Here we go. On the top. Yeah. All right, I would now like to call the Terraria 16th, 2022. Longmont sustainability advisory board meeting to order. Could we please start with roll call. Kate collards in. President. Adam Reed. Yeah. Jim Metcalf. Present. Charles Musgrave. Present. Here we go. Here we go. Here we go. Here we go. Here we go. Councilmeyer. Present. And Robert Davidson. Staff members. We have Lisa Knoblock just joined. So we'll get her on. Francie Jaffe. Here. Susan Bartlett. Here. Heather McIntyre is here and council member Martin. Here. And then we also have. I'm going to go Kelly with us from the community. Great. And we have a quorum. You have a quorum. Yes. Fantastic. I will now lead read the land acknowledgement statement. We acknowledge that Longmont sits on the traditional territory of the Cheyenne, Arapaho, Yute, and other indigenous peoples. We honor the history and the living and spiritual connection that we have with this land. It is our commitment to face the injustices that happened when the land was taken and to educate our communities ourselves and our children to ensure that these injustices do not happen again. At an all company meeting today. After our land acknowledgement statement, there's a, another statement that I want to read. I want to note that this kind of land acknowledgement statement is not a new practice developed by colonial institutions. Land acknowledgement is a traditional custom dating back centuries for many native communities and nations. I just thought I'd add that today. Thank you. So annual review of duties and responsibilities. Heather and Lisa, I think you will be leading us through this. I did make you a coho.  Heather, I think that. That this is something that you have normally led in the past and we're going to do it in January and got it and push it to February of the general business items. Okay. Of posting places and. So let me see here. Did everybody get a chance to read the rules and regulations that were included in the packet? Did anybody have any chains or changes or anything that they would like to make to them? I'm not seeing any. We also had a discussion later in the year. I think it was like October, November. About the start time for this meeting. Being the third Wednesday and the three 30 to five 30. I didn't know if that was something that you all wanted to do today or do at a later time. Oh, I've forgotten about that. We haven't talked about that, haven't we? If we changed this to a later time that meant K that you could not participate, right? Probably not going to be able to participate at least 50% of the year. Okay. Okay. And. Does this time work for. I think Charles, did you have a conflict with this time? Or is it okay as long as we're not in person? Yes. Making it in person would make it hard for me to attend at this time, but if it's. My zoom, it's fine. Okay. What's the status? I mean. Obviously we're still in a pandemic. But. What are, what are thoughts around. Moving to in person. From a. Is, are we doing this on zoom because of our particular board right now? Or is the city or all city boards. On zoom. I think in January, they made the decision to go back to zoom, but they, I know. I'm pretty sure and council member Martin, you can weigh in. I think that city council. Discuss this at the meeting last night. Okay. Okay. Thank you. On that. Yes, I do. The city council has acknowledged that we are. Almost back down to the case rate. Where in person meetings would make sense again. The Boulder. Department of health has. Lifted the mask restrictions as of five PM this coming Friday. So, I think the city council has. Voted four to two. To stay virtual for a couple of weeks longer to make to, to try to see that we get actually down to the red level. Or below the old red level, which, you know, we've been so far above that for so long that nobody even talks about it anymore. But, but that's really sort of our, our safe level. I think we'll probably go back to in person. For March. Or maybe for April when we vote on whether we're going to keep it to three meetings a month or four. But for now we have, we've stayed virtual for another two weeks. And I think part of that it's really up to each board, according to the city attorney's office. So if you all wanted to stay virtual, we could, we would just need to add that to our. We would just need to add rules and regulations to make that an option for the board to decide. Quick thumbs up, thumbs down. The folks like the board members want to keep doing. Virtual for the next couple of months. Thumbs up. Thumbs down. All right. Okay. So I find it convenient. I find it very convenient as well. I think it's lovely. Can we stay this course then for. The next couple of months at least and then reassess. Okay. You want to do it through April and then decide at the May, or decide at the April meeting how you want to continue for the other months or. Yes, please. Okay. Let's just keep kicking that can. And probably let's go ahead and do a vote on that just so that we can get it added to the bylaws that you guys can make that decision. To do virtual meetings so that because we really are beyond the emergency. Orders that we had from the city level. To be able to enable us to do that. So let's go ahead and do a vote on that. Okay. I'll move that this board meetings remain virtual. At least through. And through April. Thank you, Jim. I will second the motion. Okay. All in favor. Aye. Aye. That's a six zero. Then the next thing that we have on the agenda is, because it's the beginning of the meeting, I'll move that this board meetings remain virtual at least through. And through April. Thank you, Jim. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Jim. Because it's the beginning of the year we need to reelect officers. So we would entertain nominations for a chair. Don't jump in there at once. Well, I'd like to nominate Kate again, because I think she's been doing a fantastic job. And I see no reason. Check the words out of my mouth. You want to second that then K, or are there any other nominations? Second, the nomination for Kate, as long as she'll accept it. Absolutely. Thanks. Any other nominations? All right, let's call a vote then for, um, making Kate collards in the chair for 2022. Those in favor. Are you just abstaining because it's you. My lot of. I know you're starting to get nervous that you don't want this. Let's do for vice chair, do we have a nomination for vice chair? I just, as the current vice chair, I would have no problem at all with somebody else. We'd like to have the experience of doing it. So I will not take it as a slap in my face. Somebody would like to nominate themselves as vice chair. I was, you had your hand raised. I was going to nominate Jim so was I.  Right. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All right. And then the last thing is the designated posting place. So according to the Colorado sunshine law, we have to designate a place for public notices at the meetings. Last year we decided to do the city's website as a primary one. And the bulletin board at the service center as our physical location and secondary location. So any, do we have any discussion on moving that or keeping it the same? I don't see any reason to change it. I would agree. Do you need us to move for that? I think we can just say that. We'll just keep it the same as we did last year. So any objections to that? Okay. I think we're good. And then I'll turn it back over to Kate. All right. Okay. So, um, The next item. Oh, Lord, I've lost the agenda. I'm sorry. Count it. The next item is the approvals of the minutes. Would anybody like to make a motion to approve the minutes from last meeting? I'll motion to approve. I'll second. All in favor. All right. And the motion passes. Thank you. Um, Okay. I would now like to open it up for public invited to be heard. We have one member of the public who would like to be heard. You will have, uh, you will be unmuted and, um, you will have three minutes, um, for your comment. Um, please. Uh, state your name and your address for the record. And, uh, I, I will time you. Um, so. Okay. Great. And we have do Kelly up. Can you hear me? We can. Yes. Okay. This is do Kelly, uh, Barbary drive in Longmont. Oh. Okay. Good afternoon, you guys. This is a quote entitled strange symptoms by Richard H. Conrad PhD. He said, The quote is derivative of information collated from the main smart meter survey that he conducted. The date is February 2013. So the issue is not new. I quote. Many of them said they had never heard of electrical sensitivities before. We're developing strange symptoms they never had before. Could not use computers, but they had never heard of electrical sensitivities. They were not aware of how painful symptoms, even though previously they had been using them heavily with Wi-Fi and offices and on in homes 24 seven weeks or months after their symptoms began, they first discovered a smart meter on their home upon inquiry. They found out it had been installed at the time or just before their symptoms initiated. They found out that a smart meter was initiating ES or electrosensitivity in previously normal, healthy persons who had tolerated Wi-Fi and cell phones for years with no problems. End quote. In April of 2016, I became electrosensitive after having the next slide install at midday. A new wireless router in our living room. By that evening, I was able to see that a lot of the signals and head were only continued confirmation of what I thought I knew that I had been tipped into electrosensitivity and had received what's now being called a microwave injury. This injury was confirmed to me by a brain mapping therapist I was seeing at the time as my before and after brain graphs were startlingly different. I'm sure you all know that wireless devices and the telecommunications system are very similar to the telecommunications system. I'm not giving them information by a microwave carrier waves. For most people, this is not a problem. For the canaries in the coal mine and increasing numbers of others worldwide, it is a massive and growing public health phenomenon. And yet this problem remains mostly invisible like the microwaves that are causing it. I am grateful to city council for standing up for the discussion. And it seems unjust that someone who's already electrosensitive in order to not be exposed to this radiation be forced to pay a monthly fee. There must be a better way. And I charge you with the task of finding it for myself. I would like to propose to the city on no fee opt out. I will send you via Heather an email with a couple of links to of articles regarding this subject. And with the above quote and link to the main survey. I would like to thank you for listening. And I hope you will consider this proposal seriously. Thank you for sharing. Any. Any comments from the board. I look forward to receiving that. That information. Thanks for sharing. Okay. Are there any. Agenda revisions or documents to be submitted? Yes. I can just add on the items from staff. There's a. An item about bringing. Sab applicant applications to the board for review. I just want to date you all on that. