metcouncil-cprg-ghg.bib

@report{acogPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan Oklahoma City Metropolitan Statistical Area}}},
  shorttitle = {{{OK City PCAP}}},
  author = {{ACOG}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--59},
  institution = {Association of Central Oklahoma Governments},
  location = {Oklahoma City, OK},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/5d-02f47301-0-acog-association-of-central-oklahoma-governments-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {THE CLIMATE IS CHANGING The not so distant past provides an example of environmental disaster that led to extreme societal and economic hardship. The combination of extreme weather and man-made technological advances and practices produced The Dust Bowl, a devastating scourge for countless communities across the Southern Plains. But as adaptokc states, “a proportionate response came as across the country people were enlisted in a peacetime war against environmental degradation, mounting hundreds of public works projects including drainage, erosion control, fire, disaster response, development and construction of infrastructure from rural fire roads to urban parks, and a “shelter belt” of nearly 220 million trees planted to reduce the landscape-scouring winds.” Today, the climate is changing at an increasing rate and is putting communities at risk from climate hazards that impact the land, water, and quality of life for the region. Central Oklahoma communities are seeing extreme weather and heat, ice storms, flooding and drought, water quality and quantity concerns, and wildfires. Warming temperatures are worsening air pollution by elevating near-surface ozone levels.1 The Oklahoma City Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) is rapidly growing, and that growth is contributing to increases in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, resulting in accelerated climate change. Climate action for the region will rely on comprehensive planning and implementation strategies for mitigation (emissions reductions) and adaptation actions (strategies to reduce the impacts). The impact of these actions extends beyond an individual project and direct impacts to GHGs. Climate hazards are exacerbated by climate change and disproportionately impact low-income and minority communities in how the hazard effects communities and how the hazard is mitigated. Often, housing in these communities lacks adequate weatherization and shade from tree canopies, and residents are subject to increases in flood vulnerability.2 Investments in planning and implementation create new workforce development opportunities and position the region to continue to support a green economy. Authorized under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) Program provides \$5 billion in federal funding to states, metropolitan statistical areas, and tribal nations to develop climate action plans that reduce GHG emissions. GHG emissions reductions are an important step to reducing the rate of climate change and the harmful effects.}
}

@report{ademPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority Climate Action Plan},
  shorttitle = {Alabama {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{ADEM}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--234},
  institution = {Alabama Department of Environmental Management},
  location = {Montgomery, AL},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/alabama-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) has partnered with members of our stakeholder group (Appendix A) and potential implementation grant applicants to produce this priority climate action plan (PCAP) to support investment in policies, practices, and technologies that reduce pollutant emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all Alabamians. This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under assistance agreement 02D51623 to the Alabama Department of Environmental Management. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document. The measures contained herein should be construed as broadly available to any entity in the state eligible for receiving funding under the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Implementation Grants and other funding streams, as applicable. This PCAP is organized into six sections: 1. Introduction 2. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventory 3. Priority Measures 4. Low-Income/Disadvantaged Community Benefits Analysis 5. Review of Authority to Implement 6. Conclusion}
}

@report{alexanderHennepinCountyGreenhouse2020,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Hennepin {{County}}    {{Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory}} and {{Analysis}} 2006-2020},
  author = {Alexander, Becky},
  date = {2020-06},
  pages = {1--12},
  institution = {Hennepin County},
  location = {Minneapolis, MN},
  url = {https://www.hennepin.us/climate-action/-/media/climate-action/hennepin-county-ghg-emissions-inventory-2006-2020.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {In 2007 the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners adopted the Cool Counties Initiative, pledging to inventory the county’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, commit to reduction goals, and take climate action. To support this, the county developed an inventory of GHG emissions from county residents, businesses, and organizations for the years 2006 through 2012. In 2020, this inventory was updated to include additional years and was used to inform Hennepin County’s Climate Action Plan (May 2021) and revised GHG reduction goals. Since then, 2020 data has also been collected. This report provides a high-level overview of GHG emissions trends since 2006, including an analysis of the key drivers of change across this time period.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{amlStateAlaskaPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {State of {{Alaska Priority Sustainable Energy Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Alaska {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{AML}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--111},
  institution = {Alaska Municipal League},
  location = {Juneau, AK},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/ak-priority-sustainable-energy-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {Purpose and Scope The State of Alaska has produced its Priority Sustainable Energy Action Plan (PSEAP) in accordance with the guidance of the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program, and which satisfies the requirements of a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). The State’s purpose in producing this plan is to enable participation by State agencies and political subdivisions in submitting applications to the EPA’s CPRG Implementation Grant program. The scope for the PSEAP is focused on mitigation measures that are consistent with guidelines of the CPRG implementation NOFO, to ensure as broad an opportunity as possible to deliver benefits to Alaska communities. The State recognizes that a more substantial undertaking is ahead, in producing the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) over the coming year, and that this effort will require more detailed analysis and thorough review of opportunities climate pollution reduction. Ultimately, the State of Alaska has placed an emphasis on including in this initial round of planning mitigation measures that are readily available for implementation and which capacity of eligible entities is identified and ready to submit for the grant program. This effort has the most potential to result in real, tangible improvements for Alaska communities in the shortest amount of time possible. Plan Overview The PSEAP is organized into chapters that align with CPRG PCAP guidance. It includes external sources of information, including and especially as it relates to Alaska’s Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventory. The PSEAP also includes a Low Income / Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) analysis as a standalone worksheet that evaluates equity and environmental justice by census tract, and using available tools provided by the EPA. This initial planning effort included literature review, data analysis, and active stakeholder engagement. This plan includes chapters required by EPA, as well as initial versions of optional chapters that help to describe the context experienced by Alaska communities. These are summarized below. Responsible Agency The Governor designated the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to lead the CPRG planning effort, and the DEC Division of Air Quality has been responsible for the development of the PSEAP. DEC contracted with the Alaska Municipal League (AML) as the sub-awardee to conduct the greenhouse gas emissions inventory (produced by Constellation Energy), collaborate with Tribal governments conducting their parallel planning efforts, facilitate stakeholder engagement, and produce the PSEAP and CSEAP. State-specific Considerations for Plan DEC has adopted by reference any mitigation measure contained within: •	 Alaska DOT\&PF’s Carbon Reduction Strategy, which includes multiple lines of effort that support transportation-related emission reduction strategies. •	 Municipal Climate Action Plans, including those of Juneau, Anchorage, Homer; and where relevant findings from Sitka and Fairbanks’ CAP development processes. DEC recognizes the opportunity to collaborate with Tribal governments through this process and its comprehensive planning will advance ways in which complementary, non-duplicative efforts can achieve mutually beneficial goals. Tribal mitigation measures that also advance the State’s goals of affordability and energy security will be prioritized, and the potential for multi-jurisdictional implementation will be leveraged to the greatest extent possible.  STATE OF ALASKA PRIORITY SUSTAINABLE ENERGY ACTION PLAN 6 Review of Existing Local Climate Action Plans (CAPs) Since Homer completed the state’s first CAP in 20071 , five other Alaska communities have worked to produce CAPs and their associated emissions inventories. As a planning document, a local CAP must be developed by the local or tribal government, reviewed by the public in a stakeholder engagement process, and finally adopted by the entity’s governing body. Only three Alaska communities have completed this process, with three others in progress. Most communities who engaged in a CAP process produced some version of an emissions inventory. Both Anchorage and Homer used the ICLEI ClearPath Tool following ICLEI U.S. Community Protocol standards. Anchorage modeled their Emissions Inventory after the Ann Arbor 2019 Community-Wide Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report. Emissions inventory documentation often focuses primarily on a municipal scope rather than a community scope, such as in Homer and Sitka. Likely because of the relatively labor-intense process behind developing an emissions inventory, additional inventories have been challenging. Juneau, which has inventories for 2007, 2010, and 2021, is the only community with more than two years of inventories on record. Beyond the plans discussed above, relevant planning efforts in Alaska have largely focused on either 1) affordable, sustainable solutions for rural microgrids or 2) adaptation efforts to respond to the impacts of greenhouse gases. All Alaska municipalities with planning commissions are required to submit comprehensive plans under Alaska statute as a “compilation of policy statements, goals, standards, and maps for guiding the physical, social, and economic development, both private and public, of a community… [including] statements of policies, goals, and standards; a land use plan; a community facilities plan; a transportation plan; and recommendations for implementation of the comprehensive plan.”2  As the primary document guiding the actions of municipal officials, comprehensive plans have many implications for emissions reduction efforts. A review of borough-level comprehensive plans found many recommended actions with emissions reduction potential. The projects in Juneau’s 2011 Climate Action Plan were adapted into the Sustainability section of the 2013 Comprehensive Plan, which now serves as the foundation for more relevant planning efforts such as the 2018 Juneau Renewable Energy Strategy. Comprehensive plans provide the authority for municipal officials to pursue emissions reduction projects. For example, the Kodiak Island Borough Plan3  put alternative energy solutions for rural communities in the borough as high priority actions. In the Energy chapter of the North Slope Borough’s Comprehensive Plan4 , energy efficiency technologies like weatherization, waste heat recovery, and innovative housing technology are included. The Northwest Arctic Borough Comprehensive Plan5  establishes the goal to “invest in renewable energy, promote energy efficiency, and reduce reliance on imported fuels,” which is furthered via proposed actions and community-level data review via their regional energy plan6 . Hazard mitigation planning, which is often a FEMA-funding requirement for many localities, may lead communities to consider some similar efforts as climate adaptation planning. While these do not pertain directly to GHG reduction measures, there may be overlap between proposed adaptation measures and CPRG projects – e.g., projects that increase micro-grid resilience and reduce emissions in these communities. A review of Alaska adaptation plans revealed lack of funding as a major implementation issue and climate action projects may help alleviate this. 1 https://www.cityofhomer-ak.gov/citycouncil/climate-action-plan 2 AS 29.40.030 via https://touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title29/Chapter40/Section030.htm 3 https://www.kodiakak.us/DocumentCenter/View/1507/2008-Comprehensive-Plan-Updatepdf 4 https://www.north-slope.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/10\_Energy\_-\_NSB\_Comprehensive\_Plan.pdf 5 https://nwab2030.org/ 6 http://www.nwabor.org/wp-content/uploads/NWAB-Regional-Energy-Plan-Update-Final-Reduced.pdf STATE OF ALASKA PRIORITY SUSTAINABLE ENERGY ACTION PLAN 7 Working with the Office of Indian Energy, many communities around Alaska have created Strategic Energy Plans7  that set renewable generation goals. These plans are confidential, proprietary information belonging to the entity (primarily tribal governments and native corporations) that have completed them, so they are unfortunately not available via any public repository. Those completing CPRG planning for Alaska’s tribal governments might benefit from requesting and reviewing them. Summary of Priority Plan Engagement The development of this plan included substantial engagement with state agencies, local governments, and Tribes (including tribal consortia). Stakeholder meetings were held separately with state agencies and municipal governments to discuss ways in which to maximize the potential benefits to Alaska through large-scale, broad mitigation measures. These facilitated discussions were followed up on with individual communication to further develop proposed measures, including to contemplate implementation grant applications. The hallmark of the State’s approach has been collaboration with Tribes and tribal consortia. The State’s development of its GHG emissions inventory includes sharing with all tribal planning and applicants. This data-sharing includes the ability for each Tribe or consortia to utilize the mitigation measures evaluation available through this online tool. AML facilitates bi-weekly calls with the state’s CPRG Working Group that includes all planning partners. Further details on engagement for the development of this plan are given in section I, with plans for future engagement detailed in section VII. Plan Elements and Key Takeaways The PSEAP is a preliminary analysis of the potential for climate pollution reduction in Alaska, and corresponding mitigation measures. DEC expects a more thorough review as part of the comprehensive planning process, including a robust stakeholder engagement and public consultation. This plan includes all of the components required by EPA and has included many of the optional elements to introduce appropriate context for relevant issues. Key Takeaways include: •	 The ability of the State to build the infrastructure for a statewide GHG emissions assessment available to all communities is an important feature of the PSEAP. •	 The State’s collaboration with tribes and tribal consortia will be critical to successful implementation. •	 This initial assessment was limited by available project time before PCAP deadline. •	 There is concern voiced by many eligible entities and stakeholders that the tie and timing between the PSEAP and the tribal PCAPs and the implementation grants limits the extent to which disadvantaged communities may receive the most benefit. •	 Community need exceeds available resources, and EPA must take an equitable distribution of resources into account. 2022 Greenhouse Gas Inventory Section II of this plan contains a summary of the statewide GHG inventory completed for calendar year 2022. This inventory work will also result in community-level reports, resulting in opportunities to evaluate GHG reduction measures broadly at the local, regional, and statewide levels. The emissions inventory and community reports include: •	 Stationary Combustion by fuel type, and percentages by sector. •	 Transportation by fuel type, and percentages by road and non-road activity},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{arcPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan Atlanta Metropolitan Statistical Area}}},
  shorttitle = {Atlanta {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{ARC}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--134},
  institution = {Atlanta Regional Commission},
  location = {Atlanta, GA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/atlanta-msa-arc-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {Across the Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Alpharetta Metropolitan Statistical Area (Atlanta MSA), as throughout the Southeast United States, communities are experiencing more frequent and intense storms, flooding, heat waves, droughts, and other impacts of climate change (USGCRP, Fifth National Climate Assessment, 2003).1 As the lead organization for the MSA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grants planning process, the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) takes seriously its responsibility to develop climate action plans that will set up the region and its individual communities to best mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in conjunction with protecting human health, increasing economic mobility, and creating a competitive economy that benefits everyone. This Atlanta MSA Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) was developed as part of a US EPA Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program, a four-year planning initiative authorized by the Inflation Reduction Act. It builds on the existing climate-related work of ARC, including the Green Communities program, Livable Centers Initiative, and the ongoing transportation planning and policy work undertaken by the ARC Metropolitan Transportation Plan. It also builds on the climate, clean energy, and sustainability work of many of metro Atlanta’s local governments. This PCAP, the first deliverable required by the CPRG program, is intended to serve as a resource and guide for applicants seeking CPRG Phase 2 Implementation grants, not as a comprehensive list of policy and program recommendations for the Atlanta MSA to reduce its emissions to net zero.}
}

@report{arizonastatuniversityCleanArizonaPlan2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {The {{Clean Arizona Plan}}: {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Arizona {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Arizona Stat University} and {Northern Arizona University} and {Arizona Governor’s Office of Resiliency}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--67},
  institution = {Arizona State University},
  location = {Phoenix, AZ},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/the-clean-arizona-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {As funded by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program provided a total of \$250 million in formula grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop plans to improve air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Under the leadership and authority of Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs, the Governor’s Office of Resiliency received \$3 million to conduct planning that would identify opportunities and projects that would improve air quality throughout Arizona, with a priority focus on delivering the benefits of improved air quality to low-income and historically underserved communities in the state. To meet these goals, the Governor’s Office of Resiliency partnered with Arizona State University and Northern Arizona University to produce this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) to support investment in policies, practices, and technologies that reduce pollutant emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all Arizonans. In coordination with the Governor’s Office of Resiliency, Arizona State University and Northern Arizona University hosted 6 community engagement events, and 5 stakeholder roundtables, and engaged with hundreds of Arizonans, including representatives of community-based organizations and industry leaders. These stakeholder conversations directly informed the creation of the Clean Arizona Plan through the identification of key measures, projects, and opportunities that would improve air quality, especially in lowincome, historically underserved, rural, and tribal Arizona. The measures contained herein should be construed as broadly available to any entity in the state eligible for receiving funding under the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Implementation Grants (CPRG) and other funding streams, as applicable. The Governor’s Office of Resiliency will prioritize measures that address the two primary sources of greenhouse gas emissions in Arizona: electric generation and transportation. Highlighted measures outlined in the Clean Arizona Plan include: ● Expanding access to weatherization, energy efficiency upgrades and electrification; ● Support for the development and deployment of renewable energy generation projects, such deploying as solar-plus-battery systems; ● Increased access to publicly accessible electric vehicle charging infrastructure; ● Accelerated adoption of electric and zero-emission vehicles; and ● Establishment of partnership programs that provide workforce training and certification for energy efficiency and emerging energy technology contracting.  5 By prioritizing these measures, the Clean Arizona Plan identifies opportunities totaling a reduction of 8,835,826 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions reductions and the potential for hundreds of millions of dollars of investment in communities across Arizona. This PCAP is organized into 5 sections: 1. Executive Summary 2. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventory 3. Priority Measures including LIDAC and GHG Impact Analyses 4. Review of Authority to Implement 5. Coordination and Outreach This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under assistance agreement 98T67401 to the Arizona Governor’s Office of Resiliency. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{arkansasdepartmentofenergyandenvironmentArkansasEnergyEnvironment2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Arkansas {{Energy}} and {{Environment Innovation Plan Priority Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Arkansas {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Arkansas Department of Energy and Environment}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--339},
  institution = {{Arkansas Department of Energy and Environment}},
  location = {Little Rock, AR},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/5d-02f35201-pcap-arkansas-eei-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {With this report, the 2023-24 Arkansas Energy and Environment Innovation (EEI) plan, Arkansas Department of Energy and Environment (E\&E) prepared an emissions inventory and priority assessment of energy and environmental solutions that will help Arkansas remain forward-looking and will serve as guidance for future investments. The EEI plan is also the primary deliverable priority action plan (PAP), as required under EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG). For preparation of this PAP, E\&E partnered with City of Fort Smith, Metroplan, and Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission (NWARPC), with the intent to support investment in policies, practices, and technologies that reduce pollutant emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all Arkansans. E\&E and partners look forward to the numerous economic, public health, and environmental benefits associated with the additional clean energy infrastructure investments in the state made possible through implementation of the measures included in this Energy and Environment Innovation PAP and Arkansas’s forthcoming Comprehensive Action Plan (CAP). This project has been funded by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under assistance agreement 02F35201 to E\&E. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document. The measures contained herein should be construed as broadly available to any entity in the state eligible for receiving funding under the EPA’s CPRG implementation grants and other funding streams, as applicable. This PAP is organized into the following sections: 1. Emissions Inventory 2. Priority Measures Outline 3. Low-Income and Disadvantaged Community Analysis 4. Review of Authority 5. Coordination and Outreach 6. Funding Intersections 7. Appendices (Priority measures detailed, procedural documentation, etc.)}
}

@report{baltimoremetropolitancouncilPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan}} for the {{Baltimore Region}}},
  shorttitle = {Baltimore {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Baltimore Metropolitan Council}},
  date = {2024},
  pages = {1--356},
  institution = {Baltimore Metropolitan Council},
  location = {Baltimore, MD},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/baltimore-msa-bmc-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {Seven local jurisdictions of the Baltimore-Columbia-Towson Metropolitan Statistical Area and the Baltimore Metropolitan Council (BMC) have come together in an effort to develop a shared plan for moving the region forward in addressing harmful greenhouse gas emissions. This shared effort will consist of the following: ❖ A Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP); ❖ A Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP), due approximately July 31, 2025; and, ❖ A Status Report, due at the close of the four-year grant period. The Baltimore Metropolitan Council (BMC) oversaw and coordinated the development of this PCAP. This document focuses on developing a recommended set of priority greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction measures for the Baltimore region. As part of the process of developing the list of priority GHG reduction measures, the following were prepared: ● A preliminary regional greenhouse gas emissions inventory with a 2021 emissions reporting year, ● GHG emissions projections for 2030 and 2050, ● GHG reduction targets ● An initial benefits analysis for Low Income Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC), ● A review of authority to implement, and, ● An initial workforce planning analysis. Given the variation in climate action planning readiness across the seven jurisdictions in the MSA, the intent of the PCAP is to identify regional priorities to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases, sequester carbon and highlight the most urgent climate mitigation and adaptation needs for climatevulnerable communities in each county/city participating in this planning process. Current priorities outlined in existing climate action, sustainability, resilience or other related plans from jurisdictions in the MSA are reflected in this document. BMC contracted with ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI) to develop a regional greenhouse gas inventory. With input from ICLEI on the potential reductions possible from various reduction measures, the Steering Committee developed a list of high impact greenhouse gas emission reduction measures, called the priority GHG reduction measures. Emission reductions from these measures, achievable by 2030 and 2050 were calculated by ICLEI, and are included in Appendix A. The CCAP, to be developed in 2024, and completed in 2025, will include a more comprehensive regional greenhouse gas emissions inventory, GHG emissions projections for 2030 and 2045, GHG reduction targets, a more comprehensive list of quantified greenhouse gas emission reduction measures, a benefits analysis including analyses for LIDAC, a review of authority to implement and intersection with other funding available, and a workforce planning analysis. The priority measures identified in the PCAP will most likely be included in the CCAP. Additional measures to reduce GHG emissions will be identified and quantified. The additional measures will also  PCAP for the Baltimore-Columbia-Towson Metropolitan Statistical Area Region March 2024 7 be evaluated for other items including LIDAC benefits. As in the PCAP, ICLEI will perform technical analyses necessary for the CCAP. In developing the PCAP, the State of Maryland’s Climate Pollution Reduction Plan and existing local climate action plans were reviewed as demonstrated in Section 2.1. Jurisdictions led a significant amount of local engagement to develop local climate action plans, which then contributed towards the Baltimore Region PCAP and its priority emission reduction measures.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{bayareaairqualitymanagementdistrictBayAreaRegional2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Bay {{Area Regional Climate Action Planning Initiative Priority Climate Action Plan}} for the {{Northern}} and {{Central Bay Area Metropolitan Region}}},
  shorttitle = {Bay {{Area PCAP}}},
  author = {{Bay Area Air Quality Management District}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--54},
  institution = {Bay Area Air Quality Management District},
  location = {San Francisco, CA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/san-francisco-oakland-berkeley-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (Air District) has partnered with local governments (cities and counties) and regional agencies across the San Francisco Bay Area region1 (Bay Area region) to produce this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) for the San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). Throughout development of the PCAP, the Air District conducted extensive coordination and outreach with other government agencies and engaged a range of stakeholders across the Bay Area region. The Air District established an Advisory Work Group (AWG) in April 2023 to support this effort by engaging them in discussions and decision-making on key aspects of the PCAP, including coordination and engagement with other agencies, organizations, and low income, disadvantaged communities (LIDACs), measure selection, and development of deliverables, as well as provision of information and data and advising on technical analyses. The AWG is composed of representatives from: • Bay Area regional agencies (Air District, Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) through its program Bay Area Regional Energy Network (BayREN), Bay Area Regional Collaborative (BARC), and MTC), • the cities named in the MSA (City of Berkeley, City of Oakland, and City and County of San Francisco) and • the counties comprising the MSA (Alameda County, Contra Costa County, Marin County, Napa County, San Mateo County, and the portions of Solano County and Sonoma County that are within the Air District’s jurisdiction).2},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{bhatiaCorporateValueChain2011,
  type = {Non-profit},
  title = {Corporate {{Value Chain}} ({{Scope}} 3) {{Accounting}} and {{Reporting Standard}}: {{Supplement}} to the {{GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting}} and {{Reporting Standard}}},
  author = {Bhatia, Pankaj and {Cynthia Cummis} and Brown, Andrea and Rich, David and Draucker, Laura and Lahd, Holly},
  date = {2011-09},
  pages = {1--162},
  institution = {World Resources Institute, World Business Council for Sustainable Development},
  url = {https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/Corporate-Value-Chain-Accounting-Reporing-Standard_041613_2.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-06-26},
  abstract = {E missions of the anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHG) that drive climate change and its impacts around the world are growing. According to climate scientists, global carbon dioxide emissions must be cut by as much as 85 percent below 2000 levels by 2050 to limit global mean temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.1 Temperature rise above this level will produce increasingly unpredictable and dangerous impacts for people and ecosystems. As a result, the need to accelerate efforts to reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions is increasingly urgent. Existing government policies will not sufficiently solve the problem. Leadership and innovation from business is vital to making progress. Corporate action in this arena also makes good business sense. By addressing GHG emissions, companies can identify opportunities to bolster their bottom line, reduce risk, and discover competitive advantages. As impacts from climate change become more frequent and prominent, governments are expected to set new policies and provide additional market-based incentives to drive significant reductions in emissions. These new policy and market drivers will direct economic growth on a low-carbon trajectory. Businesses need to start planning for this transition now as they make decisions that will lock in their investments for years to come. An effective corporate climate change strategy requires a detailed understanding of a company’s GHG impact. A corporate GHG inventory is the tool to provide such an understanding. It allows companies to take into account their emissions-related risks and opportunities and focus company efforts on their greatest GHG impacts. Until recently, companies have focused their attention on emissions from their own operations. But increasingly companies understand the need to also account for GHG emissions along their value chains and product portfolios to comprehensively manage GHG-related risks and opportunities. Through the development of the GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard, the GHG Protocol has responded to the demand for an internationally accepted method to enable GHG management of companies’ value chains. Following the release of this standard, the GHG Protocol and its partners will proactively work with industry groups and governments to promote its widespread use – along with the entire suite of GHG Protocol standards and tools – to enable more effective GHG management worldwide.}
}

@online{brusseauAgingTrucksCreate2019,
  type = {Industry},
  title = {Aging Trucks Create More Service Opportunities},
  author = {Brusseau, Dawn},
  date = {2019-01-11},
  url = {https://www.ntea.com/NTEA/NTEA/Member_benefits/Industry_leading_news/NTEANewsarticles/Aging_trucks_create_more_service_opportunities.aspx},
  urldate = {2024-01-31},
  abstract = {In 2008, average age of commercial trucks in the U.S. was 12.8 years, and rose to 14.2 years in 2018, according to recent analysis by IHS Markit. The increase in truck age can be correlated to numerous factors, including truck population growth, trade packages and fuel trends. Last year brought historic registration volumes that made commercial headlines soar. While all of these new trucks may, in time, drive down average vehicle age, there is a large population of older, registered trucks still running on our roadways. Figure 1 shows an evaluation by model year for Class 4–8 commercial vehicles for calendar year 2008 versus 2018.},
  organization = {NTEA}
}

@dataset{btsAverageAgeAutomobiles2023,
  title = {Average {{Age}} of {{Automobiles}} and {{Trucks}} in {{Operation}} in the {{United States}}},
  author = {{BTS}},
  date = {2023-12-27},
  url = {https://www.bts.gov/content/average-age-automobiles-and-trucks-operation-united-states},
  urldate = {2024-01-31},
  abstract = {Data for average age of automobiles are as of July 1 of each year, except in 2009, the data are as of October 1. Description: KEY: RV = recreational vehicle; U = data are not available. a The 1969, 1977, 1983, and 1990 surveys do not include a separate category for sports utility vehicles (SUV), while the 1995, 2001, 2009 and 2017 surveys do. In 1990, most SUVs were classified as automobiles. Source: Average age of automobiles: 1995-2001: IHS Markit Co., Average Age of Light Cars and Trucks in U.S, (Annual release), available at https://news.ihsmarkit.com/news-releases. 2002-16: U.S. Department of Energy, Vehicle Technologies Office, Average Age of Cars and Light Trucks, 2002-2016, available at https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/09/f37/fotw\%23997\_web.xlsx as of Sep. 17, 2019. 2017: Wolf Street Co., Average Age of Cars \& Trucks by Household Income and Vehicle Type over Time, available at https://wolfstreet.com/2018/08/21/average-age-of-cars-trucks-vehicles-by-household-income-vehicle-type/ as of Sep. 17, 2019. 2018-19: IHS Markit Co., Average Age of Cars and Light Trucks in U.S. Rises Again in 2019 to 11.8 Years, IHS Markit Says, available at https://news.ihsmarkit.com/press-release/automotive/average-age-cars-and-light-trucks-us-rises-again-2019-118-years-ihs-markit- as of Sep. 17, 2019. 2021: IHS Markit CO., Average age of US light trucks and cars approaches 12 years, available at https://ihsmarkit.com/research-analysis/average-age-of-us-light-trucks-and-cars-approaches-12-years.html as of Mar. 29, 2022. 2022: S\&P Global Mobility, Average Age of Vehicles in the US Increases to 12.2 years, according to S\&P Global Mobility, available at https://www.spglobal.com/mobility/en/research-analysis/average-age-of-vehicles-in-the-us-increases-to-122-years.html as of Apr. 17, 2023. Average age of household vehicles: 1969, 1977, 1983, 1990, 1995: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics,1995 Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey: Summary of Travel Trends (Washington, DC: 1999). 2001: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2001 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) Data, available at http://nhts.ornl.gov as of Sep. 2009. 2009: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2009 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) Data, personal communication. 2017: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2017 National Household Travel Survey available at https://nhts.ornl.gov/ as of May 17, 2018. 2022: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2022 National Household Travel Survey available at https://nhts.ornl.gov/ as of Dec. 7, 2023. Publications: National Transportation Statistics Table 1-26}
}

@report{carbStateCaliforniaDraft2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {The {{State}} of {{California}}’s {{Draft Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {California {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{CARB} and {CalEPA}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--70},
  institution = {{California Air and Resources Board}},
  location = {Sacramento, CA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/california-cprg-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {California’s Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) presents a strong portfolio of proven climate programs specifically chosen to guide a range of coordinated implementation grant applications throughout the State. With federal funding, the climate measures included in this PCAP would immediately begin to help California meet its long-term goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and deliver a range of short-term benefits over the next five years. In particular, this PCAP delivers the benefits of clean energy, technology, and transportation to historically underserved and marginalized communities. These are the communities that have all too often borne the brunt of heavy pollution, especially in California, from fossil fuel combustion, mobile sources, and industries. Californians in these frontline communities live in or near regions of the State that are not attaining federal air quality standards, which are often communities near ports and federally recognized freight corridors, or adjacent to fossil gas power plants and large fossil-fueled industrial facilities. Communities most affected by environmental burdens also includes those in or near forested areas that are increasingly prone to wildfire risk and encompasses remote Tribal lands and rural areas. The measures included in this PCAP leverage a variety of existing programs from multiple state agencies that directly incorporate Governor Gavin Newsom’s whole-of-government approach to tackling climate change. The measures are also consistent with the Governor’s Executive Order N-16-221 to take additional actions to embed equity considerations in every State climate plan and program. Since this PCAP directly addresses the major sectors of one of the world’s largest economies, the programs and approaches outlined will also advance the national climate goals pursuant to the Paris Agreement. 2 This PCAP will help further U.S. energy independence by supporting the development and transmission of clean and renewable energy, including scalable hydrogen and bio-methane projects. The PCAP will take strides toward achieving the federal environmental Justice 40 goal, ensuring that 40\% of overall benefits of certain Federal investments “flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized, underserved, and overburdened by pollution.”3 It will help develop and propel innovative and practical climate solutions and technologies that can be exported to other states – and even beyond our national borders. This PCAP will help ensure that the U.S. leads by example in tackling this global threat while delivering co-benefits at home. This PCAP was developed with public participation and input, including a kickoff virtual public workshop, multiple comments and recommendations from a broad group of interested parties and communities, and three virtual public webinars to present the draft 1 2022. Executive Order N-16-22. https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/9.13.22-EO-N-16-22-Equity.pdf 2 UNFCC. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement. 3 The White House. Justice40. https://www.whitehouse.gov/environmentaljustice/justice40/ .  7 PCAP, where CARB received written comments in an online docket. Staff had several meetings with representatives of Tribal Nations and with the 10 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) in California that were offered their own CPRG planning grants. These MSAs are home to more than 90\% of the state’s 40 million residents, and each engaged in their own outreach on their respective PCAPs. The State organized more than 15 meetings with MSAs in the development of the PCAP. Many of the agencies and programs in this PCAP include statutory and ministerial requirements to consult with representatives of low-income and disadvantaged communities to ensure program implementation provides meaningful engagement opportunities and direct community benefits. In developing this PCAP, California was fortunate to have a decade and a half of climate planning experience, as well as a many successful climate programs and projects to leverage from across dozens of state agencies and multiple economic sectors. Over that same decade and a half, California has also witnessed first-hand the growing ravages of the effects of climate change. Weather whiplash has become commonplace with years of severe drought followed by seasons of atmospheric rivers bringing flooding, mudslides, and even the reappearance on Central Valley farmland of an inland sea that had not been seen in more than a century. California’s forestlands have also been hit hard. Nearly 200 million trees, stressed by drought, were killed by bark beetle infestation linked to warmer winters, and now stand dead and dry throughout the State’s forests. Hotter summers and strong dry winds are resulting in catastrophic megafires. In the 2017 and 2018 fire seasons alone, more than 17,000 wildfires burned over 3 million acres – nearly 3\% of California’s land mass. These fires killed 139 people, destroyed tens of thousands of homes and businesses, and devastated millions of acres of precious habitat and critical watersheds. In addition to the destruction, these megafires are converting hundreds of thousands of acres of conifer forests to shrub land and emitting black carbon, further compounding the climate change crisis. By the end of this century, California’s wildfires are expected to burn 77\% more acreage — roughly the size of Delaware — every year. Rising temperatures also adversely impact those communities already suffering disproportionately from fossil fuel pollution. The impacts to low-income and disadvantaged communities, coupled with emerging studies that indicate increasing temperatures may start to reverse progress already made to improve air quality, 4 underscore the need to move with all possible haste to slash carbon and air pollution. California’s unique weather, topography, and the size of its population and economic activity leave it with some of the worst air quality in the nation: over half of its residents (21 million of roughly 40 million) live 4 U. Ifran. 2015. Global Warming Could Undo 50 Years of Health Gains. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/global-warmingcould-undo-50-years-of-health-gains/ .  8 in areas that exceed the most stringent federal ozone standard5 and the State is home to the only three ‘extreme non-attainment’ areas for federal ozone standards. As the EPA recently established more health-protective fine particle limits, more regions of the State are falling into non-attainment of federal clean air quality standards, highlighting the need to move more quickly to zero-emissions transportation and other clean-energy solutions. CARB submits this PCAP not as a definitive compendium of California programs but as a careful selection of climate solutions that, over the next five years, will cut climate pollution and deliver benefits to those communities who most need them. The funding offered by the U.S. EPA under this program will help California achieve climate and clean air goals, protect the State’s forests and rural communities, provide resources to Tribal Nations, and help clean the air for low-income and disadvantaged communities. It will also establish a new and important level of cooperation and partnership with U.S. EPA, further strengthening the meaning and reality of cooperative federalism that has benefited California and the nation for decades.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{castigliegoCarbonFreeBoston2019,
  title = {Carbon {{Free Boston}}: {{Waste Technical Report}}},
  author = {Castigliego, Joshua R. and Walsh, Michael J and Pollack, Adam and Cleveland, Cutler J},
  date = {2019},
  pages = {1--45},
  institution = {Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy},
  location = {Boston, MA, USA},
  url = {https://sites.bu.edu/cfb/carbon-free-boston-report-released/technical-reports/},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {For many people, their most perceptible interaction with their environmental footprint is through the waste that they generate. On a daily basis people have numerous opportunities to decide whether to recycle, compost or throwaway. In many cases, such options may not be present or apparent. Even when such options are available, many lack the knowledge of how to correctly dispose of their waste, leading to contamination of valuable recycling or compost streams. Once collected, people give little thought to how their waste is treated. For Boston’s waste, plastic in the disposal stream acts becomes a fossil fuel used to generate electricity. Organics in the waste stream have the potential to be used to generate valuable renewable energy, while metals and electronics can be recycled to offset virgin materials. However, challenges in global recycling markets are burdening municipalities, which are experiencing higher costs to maintain their recycling. The disposal of solid waste and wastewater both account for a large and visible anthropogenic impact on human health and the environment. In terms of climate change, landfilling of solid waste and wastewater treatment generated emissions of 131.5 Mt CO2e in 2016 or about two percent of total United States GHG emissions that year. The combustion of solid waste contributed an additional 11.0 Mt CO2e, over half of which (5.9 Mt CO2e) is attributable to the combustion of plastic [1]. In Massachusetts, the GHG emissions from landfills (0.4 Mt CO2e), waste combustion (1.2 Mt CO2e), and wastewater (0.5 Mt CO2e) accounted for about 2.7 percent of the state’s gross GHG emissions in 2014 [2]. The City of Boston has begun exploring pathways to Zero Waste, a goal that seeks to systematically redesign our waste management system that can simultaneously lead to a drastic reduction in emissions from waste. The easiest way to achieve zero waste is to not generate it in the first place. This can start at the source with the decision whether or not to consume a product. This is the intent behind banning disposable items such as plastic bags that have more sustainable substitutes. When consumption occurs, products must be designed in such a way that their lifecycle impacts and waste footprint are considered. This includes making durable products, limiting the use of packaging or using organic packaging materials, taking back goods at the end of their life, and designing products to ensure compatibility with recycling systems. When reducing waste is unavoidable, efforts to increase recycling and organics diversion becomes essential for achieving zero waste. Pursuing such zero waste strategies will have impacts beyond reducing carbon emissions. First such strategies will likely reduce the cost of waste management and disposal, relieving tax payers of these burdens. Second, bag bans and packaging requirements will spur producers to use sustainable solutions and help to promote innovation in product packaging and materials design. Accelerating such a transformation will have global impacts by shifting the materials used in our lives to be more sustainable, and limit their accumulation in natural systems such as our waterways and oceans. The City of Boston’s consumption and waste streams extend far beyond the city’s boarders. Changes to these external systems, outside of the City’s control, will have a large influence over the footprint of people and businesses in the city. Despite this large external influence, there remain a large opportunity for the City and its constituents to take action to reduce their waste and waste-GHG footprints as described below.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{cdrpcPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan}} for the {{Capital Region}}: {{A Climate Action Plan}} to {{Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions}}},
  shorttitle = {Albany {{NY PCAP}}},
  author = {{CDRPC} and Fabozzi, Todd M.},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--26},
  institution = {Capital District Regional Planning Commission},
  location = {Albany, NY},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/albany-ny-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {On August 3, 2023, the Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Metro Area (EPA Region 2), led by the Capital District Regional Planning Commission (CDRPC), was awarded a CPRG Planning Grant. This award is one of only four awards made to New York State Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA - an area defined by the U.S. Census 2020 MSA population) and one of five grants awarded in the state of New York (New York State secured the 5th award). The CDRPC is responsible for leading the development of the first ever climate action plan for the Capital Region. Funding for this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) came from the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program which provides \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement ambitious plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful air pollution. Authorized under Section 60114 of the Inflation Reduction Act, this two-phase program provides \$250 million for noncompetitive planning grants, and approximately \$4.6 billion for competitive implementation grants.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@dataset{Census2022ACSDP1Y2022.DP05,
  title = {{{ACS}} Demographic and Housing Estimates},
  author = {{U.S. Census Bureau}},
  date = {2021},
  url = {https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDP5Y2021.DP05?g=050XX00US27053_040XX00US27},
  urldate = {2024-01-11},
  howpublished = {U.S. Census Bureau},
  vintage = {2021}
}

