Loading...
2020-01-10 Environmental Committee AgendaAGENDA CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MEETING LOCATION: CITY HALL — WEST CONFERENCE ROOM 350 Main Street, EI Segundo The Environmental Committee, with certain statutory exceptions, can only take action upon properly posted and listed agenda items. The public can only comment on City -related business that is within the jurisdiction of the Environmental Committee and/or items listed on the Agenda during the Public Communications portion of the Meeting. Additionally, the Public can comment on any Public Hearing item on the Agenda during the Public Hearing portion of such item. The time limit for comments is five (5) minutes per person. Before speaking to the Environmental Committee, please state: Your name and residence and the organization you represent, if desired. Please respect the time limits. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact Jasmine Allen, Senior Management Analyst, 310-524-2365. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. REGULAR MEETING OF THE EL SEGUNDO ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE FRIDAY, JANUARY 10, 2020-12:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS— (Related to City Business Only and for which the Committee is responsible — 5 minute limit per person, 30 minute limit total) While all comments are welcome, the Brown Act does not allow the Environmental Committee to take action on any item not on the agenda. Environmental Committee members may respond to comments after Public Communications is closed. 4. NEW BUSINESS: None 5. REPORTS: PUBLIC WORKS— this portion of the agenda is for City staff to provide brief reports to the Committee. These are "receive and file," non -action items only. Any actions needed to be taken must be included on an upcoming agenda. a. Kelly Watson from the Transportation Sub -Committee to recruit a member from the Environmental Committee in order to assess current transportation programs that the City offers and also consider alternative transit opportunities for the future. b. Public Works to update the Committee regarding a new ordinance to require an "upon request" policy for plastic straws, stirrers and utensils — that was presented to Council on Dec. 17, 2019 Council Meetings. Second reading scheduled for January 21, 2020. c. Public Works to update the Committee on Commercial and Multi -Family Solid Waste Collections Permit Program: Staff is currently reviewing hauler applications and conducting inspections. httr)s://www.elsegundo.org/der)ts/works/ d. Public Works to discuss if Environmental Committee's participation in South Bay ECOFair would be advisable. 6. ACTION ITEMS: None 7. REPORTS: ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS — this portion of the agenda is for members to discuss various ideas and for subcommittees established by the Committee to provide brief reports on the work being done by the subcommittee. These are "receive and file," non -action items only. Any actions needed to be taken must be included on an upcoming agenda. a. Work Plan: Committee members to update on their progress and discuss strategy for top committee goals: 1. Solid Waste Reduction/Elimination of Single -Use Plastics (Tracey Miller- Zarneke): committee to discuss creation of educational packet in support of new ordinance and continued progress 2. Green Business Recognition Program (Corrie Zupo): provide update regarding the discussion with Chamber of Commerce and next steps. 3. Water Conservation (Rachel McPherson) 4. Green Construction Standards (Kristin Faivre/Sarah Brockhaus) 5. Kevin Maggay to present his research and recommendations on Community Choice Aggregation (document attached). b. Desalination Project: committee to discuss gathering of facts as organized and presented through the "social/economic/environmental impacts on ES" perspective (document attached). C. Corrie Zupo will recap on the recent public meeting on the updated Flare Event Notification and Rule 1180 (fenceline air monitoring). d. Corrie Zupo will recap on SBCCOG/El Seg Partnership Long Term/Short Term Goals. 8. CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of November 11, 2019 Committee Meeting Minutes. Recommendation: Approval. 