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Okay. All right. So the next item on the agenda is. The electrical electrification plan. Progress update. Susan. You have a floor. Thank you. Board members. Thanks for having me back. I think it was November. When I talked with you all. Before about this. On a second. I'm going to get my screens arranged correctly. There we go. Yep. So I appreciate your willingness to hear from me again. And I think since that time. You have a new city council. Representative. And Marsha could probably give this talk just as easily as I could at this point, because she's been very much. Involved in, in our work. I'm going to try. Get to a hundred percent here on my view. Sorry. I'm fussing with my screens a little bit. Okay. I'm just going to go with it there. When, when I was last talking with you, you mentioned that you would be interested in hearing some of the results of the research that was underway in the modeling that we were doing. And we have a little bit of that coming in at this point. And so I wanted to just share with you what we know there. So I'm going to go ahead and go ahead and get started. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. Oh, next one. And since there's no one new on the board, I won't go real deep into our process. This is kind of the same that I showed you last time, but, but our arrow is a little further down the path. So our advisory committee has been meeting. Since summertime and has helped with a variety of. Topics and activities. We've been working on a number of things. We've been working on a number of things. Development issues not too long ago. And they've kind of reviewed some of the study results that have come in. We'll continue to meet. Into the spring as we start to build out the plan. So we're glad to have them all on board. We're also continuing to work on a communications plan. That's kind of a part and parcel of the electrification plan that we've been working on. We've been working on a number of things that we've been working on. We've been working on a number of things that we've been working on with people to do. And the culmination of the work is going to be this phased building electrification plan with. Recommended policies, program strategies. Like education campaigns, equipment incentives. Code updates. Workforce training. That kind of thing. We're aiming to have a final plan by August of 2022. Next slide. Okay. So we're going to talk about the results that we're seeing. I wanted to share what we've learned. To date. And part of that was work that we started in early 2021. It was a collaboration with Fort Collins utilities. Where we brought on apex analytics. First to do a national inventory of other electrification. Incentive programs offered through other electric utilities in the region. We had to do a little bit of local market research on. Just level of awareness, both for our contractor pool and our customer base. We wanted to hear from them on, you know, what they know about. He pumped technologies or other electrification. Measures. And then what they see as market challenges in our area. We had to do a lot of research. And then what we did at the time in the past, we had to do a lot of research. And then what we did at the time at Fort Collins was to develop a just a jurisdiction specific cost effectiveness analysis. That was looking at residential electrification measures. And this work is going to help us prioritize. What makes the most sense for our community in terms of recommendations and program development. As an aside, apex is also working with flat river power authority. And then what we're doing is looking at the potential for electrification adoption across all four of the owner communities. And what those impacts will have on generation, but also and to a limited degree on our distribution systems, which is really important as we try and figure out what this looks like in 10 years or 20 years. Next slide. I wanted to share some highlights with you from the local market research. It gave us a good sense for what folks are thinking about or not thinking about in our communities. And one of the things that I wanted to point out that with our contractor focus group, we had seven or eight. I don't remember what our final number was of contractors that participated and they all demonstrated really high awareness of heat pump technologies in homes and small businesses. And we don't think that's generally the case. I think what you might agree with is that the folks that agree to participate are usually those that are the most engaged and the most knowledgeable. And so we think that's probably what happened here, but nonetheless, we were glad to hear from them and they had some good things to share with us. I thought interestingly, they view heat pump technologies and electrification technologies as an opportunity. They see this as coming and they want to be on board with it and they want to be able to be experts. They see the projects having higher value for them as a business. They also understand the efficiency of a lot of this equipment, but they were also very quick to point out some of the challenges that they're already facing. One of those, of course, as you might imagine is just higher cost consumers for this equipment. And they're primarily working, the ones that we talked to are primarily working in the existing building market as opposed to new construction. But they're also concerned about the fact that a lot of this equipment is much more complex than some of the standard HVAC and water heating equipment that they've installed in the past. And what that means is more training is required for their technicians. And it's more challenging to troubleshoot when things go wrong. Also, they pointed out just how much variability there can be from home to home. And this could come in the form of duct work if it's a central system or panel capacity or insulation and air sealing. Just a lot of variables that make it harder to work in this sector. And then one thing they also pointed out is that heat pump technologies require a good deal of customer retraining, if you will, so that they understand how to use the equipment in a way that's optimized and that it does behave differently than your natural gas furnace if you're trying to heat a space. We've taught everybody to use programmable thermostats with setbacks when we're gone and at night when we're sleeping. And heat pump technology doesn't necessarily respond well in those circumstances with those kind of controls. So they just wanted us to be aware that they're seeing that in the market. One thing they also did, I don't know that if it was universal across all contractors, but they talked about how they are almost always recommending heat pump anytime there's an air conditioner replacement that they're looking at. So we thought that was really good feedback. And then Apex also did a customer survey across Fort Collins and Longmont customers. And I'm proud to say that we had more participants than Fort Collins did. So yay for Longmont. It looked at three different sets of customers. One was customers who had participated in our Efficiency Works program or Boulder County Energy Smart program. One group that had replaced equipment but hadn't participated in those programs. And then a third group that hadn't done any equipment upgrades. So we had a pretty broad variety of folks that responded. And, you know, what we learned is that most people are not going to replace equipment until it fails. And when it does fail, they're going to put in exactly what came out. That's it's easy. It's what a lot of contractors recommend. It's familiar. They know how to run it. And that tends to be the option they go with. Of the folks that responded, 82% either were not very or were not at all familiar with heat pump technologies. And over the customers that responded, only 10% of them said that their contractor mentioned another option or a heat pump as an option. And so, you know, I think that's one of the things that I think is really important is that of that 10% or of that subset in making a decision about whether or not to install a heat pump, cost rose to the top as, you know, informing their decision not to install. A lot of these customers also recognize that a lot of things about their home made a heat pump more complicated or more complicated. And so, you know, I think that technology itself, you know, they may have heard that it wasn't as reliable or it made the space less comfortable, or it would not have as long a life of a lifetime. So it was good to gather all that information. Before we got started. And I think my big takeaway. From the market research is that we have a huge. We have a huge impact on the customer's awareness, both on the contractor side and on the consumer side. Next slide. And then this may be a little hard for you to read, but some of the key findings from apex on their cost benefit analysis. One is one is kind of an obvious, but confirming the obvious and that's that our buildings contribute in a really big way to our greenhouse gas emissions and we'll continue to do so over time. So one of the keys to making heat pump technology, both for space and water heating. A good economic story is that we have to keep our electricity prices low relative to natural gas so that the economics work out. They also the work also indicated that partial displacement and what I mean by that, you probably already understand this term, but that's when you. You don't entirely electrify. You have a heat pump. And instead of having electric backup heat, you might have natural gas backup heat instead. So partial displacement rather than full electric is more economical and it won't contribute to a potential winter peak. So overall it's kind of, it's better for ratepayers and I'll talk about that in a minute. Another outcome of this work and some of the work that they're doing for Platte River is that full electrification can have a pretty big impact on when our system peaks. Right now we peak in the summer with our air conditioning load and over time, depending on the rate of adoption of electric electrification equipment, we can become a winter peaking community. And, you know, the reason that's important is that in the summertime are, you know, the, the, the peak happens at a certain time of day, usually in the afternoon between three and seven, and then it cools off at night.  