@online{censusNumberTruckersAllTime2019,
  type = {Government},
  title = {America {{Keeps}} on {{Truckin}}': {{Number}} of {{Truckers}} at {{All-Time High}}},
  author = {Cheeseman, Jennifer and Hait, Andrew W.},
  date = {2019-06-06},
  url = {https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/06/america-keeps-on-trucking.html},
  urldate = {2024-02-12},
  abstract = {More than 3.5 million people are truck drivers, an all-time high. Driving trucks is one of the largest occupations in the nation.},
  organization = {Census.gov}
}

@report{ceoColoradoPriorityClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Colorado {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Colorado {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{CEO}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--81},
  institution = {Colorado Energy Office},
  location = {Denver, CO},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/colorado-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {Colorado recently updated its Greenhouse Gas Pollution Reduction Roadmap (Roadmap 2.0) to both quantify progress to-date and chart a path forward for the state’s decarbonization strategy. The plan was developed with input from state agencies including the Colorado Energy Office (CEO), Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA), Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) at the Department of Regulatory Affairs (DORA) and Office of Economic Development and International Trade (OEDIT), as well as input from the public, local governments and industry and other stakeholders. The update includes identification and development of new Near Term Actions that the state committed as additional steps to continue making investments and adopting new technological and policy innovations to get us closer to our long-term decarbonization goals. A subset of these Near Term Actions have been selected for the Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), as well as actions focused on local government and tribal actions, as they represent the work that will bring the state of Colorado closer to meeting our greenhouse gas and pollution reduction goals with the highest-impact and achievable policy priorities. The focus of this PCAP is long-term strategies that take advantage of unprecedented federal funding, work towards our goal of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions, save Coloradans money, improve air quality, and deploy new clean energy solutions, including geothermal energy, clean hydrogen, industrial efficiency and electrification, and carbon management, as well as expanding partnerships with local governments. CPRG Overview The Colorado Energy Office received a CPRG planning grant in July of 2023 and as part of that funding must submit this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) with specific GHG reduction strategies by March 1, 2024. The plan articulates measures that will enable the state of Colorado to: 1. Implement ambitious measures that will achieve significant cumulative GHG reductions by 2030 and beyond; 2. Pursue measures that will achieve substantial community benefits such as reduction of criteria air pollutants (CAPs) and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), particularly in low-income and disadvantaged communities; 7 3. Complement other funding sources to maximize these GHG reductions and community benefits; and, 4. Pursue innovative policies and programs that are replicable and can be scaled up across multiple jurisdictions. Measures that are identified in this PCAP are eligible actions to seek federal funding under the Environmental Protection Agency’s CPRG Implementation grant opportunity. Applications for the General Competition Implementation grants are due April 1, 2024. Scope of the PCAP Colorado’s PCAP spans the entire state. This report is organized into three sections related to greenhouse gas reduction measures: statewide priority measures, local government priority measures and Ute Mountain Ute priority measures. Measures often include both policy changes and incentives as policy adoption paired with project funding can achieve much greater GHG benefits (and often related co-pollutant benefits) than incentive/project funding alone. The Ute Mountain Ute Tribe has provided priority reduction measures specific to their needs, lands and within their authority to implement as a sovereign entity. The statewide priorities identify measures that have significant GHG impact associated with activities that are not controlled by local authority whereas the local government priorities emphasize activities that local governments, municipalities or other eligible entities as defined by the EPA have agency to make the most impact. The local government priorities that Colorado is including in its PCAP have also been developed in collaboration with the Denver Metropolitan Statistical Area led by the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG). DRCOG is developing its own PCAP, and wherever possible the State has worked with DRCOG to ensure that the two entities do not apply for implementation funding for overlapping programs. Colorado GHG Reporting and Climate Action Context Colorado has adopted a whole-of-government approach to tackling greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and mitigating its contribution to global warming, setting science-based targets that align with those established by the Paris Agreement in 2015. From first tracking emissions in 1990, to establishing a Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) in 2004, and executive orders in 2008 and 2017 establishing the first emission reduction goals, many additional climate action measures have been developed since 2019, when the legislature adopted economy-wide GHG emissions reduction goals. 8 The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) has been assessing emissions of GHGs since 1990. Since the state created Colorado's first technical climate change assessment in 1998, the government has published inventory reports in 2002, 2007, 2014, 2019, 2021, and 20231 . In 2019, the legislature adopted and Governor Polis signed HB19-12612 , which set economy-wide GHG reduction goals for the state of 26\% below 2005 levels by 2025, 50\% by 2030 and 90\% by 2050. In 2023, SB23-0163 amended the targets set by HB19-1261 to include reductions of 65\% by 2035, 75\% by 2040, and 90\% by 2045, while also revising the 2050 target to net zero emissions. After adoption of HB19-1261, the administration conducted a technical analysis and stakeholder process to develop the state’s first GHG Pollution Reduction Roadmap4 , a strategic plan for the near term actions the administration would pursue to make progress towards the short- and long-term goals. The state has completed approximately 95\% of the identified near term actions. In many cases implementation will continue for decades, but the policies have been adopted and programs begun. The state worked during 2023 to update the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Reduction Roadmap (“Roadmap 2.0”), including an updated forecast of emissions and a new set of Near Term Actions that will guide implementation in the state. Findings from Roadmap 2.0 have been used to inform this PCAP and the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) due in July of 2025. Roadmap 2.0 builds on extensive work carried out by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment to conduct greenhouse gas inventories. The inventory is conducted every two years, and an update was released in late 2023. The 2023 inventory relies on both reported and modeled data.}
}

@online{ChesapeakeBayProgram,
  title = {Chesapeake {{Bay Program Land Use}}/{{Land Cover Data Project}}},
  url = {https://www.chesapeakeconservancy.org/conservation-innovation-center/high-resolution-data/lulc-data-project-2022/},
  urldate = {2024-04-05},
  langid = {american},
  organization = {Chesapeake Conservancy}
}

@article{chesterLifecycleEnergyEmissions2009a,
  title = {Life-Cycle {{Energy}} and {{Emissions Inventories}} for {{Motorcycles}}, {{Diesel Automobiles}}, {{School Buses}}, {{Electric Buses}}, {{Chicago Rail}}, and {{New York City Rail}}},
  author = {Chester, Mikhail and Horvath, Arpad},
  date = {2009-05-01},
  url = {https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6z37f2jr},
  urldate = {2021-12-15},
  abstract = {The development of life-cycle energy and emissions factors for passenger transportation modes is critical for understanding the total environmental costs of travel. Previous life-cycle studies have focused on the automobile given its dominating share of passenger travel and have included only few life-cycle components, typically related to the vehicle (i.e., manufacturing, maintenance, end-of-life) or fuel (i.e., extraction, refining, transport). Chester (2009) provides the first comprehensive environmental life-cycle assessment of not only vehicle and fuel components but also infrastructure components for automobiles, buses, commuter rail systems, and aircraft. Many processes were included for vehicles (manufacturing, active operation, inactive operation, maintenance, insurance), infrastructure (construction, operation, maintenance, parking, insurance), and fuels (production, distribution). The vehicles inventoried were sedans, pickups, SUVs, urban diesel buses, light rail (San Francisco’s Muni Metro and Boston’s Green Line, both electric), heavy rail (San Francisco Bay Area’s BART and Caltrain), and aircraft (small, medium, and large-sized planes are disaggregated). Given the methodological framework in Chester (2009), the question of applicability of these systems to other U.S. modes, and the data availability of other modes, is extended in this study to motorcycles, light duty diesel vehicles, school buses, electric buses, Chicago commuter rail modes, and New York City commuter rail modes.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{cirdaCentralIndianaEnvironmental2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Central {{Indiana Environmental Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Indianapolis {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{CIRDA}},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--218},
  institution = {Central Indiana Regional Development Authority},
  location = {Indianapolis, IN},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/indianapolis-cprg-cirda-pcap-report.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {Central Indiana Regional Development Authority (CIRDA) was awarded a \$1 million planning grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop regional plans for Central Indiana focused on strategies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollution. The grant is part of EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program. 1 CLIMATE POLLUTION REDUCTION GRANT OVERVIEW The CPRG program provides \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement ambitious plans for reducing GHG emissions and other harmful air pollution. CPRG is authorized under Section 60114 of the Inflation Reduction Act,2 and consists of two phases: Phase 1 provides \$250 million for noncompetitive planning grants, and Phase 2 provides approximately \$4.6 billion for competitive implementation grants. Phase 1 of the CPRG program provides flexible support to states, local governments, tribes, and territories for climate planning. Planning grant recipients must design climate action plans that incorporate a variety of measures to reduce GHG emissions from across their economies in the following key sectors: electricity generation, industry, transportation, buildings, agriculture, natural and working lands, and waste management. All planning grantees must submit the following deliverables to EPA: • Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) – A PCAP is a narrative report that includes a focused list of near-term, high-priority, and implementation-ready measures to reduce GHG pollution and an analysis of GHG emissions reductions. PCAPs for states and metropolitan statistical areas 1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. “Climate Pollution Reduction Grants.” Modified 5 February 2024. Retrieved from: https://www.epa.gov/inflation-reduction-act/climate-pollution-reduction-grants 2 U.S. Congress. 2022. H.R.5376 - Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Online posting. Modified 16 August 2022. Retrieved from: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5376/text  CIRDA Priority Climate Action Plan 2024 12 (MSAs) are due to EPA on 1 March 2024, and on 1 April 2024 for tribes, tribal consortia, and territories. • Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) – A CCAP is a narrative report that provides an overview of the grantees’ significant GHG sources/sinks and sectors, establishes near-term and long-term GHG emission reduction goals, and provides strategies and identifies measures that address the highest priority sectors to help the grantees meet those goals. CCAPs for states and MSAs are due to EPA 2 years after the planning grant award, or approximately mid-2025, and CCAPs for tribes, tribal consortia, and territories are due at the close of the grant period. • Status Report – A Status Report should include the implementation status of the quantified GHG reduction measures included in the CCAP; any relevant updated analyses or projections supporting CCAP implementation; and next steps and future budget/staffing needs to continue CCAP implementation. Status Reports are due to EPA at the end of the 4-year grant period (approximately mid-2027) for state and MSA grantees. Phase 2 of the CPRG program provides \$4.6 billion in competitive grants to support the implementation of measures identified in the PCAP developed with Phase 1 planning grant funding. This funding is open to entities that received planning grants, as well as eligible entities that did not directly receive a planning grant that are applying for funds to implement measures included in an applicable PCAP. Applications for Phase 2 implementation grants are due to the EPA on 1 April 2024, for states and MSAs. EPA’s key objectives for the CPRG program include the following: • Tackle damaging climate pollution while supporting the creation of good jobs and lowering energy costs for families. • Accelerate work to address environmental injustice and empower community-driven solutions in overburdened neighborhoods. • Deliver cleaner air by reducing harmful air pollution in places where people live, work, play, and go to school.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{cityandcountyofhonoluluPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Honolulu {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{City and County of Honolulu}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--64},
  institution = {{City and County of Honolulu}},
  location = {Honolulu, HI},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/honolulu-pcap-cprg.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The City and County of Honolulu (“City”) is a consolidated city-county jurisdiction incorporated in 1907 and encompassing the entirety of the island of O‘ahu, in the state of Hawai‘i. The City provides and maintains services for just under one million residents situated in just under 600 square miles of geographically diverse neighborhoods, from such environments as the primary urban core of downtown Honolulu to more rural communities, like those of Ko‘olauloa. Within the City, the Mayor’s Office of Climate Change, Sustainability and Resiliency (CCSR) works to protect and improve the lives of O‘ahu residents by increasing community resilience in the face of challenge and change. Established by O‘ahu voters in 2016 by City Charter amendment, CCSR tracks climate change science and impacts and coordinates City actions and policies to implement projects and programs that create a more equitable, thriving, and climate-ready island home. CCSR’s guiding principles focus on developing enduring partnerships, thinking long-term, empowering leadership within and outside of City government, and scaling successful work to meet community needs. Per § 2-10.12 of the Revised Ordinances of Honolulu (ROH), CCSR is charged with the coordination and implementation of the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and achieve net-negative carbon emissions no later than 2045, consistent with the State of Hawai‘i zero emissions clean economy target established in §225P-5 of the Hawai‘i Revised Statutes. The City’s first-ever CAP, One Climate, One O‘ahu: Climate Action Plan 2020-2025, was adopted by the Honolulu City Council in June of 2021. Additionally, as codified by the ROH, the City’s CAP must be updated by CCSR every five years. On behalf of the City and County of Honolulu, and in consultation with various City agencies, industry stakeholders, and community partners, CCSR has developed this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) to accelerate continued implementation of the City’s existing CAP. Additionally, this PCAP initiates analyses and planning processes for the development of the City’s next (and first-ever) CAP Update towards 2030 emissions reduction targets. That CAP Update will additionally fulfill the second deliverable—a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP)—of the City’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Program (CPRG) formula grant award from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This PCAP and the priority measures contained within are intended to support investment in policies, practices, partnerships, and technologies that reduce pollutant emissions, create high-quality jobs, prioritize benefits to low-income and disadvantaged communities, and enhance the quality of life for all O‘ahu residents within the City and County of Honolulu.  Honolulu PCAP | Introduction | 6 This PCAP is organized into 7 sections: 1. Introduction 2. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventory 3. Coordination and Outreach 4. Priority Measures 5. Low-Income, Disadvantaged Community Benefits Analysis 6. Review of Authority to Implement 7. Conclusion This project has been funded wholly or in part by the EPA under assistance agreement 98T74101 (FAIN) to the City and County of Honolulu Office of Climate Change, Sustainability, and Resiliency. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document. The measures contained herein should be construed as broadly available to any entity within the geographic scope of this PCAP eligible to receive funding under the EPA’s CPRG Implementation Grant General Competition and other funding streams, as applicable.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{cityofalbuquerqueAlbuquerqueMSAPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Albuquerque {{MSA Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Albuquerque {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{City of Albuquerque}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--308},
  institution = {City of Albuquerque Sustainability},
  location = {Albuquerque, NM},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/cprg-pcap-albuquerque-msa-city-of-albuquerque.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {Issues of climate and sustainability are central to the livelihoods of all Americans, and urban centers have a vital role to play in addressing the climate crisis. To e ectively adapt and mitigate the changes we are already seeing, governments, industry, and community members recognize the need for coordinated planning that center the needs of frontline communities—those who are a ected “first and worst” by the climate crisis. This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is the first step in a multi-year initiative towards transformative planning for the Albuquerque Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) - which includes the City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo, Sandoval, Torrance, and Valencia County. Funded and directed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) Planning Program, this report sets out to identify an initial list of high-priority, near-term, regional projects that both tackle climate pollution and benefit the needs of frontline communities.1 This Albuquerque MSA PCAP builds o  of the important work done in the City of Albuquerque’s 2021 Climate Action Plan (CAP),2 the 2020 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory,3  Albuquerque Justice 40 Oversight Coordinating Committee (J40 OCC),4  the Single Space Strategies Draft CPRG Plan5 and CPRG Working Group6 engagement to present an initial list of regional near-term measures to address climate pollution to assist our frontline communities. Guided by the EPA’s priorities, this PCAP is organized into the following sections: • Introduction • Frontline Community Analysis • Greenhouse Gas Inventory • Community Priorities \& Projects by Sector • Conclusion • Appendices}
}

@report{cityofaustinAustinRoundRockGeorgetownMetropolitan2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Austin-{{Round Rock-Georgetown Metropolitan Statistical Area Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Austin {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{City of Austin} and Lilauwala, Rohan and Duran, Phillip and Calvo, Mali and Udita, Tasnuva},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  institution = {City of Austin Office of Sustainability},
  location = {Austin, TX},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/city-of-austin-austin-rrock-georgetown-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The City of Austin has partnered with cities, counties, regional organizations, and utilities in the Austin-Round Rock-Georgetown MSA to produce this priority climate action plan (PCAP) to support investment in policies, practices, and technologies that reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, provide other environmental benefits, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life in the Austin-Round Rock-Georgetown MSA. This plan aims to highlight priority measures for regional greenhouse gas reductions, addressing the dispersed authority across water, housing, transportation, and resource conservation through planning at the regional level. The Austin region is one of the fastest-growing metropolitan statistical areas 1 in the country, and this plan represents an innovative approach to fostering collaboration in climate planning. Several participating municipalities have already undertaken steps to mitigate climate change and reduce GHG emissions, including climate-focused strategies and initiatives in their comprehensive, strategic, and vision plans. Notably, the City of Austin and Travis County have directed plans exclusive to climate planning — the City of Austin Climate Equity Plan and the Travis County Climate Action Plan. This PCAP represents an opportunity to work across municipalities, building on the alignment across plans that pertain to greenhouse gas reduction and leveraging the implementation authority across each of the participating cities, counties, and regional planning organizations. These GHG reduction and climate goals are also reflected at the federal level. Measures developed from the PCAP will support Objective 1.1 of EPA’s Strategic Plan, “Reduce Emissions that Cause Climate Change,” and support compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards outlined in the Austin MSA Regional Air Quality Plan.}
}

@report{cityofbakersfieldCityBakersfieldPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {City of {{Bakersfield Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Bakersfield {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{City of Bakersfield}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--26},
  institution = {City of Bakersfield},
  location = {Bakersfield, CA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/city-of-bakersfield-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) provides an overview of the City of Bakersfield’s (City’s) near-term climate action strategy. It is the first deliverable due to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program. This PCAP includes:  an inventory of citywide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as of 2019, by sector;  a discussion of climate-related risks for low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs), as well as the potential benefits of climate action to these communities;  a priority list of GHG reduction measures for near-term implementation; and  a stakeholder engagement strategy to ensure successful implementation of these measures. This PCAP builds on the July 2023 Public Review Draft of the City of Bakersfield’s Climate Action Plan (Bakersfield CAP) and its associated technical appendices. Where noted, tables and figures in this PCAP are derived from these documents. This PCAP also takes into account significant community stakeholder feedback received in response to the draft Bakersfield CAP.}
}

@report{cityofbirminghamCleanAirBirmingham2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Clean {{Air}} \& {{Birmingham}}: {{Birmingham-Hoover Metropolitan Statistical Area Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Birmingham {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{City of Birmingham}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--23},
  institution = {City of Birmingham},
  location = {Birmingham, AL},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/city-of-birmingham-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {In 2023 the EPA allocated funding to the Birmingham-Hoover MSA in order to develop a climate action plan; the plan is required to include an inventory of greenhouse gases emitted in the MSA over a one-year time period, and emissions reduction strategies that could be implemented. The City of Birmingham elected to lead the climate action planning process, with the support of the Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham (RPCGB). The first iteration of the plan is the Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), which is this document. The PCAP is required to include an inventory of one emissions sector out of six: Agriculture and Open Space Buildings Energy Production Industry Transportation Waste The Birmingham-Hoover MSA PCAP focuses on transportation sector emissions and projects to reduce those emissions. The City of Birmingham will conduct a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP), which we intend to complete by Fall of 2025. We will then focus on implementation of key projects from the CCAP until Fall 2027, at which point the CPRG planning effort will conclude.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{cityofbowlinggreenBowlingGreenMetropolitan2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Bowling {{Green Metropolitan Statistical Area}} ({{BG MSA}}) {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Bowling {{Green PCAP}}},
  author = {{City of Bowling Green}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--76},
  institution = {The City of Bowling Green},
  location = {Bowling Green, KY},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/bowling-green-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The Bowling Green Metropolitan Statistical Area (BG MSA) consists of the City of Bowling Green, Kentucky, the rest of Warren County, and the three surrounding counties of Allen, Butler, and Edmonson. A mixture of urban, rural, and rapidly growing suburban communities can be found in the BG MSA. Without intervention, the effects of climate change will continue to be felt in the region through the coming decades, furthering social vulnerability and climate impacts that can reduce the quality of life and economic prosperity for the BG MSA’s residents. Kentucky and five of the census tracts in the BG MSA are ranked in the 90th percentile or higher in overall climate vulnerability according to the latest Climate Vulnerability Index. 1 This index finds that census tracts across Warren, Allen, Butler, and Edmonson counties are at risk for higher numbers of air pollution-related deaths as well as economic and productivity losses brought on by climate change. Further, five census tracts in the four BG MSA counties are designated as disadvantaged regarding climate change, health, and income disparities.2 The BG MSA’s Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is a proactive step to address the negative impacts and challenges brought by climate change. This document serves as the first iteration of the BG MSA’s first climate action plan and builds upon independent climate planning initiatives within the BG MSA. This iteration of the plan will be improved upon in the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) phase of the CPRG program. PCAP acts as a roadmap to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other air pollutants in the BG MSA and seeks to improve quality of life for those living and working in its four counties. The City of Bowling Green’s Environmental Compliance Division, with support from the city’s Neighborhood and Community Services, prepared this PCAP in response to the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Program (CPRG) initiated by the EPA. The CPRG is a significant constituent of the broader Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) legislation sanctioned in 2022. The creation of this PCAP was successful largely due to a \$1 million planning grant awarded to the BG MSA through the CPRG program. The contents of this PCAP are as follows and describe the current state of emissions and impacts in the BG MSA as well as the corresponding priority measures proposed to reduce air pollution: (1) greenhouse gas inventory, (2) priority pollution reduction measures and associated emissions reduction potential, (3) co-pollutant benefits analysis, (4) low income and disadvantaged communities analysis, and (5) authority to implement. The BG MSA has selected five overarching strategies as priority areas for emissions reduction: (1) transportation improvements, (2) building energy efficiency enhancement, (3) renewable energy enhancement, (4) waste diversion and landfill management, (5) land use enhancement. Within these five strategies, the BG MSA has 1  Environmental Defense Fund, Overall Climate Vulnerability in The U.S. | The U.S. Climate Vulnerability Index, 2024.n 2 The EPA defines disadvantaged communities as (1) census tracts that are at or above the threshold for one or more environmental, climate, or other burdens and associated socioeconomic burdens, (2) census tracts that are on land within the boundaries of Federally Recognized Tribes, or (3) census tracts that are surrounded by disadvantaged communities and are at or above the 50\% percentile for low income. Each category of burden is defined by relevant indicators; for example, communities facing health burdens are at or above the 90th percentile for asthma or diabetes or heart disease or low life expectancy. Census tract boundaries for statistical areas are determined by the U.S. Census Bureau once every ten years. For a detailed definition of disadvantaged communities by the EPA, see: Council on Environmental Quality, Climate \& Economic Justice Screening Tool. November 2022 9 identified twelve high-priority actions, hereafter referred to as “measures,” that have the scope to mitigate GHG emissions by an estimated 4\% by the year 2030 and 10\% by the year 2050 from a 2019 base year.}
}

@report{cityofcheyennePriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan For}} the {{Cheyenne Metropolitan Statistical Area}} ({{MSA}}), on Behalf of All Cities within {{Laramie County}}, {{Wyoming}}},
  shorttitle = {Cheyenne {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{City of Cheyenne}},
  date = {2024},
  pages = {1--60},
  institution = {City of Cheyenne},
  location = {Cheyenne, WY},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/cheyenne-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The City of Cheyenne has begun collaborative work across diverse public and private sectors in the Cheyenne Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) to produce this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). This PCAP is designed to support investment in policies, practices, and technologies that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) and other pollution emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all communities and residents of Laramie County. This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under assistance agreement \#5D - 00I10301-0. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document. The priority GHG measures contained within this PCAP should be construed as broadly available to any entity in the MSA eligible for receiving funding under the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program and other funding streams, as applicable. This PCAP is organized into ten sections: 1. Introduction 2. GHG Emissions Inventory 3. GHG Emissions Projections and Reduction Targets 4. Quantified Priority GHG Reduction Measures 5. Benefits Analysis 6. Low-Income and Disadvantaged Community Benefits Analysis 7. Review of Authority to Implement 8. Workforce Planning Analysis 9. Stakeholder Engagement Activities 10. Next Steps, Future Budget \& Staffing Needs 1.1 CPRG overview The Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program provides \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement ambitious plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful air pollution. Authorized under Section 60114 of the Inflation Reduction Act, this two-phase program provides \$250 million for noncompetitive planning grants, and approximately \$4.6 billion for competitive implementation grants. Phase 1 of the CPRG program provides flexible support to states, local governments, tribes, and territories regardless of where they are in their climate planning and implementation process. Planning grant recipients  Cheyenne WY MSA PCAP March 2024 4 are using the funding to design climate action plans that incorporate a variety of measures to reduce GHG emissions from across their economies in six key sectors, including electricity generation, industry, transportation, buildings, agriculture/natural and working lands, and waste management. Participation in the CPRG program will allow the Cheyenne Metropolitan Service Area to assess, develop, and implement plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful air pollution through policy, collaboration, and innovation in an equitable, just, and sustainable way.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{cityofelpasoPasoRegionalClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {El {{Paso Regional Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {El {{Paso PCAP}}},
  author = {{City of El Paso}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--73},
  institution = {City of El Paso},
  location = {El Paso, TX},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/el-paso-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The El Paso Metropolitan Statistical Area (El Paso MSA) faces climate risks including drought, flash flooding, air pollution, extreme heat, and extreme cold. Nearly 65\% of El Paso County and 100\% of Hudspeth County are considered low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs) facing burdens like linguistic isolation and poor health that make it harder to address climate risks. 1 In the face of these challenges, the City of El Paso worked with partners across El Paso and Hudspeth Counties to create this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). This PCAP prioritizes measures to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the El Paso MSA, while providing other benefits to residents, such as creating jobs, improving air quality and quality of life. The PCAP includes an MSA-wide inventory of major GHG emissions sources within El Paso County and Hudspeth County. In 2019, the El Paso MSA generated approximately 8,500,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e). The largest emissions sources were from transportation (40\% of total emissions), commercial energy use (24\%), industrial energy use (17\%), and residential energy use (16\%). These initial results are consistent with other communities in Texas and throughout the United States where building energy use and transportation are typically the largest community emissions sources. The PCAP was developed through a community driven process. The PCAP team gathered feedback from community members across El Paso and Hudspeth counties to identify ways to reduce climate pollution across different sectors. To solicit input from community members, particularly residents of low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs), the City of El Paso hosted a bilingual survey and an open house at a community center located in a LIDAC. In addition, the City of El Paso shared an overview of the PCAP on its website and hosted two community listening sessions to discuss the priority measures. The City of El Paso presented an overview of the PCAP in a City Council work session that was open to the public. The core engagement strategy was to meet people where they are and the City of El Paso met with key community institutions, such as Eco El Paso, Community First Coalition, Amanecer, The El Paso Chamber of Commerce, The El Paso Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and both the El Paso Community Foundation and the Paso Del Norte Health Foundation to brief them on the CPRG program. As an immediate follow-up to the PCAP, in April, community-based leaders and organizations will convene the region’s public leaders and 200 members from historically disinvested communities to discuss climate action. Together, residents, project partners, and other stakeholders shared more than 200 unique measure and project ideas to reduce GHG emissions in the El Paso MSA. The PCAP engagement process outcomes included: − 95+ community members attended an open house on January 24th − 640+ responses were received through the bilingual community survey open from January 24th to February 9th − 28 community members attended two listening sessions on February 20th and February 24th 1 Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), “Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool 1.0,” 2022, https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/\#3/33.47/-97.5. El Paso Metropolitan Statistical Area - Priority Climate Action Plan vi This community feedback shaped the plan’s priority measures. In El Paso’s PCAP, a priority measure is a broad strategy that addresses an emissions source or sources within the El Paso MSA, aligns with local goals, and is important to the community. Many of the priority measures, which are listed in Figure 1, come with more defined project ideas from the community. PCAP projects are specific, implementationready projects or programs that support a PCAP measure. In addition to high-level GHG reduction estimates and evaluation of the authority to implement, each priority measure also presents an assessment of LIDAC impacts. Benefits and disbenefits are described, with mitigation strategies included for each disbenefit identified. The order in which priority measures are presented in the PCAP is based on benefits the community prioritized through the engagement process. Community members provided 200+ unique ideas. Inter-Governmental project partners shared 35+ implementation-ready projects. From this input, 10 regional priority measures were identified.}
}

@report{cityofknoxvilleKnoxvilleTNPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Knoxville, {{TN Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Knoxville {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{City of Knoxville} and {KRTPO}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--63},
  institution = {City of Knoxville},
  location = {Knoxville, TN},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/knoxville-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The City of Knoxville developed the Knoxville Metropolitan Statistical Area’s (MSA) Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) to meet the requirements of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program. The CPRG program provides funding to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollutants. The City of Knoxville, as the lead organization representing the Knoxville MSA, was awarded a CPRG planning grant on August 1, 2023, and will use those funds to develop planning deliverables, including this PCAP. The funds will also be used to develop a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) in 2025 and a CCAP Status Report in 2027. 1.1 CPRG Program Overview The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), signed into law on August 16, 2022, directs federal funding to reduce carbon emissions, lower healthcare costs, fund the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and improve taxpayer compliance. The IRA contains provisions that directly or indirectly address issues related to climate change, including reduction of GHG emissions and promotion of adaptation and resilience to climate change impacts.1 The law represents the largest investment toward addressing climate change in United States history, investing approximately \$369 billion for climate and clean energy programs over ten years.2 The CPRG program, authorized under Section 60114 of the IRA, provides \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans for reducing GHG emissions and other harmful air pollutants. The CPRG program consists of two phases: planning and implementation. The planning phase provides \$250 million in noncompetitive grants to state and local agencies to develop emissions inventories and identify emissions reduction measures. The implementation phase provides \$4.6 billion in competitive grants to eligible applicants to implement GHG reduction measures identified in a PCAP developed under a CPRG planning grant.3 1 CRS. “Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA): Provisions Related to Climate Change,” October 3, 2022. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47262. 2 U.S. Department of Energy. “The Inflation Reduction Act Drives Significant Emissions Reductions and Positions America to Reach Our Climate Goals.” August 2022. https://www.energy.gov/sites. 3 US EPA. “Climate Pollution Reduction Grants.” January 18, 2023. https://www.epa.gov/inflation-reduction-act/climatepollution-reduction-grants. Knoxville MSA Priority Climate Action Plan | 2 1.2 PCAP Overview and Scope Because including a GHG reduction measure in a PCAP is a prerequisite for organizations to compete for the CPRG Phase 2 implementation grant, the measures identified in this PCAP are designed to be broad enough to encompass local and regional priorities for addressing climate pollution. To that end, the geographic scope of this PCAP covers the entirety of the Knoxville MSA, which consists of the following nine counties: Anderson, Blount, Campbell, Grainger, Knox, Loudon, Morgan, Roane, and Union (see Figure 1-1). This PCAP includes a focused list of near-term, high priority, implementation-ready measures to reduce GHG pollution throughout the Knoxville MSA region and aims to provide 40\% of the benefits of these measures to low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs) to further advance the goals of the federal Justice40 Initiative as set forth in Executive Order 14008. Table 1-1 summarizes the information provided within this PCAP, in accordance with EPA’s CPRG Planning guidance.4 Table 1-1: Summary of PCAP Elements and Location within Report PCAP Element Document Location GHG Inventory and Projections Section 2.1 Quantified GHG Reduction Measures Section 3 LIDACs Benefits Analysis Section 2.2 and Section 3 Review of Authority to Implement for Each Measure Section 3 1.3 Approach to Developing the PCAP To identify, prioritize, and analyze GHG reduction measures, the City of Knoxville followed the approach outlined in Figure 1-2. As part of this process, the City of Knoxville with support from the Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) continuously engaged stakeholders to seek feedback on priorities and discuss key implementation information. A summary of engagement efforts that were undertaken to support PCAP development are detailed in Section 1.4.}
}

@report{cityofmcallenpublicworksPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan City}} of {{McAllen City}} of {{Edinburg City}} of {{Mission Metropolitan Statistical Areas}}},
  shorttitle = {{{McAllen PCAP}}},
  author = {{City of McAllen Public Works}},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--20},
  institution = {City of McAllen Public Works},
  location = {McAllen, TX},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/mcallen-tx-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The City of McAllen continues its valued partnership with the neighboring municipalities of the City of Edinburg and the City of Mission. Through this municipality team designated as the McAllen-Edinburg-Mission Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA), the Cities have joined collaborative efforts for participation in the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Program. The McAllen MSA was awarded a CPRG – Planning Grant in 2023, and plans to incorporate stakeholder involvement through City departments, residents and business owners, local and state government agencies, universities, and community organizations in the development of a Climate Action Plan for the MSA region. For this endeavor, the McAllen-Edinburg-Mission MSA will be seeking consultant services during the next phase of the CPRG – Planning Grant consisting of the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan deliverable.}
}

@report{cityofrapidcityRapidCityCommunity2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Rapid {{City Community Climate Resiliency Plan}}: {{A Priority Climate Action Plan}} for {{Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions}} and {{Improving Climate Resiliency}}},
  shorttitle = {Rapid {{City PCAP}}},
  author = {{City of Rapid City} and {Sustainability Solutions Group} and {VIREO}},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--120},
  institution = {City of Rapid City},
  location = {Rapid City, SD},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/rapid-city-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {Rapid City is joining jurisdictions across the United States that are using federal Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) funding (through the Environmental Protection Agency’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program) to take local action to reduce climate pollution. The funding is for two stages of planning—Priority Climate Action Plans (PCAP) and Comprehensive Climate Action Plans (CCAP)—with the possibility of additional funding for implementing measures identified in the plans. The funding program is designed to help identify local measures that will reduce air pollution, reduce waste, generate clean energy, create resilience against extreme weather events like forest fires, bolster the local economy, and improve quality of life for residents. For this PCAP component of the process, 34 priority measures have been developed across seven action themes. Many priority measures focus on low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDAC), as taking action in these communities typically provides benefits to all. The upcoming CCAP component of the process will involve a more systematic analysis and thorough engagement process leading to a long-term action plan. This PCAP is for the Rapid City Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), which includes Pennington County and Meade County. The CCAP effort is intended to extend to the Micropolitan Statistical Area, which includes Lawrence County and the second-largest city in western South Dakota, the city of Spearfish. For this reason, references to initiatives happening in Lawrence County have been included in the context review. The PCAP includes a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory for the Rapid City area as well as a contextual analysis of trends and drivers of energy and emissions.}
}

