HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-11-10_07_00_PM-EEC_MembersAgenda
Energy and Environment Commission
City Of Edina, Minnesota
City Hall, Community Room
4801 W 50th Street, Edina MN 55424
Thursday, November 10, 2016
7:00 PM
I.Call To Order
II.Roll Call
III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda
IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes
A.October Meeting Minutes
V.Community Comment
During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share relevant
issues or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit
the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking,
items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment.
Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board/Commission Members to respond to their
comments tonight. Instead, the Board/Commission might refer the matter to sta% for
consideration at a future meeting.
VI.Reports/Recommendations
A.iMatter Climate Action Plan Resolution
B.Study and Report: Packaging
C.Working Group Updates
VII.Correspondence And Petitions
VIII.Chair And Member Comments
A.The Nature Conservancy Report
IX.Sta* Comments
A.Q3 Report: Partners in Energy Action Plan
X.Adjournment
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the
public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing ampli0cation, an
interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861
72 hours in advance of the meeting.
Date: November 10, 2016 Agenda Item #: IV.A.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
Minutes
From:Tara Brown, Sustainability Coordinator
Item Activity:
Subject:October Meeting Minutes Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approve meeting minutes from October.
INTRODUCTION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
October EEC Meeting Minutes
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
Minutes
City Of Edina, Minnesota
Energy and Environment Commission
Edina City Hall Community Room
Thursday, October 13, 2016, 7:00 PM
I. Call To Order
Chair Zarrin called the meeting to order at 7:00p.m.
II. Roll Call
Answering Roll Call were Burmeister, Glahn, Horan, Jackson, Kim, Kostuch, Madhok, Manser,
Mohanty, Satterlee, Seeley, Waddick and Chair Zarrin.
Late: Kim at 7:06pm
Absent:
Staff Present: Tara Brown, Rebecca Foster, Sulekha Mohamed,
III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda
Motion made by Member Zarrin to approve the Meeting Agenda. Motion seconded by
Member Glahn. Motion carried.
IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes
Motion made by Chair Zarrin to approve the September 22, 2016 minutes. Motion seconded
by Member Burmeister. Motion carried.
V. Special Recognitions And Presentations
• Dr. Lester Shen shared a presentation on “How to change Behavior.” He discussed the
Fogg Behavior Model, motivational tools, abilities and triggers to engage residents and
businesses in energy conservation.
VI. Community Comment
• “iMatter” – “We The Youth of Edina, MN”
o iMatter is a vision for the path forward, backed by powerful tools and
resources. It calls upon young activists to secure commitments from local
governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to levels that ensure a
healthy planet for ours and all future generations.
1. Yun Gin Quang – 12th grader who currently lives in 10300 Wyoming Avenue South
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
a. “If our environment is destroyed, we will never get restored. We cannot wait any
longer for change, we the youth cannot deal with the consequences.”
2. Joanna Kim – 11th grader (EEC student committee member) who is Vernn Avenue South
a. Personally got drawn into the Environmental crisis because of her love for the
environment
b. iMatter has A-F grading system that endorse climate report card & call for
immediate action to protest out future from the Climate Crisis
c. Edina’s Report Card: for Zero Emissions Plan (D); Renewable Energy (C); Waste (B);
Carbon Removal (C); Youth Involvement (Plus ½ grade bonus)
3. Andrew Hall 10th grader who currently lives in 4505 West 44th street
a. Overall grade that Edina has been given is a C
b. Edina has does greenhouse inventory which is very good in helping create an
action plan
i. Although Edina doesn’t have a current climate action plan
c. Edina’s grade in waste helps because Edina does have a curbside wasting plan,
which is helpful.
d. Edina does have 2 youth commissioners’ EEC members, so that helps with Edina’s
overall grade
4. Garn Madhok lives in 4924 Interlocking Court
a. Passionate about climate change because it’s fair for the youth, but they’re not the
only students/youth the only youth care about the environment
b. They have collected over 125 signatures and iMatter petition from middle school
and high school. They are hoping to gather more student signatures as well as
signatures from other organizations from the city and adults in their lives
c. They are asking EEC to work on this matter
5. Allison Russell 12th grader in Edina High School lives in 6112 Ashcroft Avenue
a. She has a deep concern surrounding our state environment
b. As we approach the 10-year mark of EEC; we need to do more
c. They need a climate action plan and they need EEC’s help and participation
6. Larry Kraft from St. Louis Park
a. He is a volunteer and mentor with the iMatter group and Involved in the energy
program in St. Louis Park
i. Fantastic feedback from the group
ii. “The youth could be your window for behavior change in Edina.”
b. Larry encourages everyone in EEC to view iMatter as a solution to see actual
behavior change in our youth and generations that follow
c. The report card that students presented was a product of students and
government collaborations. That’s how Andrew gathered information
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
d. Specific programs- they mentioned that there’s a specific science behind it. The
students tried to be very subjective with the data they presented.
7. Chair Zarrin recommended the group review their data and share with City Council.
VII. Reports/Recommendation
A. 2016 Work Plan Updates
City Operations Energy Efficiency Subcommittee
• No update.
Water Quality Working Group
• Worked with the City to put out information on community fall cleanup.
• Working on library display cases and trying to set up by putting up
information/posters in the first week of November
• Hoping to highlight local business doing good work with recognition in Star
Tribune or local newspaper
• Adapt a drain- keeping an eye on local draining
Motion made by Chair Zarrin to add Richard Manser to the working group. Motion seconded by
Member Mohanty. Motion carried.
Business Energy Efficiency Working Group
• Hoping to sit down with Mayor Hovland and Tara Brown in the upcoming weeks to
discuss business energy
• Tara created a tool from CEE and modify clusters of information from apartments,
business, and overall message to all the business
• We are going to be in touch with Chamber of Commerce and 50th & France
business to discuss community outreach
• Edina Urban Vision Symposium – discussed to see if the City of Edina wants to go
beyond their own energy code. Tara noted the City can only ask for requirements
above code if the city is providing money for the building.
Motion made by Glahn to remove Marshall Silberstein from the working group. Motion seconded
by Member Chair Zarrin. Motion carried.
Residential Energy Efficiency Working Group
• Discussed how to get more people into the Residential group
• Also getting people out to the Open Street event a few weeks ago
• Spend with iMatter group discussing youth drive of their incentive and our
incentives. How to get the students to get more involved
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
Education and Outreach Working Group
• Communicating with Tara regarding the film series and the budget we have for our
incoming 2017 year
• As soon as they are confident to get sponsorships to help the films, Education and
Outreach Working Group will roll out the schedule
Student Environment Leadership Council (Subcommittee)
• Worked with iMatter to bring their presentation to EEC meeting on October 13th
• Future plans to look into the student consumption and what they can do
• Plan to attend other meetings in other local schools
• Define motivational tools to reach out to the youth via school newspaper
Member Kim excused herself from the meeting at 8:36pm.
Member Madhok excused herself from the meeting at 8:36pm.
Recycling, Solid Waste and Organics Working Group
• All chair meeting and commissioners went around discussing work plans in the
upcoming future
• With the regard to comprehensive plans, council will be asking more input in the
future. There is no timeline yet since they are working on the plan throughout next
year.
• The City and Council do value the input of Recycling Solid Waste and Organics
Working Group
VIII. Correspondence And Petitions
• None.
IX. Chair And Member Comments
A. Attendance report and roster
X. Staff Comments
A. Staff Comments
• Liaison Brown presented PiE Q3 Report that shared the strategies and planning for our
three goals in Facilities, Business, and Residential in reducing greenhouse gas emissions
• Chair Zarrin requested an additional meeting to bring all chair working groups related to
PiE together to review overlaps.
XI. Adjournment
Draft Minutes☒
Approved Minutes☐
Approved Date:
Motion made by Member Zarrin to adjourn the October 13, 2016 meeting at 9:05p.m. Motion
seconded by Chair Mohanty. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Sulekha Mohamed
Executive Assistant
Date: November 10, 2016 Agenda Item #: VI.A.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
Report and Recommendation
From:Tara Brown, Sustainability Coordinator
Item Activity:
Subject:iMatter Climate Action Plan Resolution Action
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
Vote on draft resolution for Council's consideration.
INTRODUCTION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
iMatter Youth Climate Report Card
iMatter Detailed Report
iMatter Climate Inheritance Resolution
WE, THE YOUTH OF
Edina MN
endorse this Climate Report Card & call for
immediate action to protect our future from the
Climate Crisis.
SCHOOL OR GROUP NAME:
Edina
CLIMATE REPORT CARD
ZERO EMISSIONS PLAN D-
Rapidly reducing greenhouse gas emissions is the most
important thing we can do to address the climate crisis .
RENEWABLE ENERGY C
Electricity generation caused 32% of US greenhouse gas
emissions in 2012 (source: EPA), the largest of any source.
WASTE B
Reducing the amount of waste we generate and recycling more
of it reduces the amount of greenhouse gases from landfills.
Waste reduction is also an indirect indicator that we're
reducing the amount of completely new stuff we're buying.
Production of new stuff can generate a lot of greenhouse gases.
CARBON REMOVAL C
Removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere will reduce
the impacts of climate change.