We might ramp up again the next day, but it's a little more variable. A winter peak is more sustained. You know, think about cold snaps where we have three or four days in a row that are very cold and it's very cold at night and it's very cold during the day. So we have this higher and sustained peak, which means we have to think about generating more dispatchable energy during that time so it can be more costly to have peaks in the winter. And finally, I'll just say that with full electrification, that's where you're not doing that partial displacement. And it looks like that would add about 10 KW per home. During the winter. And that's when that electric resistance heat kicks on. And with our current difference between summer and winter load across our system, we have about 15 megawatts of space, which would be about 5,000 homes in Longmont will kind of push us to that winter peak. Next slide. So not to be discouraged by all that. Apex did provide some recommendations for how we might phase in the work that we want to do with the first phase, really kind of digging in on education, awareness, contract or training, you know, incentivizing our early adopters. And one of the questions that we want to answer is, what would it take for contractors to almost always install a heat pump instead of an air conditioner, you know, kind of nail that down in this first phase. And then also they recommended that we incentivize all heat pumps, not just cold climate. And right now our efficiency works. And I believe Boulder County County's energy smart focus on cold climate heat pumps only for their rebates. So, you know, kind of getting people used to any kind of heat pump is a good thing. And then the next phase, we would start building in code requirements for new construction. We should look at working with manufacturers and distributors to make sure that the equipment that they're, that they have on hand and that they're pushing out into our community is the equipment that we want people to install so that they can use that heat pump equipment. And, you know, just to kind of broaden our offerings related to electrification technology. And then that third phase is the real hard push to zero carbon where we're looking at, you know, hard and fast code changes relative to heat pump space heating and water heating in all new installations or requiring all electric new homes for construction. And while Apex kind of has it as 2030 and later, that doesn't necessarily mean that's when it has to happen. They were looking at our code cycles and how we adopt new code. Fortunately, Longmont is pretty progressive in that when a new code comes out, we review it and we adopt it. That's part of our policy. And so it's more a matter of code amendments and when those might happen along the way as, as part of our code cycle, a code adoption cycle. And some of you may also be familiar with a lot of code work that's happening right now with sweep and RMI. There are good frameworks in place that we can build off of that look at a phased approach to code amendments and code adoption. So we're keeping those in mind as we move through our plan. Next slide. So beyond the work from Apex, Lotus engineering and sustainability is our consultant that's facilitating our planning work and the advisory committee. And group 14 is a sub consultant there and is modeling potential impacts from strategies that we might include in our plan. Their work, their model considers our baseline emissions. It looks at the building stock in Longmont. It looks at where we're using natural gas in these buildings. It considers what our current greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals are. And then the beauty of this modeling is it's a tool that we can use over time, you know, right now for building our plan, but also over time that allows us to toggle strategy pieces on and off, types of policy, implementation dates, what kind of level of adoption we think we might see equipment types. So there are a lot of different ways to turn the dial in order to understand better the impacts that we may have. The model also includes, you know, those emissions impacts as benefits and also what the cost implications might be. Next slide. I hope this isn't too hard for you to see. Excuse me. This is some graphic representation of the building stock analysis that they did. And it lines up with what we've seen in our greenhouse gas inventory and some other work that we've done. The first two pie charts are a breakdown of building type, either by square footage or by building count. The square footage wise about 61% are residential. And then by building count, you know, 84% are residential. If you roll in that multifamily piece, you know, we're looking at almost 93% of our building space is allocated for residential uses. And then on the natural gas breakout, we've got residential accounts for about 62% of our community wide natural gas use and CNI is about 38%. So essentially what this does is it kind of helps us focus, you know, where can we get the most impact? Having said that, we don't want to be exclusive and say we're only going to focus on residential because that doesn't, you know, that doesn't help us achieve our goals. So we are considering both commercial and residential, but clearly a lot of our impact is going to come from that residential sector. Another interesting note is that the majority of buildings in Longmont were built after 1980. And we had our biggest kind of boom between 2000 and 2009. And again, that gives us a sense for, you know, the age of our building stock and, you know, what cycle code was happening when a lot of these buildings were made and what kinds of implications does that have on, you know, insulation and efficiency of envelope, as well as electric panel size and that kind of thing. Next slide. This is really, really hard to read and I don't expect you to see it well or understand all the parts and pieces. I just wanted to point out some highlights. It's a little, it's a little grab from the modeling tool. But I just wanted to show you kind of some of the ways that we can toggle. And your, your packet included a list of potential best practices that are being considered for the plan. And not all of those are modeled in the tool because not all of them are easily quantifiable, but anything that could be quantified in some manner, Group 14 included in the model. And so some of the things that we can toggle on and off are different types of strategies on the voluntary and incentive side, you know, we're looking at partnerships with efficiency programs. We're looking at no to low interest financing options, bulk purchase programs, things like that where we're trying to encourage voluntary activity. And that's kind of up in the top left hand corner here. And then over to the right, you see the blue. Boxes and there's a start date and there's an adoption rate. And so we can, we can determine what we want these things to begin in 2023 or 2025. And we think as a result of our effort, we're going to get high adoption or medium adoption. Low adoption is kind of a baseline. It's if we don't do anything too much different than we're doing now. So we're trying to figure out, we're trying to figure out, we're trying to figure out, medium is pushing harder and that high adoption is where we're sort of things are more compulsory, if you will. And then in the lower part there of that screenshot, we're able to toggle on and off policy paths. You know, the one in the middle here is, you know, we're going to require that anything, any air conditioning is a heat pump technology. Or we're looking at, you know, things for existing buildings. If something fails, the new thing that goes in has to be electric and we're going to do that by 2025 or whatever. So it lets us, it gives us a lot of choice in how we want to set up our scenarios and our strategies. And we, we just got the final tool and the final memo last week. So we're kind of digging in to see what it tells us, but there are some highlights that I wanted to share with you from the work. Next slide. So again, kind of pointing out the obvious, but confirming that we need to electrify our buildings in order to achieve our greenhouse gas emissions goals. It's also important that we consider both residential and commercial buildings, but looking at residential for the biggest impact. We also want to make sure that we're considering both new construction and existing buildings. And then also this partial displacement idea surfaced again in that having a heat pump for air conditioning and for most of the heating with natural gas for backup on those very coldest days is the most economic option right now. And that cold climate heat pumps with that electric resistance backup. So that 100% electrification are recommended for new construction, but not existing buildings yet. And then this was interesting too. And that is that those voluntary strategies where we're encouraging people to kind of do what we want. It gets us, it helps us save about 10% toward our goal. And so in order to get beyond that, we have to have really good and thoughtful policies that will bring along the rest of the folks to participate so that we can hit our ultimate goals. Next slide. Finally, this is the work that river power authority is doing. They're working with all four of their owner communities gathering data from all four owner communities. And what they're trying to do is project based on certain adoption rates, again, high, medium, low, low being, we don't really do anything different. We just keep bumping along the way that we are, you know, and, and medium is, you know, more incentives and bigger education and whatnot. And then high is just where we're, we're requiring certain things. So they're looking at those scenarios as well. And what they're trying to get a sense for is at each of these levels, what does that look like in terms of how much electricity we have to generate? And what does it look like in terms of our distribution system? Where will the vulnerabilities be? What kind of infrastructure will we need to have in place in order to accommodate that electric demand? And, you know, they're looking at load shapes, both on a monthly and an annual basis based on these projections and also considering the, the, the, the type of energy that they'll need to bring in and that, that energy may not be immediately dispatchable. It might be, you know, renewable energy that is going to require some more flexibility in some demand, response or behavioral change on our part. They're also looking really closely at, the winter peaking implications. And then we're able to take some of their learning and apply it on our distribution. Just considering what that's going to mean. To hosting capacity. And so that's still underway. We don't have the final information from Platte River yet. And another element that we're looking at. So this particular study is building electrification only. So you think of the implications there. And then you add in the additional implications for EV charging, which wasn't included here. So there's, there's a lot of, there's a lot of study going on to help us understand what the outcomes of electrification may be. Next slide. So the next steps for us are to, to share with you kind of what we know so far. We're also gathering focus groups. And we've got one already behind us, but we have another several coming up. We're talking to key sectors about their level of awareness potential impacts that they see, whether it's positive or negative. Ideas they have for helping us to be as successful as possible with our plan efforts. And then really, and importantly, how best do we communicate with them and folks in their sector about the plan implications and how we get those strategies accomplished. We're continuing to vet the best practices that were in your package. And then we're going to talk about, we're continuing to vet the best best practices that were in your packet. We had the opportunity to work with the equitable climate action team to evaluate a couple of those best practices using their equity guide. And this is really important because we don't want to overlook important concerns when we're looking at these best practices. And so that was really helpful to get their feedback on, are we asking the right questions? Are we, are there ways to mitigate