric vehicle partnerships and infrastructure since its first EV program in 1994. The City already hosts 682 public EV charging stations and connectors. Volkswagen subsidiary, Electrify America, designated Sacramento as the first Green City in its Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Investment Plan in 2017. Under this initiative, also known as “Sac-to-Zero”, Electrify America invested $44 million in Sacramento between 2017 and 2020, part of which was allocated to installing new charging infrastructure. In addition, the City launched its first curbside charging pilot in May 2019 in partnership with EVgo, which offers fast charging in the right-of-way at Southside Park. The chargers are owned and operated by EVgo and available to any member of the public. Over 700 vehicles have used the chargers, resulting in an estimated 400,000 EV miles powered and more than 19,000 gallons of gasoline avoided.66 The City is currently working with EVgo on a second curbside charging pilot with an anticipated launch date by Fall 2020.

Since 2017, the City’s public/private partners have installed or will install by 2025 75 Level II, DC fast chargers, and high-power chargers through Electrify America, three EVgo curbside charging stations, and 42 new Level II connectors through the City itself, for a total of 123 new chargers. Through these existing programs and new opportunities, the City and its partners will continue to install new chargers to meet the 2025 and 2030 targets.

Quantification Results Summary
In order to calculate the GHG reductions associated with achieving a 28% EV adoption level in 2030 and 100% in 2045 the following calculations were conducted. For 2030 the difference in total EV adoption (28%) and projected EV adoption (by EMFAC) was calculated to be 23%. A 23% reduction in 2030 VMT was then calculated and multiplied by the 2030 EMFAC emission factor. For commercial vehicles EMFAC does not project commercial EV adoption, so no adjustment was necessary. Finally, emissions associated with the electricity consumed by the EV’s was calculated by

65 Data provided by the City of Sacramento
66 Data provided by the City of Sacramento
TOC
Mobility

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 31 using an estimated EV efficiency.67 The resulting kWh estimate was multiplied by the SMUD projected emission factor. The impacts of the SMUD 2030 Zero Carbon Plan are quantified in E-1.

Actions TR-3.1 through TR-3.3 2030 2045
Passenger Vehicles
Percent Passenger EV’s 28% 100%
Forecasted EV's 4.58% 7.25%
Net Increase 23% 100%
VMT driven by EV 890,832,307 3,924,599,639.72
MT CO2e/VMT (Adjusted to include emissions from electric car) 0.0002139 0.0002058 Passenger MT CO2e Savings 190,563 807,854
Commercial Vehicles
Percent Commercial Vehicle EV’s68 22% 100%
Forecasted EV’s 0% 0%
VMT driven by EV 69,050,601 331,756,294.30
MT CO2e/VMT (Adjusted to include emissions from electric car) 0.0008783 0.0009923 Commercial MT CO2e Savings 60,647.31 329,216.91
Gross MT CO2 Savings 251,210 1,137,071
Electricity Emissions Adjustment
MT CO2e/VMT EV (passenger) 0.000027 0.000027
MT CO2e/VMT EV (commercial) 0.000219 0.000219
Emissions from EV’s 38,759 0
Total MT CO2 Savings 212,451.08 1,137,070.81

4.6 Measure TR-3 Supportive Actions
Action TR-3.4
Evidence: The City was an early partner for the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District’s Our Community CarShare program, California’ first all-electric carsharing program targeted for low-income communities. Our Community CarShare offers a free membership transportation service located in low-income and affordable housing communities throughout the City of Sacramento. Residents can reserve clean zero emission vehicles to run errands, get to appointments, and take local trips. The program has successfully launched two phases, and as of January 2020 the program offers 14 vehicles at 7 sites that have delivered over 470,000 electric miles driven and more than 19,000 gallons of gasoline avoided (169 MT CO2e). The project is currently building out its third phase for expanded service at four additional sites.

Other notable car share programs in the City of Sacramento include Envoy and GIG Car Share, both of which received funding in Sacramento from Electrify America’s Sac-to-Zero initiative. Envoy is a round-trip ZEV care share service located at 40+ multifamily apartment complexes, with a majority serving low income or disadvantaged residents. GIG Care Share is the nation’s largest free-floating

67 https://cleantechnica.com/2018/06/30/what-are-the-most-efficient-electric-cars/ 68 Commercial vehicles refers to vehicles in EMFAC classes LHD1, LHD2, T6, T7, PTO, UBUS, Motor Coach, All Other Buses, MH, T7IS ,

OBUS, MH
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

32 ZEV car sharing program, with 260 all-electric vehicles in Sacramento. Recent data from GIG for the Oakland area in 2017 found that GIG cars were used 2.7 times more than privately-owned cars, based on the National Household Travel Survey’s estimate that privately-owned cars are idle 94.3 percent of the time.69
Action TR-3.5
Evidence: The Sacramento EV Blueprint evaluated examples of e-mobility hubs from other cities and created recommendations for an e-mobility hub in Sacramento, including a preliminary design concept and list of potential locations to consider. This action would take further advantage of the City’s work to date and would lead to increased support for EVs within the City of Sacramento.

Additionally, data collected from the development of a mobility hub pilot project in the City of Austin in 2018 suggested that mobility hubs can shift mode-share from single-passenger vehicles to walking or biking.70 Efforts to evaluate and seek funding for e-mobility hubs are underway in collaboration with the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, and other local partners.

Action TR-3.6
Evidence: In 2016, the City passed ordinance 15.08.190 to expedite the application process for EV charging station installation in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 1236. The City of Sacramento is one of only 40 cities and counties to have effectively developed and implemented a streamlined EVCS permitting process in accordance with AB 1236 to date. All application materials and requirements can be found on the City’s website, including a simple checklist that applicants use to ensure they have all required materials included in the application. Applications can be submitted via e-mail providing additional convenience to applicants. If all required documents are submitted, applicants can expect to have their expedited EVCS building permits reviewed and approved within 24 hours for residential applications and approximately five business days for non-residential applications – both exceeding the best practices recommended by the Governor’s office. Expedited implementation is supported by ongoing collaboration across the departments of Community Development and Public Works. It has further demonstrated the City’s dedication to improving local air-quality, achieving community-wide climate and energy goals, and ensuring that zero-emission vehicles can be accessible and utilized by all community members.

Evidence: SMUD has a long history of supporting EV charging infrastructure in the City of Sacramento. SMUD also owns and operates 6 DCFC stations in Sacramento County.71 SMUD’s past and ongoing work to bring public EV chargers to Sacramento will be supplemented by this action to provide substantial incentives for EV owners to install their own chargers at home, where a majority of EV charging occurs. As of 2020, SMUD will offer $500 for each new electric circuit and up to $2,500 if a panel upgrade is also required, as well as a free Level II charger72. SMUD also offers a $1,500 incentive for each Level II charger port at businesses, with up to 20 incentives available per business.73

69 https://www.berkeleyside.org/2017/04/19/bay-areas-first-one-way-car-share-debuts-berkeley-oakland 70 https://rmi.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/rmi-mobility-hub-report-2018.pdf 71 http://www.cityofsacramento.org/-/media/Corporate/Files/Public-Works/Electric- Vehicles/EVStrategy_171212_FINAL_CityOfSacramento.pdf?la=en 72 https://www.smud.org/en/Rebates-and-Savings-Tips/Improve-Home-Efficiency/Go-Electric-Bonus-Package https://www.smud.org/en/Rebates-and-Savings-Tips/Improve-Home-Efficiency/Go-Electric-Bonus-Package 73 https://fundingwizard.arb.ca.gov/web/
TOC
Mobility

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 33 Action TR-3.7
Evidence: While not directly quantifiable, EV charging fees will increase turnover at charging stations, helping to promote equitable access to EV charging infrastructure and encourage widespread EV adoption across a greater demographic range. This will be coupled with increased parking fees for non-EV, encouraging use of both EVs and/or active transit.

Action TR-3.8
Evidence: Curb space is a major resource within the City serving multiple functions relating to mobility. By continuing to price curb space appropriately and preparing for a change to autonomous vehicles, the City of Sacramento can ensure the highest and best use of this limited resource.

Action TR-3.9
Evidence: The State of California is the City’s largest employer and has implemented various initiatives to increase its ZEV fleet and available ZEV charging infrastructure for employees.74 This action would also benefit other major employers interested in providing workplace charging.

Sacramento City Unified School District (SCUSD), for example, has an EV workplace charging program and offers 6 charging stations available for employees.75 Action TR-3.10
Evidence: The countywide CALeVIP incentive is anticipated to bring additional public DCFC and L2 workplace or fleet chargers. Rebates are reserved for at least 400 new or replacement L2 chargers, and additional community wide L2 chargers, and 76 new DCFC units.76 SMUD incentives are detailed under Action TR-3.6. The City of Sacramento is in the top three of California cities for EV promotion activities. As the City’s EV programs continue to expand, outreach surrounding incentives for installing Level II chargers on private property will support the City’s targets and this overall measure.

Action TR-3.11
Evidence: Providing information on existing and future programs, incentives, resources, and benefits of electric vehicle adoption to the community will increase adoption and contribute to the overall goal of electrified VMT in the City.

Action TR-3.12
Evidence: City staff are continuously evaluating emerging opportunity areas including:
 Expanded EVSE at City facilities
 Workforce development and job training for emerging ZEV industries  E-Mobility hubs that connect multiple modes of transportation  Community incentive programs and resources for low-income and disadvantaged communities  Education and outreach
 Operationalizing equity & flexibility

74 https://www.green.ca.gov/fleet/about/initiatives/
75 https://www.scusd.edu/ev-workplace-charging-program
76 Data provided by City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

34  Public-private partnerships for acceleration of shared mobility programs and transit While not directly quantifiable, this action will help ensure the City prioritizes the most impactful technologies and solutions as the ZEV landscape changes, maximizing on benefits from other actions and supporting the overall measure.

TOC
Waste

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 35 5 Waste
Measure W-1
Work to reduce organic waste disposal 75%
below 2014 levels by 2025
2030 Target
134,991 MT CO2e
2045 Target
160,897 MT CO2e
Performance Metrics:
 Compliance with SB 1383 requirements by 2025
 Compost or otherwise divert at least 75% of organic waste in 2025 relative to 2014  Recover 20% of edible food by 2025
 Maintain or improve these metrics through 2030

Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Actions
W-1.1 Implement the requirements of SB 1383 to compost or otherwise divert 75% of organic waste compared to 2014 levels by:
 Providing organic waste collection to all residents and businesses.
 Establishing an edible food recovery program that recovers edible food from the waste stream and redistributes the food to local community organizations to be used or eaten.
 Conducting outreach and education to affected parties, including generators, haulers, facilities, edible food recovery organizations, and city/county departments.
 Conducting capacity planning and evaluate your jurisdiction’s readiness to implement SB 1383.
 Procuring organic waste products like compost, mulch, and RNG.
 Inspecting and enforcing compliance with SB 1383.
134,991 MT CO2e (2030)
160,897 MT CO2e (2045)
Supportive Actions
W-1.2 Work with regional partners (other municipalities) and the private sector to assess the feasibility of siting long term organics processing facilities in or near Sacramento County.

Supportive
W-1.3 Continue to provide backyard compost education and reduced-cost compost bins as well as kitchen-top food waste containers to participating residents.

Supportive
W-1.4 Implement a food waste diversion program for single-family residential customers by 2022.

Supportive
W-1.5 Enforce new commercial waste code which requires businesses to subscribe to organics recycling collection service through the City’s franchised commercial haulers starting July 1, 2021.

Supportive
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

36 Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
W-1.6 Serve as a regional partner in the development and implementation of an edible food recovery program which connects commercial edible food generators with local food banks, to recover at least 20% of the edible food that is currently disposed of for human consumption, consistent with SB 1383.

Supportive
W-1.7 Explore the feasibility of capital improvement projects for reducing organics in the waste stream, such as organics extraction presses and anaerobic digesters.

Supportive
W-1.8 Consider adopting, if needed, an ordinance that aligns with AB 827, the state law that requires most restaurants to have front-of-house composting.

Supportive

5.1 Measure W-1 Quantification
SB 1383 was adopted in 2016 and is a landmark waste mandate that requires the state to reduce organic waste disposal by 75% by 2025, or by about 20 million tons annually. The law also requires the state to increase edible food recovery by 20 percent by 2025. Since the requirements of SB 1383 fall on the City in many regards, the impacts of SB 1383 were not included in the adjusted forecast.

Instead, they are accounted for here as actions for the City to complete as part of the CAAP implementation. CalRecycle describes the requirements of local governments in meeting these targets as follows77:
 Provide organic waste collection to all residents and businesses  Establish an edible food recovery program that recovers edible food from the waste stream  Conduct outreach and education to affected parties, including generators, haulers, facilities, edible food recovery organizations, and city/county departments  Capacity Planning: Evaluating your jurisdiction’s readiness to implement SB 1383  Procure recycled organic waste products like compost, mulch, and renewable natural gas (RNG)  Inspect and enforce compliance with SB 1383
 Maintain accurate and timely records of SB 1383 compliance Action W-1.1
The actions listed above for the CAAP are a summary of the complete list of actions required to comply with SB 1383. More information on the requirements of SB1383 which the City would adopt in some form are included below:

Expand local organics collection program: Increase organics collection by offering technical assistance and outreach to commercial and residential accounts and planning for expanded processing capacity.
 Desired Result
▫ 50% reduction in landfilled organic waste by 2020
▫ 75% reduction in landfilled organic waste by 2025
▫ Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 4 million metric tons statewide by 2030

77https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/education#:~:text=The%20SB%201383%20draft%20regulations,and%20other%20food%2 0recovery%20organizations.

TOC
Waste

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 37  Benefits
▫ Compliance with SB1383 state regulation
▫ Public health benefits
▫ Green economy (expanded organics processing facilities and jobs)  Key Steps
▫ As stated in CalRecycle’s SB 1383 regulations78, the City of Sacramento must engage in organic waste recycling capacity planning by supporting Sacramento County in executing the following actions:
- Estimate Sacramento’s disposal of organic waste (tons) - Identify and verify amount of available organic waste recycling infrastructure - Estimate the amount of new or expanded capacity needed to process organic waste - If existing and planned capacity is insufficient based on this process, the City of Sacramento shall support Sacramento County efforts to:
 Develop and submit an implementation schedule highlighting planning effort to provide enough new or expanded organics capacity, including timelines and relevant milestones, by the end of the report period
 Identify proposed new or expanded facilities that could be used for additional capacity
▫ Expand organic waste collection for all commercial and residential generators - Require organics generators to subscribe to organics collection programs or alternatively report organics self-hauling and/or backhauling - Work with the City of Sacramento’s Recycling and Solid Waste Division and franchise waste haulers to collect organic waste and verify facility where they will transport organic waste (with exclusions of haulers transporting source-separated organic waste to a community-scale composting site and haulers transporting construction and demolition (C&D) waste in compliance with CALGreen)
- Allow limited waivers and exemptions to generators for de minimus volumes and physical space constraints and maintain records for waivers/exemptions - Standardize all colors and labels for carts, dumpsters, debris boxes, compactors for garbage, recycling, and organics based on SB 1383 statewide requirements ▫ Develop and implement an education and outreach program that provides compliance assistance to organics generators.
- Identify percentage of organics generators who are “limited English-Speaking households” or “linguistically isolated.” If more than five percent (5%) of Sacramento’s organics generators are defined as “limited English-speaking households” or linguistically isolated,” provide education and outreach in a language or languages that will assure the information is understood by that community - Prior to February 2022 and annually thereafter, provide organics generators the following information:
 Requirements to properly separate materials
 Organic waste prevention and on-site recycling

78 Key actions are extracted from the second draft of the proposed SB 1383 regulations text.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

38  Methane reduction benefits
 How to implement organic waste collection services with AVI  Information related to edible food donation
▫ Implement inspection and compliance program with defined enforcement mechanisms and penalties by January 31, 2022 and annually thereafter
- Perform compliance review of all commercial garbage accounts that generate 2 cubic yards or more per week of organics and solid waste
- Conduct annual contamination inspections and route reviews on randomly selected accounts and waste containers or conduct waste evaluations twice a year that meet the guidelines outlined in Article 3 of SB 1383
- Enforce penalties for noncompliant entities as required by Article 16 of SB 1383. ▫ Maintain records, including an initial compliance report, annual report, and implementation record as required by Articles 3, 14, and 16 of SB 1383.

Increase edible food recovery: Develop and implement an edible food recovery program which connects large food generators with local food banks, to recover at least 20% of the edible food that is currently disposed of for human consumption, consistent with SB1383.  Desired Result
▫ 20% increase in recovery of currently disposed edible food from large food generators to food banks and hunger relief organizations
▫ Reduction in landfilled organic waste
 Benefits
▫ Compliance with SB1383 state regulation.
▫ Reduction in food insecurity.
▫ New or enhanced community connections via more active and/or extensive donation networks.
▫ Support for businesses, which may receive tax incentives for donations.  Key Action
▫ Recover at least 20% of the edible food that is currently disposed of for human consumption by 2025, consistent with SB1383
▫ Conduct edible food recovery capacity planning by executing the following actions:
- Estimate the amount of edible food that will be disposed by organics generators in Sacramento
- Identify the minimum capacity required to recover 20% of edible food that is estimated to be disposed
▫ Work with commercial food generators to reduce excess edible food generation:
- Connect large food generators to food banks and food recovery organizations - Consider the adoption of an edible food recovery ordinance or similarly enforceable mechanism to ensure that large edible food generators connect with local food recovery programs
- Implement an inspection and compliance program with defined enforcement mechanisms and penalties targeted towards food generators and food recovery agencies as required by SB 1383
TOC
Waste

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 39 ▫ Maintain an initial compliance report, implementation record, and annual report as required SB 1383
Implement organics procurement: Increase municipal procurement of recovered organic waste products and post-consumer fiber products.
 Desired Result
▫ Reduction in landfilled organics via bolstering the market for recycled organics products.  Benefits
▫ Carbon sequestration through use of purchased compost ▫ Beautified landscapes through application of purchased compost ▫ Public health benefits (Reduced particulate emissions from fossil fuels via increased use of clean energy sources
 Key Actions
▫ As stated in CalRecycle’s proposed SB 1383 regulations, the City of Sacramento must procure a quantity of recovered organic waste that meets or exceeds the organic waste product procurement targets for the City of Sacramento. Recovered organic waste products that a jurisdiction may procure to achieve compliance are: 1) compost, 2) renewable natural gas for transportation, electricity, heating applications, 3) pipeline ejection, or 4) electricity from biomass conversion
▫ Ensure that at least 75% of City of Sacramento’s annual purchase of paper products, printing paper, and writing paper is paper with a at least 30 percent post-consumer fiber paper.

Require paper suppliers to certify minimum percentage of post-consumer material ▫ Procure and use compost to meet California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO) requirement for incorporating compost into new and renovated permitted landscapes (at least four cubic yards per 1,000 sq. ft. to a depth of six inches of compost) ▫ Implement an inspection and compliance program with defined enforcement mechanisms and penalties, as required by Article 16 in SB 1383
▫ Maintain records, including an initial compliance report, annual report, and implementation record as required by Articles 3, 14, and 16 of SB 1383 Evidence: The requirements and actions associated with SB 1383 have been developed to produce a 75% reduction in organics by the State of California.79 Therefore, by taking the actions required, the City of Sacramento can expect to achieve a similar reduction level. The emissions reductions associated with a 75% reduction in organics was calculated using the 2014 waste characterization study for the County of Sacramento pursuant to the SB 1383 guidelines. A 75% reduction was applied in 2025 and continued through 2030 and the reduced amount was multiplied by CARB’s emission factor for mixed organics (.31 MT/short ton).80 Total emissions reductions are estimated to be 51,429 MT of CO2e in 2030.

79 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1383 80 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-06/documents/warm_v15_organics.pdf City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

40 Quantification Results Summary
Action W-1.1 2030 2045
Percentage of waste that is organics 27% 27%
Total Waste (tons)81 704,696 839,935
Organic tons 188,506 224,683
Organics reduced by SB 1383 (75%) 141,380 168,512
Organics Emission Factor82 0.364 0.364
Emissions Saved (MT CO2e) 51,429 61,298

5.2 Measure W-1 Supportive Actions
Action W-1.2
Evidence: Identifying a regional organics processing facility is a key step in diverting the required organics specified by SB 1383. Having a close facility will also reduce VMT compared trucking waste to a less local destination. Permitting is currently a hurdle for facilities in Sacramento County due local quality challenges and standards; however, other nearby regional areas may be identified.

Action W-1.3
Evidence: Sacramento currently provides backyard composting education, reduced-cost compost bins, and kitchen-top food containers to residents.83 Providing compost buckets to residents will remove barriers to composting and allow for more organics to be diverted from the waste stream.

Providing free buckets is also an equity benefit.

Action W-1.4
Evidence: The implementation of a food waste diversion program for all residents is a key action in achieving the SB 1383 goals. However, it is only a portion of the SB 1383 strategy and is not quantified here in order to avoid double counting.

Action W-1.5
Evidence: This measure would increase organics diversion and contribute to the overall SB 1383 reduction target.

Action W-1.6
Evidence: This action is required by SB 1383. Diverting edible food waste will both reduce GHG emissions and potentially reduce hunger and improve equity in the City.

Action W-1.7
Evidence: Continuing to explore new technologies in waste diversion may allow Sacramento to better reach its long-term waste goals.

81 See Community Inventory and Forecast in Appendix A
82 https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/waste/cerffinal.pdf
83 http://www.cityofsacramento.org/public-works/rsw/
TOC
Waste

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 41 Action W-1.8
Evidence: Some cities have introduced ordinances to mandate commercial compost collection, including San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, and Boulder, among others. Boulder approved a Universal Zero Waste Ordinance in 2015, which requires that every home, business, and apartment have recycle and composting services, including front of house composting at restaurants. A waste audit study conducted by Eco-Cycle at food service establishments in Denver found that food establishments of all types can achieve food waste capture rates (57-98%) through FOH collection with minimal contamination rates (1-22%).84 This suggests that FOH collection can be a key source of compost material for composting facilities. The study also found that clear signage improved contamination rates for compost collection. FOH composting may also be more successful at establishments that offer compostable service ware or durable service ware.

Composting not only reduces methane emissions from decomposing food scraps in the landfill, but can also increase carbon sequestration when the compost is applied to soil. 85 Increasing compost added to soil has the additional indirect benefits of decreasing the need for fertilizers (reducing GHGs produced from their production) and improving tillage and workability of soil (reducing GHG produced from working the soil). CARB estimates that approximately 0.69 MT CO2e is avoided per ton of food waste, arising from decreased methane emissions, soil erosion, and fertilizer usage. 86 In addition, the US EPA estimates that approximately 183 kg (0.183 MT) of CO2 is sequestered by one ton of wet compost,87 suggesting an overall emissions reduction of 0.873 MT CO2e per ton of composted waste.

84 https://ecocycle.org/content/uploads/2019/09/Report_how-denver-can-achieve-sustainability-with-composting.pdf 85 sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960852408010572 86 https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/waste/cerffinal.pdf (see Table 10) 87 http://libjournals.unca.edu/ncur/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/1698Deesing-Brittany-FINAL.pdf City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

42 6 Carbon Sequestration
Measure CS-1:

Increase urban tree canopy cover
to 25% by 2030 and 35% by 2045
2030 Target
23,053 MT CO2e (Sequestered)
2045 Target
61,474 MT CO2e (Sequestered)
Performance Metric(s):
 Achieve 25% urban tree canopy cover by 2030 consistent with the Urban Forest Plan  Achieve 35% urban tree canopy cover by 2045

Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Actions
CS-1.1 Implement the Urban Forest Plan with a goal to achieve 25% urban canopy cover by 2030 and 35% by 2045. Prioritize tree planting in areas with the lowest average tree canopy cover and explore strategies to reduce barriers to tree planting in disadvantaged areas and improve tree health.
23,053 MT CO2e (2030)
61,474 MT CO2e (2045)
Supportive Actions
CS-1.2 Utilize compost and mulch for application to City-owned trees and planters to increase the carbon sequestration potential of tree plantings.

Supportive
CS-1.3 Develop online educational materials about tree species that are adapted to Sacramento’s climate and resilient to drought and climate change.

Supportive
CS-1.4 Continue to support the SMUD/Sacramento Tree Foundation program which provides free shade trees for residents and businesses and support increased plantings on private property in areas that are under-canopied through new partnerships and programs.

Supportive

6.1 Measure CS-1 Quantification
Carbon sequestration is the process by which carbon is taken out of the atmosphere and sequestered in soil, vegetation, or manmade structures. This measure deals with the carbon sequestration achieved by plants through photosynthesis whereby trees and other green plant pull CO2 out of the atmosphere, use the carbon to grow, and release oxygen. According to the City of Sacramento’s Urban Tree Canopy Assessment the current urban forest sequesters 73,000 MT of CO2e per year and covers 19% of the City.88 Expanding the urban forest to cover 25% of the City would be equivalent to an expansion of 6%.

88 https://www.cityofsacramento.org/-/media/Corporate/Files/Public-Works/Maintenance-Services/Urban-Forest-Master-Plan/Copy-of- Sacramento-UTC-Assessment-20180515.pdf?la=en
TOC
Carbon Sequestration

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 43 Action CS-1.1
Evidence: The growth of trees and other vegetation sequesters carbon.89 According to the 2018 Urban Tree Canopy Assessment which mapped urban tree canopy using high-resolution aerial imagery and infrared technology to remotely map tree canopy and land cover in the City of Sacramento approximately 19% of the City has tree canopy cover. This vegetation sequesters approximately 73,000 MT of CO2e per year. If the City were to increase the tree canopy cover to 25% it would increase total sequestration by 32%.

Quantification Results Summary
Action CS-1.1 2030 2045
Total tree canopy coverage in 2018 19% 19%
Total tree canopy coverage goal 25% 35%
Annual sequestration in 2018 73,000 73,000
Percent increase in canopy coverage 6% 16%
Net MT CO2e Savings 23,053 61,474

6.2 Measure CS-1 Supportive Actions
Action CS-1.2
Evidence: This action will help Sacramento meet the compost procurement goals of SB 1383 and increase the carbon sequestration potential of the land in Sacramento. Compost application is associated with increased carbon sequestration.90
Action CS-1.3
Evidence: This supportive action will help the community better understand the impacts of climate change as well as identify which tree species will be best suited to Sacramento’s future climate.

Action CS-1.4
Evidence: Providing the community with free trees to plant will provide multiple benefits including education on the benefits of trees in Sacramento, increased tree canopy, and increased awareness of climate change and climate adaptation and mitigation actions.

89 https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=26107
90 https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/compostmulch/toolbox/carbonsequest City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

44 7 Water and Wastewater
Measure WW-1
Reduce water utility emissions (in MT of
CO2e per million gallon delivered) by 100%
by 2030 and maintain that through 2045
2030 Target
6,296 MT CO2e
2045 Target
0 MT CO2e
Performance Metrics:
 Utilize carbon neutral power for 100% of water utility electricity demands by 2030

Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Actions
WW-1.1 Reduce GHG emissions associated with the water utility by procuring 100% carbon neutral electricity by 2030.
6,877 MT CO2e (2030)
0 MT CO2e (2045)
Supportive Actions
WW-1.2 Investigate the feasibility of allowing on-site non potable treatment and distributed water resources in new development.

Supportive
WW-1.3 Continue to implement the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance each year.

Supportive
WW-1.4 Continue to require the use of low impact development (LID) strategies for new construction and development.

Supportive
WW-1.5 Continue to investigate the landscaping/irrigation use of non- potable reclaimed water from regional sanitation at parks.

Supportive
WW-1.6 Increase the use of renewable energy and storage to reduce GHG emissions and increase resiliency for critical infrastructure.

Supportive
WW-1.7 Continue to encourage efficient water use by residents and businesses through expanded education, incentives and assistance services in compliance with Assembly Bill 1668 and Senate Bill 606, which help reduce the City’s water demand and related energy use.

Supportive

7.1 Measure WW-1 Quantification
GHG emissions from water treatment and distribution are 100% attributable to electricity generation. Therefore, the primary measure for reducing GHG emissions is to reduce the emissions associated with electricity used to pump and treat water within the City of Sacramento. By 2030 the water utility will procure 100% carbon free electricity and reduce GHG emission on a per acre foot basis to zero. Additional supportive measures such as water conservation, greywater, and stormwater management will further this goal and reduce the amount of electricity needed by reducing overall water demand as the City continues to grow.

TOC
Water and Wastewater

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 45 Action WW-1.1
Evidence: Reducing the emission factor of electricity used to pump and treat water to zero would increase the expected reductions from SB 100 by 6,877 MT of CO2e per year. By 2045, SB 100 will be fully implemented and therefore, procuring carbon neutral electricity will no longer provide a benefit above and beyond the adjusted forecast from which GHG emission reductions are calculated. This measure was not included in Measure E-2 to avoid double counting.

Quantification Results Summary
Action WW-1.1 2030 2045
Projected Electricity Use (kWh) 52,793,843 0
Projected Emission Factor (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.000119 0.0
Projected Emissions (With SB 100) 6,296 0
Emission Factor with Measure E-1 (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.0 0.0
GHG Emissions with Measure E-1 (MT CO2e/kWh) 0 0
GHG Emissions Savings (MT CO2e) 6,296 0

7.2 Measure WW-1 Supportive Actions
Action WW-1.2
Evidence: As part of SB 966, the City of Sacramento is investigating the feasibility of on-site treatment and reuse of non-potable water use in multifamily residential, commercial, and mixed- use buildings. When enacted, a policy of this kind could greatly decrease the amount of potable water consumption.

Action WW-1.3
Evidence: The City will continue to report for the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance on an annual basis and investigate areas for enhanced landscape water conservation.

Action WW-1.4
Evidence: When new projects are permitted in the City of Sacramento, the City will review and encourage applicants to use green infrastructure and low impact development strategies. These strategies can increase stormwater retention and groundwater infiltration.

Action WW-1.5
Evidence: The City will continue to investigate the efficacy of reclaimed water application for non- potable uses at area schools. Reclaimed water use reduces the consumption of potable water both protecting a limited resource and reducing the energy needed to pump and treat potable water.

Action WW-1.6
Evidence: Installing renewable energy and battery storage projects to support the City’s water services will improve local grid resiliency and reduce GHG emissions associated with those services.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

46 Action WW-1.7
Evidence: Improving water use efficiency decreases the energy need per person associated with water conveyance and treatment. Reducing energy demand helps reduce associated GHG emissions.

TOC
Water and Wastewater

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 47 Measure WW-2
Reduce wastewater emissions by 22% by
2030 and 40% by 2045
2030 Target
5,495 MT CO2e
2045 Target
11,517 MT CO2e
Performance Metrics:
 None – projects to reduce wastewater emissions were completed before release of the CAAP

Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Actions
WW-2.1 Regional San implements biogas recovery and improvement projects.
993 MT CO2e (2030)
1,171 MT CO2e (2045)
WW-2.2 GHG Emissions Reductions from SB 100 implementation by Regional San.
4,572 MT CO2e (2030)
11,681 MT CO2e (2045)
WW-2.3 Regional San implements solar PV generation project. 389 MT CO2e (2030) 0 MT CO2e (2045)

7.3 Measure WW-2 Quantification
Although GHG emissions from wastewater are generated by the Sacramento Community, operational control of the wastewater treatment facility is covered by Regional San. This means the City of Sacramento has no direct levers to reduce these emissions. However, since the GHG emissions associated with wastewater are included in the GHG emissions inventory, several of the GHG reducing activities which Regional San has undertaken are included here. The City of Sacramento and SMUD will continue to support Regional San in these and future partnerships to further reduce emissions from the wastewater sector.

Action WW-2.1
Evidence: Regional San has operated a biogas recovery project which collects digester gas and utilizes it to generate electricity in a SMUD-owned cogeneration facility. The combustion of the biogas reduces methane emissions, a powerful short-lived climate pollutant able to trap over 25 times more heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide does over a 100-year period, meaning that it has a much higher climate change impact. The biogenic CO291 created in the biogas recovery and combustion process has a much smaller impact on global warming. This program has reduced methane emissions from the facility by 96% to 0.454 tons per year.92 Sacramento’s GHG inventory estimated methane emissions at 32 tons in 2016. To calculate the expected reduction in methane

91 Biogenic CO2 is CO2 released as the result of the combustion or decomposition of organic material (biomass), as opposed to anthropogenic or fossil CO2 which results from the combustion of fossil fuels. 92 https://www.regionalsan.com/biogas-recycling
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

48 emissions from the biogas program into the future, a per service person93 methane value was calculated (0.000040 MT CH4/person) and the service person forecast for each target year was applied.

Quantification Results Summary
Action WW-2.1 2030 2045
2016 estimated methane production 32 32
Estimated CH4 emissions per service person 0.000040 0.000040 MT CH4 in target year 38.7 45.1
Estimated BAU emissions 967 1,127
96% reduction in emissions 47 64
GHG Emissions Savings (MT CO2e) 920 1,063
Action WW-2.2
Evidence: Because a majority of emissions associated with wastewater are from process emissions, specifically the generation of CH4 and N2O, SB 100 impacts were not included in the adjusted forecast. However, a projected 40,108 MWh of electricity are expected to be used to treat Sacramento’s wastewater in 2030 and 46,749 MWh of electricity in 2045.94 Emissions associated with this electricity are expected to go to zero by 2045.

Quantification Results Summary
Action WW-2.2 2030 2045
Projected electricity use (MWh) 40,108 46,749
BAU emission factor (MT CO2e/MWh) 0.2236 0.2236
Projected emission factor (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.000119 0.0
Emissions under BAU scenario 8,968 10,453
Emissions with SB 100 4,783 0
GHG emissions savings (MT CO2e) 4,185 10,453
Action WW-2.3
Evidence: In 2018 Regional San installed a 4.2-megawatt solar array which provides an estimated 10% of its operational electricity. In 2016 it was estimated that approximately 32,645 MWh were used to treat wastewater from the City of Sacramento. Offsetting 10% of this usage would reduce GHG emission by approximately 389 MT of CO2e. However, by 2045, due to SB 100 (calculated in Action 2) reduces the GHG benefit of the solar array to zero to avoid double counting.

93 Service person counts both residents and employees (i.e., population + jobs) to account for activities associated with both. Per service person metrics are calculated as the metric divided by the service population (e.g., community GHG emissions divided by service population).
94 See Community Inventory and Forecast in Appendix A.

TOC
Water and Wastewater

Appendix C - Community Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 49 Quantification Results Summary
Action WW-2.3 2030 2045
Projected offset of electricity use (kWh) 10% 10%
Estimated electricity use attributable to Sacramento in 2016 (kWh) 32,645 32,645
Electricity offset by solar PV (kWh) 3,264.5 3,264.5
Emission Factor from SMUD (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.000119 0.0
GHG emissions savings (MT CO2e) 389 0

Appendix D - Funding and Financing
Strategy Administrative Draft
360

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
Appendix D – Funding and Financing Strategy
Administrative Draft
prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
449 15th Street, Suite 300
Oakland, California 94609
and
BAE Urban Economics
803 2nd Street, Suite A
Davis, California 95616
March 2023

TOC
Table of Contents

Funding and Financing Strategy i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Measure Costs ............................................................................................................................... 2 3 Funding and Financing Strategy ................................................................................................... 17

3.1 Priority City-Led CAAP Measures ..................................................................................... 17

3.2 Funding Principles ............................................................................................................ 19

3.3 Prioritization Strategy for Available City Funds ............................................................... 20

3.4 Conceptual Funding Approach for Priority City-Led CAAP Implementation Actions ....... 20

3.5 Summary .......................................................................................................................... 21

3.6 Other Actions Critical to CAAP Success ............................................................................ 22 4 Types of Funding Sources ............................................................................................................ 23

4.1 Grants ............................................................................................................................... 23

4.2 City General Fund Monies ................................................................................................ 23

4.3 Restricted Funds .............................................................................................................. 24

4.4 Fees for Service/User Fees ............................................................................................... 25

4.5 Financing Tools ................................................................................................................. 25

4.6 Potential New Funding Sources and Tools ....................................................................... 27

4.7 Funding Measures Requiring State Legislation/Action .................................................... 29

4.8 Federal Funding ............................................................................................................... 31 Tables
Table 1 Measure Cost and Funding Strategies ............................................................................... 5 Table 2 Estimated Costs for Short Term Priority City-Led CAAP Measures .................................. 18 Table 3 Funding Gap for Priority City-Led CAAP Measures .......................................................... 21 City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

This page intentionally left blank.

TOC
Introduction

Funding and Financing Strategy 1
1 Introduction
Recognizing the importance of Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) implementation, the Sacramento City Council allocated approximately $4.5 million in one-time money to seed near-term CAAP activities in its 2020-21 budget. However, full implementation will require a substantial long- term commitment on the part of the City and other entities to fund necessary CAAP investments.

This appendix presents a summary of the anticipated costs to the City of Sacramento to implement the CAAP and a strategy to approach funding Priority City-led CAAP Measures that require City funding over the next 20 years (i.e., through 2040).

Complete implementation of the CAAP is estimated at a minimum of $3.2 billion in direct City investments, investments from private citizens, businesses, and other agencies will also be needed, as well as substantial commitment of staff time. Though many of these investments will provide substantial savings to Sacramento and the community over time, full implementation will require the City to consider funding from a wide range of potential sources. This Appendix provides a starting point of the high-level
1 costs associated with the measures and actions in the CAAP, as well as a strategy of how the City could focus its efforts on securing the funding for the approximately $616 million in primary CAAP actions. These strategies include various new funding options including development impact fees, grant funding from various sources, motor vehicle registration surcharges, and a tax on transportation network company (TNC) operations. Most of these would require voter approval and/or legislative actions.

Section 2 of the document organizes the specific actions in the CAAP into three categories of high, moderate, and low costs. Those actions that are expected to be either moderate or high cost are then provided with a high-level cost estimate and potential funding and financing sources. As actions are further defined and implemented, additional funding options are expected to be identified. Estimates have not been provided for low-level cost actions.

Section 3 provides additional information on the potential funding and financing strategies that the City has access to as it further defines and implements the actions in the CAAP. This guide is a starting point for the City and its partners to identify the resources required to reach its greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets. Finally, Section 3 also provides a more detailed financing plan for several core CAAP implementation strategies that have more well-defined project specifics and also provide significant GHG reductions.

1 This is a high-level estimate which does not include an estimate of low-cost measures.

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

2 2 Measure Costs
As part of its updated CAAP, the City has developed a comprehensive strategy for reducing community-wide GHG emissions over time. However, bringing the City to carbon neutrality requires significant, strategic investments into many elements of the community, including new policies, infrastructure, and behavior change on the part of the community. In order to develop transparency around the prioritization of these aforementioned measures, this technical appendix details the estimated cost to the City associated with the implementation of many of the City’s most impactful measures.

This document focuses on the cost of implementation to the City and not on the potential costs and savings to the community in general. While the CAAP focused on cost-effective and even cost-saving actions, such as new building electrification (which costs less to both build and operate) 2 or owning
electric vehicles which have lower lifecycle costs than internal combustion vehicles 3 , the details of
upfront costs and lifecycle savings for individual community members will be identified during implementation. One example of this is the Existing Building Electrification Strategy that will provide a deep dive on community costs and savings associated with existing building electrification. Costs associated with many of the other actions in the CAAP, such as new bike lanes and expanded transit, will have major benefits for community members and costs that will ultimately depend on how they are funded and financed.

The measures listed below have been broken down into three cost segments which include:

1. Low-Cost. Low-cost measures are the low-hanging fruit for the City to reduce emissions, generally delineated as measures associated with relatively low-upfront costs. These actions are assumed to be handled through existing resources or through smaller low-cost changes, such as policies and ordinance.

2. Moderate-Cost. This segment includes measures with an intermediate level of costs for implementation. These measures will require additional funding or increase short-term costs to the City and community (e.g., electric vehicle [EV] charging infrastructure and program development)

3. High-Cost. This segment includes longer term projects that require substantial investments over time to reduce emissions, (e.g., new infrastructure and transit). These measures will require significant investment that cannot be paid for by the City alone. Funding and financing will be key to the implementation of these measures.

While many of the low-cost items listed below could be covered by current staff time on an individual basis, the cumulative impact of the CAAP and its many actions will likely necessitate additional sustainability staff. Hiring additional staff results in long-term costs that are not covered by grants. In addition to the need for additional staff resources, one potential opportunity that is not tied to any single CAAP action is to apply to host a Civic Spark Fellow who could work under the direction of the City’s sustainability staff to help with CAAP implementation activities. Civic Spark Fellows are provided through an AmeriCorps program that places Fellows with local governments and other entities that are engaged in sustainability projects. Most of the cost of the Fellows is

2 https://explorer.localenergycodes.com/jurisdiction/sacramento-city/summary 3 https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/EV-Ownership-Cost-Final-Report-1.pdf TOC
Measure Costs

Funding and Financing Strategy 3
covered by the Civic Spark program, meaning that a General Fund allocation to cover the City’s required local fiscal contribution could leverage the Civic Spark program to secure more staffing than the City could otherwise afford to support.

Table 1 below includes each measure and the corresponding cost bucket. For measures falling into the moderate or high-cost bucket, costs have been estimated, and funding and financing strategies have been provided. A more detailed funding analysis has been completed for a subset of key CAAP measures and is included in Section 3 - Funding Strategy.

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

4 This page intentionally left blank.

TOC
Measure Costs

Funding and Financing Strategy 5
Table 1 Measure Cost and Funding Strategies
Sector
Measure +
Action # Action(s) Required Potential Funding Sources Confirmed Funding Source What Funding Source Program Can Fund Cost to City
Operations
Estimated Cost
(Cost to City $ millions) References and Assumptions
Built Environment E-1.1 Support SMUD in the
implementation of the 2030 Zero
Carbon Plan.

SMUD Zero Carbon Plan Carbon free electricity through SMUD by 2030.
1 Low (through rates) https://www.smud.org/en/Corporate/ Environmental-Leadership/2030-
Clean-Energy-Vision
Built Environment E-2.1 Develop and adopt an electrification ordinance that requires all new
construction under four stories to be
all-electric by 2023 and all
construction to be all-electric by
2026.