YOUTH INVOLVEMEMT Plus 1/2 grade
The youngest generation will be most impacted by the climate
crisis and should be involved when policies are be ing put in
place. A city gets a half grade increase if they have youth
involved in advising on or developing climate related policies
OVERALL GRADE C
RATIONALE FOR GRADES
(see the Detailed Report for specifics)
ZERO EMISSIONS PLAN 50% Weighting
While Edina has not done a Climate Action Plan, it gets some
credit because its levels of greenhouse gas emissions are
known.
RENEWABLE ENERGY 20% Weighting
The percent of Edina's electricity that comes from renewable
sources is unknown, so the state average has been used, and the
max base grade is a C. Edina received 21.31% of its energy from
renewable sources in 2014. This is above the national average.
Edina's renewable energy percentage changed by -0.48
percentage point(s) from 2013 to 2014. This did not change the
grade.
WASTE 20% Weighting
Waste created per person in Edina is decreasing which results
in a better grade. The portion of Edina's waste that is being
recycled or composted is increasing which results in a better
grade.
CARBON REMOVAL 10% Weighting
Edina has a program that will contribute to removing carbon
from the atmosphere. Therefore the grade starts at a C.
YOUTH INVOLVEMEMT Possible +1/2 grade
Edina has youth formally involved in the process of creating
and executing climate related policies and actions .
Edina Detail Report
-1-
For Edina MN Climate Report Card
1 Report Card Background
Working from the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions in the
United States, iMatter developed a Report Card based on the areas a city can
impact, and data that is generally publicly available. An A-F grading system
evaluates a city's action (or inaction) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to
levels needed to end the climate crisis.
Actions taken to improve Report Card grades should focus a city on the right
things and at the right levels to make meaningful progress on the climate
crisis.
And because youth will have to deal with the effects of the climate crisis
more than older generations, youth opinion matters. Youth should be
involved when policies are being put in place, both so they have a voice, and
so they can participate in local solutions. Youth can be partners with local
government in creating the will for community change.
1.1 Basis for Report Card
Report Card grades are based on real data, the presence of programs with
appropriate goals, and concrete actions. To determine appropriate goals, the
science from pre-eminent climate scientist, Dr. Jim Hansen, was used.
Dr. Hansen, formerly of NASA, led a team that wrote a paper at the end of
2013, which gives a prescription for avoiding the worst consequences of
climate change. His team makes the point that we need to keep
temperatures roughly within the range of temperatures that led to the rise of
human civilization. To do this required a reduction in global emissions of 6%
per year starting immediately (meaning 2014/2015) and that we
simultaneously take carbon out of the atmosphere with things like
reforestation and better soil management. This recipe guides the Report Card
grading system.
You can find Dr. Hansen's paper here, and a non-technical summary of it
here.
1.2 Report Card Sections
There are five sections of the report card that are combined into an overall
grade. The Report Card itself describes why each of these sections is
important. At a high level, for each section, here is what is rewarded:
Edina Detail Report
-2-
Zero Emissions Climate Action Plan: When the city's Climate Action
Plan gets to net zero human emissions (by 2040 is an A, 2050 a C).
Renewable Energy: When the percent of renewables used to generate
a city's electricity is more than the national average, and the
percentage is rising.
Waste: When the amount of waste per person is decreasing and the
percent of that waste that is recycled or composted is increasing.
Carbon Removal: When there is some kind of a program that will
result in more carbon being removed from the atmosphere.
Youth Involvement: A bonus area that rewards a city 1/2 grade for
having youth involved in advising on or setting climate change related
policies and plans.
The sections are combined into an overall grade. Weightings are based on
the U.S averages for the impact of each area on a typical community's
greenhouse gas footprint.
Sample grades with weightings
Grade Weighting
Zero Emissions Climate Action Plan C 50%
Renewable Energy % B 20%
Waste (Generated/Recycled/Composted) C 20%
Carbon Removal D 10%
Youth Involvement +½ grade
Overall grade B-
Note: The "Carbon Removal" grade is slightly underweighted compared to an
overall U.S impact, but this is because much of the U.S. impact will likely
come from areas that may be outside typical city boundaries (e.g., national
forests, croplands, etc.)
Detail on grade calculations is shown in each grade description section. You
can also find a generic description here.
1.3 Advisors
In addition to using the leading climate science, some of the most
knowledgeable people and organizations on community climate change
initiatives have been consulted to develop the Report Card. The following is
our list of Advisors.
David Allaway, Policy and Program Analyst, Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality
Brian Holland, Director of Climate Programs, ICLEI – Local
Governments for Sustainability USA
Paul Kroening, Supervising Environmentalist, Waste Reduction and
Recycling Unit, Hennepin County, MN
Edina Detail Report
-3-
Hunter Lovins, President, Natural Capitalism Solutions
Matt McRae, Climate and Energy Analyst, City of Eugene, Oregon
Eli Yewdall, Senior Program Officer, ICLEI-Local Governments for
Sustainability USA
Martha Campbell, Sr. Associate - Communities, Rocky Mountain
Institute
Kaitlyn Bunker, Ph.D., Associate, Rocky Mountain Institute
Ryan Griffin, Managing Consultant, See the Forest, LLC
The Report Card has also already been endorsed by the following
organizations to encourage its use by U.S. communities.
Project Drawdown
Natural Capitalism Solutions
Moms Clean Air Force
Green Schools
2 Overall Grade for Edina = C
3 Individual Grade Descriptions
3.1 Zero Emissions Plan: D-
It's good that Edina has done or is planning on doing a Greenhouse Gas
Inventory. The next step to an improved grade is a Climate Action Plan.
Climate Action Plan information entered:
Link to Greenhouse Gas Inventory (if entered):
http://www.regionalindicatorsmn.com/
Link to Climate Action Plan (if entered):
Link to Annual Report (if entered):
3.2 Renewable Energy: C
Edina's renewable energy percentage is unknown, so the state average has
been used. The maximum base grade that can be received when a state
average is used is a C. If the city can get this data, then the maximum base
grade would be an A.
Edina Detail Report
-4-
Edina received 21.31% of its energy from renewable sources in 2014 and
21.79% in 2013. In 2014 this differs from the national average by 7.84
percentage point(s). The grade is as follows:
F, 5% or more below the national average (includes 5% below)
D-, 5%-2% below the national average (includes 2% below)
D, 2% below to 3% over the national average (includes 3% above)
C-, 3% to 7% above the national average
C, 7% or more above the national average (includes 7% above)
Edina's renewable energy percentage changed by -0.48 percentage point(s)
from 2013 to 2014.This did not change the grade. This is the formula used:
If a city's percentage increases by at least 0.5% year over year, the
grade is increased 1/3 level, if it decreases by 0.5% or more year over
year, the grade is decreased 1/3 level. If a city's percentage increases
more than 2% year over year, it moves up a whole grade, unless it is
already at A, in which case it moves up to A+.
Renewable energy data came from, if entered: Used the state average for
MN. Though it was learned that the city government has a small amount of
renewable energy.
From Ross Bintner - Water Resources Engineer - Note that the City owns a
40Kw solar panel rig on City Hall.
National renewable percentages for reference:
2014: 13.47 2012: 12.46
2013: 13.09 2011: 12.71
3.3 Waste: B
There are two main factors to the Waste grade:
1. Waste Created per person. Waste created or generated equals the
waste disposed (in a landfill or burned) plus the waste recovered
(recycled or composted). Higher grades are received the more this is
reduced.
2. Recovery rate: This is the percent of the total waste created that is
either recycled or composted. It is calculated by dividing the total
weight of materials recycled and composted by the total amount of
waste generated in a year. Higher grades are received the more this is
increased.
Here is the data calculated for Edina:
Waste Created per person (tons) in 2015: 0.1172
Waste Created per person (tons) in 2014: 0.11788
Edina Detail Report
-5-
Change in Waste Created per person from 2014 to 2015: -0.57686%
Recovery rate in 2015: 75.6303%
Recovery rate in 2014: 75.5274%
Recovery rate change from 2014 to 2015: 0.1029 percentage points
Edina Detail Report
-6-
Waste grades are calculated using the following table:
Recovery Rate = Total Recycling & Composting / Total Waste Generated
Grading is based on the percent increase or decrease in the rate (e.g. going from
10% recovery rate to 12% is a 2% increase.) But when 50% overall recovery rate
has been reached, then the lowest set of grades a community can receive is column
4 (and 70% is column 5.)
Waste Created per
person
Grading is based on
the annual percent
increase or
decrease in the
weight of waste per
person
1% or more
decrease
0-1%
decrease
0-1%
increase
1-3% increase
or
Greater than
50% RR
More than 3%
increase
or
Greater than
70% RR
2% or more
increase F D- D C- C
0-2% increase
(includes 0) D- D C- C B-
0-2.5% decrease D C- C B- B
2.5-5% decrease C- C B- B A-
5% or more
decrease C B- B A- A
When a city reaches 70% recovery rate, if they increase their recovery rate by more than 1.5% in a
year, then their score is increased 1/3 level (i.e. A- to A, A to A+)
Edina has a curbside recycling program, which is good. If it did not, then
grades would be reduced by at least 1/3 level. Edina could increase its grade
by 1/3 level if it had a curbside organics recycling program.
Waste related data entered:
Total waste (tons) in 2015: 5950
Total waste (tons) in 2014: 5925
Population in 2015: 50766
Population in 2014: 50261
Recycling tons in 2015: 4500
Recycling tons in 2014: 4475
Composting tons in 2015:
Composting tons in 2014:
Where waste data came from (if entered): Solvei Wilmot,
Environmental Health Specialist and Recycling Coordinator. City of
Edina Data. Composting service was deemed not an official program.
