I. Title of the Best Practice

II. Overview of the Best Practice

A. General Description
Many state and local governments and private sector organizations are taking their own actions that reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) - and at the same time creating jobs and strengthening economic development, saving energy and money, and improving local air and environmental quality. These initiatives may be explicitly included in a state or local climate change initiative, or may be more general efforts that have the co-benefit of reducing GHG emissions. Although a number of these efforts may receive some federal funding, the federal government is not the initiating or primary entity. Short descriptions of several such state, local, or non-profit initiated efforts follow:

B. Special Characteristics of the Best Practice
There are many hundreds of examples of initiatives undertaken by states and localities that have resulted directly or indirectly in lower greenhouse gas emissions. For example:

Smart Growth describes a new approach to economic growth and development in communities that is balanced by environmental protection and quality of life. Smart Growth takes advantage of locational decisions and site designs to minimize development's impact on the environment. For example, air quality can be improved by reducing commuting and other transportation needs. Individual state and local governments, in partnership with stakeholders including developers, community leaders, the business community, environmental organizations, and local citizens, have been developing a variety of strategies to address fiscally responsible land use, growth and development.

The State of Maryland General Assembly passed the "Smart Growth and Neighborhood Conservation Initiative" to encourage development and economic expansion in the locations where it makes the most sense and where the infrastructure is in place, or planned, to support it. For example, the Fairfield Ecological-Industrial Park is a model of a new voluntary compliance approach to "brownfields" redevelopment (brownfield sites are abandoned, idled, or under-used industrial and commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination).

King County's (Washington State) Smart Growth Initiative has been successful in keeping 91% of its development within designated Urban Growth Areas. Farmlands will be protected from sprawl and excessive development through zoning and subdivision code changes, and through development rights transfer. Development and infrastructure will be linked more closely through transportation planning, flexible road budgeting and supplemental capital project appropriation. Inter-jurisdictional planning will integrate main traffic corridors into a Regional Arterial Network, improving freight between the area's industrial centers and ports. With faster and more efficient mass transit, King County will be promoting compact mixed-use development around transit hubs to create livable communities, boost affordable housing and spur brownfields reuse.

GHG Inventories: Nearly two-thirds of states have developed GHG inventories and one-half have state action plans through the EPA State and Local Climate Change Outreach Program. Examples include:

The State of New Jersey established a goal to reduce its GHG emissions by 3.5 % (or 5.2 million metric tons of carbon equivalent or MMTCE) below 1990 levels by 2005. The primary focus of their plan is on the commercial and industrial sectors. Strategies include energy efficiency, use of innovative technologies, pollution prevention, solid waste/recycling and sequestration.

After completing its action plan in 1995, the State of Oregon outlined a strategy estimated to reduce GHG emissions by at least 0.5 million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCE) in 2015. In 1997, the Oregon State legislature enacted legislation that establishes a CO2 Standard for all new fossil-fueled power plants of 25 MW or larger. The legislation sets a standard for net emissions per kWh generated that is 17% lower than the most efficient gas-fired plant currently operating in the U.S.

A description of the EPA State and Local Climate Change Program, which provides states with assistance in developing action plans and maintains a database of state activities is included in U.S. Best Practices submission on Federally Leveraged State and Local Action.

Several states are adding a renewable energy and/or energy efficiency component to their electricity restructuring plans or their own electricity management. Examples include:

The State of California established the Renewable Resource Trust Fund to collect US$540 million from the state investor-owned utilities from January 1, 1998 to January 1, 2002 to support existing, new, and emerging renewable technologies. Municipal utilities and individual customers also may contribute to the fund. The funds are divided among four accounts. The Existing Renewable Resources Account totals US$243 million, with funds distributed through a production incentive (capped at 1.5 cents per kilowatt-hour). Some funds from the Existing Renewables Account may be shifted over time to increasingly competitive technologies. The New Technologies Account totals US$162 million, and also will be distributed through production incentive payments. The Emerging Technologies Account (US$54 million) provides rebates, buy-downs, or equivalent incentives for emerging renewables, and the Consumer-Side Account (US$81 million) provides customer rebates for the purchase of renewable energy and funds an education program to help develop a consumer market for renewable energy. California also is collecting US$218 million from the state investor-owned utilities for energy efficiency projects.

In 1996, the City of Denver (state of Colorado) started replacing the incandescent traffic light bulbs with LEDs in over 1200 intersections. The city of Denver expects annual savings over US$229,000 with energy savings of 7.8 kWh. Because of the LEDs long life expectancy, replacement will be less frequent and will provide additional savings in labor and materials of US$127, 500. When the project is completed, GHG savings are expected to be approximately 2202 metric tons of carbon equivalent per year.