SMUD Advanced Commercial
Solutions Program
SMUD Advanced Commercial Solutions
currently provides assistance and
incentives of up to $5,000 per unit to
private individuals and the building
industry for new buildings (electrification
and energy efficiency).
1 No/Low Upfront Costs to
Developers, Cost Savings
Over Lifecycle
In-kind staff time to develop and adopt
Ordinance. Assumes that SMUD will
continue to provide incentives for new
development to incorporate electric
appliances.
https://explorer.localenergycodes.com
SMUD All Electric Smart Home
Program
Currently SMUD provides incentives up
to $5,000 per unit.

Built Environment E-3.1 Develop a comprehensive existing building electrification strategy that
identifies associated costs and
addresses potential equity impacts
prior to implementation of
mandatory requirements.

City City – 1 One time consulting fee
budget of $130,000
established with existing
funding allocations.

Cost of implementing existing building
electrification strategy is TBD.

Built Environment E-3.2 Develop an electrification ordinance for existing buildings/construction
that will be implemented through
the building permit process to
transition away from fossil fuels to
electric at time of replacement
following adoption of Measure E3.1.

The existing buildings ordinance
would include the following
elements:
• No new expansions of fuel
gas piping at existing
buildings/sites.
• Require HVAC system
replacements and new
water heaters to be all-
electric or utilize other
low-carbon technologies
as the market evolves.

SMUD Residential and
commercial rebates/incentives
Rebates and incentives for energy
efficient equipment.
1-2 Stage 1: Low Cost (See E-1-1)
Stage 2: Low Cost
Assumes that stages 1 & 2 are
ordinances. FTE for enforcement
program depends on what it is. Permit
compliance would require ~seven
administrative staff.

SMUD Rebates and Incentives:
https://www.smud.org/Rebates-and-
Savings-Tips/Rebates-for-My-
Home/#Home-Rebates
City Building Permit/Plan
Check/Inspection Fees

Recoup the cost of reviewing and
approving construction plans and
conducting inspections to ensure
compliance.

Built Environment E-3.3 Work with SMUD to expand existing low-income programs within the
City to weatherize and
retrofit/electrify existing buildings,
with the goal of reducing energy
consumption, decreasing utility bills,
and converting to carbon-free
energy use by 2040.

Potential in-kind city staff
time
SMUD Energy Assistance
Program Rate (EAPR)
SMUD currently funds weatherization
and energy efficiency and electrification
for qualifying low-income households.
2 TBD based on results of
existing building
electrification strategy.

Assumes that SMUD continue to
implement low-income retrofits, with
support from the City with
implementation and locating
additional grant funding to expand
programs.

Home Energy Assistance
Program (HEAP)
Provides financial assistance to qualified
low-income residents as a credit on their
utility bills.

Community Resource Project, Inc
Low-Income Weatherization
Program
Free energy efficiency and
weatherization services and equipment
for low-income households.

Community Resource Project, Inc and
Grid Alternatives are SMUD's
contracted service providers.

Built Environment E-3.4 Promote and educate the
community about existing programs
and expand electrification retrofit
TECH
Switch is On
SMUD Residential and
commercial rebates/incentives
SMUD Rebates and incentives for energy
efficient equipment.
1 Low cost to City Assumes that most of additional
outreach and education will be by
SMUD, and that any additional
City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

6 Sector
Measure +
Action # Action(s) Required Potential Funding Sources Confirmed Funding Source What Funding Source Program Can Fund Cost to City
Operations
Estimated Cost
(Cost to City $ millions) References and Assumptions
incentives for space and water
heating to support the electrification
ordinances.
outreach and education can be done
on an as-needed basis by existing City
staff.

Existing City resources CDD operating budget Links to SMUD educational materials on City websites, or inclusion of SMUD staff
at City events when appropriate,
Low cost to the City Assumes that the City will leverage existing City resources when
appropriate to raise public awareness
about the existence of SMUD
incentives. Assumes that City staff will
not advise the public about the
specifics of SMUD programs or create
educational content.

Built Environment E-3.5 Provide electrification retrofit incentives and financing for space
and water heating.

SMUD’s Advanced Homes
Program
Central air conditioner, heat pumps and
induction cooking.
1 Low cost to City Assumes that this will continue to be implemented by SMUD and that City
staff will get involved when SMUD
makes a specific request.

Built Environment E-3.6 Continue to promote and incentivize electrification supportive energy
efficiency in existing buildings
including lighting, insulation, and air
sealing upgrades through programs
and financing mechanisms.

Multiple SMUD programs:

Express Energy Solutions,
Complete Energy Solutions,
Custom Retrofit, Integrated
Design Solutions
lighting, refrigeration, food service
equipment, HVAC, industrial equipment,
retro-commissioning, etc.
1 Low cost to City Assumes that incentives and
promotion of incentives will continue
to be implemented primarily by SMUD
and that City staff will get involved
when SMUD makes a specific request.

SMUD Rebates and Incentives:
https://www.smud.org/en/Rebates-
and-Savings-Tips
Built Environment E-4.1 Continue to promote and support local energy generation and storage
resources.

Potential in-kind city staff
time
SMUD Solar and Battery
Storage Incentives
1 Low cost to City Assumes that SMUD will promote and
support local on-site energy storage
and implement SMUD's IRP, but that
SMUD may request in-kind staff time.

SMUD Solar and Battery Storage
Incentives:
https://www.smud.org/en/Going-
Green/Solar-for-Your-Home
Built Environment E-4.2 Work with SMUD to site storage and renewable generation at locations in
the City that would best support
overall grid functionality while
electrifying the building stock and
maximizing the utilization of existing
electrical infrastructure.

Potential in-kind city staff
time
SMUD Solar and Battery
Storage Incentives
1 Low cost to City Assumes SMUD will fund and lead the
development of this plan and request
in-kind staff time from the City if
needed.

SMUD Solar and Battery Storage
Incentives:
https://www.smud.org/en/Going-
Green/Solar-for-Your-Home
Built Environment E-4.3 Work alongside SMUD to promote
and further incentivize battery
storage as a means to maximize
electrification benefits and improve
resiliency.

Potential in-kind City staff
time
SMUD Solar and Battery
Storage Incentives
SMUD incentives for new My Energy
Optimizer program
1 Low cost to City Assumes that SMUD will fund and
implement programs and the Building
Division will support with streamlined
permit processing and provide related
educational materials to customers.

Built Environment E-4.4 Develop a community solar and
storage project of at least 1 MW as a
pilot project collaboration between
SMUD and the City with SMUD
leading project development and
the City supporting by providing a
location and permitting support.

Potential in-kind staff
time, Potential General
Fund money allocated to
solar and storage project
1 Low cost to City Assumes that SMUD will determine
criteria for a potential site for a 1 MW
pilot project, and Public Works
Department will provide in-kind staff
time to identify a list or map of
suitable City-owned properties, and
TOC
Measure Costs

Funding and Financing Strategy 7
Sector
Measure +
Action # Action(s) Required Potential Funding Sources Confirmed Funding Source What Funding Source Program Can Fund Cost to City
Operations
Estimated Cost
(Cost to City $ millions) References and Assumptions
that SMUD will support project
development.

Built Environment E-5.1 Adopt and implement policies, land use designations, and
implementation programs which
provide a framework to:
 Accommodate 30% of the
region's new living-wage jobs
and 30% of the region's new
housing units by 2040.
 Focus 90% of the city's infill
growth into established and
center/corridor communities
with the goal of achieving 90%
small-lot single family and
attached homes by 2040.
 Prioritize construction of lower-
cost workforce and affordable
housing through modifications of
land-use designations and
zoning, offering ministerial/staff-
level review of infill housing and
continue to reduce fees and the
time and expense of planning
approval and building permit
processes.
 Include anti-displacement
policies and programs.

CA Housing and
Community Development
Infill Infrastructure Grant
Program
In-kind staff time Infill Infrastructure Grant Program could potentially provide funding for capital
improvement projects.
1 No/Low cost to City Assumes in-kind staff time to develop policies and changes to City Code and
that new development will be funded
by private businesses and private
sector housing producers.

Energy E-5.2 Enable development of 29,000 new
multi-unit dwellings that are public
transit accessible (i.e., within 0.5
mile of public transit) by 2040
through the continuation of the
City’s ministerial/staff-level review
of infill housing, reduced fees, and
identification of local funding
sources.

In-kind staff time Planning activities 1 Low cost to City Assumes in-kind staff time to develop policies and changes to City Code, and
that new development will be funded
by private sector housing producers.

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

8 Sector
Measure +
Action # Action(s) Required Potential Funding Sources Confirmed Funding Source What Funding Source Program Can Fund Cost to City
Operations
Estimated Cost
(Cost to City $ millions) References and Assumptions
Energy E-5.3 Enable the development of 8,700
new missing middle and affordable
by design housing types (such as
dormitories and smaller units) by
2040 within 0.25 mile of public
transit by updating the City Code to
allow and reduce barriers to these
housing types. Couple with anti-
displacement policies and programs.

CA Housing and Community
Development: SB2 Formula
Funds
Technical assistance to local
governments
1 Low cost to City Assumes in-kind staff time to develop policies and changes to City Code, and
that new affordable dwellings will be
funded by private sector housing
developers and individual landowners.

Energy E-5.4 Permit a greater array of housing
types in existing single-family
neighborhoods citywide by allowing
missing middle housing types such
as accessory dwelling units (ADUs),
duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes,
and bungalow courts in single-family
and duplex dwelling zones. Develop
tools, resources and educational
materials to promote and facilitate
the development of ADUs in
neighborhoods throughout the City.

CA Housing and Community
Development SB2 Formula
Funds
Technical assistance to local
governments
1 Low cost to City Assumes in-kind staff time to develop policies and changes to City Code and
that new affordable dwellings will be
funded by private sector housing
developers and individual landowners.

Transportation TR-1.1 Implement the 2016 Bicycle Master Plan by constructing a
comprehensive, connected network
of safe and accessible (low-stress)
bike paths, on- and off-street, within
and across neighborhoods totaling
40 miles of bike lanes, 48 miles of
bike routes, 40 miles of buffered
bike lane, 18 miles of separated
bikeway, and 127 miles of shared-
used paths.

New transportation
funding sources TBD; and
grants.
3 $510 Public Works Cost Estimate
New transportation funding sources
will be necessary for CAAP
implementation. City staff evaluating
options, and direction to be confirmed
with the City Manager
Transportation TR-1.2 Implement the improvements in the 2006 Pedestrian Master Plan by
providing a connected, safe and
accessible (low-stress) pedestrian
network, prioritized based on High
Injury Network (crash data), school
access, equity and community
needs. Low-stress pedestrian
network includes crossings,
sidewalks, and other paths.

Improvements made as
part of new development
projects

New transportation
funding sources TBD; and
grants.
3 $300 Public Works Cost Estimate

New transportation funding sources
will be necessary for CAAP
implementation. City staff evaluating
options, and direction to be confirmed
with the City Manager.

Transportation TR-1.3 Conduct a study to identify the
physical barriers to active
transportation by 2025 and remove
them by 2030 to support local
partners and community groups.

New transportation
funding sources TBD; and
grants.
2 $510 Public Works Cost Estimate to study
and remove barriers. Final costs will be
identified after study. New
transportation funding sources will be
necessary for CAAP implementation.

City staff evaluating options, and
direction to be confirmed with the City
Manager.

TOC
Measure Costs

Funding and Financing Strategy 9
Sector
Measure +
Action # Action(s) Required Potential Funding Sources Confirmed Funding Source What Funding Source Program Can Fund Cost to City
Operations
Estimated Cost
(Cost to City $ millions) References and Assumptions
Transportation TR-1.4 Conduct a study to identify
educational barriers and provide
education and outreach to the
community on active transportation
options in the City including a travel
training program and incentivize a
spectrum of transportation options
that includes public and private
shared and active services.

New transportation
funding sources TBD; and
grants.

1 $0.25 New transportation funding sources
will be necessary for CAAP
implementation. City staff evaluating
options, and direction to be confirmed
with the City Manager.

Transportation TR-1.5 Identify and secure ongoing funding for and then implement active
transportation programs (open
streets, pilot projects, classes, etc.)
quality and healthy opportunities for
parts of the community workforce
most impacted by climate change.

New transportation
funding sources TBD; and
grants.

1 $0.2 (recurring, per year)
Transportation TR-2.1 Update and implement the City’s
Transportation System Management
Plan (TSMP) ordinance to shift travel
behavior away from the single-
occupancy vehicle.

Public Works Funding Public Works Funding 2 $0.2
Transportation TR-2.2 Eliminate parking minimums
citywide, develop parking
maximums and require parking
management and transportation
demand management plans for all
areas of the City based on available
transportation options, travel
patterns, and land use.

In-kind city staff time

Parking Demand
Management Program
Mini-grants to fund pilot projects that
change travel behavior.
1 Assumes that in-kind city staff time will
support making changes to City Code.

Transportation TR-2.3 Encourage SacRT to provide
frequent, reliable transit in the City’s
priority corridors to reduce VMT and
support SacRT in implementing
priority transit corridors. Coordinate
transit priority corridors with
consideration of transportation
needs as well as land use planning to
provide transit-supportive land uses.

Encourage the expansion of
frequent, reliable transit services
throughout the City.

Sacramento
Transportation Authority
Transportation improvement projects.

Specific projects and programs to be
determined.
3 $1-$2 million per mile

Transportation TR-2.4 Collaborate with SacRT in planning and implementing increased transit
services with reduced headways and
expanded service lines to support an
11% public transit mode share by
2030.

New transportation
funding sources TBD and
grants
3 Approximately $1 Billion -
3$ Billion (City’s portion of
costs only to fund signal
prioritization, bus lanes, bus
bulbs, and light rail
enhancement in City ROW.)
New transportation funding sources
will be necessary for CAAP
implementation. City staff evaluating
options, and direction to be confirmed
with the City Manager.

Transportation TR-2.5 The City will work with SacRT to
identify changes to signals and other
technological enhancements for
transit prioritization and faster
transit travel times.

New transportation
funding sources TBD and
grants
1 New transportation funding sources
will be necessary for CAAP
implementation. City staff are
evaluating options, to be confirmed
with the City Manager for direction
from the City Council.

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

10 Sector
Measure +
Action # Action(s) Required Potential Funding Sources Confirmed Funding Source What Funding Source Program Can Fund Cost to City
Operations
Estimated Cost
(Cost to City $ millions) References and Assumptions
Transportation TR-2.6 Continue to support electric car
sharing options to offset at least 1
million VMT per year in the City
through 2030.

Regulatory fees for service
providers; see Action TR-
2-13
1 Transportation TR-2.7 Continue to support shared
rideables (bikes and scooters) to
enable a reduction of 1 million VMT
per year.

Regulatory fees for service
providers; see Action TR-
2-13
1 This assumes the ongoing service of
shared-mobility services in the City
through partnerships with private
mobility providers.

Transportation TR-2.8 Encourage SacRT to secure funding to support improved
service/communications such as
interactive service maps, app
payments, and real time arrival info.

In-kind staff time 1
Transportation TR-2.9 Continue to implement and improve curbside management strategy to
better manage and price curb space,
manage transportation network
companies (TNC) and prepare for
autonomous vehicles.

General Fund or fees on
service providers; see
action TR-2-13
1 Transportation TR-2.10 Work with SacRT to remove barriers to access transit stops and stations
(provide low-stress connectivity)
and provide enhanced, comfortable
stops and stations.

State Funding Transit Stop Improvement
Program
3 $50
Transportation TR-2.11 Implement the City’s adopted plans including modal/Citywide plans and
corridor/area plans (such as the
Bicycle Master Plan, Broadway
Complete Streets, and 65th Street
Area Plan).

Impact fees/VMT
mitigation bank fees and
other local funds
3 Covered in other measures
Human Resources TR-2.12 Identify an Employee Transportation Coordinator and establish an
employee commute program for
City staff that includes provisions for
telecommuting and encourage other
public and private agencies located
within the City to do the same using
requirements and/or incentives.

General Fund – In-kind
staff time
1 Transportation TR-2.13 Investigate and lobby for the
development of a TNC user tax
which would put a small fee on the
use of Uber, Lyft, and others and
generate funds to pay for transit and
transportation infrastructure and
related programs.

In-kind staff time 1
TOC
Measure Costs

Funding and Financing Strategy 11
Sector
Measure +
Action # Action(s) Required Potential Funding Sources Confirmed Funding Source What Funding Source Program Can Fund Cost to City
Operations
Estimated Cost
(Cost to City $ millions) References and Assumptions
Transportation TR-3.1 Amend City Building Code to require at least 20% EV-capable charging
spaces and at least one installed,
operational Level II EV charger in
new multifamily and nonresidential
development. Amend the Planning
and Development Code to
incentivize charging in both existing
and new developments.

In-kind staff time SMUD Commercial charging
incentives
Incentives for the purchase and
installation of EV charging infrastructure.

Incentives range from up to $6,500 per
connector for a Level 2 charger and up to
$80,000 per DC Fast Charger
1 SMUD’s Commercial EV Charging
Incentvies: https://www.smud.org/en/
Going-Green/Electric-
Vehicles/Business
SMAQMD, Carl Moyer
Program and Community
Air Quality Incentive
Program

Funding for hydrogen fueling and electric
charging stations; may be combined with
SMUD funding.

Transportation TR-3.2 Continue to support a variety of
public and public/private
partnerships to provide more
publicly accessible chargers
throughout the City. Examples
include public/private partnerships
on private property (Electrify
America), public/private
partnerships on public property
(EVgo), and public investment
(SMUD).

SMUD/Cal eVIP Electric Vehicle
Supply Equipment Rebates
Installation of chargers at workplaces. 2 $4.4 Based on recent construction and installation costs for installation in
existing parking lots, to complete the
remaining ~200 connectors to achieve
the EV Strategy goal for City facilities
of 300 ports
Transportation TR-3.3 Continue to install and provide EV charger access at City-owned
facilities and parking garages.

SMUD/Cal eVIP Electric Vehicle
Supply Equipment Rebates
1 The City already provides multiple EV
charging stations at City-owned
facilities and parking garages.

Transportation TR-3.4 Pursue affordable, zero-emission car share expansions to serve affordable
housing, such as the Sacramento
Metropolitan Air District’s Our
Community Carshare program to
more locations, contingent on
funding.

In-kind staff support 1
Transportation TR-3-5 Collaborate on e-mobility hub pilot efforts, in partnership with other
agencies and local groups, with
special consideration for proximity
to low-income/disadvantaged
communities and multifamily
housing.

In-kind staff support;
regional funding - See
Action TR-2-13.
1 Transportation TR-3.6 Continue to maintain a highly
streamlined EV infrastructure permit
process.

In-kind staff support;
potential support from
regulatory fees - See
Action TR-2.13.
1 Transportation TR-3.7 Develop and implement a fee for use of City-owned parking facilities
and EV chargers to promote more
efficient use and turnover and
increase EV availability for people
who really need it, including those
without access to home charging.

User Fees 1
City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

12 Sector
Measure +
Action # Action(s) Required Potential Funding Sources Confirmed Funding Source What Funding Source Program Can Fund Cost to City
Operations
Estimated Cost
(Cost to City $ millions) References and Assumptions
Transportation TR-3.8 Continue to implement and improve curbside management strategy to
better manage and price curb space,
manage TNC, and prepare for
autonomous vehicles.

General Fund – In-kind
staff support to establish;
program could be self-
supporting from user fees.
1 Transportation TR-3.9 Work and collaborate with major employers including the State of
California and Sacramento County to
promote ZEV adoption, programs,
and improvements to ZEV
infrastructure.

Regulatory fees - See
Action TR-2.13
1 Transportation TR-3.10 Continue to provide information and education about currently available
incentives for expansion of Level II
chargers on private property.

In-kind staff support 1 Partnership will be needed to continue to significantly expand EVSE in places
like downtown, where existing parking
garages are maxed out for electrical
capacity. To be tackled in partnership
with state and SMUD, with existing
City staff time, and state
grants/rebates.

Transportation TR-3.11 Coordinate with community-based
organizations, agencies, and non-
profits to conduct EV education
events with would include
information on costs/benefits of
owning EVs, steps on how to receive
incentives for EV chargers, as well as
other benefits. Events will be
equitably distributed across the City,
focusing on disadvantaged
communities.

In-kind staff support 1
Transportation TR-3.12 Because zero-emission technology is improving/changing at a rapid pace,
continue to monitor, test, and adapt
to new and emerging zero-emission
technologies and solutions.

In-kind staff support 1
Waste W-1.1 Implement the requirements of SB
1383 to compost or otherwise divert
75% of organic waste compared to
2014 levels by:
 Providing organic waste
collection to all residents and
businesses.
 Establishing an edible food
recovery program that recovers
edible food from the waste
stream and redistributes the
food to local community
organizations to be used or
eaten.
 Conducting outreach and
education to affected parties,
including generators, haulers,
facilities, edible food recovery

Recycling and Solid Waste User
fees and City Franchise Fees
and charges
2 $3-5 Per Month (Residential)
$70-$90 Per Month
(Commercial)
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/Docs/
Web/115980
TOC
Measure Costs

Funding and Financing Strategy 13
Sector
Measure +
Action # Action(s) Required Potential Funding Sources Confirmed Funding Source What Funding Source Program Can Fund Cost to City
Operations
Estimated Cost
(Cost to City $ millions) References and Assumptions
organizations, and city/county
NC waste products like compost,
mulch, and RNG.
 Inspecting and enforce
compliance with SB 1383.

Waste W-1.2 Work with regional partners (other
municipalities) and the private
sector to assess the feasibility of
siting long-term organics processing
facilities in or near Sacramento
County.

User Fees - Solid waste
program fees
Recycling and Solid Waste User
Fees and City Commercial
Franchise Fees and Charges
2 Waste W-1.3 Continue to provide backyard
compost education and reduced-
cost compost bins, as well as
kitchen-top food waste containers
to participating residents.

Recycling and Solid Waste User
Fees
2 See W-1-1
Waste W-1.4 Implement a food waste diversion
program for single-family residential
customers by 2022.

Recycling and Solid Waste User
Fees
2 See W-1-1
Waste W-1.5 Enforce new commercial waste code
which requires businesses to
subscribe to organics recycling
collection service through the City’s
franchised commercial haulers
starting July 1, 2021.

City Commercial Franchise Fees
and Charges
2 See W-1-1
Waste W-1.6 Serve as a regional partner in the
development and implementation of
an edible food recovery program
that connects commercial edible
food generators with local food
banks, to recover at least 20% of the
edible food that is currently
disposed of for human consumption,
consistent with SB 1383.

CalRecycle
Food Waste Prevention
and Rescue Grant
Program
Food Waste Prevention and
Rescue Grant Program and City
Commercial Franchise Fees and
Charges
Supports new or expanding existing food
waste prevention projects (source
reduction or food rescue for people) in
California to reduce the amount of food
being disposed in landfills.
2 See W-1-1
Waste W-1.7 Explore the feasibility of capital
improvement projects for reducing
organics in the waste stream, such
as organics extraction presses and
anaerobic digesters.

CalRecycle Grant
Programs, Public-Private
Partnership
Recycling and Solid Waste User
Fees
Development of new capital
improvement projects to support
organic waste diversion will be
pursued as needed, primarily through
the City’s contract services for the
provision of organic waste diversion.

Waste W-1.8 Consider adopting, if needed, an
ordinance that aligns with AB 827,
the state law that requires most
restaurants to have front-of-house
composting.

Recycling and Solid Waste
Fees and Charges, Grants
City Commercial Franchise Fees
and charges
2 City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

14 Sector
Measure +
Action # Action(s) Required Potential Funding Sources Confirmed Funding Source What Funding Source Program Can Fund Cost to City
Operations
Estimated Cost
(Cost to City $ millions) References and Assumptions
Carbon Sequestration CS-1.1 Implement the Sacramento Urban Forest Plan with a goal to achieve
25% urban canopy cover by 2030
and 35% by 2045. Prioritize tree
planting in areas with the lowest
average tree canopy cover and
explore strategies to reduce barriers
to tree planting in disadvantaged
areas and improve tree health.

CalFire’s Urban and
Community Forestry
Grant Programs

Urban forest expansion and
improvement; urban forest management
activities; all must include tree planting
component.
2 $6-$10 million additional
annual cost for annual
maintenance of city-
managed trees.

There is not nearly enough space to
achieve 35% tree canopy coverage on
City-owned/controlled land alone. Tree
planting on private property will need
to double. New funding sources for
urban forest expansion and
management are TBD, including but
not limited to grants funding. City staff
are evaluating options, and direction is
to be confirmed with the City Manager
City Statewide Park
Development and
Community Revitalization
Program

Urban Greening Grant

Sacramento Tree
Foundation; in-kind tree
donations

New funding streams – to
be determined
City Department of Youth,
Parks, & Community
Enrichment
Create, expand, or improve parks in
under-served communities as part of a
capital improvement project; Participate
in tree planting projects at park sites with
community partners and consider tree
acquisition, planting, and irrigation
(including hand-watering).

New funding sources are needed to
support ongoing maintenance and
irrigation of trees, overcome barriers to
planting in low-income areas and support
expanded tree canopy on private
property

Continue to enforce zoning standards for
shading in private parking lots to protect
trees in existing parking lots
Carbon Sequestration CS-1.2 Utilize compost and mulch for application to City-owned trees and
planters to increase the carbon
sequestration potential of tree
plantings.

CalRecycle 1 See Measure W-1.1 for SB1383
requirements
Carbon Sequestration CS-1.3 Develop online educational
materials about tree species that are
adapted to Sacramento’s climate
and resilient to drought and climate
change.

City CalFire’s Urban and
Community Forestry
Grant Programs
Urban forest expansion and
improvement; urban forest management
activities; all must include tree planting
component.
1 Carbon Sequestration CS-1.4 Continue to support the
SMUD/Sacramento Tree Foundation
program, which provides free shade
trees for residents and businesses
and support increased plantings on
private property in areas that are
under-canopied through new
partnerships and programs.

SMUD

CalFire Urban and
Community Forestry
Grant Programs
Urban forest expansion and
improvement; urban forest management
activities; all must include tree planting
component.
1 –
Water and Wastewater WW-1.1 Reduce GHG emissions associated with the water utility by procuring
100% carbon-free electricity by
2030.
1 Assumes that electricity from SMUD
will be carbon-free (2030 Zero Carbon
Plan)
Water and Wastewater WW-1.2 Investigate the feasibility of allowing on-site non potable treatment and
distributed water resources in new
development.

In-kind staff time and
consultant services
1 On-site non-potable water reuse study
has been funded, Standards for on-site
non-potable treatment will be
incorporated into City Code if feasible.

Water and Wastewater WW-1.3 Continue to implement the Model Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance each year.

In-kind staff time 1
TOC
Measure Costs

Funding and Financing Strategy 15
Sector
Measure +
Action # Action(s) Required Potential Funding Sources Confirmed Funding Source What Funding Source Program Can Fund Cost to City
Operations
Estimated Cost
(Cost to City $ millions) References and Assumptions
Water and Wastewater WW-1.4 Continue to require the use of low impact development (LID) strategies
for new construction and
development.

Utilities operating budget 1 Assumes that this action is a continuation of the City’s regulatory
role that will implemented by existing
staff. Installation of LID in new
construction and redevelopment will
be paid for by developers. New LID
infrastructure does, however, increase
maintenance costs for the City.

Water and Wastewater WW-1.5 Continue to investigate the landscaping/irrigation use of non-
potable reclaimed water from
regional sanitation at parks.

A source of funding would
be needed to conduct a
pilot
In-kind staff time. 1 Assumes that service provider is Regional Sanitation District if
implemented.

Water and Wastewater WW-1.6 Increase the use of renewable energy and storage to reduce GHG
emissions and increase resiliency for
critical infrastructure.

California Public Utilities
Commission’s Self-
Generation Incentive
Program (SGIP)
SGIP provides incentives for new and
emerging distributed energy resources.
2 $1-5M https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-
and-topics/electrical-energy/demand-
side-management/self-generation-
incentive-program
Water and Wastewater WW-1.7 Continue to encourage efficient water use by residents and
businesses through expanded
education, incentives and assistance
services in compliance with
Assembly Bill 1668 and Senate Bill
606, which help reduce the City’s
water demand and related energy
use.

Additional funding will be
required for expansion.

Utilities operating budget City Water Conservation Office 1 www.sacwaterwise.com Confirmed funding is for ongoing
education. Newer state regulations on
water conservation are under
development and will require
additional funding sources.

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

16 This page intentionally left blank.

TOC
Funding and Financing Strategy

Funding and Financing Strategy 17
3 Funding and Financing Strategy
Full implementation of the CAAP will require significant investments on the part of the City of Sacramento, other governmental agencies, local households and businesses, and property owners.

This Appendix outlines the estimated capital costs for actions to be taken by the City of Sacramento itself, which are approximately $3.2 billion. Other costs associated with key CAAP actions will be covered by SMUD, Sacramento Regional Transit (Sacramento RT), and private businesses and households.

The CAAP is an ambitious project and will require substantial commitment of City staff time to implement. City staff have reviewed the CAAP measures listed in Table 1 and estimated new ongoing City staff requirements for implementation. City staff estimate the need for approximately six new full-time staff. Considering salary, benefits, City overhead, etc., the approximate annual costs to the City would be around $960,000, or about $19.2 million over 20 years. This does not include additional staff who would be required to implement a building electrification monitoring and enforcement program (see Energy Measure E-2-1). This is because user fees, such as building permit fees charged to program participants, would be designed to recover costs, so these additional staff would not have a net impact on the City’s budget. 4 This would be in addition to
existing City staff positions that are already funded to support CAAP implementation in the normal course of operations.

In addition, the above estimates do not include capital costs for Sacramento Regional Transit to improve transit services, nor do they include maintenance costs for new public infrastructure, or costs to businesses and households to make changes to buildings and vehicles that are envisioned in the CAAP. Some expenditures will not represent net cost increases but instead will involve substituting investments that would otherwise have been made on less climate-friendly options into climate-friendly equipment, materials, and technologies for expenditures. Furthermore, the City and local partners such as SMUD can help households and businesses make these transitions by promoting available low-cost financing programs or providing incentives.

In some cases, expenditures may represent net cost increases compared to a “status quo” approach to climate change. As such, these costs represent an accounting for the costs to address the negative externalities5 associated with current practices that are now recognized as not sustainable.

Below are general descriptions of principles that will guide the City’s approach to funding the CAAP measures that require an outlay of City funds and descriptions of key funding sources that the City may use. A more detailed matching of specific CAAP actions with potential funding sources and tools is included in Table 1 with columns identifying potential funding sources, programs, and what items can be funded.

3.1 Priority City-Led CAAP Measures
As previously mentioned, this Appendix provides an estimate of high-cost CAAP measures and actions but does not provide cost estimates for low- and moderate-cost actions. Given the

4 Based on City staff estimate of $160,000 per year average cost, including salary and benefits, per full -time equivalent employee. 5 “A negative externality is a cost that is suffered by a third party as a result of an economic transaction. In a transaction, t he producer and consumer are the first and second parties, and third parties include any individual, organization, property owner, or resource that is indirectly affected.” Accessed 6/13/19 at: https://www.economicsonline.co.uk/Market_failures/Externalities.html City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

18 magnitude of the costs, the City will likely struggle to identify all the necessary funding for timely implementation of the CAAP. Recognizing this, it will be important for the City to direct its available financial resources to low- and moderate-cost CAAP actions and those high-cost CAAP actions that are most critical to achieving community goals and most effective in contributing to GHG reductions. As shown in Table 2 below, City staff have reviewed the list of high-cost CAAP measures that require direct City investment and identified those that are most critical to achieving the overall community and CAAP goals (Priority City-Led CAAP Measures), not including ongoing annual staffing costs. It is important to remember that this is a short-term priority list of only high-cost measures, many other moderate- and low-cost measures will also be implemented in the short term.

Table 2 Estimated Costs for Short-Term Priority City-Led CAAP Measures Measure/
Action # - Year Description Estimated Cost
TR-1.1 2045 Implement 2016 Bicycle Master Plan $510,000,000 TR-2.1 2025 Update and Implement Transportation System Management Plan $200,000 TR-3.2 Ongoing EV chargers at City-owned buildings $4,400,000 CS-1.1 Ongoing Implement Sacramento Urban Forest Plan
6 $130,000,000
TOTAL COSTS, PRIORITY CITY-LED CAAP MEASURES $644,600,000 The short-term priority City-led CAAP measures represent a more manageable 19 percent of the total estimated CAAP Measures but still total to approximately $645 million, not including required staff time (see Table 3). This listing of Priority City-led CAAP Measures provides important direction for prioritization of available City funding to invest in CAAP implementation. Other projects that do not involve direct City funding for capital costs, primarily investments in improving the public transit system, will also need to move forward, along with these Priority City-led CAAP Measures over the next 20 years.

In many cases, the expenditures will not only help to reduce GHG emissions but will bring other valuable co-benefits, such as cleaner air, water conservation, savings on energy and utility costs, more robust and flexible transportation systems, improved public health, greater resiliency to climate change, and enhanced local quality of life.

Some investments will not represent net cost increases, but instead will involve substituting expenditures on climate-friendly equipment, materials, and technologies for expenditures that would otherwise have been made on less climate-friendly options. For example, when a building owner, such as the City, a household, or a business, makes investments in building electrification, the initial expenditure on the improvements may be offset by long-term savings from reduced energy usage. Replacing a less-efficient central air conditioning and gas furnace system that it is at the end of its useful life with a new energy-efficient electric heat pump, should produce long-term savings in energy costs compared to replacing the system with conventional but less efficient equipment. Furthermore, the City and local partners, such as SMUD, can help households and businesses make these transitions by promoting available low-cost financing programs or providing incentives.

Some CAAP expenditures may represent net cost increases compared to a “status quo” approach to climate change. As such, these costs represent an accounting for the costs to address the negative

6 This assumes City costs growing to an additional $6.5 million annually over 20 years to maintain and irrigate beyond current levels of $6.5 million per year. It does not include the costs for trees on private property.

TOC
Funding and Financing Strategy

Funding and Financing Strategy 19
externalities
7 associated with current practices that are now recognized as not sustainable.

Following below are general descriptions of principles that will guide the City’s approach to funding the CAAP measures that require outlay of City funds and descriptions of key funding sources that the City may use. A more detailed matching of specific CAAP Measures with potential funding sources and tools is included in Table 1, with columns identifying the CAAP Measures, potential funding sources, estimated costs to the City, and estimated requirements for new City staff.

3.2 Funding Principles
The CAAP is targeted for implementation over the next 20 years. Funding sources for some actions can be identified at the outset, while the best means to fund other actions will be determined at the time the City is ready to implement them, depending on the resources available at the time. Several principles will help the City to determine the best approach to funding various actions, as follows.

Equity
The costs of implementing the CAAP should be spread as equitably as possible, taking care to limit the imposition of new costs on the segments of the community that have the least ability to shoulder increased costs. Where certain segments of the community will benefit disproportionately from an action, the costs should be spread accordingly. Where funding options involve establishing new local taxes, the discussion of funding options in Section 4 identifies those that are more or less equitable.

Leveraging City Resources
Leveraging will involve using outside sources of funding to augment City resources to fund implementation of the CAAP. General Fund resources are extremely limited, so the City will leverage in-kind staff time and local matching funds that can be provided by impact fee programs to aggressively seek grants (e.g., state and federal transportation infrastructure grants), in-kind contributions from partners such as SMUD, and other resources from state, federal, and philanthropic sources (e.g., Sacramento Tree Foundation) to help pay for actions and limit the cost to the City, local residents, and businesses. The CAAP also includes actions through which City staff will monitor and publicize grants and incentives that will help households and businesses make the necessary climate-friendly investments.

Long-Term Cost Savings
While some actions may require initial capital outlays, whenever possible these actions should generate long-term cost savings that will repay and even generate a return on investment (ROI). For example, Measure E-2-5 promotes private investments in energy efficiency that will yield property owners long-term savings on energy costs and offset initial capital costs.

7 “A negative externality is a cost that is suffered by a third party as a result of an economic transaction. In a transaction, the producer and consumer are the first and second parties, and third parties include any individual, organization, property owner, or resource that is indirectly affected.” Accessed 6/13/19 at: https://www.economicsonline.co.uk/Market_failures/Externalities.html City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

20 3.3 Prioritization Strategy for Available City Funds The City of Sacramento can consider two primary strategies for the prioritization of funds available to implement the CAAP. The first strategy is to focus available funds on those CAAP actions that will have the greatest impact on GHG reductions. The second strategy is to strategically utilize funds that the City of Sacramento controls to leverage other sources of funding that may be available from other sources.

Prioritization of Funds Towards Actions with the Greatest GHG Impacts Whenever possible, the City should try to direct funds that become available for CAAP implementation towards low- and moderate-cost measures and actions and the Priority CAAP Actions listed in Table 2.

Prioritization of Funds to Leverage Outside Sources
The City should also be alert to opportunities to include priority CAAP projects in any new funding programs that may be developed, such as a regional VMT-mitigation bank (provided the City can eventually obtain regional support), or newly authorized local funding programs such as congestion management fees, curbside management fees, and/or sources that would be overseen at a statewide level, such as proceeds from a surcharge on property hazard insurance.

3.4 Conceptual Funding Approach for Priority City-Led
CAAP Implementation Actions
With an overall City cost likely in excess of $3.2 billion for implementation of all City-led CAAP measures, it is clear that full implementation will require that the City of Sacramento consider funding from a wide range of potential sources. This is made more challenging by the fact that the City of Sacramento’s tax base is constrained because of the substantial amount of property in the city that is owned by the State of California, which does not pay property taxes and certain other taxes and fees that private property owners, households, and businesses pay.

New funding sources will be needed to implement the CAAP. Below is a high-level overview of potential new funding sources. City staff are evaluating options that will be confirmed with the City Manager for direction from the City Council.

Development Impact Fees – Consistent with the priority of using local funds to leverage outside funding sources, the City may be able to modify its TDIF (Transportation Development Impact Fee) program to include Priority City-Led CAAP Measures in the list of eligible TDIF expenditures.

Grant Funding – City staff estimate that based on historic grant funding, it may be feasible to obtain approximately $5 million per year in transportation infrastructure grant funding that could be used to help implement Priority City-Led CAAP Measures, or approximately $100 million over the next 20 years. State and federal transportation infrastructure grant programs typically require between 11.5 percent and 50 percent of project costs come from local matching funds, and this match is currently unfunded.

Motor Vehicle Registration Surcharge – State law allows a countywide transportation planning agency to place a ballot measure before the voters of the county to authorize an annual fee increase of up to $10 on each motor vehicle registered in that county, to fund transportation related TOC
Funding and Financing Strategy

Funding and Financing Strategy 21
projects. Through a potential Sacramento County motor vehicle registration fee, motor vehicle owners could contribute to helping the City reach its GHG reduction targets.

Tax on Transportation Network Company Trips – A new tax on TNCs such as Uber and Lyft trips would require local voter approval. If the City was successful in obtaining voter approval, this new funding source could generate revenues for multiple years.

Local Parcel Tax – Combined, the above sources could potentially fund about $266 million in costs through 2040. This would leave about $368 million that would need to be covered from other sources. In addition, the City would also need to consider the cost of debt service payments. This amount translates to the need for about $20 million in annual debt service payments. Roughly translated, this would equate to an annual cost of about $63 per household and a cost to non- residential properties of about $12 per employee per year. As a new parcel tax would be needed to repay the green bond, this strategy to fill the funding gap would require voter approval.

A voter-approved parcel tax is another method to raise funding for implementation of the CAAP and could be used for a bonding or grant match.

3.5 Summary
The magnitude of costs in Table 2 illustrates that the City of Sacramento will need to seriously consider establishment of new funding sources to enable implementation of the CAAP. While the City may not be able to afford the full benefits of a plan that requires nearly $3.2 billion, a minimum level of commitment of an estimated $664 million (which includes $19 million in ongoing staff time) to fund the Primary CAAP Measures, has potential to be funded. If $100 million in grant funding can be obtained, the funding gap is about $564 million. Success in funding this gap will likely require considerable political leadership and broad-based public support for the City’s CAAP goals. This would require a collective willingness of the Sacramento community to tax itself in various new forms in order to generate the funds necessary to cover even the priority City-led projects and staff support for CAAP implementation.

Table 3 Funding Gap for Priority City-Led CAAP Measures

Cost of Priority City-Led CAAP Measures $644,600,000
Cost of Ongoing Staffing to Support CAAP Implementation (a) $19,200,000 Total Cost for priority City-Led CAAP Measures $663,800,000 Likely grant funding over 20 years $100,000,000
Funding Gap* $563,800,000
*Table does not include the cost of debt service
The City of Austin’s Project Connect Measure A provides a case study to help put the CAAP funding challenge facing the City of Sacramento into perspective and suggests that it could be achievable. In 2020, voters in the city of Austin, Texas approved property tax increases that will fund a $7 billion transit system and $460 million in new bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. This success came after two previous failed attempts at similar transportation funding initiatives. Like Sacramento, Austin is another state capitol city; however, it is approximately twice the population of Sacramento. Although aspirational, local funding needed to support Sacramento’s CAAP does not appear disproportionately high in comparison to Austin’s funding measure.

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

22 The Austin measure expected federal transportation grants to cover 45 percent of the transit capital costs and the approved property tax increase would provide the remaining capital costs, as well as necessary funding for operations and maintenance of the transit system once built. Voters approved the property tax increase, which the City of Austin estimated would cost the owner of a home valued at $325,000 approximately $284 per year in additional taxes. The City of Austin indicated that the median taxable home value in Austin was $326,368. 8 An analysis of Sacramento’s needs
and funding potential will be conducted.

3.6 Other Actions Critical to CAAP Success
In addition to the priority City-led CAAP measures, the expansion of the RT transit system is a critical component of the CAAP. The City of Sacramento will need to work closely with RT to lobby and secure the necessary funding to increase transit service and reduce headways in the city. The total funding that RT would need to make the service and system expansions necessary to achieve an 11 percent mode share is not known, because RT has not yet designed the system expansions nor estimated the costs. City staff, however, have estimated that the City’s related costs would be between $1 billion and $3 billion.