Edina operations with an open hauling system for waste, and does now
know the total amount of waste generated. The numbers used were
the estimate of 200 pounds per household per year, with a total of
14,500 households in Edina. This is a total of 1450 tons of non
Edina Detail Report
-7-
recycled waste. It was learned that Vierkant disposal collected 479
tonnes of organic and yard waste in 2015, but it would be necessary to
get the data from the year before as well to impact the grade.
These numbers result in quite a high Recovery Rate, which is great,
but their accuracy should probably be verified.
3.4 Carbon Removal: C
Edina has a program that will contribute to removing carbon from the
atmosphere. Therefore the grade starts at a C. As there do not appear to be
metrics associated with the program, the grade remains at a C. If Edina
would add metrics to the program, and if those metrics would result in an
increase in carbon storage capacity, even if those metrics are not specifically
carbon related, then the grade will rise to a B. (For example, a program that
measured an increase in biomass of trees would increase carbon storage
capacity even though the metrics of the program was not specifically
measuring carbon storage capacity.) Edina's grade could be increased by 1/3
level if carbon storage capacity was included in the program's metrics.
Link to Program used in this section (if provided):
https://www.municode.com/library/mn/edina/ordinances/code_of_ordinance
s?nodeId=704690
3.5 Youth Involvement: Plus 1/2 grade
Edina has a climate change related Youth Council or Youth Group of some
sort participating in, or advising on setting up policy, or has youth on a
climate change related group or task force. Therefore, Edina's overall Climate
Report Card grade is increased by ½ level.
Link to Youth Climate Group (or Climate Group with youth participation) if
provided: Edina Energy and Environment Commission (2 student
commissioners):
http://www.ci.edina.mn.us/?section=boards_energyandenvironment
Edina Detail Report
-8-
Background Information and
Resources
4 Zero Emissions Climate Action Plan
Edina Grade = D-
Rapidly reducing emissions is the most important thing we can do to address
the climate crisis, so a Climate Action Plan that gets to net zero emissions is
the most heavily weighted grade in the Report Card.
Zero emissions, or at least net zero emissions is the goal. This means
completely cutting a city's carbon pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
Studies have shown (here's one) that it is doable. By saying "net zero," it
leaves a bit of practical wiggle room for some continued but drastically
reduced emissions, as long as they're balanced out by natural factors that
remove carbon pollution from the atmosphere (the Carbon Removal part of
the Report Card), or possibly by purchasing a small amount of carbon
offsets.
4.1 Greenhouse Gas Inventory
Edina has done a Greenhouse Gas Inventory, great!
4.2 Climate Action Plan
Edinadoes not have a Climate Action Plan. Hundreds of cities now do.
Here are examples of Climate Action Plans
Eugene, OR - note that Appendix 7 of the plan is a Greenhouse Gas
Inventory.
Minneapolis, MN - Greenhouse gas inventory
Minneapolis, MN - Climate Action Plan
Burlington, VT – Climate Action Plan
The EPA website has links to many greenhouse gas inventories and
climate action plans.
In the Carbonn database, affiliated with ICLEI, many cities report the
targets for their Climate Action Plans, and sometimes their progress.
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation has an
excellent set of tools and case studies on developing a climate action
plan.
Edina Detail Report
-9-
16 communities were recently recognized by the US White House as Climate
Action Champions for leadership on climate change. One of the 16,
Montpelier, VT, has launched Net Zero Montpelier in an effort to become the
first carbon neutral capital city in the US by 2030.
Measuring-Up-2015, a report by ICLEI and the World Wildlife Federation,
explores Climate Action plans in 4 of the 34 US cities who have recently
pledged to reduce emissions by 80% by 2050. Here you can find case
studies for Atlanta, Cincinnati, Minneapolis and Portland.
4.2.1 Goods produced outside Edina
Most inventories of greenhouse gas emissions count only emissions
generated from sources inside a community. But by purchasing goods and
services, a community's citizens contribute to emissions around the world, in
the places where those goods or services are produced.
Calculating emissions from goods and services produced outside the
community is difficult and the approaches for doing so are newer and require
more estimation. But it is good for a community and its citizens to be
thinking about these emissions as well. Therefore a city gets some extra
credit for thinking about this in their Climate Action Plan or trying to calculate
it in their Greenhouse Gas Inventory.
This is important, because in 2006 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
calculated that 42% of the greenhouse gas emissions in the United States
come from the provision of food or goods (see chart below). And in most
cities, a large portion of the food and goods come from outside the city.
Also, 90% or more of the greenhouse gas impact of food and products
happens before they are purchased. Recycling and waste management alone
Edina Detail Report
-10-
will not solve this problem. We must think creatively about what we buy and
eat and how we can positively influence others.
The good news is that technological and cultural innovations are already
positioning us for reduced consumption in a still thriving economy. "The
Sharing Economy", as has been coined, could greatly reduce unnecessary
personal ownership. Technology has enabled peer-to-peer connections in
everything from sharing a car or a bike to seldom used tools. The National
League of Cities recently published a report on how city government can
embrace and foster the sharing economy.
4.3 Annual Report on Climate Action Plan
While creating an annual report is no small task, the benefits can be
monumental. The first of these benefits is that the annual report is a clear
and consistent internal accountability mechanism. It is not about only
highlighting accomplishments, but also illustrating where things didn't go as
planned or opportunities still exist to improve. This level of transparency
may not come easy, but many cities have been successful at creating annual
reports and using them as a vehicle to engage their populations
environmentally.
For example, the Annual Report on the San Ramon, CA, Climate Action Plan,
covered everything from overall emissions reductions to new development
plans, to land use and transportation strategies.
4.4 Climate Recovery Ordinance
A Climate Recovery Ordinance is basically a Climate Action Plan that has
been made into a law. Eugene, Oregon is an example of a place where this
has happened.
Here is the press release from iMatter partner Our Children's Trust on the
ordinance.
Here is the ordinance itself.
5 Renewable Energy
Edina Grade = C
While typically included within a city's Climate Action Plan, electricity
generation caused 32% of US greenhouse gas emissions in 2012 (source:
EPA), the largest of any source. That's why it's included as a separate
grading item.
Finding renewable energy data
Edina Detail Report
-11-
While state data has been used to calculate a Renewable Energy score on the
Edina Climate Report Card, it is not ideal. If Edina city governmentdoesn't
know, utility companies can provide the percent renewable electricity in the
local portfolio.
Many states have set Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) that will mandate
that this percent hit a certain target by a certain year. Regional differences
often cause cities' renewable percentage to vary within the same state.
Understanding the state RPS and how the state is tracking against it is a
good start. Some states have set much more aggressive standards than
others. Hawaii, for example is leading the nation with a 70% renewable
target by 2030 and 100% renewable by 2040.
5.1 Renewable Energy Definition
Renewable energy is generally defined as energy that comes from resources
that are naturally replenished on a human timescale* such as sunlight, wind,
rain, tides, waves and geothermal heat. Another way of thinking about it is
that renewable resources are not depleted though their use. For the Report
Card, we use the US Energy Information Administration's (US EIA)
classification system for defining what is renewable energy. They include the
following in their renewable energy figures:
Hydroelectric Power
Geothermal
Solar
Wind
Biomass (includes biofuels, wood, waste)
The source of our national data also comes from the US EIA.
* - Note that on very long timescales (millions and millions of years, fossil
fuels are technically replenishable. But not in any way that is useful to
humanity.
5.2 Edina Compared to National Renewable Energy
Average
According to the data input, Edina's renewable energy is 7% or more above
the national average. Great job!
6 Waste
Edina Grade = B
Reducing the amount of waste we generate and recycling more of it reduces
the amount of greenhouse gases emitted from landfills.
Edina Detail Report
-12-
Waste reduction is also an indirect indicator that we're reducing the amount
of completely new stuff we're buying. Buying lots of new stuff can
significantly increase the greenhouse gases generated in the production of
that stuff. This is often referred to as "Materials" or "Materials and Waste."
Reduction of waste has three main impacts on greenhouse gases.
1. Reduced amounts of waste in a landfill, especially food waste, reduce
the amount of greenhouse gases (methane) given off by the landfill
(according to the EPA, waste in landfills generates 2% of our
greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S.).
2. The production and transport of the food and products (materials) we
buy is estimated to cause 42% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions (see
"Background note on greenhouse gas emissions" below). Less overall
waste created likely would mean we are buying less stuff that causes
greenhouse gases when it is produced and delivered to the market.
3. More recycling typically reduces greenhouse gases, because it
generally requires a lot less greenhouse gases to recycle materials
than to create new materials. The EPA has estimated that moving to
100% recycling would result in a decrease in our national greenhouse
gas emissions of 6%.
More and more cities and towns are adopting aggressive zero waste
initiatives.
Here are 10 major US cities with zero waste goals
Three other lesser known cities with zero waste goals
Info about SF, NY, and some international cities with zero waste goals
Small cities solve big problems - a good USA Today article from last
year.
7 Carbon Removal
Edina Grade = C
Removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere will reduce the impacts of
climate change. Carbon dioxide, the most prevalent greenhouse gas, can be
removed from the atmosphere and stored in trees, forests, plants, and soil,
mostly through photosynthesis - the process by which carbon is stored in
plants and oxygen is released into the atmosphere.
7.1 Trees
Urban forestry is a popular method of carbon sequestration within city limits.