9. ADJOURNMENT DRAFT: DESAL: PROS and CONS for El Segundo as viewed from the perspective of the Environmental Committee SUCIAL 0 ENVIRONMENT ECONOMIC SOCIAL CONCERNS PROS: There is a sense of security knowing clean water resource is locally based. Plant provides an additional source of water, particularly in an unforeseen, extended drought. Unpredictable climate patterns may become more intense and unpredictable because of climate change that will cause further strains on water supply. It is a piece of new technology in City to flaunt in "where big things happen" marketing. CONS: There is no guarantee plant will remain online during disaster, thus security of alternative water source is at risk as is any other plant operation. High disruption of residential/traffic/recreation quality during construction of plant and outbound piping Unknown detriment to ocean/beach experience Locally based plant does not have pipes for DPR distribution in place, may not deliver directly to E1 Segundo ECONOMIC CONCERNS PROS: New jobs in City CONS: High price for water and plant construction will land on stakeholders (residents, businesses and municipality); ES residents already accepted new school bond and residential trash fees in recent history, ES businesses accepted new school bond fees; they will have no say in this potential rate adjustment. (The cost of water produced by seawater desalination is four to eight times higher than alternative sources of water, ranging from $1,900 to over$3,000/AF. Source: httns:llwww.nrdc.or_a/sites_/de_fault/_files/cali_fornia- drouah t-desalination-2-ib.nd() The plant will be a new industrial blight on coastline, detrimental to tourism and housing. The plant brings no income to City (except maybe jackpot for art fee, or is it exempt?) Only a "high concept plan" was shared on what building pipes from the plant to customers receiving the DPR water would entail, which means there is no sense of City expense and complications due to construction impacts via Public Works as well as cost on end-user bills. Measure W will cover additional water conservation and storm water capture efforts that serve El Segundo, reducing justification and need for investment in another new process and facility; ES Residents already committed to paying part of this $300m through passage of Measure W (is this right?) More expensive and impactful than WRD project (lower cost/impact with brackish desal) which itself will erase the need to import water to restore groundwater that serves E1 Segundo, reducing justification and need for investment in another new process and facility. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS PROS: CONS: Construction and operation of the plant is a new industrial blight on a coastline that is already highly impacted by such industry. Pipes in place at site are not operational as suggested and will require more oceanfront construction than presented. Increased noise/air pollution during construction and operation will affect all human and wildlife in the area. There is unknown detriment to ocean life due to pollution and noise, and there is no guarantee of mitigation if deemed "too expensive." Numerous construction and operational impacts were listed as "less than significant with mitigation," but there is also mention that if mitigation is decided to be not feasible or affordable, then it may not be undertaken. Thus, such unmitigated impact could no longer be considered "less than significant," therefore allowing significant impact upon the environment from a number of construction and operation factors. It is unknown at what threshold of expense or construction complication the "less - disturbing -to -sea life" subsurface intake would not be utilized and would be considered "infeasible." This above -clay, below -sludge intake approach is much less risky for the smallest organisms in the ocean environment, and this seems like an important area of mitigation to not "cheap out" on. Seawater desalination is the most energy intensive (and therefore GHG impactful) source of water. The proposed project's energy use is presented only in comparison to imported water, rather than comparing the energy use of seawater desalination to the even less energy intensive options. Seawater Desalination Imported Water (State Water Project/So. CA) Imported Water (Colorado RiverAqueduct/So. CA) Recycled Water (Membrane Treatment) Brackish Water Desalination Imparted Water (Northern California) . Recycled Water (Tertiary Treatment) Local Groundwater Local Surface Water . 4,000 8,000 12,000 16,000 Energy Intensity {kWh per million gallons] 20,000 Comparison of the Energy Intensity of California Water Supplies: preeminent analysis conducted by the Pacific Institute, comparing the energy and GHG emissions of seawater desalination to other water supply options. High carbon footprint will be wrought due to construction efforts and long-term energy required during operations, which means a large emission of green house gases; mitigation of any carbon emission is limited to cost effective options which means that there are not any real guarantees that carbon emissions will be mitigated. Impacts of the Project's brine discharge are not fully understood, because the multiport diffuser "design is not yet finalized." More effusion into bay due to brine disposal could affect both ocean life survival and human interaction with beach and surf due to high salt and unknown amounts of toxic treatment chemicals. (Dr. Qadir of United Nations University authored a recent study showing that brine volumes are greater than most industry estimates — on average, a gallon and a half for every gallon of fresh water produced- NY Times, 10/23/19). Only a "high concept plan" has been shared on what building pipes from the plant to customers receiving the DPR water would entail, which means there is no sense of environmental impact for construction and operation of such at this point. QUESTIONS: Is it possible that a combination of efforts to increase conservation, increase production and use of recycled water, and incorporate storm water capture, treatment and reuse would achieve the project goals without all the expense and environmental impacts? Why not maximize capacity of Recycling Plant? DRAFT MEMORANDUM To: XXXXXX From: XXXXX RE: RESEARCH AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION Background Community Choce Aggregators (CCAs) are orgainizations that purchase electricty on behalf of of customers. This is a different electricty model where utilities, either independently or municipally owned, purchase and deliver the electricity to customers. CCAs have ben becoming more popular as 58 counties and 482 cities have joined CCAs. The Environmental Committee researched some of the key considerations for joining a CCA through intenet searches and discussions with the following: Ted Bardacke, Executive Director, Clean Power Alliance Clay Sandich, City of Long beach Consultant Lead Reseraching Potenital CCA Melissa Brandt, Senior Director of Public Policy and Deputy General Counsel, East Bay Community Energy Dierdre Saunders, Director of Public Policy, East Bay Community Energy Below are findings of key considerations, followed by discussion and recommenations. Joining a CCA Municipalities are eligible to join CCAs. Per the requirements approved by the California Public Utilities Commission, a ballot vote is not required to join. The standard approval process for each municipality would suffice. In the case of EI Segundo, a motion and vote by the City Council would allow the City to join. When a City joins, all residents and businesses that curretly have standard utility service through the local electricty provider, Southern California Edison (Edison), would be moved to the CCA. The CCA would then become the default provider of electricity. Any new connections would also default to the CCA. Individual Opt -outs Individual customers would have the ability to opt -out of the CCA and go back to Edison. All that would be required is a complete opt -out form. There are no financial or service penalties for indivuduals to opt -out. This woud apply to both residents and businesses. City Opt -out A city also has the option to opt -out and return to the local utility, however there are financial consequences that are involved. CCAs purchase power through long term contracts based on the forecasted need for electricity for each of the municipalities it serves. A city opting -out would be responsible for the unused electricty already purchased by the CCA. For example: • A city joins a CCA • The CCA entered into a ten year purchase agreement with an electicty prodiver • The city wants to leave the CCA after year five Under this scenario, the city would be required to pay for the years six through ten of electricity to the CCA to opt -out. Environental Considerations CCAs offer to purchase electricity of varying carbon intensities and percentages of renewable energy. This is one of the primary draws of CCAs as individual cities can select the source of electricity that can meet or beat the current renewable percentages from the grid. In 2018, 34% of California's electricity came from renewable sources. There are also aggressive mandates to increase that percentage to 50% by 2030 and to 100% by 2045. By 2045, there would be no environmental benefits from a CCA but prior to that there can be environemntal benefits if a city selects electrity with a higher renewable percentage that what is currently provided by the utility provider. In 2018, Edison's electricty came from 46% renewale sources, well above the grid and very close to meeting the 2030 mandate. Cost Interviewees were not able to give exact costs, however responses varied. To purchase electricity cleaner than what is currently provided, the Clean Power Alliance stated that it would be "slightly more", while the Bay Area CCA sees an approximately 1.5% discount from its utility, Pacific Gas and Electric. Reliability and Service Many