8 https://austintexas.gov/2020PropA#:~:text=The%20City%20of%20Austin%20is,fund%20implementation%20of%20Project%20Connect.

TOC
Types of Funding Sources

Funding and Financing Strategy 23
4 Types of Funding Sources
The CAAP will rely on a variety of funding sources for implementation. Following are general descriptions of some key funding sources identified that can be used to pay for climate-friendly actions.

4.1 Grants
From time to time, the City is able to secure funds for specific projects through grant programs provided by state and federal agencies. This includes various grant programs funded through the State of California’s Cap and Trade program, which generates money for the State’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, some of which is granted to local governments. Moving forward, state and federal grants may be a useful source of funding to pay for the portion of mitigation programs or actions that is attributable to the City’s existing residential and non-residential development, which cannot be funded through impact fees collected on new development. State and federal grants can also be used to fund climate-friendly actions and programs that have broad community benefits, or to help defray costs that might otherwise have been too burdensome for lower-income households or small businesses. From time to time, utility companies also provide grants in their service areas through various programs designed to incentivize energy conservation.

Grants are beneficial, because they represent an opportunity to reduce the cost burden for implementation programs and projects on the City itself and the burden on local residents and businesses. Grants are one funding source that the City can use to pay existing development’s share of project costs when the costs must be split between new development and existing development.

The primary disadvantages of grants are that funds availability is not certain due to competition for limited funds, timing of funds availability may not match with necessary implementation timelines, and grants are not always available for the types of projects that need funding. Typically, grants require local matching funds for which the City would need to identify new or redirected sources of funds. In addition, preparation of grant applications and grant administration is very time- consuming and costly, so funding will need to be reserved for staff or consultants to prepare such grant applications.

4.2 City General Fund Monies
The City’s General Fund receives the revenues over which the City Council exercises discretionary funding authority. The General Fund receives major funding sources including sales tax revenues, property tax revenues, property tax in-lieu of vehicle license fees, and many other smaller revenue streams. The City Council spends these monies on public services that broadly benefit the community at large. While balancing all of its budgetary needs, the City Council may elect to spend some General Fund money on CAAP implementation. It is most important that the City utilize General Fund money to support staffing required to implement and administer the CAAP, including preparing and submitting grant applications for CAAP projects and working to foster partnerships that will support CAAP implementation. This would include working with key outside agencies and organizations such as Sacramento RT, SMUD, and SACOG that will support the City’s efforts by providing grant funding and in-kind support for City of Sacramento actions and undertaking other actions that support the City’s CAAP. Given the many competing demands for General Fund monies, City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

24 it should not be anticipated that the General Fund will be a major source of capital funding for CAAP projects.

The CAAP contains numerous actions that are likely to be implemented through in-kind City staff efforts. However, it is not likely that existing City staff will have adequate capacity to take on all the responsibilities of CAAP implementation that are identified in as “Staff In-Kind”. To leverage the available staff resources, the City often partners with other agencies and/or contracts out certain services, such as using consultants for specialized studies, when that is more cost-effective. One such opportunity the City is already using is partnership through the CivicSpark Program, operated by the Local Government Commission, to host CivicSpark Fellows who work under the direction of the City’s sustainability staff to help with CAAP implementation activities. Civic Spark Fellows are provided through an Americorps program that places fellows with local governments and other entities that are engaged in sustainability projects. The cost of the Fellows is comparatively affordable. The City’s fiscal contribution could leverage the Civic Spark program to aid and support with climate programs and help build staff capacity.

A benefit of using General Fund monies to fund climate-friendly actions is that the City Council already has control and the authority to allocate General Fund monies to implement climate- friendly actions, meaning implementation of items to be funded with General Fund dollars does not have to wait for funding decisions from other governmental or private entities. However, it must also be recognized that the General Fund supports many other critical public services, such as law enforcement and fire protection, as well as parks and roadway maintenance. The City likely has little ability to allocate General Fund monies to new programs without impacting existing programs.

4.3 Restricted Funds
Restricted funds are monies that the City receives but which can only be used for specified purposes. This is often the case with funds that are passed through to the City from other governmental entities, such as state or federal agencies. Relevant examples of such restricted funds are money allocated to the City projects from Sacramento County Measure A (sales tax measure for transportation projects), Transportation Development Act (TDA) pedestrian and bicycle facilities funds, and development impact fees.

A benefit of restricted funds is that they could help pay for projects that otherwise might require General Fund support. The challenge with using these funds is that they are typically fully allocated and directing funds towards CAAP projects will require prioritizing CAAP projects over other potentially worthy uses of the funds. In the case of development impact fees, it may be possible to add certain new projects to the capital projects list that forms the basis for the fee program and then adjust the impact fee schedule to capture the additional costs.

A limitation of impact fees is that they are only paid by new development and thus can only be used to pay for new development’s “fair share” of project costs. Another limitation is the legal requirement for a “rational nexus” between the fee and the needs created by new development and the benefits incurred by new development. Development impact fees can only be used to support the needs created by the new development. Thus, they are spent only in the areas where new development is occurring and cannot provide source of funding for infrastructure or projects to support existing developed areas.

The City is sensitive to the need to not overly burden new development with costs that may create feasibility challenges for desirable projects.

TOC
Types of Funding Sources

Funding and Financing Strategy 25
City staff indicate that the City of Sacramento has among the lowest impact fee rates in the region.

While comparatively low impact fee rates may indicate that there may be some room to increase fees to help pay for some CAAP project costs, impact fees typically can only fund a small share of the cost of capital projects that support the need created by new development in the city.

4.4 Fees for Service/User Fees
The City operates some services on a cost recovery basis. The City collects funds in the form of user fees to provide specific services to various user groups, and the fees charged are designed to offset the cost of the services provided. An example of user fees that support services provided to a specific segment of the community includes building permit fees, which are charged to cover the cost of reviewing plans and conducting inspections to verify that buildings are constructed properly.

To the extent that these types of services incorporate climate-friendly actions, the costs of these actions can be recovered through user fees. User fees and ratepayer charges can also be applicable to utilities such as SMUD, water and sewer system operators, and the City’s solid waste program.

For example, the City’s costs for overseeing the implementation of CAAP Measure E-3-2 (Building Electrification) might be re-couped through building permit and/or inspection fees charged to contractors or property owners. In addition, the City currently collects regulatory fees from car share companies and from companies providing “shared rideables” (e.g., bike share, scooter share).

According to City staff, these fees cover only a small part of the overall costs of overseeing these programs. There may be an opportunity for the City to build more costs of supporting these private businesses that rely on city roadways (see CAAP Measures TR-3.8 and TR-2-13) by establishing a TNC (such as Uber and Lyft) trip tax. Another opportunity to fund CAAP improvements would be to charge users of EV chargers installed at City-owned facilities a fee (see Measure TR-3-2).

These types of fees/surcharges may represent an opportunity for the City to help fund staff time needed for work on CAAP implementation, and City staff indicate that Sacramento is typically understaffed relative to other cities. At the same time, the City will also be mindful that implementation projects and actions that are funded via fees for service, user fees, or ratepayer charges are similar to actions that are funded directly via household or business income and a disadvantage is that they could disproportionately burden lower income households or small and disadvantaged businesses that have more limited resources. The City will want to be particularly careful where users of affected services have limited ability to change their behavior to limit their exposure to increased costs. For example, some utility incentive programs can be structured to provide relatively low rates for “baseline” consumption but to charge higher rates for consumption above baseline levels that would be considered discretionary, as an incentive to minimize consumption.

4.5 Financing Tools
Financing tools are not funding sources per se; however, while many climate-friendly actions may generate long-term cost savings, they may also require significant up-front expenditures that could be a challenge for the City, households, or businesses to finance. There are various financing tools that can be used to essentially borrow the funds needed “up front” for CAAP implementation and paid back over time using one or more funding sources that will generate money over time.

Examples of such tools that could be used by homeowners or businesses include:
 Home mortgages and equity lines
City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

26  Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) programs, which the City has already established  On-bill financing and similar programs sponsored by utilities, which are not currently offered by SMUD or PG&E, but could be considered
 Private financing innovations, such as the Metered Energy Efficiency Transaction Structure (MEETS)
9 pioneered in Seattle
The City may be able to use a range of tools to help finance investments in public buildings and infrastructure. Various federal and state programs provide financing to public agencies for capital investments when funds are not provided as grants.

A financing option that the City currently uses is “interfund borrowing” whereby the City self- finances certain improvements by using money from idle fund balances, and then repaying those funds over time with other revenue streams. The City’s current program is called the Energy Efficiency Reinvestment Program. According to City staff, the program is relatively modest and is providing about $62,000 per year in repayments that will be diminishing over time. This program is suitable for smaller municipal capital projects.

Other financing tools available to the City of Sacramento include Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts (CFD) and Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFD), which are both discussed briefly in the section below regarding potential new funding sources and tools. In particular, the City should consider using financing mechanisms to pay for up-front costs of large capital projects that will yield long-term annual budget savings that can offset the annual debt service from the financings.

The City could consider the possibility of undertaking a “green bond” issuance using its authority to take on municipal debt in various forms to finance a package of capital investments included in the CAAP. Any green bond would need to be considered in the context of the City’s available remaining bonding capacity, considering other City Council priorities and commitments. If bonding capacity is available, green bonds could be an option to provide the City with revenue to fund investments to be repaid using annual budget expenditures that otherwise would have been spent in the absence of the cost savings created by the investments. In this way, the City can benefit from long-term cost savings from investments in CAAP projects. For example, if the City issued a green bond to finance the development of solar power generation facilities on City property, this would reduce the City’s energy costs and the savings on energy costs could be used to repay the bonds. Other types of cost- saving projects could include electrification of City buildings and/or energy conservation improvements in City buildings and infrastructure operations (e.g., water and sewer).

As described above, various financing tools can be beneficial, because they can help make large expenditures achievable by providing funds up front and then allowing the cost to be repaid over an extended period of time. The disadvantage of most financing programs is that the cost of financing (e.g., interest charged on the outstanding balance while the financing is being repaid), adds to overall project costs. It will be preferable for the City to fund its CAAP implementation activities on a pay-as-you-go basis whenever practical, reserving financing techniques for those situations where funds are needed up front, but not available without using financing tools, or where long-term annual operational cost savings are sufficient to offset the necessary debt service payments.

9 See: http://www.meetscoalition.org/
TOC
Types of Funding Sources

Funding and Financing Strategy 27

4.6 Potential New Funding Sources and Tools
Even if the City of Sacramento is able to maximize the use of all existing funding sources, full implementation of the CAAP will require establishing new funding sources, particularly for the long- term buildout of large public works projects that have price tags in the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars featured in the transportation sector of CAAP measures. A characteristic that is common to many of these projects is that they are public infrastructure projects, and it will be difficult and/or politically infeasible to charge user fees to the general public for access/use of these facilities. Given their broad public use, and the fact that in most cases it will not be desirable to create a financial disincentive for the public to use these facilities, it may be most appropriate to fund them using revenues from sources that are more broadly based.

Funding Measures Requiring Local or Regional Actions
There are some funding options available to the City of Sacramento that can be enacted under the authority of the City Council.

Development Impact Fee Updates/VMT Mitigation Bank
The City can review the capital improvement lists for its development impact fee program to consider if new CAAP implementation projects have a rational nexus for inclusion. CAAP projects in the Transportation Sector that involve public transportation infrastructure improvements such as new pedestrian, bicycle, and transit capital projects, are the most likely candidates to be included in development impact fee updates.

It should be noted that, according to City staff, the City’s existing transportation impact fees are currently set about 10 percent of the maximum justifiable amount out of concern for the financial feasibility of new development projects. Updating the City’s transportation impact fees to collect the maximum justifiable amount for CAAP projects would require a major City policy shift and could also have a significant impact on the economic feasibility of development projects. Modifications to the impact fee schedule would need to be considered in relation to other City goals as well, such as mitigating impediments to housing development.

A funding opportunity that is related to development impact fees is a VMT mitigation bank.

Currently, regional support for a VMT mitigation bank does not exist. If support can be obtained in the future, a VMT mitigation bank would identify a series of projects and programs that would help regional goals for VMT reduction under SB 743 and new development projects that create excess VMT would have the option to pay into a VMT mitigation bank to provide funds that the City would spend on projects that would mitigate those impacts. Examples would primarily include projects listed under the Transportation Sector of the CAAP that would help to increase bicycle, pedestrian, and transit mode shares and reduce auto usage.

If a VMT mitigation bank is implemented at a regional scale, some projects in the Sacramento CAAP might be eligible for funding from the VMT bank. Project costs that are included in a local impact fee program, a local VMT mitigation bank, or a regional VMT mitigation bank should not be included in any of the other of these related programs, to ensure against “double dipping”.

The concept of a VMT mitigation bank is similar to the Emissions Banking Program operated by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, which facilitates the exchange of emissions credits between businesses that are awarded credits for emission reduction projects and businesses that need credits to offset impacts of new or expanded activities that generate increased emissions. In City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

28 this case the City would be delivering GHG-reducing projects through implementation of the CAAP that receive credits and the City would receive payment from other organizations that undertake projects that increase emissions.

Parking Fees
Increasing parking fees to help pay for GHG-reduction projects may be another locally available but limited option to raise funds. (For example, see Measure TR-3-7, which calls for developing and implementing a fee for use of City-owned parking facilities and EV chargers to encourage more efficient use and turnover and increase EV availability.) It should be noted however, that parking fees are driven by market demand and are constantly monitored and adjusted to maximize revenue within the limits that the market will bear. Increasing fees above the market risks loss of customers and revenue. Furthermore, the City uses existing parking fees to cover General Fund obligations, such as payment on the bonds for the Golden 1 Arena, so certain levels of growth in fees are already assumed and obligated.

CFD/EIFD Financing
As mentioned above, the City has the authority to utilize state law that allows formation of Mello- Roos Community Facilities Districts (CFD) and Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFD) to generate funding that could be used to support CAAP project implementation and to provide financing tools to help spread the costs over time. Bond financing supported by revenues from a CFD or EIFD would be most appropriately used to pay for large public capital improvement projects that have useful lives that would match or exceed the term of the bonds issued; most likely involving projects in the CAAP Transportation Sector.

Most likely, a CFD would involve establishing a new special tax on properties located within the district, requiring authorization by a 2/3 super-majority vote. A CFD special tax would be collected annually, and the City could bond against the annual tax levies. Because a CFD is approved by a 2/3 vote, it is considered a special tax. If approved, the City would have flexibility to use the funds for a broad range of voter-authorized purposes, and the City would not be held to the same strict standards of proportionate benefit that apply with property assessments that are approved by a simple majority.

An EIFD does not require voter approval unless it is used for a bond issue. To generate revenues that would help to fund CAAP implementation, the City Council would need to agree to divert a portion of the City’s future property tax increment generated within the district that would have otherwise accrued to the City General Fund. Both CFDs and EIFDs are able to issue bonds to be repaid by future revenues collected by the district, so the mechanisms can both provide a potentially useful mechanism to finance CAAP investments. There are challenges for EIFDs that include the need for 55 percent voter approval, high-administrative costs, and the potential need for a Joint Powers Authority.

Other Voter-Approved Funding Measures
There are a variety of other types of voter-approved funding measures that could generate funds to support CAAP implementation by creating new taxes in the City. Funding measures that would specifically earmark new tax revenues for CAAP projects would most likely constitute new special taxes, requiring 2/3 super-majority voter approval.

TOC
Types of Funding Sources

Funding and Financing Strategy 29
Motor Vehicle Registration Surcharge
Another possibility of a voter-approved funding measure that aligns well with CAAP goals is a motor vehicle registration surcharge. A number of California air quality management districts have approved these surcharges. State law enacted in 1990 (AB 2766) authorizes local agencies to assess annual motor vehicle registration fee surcharges of up to $5 per vehicle to generate funds to "to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles and for related planning, monitoring, enforcement, and technical studies necessary for the implementation of the California Clean Air Act of 1988. This would be viewed as a special tax, requiring approval by a 2/3 super-majority of the voters. In addition, this authority expires January 1, 2025, unless it is extended by state law. This funding option would need to be coordinated with the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District to ensure coordination of efforts to ensure a collaborative and mutually beneficial approach.

According to the City of Sacramento’s EV Implementation Blueprint Study, approximately half of the

1.1 million vehicles registered in Sacramento County were registered in the City of Sacramento. If City of Sacramento voters approved a $5 per vehicle surcharge, this would raise approximately $2,750,000 per year in annual revenues (assuming extension of the surcharge authority beyond January 2025).

Parcel Tax
In addition to other tax measure examples discussed above, a parcel tax charged to owners of real estate in the city of Sacramento is another example of a funding opportunity that would require voter approval, either majority or 2/3, depending on how structured. Because the revenues from a parcel tax are secured by liens on the property in the area subject to the parcel tax, the annual revenue flow from a parcel tax approved to provide CAAP funding would be bondable, creating the opportunity to finance CAAP projects over time.

In 2020, voters in the city of Austin, Texas, approved property tax increases that will fund a $7 billion transit system and $460 million in new bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Like Sacramento, Austin is another state capitol city; however, it is approximately twice the population of Sacramento. Thus, if Sacramento sets its sights on a parcel tax to fund similar GHG-reducing projects, it may be appropriate for the City to target more modest dollar amounts.

In the California context, depending on the way the parcel tax is structured, it could require either a majority or 2/3 voter approval. If the ballot measure names specific allowable uses of the funds, it would be considered a special tax requiring 2/3 voter approval. Some jurisdictions choose to structure a ballot measure as a general tax that does not name specific allowable uses for the funds, and then the ballot measure is accompanied by a second advisory ballot measure that outlines recommended, but not required, uses of the parcel tax proceeds.

4.7 Funding Measures Requiring State
Legislation/Action
The Sacramento/West Sacramento Mayors’ Commission on Climate Change identified and discussed a range of potential funding options for climate mitigation investments, including many of those discussed above. In addition, the Commission identified some “big idea” funding options that would require not only support at the local level but also enable state legislation as well. Two such examples were:

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

30  a tax/surcharge on property hazard insurance premiums on property in the local area that could be used to fund climate resiliency projects; and
 congestion management fees that would be charged to drivers using specified local roadways at certain times as a way to manage demand for roadway facilities and reduce associated congestion and pollution.

Another example of a potential local funding measure that would require state authorization is taxes on TNC users. In 2018, California Assembly Bill 1184 confirmed that the City of San Francisco (only) had authority to place Measure D on its November 2019 ballot, and it was subsequently narrowly approved by the voters. This measure assesses a tax on ride share companies (car, bike, scooter, etc.) to raise funds for transit, pedestrian, and bicycle services. The rate is 1.5 percent for rides in zero emission vehicles and 3.25 percent on private rides, such as Uber and Lyft. The City of San Francisco expects to generate from $30 million to $35 million per year from this program. Along these lines, Measure TR-2-13 calls for the City to investigate and lobby for the development of a TNC user tax.

If the City of Sacramento sought and gained approval for such a program, it could provide a useful source of annual revenue to support CAAP projects. This funding source would most appropriately be used to fund projects that support TNC functioning in the City, including providing space for TNCs to use for parking of shared bicycles and scooters, providing bike lanes for bicycles and scooters, providing curb space and parking space for TNC vehicle parking, waiting, and pick-up/drop-off, and related signage and other infrastructure.

City staff estimate that the process of obtaining enabling legislation at the state level, placing a local measure on the ballot, and then implementing the program would take a minimum of approximately 5 years. Thus, if successful, this would represent a medium- to long-term funding opportunity.

After adjusting for the City of Sacramento’s smaller population and a generally lower market share for TNCs versus San Francisco, an equivalent tax level in Sacramento might raise around $6 million per year. Although this is a modest amount of money in comparison to San Francisco’s estimate, a steady, predictable stream of revenues that is at least partially generated by visitors as opposed to residents and local property owners and businesses can be an important piece of the total revenue package for CAAP implementation.

Carbon Offset Credits
The California Air Resources Board administers the State of California’s carbon Cap and Trade program. To date, the program has provided limited opportunities for entities that undertake GHG- reduction actions to monetize carbon offset credits. However, in the future, there may be opportunities to do so.

With GHG reduction as a central focus, many of Sacramento’s CAAP actions, such as its aggressive plan to expand the urban forest, could potentially qualify for carbon credits which, if sold, could provide funding for additional CAAP investments. However, the ability to do so would depend on the particular carbon offset protocols that are established and a determination as to whether the GHG reductions represent net new reductions that would not have happened in absence of the ability to sell the credits.

As mentioned previously, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District administers a regional Emissions Banking Program. One potential advantage of a program administered by the Air TOC
Types of Funding Sources

Funding and Financing Strategy 31
Resources Board would be a much larger (potentially statewide) pool of potential buyers who need to obtain emissions credits. This could support higher values for emissions credits than if the buyers were limited to those in the Sacramento area.

4.8 Federal Funding
From time to time, the federal government appropriates funds to be distributed to states and local governments to fund various types of infrastructure investments. Although unpredictable, it is possible that some such funds could be utilized to help implement certain CAAP projects that align with the federal program criteria. Depending on the priorities of the administration following from the 2020 presidential and congressional elections, there may be renewed focus on investments in climate change-related programs and projects and/or investments in infrastructure as a component of stimulus programs to aid in recovery from the COVID-19 epidemic. These funds would most likely flow to the local level through programs administered by federal agencies that pass grant funding through to state, regional, and local governments, such as the Department of Transportation and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Appendix E - Municipal
Inventory and Forecast
396

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast
Methodology
prepared for
City of Sacramento
915 I Street
Sacramento, California 95814
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
4825 J Street, Suite 200
Sacramento, California 95819
June 2022

TOC
Table of Contents

Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast Methodology i Table of Contents
1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................3 2 Municipal Inventory ........................................................................................................................4

2.1 Previous Inventories and Emissions Reduction Progress ....................................................5

2.2 Inventory Data Sources .......................................................................................................8

2.3 Building and Facilities ..........................................................................................................9

2.4 Water Management ......................................................................................................... 12

2.5 Vehicle Fleet ..................................................................................................................... 12

2.6 Waste-in-Place ................................................................................................................. 13

2.7 Streetlights and Traffic Signals ......................................................................................... 13 3 Municipal Forecast ...................................................................................................................... 15

3.1 Forecast Methods and Results Summary ........................................................................ 15

3.2 Buildings and Facilities ..................................................................................................... 16

3.3 Water Management ......................................................................................................... 17

3.4 Waste-in-Place ................................................................................................................. 18

3.5 Streetlights and Traffic Signals ......................................................................................... 18

3.6 Vehicle Fleet ..................................................................................................................... 19 4 Municipal Target Setting .............................................................................................................. 21 Tables
Table 1 2016 Municipal Emissions by Sector ...................................................................................4 Table 2 Municipal Inventory Comparison ........................................................................................5 Table 3 Municipal Data Sources and Emissions Factors by Year and Sector ...................................7 Table 4 Inventory and GHG Emission Factors Sources ....................................................................9 Table 5 Municipal Building and Facilities Energy Use ................................................................... 10 Table 6 Municipal Buildings and Facilities Emissions ................................................................... 10 Table 7 Municipal Water Management Emissions ....................................................................... 12 Table 8 Municipal Fleet Emissions ................................................................................................ 12 Table 9 Streetlight and Traffic Signal Emissions ........................................................................... 14 Table 10 Municipal Forecast Summary .......................................................................................... 16 Table 11 Estimated GHG Emissions Savings from SB100 ............................................................... 16 Table 12 Activity and Emissions Data for Municipal Buildings and Facilities ................................. 17 Table 13 Water Management Activity and Emissions Data ........................................................... 18 Table 14 Waste-in-Place Collected Gas and Emissions Estimates .................................................. 18 Table 15 Streetlights and Traffic Signals Activity and Emissions Data............................................ 19 Table 16 Activity and Emissions Data for Municipal Vehicle Fleet ................................................. 20 City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

ii
Table 17 Municipal Target Reduction Pathways ................................................................................. 22 Figures
Figure 1 2016 Municipal GHG Emissions (MTCO2e) ..........................................................................5 Figure 2 Municipal Inventory Comparison (MTCO2e) .......................................................................6 Figure 3 Municipal Target Reduction Pathways ............................................................................ 22

TOC
Introduction

Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast Methodology 3 1 Introduction
California considers greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the impacts of climate change to be a serious threat to public health, the environment, economic well-being, and natural resources of the State, and has taken an aggressive stance to mitigate the impact on climate change at the State- level through the adoption of legislation and policies. Many cities have developed local climate action plans and aligned goals to correspond with State emissions reduction targets. The two major State GHG-related goals are established by Assembly Bill (AB) 32 and Senate Bill (SB) 32. AB 32 required State agencies to reduce State GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020; SB 32 requires a 40 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2030. The goals set by AB 32 were achieved by the State in 20161 and many local jurisdictions are completing GHG inventories to quantify progress toward their own 2020 goals as well as develop targets to align with the requirements of SB 32.

GHG inventories and targets are generally established at the community-level, to capture the full picture of GHG emissions for the jurisdiction. To this end, a 2016 community-wide GHG inventory and forecast was completed for the City of Sacramento and methodologies and results of that inventory are contained in a separate technical appendix (Appendix A). This document by contrast contains methods and results of a municipal-level GHG inventory for the City of Sacramento. The municipal inventory complements the community-wide inventory, with a narrower focus on GHG emissions for City programs, buildings, and staff. While the municipal inventory is a subset of the community inventory, the increased resolution at the municipal level allows the City to take exemplary action in reducing its own GHG emissions and act as a leader for the much larger community-wide effort to achieve substantial GHG reduction targets. Emissions contained within the municipal inventory include activities under direct control of the City of Sacramento.

This technical appendix provides a complete analysis of the previous municipal inventories completed for the City of Sacramento in 2005 and 2013 as well as details on the methodology used by Rincon for the 2016 inventory update, which is also used as the baseline for GHG forecast.

Municipal emissions are forecast for the years 2020, 2030, and 2045 to align with State and City targets.

Emissions inventories are an iterative process and each year must be viewed in the context of other inventories and relative trends of each sector to maintain consistency with the emissions inventory methods and factors.

1 California Air Resources Board. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory. Accessed at:
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/inventory.htm. Accessed on: July 2019 City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

4 2 Municipal Inventory
The methodologies, data sources, calculations, and results associated with the 2016 municipal GHG inventory are included in this section. The municipal inventory is considered a subset of the community inventory (see Appendix A) and has therefore already largely been accounted for in the community inventory.2 The GHG emissions below are included in this appendix to inform the development of climate action plan strategies that will reduce emissions in internal government operations.

The ICLEI Local Government Operations Protocol3 (referred to hereafter as ICLEI LGOP) recommends local governments examine their emission sources in the context of operational control when determining whether to include in their inventory. The 2016 municipal GHG inventory is based on this recommendation and for consistency with previous GHG inventory methods and reporting (2005 and 2013).

The 2016 inventory reports the following emission sectors as recommended by ICLEI LGOP:
 City-owned buildings and facilities
 Streetlights and traffic signals
 Water and wastewater treatment and conveyance
 Vehicle fleet
 Solid waste facilities (waste-in-place)
In 2016, municipal operations resulted in 56,463 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e). The largest emissions sector was vehicle fleet (28 percent) followed by buildings and facilities (27 percent) and waste-in-place (19 percent) emissions. Detailed results can be found in Table 1 and Figure 1. The following sections discuss each emissions sector of the municipal inventory.

Table 1 2016 Municipal Emissions by Sector
Sector Emissions (MT CO2e)
Vehicle Fleet 16,035
Building & Facilities 15,214
Waste-in-Place 10,512
Water Management 9,516
Streetlight & Traffic Signals 5,186
Total 56,463

2 The municipal inventory captures a small amount of GHG emissions that are not captured in the community inventory. This includes GHG emissions from off-road equipment (e.g., from heavy-duty equipment used at City parks or other City land) and fuel use for building needs not supplied by the grid (e.g., fuel in emergency generators or backup equipment). However, all other GHG emission sources captured by the municipal inventory are already captured in the community inventory. The municipal invento ry is therefore considered, effectively, to be a subset of the community inventory and the two inventories should not be “added” together. 3 https://icleiusa.org/resources/local-government-operations-lgo-protocol/ TOC
Municipal Inventory

Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast Methodology 5 Figure 1 2016 Municipal GHG Emissions (MTCO 2e)

2.1 Previous Inventories and Emissions Reduction
Progress
The City of Sacramento has conducted two previous GHG inventories for internal government operations, one for the calendar year 2005 and another for the calendar year 2013. Since 2005, overall GHG emissions have decreased by 22,121 MT CO2e or 28 percent. An accounting of the methodological changes between each inventory is included in the following section. The building and water management sectors and the waste sector decreased each year from 2005 to 2016. The transportation sector decreased from 2005 to 2013 but increased again in 2016 by 1,092 MT CO2e.

Streetlights and traffic signals followed a similar trajectory, decreasing from 2005 to 2013 but seeing a slight rise in 2016. However, changes to streetlight calculation methodologies could be the cause of this change. A summary of each inventory year are included below in Table 2 and Figure 2.

Table 2 Municipal Inventory Comparison
Sector
2005
(MT CO2e)
2013
(MT CO2e)
2016
(MT CO2e)
Building & Facilities
35,773
15,011 15,214
Water Management 12,043 9,516
Vehicle Fleet 21,927 14,081
16,035
Off-road N/A 862
Streetlights & Traffic Signals 6,872 4,870 5,186
Waste 14,012 13,750 10,512
Total Emissions 78,584 60,617 56,463
MTCO2e: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
Building & Facilities
27%
Water
Management
17%
Waste In Place
19%
Vehicle Fleet
28%
Streetlight & Traffic
Signals
9%
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

6 Figure 2 Municipal Inventory Comparison (MTCO2e)

Methodology Changes
The data sources and emissions factors used for the 2005, 2013, and 2016 inventories are summarized in Table 3. Several minor changes are apparent between each year as methods evolved.

One minor change made in the 2013 inventory was the breakout of water management emissions from overall building and facilities use. Notable changes to methods in the 2016 inventory include electricity data for all libraries, inclusion of regional pumping electricity data not included in 2013, and a better breakdown of energy data by building/facility. -
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
2005 2013 2016
Buildings & Facilities Water Management Vehicle Fleet
Offroad Streetlights & Traffic Signals Waste-in-Place
TOC
Municipal Inventory

Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast Methodology 7 Table 3 Municipal Data Sources and Emissions Factors by Year and Sector Data 2005 2013 2016
Data Sources
Building and
Facilities
City energy use from Keith
Roberts, included water
management energy use.

Streetlight and Traffic Signals
not included. Included propane
but not diesel.

Energy use from EnergyCAP,
excludes propane and Library
electricity from Pocket-
Greenhaven and North
Sacramento libraries. Includes
diesel generator. May not
include all City-operated
buildings.

Energy use from EnergyCAP,
excludes propane. Includes
gasoline and diesel generators.

Water
Management
Electricity use by water
management system (water,
sewer, drainage) from
EnergyCAP. Excludes electricity
from regional pumping.

Electricity use by water
management system (water,
sewer, drainage) from
EnergyCAP.

Vehicle Fleet Vehicle fuel use by vehicle type
and fuel type. Reported four
vehicle types.

Detailed data by vehicle
mileage, fuel consumption, and
model year. Includes 14 vehicle
types.

Utilimarc detailed data by fuel
consumption, vehicle mileage,
and model year. Includes 31
vehicle types.

Data included in vehicle fleet
data from City.

Off-road Fleet Data included in vehicle fleet
data from City.

Data broken out from vehicle
fleet and reported separately.

Streetlights and
Traffic Signals
Total energy use from SMUD. Streetlight and traffic signal energy totals from EnergyCAP,
extrapolated by light type.

SMUD-owned streetlight and
traffic signal energy totals from
EnergyCAP, extrapolated by
average light use. City-owned
streetlight energy totals based
on number of streetlights and
estimated 4,000 hours of
nighttime operation.1
Waste-in-Place Waste in-place tonnage. Total CH4 captured at 28th Street Landfill
Total CH4 captured at 28th
Street Landfill.

Emissions Factors
Building and
Facilities
SMUD2 2005
SMUD 2013 SMUD 2016, PG&E 2016, EPA
eGRID 2016, TCR 2016
(generators)
Water
Management
SMUD and PG&E 2013 SMUD 2016, EPA eGRID 2016
Vehicle Fleet Fuel-based Fleet fuel consumption, EMFAC
20143, TCR 2013 for non-
gasoline fuel
Fleet fuel consumption,
mileage and TCR4 2016 for CH4,
N2O, non-gasoline fuel
Off-road Fleet N/A Fuel-based Fuel-based (TCR 2016)
Streetlights and
Traffic Signals
SMUD 2005 SMUD 2013 SMUD 2016, EPA eGRID 2016
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

8 Data 2005 2013 2016
Waste-in-Place ARB FOD ICLEI LGOP 9.1 ICLEI LGOP 9.1
GWP IPCC SAR (21, 310) IPCC SAR (21,310) IPCC AR4 (25, 298) 1 https://www.smud.org/-/media/Documents/Rate-Information/Rates/01_SLS.ashx\ 2Sacramento Municipal Utilities District
3https://www.arb.ca.gov/emfac/2014/?_ga=2.188515880.1044032860.1584991585-988399991.1554499524 4 2016 The Climate Registry Emissions Factors, https://www.theclimateregistry.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/2016-Climate- Registry-Default-Emission-Factors.pdf
As noted earlier, the internal operations emissions data presented above are a subset of the communitywide inventory (see Appendix A). These emissions are not added to the community inventory and therefore, no “double-counting” is occurring between community-wide and internal operations. Additional information regarding the 2005 and 2011 Sacramento GHG inventories can be found in the previous 2016 IO CAP Update.4

2.2 Inventory Data Sources
The data used to complete the 2016 GHG inventory and forecast came from multiple sources, as summarized in greater detail in Table 4. Data for the 2016 municipal GHG inventory calculations were provided by City staff via personal communication with Helen Selph, Jennifer Venema, John Febbo, and Mark Stevens5.

4 City of Sacramento. Climate Action Plan for Internal Operations, 2016 Update. https://www.cityofsacramento.org/- /media/Corporate/Files/Public-Works/Facilities/CityOfSacramento_1606_ClimateActionPlan_InternalOps_FINAL.pdf?la=en Accessed:

November 2019.
5 Helen Selph, Associate Planner; Jennifer Venema, Sustainability Manager; John Febbo, Integrated Waste Planning Superintendent, Mark Stevens, Fleet Manager.

TOC
Municipal Inventory

Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast Methodology 9 Table 4 Inventory and GHG Emission Factors Sources
Sector Data Unit Source
Activity Data
Building Energy Electricity Consumption kWh EnergyCAP
Natural Gas Consumption Therms EnergyCAP
Transportation Fuel Usage, Annual Mileage Gallon, GGE, VMT Utilimarc Streetlights Electricity Consumption kWh EnergyCAP
City of Sacramento
Water Electricity Usage kWh EnergyCAP
Solid Waste Landfill Gas, Methane Content cf Sacramento Public Works Department
Emission Factors
Electricity SMUD, PG&E, and eGRID
electricity emissions factors
CO2/MWh, CH4 MWh,
N2O/MWh
The Climate Registry 2016
Reported Emissions Factors,
EPA eGRID
Natural Gas PG&E natural gas emissions
factor
CO2/therm, CH4/therm,
N2O/therm
The Climate Registry 2016
Reported Emissions Factors
Transportation Fuels Diesel, Gasoline, CNG, LNG, E85,
and Propane emission factors
CO2/gal or mi, CH4/gal
or mi, N2O/gal or mi
The Climate Registry 2016
Default Emissions Factors
Streetlights and Traffic
Signals
SMUD and EGRID electricity
emissions factors
CO2/MWh, CH4 MWh,
N2O/MWh
The Climate Registry 2016
Emissions Factors, EPA eGRID
Water Management SMUD and EGRID electricity
emissions factors
CO2/MWh, CH4 MWh,
N2O/MWh
The Climate Registry 2016
Reported Emissions Factors,
EPA eGRID
Waste N/A (constants) N/A N/A
cf: cubic feet; CO2: carbon dioxide; CH4: methane; CNG: compressed natural gas; EPA: Environmental Protection Agency; kWh: kilowatt hours; gal: GGE: gasoline gallon equivalent; LNG: liquid natural gas; MWh: megawatt hour; N2O: nitrous oxide; PG&E: Pacific Gas & Electric; SMUD: Sacramento Municipal Utility District; VMT: vehicle miles traveled; N/A: not applicable

2.3 Building and Facilities
In 2016, municipal building and facility energy use resulted in 15,214 MT CO2e, comprising the second largest emissions source after the vehicle fleet. Energy use consisted primarily of electricity and natural gas, as well as diesel and gasoline which is used to power emergency generators.

Electricity, natural gas, and generator fuel for building and facilities were provided by SMUD, Tesla/Solar City (on-site solar), Public Works Department fuel contracts, and PG&E. Grid-supplied building and facility energy data were collected by the City of Sacramento staff using EnergyCAP software, run through internal analysis, and provided to Rincon (as summarized in Table 5).

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

10 Table 5 Municipal Building and Facilities Energy Use Emission
Source
Energy
Usage Unit
Emissions
Factor
Emissions
(MT CO2e)1
Percent (%)
of Total
SMUD Purchased Electricity
(except H2O management)
40,323.72 MWh 0.2236 MT CO2/MWh 9,053 59%
PG&E Purchased Electricity2 86 MWh 0.1332 MT CO2/MWh 12 0.08% Solar City Purchased
Electricity
4,353 MWh 0.0 MT CO2/MWh 0 0%
PG&E Natural Gas Use 900,788 therms 0.0053 MT CO2/therm 6,130 40% Gasoline Generators 44 gallons 0.0088 MT CO2/gal
gasoline

0.4 0.0025%
Diesel Generators 1,661 gallons 0.0102 MT CO2/gal diesel 19 0.13% Total Emissions – – – 15,214 –
1 MT CO2e: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
2 PG&E electricity provided for Camp Sacramento operations only.

Buildings and facilities in this sector include City-owned and operated offices, corporation yards, parking lot facilities, and irrigation systems at City-owned facilities. Electricity use includes lighting, appliances, and equipment in City buildings and facilities.6 Natural gas was most often used for space heating and water heating. Diesel and gasoline fuel were used for City-operated back-up generators, which are used intermittently during power outages and for regular testing. Generator fuel use was provided by the City of Sacramento’s Utilimarc program for tracking fuel purchases.

Electricity use for water supply and management by the Department of Utilities is included in a separate section and has been removed from the Buildings and Facilities category. Electricity for vehicle charging has not been broken out and is included in overall building electricity.7 A detailed breakdown of building energy use by emission source and building type can be found in Table 6.

The 2016 inventory likely includes more buildings than the 2013 inventory. At a minimum, the 2016 inventory includes the Pocket-Greenhaven Library electricity consumption which was not included in the 2013 inventory (approximately 523,823 kWh or 117 MT CO2e). The 2013 inventory noted that data from this library was not available at the time of inventory creation. Additional buildings may also be an addition to the 2016 inventory. However, because the 2013 inventory does not include a detailed list of buildings accounted for in the analysis, it is not possible to identify if the library was accounted for in a different portion of the building inventory. However, all future inventories will provide a complete list of building-by-building end uses to avoid this issue.

Table 6 Municipal Buildings and Facilities Emissions
Facility
Type
Energy
Consumption
CO2
(MT)
CH4
(MT)
N2O
(MT)
CO2e
(MT)
Fuel
Type
Electricity (kWh)
Camp Sac 85,960 11.45 0.00 0.00 12 Electricity
Solar City (Purchased) 4,353,000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 Electricity Police 6,319,471 1,413.03 0.09 0.01 1419 Electricity

6 Electricity use for streetlights and traffic signals is accounted for in a separate sector. Refer to Section 2.7. 7 At the time of report preparation, data was unavailable for all electricity related to EV charging; as of late 2019, only one City facility had a separate submeter for EV charging, City Hall Parking Garage.

TOC
Municipal Inventory

Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast Methodology 11 Facility
Type
Energy
Consumption
CO2
(MT)
CH4
(MT)
N2O
(MT)
CO2e
(MT)
Fuel
Type
Fire 2,147,681 480.22 0.03 0.00 482 Electricity
Public Works 10,495,687 2,346.82 0.16 0.02 2356 Electricity Libraries1 3,331,210 744.85 0.05 0.01 748 Electricity
Parks & Recreation 5,890,602 1,317.13 0.09 0.01 1323 Electricity Cultural and Community Services 11,075,055 2,476.37 0.17 0.02 2487 Electricity Youth Parks and Community
Enrichment
34,862 7.80 0.00 0.00 8 Electricity
Community Development
Department
356,474 79.71 0.01 0.00 80 Electricity
Other-City-Related-Accounts 300,243 67.13 0.00 0.00 67 Electricity Unknown Accounts 3,366 0.75 0.00 0.00 1 Electricity
Downtown Plaza- Central Garage
(Lot U)
136,758 30.58 0.00 0.00 31 Electricity
Old Sac Waterfront 111,726 24.98 0.00 0.00 25 Electricity 1109 2nd St. Building 37,154 8.31 0.00 0.00 8 Electricity 1115 2nd St. Building 3,791 0.85 0.00 0.00 1 Electricity Old Sac Promenade 48,342 10.81 0.00 0.00 11 Electricity 1012 2nd St. Building 31,298 7.00 0.00 0.00 7 Electricity Total 44,762,680 9,027.8 0.60 0.07 9,0652 --
Diesel and Gasoline (Gallons)
Generators 1,661 16.96 0.0009 0.0069 19 Diesel
Generators 44 0.39 0.0000 0.0000 0 Gasoline
Total 1,705 17.35 0.00095 0.0069 19 --
Natural Gas (Therms)
Police 78,736 417.85 3.78 0.079 536 Natural Gas
Fire 75,832 402.44 3.64 0.076 516 Natural Gas
Utilities 205,861 1,092.51 9.88 0.206 1401 Natural Gas Public Works 141,931 753.23 6.81 0.142 966 Natural Gas Libraries1 68,891 365.61 3.31 0.069 469 Natural Gas
Parks & Recreation 54,074 286.97 2.60 0.054 368 Natural Gas Convention and Cultural Services 249,902 1,326.24 12.00 0.250 1701 Natural Gas Community Development
Department
25,389 134.74 1.22 0.025 173 Natural Gas
Old Sac Waterfront 172 0.91 0.01 0.000 1 Natural Gas
Total 900,788 4,780.5 43.2 0.9 6,130 –
1Includes activity data for all libraries in City limits that are City-owned buildings. 2 Numbers may not sum due to rounding
MT = metric tons
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

12 Approximately 60 percent of building and facility emissions occurred from electricity usage, while 40 percent were attributable to natural gas and generator emissions. Overall, buildings and facilities were 27 percent of total municipal operations emissions.