Maintaining a healthy tree canopy has myriad benefits in addition to reducing
atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and positively impacting climate change.
There are some terrific free tools available to cities.
Edina Detail Report
-13-
iTree, peer-reviewed software created by the USDA Forest Service, provides
urban forestry analysis and benefits assessment tools through a
combination of tree inventory and use of satellite analysis. iTree
provides a way to regularly count trees and concretely assess the
benefits they provide.
EarthDefine is building the largest collection of high-resolution land
cover information for the contiguous United States. This dataset
currently covers over 233 million acres and is continuously expanding.
In St. Louis Park, MN, using the above two tools, the city forestry
department uses a combination of a physical street tree inventory, biomass
from LIDAR satellite images, and a Geographic Information System (GIS)
Asset Management database for its trees.
While the number of trees important, it is their overall biomass that largely
determines their carbon removal capabilities. Policies could be put in place
that set targets for biomass with language on carbon removal. They could
also include language to preserve trees in parks and redevelopment zones,
and implement a more robust replanting policy.
Atlanta, like many cities, has a formal policy requiring a permit for tree
removal on private property, and ensuring that replanting happens.
Burlington, VT has a policy for the city to plant 588 trees per year. See
pages 18 and 23 of the Burlington Climate Action Plan for more information,
including a great description on the many benefits of effectively managing
trees.
7.2 Soil
Here is a great article by Judith Schwartz, author or the book Cows Save the
Planet and Other Improbable Ways of Restoring Soil to Heal the Earth that
describes how better managing soil can play a significant role in addressing
the climate crisis.
8 Other great resources for cities
Note that all materials linked to are either publicly available and/or have
been provided with the consent of the creating organization.
Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) has an excellent new Community
Resource Guide that provides a blueprint to launch a community
energy transformation. Additional resources from RMI include:
o A strategy presentation supporting the climate action plan of
Fort Collins, CO.
o A spreadsheet of specific tactics for Fort Collins
o This page has links to the full set of community resources
available from Rocky Mountain Institute.
Edina Detail Report
-14-
Redstone Strategy Group is a leading advisor to private foundations
and non-profits around the world, and created this excellent report for
Menlo Spark, an organization looking to lead Menlo Park, CA, to
climate neutrality by 2025.
Natural Capitalism Solutions created a Climate Protection Manual for
Cities that takes cities through the steps needed to conduct a
greenhouse gas inventory, create a climate action plan, and measure
results.
Climate Inheritance Resolution
A Resolution expressing the commitment of the <city> City Council to
protect the children and grandchildren of this community from the risks of
climate destruction.
WHEREAS, 195 countries, including the United States and every country that is a member of
the United Nations, reached an agreement in Paris, France on December 12, 2015, that
recognizes the risk to our children’s and grandchildren’s future from climate change;
WHEREAS, the greatest burden resulting from an inadequate response to the climate crisis will
be carried by the youngest generation, and all who follow;
WHEREAS, the risks from an inadequate response are potentially devastating, and include
economic and environmental disruptions many of which are already being felt such as more
severe storms, longer and hotter heat waves, worsening flood and drought cycles, growing
invasive species and insect problems, accelerated species extinction rates, rising sea levels,
increased wildfires, and a dramatic increase in refugees from climate impacted lands, <if
applicable, include or change this list to reflect the specific threats to your community>;
WHEREAS, leading climate scientists1 have indicated that further delay in significantly
reducing greenhouse gas emissions will rapidly push humanity past the point where
disastrous consequences can be avoided;
WHEREAS, numerous governmental and non-governmental bodies across the nation and the
world have already adopted climate action plans to immediately and rapidly reduce
greenhouse gas emissions while also stopping them entirely within 25 years;
WHEREAS, youth of <city> have brought this Council a Youth Climate Report Card highlighting
the gap between what we are doing today and actions that would be necessary to protect their
future;
WHEREAS, youth of <city> have indicated a willingness to work with this Council on such
actions, we, therefore, declare it:
RESOLVED, that <city> City Council commits to working constructively, using ingenuity,
innovation, and courageous determination to complete or update a <city> Climate Action Plan
1 Hansen J, Kharecha P, Sato M, Masson-Delmotte V, Ackerman F, Beerling DJ, et al. (2013) Assessing
“Dangerous Climate Change”: Required Reduction of Carbon Emissions to Protect Young People, Future
Generations and Nature. PLoS ONE 8(12): e81648. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0081648
for consideration that significantly reduces <city>’s greenhouse gas emissions to levels that
would protect our community’s children and grandchildren from the risk of climate destruction
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that <city> City Council commits to start the <city> Climate
Action Plan creation or modification process within <(30 days)>, and to complete it as soon as
possible
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a mechanism will be created to for the ongoing inclusion of
young people in the process of creating and executing climate related policies and actions.
CERTIFICATION
The foregoing resolution was adopted by __________________ in ______________ on
________________ with a quorum present.
Signed by: ________________________________
Attest: ____________________________________
Date: November 10, 2016 Agenda Item #: VI.B.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
Report and Recommendation
From:Tara Brown, Sustainability Coordinator
Item Activity:
Subject:Study and Report: Packaging Discussion, Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
Council requested a Charge 1: Study and Report on packaging policies. Commissioner Horan took lead on report.
Staff liaison has put together the attached report to send to Council.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Study and Report: Packaging
Minneapolis packaging ordinance
St Louis Park Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
1 The MPCA Guide can be found online at: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/p-p2s1-06.pdf
2 https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/p-p2s1-06.pdf
3 Polystyrene bans are also in place at the local level in other states including Florida, Maine, Oregon and Massachusetts.
Date: November 7, 2016
To: City Council
From: Energy and Environment Commission
Subject: Study and report on proposal to band Styrofoam food packaging materials in
Edina.
Action
Requested
:
The Energy and Environment Commission is seeking Edina City Council’s input on
how they would like to proceed.
Background: With Zero Waste and Environmental Packaging ordinances being enacted in surrounding
communities and across the nation, the Edina City Council asked the Edina Energy and
Environmental Commission (EEC) to research and report on a proposal to ban polystyrene food
packaging in materials. This report outlines the EEC’s findings.
The Edina Energy and Environmental Commission (EEC) researched national and regional
trends relating to bans, Zero Waste and Environmental Packaging ordinances. The extent of the
movement towards bans, restrictions, and ordinances is best summarized in the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Guide1 which outlines goals, considerations, resources, and
policies on product bans and restrictions. Through our research we found bans were not as
productive as packaging ordinances. Packaging Ordinances are driven by waste reduction
goals and can be flexible if new data or market change. In this report, you will find information
regarding polystrene bans and the considerations around packaging ordinances.
Assessment: Polystrene Bans
Currently, the MPCA does not have a blanket position on policies to prohibit or restrict any
single-use consumer packaging products at the city, county or state level.2 However, the MPCA
report shows that there are 65 city or county ordinances in California that ban the use of
polystyrene food containers for food vendors, restaurants and at government facilities.3
Additionally, Haiti has a (poorly enforced) ban on polystyrene containers, and Guyana plans to
Page 2
ban import and use of expanded polystyrene foam in 2016.
Table 1 below, also from the MPCA guide, outlines the rational and impact of comparable
ordinances in Cities throughout the United States:
Table 1
Polystyr
ene
contain
ers City
Ordinance/ Policy Enacted Rationale Impact Ordinance
Amherst, MA Prohibits food
establishments and
City facility users from
dispensing prepared
foods in expanded
polystyrene
Novemb
er, 2012
(effectiv
e
January
1 2014)
Reduce waste
that is not
recyclable; To
protect health,
safety of
residents from
styrene.
Information
on the
impact of
this policy is
not readily
available
https://www.amherst
ma.gov/Docum
entCenter/View/2481
8
Seattle ,WA Ban on polystyrene
foam food containers
and packing material.
The ban applies to all
food service
businesses, including
restaurants, grocery
stores, delis, coffee
shops and institutional
cafeterias.
January
2009
Reduce amount
of waste and
negative
environmental
impacts to bird
population.
Seattle aspires to
be a zero waste
city, and this ban
was part of this
policy objective.
Information
on the
impact of
this policy is
not readily
available
http://clerk.seattle.go
v/~scripts/nph-
brs.exe?s3=&s4=1227
51&s5=&s1=&s
2=&S6=&Sect4=AND
&l=0&Sect2=THE
SON&Sect3=PLURON
&Sect5=CBORY
&Sect6=HITOFF&d=
ORDF&p=1&u=%
2F~public%2Fcbor1.h
tm&r=1&f=G
Page 3
4 https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/p-p2s1-06.pdf
Minneapolis,
MN
Requires all takeout
food containers to be
recyclable, reusable,
returnable or
compostable (rigid and
expanded polystyrene
are not included on
the list of plastics
meeting the
requirements).
Covered food
establishments must
have recycling and
composting programs.
April
2015
To promote
reusable,
refillable,
recyclable or
compostable
food and
beverage
packaging.
Information
on the
impact of
this policy is
not readily
available
http://www.ci.minnea
polis.mn.us/w
ww/groups/public/@
health/docume
nts/webcontent/wcms
1p-130775.pdf
New York,
NY
Ban on single-use
expanded polystyrene
foam, including
packing peanuts.
January
2015
Reduce waste
that is not
recyclable.
None;
ordinance
under
appeal after
judge struck
it down,
saying that
EPS is
recyclable.