@report{claflinGreenhouseGasEmissions2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Greenhouse Gas Emissions in {{Minnesota}} 2005-2020},
  author = {Claflin, Anne and Coleman, Nick and Hagan, Linda and Gaffney, Kevin and Trudeau, Lise},
  date = {2023-01},
  number = {lraq-2sy23},
  pages = {1--25},
  institution = {{Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Department of Commerce}},
  location = {St. Paul, Minnesota},
  url = {https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/lraq-2sy23.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {Climate change is here and now. Damaging storms and floods have increased in frequency, and our winters are warming fast, reducing lake ice coverage across the state by 10 to 14 days over the past 50 years. Beloved Northwoods trees like spruce, aspen, and birch are expected to leave Minnesota over the next 80 years if we continue to change our climate. These changes are caused by human activities that release greenhouse gases (GHGs). This emissions inventory summarizes what we know about GHG emissions in Minnesota, including the major sources and trends over time. Tracking GHG emissions and identifying their sources are two important ways that state government can help Minnesotans understand our changing climate and respond accordingly. To guide our response to climate change, the State of Minnesota has developed a Climate Action Framework mn.gov/framework. The Framework identifies immediate, near-term actions to reduce climate pollution and prepare Minnesota communities for the impacts of climate change. It also sets new goals for Minnesota to reduce GHG emissions by 50\% by 2030 and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. Analyzing Minnesota's emissions through this inventory allows us to track progress on the framework goals and focus actions for maximum impact to address climate change. This inventory documents Minnesota's GHG emissions from 2005 through 2020 and shows the impact of actions taken by individuals, organizations, and governments across Minnesota. The COVID-19 pandemic changed how Minnesotans lived and worked in 2020, further reducing emissions, but emissions were trending downward, even before the lifestyle shifts caused by the pandemic. Future years' data will show whether these are sustained trends or if some emissions bounced back when COVID-19 restrictions were eased. While there is much work ahead of Minnesota to meet our climate goals, this inventory demonstrates that collaborative action works.},
  langid = {english},
  annotation = {https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/mpca.data.services/viz/GHGemissioninventory/GHGsummarystory}
}

@report{clarkcountydepartmentofenvironmentandsustainabilityVegasHendersonParadiseMSAPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Las {{Vegas-Henderson-Paradise MSA Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Las {{Vegas PCAP}}},
  author = {{Clark County Department of Environment and Sustainability}},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--102},
  institution = {{Clark County Department of Environment and Sustainability}},
  location = {Las Vegas, NV},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/5d-98t73601-0-las-vegas-henderson-paradise-msa-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {Clark County, Nevada, is a dynamic and diverse region renowned for its vibrant communities and unique characteristics. With five incorporated cities—Boulder City, Henderson, Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, and Mesquite—the County is a hub of regional activity. Home to a rapidly growing population and booming tourism industry, Clark County embraces its role as a leading destination, attracting millions of visitors annually and anticipating to add another 820,000 residents by 2060. At the same time, Southern Nevada has undergone notable shifts in its climate, witnessing a rise in high heat days, intense precipitation events, regional wildfires, strong winds, and prolonged drought conditions. These changes are affecting the well-being, economy, and safety of the region. Notably, Las Vegas has been deemed one of the fastest-warming cities, experiencing the impacts of climate change firsthand, and Southern Nevada is situated in the Mojave Desert, the driest desert in North America. The All-In Clark County initiative takes a smart, bold, and inclusive approach to creating a sustainable community. Sustainability in Clark County goes beyond ensuring clean air and water; it encompasses affordable housing, clean energy, a variety of sustainable employment opportunities, and a climate conducive to the overall prosperity and well-being of present and future generations. Individually, jurisdictions and agencies in Southern Nevada have been moving forward over the last decade on various programs and initiatives that drive reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and foster a more resilient region. From solar array installations, building efficiency programs, clean fuel transit and electric fleets, and a nationally recognized water conservation program, the region knows what it takes to be sustainable. In 2021, during the development of the All-In Clark County Community Sustainability and Climate Action Plan, and amidst the hottest year on record (at the time) and record low water levels in Lake Mead, it became clear that regional coordination would be a more effective way to address the climate crisis. Timeline of Recent All-In Clark County Efforts to Address Climate Change in Southern Nevada: • August 2020 – In an effort to lead by example, Clark County launches the All-In Initiative by first addressing County operations. • March 2021 – On behalf of all Southern Nevada, Clark County funds the update of the 2014 Regional Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory. • June 2021 – The All-In Climate Vulnerability Assessment process kicks off to assess how resilient Southern Nevada’s people, natural resources, economy, and infrastructure are to climate change. • July 2021 – Launch of the planning process for the All-In Clark County Community Sustainability and Climate Action Plan. • September 2021 – Final All-In Climate Vulnerability Assessment released. • December 2021 – Release of the All-In Regional Community Greenhouse Gas Inventory with results for the whole region and for each municipality. • August 2022 – Local government and regional agency key staff hold first roundtable to discuss need for and interest in regional climate collaboration. • October 2022 – A second meeting of local government and regional agency key staff is held to determine the most appropriate regional climate collaboration model for Southern Nevada. • March 2023 – EPA announced the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to tackle climate pollution. • April 2023 – Clark County Commissioners unanimously approve and adopt the All-In Community Plan.  Las Vegas-Henderson-Paradise MSA Priority Climate Action Plan 6 / About All-In Clark County • August 2023 – County awarded EPA grant to create a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). • September 2023 – First meeting held of the All-In Regional Climate Collaborative. • November 2023 – Clark County and regional partners launched community engagement efforts as part of the PCAP development. • December 2023 – Clark County submits application for funding through the Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) program to design and launch pilot program for the All-In Home and Building Improvement Program. • January 2024 – The All-In Regional Climate Collaborative is official as all necessary boards and councils have approved their organization’s participation through an executed interlocal agreement that defines how the region will work collaboratively to further the goals and actions of the All-In Community Plan and the PCAP.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{cleanairnortheastfloridasteeringcommitteeCleanAirNortheast2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Clean {{Air Northeast Florida Regional Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Northeast {{FL PCAP}}},
  author = {{Clean Air Northeast Florida Steering Committee}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--164},
  institution = {Clean Air Northeast Florida Steering Committee},
  location = {Jacksonville, FL},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/clean-air-northeast-florida-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is a vital initial step in the journey toward sustainable environmental management, specifically tailored to Northeast Florida’s unique context. As the inaugural deliverable to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the planning grant phase of Phase 1, the PCAP is a comprehensive narrative report. This report meticulously outlines a range of near-term, high-impact, implementation-ready actions to reduce greenhouse gases. Furthermore, it incorporates a detailed quantitative analysis of the expected reductions in greenhouse gases as a result of these actions. Table 1 details all economic sectors' total NEFL GHG emissions in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (mtCO2e)},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{cmapPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan}} for the {{Chicago Metropolitan Statistical Area}}},
  shorttitle = {Chicago {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{CMAP}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--183},
  institution = {Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning},
  location = {Chicago, IL},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/chicago-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {As a part of the Inflation Reduction Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is implementing the historic the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program in partnership with states, local governments, territories and tribes to ensure the health and well-being of Americans and to support global initiatives to mitigate climate impacts through the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful air pollutants. 1.1.1 Phase 1 – Planning The Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program is providing funds to 46 states and some 67 of the nation’s largest MSAs to develop and implement plans for achieving CPRG objectives. The Metropolitan Mayors Caucus was awarded a \$1 million Planning Grant to complete the planning requirements of CPRG for the Chicago MSA over a four-year period beginning in 2023. This PCAP is the first of these CPRG planning products. The State of Illinois was awarded a \$3 million Planning Grant to complete the planning requirements of CPRG for the State over a similar timeframe. The State of Wisconsin and the State of Indiana also accepted CPRG Planning Grants. Successful completion of these complementary regional and state PCAPs allows jurisdictions covered by these plans to be eligible to compete for grants through the \$4.6 billion CPRG Implementation Grant Program. Each state and MSA participating in the CPRG planning grant program must complete these three climate planning products. The Metropolitan Mayors Caucus (Caucus) is collaborating with CMAP and NIRPC to produce these elements for the Chicago MSA following this timeline: 1. Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), due March 1, 2024 2. Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP), due June 2025 3. Status Report, due June 2027 The Caucus has led in the production of the PCAP. CMAP will lead in developing the CCAP. This narrative report will provide an overview of the region’s significant GHG sources/sinks and sectors, establish nearterm and long-term GHG emission reduction goals, and provide strategies and measures that address the highest priority sectors to meet those goals. The CCAP must include a comprehensive inventory of emissions and sinks for the following sectors: industry, electricity generation and use, transportation, commercial and residential buildings, agriculture, natural and working lands, and waste and materials management. CMAP will collaborate with the Caucus to produce the Status Report. 1.1.2 Phase 2 – Implementation The Priority GHG Reduction Strategies identified by the PCAP guide the eligibility of proposed projects for competitive CPRG Implementation funding, subject to review by the EPA. Any eligible jurisdiction within the Chicago MSA may apply for CPRG Implementation funding for projects that address priority strategies in either this PCAP, or their respective state plan – Illinois, Indiana, or Wisconsin. The U.S. EPA Notice of Funding Opportunity for CPRG Implementation Grants describes eligible applicants: states, municipalities, air pollution control agencies, tribes, territories, and groups thereof. Lead organizations that directly received a CPRG planning grant, including the Caucus are eligible to apply for an implementation grant.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{cmcogCentralMidlandsPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Central {{Midlands Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Columbia {{SC PCAP}}},
  author = {{CMCOG}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--64},
  institution = {Central Midlands Council of Governments},
  location = {Columbia, SC},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/columbia-sc-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {Central Midlands Geography Under this Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program, analyses and planning will occur for the Columbia Metropolitan Statistical Area and the Newberry Micropolitan Statistical Area. This geography covers the seven counties of Richland, Lexington, Kershaw, Newberry, Fairfield, Saluda, and Calhoun (see Figure 1). This area will be referred to as the Central Midlands, or more simply, the Midlands. Figure 1: The seven counties of the planning geography under the CPRG program. As of 2022 there are 869,831 people living in the Midlands according to the Census Bureau (16.9\% of the state’s population), representing 343,776 households with a median household income of \$57,184 (see Appendix A).1 In 2022 the combined Gross Domestic Product of the Midlands was \$55.8 billion according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (see Appendix A).2 The Midlands is growing both economically and in number of residents; in the last decade the population grew by 7.7\% (see Appendix A). Additional socio-economic details are shown below in Table 1},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{cmrpcGreaterWorcesterPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Greater {{Worcester Priority Climate Action Plan}} 2024-2035},
  shorttitle = {Worcester {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{CMRPC}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--233},
  institution = {Central Massachusetts Regional Planning Commission},
  location = {Worcester, MA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/greater-worcester-msa-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The Greater Worcester GWPCAP (GWPCAP) has been developed as part of a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) Phase 1 Planning Grant. To reduce greenhouse gas emissions throughout Central Massachusetts and Northeast Connecticut, the Central Massachusetts Regional Planning Commission (CMRPC) partnered with the Montachusett Regional Planning Commission (MRPC) and the Northeast Connecticut Council of Governments (NECCOG) to determine twenty priority measures for reducing emissions that aligned with the public’s needs and concerns for the region. For the region to achieve the climate goals of both Massachusetts and Connecticut, these measures are meant to be implemented in the short-term (up to 2035) and monitored for emissions reductions. CMRPC worked with Weston \& Sampson, Inc to develop an emissions baseline for 2017 and to quantify the emissions reductions for each measure. This plan represents the feedback of ten community outreach events, two public surveys, and countless hours of one-on-one conversations with stakeholders. CMRPC and partner organizations intend to use this plan to seek out funds to implement the many incredible and important projects described below. Six key emissions sectors were examined as part of the plan: Transportation, Electricity, Residential \& Commercial Buildings, Industry, Waste Management, and Agricultural, Natural \& Working Lands. Throughout the planning process, CMRPC found that the highest priorities for the region includes waste reduction through composting, weatherization of old housing stock, expanding fare-free public transit services, and expanding solar coverage in appropriate areas such as brownfields and rooftops. CMRPC would like to thank everyone who attended and contributed to the community workshops, responded to the surveys, and answered calls for input and advice when creating this plan; it is as much theirs as it is ours. CMRPC would like to give particular thanks to our partner organizations, MRPC and NECCOG, for their help in shaping the plan, the States of Massachusetts and Connecticut for their support throughout the process, the EPA for providing us with this opportunity, and the team at Weston \& Sampson for all the data analytics and calculations.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@article{conantGrasslandManagementImpacts2017,
  title = {Grassland Management Impacts on Soil Carbon Stocks: A New Synthesis},
  shorttitle = {Grassland Management Impacts on Soil Carbon Stocks},
  author = {Conant, Richard T. and Cerri, Carlos E. P. and Osborne, Brooke B. and Paustian, Keith},
  date = {2017},
  journaltitle = {Ecological Applications},
  volume = {27},
  number = {2},
  pages = {662--668},
  issn = {1939-5582},
  doi = {10.1002/eap.1473},
  url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/eap.1473},
  urldate = {2024-02-26},
  abstract = {Grassland ecosystems cover a large portion of Earths’ surface and contain substantial amounts of soil organic carbon. Previous work has established that these soil carbon stocks are sensitive to management and land use changes: grazing, species composition, and mineral nutrient availability can lead to losses or gains of soil carbon. Because of the large annual carbon fluxes into and out of grassland systems, there has been growing interest in how changes in management might shift the net balance of these flows, stemming losses from degrading grasslands or managing systems to increase soil carbon stocks (i.e., carbon sequestration). A synthesis published in 2001 assembled data from hundreds of studies to document soil carbon responses to changes in management. Here we present a new synthesis that has integrated data from the hundreds of studies published after our previous work. These new data largely confirm our earlier conclusions: improved grazing management, fertilization, sowing legumes and improved grass species, irrigation, and conversion from cultivation all tend to lead to increased soil C, at rates ranging from 0.105 to more than 1 Mg C·ha−1·yr−1. The new data include assessment of three new management practices: fire, silvopastoralism, and reclamation, although these studies are limited in number. The main area in which the new data are contrary to our previous synthesis is in conversion from native vegetation to grassland, where we find that across the studies the average rate of soil carbon stock change is low and not significant. The data in this synthesis confirm that improving grassland management practices and conversion from cropland to grassland improve soil carbon stocks.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {carbon,grassland,management,sequestration,soil land use}
}

@report{countyofsanbenitoCountySanBenito2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {County of {{San Benito}} \& {{County}} of {{Santa Clara MSA Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {San {{Benito}}, {{Santa Clara PCAP}}},
  author = {{County of San Benito} and {County of Santa Clara}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--180},
  institution = {San Benito, Santa Clara Counties},
  location = {Hollister, CA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/san-benito-and-santa-clara-counties-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The San Benito County and Santa Clara County MSA is comprised of the incorporated and unincorporated areas within San Benito and Santa Clara Counties. San Benito County encompasses approximately 1,400 square miles and is situated southeast of the San Francisco Bay Area, within the Monterey Bay Region. The County has two incorporated cities, Hollister and San Juan Bautista and boasts a rich history of ranching and agriculture. With an estimated total population of 67,579, approximately 71 percent of the county's residents identify as Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC). Specifically, 61 percent of the county’s residents identify as Hispanic or Latino. Santa Clara County spans approximately 1,300 square miles and is located in the southern tip of the San Francisco Bay Area. The County is bordered by the rolling hills of the Diablo Range to the east, the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west, and the San Francisco Bay to the north. The County is situated at the heart of Silicon Valley, but also has a historical and currently active agricultural economy. With an estimated total population of 1,870,945, BIPOC make up approximately 72 percent of Santa Clara County's residents. Figure 1 depicts San Benito and Santa Clara Counties, major roadways, urban areas, and waterbodies. The San Francisco Bay Area has long been recognized as a pioneer in climate action. From grassroots movements to groundbreaking policies, the region has consistently led the charge in mitigating climate change and implementing sustainable policies. Many jurisdictions in the region have established aggressive GHG reduction targets which meet or exceed state targets for carbon neutrality by 2045. These jurisdictions have also identified innovative programs and initiatives, ranging from building electrification to carbon sequestration. However, there remains a significant challenge in securing adequate funding to support these initiatives and implement them in an equitable manner. The high cost of implementing new technologies, infrastructure, and programs poses a barrier to progress. Although making progress locally on GHG mitigation, San Benito County and Santa Clara County residents are already facing and will continue to experience increasingly extreme and frequent climate impacts as global temperatures rise above pre-industrial levels. Both counties are expected to experience more frequent and intense heat events, prolonged periods of drought, increased frequency and severity of wildfires, degraded air quality, and more frequent extreme precipitation events and flooding, particularly in low-lying and riverine areas.1 These climate projections and impacts underscore the urgent need for the MSA to contribute their fair share to mitigating climate change.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{countyofventuraThousandOaksOxnardVenturaMetropolitan2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Thousand {{Oaks-Oxnard-Ventura Metropolitan Statistical Area}} ({{MSA}}) {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Ventura {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{County of Ventura}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--170},
  institution = {County of Ventura Sustainability Division},
  location = {Ventura, CA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/5d-98t72801-ventura-county-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The County of Ventura Sustainability Division is pleased to receive funds through U.S. EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) Planning Grant to create a Regional Climate Action Plan for the Thousand Oaks-Oxnard-Ventura Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA/County of Ventura). The County of Ventura is located in California between Santa Barbara and Los Angeles Counties, along the south-central California coastline. The County is diverse, both in geography and population, with land at sea level ranging all the way up to over 8,800 feet at the top of Mt. Pinos and more than 840,000 people. 1 The region is also notable for the 42 miles of coastline2 and incredibly fertile soil that is suitable for agricultural production of all types. The County is home to the only deep-water port (Port of Hueneme) between Los Angeles and San Francisco, and although it is the smallest port in the State in terms of footprint, it plays a major role in the local economy. Specifically, in 2021, the Port of Hueneme generated \$2.2 billion in trade related activity and 20,032 trade related jobs, accounting for 4 percent of Ventura County’s total Gross Domestic Product and making up 6 percent of the County’s local workforce. 3 The County consists of the unincorporated areas – along with the ten incorporated cities of Camarillo, Fillmore, Moorpark, Ojai, Oxnard, Port Hueneme, Santa Paula, Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, and San Buenaventura (Ventura). See Figure 1 for a map of the County and associated jurisdictions. The County’s geographic location makes the industries and communities within the region more susceptible to the impacts of climate change as it is located between the mountains and the sea. For example, in the past few years the County has felt impacts of climate change with 1,000-year storms,4 frequent large wildfires,5 and coastal flooding.6 1 The United States Census Bureau. Ventura County, California. Available at: https://data.census.gov/profile/Ventura\_County,\_California?g=050XX00US06111 2 County of Ventura Executive Office. Available at. https://www.ventura.org/county-executive-office/about-us/ 3 The Port of Hueneme (Oxnard Harbor District). February 23, 2022. Updated Assessment Shows Port of Hueneme’s Economic Footprint Reaches All Time Highs in Ventura County. Available at: https://www.portofhueneme.org/economic-report-2022-john-martin/ 4 Smith, Hayley and Toohey, Grace. January 25, 2024. SoCal sees two ‘thousand-year’ storms within weeks. More could be coming. Available at: https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2024-01-25/how-perfect-storms-dumped-rain-on-ventura-and-san-diego 5 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2024. Thomas Fire. Available at: https://www.fire.ca.gov/incidents/2017/12/4/thomas-fire/ 6 Sharp, Julie. December 28, 2023. Some Ventura County beaches closed as high surf and flooding wreak havoc on the area. Available at: https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/high-surf-hits-southern-california-coast-some-areas-to-see-15-to-20-foot-sets/  Priority Climate Action Plan 2 Figure 1 Regional Map of Project Partners Plans, programs, and policies have been developed and implemented throughout the region to reduce the greatest impacts of climate change and increase our ability to adapt. Recently adopted plans include the County of Ventura Climate Action Plan,7 City of Oxnard Climate Action \& Adaptation Plan,8 and the Camarillo Sustainability Master Plan for Municipal Operations. 9 Additionally, the City of Ventura10 has recently released a draft Climate Action Plan for public review and comment. The City of Thousand Oaks also released a draft Climate and Environmental Action Plan,11 which is anticipated to be adopted in Spring 2024. Ventura County recognizes the importance of integrating more holistic solutions, in a fiscally responsible way, to make the region more sustainable, while utilizing numeric metrics, such as GHG emissions to monitor success. As such, this plan is intended to go beyond the work that has been done previously and establish aspirational goals for the County to move towards. One of the greatest hurdles to greater progress is a dash for limited resources coupled with limited time.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{cprcBatonRougeMetropolitan2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Baton {{Rouge Metropolitan Statistical Area Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  author = {{CPRC}},
  year = {Febraury 2024},
  pages = {1--132},
  institution = {Capital Region Planning Commission},
  location = {Baton Rouge, LA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/5d-02f46201-pcap-baton-rouge-msa.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {With its enactment of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA), Congress provided many tools to pursue greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution reductions, including the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program. The overall strategy of the CPRG is to address climate change by identifying initiatives that reduce GHGs, provide good-paying jobs, and address environmental injustices and inequalities. CPRG planning grants support the development of climate action plans for states, local governments, Tribes and territories, while CPRG implementation grants are a competitive opportunity to implement specific measures included in the climate action plans. The Baton Rouge Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) received a grant from the CPRG program to develop plans to reduce GHG emissions across the MSA’s parishes. This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is the first of two plans that the MSA will develop with the funding. The primary objective is to identify near-term, high-priority, implementation-ready measures to reduce GHG emissions. These measures are designed to be eligible for CPRG implementation funding (CPRG phase 2). This PCAP includes a context review, a GHG inventory, business-as-usual GHG emissions projections, identification of low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs), and priority measures for GHG reductions with LIDAC benefits analysis. The PCAP will be followed by the development of a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP). The CCAP will provide a more comprehensive set of measures to reduce GHG emissions that will be developed by undertaking further technical analysis and broad and meaningful engagement with the public and affected parties. The Baton Rouge MSA, also known as the Capital Region, comprises the 10 parishes surrounding the state capital of Baton Rouge: Ascension Parish, Assumption Parish, East Baton Rouge Parish, East Feliciana Parish, Iberville Parish, Livingston Parish, Pointe Coupee Parish, St. Helena Parish, West Baton Rouge Parish, and West Feliciana Parish. The MSA sprawls across nearly 4,200 square miles of the southeastern portion of Louisiana state, with a population of 870,569. There are already a broad spectrum of initiatives in the Baton Rouge MSA aimed at transitioning towards renewable energy and reducing GHG emissions while fostering economic growth. The PCAP planning process builds upon these efforts and initiatives, and identifies additional measures from transportation such as the MSA’s Long Range Transportation Plan MOVE 2046 for a Changing Region. The development of this PCAP includes: 1) a policy and background review; 2) an inventory of current GHG emissions and business-as-usual projections; 3) two public meetings; 4) a technical analysis of the proposed measures to estimate the emissions reductions, including costs and benefits; 5) LIDAC analysis of the benefits from the proposed measures; and 6) prioritization of the measures, given their benefits and outcomes.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{cprcPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan}} for the {{RaleighCary}} and {{Durham-Chapel Hill Metropolitan Statistical Areas}}},
  shorttitle = {Durham {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{CPRC}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--121},
  institution = {Central Pines Regional Council},
  location = {Durham, NC},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/raleigh-durham-nc-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {Central Pines Regional Council has worked with its partners and hundreds of regional stakeholders to produce this priority climate action plan (PCAP) to support investment in policies, practices, and technologies that reduce pollutant emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life in the Raleigh-Cary and Durham-Chapel Hill area. This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under assistance agreement 02D56123 to Central Pines Regional Council (formerly named Triangle J Council of Governments or TJCOG). The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document. The measures contained herein should be construed as broadly available to any entity within the geographic scope of this PCAP eligible to receive funding under the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) Implementation Grant General Competition and other funding streams, as applicable.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{crcogHartfordEastHartford2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Hartford - {{East Hartford}} – {{Middletown Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {{{CRCOG PCAP}}},
  author = {{CRCOG}},
  date = {2024-03},
  institution = {Capitol Region Council of Governments},
  location = {Hartford, CT},
  url = {https://crcog.org/document/2024-priority-climate-action-plan-pcap/},
  urldate = {2024-03-01},
  abstract = {The Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is the first required deliverable of the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Program (CPRG). The PCAP outlines near-term carbon reduction measures ready for implementation in 2025-2030. PCAP measures must lessen GHG emissions and air pollution and benefit low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs). The PCAP is an initial step towards a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) and the final planning document, an implementation status report. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program provides funding to U.S. states, regions, territories, and tribes, to make meaningful plans to reduce green house gases (GHGs) and other harmful air pollutants. The program funds planning work to identify potential measures to reduce GHG emissions regionally, as defined in this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) and the forthcoming Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP). The CPRG Implementation Phase will fund projects through a competitive grant process. This document, the PCAP for the HartfordEast Hartford–Middletown metropolitan statistical area (MSA), has been created by the Capitol Region Council of Governments (CRCOG) and the Lower Connecticut River Valley Council of Governments (RiverCOG). The planning area for the region comprises 60 communities and over 1.2 million residents. The region is located in the middle of the state, and contains a mix of urban, suburban and rural communities, including the state's capitol. The MSA primarily contains municipalities within CRCOG and RiverCOG with some additions from neighboring COGs (Figure 1). The PCAP is a product of: • Comprehending the region’s current GHG emissions through a GHG inventory prepared by the University of Massachusetts – Amherst (UMass – Amherst), • Understanding what GHG reduction measures municipalities are currently undertaking through a series of virtual and in-person stakeholder meetings, • Engaging stakeholders at the municipal, state, and local level to further develop and refine GHG reduction measures – with a particular focus on engaging local residents in low income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs), and • Reviewing planning documents at the state, regional and local levels to see how the GHG reduction measures proposed in this document align with planning efforts and goals. The PCAP is focused on short-term, implementable GHG reduction measures that are a priority for the region. Any measure seeking EPA implementation funding must be included in the PCAP, whether the COG or a municipality submits the grant application. This PCAP highlights twelve GHG reduction measures grouped into six key sectors identified by the EPA: Electricity Generation, Transportation, Agricultural/ Natural \& Working Lands, Waste \& Materials Management, Commercial/Residential Buildings, and Industrial sectors.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@online{creechSavingMoneyTime2017,
  title = {Saving {{Money}}, {{Time}} and {{Soil}}: {{The Economics}} of {{No-Till Farming}} | {{USDA}}},
  shorttitle = {Saving {{Money}}, {{Time}} and {{Soil}}},
  author = {Creech, Elizabeth},
  date = {2017},
  url = {https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2017/11/30/saving-money-time-and-soil-economics-no-till-farming},
  urldate = {2024-02-26},
  abstract = {For farmers across the country, it comes as no surprise to hear that conservation tillage practices – particularly continuous no-till – can save time and money compared to conventional tillage. The potential benefits of no-till are well-documented, from improving soil health to reducing annual fuel and labor investments.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{crtCentralinaRegionalCouncil2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Centralina {{Regional Council Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Charlotte {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{CRT}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--144},
  institution = {Centralina Regional Council},
  location = {Charlotte, NC},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/charlotte-gastonia-concord-nc-sc-msa-pcap.pdf},
  abstract = {The Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia North Carolina/South Carolina Metropolitan Statistical Area (CLT MSA) received Climate Pollution Reduction Grant funding to produce this priority climate action plan (PCAP) to support investment in policies, practices, and technologies that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for communities within the CLT MSA. This PCAP is in alignment with NC Executive Order (EO) 2461 , which establishes science-based goals of 50\% reduction in GHG emissions below 2005 levels by 2030 and net-zero emissions by 2050. EO 246 builds on EO 802 , affirming North Carolina's commitment to addressing climate change, and EOs 1433  and 2684  establishing the Andrea Harris Social, Economic, Environmental and Health Equity Task Force to address long-term disparities in health and wellness outcomes in underserved communities. Centralina Regional Council (Centralina) has led the efforts to coordinate the various local government entities within the CLT MSA in development of this PCAP. Centralina’s purpose is to provide collaboration for leaders and entities across the region to share information and build solutions to advance the regions goals.5  Centralina provides a variety of support services to the region, including planning, grants and intergovernmental coordination, transportation and mobility, and business and workforce development, among others. The CLT MSA climate action planning study area covered by this PCAP includes Anson, Cabarrus, Cleveland, Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan, Stanly, and Union counties in North Carolina (NC), and Chester, Lancaster, and York counties in South Carolina (SC) (see Figure 1). Cleveland and Stanly counties are not part of the CLT MSA but are included in this planning effort to create consistency with transportation planning organization geographies. All of these counties (including Cleveland and Stanly) are collectively referred to as the CLT MSA study area for purposes of this PCAP, as shown in Figure 1.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{ctdeepEPAClimatePollution2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {{{EPA Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Planning Grant First Deliverable}}: {{A Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Connecticut {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{CT DEEP}},
  date = {2024},
  pages = {1--183},
  institution = {{Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection}},
  location = {Hartford, CT},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/connecticut-state-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {A. A Priority Climate Action Plan – implementation-ready climate action measures for federal funding The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CT DEEP) developed this State Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) with funding from the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program: Phase 1 Planning Grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designated by the federal Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022. CT DEEP received \$3 million in formula funds from EPA for the completion of this PCAP and a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP). This PCAP is focused on identifying immediately implementable climate actions that are likely to be competitive when applying for CPRG implementation funding. The CCAP, which will be developed over a longer time-horizon, will create a roadmap for Connecticut to achieve necessary emission reductions across all sectors. The EPA also awarded planning funds to three Connecticut Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), the Pequot Tribal Nation, and the Mohegan Tribe to develop PCAPs and CCAPs covering their geographic areas. The MSA plans are led by the relevant Council of Governments (COGs): • WestCOG \& MetroCOG: Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk MSA • SCRCOG \& NVCOG: New Haven-Milford MSA • CRCOG \& RiverCOG: Hartford-East Hartford-Middletown MSA This State PCAP contains 14 implementation-ready climate action measures in the sectors of transportation, buildings, electricity, waste, and natural and working lands that: • Align with Connecticut’s existing climate action plans, including the Governor’s Council on Climate Change (GC3) January 2021 report and the state’s sector-specific climate plans (see Table 1; see also CT DEEP’s Climate Change webpage, which highlights some of the key plans).  DRAFT March 1, 2024 6 • Were considered competitive for funding under the CPRG program Phase 2 Implementation Grant when qualitatively evaluated against EPA’s scoring criteria for that grant, including maximizing greenhouse gas emission reductions in the near-term of 2025-2030 and with significant benefits to low income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs), per EPA’s terminology. • Are implementable within the 5-year period of performance to meet the CPRG Implementation Grant requirement that all grant funds be spent by October 2029. • Have existing entities within the state with the authority to implement these actions; e.g., these 14 actions do not require additional statutory authority to be implemented. • Have a funding gap and need that could be met by the funds available from the CPRG alone or in combination with other funding sources. Eligible entities for the CPRG Phase 2 Implementation Grant within Connecticut, which includes municipalities, Councils of Governments, and Tribes, may reference the 14 climate action measures for the purpose of applying for funding to implement that climate action. According to the Notice of Funding Opportunity issued by EPA for funding under the CPRG, entities may only apply for CPRG Implementation Grant funding for climate action measures (also known as “greenhouse gas reduction measures”) included in a PCAP that covers their geographic area. The state PCAP covers all eligible entities; a regional plan from an MSA or Tribe may also cover them. The entity’s Implementation Grant application may refer to either or both PCAPs. EPA will not award implementation grant funding for the same climate action in the same geographic location. (Therefore, eligible entities should please contact CT DEEP at deep.climatechange@ct.gov if they are planning to apply for funding aligned with a climate action in the State PCAP to avoid this situation. Coordination of applications is critical to maximizing potential CPRG funding being awarded to Connecticut. For more information go to: https://www.epa.gov/inflation-reduction-act/about-cprg-implementation-grants.) The 14 highly focused, near-term list of implementation-ready climate actions in this State PCAP best met the criteria above for federal funding opportunities from the EPA CPRG. If implemented with additional federal funding, these 14 measures can help Connecticut meet its greenhouse gas emission reduction targets to fight climate change and benefit low income disadvantaged communities in the state by ensuring cleaner air, creating good jobs, and lowering energy bills.  DRAFT March 1, 2024 7 This PCAP contains the required elements from the EPA CPRG Planning Grant guidance (see Sec. 15.3. of EPA CPRG Planning Grants Program Guidance for StatesMunicipalities-Air Agencies 03-01-2023) as follows: • Greenhouse Gas Inventory • Quantified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Measures (14 Climate Action Measures) • Benefits Analysis (Reduction in Co-pollutants) • Low Income Disadvantaged Communities (LIDACs) Benefits Analysis • Review of Authority to Implement • Intersection with Other Funding Availability (focused on other federal funding opportunities through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act) Additional information on Connecticut’s existing climate plans, statutory economywide greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, and the coordination and engagement activities conducted during the planning process are also included. B. The role of the 14 climate action measures within Connecticut’s climate change landscape This PCAP aligns with—but does not replace—the pathways and recommendations described in Connecticut’s climate plans (see Table 1). Instead, this plan is designed as a resource for applicants seeking CPRG Phase 2 Implementation Grants, as described above. CT DEEP and its sister agencies continue to take action to implement recommendations of the Governor’s Council on Climate Change (GC3) (summarized in Box 1) and to work with the legislature to ensure the state has the statutory authority it needs to implement those recommendations and the state’s sector-specific climate plans. The CT DEEP is uniquely structured to meet the challenge of climate change as a state agency charged with programs for energy, environmental protection, and natural resource conservation. Under this agency structure, all the plans in Table 1 may be aligned across these divisions allowing for a multi-sector approach to addressing climate change, which is reflected in the climate actions measures of this PCAP. The GC3 exemplifies that multi-sector approach that also centered equity and environmental justice in its planning and engagement process. The 14 climate action measures in this PCAP were informed by that process that included 100+  DRAFT March 1, 2024 8 organizations and 186 collaborative meetings with 231 individual working group members in addition to engagement on all the sector-specific climate plans. Building upon that previous engagement process was critical because the PCAP planning process afforded a short timeframe for completion, approximately six months from the time of award, which somewhat limited opportunities for engagement. During these six months, DEEP held a public meeting, requested feedback and public comment on the 14 measures through a public meeting and survey, sought regular advice from the Low Income Disadvantaged Communities Advisory Group, and engaged with a limited number of community organizations within LIDACs, in addition to coordinating with sister agencies, the MSA organizations, and municipal governments. The GC3’s economy-wide plan and the more detailed strategies in each of the state’s sector-specific plans - including the 2020 Integrated Resources Plan which shows how the state can meet its statutory zero carbon energy supply by 2040 target - serve as the current pathways to meet Connecticut’s 2030 and 2050 targets. The 14 measures in this PCAP support those pathways, but they are not an exhaustive list of all the actions that Connecticut can and needs to take to address climate change. The Comprehensive Climate Action Plan process described below will further strengthen the focus on meeting necessary 2050 reductions.},
  langid = {english}
}

@dataset{departmentofhomelandsecurityNaturalGasService2017,
  title = {Natural {{Gas Service Territories}} - {{Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data}}},
  shorttitle = {{{MN}} Natural Gas Service Territories},
  author = {Department of Homeland Security},
  date = {2017},
  url = {https://hifld-geoplatform.opendata.arcgis.com/maps/natural-gas-service-territories}
}