2.4 Water Management
The City provides water-related utility services to residents and businesses in the form of water intake, treatment, and distribution; wastewater collection and conveyance; and stormwater drainage. In 2016, pumping and other activities associated with these water-related services (referred to hereafter as the “water management” sector) produced 87,811 acre-feet of water. This sector comprised 17 percent of the City’s total municipal GHG emissions in 2016. Water management activity represented the fourth largest sector of emissions in the city after the vehicle fleet emissions, building and facility energy use, and waste. More detail on the sector is available in Table 7.

Table 7 Municipal Water Management Emissions
Activity
Electricity
(kWh)
CO2
(MT)
CH4
(MT)
N2O
(MT)
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Water Supply Conveyance 35,190,068 7,868.45 0.527 0.064 7,901 Wastewater Conveyance 2,551,344 570.48 0.038 0.005 573
Stormwater Drainage 4,645,541 1,038.74 0.070 0.008 1,043 Total 42,386,953 9,477.66 0.63 0.08 9,516

2.5 Vehicle Fleet
The City’s 2016 vehicle fleet consisted of a variety of vehicle types using both conventional and alternative fuels. Fuel consumption from vehicle fleet operations contributed to approximately 16,035 MT CO2e in 2016, comprising 28 percent of the City’s annual operational GHG emissions (Table 8). This sector captures fuel usage for both on-road and off-road vehicle activities. All fuel use is presented by fuel type for this sector.

Table 8 Municipal Fleet Emissions
Fuel Type
Units
(Gallons)
CO2
Factor
CO2
(MT)
CH4
(MT)
N2O
(MT)
Total
(MT CO2e)
Gasoline 1,146,935 0.00878 10,070 0.12 0.2 10,125 Diesel 5,173 0.01021 53 0.003 0.022 59
Biodiesel 512,081 N/A 0 0.29 2.1 643
CNG 67,880 0.006896 468 0.53 0.05 495
RNG 18,228.30 N/A 0 0.14 0.05 18
Propane 7,538 0.00568 43 0.02 0.0 44
LNG 945,258 0.00446 4,216 1.86 0.17 4,312
E-85 53,808 0.0062651 337 0.01 0.0 340
Total – – 15,187 2.97 2.60 16,035
TOC
Municipal Inventory

Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast Methodology 13 In 2016, the City operated 2,330 vehicles including maintenance trucks, vans, solid waste collection vehicles, police and fire vehicles, and light duty passenger vehicles. This included 38 CNG, 461 diesel, 222 E85, 90 LNG, 45 propane, and 1,474 unleaded gasoline vehicles.

Fleet emissions were calculated using the LGOP recommended methodologies 7.1.1 and 7.1.3 for CO2, CH4, and N2O in mobile combustion. The LGOP recommends quantifying CO2 levels through total annual fuel consumption by fuel type and appropriate emissions factors for each. Annual fuel use was provided by the City of Sacramento while emissions factors utilized were identified by The Climate Registry (TCR)8, an industry-standard independent third-party verifier for reporting GHG emissions. CH4 and N2O levels were calculated either by using the same methodology when emissions per gallon emission factors were available (Gasoline, Diesel, and Propane) or by mileage of each vehicle type when mileage-based emission factors were available (CNG, RNG, LNG, and Ethanol). This method was used for all fleet fuel consumption, both on-road and off-road.

2.6 Waste-in-Place
Waste-in-place emissions are inventoried under LGOP recommended Calculation 9.1 for landfills with landfill gas collection systems. In 2016, the 28th Street Landfill collected 243,718,413 cubic feet of gas with an average methane content of 29.10 percent. Total emissions from the 28th Street Landfill were 10,512 MT CO2e. This value differs from the community-wide inventory for the same year because it includes only the 28th street landfill which is under the City’s direct control. The method for calculation is also different and leverages actual measures CH4 emissions at the site as well as several assumptions defined by Calculation 9.1 of the LGOP.

GHG emissions in the waste category are attributed to waste-in-place emissions at the City-owned- and-operated 28th Street Landfill. Waste-in-place emissions are the result of anaerobic decomposition of organic material from the existing accumulated waste in a landfill. The anaerobic decomposition occurs at covered landfills where the deposited waste is not exposed to the oxygen in the atmosphere. Previously, the 28th Street Landfill served as the disposal location for solid waste generated within the City between 1968 and 1994. Since the 28th Street Landfill’s permanent closure in 1997, a methane gas recovery system was installed and operated by a third-party contractor that collects and disposes of much of the gas that is generated from the closed landfill. From the early 1990s until 2010, the City sold a portion of the captured landfill gas to Blue Diamond Almond for their industrial operations, flaring the remaining captured CH4. However, in 2013, due partially to the declining quality of landfill gas, the landfill flared all CH4 that was captured through its landfill gas (LFG) collection system, rather than sell it for combustion. Fugitive CH4 emissions which were not flaring in 2016 resulted in an estimated 10,512 MTCO2e. The IPCC considers any CO2 (non- methane) emissions from flaring or fugitive emissions from landfills to be of biogenic origin and not significant to overall solid waste emissions.

2.7 Streetlights and Traffic Signals
Electricity in this sector falls into three categories, traffic signals, City-owned streetlights (metered and non-metered), and SMUD-owned streetlights. Electricity usage for traffic signals and SMUD owned streetlights was provided by with the EnergyCAP data. Electricity data for unmetered

8 The Climate Registry. 2016 Default Emission Factors. https://www.theclimateregistry.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/2016-Climate- Registry-Default-Emission-Factors.pdf Accessed: Oct. 2019 City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

14 streetlights was not available through EnergyCAP. Instead, the City provided a comprehensive list of all City-owned streetlights and wattage estimates. This information along with a SMUD-provided operational assumption of approximately 4,000 hours of streetlight use per year was used to estimate unmetered streetlight electricity use.9
In 2016, the operation of streetlights and traffic signals in the City required approximately 23,097,333 kWh of electricity and resulted in 5,186 MTCO2e, contributing 9 percent of the City’s total annual GHG emissions (Table 9). In 2016 the City operated 41,591 streetlights and at least 631 traffic signals.10 This sector captures electricity for all streetlights and traffic signals operated by the City, including both City-owned and SMUD-owned streetlights.

Table 9 Streetlight and Traffic Signal Emissions
Source (Number)
Electricity
(kWh)
CO2
(MT)
CH4
(MT)
N2O
(MT)
Emissions
(MT CO2e)
Traffic Signals (631) 1,995,276 446.1 0.0299 0.0036 448 City-Owned Streetlights (38,135) 19,348,584 4326.3 0.2896 0.0351 4,344 SMUD-Owned Streetlights (3,456) 1,753,473 392.07 0.0262 0.0032 394 Total 23,097,333 5164.5 0.35 0.0419 5,186

9 https://www.smud.org/-/media/Documents/Rate-Information/Rates/01_SLS.ashx 10 630 traffic signal accounts were registered with SMUD with one additional Master Account with an unknown number of associated signals. 631 is used here as the minimum value.

TOC
Municipal Forecast

Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast Methodology 15 3 Municipal Forecast
A baseline municipal GHG emissions inventory (i.e., the City of Sacramento’s 2016 municipal inventory) sets a reference point for municipal emissions for a single year. As the demographics of the City change, municipal emissions may change as well, such that municipal emissions in the future may be quite different. A municipal GHG emissions forecast attempts to quantitatively capture these future changes and is based primarily on projected population growth within the City, as well as existing programs and regulations at the City and State level as of the 2016 inventory. The projections from the municipal emissions forecast provides the basis for determining the City’s Climate Action Plan policies on a municipal level. Municipal policies are developed based on the difference or gap between the municipal forecast and the municipal reduction targets set by the City.

This section quantifies the projected municipal GHG emissions for the City of Sacramento in the horizon years 2030 and 2045. The forecast additionally includes reductions from State regulations in order to provide a more accurate picture of future emissions growth and highlight the City’s responsibility for achieving further reductions necessary for attainment of municipal GHG emissions targets. This “gap analysis” provides the City with the total municipal emissions reductions that would be necessary to achieve goals, as well as information on the emissions sectors and sources which have the most GHG reduction opportunities. Further details on State regulations and programs aimed at reducing GHG emissions are provided in Appendix B.

3.1 Forecast Methods and Results Summary
The driving factor for the municipal forecast was population growth, as an increasing population is anticipated to lead to increased municipal staff and increased usage of municipal facilities and services. Population projections were obtained from the 2035 Sacramento General plan population forecast. While it is not known if the City will build or acquire new buildings or facilities by 2045, it was conservatively assumed that any newly constructed or acquired building or facility would be at least as energy-intensive as the building or facility it replaced. Therefore, building and facility energy use projected into 2030 and 2045 is the same as energy use in 2016. Waste-in-place emissions are expected to decrease, as the 28th St. Landfill is no longer operating which will decrease overall emissions from off-gassing. All other sectors – water management, streetlights and traffic signals, and vehicle fleet – represent services for the general population and should therefore increase with the population. For simplicity, growth in these service sectors were assumed to increase linearly with population. The exception is electricity usage for stormwater drainage under the water management sector, which will vary from year to year based on total precipitation in each year and was carried forward unchanged from 2016 to 2030 and 2045 for reasons further discussed in Section 3.3.

Overall municipal GHG emissions in the City of Sacramento are forecast to decrease 42 percent by 2045 under existing programs and regulations (Table 10). Due to SB 100 requiring 100 percent GHG- free electricity in 2045, electricity-related emissions from buildings and facilities, streetlights and traffic signals, and water management are expected to reduce to zero by 2045. Emissions from natural gas, waste, and fuel usage from the vehicle fleet are expected to constitute the majority of emissions by 2045.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

16 Table 10 Municipal Forecast Summary
Year 2005 2016 2030 2045
Population 369,365 487,758 600,231 699,903
Projected Population Increase (%)
– –

23.1 (17% per year

16.6 00.1% per year
Buildings and Facilities
35,773
15,214 10,965 6,149
Water Management 9,516 6,093 0
Waste-in-Place 14,021 10,512 6,775 3,722
Streetlights and Traffic Signals 6,872 5,186 3,390 0
Vehicle Fleet 21,927 16,035 19,732 23,009
Municipal Emissions (MT CO2e) 78,584 56,463 46,954 32,880 Municipal Emissions per Capita (MT
CO2e/person) 0.116 0.078 0.047
Reduction from 2016 (%) – – 17% 42%
MT CO2e: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
SB 100 is the only state regulation included in the muncipal forecast. Although, it will reduce municipal GHG emissions substantially by 2045 as shown in Table 11. However, a gap remains between the municipal forecast and the City’s municipal targets. The reductions to close the gap will come from existing and newly identified municipal measures included in this and future iterations of the Sacramento Climate Action Plan.

Table 11 Estimated GHG Emissions Savings from SB100
Year 2016 2030 2045
Projected Electricity Use (kWh) 40,409,680 40,409,680 40,409,680 BAU Emissions (MT CO2e) 9,065 9,065 9,065
Emissions with SB100 (MT CO2e) 9,065 4,816 0
Savings (MT CO2e) 0 4,249 9,065

3.2 Buildings and Facilities
As described in Section 3.1, it was conservatively assumed that building and facility energy use projected into 2030 and 2045 will be the same as energy use in 2016. That is, the City will use roughly the same amount of electricity, natural gas, gasoline, and diesel each year through 2045.

However, while municipal building and facility energy use is expected to remain the same, GHG emissions from electricity in general are expected to decrease each year, due to the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) and SB 100. 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 percent of total procurement by 2026 and 60 percent of total procurement by 2030. The RPS program further requires these entities to increase procurement from GHG-free sources to 100 percent of total procurement by 2045. Further details on the RPS program are contained in Appendix A. After factoring in emissions reductions from the RPS program, overall GHG emissions from municipal buildings and facilities will therefore TOC
Municipal Forecast

Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast Methodology 17 decrease through 2045, from 15,214 MT CO2e in 2016 to 10,965 MT CO2e in 2030 to 6,149 MT CO2e in 2045 (Table 12).

Table 12 Activity and Emissions Data for Municipal Buildings and Facilities 2016 2030 2045
Activity Data
Purchased Electricity – SMUD (kWh) 40,323,720 40,323,720 40,323,720 Purchased Electricity – PG&E (kWh) 85,960 85,960 85,960 Purchased Electricity – Solar City (kWh) 4,353,000 4,353,000 4,353,000 Natural Gas Use – PG&E (therms) 900,788 900,788 900,788 Gasoline Use (gallons) 44 44 44
Diesel Use (gallons) 1,661 1,661 1,661
Emissions Factors
SMUD Electricity (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.00022 0.00012 0.0
PG&E Electricity (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.00013 0.00008 0.0
Solar City Electricity (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.00000 0.00000 0.0 PG&E Natural Gas (MT CO2e/therm) 0.00681 0.00681 0.00681 Gasoline (MT CO2e/gallon) 0.00883 0.00883 0.008823
Diesel (MT CO2e/gallon) 0.01147 0.01147 0.01147
Emissions (MT CO2e)
Electricity – SMUD 9,053 4,809 0
Electricity – PG&E 12 7 0
Electricity – Solar City 0 0 0
Natural Gas – PG&E 6,130 6,130 6,130
Gasoline 0.4 0.4 0.4
Diesel 19 19 19
Total 15,214 10,965 6,149
MT CO2e: metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; kWh: kilowatt hour

3.3 Water Management
Electricity used for water management attributable to water supply conveyance and wastewater conveyance will increase each year as the population grows, to service more people and meet projected demand. As mentioned above, electricity usage attributable to stormwater drainage varies from year to year based on precipitation levels, independent of population growth. Inventory year 2016 was the ninth wettest year on record in Sacramento, suggesting that electricity usage for stormwater drainage was particularly high in 2016. This forecast made the conservative assumption that 2030 and 2045 may also be particularly wet years, especially considering that climate change is expected to bring more intense rainfall to Northern California. The electricity usage for stormwater drainage from 2016 was therefore carried forward into 2030 and 2045. Emissions totals for electricity usage from water management factored in anticipated changes to emissions factors due to the RPS program (Table 13)
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

18 Table 13 Water Management Activity and Emissions Data 2016 2030 2045
Activity Data
Water Supply Conveyance (kWh) 35,190,068 43,304,613 50,495,600 Wastewater Conveyance (kWh) 2,551,344 3,139,663 3,661,023 Stormwater Drainage (kWh) 4,645,541 4,645,541 4,645,541 Emissions Factors
SMUD Electricity (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.00022 0.00012 0.0
Emissions (MT CO2e)
Water Supply Conveyance 7,901 5,164 0
Wastewater Conveyance 573 374 0
Stormwater Drainage 1,043 554 0
Total 9,516 6,093 0
MT CO2e: metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; kWh: kilowatt hour

3.4 Waste-in-Place
Waste-in-Place emissions are expected to decrease over time due to no new organic material being added to the 28th Street landfill. As described in Section 2.6, waste-in-place emissions are entirely attributed to flaring of off-gassed CH4 from the permanently closed 28th Street Landfill. To estimate how emissions may decrease over time the annual percent reduction (4 percent) was calculated for the period between 2013 and 2016. In 2016, the landfill collected and flared 243,718,413 cubic feet of gas with an average methane content of 29.10 percent. Emissions from gas flaring at the landfill were 10,512 MT CO2e. The estimated gas capture based on historic subsidence and associated emissions based on Equation 9.1 of the LGOP protocol are included below in Table 14.

Table 14 Waste-in-Place Collected Gas and Emissions Estimates 2016 2030 2045
Data
Collected Gas 243,718,413 157,070,840 86,282,675
Emissions (MT CO2e) 10,512 6,775 3,722

3.5 Streetlights and Traffic Signals
Emissions from streetlights and traffic signals are based on electricity usage. Electricity usage associated with streetlights and traffic signals will increase as population increases (Table 15).

TOC
Municipal Forecast

Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast Methodology 19 Table 15 Streetlights and Traffic Signals Activity and Emissions Data 2016 2030 2045
Activity Data (kWh)
Traffic Signals 1,995,276 2,455,371 2,863,099
City-owned
streetlights 19,348,584 23,810,211 27,764,037
SMUD-owned
streetlights 1,753,473 2,157,810 2,516,127
Emissions Factors
SMUD Electricity (MT
CO2e/kWh)

0.00022 0.00012 0.0
Emissions (MT CO2e)
Traffic Signals 448 293 0
City-owned streetlights 4,344 2,839 0
SMUD-owned streetlights 394 257 0
Total 5,186 3,390 0
MT CO2e: metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent; kWh: kilowatt hour

3.6 Vehicle Fleet
Emissions from the City’s vehicle fleet were calculated based on total fuel usage in the year 2016. To project these numbers forward into 2030 and 2045, all fuel usage was assumed to increase at the same rate of population, as vehicle usage increases to provide services to more people every year (Table 16). Because vehicle fleet emissions are calculated using fuel specific factors (MT CO2e per gallon of fuel) these emission factors will not change over time as they are tied to the direct properties of the fuel. However, the efficiency of the fleet may increase over time lowering the total fuel combusted. This efficiency increase is difficult to calculate for several reasons. The first is that a large portion of the fuel combusted was in heavy duty vehicles which are not covered under current legislation. Furthermore, the estimates in the EMFAC model tool which is used to calculate future vehicle emissions is based on the countywide fleet. It is not clear that the City fleet (which is already made up of generally newer and more efficient vehicles) would have the same impact due to current legislation like Pavley. Therefore, to be conservative no adjustments were made to the City fleet. Emissions reductions will be calculated as part of the GHG reduction measures.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

20 Table 16 Activity and Emissions Data for Municipal Vehicle Fleet

2016 2030 2045
Activity Data (gallons)
Gasoline 1,146,935 1,411,409 1,645,782
Diesel 5,173 6,365 7,422
Biodiesel (99%) 512,081 630,163 734,806
CNG 67,880 83,532 97,403
RNG 18,228 22,432 26,156
Propane 7,538 9,276 10,816
LNG 945,258 1,163,227 1,356,388
Ethanol 53,808 66,216 77,212
Emissions Factors (MT CO2/gallon)
Gasoline 0.00886
Diesel 0.01147
Biodiesel (99%) 0.00126
CNG 0.00732
RNG 0.00097
Propane 0.00577
Emissions (MT CO2e)
Gasoline 10,125 12,459 14,528
Diesel 59 73 85
Biodiesel (99%) 643 791 922
CNG 495 610 711
RNG 18 22 25
Propane 44 54 62
LNG 4,312 5,306 6,187
Ethanol 340 418 487
Total 16,035 19,732 23,009
TOC
Municipal Target Setting

Appendix E – Municipal Inventory and Forecast Methodology 21 4 Municipal Target Setting
Municipal emissions reduction targets can be set the same way as community-wide reduction targets: as either an efficiency target (MT CO2e per capita or per service population per year) or as a community wide mass emissions target (total MT CO2e). 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. Furthermore, the General Plan Update may impact the forecast results. As such, the targets identified herein should remain provisional until the General Plan Update values are finalized and the quantification and analysis of potential GHG reduction measures completed.

The City of Sacramento has achieved both efficiency and absolute emissions reductions in municipal operations between 2005 and 2016. The purpose of target setting is to develop the trajectory toward achieving the State’s 2030 goal and prepare for the deep decarbonization needed by 2045 in a cost-effective manner by setting an incremental path toward achieving the EO B-55-18 goals.

There are two primary target pathways available to be consistent with State reduction goals:
 SB 32 Target Pathway (red) is the pathway toward achieving the minimum reductions required by State law. This will require minimal reductions until 2030 and then steep reductions from 2030 to 2045.
 Linear Carbon Neutrality Pathway (green) is an incremental linear pathway from current per capita emissions levels straight to carbon neutrality in 2045. This pathway is also compliant with the 2030 State goal.

At this time Rincon suggests setting a municipal target that meets or exceeds the targets set for the community. The City has already set a reduction target of 33 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 which is more aggressive than the AB32 requirement of a return to 1990 levels or approximately a 15 percent reduction below 2005 levels by 2020. The two suggested reduction pathways are shown graphically in Figure 2.

Per Capita based municipal emissions targets were not included in this analysis. While a per capita target works well for the community, it is not recommended for the City since municipal emissions are not as directly tied to population growth. Therefore, Rincon suggests setting a mass emissions reduction target of at least 55 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2045 and thereafter. This pathway would be consistent with SB32 and Executive Order B-55-18 and is shown in Figure 3 (in red). However, a more aggressive target such as a linear reduction to carbon neutrality in 2045, shown in green in Figure 3, could also be considered. In order to achieve the SB32 compliant pathway (red), the City would need to reduce 48 percent below 2005 levels, 29 percent below 2016 levels, or an estimated 15 percent below 2030 forecast levels by 2030. To reach the linear to carbon neutral target shown in green, the City would need to reduce 60 percent below 2005 levels, 48 percent below 2016 or 38 percent below 2030 forecast levels by 2030. Emission levels for each target pathway, relative to historical actuals and the forecast, are presented in Table

17. City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

22 Figure 3 Municipal Target Reduction Pathways

Based on the results of the community target setting and the municipal measure quantification process, the City may choose either of these targets for consistency with state targets.

Table 17 Municipal Target Reduction Pathways
Target Pathway
2005
(MT CO2e)
2016
(MT CO2e)
2030
(MT CO2e)
2045
(MT CO2e)
Historical Actual & Forecast 78,584 56,463 46,954 32,880 SB 32 - - 40,078 0
Linear to Carbon Neutral - - 29,205 0
MT CO2e: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent

0 10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
2044
2045
MT CO2e
Forecast SB32 Linear to Carbon Neutral
TOC
This page intentionally left blank
Appendix F - Municipal Measures
GHG Emissions Quantification
422

City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG
Emissions Quantification

prepared by
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
449 15th Street, Suite 300
Oakland, California 94609
June 2022

TOC
Table of Contents

Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG Emissions Quantification i Table of Contents
1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 3 2 Reduction Target ....................................................................................................................... 4 3 GHG Reduction Summary .......................................................................................................... 5 4 Municipal Measures Detail ........................................................................................................ 7 MM-1 Quantification ................................................................................................................. 8 MM-2 Quantification ............................................................................................................... 10 MM-3 Background ................................................................................................................... 12 MM-4 Background ................................................................................................................... 13 MM-5 Quantification ............................................................................................................... 17 MM-6 Background ................................................................................................................... 18 MM-7 Quantification ............................................................................................................... 19 MM-8 Background ................................................................................................................... 21 Tables
Table 1 Summary of GHG Emissions Reductions by Measure ...................................................... 6 Table 2 Quantification Results for MM-1.1 and MM-1.2 ............................................................. 8 Table 3 Quantification Results for MM-1.3.................................................................................. 9 Table 4 Quantification Results for MM-2.1................................................................................ 11 Table 5 Quantification Results for MM-2.2................................................................................ 11 Table 6 Quantification Results for MM-5.1................................................................................ 17 Table 7 Quantification Results for MM-7.1................................................................................ 19

Figures
Figure 1 Estimated Municipal GHG Reductions and Target Pathway ............................................. 5 City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

This page intentionally left blank.

TOC
Introduction

Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 3 1 Introduction
This technical appendix contains a detailed description of each measure the City will take to reduce its municipal-level greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as well as quantification of the reductions expected from the measures wherever possible. This technical appendix is organized around two levels which include:
 Municipal Measures (MM): Municipal measures define core strategies that will result in reductions in GHG emissions at the municipal level
o Actions: Each measure is driven by sets of actions that together support and generate the GHG reductions necessary to achieve the City’s municipal-level goals Municipal measures and actions can be either quantitative or supportive and are defined as follows:
 Quantitative: These measures and actions have substantial evidence including case studies, calculations, or other substantial evidence that prove that the implementation of said measure/action will have a measurable GHG reduction when implemented. These measures/actions have been quantified based on this substantial evidence and the reductions summed to show how the City will meet its 2030 and 2045 municipal goals and exceed the state target (SB 32) of 40 percent below 1990 GHG levels by 2030.  Supportive: These measures and actions may also be quantifiable and in most cases have substantial evidence to support their overall contribution to GHG reduction. However, due to one of several factors including a low GHG reduction benefit, indirect GHG reduction benefit, lack of the necessary data, or simply a high level of difficulty in quantifying accurate GHG reductions, they have not been quantified and do not contribute directly to the expected municipal GHG reduction goal. However, these measures/actions are critical to the overall success of the CAP.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

4 2 Reduction Target
Without additional action, municipal emissions are currently forecast to decrease from 56,463 MT CO2e in 2016 to 46,954 MT CO2e in 2030, and to 32,880 in 2045. The City has established a goal of reducing municipal emissions on a linear path to carbon neutrality in 2045. This equates to 29,205 MT CO2e in 2030 (17,749 MT CO2e below the 2030 forecast) and net zero in 2045 (32,880 MT CO2e below the 2045 forecast). Together the quantitative and supportive measures and actions listed in this document will help the City achieve its 2030 and 2045 emission reduction goals. These goals align with the City’s community CAP goals as well as the State goals, including the requirements of SB 32 (a 40 percent reduction from 1990 levels in 2030), and the intent of Assembly Bill (AB) 1279. A linear reduction to carbon neutrality exceeds the State target by establishing a target of 56 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

This technical report provides the emission reduction calculations and evidence that the municipal measures adopted in the CAP will allow the City to reach its 2030 goal and will provide substantial foundation for and progress toward achieving the 2045 goal and AB 1279.

Achieving carbon neutrality, on both a municipal and community level, will require significant changes to the technology and systems currently in place. These changes include carbon neutral electricity, complete electrification of buildings and the transportation system, a shift to shared and active mobility, and waste reduction and diversion. The measures and actions developed to meet the 2030 goals are the foundations for this long-term transformation. However, the emissions reductions quantified for 2045 in this document are not yet enough to meet the long term 2045 goal. As the current measures and actions are implemented, the City will gain more information, new technologies will emerge, and current pilot projects and programs will scale to the size needed to reach carbon neutrality. Furthermore, the State is expected to continue providing updated regulations and support once the 2030 target is achieved. Future CAP updates will outline new measures needed to reach the 2045 goal of carbon neutrality.

TOC
GHG Reduction Summary

Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 5 3 GHG Reduction Summary
The City of Sacramento, in coordination with Rincon Consultants has developed a suite of measures and specific actions to reduce municipal GHG emissions over time. Based on these measures, emissions are expected to exceed the 2030 reduction target but fall short of the 2045 target by 3,741 MT CO2e. This is illustrated below in Figure 1. The 3,741 MT CO2e remaining in 2045 is entirely attributed to waste-in-place emissions which are caused by the degradation of waste already located in the closed municipal landfill, as well as some remaining gasoline and diesel usage for municipal generators. This waste sector is not usually considered in most GHG inventories, and the City is already capturing methane from this facility, greatly reducing GHG emissions. These remaining sources of GHG emissions will likely need to be mitigated through carbon sequestration taking place at the larger community scale.

Figure 1 Estimated Municipal GHG Reductions and Target Pathway

A summary of the GHG emissions reduction by Measure is included in Table 1. For a complete description of each measure and the contributing actions, please refer to the individual measure descriptions below.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

6 Table 1 Summary of GHG Emissions Reductions by Measure Measure
# Measure Description
2030 Reduction
(MT CO2e)
2045 Reduction
(MT CO2e)
MM-1 Reduce natural gas consumption 50% below 2016 levels by 2030 and 100% by 2045.
3,068 6,130
MM-2 Electrify or decarbonize 100% of light-duty fleet vehicles by 2035 and 100% of municipal fleet by 2045.
9,246 23,009
MM-3 Reduce emissions from trips between City facilities occurring during the workday.

Supportive Supportive
MM-4 Reduce municipal waste sent to landfills. Supportive Supportive MM-5 Reduce emissions from water usage/conveyance and
stormwater drainage (in MT of CO2e per MG delivered) 100% by 2030.
6,093 0
MM-6 Improve carbon sequestration potential of municipal parks, greenspace at City properties, and street tree planters in the public right-of-way.

Supportive Supportive
MM-7 Procure carbon free electricity by 2030, in alignment with SMUD’s 2030 Zero Carbon Plan.
8,198 0
MM-8 Reduce City employee commuter VMT. Supportive Supportive MM-9 Encourage an increase in the number of employee-owned EV and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles 28% by 2030 and 100% by 2045
Supportive Supportive
Reduction Summary
Estimated Reductions Achieved from Full Implementation of Measures 26,604 29,139 Total Reduction Needed 17,749 32,880
Gap -8,855 3,741
Notes: MM = municipal measure, numbers may not sum due to rounding.

TOC
Municipal Measures Detail

Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 7 4 Municipal Measures Detail
Measure MM-1:

Reduce natural gas consumption 50%
below 2016 by 2030 and 100% by
2045.
2030 Target
3,068 MT CO2e
2045 Target
6,130 MT CO2e
Performance Metric(s):
• 50% all-electric building stock by 2030
• 100% all-electric building stock by 2045

Action # Action Anticipated
Reduction
Quantitative Measures
MM-1.1 Electrification –Implement an “electric first” commitment for building projects and major retrofits.
3,065 MT CO2e
(2030)
6,130 MT CO2e
(2045)
MM-1.2 Building Retrofits - Develop a strategy to transition 100% of existing municipally owned and controlled buildings and facilities to electric by 2045 through expansion of the City’s Energy Efficiency Reinvestment Program. This includes auditing remaining City facilities, establishing a retrofit project pipeline of fundable projects prioritized based on opportunities to reduce energy costs and eliminate natural gas, developing a phase-out plan for each piece of natural gas equipment, and creating an internal revolving loan fund for City facility retrofits.

MM-1.3 SolarShares - Maintain participation in SolarShares for off-site solar photovoltaics to offset at least 35% of municipal power in 2030. 3 (2030) Supportive Measures
MM-1.4 Streetlights – Retrofit all post-top streetlights to LED and remaining streetlights as feasible by 2030. Supportive
MM-1.5 Municipal Green Building Policy – Develop a Municipal Green Building Policy to include all-electric retrofits at time of replacement for major retrofits or building replacements, when feasible.

Supportive
MM-1.6 Generator Phase-out – Evaluate the feasibility of phasing out diesel generators by 2033, by replacing them with solar and storage to provide backup power for buildings.

Utilize renewable diesel requirements for existing generators in the short-term if needed.

Supportive
MM-1.7 Solar – Expand on-site production of renewable power and develop energy storage technologies for critical operations.

Supportive
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

8 MM-1 Quantification
In order for the City to contribute its part in reaching carbon neutrality on a community-wide level, the majority of the City’s building stock will need to be carbon neutral. Electrification allows buildings to use the 100% carbon neutral electricity that will be provided by SMUD by 2030. This measure ensures (1) that new buildings will be built 100% electric so that they won’t need to be retrofitted later, (2) that old buildings will be retrofitted on as fast a timeline as possible, and (3) decreases building emissions to the extent feasible while they are not electric. The municipal forecast also included expected efficiencies through 2045 due to Title 24 and SB 100. Actions 1.1 and 1.2 are quantified together. Supportive Actions 1.4 through 1.12 are not directly quantifiable but will help the City achieve the overall measure.

Evidence for Actions 1.1 and 1.2: These two measures ensure electrification of the municipal building stock. By 2030, electricity will be carbon neutral (i.e., 0 MT CO2e per kWh) and 100% electrification of the building stock would result in 100% reduction in building emissions from natural gas. In addition to the electrification efforts, retrofits to increase energy efficiency in municipal buildings is well underway, and the City aims to reduce electricity use in buildings 25% by 2030. Between 2016 and 2019, the City has decreased electricity.

Table 2 Quantification Results for MM-1.1 and MM-1.2
Actions 1.1 and 1.2 2030 2045
Natural Gas Saved (therms) 450,394 900,788
MT CO2e/therm 0.00681 0.00681
Emissions reductions (MT CO2e) 3,067 6,130
Emissions from electricity conversion 0 0
Electricity saved from retrofits (kWh) 10,102,420 10,102,420 Net MT CO2e Savings 3,068 6,130
MM-1.8 Battery Storage Pilot Project: Identify a site and construct a battery storage pilot project as well as encourage pairing battery storage systems with all solar PV system installation.

Supportive
MM-1.9 Microgrid Pilot Project - Identify a site and construct a microgrid pilot project preferably for a critical facility like a fire station.

Supportive
MM-1.10 Energy Management – Install and utilize energy management software in existing and new buildings in order to allow for building monitoring, responsive repairs, and assessment of long-term energy trends. Provide trainings on software to facilities management.

Supportive
MM-1.11 Electrification Study – Conduct an electrification study to identify sources of natural gas and diesel which can be eliminated/switched at time of replacement.

Supportive
MM-1.12 Additional Resources – Identify additional resources (money and staffing) to assist with implementation of Municipal Measure 1.

Supportive
TOC
Municipal Measures Detail

Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 9 Evidence for Action 1.3: The City of Sacramento participates in the SolarShares program, which has offset 28,979,195 kWh since 2016 (about 35% of electricity usage year-to-year). By continuing to participate in the program, the City expects to continue offsetting approximately 35% of electricity usage each year, resulting in savings through 2030, until electricity is carbon-neutral.

Table 3 Quantification Results for MM-1.3
Action 1.3 2030 2045
Electricity Offset (kWh) 10,607,541 0
Net MT CO2e Savings 31 0

1 Emissions reductions are small due to SMUD electricity reaching carbon neutrality by 2030 as part of the SMUD 2030 Plan. The reductions are therefore attributed only to the PG&E electricity which is a small portion of overall City consumption and will also be much lower emissions by 2030.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

10 MM-2 Quantification
Electrifying the vehicle fleet will reduce the City’s dependence on fossil fuels and enable emissions from vehicles replaced by EVs to go to zero in 2045, due to SB 100 making electricity carbon neutral in 2045. The City of Sacramento will electrify the vehicle fleet in a phased approach that starts with light-duty vehicles and will include medium and heavy-duty vehicles as the technology becomes available. Currently, the City’s fleet of 2,433 units is comprised of 2,179 on-road vehicles and 254 off-road vehicles. A total of 1,632 units (roughly 67% of the fleet) are less than 10 years old, while the remained of the fleet, numbering 801 units (15% of the fleet) is more than 15 years old and Measure MM-2:

Electrify or decarbonize 100% of light-duty
fleet vehicles by 2035 and 100% of municipal
fleet by 2045
2030 Target
9,246 MT CO2e
2045 Target
23,009 MT CO2e
Performance Metrics:
• 74% of light-duty fleet vehicles are EVs by 2030
• 100% of light-duty fleet vehicles are EVs by 2035
• 100% of municipal fleet is EV by 2045
Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Actions
MM-2.1 ZEV First – Continue to implement the City’s adopted “Zero-emission Vehicle First” policy that directs City departments to purchase ZEVs and develop a plan to convert 100% of all light-duty vehicles in the City’s fleet to ZEVs by 2035 while forging partnerships with manufacturers to pilot medium and heavy-duty ZEVs.
9,181 MT CO2e (2030)
23,009 MT CO2e (2045)
MM-2.2 Renewable Diesel and Alternatives – Continue to use renewable diesel in all diesel fleet vehicles.
65 MT CO2e (2030)
Supportive Actions
MM-2.3 EV Chargers – Install EV charging infrastructure across City-owned facilities for motor pool vehicles and personal vehicle fueling Supportive
MM-2.4 Hybrid Phase-in – Replace all expiring mid-size vehicles and trucks with hybrid models if no all-electric alternative is available.

Supportive
MM-2.5 Anti-idling Policy – Expand and enforce existing anti-idling policies on all City vehicles
Supportive
TOC
Municipal Measures Detail

Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 11 could be replaced with EVs prior to 2025. Actions 2.1 and 2.2 are quantified below. Actions 2.3 through 2.5 are not directly quantifiable but will help the City to achieve the overall measure.

Evidence for Action 2.1: This measure ensures electrification of light-duty vehicles that are expected to use about 1.4 million gallons of gasoline in 2030, the equivalent of 12,459 MT CO2e. By 2040, the City’s vehicle fleet is projected to produce approximately 23,009 MT CO2e. The conversion of light- duty vehicles to all-electric by 2030 will replace the projected gasoline usage with electricity usage, with a much lower emissions factor than gasoline. By 2045, the emissions factor for electricity will be 0 MT CO2e/kWh, making all electric vehicles carbon neutral, saving all vehicle fleet emissions otherwise projected.

Table 4 Quantification Results for MM-2.1
Action 2.1 2030 2045
Gallons of gasoline saved 1,411,409 1,645,782
MT CO2e/gallon 0.00883 0.00883
Emissions Reductions (MT CO2e) 12,459 14,528
Emissions from other fuels saved 0 8480
Emissions from electricity conversion 0 0
Net MT CO2e Savings 9,181 23,009

Evidence for Action 2.2: This measure replaces the vehicle fleet’s diesel usage in 2030 and 2045 with renewable or biodiesel, reducing associated GHG emissions to zero.

Table 5 Quantification Results for MM-2.2
Action 2.2 2030 2045
Emissions from diesel usage in fleet in
2030 - after Action 2.1 (MT CO2e) 73 0
Diesel usage by fleet in 2030 (gallons) 6,365 0
Renewable diesel emission factor (MT
CO2e/gallon) 0.001 0.001
Net MT CO2e Savings 65 0

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

12 MM-3 Background
One way the City will reduce VMT and overall emissions in the transportation sector, for its employees during the workday will include reducing emissions from trips between City facilities. The City plans to do this by providing alternatives if driving is avoidable (such as telecommuting and teleconferencing) and making an electric car share program available when driving is unavoidable.

The mechanism through which the City plans to avoid unnecessary trips is through incentive programs for employees and by institutionalizing work-from-home as a default option for many employees.

Measure MM-3
Reduce emissions from work-related trips
by City employees
2030 Target
Supportive
2045 Target
Supportive
Performance Metrics:
• Number of actions/programs completed or in place.
• Annual survey of City employees on work-related trips and telecommuting.

Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
MM-3.1 Teleconferencing and Telecommuting – Promote video conferencing and telecommuting in place of in person
meetings or working in the office when possible
Supportive
MM-3.2 Vehicle Trips – Reduce vehicle trips for City business by encouraging active transportation modes, transit, and
carpooling. Award points or have a program to encourage staff to take active and transit modes. Have a prize drawing quarterly to further incentivize adoption.

Supportive
MM-3.3 Bikepools – Expand incorporation of bicycles (including electric bicycles) into City motor pool fleet for employees to use for work-related business.

Supportive
TOC
Municipal Measures Detail

Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 13

MM-4 Background
While this measure is not directly quantified (and not included in the GHG inventory), the City plans to take multiple steps to drastically reduce its waste output. The City will lead community-wide efforts to reduce and divert organic waste through new programs, and employee education. Action Measure MM-4
Reduce municipal waste sent to landfills
2030 Target
Supportive
2045 Target
Supportive
Performance Metrics:
• No waste sent to landfill from municipal buildings in 2045 Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
MM-4.1 Develop a set of internal policies for city facilities and departments to increase diversion of solid waste from city operations away from landfills.

Supportive
MM-4.2 Compost and Recycling for Buildings - Ensure organics recycling collection services are available in all owned facilities, as well as ensure its availability in all future occupied facilities, by 2023.

Supportive
MM-4.3 Employee Outreach – Run online and in person outreach and educational events that encourage waste diversion
among City employees, including the creation of a training around compost and recycling in City Facilities to be taken by all new hires during their onboarding process.

Supportive
MM-4.4 Centralization - End deskside collection of garbage by custodial, and switch instead to combined organics,
recycling and garbage stations.

Supportive
MM-4.5 Update the City’s Sustainable Purchasing Policy which mandates procurement of items which have substantial
quantities of recycled or reused content and are recyclable, reusable or compostable themselves.

Supportive
MM-4.6 Develop and implement a plan for procuring compost, mulch, and renewable natural gas in alignment with SB
1383 requirements and using these materials for City
facilities and operations, community benefit, and/or carbon sequestration.

Supportive
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

14 4.1 directs the city to conduct a waste reduction plan and audit, establishing a baseline for future actions.

The City’s control over supplies and services such solid waste collection and janitorial services is largely decentralized. For example, nearly all City facilities contract for their own solid waste services through Waste Management Inc. under an Agreement administered by the Procurement Division. Implementation of MM-4 will require involvement of an array of groups and service providers, from the Facilities Division of Public Works to the Procurement Division of Finance, to align solid waste collection and janitorial services with MM-4 and supporting actions. City will need to develop a set of policies and a strategies to engage and work across multiple departments, divisions, and services providers to divert solid waste from the City’s operations away from landfills.

TOC
Municipal Measures Detail

Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 15

Measure MM-5
Reduce emissions from water
usage/conveyance and stormwater
drainage (in MT of CO2e per MG
delivered) 100% by 2030
2030 Target
6,093 MT CO2e
2045 Target
0 MT CO2e
Performance Metrics:
• Water utility emissions associated with electricity decreased 100% by 2030 Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
Quantitative Actions
MM-5.1 Purchase 100% carbon-free electricity for water
conveyance and stormwater drainage needs.
6,093 MT CO2e (2030)
0 MT CO2e (2045)
Supportive Actions
MM-5.2 Investigate deployment of on-site solar and storage projects to increase resiliency of critical water and
stormwater infrastructure.

