[bouldercouncilhotline] Hotline: Sam Weaver comments for May 12 Study Session

[cmosupport at bouldercolorado.gov]

Sender: Weaver, Sam


Fellow Council Members and staff:
 
Since I will miss the meeting tonight due to a work commitment, I would like to submit some feedback on the meeting subjects.  Thank you for considering them.
 
Energy Future:
 
1)     Staff has done an excellent job in working on advancing both the Utility of the Future concepts, as well as seeking outside grant funding to pursue projects that will inform our future energy choices.  Both the nano-grid and district
 scale projects are very innovative and interesting.  The collaboration with Minneapolis, Seattle, and San Francisco on our grid and thermal projects are extremely welcome.  I am very pleased to see the beginning work on de-carbonizing our heating systems in buildings as well.

2) The Blueprint for Energy Transition event for this summer on July 22 and 23 looks very exciting.  Kudos to all for convening this and including Boston, Minneapolis, San Francisco, and Portland.  It is good to see the sharing of best
 practices among our fellow cities.  I do hope that staff maximizes the public component of this event within the constraints of keeping the staff-level meetings between the cities effective.

3)  As far as the Top 10 potential policies to seek on energy subjects at the state level, I would add one. I would suggest that ultimately we need to separate the functions of generation from transmission from distribution in our state
 electricity system, similar to how Texas has configured its electricity system.  This would enable competition in the generation sector, as well as true consumer choice, and allow distributed power generation to compete in the generation market.  A true independent systems operator function could be implemented to manage dispatch and balancing functions for the grid.  While probably politically impossible, this important policy change would make the achievement of other policy goals much more probable.  I would also like to support the City backing efforts to create a state-wide carbon tax to fund carbon-free power generation and energy efficiency.

4)  I generally support the current state of the transition plan, and hope that Xcel/PSCo is responsive to Boulder’s RFP for providing electricity as any separation process proceeds.  Staff is again to be commended for the thorough work on the transition plan.
 
Commercial and Industrial Building Energy Efficiency ordinance:
 
1)   Again, staff has done a great job in running a solid outreach program to understand the implications of various policy options on building owners, occupants, and the community at large.

2)   The staff analysis is superb as far as detailing potential costs and benefits, and has done a good job of identifying potential issues associated with all of the options.

3)  I support beginning the process in 2016 for buildings over 50,000 sf in order to tune up the process and work through implementation issues.

4)  I support adding buildings over 20,000 sf after all 50,000 sf buildings have come into compliance with new requirements, and the process is well-established.

5)  I ask that staff be very flexible with initial implementation, especially for buildings dominated by plug and process loads.

6)  I also ask that staff be very flexible for buildings with many different uses (and potentially many different tenants) in a single building.  These will be the most complex situations to determine responsibility for energy use as well
 as potential payback times.

7)   I support the staff recommendation (Option 3A) for public disclosure of building energy use, taking care to separate building energy use from plug and process loads.

8)  I support the staff recommendation (Option 4C) for energy use assessments and limited actions.  I think Council should re-visit the types of efficiency measures required once the full program is operating smoothly with all buildings
over 20,000sf.

9)  I think this program will be the most successful to the extent that the City can help direct building owners and tenants toward resources which can reduce their implementation costs.
 
Resilience Planning:
 
1)  I support the current direction of work on resiliency.

2)  I would caution that the scope of the resilience subjects not incorporate absolutely everything that may be thought of as contributing to resilience.  For example, open, transparent engaging governance is highly desirable, and contributes to resilience, but the same argument could be made for that type of governance contributing to sustainability.  I would suggest that the resiliency work focus on programs and coordination efforts that currently have demonstrable gaps in City and regional partner capabilities.
 
Thanks to everyone for the great work!
 
All the best,
 
Sam Weaver
Member of Boulder City Council
weavers at bouldercolorado.gov
Phone: 303-416-6130