@report{deqMontanaClimatePollution2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Montana {{Climate Pollution Reduction Priorities Supporting}} Healthy Communities through Innovative {{Montana-made}} Solutions},
  shorttitle = {Montana {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{DEQ}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--97},
  institution = {Department of Environmental Quality},
  location = {Helena, MT},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/montana-pollution-reduction-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {This document is intended to meet the needs of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program. The CPRG program is an opportunity for Montana businesses and communities to access over \$4 billion in federal funding for Montana-made projects. It is an opportunity to help Montanans tackle real needs that limited state resources may not fully address. Montanans experience a changing climate through record-setting summer heat, longer wildfire seasons, changing snowpack, more frequent drought in some areas and historic flooding in others. The CPRG program is an opportunity to support Montana-made solutions to the changing climate. The CPRG program is a two-phase federal grant program that allows the state to develop and implement community-driven projects that reduce ambient air pollution while supporting the creation of quality jobs and lowering energy costs for Montanans. • Phase I provided \$250 million for noncompetitive planning grants, of which states were eligible for \$3 million each to support the development of a climate action plan. • Phase II includes \$4.6 billion in competitive implementation grants to execute the projects identified in the climate action plan. In August 2023, the State of Montana received a four-year \$3 million planning grant under the CPRG program. Governor Gianforte designated the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) as the lead agency to receive the grant and facilitate a broad planning process. COORDINATION AND OUTREACH Since August, DEQ has engaged a wide range of interested parties from across Montana to identify emission reduction measures that will cut pollution and improve the lives of Montanans. From the start, DEQ established an expectation that the measures included in Montana’s plan would be non-regulatory, incentive-based actions that focus on innovation and do not expand government. As lead agency, DEQ conducted extensive intergovernmental coordination and outreach in the development of this PCAP. DEQ engaged the following state agencies, to varying degrees, in discussions about this plan: • Department of Natural Resources and Conservation • Fish, Wildlife \& Parks • Department of Commerce • Department of Agriculture • Department of Transportation 2 • Department of Public Health and Human Services • Department of Labor \& Industry • Disaster \& Emergency Services • Governor’s Office of Indian Affairs DEQ also solicited input from a broad range of stakeholders representing the organizations, groups, and individuals who may be impacted by implementation of this plan. While DEQ actively identified potential interested parties, the list of stakeholders expanded as groups and individuals became aware of the program and contacted DEQ to be involved in the planning process. Stakeholders included: • Economic development organizations • Environmental advocates • Utilities • Local elected officials • Universities • Community-based organizations • Other interested organizations; and • Montana residents. DEQ actively engaged with our regional and national organization partners, including the Conveners Network, in order to hear and learn from other states as we worked through the planning process. DEQ used multiple outreach channels—including a new CPRG webpage, email distribution lists, in-person and virtual public meetings, DEQ’s existing public notice web pages, online surveys, press releases, and social media—to share information about the planning process. DEQ prioritized information sharing and transparency throughout the PCAP development process and will continue to develop and maintain stakeholder engagement strategies. DEQ solicited public input on potential emission reduction priorities from late-October through early-January and received more than 350 individual submittals from individuals, organizations, and businesses across the state. In collaboration with other state agencies and the Governor’s office, DEQ then reviewed and prioritized project proposals, focusing on projects that will cut harmful pollution, catalyze innovation, reduce energy cost burdens, and provide real benefits to our communities without any new red tape. THE MONTANA POLLUTION REDUCTION PLAN As lead agency, DEQ is responsible for developing the grant deliverables for the State of Montana under the CPRG program, including a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). This “Montana Pollution Reduction Plan” represents the state’s PCAP. This plan differs from past climate planning because it is directly tied to federal funding made available to implement the  3 projects states identify. This is an opportunity for Montana-made, market-driven solutions focused on innovation that will also reduce emissions. This plan includes strategies to reduce emissions and support thriving Montana communities through innovation, not regulation. DEQ produced this plan to support investment in practices and technologies that reduce air pollution, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all Montanans. Nothing in this plan is intended to be implemented through new policies, regulations, or requirements, and projects that propose to use regulation to cut emissions are not covered by this plan. This document is organized into the following sections: 1. Montana’s Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory 2. Priority Emission Reduction Measures 3. Low-Income \& Disadvantaged Community (LIDAC) Benefits Analysis 4. Conclusion \& Next Steps 5. Appendices FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The development of Montana’s PCAP has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under assistance agreement 00105500 to the state of Montana. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document.}
}

@report{deqOregonPriorityClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Oregon’s {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Oregon {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{DEQ} and Schafer, Morgan},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--184},
  institution = {Oregon Department of Environmental Qualtiy},
  location = {Portland, OR},
  url = {https://www.oregon.gov/deq/ghgp/Documents/CPRG-OregonPCAP.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-01},
  abstract = {Oregon is already experiencing the devastating effects of climate change. Extreme weather events, chronic heat and drought, flooding and intense wildfires are impacting everyone in Oregon. In March 2020, Governor Brown signed Executive Order 20-04, directing state agencies to take action to reduce and regulate greenhouse gas emissions toward meeting reduction goals of at least 45\% below 1990 emissions levels by 2035. Achieving these reductions requires enormous effort and investments throughout Oregon’s economy and landscape. Oregon has a good start in reducing climate pollution, and the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program offers a historic opportunity to make investments that will be critical to achieving those goals. The Oregon Departments of Environmental Quality and Energy developed Oregon’s Priority Climate Action Plan as part of an Environmental Protection Agency Phase I Climate Pollution Reduction Grant. The grant program is one of many funding opportunities provided in the federal Inflation Reduction Act. The EPA has stated objectives to prioritize grant funds: 1) that achieve maximum reductions in greenhouse gas emissions while driving benefits to surrounding communities, and 2) to invest in measures that are ready to receive funds to use over the next several years. Oregon has taken those objectives to heart, and that is reflected in the framework of our state’s plan. This plan is not designed to address all the necessary and needed actions for emission reductions in Oregon. Instead, it has been developed to achieve the most reductions in the short term so that longer term planning, engagement, and development can be a future focus. DEQ and ODOE selected the measures in this plan to meet EPA’s criteria in the implementation grant notice guidance, prioritizing greenhouse gas reductions over the next several years. This plan utilizes the work already done in Oregon by building on existing analyses, policies, and programs. This plan is also intended to guide how Oregon will engage with EPA on its Phase II Implementation Grant application that will be submitted later this year. Lastly, this plan contains Tribal priority measures in support of grant application submissions. The three main areas identified in this plan for EPA grant funding are 1) transportation, 2) residential and commercial buildings, and 3) waste and materials management. These categories contribute the most to greenhouse gas e},
  keywords = {State PCAP}
}

@article{dharmawanApplicationHighResolutionRemoteSensing2021,
  title = {Application of {{High-Resolution Remote-Sensing Data}} for {{Land Use Land Cover Mapping}} of {{University Campus}}},
  author = {Dharmawan, Irwan Ary and Rahadianto, Muhammad Ario Eko and Henry, Edward and Endyana, Cipta and Aufaristama, Muhammad},
  date = {2021-07-30},
  journaltitle = {The Scientific World Journal},
  shortjournal = {ScientificWorldJournal},
  volume = {2021},
  eprint = {34381317},
  eprinttype = {pmid},
  pages = {5519011},
  issn = {2356-6140},
  doi = {10.1155/2021/5519011},
  url = {https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8352705/},
  urldate = {2024-04-05},
  abstract = {The study of Land Use Land Cover (LULC) is essential to understanding how land has been altered in recent years and what has caused the processes behind the change. This is significant for the future development of the area, particularly on the campus of the Universitas Padjadjaran Jatinangor. The purpose of this study was to apply remote-sensing techniques to map a university campus and vicinity by comparing the area of urban green space (UGS) and floor area ratios (FARs) of the campus in 2015 and 2017. Additionally, surface runoff analysis was also conducted. For our research, we used WorldView-2's high-resolution satellite imagery with a resolution of 0.46\,m in the Universitas Padjadjaran (Padjadjaran University, or Unpad) Jatinangor campus, Jawa Barat, Indonesia. Our approach was to interpret the imagery by running the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) to distinguish UGS and FAR and using digital elevation model (DEM) interferometric synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data with hydrologic analysis to identify the direction of surface runoff. The results obtained are as follows: the UGS remained more extensive compared with FAR, but the difference decreased over time owing to infrastructure development. Surface runoff has tended to flow toward the southeast in direct relation to the slope configuration.},
  pmcid = {PMC8352705}
}

@report{districtofcolumbiadepartmentofenergyandenvironmentDistrictColumbiaPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {District of {{Columbia Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {{{DC PCAP}}},
  author = {{District of Columbia Department of Energy and Environment}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--46},
  institution = {{District of Columbia Department of Energy and Environment}},
  location = {Washington, DC},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/dc-cprg-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {1 Introduction The District Department of Energy and Environment developed this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) to meet the requirements of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program. The CPRG program provides funding to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollution. By submitting this PCAP, the District is eligible to apply for implementation funds through CPRG. 1.1 CPRG overview The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), signed into law on August 16, 2022, directs federal funding to reduce carbon emissions, lower healthcare costs, and improve taxpayer compliance. The IRA contains provisions that directly or indirectly address climate change, including reduction of U.S. GHG emissions and promotion of adaptation and resilience to climate change impacts.1 The law represents the largest investment toward addressing climate change in United States history, investing approximately \$369 billion in energy security and climate change programs over the next 10 years.2 The CPRG program, authorized under Section 60114 of IRA, provides \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans for reducing GHG emissions and other harmful air pollution. The program consists of two phases: planning and implementation. The planning phase provides \$250 million in noncompetitive planning grants for state and local agencies, tribes, and territories to develop a PCAP, CCAP and Status Report. The second phase provides \$4.6 billion for competitive grants to eligible applicants to implement GHG reduction measures identified in a PCAP. 1.2 PCAP Overview and Definitions This PCAP identifies high priority, ready-to-implement GHG reduction measures that will provide significant GHG reductions and other benefits to the District, including to specific communities within it. Inclusion of a measure within a PCAP is a pre-requisite for agencies and organizations within an MSA or state to compete for implementation grant funding in the second phase of the CPRG program. Accordingly, the measures identified in this PCAP are designed to be broad enough to encompass local priorities for addressing climate pollution. The PCAP also serves as a starting point for a larger, more comprehensive region-wide climate planning effort to be conducted through 2025 (CCAP). This PCAP closely follows priority actions found in the District’s related plans, including Carbon Free DC (CFDC), Clean Energy DC (CEDC) and 2.0 update-in-progress, Sustainable DC 2.0, moveDC, and more.}
}

@report{dnrecDelawareClimatePollution2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Delaware {{Climate Pollution Reduction Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Delaware {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{DNREC}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--99},
  institution = {{Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control}},
  location = {Wilmington, DE},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/dnrec-cprp.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), signed into law on August 16, 2022, directs federal funding to reduce carbon emissions, lower healthcare costs, fund the IRS, and improve taxpayer compliance. The IRA contains provisions that directly or indirectly address issues related to climate change, including reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and promotion of adaptation and resilience to climate change impacts. The U.S. EPA CPRG program, authorized under Section 60114 of the IRA, provides \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans for reducing GHG emissions and other harmful air pollution. The CPRG program consists of a planning and implementation phase: • The planning phase provides \$250 million in noncompetitive planning grants for state and local agencies to develop phased plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions • The implementation phase provides \$4.6 billion for competitive implementation grants to eligible applicants to implement GHG reduction measures identified in a plan developed under a CPRG Planning grant.1 The Delaware DNREC is the designated lead for CPRG planning deliverables for the state of Delaware. Along with DNREC, the Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD metropolitan statistical area (MSA) in Delaware also received a CPRG planning grant. DNREC coordinated closely with the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC), the lead organization responsible for the MSA’s CPRG plans, to align emission reduction measures where practicable and jointly engage with stakeholders across Northern Delaware This document is a grant deliverable for the CPRG Program and serves as the state level “Priority Climate Action Plan” as required by the grant. The document includes information 1 US EPA. “Climate Pollution Reduction Grants.” January 18, 2023. https://www.epa.gov/inflation-reduction-act/climate-pollutionreduction-grants. Definitions • GHG: The\,air pollutants\,carbon dioxide, hydrofluorocarbons, methane, nitrous oxide, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. • GHG Inventory: A list of emission sources and sinks, and the associated emissions quantified using standard methods. • GHG Reduction Measure: Policies, programs, actions, or projects that reduce GHG emissions or enhance carbon removal. Measures that enhance “carbon removal” are those that increase the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through, for example, the uptake of carbon and storage in soils, vegetation, and forests. • Benefits: Improvements in air quality/reduction in harmful air pollutants. • Co-Benefits: Positive effects beyond the stated goal of a GHG reduction measure (e.g., improved public health outcomes, economic benefits, increased climate resilience). • Low Income Disadvantaged Community (LIDACs): Communities with residents that have low incomes, limited access to resources, and disproportionate exposure to environmental or climate burdens. DELAWARE’S CPRP | 2 required as outlined in the March 2023 EPA document: “Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Program: Formula Grants for Planning Program, Guidance for States, Municipalities, and Air Pollution Control Agencies.” Within this guidance document EPA specified tools or approaches to use. DNREC followed this guidance, but also presents state-specific supplemental or additional information where available. This plan includes the activities and actions already identified and prioritized through the development of the 2021 CAP as well as additional information and analysis about these actions as required by EPA. This document does not supersede or serve as a replacement or update for the 2021 Climate Action Plan and the Delaware Climate Action Plan 2023 Implementation Report. The completion and delivery of this report to EPA enables the state and eligible entities within the state to apply for CPRG grant funding through the EPA for implementation of emission reduction measures described within the report. 1.1 Climate Pollution Reduction Plan Purpose, Scope, and Overview Starting in 2019, Delaware undertook a multi-year comprehensive climate planning process to develop its first comprehensive Climate Action Plan that included: • Stakeholder and community engagement in all Delaware counties and with key industrial sectors and technical experts in the state.2 • Development, prioritization, and analysis of strategies and actions to reduce GHG emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change. 3 • Selection of key priority strategies and actions for emission reduction and adaptation for inclusion in the state’s Climate Action Plan. • Implementation of certain strategies and continued public outreach and engagement about climate change and the role of the Climate Action Plan. This transparent process and robust engagement resulted in the state’s 2021 Climate Action Plan (CAP), which has subsequently guided the state’s efforts to minimize GHG emissions and maximize resilience to climate change impacts. Activities and actions that were spurred from the 2021 CAP are still ongoing and continue to be a high priority for the state to address climate change. This Climate Pollution Reduction Plan was developed based upon EPA grant guidelines and requirements. It consolidates the information and analysis presented in the 2021 CAP and identifies policy or progress updates since the CAP’s completion, where available. This Climate Pollution Reduction Plan includes the information outlined in Table 1 below. In this table, the},
  langid = {english}
}

@article{domkeGreenhouseGasEmissions2021,
  title = {Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Removals from Forest Land, Woodlands, and Urban Trees in the {{United States}}, 1990–2019},
  author = {Domke, Grant M. and Walters, Brian F. and Nowak, David J. and Smith, James and Nichols, Michael C. and Ogle, Stephen M. and Coulston, J. W. and Wirth, T. C.},
  date = {2021},
  journaltitle = {Resource Update FS–307. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 5 p. [plus 2 appendixes].},
  volume = {307},
  doi = {10.2737/FS-RU-307},
  url = {https://www.fs.usda.gov/research/treesearch/62418},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{drcogDenverRegionalCouncil2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Denver {{Regional Council}} of {{Governments Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Denver {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{DRCOG}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--99},
  institution = {Denver Regional Council of Governments},
  location = {Denver, CO},
  url = {https://epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/denver-regional-council-of-governments-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {The Denver-Aurora-Lakewood Metropolitan Statistical Area received a \$1 million planning grant to develop climate action plans as part of the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants program, an initiative of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Denver Regional Council of Governments (also known as DRCOG) is spearheading the climate action planning efforts, expanding the planning area to include Elbert County and Park County. This is referred to as the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Planning Area (Figure 1). This Priority Climate Action Plan is the first deliverable for the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants program and includes a greenhouse gas inventory, a workforce planning analysis and climate pollution reduction measures, including an assessment of the positive effects the measures will have on low-income and disadvantaged communities and a review of the authority to implement the measures. Public and stakeholder engagement To ensure local community priorities were addressed, DRCOG staff convened three committees to facilitate this plan’s creation — a project management team, a  10 stakeholder steering committee and an equity subcommittee. Additionally, DRCOG staff held two virtual public meetings and used a public engagement website to gather public feedback. Greenhouse gas inventory The 2022 greenhouse gas inventory for the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Planning Area used the Global Protocol for Community Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventories, a standard framework for local and regional governments. The inventory provides a quantitative assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from human activities, enabling policymakers and local government staff to understand the sources and magnitude of contributions to climate change. The assessment serves as a baseline for developing effective strategies to reduce emissions and track progress over time. Within the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Planning Area, transportation (34\%), commercial buildings (30\%) and residential buildings (22\%) constitute a combined 86\% of the area’s emissions, depicted in Figure 4. Transportation emissions include those from roadway and off-road vehicles, aviation activities and railroads.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{dvrpcPhiladelphiaCamdenWilmingtonPANJDEMDMetropolitan2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Philadelphia-{{Camden-Wilmington}}, {{PA-NJ-DE-MD Metropolitan Statistical Area Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Philadelphia {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{DVRPC} and {WILMAPCO}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--125},
  institution = {Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/phl-msa-pcapreport-dvrpc.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC), in collaboration with the Wilmington Area Planning Council (WILMAPCO) and South Jersey Transportation Organization (SJTPO), has led the development of this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) for the Philadelphia Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). It meets the requirements of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program. The CPRG program provides funding to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful air pollution. DVRPC will also lead the other required CPRG planning deliverables for the Philadelphia MSA, including a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP, due mid 2025) and Status Report (due 2027). Within the limited eight-month timeline to coordinate across the MSA and produce the PCAP, DVRPC and partners strove to create an inclusive process from the beginning, and to center those most marginalized by the impacts of climate pollution in the planning process. Our stakeholder approach focused on building a foundation of relationships with community-based organizations to elevate the voices of low income and disadvantaged communities. Moving forward, we will continue this momentum through deeper engagement within our diverse and dynamic MSA in the CCAP process. The Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD MSA is geographically comprised of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, and Philadelphia counties in Pennsylvania; Burlington, Camden, Gloucester, and Salem counties in New Jersey; New Castle County in Delaware; and Cecil County in Maryland (see Figure 1for a map of the Philadelphia MSA). DVRPC added Mercer County, NJ, to the CPRG geographic area, as Mercer County is one of DVRPC’s member governments.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{ecfrpcEastCentralFlorida2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {East {{Central Florida}}’s {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Orlando {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{ECFRPC}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--88},
  institution = {East Central Florida Regional Planning Council},
  location = {Orlando, FL},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/ecfr2c-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 introduced impactful measures aimed at curbing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, notably through initiatives like the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program. Spearheaded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), this legislation facilitated the creation and execution of comprehensive climate action plans across various levels of governance, from states and territories to municipalities, air pollution control agencies, tribes, and regional organizations. The CPRG program has two phases: Phase One: Planning Phase: 4-year grant period with \$250 million provided to eligible entities to develop plans to reduce GHGs. \$3 million was available to each state, the District of Columbia (DC), and Puerto Rico. \$1 million was available to each of the 67 most populated metropolitan statistical areas (MSA). \$25 million was available to tribes and tribal consortia and \$2 million to U.S. territories. Phase Two: Implementation Phase: \$4.3 billion in grants available to implement GHG reduction measure developed through the phase one planning grants spanning a 5-year period. The East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC) was awarded a \$1 million planning grant as part of phase one from the EPA to lead the development of the Orlando Sanford Kissimmee MSA climate action plan. Building upon the region’s 2019 GHG inventory, which covered emissions from building’s energy consumption, transportation, and waste sectors, the plan expanded its scope to include emissions and removals from land use and forestry. Notably, emissions from residential, commercial, and industrial buildings accounted for the largest share at 53.6\%, followed by transportation at 39.4\%. Through analysis and forecasting, the East Central Florida region established a science-based target of reducing emissions by 54.3\%. Seven key strategy areas were identified to support the path toward the emissions reduction target: decarbonization, reducing vehicle miles traveled, promoting the adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) and alternative fuels, enhancing building energy efficiency, expanding solar photovoltaic (PV) adoption, reduce and divert waste whilst also capturing of emissions generated and encouraging the preservation and integration of natural lands and forests as the region continues to develop. These emission reduction strategies not only bolster the region's resilience but also deliver tangible benefits to vulnerable communities by mitigating air pollution, alleviating energy burdens, enhancing environmental quality, and fostering economic and energy resilience. This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) lays a solid foundation for continued GHG emission reduction efforts in the East Central Florida region, fostering resilience and sustainability across its communities.}
}

@report{ecicogEastCentralIowa2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {East {{Central Iowa Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {East {{Central IA PCAP}}},
  author = {{ECICOG}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--116},
  institution = {East Central Iowa Council of Governments},
  location = {Cedar Rapids, IA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/east-central-iowa-cedar-rapids-iowa-city-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The East Central Iowa Council of Governments (ECICOG) has partnered with communities and organizations in East Central Iowa, to prepare this priority climate action plan (PCAP). The primary goal for the plan is to support investment in programs and technologies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and equitably enhance the quality of life in East Central Iowa. This project has been funded wholly by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under assistance agreements 96704201 and 96704701 to ECICOG as the lead entity for the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Program in the region. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document. This PCAP is organized into the following sections: 1. Introduction 2. Coordination and Outreach 3. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventory 4. Priority GHG Reduction Measures 5. Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities Benefits Analysis 6. Next Steps 7. Appendices a. Coordination and Outreach b. Greenhouse Gas Inventories c. Priority Measures d. Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities The greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction measures contained in this PCAP should be construed as broadly available to any entity within the geographic scope of this PCAP eligible to receive funding under the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Program (CPRG): Implementation Grants General Competition and other funding streams, as applicable. This PCAP covers East Central Iowa, which includes Benton, Iowa, Johnson, Jones, Linn, and Washington counties.}
}

@report{eggelston2006IPCCGuidelines2006,
  title = {2006 {{IPCC Guidelines}} for {{National Greenhouse Gas Inventories}}},
  namea = {Eggelston, Simon and Buendia, Leandro and Miwa, Kyoko and Ngara, Todd and Tanabe, Kiyoto},
  nameatype = {collaborator},
  date = {2006},
  institution = {Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change},
  url = {https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/vol5.html},
  urldate = {2024-06-06}
}

@report{egleMichiganPriorityClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Michigan {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}: {{Implementing}} the {{MI Healthy Climate Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Michigan {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{EGLE}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--123},
  institution = {{Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy}},
  location = {Lansing, MI},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/michigan-egle-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {This document outlines the State of Michigan's Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), developed as part of the EPA's Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Program. Michigan’s PCAP closely follows the framework and key strategies laid out in the MI Healthy Climate Plan (MHCP). The PCAP involved statewide community engagement and development of a greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory to establish priority reduction measures, quantify potential GHG emission reductions, analyze benefits for low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs), and provide commentary on the authority to implement the identified measures, intersection with other funding opportunities, and information about the workforce required to realize the measures. Of these elements, the key outcomes include: • Community Engagement: Extensive statewide community engagement efforts, including public meetings, surveys, and focus groups, identified key priorities and concerns including topics around environmental justice and all areas of Michigan’s economy. • Michigan's GHG Emissions Inventory: As of 2019, Michigan's net GHG emissions were 166.73 MMTCO2E, a 15\% decrease from the baseline year of 2005. The Energy inventory sector remains the largest emitter, followed by Industrial Processes and Waste. • Priority Reduction Measures: GHG reduction measures were evaluated and prioritized for the PCAP in the following sectors:  Electricity Generation  Commercial and Residential Buildings  Transportation  Industry The selected reduction measures identify several strategic priorities inclusive of renewable energy deployment, expansion of energy efficiency, electrification of the transportation and built environment, increased access to public transit, emphasis on methane reductions, and more. • LIDAC Benefits Analysis: The PCAP prioritizes measures that benefit LIDACs by reducing emissions, improving air quality, and creating clean energy jobs. These communities often experience disproportionate negative impacts from climate change and pollution, and the PCAP aims to analyze and address these disparities through its priority reduction measures. • Next steps: Refinement of several areas to build off PCAP learnings in development of the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) include deeper analysis in all areas of the PCAP, additional engagement with communities across the state, preparation for implementation grant applications, and more. The PCAP represents a significant opportunity in Michigan's efforts to address climate change and create a more sustainable future for all residents through the implementation of the MI Healthy Climate Plan. It is important to note that achieving these ambitious goals will require sustained commitment, collaboration, and investment from all levels of government, businesses, and communities.},
  langid = {english}
}

@dataset{eia861,
  title = {Annual {{Electric Power Industry Report}}, {{Form EIA-861}} Detailed Data Files (2021)},
  author = {{U.S. Energy Information Administration}},
  date = {2023-10-05},
  url = {https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia861/},
  urldate = {2024-01-24},
  abstract = {Form EIA-861, Annual Electric Power Industry Report, and Form EIA-861S (the shortform) collect data from distribution utilities and power marketers of electricity. This survey is a census of all United States electric utilities. The short form is intended for smaller bundled-service utilities and has less detailed responses. This survey collects more data than the monthly counterpart, Form EIA-861M. Data are the individual surveys responses and are included in the files described below. Our survey page contains the current survey form, instructions, respondent portal, and frequently asked questions. Data from these files can be found throughout our publications, usually in aggregated form in our Electric Power Annual (EPA) report; State Electricity Profiles (SEP); Electric Sales, Revenue, and Average Price (ESR) report; Electricity Data Browser; and in some Today in Energy articles. Please refer to our Guide to EIA Electric Power Data and send any questions to InfoElectric@eia.gov. In 2012, we created Form EIA-861S to reduce respondent burden and to increase our processing efficiency; that year, about 1,100 utilities initially reported on this form instead of Form EIA-861. In 2020, the number of utilities increased to about 1,700 utilities. We reformatted the files for the years 1990–2011, but we didn’t change or update any data files. We reformatted the files to make them easier to understand and to match the format and titles of the current files.}
}

@report{elkrivermunicipalutilities2021AnnualFinancial2022,
  type = {Financial report},
  title = {2021 {{Annual Financial Report}}},
  author = {{Elk River Municipal Utilities}},
  date = {2022},
  url = {https://www.ermumn.com/application/files/3316/5668/9846/2021_Annual_Financial_Report.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-01-24}
}

@standard{epa_chief_2023_eiqp,
  type = {Policy Directive},
  title = {Chief {{Information Officer}}’s {{Policy Directive}} on {{Information Technology}} / {{Information Management}}: {{Environmental Information Quality Policy}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-03-07},
  number = {Directive No: CIO 2105.3},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-04/environmental_information_quality_policy.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {This Policy: • establishes policy and program requirements for the preparation and implementation of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Quality Program; • is consistent with the principles in the American Society for Quality (ASQ)/American National Standards Institute (ANSI) E4:2014, Quality management systems for environmental information and technology programs— Requirements with guidance for use; • recognizes existing quality policies, procedures, standards, and guidance as the foundation of the EPA Quality Program; and • provides a structure to ensure and enhance the effectiveness of the Quality Program and its application to environmental information and technology. This Policy affirms: • EPA’s commitment to applying quality principles and practices to environmental information and technology programs; • EPA’s commitment to utilizing environmental information of known and documented quality, scientifically valid, legally defensible, and appropriate for the intended use; • the EPA Chief Information Officer’s (CIO) responsibility, as the Deputy Assistant Administrator (DAA) for Environmental Information (EI) within the Office of Mission Support (OMS) and the designated federal official for quality at EPA, to lead, coordinate, and maintain an effective Quality Program throughout EPA; • the DAA/CIO and the CIO Strategic Advisory Council’s (SAC) leadership of EPA’s Quality Program in assuring the quality of environmental information and technology; and the roles of other key Agency managers and organizations that are implementing quality policies and practices for collection, production, evaluation, or use of environmental information across Agency programs.},
  pagetotal = {13}
}

@standard{epa_chief_2023_qapp,
  type = {Policy Directive},
  title = {Chief {{Information Officer}}’s {{Policy Directive}} on {{Information Technology}} / {{Information Management}}: {{Quality Assurance Project Plan}} ({{QAPP}}) {{Standard}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-03-07},
  number = {Directive No: CIO 2105-S-02.0},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-07/quality_assurance_project_plan_standard.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {This Standard supports the implementation of EPA’s Environmental Information Quality Policy and Environmental Information Quality Procedure. All EPA organizations performing environmental information operations and non-EPA organizations performing environmental information operations on behalf of EPA are required to participate in the EPA Agency-wide Quality Program. EPA’s Quality Program supports EPA’s mission to protect human health and the environment and to ensure environmental information operations products and services are of known and documented quality for their intended use(s). All work performed by or on behalf of EPA involving environmental information operations shall be implemented in accordance with an approved Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). The QAPP is a formal planning document which describes how environmental information operations are planned, implemented, documented, and assessed during the life cycle of a project. The QAPP describes in comprehensive detail the necessary Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC) requirements and other technical activities that must be implemented to ensure that the results of the environmental information operations performed will satisfy the stated performance and acceptance criteria. QAPPs must be approved in accordance with this Standard. EPA QA Managers (QAM), as defined by the organization’s Quality Management Plan (QMP), review and approve QAPPs for all environmental information operations projects prior to any information gathering work, or use, except under circumstances requiring immediate action to protect human health and the environment or operations conducted under police powers.}
}

@article{erkerStatewideUrbanTree2019,
  title = {A Statewide Urban Tree Canopy Mapping Method},
  author = {Erker, Tedward and Wang, Lei and Lorentz, Laura and Stoltman, Andrew and Townsend, Philip A.},
  date = {2019-08},
  journaltitle = {Remote Sensing of Environment},
  shortjournal = {Remote Sensing of Environment},
  volume = {229},
  pages = {148--158},
  issn = {00344257},
  doi = {10.1016/j.rse.2019.03.037},
  url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0034425719301282},
  urldate = {2024-04-03},
  abstract = {Maps of urban tree canopy are essential to estimate the magnitude and spatial distribution of ecosystem services, and to determine who benefits from them. Our objective was to develop a repeatable method to map urban tree canopy cover for the state of Wisconsin. We compared two types of imagery (pan-sharpened 1.5 m SPOT-6 and 1 m NAIP aerial photography), three classification algorithms, seven segment sizes ranging from single pixels to 105 m2, three levels of compactness for each segment size, and sixteen subsets of features. NAIP outperformed SPOT. On average across classification algorithms there were no significant differences in map agreement. Pixelbased maps with convolution features performed as well as the best segment-based maps. The best segment size tested was 60 m2 on average, but there was also a local maximum around 15 m2, which suggests a large range of possible segment sizes must be tested to find the best. The model chosen for application to the whole state was a pixel-level Random Forest classifier with 160 features, and the final state-wide map has five classes: tree/woody vegetation, grass/herbaceous vegetation, impervious surfaces/bare soil, water, and non-forested wetland. Overall accuracy for our state-wide map at the pixel-scale was 79.3\% (95\% CI: 77.5–81\%). Errors occurred due to meter-scale heterogeneity in the urban environment which increases the errors due to spatial misregistration and the number of difficult-to-classify mixed and edge pixels. At larger management level scales, mean absolute error (MAE) decreases to about 10\% at the Landsat pixel scale and about 6\% at the scale of a city block. Our work is comparable to past efforts to map urban tree canopy, and the open source software and use of imagery that is freely available for all cities in the contiguous US make it broadly applicable.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{ewgPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan}}: {{St}}. {{Louis MO}}/{{IL Metropolitan Statistical Area}}},
  shorttitle = {St. {{Louis PCAP}}},
  author = {{EWG}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--88},
  institution = {East‐West Gateway Council of Governments},
  location = {St. Louis, MO},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/st-louis-mo-il-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is a required element of the U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program. The elements of the PCAP are a  baseline regional greenhouse gas inventory, a list of measures for consideration for CPRG  implementation funding, and research and data supporting the selection of those measures. The PCAP  covers the 15‐county St. Louis, MO/IL Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA).  East‐West Gateway Council of Governments (EWG) received funding to conduct the planning phase of  the CPRG, including the PCAP. While EWG staff were solely responsible for assembling and publishing  the PCAP, they worked with and received input from many members of the OneSTL Working Groups, the  OneSTL Network, and representatives from various agencies and organizations.  The OneSTL Energy and Emissions Working Group completed a greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory for the  St. Louis region for the years 2010 and 2015. For the PCAP, EWG staff accessed the inventory and  verified the data collected. According to the inventory, the largest and second largest sources of GHG  emissions in the St. Louis MSA are energy used to heat and cool buildings, and the transportation  network respectively.  EWG staff held over 100 meetings and interviews with local government agencies and non‐profit  organizations to discuss the kinds of projects they were working on or planning in the short term that  would reduce carbon and other GHG emissions. Below is a reference list of the measures collected and  reported by GHG emissions sector as recorded in Section 3. Each measure includes general location,  implementing agency and authority to implement, potential for GHG emissions reduction, milestones,  metrics, estimated cost, other funding sources, community benefits, low income census tracts impacted,  and potential workforce impacts.  Buildings   Measure 1: Weatherization and pre‐weatherization for affordable housing   Measure 2: Electrification and solar for affordable housing   Measure 3: Green schools and environmental education   Measure 4: Policies to promote solar energy and reduce energy use   Measure 5: EcoBlocks   Measure 6: Incentive programs for residents   Measure 7: Energy efficient upgrades and renewable energy for government buildings and  nonprofits   Measure 8: Resilience hubs   Measure 9: Energy efficient rehab of buildings  Transportation    Measure 1: Electric conversion of municipal, transit, school bus, and other fleets   Measure 2: Bike and pedestrian infrastructure and connectivity   Measure 3: Development of a container‐on‐vessel port facility   Measure 4: Port truck staging and calling facility   Measure 5: Signal preemption and priority   Measure 6: Community mobility hubs   Measure 7: Gas lawn mower replacement  6  Waste Reduction   Measure 1: Reducing food waste and expanding collection of composting   Measure 2: Policies to reduce waste   Measure 3: Expanding recycling   Measure 4: Large scale reuse system to reduce single‐use plastics   Measure 5: Reducing illegal dumping   Measure 6: Anaerobic digestion  Agriculture, Forestry, and Land Use   Measure 1: Solar arrays and orchards for local farms   Measure 2: Planting trees and native gardens   Measure 3: Preservation and restoration of forests, prairies, wetlands, and floodplains  Section 4 ‐ Additional Analyses contains an overview of the 155 census tracts in the St. Louis, MO/IL MSA  identified by the Climate and Economic Justice Tool, a brief review of Authority to Implement, and a  subjective Workforce Development summary. Section 5 ‐ Next Steps briefly describes steps for the CPRG  implementation grant, completing the regional Climate Action Plan, and developing regional capacity to  implement a Climate Action Plan.}
}

@article{ewingTravelBuiltEnvironment2010a,
  title = {Travel and the {{Built Environment}}: {{A Meta-Analysis}}},
  author = {Ewing, Reid and Cervero, Robert},
  date = {2010-06},
  journaltitle = {Journal of the American Planning Association},
  volume = {76},
  number = {3},
  pages = {265--294},
  publisher = {Taylor \& Francis Group},
  issn = {0194-4363},
  doi = {10.1080/01944361003766766},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/01944361003766766},
  abstract = {Problem: Localities and states are turning to land planning and urban design for help in reducing automobile use and related social and environmental costs. The effects of such strategies on travel demand have not been generalized in recent years from the multitude of available studies. Purpose: We conducted a meta-analysis of the built environment-travel literature existing at the end of 2009 in order to draw generalizable conclusions for practice. We aimed to quantify effect sizes, update earlier work, include additional outcome measures, and address the methodological issue of self-selection. Methods: We computed elasticities for individual studies and pooled them to produce weighted averages. Results and conclusions: Travel variables are generally inelastic with respect to change in measures of the built environment. Of the environmental variables considered here, none has a weighted average travel elasticity of absolute magnitude greater than 0.39, and most are much less. Still, the combined effect of several such variables on travel could be quite large. Consistent with prior work, we find that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is most strongly related to measures of accessibility to destinations and secondarily to street network design variables. Walking is most strongly related to measures of land use diversity, intersection density, and the number of destinations within walking distance. Bus and train use are equally related to proximity to transit and street network design variables, with land use diversity a secondary factor. Surprisingly, we find population and job densities to be only weakly associated with travel behavior once these other variables are controlled. Takeaway for practice: The elasticities we derived in this meta-analysis may be used to adjust outputs of travel or activity models that are otherwise insensitive to variation in the built environment, or be used in sketch planning applications ranging from climate action plans to health impact assessments. However, because sample sizes are small, and very few studies control for residential preferences and attitudes, we cannot say that planners should generalize broadly from our results. While these elasticities are as accurate as currently possible, they should be understood to contain unknown error and have unknown confidence intervals. They provide a base, and as more built-environment/travel studies appear in the planning literature, these elasticities should be updated and refined. Research support: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.},
  keywords = {built environment,effect sizes,transit,vehicle miles traveled (VMT),walking}
}

