Accountability for real progress in meeting Oakland's Energy and Climate Action Plan
"In July 2009, the Oakland City Council approved a preliminary GHG reduction target for the year 2020 of 36% below 2005 levels. " (See http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/pwa/documents/report/oak039056.pdf ECAP executive summary , pg. 3.) The document goes onto specify,a decrease of 32% electricity use and a decrease of 14% from 2005 levels needed, amongst other good plan strategies, to meet our overall 36% GHG reduction goal by 2020 . The most recent annual report by the City, 'Sustainable Oakland 2013-14,' states: "City-wide energy use has decreased 2.2 percent since 2005.While electricity use has risen by 3.3 percent, it has been offset by a 5.4 decrease in natural gas use..." (See http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/pwa/documents/image/oak049719.pdf Sustainable Oakland 2013-14 report ,pg. 9.)
Is there something alarming about this?
First of all, we don't see any transparency on any real greenhouse gas (GHG) annual inventories past a baseline inventory (presumably) in 2005. Thus we have no accurate measurement of our actual progress on our reduction goal of 36% of GHG emissions from our 2005 baseline. Second, electricity and natural gas use do not produce equivalent GHG emissions. (Thus, asserting natural gas reductions 'offset' electricity increases is misleading.) And lastly, if the 36% reduction goal by 2020 was created in 2009, we are about halfway to 2020. Are we even close to 15-18% (about halfway to 36%) reduction in GHG emissions !?!
Everyone knows we can't manage what we don't measure. And as long as we keep avoiding measuring our GHG emissions accurately, no one can hold us accountable for not meeting a goal... until it is too late.
I would like to vote for having meaningful discussions and start to take impactful actions now, in 2015, rather than wait until CityCamp 2020 to be accountable. Anyone else?