Supportive
MM-5.3 Continue to implement and track low water use landscapes (native and drought tolerant plants) for new park
development per YPCE Strategic Plan Policy 2.5d and e, and the Model Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance.

Supportive
MM-5.4 Evaluate the feasibility of converting sports fields to synthetic turf and add new synthetic fields where possible.

Supportive
MM-5.5 Continue to evaluate the existing watering/irrigation schedule and determine what water reduction strategies
can be implemented per YPCE Strategic Plan Policy 2.5d
and e. Examples include reducing the number of watering days and watering in the evening to reduce
evapotranspiration.

Supportive
MM-5.6 Optimize the efficiency of irrigation control systems by training staff how to correctly use them. YPCE will
inventory EPA WaterSense certified Smart Irrigation
Controllers and host trainings to ensure that the
appropriate staff learn how to operate each controller to improve the management, use, reporting, and data analysis of the irrigation control systems.

Supportive
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

16 MM-5.7 Continue to report for the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance each year. YPCE will work with the Community
Development Department and the Department of Utilities
to submit the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance Implementation Annual Report every January.

Supportive
MM-5.8 Continue investigation of energy efficiency improvements of water utility operations and systems and continue to improve the energy efficiency of utility pumps and water treatment plants.

Supportive
MM-5.9 Water Conservation Inspections for City Facilities: Include landscape irrigation inspections in water conservation
inspection and provide educational materials/media for
building maintenance staff on how maintain landscape
irrigation and track and set leak alerts for buildings.

Supportive
TOC
Municipal Measures Detail

Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 17 MM-5 Quantification
Emissions from utilities are directly attributable to the electricity, natural gas and diesel used for water and wastewater conveyance and stormwater drainage, with the majority of those emissions from electricity use. By 2045, electricity in California is required to be carbon neutral, with an emissions factor of 0, due to SB 100. However, prior to 2045, there is opportunity for the City to utilize electricity that is carbon neutral or lower carbon than what is offered by the current electricity providers within the City. Because water and wastewater conveyance and stormwater drainage are necessary services that the City will continue to provide through 2045 and beyond, the only way to reduce emissions in this sector is to reduce the emissions factor for the electricity used, by adding more renewable resources—through purchase or direct construction—to the grid mix. In 2017, water management accounted for almost 20% of overall emissions, and is therefore a key emissions sector to address.

Evidence for Action 5.1: The overall measure aims to achieve a 100% carbon free electricity by 2030, and to become carbon neutral by 2045. Emissions from utilities are expected to be approximately 6,000 MT CO2e in 2030 and, due to electricity being carbon neutral in 2045, 0 MT CO2e in 2045.

Table 6 Quantification Results for MM-5.1
Action 5.1 2030 2045
Emissions from water utilities 6,093 0
Emission Reduction 100% 100%
Total MT CO2e Savings 6,093 0
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

18 MM-6 Background
Measure MM-6 focuses on carbon sequestration in municipal greenspaces as a long-term strategy for reducing municipal GHG emissions. Trees, plants, and other green materials have natural carbon sequestration capabilities. The City manages many open and green spaces around Sacramento, including street trees, parks, and other landscaped areas. Managing these spaces for higher carbon sequestration potential includes integrating low-water use landscapes. The City also plans to explore ways to utilize building materials which have been created through a process that stores carbon in the material.

Measure MM-6
Improve carbon sequestration potential of
municipal parks, greenspace at City
properties, and street tree planters in the
public right-of-way
2030 Target
Supportive
2045 Target
Supportive
Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
MM-6.1 Evaluate existing park turf areas for conversion to low water use landscapes using non-irrigated, drought
tolerant, or mulched landscaping.

Supportive
MM-6.2 For passive recreation areas, continue to reduce landscape water usage with low-water use plants,
compost, and landscape design that emphasizes
drought tolerant plants and mulch areas.

Supportive
MM-6.3 Investigate and explore options for carbon
sequestration at City facilities such as through carbon sequestration in materials for construction and
hardscapes or soil health restoration projects.

Supportive
TOC
Municipal Measures Detail

Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 19

MM-7 Quantification
MM-7 Aligns with SMUDs 2030 Zero Carbon Plan which will provide the City with 100% carbon free electricity by 2030. While there are no specific municipal measures listed, the City will support SMUD in the implementation of the 2030 Zero Carbon Plan as highlighted in the community actions.

Table 7 Quantification Results for MM-7.1
Measure MM-7.1 2030 2045
Emissions from Electricity 8,198 0
Total MT CO2e Savings 8,198 0

Measure MM-7
Procure carbon-free electricity by 2030
2030 Target
8,198 MT CO2e
2045 Targe0
0 MT CO2e e
Action # Action Anticipated Reduction
MM-7.1 Procure carbon-free electricity for municipal
operations by 2030.
8,198 MT CO2e (2030)
0 MT CO2e (2045)
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

20 Measure MM-8
Reduce City employee commuter VMT
2030 Target
Supportive
2045 Target
Supportive
Performance Metrics:
• Employee VMT reduced 20% by 2030
• Employee VMT reduced 30% by 2045
Action # Action Anticipated
Reduction
MM-8.1 Establish a Transportation Demand Management program for City employees
Supportive
MM-8.2 Survey City staff to determine baseline commute data. Conduct a new survey every 2 years.

Supportive
MM-8.3 Conduct internal outreach to educate staff on available incentives and solicit feedback on which options work best and how to improve incentives/reduce hurdles to implementation.

Supportive
MM-8.4 Paid Time Off Rewards Program – Implement a sustainable commute rewards program rewarding employees with time off for using alternative modes of transportation.

Supportive
MM-8.5 Pre-Tax Commuter Benefit – Continue providing pre-tax commuter benefits for transit commuters and encourage use of commuter benefits for bicycle commuters as allowed by federal law.

Supportive
MM-8.6 Parking Cash-out – Engage with labor partners to explore alternatives to traditional employee commute provisions such as City-provided parking and parking stipends, and instead incentivize carpooling, public transit, and active transportation.

Supportive
MM-8.7 Dynamic Ridematch – Promote the regional carpool matching platform that allows employees to request carpool with peers on days and times when they are needed.

Supportive
MM-8.8 Remote work – Promote and support working remotely for employees where possible by encouraging it for office employees as appropriate, by providing necessary equipment, training, and encouraging all meetings (when possible) to be set up for web conferencing so that people who aren’t physically in the room can attend. Allow for hybrid work-from-home schedules to increase flexibility for employees.

Supportive
TOC
Municipal Measures Detail

Appendix F - Municipal Measures GHG Emissions Quantification 21 MM-8 Background
The actions in Measure MM-8 have not been quantified but are key strategies in reducing VMT at the municipal level within Sacramento, as well as helping to reduce overall VMT within the community. As VMT is a large share of the municipal and community emissions, reducing VMT will result in important emissions reductions. While the City cannot require employees to choose alternate commuting methods, these actions will help provide options and incentives to City employees to choose transportation modes other than single-passenger vehicles to commute to work, thereby creating the opportunity for employees to actively reduce their own VMT.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

22 MM-9 Background
The actions in Measure MM-9 have not been quantified but are key strategies in decarbonizing the work commutes of Sacramento City employees. While the City does not currently track employee commute distances and methods in order to determine associated GHG emissions, these actions will help the City start to track these metrics, as well as incentivize employees to choose EVs or plug- in vehicles where feasible. The EV adoption goals associated with this measure track with the communitywide EV adoption goals of the CAAP.

Measure MM-9
Encourage an increase in the number of
employee-owned EV and plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles 28% by 2030 and 100% by
2045
2030 Target
Supportive
2045 Target
Supportive
Performance Metrics:
• 28% of employee-owned vehicles are EV/plug-in hybrid by 2030 • 100% of employee-owned vehicles are EV/plug-in hybrid by 2030 Action # Action Anticipated
Reduction
MM-9.1 EV Chargers – Implement the 2017 EV Strategy directive to meet or exceed CALGreen Tier 2 standards for EV chargers, and transition existing facilities to provide EV charging capacity as feasible.

Supportive
MM-9.2 Commuting Surveys – Conduct a survey of City Staff to determine how staff commute to work, what kinds of vehicles they own, and what hurdles they face in purchasing EVs. Conduct a new survey every 2 years.

Supportive
MM-9.3 EV Rebates – Provide information to all City staff about local, State, and federal rebates annually. Include lifecycle and maintenance cost information of EV ownership.

Supportive
TOC

Appendix G - Vulnerability Assessment
448

Appendix G - Climate Change Vulnerability
Assessment

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT

Prepared by

Dyett and Bhatia
4001 Howe Street
Oakland, CA 94611

April 2023
City of Sacramento
Climate Action and Adaptation Plan

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
i

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 4

1.1 What is Climate Vulnerability? ........................................................................................ 5 2 Climate Change Effects .......................................................................................... 7

2.1 Broad Changes in the Climate System ............................................................................. 7

2.2 Primary and Secondary Impacts .................................................................................... 11 3 Vulnerability ......................................................................................................... 64

3.1 Vulnerable Populations ................................................................................................. 64

3.2 Critical Facilities ............................................................................................................. 87 4 Adaptive Capacity ................................................................................................ 99

4.1 Climate Change Readiness Landscape ........................................................................... 99

4.2 Existing Adaptive Capacity ........................................................................................... 109 5 Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 122

5.1 Risk Assessment Summary .......................................................................................... 122 6 Appendix: Understanding Cal-Adapt and Key Scenario Assumptions ................. 123

TOC
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
ii

List of Figures
Figure 2-1: Average Annual Temperatures ................................................................................... 14 Figure 2-2: Annual Number of Extreme Heat Days ....................................................................... 16 Figure 2-3: Average Number of Extreme Heat Days per Year ....................................................... 16 Figure 2-4: Average Number of Extreme Heat Events per Month ................................................ 17 Figure 2-5: Monthly Average Maximum Temperature of Extreme Heat Days ............................. 17 Figure 2-6: Annual Number of Warm Nights ................................................................................. 22 Figure 2-7: Annual Number of Warm Nights ................................................................................. 23 Figure 2-8: Average Number of Warm Nights Per Month ............................................................. 23 Figure 2-9: Monthly Average Temperature of Warm Nights ........................................................ 25 Figure 2-10: Longest Stretch of Consecutive Warm Nights........................................................... 25 Figure 2-11: Average Longest Stretch of Consecutive Warm Nights ............................................ 26 Figure 2-12a: Number of Heat Waves Per Year ............................................................................ 27 Figure 2-12b: Average Number of Heat Waves Per Year .............................................................. 27 Figure 2-13: Maximum Heat Wave Duration ................................................................................ 28 Figure 2-14: Average Maximum Heat Wave Duration .................................................................. 28 Figure 2-15: Total Annual Precipitation ......................................................................................... 32 Figure 2-16: Average Annual Precipitation ................................................................................... 33 Figure 2-17: Number of Extreme Precipitation Events Per Year ................................................... 33 Figure 2-18: Annual Inches of Rainfall from Extreme Precipitation Events .................................. 34 Figure 2-19: Average Number of Extreme Precipitation Events Per Month ................................. 34 Figure 2-20: Average Total Rainfall Due to Extreme Precipitation Events Per Month ..................... 35 Figure 2-21: Average Statewide April Snow Water Equivalence (Inches) ..................................... 45 List of Tables
Table 2-1: Primary and Secondary Climate Change Impacts in Sacramento ................................ 12 Table 2-2: Temperature Increase .................................................................................................. 14 Table 2-3: Changes in Precipitation Patterns ................................................................................ 31 Table 2-4: Major Flood Events in the Sacramento Region, 1986 - 2021 ....................................... 37 Table 2-5: Wildfire ......................................................................................................................... 51 Table 2-6: Sea Level Rise ............................................................................................................... 60 Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
iii
List of Maps
Map 1: Urban Heat Island .......................................................................................................... 20 Map 2: Tree Canopy ................................................................................................................... 21 Map 3: Levee System and Leveed Areas ................................................................................... 40 Map 4: Repetitive Loss Areas and FEMA Flood Zones ............................................................... 41 Map 5: Historical Snowpack (1961 – 1990) ............................................................................... 46 Map 6: Snowpack Mid-Century (2035 – 2064) .......................................................................... 47 Map 7: Snowpack End-of-Century (2070 – 2099) ...................................................................... 48 Map 8: Historical Annual Average of Area Burned by Wildfires (1961 - 1990) ......................... 53 Map 9: Annual Average of Area Burned by Wildfires Mid-Century (2035 – 2064) ................... 54 Map 10: Annual Average of Area Burned by Wildfires End-of-Century (2070 - 2099) ............... 55 Map 11: Composite Air Quality by Census Tract ......................................................................... 58 Map 12: Extreme Sea Level Rise Average Model 2040 to 2060 and FEMA Flood Zone .............. 62 Map 13: Extreme Sea Level Rise Average Model 2060 to 2080 and FEMA Flood Zone .............. 63 Map 14: Children Under 5 Years ................................................................................................. 66 Map 15: Percentage of Adults Ages 65 and Older ...................................................................... 68 Map 16: Disability ........................................................................................................................ 70 Map 17: Communities of Color ................................................................................................... 72 Map 18: Racial Distribution ......................................................................................................... 73 Map 19: Concentration of Poverty .............................................................................................. 75 Map 20: Housing Cost Burdened Households ............................................................................. 78 Map 21: Renter-Occupied Housing Units .................................................................................... 79 Map 22: Rate of Linguistic Isolation ............................................................................................ 82 Map 23: Urban Heat Island and Disadvantaged Communities ................................................... 84 Map 24: Disadvantaged Communities in Repetitive Loss Areas and FEMA Flood Zones ........... 85 Map 25: Emergency Evacuation Shelters and FEMA Flood Zones .............................................. 93 Map 26: Industrial Facilities and FEMA Flood Zones ................................................................... 94 Map 27: Public Safety Facilities and FEMA Flood Zones ............................................................. 95 Map 28: Transportation Facilities and FEMA Flood Zones .......................................................... 96 Map 29: Disadvantaged Communities, Opportunity and Promise Zones ................................... 98 TOC

Executive Summary
This Vulnerability Assessment provides a foundation for the City’s policies and actions to adapt to climate change impacts, by assessing the key climate change impacts that are likely to affect Sacramento, including those that have potential to put residents and critical infrastructure at risk.

The City’s ability to build adaptive capacity to respond to climate change requires an understanding of the ways in which climate change impacts will be felt in Sacramento. This report details those findings, which are summarized below.

CLIMATE CHANGE EFFECTS
The primary climate change impacts that are expected for Sacramento include increases in average temperature and changes in precipitation patterns such as reduced snow pack, increases in extreme weather such as heat waves and extreme precipitation events, and air quality impacts from increased wildfires.
• Temperature. Temperatures are projected to increase by about five to six degrees Fahrenheit ( °F) throughout Sacramento by mid- century ( 2035-2064). Under these conditions, Sacramento could experience hotter and significantly drier conditions. The effects of temperature increase are likely to be felt throughout Sacramento , especially in more densely developed areas with relatively less green space and tree canopy . Overall temperature increase can also lead to an increase in the number of extreme hea t days and heat waves, the intensification of the urban heat island effect, heat-related illnesses such as heat stroke and exhaustion, reduced air quality, and stress to infrastructure. • Increased Variability, Extreme Weather and Changes in Precipitation. Annual precipitation is expected to increase in the Sacramento region. Sacramento has historically experienced about 18.9 inches of precipitation per year, which could increase to about 27.8 inches per year at the end of the century. This increase, however, will not occur at a uniform rate throughout the year. Rainfall will become more concentrated in the winter months and occur in fewer, higher-intensity events. These storms may produce higher volumes of runoff, contribute to increased flood risk, damage infrastructure, increase burden on the City’s internal drainage system, and threaten the stability of levees. In addition, warmer temperatures will cause more precipitation to fall primarily as rain rather than snow , leading to less winter snowpack. This is especially true for the Northern Sierras, which are a primary water source for the Sacramento Valley region and are expected to have almost no annual snowpack by the end of the century. 1 Meanwhile, the spring and summer

1 Benjamin Houlton and Jay Lund, California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment - Sacramento Summary Report (University of California, Davis: 2018), Publication number: SUM-CCCA4-2018-002,

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
2 months are expected to see reductions in rainfall, and lesser volumes of snowpack will melt earlier in the year – which could lead to flooding, increased challenges in operating water storage facilities, drought, increased wildfire risk, changes in streamflow, vulnerability to local habitats, and strain to health, energy, and infrastructure systems. • Air Quality Impacts from Wildfires. Wildfire risk and intensity will continue to increase as further development occurs along urban- wildland interface accompanied by shifts in forest management, and invasive species such as bark beetles. While wildfire is unlikely within the City limits, Sacramento will be impacted by wildfires occurring throughout the region via impacts on air and water quality; damage to energy infrastructure and roads; and strain on local firefighting resources as the fire department is called to respond to fires across the region and state.
• Flood Risk and Sea Level Rise. While Sacramento is not a coastal city, the Sacramento and American Rivers drain into the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta, which in turn drains into the San Francisco Bay and the Pacific Ocean. As such, sea level rise may exacerbate flood risk in Sacramento by raising river levels during major storm events. Sea level rise is expected to increase saltwater intrusion in the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta, impacting freshwater quality and the wellbeing of aquatic s pecies. However, the risk that saltwater intrusion could reach the City’s surface water intakes is low.

VULNERABILITY
Climate change impacts will affect key community features and services provided by the City of Sacramento. These key features include cr itical infrastructure and facilities , the damage or disruption of which may interfere with the operation of key transportation, power, communication, health, and safety systems, or expose residents to significant health and safety risks. Many critical facilities, infrastructure, and services are at risk of flooding hazards, including industrial facilities, public safety facilities, and transportation facilities shown in Maps 25, 26, 27, and 28. While areas with a higher probability of annual flooding may b e unsuitable locations for existing critical facilities and may require relocations in the future, facilities in areas with lower probabilities of annual flooding may be good candidates for green infrastructure interventions to mitigate the extent and duration of flood impacts.

In addition, the health and economic impacts of climate change are not experienced equally, or in the same way, by all members of the population. Climate change effects manifest on top of a dynamic and complex socio- cultural landscape in which various grou ps already experience different levels of access to economic, health, and political resources . Historically, many of these resources have been out of reach to the socially marginalized . Thus, the inequitable impacts of climate change produce unique individual and community levels of exposure, degrees of sensitivity, and adaptive capacit ies to climate change hazards. One important element of understanding and addressing climate change vulnerability is understanding how and why this vulnerability is disproportionally distributed among different subsets of the population.

https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-11/Reg_Report-SUM-CCCA4-2018- 002_SacramentoValley_ADA.pdf.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
3 It is important to understand where vulnerable populations are prevalent in Sacramento in order to provide targeted services and infrastructure that improves responses to climate- related hazards and thus increases climate resilience and equity within the city. Populations that are particularly vulnerable to climate change include children, older adults , individuals with disabilities, low - income individuals and households, outdoor and seasonal workers, households in substandard housing, cost-burdened households, renters, homeless individuals, linguistically isolated individuals, and communities of color. Identifying where concentrations of such populations overlap with areas of high risk can help prioritize future public investments that bolster the City’s adaptive capacity.

ADAPTIVE CAPACITY
Climate change adaptation is the process of adjusting to current or anticipated effects of climate change, in order to reduce harm and improve livability. Adaptive capacity can be improved in a variety of ways, including emergency response and hazard response services, the collection and distribution of climate -relevant information, and strategic infrastructure investments and maintenance. Prioritizing adaptation actions is a multi-step process that involves identifying which climate impacts are most likely to impact Sacramento, when these impacts will be felt, how severe these impacts will be, and which City services and communities are most likely to be affected.

Ideally, th e most pressing climate change impacts should be given priority when considering adaptation, with special consideration given to areas with the most vulnerable populations.

In addition to the existing climate chan ge readiness landscape in California and the Sacramento region, the City of Sacramento has already taken preliminary steps to establish adaptive capacity in response to the climate risks that affect the city . This includes plans, programs, and services tha t are continually updated and maintained to respond to environmental and community changes, as well as ongoing projects to mitigate known hazards. The synergies between these efforts such as Local Hazard Mitigation Plans and the General Plan Safety Element help bolster the City’s adaptive capacity. This Vulnerability Assessment builds on those plans and identifies additional actions that can be taken to more specifically address the climate change vulnerabilities identified in this document as well as lever age other opportunities to efficiently and effectively build resilience in Sacramento’s communities.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
4 1 Introduction
From flooding to drought, extreme heat, and wildfires, the Sacramento region has a long history of confronting natural hazards. Understanding how climate change might exacerbate the region’s risks and vulnerabilities to extreme weather is fundamental to formulate strategic priorities to enhance public health, resilience, and sustai nability. The purpose of this Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment is to assist the City and its residents in planning for the future by identifying the climatic changes that are likely to influence life and wellbeing in Sacramento over the next several decades, especially for the populations and community services that these changes are most likely to affect. This document was prepared in parallel with the City’s 2040 General Plan Update to comply with California Senate Bill 379 (Stats. 2015, codified at Government Code section 65302(g)), which requires all cities and counties in California to address climate adaptation and resiliency in their General Plans , and is part of the City’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP).

A climate change vulnerability assessment is a document that identifies and summarizes the risks that climate change poses to a local area, highlighting specific locations and communities that are most likely to be severely impacted by climate change. This Vulnerability Assessment synthesizes climate change projections created by Cal -Adapt (a statewide climate change assessment tool, further discussed in Section 2.1: Broad Changes in the Climate System) , historical data pertaining to natural events and hazards, and sociodemographic information collected by the United States Census Bureau to determine which climate impacts are most likely to affect the City of Sacramento, where these impacts may manifest, who will be affected, and how severely. The assessment considers existing and planned development in identified at-risk areas, including structures, roads, utilities, and essential public facilities. The assessment identifies the federal, state, regional, and local agencies with responsibility for the provision of public health, safety, transportation, and environmental services, including special districts and local offices of emergency services. • Chapter 1 of this document provides context for this document and introduces the concept of climate vulnerability.
• Chapter 2 outlines key climate change impacts that are likely to affect the Sacramento region such as temperature increase, increased flood risk and drought based on changes in precipitation patterns, air quality impacts from wildfire, and possible late-century flooding related to sea level rise. This chapter discusses the origin of these impacts, their projected severity, permanence, and rate of increase, as well as key secondary disruptions to the climate, weather, the environment, infrastructure, and health and safety that may result. • Chapter 3 identifies vulnerable areas and populatio ns at risk to climate change hazard events. Critical facilities and infrastructures potentially at risk to climate hazards are also identified.
• Chapter 4 describes actions currently being taken within the state and Sacramento region to address climate change and identifies existing federal, state, regional, and local agencies implementing adaptation and mitigation strategies . This includes an assessment of the capacity of public agencies and the community to adapt and respond to climate hazards. • Chapter 5 provides a risk assessment and identifies potential gaps in existing adaptation strategies and recommendations for future improvements.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
5 1.1 What is Climate Vulnerability?
Climate change vulnerability refers to the extent to which individuals, communities, or infrastructure are exposed to, susceptible to, and/or unable to cope with or adapt to the effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes. 2 Climate change vulnerability emerges across time and space from the interaction of several related components of both the climate system and surrounding social, physical, and political environment. These components include exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity.3
Exposure describes whether and to what degree a community or individual will experience a stress or hazard due to climate change.4 A low-lying coastal community, for example, has a higher degree of exposure to sea level rise than a community that is located in the mountains far above sea level.

If sea level rise does occur in a community, the community may be more or less affected depending on such factors as the location of housing developments and roads. A community that locates major housing developments or critical healthcare or utility services within a coastal, low-lying area will be more severely affected by sea level rise than a community that preserves or restores wetlands in this location instead. This degree to which a community, system, or individual is affected by a climate change impact is referred to as its sensitivity.

Adaptive capacity refers to the ability to respond to climate change impacts. If a community has the ability to construct levees, flood walls or natural landscaping buffers, flood -proof homes, and educate residents and home developers about the potential risk associated with living and building in an area likely to be exposed to sea level rise, then these resources are referred to as the adaptive capacity of the community to address sea level rise. Factors influencing adaptive capacity include levels of economic resources, technological capacity, education and awareness, and equity in access and distribution of resources. All else being equal, those individuals, communities, and cities with a greater degree of adaptive capacity will suffer less harm from exposure to climate impacts and will recover more quickly from the impact.5
The concept of resilience is closely related to that of adaptive capacity. Resilience has been described as the ability of a system, community, structure, or individual to withstand and recover from distress or perturbation while maintaining its core functions or meeting the core needs of community members. Resilience involves the ability to be responsive to change while simultaneously preserving core structure and function. 6 Citywide resilience-building features can take many forms, including strong and supportive social ties within a community, redundancies in key infrastructural systems that prevent service interruptions, and responsive governance. Climate resilience is a specific subtype of resilience that deals with the ability to anticipate, prepare for, and

2 Cal-Adapt, “Frequently Asked Questions,” 2018. Accessed October 29, 2019: https://cal-adapt.org/help/faqs/. 3 Thomas, K., Hardy RD., Lazrus H., Mendez M., Orlove B., Rivera-Collazo, I., Roberts JT., Rockman M., Warner BP., Winthrop R., Explaining differential vulnerability to climate change: A social science review (December 2018). Oct 29 2019: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wcc.565. 4 Nutters, H., Addressing Social Vulnerability and Equity in Climate Change Adaptation Planning, June 2012, Oct 29 2019: http://www.adaptingtorisingtides.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ART_Equity_WhitePaper.pdf. 5 Nutters, H., 2012.
6 Nutters, H., 2012.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
6 respond to hazardous events, trends, or disturbances related to climate change. This assessment is designed to improve the City’s understanding of climate-related risks as a first step to enhancing Sacramento’s climate resilience.

Exposure is often an inherent feature of the climate system—the underlying probability that a given climate change impact will occur in a particular location. Knowing a community’s changing exposure level is a critical piece of understanding vulnerability and thus of making well -informed growth and development decisions that minimize long -term risk. Exposure, however, is not something that a community will likely be able to significantly change on its own. In contrast, making well-informed development and investment decisions can help a community improve its sensitivity and adaptive capacity.

Measures of a community’s sensitivity and adaptive capacity can also be highly subjective. Different members of the community will see different community features as being worthy of protection, will be affected by climate change impacts in different ways or to different degrees, and will see relatively more or fewer benefits from a given adaptive capacity-building strategy. For that reason, it is important to take stock of a variety of voices and experiences throughout the vulnerability assessment process, highlighting Sacramento’s rich diversity both in terms of how different groups of people may experience climate change differently and in terms of the wide range of response and resilience strategies that different communities are able to employ.

Likewise, it is important to remember that vulnerability is not an inherent and unchallengeable characteristic of an individual, community, or city. Vulnerability emerges from a dynamic and interacting web of physical, environmental, and social factors such as environmental exposure, infrastructural integrity, and historical and present-day decisions regarding development patterns, allocation of key resources, and distribution of political power .7 It is the cumulative unequal distribution of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity that creates an unequal distribution of climate change vulnerability, and th is distribution often reflects patterns of structural inequality present in society. Climate change is likely to amplify pre-existing disparities in health and wealth on the global, regional, and municipal scales. This makes the work of analyzing and responding to vulnerability all the more urgent. If created early and leveraged often, information about the distribution of climate change vulnerability within a community can be used to promote more equitable social and health outcomes.

7 Thomas, K., et. al, 2018.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
7 2 Climate Change Effects
This chapter provides an overview of how climate change impacts are likely to manifest in the City of Sacramento. It begins with a brief discussion of the nature of climate modeling, then discusses the nature of the effects that temperature increase, change in precipitation, wildfire, and sea level rise are predicted to have on the city.

2.1 Broad Changes in the Climate System
Climate change represents more than a mere short-term extreme weather event, but rather a long- term, large-scale shift in the entire climate system. Everything in the climate system is connected.

This means that climate change manifests not only in discrete, observable weather events, but a host of other climatic and geophysical states and processes such as air quality, erosion rates, water quality, soil composition, and growing seasons. Each of these secondary climate change impacts manifest at different rates, in different ways, and may have more severe impacts on some community members than others.

The primary climate change impacts that are expected to be experienced in California include:
• Increased wildfire frequency and intensity
• Shifts in the water cycle
• Increases in average temperature and number of extreme heat days • Sea level rise and flooding
Some climate change impacts are more frequent, such as heat, drought, and smoke from wildfires, and others may be more episodic, such as extreme storms and major floods. Between 2000 and 2022, the average maximum temperature in Sacramento was about 75. 0°F, with maximum temperatures during summer months (May to September) averaging a maximum of about 88.6°F.8 Average temperatures from baseline levels (1961-1990) are expected to increase by between 5.4 and

9.7°F by the end of this century,9 while the average annual number of extreme heat days (when the maximum temperature is above 103.8°F 10) is projected to increase by between 19 and 48 days per

8 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Centers for Environmental information, Climate at a Glance: City Time Series, published January 2023, retrieved on January 11, 2023 from https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/city/time-series. 9 Cal-Adapt, Annual Average Maximum Temperature for Sacramento, California [Place (Incorporated and Census Designated, 2015)], RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5, Global Climate Model CanESM2, 2018. [Cal-Adapt website developed by University of California at Berkeley’s Geospatial Innovation Facility under contract with the California Energy Commission.] Retrieved January 11, 2023: https://cal-adapt.org/tools/extreme-heat/. 10 This threshold is determined as the 98th percentile maximum daily temperature over a historical baseline period of April to October from 1961 to 1990. This value is used to better account for the local ecosystem.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
8 year.11 These temperature increases will be accompanied by intense heat waves, a reduction in the number of cool nights, and decreased air quality. These changes pose health risks – especially for those unable to seek shelter from heat and those whose physiology makes it difficult to regulate body temperature. Changes in temperature regimes will also impact regional snowmelt and wildfire patterns and increase warm season electrical load.

From 1972 through 2018, California experienced a fivefold increase in annual burned area, due to more than an eightfold increase in summer forest- fire extent.12 Annual frequency and intensity of wildfires are expected to continue to increase, often exacerbated by hotter temperatures. Statewide, total annual hectares burned by wildfire is projected to almost double by the end of the century.

Changes in wildfire regimes can give rise to a host of secondary social and environmental consequences, including changes in forest composition, impacts to transmission lines, safety threats to those living in high-exposure areas, and reductions in air quality due t o the presence of smoke.

Health problems related to wildfire smoke exposure can be as mild as eye and respiratory tract irritation and as serious as worsening of heart and lung disease, including asthma, and even premature death.

Mediterranean climates such as California are characterized by warm, wet winters and hot, dry summers. In addition to annual swings in precipitation, historical and paleoclimatic evidence points to California as a land of hydrological extremes, including mega- droughts and episodic but infrequent extreme storm sequences giving rise to great mega-floods.

Using data from the Community Earth System Model Large Ensemble, scientists found that climate change has already doubled the likelihood of an extreme storm event capable of produci ng catastrophic flooding, and that larger future increases are likely due to continued warming.

Furthermore, they found that runoff in the future extreme storm scenario may be 200 to 400 percent greater than historical values in the Sierra Nevada because of increased precipitation rates and decreased snow fraction. In addition, between 2012 and 2021, California experienced two historically severe droughts, one of which may have been the most intense in the past millennium.13 As global temperatures continue to rise, precipitation patterns in California are expected to continue to change, which has direct implications for flood and emergency management as well as water supply management.

The Northern Sierras, which are a primary water source for the Sacramento Valley, are expected to have virtually no annual snowpack by the end of the century. 14 Unless mitigated, reduced winter snowpack will negatively impact local water availability, particularly during drought periods , because less snow means l ess water is temporarily stored in the form of snow and metered into

11 Cal-Adapt, Number of Extreme Heat Days per Year for Sacramento, California [Place (Incorporated and Census Designated, 2015)], RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5, Global Climate Model CanESM2, 2018. [Cal-Adapt website developed by University of California at Berkeley’s Geospatial Innovation Facility under contract with the California Energy Commission.] Retrieved January 11, 2023: https://cal-adapt.org/tools/extreme-heat/. 12 Williams, A. P., Abatzoglou, J. T., Gershunov, A., et al. 2019. Observed impacts of anthropogenic climate change on wildfire in California. Earth's Future, 7, 892– 910. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EF001210. 13 Climate Change is Increasing the Risk of a California Megaflood, Science Advances, Vol. 8, No. 32. 14 Houlton and Lund, 2018.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
9 water reservoirs as snow melts. Additionally, smaller bodies of snowpack will have less resistances to changes in temperature, leading to greater and more concentrated volumes of surface runoff.

Water storage capacities will need to account for this pattern of runoff by releasing reservoirs for flood control, potentially leaving less water supply in the summer. Further, intermittent, intense episodes of rain may become the norm, which will strain local stormwater management systems, increase flood risk, and exacerbate erosion. Warmer water also negatively affects water treatment and the ecosystem. Temperature management in the Lower American River often drives operational decisions in storage reservoirs to protect aquatic species.

Sea level rise can expose coastal areas to inundation and flooding, impact water quality, and increase rates of coastal erosion. Since Sacramento is not a coastal community, it is not as vulnerable to the direct impacts of sea level rise as some other California cities. However, eventually, higher sea level will push saltwater from the ocean into the freshwater systems of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.15 Sea level rise may also exacerbate flood risk in Sacramento during extreme storm events by raising river levels within the Sacramento River channel during major storm events. As saltwater pushes into river systems, it may also affect the health of freshwater aquatic ecosystems.

INTERPRETING CLIMATE CHANGE PREDICTIONS
The summaries of the extent, severity, rate of onset, and duration of the climate change impacts discussed in this document draw from climate change projections provided by Cal -Adapt. Cal- Adapt is the result of a partnership between the California Energy Commission, California Natural Resources Agency, and the Public Interest Energy Research Program, which provides an online climate data visualization tool that allows users to explore a wealth of climate data pertaining to climate change impacts in California. Cal- Adapt data contributors include the Pacific Institute, Santa Clara University, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC Berkeley, UC Merced, and the U.S. Geological Survey.

In order to understand the descriptions and visualizations of projected climate change impacts that appear in this document, it is important to understand the types of data provided through Cal - Adapt, its strengths, and limitations.

Cal-Adapt provides projections of different future climate scenarios. Climate projections are not definitive statements about what types of weather patterns or climate impacts are guaranteed to occur in a particular year but provide general guidance on how climatic conditions might be expected to change over time. Climate projections are the output of global climate models — sophisticated computer modeling tools that simulate how the global climate system works.

Scientists can input certain assumptions about how this global climate system works, as well as different predicted patterns of greenhouse gas emissions, to obtain a prediction for climatic conditions.

Despite the sophistication of these computer programs, the complexity of the global climate system and the significant uncertainty regarding long -term greenhouse gas emissions means that the

15 California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment, Sacramento Valley Region Report, Publication number: SUM- CCCA4-2018-002
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
10 results of different climate projections can look quite different. Cal- Adapt helps demonstrate this variability in modeling results by allowing users to work with different emissions scenarios and different climate models. Each tool in Cal- Adapt shows possible outcomes for two different greenhouse gas emission scenarios: a high-emissions scenario, in which greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise over the 21st century ( representative concentration pathway [RCP ] 8.5), and a medium-emissions scenario, in which greenhouse gas emissions level off around the middle of the 21st century and are lower than 1990 levels by the end of the century (RCP 4.5).16 This assessment uses the high-emissions scenario as the basis for Map 6: Snowpack Mid-Century, Map 7: Snowpack End-of-Century, Map 9: Annual Average of Area Burned by Wildfires Mid -Century, Map 10:

Annual Average of Area Burned by Wildfires End -of-Century, Map 1 3: Extreme Sea Level Rise Average Model 2040 to 2060 and FEMA Flood Zone, and Map 14: Extreme Sea Level Rise Average Model 2060 to 2080 and FEMA Flood Zone. However, results from both medium and high emissions scenarios are discussed in the text. This was done in order to help decision- makers prepare for worst case climate scenarios, while also providing an indication of the scale of future climate variability. However, it is important to keep in mind that both the medium and high emissions scenarios are based on assumptions of likely —not guaranteed —future emissions patterns; future greenhouse gas emissions may not adhere to either of these scenarios.

As a default, Cal- Adapt allows users to compare the results produced by four different climate models: CanESM2 (Average), HadGEM2- ES (Warm/Drier), CNRM-CM5 (Cooler/Wetter), and MIROC5 (Complement). These results each represent the average values from a variety of models.

This document uses the CanESM2 model because it represents an average primary climate model.

For additional details regarding the emissions scenarios and climate models, see Section 6:

Understanding Cal-Adapt and Key Scenario Assumptions at the end of this document.

Rather than discussing only current (e.g., 2023) conditions, which would reflect a point -in-time snapshot, the best practice in climate science analyzes long-term trends. Cal-Adapt uses three 30- year ranges—historical baseline, mid-century, and end of century—to assess climatic changes over time. These time frames span 30 years to control for variability by establishing a stable average that helps ensure that climate change analysis is not skewed by singular, anomalous events that significantly differ from typical values.

The default historical baseline is defined as 1961 to 1990 and represents the period when the majority of California’s critical infrastructure was developed and when anthropogenic climate change signals were beginning to be felt. Use of the terms “historical” or “historically” in this document refers to this historical baseline period defined by Cal-Adapt unless otherwise stated. In some cases, additional data sources have been used to extend observed data to the most recent date available. For example, temperature data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) National Centers for Environmental Information Climate Data Online tool is used to report recent temperature trends between 2000 and 2022.

Cal-Adapt uses climate model projections for mid- century (2035 to 2064) and end of century (2070-2099) to analyze patterns of climate change in the near-term and long -term, respectively.

When speaking of projections of climate conditions, mid-century and end-of-century conditions

16 Cal-Adapt, “About climate projections and models,” 2023. Accessed April 24, 2023: https://cal-adapt.org/help/get- started/about-climate-projections-and-models/.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
11 are averages of the projected conditions occurring in these windows unless otherwise noted. Both of these periods are also 30- year ranges for the same reason s as the historical baseline, in addition to ensuring that the assessed values are valid comparisons. It is noted that the mid-century period most closely coincides with the projected build out date of the City of Sacramento’s General Plan Update (2040).

2.2 Primary and Secondary Impacts
This work begins with an assessment of the primary and secondary climate change impacts most likely to affect the City of Sacramento. Primary and secondary impacts are identified in accordance with the California Adaptation Planning Guide: Planning for Ada ptive Communities and via consultation with City of Sacramento staff , where a primary impact can be understood as a major disruption to the weather or environment that results from climate change, and a secondary impact is a shift in the weather or environment that occurs as a result of the primary impact. Primary and secondary climate impacts are organized as outlined in the Table 2-1.

Potential effects on human health and critical infrastructures are discussed under secondary impacts where appropriate. Each primary impact contains an assessment of that impact’s temporal and spatial scale, as well as its level of uncertainty and estimated level of disruption to community function.

TEMPERATURE INCREASE
Climate models consistently report rising average temperatures across California. 17 The average annual maximum temperature in the City of Sacramento has already increased from the historical baseline average of 74.1°F18 to about 75.0°F between 2000 and 2022. 19 Average annual maximum temperatures are projected to continue increas ing to between 78.9°F and 79.9°F by mid -century, and to between 79.9° F a n d 83.8°F by the end of the century (Figure 2- 1).20 Increasing average daytime temperatures are expected to be accompanied by higher nighttime temperatures.

Historically, the average annual minimum temperature has been 49.3°F , but these minimums are also projected to increase to between 53.6°F and 54.8°F by mid-century and to between 54.5°F and

58.8°F by the end of the century (Figure 2- 1).21 Overall temperature increase is associated with several secondary impacts, including increased incidence of extreme heat days, warm nights, heat waves, urban heat islands, heat- related health impacts, and heat-related damage to infrastructure (Table 2-2), as discussed below.

17 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Climate Readiness Assessment and Action Plan, 2016. 18 Cal-Adapt, Annual Average Maximum Temperature for Sacramento, California, RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5, Global Climate Model CanESM2, 2018.
19 National Centers for Environmental Information, Climate Data Online - Global Historical Climatology Network, accessed October 3, 2022.
20 Cal-Adapt, Annual Average Maximum Temperature for Sacramento, California, RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5, Global Climate Model CanESM2, 2018.
21 Cal-Adapt, Annual Average Minimum Temperature for Sacramento, California, RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5, Global Climate Model CanESM2, 2018.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
12 Table 2-1: Primary and Secondary Climate Change Impacts in Sacramento Impacts1 Temporal Extent Spatial Extent Permanence Level of Disruption Level of Uncertainty Temperature Increase
• Increased Heat waves
• Increased Urban heat
island effects
• Warmer average
temperatures
Moderate.

Effects will be
most extreme in
July and August,
but may be felt
anytime
between May
and October
High. Effects will be felt
throughout the City, but
will be most extreme in
and around urban heat
islands
High. The most
extreme effects
will be seasonal,
but average
ambient
temperatures will
increase steadily
over the century
High. Increased strain
and potential physical
damage to energy,
utility, and
transportation
infrastructure from
extreme heat; risk of
blackouts; and heat-
related illness/death.

Higher source water
temperature create
need for additional
water treatment
technologies.

Low.

Precipitation Changes
• Extreme Storms
• Flooding
• Snowpack reduction
• Drought
• Reduced groundwater
recharge
• Increased water
temperature
• Deteriorated water
quality
High. Increased
likelihood of
riverine flooding
in winter/early
spring. Reduced
surface water
supply in
summer due to
reductions in
winter snowpack
High. Nearly all of the
city is low-lying and
dependent on levee
protection and a system
of pumping stations,
pipes, ditches, and
channels, but areas
already susceptible to
localized, riverine, and
flash flooding and/or
that have limited
stormwater
infrastructure will be
most affected by
increased winter rain
and flows. Drought will
affect most areas and
High. The most
extreme effects
will be seasonal,
with continued
changes expected
over the century
High. A large storm
could cause significant
health and
infrastructure impacts
over potentially large
portions of the City.

Increased water
temperature is harmful
to water treatment,
reservoir and
hydroelectric
operation, and
ecological health.