potential negative impacts? And, you know, we hope to be able to apply what we learned on those few strategies to all the others as well. And as I said, we're continuing kind of building out the communication strategy based on the things that we want, that we want people to help us do. And we hope to have that plan by August of 2022. And I would just say if any of you, I know this, this group is very plugged in, you're very informed. And if you have feedback on the best practices that were included in your, in your packet, or if you have questions for me today that I may or may not be able to answer, but I'll get an answer for you, just definitely interested in your feedback. And so I'll open it up for questions. Thanks so much. Go ahead, Robert. So I was going to ask about the decision not to recommend the cold climate heat pumps for existing construction or retrofit applications. Is that just due to the cost for additional electrical work required to do that? Or what's kind of the rationale there? It's, it's a variable of, of consideration. So there is the cost of, you know, some, some installations are pretty simple because it's a newer construction, your house is pretty tight and you've got a panel that has capacity. Your ductwork is sized big enough. You know, so, so it gets more complicated. Oh, you asked about cold climate specifically though. So yeah, they're much more expensive than, than the standard, standard heat pumps. Also, we're trying to balance. How quickly we get to winter peak. And with the cold climate heat pumps with electric resistance backup, we're going to get there faster, which means we have to accommodate that sooner. So, so it's a little bit of this and a little, it's a little bit of that, but the, but the biggest factor is the installation costs, the equipment costs. Charles. So, yeah, so it sounds like probably due to initial installation costs that the recommendations are really focused on air source heat pumps, as opposed to ground source heat pumps. And it seems to me that a partial replacement. I mean, in some ways you're replacing an electrical system with another electrical system. So it's not truly electrification because air conditioning is already electrified. It's, but the, but the air source heat pump for air conditioning is, is pretty efficient and works really well. It's, it's cold winter days that you have the big problem. So, and there's, there's problems with partial replacements. You add complexity to the system. And one of the challenges that they mentioned was that these systems are complex, but now you have an even more complex system when you have a partial replacement because you have a hybrid between, you know, a gas furnace and a air source heat pump. So it seems like if we could do anything we can do to me, it seems like anything we could do to incentivize going all the way to a ground source heat pump just seems to make sense. I mean, cold climate air source heat pumps are better than the old heat pumps that gave heat pumps a bad name because of resistive heating costing so much. But if, yeah, if, but if you, if you don't do a partial displacement and you just do an air source heat pump installation with supplemental electricity, then winter peak is going to be really bad. So there's, there's other things maybe we can do to incentivize things like the safety, you know, heat pumps are safer system than gas furnaces. And I think safety actually probably is affects lower income parts of the population worse because they have gas furnaces, for example, that are not maintained at the same level or as often. And so they end up getting having problems that could lead to, you know, gas leaks, CO poisoning, fires, et cetera. So just one last thing I was thinking was, have we ever thought of doing anything like having maybe a building permit, like lower fees, where for people who are putting in things that are actually, we want them to do, I mean, we keep, so we keep building buildings using, you know, wood frames, you know, residential construction is wood frames. That technology is invented in 1822, which is the 200 years old anniversary this year.  And there are better building technologies and ways to incentivize that, which would, I mean, that, you know, a tighter envelope, building envelope. And yeah, you know, with better monolithic R values across the panel, for example, that saves you a lot in terms of air conditioning. And anyway, so if there are opportunities later to contribute to this area, I've been studying this for the last 25 years or so. So I'd be happy to chat with someone. There's options for more community input, et cetera. Thanks for your input, Charles. And you, you pack a lot in there. One thing I was going to mention that's come up in our committee meetings is ground source heat pump for campuses, if you will, because then the economy of scale is a little more palatable. And you're right, you know, then, then we sort of eliminate some of the things that are associated, some of the negatives associated with air source heat pump and, you know, certainly encouraging better built buildings from the beginning through, you know, rewards of some kind through permitting or, you know, making it easier or, or faster or less expensive are certainly things that, that we're considering. And I'm pretty excited. I realize it's a commercial thing, but at least on the commercial building front with the state's mandate for benchmarking on buildings larger than 50,000 square feet, there's going to be a performance element coming. I don't know when I don't know. I guess it's in the, it's in the bill, but, you know, so we're going to start to have to talk about how buildings perform, not only existing, but especially those that are new. So those. Yeah, that'd be fantastic. You know, residential, there is no, you know, unfortunately it's 50,000 square feet or larger. For residential, there isn't much there except for just the homeowner saving, you know, some money. But the long-term cost of ownership of these systems is much lower.  If we could do that, that'd be fantastic. Yeah, we need to, we need to talk these things up and educate more folks. Marcia. Yeah, I've just got a couple of points. One is that I think we're going to need to try to make some effort to gather a little more data that we have than we have so far maybe locally.  So he's kept his six-month or six-year-old gas furnace. And the interesting part of it is that this is an old historic west side house. You know, so we're going to have lots of use cases involved as he goes forward. And he is willing to take one of those copper appliances that measures your gas usage by listening to your old gas meter. Oh, kind of the clamp-on thing? No, it plugs, it actually plugs into an outlet inside your house. But what it does is, you know, an analog gas meter just goes ping, ping, ping, ping with RF every time the virtual wheel turns over, right? And so it can, I have one in my house, and I know how much my gas usage fluctuates based on temperature outdoors, and he's willing to take one of those because what he's got is now an external ducted air source heat pump installed in conjunction with his gas furnace and a smart thermostat that is that cuts over from heat pump to gas when the external temperature is 20 Fahrenheit. So, you know, maybe we can, you know, do, my copper is complimentary, but and we're trying to work out a change, but maybe there's something that we could do about using those to gather data if we subsidize them with the company. So I think that's going to be really important information to be able to supply to people. The other thing that I was just thinking about is a situation like mine where I have a gas furnace that is pretty old, and if I went for a displacement architecture, what would I expect to happen to the future life of my gas furnace, you know, would it fall apart immediately because it wasn't being used, or would it last a long time because it was only being used a little bit. That's something that we would like to know in terms of encouraging people to make the switch. So, you know, I just think that as we go forward, there are all kinds of important things that we need to figure out and I really like the way, you know, Charles was thinking about this because it sounds like he's been in the business of learning those things. So that's my two cents. Well, there is so much to know about this, and I appreciate that both you and Charles brought up the nature of controls when you have these partial systems where you have, you know, it only works if the controls are functioning correctly and switch over temperatures happen at the right time and, you know, that's a new thing for our contractor pool. So, yeah. Adam? Before you call on the next person, I also wanted to say, you know, the local social media has ads for HVAC people, and I've been going around asking them if they do heat pumps and they're all claiming they do. Okay, we'll see. Let's take them up on it. Adam. Real quick, I want to jump in and just, we've got a really full agenda after this. After Adam and Jim. Let's call questions to an end, please. I actually have to go. Okay. I'll make my question quick. Thanks a lot, Susan for the talk. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for regarding the PRPA's forecast for the grid. As more buildings electrified, it's going to be, of course, more demand for electricity. And so do they have a forecast for how the energy mix will evolve? Well, they, they have the forecast that's in the IRP. But I think the work that they're doing now will also inform. The next revision to the IRP. I'm not sure where that's going to come from. So no, I don't, I don't know what that looks like yet, but I'm sure that's part of their thinking as they revise the IRP. Well, thanks again for, for letting me join you today. I appreciate it. Really appreciate you being here. That was great presentation. Thanks for all of the information. Thank you. Reach out with any input or feedback that you have. Happy to take it. Perfect. Thanks. Thank you. Okay. Now it's time for the zero waste update. Lisa. Thanks. I'll be pretty quick. Heather, can you close that presentation for me real quick, please? Did you get it? Okay. Great. Thanks. Yeah, so you can go to the next side, Heather. Thanks. I just wanted to give you all a quick update since we went to council last night to give them an update on where our zero waste efforts are at and just give you all a sense of the timeline. Moving forward. So just a quick reminder, the four areas that council had given us direction to pursue additional zero waste efforts on where the education and outreach piece, which is mostly our relationship with eco cycle and savory Valley school district and supporting the green star schools program. Increasing hard to recycle opportunities for hard to recycle programs. So we're going to go ahead and give you a quick update. So we're going to go ahead and give you a quick update. Zero waste resolution. With an additional focus areas and specific targets. And then exploring a universal recycling ordinance and what all that might include. Next slide, please. Some quick updates just on the accomplishment. So our target from the sustainability plan in the residential sector is 50% diversion by 2025. So we're doing 42%. So we're doing pretty well