No ordinance in
effect currently.
Lifecycle Considerations and Trade-offs
One of the primary concerns identified by the EEC in regards to a polystyrene food packaging
ban is the need to consider the complete life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle inventory
(LCI) of a product in order to determine its true impact on the environment. The lifecycle of a
product includes the extraction of raw materials, the manufacturing of the product,
transportation, use, and disposal. Lifecycle assessments are very complex and the results may
vary depending on bias of the sponsoring institute and the quality of the data. We have listed
a few LCA/LCI studies in the resources tab for an in-depth look. The impacts articulated therein
outline the trade-offs that will result from the replacement materials.
Some impacts of particular interest to the commission were in relation to take-out food
packaging. The MPCA report reads, “a ban on polystyrene containers will result in an increase
in the products that replaces it – another type of plastic, paper with plastic lining, or
compostable containers. Some specific alternative products may be manufactured in such a
way to decrease life cycle impacts compared to polystyrene. Though more of the alternatives
may be recyclable, they are also likely to weigh more than polystyrene, so waste generation
tonnage may go up along with recycling rates. Switches to compostable products are beneficial
only if there are prevalent organics collections programs in place.”4 Trade-offs were also found
by the California Integrated Waste Management Board. “Polystyrene used less energy and
Page 4
5 https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/p-p2s1-06.pdf
chemical inputs and resulted in fewer emissions than other packaging types (e.g. paper), but
caused more solid waste by volume. In terms of toxics, styrene, from which polystyrene is
made, is a likely carcinogen; on the other hand, most types of packaging plastics leach
chemicals that can interfere with human hormone activity”5
Policies will have trade-offs because of environmental impacts of different product materials or
because of how a policy affects citizen behaviors. Instead of looking at outright bans, The
Edina City Council should explore a policy that holistically supports our environmental goals to
reduce waste and greenhouse gas emissions. Waste and greenhouse gas reductions were what
drove our neighboring cities to enact packaging ordinances. The rest of this report looks at the
law, economics, arguments and considerations for a packaging ordinance.
Statute and goals driving a packaging ordinance
A packaging ordinance in the City of Edina would support our solid waste and greenhouse gas
reduction goals.
• Waste – Our current rate and use of materials is not sustainable. For this and many
other reasons, the Waste Management Act and The Landfill Abatement Act requires
that the state’s waste management system move away from landfill disposal and adopt
a hierarchy for solid waste processing in order of preference: reduce, reuse, recycle,
organics recycling, landfill.
Page 5
To assist businesses and the public in minimizing waste, additional statues and goals have been
developed:
o Business - As of January 1, 2016, the Minnesota legislature expanded the recycling
requirements to businesses. Businesses in the seven-county metro area that contract
for four cubic yards or more of trash per week must recycle three materials.
o Residential - Counties have been required to amend their solid waste master plans in
order to meet these goals of waste prevention, recovery and landfill abatement.
Hennepin County’s Master Plan includes the following goals to be attained by 2030
for residential waste collection: Increase recycling from 41% to 54-60%; Increase
organics recycling from 3% to 9-15%; Decrease landfill disposal from 19% to 9%.
• Greenhouse gas reduction – Food waste is a significant contributor to our greenhouse
Page 6
6 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/reducing_wasted_food_pkg_tool.pdf
7 https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/wycd/waste/downloads/execsum.pdf
gas emissions.6 Food and its packaging containers account for almost 45% of materials
landfilled in the United States. Using packaging that is easily recycled, composted or
reusable not only reduces solid waste generation, but also reduces negative
environmental impacts by using less energy and raw materials and emits less
greenhouse gas (GHG). In an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report, which
examined the relationship between municipal solid waste (MSW) management and
Climate Change, it states that:
o Source reduction, in general, represents an opportunity to reduce GHG emissions in
a significant way. For many materials, the reduction in energy-related CO2 emissions
from the raw material acquisition and manufacturing process, and the absence of
emissions from waste management, combine to reduce GHG emissions more than
other options do.
o For most materials, recycling represents the second best opportunity to reduce GHG
emissions. For these materials, recycling reduces energy-related CO2 emissions in
the manufacturing process (although not as dramatically as source reduction) and
avoids emissions from waste management. Paper recycling increases the
sequestration of forest carbon.
o Composting is a management option for food discards and yard trimmings. The net
GHG emissions from composting are lower than landfilling for food discards
(composting avoids CO2emissions), and higher than landfilling for yard trimmings
(landfilling is credited with the carbon storage that results from incomplete
decomposition of yard trimmings). Overall, given the uncertainty in the analysis, the
emission factors for composting or combusting these materials are similar.7
The economics behind a packaging ordinance
When looking at reducing waste, there are economic benefits to selecting materials that can
have another life, materials that are recyclable and compostable. Understanding the materials
that have another life, recyclable or compostable, and a market in Minnesota is important to
factor in when selecting the materials for a packaging ordinance. The following is a brief
overview of the different resins that have economic value and are sorted and collected in
Minnesota MRFs:
PET Resin #1 Roughly 75 percent of recycled PET (Polyethylene terephthalate) bottles
go to domestic markets. Although Minnesota does not have a PET reclaimer it does
have companies that purchase recycled PET flakes and pellets. The out-of-state
reclaimers are not at capacity for PET, therefore, any increase of PET recovered from
Minnesota would be in demand at these national and regional reclamation operations.
Page 7
8 St Louis Park Council Votes Unanimously in Support of Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance Seth Rowe for the Sun Sailor,
published December 15, 2015, http://sailor.mnsun.com/2015/12/15/st-louis-park-council-votes-unanimously-in-support-
of-zero-waste-packaging-ordinance/
HDPE Resin #2 Approximately 80% of HDPE (High-density polyethylene) stays in
domestic markets. Unlike PET Minnesota does have in-state reclaimers for HDPE.
Currently Minnesota’s reclaimers need to purchase HDPE from out-of-state to meet
their demand of recycled HDPE. Any increase in HDPE recovery will decrease
Minnesota’s need to purchase out-of-state HDPE.
Resin #3-#7 These resins are generally packed together at MRF as pre-picked rigid
grade. This grade generally needs to be sent somewhere else to be further sorted, the
majority being exported to China. Included in this category is rigid Polystyrene (resin
#6). Currently, Polystyrene, both rigid #6 or food service foam are difficult to recycle
economically. Therefore, there are not strong after markets for these plastics. However,
in the last few years, there have been companies around the nation that have begun to
sort and resell these mixed resins to reclaimers, but until these end markets grow, the
demand for rigid #6 is not significant in Minnesota.
Resin #7 These resins can include Polylactic Acid (PLA) Polylactic Acid is a
biodegradable thermoplastic aliphatic polyester. It is made with renewable resources
such as corn starch, tapioca, or sugar cane and is used in compostable products.
Stakeholder engagement
The Recycling Solid Waste and Organics working group (RSWO) met with many stakeholders to
learn more about Zero Waste and Environmental Packaging ordinances. These events and
meetings kicked off in November of 2015 and continued through 2016.
Through the discussions and articles, the arguments against the Minneapolis and St. Louis Park
ordinances mainly came from the chemical and restaurant industry. Letters and/or
Representatives from DOW Chemical Company and the American Chemistry Council came in to
argue that both the City of Minneapolis’ and St. Louis Park’s ordinance should include
polystyrene as a recyclable and acceptable packaging option. They also argue that
polystyrene is recycled in other states, but if it continues to be rejected as a recyclable material
in Minnesota it will be difficult to create the “robust markets” that the Minneapolis and St.
Louis Park ordinances require. The St. Louis Park City Council’s rejected the “arguments from
industry representatives opposed to an ordinance aimed at banning food packaging the city
deems to be unable to be recycled, composted or reused.”8 An additional concern from the
Minnesota Restaurant Association is mainly concerned with performance and price of the
acceptable packaging options.
There were many positive responses from some business/restaurant owners/managers. Some
Page 8
business owners, have multiple locations and have already made the switch because they are
already under the Minneapolis ordinance. Some know their customers want it and are doing
it anyway with compostable products because they already compost. Additionally, businesses
see it as a way to reduce their waste and hopefully reduce their costs in hauling. Lastly,
businesses shared that transitioning to the new products was not difficult.
Below is an in-depth listing of the meetings and information shared.
1. Minneapolis Packaging Ordinance – EEC Commissioners met with Minneapolis staff
to understand the work that went into drafting their ordinance; including their process,
research and lessons learned.
2. Compostable serve ware – EEC Commissioners met with Simon Hefty from Litin Eco to
understand the state of the compostable serve ware market. Simon has been in the
compostable products business for over ten years. He was used as the “expert” on
compostable products for both Minneapolis and St. Louis Park
3. Minnesota Restaurant Association – On March 2, 2016, Solvei Wilmot, Health and
Recycling Coordinator; Melissa Seeley, EEC Commissioner; Michelle Horan, EEC
Commissioner met with Dan McElroy, Executive Vice President of the Minnesota
Restaurant. Dan shared businesses concerns: the quality hot and cold cup packaging
and potential cost increase of packaging. Additionally, franchise owners need to hold
to national pricing and will be unable to pass on any pricing increase to customer.