Moderate. While
impacts vary
year to year,
climate change is
increasing the
likelihood of a
storm event
capable of
significant
flooding;
drought
frequency is
projected to
increase in
California.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
13 Impacts1 Temporal Extent Spatial Extent Permanence Level of Disruption Level of Uncertainty increase demand for
groundwater use.

Wildfire
• Declines in air quality
Moderate.

Projected
wildfire
extent/severity is
highly variable
but will generally
increase over the
century. Future
fire seasons may
become longer.

High. A wildfire is
unlikely to break out
within City limits, but
wildfire smoke will affect
the entire city.

Moderate.

Wildfire intensity
is expected to
gradually
increase, with
significant year-
to-year variability.

Moderate. The wildfire
impact most likely to
have a significant
impact on the city is
reduced air quality
from wildfire smoke.

Moderate.

Sea Level Rise
• Higher river levels
during major storm
events
Low. Sea level
rise is projected
to occur
gradually over
the course of the
century.

Low. Areas within or
near the Delta are most
at risk.

High. In the
longer term, sea
level rise may
exacerbate flood
risk associated
with major storm
events.

Low. Effects may be
significant when
coinciding with riverine
or flash flooding.

Increasing salinity of
water may increase
burden on upper
watershed resources.

Moderate.

1. Primary impacts are shown in bold and secondary impacts are listed by bullets (•) in the first column.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
14 Table 2-2: Temperature Increase
Temporal
Extent
• Effects will be felt most acutely in July and August, but excessive heat may occur May through October
Spatial Extent • The entire City of Sacramento is likely to be affected • Effects will be felt most acutely in highly urbanized areas with limited tree canopy, where the urban heat island effect is most likely to occur Permanence • Annual average temperatures are projected to continue to increase through the end of the century, though the projected rate of increase is higher under a high emissions scenario
Level of
Disruption
• High
Nature of
Disruption
• Increased heat strains the electrical service sector by reducing the efficiency of electrical transmission and increasing demand for air conditioning • Greater incidence of heat-related illnesses and deaths may increase hospital visits and demand for medical services
• High temperatures can physically damage utility and transportation infrastructure, disrupting services and increasing discomfort associated with active and public transportation
• Increased water temperature affects drinking water treatment and quality, can lead to algal blooms, and is harmful to spawning anadromous fish and reservoir operations
Level of
Uncertainty
• Low

Figure 2 -1: Average Annual Temperatures

40 45
50 55
60 65
70 75
80 85
90 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 degrees Fahrenheit
Historical Maximum Temperature Projected Maximum Temperature Historical Minimum Temperature Projected Minimum Temperature Created using historical and projected annual temperature data from Cal-Adapt. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento.

Data values for 2007-2022 are included as historical values using data from NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information Climate Data Online. Both the average maximum and minimum temperatures are projected to increase over the course of the century.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
15 Secondary Impacts
Extreme Heat Days
Cal-Adapt defines an extreme heat day as a day falling between April and October where the maximum daily temperature exceeds the 98th percentile of daily maximum temperature, based on historical data from between 1961 and 1990 (for the City of Sacramento, 103.8 °F).

Historically, the City of Sacramento has expe rienced about four extreme heat days per year. By mid-century, the city is projected to experience between 21 and 26 extreme days per year. At the end of the century, this number is anticipated to be between 23 and 52 extreme heat days per year (Figure 2 -2 through 2-3). 22
July and August are likely to be the most critical months for increased temperature effects.

Historically, these months have experienced the highest temperatures; they are also projected to experience the highest temperature increases during the 21st century.23 By the end of the century , about one of every two days in the month of July may be an extreme heat day (Figure 2-4). However, the effects of extreme heat days will likely be felt throughout spring and summer. Historically, extreme heat days in May, September, and October have been rare (on average, one or fewer high heat days every two years). By the end of the century, May and September are projected to experience an average of at least one extreme heat day per year, and these extreme heat days may extend into October (Figure 2-4). Dynamic weather patterns over the past two years have brought late summer heat waves to the region, with record-setting temperatures reached in 2022. Most concerningly, the late season heat wave in 2022 did not appear on long-range forecasts until a week prior, adding to the uncertainty of what future dynamic extreme heat events may bring.

The average temperature of extreme heat days is projected to gradually increase over the course of the century. Historically, the average temperature of a high heat day has been about 105.3°F. By the end of this century, this value may increase to 108.2°F (Figure 2-5).

Urban Heat Islands
Increases in urban temperature may be felt particularly acutely by those living in urban heat islands.

Urban heat islands are pockets of the urban environment where temperatures can dramatically exceed those in neighboring areas with fuller tree canopies and more parks and open space. Urban heat islands are associated with a number of negative environmental and health effects, as well as increased demands for energy.

22 Cal-Adapt, Number of Extreme Heat Days per Year for Sacramento, California [Place (Incorporated and Census Designated, 2015)], RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5, Global Climate Model CanESM2, 2018. 23 Sacramento Area Council of Governments, Sacramento Region Transportation Climate Adaptation Plan, 2015.

Accessed August 25, 2022: https://www.sacog.org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/fullplanwithappendices.pdf.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
16 Figure 2 -2: Annual Number of Extreme Heat Days

Created using Cal-Adapt’s Extreme Heat Days & Warm Nights climate data tool. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. Historical data (modeled and observed) is capped to 2005. While some variability in the annual number of extreme heat days is projected to occur in the future, there is a clear upwards trend in the number of extreme days that occur per year. By the end of the century, the annual number of extreme heat days is projected to be significantly higher than anything that has been observed historically.

Figure 2-3: Average Number of Extreme Heat Days per Year

Created using historical and projected annual temperature data from Cal-Adapt. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. This chart shows the number of extreme heat events either observed or projected to occur, averaged over the time period indicated.

0 20
40 60
80 100
120
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 Historic Data Projected Data
4 26
52 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
Historic Baseline
1961-1990
Mid-century
2035-2064
End of Century
2070-2099
TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
17 Figure 2-4: Average Number of Extreme Heat Events per Month

Created using gridMET observed daily maximum temperatures for 1979 to 1990 and projected daily maximum temperature data from Cal -Adapt under the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. Observed daily maximum temperature is not available for 1961 to 1978. The number of extreme heat events occ urring per month are projected to increase dramatically by the end of the century, particularly in the months of June, July, and August.

Figure 2-5: Monthly Average Maximum Temperature of Extreme Heat Days

Created using gridMET observed daily maximum temperatures for 1979 to 1990 and projected daily maximum temperature data from Cal -Adapt under the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. Observed daily maximum temper ature is not available for 1961 to 1978. Dramatic increases in the average daily high of extreme heat days are projected to occur, particularly in July in August and, by the end of the century, June. Mid - and end-of-century projections indicate that extreme heat days will begin to occur in October at least by 2040, a phenomenon that was not observed during the historical period.

0.1 0.6 1.6 0.8 0.3 00.2

4.1 9.9 9.3

2.9 0.21.6

8.9 17.3 18.3
7 0.7
0 5
10 15
20 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Historic Baseline
1979-1990
Mid-century
2035-2064
End of Century
2070-2099
106.2
104.9
105.6 105.4 104.9
105.7
106.8
108.2 107.9
106.5
104.9
107.4
108.4
109.6 109.1
107 106.5
102
104
106
108
110
May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
derees Fahrenheit
Historic Baseline
1979-1990
Mid-century
2035-2064
End of Century
2070-2099
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
18 Urban heat islands form where high levels of development intersect with limited landscape vegetation. Natural elements such as trees and green spaces provide cooling via evapotranspiration and shade.24 In contrast, the materials that constitute the built environment, such as asphalt and concrete, absorb heat. These materials re-radiate absorbed heat and can raise nearby temperatures by several degrees.25 Other anthropogenic activities such as running air conditioners and operating internal combustion engines can also raise urban temperatures.26 The location of urban heat islands can also shift with changes in atmospheric conditions such as prevailing wind patterns.27 The pockets of high temperature created by urban heat islands facilitate the formation of ozone and smog.28 Additionally, high pavement and rooftop surface temperatures can heat stormwater runoff.

This heated runoff can enter local rivers and lakes, where it may upset the metabolism and reproduction of aquatic species.29
Increased daytim e temperatures, reduced nighttime cooling, and higher air pollution levels associated with urban heat islands can exacerbate the health effects associated with excessive heat, warm nights, and air pollution. Potential health complaints include general discomfort, dehydration, respiratory difficulties, heat cramps and exhaustion, heat stroke, and heat- related mortality.30 Seeking relief from excess heat, many urban residents may turn to air conditioning.

While air conditioning can alleviate some of the most immediate health impacts of urban heat islands, air conditioning use also increases energy use31, straining the electrical grid and potentially releasing both greenhouse gases and excess heat into the environment.

The impact of urban heat islands is particularly pronounced during the summer months and heat waves32, when maximum temperatures reach their peaks, but hotter temperatures can also extend

24 Golden JS, “The Built Environment Induced Urban Heat Island Effect in Rapidly Urbanizing Arid Regions – A Sustainable Urban Engineering Complexity,” Environmental Sciences, 2004. May 1, 2020:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15693430412331291698. 25 Golden JS, 2004; United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Learn About Heat Islands,” last updated September 2, 2022. Accessed October 27, 2022: https://www.epa.gov/heatislands/learn-about-heat-islands. 26 Memon RA, Leung DY, Chunho L, “A review on the generation, determination and mitigation of urban heat island,” Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2008. May 1, 2020: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18572534; Salamanca F. Georgescu M, Mahalov A, Moustaoui M, Wang M. “Anthropogenic heating of the urban environment due to air conditioning.” Advancing Earth and Space Science, May 9, 2014. May 1, 2020:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2013JD021225. 27 Wilby, RL. “A Review of Climate Change Impacts on the Built Environment.” Built Environment, Mar 13 2007. May 4 2020: https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/alex/benv/2007/00000033/00000001/art00003 28 Akbari, H. “Energy Saving Potentials and Air Quality Benefits of Urban Heat Island Mitigation.” (2001). May 1, 2020:
https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/860475.
29 United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Heat Island Impacts,” last updated September 2, 2022. Accessed October 27, 2022: https://www.epa.gov/heatislands/heat-island-impacts 30 United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Heat Island Impacts,” 2022; Laaidi K, Zeghnoun A, Dousset B, Bretin P, Vandentorren S, Giraudet E, Beaudeau P. “The Impact of Heat Islands on Mortality in Paris during the August 2003 Heat Wave.” Environmental Health Perspectives, Feb 1, 2012. May 1, 2020:
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/full/10.1289/ehp.1103532; Memon RA, Leung DY, Chunho L, 2008. 31 United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Heat Island Impacts,” 2022. 32 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2016.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
19 into early morning and night.33 This is significant because these cooler periods typically provide relief, especially for people who reside in or around urban heat islands and cannot afford or lack access to air conditioning, b ut latent heat accumulated throughout the day can severely dampen this effect and lead to prolonged heat exposure and health effects. Similarly, warmer nights will also increase energy costs and demand for air conditioning.

This heat island map, created using urban heat island index (UHII) data produced by the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District’s Capital Region Urban Heat Island Mitigation Project, calculated UHIIs using air temperatures at human height levels, as opposed to the surface temperatures of roads or buildings. This focus on air-temperature data provides a more accurate reflection of temperatures as experienced by Sacramento residents. UHII expresses the cumulative temperature difference between an urban location and a non -urban reference point summed over a certain time interval. The units of UHII are degree-hours or degree-days and represent the total urban heat island effect added up over a period of time. The UHII illustrated in Map 1 was computed for the May to September period for years 2013 through 2016 and was calculated for all hours (24-hour day), specific hours (6:00 a.m., 1:00 p.m., and 3:00 p.m.), and for ranges of hours representing peak periods for the electricity system.34 The urban heat island effect is currently prevalent throughout Sacramento, particularly in areas adjacent to major roadways and in the northeast quadrant of the city. Over the course of the next several decades, UHII is expected to increase. In areas that are already urbanized, local climate change will be the primary contributor to future changes in UHII. In areas that will be urbanizing between now and 2050, the impacts on air temperature will result from both changes in land use type and changes in climate.

One feature of the natural and built environment that can both reduce intensity of the urban heat island effect and improve air quality is the presence of trees and other forms of vegetation. As seen in Map 2: Tree Canopy, Sacramento’s tree canopy is typically the densest in areas neighboring — but not immediately within —downtown. Tree cover is highest in wealthy historic neighborhoods and tends to decrease in areas that lie along the borders of the city. Trees will be more vulnerable to patterns of increased heat, drought, and storms, which will in turn cause them to be more vulnerable to stress and disease.

It is important to note that there may be tradeoffs in adaptation strategies. For instance, water conservation and drought resilience efforts could have a negative impact on urban heat islands due to removal of vegetation and use of heat- absorbent materials such as rock or artificial turf. These unintended consequences will need to be weighed alongside potential co-benefits when prioritizing adaptation measures.

33 Memon RA, Leung DY, Chunho L, 2008; Golden JS, 2004. 34 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, Summary Report: Capital Region Urban Heat Island Mitigation Project (2020).

Park
Sacramento City Limit
Water
/0¦2
I½!"c$
Ad
J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-Urban Heat Island Index_Day_Parks.mxd A½
!"^$
!"c$
AÎ
A½
0 1 2½ Mile
I½
/0¦2
!"^$
!"c$
Source: NASA, 2020; County of Sacramento, 2018; City of Sacramento, 2018; Dyett & Bhatia, 2021 Map 1: Urban Heat Island
T emperature (F)
High : 44.8
Low : -24.4
Map 1: Urban Heat Island, illustrates the incidence of urban heat islands in the City of Sacramento. Darker red and orange colors indicate locations where the average urban temperature exceeds that of associated rural areas. Urban heat island effects are most prevalent in the northeast quadrant of the city, including neighborhoods such as Northpointe, Glenwood Meadows, Raley Industrial Park, and Del Paso Heights, as well as the Central City.

TOC
Broadway
DonJulioBlvd
BrucevilleRd
Riverside Blvd
16T
h St
Alta Arden Expy
Richard s Blvd
59Th
St
Elk Grove Blvd
15T
h St
10T
h St 19T
h St
J St
3Rd
St
5T
h St
Madison A ve
Meadowview Rd
21StSt
El Camino Ave
Florin
PerkinsRd
X St
47Th Ave
W
att Ave
Garfield Ave
Sutterville Rd
W
alnut
Ave
Fulton Ave
GardenHwy
TruxelRd
FairO
aks Blvd
Norwood Ave
French Rd
A St
L St I St
N St
P St 29T
h St
San Juan Rd
ElCentro
Rd
N
orthgateBlvd
HoweAve
Eastern
Ave
Sims Rd
Marconi Ave
Del Paso Rd
Franklin
Blvd
Main Ave
W El Camino Ave
Sheldon Rd
Stockton
Blvd
AuburnBlvd
12T
h St
Arden Way
W Elkhorn Blvd
Kiefer Blvd
Laguna Blvd
Power Inn
Rd
Raley Blvd
Del Paso Blvd
N
atom
asBlvd
Marysville
Blvd
Big Horn Blvd
FreeportBlvd
Bradshaw Rd
Calvine Rd
Mack Rd
Florin Rd
Folsom Blvd
Elk Grove Florin Rd
Arena Blvd
Bell Ave
HillsdaleBlvd
CenterPkwy
E
CommerceW
ay
65Th St
Roseville Rd
Elkhorn Blvd
D
wightRd
W
aterman Rd
Fruitridge Rd
N Market Blvd
Exposition Blvd
Bader Rd
65T
h Street Expy
Gerber Rd
Bond Rd
Jackson Rd
Grant Line Rd
Power Line Rd
Elder Creek Rd
Cosumnes River Blvd
Sacramento City Limit
WaterMap 2: Tree Canopy
/0¦2
I½!"c$
Ad
J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-TreeCanopy.mxd A½
!"^$
!"c$
AÎ
A½
0 1 2½ Mile
I½
/0¦2
!"^$
!"c$
Tree Canopy Density by Census Tract
Over 30%
20% - 30%
10% - 20%
Under 10%
Source: Urban Forestry/Department of Public Works, 2018; City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023 City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
22 Warm Nights
Cal-Adapt defines a warm night as a night falling between April and October when the daily minimum temperature exceeds the 98th historical percentile of daily minimum temperatures observed from 1961 to 199035 (for the City of Sacramento, 66.6°F). Both the frequency and intensity of warm nights are projected to increase in the future. Historically, the City of Sacramento experienced an average of three warm nights per year. By mid-century, the city is predicted to experience approximately 35 to 48 warm nights per year. By the end of the century, this figure could climb as high as 101 warm nights per year (Figure 2-6 and 2-7). The majority of these warm nights are projected to occur between June and September. By the end of the century, almost every night in July and August may be a warm night. Warm nights may also become a larger concern in May and October, months in which warm nights have historically been rare (Figure 2-8).

Figure 2 -6: Annual Number of Warm Nights
Created using historical and projected warm night data from Cal-Adapt. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. Historical data (modeled and observed) is capped at 2005. While some degree of variability in the annual number of warm nights that occur per year is projected to continue into the future, projections demonstrate a steadily increasing trend through the end of the century. By the end of the century, the annual number of warm nights is projected to far exceed anything that has been observed between 1950 and 2005.

35 Cal-Adapt, “Extreme Heat Days & Warm Nights,” 2018.
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 Historic Data Projected Data
TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
23 Figure 2 -7: Annual Number of Warm Nights

Figure 2 -8: Average Number of Warm Nights Per Month

Created using gridMET observed daily minimum temperatures for 1979 to 1990 and projected daily minimum temperature data from Cal-Adapt under the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. Observed daily minimum temperature is not available for 1961 to 1978. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. The average number of warm nights is projected to increase most dramatically in the summer months.

However, temperature projections also illustrate increase in the number of warm nights that occur in the Spring and Fall.

Historically, the average warm night temperature has been about 68.9° F. By mid-century, average warm night temperature is projected to increase to 70.1°F. By the end of the century, average warm night temperature is projected to further increase to 71.6° F. The most dramatic increases in nighttime temperature are projected to occur in July and August (Figure 2-9).

4.2 48.4
101.4
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
Historic Baseline
1961-1990
Mid-century
2035-2064
End of Century
2070-2099

0.4 1.3 3.3 1.8 1.3 0.11.2

6.4 13.4

16.9 8.2

1.93.2 15.2

26.7 29.4

19.9 6
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Historic Baseline
1979-1990
Mid-century
2035-2064
End of Century
2070-2099
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
24 Stretches of consecutive warm nights are also expected to increase in length. Historically, it has been unusual to see significantly more than two warm nights in a row. By mid-century, consecutive stretches of warm nights may be between 9 and 13 nights long. At the end of the century, the length of the average stretch of consecutive warm nights may climb up to 71 nights in a row (Figure 2-10, 2-11).

Elevated nighttime temperatures limit the body’s opportunity to offload excess heat acquired during the day, increase mortality risk36, and can disrupt sleep.37 Within the city, the effects of warm nights may be felt most acutely in heavily built -up areas with limited vegetation. These areas can become very warm during the day and continue to radiate heat at night.38 Nighttime air conditioner use, while providing relief to residents, may actually exacerbate these effects by releasing waste heat into the environment. 39 Additionally, should air conditioner systems fail, those who had come to rely on them may have few other options for relieving heat.40 Just as cool nights help the body recover from high daytime temperatures, firefighters have traditionally relied on cooler evening and nighttime temperatures to slow wildfire growth. Higher nighttime temperatures enable wildfires to blaze through the night.41, 42

36 Laaidi K, et.al, 2012; Murage P, Hajat S, Kovats S. “Effect of night-time temperatures on cause and age-specific mortality in London.” Environmental Epidemiology, Dec 13, 2017. May 1, 2020:
https://journals.lww.com/environepidem/FullText/2017/12000/Effect_of_night_time_temperatures_on_cause_and.1 .aspx.
37 Obradovich N, Migliorini R, Mednick SC, Fowler JH. “Nighttime temperature and human sleep loss in a changing climate.” Science Advances, May 26, 2017. May 1, 2020: https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/5/e1601555. 38 Lenart M, Guido Z. “Rising temperatures bump up risk of wildfires.” Southwest Climate Outlook, March 2011. May 1, 2020: https://climas.arizona.edu/sites/climas.arizona.edu/files/pdf2011marrisingtempsfirerisk.pdf. 39 Salamanca F., et.al., 2014.
40 Gronlund CJ. “Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in Heat-Related Health Effects and Their Mechanisms: s Review.” Current Epidemiology Reports, 2014. May 3 2020: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40471-014- 0014-4.
41 McCann H, Mount J. “Managing Wildfires Requires New Strategies.” Public Policy Institute of California, Sep 23, 2015. May 1, 2020: https://www.ppic.org/blog/managing-wildfires-requires-new-strategies/; Lenart M, Guido Z. 42 Lenart M, Guido Z. “Rising temperatures bump up risk of wildfires.” Southwest Climate Outlook, March 2011. May 1, 2020: https://climas.arizona.edu/sites/climas.arizona.edu/files/pdf2011marrisingtempsfirerisk.pdf.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
25 Figure 2 -9: Monthly Average Temperature of Warm Nights

Warm nights refer to nights between April and October when the daily minimum temperature exceeds the 98th historical percentile of daily minimum temperatures observed from 1961 to 1990 (for the City of Sacramento, 66.6°F).

Created using gridMET observed daily minimum temperatures for 1979 to 1990 and projected daily minimum temperature data from Cal-Adapt under the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. Observed daily minimum temperature is not available for 1961 to 1978. Average minimum temperature is projected to increase most dramatically in July and August. However, warm nights are also to projected to occur in March, April, and November by the end of the century, a phenomenon that has not been observed historically.

Figure 2 -10: Longest Stretch of Consecutive Warm Nights

Historical data (modeled and observed) is capped at 2005. While considerable variability is projected to remain in the typical length of a nighttime heat wave up through the end of the century, nighttime temperature projections do demonstrate a clear upward trend in nighttime heatwave length. This increase may occur somewhat gradually up through the middle of the century but then begin to increase rapidly thereafter.

0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 Historical Projected

68.5 68.7

69.7 69.3

68.1 68.167.7

68.6 69.8 69.8

70.9 70.7 70.4

68.8 69.669.2 68.7

70.3 70.9

73.3 74.7

71.7 69.8

68.5 64
66 68
70 72
74 76
Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
derees Fahrenheit
Historic Baseline
1979-1990
Mid-century
2035-2064
End of Century
2070-2099
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
26 Figure 2 -11: Average Longest Stretch of Consecutive Warm Nights

Created using historical and projected warm night data from Cal-Adapt. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. The chart above displays the historical and projected longest stretch of consecutive warm nights, averaged over the years indicated.

Heat Waves
Cal-Adapt defines a heat wave as a period of four consecutive extreme heat days or warm nights. 43 Between 1961 and 1990, the Sacramento region experienced about one to two heat waves per decade.44 Heat waves are projected to increase in intensity and duration.45 By mid-century, the City of Sacramento may experience about three to eight four-day heat waves per year. At the end of the century, this range is predicted to rise to between three and 21 four-day heat waves per year (figures 2-12a and 2-12b). The typical heat wave duration is predicted to grow to between seven and 15 days by mid-century and up to 49 days by the end of the century (Figure 2-13 through 2-14).

43 Cal-Adapt defines warm nights as those with daily minimum temperatures above the 98th percentile of historical daily minimum temperatures for a place, computed using data from April through October for 1961 to 1990. For the City of Sacramento, this is 66.6°F.
44 Ascent Environmental, Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment for the Sacramento County Climate Action Plan:

Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation (2017). 45 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, SMUD 2018 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (2018). Oct 28 2019:
https://www.smud.org/-/media/Documents/Corporate/About-Us/Company-Information/Reports-and- Documents/2014-2021/2020/20190124-Local-Hazard-Mitigation-Plan-re-Submittal.ashx.

2.2 14.6

49.4 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
Historic Baseline
1961-1990
Mid-century
2035-2064
End of Century
2070-2099
TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
27 Figure 2 -12a: Number of Heat Waves Per Year

Created using historical and projected heat wave (both extreme heat days and warm nights) data from Cal-Adapt.

Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. Historical data (modeled and observed) is capped at 2005. While considerable variability in the annual number of heat waves is projected to continue, the number of heat waves projected to occur per year does increase dramatically by the end of the century.

Figure 2 -12b: Average Number of Heat Waves Per Year

Created using historical and projected heat wave (both extreme heat days and warm nights) data from Cal-Adapt.

Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. While considerable variability in the annual number of heat waves is projected to continue, the number of heat waves projected to occur per year does increase dramatically by the end of the century.

0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 Historical Projected

0.3 7.6

20.7 0
5 10
15 20
25 Historic Baseline
1961-1990
Mid-century Projection
2035-2064
End-of-century Projection
2070-2099
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
28 Figure 2 -13: Maximum Heat Wave Duration

Created using historical and projected heat wave (both extreme heat days and warm nights) data from Cal-Adapt.

Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. Historical data (modeled and observed) is capped at 2005. The length of the longest heat wave is projected to gradually increase over the course of the century.

Figure 2 -14: Average Maximum Heat Wave Duration

Created using historical and projected heat wave (both extreme heat days and warm nights) data from Cal-Adapt.

Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento.
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 Historical Projected

2.7 14.9

49.4 0
10 20
30 40
50 60
Historic Baseline
1961-1990
Mid-century Projection
2035-2064
End-of-century Projection
2070-2099
TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
29 Sensitivity
Heat-Related Illness
Heat waves and sustained high heat days directly harm human health through heat -related illness such as heat cramps, heat exhaustion, and heat stroke. 46 Heat also intensifies the photochemical reactions that produce smog, ground level ozone, and fine particulates, which exacerbate respiratory diseases in children, the elderly, and people with pre- existing cardiovascular, respiratory, and cerebrovascular disease and diabetes -related conditions.47 Prolonged exposure to high temperatures is associated with increased hospital admissions for cardiovascular, kidney, and respiratory disorders.48 On especially hot days, cooler nights have typically provided a period of respite. Increases in nighttime temperature prevent people from being able to adequately cool down at night, further increasing their risk of suffering heat-related illness.49 Most people find it relatively easy to take measures, such as locating to a cooler environment, that reduce their exposure to excessive heat. However, opportunities to reduce heat exposure are not evenly distributed throughout the population. Segments of the population who face especially high levels of heat exposure include those experiencing homelessness, outdoor workers, individuals that depend on medical equipment, individuals with impaired mobility,50 and those without access to adequate home insulation, air conditioning, or ventilation.51 Survey data collected from residents of the greater Sacramento region revealed that heat-related discomfort at home tends to be more prevalent among lower-income households. The proportion of respondents with household incomes under $40,000 who reported feeling the most heat-related discomfort at home was nearly 2.8 times greater than those with household incomes over $100,000 (about 33 percent compared to 12 percent, respectively) . Similarly, the proportion of respondents from households with incomes of over $100,000 who reported that their greatest source of heat- related discomfort came from outdoor activity was 2.6 times greater than households earning $40,000 or less (37 percent compared to 14 percent, respectively). A majority (about 60 percent) of those who reporting feeling no discomfort due to heat at all were respondents earning $60,000 or more. Only six percent of those earning $40,000 or less said they felt no heat impacts, compared to 14 percent of those earning over $100,000. Survey results also show race contributing to experiences

46 Sari Kovats R, Hajat S. “Heat Stress and Public Health: A Critical Review.” Annual Review of Public Health, Nov 21 2007. May 3 2020: https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.29.020907.090843. 47 Maizlish N, English D, Chan J, Devin K, English P, Climate Change and Health Profile Report: Sacramento County (Sacramento, CA, 2017). Oct 28 2019:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/CDPH%20Document%20Library/CHPRs/CHPR067Sacramento_County2 -23-17.pdf; U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit, Extreme Heat—NIHHIS. Oct 28 2019:
https://toolkit.climate.gov/topics/human-health/extreme-heat. 48 U.S. Global Change Research Program, Climate and Health Assessment (Washington D.C., 2016). Oct 28 2019:
https://health2016.globalchange.gov/temperature-related-death-and-illness; Gronlund CJ, 2014. 49 U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit, Extreme Heat—NIHHIS; U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016. 50 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2018.
51 Maxwell, K., Julius S., Grambsch A., Kosmal A., Larson L., Sonti, N., Built Environment, Urban Systems, and Cities.

In Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II (Washington D.C., 2018). Oct 28 2019: https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/11/; Gronlund CJ, 2014.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
30 of heat. Higher percentages of American and Alaskan Native (36 percent), Latinx (26 percent), Asian (27 percent), and Middle Eastern or North African (44 percent) respondents reporting feeling their highest heat stress at home, as opposed to 19 percent of white respondents. Black respondents were more likely to report feeling heat- related discomfort during their commute (15 percent) and at work (19 percent) compared to white respondents (6 percent and 12 percent, respectively).52
Personal perceptions regarding heat risk and safety can also influence responses to heat. Those who fear exposure to crime may hesitate to open windows or travel to cooler locations, while some may not be aware of the dangers posed by high heat or may not think of themselves as susceptible.53 Studies have shown that cooling of the body is achieved through increased blood flow to the skin and sweating, cooling mechanisms that rely heavily on the cardiovascular system, as well as the endocrine, urinary, and integumentary processes.54 Certain segments of the population whose natural cooling systems are inhibited are thus more sensitive to the health effects of heat. These groups include the elderly, those taking certain types of medication (anticholinergic, antihypertensive, and antipsychotic drugs) , and children .55 Conditions such as dementia and Parkinson’s have also been found to be important risk factors for heat mortality . Additionally, social, cultural, and linguistic isolation have also been shown to contribute to heat’s adverse health effects.56 Sometimes limited transportation options for the elderly can also make it more difficult to relocate to cooler locations when local temperatures become extreme.

Just as cool nights help the body recover from high daytime temperatures, firefighters have traditionally relied on cooler evening and nighttime temperatures to slow wildfire growth. Higher nighttime temperatures enable wildfires to blaze through the night.57 Heat-Related Infrastructure Impacts
High temperatures can have detrimental impacts on key infrastructures including energy generation and distribution and transportation. High temperatures decrease the efficiency of power lines while increasing the demand for energy -intensive uses such as air conditioning and cooling equipment 58. This results in a higher risk of energy blackouts 59 and increases energy bills. 60 These

52 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, 2020. 53 Gronlund CJ, 2014.
54 Gronlund CJ, 2014.
55 Sari Kovats R and Hajat S, 2007; U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016; Gronlund CJ, 2014. 56 Gronlund CJ, 2014.
57 McCann H, Mount J. “Managing Wildfires Requires New Strategies.” Public Policy Institute of California, Sep 23, 2015. May 1, 2020: https://www.ppic.org/blog/managing-wildfires-requires-new-strategies/; Lenart M, Guido Z. “Rising temperatures bump up risk of wildfires.” Southwest Climate Outlook, March 2011. May 1, 2020:
https://climas.arizona.edu/sites/climas.arizona.edu/files/pdf2006aprrisingtempsfirerisk.pdf. 58 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2016..
59 Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2015; U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit, Extreme Heat—NIHHIS. 60 Maxwell, K., et. al., 2018.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
31 impacts can strain household budgets, increase exposure to heat, and negatively impact the provision of medical and social services.61
Extremely high temperatures can damage roadways, railways, and bridges, as well as reduce the comfort and feasibility of walking, biking, and taking public transit.62 Roads and sidewalks absorb and radiate heat, subjecting those nearby, including walkers and transit riders, to increased heat burdens.63 The Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT) powers their light rail system with overhead catenary systems lines, which can stretch with heat and may lead to severing of the connection with the rail car.64 Increased temperatures can also have cascading effects through the environment as they increase the risk of wildfire and influence local precipitation patterns, as discussed later in this report.

CHANGES IN PRECIPITATION PATTERNS
Climate change models predict changes in the seasonal distribution of precipitation, with rainfall becoming more concentrated in extreme precipitation events during the winter months.

Meanwhile, increasing average temperatures will cause more precipitation to fall in the form of rain, as opposed to snow. These changes may result in a number of secondary impacts, such as flooding, reduction in winter snowpack, drought, increased wildfire risk, changes i n streamflow, and strain to health, energy, and infrastructure systems, as described below and in Table 2-3.

Table 2-3: Changes in Precipitation Patterns
Temporal
Extent
• Increases in annual rainfall projected to continue through the end of the century
• Most dramatic increases in extreme rainfall events projected to occur in the winter months
• Decreased snow fraction/increased rain fraction. April snowpack level projected to continue to decline through the end of the century Spatial Extent • Flooding effects will be felt most strongly in low-lying areas, areas dependent on levee protection, and areas with inadequate stormwater infrastructure Permanence • Effects may be felt most acutely in winter months, with drought periods also becoming more likely
Level of
Disruption
• High
Nature of
Disruption
• A large storm could cause significant health and infrastructure impacts over potentially large portions of the city or region.
• Increased water temperature is harmful to water treatment, reservoir and hydroelectric operation, and ecological health.

Level of
Uncertainty
• Low

61 Maxwell, K., et. al., 2018.
62 Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2015.
63Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, 2020. 64 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, 2020.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
32 Overall, annual precipitation is expected to increase in the Sacramento region. Between the years of 1961 and 1990, the City of Sacramento received about 18.9 inches of rain per year. By midcentury, this number is projected to increase to an average of 25.5 inches per year. Annual precipitation may reach an average of 27.8 inches per year by the end of the century (Figure 2-15 through 2-16). However, this increase will not occur at a uniform rate throughout the year. Cal-Adapt predicts that the Sacramento region will experience a slight increase in fall and winter precipitation—which will fall more as rain and less as snow—while spring and summer months are generally expected to see less rainfall compared to historical patterns. Much of this increase in rainfall projected during winter months may be attributable to high-intensity or extreme storms. Cal-Adapt defines an extreme rain event for the City of Sacramento as an event where the two-day rainfall total exceeds 0.97 inches, the lowest annual maximum value that occurred in the historical period between 1961 and 1990. Historically, the City of Sacramento has experienced about four extreme rain events per year. This number could increase to about seven extreme rain events by the end of the century.

The most significant increases in extreme rainfall frequency are projected to occur in January and February. By mid-century, extreme rain events may also be common in November and December, though the frequency of these events may taper off towards the end of the century (Figure 2-19).

These high- intensity storms may produce higher volumes of runoff and higher river levels, contributing to increased flood risk. Higher intensity storms may also increase the burden on the City’s internal drainage and combined sewer systems. Higher river levels increase the risk of overtopping levees, which could contribute to levee failure. Shifts in winter precipitation will also increase the conflict between balancing flood control and water supply management at the Folsom Dam, discussed further below.

Figure 2 -15: Total Annual Precipitation

Created using historical and projected precipitation data from Cal-Adapt and observed measurements for 2007 to 2022 from NOAA’s NCEI Climate Data Online portal. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. Historical data (modeled and observed) is capped at 2005 and supplemented with data from NOAA. While significant variability in annual rainfall is projected to continue into the future, the dotted linear trendline illustrates a gradual increase in annual rainfall over time.

0.0 10.0

20.0 30.0

40.0 50.0

60.0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 Inches per Year
Historical Projected Projected (Linear)
TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
33 Figure 2-16: Average Annual Precipitation

Created using historical and projected precipitation data from Cal-Adapt. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. There is a projected to be a larger jump in annual precipitation between the historical trends and mid-century than between mid- and end-of-century.

Figure 2 -17: Number of Extreme Precipitation Events Per Year

Created using historical and projected precipitation data from Cal-Adapt. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. A high degree of variability in the number of extreme rainfall events is projected to continue into the future. However, the dotted linear trendline illustrates, the amount of precipitation that falls during extreme events each year is projected to gradually increase.

18.9 25.5

27.8 0
5 10
15 20
25 30
Historic Baseline
1961-1990
Mid-century Projection
2035-2064
End-of-century Projection
2070-2099
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 14
16 18
20 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 Historical Projected Projected (Linear)
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
34 Figure 2 -18: Annual Inches o f Rainfall from Extreme Precipitation Events

Created using historical (gridded observed meteorological data from University of Colorado Boulder for 1950 to 2013) and projected precipitation data from Cal-Adapt. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. A high degree of variability in the amount of rainfall from extreme rainfall events is projected to continue into the future. However, the dotted linear trendline illustrates, the amount of precipitation that falls during extreme events each year is projected to gradually increase.

Figure 2-19: Average Number of Extreme Precipitation Events Per Month

Created using historical (gridded observed meteorological data from University of Colorado Boulder for 1950 to 2013) and projected precipitation data from Cal-Adapt. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. The number of extreme precipitation events occurring in January and February is projected to increase dramatically by the end of the century; the number of extreme rain events occurring in October through December may rise at mid-century but taper off by the century’s end.

0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 Inches per Year
Historical Projected Projected (Linear)

1.2 0.8 0.8

0.3 0 0 0.1 0 0

0.3 0.9 0.9

1.5 1.3

0.7 0.4

0.2 0 0 0 0.1 0.2
1 1.2

1.7 1.3

0.7 0.2 0.1 0 0 0

0.2 0.1

0.5 0.9
0 0.5
1 1.5
2 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Historic Baseline
1979-1990
Mid-century
2035-2064
End of Century
2070-2099
TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
35 Figure 2-20: Average Total Rainfall Due to Extreme Precipitation Events Per Month

Created using historical (gridded observed meteorological data from University of Colorado Boulder for 1950 to 2013) and projected precipitation data from Cal-Adapt. Projected data was generated for the high emissions (RCP 8.5) scenario and the averaged (CanEMS2) climate model for the City of Sacramento. The amount of precipitation that falls during extreme events in January and February is projected to increase significantly by the end of the century. In November and December, the amount of precipitation falling during extreme events is projected to rise around mid- century but may level off by the end of the century.

Secondary Impacts
Flooding
Section 2.1 describes the historical context of California prior to anthropogenic climate change as a land of hydrological extremes. These extremes are not limited to its annual cycle of wet winters and dry, hot summers, but include mega -droughts and mega -floods. Recently uncovered paleo - climatic evidence reveals that massive floods occurred in California approximately every 100- 200 years. These great floods were likely caused by “atmospheric rivers”, a term coined in the early 1990s to describe long narrow corridors of intense water vapor transport which can contain vapor flows comparable to the largest land rivers in the world.

Sacramento sits at the confluence of the Sacramento and American Rivers, which collectively drain water from a watershed the size of West Virginia. 65 Historically, flooding has been the most frequent natural hazard occurring in the Sacramento region. Even though an extensive system of dams, levees, weirs, and other infrastructure has been established, flooding remains a major concern as the Sacramento area has experienced major recent floods in 1986, 1995, 1997, 2006, 2017, and 2021.66

65 Sommer, L. “California Cities Will Flood, So Why Aren’t We Ready?” KQED Sep 25 2017. May 8 2020:
https://www.kqed.org/science/1915937/california-cities-will-flood-so-why-arent-we-ready 66 Sacramento County, “Storm Ready: Region’s Flooding History.” Nov 8 2019:
https://waterresources.saccounty.net/stormready/Pages/Region's-Flooding-History.aspx; Esri, “Sacramento at Risk:

Understanding Floods in California.” Nov 8 2019:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=8e7c54b2d9cf4c3cb8de0a093d5509e3.

3.4 3.3

1.9 1.6 1.4
0 2.3
0 1.5 1.7 2.1 1.7

7.6 4.2

3.0 1.7 2.5
0 0 0

2.5 2.2

3.3 4.5

10.5 7.0

3.2 1.6 1.5
0 0 0

2.4 1.3

2.4 4.0
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Historic Baseline
1979-1990
Mid-century
2035-2064
End of Century
2070-2099
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
36 Downtown Sacramento following the Great Flood of 1862, the largest flood in recorded history.

Between 1996 and 2015, the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) reported 32 flood events within Sacramento County. These floods have damaged bridges and levees and resulte d in significant numbers of people injured, killed, or forced to evacuate (Table 2- 4). Large floods can result in multiple severe and widespread impacts including damage to electric and transportation infrastructure, destruction of homes and businesses, increased rates of flood-borne disease, and loss of life.

The region’s extensive network of levees, dams, and weirs therefore face a very challenging task that will become increasingly challenging as infrastructure ages and climate change induces larger storm and flood events.

The Sacramento area is particularly vulnerable to riverine flooding because it sits at a low elevation at the confluence of the Sacramento and American Rivers. Riverine flooding occurs when streams or rivers exceed the capacity of their natural or constructed channels and water overflows the river banks or overtops the levees. This generally occurs as a result of intense prolonged rainfall from atmospheric rivers or from the combined effects of rainfall and snowmelt in the Sierras. 67 Within

67 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2018.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
37 Sacramento County, riverine flooding can occur anytime from November through April. 68 In addition, Sacramento is vulnerable to flash flooding, as well as flooding associated with localized stormwater overflow. Flash floods are short, intense floods that occur within relatively confined areas, usually resulting from heavy rainfall. Flooding can be more severe when preceded by rainfall that has saturated the ground.

River water levels tend to rise in the winter and early spring months due to high flows from storm runoff and snowmelt. Flooding north of the American River is most likely to affect the Campus Commons, Cal Expo, Arden, and Natomas areas. Flooding occurring south of the American River is most likely to affect downtown Sacramento.69
During most storms, t he amount of water flowing through the levee system can be controlled by Folsom Dam on the American River and the reserve overflow area of the Yolo Bypass on the Sacramento River. The dam is owned and operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Folsom Lake and its afterbay, Lake Natoma, release water to the lower American River and to the Folsom South Canal. The operation of Folsom Dam directly affects most of the water utilities on the American River system. Water flows into the Yolo Bypass via the Fremont Weir northwest of the city and the Sacramento Weir west of the city. The Sacramento River bypass system was federally authorized in 1917 and includes a system of flood relief structures and weirs that release Sacramento River flows into the byp ass system west of the Policy Area when flows exceed downstream channel capacity.

Downstream of the American River confluence, the Sacramento River has a design capacity (maximum flow that the flood control structures can convey) of 110,000 cubic feet per second (cfs).