on that goal. We don't yet have targets specifically in the commercial sector, which is part of what we'll be looking at in this process, but on the residential side, we're doing pretty well. Next slide. And then specifically with the composting program. If you all recall, I think some of you are around a number of years ago when we. Wasn't that long ago, I guess, but about five years ago, we had a lot of, you know, we had a lot of work on the curbside composting program, the sustainability advisory board. Had some conversations and have written some. Recommendations to city council on that. Whether it should be opt in or opt out council initially. Approved an opt in curbside composting program. We had some analysis from. Somebody that we work with that does a lot of data and economic analysis specifically in the waste sector, but we're still getting subscriptions for that. So we're at about 24% participation. And so we're at about 24% now. So we are seeing that kind of leveling off. So we can definitely, there, we, we're still getting subscriptions for that. We've, we still promote that quite heavily. But we, we may be hitting our limit kind of with an opt in program. Next slide. And then hard to recycle services, as I mentioned, we had a lot of, we had a lot of, a lot of, a lot of community services, our sanitation manager organized this event that, that happened in October. So it was initially an interim strategy of looking at different options. And so he worked with some external partners to put together a two week event that was held in October that was really successful. It took a number of different items. We had a lot of participation. And so we got some direction from council to. Some bi-annual programs, but also to continue to explore other opportunities for hard to recycle services because we know that that's a need. And it's not always easily accessible for folks to get to the Boulder County Charm facility. So we are still looking for longer term solutions in that area. Next slide, please. The green star school program. So that's a partnership that we do with eco cycle. They have a great curriculum that they've put together. We're currently working with 11 out of the 27 schools. And we are the city is funding two additional schools. Per year. And then the, the St. Marine Valley school district funds an additional school per year. Although that can be anywhere within the district. So sometimes that's going to fall in, in within the boundaries of Longmont. And sometimes obviously that will fall into other communities. But the two schools that the city funds per year will fall specifically within Longmont. And so they do staff trainings. They work with students. They work with parents. They have a whole curriculum. Five years after a school is launched, they go back and do a whole revamp. They do the data tracking and all of that sort of stuff. So it's a successful program and partnership. Next slide, please. And then the zero waste resolution. So I chatted with you all about this a couple of months ago. I think it was back in the fall of last year. We were initially pending to kick off community engagement for the update to the zero waste resolution last fall, but as you all know, we're down a couple of staff. So, but just a quick reminder for folks, the original resolution was passed in 2008. On the left hand side is just a very high level outline and the areas in gray were included in the initial resolution. And the areas in green are the areas that we want to incorporate into the update. We also want to include some specific targets. So not only our target from the existing sustainability plan, but look at some more ambitious targets and include a specific commercial target. And then really focus on community engagement as well as data analysis to help us inform the content of the zero waste resolution. So really our high level goals and commitments, but then also the details of the universal recycling ordinance, which is having specific requirements in place for. Everyone residential in the commercial sector as well. Next slide please. Just some high level guiding principles is that everybody lives in a clean and safe community. We want to increase access to recycling and composting for everyone and then reducing waste supports or climate action goals. Next time. The community centered engagement piece, as I mentioned, this is an important component to make sure that we understand the needs and priorities of the community, as well as potential equity issues. So we want to engage the residential sector. Key partners. So folks like advisory boards, sustainable, resilient, Longmont, Boulder County, partners for a clean environment, recycled Colorado, as well as have conversations with peer communities that have done some great zero waste work that we can really learn from their expertise. And then also our city staff as well. So from various departments who are impacted by, or also have been a role in supporting our zero waste efforts. And then specific targeted outreach to the commercial and multifamily sector again, who will be most impacted by universal recycling ordinance. And use all of that community engagement information for both the resolution and the ordinance. Next slide. So as I mentioned, we'll also be doing some data analysis in this process. So if you'll recall a couple of years ago, we did a waste life cycle analysis to look specifically at how waste impacts our greenhouse gas emissions. And we looked at two different target scenarios within that. One that's less ambitious and one that's more ambitious. And so we'll be doing some data analysis to understand what, what are the potential programs and policies we would need to put in place to meet both of these scenarios and what would the cost associated with those be so that that can also help inform. What we put into place next slide. And then some key dates. So the first quarter of the year, January through March early is our community engagement phase. April and May we'll be drafting a resolution and bringing that back to key partners for feedback. So we have it on, on, on the agenda for May to bring you all a draft resolution to review and provide feedback with the goal of bringing that draft resolution to council in June. And then we'll continue to focus on more refined engagement with the commercial and multi-family sector for the universal recycling ordinance to make sure that we're, we're capturing and phasing things appropriately in that with the goal of having that back to city council by the end of the year. So with that, that's all I had for you all just wanted to give you an update of where things are at and to keep an eye out for the community engagement opportunities. We launched an engaged long mount page and we'll have some community engagement opportunities that we'll keep you all comprised of and then have that draft resolution for you all to review in May. Does anyone have any questions before we move on? Yeah, Kate. I'm curious about the composting opt in versus opt out. Is there any. Desire. Do you have any questions from council to change that to an opt out? Yeah, there is desire for that. There was definitely constraints for us to doing that, but I think that'll be part of what we're evaluating in this, in this process. Marcia, did you want to jump in there? Nope. Maybe not. Here I go. Oh. There we go. Sorry. I'm not, we didn't really take a vote. Last night. So there, I think the main expressed interest, mine and a couple others. Who has been not putting any rate burdens. Any more rate burdens on the public for a while, because we've raised the rates on everything. In the last four years. We've raised the rates going up stepwise because of the new. Waste treatment plant. You've got the smart meters, which are going to cause rates to increase a little bit for a while. And, you know, I hope we'll be able to do things. To counteract that once the smart meters are. Allowing us to do font design creative. And then we're going to be able to do things. With the rate structures, but for a while, we need to stay off the public because we're getting a lot of, of, of complaints. So, you know, that's, that's my position on it. And I think that the way to go would be to. You know. Encourage the public to throw away less stuff. Reuse a lot more.  To reduce their waste diversion expenses. I know I'm on the cheapest. Plan that you can get that involves composting. And, and, and I. You know, my compost bin is only full twice a year. So. I don't know if, you know, out of out of local patriotism or something. But I don't have any trouble getting along with every two weeks, little carton for landfill. And it could be done, you know, so I think that, that. You know, communication is the best way and, and not doing anything that's going to cause rates to go up. But I think that's the best way to go. I think that's the best way to go. Like I said, that's, that's me. I think two other council members expressed the same sentiment, but, you know, sustainable resilient llama. Wants everybody to pay. For. You know, approaching zero waste much faster. So. If we did take a vote, I don't know where we would go with it. But I think all of those, I think would be really important for us to be able to say if we do want to increase those targets, What would it require in order for us to get there from, you know, what are the recommended policies and programs and what would the cost associated with that be, and then it will be a decision for council to decide, you know, what, what do we want to go with. Given the bigger picture that, that council member merchant council member. of rain impacts to the community. You couldn't call me council member, Marsha. Council member Marsha, I like that. I don't even count. Council member is a Christian. I just want to throw in, I have a family of four and we have been on every other week trash since we moved here and have never, ever had to go throw our trash in somebody else's bin. It's totally doable. Sorry, Kay. I was saying right now, right now I'm on the big trash again because I'm trying to clear out my house and purge, but then I'm going to go back to small later because we did that for three years without a problem. As far as the count post goes, I, the one thing about the opt-in is right now you have the buy-in of the people who are excited about the program, who are going to be diligent about what they're putting in there as a person.  So they've been going slowly in the bins of all the neighbors. But I was going to say that's the one thing to consider before you go, like the good part about the opt-in is you're getting the clean compost.  So, you know, it might be something where you have to find another small compost bin to handle smaller items or encourage things like more cardboard or something which may or may not be great because it's so dry. And that might, as far as compost goes, I'm thinking they might make things more difficult if they get overloaded of paper versus the foods and the green products. So there has to be a conscious effort when it comes to that actually implementing the compost. And that's kind of, I think a big part of, you know, yeah, we want people doing it, but when we do consider that, I guess consider how much separation has to occur at the facility and if that's going to be a burden to them and what kind of increase in fees they're going to have to be pulling out my husband's garbage bags that are landing in my compost. Really?  