@report{fcogFresnoPriorityClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Fresno {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Fresno {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{FCOG}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--295},
  institution = {Fresno Council of Governments},
  location = {Fresno, CA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/fresno-cog-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {Fresno Council of Governments (Fresno COG) received a planning grant from the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program, which was appropriated by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). There is a total of \$5 billion in CPRG funding, among which \$250 million was allocated as planning grants to eligible entities to develop GHG reduction plans; \$4.6075 billion was allocated to fund the implementation of the GHG reduction measures identified in the GHG reduction plans developed through the planning grants. The Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is the first component of the Regional Climate Action Plan that Fresno COG will be developing for the CPRG grant funding. It includes a regional greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory, a public outreach process, identification and quantification of priority GHG emissions reduction measures, a benefit analysis for low-income and disadvantaged communities, and identification of implementation authorities. Fresno COG staff utilized a three-pronged approach to developing the PCAP. First, a robust public outreach process with multi-media platform was conducted to reach the general public, especially the low-income and disadvantaged communities identified during the process. As a parallel process, a Stakeholder Steering Committee was formed to provide input and guidance on the overall process. The third and final step of the PCAP development process was to present the PCAP to the Fresno COG’s three standing committees, including the Transportation Technical Committee, the Policy Advisory Committee and the Policy Board, for final approval. The GHG inventory in the PCAP follows the U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, developed by ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability,1 as modified for use in California and was developed utilizing available tools and data from EPA, CARB, and the City of Fresno. The quantification of GHG reductions associated with each priority GHG reduction measure was conducted using previously conducted studies such as Fresno COG’s EV Readiness Plan (EVRP), publicly available datasets such as the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)’s residential and commercial building stock typologies, and tools such as the EPA’s Waste Reduction Model (WARM). The PCAP was the first region-wide climate action planning effort in Fresno County. It provided a valuable educational experience to the communities in the region as well as to the municipality staff on climate action planning. However, due to the constrained timeline (5 months) for the PCAP development, the process for many components of the PCAP was shortened or simplified. The next step in the planning process will be the preparation of a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) that will build on the PCAP, address the additional requirements for the CCAP, and expand/enhance the PCAP components in the CCAP.}
}

@report{fongGlobalProtocolCommunityScale2021,
  title = {Global {{Protocol}} for {{Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Inventories}}},
  author = {Fong, Wee Kean and Sotos, Mary and Doust, Michael and Schultz, Seth and Marques, Ana and Deng-Beck, Chang},
  date = {2021},
  pages = {1--190},
  institution = {Greenhouse Gas Protocol},
  url = {https://ghgprotocol.org/ghg-protocol-cities},
  urldate = {2024-02-21},
  abstract = {Cities are the global centers of communication, commerce and culture. They are also a significant, and growing, source of energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A city’s ability to take effective action on mitigating climate change, and monitor progress, depends on having access to good quality data. Planning for climate action begins with developing a GHG inventory. An inventory enables cities to understand the emissions contribution of different activities in the community. Inventory methods that cities have used to date vary significantly. This inconsistency makes comparisons among cities difficult, raises questions around data quality, and limits the ability to aggregate local, subnational, and national government GHG emissions data. To allow for more credible and meaningful reporting, greater consistency in GHG accounting is required. The updated version of the Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Inventories (GPC) responds to this challenge and offers a robust and clear framework that builds on existing methodologies for calculating and reporting city-wide GHG emissions. This version of GPC is an update to the original Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Inventories published in 2014. It includes revisions informed by the 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, clarifies ambiguities and provides further methodological guidance where appropriate, and discusses how the Global Covenant of Mayors’ Common Reporting Framework aligns with the GPC. Appendix A provides a comprehensive list of the updates made to the GPC 2014 version. The GPC provides extensive guidance on emissions calculations and reporting, and it acknowledges the need for further guidance on emissions and removals accounting in the land sector, which will be published in an upcoming GHG Protocol guidance. The GPC requires cities to measure and disclose a comprehensive GHG inventory using two distinct but complementary approaches. One captures emissions from both production and consumption activities taking place within the city boundary, including some emissions released outside the city boundary. The other categorizes all emissions into “scopes,” depending on where they physically occur. Separate accounting of emissions physically released within the city boundary should be used for aggregation of multiple city inventories in order to avoid double counting. The GPC is divided into three main parts: • Part I introduces the GPC reporting and accounting principles, sets out how to define the inventory boundary, specifies reporting requirements and offers a sample reporting template • Part II provides overarching and sector-specific accounting and reporting guidance for sourcing data and calculating emissions, including calculation methods and equations • Part III shows how inventories can be used to set mitigation goals and track performance over time, and shows how cities can manage inventory quality Note, the term “city” is used throughout this document to refer to any geographically discernable subnational entity, such as a community, town, city, or province, and covers all levels of subnational jurisdiction as well as local government as legal entities of public administration.}
}

@online{FoodWasteSolutions2024,
  title = {Food {{Waste Solutions}} - {{Reduce Food Waste}}, {{Food Recycling}} \& {{Recovery}}},
  date = {2024-02-27},
  url = {https://refed.org/},
  urldate = {2024-02-27},
  abstract = {ReFED identifies comprehensive food waste recycling solutions for businesses of all sizes in the United States. We are committed to reducing U.S. food waste. We're advancing data-driven solutions to fight food waste. ReFED is working across the food system to cut food loss and waste in support of national and international goals.},
  langid = {english},
  organization = {ReFED}
}

@report{g/flrpcPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan}}: {{Genesee}}/{{Finger Lakes Region}}},
  shorttitle = {Rochester, {{NY PCAP}}},
  author = {{G/FLRPC}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--54},
  institution = {Genesee/Finger Lakes Regional Planning Council},
  location = {Rochester, NY},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/gfl-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@online{GHGEmissionInventory,
  title = {{{GHG}} Emission Inventory},
  url = {https://public.tableau.com/views/GHGemissioninventory/GHGsummarystory?%3Adisplay_static_image=y&%3AbootstrapWhenNotified=true&%3Aembed=true&%3Alanguage=en-US&:embed=y&:showVizHome=n&:apiID=host0#navType=0&navSrc=Parse},
  urldate = {2024-02-19},
  langid = {english},
  organization = {Tableau Software}
}

@report{gnrcPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan Nashville-Davidson-MurfreesboroFranklin}}, {{TN MSA}}},
  shorttitle = {Nashville {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{GNRC}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--73},
  institution = {Greater Nashville Regional Council},
  location = {Nashville, TN},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/2024-0301-gnrc-nashville-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {1.1 Program Overview The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program provides \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement ambitious plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful air pollution. Authorized under Section 60114 of the Inflation Reduction Act, this two-phase program provides \$250 million for noncompetitive planning grants, and approximately \$4.6 billion for competitive implementation grants. Through the CPRG program, EPA is seeking to achieve three broad objectives: • Tackle damaging climate pollution while supporting the creation of good jobs and lowering energy costs for families. • Accelerate work to address environmental injustice and empower community-driven solutions in overburdened neighborhoods. • Deliver cleaner air by reducing harmful air pollution in places where people live, work, play, and go to school. CPRG includes two phases of investment. Phase 1 provides noncompetitive grants to state and local/regional agencies to develop custom plans to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs). Phase 2 provides funding to help implement priority measures identified in those plans. Priorities for the phase I planning grants include: • Establishing ambitious measures that will achieve significant cumulative GHG reductions by 2030 and beyond; • Prioritizing strategies that will achieve substantial community benefits (such as reduction of criteria air pollutants (CAPs) and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), particularly in low income and disadvantaged communities; • Identifying opportunities to leverage other funding sources to maximize these GHG reductions and community benefits; and • Innovating policies and programs that are replicable and can be “scaled up” across multiple jurisdictions. Priority Climate Action Plan The first deliverable of the CPRG planning grant is a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). The PCAP must include a focused list of near-term, high-priority, implementation-ready measures that have been identified for implementation by the lead organization and any other collaborating entities (e.g., municipalities, tribes). The PCAP includes: • A GHG inventory; • Quantified GHG reduction measures; • A low-income and disadvantaged communities benefits analysis; and, • A review of authority to implement. A comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) will be completed following the PCAP. The CCAP provides the scope for more detailed inventory, modeling, technical analysis, and community engagement.  GREATER NASHVILLE REGIONAL COUNCIL | PRIORITY CLIMATE ACTION PLAN | MARCH 2024 | 2 1.2 Lead Entities In response to the opportunities provided by EPA through the CPRG, the TN Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) is leading a statewide effort to develop the Tennessee Volunteer Emission Reduction Strategy or TVERS. Local partners of the three largest metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) within Tennessee are working in partnership with TDEC to develop regional emissions reduction plans for their respective areas. The Greater Nashville Regional Council (GNRC) is designated as the lead entity for the EPA’s CPRG Program across the Nashville-Davidson- Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). GNRC is a public body corporate and politic originally established by the Tennessee Development District Act of 1965. Today, GNRC services a council of governments empowered by State law to convene local and state leaders for the purposes of planning and programming state and federal investments into a range of social services and public infrastructure across a thirteen-county region. The 93-member governing body of the Regional Council includes 13 county mayors, 52 municipal mayors, 2 state legislators, a private citizen from each county representing issues of business and commerce, and a private citizen from each county representing issues of social equity and inclusion. GNRC’s mission is to assist local communities and state agencies in the development of plans and programs that guide growth and development in the most desirable, efficient, and cost-effective manner, while ensuring the continued long-term livability of the region. GNRC carries several designations as it works on behalf of State and local governmental partners. GNRC carries several designations as it works on behalf of State and local partners. • GNRC is designated by the U.S. Economic Development Administration as the region’s economic development district to act on behalf of local officials, chambers of commerce, and private sector investors. • GNRC staff provide regional transportation planning for the Nashville Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and has representation on the neighboring Clarksville Urbanized Area MPO, Middle Tennessee Rural Planning Organization (RPO), and Dale Hollow RPO. • GNRC is designated as the Area Agency on Aging and Disability for the primary purpose to coordinate the delivery of services and programs to enhance the quality of life of the region’s older population. • GNRC staffs the Mid-Cumberland Area Development Corporation and administers lending programs to small businesses with resources provided by the U.S. SBA and the U.S. EDA, and USDA. • GNRC staffs the Middle Tennessee Tourism Council to provide tourism marketing and other promotional support to the tourism economy. • GNRC staffs Cumberland Region Tomorrow to encourage responsible growth and ensure that the region’s communities grow to be vibrant and livable places that offer a range of transportation and housing choices, while preserving the region’s natural environment. GNRC’s professional staff have decades of combined expertise in community development; land use, environment, and transportation planning; economic development; project and program management; grant writing and management; aging and disability services; policymaking; and data analysis. The organization’s extensive experience and permanence in Middle Tennessee have enabled GNRC to establish relationships with organizations and agencies in the public, private, and non-profit sectors to better serve the region’s residents and communities. GNRC staff are often working with federal, state, and local departments of transportation and economic development agencies; community housing agencies; water and sewer utilities, electric and  GREATER NASHVILLE REGIONAL COUNCIL | PRIORITY CLIMATE ACTION PLAN | MARCH 2024 | 3 natural gas utilities, and broadband service providers; religious and community-based organizations; community health and private health organizations; and universities in addition to local governments and the public. GNRC is uniquely positioned to leverage its existing capacity and organizational structure to convene key decision makers, practitioners, and public and private sector stakeholders in developing the CPRG deliverables that address the unique concerns of the MSA and position municipal and county governments and other implementing agencies for subsequent EPA grants and other federal funds to achieve the climate pollution reduction goals of the PCAP and CCAP. 1.3 Geographic Scope GNRC’s planning area for the CPRG program consists of seventeen counties within Middle Tennessee. As a multi-faceted organization, GNRC serves a variety of counties in its day-to-day activities. For example, GNRC member counties differ slightly from the counties found in the Nashville MSA, which in turn differ slightly from the counties served by the Nashville MPO, which is also staffed by GNRC. In recognition of this fact, GNRC has extended its Climate Action Planning Area to represent the thirteen counties included in the Nashville MSA, along with four additional counties that are traditionally included in GNRC’s area of service. The complete list of counties included in the PCAP are as follows: Cannon County, Cheatham County, Davidson County, Dickson County, Houston County, Humphreys County, Macon County, Maury County, Montgomery County, Robertson County Rutherford County, Smith County, Stewart County, Sumner County, Trousdale County, Williamson County, and Wilson County. For the sake of this PCAP, GNRC created a community-scale greenhouse gas inventory using ICLEI’s ClearPath tool for the following priority sectors: transportation; Grid Electricity; Agriculture, Forestry, and other Land Uses; Stationary Fuel (including for Commercial \& Residential heating), Solid Waste, and other Sources. Additional sectors will be included in the CCAP. 1.4 Interagency Coordination In its role as a regional convenor, GNRC coordinates with state and local agencies and organizations on regional and local planning efforts and continued to expand these relationships through the CPRG planning effort. GNRC leveraged its existing capacity and organizational structure to convene key decision makers, practitioners, and public and private sector stakeholders to develop PCAP deliverables that address the unique concerns of the planning area. Specifically, GNRC currently facilitates regional dialogue among the following relevant groups: • Regional Council Body: The Regional Council body is comprised of 93 members and includes 65 mayors and county executives, 26 mayoral appointments, and 2 state legislators. • Transportation Policy Board: The board is empowered to adopt formal transportation plans and programs on behalf of the Nashville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. The TPB is comprised of mayors and county executives of member governments, the Governor (or TDOT designee), a representative of area transit agencies, a representative of county highway departments, and representatives of the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration. • Middle Tennessee Mayors Caucus: The Middle Tennessee Mayors Caucus was formed in 2009 in order to provide leadership on important issues facing a rapidly changing regional landscape. Transportation, and particularly the pursuit of a modern regional transit system, served as the early catalyst, but in its brief history, the Caucus has served as an effective forum for building working relationships among mayors and has helped local governments support each other on issues ranging from flood recovery to  GREATER NASHVILLE REGIONAL COUNCIL | PRIORITY CLIMATE ACTION PLAN | MARCH 2024 | 4 state and federal legislative and policy priorities. Today, the Caucus serves as GNRC’s primary forum for area mayors to advocate for the region’s policy and legislative priorities. • Economic Development Advisory Committee: The Economic Development Advisory Committee advises GNRC on a variety of projects and initiatives aimed at supporting regional economic development goals. Its primary purpose is to guide the development of the federally required Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy for northern Middle Tennessee which opens doors to federal grants. The membership is comprised of three mayors appointed by the GNRC chairperson, business representatives appointed by each of the thirteen (13) county mayors, and social equity representatives also appointed by county mayors. • Regional Environmental Roundtable: Recognizing the impact of rapid growth and development in Middle Tennessee and the need for collaboration, GNRC convenes a regional environmental roundtable comprised of local experts, practitioners, and advocates from non-profit organizations and State and federal public agencies to collaborate on issues and challenges related to the environmental quality of the region. The group was established by GNRC in 2020 to assist in a major update to the regional transportation plan and to help inform the Council’s activities in environmental and conservation focus areas. In addition, GNRC worked closely with the statewide CPRG planning effort, TVERS, and the two CPRG TN MSA planning grant recipients, the cities of Knoxville and Memphis, and the City of Chattanooga. In the Nashville planning area, GNRC collaborated with Metro Nashville’s Mayors Office and Office of Sustainability and the Metro Nashville Health Department. 1.5 Community Engagement GNRC conducted community engagement to provide an opportunity for members of the general public to help shape the determine the priorities presented as part of the PCAP. Building relationships takes time, commitment, and transparency. The timeline associated with the development of the PCAP was short. More extensive community engagement and partnerships with other agencies will be conducted in the development of the CCAP. Coordinating with the statewide CPRG effort, TVERS, GNRC hosted four public events in the Nashville planning area to engage with community members. Three of the events were in-person where attendees could ask questions and provide input on the planning elements. One of the public events was a virtual meeting with polling using Poll Everywhere software to engage participants and receive feedback. Two of the facilities are in a low-income disadvantaged community as identified using the CEJST. • October 19, 2023, Lentz Public Health Building, Nashville • February 22, 2024 – Virtual Meeting • February 27, 2024 – Hadley Park Community Center, Nashville • February 28, 2024 – Southeast Community Center, Nashville In addition, through its partnership with TDEC, GNRC was able to review the responses from a statewide planning effort had a survey available through MetroQuest for public input. The survey was available from September to November 2023. TDEC provided data of the responses from participants who identified a home location in the Nashville planning area to GNRC. The statewide survey had 1,639 responses and 540 respondents were in the Nashville planning area.  GREATER NASHVILLE REGIONAL COUNCIL | PRIORITY CLIMATE ACTION PLAN | MARCH 2024 | 5 1.6 Findings from Outreach During stakeholder and community meetings, GNRC provided an overview of air pollution, GHG emissions and an overview of the EPA’s CPRG within the context of the Nashville planning area and the statewide effort, TVERS. GNRC staff had conversations with attendees and activities were available to solicit input from individuals. Activities focused on identifying the community’s priorities for emissions reduction by sector and support for their jurisdictions focus on emissions reduction measures. In addition, individuals were asked to share what actions they currently take that reduce emissions and what were the challenges and barriers to doing more. Prioritization of Sectors to Reduce Emissions: 1. Transportation 2. Grid Electricity 3. Solid Waste 4. Stationary Fuels 5. AFOLU Most individuals who participated in an engagement activity already do the following to reduce their emissions: • recycle and reduce their waste and compost organic materials, • use energy efficient appliances and lightbulbs, • consolidate their errands and daily trips to reduce the miles that they drive, and • take transit and/or walk and bike instead of drive. The primary challenges for reducing their emissions are: • The lack of a safe, connected, and convenient transit, pedestrian and biking infrastructure makes it difficult to not have to drive, • High cost of efficient or sustainable alternatives • Limited knowledge or information Actions that they would like their community, city, or county to focus on include: • Incentives for waste and recycling • More transit options – trains and buses – and free service • Expand and improve existing local and regional transit systems and infrastructure • Invest in building energy efficiency and weatherization improvements and programs • Protect and increase the tree canopy • Reduce travel demand and increase alternative travel modes with choices, behaviors, and incentives. • Improve transportation infrastructure and ITS to reduce travel times and idling. 1.7 Future Coordination and Engagement . To complete the CCAP, GNRC will expand coordination and engagement efforts undertaken in developing the PCAP. The activities and relationships built during the PCAP establish a foundation to build from and expand outreach.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{governorsofficeofpolicyinnovationandthefutureStateMainePriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {State of {{Maine Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Maine {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Governor’s Office of Policy Innovation and the Future}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--81},
  institution = {{Governor’s Office of Policy Innovation and the Future}},
  location = {Augusta, Maine},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/maine-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {Governor Janet Mills has prioritized tackling climate change, advancing clean energy, and improving the climate resiliency of Maine’s communities. The Governor’s Office of Policy Innovation and the Future (GOPIF) coordinates the work of the Maine Climate Council, established in law in 2019, and works with the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (Maine DEP), the Governor’s Energy Office (GEO), Maine Department of Transportation (Maine DOT), other state agencies, regional and municipal governments, and key stakeholders on policy issues to advance climate and energy policy. GOPIF serves as the lead agency for the EPA Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG). The following Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) for Maine builds on the awardwinning, Maine Won’t Wait (PDF), (2020) the state’s first four-year Climate Action Plan from the Maine Climate Council. On December 1, 2023, the Maine Climate Council released a progress report as well as a new online dashboard, highlighting progress being made to implement Maine Won’t Wait’s climate and energy recommendations. The PCAP supports investment in policies, practices, and technologies that reduce carbon pollutant emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all in Maine. The Maine Climate Council consists of 39 scientists, industry leaders, bipartisan local and state officials, and engaged citizens. More than 200 additional representatives from communities, businesses, organizations, government leaders, and youth serve on the Council’s working groups and subcommittees — Transportation; Buildings, Housing, and Infrastructure; Energy; Natural and Working Lands; Coastal and Marine; and Community Resilience working groups, and the Equity and Scientific and Technical subcommittees. Thousands more Maine people offered their climate concerns, observations, ideas, and encouragement to the Maine Climate Council, in the development of Maine Won’t Wait, released December 2020. The greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies outlined in Maine Won’t Wait form the backbone of Maine’s PCAP. This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Grant Number 00A01355 to GOPIF. The contents of  State of Maine Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) 7 this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document. The measures contained herein should be construed as broadly available to any entity in the state eligible for receiving funding under the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Implementation Grants (CPRG) and other funding streams, as applicable. GOPIF has prioritized greenhouse gas emission reductions measures that maximize cumulative emission reductions, provide benefits to low-income and disadvantaged communities, and leverage existing programs, policies and federal funding streams to advance climate action in cost-effective measures. A public version of this PCAP is available at: https://www.maine.gov/future/climate/climate-pollution-reductiongrant. This PCAP is organized into 11 sections: 1. Introduction 2. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventory 3. Emissions Projections and Reduction Targets 4. Priority Measures 5. Benefits Analysis 6. Low-Income/Disadvantaged Community Benefits Analysis 7. Review of Authority to Implement 8. Intersection with Other Funding Availability 9. Workforce Planning Analysis 10.Coordination and Outreach 11.Conclusion}
}

@report{greatriverenergy2021AnnualReport2022,
  title = {2021 {{Annual Report}}},
  author = {Great River Energy},
  date = {2022},
  url = {https://greatriverenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/2021-GRE-Annual-Report-FINAL.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-15}
}

@article{guoNationwideUrbanTree2023,
  title = {Nationwide Urban Tree Canopy Mapping and Coverage Assessment in {{Brazil}} from High-Resolution Remote Sensing Images Using Deep Learning},
  author = {Guo, Jianhua and Xu, Qingsong and Zeng, Yue and Liu, Zhiheng and Zhu, Xiao Xiang},
  date = {2023-04},
  journaltitle = {ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing},
  shortjournal = {ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing},
  volume = {198},
  pages = {1--15},
  issn = {09242716},
  doi = {10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2023.02.007},
  url = {https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0924271623000461},
  urldate = {2024-04-03},
  abstract = {Urban tree canopy maps are essential for providing urban ecosystem services. The relationship between urban trees and urban climate change, air pollution, urban noise, biodiversity, urban crime, health, poverty, and social inequality provides important information for better understanding and management of cities. To better service Brazil’s urban ecosystem, this study developed a semi-supervised deep learning method, which is able to learn semantic segmentation knowledge from both labeled and unlabeled images, to robustly segment urban trees from high spatial resolution remote sensing images. Using this approach, this study created 0.5 m fine-scale tree canopy products for 472 cities in Brazil and made them freely available to the community. Results showed that the urban tree canopy coverage in Brazil is between 5\% and 35\%, and the average urban tree canopy cover is approximately 18.68\%. The statistical results of these tree canopy maps quantify the nationwide urban tree canopy inequality problem in Brazil. Urban tree canopy coverage from 130 cities that can accommodate approximately 27.22\% of the total population is greater than 20\%, whereas 342 cities that can accommodate approximately 42\% of the total population have tree canopy cover less than 20\%. We expect that urban tree canopy maps will encourage research on Brazilian urban ecosystem services to support urban development and improve inhabitants’ quality of life to achieve the goals of the Agenda for Sustainable Development. In addition, it can serve as a benchmark dataset for other high-resolution and mid/low-resolution remote sensing images urban tree canopy mapping results assessments.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{gvmcWestMichiganHealthy2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {West {{Michigan Healthy Climate Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Grand {{Rapids PCAP}}},
  author = {{GVMC}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--99},
  institution = {Grand Valley Metropolitan Council},
  location = {Grand Rapids, MI},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/grand-valley-metro-council-w-mi-healthy-climate-plan-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The West Michigan Priority Climate Action Plan is the result of a collaborative planning effort between the Grand Valley Metropolitan Council and the four counties that comprise the Grand Rapids-Kentwood Metropolitan Statistical Area. The plan's purpose is to present and analyze a list of high-priority, implementation-ready greenhouse gas reduction measures in the region. A greenhouse gas inventory of the region was completed to lay the foundation for developing and analyzing reduction measures. Collectively the region is responsible for 38,102,961 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions annually. This is equivalent to 210,070 railcars’ worth of coal burned or 88,129,625 barrels of oil consumed. A majority of regional greenhouse gas emissions result from the stationary energy and transportation sectors. Stationary Energy Transportation Waste 20,543,437 MT CO2e 17,065,195 MT CO2e 494,329 MT CO2e 54\% 45\% 1\% To prevent the further exacerbation of climate change the Project Team (members of Grand Valley Metropolitan Council with support from KERAMIDA) has developed six reduction measures. Each reduction measure will reduce GHG emissions and provide benefits to low income and disadvantaged communities including the reduction of air pollution, job creation, and reduction in energy bill prices. Reduce the carbon intensity of stationary energy Improve building energy efficiency Shift to electric vehicles Reduce vehicle miles traveled Reduced the production of waste Sequester emissions 362,138* 36,499* 41,825* 156,018* 686,549* 1,121* Collectively these measures can reduce GHG emissions by 1,242,325 metric tons by 2030 (*reduction potential of each measure shown above in MT CO2e) – significantly less than needed to meet the goals outlined by the Michigan Healthy Climate Plan. This plan represents a snapshot of the region’s potential. To close the GHG emissions reduction gap, the Project Team will be working with the community to expand on the six measures and develop new measures, which will be included in the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan.}
}

@report{hatchadorianCarbonFreeBoston2019,
  title = {Carbon {{Free Boston}}: {{Buildings Technical Report}}},
  author = {Hatchadorian, Rebecca and Best, Rob and Wholey, Katie and Calven, Alexandra and Levine, Erica and Tepfer, Sara and Swett, Brian and Walsh, Michael J. and Pollack, Adam and Perez, Taylor and Castigliego, Joshua R. and Cleveland, Cutler J.},
  date = {2019},
  pages = {1--86},
  institution = {Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy},
  location = {Boston, MA, USA},
  url = {https://www.bu.edu/igs/2019/05/20/carbon-free-boston-technical-reports/},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {Boston is known for its historic iconic buildings, from the Paul Revere House in the North End, to City Hall in Government Center, to the Old South Meeting House in Downtown Crossing, to the African Meeting House on Beacon Hill, to 200 Clarendon (the Hancock Tower) in Back Bay, to Abbotsford in Roxbury. In total, there are over 86,000 buildings that comprise more than 647 million square feet of area. Most of these buildings will still be in use in 2050. Floorspace (square footage) is almost evenly split between residential and non-residential uses, but residential buildings account for nearly 80,000 (93 percent) of the 86,000 buildings. Boston’s buildings are used for a diverse range of activities that include homes, offices, hospitals, factories, laboratories, schools, public service, retail, hotels, restaurants, and convention space. Building type strongly influences energy use; for example, restaurants, hospitals, and laboratories have high energy demands compared to other commercial uses. Boston’s building stock is characterized by thousands of turn-of-the-20th century homes and a postWorld War II building boom that expanded both residential buildings and commercial space. Boston is in the midst of another boom in building construction that is transforming neighborhoods across the city. The age of Boston’s building stock is important because many of the city’s residences were built before the 1950’s and the establishment of the first building energy codes. These buildings typically have less insulation, are less air-tight, and use older, inefficient equipment, all of which result in higher energy use and GHG emissions compared to newer buildings. Recent buildings conform to a common energy code that aims to balance cost-effectiveness, building comfort, and environmental goals that leads to lower energy use and GHG emissions. Carbon-neutral buildings are highly efficient and do not use fossil fuels for heating and other services. New buildings will be built to the highest possible performance standards while avoiding the lock-in of fossil fuels. Existing buildings will require deep retrofits that reduce energy consumption and electrify heating systems. Achieving these goals requires a synergistic mix of fast-acting policies such as net zero codes, performance mandates, and retrofit requirements. These changes generate significant benefits but require significant upfront capital, a trained labor force, and the willingness and capacity of Boston’s residents, businesses and institutions to invest in their buildings. These actions must also give socially vulnerable populations access to information, technical assistance, and financial resources. This will ensure that they can reap the benefits of lower utility bills, and not be further displaced as a result of higher housing costs, or left out of benefits that accrue to residents of new, efficient buildings},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{hawaiiclimatechangemitigation&adaptationcommission`A`oheHanaNui2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {{{ʻAʻohe}} Hana Nui Ke Alu ‘ia  {{No}} Task Is Too Big When Done Together {{Hawai}}‘i {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Hawai'i {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Hawai‘i Climate Change Mitigation \& Adaptation Commission} and {Adaptation Commission)}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--87},
  institution = {{Hawaiʻi Department of Land and Natural Resources}},
  location = {Honolulu, HI},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/hawaii-pcap-final-.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The climate crisis has already cost Hawai‘i lives, a price much higher and more devastating than even the most pessimistic predicted. Hawai‘i now has a clearer understanding of the need for urgent action. This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) outlines seventeen (17) actions across islands and sectors to reduce future climate impacts. To create the PCAP, the Hawai‘i Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission (CCMAC) partnered with the Hawai‘i State Energy Office (HSEO), the Hawai‘i Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), all four Hawai‘i counties, and competitively selected community partners to identify immediate actions that can be taken to reduce greenhouse gases (GHG) and air pollution, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all who live, work, and play in Hawai‘i. The PCAP outlines Hawai‘i’s priority measures to reduce GHG emissions and achieve climate change goals in a manner that is clean, equitable, and resilient. The seventeen (17) priority measures detailed in the PCAP address GHG reductions from 2025 through 2050. These priority measures complement Hawai‘i's existing climate policies and initiatives that mitigate emissions and were chosen based on their GHG reduction potential, high degree of implementation readiness, cost-effectiveness, and the additional community benefits they provide. The priority measures are “shovel-ready” and can be completed within the five-year performance period of the Implementation Grant. The measures will achieve significant cumulative GHG reductions by 2030 and beyond and provide substantial community benefits including reducing the cost of living through energy efficiency and improved public transportation and multimodal options, waste reduction and diversion, natural resource restoration, enhanced local food production, and the reduction of fire risk--particularly in low-income and disadvantaged communities. The measures are replicable to be “scaled up” across multiple jurisdictions to maximize GHG reductions and community benefits across the state. All the PCAP priority measures advance Hawai‘i’s climate goals and reflect the State’s Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission’s mission statement to advance strategies that are “clean, equitable, and resilient.” Hawai‘i has high ambition in addressing climate change and is an early mover in the fight against climate change. For Hawai‘i, as with its Pacific Island neighbors, climate change is an existential threat. In 2015, to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, countries around the world signed the Paris Agreement to keep global warming “well below” 2 degrees Celsius, to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.1 When the previous administration announced the United States' withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on June 1, 2017, Hawai‘i, expressed strong opposition to this decision, and took several actions to reaffirm its commitment to climate action. In 2017, Hawai‘i reaffirmed its commitment to the goals outlined in the Paris Agreement and established the Hawai‘i Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission (CCMAC) that provides the 1 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (2015). Paris Agreement, https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english\_paris\_agreement.pdf 2 strong framework for a coalition of partners at the state and county levels to address climate change issues through mitigation, adaptation, and resilience to accelerate Hawai‘i’s response to climate change. Hawaiʻi again reaffirmed this comitment with Act 238 (Session Laws of Hawaii, or SLH 2022) which codified in Hawai‘i Revised Statutes (HRS) §225P-5, requires Hawai‘i to reduce GHG emissions by at least 50 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 and 100\% by 2045, in line with the United States’ Paris Agreement commitments and Nationally Determined Contribution. 2 Equity is at the center of Hawai‘i’s response to climate change. The CCMAC “recognizes the urgency of climate threats and the need to act quickly.” Though climate change affects communities around the globe, the impacts of climate change are not equal, with some regions disproportionally impacted due to geographic location and socio-demographic characteristics. Climate change exacerbates existing inequalities in vulnerable and historically marginalized communities. To build climate equity, it is essential to center the voices and strengths of historically underserved communities and acknowledge the institutions and policies that are responsible for these disparities. Recognizing this, CCMAC puts equity at the center of its mission statement, to quickly “promote ambitious climate-neutral culturally responsive strategies for climate change mitigation and adaptation in a manner that is clean, equitable and resilient.” Hawai‘i’s four counties and HSEO (through the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism) are represented on the CCMAC, and for the purposes of the PCAP, comprise a Coalition. The PCAP describes the Coalition’s effort to identify and advance priority measures to reduce GHG emissions in the state. The Hawai‘i PCAP is organized into the following sections to conform to the requirements and guidelines outlined by EPA: 1. Introduction 2. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventory 3. Emissions Projections and Reduction Targets 4. Overview of Current State Action 5. Priority Measures for Implementation 6. Benefits Analysis 7. Low-Income/Disadvantaged Community Benefits Analysis 8. Review of Authority to Implement 9. Intersection with Other Funding Availability 10. Workforce Planning Analysis 11. Coordination and Outreach 12. Conclusion}
}

@article{hawesComparingCarbonFootprints2024,
  title = {Comparing the Carbon Footprints of Urban and Conventional Agriculture},
  author = {Hawes, Jason K. and Goldstein, Benjamin P. and Newell, Joshua P. and Dorr, Erica and Caputo, Silvio and Fox-Kämper, Runrid and Grard, Baptiste and Ilieva, Rositsa T. and Fargue-Lelièvre, Agnès and Poniży, Lidia and Schoen, Victoria and Specht, Kathrin and Cohen, Nevin},
  date = {2024-02},
  journaltitle = {Nature Cities},
  shortjournal = {Nat Cities},
  volume = {1},
  number = {2},
  pages = {164--173},
  publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},
  issn = {2731-9997},
  doi = {10.1038/s44284-023-00023-3},
  url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/s44284-023-00023-3},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {Urban agriculture (UA) is a widely proposed strategy to make cities and urban food systems more sustainable. Until now, we have lacked a comprehensive assessment of the environmental performance of UA relative to conventional agriculture, and results from earlier studies have been mixed. This is the first large-scale study to resolve this uncertainty across cities and types of UA, employing citizen science at 73 UA sites in Europe and the United States to compare UA products to food from conventional farms. Results reveal that the carbon footprint of food from UA is six times greater than conventional agriculture (420\,gCO2e versus 70\,gCO2e per serving). However, some UA crops (for example, tomatoes) and sites (for example, 25\% of individually managed gardens) outperform conventional agriculture. These exceptions suggest that UA practitioners can reduce their climate impacts by cultivating crops that are typically greenhouse-grown or air-freighted, maintaining UA sites for many years, and leveraging circularity (waste as inputs).},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Agriculture,Civil engineering,Climate-change mitigation,Sustainability}
}