Table 2-4: Major Flood Events in the Sacramento Region, 1986 - 202170 `Year Summary of Flood Impacts
1986 February rains across northern California resulted in 10 inches of rainfall in Sacramento over an 11-day period. Floodwaters resulted in significant damages to home foundations and levees. 1995 Heavy rains caused widespread localized flooding, particularly in the Arcade, Morrison, Florin, Union and Dry Creek areas.
1997 Early January storms caused riverine flooding and damage to levees along the Cosumnes River.

Floodwaters inundated 33,000 acres of cropland and 84 homes, resulting in $2,400,000 of property damage. This flood was responsible for one death.

Heavy rains in late January were responsible for flooding 1,500 homes around Arden-Arcade and Chicken Ranch Slough.
2006 A series of winter storms resulted in heavy rain, mudslides, flooding, and high winds across northern California. Levee overtopping, breaching, and river flooding occurred along the Feather and Sacramento Rivers, as well as along smaller rivers, creeks, and streams.

68 Sacramento County, 2016.
69 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Climate Readiness Assessment and Action Plan, 2016. 70 Sacramento County, “Storm Ready: Region’s Flooding History.” Nov 8 2019:
https://waterresources.saccounty.net/stormready/Pages/Region's-Flooding-History.aspx; Sacramento County, “2016 Sacramento Countywide Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update,” 2016; Kasler D, Reese P, Sabalow R. “After years of drought, Sacramento confronts an old foe: Flood Risk.” Sacramento Bee Jan 24 2017. May 8 2020:
https://www.climatesignals.org/headlines/after-years-drought-sacramento-confronts-old-foe-flood-risk.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
38 Table 2-4: Major Flood Events in the Sacramento Region, 1986 - 202170 `Year Summary of Flood Impacts
Transportation infrastructure was impacted by road closures due to severe flooding and mudslides along Interstate 80 and US Highway 50.

This series of floods resulted in $4,500,000 of property damage within Sacramento County. 2017 January storms impacted several parts of Sacramento County. Several levees were breached along the Cosumnes River. The Sacramento Weir, a flood-release valve used to flush excess water from the Sacramento River, was open for the first time in a decade. 2021 In October 2021, a record-breaking 500-year storm event with more than five inches of rain in a 24-hour period resulted in localized flooding. However, the Department of Utilities and Citywide response and management fared exceptionally well.

The American River, however, enters the Sacramento River with a higher design capacity of 160,000 cfs. During periods of high flow, the two-mile portion of the Sacramento River between the Sacramento Bypass and the American River confluence can support reverse river flow so that a portion of the American River input flows upstream and through the Sacramento Weir. The Sacramento Weir diverts floodwaters west down the mile -long Sacramento Bypass into the Yolo Bypass. The Sacramento Weir was most recently opened in 1998, 2005, and 2017. It is a key structure protecting the City of Sacramento during high flows on the Sacramento River, diverting flows through the Sacramento Bypass into the Yolo Bypass for safe passage to the Delta. Construction to widen the Sacramento Weir and Bypass to minimize flooding downstream of the Sacramento and American rivers confluence began in 2020 (further detailed in Section 4.2: Existing Adaptive Capacity).

The City has approximately 65,183 improved parcels, $27.2 billion of structure and contents value, and 161,675 residents within areas that are protected by levees, meaning that the threat of flooding via levee failure poses a great risk to life and welfare within the City. The majority of Sacramento’s urban center, as well as vital public utilities, are dependent on levee protection.71 In the event of a significant levee failure, repair and dewatering could take over a year and costs could run as high as $480 million.72 However, there are measures within the city to help relieve pressure from the rivers as water gets high.

For example, the Yolo Bypass is a restored wetland that protects Sacramento and neighboring communities from flooding. During wet seasons, the bypass carries Sacramento River water overflow to the Delta, preventing flooding within the city. Map 3: Levee System and Leveed Areas, illustrates the nature of the extensive levee system on which the City of Sacramento depends. On Map 4: Repetitive Loss Areas and FEMA Flood Zones, the 100 Year Flood Zone refers to the area in which, historically, there is a one-percent annual chance of experiencing a flood. Similarly, the 500 Year Flood Zone refers to the area in which there is a 0.2-percent annual chance of experiencing a flood.

71 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2018; Water Education Foundation, “Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Levees.” Nov 9 2019: https://www.watereducation.org/aquapedia/sacramento-san-joaquin-delta-levees. 72 Porter K., et al., “Overview of the ARkStorm Scenario.” United States Geological Survey (2010). July 1 2020:
https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1312/; Cost estimates are based on modeling by USGS under the ARkStorm Scenario (footnoted above). Property damage methodology is based on FEMA’s HAZUS-MH, census data, and other information developed for the ARkStorm Scenario. For more information see:
https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1312/of2010-1312_text.pdf TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
39 Climate and topographic factors that affect flood risk and magnitude include elevation, topography, rainfall amount, intensity and duration; soil moisture and type ; snow depth; impermeability of manmade surfaces, development patterns, and vegetation. Warmer temperatures and the increased fraction of precipitation falling as rain rather than snow contribute to greater, more intense surface runoff, which will peak in February through March, which is significantly earlier than historical peaks in May. Local flood management, such as of Folsom Reservoir, will correspondingly need to account for water capacity in anticipation of flood events, with consequent reductions in drinking water available in Folsom during summer and fall for drinking water, hydropower, irrigation and recreation. It is noted that federal storage facilities and operation of upstream water storage facilities will also play a pivotal factor in regional flood control management, given that Folsom Reservoir by itself is currently undersized for additional flood control management. Localized flooding associated with smaller creeks in the City are also a factor that may cumulatively pose substantial flood risk.

Although flooding due to levee failure may result in more catastrophic damage, most of the City’s flooding damage since 1955 has been due to runoff that exceeded the capacity of underground storm drain pipes. 73 The limited capacity of the City’s internal drainage system therefore is a risk factor affected by the increase in frequency and severity of storm events.

Several repetitive loss areas are identified within the City of Sacramento’s 2017 Comprehensive Flood Management Plan. Repetitive loss areas are areas that have experienced significant flood damage numerous times within the past several decades. Repetitive loss properties are widely distributed throughout the City of Sacramento. The City’s analysis indicated that the majority of repetitive loss properties within the city flooded during winter storms occurring in 1995 and 1997 due to undersized drainage conveyance systems, power outages at pump stations, and the properties’ relatively low elevation within their respective neighborhoods.74 The City is currently updating the 2017 Repetitive Loss Area analysis, which is anticipated to be completed in mid-2023.

The City of Sacramento’s Repetitive Loss Analysis defines five Repetitive Loss Areas (RLA), as indicated in Map 4:
• RLA 1, South Natomas, sits within the Natomas Basin. The Natomas Basin is surrounded by levees, and is at risk to riverine flooding, levee breech, and flooding due to internal drainage issues. Within RLA 1, factors found to exacerbate flood risk and damage include high levels of development, presence of landfill with associated uneven land grading, and elevation changes.
• RLA 2, Downtown East, corresponds to the neighborhoods of River Park, McKinley Park, and Coloma Terrace. These are older areas of the City that may experience overbanking, erosion, and seepage from the American River levees. Undersized drainage systems were also found to contribute to flood risk in this area.

73 City of Sacramento Department of Utilities, Comprehensive Flood Management Plan (February 2016). Nov 8 2019:
https://www.cityofsacramento.org/~/media/Corporate/Files/DOU/Flood-Ready/2016%20CFMP.pdf. 74 City of Sacramento, City of Sacramento Comprehensive Flood Management Plan (2017). Nov 8 2019:
https://www.cityofsacramento.org/-/media/Corporate/Files/DOU/Flood-Ready/Chapter-X-Appendix-D-RLAA- UPDATED_Final.pdf?la=en.
15T
h St
L St
Garden Hwy
Broadway
Del Paso Blvd
Jackson Rd
Cosumnes River Blvd
DonJulio Blvd
Folsom Blvd
Marconi Ave
Power Line Rd
BrucevilleRd
Franklin Blvd
Riverside Blvd
16T
h St
El Camino Ave
59Th
St
Alta Arden Expy
X St
Elk Grove Blvd
Fulton Ave
W
attAve
Norwood Ave
W
alnut
Ave
Richards Blvd
5T
h St
3Rd
St
FairOaks Blvd
12T
h St
10T
h St 19T
h St
J St
Florin Rd
TruxelRd
Hillsdale Blvd
Madison A ve
MarysvilleBlvd
Main Ave
A St
Meadowview Rd
21StSt
Florin
PerkinsRd
W El Camino Ave
FreeportBlvd
N
orthgateBlvd
Sutterville Rd
Mack Rd
47Th Ave
Garfield
Ave
Kiefer Blvd
Eastern
Ave
Fruitridge Rd
StocktonBlvd
French Rd
N St
I St
P St
Arena Blvd
29T
h St
San Juan Rd
PowerInn
Rd
Sheldon Rd
W Elkhorn Blvd
El Centro Rd
Gerber Rd
Elder Creek Rd
HoweAve
Sims Rd
Del Paso Rd
Elk Grove Florin Rd
Bradshaw Rd
AuburnBlvd
Bond Rd
Arden Way
Laguna Blvd
Raley BlvdNatom
asBlvd
Bell Ave
Calvine Rd
N Market Blvd
Grant Line Rd
65T
h Street Expy
W
aterman Rd
Big Horn Blvd
CenterPkwy
E
Com
merceWay
65Th St
RosevilleRd
Elkhorn Blvd
D
wightRd
Exposition Blvd
Bader Rd
Sacramento City Limit
Water
/0¦2
I½!"c$
Ad
J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-Sac-SanJoaquinDeltaLeveesAnatomy.mxd A½
!"^$
!"c$
AÎ
A½
0 1 2½ Mile
I½
/0¦2
!"^$
!"c$
Delta Levee (State Dept. of Water Resources)
National Levee Dataset System
Includes Levee Centerlines, Closure Structures,
and Floodwalls
Floodplain Area Protected by Levee
Source: Esri/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2021; DWR, 2019; City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett and Bhatia, 2023 Map 3: Levee System and Leveed Areas
TOC
1 23
4 5
Del Paso Blvd
Raley Blvd
Land
ParkDr
Grand Ave
Northborough Dr
J St
Sheldon Rd
N
16ThSt
K St
NorthgateBlvd
39Th
St
43Rd Ave
N St
Sutterville Rd
Arden Way
StocktonBlvd
Rush River Dr
Cosumnes River Blvd
Q St
Richards Blvd
Marconi Ave
N
atomasCentralDr
Riverside Blvd
BrucevilleRd
Elder Creek RdFranklin Blvd
Club Center Dr
RioLindaBlvd
Windbridge Dr
Jackson Rd
Valley Hi Dr
24ThSt
El Camino Ave
59ThSt
HavensideD
r
La Riviera Dr
Fair Oaks Blvd
X St
American River Dr
Mck inley Blvd
ElvasAve
21St St
Fulton Ave
PowerInnRd
Norwood Ave
Eastern Ave
Grove Ave
I Street Brg
CenterPkwy
Freeport Blvd
Danbrook D r
Broadway
19Th St
Watt Ave
65ThSt
16Th St
29Th St
12Th St
9Th St
10Th St
30Th St
15Th St
Alhambra Blvd
GreenhavenDr
Florin Rd
H St
Hovnanian Dr
Truxel Rd
MarysvilleBlvd
Main Ave
Ethan Way
W El Camino Ave
CollegeTown Dr
Brookfield Dr
Regency ParkCir
Engle Rd
13Th St
Gloria Dr
47Th Ave
Seamas Ave
Cottage Way
Harvard
St
Pocket Rd
Roseville Rd
Walnut Ave
AuburnBlvd
E Stockton Blvd
L St
T ower Brg
Westlake Pkwy
Capitol Mall
Arena Blvd
Edison Ave
Kiefer Blvd
MissionAve
French Rd
W St
T elevision Cir C St
I St
P St
5ThSt
3Rd St
Bridgecross Dr
65Th
StreetExpy
San Juan Rd
Azevedo Dr
Alta Arden Expy
SWattAve
Northrop Ave
Howe Ave
Meadowview Rd
Silver Eagle Rd
Exposition Blvd
Del Paso Rd
Curtis Dr
Elk Grove Florin Rd
Elsie Ave
Fruitridge Rd
Munroe St
N Bend Dr
N12Th St
Gateway Park Blvd
NatomasBlvd
Bell Ave
Calvine Rd
Mack Rd
46Th St
W Elkhorn Blvd
N Market Blvd
Elkhorn Blvd
Gerber Rd
S Land Park Dr
14Th St
Florin
PerkinsRd
American River
E
CommerceWay
Folsom Blvd
Big Horn Blvd
Levee Rd
Hurley Way
35Th Ave
Arden Garden
N Park Dr
E Levee Rd
Laguna Blvd
Lone Tree Rd
Metro Air Pkwy
Power Line Rd
ElCentro
Rd
Hedge Ave
Garden Hwy
Map 4:

Repetitive Loss Areas
and FEMA Flood Zones
Source: CalAdapt/UC Berkeley, 2016; FEMA, 2015; City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett and Bhatia, 2019 J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-RepetitiveLossAreasFloodZones.mxd Repetetive Loss Area
Flood Zone
100-yr Floodplain, Magpie Creek
100 Year Flood Zone
500 Year Flood Zone
Sacramento City Limit
Water0 1 2½ Miles
City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
42 • RLA 3 , Downtown West, is located just east of the Sacramento River in Downtown Sacramento. The repetitive loss properties in this RLA are residential, the primary source of flooding is an undersized combined sewer system that is overwhelmed during large storms.
• RLA 4, Southeast Sacramento, is a residential area located at the Southeast portion of the city limits. Flooding in this area has occurred when water from higher- elevation adjacent properties has flowed into lower-lying areas, causing some homes to flood. • RLA 5, Sutterville/Meadowview, extends from Sutterville to Meadowview Road. The RLA is surrounded by levees and is primarily residential. Investigations within the RLA revealed that common sources of flooding are undersized drainage systems and low-lying elevation.

Flooding can have negative impacts on infrastructure integrity and human health. Flooding impacts transportation infrastructure, inhibiting the movement of vehicles and increasing accident rates, 75 and can damage electricity and telecommunications infrastructure, leading to service outages .76 Floodwaters can also inundate important infrastructure such as sewer systems, water treatment facilities, and hazardous materials facilities, leading to contamination .77 These impacts can take extensive time and resources to address, meaning that a flooded area may continue to experience flooding impacts for many months after the initial flood event. Damage to transportation networks, businesses, and related infrastructure may impede worker’s ability to get to work and adversely affect local employment opportunities and business revenues. Ability to reach work and other key services may be especially significant for those who rely on public transportation.78 Flood waters can contain a myriad of hazardous substances including dirt, oil, animal waste, and industrial chemicals.79 These waters can overwhelm sanitary sewer lines, causing wastewater to back up into low-lying areas and homes and providing a breeding ground for bacteria such as e. coli .80 Water intrusion into buildings can result in mold contamination, leading to indoor air quality problems and exacerbation of asthma, allergic reactions, and respiratory infections .81 Even as floodwaters begin to dissipate, remaining pools of stagnant water can provide breeding grounds for

75 Mitsakis E, Stamos I, Diakakis M, Salanova Grau JM. “Impacts of high-intensity storms on urban transportation:
applying traffic flow control methodologies for quantifying the effects.” International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology Apr 10 2014. May 11 2020: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13762-014-0573-4. 76 Lane K, Charles-Guzman K, Wheeler K, Abid Z, Graber N, Matte T. “Health Effects of Coastal Storms and Flooding in Urban Areas: A Review and Vulnerability Assessment.” Journal of Environmental and Public Health May 30 2013.

May 11 2020: https://www.hindawi.com/journals/jeph/2013/913064/; Porter K., et al., 2010. 77 Rudolph L, Harrison C, Buckley L, North S. “Climate Change, Healthy, and Equity: A Guide for Health Departments.” Public Health Institute, American Public Health Association (2018). May 11 2020:
https://www.apha.org/-
/media/files/pdf/topics/climate/climate_health_equity.ashx?la=en&hash=14D2F64530F1505EAE7AB16A9F9827250 EAD6C79; Porter K., et al., 2010.
78 Constible J, Chang B, Morganelli C, Blandon N. “On the Front Lines: Climate Change Threatens the Health of America’s Workers.” Natural Resources Defense Council Jun 2020. July 31 2020:
https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/front-lines-climate-change-threatens-workers-report.pdf. 79 Sacramento County, “2016 Sacramento Countywide Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update,” 2016. 80 Sacramento County, 2016.
81 CalBRACE, Climate Change and Health Profile Report Sacramento County (2017); Lane K, et.al., 2013.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
43 mosquitoes.82 Exposure to floodwater can thus increase risk of exposure to viral and bacterial contamination.

Flooding can also result in forced evacuation, which may strain local and regional emerge ncy response resources and disrupt family and community stability .83 Indeed, extreme climate events, including major storms and flooding, have been shown to be associated with mental health consequences, exacerbating pre-existing conditions and increase incidence of stress, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression.84 By disrupting access to health services, these extreme events can continue to adversely impact health even after the event has passed.85 Groups especially vulnerable to the health effects of flooding include the elderly, pregnant women, people with preexisting mental illness, low-income households, people experiencing homelessness, tribal and Indigenous communities, and emergency responders.

Geological Impacts
Stormwater runoff, particularly during high-intensity storms, can lead to erosion and transport and redistribution of soils, sediments, and rock materials. Such activities are expected to result in significant impacts to local species and habitats and pose a risk to human health and structures.

Landslides triggered by severe storms have caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damage and numerous casualties across California.86
Severe Winds
The strong winds that can occur during heavy storms can damage structures and pose a threat to electricity infrastructure. Wooden crossbars and pole-mount transformers on distribution-voltage utility poles can be damaged by wind speeds as low as 60 miles per hour. Moderate winds can also cause lines to sway, touch, and cause cross-phase shorting.87 Individuals living in mobile homes are especially vulnerable to the effects of high winds.88
Changes in Winter Snowpack
Historically, the Sierra snowpack and its spring and summer snowmelt has been a key part of the water planning process in the Sacramento region and throughout the watersheds of the Sierra Nevada. California’s municipalities, industries, and ecosystems rely on the gradual melting of the Sierra snowmelt to provide a reliable supply of summertime freshwater and hydroelectric power.89

82 Sacramento County, 2016.
83 Maxwell, K., et.al., 2018.
84 Lane K, et.al., 2013.
85 Maxwell, K., et.al., 2018.
86 Porter K., et al., 2010.
87 Porter K., et al., 2010.
88 The National Severe Storms Laboratory, “Severe Weather 101: Damaging Winds Basics,” July 1, 2020:
https://www.nssl.noaa.gov/education/svrwx101/wind/.
89 Meisen P, Phares N. “Impacts of Climate Change on California’s Water Supply.” Global Energy Network Institute

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
44 As temperatures increase, more precipitation will fall as rain instead of snow , and snowmelt will occur earlier in the year, leading to more concentrated volumes of surface runoff .90 91 Statewide, average April snow water equivalence, or the depth of water that would occur if all the snow were melted, has been 2.1 inches between 1961 and 1990. By the middle of this century, this number could decline to about 1.0 inches. By the end of the century, April snow water equivalence is projected to be between 1.0 and 0.7 inches (Figure 2-21).

The Sierra winter snowpack plays a pivotal role in regulating water availability throughout the State by providing a steady supply of freshwater that can be stored in dams, supplementing the scant summer rainfall, and used to produce electricity. Disruption to the processes that ensure adequate snow supply may therefore have a signific ant impact on energy generation, water availability, flood risk, and ecosystem health throughout California and the Sacramento region .92 Climate change has significant implications for water management because the warming climate is increasing the fraction of rainfall and decreasing the fraction of snowfall in the Sierras. Higher levels of Sierra rainfall and faster rates of snowmelt produce quantities of water that are anticipated to exceed the State’s reservoir capacity and therefore cannot be effectively stored for later consumption or used to generate electricity, 93 while increasing risk of flooding. Ecological impacts of decreased flows and increased temperatures in the Lower American River in summer and fall can threaten native Chinook salmon during future fall spawning. Additionally, e arlier snowmelt will reduce the amount of water available for consumption during the summer, potentially leading to water scarcity.

An assessment of the City’s water service reliability and drought risk concluded that “the City is well-positioned to withstand the effects of a single dry year and a five- year drought at any period between 2025 and 2045. The City’s drought risk was specifically assessed between 2021 and 2025, assuming that the next five years are dry years. In each case, water supplies comfortably exceed water demands. This remains true whether the drought occurs in 2021, 2045, or any year between.”94 Since the City of Sacramento has senior water rights to natural flows and stored water Sacramento residents are at less pronounced risk than other water users throughout the State with lower priority access to surface water through the State Water Resources Control Board water rights process. However, historical records show that droughts are intrinsic to the na tural climate of California, and that droughts of 5-10 years are not at all anomalous.

(2011). May 6 2020: http://www.geni.org/globalenergy/research/impact-of-climate-change-on-californias-water- supply/Impacts%20of%20Climate%20Change%20on%20California%92s%20Water%20Supply.pdf. 90 United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, Reclamation Managing Water in the West. West- Wide Climate Risk Assessment Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins Climate Impact Assessment (2014). Nov 8 2019:
https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/baseline/docs/ssjbia/ssjbia.pdf. 91 Reich KD, Berg N, Walton DB, Schwartz M, Sun F, Huang X, Hall A. “Climate Change in the Sierra Nevada:

California’s Water Future.” UCLA Center for Climate Science (2018). May 6 2020: https://www.ioes.ucla.edu/wp- content/uploads/UCLA-CCS-Climate-Change-Sierra-Nevada.pdf 92 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2016.
93 Meisen P and Phares N., 2011; Reich KD, et.al., 2018. 94 City of Sacramento 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (May 2021). May 10 2021:
https://www.cityofsacramento.org/-/media/Corporate/Files/DOU/Reports/R---038---City-of-Sacramento-Draft- 2020-UWMP---05-18-21.pdf?la=en.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
45 Reductions in winter snowpack are associated with declines in summer soil moisture content, which increases wildfire risk .95 Additionally, reduced water flow during s ummer and fall months may lower water quality via reduced levels of dissolved oxygen, higher detritus and bacterial content, and increased salinity .96 Maps 5 , 6 , a n d 7 illustrate historically observed and projected April snowpack levels at the middle and end of this century. The stark contrast in snowpack volume demonstrated in these figures demonstrates the significant degree to which Sacramento may experience limited access to vital Sierra snowpack water resources as the century unfolds.

Figure 2 -21: Average Statewide April Snow Water Equivalence (Inches)

Drought
Drought is a complex phenomenon that results from the long-term interaction of temperature, precipitation, snowpack retention, and other climate factors. Drought is associated with a number of ecosystem effects, including reduced soil moisture, increased risk of wildfire, and reductions in streamflow.97 Other environmental and health impacts of drought include dust storms, flash flooding, lower crop yields, and reduced water quality .98 Periods of surface water scarcity also increase demand for groundwater, with attendant environmental consequences as described below.

Meanwhile, drought can increase the concentrations of industrial chemicals, heavy metals, and

95 Gergel DR, Nijssen B, Abatzoglou JT, Lettenaier DP, Stumbaugh MR. “Effects of Climate Change on Snowpack and Fire Potential in the Western USA. Climatic Change Feb 1 2017. May 6 2020:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-017-1899-y. 96 Meisen P and Phares N., 2011.
97 Williams AP, Seager R, Abatzoglou JT, Cook BI, Smerdon JE, Cook ER. “Contribution of Anthropogenic Warming to California’s Drought 2012-2014.” Geophysical Research Letters, Aug 20 2015. May 7 2020:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2015GL064924%4010.1002/%28ISSN%291944- 8007.CALDROUGHT1.
98 CalBRACE, Climate Change and Health Profile Report Sacramento County (2017); Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2018;

2.1 1

0.7 0

0.5 1

1.5 2

2.5 Historic Baseline
1961-1990
Mid-century Projection
2035-2064
End-of-century Projection
2070-2099
N
E
VA
D
A

O R E G O N
UV160UV4
UV24
UV242
UV92
UV85
UV13
UV120
UV1
UV99
Berkeley
Concord
Daly City
Fairfield
Fremont
Hayward
Oakland
Redding
Richmond
San Francisco
San Mateo
Santa Clara
Santa Rosa
Sunnyvale
Vallejo
Elk Grove
Modesto
Stockton
Chico
Roseville
Reno
Sacramento
£¤101
£¤101
£¤101
£¤50
¨§¦580
¨§¦380 ¨§¦238
¨§¦305
¨§¦280
¨§¦880
¨§¦5
¨§¦5
¨§¦80
¨§¦780
¨§¦99
¨§¦205
¨§¦580
¨§¦680
¨§¦505
¨§¦80
Source: CalAdapt/UC Berkeley, 2016; Esri, USGS, NOAA, City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett and Bhatia, 2019 J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-Snowpack1961-1990.mxd 0 25 50
Miles
Snow Water Equivalence
Amount of Water Stored in April,
Averaged Over 30 Years (Inches)
0 - 1
1 - 4
4 - 8
8 - 12
12 - 16
16 - 20
20 - 24
24 - 28
28 - 32
32 - 36
36 - 40
>40
P
a
c
ific
O
c e a n
S
I
E
R
R
A
N
E
V
A
D
A
S
Map 5: Historical Snowpack
(1961-1990)
TOC

N E V A D AOREGON
UV160UV4
UV24
UV242
UV92
UV85
UV13
UV120
UV1
UV99
Berkeley
Concord
Daly City
Fairfield
Fremont
Hayward
Oakland
Redding
Richmond
San Francisco
San Mateo
Santa Clara
Santa Rosa
Sunnyvale
Vallejo
Elk Grove
Modesto
Stockton
Chico
Roseville
Reno
Sacramento
£¤101
£¤101
£¤101
£¤50
¨§¦580
¨§¦380 ¨§¦238
¨§¦305
¨§¦280
¨§¦880
¨§¦5
¨§¦5
¨§¦80
¨§¦780
¨§¦99
¨§¦205
¨§¦580
¨§¦680
¨§¦505
¨§¦80
Source: Cal-Adapt/UC Berkeley, 2017; Esri, USGS, NOAA, City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023 J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-SnowpackEndOfCentury.mxd 0 25 50
Miles
Snow Water Equivalence
Amount of Water Stored in April,
Averaged Over 30 Years (Inches)
0 - 1
1 - 4
4 - 8
8 - 12
12 - 16
16 - 20
20 - 24
24 - 28
28 - 32
32 - 36
36 - 40
>40
P
a
c
ific
O
c e a n
S
I
E
R
R
A
N
E
V
A
D
A
S
Map 7: Snowpack
End-of-Century (2070-2099)
TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
49 agricultural runoff contaminants in groundwater, increasing the risk of exposure among communities that rely of groundwater resources.99
Drought conditions have profound impacts on water availability across California. Industries and communities especially vulnerable to the effects of drought include the agricultural sector, hydropower industry 100, rural populations, and those dependent on wells .101 The soil drying and weakening caused by long-lasting droughts can also comprise levee integrity.102 A combination of drier soils and increased wildfire activity, which removes vegetation and other natural soil stabilizers, increases wind erosion and causes unhealthy dust to be released into the air.

Small dust particles can travel deep into the lungs and enter the bloodstream, where they can cause or exacerbate conditions such as asthma and bronchitis. Dust can also carry pesticides and heavy metals as well as viral, bacterial, and fungal pathogens.103 The exact timing, location, and duration of future droughts is difficult to predict. However, studies have shown that statewide shifts in precipitation patterns towards wetter winters and drier summers make drought-like conditions more likely.104
California recently experienced a major drought from 2012 to 2016, and statewide efforts have since made several improvements to become less vulnerable to drought such as through the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, establishing new water use standards, funding drought response and long -term water resilience projects, and preparing a Water Resilience Portfolio . Yet, two consecutive years of dry conditions have resulted in drought or near- drought conditions throughout the state, and the combination of exceptionally low precipitation, warm temperatures, and dry soils have resulted in r ecord low runoff from the Sierra -Cascade snowpack, leading to significantly reduced water suppl y and extremely low reservoir storage levels . On May 10, 2021, Governor Newsom declared a drought emergency for 41 counties, including those within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and outlined water conservation and water supply contingency actions that the State Water Board, urban water suppliers, and other agencies should take or consider.105 On October 19, 2021, the drought emergency was expanded statewide, and the State Water Board was empowered to prohibit wasteful uses of potable water such as washing sidewalks/driveways, filling decorative fountains/ponds, watering lawns during and right after rain,

99 Rudolph, et.al., 2018.
100 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2018.
101 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2018.
102 Maxwell, K., et.al., 2018.
103 Constible J, et.al., 2020.
104 Swain DL., Langenbrunner B., Neelin JD., Hall A., “Increasing precipitation volatility in twenty-first-century California.” Nature Climate Change (2018); Mann ME, Gleick PH. “Climate Change and California Drought in the 21st Century.” PNAS Mar 31 2015. May 7 2020: https://www.pnas.org/content/112/13/3858.short. 105 California Water Boards, “Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Watershed Drought & Curtailment Information,” last updated September 29, 2022, accessed October 3, 2022:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/delta/.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
50 and using hoses without automatic shutoff nozzles. Califor nia residents are also encouraged to voluntarily reduce water consumption by 15 percent.106
Groundwater Supply
Sacramento County lies over the north central portion of California’s Great Valley Groundwater Basin, which provides groundwater to the City and County of Sacramento. Groundwater recharge occurs primarily from the American and Cosumnes rivers, with additional recharge from the Sacramento River and local streams. Groundwater currently comprises about one- third of the region’s water use.107 This rate of usage is by design in the City of Sacramento, where policies in the City’s General Plan and regional groundwater sustainability plans implement a standing water management objective to rely on groundwater during surface water scarcity and rely on surfac e water during excess, a balance that allows groundwater supply to recharge.

Streamflow declines and changes in precipitation patterns anticipated under continued global climate change may increase demand for groundwater. Groundwater overdraft is associated with numerous economic and ecosystem effects, including higher groundwater pumping costs, decreased streamflow, land surface subsidence, and loss of wetland ecosystems .108 Reduced snowpack in the upper watershed of the American River Basin, for instance, will directly impact water supply reliability in Sacramento. Increased flood risk in the winter (as discussed above) will prompt more flood releases from Folsom Reservoir. Along with decreased runoff in the spring, this will reduce water available in Folsom Reservoir during summer and fall for drinking water, hydropower, irrigation, and recreation, making the region more vulnerable to shortages. However, the City’s groundwater supplies are currently being managed sustainabl y, including through key partnerships such as the Regional Water Authority, and major overdrafts are not anticipated.109

WILDFIRE
Historically, wildfire has exhibited a cyclical pattern within California – some years may see intense wildfire while others may not. Additionally, there used to be what was considered a “fire season” in California from mid-summer to fall; however, now fires are increasingly occurring year-round. As wildfire emerges from a variety of climate conditions including type of vegetative cover, precipitation,

106 State of California, “State drought response,” accessed October 3, 2022: California Drought Action, https://drought.ca.gov/state-drought-response/#regional-drought-response. 107 “Fact Sheet: The State of Sacramento Valley Groundwater.” Northern California Water Association Jul 1, 2017. May 7 2020: https://norcalwater.org/wp-content/uploads/Groundwater_factsheet.pdf 108 Famigletti JS. “The Global Groundwater Crisis.” Nature Climate Change Oct 29 2014. May 7 2020:
https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2425; Lund JR, Harter T. “California’s Groundwater Problems and Prospects.” California Water Blog Jan 30 2013. May 7 2020: https://californiawaterblog.com/2013/01/30/californias- groundwater-problems-and-prospects/.
109 Northern California Water Association, “Fact Sheet: The State of Sacramento Valley Groundwater,” July 1, 2017.

May 7 2020: https://norcalwater.org/wp-content/uploads/Groundwater_factsheet.pdf;West Yost Associates. “2015 Urban Water Management Plan.” City of Sacramento (2016). May 7 2020:
https://www.cityofsacramento.org/~/media/Corporate/Files/DOU/Reports/City%20of%20Sacramento%20Final%20 2015%20UWMP%20June%202016.pdf.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
51 and temperature, wildfire severity will continue to fluctuate over time. However, climate change will favor many of the climatic conditions that make wildfire more likely, meaning that average wildfire intensity will gradually increase. Wildfire is associated with secondary impacts such as smoke production and air quality reductions, reductions in soil and water quality, landslides and erosion, and impacts to health, energy, and transit systems, as discussed below and in Table 2-5.

Table 2-5: Wildfire
Temporal
Extent
• Wildfire extent and severity is projected to exhibit high levels of variability, but generally increase over time
• Historically, fire season has extended from early summer through late fall.

Fire season may continue to expand in the future
Spatial
Extent
• A wildfire is unlikely to break out within Sacramento City limits. However, the entire City may be subject to wildfire smoke originating from across the Sacramento Valley
• Storm events will mobilize the debris from these events into the waterways and become a concern for source water protection.

Permanence • An overall trend of increased wildfire intensity with year-to-year variability • Impacts of contamination to air and water quality may be irreversible.

Level of
Disruption
• Moderate
Nature of
Disruption
• The wildfire impact most likely to have a significant impact on the city is air pollution from wildfire smoke
Level of
Uncertainty
• Moderate
California has an extensive history of wildfires, with large -scale, highly damaging fires becoming increasingly common. Nine of California’s 20 largest wildfires have occurred since the year 2020 and generally rank among the largest within the list , damaging 4,098,950 acres of land and 8,327 structures. Four of these largest wildfires occurred in 2021. 110 The Camp Fire that occurred in November 2018 resulted in 18,804 structures damaged or destroyed and 85 deaths —the highest amount of any fire recorded.111 This fire occurred in Butte County, less than 100 miles from the City of Sacramento. Between 2014 and 2016, there were three wildfires that occurred within Sacramento County and caused a total of three million dollars in property damage. 112 There were 13 additional fires that occurred in Sacramento County between 2016 and 2020, burning more than 8,800 acres, Indeed, the Sacramento metropolitan area has among the highest number of homes at

110 CAL FIRE, “Top 20 Largest California Wildfires,” October 24, 2022, accessed April 24, 2023: https://34c031f8-c9fd- 4018-8c5a-4159cdff6b0d-cdn-endpoint.azureedge.net/-/media/calfire-website/our-impact/fire-statistics/featured- items/top20_acres.pdf?rev=be2a6ff85932475e99d70fa9458dca79&hash=A355A978818640DFACE7993C432ABF81 . 111 CAL FIRE, “Top 20 Deadliest California Wildfires,” October 24, 2022, accessed April 24, 2023: https://34c031f8- c9fd-4018-8c5a-4159cdff6b0d-cdn-endpoint.azureedge.net/-/media/calfire-website/our-impact/fire- statistics/featured-
items/top20_deadliest.pdf?rev=e201e407ab6943c7854c7c917c7b818b&hash=8068F655A48FC601C6E2F55F9E0A168

2. 112 Sacramento County, 2016.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
52 risk of damage from wildfires in the United States ,113 posing a significant risk to structures within the region. While a wildfire may be unlikely to br eak out within city limits, these major wildfires have profound impacts on economies, health, and ecosystem function throughout the region.

Wildfire risk is influenced by a number of climatic factors, including topography, fuel type and availability, temperature, soil moisture, as well as local typography and wind and precipitation patterns.114 Climate change is expected to increase wildfire risk and intensity b y increasing temperatures, reducing snowpack, and altering precipitation patterns.

Large swings in rainfall from season to season can encourage vegetation growth in rainy periods, allowing more vegetation to accumulate .115 Meanwhile, high temperatures increase the rate of evapotranspiration in plants, making vegetation drier and more prone to catching fire. 116 High temperatures also reduce winter snowpack by encouraging precipitation to fall as rain instead of snow and prompting earlier snowmelt.117 These changes lead to longer and drier summers, during which wildfires may be more likely to occur.

Across the state of California, approximately 436,763 acres of land succumbed to wildfire per year between 1961 and 1990, as shown in Map 8. This figure is projected to increase to 538,388 acres per year by mid-century and may climb as high as 630,345 acres per year by the end of the century, a 44-percent increase over historic levels . Within the Sacramento-Delta Climate Region, approximately 29,913 acres were burned in wildfire per year between 1961 and 1990. This value is projected to increase to between 30,665 and 31,099 acres by mid-century and between 29,549 and 31,095 acres per year by the end of the century, a four-percent increase. Maps 9 and 10 illustrate the projected increase in wildfire extent and severity that is projected to take place in Northern California as climate change progresses. A notable increase in the annual area affected by wildfire is projected to occur to the northwest of Sacramento. Wildfires occurring in the Sierra Nevada are projected to increase in intensity.

Wildfires may pose a threat to the homes of those who live in the urban-wildland interface (UWI), areas where homes are built near or among lands prone to wildland fire outside the city limits.118

113 CoreLogic, “2019 Wildfire Risk Report.” 2019. May 8 2020: https://www.corelogic.com/downloadable-docs/wildfire- report_0919-01-screen.pdf; Milne S. “Sacramento Metro Area Ranks No. 4 On National Wildfire Risk Report.” Capradio Sep 12 2019. May 8 2020: https://www.capradio.org/articles/2019/09/12/sacramento-metro-area-ranks-no- 4-on-national-wildfire-risk-report/.
114 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2018; Sacramento County, 2016. 115 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, 2016.
116 Sacramento County, 2016; Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2015. 117 Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2015.
118 International Association of Fire Chiefs, “What Is The Wildland-Urban Interface?” April 24, 2023:
https://www.wildlandfirersg.org/s/iafc2/what-is-the-wildland-urban-interface- MCVXRWBEHSZFCQ7IV6PER5CF6UVQ?language=en_US.

TOC

N E V A D AOREGON
UV160UV4
UV24
UV242
UV92
UV85
UV13
UV120
UV1
UV99
Sacramento
Berkeley
Concord
Daly City
Fairfield
Fremont
Hayward
Oakland
Redding
Richmond
San Francisco
San Mateo
Santa Clara
Santa Rosa
Sunnyvale
Vallejo
Antioch
Elk Grove
Modesto
Stockton
Chico
Roseville
Reno
£¤101
£¤101
£¤101
£¤50
¨§¦580
¨§¦380 ¨§¦238
¨§¦305
¨§¦280
¨§¦880
¨§¦5
¨§¦5
¨§¦80
¨§¦780
¨§¦99
¨§¦205
¨§¦580
¨§¦680
¨§¦505
¨§¦80
Map 8:

Historical Annual Average of
Area Burned by Wildfires
(1961-1990)
Source: CalAdapt/UC Berkeley, 2016; Esri, USGS, NOAA, City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019 J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-AnnualAvgAreaBurnedWildfire1961-1990_v2.mxd 0 25 50
Miles
Annual Average of
Area Burned (Hectares)
100+
1 P
a
c
ific
O
c e a n
S
I
E
R
R
A
N
E
V
A
D
A
S
N
E
VA
D
A

O R E G O N
UV160UV4
UV24
UV242
UV92
UV85
UV13
UV120
UV1
UV99
Sacramento
Berkeley
Concord
Daly City
Fairfield
Fremont
Hayward
Oakland
Redding
Richmond
San Francisco
San Mateo
Santa Clara
Santa Rosa
Sunnyvale
Vallejo
Elk Grove
Modesto
Stockton
Chico
Roseville
Reno
£¤101
£¤101
£¤101
£¤50
¨§¦580
¨§¦380 ¨§¦238
¨§¦305
¨§¦280
¨§¦880
¨§¦5
¨§¦5
¨§¦80
¨§¦780
¨§¦99
¨§¦205
¨§¦580
¨§¦680
¨§¦505
¨§¦80
Map 9:

Annual Average of Area
Burned by Wildfires
Mid-Century (2035-2064)
Source: CalAdapt/UC Berkeley, 2016; Esri, USGS, NOAA, City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023 J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-AnnualAvgAreaBurnedWildfireMidCentury_v3.mxd 0 25 50
Miles
Annual Average of
Area Burned (Hectares)
100+
1 P
a
c
ific
O
c e a n
S
I
E
R
R
A
N
E
V
A
D
A
S
TOC

Annual Average of Area
Burned by Wildfires
End-of-Century (2070-2099)
Annual Average of
Area Burned (Hectares)
100+
1 Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
56 At the UWI, structures and vegetation are sufficiently close that a wildfire could spread to a structure, or a structure fire could ignite vegetation.119 Numerous factors can contribute to wildfire risk within the UWI, including type and distribution of vegetation, structure flammability, proximity to fire-prone vegetation, weather patterns, topography, lot size and structure density, and road construction.120 The Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District has found that almost all the wildfires that occur within its territory are caused by humans and occur closer to developed areas.121 Areas characterized as UWI by the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District occur along the eastern and northern edges of the city.

While the UWI area within the city is not extensive, the city will be impacted by wildfires occurring throughout the metropolitan region via impacts on air, water, and soil quality; damage to energy infrastructure and roads; and strain on local firefighting resources as the fire department is called to respond to fires across the region and State.

Secondary Impacts
Air Quality
Residents and employees of Sacramento’s urban environment may not experience the direct impacts of wildfire the same way they might directly feel the immediate effects of heat waves, extreme rain events, and floods. However, wildfires are projected to increase in severity across Northern California, and their health impacts are not easily contained within city limits. In fa ct, particulate matter from wildfire can dissipate throughout the Central Valley and degrade air quality for extended periods of time.122
Wildfires emit substantial quantities of particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds.123 The effects that wildfire smoke can have on Sacramento’s air quality are immense. During the 2018 Camp Fire, Sacramento’s PM 2.5 (particulate matter) concentrations exceeded 300 µg/m3, among the highest in the world.

Wildfire smoke can cause ad verse health effects including restricted breathing; eye irritation; aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular diseases including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), bronchitis, and pneumonia; and may increase cancer risk and impair immune function.124
119 Ascent Environmental, “Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District Community Wildfire Protection Plan.” (2014). Oct 29 2019: https://www.ascentenvironmental.com/experience/climate-change-adaptation/sacramento-metropolitan- fire-district-community-wildfire-protection-plan/.
120 International Association of Fire Chiefs, 2023.
121 Ascent Environmental, 2014.
122 Sacramento County, 2016.
123 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Wildfires.” (2019). Oct 29 2019:
https://www.cdc.gov/climateandhealth/effects/wildfires.htm. 124 Finlay SE., Moffat A., Gazzard R., Baker D., Murray, V. “Health Impacts of Wildfires.” PLos Currents, Nov 2, 2012.