individuals, businesses, and municipalities often look into CCAs for the potential increase in reliability and service. Rolling black outs and now power shut downs due to fire risk has caused a lot of frustration in customers and they see CCAs as a way to cutting ties with utilities. However, electricity will still be delivered via utility transmission and distribution lines/infrastructure. Moving to a CCA would have no impact or improvement on reliability and service. Impacts to Business EI Segundo has approximately 17,000 residents, however the daytime population balloons to over 100,000 people because of the businesses located in town. Although there is no publicly available data, it is safe to assume that businesses account for a vast majority of the electricity use in the city. Large entities, such as Chevron, have the ability to negotiate electricity prices directly with the utility to secure the best rates. In many cases, other entities can piggyback on these negotiations and be included in the lower rates. In discussions with some of these entities, it is likely that they would opt -out and stay with the current provider. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TBD CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE *} MEETING MINUTES U S Friday, November 1, 2019, 12:00 p.m. City Hall, West Conference Room, 350 Main Street, EI Segundo, CA 90245 1. CALL TO ORDER Tracey Miller-Zarneke called to order the monthly meeting of the Environmental Committee (EC) at 12:04pm, on Friday, November 1, 2019 in the City of EI Segundo, City Hall West Conference Room, 350 Main Street, EI Segundo, California, 90245. 2. ROLL CALL The following Committee Members were present: • Tracey Miller-Zarneke, Resident, Local Business, Committee Chair • Kristin Faivre, EI Segundo School District, Member • Sarah Brockhaus, Resident, Member • Rachel McPherson, Resident, Member • Corrie Zupo, Resident, Committee Vice -Chair • Kevin Maggay, Local Business, Member • Caroline Hawks, Resident, Member (on the phone) The following City staff member(s) / Council member(s) were present: • Jasmine Allen, City of EI Segundo, Senior Management Analyst • Drew Boyles, City of EI Segundo, Mayor 3. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION Four people were present from public, including a representatives from Heal the Bay and South Bay Eco Festival. 4. NEW BUSINESS None 5. REPORTS: CITY STAFF a. Meredith Petit, Rec & Park Director provided update and answered questions regarding s tree health scorecard, database of approved city trees, and information on city tree maintenance. CITY OF EL SEGUNDO ate, ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE - MEETING MINUTES b. Jasmine Allen recapped well received Compost Workshop that was hosted by LA County Smart Gardening, on October 26th. c. Jasmine Allen updated the Committee on Commercial and Multi -Family Solid Waste Collections Permit Program: https://www.elsegundo.org/depts/works/ BUSINESSES AND MULTI -FAMILY PROPERTIES - effective February 1, 2020, no owner or occupant of a commercial or multi -family premises shall employ another, other than the holder of a permit issued by the City of EI Segundo, to collect solid waste, organics or recvclables generated on the premises. Please check with your solid waste ("trash") collections hauler to ensure they intend to obtain a Commercial/Multi-Family Solid Waste Collections permit with the City and continue to service your property/business! EISegundomandatorvbusinessandmultifamilvorganicsrecvcling.pdf 6. ACTION ITEMS: The Committee voted unanimously to request Council for approval to conduct a survey regarding Single - Use Plastics not to exceed $15K. 7. REPORTS: ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS - Solid Waste Reduction/Elimination of Single -Use Plastics: The Committee discussed the options and the next steps. - Green Business Recognition Program (Corrie Zupo) — Corrie followed up with Chamber. - Water Conservation (Rachel McPherson) - no update - Green Construction Standards (Kristin Faivre/Sarah Brockhaus) — Sarah will send Jasmine list of questions for Building and Planning Dept. - Clean Power Alliance (Kevin Maggay) — Kevin discussed in detail the pros and cons. - Desalination Plant Progress: Tracey discussed the latest developments regarding WBMWD project (httr)s://westbasindesal.com/final-eir.html ) and created a sub -committee. - South Bay ECOFair: Tracey discussed opportunity from Vistamar School for participation in Earth Week event. 8. CONSENT AGENDA: Approved Minutes from October 4, 2019. 9. ADJOURNMENT Tracey Miller-Zarneke adjourned the meeting at 1:24pm. The next regular meeting is scheduled for Friday, January 10, 2020 at 12:00pm at City Hall - West Conference Room.