To Mitigate Climate Change, DC Must End Fossil Fuel Combustion

January 10, 2022

Testimony
of
Mark Rodeffer
Sierra Club Washington DC Chapter
DC Council Joint Public Hearing on
Climate Resilience Planning in the District and
B24-410, the Flood Resilience Amendment Act of 2021
January 10, 2022

Councilmembers Cheh, Allen, and McDuffie, thank you for holding this hearing today. My name is Mark Rodeffer and I am the vice chair of the Sierra Club DC Chapter. The Sierra Club is the nation’s oldest, largest and most influential environmental advocacy group. We have chapters in all 50 states. The DC chapter has about 3,000 dues-paying members.

The Sierra Club is pleased that three committees of the DC Council are holding today’s hearing on the important issue of preparing the District for climate change and mitigating the effects of climate change. The most effective way to mitigate the effects of climate change is to mitigate the causes of climate change, and the primary cause of climate change is greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels. According to the DC Department of Energy and Environment (DOEE), 94 percent of our greenhouse gas emissions are from burning fossil fuels in buildings and for transportation, with the remaining 6 percent coming from landfills, incineration, and wastewater.[1] To mitigate climate change and to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, we must eliminate greenhouse gas emissions from all these sources by 2050.

Electricity

Thanks to leadership of Councilmembers Cheh and McDuffie, in 2018 DC enacted the Clean Energy DC Omnibus Act, which requires DC’s electricity to come from a higher share of renewable sources each year, achieving 100 percent clean electricity by 2032. As DC moves to electricity from renewable sources, we must move our buildings and transportation away from fossil fuels and toward electricity.

Fracked Gas

About a quarter of DC’s greenhouse gas emissions come from fracked gas burned in buildings to provide heat, according to DOEE.[2] Because gas leaks are approximately double official estimates, emissions from the gas sector are likely higher.[3] The gas we burn in our homes is methane, and when released directly into the atmosphere, it is 84 to 87 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, the most common greenhouse gas.[4]

In addition to the climate threat from fracked gas, there is a public health threat. Gas appliances fill our homes with many of the same pollutants as car exhaust – carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and even formaldehyde.[5] Because of this, the air we breathe indoors – where we spend 90 percent of our time – is often more polluted than outdoor air.[6] Health impacts stemming from elevated nitrogen dioxide exposure include aggravated respiratory symptoms and higher susceptibility to lung infections,[7] a 42 percent increased risk of children developing asthma symptoms,[8] and IQ and learning deficits in children.[9] Researchers in Australia found that asthma rates in children living with gas stoves are comparable to those of children living with cigarette smokers. The researchers attributed 12 percent of all childhood asthma to pollution from gas stoves.[10]

The only way to deal with the climate and health threats of burning gas in buildings is to stop burning gas in buildings. This means providing space and water heating using highly efficient heat pumps. Despite this, AltaGas, the Canadian fracked gas company that owns DC’s local gas utility, wants to charge DC ratepayers up to $5 billion to replace its fossil fuel infrastructure.[11] Instead of doubling down on dirty energy infrastructure that pollutes our homes and will prevent DC from meeting our climate commitments, DC should invest in electrifying buildings, starting with the homes of low and moderate income residents, saving DC families and businesses billions in gas infrastructure costs. These investments should be coupled with energy efficiency and weatherization measures as well as efforts to address other indoor quality issues, such as those arising from mold and pests.

To ensure that DC’s clean energy transition and electric retrofits result in good-paying jobs for DC residents, the District needs to establish a robust workforce training program to equip workers for jobs installing heat pumps and retrofitting buildings to meet DC’s need to transition our buildings off fossil fuels.

Transportation Electrification

As we transition DC's energy sources off fossil fuels, the District should also prepare for a transition to electric vehicles (EVs). With transportation electrification already in full swing and more people buying EVs, DC needs to ensure that we have the infrastructure required to meet demand. This will require the Council to work with and put pressure on agencies like DDOT and DOEE so DC can be a national leader in transportation electrification.

DOEE is working on the District’s Transportation Electrification Roadmap to meet the targets of the Clean Energy DC Omnibus Act. Public release of the roadmap is expected in April. Interagency communication will be key in its development and implementation. Additionally, Pepco's recent five-year Climate Action Plan (Formal Case No. 1167) includes promising programs for electrifying transportation, including make-ready charging infrastructure, rebate incentives to support installation of fast-charging stations in high traffic areas, smart rate design, fleet assessments for electrification, and innovation funding for emerging electrification projects.

The rules concerning EVs and their charging stations (EVCSs) should promote the use of clean energy by fostering a robust market that is profitable for suppliers and affordable and easily understood by consumers. A proactive approach to this issue is necessary because of the long-term planning involved, as is leadership from the DC Council.     

Grid Modernization

Pepco spends millions of ratepayer dollars annually to maintain a reliable electricity distribution grid in the District. For a hundred years, business as usual meant new incremental capacity to supply power to meet new demand. But modern demands on the grid now include electrification of buildings and transportation, at the same time as we work to decarbonize our power sources and make the greatest use possible of clean energy. DC’s Public Service Commission is struggling to regulate the utilities to this new reality. This is why the Sierra Club has called for the Mayor’s nominees to the Commission to have experience and knowledge in this area.