So, you know, there's plenty of times where I've seen the recycle go in that one and had to sit there and take it out. I mean, it's a rough one, you know? My kids would know because I, you know, but anyway, and he's getting better, but it's a learning process. And so that's just one thing is when you get to, you know, I'm supporting the opt-in program, I think it's great, it could be something where if you could offer people a one month trial or something of it, if you do do it in the fall when people are pruning, you know, something like that might attract people to being like, oh, this is actually easy, I can do a lot with this. You know, but some ideas, I think it's good as an opt-in program, I'd love to see more people doing it. I think the bins breed, but also I picture some of those multi-family homes where you drive by on like 17th Avenue and it's just a row of recycle, recycle trash, recycle trash, recycle trash. And it's like, it's hard enough to get the landlords to get into the recycling, let alone now tell them to add a third bin for everyone. And that's, that's, so that's one thing is I think we might have to look at smaller, smaller vessels for multi-family housing at least. Just some things to consider down the road. I love it, but, you know, it was all over my coat this morning when I ripped those bags over, open it. And I think one of my neighbors had two bags to go from his own yard and he kind of looked at me like, what are you doing? Well, thanks for all of those perspectives. Seriously, Kay, I love the perspectives that you bring to my comments. And I'm like, oh, well, that's a good way to look at it. I'm like, I was gonna say, I saw some of these family households where, you know, not, you know, we're multi-colored in this home as far as politically.  Other thoughts on the zero-waste presentation in general? It was great, though. It was great. Thank you, Lisa. Thanks. Yeah, I do want to make sure we have enough time, Adam's up next with the climate awareness, but, oh yeah, sorry, Robert, go ahead. Yeah, all I was gonna say is that I think encouraging as much participation as we can at the education level, at the school children level is the way to go to reach these objectives.  They make a difference, I believe. Yeah. It's a real good point. Okay, but before we get to Adam, so we have other business, but I don't think anybody has, but we do have something that you wanted to add, Lisa, from staff. Oh yeah, sorry about that. Just really quickly. So, I believe it was council member Waters and council member Marshall, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but thought that it would be good for board members to be more involved in the interview process when new board applicants come through. And so we are gonna be pursuing that process this year. And so board recruitment opened in March and the timeline that we have set out to still follow city council's timeline to make sure they can interview applicants and get people on in the appropriate timing. We would bring board interviews to you all in our May, in our May meeting. And we can put this on a different meeting to discuss the details, but I just wanted to put it on your radar. It doesn't need to be the whole board that participates in that. It could be a subcommittee. It could be the board chair and the staff liaison. You all can decide who you think should be responsible for doing that, doing those interviews, but then we'll send those recommendations that you all have on who you think are the top candidates for to fill new board positions to council and then they will still go through the appointment process. So council will still appoint those folks the attitude. Yeah, Marcia. Yeah, I would just say, I think the whole council is on board with having the boards filter so that we interview fewer applicants because it's kind of insulting, you guys are really heavy hitters in your area of interest and then you get a five minute interview.  So, it's really more like, we all want to reform this process. We just are not doing a very good job of agreeing on how to get it done. That's fair. So this is, I think as a trial year, we'll see how those things may change in the future, but I just wanted to let you all know so it didn't just come up out of the blue, especially because when those, the recruitment will open before your March meeting. So just, yeah. Perfect. Adam, you think you're up? Wait, Charles has a question. Oh, sorry. Yeah, just real quick, I wanted to apologize to the group and especially to Adam, I'm going to have to leave at five. It's Boulder County Community Advisory Committee and we're talking about the redesign of the airport 119 intersection. So I don't want to miss that. So these two boards unfortunately can flip. So sorry, Adam, I will be leaving shortly. Don't worry, Charles. Heather, do you want to queue up the slides now? Sure, give me one second. Sure. I'm so excited about this presentation. And while Adam does that, I'm going to, he's going to share his screen, but I'm going to keep an eye on folks. So I might butt in every once in a while to let Adam know if there is a question because he might not be able to see everyone. And I'm, so just... Yeah, actually, Heather, could you jump to the first slide? Wonderful. So thanks everyone for giving me an opportunity to present what's called an En-Roads Climate Workshop. These workshops typically last well over an hour. However, for our board meeting, we obviously don't have that time. So I'm going to commence it to about 30 minutes just to check how much time do we have available left? 37 minutes. Okay. Well, in the interest of time, I'll ask that we try to hold questions until the end unless you have any quick clarification ones. Next. For this workshop, we'll use an interactive tool called En-Roads, which was developed by Climate Interactive, a leading energy and climate think tank that grew out of the MIT Sloan Sustainability Initiative. Next. Here's today's agenda. I'll provide a very brief introduction to En-Roads explaining what it is and why we should care about it. And then we'll jump right into running En-Roads together, creating our own scenario in which we aim to limit warming well below two degrees Celsius. And at the end, we'll have a quick debrief in which we reflect as a group on our experience together. Next. So the introduction. What is En-Roads? Next, you can keep it on the next one. Thanks, Heather. En-Roads is a global climate policy simulator that enables users to explore their own scenarios up to the end of the century. I'll note that En-Roads is built using the best available science, and it's freely available online for anyone to use. What you're looking at here is a screenshot of the front panel of En-Roads as you would see it in your browser. I'll explain more about this later in the introduction. Next. But first, why should we care about En-Roads? In short, En-Roads is a very powerful tool that helps encourage people to take effective action by improving their understanding of climate change and what we can do about it. Here in Longmont, the city is taking multiple climate actions that impact many things like our energy mix, air quality, economy, and several areas depicted below. Where En-Roads comes in is that it helps ground our conversations about these actions in the best available science so that we can ensure our actions are equitable and high leverage. Next.  So far, there've been over 100,000 participants in 94 countries, and the participation continues to grow. So let's get going, let's run En-Roads. Next. Next. I would like to first get you oriented with En-Roads. When you first open up En-Roads, this is what you see, this is the front panel. And next. On the top left, you can see the energy sources that we use each year. On the bottom in brown and coal is coal, red is oil, blue is gas, green are the renewables, bioenergy and nuclear at the top. Next. And at the bottom, there are 18 sliders that enable you to apply various climate actions that impact things like our energy mix and land use. Next. And I'll point out that these three dots take you to a menu that allows you to apply some more advanced options and gain more information about the action. And we'll explore that when we interact with En-Roads. Next. And on the top left, you can see how our actions impact the global temperature increase by the end of the century. I wanna emphasize that what you're looking at is the baseline scenario in which we take minimal additional action. That is, we don't really alter these sliders. In this case, greenhouse gases continue to grow leading to a dramatic temperature rise by the end of the century. Next. So today's goal, we're going to create a scenario that aims to limit warming well below two degrees Celsius. So let's jump in. Actually, Heather, can you go to the next slide? And I'll ask everyone as we run En-Roads, I would like you to also think about the co-benefits of these climate actions as well as their equity considerations. And I'll highlight how En-Roads ties into both of these. So at this point, I will share my screen and pull up En-Roads. So at this point, you should see the En-Roads front panel. And what I'd like to do is have you think about some of the actions that we've talked about, like today, building electrification and think about how we can apply that in En-Roads. And I want you to make a guess about how that will impact temperature. This is important not to show that anyone is wrong or anything, but rather to strengthen our mental models of this complex energy, land, climate, economic system. So with that, I'll open it up and welcome anyone to propose an action to take. Let's reduce the coal. Wonderful. So what I can do is move the coal slider to the left and what that corresponds to is putting a bunch of taxes on coal, for example. And I'd like to know, what do you think that'll do to the final temperature? I hope that it will decrease the final temperature. Decrease the final temperature. I hope we can... What is the alternative if you decrease coal? You have to increase something else. That's a really good question. And we'll examine that as well. So, Kate, I just want to check quantitatively, what do you think will happen to the temperature? I think that the temperature is going to go down. By 0.1 degree. Oh, I don't know. Take a guess. It's okay not to put the spotlight on you. I'll say I was going to vote for 0.4 or a full degree even. Okay, so... I'm anti-coal. Okay, so we're anti-coal here. I'm going to assume that means we apply a very large tax. Get rid of coal. Yes, get rid of coal. So what we saw here is the temperature decrease and what we can do is click this button to replay the last change. Oh, neat. So there was a question. Something else is going to change. So can anyone guess what do you think is going to happen to the energy banks? Short-term increase in natural gas. Sure, any others? I mean, let's add some renewables here. Yeah, so I'll point you to these dropdown menus where you can go and take a look at, for example, the primary energy demand types. And let's look at coal. So coal's dropping, that's what we wanted. Now, let's look at natural gas. Ah, so