4. Public Meetings – EEC held two public, stakeholder meeting to get input from
businesses and the public.
a. January 27, 2016, Stake holders meeting – In attendance: Solvei Wilmot;
Michelle Horan; Lauren Satterlee, EEC Commissioner; Melissa Seeley, and Simon
Hefty. No businesses attended.
b. March 2, 2016, Stake Holders meeting 2 – In Attendance: Solvei Wilmot;
Michelle Horan; Lauren Satterlee; Melissa Seeley, Simon Hefty. Businesses in
attendance: Dave Fashant, Fairview Southdale Hospital; Bill Chrysler, Edina
Country Club; Eric Wold, Neighborhood Ice Cream Shop, owner; Jordan
Hamilton, Hello Pizza. Below are the comments:
i. Fairview Southdale Hospital - Wanted to be on record to let Edina
know that he hoped we did NOT exempt hospitals from our ordinance.
Current waste composition: 40 yard dumpster of MSW picked up 4
times/week; 40 yard dumpster of recycling picked up 2 times/week; 40
yard construction & demolition; and organic collection with Barthold’s
Farms (food for animals)
1. They currently have a 30% recycling rate (single sort). They
contract with Sodexo for food service. They are working with
them to ban polystyrene foam.
2. They are changing to a full organics program with Aspen as the
Page 9
hauler. Started a food to hogs program 12-15 years ago
capturing food from the kitchen during prep.
3. Concerns: Space on the loading dock for an additional dumpster.
Although they support a ban of polystyrene foam for food
containers, Fairview does not want the ordinance to ban all
polystyrene foam. They have unique situations with
vendors/products that currently require foam.
ii. Edina Country Club – They currently collect recycling and have had a
food to hogs program for 3 years. The food to hogs program covers
kitchen food prep and leftover food from dining operations. The only
polystyrene foam they currently use is cups out on the golf course.
1. Concerns: Additional costs related to an organics program. He
was made aware of grant money and assistance available from
Hennepin County. Asked about education of club members.
Wondered if ECC would be responsible for
contamination/compliance with all three waste streams.
Additional costs regarding compostable cups members would
use on the course.
iii. Hello Pizza – When they first opened they had every intention of having
all compostable products. They have no objections to the proposed
ordinance. Currently they use compostable cups.
1. The obstacle: Their loading dock is shared among three
restaurants and two of the restaurants are not interested in
collecting organics.
2. Once they are able to incorporate organics collection the only
MSW they foresee is straws and items brought in by customers
from outside the restaurant.
iv. Neighborhood Ice Cream - Currently serve everything in polystyrene
foam and only collect MSW. Any recyclables collected are taken home
by the manager. They share a loading dock with other tenants and there
is currently only one 4 yard container for MSW collected once per week.
The manager came to collect information and is willing to make the
switch. Considering reusable wares versus compostable. They were also
made aware of available assistance from Hennepin County
5. Convention Grill – EEC Commissioner met with the owners who have eight other
restaurants many in Minneapolis and has already switched packaging for those
establishments.
6. St. Louis Park ‘Zero Waste’ Ordinance – EEC Commissioners met with St. Louis Park
staff to understand their process and decision making that lead to the passage of the
ordinance.
a. EEC Commissioners also attended the St. Louis Park’s Packaging Fair to see the
Page 10
communication and resources provided to businesses. Businesses attending
were receptive to the ordinance change and resources available from Hennepin
County
7. DART Container Corporation – Solvei Wilmot, Michelle Horan, Sarah Clarke, DART
Lobbyist DART, and AnnMarie Treglia, from DART (phone) were in attendance. DART
made the argument that Polystyrene, both rigid and expanded, are recyclable materials,
and there are places in the states where it is currently being recycled. Their request is
to include polystyrene products as an acceptable packaging option in Edina's proposed
Acceptable Packaging Ordinance, because polystyrene is recyclable. Their argument is
valid, however, currently, in the state of MN, there is not a strong market for
polystyrene, and therefore, it is not recyclable here. When markets grow and there is
demand for polystyrene, due to the wording of the ordinance, the adjustment to
add polystyrene can be made.
8. Organic Processing Facility Tour – Members of the Energy and Environment
Commission’s Recycling, Solid Waste and Organic Workgroup toured Full Circle
Organics processing facility, Hennepin County’s Brooklyn Park Transfer Station where
commercial organic material is collected and Mdewakanton Sioux’s Organic processing
facility. Members learned the challenges of managing yard waste compostable
materials with organic materials and the laws that have requirements for management
of those items. In addition, the members visited with Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency about the requirements a compost and organic processing facility must meet.
Next Steps: In summary, the MPCA is supportive of policies that result in net prevention of waste, conserve
natural resources, lower life cycle pollution and emissions, and push management of wastes to
their highest and best uses.
By creating a preferred packaging ordinance, Edina would be leading the way in improving
both Minnesota’s economy and environment with the following direct and indirect affect:
• It would support Edina businesses in complying with the new recycling business
legislation;
• It would increase the amount of recyclable materials being diverted from the waste
stream and landfills;
• It would increase the amount of recovered materials going into the markets and
Minnesota’s economy.
Attached is the Minneapolis and St Louis Park’s packaging ordinances. The Energy and
Environment Commission is seeking Edina City Council’s input on how they would like to
proceed.
Page 11
1
2014-Or-_____
AN ORDINANCE
of the
CITY OF
MINNEAPOLIS
By A. Johnson
Amending Title 10, Chapter 204 of the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances relating to Food
Code: Environmental Preservation: Environmentally Acceptable Packaging.
The City Council of the City of Minneapolis do ordain as follows:
Section 1. That Section 204.10 of the above-entitled ordinance be amended to read as follows:
204.10. Legislative purpose. The city council finds that discarded packaging from foods
and beverages prepared for immediate consumption constitutes a significant and growing
portion of the waste in Minneapolis' waste stream. Regulation of food and beverage packaging,
therefore, is a necessary part of any effort to encourage a recyclable and compostable waste
stream, thereby reducing the disposal of solid waste and the economic and environmental costs
of waste management for the citizens of Minneapolis and others working or doing business in
Minneapolis.
The council further finds that plastic packaging is rapidly replacing other packaging
material, and that most some plastic packaging used for foods and beverages is nondegradable
nonreusable, nonreturnable, and nonrecyclable and noncompostable.
The council also finds that the two (2) main processes used to dispose of discarded
nondegradable nonreusable, nonreturnable, and nonrecyclable and noncompostable plastic
food and beverage packaging, are land filling and incineration, both of which should be
minimized for environmental reasons.
The council therefore finds that the minimization of nondegradable nonreusable,
nonreturnable, and nonrecyclable and noncompostable food and beverage packaging
originating at retail food establishments and at events providing food and/or beverages within
the City of Minneapolis is necessary and desirable in order to minimizereduce the city's waste
stream, so as to reduce the volume of landfilled waste, to minimize toxic by-products of
incineration,, to make the waste stream less damaging to the environment, and to make our city
and neighboring communities more environmentally sound places to live.
Section 2. That Section 204.20 of the above-entitled ordinance be amended to read as follows:
204.20. Definitions. As used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have
the meanings as defined in this section:
2
(a) Packaging shall mean and include food or beverage cans, glass bottles, or
plastic bottles or containers used to package food and beverage products for
distribution including glasses, cups, plates, serving trays, and to-go containers;
but shall specifically exclude foods pre-packaged by the manufacturer, producer
or distributor; plastic knives, forks and spoons sold or intended for use as
utensils; and plastic films less than ten (10) mils in thickness.
(b) Environmentally acceptable packaging shall mean and include any of the
following:
(1) Reusable and Rreturnable packaging: Food or beverage containers or
packages, such as, but not limited to, soft drink bottles water bottles,
growlers, and milk containers and bulk product packaging that are
capable of being refilled at a retail location or returned to the distributor,
such as, but not limited to, dairies and soft drink bottlers, for reuse at least
once as a container for the same food or beverage;
(2) Recyclable packaging: Packaging that is separable from solid waste by
the generator or during collection for the purpose of recycling including
glass bottles, aluminum cans and plastic food and beverage packaging
that have robust recycling markets. For the purposes of this chapter,
environmentally preferable plastic packaging includes the following plastic
types:
a. Polyethylene Terephthalate (#1 PET or PETE);
b. High Density Polyethylene (#2 HDPE); and
c. Polypropylene (#5 PP).
(3) Compostable packaging: Packaging that is separable from solid waste by
the generator or during collection for the purpose of composting.
Compostable packaging must be made of paper, certified compostable
plastics that meet ASTM D6400 or ASTM D6868 for compostability or
other cellulose-based packaging capable of being decomposed through
composting or anaerobic digestion.
(c) Food establishment, as used in this chapter, means a "food establishment" as
defined in section 188.10 186.50 of the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances.
Section 3. That Section 204.30 of the above-entitled ordinance be amended to read as follows:
204.30. Prohibitions and duties. (a) No person owning, operating or conducting a food
establishment or any person or organization providing free food or beverage products within the
City of Minneapolis pursuant to a permit or license, or in a manner which would require a permit
or license, shall do or allow to be done any of the following within the city: Sell or convey at retail
or possess with the intent to sell or convey at retail any food or beverage intended for immediate
consumption contained, at any time at or before the time or point of sale, in packaging which is
not environmentally acceptable packaging. The presence on the premises of the food
establishment of packaging which is not environmentally acceptable packaging shall constitute
a rebuttable presumption of intent to sell or convey at retail, or to provide to retail customers
3
packaging which is not environmentally acceptable packaging; provided, however, that this
subparagraph shall not apply to manufacturers, brokers or warehouse operators, who conduct
or transact no retail food or beverage business.