Oct 29 2019: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3492003/; U.S. Global Change Research Program, The Impacts of Climate Change on Human Health in the United States: A Scientific Assessment. (Washington, DC:
2016). Oct 29 2019: https://health2016.globalchange.gov/air-quality-impacts; Cascio, WE. “Wildland Fire Smoke and Human Health.” Science of the Total Environment, Dec 27, 2017. Apr 30, 2020:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896971733512X.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
57 Many of the chemicals released during wildfires are ozone precursors, chemicals that can interact to form ground -level ozone.125 Populations exposed to ozone air pollution are at greater risk of dying prematurely, experiencing respiratory-related hospital admission, and contracting asthma.126 The health impacts associated with air pollution exposure may be compounded by exposure to additional climate stressors such that, for example, the risk of dying from exposure to a given level of ozone pollution may increase on warmer days .127 In addition to wildfire, conditions that favor high ozone levels include high temperatures, sunny skies, low humidity, and periods of low wind.128 Young children; middle-aged and older adults; pregnant women; those with hypertension, diabetes, and COPD ; and smokers are particularly sensitive to the health effects of smoke .129 African Americans have been found to experience higher rates of cardiovascular disease and asthma, which increase sensitivity to the health effects of smoke. 130 Some studies have also found associations between low socioeconomic status and health effects related to wildfire smoke expo sure.131 Low socioeconomic status is associated with a higher prevalence of preexisting diseases, limited access to medical care, and limited access to fresh food, all of which may contribute to susceptibility to the health effects of particulate matter exposure .132 Members of the community such as outdoor workers and the homeless, who may not be able to remain indoors in order to reduce smoke exposure, are also at elevated risk for health impacts.

Many Sacramento residents may be required to make behavioral or lifestyle changes in order to minimize exposure to poor air quality during wildfires. These changes, such as avoiding active transportation, spending less time outdoors, or avoiding public transit if facilities are not adequately ventilated, may have ripple effects on community health, energy use, and transportation-related emissions as residents may not be able to partake in daily exercise or may choose to replace alternative transportation with the use of private vehicles.

Map 11 shows current air quality across the City of Sacramento. As can be seen in Map 11, areas with poor ambient air quality tend be clustered in the center of the city and along major roadways Interstate 50, SR 99, and Interstate 80. In the event of a wildfire, the distribution of smoke-related 125 United States Department of Agriculture, “Ozone Precursors.” (2012). Oct 29 2019:
https://www.climatesignals.org/sites/default/files/resources/ozone%20precursors.pdf. 126 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016.
127 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016; Orru H., Ebi KL., Forsberg. “The Interplay of Climate Change and Air Pollution on Health.” Current Environmental Health Reports, Oct 28, 2017. Oct 29 2019:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5676805/.
128 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016; Orru H., et.al., 2017. 129 Finlay SE., et.al., 2012; Cascio, WE. “Wildland Fire Smoke and Human Health.” Science of the Total Environment, Dec 27, 2017. Apr 30, 2020: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004896971733512X. 130 Rudolph L, et.al., 2018.
131 Cascio, WE., 2017.
132 Sacks JD, Wichers Stanek L, Luben TJ, Johns DO, Buckley BJ, Brown JS, Ross M. “Particulate Matter-Induced Health Effects: Who is Susceptible?” Environmental Health Perspectives, Apr 1, 2011. Apr 30, 2020:
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/full/10.1289/ehp.1002255
air pollution will likely not be concentrated in separate neighborhoods as seen in Map 11 but will be dispersed across the City.

Broadway
DonJulioBlvd
BrucevilleRd
16Th St
Alta Arden Expy
Richard s Blvd
59Th
St
Elk Grove Blvd
J St
15Th St
10Th St
19Th St3Rd
St
5Th St 29Th St
Madison A ve
A St
Meadowview Rd
21StSt
El Camino Ave
Florin
PerkinsRd
X St
47Th Ave
Watt Ave
Garfield Ave
Sutterville Rd
Walnut Ave
Fulton Ave
GardenHwy
TruxelRd
FairO
aks Blvd
Riverside Blvd
Norwood Ave
French Rd
L St I St
N St
P St
San Juan Rd
ElCentro
Rd
N
orthgateBlvd
HoweAve
EasternAve
Sims Rd
Marconi Ave
Del Paso Rd
Franklin Blvd
Main Ave
W El Camino Ave
Sheldon Rd
StocktonBlvd
AuburnBlvd
12Th St
Arden Way
W Elkh orn Blvd
Kiefer Blvd
Laguna Blvd
Power Inn Rd
Raley Blvd
Del Paso Blvd
N
atom
asBlvd
M
arysville
Blvd
Big Horn Blvd
FreeportBlvd
Bradshaw Rd
Calvine Rd
Mack Rd
Florin Rd
Folsom Blvd
Elk Grove Florin Rd
Arena Blvd
Bell Ave
HillsdaleBlvd
CenterPkwy
ECommerceWay
65Th St
Roseville Rd
Elkhorn Blvd
D
wightRd
Waterman Rd
Fruitridge Rd
N Market Blvd
Exposition Blvd
Bader Rd
65Th Street Expy
Gerber Rd
Bond Rd
Jackson Rd
Grant Line Rd
Power Line Rd
Elder Creek Rd
Cosumnes River Blvd
Composite Air Quality
by Census Tract
/0¦2
I½!"c$
Ad
J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-Pollution_Air.mxd A½
!"^$
!"c$
AÎ
A½
0 1 2½ Mile
I½
/0¦2
!"^$
!"c$
Source: CA OEHHA, 2021; City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023.

Air Pollution Level
Low
Medium-Low
Medium
High
T ruck Routes
City T ruck Routes
Weight Restricted Route
STAA Truck Routes
Sacramento City Limit
Sphere of Influence
Water
Note: Air Composite level is calculated based on CalEnviroScreen 4.0 scores in the top 25% citywide for ozone, particulate matter finer than 2.5 micrometers, diesel particulate matter, and traffic density.

Map 11:

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
59 Water and Soil Quality
Even after a fire is put out, it can continue to have detrimental effects on the environment and surrounding communities. The infiltration capacity of soil is reduced following wildfire, increasing the risk of waterbody contamination from upstream landslides .133 Ash debris from wildfires may contain high levels of heavy metals such as arsenic, cadmium, copper, and lead, potentially causing long-term effects to soil and water quality.134
Infrastructure Damage
Energy production and distribution are threatened by heat and wildfires. Physical infrastructure such as power lines or pipes in the direct path of a fire can suffer extensive damage. Transmission capacity is affected by high heat, smoke, and particulate matter, and lines may be shut down as a firefighting measure.135 Wildfire in the Sierra Nevada may damage water and energy infrastructure upon which the Sacramento region relies.136
Extreme heat and wildfire also threaten water production and distribution . Water treatment and utility services depend on the electric utility to operate, and rely on diesel generators for back-up.

Increased incidents of power outages may increase reliance on diesel and other fossil fuel as well as the possibility of water shortages.

Wildfire affects transportation infrastructure by causing road and airport blockages, closures, and reducing road visibility.137 Transportation services such as electric rail lines and traffic signals may also be affected by the disruptions to power service described above. Transportation infrastructures such as roads and rail lines can also be damaged by wildfires that result in high heat.138

133 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, “Climate Readiness Assessment and Action Plan ,” (2016); Sacramento Municipal Utility District, “2018 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.” (2018) ; United States Environmental Protection Agency, “Wildfires: How Do They Affect Our Water Supplies?” (2019). Oct 28 2019:
https://www.epa.gov/sciencematters/wildfires-how-do-they-affect-our-water-supplies. 134 Finlay SE., Moffat A., Gazzard R., Baker D., Murray, V. “Health Impacts of Wildfires.” PLos Currents, Nov 2, 2012.

Oct 29 2019: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3492003/. 135 Sacramento Municipal Utility District, “Climate Readiness Assessment and Action Plan,” 2016; Maizlish N., English D., Chan J., Dervin K., English, P , “Climate Change and Health Profile Report Sacramento County ,” Sacramento County Office of Health Equity, California Department of Public Health, 2017; Sacramento Municipal Utility District, “2018 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.” (2018).
136 Maizlish N., English D., Chan J., Dervin K., English, P. “Climate Change and Health Profile Report Sacramento County.” Sacramento County Office of Health Equity, California Department of Public Health (2017). 137 Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2015; Finlay SE., Moffat A., Gazzard R., Baker D., Murray, V. “Health Impacts of Wildfires.” PLos Currents, Nov 2, 2012. Oct 29 2019:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3492003/.
138 Sacramento Area Council of Governments, 2015.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
60 Higher Demand for Fire Fighting and Support Services The Sacramento Fire Department maintains automatic aid agreements with all of its neighboring agencies and participates in the California Fire and Rescue M utual Aid System, which provides Type I and Type III engine companies at the request of the California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES ). The department regularly provides overhead personnel for the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) Incident Support Teams (IST). In 2017, the department responded to 47 incidents with overhead personnel or resources, both throughout the state and internationally, and provided mutual aid for 8,114 incidents outside of the department’s service area.139 As the severity and frequency of wildfire increase across the Sacramento region and beyond, municipalities throughout the state will experience increased demand for fire protection services and the City may experience increased demand for its fire protection services.

Increased levels of homelessness and higher housing costs have been reported following major California wildfires.140 141 Displaced residents from neighboring communities have the potential to increase demand for social support services in Sacramento. Meanwhile, reductions in housing stock and increases in local demand may lead to elevated housing prices and exacerbate housi ng insecurity among lower income individuals and families.

SEA LEVEL RISE
Climate models anticipate some degree of sea level rise in all areas that are connected to ocean bodies. Sea level rise is not as significant a concern in the City of Sacramento as c hanges in precipitation and riverine flood risk. However, sea level rise has the potential to raise the water level within the river channel and exacerbate Sacramento’s flood risk in combination with extreme storm events. The key characteristics of sea level rise’s impact on the City of Sacramento are summarized in Table 2-6.

Table 2-6: Sea Level Rise
Temporal Extent • Projected to gradually increase over the course of the century Spatial Extent • Areas within or near the Delta are most at risk Permanence • High
Level of Disruption • Moderate
Nature of Disruption • Effects may be significant when coinciding with riverine flooding Level of Uncertainty • Moderate
The Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta has been a tidal freshwater marsh, with a vast network of channels, sloughs, and islands, for more than 6,000 years .142 The Delta’s characteristic intertidal

139 City of Sacramento Fire Department, “2017 Annual Report.” (2016). 140 Raphelson S. “Wildfires Exacerbate Chronic Homelessness In Northern California.” NPR, Dec 6, 2017. Apr 30 2020:
https://www.npr.org/2017/12/06/568857057/wildfires-exacerbate-chronic-homelessness-in-northern-california. 141 Levine AS. “After a California Wildfire, New and Old Homeless Populations Collide.” The New York Times, Dec 3, 2018. Apr 30, 2020: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/03/us/california-fire-homeless.html. 142 Mount J, Twiss R. “Subsidence, sea level rise, seismicity in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.” San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science (2005).

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
61 conditions have created a unique and vibrant ecosystem that serves as a home for nearly 750 species.143 While Sacramento is not a coastal city, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta’s connection to the Pacific Ocean means that the Delta ecosystem, and potentially portions of the Sacramento River, may be impacted by rising seas. Ecosystem effects likely to result from sea level rise include saltwater intrusion144, with subsequent effects on freshwater quality, agricultural production145, and the wellbeing of aquatic species such as the delta smelt.146 In 2014, the U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Reclamation predicted that Delta salinity may increase by 33% by the end of the century.147
Saltwater intrusion may affect municipal and agricultural water sources in the Delta. As upstream flows from the high Sierras decrease with reduced snowpack, so too will the amount of freshwater used to push back saltwater from higher sea levels, resulting in infiltration of saltwater further west into the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta. However, the potential for saltwater intrusion to impact City of Sacramento municipal water sources is not considered a significant risk at this time. The delta is an important water source for California farmers and water agencies, and it also provides fresh water through the State Department of Water Resources (DWR) via the California aqueduct and the rest of the State Water Project’s water delivery system. As sea level rise increases salinity of Delta waters, extra outflow of fresh water will be needed to meet environmental standards, an increasing issue that has conflicting tradeoffs during periods of water shortages. 148 Maps 12 and 13 illustrate the amount of sea level rise projected to occur in the Sacramento region over the course of the century. As can be seen in these images, sea level rise is projected to progress gradually over the course of the century, affecting the areas west of the Sacramento River Deep Water Ship Channel.

143 Meisen P and Phares N., 2011.
144 Sacramento County, 2016; Sacramento County, Sacramento County Climate Action Plan (2011). 145 Medellín-Azuara J, Howitt RE, Hanak E, Lund JR, Fleenor WE. “Agricultural Losses from Salinity in California’s Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.” San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science (2014). May 9 2020:
https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4b7295m9
146 Brown LR, Bennett WA, Wagner RW, Morgan-King T, Knowles N, Feyrer F, Schoellhamer DH, Stacey MT, Dettinger M. “Implications for Future Survival of Delta Smelt from Four Climate Change Scenarios for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, California.” Estuaries and Coasts (2013). May 9 2020:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12237-013-9585-4. 147 United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, Reclamation Managing Water in the West. West- Wide Climate Risk Assessment Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins Climate Impact Assessment (2014). Nov 8 2019:
https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/baseline/docs/ssjbia/ssjbia.pdf. 148 California Department of Water Resources, “Could Sea Level Rise Threaten the Water Coming Out of Some California Taps?”, September 17, 2019: https://water.ca.gov/News/Blog/2019/Sept-19/Sea-Level-Rise-Climate- Change.

Del Paso Blvd
Raley Blvd
Land
ParkDr
Grand Ave
N
orthborough Dr
J St
Sheldon Rd
N
16Th
St
K St
Northgate
Blvd
39Th
St
43Rd Ave
N St
Sutterville Rd
Arden Way
StocktonBlvd
Rush River Dr
Cosumnes River Blvd
Q St
Richards Blvd
Marconi Ave
N
atom
asCentral Dr
Riverside Blvd
Bruceville
Rd
Elder Creek Rd
Franklin Blvd
Club Center Dr
Auburn Blvd
Rio Linda Blvd
Windbridge Dr
Jackson Rd
Valley Hi Dr
24ThSt
El Camino Ave
59Th
St
Havenside
D
r
La Riviera Dr
Fair Oaks Blvd
X St
American River Dr
Mckinley Blvd
Elvas Ave
21St St
Fulton Ave
PowerInnRd
Norwood Ave
Eastern Ave
Grove Ave
I Street Brg
Center Pkwy
Freeport Blvd
Danbrook D r
Broadway
19Th St
W
attAve
65ThSt
16Th St
29Th St
12Th St
9Th St
10Th St
30Th St
15Th St
Alhambra Blvd
G
reenhavenDr
Florin Rd
H St
Hovnanian Dr
TruxelRd
MarysvilleBlvd
Main Ave
Ethan Way
W El Camino Ave
CollegeTown Dr
Brookfield Dr
Regency ParkCir
Engle Rd
13Th St
Gloria Dr
47Th Ave
Seamas Ave
Cottage Way
Ha rvard
St
Pocket Rd
Roseville Rd
Walnut Ave
E Stockton Blvd
L St
T ower Brg
Westlake P kwy
Capitol Mall
Arena Blvd
Edison Ave
Kiefer Blvd
M
issionA
ve
French Rd
W St
T elevision Cir C St
I St
P St
5ThSt
3Rd St
Bridgecross Dr
65Th
StreetExpy
San Juan Rd
Azevedo Dr
Alta Arden Expy
SW
attAve
Northrop Ave
Howe Ave
Meadowview Rd
Silver Eagle Rd
Exposition Blvd
Del Paso Rd
Curtis Dr
Elk Grove Florin Rd
Elsie Ave
Fruitridge Rd
Munroe St
N Bend Dr
N12Th St
Gateway Park Blvd
NatomasBlvd
Bell Ave
Calvine Rd
Mack Rd
46Th St
W Elkhorn Blvd
N Market Blvd
Elkhorn Blvd
Gerber Rd
S Land Park Dr
14Th St
Florin
PerkinsRd
American River
E
CommerceWay
Folsom Blvd
Big Horn Blvd
Levee Rd
Hurley Way
35Th Ave
Arden Garden
N Park Dr
E Levee Rd
Laguna Blvd
Lone Tree Rd
Metro Air Pkwy
Power Line Rd
ElCentro
Rd
Hedge Ave
Garden Hwy
Map 12:

Inundation from Extreme Storm
and 0.50-Meter Sea Level Rise
/0¦2
I½!"c$
Ad
Source: CalAdapt/UC Berkeley, 2016; FEMA, 2015; City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019 J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-05SLR_FloodZone.mxd A½
I½
!"^$
!"c$
/0¦2
AÎ
!"^$
A½
!"c$
0 1 2½ Mile
Water Depth (in meters)
Maximum inundation depth during a
likely 100 year storm and 0.50 m SLR

0.00 - 0.50

0.51 - 1.00

1.01 - 1.50

1.51 - 2.00

2.01 - 2.5

2.51 - 3.00

3.01 - 3.50

3.51 - 4.00

4.00 +Flood Zone
100 Year Flood Zone
500 Year Flood Zone
Sacramento City Limit
Water
Note: 0.50 meters of Sea Level Rise represents
a low-level scenario in the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta.

TOC
Del Paso Blvd
Raley Blvd
Land
ParkDr
Grand Ave
N
orthborough Dr
J St
Sheldon Rd
N
16Th
St
K St
Northgate
Blvd
39Th
St
43Rd Ave
N St
Sutterville Rd
Arden Way
StocktonBlvd
Rush River Dr
Cosumnes River Blvd
Q St
Richards Blvd
Marconi Ave
N
atom
asCentral Dr
Riverside Blvd
Bruceville
Rd
Elder Creek Rd
Franklin Blvd
Club Center Dr
Auburn Blvd
Rio Linda Blvd
Windbridge Dr
Jackson Rd
Valley Hi Dr
24ThSt
El Camino Ave
59Th
St
Havenside
D
r
La Riviera Dr
Fair Oaks Blvd
X St
American River Dr
Mckinley Blvd
Elvas Ave
21St St
Fulton Ave
PowerInnRd
Norwood Ave
Eastern Ave
Grove Ave
I Street Brg
Center Pkwy
Freeport Blvd
Danbrook D r
Broadway
19Th St
W
attAve
65ThSt
16Th St
29Th St
12Th St
9Th St
10Th St
30Th St
15Th St
Alhambra Blvd
G
reenhavenDr
Florin Rd
H St
Hovnanian Dr
TruxelRd
MarysvilleBlvd
Main Ave
Ethan Way
W El Camino Ave
CollegeTown Dr
Brookfield Dr
Regency ParkCir
Engle Rd
13Th St
Gloria Dr
47Th Ave
Seamas Ave
Cottage Way
Ha rvard
St
Pocket Rd
Roseville Rd
Walnut Ave
E Stockton Blvd
L St
T ower Brg
Westlake P kwy
Capitol Mall
Arena Blvd
Edison Ave
Kiefer Blvd
M
issionA
ve
French Rd
W St
T elevision Cir C St
I St
P St
5ThSt
3Rd St
Bridgecross Dr
65Th
StreetExpy
San Juan Rd
Azevedo Dr
Alta Arden Expy
SW
attAve
Northrop Ave
Howe Ave
Meadowview Rd
Silver Eagle Rd
Exposition Blvd
Del Paso Rd
Curtis Dr
Elk Grove Florin Rd
Elsie Ave
Fruitridge Rd
Munroe St
N Bend Dr
N12Th St
Gateway Park Blvd
NatomasBlvd
Bell Ave
Calvine Rd
Mack Rd
46Th St
W Elkhorn Blvd
N Market Blvd
Elkhorn Blvd
Gerber Rd
S Land Park Dr
14Th St
Florin
PerkinsRd
American River
E
CommerceWay
Folsom Blvd
Big Horn Blvd
Levee Rd
Hurley Way
35Th Ave
Arden Garden
N Park Dr
E Levee Rd
Laguna Blvd
Lone Tree Rd
Metro Air Pkwy
Power Line Rd
ElCentro
Rd
Hedge Ave
Garden Hwy
Map 13:

Inundation from Extreme Storm
and 1.41-Meter Sea Level Rise
/0¦2
I½!"c$
Ad
Source: CalAdapt/UC Berkeley, 2016; FEMA, 2015; City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett & Bhatia, 2019 J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-141SLR_FloodZone.mxd A½
I½
!"^$
!"c$
/0¦2
AÎ
!"^$
A½
!"c$
0 1 2½ Mile
Water Depth (in meters)
Maximum inundation depth during a
likely 100 year storm and 1.41 m SLR

0.00 - 0.50

0.51 - 1.00

1.01 - 1.50

1.51 - 2.00

2.01 - 2.5

2.51 - 3.00

3.01 - 3.50

3.51 - 4.00

4.00 +Flood Zone
100 Year Flood Zone
500 Year Flood Zone
Sacramento City Limit
Water
Note: 1.41 meters of Sea Level Rise represents
a low-level scenario in the Sacramento-San
Joaquin Delta.

City of Sacramento
City of Sacramento Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
64 3 Vulnerability
This chapter identifies vulnerabilities to climate change which involve areas at risk, vulnerable populations, and areas at the intersection of these vulnerabilities in Sacramento. This analysis is meant to guide adaptation interventions to areas that are most susceptible and less likely to recover from the impacts of climate hazards.

3.1 Vulnerable Populations
Certain populations are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change and may require additional health interventions. The following section describes the different groups who are at risk, which include children (aged 14 and below), older adults (aged 65 and over), individuals with disabilities, low-income households, outdoor workers, cost-burdened households, households living in substandard housing conditions, linguistically isolated households, and communities of color.

DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
Children
Children’s vulnerability to climate change arises primarily from their physiological characteristics and lifestyles, as well as their position of dependency on adults.

Increased time spent outdoors increases children’s exposure to high temperatures. This is especially true for student athletes.149 Newborns are also highly susceptible to temperature extremes because their capacity for body temperature regulation is limited.150 Children also have fewer opportunities than the average adult to make independent choices with regard to housing conditions, transportation, money management, medical treatment, and political representation. This means that children generally have fewer opportunities to take independent actions that might reduce their vulnerability.

Climate disruptions can be traumatic events which may result in injury, death, or displacement.

Exposure to traumatic events can impact children’s ability to regulate emotions, undermine cognitive development, and contribute to PTSD, anxiety, depression, and other psychia tric disorders, to which children are highly susceptible .151 Poverty can exacerbate the effect of these traumatic exposures, as children in poverty may encounter financial barriers to receiving proper medical care and social-emotional support and may be less able to escape or recover from extreme weather events.152 Furthermore, children’s ongoing lung development, airway size, level of physical activity, and body weight increase their susceptibility to respiratory hazards including ozone and

149 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016.
150 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016.
151 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016 ; CalBrace, “Children <5 years.” Nov 8 2019:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/CDPH%20Document%20Library/CHVIs/Children0to4_788_Narrative.pdf 152 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016.

TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
65 wildfire smoke.153 About 6.5 percent of Sacramento’s population is under five years of age, 19.2 percent are 14 years of age or younger, and 25.1 percent are younger than 19.154 Of those children aged 18 years and younger, about 31 percent are members of a household that participates in a public assistance program such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), 1 5.7 percent live in a household whose annual income is at or below the poverty level, and 11.8 percent have some form of disability.155
Within the City of Sacramento, Map 14 illustrates that particularly high concentrations of young children occur in neighborhoods such as Valley Hi/ North Laguna, Meadowview, Del Paso Heights, Strawberry Manor, and Gardenland. These are primarily single -family neighborhoods in close proximity to schools such as Grant Union High School, Castori Elementary School, Fairbanks Elementary School, Smythe Academy of Arts and Sciences, Jefferson Elementary School, Valley High School, John Reith Elementary School, Samuel Jackman Middle School, and Prairie Elementary School.

Older Adults
Older adults are a diverse population whose potential vulnerability to climate change is influenced by such factors as underlying health status, economic situation, and level of social isolation.156 The body’s natural aging processes and the effects of mental illness may interact to make the elderly especially vulnerable to the effects of heat. Aging can impair the body’s ability to regulate internal temperature.157 This is especially true for individuals taking medication that interferes with internal temperature regulation, including medications used to treat mental illnesses such as depression, anxiety, and psychosis.158 In addition, many older adults on fixed incomes may be especially affected by increases in costs for energy during high heat events.159

153 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016.
154 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Table S0101 155 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates Table S2201, Table S1701, Table S1810 156 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016; Benevolenza MA, DeRigne L. “The impact of climate change and natural disasters on vulnerable populations: A systematic review of literature.” Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment (2019). Nov 8 2019: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10911359.2018.1527739?journalCode= whum20; Gamble JL, Hurley BJ, Schultz PA, Jaglom WS, Krishan N, Harris M. “Climate Change and Older Americans:

State of the Science.” Environmental Health Perspectives Jan 1 2013. May 11 2020:
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/full/10.1289/ehp.1205223. 157 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016 ; CalBrace, “Population aged ≥ 65.” Nov 9 2019:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/CDPH%20Document%20Library/CHVIs/Elderly_789_Narrative.pdf. 158 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016.
159 Gamble JL, et.al., 2013.
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
nn
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n n
n
n n
n
n
nn n
n
n
n
n
n
n
nn
n
n
n
n
nn
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
nn
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
nn
n
n
n
n
n
nn
n
nn
nn nn
n
n
n n
n
n
nn
n
n n
n
n
nn
n
n
n
n
n n n
n
n
n
n
n
n
15T
h St
L St
Garden Hwy
Broadway
Del Paso Blvd
Jackson Rd
Cosumnes River Blvd
DonJulio Blvd
Folsom Blvd
Marconi Ave
Power Line Rd
BrucevilleRd
Franklin Blvd
Riverside Blvd
16T
h St
El Camino Ave
59Th
St
Alta Arden Expy
X St
Elk Grove Blvd
Fulton Ave
W
attAve
Norwood Ave
W
alnut
Ave
Richards Blvd
5T
h St
3Rd
St
FairOaks Blvd
12T
h St
10T
h St 19T
h St
J St
Florin Rd
TruxelRd
Hillsdale Blvd
Madison A ve
MarysvilleBlvd
Main Ave
A St
Meadowview Rd
21StSt
Florin
PerkinsRd
W El Camino Ave
FreeportBlvd
N
orthgateBlvd
Sutterville Rd
Mack Rd
47Th Ave
Garfield
Ave
Kiefer Blvd
Eastern
Ave
Fruitridge Rd
StocktonBlvd
French Rd
N St
I St
P St
Arena Blvd
29T
h St
San Juan Rd
PowerInn
Rd
Sheldon Rd
W Elkhorn Blvd
El Centro Rd
Gerber Rd
Elder Creek Rd
HoweAve
Sims Rd
Del Paso Rd
Elk Grove Florin Rd
Bradshaw Rd
AuburnBlvd
Bond Rd
Arden Way
Laguna Blvd
Raley BlvdNatom
asBlvd
Bell Ave
Calvine Rd
N Market Blvd
Grant Line Rd
65T
h Street Expy
W
aterman Rd
Big Horn Blvd
CenterPkwy
E
Com
merceWay
65Th St
RosevilleRd
Elkhorn Blvd
D
wightRd
Exposition Blvd
Bader Rd
Sacramento City Limit
Water
/0¦2
I½!"c$
Ad
J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-ChildrenUnder5.mxd A½
!"^$
!"c$
AÎ
A½
0 1 2½ Mile
I½
/0¦2
!"^$
!"c$
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett and Bhatia, 2023 Map 14: Children Under 5 Years
Percent Under 5 Years
0 - 250
250 - 500
500 - 750
750+
Census Tract Boundary
Schools Children Under 5 Attend
n Charter
n Private
n Public
School Grounds
TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
67 Older adults with cognitive or functional impairments may have difficulty responding to and recovering from extreme events, such as flooding .160 These effects may be confounded by social isolation as older adults in isolation, especially those with cognitive impairments, may not receive emergency information or may underestimate the severity of warnings .161 Elders residing in assistive care facilities or with limited mobility also face additional complications during evacuations and may be adversely affected by interruptions in care for chronic medical conditions.162 In addition, older adults are more sensitive to certain diseases, such as West Nile Virus,163 which may expand in range as precipitation patterns change.

Air pollution can exacerbate asthma and C hronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and increase the risks of heart attack in older adults, especially those who are diabetic or obese. 164 Respiratory function often declines with age. The elderly thus may be more sensitive to the effects of air pollution, airborne pathogens, and allergens than the general population.165 As depicted in Map 15, Sacramento’s older adult population is highly concentrated in four small areas: the northern portion of the Pocket neighborhood, Little Pocket, the Central City, and Sierra Oaks. With the exception of the Central City, these are suburban neighborhoods that neighbor parks and other scenic resources but may render seniors socially isolated from the broader community.

Disabled People
Disability is a broad term that refers to any condition or impairment of the body or mind that limits a person’s ability to do certain activities. Limited mobility and reliance on medical equipment can also contribute to vulnerability, particularly during times of emergency evacuation and power interruption.166 Climate-related displacement can interrupt medical treatment, with health implications for those with chronic conditions. Further, mental health issues tend to increase following disasters. Rates of depression, anxiety disorders, post- traumatic stress disorders, substance abuse, and suicide are all projected to increase as the effects of climate change become more intense.167 Use of certain medications, especially those used to treat mental health disorders, can increase sensitivity to high heat by interfering with the body’s ability to regulate internal temperature.168 In addition, the compounded effect of high poverty levels and low levels of 160 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016.
161 Gamble JL, et.al., 2013.
162 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016; CalBrace, “Population aged ≥ 65;” Gamble JL, et.al., 2013. 163 CalBrace, “Population aged ≥ 65.”
164 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016.
165 Gamble JL, et.al., 2013.
166 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016; C alBrace, “Disability.” Nov 8 2019:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/CDPH%20Document%20Library/CHVIs/BRACE_Disability_Narrative_795 _11-16-2016.pdf.
167 CalBrace, “Disability.”
168 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016.
educational attainment and employment among populations with disabilities can heighten climate change vulnerability.169
169 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2019.
15T
h St
L St
Garden Hwy
Broadway
Del Paso Blvd
Jackson Rd
Cosumnes River Blvd
DonJulio Blvd
Folsom Blvd
Marconi Ave
Power Line Rd
BrucevilleRd
Franklin Blvd
Riverside Blvd
16T
h St
El Camino Ave
59Th
St
Alta Arden Expy
X St
Elk Grove Blvd
Fulton Ave
W
attAve
Norwood Ave
W
alnut
Ave
Richards Blvd
5T
h St
3Rd
St
FairOaks Blvd
12T
h St
10T
h St 19T
h St
J St
Florin Rd
TruxelRd
Hillsdale Blvd
Madison A ve
MarysvilleBlvd
Main Ave
A St
Meadowview Rd
21StSt
Florin
PerkinsRd
W El Camino Ave
FreeportBlvd
N
orthgateBlvd
Sutterville Rd
Mack Rd
47Th Ave
Garfield
Ave
Kiefer Blvd
Eastern
Ave
Fruitridge Rd
StocktonBlvd
French Rd
N St
I St
P St
Arena Blvd
29T
h St
San Juan Rd
PowerInn
Rd
Sheldon Rd
W Elkhorn Blvd
El Centro Rd
Gerber Rd
Elder Creek Rd
HoweAve
Sims Rd
Del Paso Rd
Elk Grove Florin Rd
Bradshaw Rd
AuburnBlvd
Bond Rd
Arden Way
Laguna Blvd
Raley BlvdNatom
asBlvd
Bell Ave
Calvine Rd
N Market Blvd
Grant Line Rd
65T
h Street Expy
W
aterman Rd
Big Horn Blvd
CenterPkwy
E
Com
merceWay
65Th St
RosevilleRd
Elkhorn Blvd
D
wightRd
Exposition Blvd
Bader Rd
Sacramento City Limit
Water
/0¦2
I½!"c$
Ad
J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-AdultsOver65.mxd A½
!"^$
!"c$
AÎ
A½
I½
/0¦2
!"^$
!"c$
Percent Ages 65 and Older
by Citywide Quantiles

18.3% - 59.8%

11.8% - 18.2%

8.9% - 11.7%

0.4% - 8.8%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett and Bhatia, 2023 Map 15: Percentage of Adults
Ages 65 and Older
0 1 2½ Miles
TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
69 Risk communication materials are not always designed or delivered with accessibility in mind, potentially limiting knowledge accessibility for those who are deaf or have hearing loss, who are blind or have low vision, or those with diminished cognitive skills.

About 12.4 percent of Sacramento’s population has some form of disability; 4.7 percent are both disabled and elderly. About 27.7 percent of Sacramento’s total disabled population reported yearly income at or below the poverty level; about 69 percent of working-age disabled individuals living in Sacramento are either unemployed or do not participate in the labor force. Map 16 illustrates that the incidence of disability is particularly strong at the southern end of the city, the areas around Freeport and Meadowview. Valley Hi / North Laguna, Pocket, East Sacramento, and the northern neighborhoods of Raley Industrial Parkway, Del Paso Heights, North Sacramento, and South Natomas also contain large numbers of disabled individuals.

Race/Ethnicity
Structural racism, meaning the “totality of the social relations and practices that reinforce white privilege”, contributes to the climate change vulnerability of communities of color. 170 Structural racism manifests in a number of policy -making decisions, including race- based housing segregation, lack of investment in public transit, and exclusionary zoning practices, whose legacy continues to have impacts on climate change vulnerability. Redlining is an example of structural racism. The term ‘redlining’ is often used to describe the discriminatory practices of delineating areas where banks would avoid investments based on the racial makeup of certain communities; this was common practice in the United States for decades, starting in the 1930s. Structural racism’s entrenched position in American life means that this race- based source of vulnerability manifests in a number of interacting ways, including inequities in housing quality and location, household wealth, and educational and employment opportunities .171 Historically, public policy has reinforced and compounded these inequalities as white and affluent residents have accrued disproportionate levels of wealth and influence in the political process.172 When analyzing the effect that race or ethnic group identity has on climate change vulnerability, it is important to keep this extensive history of race-based discrimination in mind. Race or ethnicity, considered in a historical and societal vacuum, may not contribute significantly to vulnerabi lity.

What matters in this case is the fact that factors such as race, immigration status, income level, educational attainment, and housing and employment opportunities have and continue to intersect to systematically affect access to resources, societal advantages, and environmental exposures in ways that are consistently associated with race .173 As a result, being a racial or ethnic minority in 170 Thomas, K., et.al., 2018.
171 Thomas, K., et.al., 2018; U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016; Bolin B and Kurtz LC, 2017. 172 Deas M, et.al.,. “Opportunities for Equitable Adaptation in Cities: A Workshop Summary Report.” Georgetown Climate Center (2017). Nov 8 2019: https://www.georgetownclimate.org/files/report/GCC- Opportunities_for_Equitable_Adaptation-Feb_2017.pdf.
173 Bolin B and Kurtz LC, 2017.
the United States is correlated with lower income, poorer physical health, living in an area with sparse vegetation and more heat-absorbing surfaces, lower air conditioning ownership, and higher 15T
h St
L St
Garden Hwy
Broadway
Del Paso Blvd
Jackson Rd
Cosumnes River Blvd
DonJulio Blvd
Folsom Blvd
Marconi Ave
Power Line Rd
BrucevilleRd
Franklin Blvd
Riverside Blvd
16T
h St
El Camino Ave
59Th
St
Alta Arden Expy
X St
Elk Grove Blvd
Fulton Ave
W
attAve
Norwood Ave
W
alnut
Ave
Richards Blvd
5T
h St
3Rd
St
FairOaks Blvd
12T
h St
10T
h St 19T
h St
J St
Florin Rd
TruxelRd
Hillsdale Blvd
Madison A ve
MarysvilleBlvd
Main Ave
A St
Meadowview Rd
21StSt
Florin
PerkinsRd
W El Camino Ave
FreeportBlvd
N
orthgateBlvd
Sutterville Rd
Mack Rd
47Th Ave
Garfield
Ave
Kiefer Blvd
Eastern
Ave
Fruitridge Rd
StocktonBlvd
French Rd
N St
I St
P St
Arena Blvd
29T
h St
San Juan Rd
PowerInn
Rd
Sheldon Rd
W Elkhorn Blvd
El Centro Rd
Gerber Rd
Elder Creek Rd
HoweAve
Sims Rd
Del Paso Rd
Elk Grove Florin Rd
Bradshaw Rd
AuburnBlvd
Bond Rd
Arden Way
Laguna Blvd
Raley BlvdNatom
asBlvd
Bell Ave
Calvine Rd
N Market Blvd
Grant Line Rd
65T
h Street Expy
W
aterman Rd
Big Horn Blvd
CenterPkwy
E
Com
merceWay
65Th St
RosevilleRd
Elkhorn Blvd
D
wightRd
Exposition Blvd
Bader Rd
Sacramento City Limit
Water
/0¦2
I½!"c$
Ad
J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-Disability.mxd A½
!"^$
!"c$
AÎ
A½
I½
/0¦2
!"^$
!"c$
Percent with One or More Disabilities
by Citywide Quantiles

14.6% - 53.1%

11.4% - 14.5%

9.1% - 11.3%

2.5% - 9.0%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates; City of Sacramento, 2019; Dyett and Bhatia, 2023 Map 16: Disability
0 1 2½ Miles
TOC
Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment
71 rates of participation in outdoor and farming work 174, all factors which increase vulnerability to climate change.

Communities of color are disproportionately impacted by poor air quality, such as that which may arise from wildfire, industrial and transportation emissions, and the urban heat island effect, due to both disproportionate levels of exposure to air pollutants and elevated rate of diseases such as asthma and COPD, whose symptoms are exacerbated by climate change.175 Sacramento is one of America’s most racially diverse cities. Approximately 48.5 percent of the city is white, 18.7 percent Asian, 13.4 percent Black or African American, 1.6 percent Native Ha waiian or Pacific Islander, and 0.7 percent Native American. Approximately 17.1 percent identified as belonging to two or more races or a race not identified in the U.S. Census.

As can be seen in Maps 17 and 18, communities of color are clustered primarily at the northern and southern ends of the city, which, as demonstrated in the series of maps above, contain several neighborhoods that experience elevated levels of climate change vulnerability along several different axes.

SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS
Low-Income and Poverty
Low-income people can be more vulnerable to climate change as a result of pre- existing health conditions, reduced mobility options, reduced access to health care, and limited ability to purchase the goods and services that could mitigate the negative effects of climate change. 176 Anticipated increases in food, water, and utility prices under climate change may also be especially problematic for low-income households.177

174 Gronlund CJ, 2014.
175 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016.

176 U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2016; CalBrace, “Poverty Rate.” Nov 8 2019:
https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/CDPH%20Document%20Library/CHVIs/HCI_PovertyRate_754_Narrativ e_Examples11-5-13rev3-12-14.pdf; Wilson SM, Richard R, Joseph L, Williams E. “Climate Change, Environmental Justice, and Vulnerability: An Exploratory Spatial Analysis.” Environmental Justice Mar 17 2010. May 11 2020:
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/env.2009.0035. 177 Tacoli C. “Urban poverty, food security, and climate change.” International Institute of En vironment and Development (2013). May 11 2020: https://pubs.iied.org/pdfs/17149IIED.pdf; Shonkoff SB, Morello-Frosch R, Pastor M, Sadd J. “The climate gap: environmental health and equity and implications of climate change and mitigation policies in California – a review of the literature.” Climatic Change Nov 24 2011. May 11 2020:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-011-0310-7. 15T
h St
L St
Garden Hwy
Broadway
Del Paso Blvd
Jackson Rd
Cosumnes River Blvd
DonJulio Blvd
Folsom Blvd
Marconi Ave
Power Line Rd
BrucevilleRd
Franklin Blvd
Riverside Blvd
16T
h St
El Camino Ave
59Th
St
Alta Arden Expy
X St
Elk Grove Blvd
Fulton Ave
W
attAve
Norwood Ave
W
alnut
Ave
Richards Blvd
5T
h St
3Rd
St
FairOaks Blvd
12T
h St
10T
h St 19T
h St
J St
Florin Rd
TruxelRd
Hillsdale Blvd
Madison A ve
MarysvilleBlvd
Main Ave
A St
Meadowview Rd
21StSt
Florin
PerkinsRd
W El Camino Ave
FreeportBlvd
N
orthgateBlvd
Sutterville Rd
Mack Rd
47Th Ave
Garfield
Ave
Kiefer Blvd
Eastern
Ave
Fruitridge Rd
StocktonBlvd
French Rd
N St
I St
P St
Arena Blvd
29T
h St
San Juan Rd
PowerInn
Rd
Sheldon Rd
W Elkhorn Blvd
El Centro Rd
Gerber Rd
Elder Creek Rd
HoweAve
Sims Rd
Del Paso Rd
Elk Grove Florin Rd
Bradshaw Rd
AuburnBlvd
Bond Rd
Arden Way
Laguna Blvd
Raley BlvdNatom
asBlvd
Bell Ave
Calvine Rd
N Market Blvd
Grant Line Rd
65T
h Street Expy
W
aterman Rd
Big Horn Blvd
CenterPkwy
E
Com
merceWay
65Th St
RosevilleRd
Elkhorn Blvd
D
wightRd
Exposition Blvd
Bader Rd
Sacramento City Limit
Water
/0¦2
I½!"c$
Ad
J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\VulnerabilityAssessment\Draft2\VA-CommunitiesofColor.mxd A½
!"^$
!"c$
AÎ
A½
I½
/0¦2
!"^$
!"c$
Percent Non-White Population

78.0% - 95.4%

Sacramento City CouncilAugust 22, 2023

Sacramento City Council
August 22, 2023