we increased natural gas a little bit. We can call this effect like squeeze the bloom. We are reducing one thing like coal and then you're getting a lot more of something else, natural gas. And I'll ask, can you think of a co-benefit to reducing coal? Better air quality. Better air quality, exactly. So I'll point out in the advanced menu, you can click on these three dots and we're gonna go, it doesn't look like it's there. I'm gonna take you, sorry about that, to this plot, you can click on impacts and go to air pollution. So what you're looking at is a plot of particulate matter, it's decreasing as well. So this is an example of a co-benefit of cutting coal. Now, I'll go back to the natural gas demand. What is another consequence you can think of of having more natural gas? More fracking. More fracking, and what does more fracking lead to? Air pollution. Pardon? Earthquakes. Earthquakes, yeah. Air quality issues. Air quality, air quality. What else comes with fracking and natural gas infrastructure? Oil, water use. Water use, that's a good one. Unfortunately, I'm not aware of En-Road's capturing that one, but that's a good point to bring up. What about in terms of extra emissions? I think that most of that's actually captured, but. From the equipment, is that what you're saying? The extra emissions from doing the actual drilling? Yeah, and just thinking broadly about using more natural gas. What is a consequence of doing that? The normal CO2 emissions of combustion, but that's kind of the baseline for all the fossil fuels, right? That's right. I mean, I think coal has this as well, but what I'm trying to get you at is when using En-Road's, I encourage you to look at these plots and see what other kinds of impacts there could be. And I'll just guide you toward that. We looked at air pollution. What we can also do is look at greenhouse gas emissions. And what kind of gases do you think would be associated with more natural gas emissions? I don't know. Hi. Okay, I'm gonna say I'm very familiar with the process because I do work for the oil and gas industry and I've seen all their processes and they're tightening it up pretty good out there as far as what actually comes off on natural gas. Yeah, and that's why I wanna draw your attention. Oh, sorry. Yeah, I wanna say that on natural gas, it's pretty efficiently burning and they have very good methane recovery systems and they'll flare that off nowadays. It's changed quite a bit with the new air regulations on how natural gas is produced. So I would look and say there should probably not be a big dip or not a big increase in the emissions much more than the proportional. It shouldn't skyrocket. I'm curious as to what oil, where it says oil for an energy, is that like burning oil? Yeah, so I'll just address this here. That sounds kind of dirty. Yeah, so I'll just get some closure here and I'll point out that in addition to looking at greenhouse gas emissions, you can look at methane emissions and others, but in the interest of time, I'm just gonna plow forward. We now wanna take action on oil. Yeah. Just to move us along. I know this feels like we're going through it quickly, but in the interest of time, I wanna try to explore as many of these actions as we can and with oil, do you wanna get rid of that as well? In other words, tax it heavily. Yes. Go for it. Yeah, sure. What do you think that'll do to temperature? Again, goals to strengthen our mental models.  Sorry. I hope it does. Okay, so again, we're gonna take oil and move it far over. We're guessing something like a border, half a degree Celsius. So let's put that down. There we go. Oh, no. It's too much. Yeah. It is. And you can see here that the oil usage is just going down, but what else are you noticing? Play it again. Play it again. What's the, wow. Renewables are growing. Renewables are growing. And why do you think that is? It's still the same demand. Yeah. And what I wanna point you to, right now we're getting at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. If you wanna look at the main drivers of greenhouse gas emissions from the energy sector, you can look at what are called these kia graphs. And here they basically break down this problem into main drivers that are population, consumption, energy intensity of our economy and the carbon intensity. So when you multiply all these together, you get the total CO2 emissions from our energy. And what you can see here is that when we start cutting out these fossil fuels, we're cutting out the energy intensity of our energy sources. And what I'm gonna do is draw your attention to this little house. You can go back to the main screen and we'll just keep marching forward with action. Sorry that I keep cutting this off. Sorry, you just touched on the energy intensity. Can you give the quick description of what that would mean? Yeah, so this is how much CO2 we emit for a given unit of energy. And so as we start removing coal, oil and gas, we lower the energy intensity and thus reduce the overall emissions from the energy sector. And one way to see that is we can go to these plots. Here I'm gonna go to the primary energy demand types and we can look at renewable demand. You can see here the renewable demand is going up. And you can ask a few questions like why is that? Well, from a cost perspective, you can go down here and look at financial and go to the market price of electricity. Oh, sorry, the market cost of wind and solar. You can see here that it's starting to drop. Adam, this tool looks fantastic. I'll say I don't believe this part of it. I think that the adoption of renewables is gonna grow exponentially and not linearly. And you're already seeing that. So I think this is great, but I'm more optimistic than what this tool projects. Yeah, Charles, that's a really good point. And I'll point out that it also has historical data in there from the IEA. For example, about the marginal cost of solar electricity. And so you can take a look at that and how it dropped substantially since 1990 as well as there's another thing I'll point out.  We can look at the historical demands for wind and solar. And Charles, you also bring up another point that I wanna highlight about the simulator is that if there's something that you're concerned about with, say the assumptions in it, you can go to the simulation and go to assumptions and you can address various aspects of the model's assumptions. For example, when climate sensitivity or here we got renewable subsidies and some other aspects about the model. And just in the interest of time, I don't wanna dig into that, but I really appreciate that question because it shows that this model is just helping us explore what the actions have on the say various impacts like greenhouse gas emissions and temperature relative to a baseline. So you can get a sense of how they are high leverage or low leverage. It's not necessarily out there to make very accurate predictions. So there's this trade-off in modeling space here. It's meant to be fast and easy to use so that you can gain that intuition. Yeah, yeah, I definitely can see how you have to do that. Totally makes sense. It's just sometimes hard to estimate that the effects, especially with feedback loops and things like that of something that's fundamentally exponential. And so, yeah, this is great and a great start. And I'm just hoping that those exponentials continue the way we've been seeing them. I agree. I look forward to that. And I'll point you to documentation for this model. They do have a 400 plus page document where they outline the model. It's basically this systems dynamic model that takes into account feedback loops, various inputs and some of those assumptions that are showed you can actually change. But that's already getting into like the way advanced stuff. And I will underscore that I really appreciate those questions. Those are really good questions to ask about this. And maybe I'll just point out and emphasize I'm not encouraging folks to say, hey, the model says we need to do this, therefore we need to do it. The main goal here is just strengthen our mental models, play with this tool, explore some of these actions so you can distinguish what are high and low leverage actions and see what are useful complementary policies that could help out. So what I'm gonna do is get us back on track. I'm gonna reset the graphics and try to get us applying more actions so we can march toward our goal of getting well below two degrees Celsius. So- Sorry. I'm curious about deforestation. Deforestation, okay. So let's stop at the rate at which we're cutting down trees and again, this is a global model. So it's not just here in the United States but it's also assuming say in Brazil, for example, lowering the deforestation there. So I'm gonna max that out. What do you think it's gonna do to temperature? I think maybe another half a degree off. Half a degree. Okay, so I'm gonna max out the deforestation. Just a little bit. So if you wanna explore the why to that what we can do again, let's go to these plots. And again, I encourage you to use this as a tool to coax you into the state where you're asking questions like why didn't it have as big of an impact as I thought it would have? And you can poke around and say, let's look at CO2 emissions. And you can look at, sorry, let's see. So you can look at, let's see. Oh, sorry, it's under this one. CO2 emissions and removals. And so here you can look at the rate at which we emit CO2 into the atmosphere relative compared to the rate at which we remove it. And yeah. What if you increase the technological carbon recapture approach substantially? Yeah, that's a good one. You hear a lot about the news about direct air capture and mineralization and things like that. And so do you wanna be very optimistic about it and apply that action to max, okay. Charles is gonna invent something and save us all. Okay. I wish, I have a project on that and I'm very pessimistic. Okay. Well, yeah, let's, so what do you think it's gonna do to temperature? I think it'll be big if you can really be successful at it. Do you think it'll get it? Just throw a number out there. Let's go at 0.7 Celsius. 