(b) Packaging used to contain food or beverages intended for immediate
consumption consumed at the point of sale shall be considered environmentally
acceptable packaging only when the food establishment provides consumers
with an opportunity to recycle and/or appropriately manage compostable plastics
and utilizes a qualified recycling and/or organics management system. A
qualified recycling system shall have the following elements:
(1) A qualified recycling system shall have the following elements:
a.(1) A clear and verifiable process for separating recyclable packaging
from discarded solid waste; and
b.(2) Collection and delivery of recyclable packaging to a recycling
facility for processing in the same or at least similar manner as
recyclable packaging collected in a municipally approved recycling
program.
(2) A qualified organics management system shall have the following
elements:
a. A clear and verifiable process for separating organic materials
from discarded solid waste; and
b. Collection and delivery of organic materials to a food to people,
food to animals, organics composting or anaerobic digestion
facility in the same manner or at least similar manner as organic
materials collected in a municipally approved organics
management program.
Section 4. That Section 204.40 of the above-entitled ordinance be amended to read as follows:
204.40. Enforcement. The environmental health division of the health department shall
have the duty and the authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter. The license official
shall also have authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter.
Section 5. That Section 204.50 of the above-entitled ordinance be amended to read as follows:
204.50. Rules and regulations. The environmental health division may, upon notice
and hearing, promulgate such rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the
purposes of this chapter and protect the health of the public, including the development of
exemptions under section 204.70 for packaging for which there is no reasonable commercially
available alternative. In promulgating such rules, the director division shall consider the
legislative purposes provided in section 204.10 of this chapter and shall consult with the
operators of affected food establishments.
4
Section 6. That Section 204.60 of the above-entitled ordinance be and is hereby repealed:
204.60. Advisory committee on environmentally acceptable packaging. (a) The city
council shall, by resolution, establish an advisory committee on environmentally acceptable
packaging. The resolution shall provide for the membership, manner of appointment, the
committee's charge and its duration. The membership shall be drawn from affected
governmental units, business and industry, trade associations, general business organizations,
consumer groups, environmental groups and others as determined in the resolution. The
advisory committee shall include a member designated by the Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners from outside the City of Minneapolis and a member designated by the
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities. The charge of the committee shall include the
following:
(b) Advising the environmental health division on implementation issues.
Section 7. That Section 204.80 of the above-entitled ordinance be amended to read as follows:
204.80. Penalties. Each violation of any provision of this chapter or of lawful regulations
promulgated under section 204.50 hereof shall be a petty misdemeanor, for which the maximum
fine shall be fifty dollars ($50.00) punishable as an administrative offense pursuant to Chapter 2
of this Code. Each day on which a violation occurs constitutes a separate violation.
Section 8. That Section 204.110 of the above-entitled ordinance be amended to read as
follows:
204.110. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect April 22, 1991 2015.
ORDINANCE NO. 2485-15
ORDINANCE TO INCREASE TRADITIONAL RECYCLING
AND ORGANICS RECYCLING OF
FOOD AND BEVERAGE PACKAGING AND TO-GO CONTAINERS
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
CHAPTER 12 – Environment and Public Health
Division VI. ZERO WASTE PACKAGING
12-201. - Legislative purpose.
The city council (council) adopted the strategic direction in March 2007 stating that the city is
committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship and will increase environmental
consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city business.
As such, the council finds that discarded packaging from foods and beverages prepared for
immediate consumption constitutes a portion of the waste stream in St. Louis Park that could be
diverted for reuse, recycling, or organics recycling. Regulation of food and beverage packaging,
therefore, is a necessary part of any effort to encourage a recyclable and compostable waste stream,
thereby reducing the disposal of solid waste and the economic and environmental costs of waste
management for the citizens of St. Louis Park and others working or doing business in St. Louis
Park.
The council also finds that the two (2) main processes used to dispose of discarded nonreusable,
nonreturnable, nonrecyclable and noncompostable food and beverage packaging are land filling
and incineration, both of which should be minimized for environmental reasons.
The council therefore finds that the minimization of nonreusable, nonreturnable, nonrecyclable
and noncompostable food and beverage packaging originating at retail food establishments and at
events providing food and/or beverages within the city of St. Louis Park is necessary and desirable
in order to minimize the city's waste stream and maximize recycling and organics recycling, so as
to reduce the volume of landfilled waste, to minimize toxic by-products of incineration, and to
make our city and neighboring communities more environmentally sound places to live.
12.202. - Definitions.
As used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meanings as defined in this
section:
(a) “Distributor” shall mean a business that distributes food and beverages but who conduct
no retail food or beverage transactions.
(b) “Food establishment”, as used in this chapter, shall mean a "food establishment" as
defined by Chapter 3.3.1 Hennepin County Code of Ordinances.
(c) “Mobile use-food establishment”, as used in this chapter, shall mean “mobile use-food”
as defined in Chapter 36-142(g)(5) of the City Code of Ordinances, as a vehicle or cart
used to prepare and serve food and/or beverages in individual portions in a ready-to-
consume state. Mobile use-food does not include the sale of groceries or vegetables and
fruits not prepared for immediate consumption at the vehicle.
Ordinance No. 2485-15 -2-
(d) “Packaging” shall mean and include food or beverage cans, bottles or containers used to
package food and beverage products for distribution including glasses, cups, plates,
serving trays, and to-go containers. The following exclusions apply: foods pre-packaged
by the manufacturer, producer or distributor; plastic knives, forks and spoons sold or
intended for use as utensils; and plastic films less than ten (10) mils in thickness.
(e) “Violation” shall mean any time a food establishment is found by the city to be non-
compliant with one or more section(s) of this chapter.
(f) “Zero waste packaging” shall mean and include any of the following:
(1) “Reusable and returnable packaging”: Food or beverage containers or packages, such
as, but not limited to, water bottles, growlers, milk containers and bulk product
packaging that are capable of being refilled at a retail location or returned to the
distributor for reuse at least once as a container for the same food or beverage;
(2) “Recyclable packaging”: Packaging that is separable from solid waste during
collection for the purpose of recycling including, but not limited to, glass bottles,
aluminum cans and plastic food and beverage packaging. Recyclable packaging must
be accepted by the local material recovery facilities receiving and processing the
materials and have existing robust recycling markets as determined by the Public
Works Division by rule promulgated pursuant to section 12.205.
(3) “Compostable packaging”: Packaging that is separable from solid waste during
collection for the purpose of composting. Compostable packaging must be made of
unlined paper (unless lining is certified compostable), certified compostable plastic
that meet ASTM D6400 or ASTM D6868 or other material accepted by the
commercial compost or anaerobic digestion facility receiving and processing the
materials.
12.203. - Prohibitions and duties.
(a) No person owning, operating or conducting a food establishment or any person or
organization providing free food or beverage products within the city of St. Louis Park
pursuant to a Hennepin County permit or license, or in a manner which would require a
permit or license, shall do or allow to be done any of the following within the city:
(1) Sell or convey at retail or possess with the intent to sell or convey at retail any food
or beverage intended for immediate consumption contained, at any time at or before
the time or point of sale, in packaging which is not zero waste packaging. The
presence on the premises of the food establishment of packaging which is not zero
waste packaging shall constitute a rebuttable presumption of intent to sell or convey
at retail, or to provide to retail customers packaging which is not zero waste
packaging; provided, however, that this subparagraph shall not apply to
manufacturers, brokers or warehouse operators, who conduct or transact no retail
food or beverage business.
(b) Packaging used to contain food or beverages intended for immediate consumption shall
be considered zero waste packaging only when the food establishment provides
consumers with an on-site opportunity to recycle and/or appropriately manage
compostable packaging and compostable plastics and utilizes a qualified recycling and/or
organics management system.
(1) A qualified recycling system shall have the following elements:
Ordinance No. 2485-15 -3-
a. A clear and verifiable process for separating recyclable packaging from
discarded solid waste; and
b. Collection and delivery of recyclable packaging to a recycling facility for
processing in the same or at least similar manner as recyclable packaging
collected in a city approved recycling program.
(2) A qualified organics recycling system shall have the following elements:
a. A clear and verifiable process for separating organic materials from discarded
solid waste; and
b. Collection and delivery of organic materials to an organics composting or
anaerobic digestion facility in the same manner or at least similar manner as
organic materials collected in a municipally approved organics management
program.
(3) A food establishment that does not have dine-in seating for consumers, except a
mobile use-food establishment, is exempt from the requirement to provide consumers
with an on-site opportunity to recycle and/or manage compostable
packaging/compostable plastics as defined in Sec 12-203(b).
12.204. – Violations and Enforcement.
(a) When a violation of this chapter has occurred, the food establishment shall be subject to
the penalties set forth below.
(b) A violation of this chapter is a misdemeanor.
(c) Violations of this chapter shall be punishable as an administrative offense pursuant to
City Code Ordinance 2420-12, Section 1-14 Administrative Penalties, as follows:
(1) A warning notice in writing for the first violation;
(2) A fine of $100 for the second violation;
(3) Repeat subsequent violations within 24 months, a fine double the amount of the fine
imposed for the previous violation, up to a maximum of $2,000. For example if there
were four occurrences of a violation that carried a $100 fine: first is $0 (warning);
second is $100, third is $200, forth is $400).
(d) At the time a violation occurs, the food establishment will be given 14 calendar days to
take corrective action before a subsequent fine is issued.