@report{hgacHoustonGalvestonAreaCouncil2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Houston-{{Galveston Area Council}}},
  shorttitle = {Houston {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{HGAC}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--82},
  institution = {Houston-Galveston Area Council},
  location = {Houston, TX},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/hgac-houston-galveston-02f39301-0-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {Background The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act allocated \$5 billion to states, territories, and regions to develop and implement plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This effort was launched on March 1, 2023, when the Environmental Protection Agency introduced the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CGRP) Program. This program aims to cut greenhouse gas emissions, create jobs, improve air quality, and reduce energy costs. In its initial phase, the program awarded \$250 million in non-competitive grants to states and the 60 largest metropolitan regions. The Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) submitted and received approval of a grant request. This funding will support the development of a climate action plan. The resulting plan will propose measures to reduce regional greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants, create jobs, and identify economic opportunities. It will also position the H-GAC region to compete for \$4.6 billion in implementation grants. H-GAC is collaborating with Fort Bend County, Harris County, City of Houston, and the Houston Advanced Research Center to leverage existing efforts and receive technical assistance. PCAP Engagement H-GAC prioritizes community engagement throughout the CPRG process, seeking proactive input for the PCAP. Strategies include website polls and surveys, a call-for-projects, hybrid public meetings, and regular sessions with municipal partners and industry stakeholders. A dedicated webpage informs the public about CPRG efforts, with over 500 unique visitors in the four months prior to this writing. The webpage includes tools for quick polls and in-depth surveys, revealing significant interest in transportation and waste sectors. A call-forprojects garnered 37 submissions, indicating community interest and existing planning efforts. A hybrid public meeting attracted 77 attendees, demonstrating the effectiveness of virtual participation. H-GAC also conducted formal presentations for various stakeholders and holds regular meetings with regional government partners.  h-gac.com/climate-pollution-reduction-grant-program 6 PCAP Strategies Overview The PCAP outlines a comprehensive strategy across various sectors to promote sustainability and reduce greenhouse gas emissions: Buildings: • Foster partnerships to improve building efficiency through rating, monitoring, and collaboration with stakeholders. • Support small, minority, and women-owned businesses in adopting energy efficiency solutions. • Provide financial support to municipalities for weatherizing public buildings. • Collaborate with municipal stakeholders to adopt the latest building or energy codes. Energy: • Provide funding for municipalities to integrate solar and energy storage on public property. • Work with partners to incentivize and promote demand-side management to reduce peak energy demand. • Finance projects at port facilities and industrial locations to support the shift from fossil fuels to low-carbon energy sources. Transportation: • Provide incentives to regional small businesses for commute reduction programs to support alternatives to driving alone. • Invest in partnerships to encourage van pools, vehicle sharing, and other micro transit options for rural and disadvantaged communities. • Allocate resources to increase adoption of low and zero-emission vehicles and efficient fuels, along with installing EV charging infrastructure in lowincome areas. • Collaborate with stakeholders to improve bike and pedestrian infrastructure and incentivize multimodal improvements in capital construction projects. Agriculture (Urban): • Promote the use of native landscaping and restore degraded lands to increase carbon storage. • Work with municipal partners to protect and enhance greenspace and expand urban tree planting programs. h-gac.com/climate-pollution-reduction-grant-program 7 Materials Management (Waste): • Promote recycling, composting, and voluntary waste reduction programs to decrease landfill waste. GHG Inventory The Houston Advanced Research Center (HARC), in collaboration with H-GAC and ICLEI, established a local partial baseline inventory of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the thirteen counties in the H-GAC service area using 2021 data. The inventory combined existing datasets to estimate emissions from various sectors and facilities. In 2021, the region emitted approximately 232,724,725 metric tons (MTCO2) of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), with stationary fuel combustion accounting for 84\%, electric power consumption for 17\%, and transportation for 13\% of emissions. Per capita emissions for the region in 2021 were 31.5 MTCO2. Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities Benefits Analysis The PCAP prioritizes GHG reduction strategies focusing on buildings, energy, transportation, and materials management sectors, along with nature-based solutions for carbon capture. These strategies often benefit communities identified as Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC). While some projects directly impact the LIDAC community by being located within strategic census tracts, regional initiatives, like incentives for reducing vehicle miles traveled, offer indirect benefits by mitigating air and noise pollution from roadways. Next Steps H-GAC's CPRG program is moving forward with several key next steps: 1. Meaningful Engagement: Public involvement is crucial for the CPRG effort, which includes ensuring diverse stakeholders' voices are heard and considered. H-GAC plans to enhance engagement efforts for the CCAP. 2. CPRG Implementation Grant: The PCAP positions H-GAC to compete for \$4.6 billion for Implementation Grants. Applications for implementation awards are due by April 1, 2024. 3. CPRG Deliverable \#2: Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP), due 2025. It will address all significant greenhouse gas sources and sectors in H-GAC's metropolitan service area.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{holtWisconsinCleanEnergy2019,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Wisconsin's {{Clean Energy Policies}}},
  author = {Holt, Dominic},
  date = {2019-12},
  pages = {1--9},
  institution = {Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources},
  url = {https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/sites/default/files/topic/ClimateChange/WisconsinCleanEnergyPolicies.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-14},
  abstract = {In August 2019, Governor Tony Evers issued Executive Order 38, charging state agencies with addressing climate change, with a focus on sustainability and clean energy. According to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), “Energy efficiency measures have been proven by many analyses to be the most cost-effective and fast-track way to address global climate change while reducing energy usage and more affordably expanding the use of renewable energy sources.”i Founded in 1980, ACEEE is a national non-profit organization that scores states’ energy efficiency and related policies. This document summarizes Wisconsin’s clean energy, energy efficiency and other climaterelated policies, and reports the ACEEE scores for those policy areas. This document also includes some comparisons to Minnesota’s policies. Unless otherwise noted, the following information comes from the ACEEE profile of Wisconsin.}
}

@report{hrpdcPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan For}} the {{Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News}}, {{VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area}}},
  shorttitle = {Virginia {{Beach PCAP}}},
  author = {{HRPDC}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--103},
  institution = {Hampton Roads Planning District Commission},
  location = {Chesapeake, VA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/hampton-roads-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {This document is the PCAP for the Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Metropolitan Statistical Area (Hampton Roads MSA) and is the first deliverable for the MSA under the EPA CPRG program. The HRPDC has a strong interest in improving resiliency to flooding and sea level rise and in promoting cleaner air and water for its residents. Therefore, HRPDC submitted an application, workplan, and budget to the U.S. EPA for a CPRG planning grant under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The planning grant was used to develop a Hampton Roads MSA-wide PCAP and will be used to develop a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) and a subsequent Status Report. The PCAP: The PCAP identifies immediately impactful, cost-effective actions and projects that target priority greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions source sectors and can be implemented to reduce GHG and co-pollutant emissions in the near-term. This plan includes a simplified GHG inventory developed using downscaled state-level data and publicly available datasets such as in the EPA MOVES tool. Descriptions and analysis of priority GHG reduction measures included in the plan were identified through stakeholder input. Under the conditions of the CPRG planning grant, the PCAP has been developed and submitted to the EPA by the deadline of March 1, 2024. The following seven priority GHG reduction measures were identified as part of this PCAP: • Measure 1: Create programs to support and incentivize a transition to clean energy, including onsite renewable energy, energy storage system deployment, and fuel switching. • Measure 2: Reduce energy consumption and increase building decarbonization through programs to support, incentivize, and install energy efficiency and electrification measures. • Measure 3: Develop an electric vehicle (EV) procurement plan and electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) deployment strategy to support the adoption of EVs. • Measure 4: Reduce vehicle miles traveled and support alternative modes of transportation through bike/pedestrian infrastructure investments. • Measure 5: Reduce emissions from port operations through the adoption of low-carbon fuels, electric equipment, and operational changes. • Measure 6: Reduce GHG emissions through improved equipment efficiencies, increased methane capture at waste and wastewater facilities, and organic waste diversion. • Measure 7: Increase opportunities for carbon sequestration through tree planting, protecting, and restoring high-carbon coastal habitats, wetlands, and forest lands. The CCAP: The CCAP is a longer-term plan that identifies strategies to reduce GHG and co-pollutant emissions that aligns with statutory goals and requirements for reducing these emissions in an efficient and environmentally responsible manner. This plan will cover all source sectors in an MSA-wide GHG inventory and will provide substantial outreach and input opportunities, with a specific intention to engage with traditionally disadvantaged communities. The CCAP will be developed and submitted to the EPA no later than two years after the award of the planning grant (summer-fall 2025). The Status Report: The Status Report is a document that will be developed by HRPDC to report on CCAP progress. The Status Report will be delivered in 2027 and will include:},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{icfUsersGuideMinnesota22,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Users {{Guide}}: {{Minnesota Infrastructure Carbon Estimator}} ({{MICE}}) Version 2.1},
  author = {{ICF}},
  date = {0022-01-25},
  number = {2.1},
  pages = {1--33},
  institution = {ICF},
  location = {St. Paul, Minnesota},
  url = {https://edocs-public.dot.state.mn.us/edocs_public/DMResultSet/download?docId=36622964},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {The Infrastructure Carbon Estimator (ICE) is a spreadsheet tool that estimates the lifecycle energy and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the construction and maintenance of transportation facilities. The ICE tool was created to solve the problem of “planning level” estimation of embodied carbon emissions in transportation infrastructure. Without the need for any engineering studies, ICE helps answer this question: How much carbon will be embodied in the building, modification, and/or maintenance of this transportation project (or group of projects)? The inputs to ICE are designed to be as simple as possible to source and input while still producing a reasonable analysis. The primary inputs required by the tool are metrics that should be readily available, such as roadway lane miles, rail track miles, or number of bridges, signs, or lights. ICE is designed to be self-explanatory. ICE includes detailed instructions and explanations of key input parameters in the tool itself. These are included as text in the tool as well as using Excel’s comment windows to populate “pop-up” windows with useful information.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{idahodepartmentofenvironmentalqualityGemStateAir2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Gem {{State Air Quality Initiative}}},
  shorttitle = {Idaho {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Idaho Department of Environmental Quality}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--48},
  institution = {Idaho Department of Environmental Quality},
  location = {Boise, ID},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/idaho-priority-plan-for-gem-state-air-quality-initative.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The Gem State Air Quality Initiative (GSAQI) is funded through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) Program, part of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which aims to support job creation, lower energy costs for families, and deliver cleaner air in places where people live, work, play, and go to school, particularly in rural communities. The CPRG Program provides nearly \$5 billion to state, municipalities, and Tribes to plan for and implement projects in their jurisdiction. The CPRG Program is funded in two phases. The first is the planning phase that provides funds to states, Tribes, and municipalities to update existing climate, energy, or sustainability plans, or develop new plans. The second phase is the implementation phase that includes competitive implementation grants to fund measures included in priority plans developed by municipalities, states, and Tribes under the planning phase. Idaho, with the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) as the lead agency, elected to receive the planning grant to ensure rural communities in Idaho would have access to funds available under the competitive implementation grant phase. With the assistance of the University of Idaho McClure Center for Public Policy Research (McClure Center), DEQ coordinated with other state agencies, local governments, nonprofits, utilities, businesses, industries, and numerous other stakeholders across Idaho to develop Idaho’s Priority Plan. This plan qualifies Idaho entities to apply for federal funding to support investment in Idaho communities to reduce air pollution, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all Idahoans. The purpose of this plan is to ensure that all Idaho communities, regardless of size, have an opportunity to receive funding through the implementation phase of the CPRG Program. All priority measures included in this plan are non-regulatory, voluntary in nature and do not set any expectation of implementation. This plan satisfies the EPA grant requirement for the development of a Priority Climate Action Plan and is funded wholly by the EPA under the assistance agreement 5D-02J31201. This plan includes the following elements: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory Low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDAC) benefits analysis Priority measures}
}

@report{idemIndianaPriorityClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Indiana {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Indiana {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{IDEM}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--126},
  institution = {Indiana Department of Environmental Management},
  location = {Indianapolis, IN},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/indiana-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {In July 2023, the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) received a \$3 million planning grant as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program. The CPRG program provides federal funding to state governments, municipalities, tribes, and territories to plan and implement strategies for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollutants. Through this program, IDEM aims to promote sustainability, enhance Indiana’s resiliency to environmental challenges, and safeguard the state’s natural resources. This planning grant supports the creation of three key deliverables: 1) a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), 2) a more detailed Comprehensive Climate Action Plan, and 3) a Status Report at the end of the 4- year planning period. Using the EPA planning grant funding, IDEM hired ClimeCo, a decarbonization firm, to provide technical expertise and fulfill key components of these requirements. This climate planning effort represents the first of its kind at the state level for Indiana. However, it builds upon the long-term climate planning efforts of municipalities and organizations throughout the state. This PCAP identifies near-term, high-priority measures to reduce Indiana's greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful pollutants. These measures were selected through an accelerated and iterative process emphasizing collaboration, stakeholder participation, and the potential for GHG impact and other co-benefits. The PCAP details how measures were selected for inclusion and their estimated potential for impact. The PCAP uses the following structure for communicating these measures: • Chapter 1 of this plan lays the foundation for measure selection and communicates Indiana’s focus areas for prioritization. Specifically, this section outlines work conducted by the state to quantify and understand its GHG emissions, to identify priority lowincome and disadvantaged communities, and to assess the climate risks to these communities. • Chapter 2 continues by detailing the approach for many of the assessments completed by the state and the three-step process for selecting PCAP measures. This process began with an initial screening of best practices from across the country, informing a draft list with near-term, high-impact emissions reduction measures. IDEM then launched stakeholder engagement for feedback and revisions through public meetings, surveys, interviews, and email submissions, gathering the input of over 1,500 Hoosiers. Throughout this process, additional consideration was given to the priorities and plans from low-income and disadvantaged communities to help ensure that opinions from these critical stakeholders were reflected in the final plan. Next, IDEM reviewed the revised measures for alignment with municipal climate action plans, as each plan represented additional stakeholder perspectives and local climate priorities. After  6 prioritizing the measures, IDEM quantified the GHG and co-pollutant reduction benefits and evaluated other potential benefits to low-income and disadvantaged communities. • Chapter 3 provides a comprehensive analysis of each priority measure. It begins by assessing the current state of the sector and the measure itself. Next, it summarizes stakeholders’ comments and identifies affected communities. Then, it outlines calculated emissions reductions and other expected benefits. This chapter also includes a preliminary analysis of workforce needs and job creation. Finally, it examines the authority to implement and outlines implementation details. This chapter elaborates on the many positive outcomes of the plan, including increased climate resilience, economic growth, and improved air quality in high-priority communities. • Chapter 4 outlines future actions that can build on the PCAP. These actions include the pursuit of funding to implement the identified measures. The first step in this process will be Indiana’s application for the CPRG Phase 2 Implementation Grants, approximately \$4.6 billion in competitive grants to support the implementation of GHG reduction measures. The measures identified in the plan could reduce Indiana’s annual GHG emissions by 28.4 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (MMT CO2e) by 2030 and 98.9 MMT CO2e by 2050 compared to a theoretical reference case without intervention. At the same time, these measures could significantly reduce co-pollutants that drive adverse health outcomes. The actions outlined herein will also lead to numerous economic and community benefits, such as reducing air pollution and improving health, reducing energy costs, improving access to transportation, building the resilience of buildings and communities, improving waste management, creating jobs, and reducing climate impacts and risks. By identifying strategies to address sources of pollution in Indiana, this PCAP aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to reduce air pollution, especially for the state’s most vulnerable populations. Through efforts to build a more sustainable and resilient future, Indiana will remain a great place to live, work, and play for future generations.}
}

@report{illinoisenvironmentalprotectionagencyStateIllinoisPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {State of {{Illinois Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Illinois {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Illinois Environmental Protection Agency} and Kibbey, J.C.},
  date = {2024},
  pages = {1--98},
  institution = {Illinois Environmental Protection Agency},
  location = {Springfield, IL},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/illinois-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {Illinois has already been hard at work to address the problem of climate change. The centerpiece of that work is the Climate and Equitable Jobs Act (CEJA), signed into law in 2021, which commits the state to 100\% carbon-free power by 2045 while also supporting energy efficiency, electric vehicles, and building electrification, and reforming utility planning and regulation. The state has been a national leader on climate: ● Governor Pritzker signed an executive order in 2019 committing the state to the principles of the Paris Climate Agreement. ● The Illinois Capital Development Board will approve the state’s first-ever stretch energy code in June 2024. ● The Illinois Commerce Commission is set to begin proceedings on the Future of Gas, to explore pathways towards a decarbonized buildings sector, in the first half of 2024. ● Since being named the Climate Bank in CEJA, the Illinois Finance Authority, in partnership with the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, mobilized approximately \$627 million in private capital for climate finance projects, 54\% of which are in or benefit low-income and disadvantaged communities. ● The state has set a goal of having 1 million electric vehicles on the road by 2030. Emissions Illinois’ annual greenhouse gas emissions today are estimated at 228 MMTCO2e, with transportation (60 MMTCO2e) accounting for the largest share, followed by power (52 MMTCO2e). This represents a nearly 20\% decline from 2005 emissions, which were 283.6 MMTCO2e. Power was the largest sector by emissions in 2005 with 94 MMTCO2e, and also saw by far the biggest decline of any sector between 2005 and 2021. The second-largest source of emissions in 2005 was transportation with 72 MMTCO2e. Meeting Illinois’ commitment to the Paris Climate Agreement would require cutting emissions about 39\% from current levels to 139 MMTCO2e. PCAP This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) proposes a path towards broad emissions reductions in every large-emitting sector of the economy. It also explores specific series of potential actions within those measures, with an emphasis on filling gaps in existing federal and state programs, and catalyzing projects that also leverage other sources of funding. Nearly all measures explore the workforce development efforts that will be necessary to achieve them, and the benefits they can provide to low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs). The Plan also draws from and builds upon the work of many entities in our state that have developed their own climate action plans: the City of Chicago, the Chicago metropolitan region, the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, and the University of Illinois in both Chicago and Urbana-Champaig},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{incogTulsaMetropolitanArea2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Tulsa {{Metropolitan Area Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Tulsa {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{INCOG}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--37},
  institution = {Indian Nations Council of Governments},
  location = {Tulsa, OK},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/5d-02f43401-0-tulsa-msa-cprg-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) initiative allocates \$5 billion in grants to support states, local governments, tribes, and territories in crafting and executing robust strategies to curtail greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate adverse air pollution. Authorized under Section 60114 of the Inflation Reduction Act, this dual-phase initiative allots \$250 million for noncompetitive planning grants and around \$4.6 billion for competitive implementation grants. The Indian Nations Council of Governments (INCOG) was designated as the Lead Organization representing the Tulsa Metropolitan Statistical Area’s (MSA) participation in the CPRG program by the INCOG governing body on March 14th, 2023. INCOG is the Tulsa region’s Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and Council of Governments (COG), and five of the seven counties included in the Tulsa MSA are member organizations: Tulsa, Osage, Creek, Rogers, and Wagoner counties. The two counties within the Tulsa MSA that are not already included in INCOG’s membership are Pawnee and Okmulgee counties. As the primary convener of intergovernmental collaboration and transportation planning for our region, INCOG is uniquely qualified and positioned to accomplish the CPRG grant program deliverables. INCOG’s Office of Energy and Environmental Sustainability is leading the agency’s development of CPRG deliverables in alignment with existing air quality programs managed and administered by the Office. These programs include the Tulsa Air Quality Program, the Ozone Alert! program, the Tulsa Area Clean Cities program. While significant progress has been made over the decades through the above-mentioned programs, the CPRG program presents an opportunity for a broader approach in addressing environmental sustainability challenges across the Tulsa region. 1.2 PCAP Overview and Scope The Primary Climate Action Plan (PCAP) for the Tulsa region includes all of the requirements set forth by the EPA, including a greenhouse gas emissions inventory for the region, a benefits analysis for Low-Income and Disadvantage Communities (LIDAC), quantified greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction measures, and a review of authority for implementation. INCOG has worked in close coordination with the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) and the Association of Central Oklahoma Governments (ACOG) to develop two key components of this PCAP: the GHG emissions inventory and quantified GHG reduction measures. ODEQ’s GHG emissions inventory has been enhanced by providing more emissions data in the Tulsa MSA region, with a particular focus on transportation emissions. This was accomplished by using MOVES, AVERT, and AFLEET software.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@book{ipccAR62021,
  title = {Climate {{Change}} 2021 – {{The Physical Science Basis}}: {{Working Group I Contribution}} to the {{Sixth Assessment Report}} of the {{Intergovernmental Panel}} on {{Climate Change}}},
  shorttitle = {Climate {{Change}} 2021 – {{The Physical Science Basis}}},
  author = {{IPCC}},
  date = {2023-07-06},
  edition = {1},
  publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
  doi = {10.1017/9781009157896},
  url = {https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/9781009157896/type/book},
  urldate = {2024-05-30},
  abstract = {The Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) provides a comprehensive assessment of the physical science basis of climate change. It considers in situ and remote observations; paleoclimate information; understanding of climate drivers and physical, chemical, and biological processes and feedbacks; global and regional climate modelling; advances in methods of analyses; and insights from climate services. It assesses the current state of the climate; human influence on climate in all regions; future climate change including sea level rise; global warming effects including extremes; climate information for risk assessment and regional adaptation; limiting climate change by reaching net zero carbon dioxide emissions and reducing other greenhouse gas emissions; and benefits for air quality. The report serves policymakers, decision makers, stakeholders, and all interested parties with the latest policy-relevant information on climate change. Available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.},
  isbn = {978-1-00-915789-6}
}

@report{ipccClimateChange2014,
  title = {Climate {{Change}} 2014: {{Synthesis Report}}. {{Contribution}} of {{Working Groups I}}, {{II}} and {{III}} to the {{Fifth Assessment Report}} of the {{Intergovernmental Panel}} on {{Climate Change}}},
  shorttitle = {{{IPCC AR5}}},
  author = {{IPCC} and {Core Writing Team}},
  editor = {{R.K. Pachauri} and {L.A. Meyer}},
  editortype = {redactor},
  date = {2014},
  pages = {1--151},
  institution = {Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change},
  location = {Geneva, Switzerland},
  url = {https://www.ipcc.ch/assessment-report/ar5/},
  urldate = {2024-01-30},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{irishSLOPEScenarioPlanner2021,
  title = {{{SLOPE Scenario Planner}} 2021 {{Data Sources}} \& {{Methodology}}},
  author = {Irish, Matt and Murphy, Caitlin},
  date = {2021},
  pages = {1--32},
  institution = {NREL},
  url = {https://gds-files.nrelcloud.org/auto-sync/slope/SLOPE-Scenario-Planner-Methodology.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-12},
  abstract = {The Department of Energy’s State and Local Planning for Energy (SLOPE) Platform, published by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), aims to empower data-driven state and local energy planning. This documentation explains SLOPE’s new web-based map interface called the SLOPE Scenario Planner, which delivers energy system scenario data down to a county-level spatial resolution. The SLOPE Scenario Planner offers users the chance to compare how various energy strategies would influence energy consumption, associated carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, and energy system costs out to 2050 at the county, state, and quasi-national (conterminous United States) levels. This document outlines the data that can be accessed via the SLOPE Scenario Planner, the sources of the data, and the methodologies used to create them},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{kawerakBeringStraitRegion2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Bering {{Strait Region Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Bering {{Strait PCAP}}},
  author = {{Kawerak}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--54},
  institution = {Kawerak, Inc.},
  location = {Nome, AK},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/kawerak-regional-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {Purpose and Scope: Tribal Roadmap for GHG Reduction The core purpose of this our Climate Action Plan is to create a tangible, effective roadmap for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by leveraging this planning phase to develop impactful projects. This Climate Action Plan, developed with the support of the EPA's Climate Pollution Reduction Program, represents the concerted effort of a consortium of Tribes dedicated to preserving their way of life and natural resources. It is a strategic response to the urgent challenge of climate change, encompassing both the Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) and the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP), reflecting the Tribes' role as stewards of their ancestral lands. Phase I: Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) – March 1, 2024 The first phase of our journey begins with the creation of the PCAP. Our focus in this phase is to identify immediate, actionable strategies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The PCAP will encapsulate near-term priorities, reflecting our unique environmental challenges. This plan will serve as a springboard, enabling us to pursue the necessary funding through the EPA CPRG Implementation Phase and support for our envisioned projects. Phase II: Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) With the foundational work of the PCAP in place, we will expand our vision in the CCAP, due Summer 2025. This comprehensive plan will delve deeper, covering significant GHG emission sources and carbon sinks within our region. It will outline both short- and long-term goals, strategies, and measures, encompassing a broad spectrum of environmental, economic, and project opportunity considerations. The CCAP is our roadmap to not only meet the immediate challenges of climate change but to set a course for the future},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Tribal PCAP}
}

@report{kdheerampKansasEmissionReduction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Kansas {{Emission Reduction}} and {{Mitigation Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Kansas {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{KDHE ERAMP}},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--62},
  institution = {{Kansas Department of Health and Environment}},
  location = {Topeka, KS},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/kansas-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {Through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022, the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program is a two-phase federal grant that allows states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement community driven projects to reduce ambient air pollution while supporting the creation of quality jobs and lowering energy costs for Kansans, as well as to accelerate work to empower community-driven solutions in their neighborhoods. The Kansas Department of Health and Environment was designated to be the lead agency for the purposes of planning and outreach for this grant program in the state of Kansas. The Emissions Reduction and Mitigation Plan (E-RAMP) is the result of the planning award for the state from the CPRG. Through E-RAMP, this document includes all the required items from the CPRG guidelines to suffice as the Priority (Climate) Action Plan that will be submitted to EPA by the imposed March 1, 2024, deadline. This submission can be leveraged by eligible entities to apply for a share of \$4.3 billion in funding that will be awarded as part of the CPRG implementation grants to assist in funding community driven projects across the state that reduce greenhouse gases and their impacts. To meet requirements for the CPRG planning grant, this Priority Action Plan includes: • Greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory: simplified list of emission sources and sinks, along with associated emissions quantified using standard methods. • Greenhouse gas measures: specific projects to reduce emissions across the state. • Low income and disadvantaged communities (LIDAC) benefit analysis and measures: with the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, the Environmental Justice Screening and Mapping Tool, and work by the Heartland Environmental Justice Center to identify which communities across Kansas are burdened with low incomes, limited access to resources, and disproportionate exposure to environmental or climate impacts. • Review of authority to implement. This Priority Action Plan (PAP) has been put together by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment to ensure that all areas of the state are included, and the projects are in the best interest of the people and environment of the state of Kansas. While some regional planning organizations or municipalities within the state may have their own sustainability or mitigation plans related to greenhouse gases and environmental impacts, the state Priority Action Plan encompasses the entire state and can be leveraged as a guide for all areas, especially entities who do not have resources of their own. Weather events such as drought, flooding, and temperature extremes have already had an impact on lives of the residents of Kansas. This action plan is intended to allow communities and organizations to set measurable goals to become more sustainable and conscious of greenhouse gas emissions while simultaneously providing an opportunity for federal funding to support the development of projects that assist in reaching those goals. This action plan is flexible and tailored to Kansas’ unique resources, capacity, and includes a mix of key sectors responsible for emitting and absorbing greenhouse gases. KDHE ERAMP Priority Action Plan February 2024 4 Approach The establishment of E-RAMP necessitated the creation of a new BOA section to undertake and oversee CPRG planning efforts on behalf of the state of Kansas. Creation of the Data and Sustainability Section increased KDHE’s capacity to complete required tasks to submit the action plan and allow Kansas communities the opportunity to pursue CPRG implementation funds directly from EPA. The process required an extensive public outreach effort to inform Kansas communities about E-RAMP objectives and assure public participation. An E-RAMP contact and information webpage (https://www.kdhe.ks.gov/2071/) was created to begin the outreach effort. KDHE partnered with Wichita State University (WSU) Environmental Finance Center and Heartland Environmental Justice Center to develop, schedule, and promote a series of in-person and virtual public meetings. A description of the engagement process and results are provided in this document. Meetings with state agencies, businesses, industry, stakeholder groups, and the public discussed the E-RAMP program and potential projects to include in the action plan. As a result of these engagements, approximately 50 projects were submitted to KDHE for consideration and inclusion in the Priority Action Plan. KDHE worked with the Wichita State University (WSU) Environmental Finance Center and Heartland Environmental Justice Center to develop the LIDAC analysis and further develop project proposals. KDHE intended to support all efforts across the state which met program goals to reduce ambient air pollution while supporting the creation of quality jobs and lowering energy costs for Kansans, as well as to accelerate work to empower community-driven solutions in their neighborhoods. The intention of the Priority Action Plan is to be all encompassing and provide necessary ambiguity that allows for state, regional, and local adaptations regarding projects that can help reduce greenhouse gases, improve carbon sinks, and provide additional benefits for Kansans. The inclusion and/or reference to specific projects does not favor specific projects over others that may not be referenced. A draft of the Priority Action Plan was provided for public comment prior to the submittal to EPA to ensure that all voices within Kansas have an opportunity to provide input on the creation of the statewide plan. The public comments received are not included for a specific response within the final document but received comments provided impetus for changes from the initial draft developed. After the public comment period the final version of the Priority Action Plan was completed, posted on the E-RAMP webpage, and provided to EPA prior to the March 1, 2024, grant imposed deadline},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@article{knopsSoilCarbonNitrogen2009,
  title = {Soil {{Carbon}} and {{Nitrogen Accumulation}} and {{Vertical Distribution}} across a 74-{{Year Chronosequence}}},
  author = {Knops, Johannes M. H. and Bradley, Kate L.},
  date = {2009},
  journaltitle = {Soil Science Society of America Journal},
  volume = {73},
  number = {6},
  pages = {2096--2104},
  issn = {1435-0661},
  doi = {10.2136/sssaj2009.0058},
  url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.2136/sssaj2009.0058},
  urldate = {2024-05-24},
  abstract = {The majority of the world's terrestrial C and N is contained in soil; however, most soil research has been focused on the top 10 to 30 cm. We quantified the ecosystem C and N pools down to 1 m, including the aboveground biomass, litter, and roots in a 74-yr grassland chronosequence of abandoned agricultural fields in Minnesota. Carbon accumulated at a rate of 34 g C m−2 yr−1; however, only the two top depths, 0 to 10 and 10 to 20 cm, showed a significant increase of 11.0 and 5.8 g C m−2 yr−1 Soil N also increased significantly only in the top 10 cm. Litter C, total root C, and total root N all increased significantly across the chronosequence but were not significantly related to soil C or N gains. Root C and N gains also occurred in the top 10 to 20 cm of the soil. Overall, the changes in vegetation pools were, at best, weakly correlated with soil C and N pools. Soil C accumulation represented 11\% of the total C fixed (or sequestered) in the ecosystem and exceeded root C productivity, particularly below 20 cm. We argue that half of the soil C accumulation may be occurring below 20 cm, suggesting that deeper soil stocks are responsive to disturbances and should be included in assessments of a soil's C storage potential. Furthermore, the source of this C does not appear to be directly derived from recent plant inputs. The accumulation of soil C at all depths tended to be limited by N inputs, and our estimated rate of soil C accumulation does not appear to be sustainable because of N limitation.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{lessMetaAnalysisSingleFamilyDeep2014,
  title = {A {{Meta-Analysis}} of {{Single-Family Deep Energy Retrofit Performance}} in the {{U}}.{{S}}.},
  author = {Less, Brennan and Walker, Iain},
  date = {2014-03-01},
  number = {LBNL-6601E},
  institution = {Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. (LBNL), Berkeley, CA (United States)},
  doi = {10.2172/1129577},
  url = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1129577},
  urldate = {2024-02-26},
  abstract = {The current state of Deep Energy Retrofit (DER) performance in the U.S. has been assessed in 116 homes in the United States (US), using actual and simulated data gathered from the available domestic literature. Substantial airtightness reductions averaging 63\% (n=48) were reported (two- to three-times more than in conventional retrofits), with average post-retrofit airtightness of 4.7 Air Changes per House at 50 Pascal (ACH50) (n=94). Yet, mechanical ventilation was not installed consistently. In order to avoid indoor air quality (IAQ) issues, all future DERs should comply with ASHRAE 62.2-2013 requirements or equivalent. Projects generally achieved good energy results, with average annual net-site and net-source energy savings of 47\%±20\% and 45\%±24\% (n=57 and n=35), respectively, and carbon emission reductions of 47\%±22\% (n=23). Net-energy reductions did not vary reliably with house age, airtightness, or reported project costs, but pre-retrofit energy usage was correlated with total reductions (MMBtu). Annual energy costs were reduced \$1,283±\$804 (n=31), from a pre-retrofit average of \$2,738±\$1,065 to \$1,588±\$561 post-retrofit (n=25 and n=39). The average reported incremental project cost was \$40,420±\$30,358 (n=59). When financed on a 30-year term, the median change in net-homeownership cost was only \$1.00 per month, ranging from \$149 in savings to an increase of \$212 (mean=\$15.67±\$87.74; n=28), and almost half of the projects resulted in reductions in net-cost. The economic value of a DER may be much greater than is suggested by these net-costs, because DERs entail substantial non-energy benefits (NEBs), and retrofit measures may add value to a home at resale similarly to general remodeling, PV panel installation, and green/energy efficient home labels. These results provide estimates of the potential of DERs to address energy use in existing homes across climate zones that can be used in future estimates of the technical potential to reduce household energy use and greenhouse gas emissions through DERs.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{lexington-fayetteurbancountyLexingtonFayetteMetropolitanStatistical2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Lexington-{{Fayette Metropolitan Statistical Area Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Lexington {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Lexington-Fayette Urban County} and {Government} and {City of Lexington} and {Tetra Tech}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--162},
  institution = {Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government},
  location = {Lexington, KY},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/lexington-fayette-msa-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {This is an adaptation of a template prepared for states by the Conveners Network. This template was prepared in collaboration with the Urban Sustainability Directors Network, which provides technical assistance and support to MSAs on Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) planning through the CPRG Assistance Project—a collaboration of several organizations to provide free support to help MSA leads navigate and successfully comply with the CPRG program. This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Grant \#02D55923. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document. Kentucky ranks \#6 overall out of 51 states and districts in the U.S. Climate Vulnerability Index (CVI). The index is a measure of environmental, social, economic, and infrastructure impacts affecting a community’s ability to respond and adapt to climate change. What is “climate vulnerability”? The evolving climate is exacerbating both infectious and chronic illnesses, heightening societal and economic pressures, and amplifying the intensity of extreme weather occurrences. While certain communities in the United States possess access to resources that aid in their preparation for, endurance of, and recovery from these impacts, many others do not. These communities are disproportionately vulnerable to climate-related effects due to a legacy of racially biased housing and infrastructure development, unequal application of environmental regulations, discriminatory practices in the labor market, and other systemic injustices. Source: The U.S. Climate Vulnerability Index 2 INTRODUCTION However, with this challenge comes an opportunity to invest in a cleaner economy that can spur innovation and economic growth while building more equitable, resilient communities. Through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022, Congress provided many tools to pursue greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution reductions, including the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program. In implementing this and many other programs under the IRA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seeks to achieve three broad objectives: • Tackle damaging climate pollution while supporting the creation of good jobs and lowering energy costs for families. • Accelerate work to address environmental injustice and empower community-driven solutions in overburdened neighborhoods. • Deliver cleaner air by reducing harmful air pollution in places where people live, work, play, and go to school. The Lexington‐Fayette Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) was awarded a Planning Grant from the CPRG program. There are two phases of the CPRG program. Phase 1 of the CPRG program requires submittal of a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). The PCAP is a narrative report including a focused list of near-term, highpriority, implementation-ready measures to reduce GHG pollution, a simplified GHG inventory for the entire MSA, emissions reductions associated with the proposed implementation measures, a low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDAC) benefit analysis, and a review of the authority to implement these measures. Phase 2 of the program will expand the PCAP into a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP). The CCAP will touch on all significant GHG sources, sinks, and sectors present in the MSA, establish near-term and long-term GHG emission reduction goals, and provide strategies and measures to achieve those goals. The MSA will undertake a comprehensive public outreach and involvement campaign in order to receive feedback from stakeholders, with a focus on LIDACs. The CCAP will be a plan for the community, by the community, that will hold the promise of preserving the place we live and love for years to come. This strategy will allow communities across the country to make the inevitable changes needed to address climate change and make them opportunities to revitalize the U.S. energy and manufacturing sectors, create millions of good-paying jobs throughout the country, and address historic environmental injustices and inequities.}
}