States have identified areas of savings through their waste-management programs:

The Columbia Wastewater Treatment Plant in Portland, Oregon, produces nearly 1 million cubic feet of methane each day at its facility. Seventy percent of the gas is recovered for use in the digesters, heating the facility, and for sale to a local manufacturer. The remaining 30%, until recently, had been flared. The installation of a fuel cell using the excess methane now provides 1.3 million kWh, enough power for about 100 homes for an entire year. The offsets are estimated by the City of Portland at 134 metric tons of carbon equivalent per year, 2.7 metric tons of NOx and 5.5 metric tons of SO2.

The Rhode Island Solid Waste Management Corporation is a state chartered entity responsible for the management of the Central Landfill in the city of Johnson, Rhode Island. Each year since 1990, the Rhode Island Landfill Gas to Electricity project has been able to reduce landfill gas emissions, eliminate landfill gas odors, and receive payment for selling the right to use the landfill gas. Combusting the methane reduces annual GHG emissions by about 155,000 metric tons of carbon equivalent. In addition, the electricity generated reduces fossil fuel used by the electric utility, thus avoiding CO2 emissions by about 28,000 metric tons of carbon equivalent per year. They also receive US$600,000 in royalties each year for the use of the gas.

Energy Plans: Finally, a number of U.S. cities have instituted their own energy plans (state level plans are usually developed under the State Energy Program, see the "Intergovernmental" best practice). For example,

The City of Phoenix, Arizona, established an Energy Management Program to improve energy efficiency in its city operations. Combining energy efficiency with on-going maintenance and state-of-the-art building energy management technologies, they have implemented over 1000 projects. The City of Phoenix estimated annual savings of 4,150 metric tons of carbon equivalent in 1994 with a reduction of 10% in energy costs or about US$4 million per year.

C. Reasons for Inclusion as a Best Practice
These activities are judged to be best practice because they:

Realize multiple policy objectives. Each of these programs helps state and local governments promote community grow in sustainable ways. They often promote local economic growth and job development along with reducing local resource needs and environmental impacts.

Fit flexibly within individual state and locality needs. The initiatives are custom designed to reflect the local circumstances and needs. While there is transferability among and between program initiatives, each tends to reflect the particular circumstance under which the program was developed.

Draw on local talent and generate new program ideas. Implementation of these programs by hundreds of individuals and organizations from different backgrounds helps generate new ideas and opportunities. Many of the projects are transferable to other entities.

III. Categorizing the Best Practice

The following responses are combined for all programs listed in this section.

1. Classification(s) (Indicate main classification(s) only.)
( ) Regulatory Approach (Policy approaches-- regulations, incentives, etc.)
( X ) Practical Action (Action undertaken independently by a social actor)
( X ) Social Network Mechanism (Cooperative structure)

2. Social Actor(s) Involved (Indicate main social actor(s) only.)
( X ) Citizens
( X ) Central government
( X ) Local government
( X ) Business

3. Sector(s) (Indicate main sector(s) only.)
( X ) Energy
( X ) Household
( X ) Transportation
( X ) Industrial Enterprises
( ) Other (Non-Industrial) Business
( ) Agriculture/ Land Use/ Forestry
( ) Other (Please specify)

4. Target Greenhouse Gas(es)
( X ) CO2
( X ) CH4
( ) N2O
( ) HFC
( ) PFC
( ) SF6
( ) Other For most states, no specific greenhouse gas is targeted. The states focus on energy and waste improvements. Savings in greenhouse gases are, however, a significant by-product of these activities.

IV. List of References

http://yosemite.epa.gov/globalwarming/ghg.nsf/actions/CaseStudies
http://www.smartgrowth.org

V. Please indicate a person to contact for more information about this Best Practice.

Smart Growth
Contact Person:	Kendra Briechle
Title:	Smart Growth Program Manager
Organization:	International City/County Managers Association
Email:	kbriechle@icma.org
Tel:	202-289-4262
Fax:	202-962-3500
Address:	777 North Capitol Street, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20002-4201 USA

State and Local Climate Change Program
Contact Person:	Katherine Sibold
Title:	Team Leader, State and Local Climate Change Program
Organization:	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Email:	sibold.katherine@epa.gov
Tel:	202-260-4314
Fax:	202-260-0290
Address:	401 M Street SW (2176), Washington, DC 20460 USA