(e) The administrative offenses provided for in this chapter shall be in addition to any other
legal or equitable remedy available to the city for city code violations.
12.205. - Rules and regulations.
The Public Works Division may, upon notice and hearing, promulgate such rules and regulations
as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter and protect the health of the public,
including the development of list of recyclable and compostable packaging that meets definitions
under section 12.202 and development of exemptions under section 12.206 for packaging for
which there is no reasonable commercially available alternative. In promulgating such rules, the
division shall consider the legislative purposes provided in section 12.201 of this chapter and shall
Ordinance No. 2485-15 -4-
consult with the operators of affected food establishments, local material recovery facilities and
local commercial composting facilities. The Public Works Division rules and regulations shall be
approved by council annually.
12.206. - Exemptions.
Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary, this chapter shall not apply to:
(a) Any packaging which is not zero waste packaging, but for which there is no commercially
available alternative as determined by the Public Works Division by rule promulgated
pursuant to section 12.205. In determining whether there are commercially available
alternatives, the Public Works Division will consider whether there is availability of zero
waste packaging for affected products. Every rule creating an exemption under this
paragraph will be reviewed annually by the Public Works Division to determine whether
current conditions continue to warrant the exemption.
12.207. - Severability.
If any part or provision of this chapter or the application thereof to any person, entity, or
circumstances shall be adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction,
such judgment shall be confined in its operation to the part, provision or application which is
directly involved in the controversy in which such judgment shall have been rendered, and shall
not affect or impair the validity of the remainder of this chapter or the application thereof to other
persons, entities, or circumstances.
12.208. - Effective date.
This ordinance shall take effect January 1, 2017.
Secs. 12-209--12-250. Reserved.
First Reading December 7, 2015
Second Reading December 21, 2015
Date of Publication December 31, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect January 1, 2017
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council December 21, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Date: November 10, 2016 Agenda Item #: VI.C.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
Other
From:Working Group Chairs
Item Activity:
Subject:Working Group Updates Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
Working Group share updates
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
2016.10 BEEG WG Minutes
City of Edina
Business Energy Efficiency and Conservation Working Group
Minutes of November 1, 2106 Meeting
Community Room, Edina City Hall
7:00 p.m.
Chair Carolyn Jackson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chair Jackson, Paul
Hussian, Bill Sierks. Absent: Michelle Horan, Amy Ma
There being no changes to the minutes or the agenda, the group (“BEEG”) reviewed the survey
Xcel sent out to its customers in Edina that have individual sales reps.
Then we talked about filling out the tools on the shared documents. As we discussed that,
Carolyn reviewed the meeting she, Tara Brown and Sarah Zarrin had with Mayor Hovland on
Friday, October 28. At that meeting, the Mayor suggested a number of names of Edina business
people who would be approachable about working on energy reduction.
Paul will contact Jane Anderson Knudsvig about possibly joining BEEG and at least suggesting
the names of contacts at Edina large office buildings. As we get those names, we will populate
the contact info on the spreadsheet.
Carolyn then shared a checklist she found on energystar.gov for businesses to plan energy
reduction. It is a simple list which she recommends as a tool to approach businesses. The list is
attached.
We talked about the resources available through the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce. Bill
Sierks said that a company in St. Paul, Eutectics, has resources for companies as well. He is
going to follow up with them and see whether the City of Edina would qualify for a grant for
business outreach. He will also research the case studies available on Xcel’s website.
We then discussed having an event with 20 to 25 business leaders to lead the outreach to the
business community. Carolyn will talk with the EEC about whether this would be an appropriate
part of the April event.
We briefly discussed adding to our business outreach a question about whether they considered
LEED certification steps when building a new building or remodeling.
Carolyn reported briefly her contacts with the Edina Country Club and Christ Presbyterian
Church.
The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m.
Date: November 10, 2016 Agenda Item #: VIII.A.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
From:Sarah Zarrin, EEC Chair
Item Activity:
Subject:The Nature Conservancy Report
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
The Nature Conservancy has lots of academic information and research behind their publications. They recently
published TSC’s Planting Healthy Trees report and launched a website to help individuals engage in this topic.
Date: November 10, 2016 Agenda Item #: IX.A.
To:Energy and Environment Commission Item Type:
Other
From:Tara Brown, Sustainability Coordinator
Item Activity:
Subject:Q3 Report: Partners in Energy Action Plan Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is the report that Tara presented at the last meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
PiE Q3 Report
The CITY of EDINA
PiE Q3 2016 Report
Tara Brown, Sustainability Coordinator
October 2016
The CITY of EDINA
PiE Facilities Q3 2016 Report
Facilities
Measured &
Inventoried
•Complete
Brainstorm
Session Begin
•Spring 2016
VFA Tool Training
•November 2016
Final Brainstorm
Session
•December 2016
Final List of
Energy Savings
Projects
•February 2017
Strategy 1: Implement recommended energy use reduction
projects from building study.
Goal: Within 18 months lower the cities greenhouse gas emissions by 7%, 1.34
million kWh
Strategy 2: Negotiate renewable purchase for municipal electricity.
-Researching other cities financial mechanisms to support sustainable projects -Researching options with Xcel -Propose options for renewable purchasing to Subcommittee in January
Other projects Timeline
Xcel street light relamp to LED Q3 & Q4 2016
McKinstry lighting relamp recommendations Inventorying lights in October & November Receiving rebate and kW reports in December
Potential savings: Working with GPI to identify operations manual & other energy reduction tools Initial meeting in October Scoping in November
Building Study Milestones & Timeline
Other renewable work:
- Leasing space for Edina Solar Garden (2017) - Sourcing 18 blocks of 200kW solar
The CITY of EDINA PiE Residential Q3 2016
Report Energy Action Plan
Goal
(per PiE)
•750 homes take energy
savings action each
year, saving 562,000
kWh annually (avg
734kWh/home). And,
doubling the amount
of subscribers to
Windsource and the
amount subscribed
(675 new subscribers,
534 kWh per month)
Strategy
(per PiE)
•Strategy 1: Create
challenges for key
segments to act
•Strategy 2: Foster
neighborhood outreach
and leadership
•Strategy 3: Leverage
outreach event for
Windsource sign ups
Plan (Q4 2016)
•Identify key segments
to engage. Build
challenges around
segments’ motivations
•Identify key
neighborhood
influencers to host
parties
•Windsource to provide
2017 plans and discuss
opportunities to
amplify the message
Act (2017)
•Launch challenges
•Influencers to host
parties
•Amplify messaging,
continue to serve up in
other communication
and events
www.EdinaMN.gov 3
The CITY of EDINA
PiE Residential Q3 2016
Report
Planning Project Phase Q4
www.EdinaMN.gov 4
Information
gathering
•Review
archetypes/segments
and identify key
influencers
•Identify tools and
actions homeowners
can take
•Quantify annual kWh
savings per action
Brainstorm
Challenge
•Ideate different
activities, triggers to act,
rewards, and
communication points
per segment
• Quantify ROI for each
challenge
•Identify influencers
•Select top segments to
engage
Create
Proposed
Plan
•Build initial draft of
challenges per segment
•Identify goals and
measurements of
success
•Develop a timeline
•Identify owners
Gather
feedback
from
residents
•Share plans with a few
neighbors and EEC
•Update plan based on
feedback
Initiate
Action
Kick-off challenges
Below are the detailed steps within the Plan phase mentioned in the previous slide.
The CITY of EDINA PiE Business Q3 2016 Report:
Energy Action Plan
Goal
(per PiE)
•Reduce and/or
off-set through
renewable energy
2% of electricity
usage annually or
by 7.3m kWh in
the first year or
5,140 metric tons
of CO2 equivalent.
Strategy
(per PiE)
•Strategy 1: Engage the
top business energy
users to take action on
GHG through offsets
and reductions
•Strategy 2: Target
small to medium
business, such as
restaurants and retail
with recognition
programs
•Strategy 3: Assess
policy options to
support GHG reduction
for Edina businesses
Plan (Q4 2016)
•Identify businesses.
Understand their needs
and current actions
•Identify key
groups/localities and
understand needs
Act (2017)
•TBD Engage based on
initial conversations
•Host a learning session
through 50th & France
Association (Q1 2017)
Recap (2018)
•Annual report from
Xcel. Follow-up with
businesses based upon
agreed timelines.
www.EdinaMN.gov 5
Utilize policy work identified by CEE and other PiE cities. Review city, business and residential needs
The CITY of EDINA PiE Business: Planning Project
Phase
www.EdinaMN.gov 6
Information
gathering
•Gather usage % and
premise count by sector
•Create a database of top
400 users
•Qualitative and
quantitative information
on sector engagement
and outcomes
Survey Users
•Utilize business list to
survey business
engagement
•Ask about key
strategies, benefits, past
actions, potential future
actions
•Complete by Oct 31st
Create
Proposed
Plan
•Build initial draft of
engagement and support
(i.e. Medical office Event,
Country Club Challenge)
Based on survey
responses, identify top
key tools, partners, and
financial needs
•Identify best ways to
engage (i.e. CoC)
Gather
feedback
from sectors
Host a few roundtables to
gather feedback on initial
engagement plan
Identify businesses that
can be advocates or
champions
Inform website updates
Initiate
Action
Kick-off the next phase
of the project.
Below are the detailed steps within the Plan phase mentioned in the previous slide.