@article{litmanHowPricesOther,
  title = {How {{Prices}} and {{Other Factors Affect Travel Behavior}}},
  author = {Litman, Todd},
  abstract = {Transport demand refers to the amount and type of travel that people would choose under specific conditions. This report describes concepts related to transport demand, investigates the influence that factors such as prices and service quality have on travel activity, and how these impacts can be measured using elasticity values. It summarizes research on various types of transport elasticities and describes how to use this information to predict the impacts of specific transport price and service quality changes.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{litmanUnderstandingTransportDemands2021a,
  title = {Understanding {{Transport Demands}} and {{Elasticities}}: {{How Prices}} and {{Other Factors Affect Travel Behavior}}},
  shorttitle = {Understanding {{Transport Demands}} and {{Elasticities}}},
  author = {Litman, Todd},
  date = {2021-11-05},
  pages = {1--78},
  institution = {Victoria Transport Policy Institute},
  location = {Victoria, BC},
  url = {http://www.vtpi.org/elasticities.pdf},
  urldate = {2021-12-15},
  abstract = {Transport demand refers to the amount and type of travel that people would choose under specific conditions. This report describes concepts related to transport demand, investigates the influence that factors such as prices and service quality have on travel activity, and how these impacts can be measured using elasticity values. It summarizes research on various types of transport elasticities and describes how to use this information to predict the impacts of specific transport price and service quality changes.},
  langid = {english}
}

@incollection{liuBaselineProjectedFuture2014,
  title = {Baseline and {{Projected Future Carbon Storage}}, {{Carbon Sequestration}}, and {{Greenhouse-Gas Fluxes}} in {{Terrestrial Ecosystems}} of the {{Eastern United States}}},
  author = {Liu, Shuguang and Liu, Jinxun and Wu, Yiping and Young, Claudia and Werner, Jeremy and Dahal, Devendra and Oeding, Jennifer and Schmidt, Gail},
  date = {2014},
  series = {Professional {{Paper}}},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{lmgLouisvilleKYINMSA2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Louisville {{KY-IN MSA Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Louisville {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{LMG} and {Louisville Mayor's Office of Sustainability}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--59},
  institution = {Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government},
  location = {Louisville, KY},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/louisville-ky-in-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The Louisville Kentucky-Indiana Metropolitan Statistical Area (Louisville KY-IN MSA) is one of 80 most populous Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) in the United States to be awarded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s Climate Pollution Reduction Planning Grant (CPRG) to create a regional climate action plan. The intent of the CPRG is to help communities develop and implement ambitious greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction measures, deliver significant community benefit specifically to low-income and disadvantaged communities, complement other funding sources for an efficient utilization of grant funds, and create scalable and replicable solutions for national impact. While Indiana received a state-wide CPRG planning grant, Kentucky was one of four states that declined state-level CPRG funding. As the most populous MSA in Kentucky and the third most populous MSA touching Indiana (following Indianapolis and Chicago), the Louisville KY-IN MSA is committed to leading a regional climate planning process that is not only transformative for our MSA, but has lasting, positive ripple effects throughout both Kentucky and Indiana. Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government (LMG, a merged city-county government), through its Mayor’s Office of Sustainability (OS) served as the primary applicant for the CPRG with support from the City of New Albany, IN, and Indiana University (IU). OS continues to serve as a primary coordinator for the regional climate planning process, which engages and is supported by numerous stakeholders and community members. OS’s mission is to collaboratively and equitably build a climate-responsible and climate-resilient Louisville to advance quality of life for all residents within Louisville and beyond. Through the CPRG opportunity, OS is extending that work throughout the Louisville KY-IN MSA in close collaboration with MSA partners, stakeholders, and residents. 1.1 CPRG Overview This PCAP is the first major deliverable under the CPRG planning grant awarded to the Louisville KY-IN MSA. This document is only a preliminary plan - the Louisville KY-IN MSA project team will continue research, planning, engagement, and action to reduce emissions; invest in sustainable infrastructure, technologies, and practices; build a sustainable economy; and enhance the quality of life in the region. In 2025, the Louisville KY-IN MSA will publish a comprehensive climate action plan (CCAP) that establishes equitable and sustainable economic development strategies that reduce emissions across all sectors. The CCAP will include near- and long-term emissions projections, a suite of emission reduction measures, a robust analysis of measure benefits, plans to leverage federal funding, and a workforce planning analysis. In 2027, the Louisville KY-IN MSA will publish a status report that details implementation progress for measures included in the PCAP and CCAP, any relevant updates to PCAP and CCAP analyses, and next steps and future budget and staffing needs to continue implementation of CCAP measures. The CPRG, supported by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), is an opportunity for unprecedented support to address climate change causing GHG emissions in the Louisville KY-IN MSA. The CPRG program aims to mitigate the harmful socioeconomic effects of excessive GHG pollution by encouraging proactive strategies in areas of our countries that have historically been left behind. The Louisville KY-IN 7 DRAFT Louisville KY-IN MSA Priority Climate Action Plan MSA’s larger climate action goals are paralleled in the PCAP below. We hope to accomplish an expansion in social and technological equity with a vast decrease in GHG emission throughout the MSA. LMG has set the following goals: ● Metro Council Resolution for 100\% clean energy by 2040. This includes: 100\% clean electricity for LMG operations by 2030, 100\% clean energy for LMG operations by 2035, 100\% clean energy community-wide by 2040. ● Metro Council Resolution and Mayoral Executive Order for net zero GHG emissions community-wide by 2040. This includes an interim goal of 50\% reduction in GHG emissions community-wide by 2030. The CPRG’s goals are in line with Louisville KY-IN MSA’s goals, and the project team continues to identify aligned priorities in other cities and counties in the MSA. Note the general outcomes that Louisville hopes to see from this PCAP: 1.2 PCAP Overview and Definitions Per the EPA’s guidelines, the PCAP includes the following components: ● A GHG inventory - The GHG inventory was developed using existing regional data and is a simplified version of the inventory to be completed during the CCAP phase. More information about the inventory process can be found in section 2.1. ● GHG reduction targets - GHG reduction targets have been calculated using ClimateView based on the implementation of the priority reduction measures. Additional information regarding the reduction targets can be found in section 2.3. ● Priority GHG reduction measures - The core project team has identified a focused list of near-term, high-priority measures that are ready for implementation. Additional information on each measure is available in section 2.4. ● A Low Income / Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) benefits analysis for the PCAP and the measures within it - The LIDAC benefits analysis evaluated the ninety-seven LIDAC communities within the Louisville KY-IN MSA and established measures to address community needs within the PCAP. Additional information about the LIDAC benefits analysis can be found in section 2.3 below. ● A review of authority to implement for each reduction measure - The core project team has identified outstanding actions necessary for obtaining implementing authority. Additional information regarding the authority to implement can be found within the individual reduction measure description. Scope of the PCAP The GHG Inventory section of this PCAP further outlines the geographic, temporal, sectors, and emissions scopes included in this plan. 8 DRAFT Louisville KY-IN MSA Priority Climate Action Plan Approach to Developing the PCAP Below is an outline of the approach and activities undertaken to develop the PCAP. This builds on the approach described in the CPRG application work plan. Stakeholder and Community Engagement OS serves as the project manager and lead coordinating agency for the PCAP. OS continues to be committed to a robust and inclusive engagement process that represents priorities of stakeholders and community members across the Louisville KY-IN MSA. Due to time constraints, OS’s outreach was limited, but OS plans to continue deeper engagement throughout the CCAP phase. Photographs from an NZAG meeting 9 DRAFT Louisville KY-IN MSA Priority Climate Action Plan Below is a description of the stakeholder and community engagement approach that was utilized to develop the PCAP: Core Team: OS assembled a core team to lead the key aspects of developing the PCAP. The team included: ● LMG’s Mayor’s Office of Sustainability (OS) - Overall project management and programmatic support ● University of Strathclyde (UofS) - Research lead for the GHG inventory and quantified reduction measures ● University of Louisville (UofL) - Research lead for the Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) analysis ● David Neumann (contracted facilitator) and Annette Dangerfield (Project Manager with the LMG Mayor’s Office) - Stakeholder engagement and expert facilitation ● LMG’s Air Pollution Control District (APCD) - review of previous climate plans and studies, technical partner ● Keramida - Technical partner Net Zero Advisory Group (NZAG): The core team invited a group of over 100 stakeholders representing various areas, sectors, and communities to serve on the NZAG and advise on the development of priority actions for the PCAP. The NZAG met 4 times (9 hours in total) through a combination of virtual and in-person meetings to advise on implementation ready strategies in key emissions sectors including residential buildings, commercial buildings, industry, and transportation. Nearly 80 members regularly participated in these meetings. Key stakeholder interviews: UofL conducted 44 one-on-one key stakeholder interviews with individuals representing LIDAC communities and interests to better understand LIDAC priorities. Some interviewees were compensated for their time and expertise through the CPRG grant. The process for identifying these stakeholders is further described in the LIDAC Benefits Analysis section. Additionally, OS and UofS conducted several more one-on-one meetings with potential delivery partners and businesses to better understand priorities and implementation-ready projects. Priority project questionnaire: OS distributed a project questionnaire to numerous governmental agencies, institutional partners, and businesses to identify a pipeline of implementation ready projects that could meet PCAP criteria, and received over 50 responses. Public Survey: The core team developed and disseminated a regional climate action survey that was open to all residents in the Louisville KY-IN MSA and received 1,048 unique responses. While the survey garnered a greater proportion of responses from Louisville, we received some responses from each county included in the MSA. UofL analyzed the survey responses. Public Meetings: OS hosted 3 public meetings to discuss PCAP priorities and engaged approximately 50 residents. Two of the meetings were virtual, one was in-person (located in an LIDAC community), and the virtual meeting recordings were made available on the MSA’s official regional climate action plan webpage (hosted on the OS’s website). 10 DRAFT Louisville KY-IN MSA Priority Climate Action Plan Stakeholders for the NZAG, key stakeholder interviews, and priority project questionnaires were identified by developing a thorough list of all known contacts representing various relevant counties, sectors, and interests for the PCAP. The initial list of over 250+ stakeholders was condensed to approximately 100 by prioritizing major emissions sectors (residential buildings, commercial buildings, industry, and transportation). Further, at every engagement session, the project team consistently requested the NZAG, members of the public, and others to recommend other important contacts who should be included in the conversation. A live database of contacts was maintained and continuously updated by OS to include in future engagement opportunities.}
}

@article{luExploringEffectsLand2023,
  title = {Exploring the Effects of Land Use and Land Cover Changes on Meteorology and Air Quality over {{Sichuan Basin}}, Southwestern {{China}}},
  author = {Lu, Yaqiong and Yang, Xianyu and Wang, Haofan and Jiang, Mengjiao and Wen, Xiaohang and Zhang, Xiaoling and Meng, Lixia},
  date = {2023-03-09},
  journaltitle = {Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution},
  shortjournal = {Front. Ecol. Evol.},
  volume = {11},
  publisher = {Frontiers},
  issn = {2296-701X},
  doi = {10.3389/fevo.2023.1131389},
  url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2023.1131389},
  urldate = {2024-04-05},
  abstract = {Accurate characterization of land use and land cover changes (LULCC) is essential for numerical models to capture LULCC-induced effects on regional meteorology and air quality, while outdated LULC dataset largely limits model capability in reproducing land surface parameters, particularly for complex terrain. In this study, we incorporate land cover data from MODIS in 2019 into the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model to simulate the impacts of LULC on meteorological parameters over the Sichuan Basin (SCB). Further, we conduct Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) simulations with WRF default LULC and MODIS 2019 to probe the effects on regional air quality. Despite consistency found between meteorological observations and WRF-CMAQ simulations, the default WRF land cover data does not accurately capture rapid urbanization over time compared with MODIS. Modeling results indicate that magnitude changes trigged by LULCC are highly varied across SCB and the impacts of LULCC are more pronounced over extended metropolitan areas due to alteration by urbanization, featured by elevating 2-m temperature up to 2℃ and increased planetary boundary layer height (PBLH) up to 400m. For air quality implications, it is found that LULCC leads to basin-wide O3 enhancements with maximum reaching 21.6μg/m3 and 57.2μg/m3 in the daytime and nighttime, respectively, which is mainly attributed to weakening NOx titration effects at night. This work contributes modeling insights into quantitative assessment for impacts of LULCC on regional meteorology and air quality which pinpoints optimization of the meteorology-air quality model.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Air Quality,land cover,land use,Sichuan Basin,urban meteorology}
}

@report{lvpcLehighValleyPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Lehigh {{Valley Priority Climate Action Plan Transportation Decarbonization}}},
  shorttitle = {Lehigh {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{LVPC} and {LVTS}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--158},
  institution = {Lehigh Valley Planning Commission},
  location = {Allentown, PA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/lvpc-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is focused on a specific sector of regional importance and has been prepared by the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission (LVPC) in accordance with the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program guidance. It includes a list of near-term, high priority strategies to mitigate the impacts of climate change, even as we grow, by reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from one of the Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) top sources — the transportation sector. The MSA includes Lehigh, Northampton and Carbon counties in Pennsylvania and Warren County in New Jersey. Lehigh and Northampton counties are the geographic focus of the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission (LVPC) and the Lehigh Valley Transportation Study (LVTS), which is the designated regional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) specifically for the Lehigh Valley. The transportation sector was selected as the focus for this PCAP, as it was determined to be one of the largest sources of GHG emissions in the region. It is also the area where we can have the greatest impact because it gives us access to billions of dollars of state and federal decarbonization funding streams, many of them created through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act. The PCAP includes several required elements including a comprehensive GHG inventory, specific GHG reduction goals,or measures, and associated projections of GHG emission reductions, a low-income and disadvantaged communities benefit analysis and a review of the authority to implement the proposed goals. Climate change is often referred to on a global level because it is a threat to the health of our planet, but it also poses a significant threat to our region, which is evident every day. The region is experiencing more extreme weather events, and with two major rivers and an extensive stream network, it is now even more vulnerable to flooding. At the same time, the beauty and high quality of life here makes it attractive to more people and businesses, making it one of Pennsylvania’s fastest growing regions. The dilemma is more people and businesses typically result in more carbon emissions. The transportation sector was selected as the focus for this PCAP, as it was determined to be one of the largest sources of GHG emissions in the region.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@article{maclachlanSubpixelLandcoverClassification2017,
  title = {Subpixel Land-Cover Classification for Improved Urban Area Estimates Using {{Landsat}}},
  author = {MacLachlan, Andrew and Roberts, Gareth and Biggs, Eloise and Boruff, Bryan},
  date = {2017-10-18},
  journaltitle = {International Journal of Remote Sensing},
  volume = {38},
  number = {20},
  pages = {5763--5792},
  publisher = {Taylor \& Francis},
  issn = {0143-1161},
  doi = {10.1080/01431161.2017.1346403},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2017.1346403},
  urldate = {2024-04-05},
  abstract = {Urban areas are Earth’s fastest growing land use that impact hydrological and ecological systems and the surface energy balance. The identification and extraction of accurate spatial information relating to urban areas is essential for future sustainable city planning owing to its importance within global environmental change and human–environment interactions. However, monitoring urban expansion using medium resolution (30–250~m) imagery remains challenging due to the variety of surface materials that contribute to measured reflectance resulting in spectrally mixed pixels. This research integrates high spatial resolution orthophotos and Landsat imagery to identify differences across a range of diverse urban subsets within the rapidly expanding Perth Metropolitan Region (PMR), Western Australia. Results indicate that calibrating Landsat-derived subpixel land-cover estimates with correction values (calculated from spatially explicit comparisons of subpixel Landsat values to classified high-resolution data which accounts for over [under] estimations of Landsat) reduces moderate resolution urban area over (under) estimates by on an average 55.08\% for the PMR. This approach can be applied to other urban areas globally through use of frequently available and/or low-cost high spatial resolution imagery (e.g. using Google Earth). This will improve urban growth estimations to help monitor and measure change whilst providing metrics to facilitate sustainable urban development targets within cities around the world.}
}

@article{maloneImpactsOrganicMatter2023,
  title = {Impacts of Organic Matter Amendments on Urban Soil Carbon and Soil Quality: {{A}} Meta-Analysis},
  shorttitle = {Impacts of Organic Matter Amendments on Urban Soil Carbon and Soil Quality},
  author = {Malone, Zachary and Berhe, Asmeret Asefaw and Ryals, Rebecca},
  date = {2023-09-20},
  journaltitle = {Journal of Cleaner Production},
  shortjournal = {Journal of Cleaner Production},
  volume = {419},
  number = {138148},
  pages = {1--13},
  issn = {0959-6526},
  doi = {10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138148},
  url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652623023065},
  urldate = {2024-02-27},
  abstract = {Organic matter amendment application is an important avenue of beneficial waste diversion and is used to improve soil quality in agricultural and urban settings. In urban regions, amendments are used to support local food production, maintain vegetation for landscaping and recreational use, and reclaim disturbed soils. Urban regions generate large quantities of wasted organic resources for potential application aiding in creating a circular nutrient economy. There is a growing interest in understanding the effects of amendments such as compost, biosolids, and biochar on soil properties in agricultural settings. Gaps remain, however, in assessing their effects in urban land uses. We conducted a literature review to assess the effects of compost, biochar, and biosolids on soil carbon and soil quality of urban soils managed for gardening, landscaping, recreation, and reclamation. Application of organic matter amendments led to an average increase of 3.6 units of soil organic matter\% (SOM\%). Compost and biochar improved SOM\% the most, by 3.1 and 6.5 units of SOM\%, respectively. Biosolids resulted in the smallest increase in SOM\% but had greater nutrient benefits than other amendments. Parameters related to chemical and physical soil quality improved with the application of amendments. Gaps in the literature remain, such as assessing urban gardens, soil to depths greater than 30~cm, and the persistence of SOM in amended soils. This meta-analysis proposes that organic matter amendments are a powerful means to improve soil quality in urban regions, provide vital cobenefits to surrounding communities, and increase soil carbon storage.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Meta-analysis,Organic matter amendments,Soil carbon storage,Soil organic matter,Urban soil,Urban soil quality}
}

@report{mapaPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan}} ({{PCAP}}) of the {{Omaha-Council Bluffs Metropolitan Statistical Area Climate Pollution Reduction Grant}} ({{CPRG}}) {{Program}}},
  shorttitle = {Omaha {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{MAPA} and {City of Omaha} and Laroco, Robert and Morales, Carlos and Bluffs, Omaha-Council},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--45},
  institution = {Omaha-Council Bluffs Metropolitan Area Planning Agency},
  location = {Omaha, NB},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/omaha-council-bluffs-ne-msa-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The City of Omaha in coordination with the Omaha-Council Bluffs Metropolitan Area Planning Agency received a planning grant from the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program, which was appropriated by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is the first component of the Regional Climate Action Plan that the MSA has developed for the CPRG program. The PCAP includes a regional greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory, a public outreach process, identification of priority GHG emissions reduction measures, a benefits analysis for low-income and disadvantaged communities, and identification of implementation authorities. The public engagement process leverages the interest of the localized community through the City of Omaha engagement plan and coordination with MAPA at the broader regional level. Early engagement opportunities relied on virtual and multimedia platforms to allow the most access of materials to stakeholders, the general public, and especially the low-income and disadvantaged communities identified during the process. MAPA and the City of Omaha used existing opportunities to enhance and expand engagement efforts at the region level. The Regional Planning Advisory Committee (RPAC), which provides a forum to coordinate future planning and growth in the Greater Omaha-Council Bluffs region, is composed of representatives from across the region including municipalities, non-profits, energy representatives, education, health, and economic development from both Nebraska and Iowa. The greenhouse gas inventory in the PCAP follows and uses tools and data developed by the U.S. EPA. The data was consolidated at the county level using emissions records from numerous sources including the EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), local utilities, Nebraska and Iowa Departments of Transportation, Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, and Nebraska and Iowa Departments of Agriculture. The data was input into the EPA Local Greenhouse Gas Inventory Tool. The PCAP was the first region-wide climate action planning effort in the Omaha-Council Bluffs MSA. It provided a valuable educational experience to the communities in the region as well as to the municipality staff on climate action planning. However, due to the constrained timeline for the PCAP development, the process for many components of the PCAP was shortened or simplified. The next step in the planning process will be the preparation of a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) that will build on the PCAP, address the additional requirements for the CCAP, and expand/enhance the PCAP components in the CCAP},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{mapcGreaterBostonPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Greater {{Boston Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Boston {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{MAPC}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--156},
  institution = {Metropolitan Area Planning Council},
  location = {Boston, MA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/boston-cambridge-newton-ma-nh-mapc-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is the Greater Boston Region’s near-term plan to address the urgent challenge of climate change. The changing climate is already impacting communities across the region, leading to deadly high heat days in the summer, rising sea levels on the coasts, and increasingly frequent and severe inland flooding events from extreme precipitation due to warmer air. Climate risks and impacts disproportionately harm the region’s frontline communities – areas where residents have lower-incomes and where communities of color are more likely to live.1  To counter these risks, we must rapidly reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions emitted and focus on strategies that ensure an equitable transition to a clean energy future that prioritizes those most vulnerable to climate hazards. Action is needed at all levels to change our electricity generation, buildings, transportation, and consumption and waste systems to be net zero, or free of GHG emissions at a community scale. The PCAP highlights strategies that municipalities, in partnership with regional planning organizations, state agencies, community-based organizations, and private sector can implement to meaningfully mitigate GHG emissions and advance equity in the region. Combined with federal and state policy and funding commitments, regional and local-level climate action can help us realize a safe, healthy, and prosperous future for everyone. Figure 2: Map of the Greater Boston Metropolitan Statistical Area and the designated low-income and disadvantaged communities within the region.  12 The development of the PCAP was directed by the federal Inflation Reduction Act and funded by the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) Program. The Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) led the region’s planning effort, in close coordination with the six other Regional Planning Agencies/Commissions serving the region. The PCAP represents the first regional priority plan of near-term climate action and will inform the development of the region’s more detailed Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP), which will be complete by summer 2025. The Greater Boston Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) included in this plan spans across 167 municipalities and 4.7 million residents across Eastern Massachusetts and Southern New Hampshire. Fifty-nine municipalities within the region encompass federally defined Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) census tracts where residents experience disproportionate climate, environmental, health, and economic burdens. The PCAP focuses on implementing climate mitigation solutions in LIDAC communities to ensure the region’s most underserved populations are prioritized and benefit from programs and policies designed to reduce climate pollution in the region. This PCAP builds on existing climate action planning and implementation efforts from within the region, best practices from peer jurisdictions, and detailed input and feedback from key stakeholders. During the planning process, MAPC convened a Municipal Advisory Group and a Justice40 Advisory group to gather input from municipal stakeholders and community-based groups across the region, with a focus on LIDAC communities. Each group met three times over the six-month planning period to provide input and feedback on the plan. Additionally, MAPC held three virtual listening sessions for the region for additional stakeholders and the public to provide input.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{marcKansasCityRegional2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Kansas {{City Regional Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Kansas {{City PCAP}}},
  author = {{MARC}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--33},
  institution = {Mid-America Regional Council},
  location = {Kansas City, MO},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/kansas-city-mo-ks-msa-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {Crafted by community, the Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) prioritizes a set of actions included in the Kansas City Regional Climate Action Plan that was adopted in 2021. That initial plan was produced in partnership with Climate Action KC, whose network of 150 elected officials and hundreds of community stakeholders galvanized community support for the plan. Strong local leadership, combined with deep community engagement and science-based analysis, underlie the strength and impact of climate planning and action in the Kansas City region. Measures in the PCAP are arrayed across five action areas: building energy efficiency and renewable energy investments; transportation alternatives and technologies; urban greening; agriculture, food and waste systems innovation; and cross-sector measures that help build capacity for action across all project areas. Priority measures were determined based on the original plan, alongside extensive community engagement from September 2023 to February 2024 and analysis of applicable criteria. The measures in this document are organized into each of the five action areas above. Priorities are expected to guide regional and local action during the coming five years. Through workshops, one-on-one meetings, coalition building and a call for projects, MARC engaged residents from low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDAC), community benefit organizations, technical experts and local governments in identification of needs, priorities as well as development of measures, programs and projects to achieve climate resilience in the region. Programs and projects proposed during the engagement process are reflected in Appendix 2. Plan formulation was guided by the MARC Climate and Environmental Council (CEC) and the MARC Board of Directors. The approach will be expanded upon during the development of a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) in the coming year. Importantly, the CCAP creates an opportunity to update the regional greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory, using 2022 data compared to the original 2015 data. Three primary goals frame the measures included in the PCAP: leveraging public leadership, neighborhood resilience and critical infrastructure resilience. Each goal contributes to the transformative potential of this plan in different ways. MARC programs will support the interconnected implementation of measures— empowering municipalities, neighborhoods and individuals to take action. These actions can lead to systems-level changes, strengthening the vitality and connectivity of neighborhoods and activity centers, and contributing to a circular economy while reducing GHG emissions across the region.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{maronCarbonFreeBoston2019,
  title = {Carbon {{Free Boston}}: {{Offsets Technical Report}}},
  author = {Maron, Ariella and Zheng, Kevin and Fox-Penner, Peter and Cleveland, Cutler J.},
  date = {2019},
  pages = {1--14},
  institution = {Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy},
  location = {Boston, MA, USA},
  url = {https://www.bu.edu/igs/2019/05/20/carbon-free-boston-technical-reports/},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency defines offsets as a specific activity or set of activities intended to reduce GHG emissions, increase the storage of carbon, or enhance GHG removals from the atmosphere [1]. From a city perspective, they provide a mechanism to negate residual GHG emissions— those the city is unable to reduce directly—by supporting projects that avoid or sequester them outside of the city’s reporting boundary. Offsetting GHG emissions is a controversial topic for cities, as the co-benefits of the investment are typically not realized locally. For this reason, offsetting emissions is considered a last resort, a strategy option available when the city has exhausted all others. However, offsets are likely to be a necessity to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 and promote emissions reductions in the near term. While public and private sector partners pursue the more complex systems transformation, cities can utilize offsets to support short-term and relatively cost-effective reductions in emissions. Offsets can be a relatively simple, certain, and high-impact way to support the transition to a low-carbon world. This report focuses on carbon offset certificates, more often referred to as offsets. Each offset represents a metric ton of verified carbon dioxide (CO2) or equivalent emissions that is reduced, avoided, or permanently removed from the atmosphere (“sequestered”) through an action taken by the creator of the offset. The certificates can be traded and retiring (that is, not re-selling) offsets can be a useful component of an overall voluntary emissions reduction strategy, alongside activities to lower an organization’s direct and indirect emissions. In the Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories (GPC), the GHG accounting system used by the City of Boston, any carbon offset certificates that the City has can be deducted from the City’s total GHG emissions.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{marylanddepartmentoftheenvironmentPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan State}} of {{Maryland}}},
  shorttitle = {Maryland {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Maryland Department of the Environment}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--138},
  institution = {Maryland Department of the Environment},
  location = {Baltimore, MD},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/mde-state-of-maryland-cprg-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {This report is the State of Maryland’s Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) developed under the EPA Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) to meet the requirements of the State of Maryland CPRG Planning Grant. The State of Maryland PCAP builds on the Maryland’s Department of the Environment’s (MDE) fifteen years of GHG inventory and reduction planning experience and was developed based on the following foundational inputs: ● Existing statewide GHG inventories ● Prior statewide climate action plans ● Maryland Climate Pathway Report (June 2023) ● Stakeholder feedback on the Maryland Climate Pathway Report ● Maryland's Climate Pollution Reduction Plan (December 2023) to achieve 60\% GHG emissions reductions by 2031 and attain "net zero" by 2045 (goals set by the General Assembly). The statewide and economy-wide plan provides the analytical and policy framework to structure Maryland's PCAP. ● Stakeholder input including over 300 GHG emission reduction measures/projects assembled by MDE from eligible agencies, jurisdictions, and stakeholders. The State of Maryland’s PCAP covers the geographical scope of the entire state of Maryland, inclusive of the Maryland jurisdictions additionally covered by other CPRG planning grants. CPRG planning areas were designated by the EPA and include both statewide and Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) regional planning. In Maryland, there are four CPRG planning grants, as designated by the EPA, that cover specified counties and municipalities: State of Maryland: Statewide coordination and planning led by the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) with a Local Support Program for the following counties: Allegany, Calvert, Caroline, Dorchester, Garrett, Kent, Somerset, St. Mary’s, Talbot, Washington, Wicomico, and Worcester. The Maryland CPRG Local Support Program assists counties and their municipalities in identifying highpriority GHG emissions reduction projects with important social, ecological, and economic co-benefits and builds capacity across all of Maryland for project planning, design, financing, implementation, and tracking. Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD: Led by Baltimore Metropolitan Council for the following counties: Anne Arundel, Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Carroll, Harford, Howard, Queen Anne’s. Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD: Led by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission for Cecil County. Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV: Led by the DC Department of Energy and Environment (DOEE) and supported by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments for the following counties Charles, Frederick, Montgomery, Prince George’s. Included in this PCAP are the following elements: Maryland PCAP – March 1, 2024 15 ● GHG Inventory ● GHG Emission Projections ● GHG Reduction Targets ● GHG Reduction Measures ● Benefits Analysis ● Low Income / Disadvantaged Communities Benefits Analysis ● Review of Authority to Implement ● Intersection with Other Funding Availability ● Workforce Planning Analysis ● Next steps Core policies of the December 2023 Maryland Climate Pollution Reduction Plan were aligned based on the Modeling for the State’s Climate Plan to the following 21 priority climate action plan measures (PCAP measures) to meet the quantification requirements of the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Program. The PCAP measures detailed in this PCAP are as follows: ● PCAP MEASURE 1: Clean Economy Standard ● PCAP MEASURE 2: Increasing Renewable and Clean Energy ● PCAP MEASURE 3: Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative ● PCAP MEASURE 4: Clean Power Standard ● PCAP MEASURE 5: Advanced Clean Cars II ● PCAP MEASURE 6: Advanced Clean Trucks ● PCAP MEASURE 7: Advanced Clean Fleets ● PCAP MEASURE 8: Maryland Transportation Plan and Carbon Reduction Strategies ● PCAP MEASURE 9: Building Energy Performance Standards ● PCAP MEASURE 10: EmPOWER ● PCAP MEASURE 11: Zero-Emission Heating Equipment Standard ● PCAP MEASURE 12: Clean Heat Standard ● PCAP MEASURE 13: Hydrofluorocarbon Regulations ● PCAP MEASURE 14: Control of Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry ● PCAP MEASURE 15: Buy Clean ● PCAP MEASURE 16: Landfill Methane Regulations ● PCAP MEASURE 17: Sustainable Materials Management ● PCAP MEASURE 18: State Incentives for Agricultural Decarbonization ● PCAP MEASURE 19: Agricultural Resource Conservation and Management ● PCAP MEASURE 20: Afforestation and Improved Forest Management ● PCAP MEASURE 21: Coastal Wetland Restoration and Management}
}

@report{maSectorSpecificMethodologiesSubnational2019,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Sector-{{Specific Methodologies}} for {{Subnational Energy Modeling}}},
  author = {Ma, Ookie and Cardoso De Oliveira, Ricardo P and Rosenlieb, Evan and Day, Megan H},
  date = {2019-04-05},
  number = {NREL/TP-7A40-72748, 1506626},
  pages = {1--41},
  institution = {National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)},
  doi = {10.2172/1506626},
  url = {https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy19osti/72748.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-16},
  abstract = {The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and the United States Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Strategic Programs sought to address gaps in sub-national energy data. This report describes the methodologies developed to estimate the electricity and natural gas consumption and expenditures for the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors at sub-state geographies and made available on the State and Local Energy Data2 site to enable more strategic energy decisions by a variety of stakeholders. To estimate energy consumption at the sub-state level, researchers proportionally allocated energy sales and revenue values reported by the Energy Information Administration from state and utility geographies down to smaller geographies. Within each sector, population distributions are developed through the selection of cohorts assumed to have homogeneous energy use characteristics. In the residential sector, cohorts are based on locational, occupancy, physical, and demographic characteristics of the housing units. In the commercial sector, cohorts are based on climate zone, location, and use types of commercial square footage. The industrial sector is unique in that large greenhouse gas emitters are required to report at the facility level. These are treated individually, but the remaining cohorts are based on the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes and employment size class for business establishments. Energy values by cohort come from available statistical samples. These are then rescaled to match aggregate values from electric and natural gas utility reported sales and volumes as well as business reported fuel expenditures. These methodologies model only electricity and natural gas consumption and expenditures and do not address other forms of building energy consumption and expenditures such as bottled gas (generally propane) or heating oil or on-site industrial consumption of coal, coke, or diesel fuel for process energy. Residential sector modeling generally yields more accurate results due to greater data availability and uniformity of per customer energy use. The opposite is true of the industrial sector where significant disparities in energy consumption by industry and among facilities within industries cause modeling challenges. In small towns where a single industrial facility can comprise most of the sector’s consumption, modeled industrial sector data may be unreliable for planning purposes. Overall, a comparison with reported values by sector demonstrates that these sectorspecific modeling methodologies provide reasonable results which can inform subnational-level energy decision making where measured, utility-reported data is unavailable. In addition, the modeled data provides robust, standardized, and disaggregated national data.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{maSectorSpecificMethodologiesSubnatonal2019,
  title = {Sector-{{Specific Methodologies}} for {{Subnatonal Energy Modeling}}},
  author = {Ma, Ookie and Cardoso De Oliveira, Ricardo P and Rosenlieb, Evan and Day, Megan H},
  date = {2019-04-05},
  number = {NREL/TP-7A40-72748, 1506626},
  pages = {NREL/TP-7A40-72748, 1506626},
  doi = {10.2172/1506626},
  url = {http://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1506626/},
  urldate = {2023-12-12},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{mcogMaricopaPinalCountyRegion2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Maricopa-{{Pinal County Region Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Maricopa {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{MCOG}},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--63},
  institution = {Maricopa Association of Governments},
  location = {Phoenix, AZ},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/maricopa-pinal-county-region-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {On March 1, 2023, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the availability of \$250 million in planning grants to reduce climate pollution and build clean energy economies. This funding was part of the \$5 billion Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program funded through the 2020 Inflation Reduction Act. The EPA CPRG program is split into two phases, a planning phase and an implementation phase. In the planning phase, eligible entities were able to seek funding from EPA in a noncompetitive process to develop plans to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Eligible regions for the planning grants included all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, each of the 67 most populous metropolitan areas in the country, and territory and Native nation governments. Included in the most populous metropolitan areas was the Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler metropolitan statistical area (MSA), which includes all of Maricopa County, Arizona and Pinal County, Arizona. Under the newly created Clean Air Act section 137(d)(1), entities who were eligible to participate in the CPRG Planning Grant program included states, Native nations, municipal governments, councils of governments (COG), and air pollution control agencies. On September 20, 2023, EPA announced the availability of \$4.6 billion across two grant competitions for the implementation phase of the CPRG program. This included \$4.6 billion for a general competition1 and \$300 million for a tribes and territory only competition2 . The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) is a COG and metropolitan planning organization (MPO) that provides a forum for local governments to work together on issues that affect the lives of everyone in the greater Phoenix, Arizona region. MAG is a COG that represents 27 cities and towns, three Native nations, Maricopa County, and portions of Pinal County. Members include representatives from the incorporated cities and towns in Maricopa County as well as the City of Maricopa, Town of Florence, Maricopa County, Pinal County, Gila River Indian Community, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, and the Arizona Department of Transportation. Figure 1 below contains a map of MAG members’ Municipal Planning Areas. MAG is a regional agency that conducts planning and makes policy decisions in a number of core areas. These include safe and smart travel, the economy and growth, environment and sustainability, and improving quality of life. On April 26, 2023, the MAG Regional Council authorized MAG to submit a Notice of Intent to Participate (NOIP) in the CPRG Planning Grant program as the lead planning agency for the Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler MSA. On April 26, 2023, MAG submitted a NOIP to EPA for the CPRG Planning Grant program. On May 30, 2023, MAG submitted a program application for the CPRG Planning Grant program. On July 26, 2023, EPA notified MAG that it has been selected to serve as lead planning organization for the CPRG Planning Grant program for the Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler MSA. On August 9, 2023, the MAG Management Committee recommended approval of amendments and modifications to the MAG Fiscal Year 2024- 2025 Biennial Unified Planning Work Program and Budget to accept the CPRG Planning Grant program funds. On August 23, 2023, the MAG Regional Council approved amendments and modifications to the MAG Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Biennial Unified Planning Work Program and Budget to accept the CPRG 1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Program: Implementation Grants General Competition. Notice of Funding Opportunity. EPA-R-OAR-CPRGI-23-07. Revised January 16, 2024. 2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Program: Implementation Grants Competition for Tribes and Territories. Notice of Funding Opportunity. EPA-R-OAR-CPRGT-23-09. Revised December 15, 2023. 9 Planning Grants funds. In addition to MAG receiving CPRG Planning Grant program funds, the following entities in Arizona also received funds: • State of Arizona – Arizona Governor’s Office of Resiliency • Pima Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) – Tucson, AZ MSA • Gila River Indian Community • Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community • Navajo Nation Under the CPRG Planning Grant program, planning grant recipients are required to develop and submit three deliverables over the course of the four-year program period: 1. A Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), due March 1, 2024; 2. A Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP), due July 21, 2025; and, 3. A Status Report, due July 21, 2027. This document is intended to fulfill the PCAP deliverable obligation for the Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler MSA (hereinafter referred to as the “Maricopa-Pinal County region”) under the EPA CPRG Planning Grant program.}
}