In Formal Case FC1130, now known as PowerPath DC, the Commission has spawned numerous workgroups to understand and develop strategies for grid modernization. Formal Case 1167 requires that the utilities present plans for meeting DC’s climate commitments. Next steps for grid modernization require a sizable investment in bi-directional power management, interconnection of clean power sources, and greatly improved ability to manage power demand. The Council needs to expand its capacity to oversee this process to ensure effective management of the clean energy transition. Additionally, there may be a need for the Council to direct certain actions, such as adoption of dynamic pricing for rates so that the price of power at different times during the day and night reflect the cost to generate it.

The Sierra Club’s involvement with Commission's workgroups has made one thing very clear: the profit motive of the utilities is not a driver for their transition to clean energy, and the legislative actions of the Council have been essential to what progress is being made.

Mode Shift

In addition to transitioning cars and buses to electricity, mitigating the causes of climate change will require DC to reduce its reliance on automobiles and encourage transportation via mass transit, biking and walking. To incentivize people to shift their mode of transportation from automobiles, DC must ensure that more Circulator buses arrive on time, increase the percentage of sidewalk blocks completed in the sidewalk plan, and build more bike lanes. To meet the goals in both Move DC and Sustainable DC of 50 percent of commutes by transit and 25 percent of commutes by walking or cycling, significant investments in transit, pedestrian, and bicycle infrastructure are needed.

Waste

Plastic and food waste are often overlooked as contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. Globally, food waste accounts for 8 percent of those emissions.[12] The U.S. plastics industry is responsible for at least 232 million tons of carbon emissions per year, according to a new report. That report, The New Coal: Plastics and Climate Change, forecasts that the U.S. plastics industry will overtake greenhouse gas emissions from coal by 2030.[13] Recycling cannot keep pace with plastic production. Reducing single-use plastic waste and food waste are critical to ensuring the District achieves carbon neutrality.

The Zero Waste Omnibus Act of 2020 lays a good foundation for these efforts, but it will require funding and enforcement to ensure composting and food recovery become a widespread reality across the District as does reducing waste generated by plastic utensils and condiment packets in takeout orders by only providing them upon request of the customer.

But these measures are not enough. DC should join other jurisdictions like California, which offers curbside compost pickup, and Vermont, which mandates residential composting. Similarly, there are many additional steps we can take to reduce the use of single-use plastics. This includes adopting a plastic bag ban, reducing the use of plastic beverage containers through a deposit program that also fosters refillable beverage containers (as recently adopted in California), and by deploying refillable water bottle stations in schools, universities, offices, libraries, hospitals, and other institutions. Efforts to reduce single-use plastic must be founded in reusable food service ware and packaging. Once restaurants recover from the Covid-19 pandemic, we need to require reusable food ware for on-site dining and takeout. By adopting such measures, the District would join a growing number of jurisdictions sending a clear message that reducing our use of these products not only reduces waste, but is also a vital component of our greenhouse gas reduction strategy.

Heat Waves

Though our testimony focuses primarily on mitigation by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, we want to highlight the urgent need to mitigate the impacts of heat waves. Extreme heat kills more people in the United States than any other kind of extreme weather,[14] and climate change is driving up the frequency, length, and severity of heat waves.[15] According to a 2017 study: “Deaths in excess of 70,000 people during the 2003 European heat wave, 10,000 people during the 2010 Russian heat wave, and high death tolls from numerous other heat waves are staggering demonstrations that extreme climatic conditions are already exceeding human thermoregulatory capacity.”[16] Heat deaths are not distributed equitably. In the United States, older people of color are twice as likely to die in heat waves than older white people.[17] In addition, those who work outdoors, such as construction, landscaping, and utility workers, are also especially vulnerable to extreme heat

The District should move swiftly to mitigate extreme heat through a variety of measures, including expansion and improved maintenance of urban trees and green spaces. Tree planting should focus heavily on neighborhoods with less tree coverage, especially lower-income areas where residents are less likely to have air conditioning or to be able to pay to run air conditioning during heat waves. The District should encourage “green roofs,” which are planted with vegetation, as well as modern roofing materials that reflect heat rather than absorbing it. Likewise, street, alley, and sidewalk surfaces should use materials that reduce heat absorption (and are permeable to allow rainwater to soak into the ground). Water features such as fountains can help cool the city. Parking lots should be covered with canopies holding solar panels, adding clean energy to the grid as well as providing shade.

Flood Legislation

The mayor’s Flood Resilience Amendment Act of 2021 (B24-0410) authorizes the Department of Energy and Environment to identify flood hazard locations and require flood insurance for new or substantially improved buildings in those locations. This bill takes a first step to prepare for climate-related flooding, but it raises a number of questions. Will the flood hazard areas include not only areas near the rivers that are vulnerable to storm surge and sea level rise, but also areas vulnerable to flooding from extreme rainfall? Are there areas where the flood risk is high enough that no new buildings should be constructed? To what extent can we protect existing infrastructure in flood hazard zones, through natural protections such as permeable pavements and other green infrastructure, restored wetlands, or artificial barriers? When infrastructure in flood hazard areas cannot be protected, how will we manage relocation of those residents and businesses?

Conclusion

Thank you again, Councilmembers Cheh, Allen and McDuffie, for holding this hearing. DC must prepare for climate change and mitigate its effects and its causes to protect the District’s residents – especially our most vulnerable residents – from the worst effects of climate change.