0.7. And what do you think it'll do to the red curve? That is the CO2, oh, sorry, the removals. Yeah, I'm assuming it's gonna get much, much closer. Yeah, so I'm gonna max this out. Okay. And there we go. Absolutely. So it had an impact. I'll show you an example what this advanced menu looks like. What you can do is look into some of the details here. So not just applying these random amounts, like here it says high growth. You can be quantitative about it and use detailed settings. Like for example, specify bioenergy with carbon capture and storage or how much direct air capture. And on the right, you can look at related graphs. Like here it's how much CO2 we remove per year. You can also say, well, okay, how much say material we need from mineralization if we use that for carbon capture and like how much land. So these graphs here again are not meant to be predictions, but they're forcing us to think a little bit more quantitatively about this problem. Think about the senses of scale involved. So I think we have roughly five minutes left. I'm gonna have a five minute debriefing session. So I'll keep us moving forward. What other actions would you like to apply? Let's crank up some of that electrification since we had that- Electrification. Let's hit that electrification and see what happens. Okay. I've got a dollar on 0.2%, or 0.2 degrees. If you max them both out. Electrify the transport sector that has increased the fraction of electric cars. Okay, and what about buildings that as well? Yeah, but what is that? What do you think it's gonna do to our energy mix? I think we're just gonna keep you some more natural gas. I think we gotta crank up nuclear at the same time. Okay, so- And renewables. We haven't cranked up renewables. Yeah, let's crank up some renewables and nucleos. Okay, let's do one at a time. I'm gonna max out electrification. What is it? Ooh. The buildings is a much bigger deal than transportation. So again, I'm gonna go back to this reset graphs just to get us back to where we were. We're at the home screen now. And I think someone brought up a demand for natural gas so we can answer that question. And it shows that there is a little bit of an increase in that demand. But at the same time we also saw we can go to renewables. And what we're seeing is a larger demand for renewables. And I think someone brought up nuclear. Do we wanna apply that actually just max it out? I'm curious. Sure, it's gonna be super expensive, but go for it. Okay. Is it gonna be a panacea? Is it gonna be our silver bullet that takes us to below two degrees Celsius? No. No, okay. No, I hope not. I hope we need some renewables in there. So I'm gonna slide up nuclear. I like how we're just going all extreme. Right? That is a good observation. Yeah, there's no balance. Now I'll point out these workshops do last a long time and we can dig in and be more quantitative about what it means to say tax coal at a very high amount. We can debate those numbers, but there is an advantage to going to the extremes like this because you can then get a little bit more of a sense of how these actions impact the temperature. You can see which ones are high leverage and low leverage and how they affect each other. So what did you notice when we added more nuclear? What happened to our mix? Nuclear. Renewables, right? Yeah, it's crowding out the energy market. So that's an example of some of the dynamics that you see in this. Again, it's not meant to predict exactly what's gonna happen, but give you some sense of the dynamics of this energy climate system. Really briefly, I do wanna cover on some other aspects of this advanced menu. You can click on the information and it sort of serves as a little cheat sheet where it gives you some examples of discouraging or encouraging nuclear or any other of these actions, a big message. Like here, the authors point out that it's not a huge driver of future temperature because it's competing with the growth of renewables. They highlight some key dynamics, some potential co-benefits, as well as equity considerations, like for example, how mining can pose some health risks. And they have this information for each one of these 18 options. And so I kind of view this as like a little cheat sheet, if you will, for understanding these actions. So if you ever want more information, you can click there. Anyway, so we are almost there. Adam, can I do one quick thing? And I lied that I'm sticking around just because it's so good. I really, I wanna go all Ronald Reagan and go for high energy efficient buildings. High energy efficient buildings. Yes. That's good. And after that, I wanna plant some trees, but only about 50%. But what about the renewables, y'all? We're gonna max out energy efficiency. Will that take us below two degrees? Yes. Yes, it's gonna be good. Okay, this is the moment. We are at two degrees. And let's go back and look at our chaiagraphs. Not only to reduce the carbon intensity of our energy, but reduce the energy intensity of our economy. Yeah, so again, this is just two thirds of our overall greenhouse gas emissions. The other third comes from land use and methane. So I will go back to our home screen and we are almost at time. So one last quick action. Renewables. Renewables, I keep hearing. I'm gonna, we're gonna. Plant the trees. Okay. Okay, so I'm gonna do renewables, plant the trees, and then we're gonna call it. Okay, so we're gonna max out the subsidies on renewables. Yeah, we saved the world. You saved the world? Well, we made an impact. And what do you think planting trees is gonna do? Is it gonna have a big impact? Sure. Sure. So let's see if this does it. Just a little bit. Well, I'll point out under planting trees, again, what we can do is look at the related graphs and you can look at how much carbon gets removed per year. And what are, what's one of the challenges with planting trees? Is it an instant effect? No. Yeah. Bamboo. Yeah. Trees take, some trees take a while to grow. And so that's another dynamic I like to highlight is that there are legs in the system. So, you know, we only got the tip of the iceberg here, like we saw the crowding out effect, we saw legs. And, you know, there's a lot you can explore with the system. And again, don't assume that it's meant to predict the future, but rather use it as a tool to help challenge your mental model and strengthen it. So I'm gonna switch back to the presentation. Thank you all for playing along with this. I'm just gonna go with a very brief, debriefing part of the mini workshop. And what I would like us to do is take one minute to silently reflect on your experience. And I want you to think about the possibility that we actually create this world and think about what you would love about being part of this future. So I'm gonna set a timer for just one minute. Okay. Thank you very much for that one moment of silence. Next, I have just one more slide and that's this discussion with the following three questions. What surprised you? What were some of your key insights? And how do you think these can be applied to the challenges facing long line? I think it surprised me how limited the effect was on pricing out coal with big taxes. Yeah.  Right. For me, an insight here is just that I'm not sure I'm well calibrated to what makes the biggest difference and to what's already on the status quo if we do nothing and what needs nudges to get there faster. Sure. That's a really good point. And on nudges, thinking about what are some helpful co-policies? Like, you know, if we have more electrification, we probably want more renewables, for example. And how do we encourage that? I never thought that the problem that we are facing would be an easy one to solve, but I feel like it's even harder than I realized. It is hard. Yeah. This is the removal. The removal of the carbon made the bigger difference is what I was seeing. And the removal and there's the energy efficiency of things needing less. And I was gonna say, I think that's part of the key too is replacing the sources and attacking it from emissions only standpoint versus building on efficiency and the electrification or somewhere you're trying to conserve the energy, meaning less demand. It's the less demand overall that's gonna have it. It's gonna make a difference, maybe, but. Yeah, maybe one way can summarize is there's no silver bullet. It's not like one of them, one action is gonna solve everything. No. Not that one. Yeah, I agree with that. And definitely depositing less carbon in the atmosphere makes a big difference. The thing I was, when I said I was pessimistic was just the very difficult fundamental challenges with direct air capture. Something that's only 400 parts per million, that taking a dilute substance and transporting it to some system that actually captures it and stores it without, that's a very difficult problem.  And for us, we maxed everything out like someone pointed out. And in the real world, we might not be able to max every one of these out. Heather, I will ask, there was one more slide and misspoke. You could share that again. Thank you, Adam. Heading out to my next meeting. Thanks for hanging on, Charles. Thanks, it was fantastic. And this is just a thank you slide. I wanna say it's not gonna be easy as we assessed. It's gonna be worth it. And I hope you found this mini workshop worth it. I encourage you to learn more by checking out climateinteractive.org. And with that, I just wanna thank you for your time and attention with this. Thank you. That was fantastic, Adam. That really, I really appreciate that you taken the time to lead us through that. Yeah, and as I pointed out, we could easily go on for a long time with this. Like these workshops last for well over an hour and they could easily go on for more than that. And so that website that you had there on that final slide would then tell us how we could participate in a bigger workshop? That's right. What you can do is find a local ambassador, which is what I am training to do now. Yes, yes. That is what I'm working on. And we do hold these workshops from time to time and there are loads of fun. They last a while and they're very interactive. Cool. Especially when it's in person. I look forward to when we can have an in-person one again. Oh, do I look forward to being in person again? Yes. No, thank you. That really well done, great job leading us through that. Sharon, I'd like to thank everyone for participating. I know it's not usual that we are this interactive in the presentations. That was fun. Okay. So with that, yes? I was gonna be like, how do I get on this so I can let my kids play with it? And I did find the link. That's what I'm doing over here, so. Right. That's all. Good deal. Are you willing to share those slides with us? Sure. I can email them to Heather in the form of PDF and they have additional material if you wanted to look at, say, how the model is tested against some of the other integrated assessment models and things like that. But honestly, your best bet also is to go online and check out the website. There's loads of information. We have a module series, a training series that's been on my to-do list and I haven't gotten around to it yet, but they have a good breakdown. I think, Adam, it's like six or seven modules or something, right? I think maybe they're one to two hours each. That seemed like a good manageable approach, although I will say I have not managed to do that yet. So. Adam, I'm just sorry, Heather. Sorry, I was just going to say I do have the PDF version of that, so I can send that out after the meeting today and I can include the link for the website too. That is the main reason I wanted the PDF so that I didn't write on that website before I went away. Yeah, I'll just add to Lisa's point. I did go through the training. It's fantastic. It's not just about the simulators, it's about encouraging effective climate action. Simulators just a means to that. Love it. And it's just a lot of fun. It's good to have fun and I think the simulator also encourages that. For sure. That was a lot of fun. Cool. I think we have reached the end of our agenda. We no longer have a council member here to provide us any items from council. There is information attached to your board packet. Please read it. And with that, the last item is to adjourn. Is there a motion to adjourn? All motion. Yeah, I move. And I'll second. All right, all in favor. Here we go. All right. Thank you, everybody. Thank you, Adam. Thank you, everyone. See you next month. Bye. Bye.