@report{mdnrMissouriPlanEnvironmental2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Missouri {{Plan For Environmental Improvement Grants}}},
  shorttitle = {Missouri {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{MDNR}},
  date = {2024-02-27},
  pages = {1--130},
  institution = {Missouri Department of Natural Resources},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/missouri-plan-for-environmental-improvement-grants.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-01},
  abstract = {The federal government has made \$5 billion available to states, cities, and tribes to plan for and implement environmental improvement projects in their jurisdictions. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (department) received a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop plans required for Missouri to compete for this federal grant funding. The department coordinated with Missouri citizens, other state agencies, local governments, nonprofits, utilities, industries, and numerous other stakeholders across the State to develop the Missouri Plan for Environmental Improvement Grants (plan). This plan qualifies Missouri for federal funding to support investment in Missouri communities to reduce air pollution, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all Missourians. This plan satisfies the EPA grant requirement for the department to develop a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). This project is funded wholly or in part by the EPA under assistance agreement 96702701 to the department. The contents of this plan do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this plan. The purpose of this plan is to ensure that all Missouri communities and municipalities, regardless of size, have an opportunity to implement projects identified herein through the implementation phase of the federal grant program with \$4.3 billion available nationwide that Missouri can compete for. Throughout the development of this plan, the department engaged with stakeholders to collect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction project ideas for inclusion in this plan. This plan describes the results of this engagement and project descriptions that are of interest to these stakeholder entities. For the purposes of this plan, emissions reduction measures and project categories should be considered broadly applicable to any area of the state. Additionally, agencies in both the Kansas City and St. Louis areas, the Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) and the East-West Gateway Council of Governments (EWGW), respectively, received their own Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) Planning grants. These organizations have also been key collaborators in the development of this plan. For this reason, and to further ensure there is no confusion about whether a community at the edges of these areas is covered by this plan, the Missouri portion of both metropolitan statistical areas are also considered covered by this plan, and emissions reduction measures included herein should be considered applicable to these areas as well. The PCAPs developed by MARC and by EWGW, and the emission reduction measures included in those PCAPs are also hereby incorporated by reference into this plan upon their release. This plan is organized into the following sections: 1. GHG Emissions Inventory 2. Priority Emission Reduction Measures 3. Low-Income/Disadvantaged Community (LIDAC) Benefits Analysis 4. Review of Authority 5. Intersection with Other Funding Availability 6. Coordination and Outreach},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {State PCAP}
}

@report{memphis&shelbycountydpdMidSouthClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Mid-{{South Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Memphis {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Memphis \& Shelby County DPD}},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--207},
  institution = {Memphis \& Shelby County Division of Planning \& Development},
  location = {Memphis, TN},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/memphis-tn-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {Increases in global temperatures caused by the unprecedented influx of greenhouse gas emissions released by human activities are impacting (and will continue to impact) every corner of our globalized world. The Mid-South is not exempt from the changing climate and its varied impacts on our communities. Within the Mid-South, residents are experiencing more frequent and intense climate hazards like extreme heat, flooding, and damaging winds. Beyond the debilitating safety, public health, and financial consequences of these events, the region’s low-income and disadvantaged communities are the least equipped to adapt and protect themselves from these changes. Understanding the need to mitigate the Mid-South’s contribution to climate change and adapt for the challenges it brings, the Memphis and Shelby County Division of Planning and Development’s Office of Sustainability and Resilience (OSR) is partnering with 19 committed jurisdictions to produce the Mid-South Climate Action Plan: Priority Reduction Measures to support investment in policies, practices, and technologies that can reduce pollutant emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life in the Mid-South region. As seen in Figure 1, the Mid-South region is located in a unique geographic position requiring increased},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@dataset{metcSewershedsMetershedsWWTP2020,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Sewersheds ({{Metersheds}}, {{WWTP Service Areas}})},
  author = {{Metropolitan Council}},
  date = {2020-05-17},
  publisher = {Minnesota Geospatial Commons},
  url = {https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metc-util-sanitary-sewersheds},
  urldate = {2024-02-14},
  abstract = {This dataset was developed to divide areas within the Twin Cities Metro Area into smaller, geographic regions. These sewershed boundaries are classified as currently served, potential served in the future, or never to be served by the MCES regional wastewater system. A sewershed is a defined area that is tributary to a single point along an MCES interceptor (a community system connection) or is tributary to a single lift station. This dataset can also be queried to show Metersheds (areas tributary to each MCES Meter) or WWTP Service Areas (areas tributary to each wastewater treatment plant).},
  langid = {american}
}

@dataset{metcTravelBehaviorInventory2021,
  title = {Travel {{Behavior Inventory}} ({{TBI}}) 2021 {{Household Interview Survey}}},
  author = {{Metropolitan Council}},
  date = {2021},
  publisher = {Minnesota Geospatial Commons},
  url = {https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/us-mn-state-metc-society-tbi-home-interview2021},
  urldate = {2024-02-10},
  abstract = {The Travel Behavior Inventory (TBI) Household Survey is a travel survey of households in the greater Twin Cities region that has been conducted every 10 years since 1949. This survey supports...},
  langid = {american}
}

@report{metrocogSouthwestCTClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Southwest {{CT Climate Action Plan}}: {{Priority Climate Action Plan}} for {{BridgeportNorwalk-Stamford Metropolitan Statistical Area}}},
  shorttitle = {Southwest {{CT PCAP}}},
  author = {{MetroCOG} and {WestCOG}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--179},
  institution = {Connecticut Metropolitan Council of Governments},
  location = {Bridgeport, CT},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/bridgeport-ct-msa-metrocog-swct-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program is designed to provide \$5 billion to aid in the development of “ambitious plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful air pollution”1 . Developed under the Inflation Reduction Act, the CPRG program is a lever aimed at reducing the effects of climate change across the country, and at all levels of government awarding grants to States, local government, tribes and territories, and other local planning groups. The grant is divided in two overlapping phases, approximately \$250 million in non-competitive planning grants and approximately \$4.6 billion in competitive implementation grants. During the first phase, states, large metro areas, tribes and territories received \$1 to \$3 million each to develop climate actions plans that identify sources of emissions and propose reduction measures. The program requires two plans: the Priority Climate Action Plan and the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan. During the second phase, EPA will award competitive implementation grants to fund reduction measures identified in the plans. Priority Climate Action Plan The Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is a first cut of measurable, high impact, and implementable climate actions which set the stage for applications in the CPRG Implementation Grant Program funding (Phase 2). The planning efforts and content of the PCAP will directly feed into the development of the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP). The PCAP includes a greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory developed by UMass, reduction measures, a review of the authority to implementing, additional complimentary funding sources, and a preliminary workforce planning analysis. In addition, a Low Income/Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) benefits analysis was to be conducted, which focuses on evaluating the benefits of impacts of measures to these communities within the planning region. Comprehensive Climate Action Plan The CCAP is the fully formed climate action plan which is more encompassing and to reflect the climate actions for all stakeholders in the Southwest Connecticut region. The development of the CCAP is an extension of the PCAP, but will be an expanded collection of climate actions, stakeholder engagement, GHG inventory, GHG estimations, LIDAC analyses, and a cost benefit analysis for the entire region. 1. Project Overview 10 1.1.2.\enspace Planning Grant Leads The CPRG planning grant awarded to encompass the Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk Metropolitan Statistical Area2  (MSA) is led by the Connecticut Metropolitan Council of Governments (MetroCOG) and supported by the Western Connecticut Council of Governments (WestCOG), hereafter “planning grant leads.” As two of the nine planning regions within the State of Connecticut, the pair covers the Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk MSA, more commonly Fairfield County, as the focus of the Priority and Comprehensive Climate Action Plans. The MetroCOG Region is about 50 miles east of New York City and 150 miles west of Boston, Massachusetts. MetroCOG consists of six municipalities, the City of Bridgeport and the Towns of Easton, Fairfield, Monroe, Stratford, and Trumbull. Bridgeport, Fairfield, and Stratford are coastal communities, situated along Long Island Sound, while Easton, Monroe and Trumbull are inland communities. All six of these municipalities are represented within the Priority and Comprehensive Climate Action Plans. The MetroCOG region is a densely populated area with the State of Connecticut’s largest community, the City of Bridgeport, at its urban core. The region’s population of over 325,000 people living within a planning area of 145-square-miles makes MetroCOG the most densely populated planning region in Connecticut3 . MetroCOG’s coastal communities are more developed, while its inland communities are more rural. Norwalk. Image from WestCOG Flickr. 11 The Western Connecticut, WestCOG, region encompasses the eighteen municipalities in southwestern Connecticut, including Bethel, Bridgewater, Brookfield, Danbury, Darien, Greenwich, New Canaan, New Fairfield, New Milford, Newtown, Norwalk, Redding, Ridgefield, Sherman, Stamford, Weston, Westport, and Wilton. It falls within the greater metropolitan area of New York City and encompasses an area of 532-square-miles with a population of over 610,000 residents4 . The WestCOG region has both rural and developed suburban communities, spanning both coastline and forested areas bordering the vast state of New York. Two of the WestCOG municipalities fall outside the MSA boundary. Bridgewater and New Milford were considered in the scope of this planning process. Also, although the town of Shelton is within the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments (NVCOG) planning region, it is within the MSA border and is included in this plan’s scop},
  langid = {english}
}

@online{metropolitancouncilExtremeHeat2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Extreme {{Heat}}},
  author = {{Metropolitan Council}},
  date = {2023-08},
  url = {https://metrocouncil.org},
  urldate = {2024-02-27},
  abstract = {State climatologists are highly confident that heat waves are likely to trend upwards in future summers in the state. To create strategies to address extreme heat, researchers seek to identify the factors that exacerbate extreme heat. This research has shown that higher temperatures are amplified in areas with higher concentrations of pavement and impervious surface, as these areas tend to absorb residual heat and hold that heat longer than vegetation would. Using remote sensing and satellite imagery, the Council has mapped land surface temperature on two dates. First, temperatures mapped in 2022 show recent, high-resolution data. The 2022 data is intended to show the heat differences across the region, not the maximum temperature that any specific area can reach. Temperatures from an extreme, three-day heat wave occurring in 2016 are also mapped, but at coarser resolution. The 2016 data more closely approximates the maximum land surface temperature that urban areas may reach. In both cases, maps show that developed areas are hotter in temperature, while parks and other greenspace, and areas near water bodies, are cooler. It is important to emphasize that the data consists of land surface temperature, as opposed to air temperature. Air temperature data can provide a better measure of potential extreme heat impacts on human health. The use of land surface temperature has ensured that this analysis has full metropolitan coverage. In addition, the use of land surface temperature can be helpful in identifying land use and built environment strategies to mitigate extreme heat in specific locations through a variety of site-specific interventions.},
  langid = {american},
  organization = {Metropolitan Council}
}

@report{metropolitancouncilKeepingOurCool2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Keeping Our {{Cool}}: {{Understanding}} Extreme Heat across the {{Twin Cities}} Region},
  shorttitle = {Keeping {{Our Cool}}},
  author = {{Metropolitan Council}},
  date = {2023-08-02},
  institution = {Metropolitan Council},
  location = {St. Paul, Minnesota},
  url = {https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/10ec7b3b6dde440cbb0047cb01c51327},
  urldate = {2024-02-26},
  abstract = {Understanding extreme heat across the Twin Cities region},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{metropolitancouncilTwinCitiesMSA2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Twin {{Cities MSA Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Twin {{Cities PCAP}}},
  author = {{Metropolitan Council}},
  date = {2024},
  pages = {1--44},
  institution = {Metropolitan Council},
  location = {St. Paul, Minnesota},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/metropolitan-council-twin-cities-msa-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The Twin Cities Metropolitan Priority Climate Action Plan is led by the Metropolitan Council in collaboration with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of Health, and the State of Wisconsin. This plan has been created under the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program, authorized under the Inflation Reduction Act. It builds on the Met Council’s existing climate change mitigation work including the greenhouse gas inventory and strategy planning tool, Climate Action Work Plan, Minnesota’s Climate Action Framework, and ongoing natural systems and climate engagement and policy work as part of the 2050 regional planning process. Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program overview The Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program provides \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement ambitious plans for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollution. Authorized under Section 60114 of the Inflation Reduction Act, this two-phase program provides \$250 million for noncompetitive planning grants (of which \$1 million was awarded to the Met Council) and approximately \$4.6 billion for competitive implementation grants. The CPRG program is part of the Justice40 initiative, which sets a goal that 40\% of the benefits of certain federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that are “marginalized, underserved, and overburdened” by pollution. The two phases of the grant include two deliverables: the Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) due March 1, 2024, and a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) due in 2025 along with ongoing status reports through 2027. This document, the PCAP, provides a focused list of near-term, high-priority, implementationready measures to reduce climate pollution from GHG emissions. The PCAP components include: • A GHG inventory • Quantified GHG reduction measures • Low-income and disadvantaged communities benefits analysis • A review of authority to implement The EPA has launched two CPRG implementation grant competitions. Eligible entities, whether they received planning grants in Phase 1 or not, can apply to implement measures outlined in their Priority Climate Action Plans (PCAPs). Individual grants will range between \$2 million and \$500 million. Additional information on the PCAP elements can be found in EPA’s CPRG: Formula Grants for Planning, Program Guidance for States, Municipalities, and Air Control Agencies. The Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) is due in July 2025 and consists of several key components, such as a comprehensive GHG inventory, projections for GHG emissions, clearly defined GHG reduction targets, specified measures for GHG reduction, and a thorough benefits analysis covering the entire geographic scope and population addressed by the plan.  Twin Cities MSA Priority Climate Action Plan March 2024 Page - 2 | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Geographic scope of the PCAP This PCAP applies to 11 counties in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), including Anoka, Carver, Chisago, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, Sherburne, and Washington counties in Minnesota along with Pierce and Saint Croix counties in Wisconsin.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{metrotransitMetroTransitFacts2022,
  title = {Metro {{Transit Facts}} - {{Metro Transit}}},
  author = {{Metro Transit}},
  date = {2022-12-31},
  location = {Minneapolis, MN},
  url = {https://www.metrotransit.org/metro-transit-facts},
  urldate = {2024-02-26}
}

@report{midwestnaturalgasincorporatedElectricGasWater2022,
  title = {Electric, {{Gas}} or {{Water Annual Report}} to {{Public Service Commission}} of {{Wisconsin}} (2021)},
  author = {Midwest Natural Gas Incorporated},
  date = {2022},
  url = {https://apps.psc.wi.gov/PDFfiles/Annual%20Reports/IOU/IOU_2021_3670.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-01-24}
}

@report{millelacsbandofojibwePriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan Report}}},
  shorttitle = {Mille {{Lacs PCAP}}},
  author = {{Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe}},
  date = {2024-04-01},
  pages = {1--27},
  institution = {Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe},
  location = {Onamia, MN},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-04/mille-lacs-band-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-05-24},
  abstract = {In response to the escalating climate crisis, the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe (Band) has formulated a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). The main ideas of this document which outline strategic actions to promote sustainability and reduce environmental impacts are summarized here. The urgent need for change in our approach to environmental stewardship is addressed in the PCAP, which include reducing carbon emissions, enhancing resilience to hazards associated with climate change, and encouraging sustainable practices throughout our activities. This report is divided into three main sections that give details and specificity of the action plan: 1. An overview of the CPRG and PCAP, that highlights the scopes and gives a detailed timeline of the program. 2. The Tribal organization which includes the development team, factors that were considered for the plan and collaboration that were underwent during the process. 3. The PCAP elements, including the greenhouse gas inventory, greenhouse gas reduction measures and the benefit analysis. The PCAP focuses on short-term objectives and defines a phased implementation strategy. It highlights how crucial it is to maintain ongoing observation, review plans, and be flexible in modifying strategies in response to the changing climate. This report highlights how these objectives would be achieved through collaborative means such as interacting with stakeholders in order to promote a common commitment to tackle climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Also contained in this report are emission reduction targets identified by the developing agency that would implement methods and practices aimed at significantly reducing carbon impact. Efforts towards resilience and adaptation are also shown in this report where thorough risk assessments were carried out in order for more effective measures, and the energy audit from NORESCO showed how the Band is incorporating climate resilience into its operational procedures to withstand the impacts of climate change. This PCAP serves as the road map for the Band to a resilient and sustainable future. As the original stewards of the land, by making climate action a top priority, we lead the way in reducing the effects of climate change and support international initiatives. This report further shows the Band’s dedication in promoting a legacy of environmental care by ensuring that the EPA’s goals for climate pollution reduction are met.}
}

@article{milnarImpactUrbanExpansion2020a,
  title = {Impact of {{Urban Expansion}} and {{In Situ Greenery}} on {{Community-Wide Carbon Emissions}}: {{Method Development}} and {{Insights}} from 11 {{US Cities}}},
  shorttitle = {Impact of {{Urban Expansion}} and {{In Situ Greenery}} on {{Community-Wide Carbon Emissions}}},
  author = {Milnar, Michael and Ramaswami, Anu},
  date = {2020-12-15},
  journaltitle = {Environmental Science \& Technology},
  shortjournal = {Environ. Sci. Technol.},
  volume = {54},
  number = {24},
  pages = {16086--16096},
  publisher = {American Chemical Society},
  issn = {0013-936X},
  doi = {10.1021/acs.est.0c02723},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c02723},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {Biogenic CO2 emissions in cities are shaped by urban land cover change which can release carbon stocks, and, carbon sequestration by in situ vegetation. To date, these two processes have not been studied together and compared with transboundary fossil fuel-based CO2 emissions of urban energy use. We leverage remote sensing and machine learning to quantify biogenic CO2 emissions between 2006 and 2012, across 11 U.S cities, including central and suburban cities, in different climate zones. Results indicate that in situ carbon sequestration by greenery varied moderately across cities (−2.1 to −0.87 Mg CO2 ha–1 yr–1), while emissions from the carbon stock change due to land conversion varied much more (−3.4 to 9.8 Mg CO2 ha–1 yr–1), indicating that the latter dominates biogenic CO2 emissions. Net biogenic CO2 emissions were negative (carbon sink) in four cities, while large net positive emissions were present in rapidly growing suburbs. As a ratio of community-wide energy use for travel and buildings, biogenic CO2 emissions were a small proportion in the core cities Denver (0.17\%) and Minneapolis (0.33\%) and as high as 38.2\% in growing exurban communities. These results show that land cover change and greenery will be important policy levers in zero-carbon city planning.}
}

@online{minnesotadepartmentofcommerceAnnualReportingForms2022,
  type = {Government/regulatory filings},
  title = {Annual Reporting Forms for Electric and Gas Utilities},
  author = {{Minnesota Department of Commerce}},
  date = {2022},
  url = {https://mn.gov/commerce/energy/industry-government/utilities/annual-reporting.jsp},
  urldate = {2024-01-23},
  organization = {Annual Reporting}
}

@dataset{minnesotaitgeospatialinformationofficeElectricUtilityService2023,
  title = {Electric {{Utility Service Areas}}, {{Minnesota}}, {{January}} 2023},
  author = {Minnesota IT Geospatial Information Office},
  date = {2023},
  url = {https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/util-eusa},
  urldate = {2024-01-24}
}

@report{mississippidepartmentofenvironmentalqualityMississippiDepartmentEnvironmental2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Mississippi {{Department}} of {{Environmental Quality Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Mississippi {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--166},
  institution = {Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality},
  location = {Jackson, MS},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/ms-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program, funded by the Inflation Reduction Act, is administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to facilitate the development and implementation of climate action plans at state-, local-, tribal-, and territorial-government levels to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other air pollutants. The CPRG program includes: (1) a planning phase with grants to help jurisdictions identify key GHG sources, design corresponding reduction measures, and summarize these in a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP); and (2) an implementation phase with grants to help jurisdictions implement their proposed reduction measures. The State of Mississippi’s objectives for this CPRG program, of which this PCAP report is the first step, are to develop, plan, and implement measures to reduce state-wide GHG emissions and other air pollutants. Outreach to different communities, interest groups, and partners throughout the state is an important component of this work. This helps the state share its plans and evaluation process and also obtain feedback on future actions to meet statewide climate pollution goals. Given the limited development time for this PCAP, outreach was performed virtually through online meetings, a website, and using social media. Public outreach and engagement efforts were coordinated with those of the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, who are concurrently developing a PCAP specifically for Tribal lands. For the State of Mississippi, outreach was led by the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality and for the Tribe by their Office of Environmental Protection. An initial estimate of GHG emissions for Mississippi was developed using a set of tools published by EPA, termed the State Inventory Tool (SIT). For the PCAP the estimates are developed using the default parameters, and these are expected to be updated and refined with more statespecific data in future phases. Because of the significance of the GHG inventory in planning future activities, it was also considered important to perform an independent evaluation of the GHG estimates for Mississippi. This additional evaluation was focused on the following sectors: electric power generation, transportation, industry, agriculture, and wastewater. Emissions for the year 2017 are used as the baseline year in this analysis, because this is a year for which alternative data sources for comparison were available. The total emissions for Mississippi are 74.5 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2 -equivalent (CO2 -e) and distributed among sectors as shown in Figure ES-1. Most of the emissions are in the form of CO2  (83\%), with the rest being methane (CH4 , 7.6\%), nitrous oxide (N2 O, 6.6\%) and other gases (2.7\%). A notable observation from the inventory calculation is the finding that the extensive forested areas of Mississippi serve as a sink of magnitude comparable to GHG emissions from all other sectors. On a net basis, therefore, consideration of the forest carbon sink suggests that Mississippi’s GHG emissions are zero or slightly negative. Even so, it should be understood that implementation of emissions reduction measures will contribute to minimizing both the harmful “nearfield” effects on low income, disadvantaged communities as well as broader regional ambitions for GHG reductions. Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality Priority Climate Action Plan xiv Executive Summary The independent review of GHG emissions for selected sectors revealed only minor differences and the SIT was considered appropriate for the present application. However, review indicates areas that could be the focus of further refinement in future phases of CPRG implementation.},
  langid = {english}
}

@legislation{mndocCHAPTER7610ENERGY2005,
  title = {{{CHAPTER}} 7610, {{ENERGY INFORMATION REPORTING}}},
  author = {Minnesota Department of Commerce},
  date = {2005-01-19},
  url = {https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/7610/}
}

@dataset{mndotCityTownshipUnorganized2023,
  title = {City, {{Township}}, and {{Unorganized Territory}} in {{Minnesota}} - {{Minnesota Geospatial Commons}}},
  author = {{MnDOT}},
  date = {2023-12},
  number = {mnctu},
  publisher = {Minnesota Geospatial Commons},
  url = {https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/bdry-mn-city-township-unorg},
  urldate = {2023-12-21},
  abstract = {This medium-scale (nominally 1:24,000) dataset represents the boundaries of cities, townships, and unorganized territories (CTUs) in Minnesota. The Minnesota Geospatial Information Office created...},
  langid = {american}
}

@online{mndotGreenhouseGasAnalysis2020,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Greenhouse {{Gas Analysis}} - {{Guidance}} - {{Project Development}} - {{MnDOT}}},
  author = {{MnDOT}},
  date = {2020-05-01},
  url = {https://www.dot.state.mn.us/project-development/subject-guidance/greenhouse-gas-analysis/index.html},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {Estimating and analyzing emissions from projects is useful for decision makers to understand whether projects are causing or mitigating environmental conditions.},
  langid = {english}
}

@online{mndotGreenhouseGasEmissions,
  title = {Greenhouse {{Gas Emissions Impact Mitigation Working Group}} - {{Sustainability}} and {{Public Health}} - {{MnDOT}}},
  author = {{MnDOT}},
  url = {https://www.dot.state.mn.us/sustainability/greenhouse-gas-emissions-impact-mitigation-working-group.html},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {The 2023 legislature established the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Mitigation Working Group to prepare recommendations for implementing a Transportation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Assessment for capacity expansion projects on state highways prior to inclusion in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) or a metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{mndotMinnesotaStatewideMultimodal2022,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Minnesota {{Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan}}: {{Minnesota}}’s Highest Level Policy Plan for Transportation},
  author = {{MnDOT}},
  date = {2022-12},
  pages = {1--339},
  institution = {MnDOT},
  location = {St. Paul, Minnesota},
  url = {https://minnesotago.org/final-plans/smtp-final-plan-2022},
  urldate = {2024-02-27},
  abstract = {The Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan (SMTP) is Minnesota’s highest level policy plan for transportation. It is a 20-year plan based on the Minnesota GO Vision for a transportation system that maximizes the health of people, the environment and our economy. It supports the 16 goals for transportation established by the Minnesota Legislature. The plan is for all types of transportation and all transportation partners. It is about more than just roads and more than just the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). The plan takes into account what is changing for the transportation system and provides direction for progress over the next 20 years.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{mndotMnDOTVehicleClassification,
  title = {{{MnDOT Vehicle Classification Scheme}}},
  author = {{MnDOT}},
  url = {https://www.dot.state.mn.us/traffic/data/reports/vc/Vehicle_Classification_Scheme.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-01-10}
}

@online{mndotTFADataCollection2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {{{TFA Data Collection Methods}}},
  author = {{MnDOT}},
  date = {2023},
  url = {https://www.dot.state.mn.us/traffic/data/coll-methods.html#TVPO},
  urldate = {2024-01-18},
  abstract = {Traffic data on all traffic volume products is represented as Annual Average Daily Traffic or AADT. This is an estimate of the total number of vehicles using a length of road (in both directions) on any given day of the year. This estimate represents the total number of cars per year divided by 365 days. The AADT are developed using factors that adjust for season, day of the week, and vehicle type. AADT values are subject to variability. Historical AADT’s should be referenced along with the most current information. Traffic counts are scheduled before a project starts or after it is completed, but some construction effects are unavoidable when collecting traffic data. Construction affects traffic patterns on the entire road network, another reason why users should reference historical traffic volumes. Roadways Counted for AADT: Trunk Highways are major roadways: Interstate US Highway MN State Highway Local system roads are lesser roadways: County State Aid Highway County Road Municipal State Aid Street Other additional roadways as needed for federal reporting, such as: Municipal Non-State Aid Street Township Road Airport Road Vehicles traveling along a divided highway Vehicles traveling along a divided highway Traffic volume information has many uses: Creating annual Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) for state government use Annual reporting of VMT and AADT to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for federal travel analysis and funding One of many factors in annual funding of the County and Municipal State Aid road systems Component of rail crossing safety reviews, speeds and crash rate analysis Facilitating decision making for planners, engineers, forecasters, businesses, and the general public The traffic volume program is funded in two parts. Data collection activities are funded by the MnDOT district or responsible agency.  Processing, review and publication are financed by federal funds. If time and/or resources in any given count season become limited the priorities of the program will be Trunk Highway and HPMS counts, followed by CSAH and MSAS, and finally County Roads. The traffic volume program produces AADT values for approximately 39,000 count locations and traffic segments. A traffic segment is a section of roadway where a single AADT value or traffic volume is applied. The traffic volumes along segments may vary within a range determined by a 1990 customer/user survey. Based on this survey, the traffic volume program developed the Acceptable Percent Change table: 4,100 on Trunk Highways 13,500 on County State Aid Highways 6,100 on County Roads 9,600 on Municipal State Aid Streets 3,700 on Ramps 2,000 on other roadways as needed for HPMS There are several ways to collect data for determining AADT: Workers installing continuous count sensors on a highway Workers installing continuous count sensors on a roadway At least 34,000 are short duration counts (typically 48 hours). These sites only collect traffic volume and make up the majority of all count locations. At least 2,000 are sites where data comes from the Regional Traffic Management Center.  These sites collect volume data from sensors or loop detectors which is extracted by MnDOT central office and converted to an AADT. At least 1,500 are Vehicle Classification sites. These collect traffic volume and vehicle type.  At least 180 are an Automatic Traffic Recorder, ATR.  These are continuous devices with loops in the pavement that collect traffic volume.  Some sites also collect vehicle classification and/or speed data. At least 20 are a Weigh in Motion System, WIM.  These are continuous sites that collect vehicle weight, type, speed and volume. How and Where Counts are Taken Most traffic data is collected by MnDOT District staff.  Some counties and cities, especially in the Metro, submit their own count data. MnDOT provides a yearly schedule of locations to count. Upon request, MnDOT will provide PDF maps or GIS files of the count locations.  Approximately half of the trunk highway locations and a quarter of the local system locations are scheduled each year.  Refer to the Traffic Counting Schedule reference for details. Most traffic counting occurs between April and October.  More details about field activities are available in our Program Guidelines for Site Scheduling, Count Collection, and Count Submission. MnDOT was recently given FWHA approval to use mobile sourced AADTs where they meet validation metrics.  To learn more please contact Traffic Forecasting and Analysis at MnDOT and/or review the overall workflow for how mobile sourced AADTs will be used: MnDOT Mobile Source AADT Workflow Summary. Raw counts may be submitted to MnDOT at any time, but may not be used if submitted past the annual reporting deadline.  Please contact the Traffic Volume Section for how to submit data. AADT values are determined in the fall/winter and sent to the local county/city engineer for comment. The Official AADT values, or Traffic Volumes, are then posted to the web the following spring/summer (Data Products). Materials used by partners who collect and submit short-term traffic data at established collection sites in Minnesota can be found in the shared MnDOT Traffic Data Collection Materials.}
}

@dataset{mndotVMTRouteSystem2021,
  title = {{{VMT}} by {{Route System}} for Each {{County}}},
  author = {{MnDOT}},
  date = {2021},
  publisher = {MnDOT Website},
  url = {https://www.dot.state.mn.us/roadway/data/data-products.html#VMT},
  urldate = {2024-01-05},
  abstract = {Report data aligns with the annual data freeze used for the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS). Please note the year listed on the first page of each report. VMT reports are published when traffic data becomes available typically at the beginning of June, and Keypoint and Control Sections reports are published in October which corresponds to the last HPMS submittal approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Please see the Roadway Data Contact tab to request more up to date data.}
}

@dataset{mndotYearlyVolumeTrends2021,
  title = {Yearly {{Volume Trends With Truck Distribution}}},
  author = {{MnDOT}},
  date = {2021},
  publisher = {MnDOT Website},
  url = {https://www.dot.state.mn.us/traffic/data/data-products.html},
  urldate = {2023-12-28}
}

@online{mnPublicUtilitiesInfrastructure2021,
  title = {Public {{Utilities Infrastructure Information}} for {{Minnesota}}},
  author = {{Minnesota IT Services}},
  date = {2021},
  url = {https://www.mngeo.state.mn.us/chouse/utilities.html},
  urldate = {2024-01-29}
}

@article{mohamedMonitoringTemporalSpatial2017,
  title = {Monitoring of {{Temporal}} and {{Spatial Changes}} of {{Land Use}} and {{Land Cover}} in {{Metropolitan Regions}} through {{Remote Sensing}} and {{GIS}}},
  author = {Mohamed, Mohamed Ali},
  date = {2017-05-26},
  publisher = {Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin},
  issn = {2158-7086},
  doi = {10.18452/21636},
  url = {https://edoc.hu-berlin.de/handle/18452/22354},
  urldate = {2024-04-05},
  abstract = {The use of remote sensing techniques and subsequent analysis by means of geographical information system (GIS) offers an effective method for monitoring temporal and spatial changes of landscapes. This work studies the urbanization processes and associated threats to natural ecosystems and resources in the metropolitan areas of Berlin and Erlangen-Fürth-Nürnber Schwabach (EFNS). To compute the land use/cover (LULC) of the study areas, a supervised classification of “maximum likelihood” using Landsat data for the years of 1972, 1985, 1998, 2003, and 2015 is used. Results show that the built-up area is the dominant land use in both regions throughout the study period. This land use has increased at the expense of green and open areas in EFNS and at the expense of agricultural land in Berlin. Likewise, 5\% of forest in EFNS is replaced with urban infrastructure. However, the amount of forest in Berlin increased by 3\%. While EFNS experienced relatively big changes in its water bodies from 1972 to 1985, changes in water bodies in Berlin were rather slight during the last 40 years. The overall accuracy of our remotely sensed LULC maps was between 88\% and 94\% in Berlin and between 85.87\% and 87.4\% for EFNS. The combination of remote sensing and GIS appears to be an indispensable tool for monitoring changes in LULC in urban areas and help improving LU planning to avoid environmental and ecological problems.},
  langid = {english},
  annotation = {Accepted: 2020-07-23T11:59:04Z}
}

@report{morpcColumbusMSAPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Columbus {{MSA Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  author = {{MORPC} and {City of Columbus, OH}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--130},
  institution = {Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission},
  location = {Columbus, OH},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/columbus-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The City of Columbus has partnered with the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC), Power a Clean Future Ohio (PCFO), IMPACT Community Action, and The Ohio State University to produce this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). This PCAP will support investment in policies, practices, and technologies that reduce pollutant emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life in Central Ohio. This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under assistance agreement 00E03477 to the City of Columbus. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document. The measures contained herein should be construed as broadly available to any entity within the geographic scope of this PCAP eligible to receive funding under the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) Implementation Grant General Competition and other funding streams, as applicable.}
}

@online{mpcaClimateChangeTrends2023,
  title = {Climate Change Trends and Data},
  author = {MPCA},
  date = {2023},
  url = {https://www.pca.state.mn.us/air-water-land-climate/climate-change-trends-and-data},
  urldate = {2024-01-29}
}

@report{mpcaMetropolitanSolidWaste2017,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Metropolitan {{Solid Waste Management Policy Plan}} 2016-2036},
  author = {{MPCA}},
  date = {2017-03},
  number = {w-sw7-21},
  pages = {1--317},
  institution = {Minnesota Pollution Control Agency},
  location = {St. Paul, Minnesota},
  url = {https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/w-sw7-21.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-07},
  abstract = {In 1980, the Minnesota Legislature recognized the importance of waste management with the passage of the Waste Management Act (Minn. Stat. § 115A). This statute’s purpose is to improve integrated solid waste management (ISWM) to protect the state's natural resources and public health. It establishes the following hierarchy, in order from most to least beneficial to the environment, of preferred solid waste management practices: 1. Waste reduction and reuse 2. Waste recycling 3. Composting of source-separated compostable materials, including but not limited to, yard waste and food waste 4. Resource recovery through mixed municipal solid waste (MMSW) composting or incineration 5. Land disposal which produces no measurable methane gas or which involves the retrieval of methane gas as a fuel for the production of energy to be used on-site or for sale 6. Land disposal which produces measurable methane and which does not involve the retrieval of methane gas as a fuel for the production of energy to be used on-site or for sale The above hierarchy was established to achieve the following goals, as provided in Minn. Stat. § 115A.02(a): 1. Reduction in the amount and toxicity of waste generated 2. Separation and recovery of materials and energy from waste 3. Reduction in indiscriminate dependence on disposal of waste 4. Coordination of solid waste management among political subdivisions 5. Orderly and deliberate development and financial security of waste facilities including disposal facilities},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{mpcaMPCASCOREGuidebook2022,
  type = {Government},
  title = {{{MPCA SCORE Guidebook}}},
  author = {{MPCA}},
  date = {2022-03},
  number = {w-sw-1-31},
  pages = {1--11},
  location = {St. Paul, Minnesota},
  url = {https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/w-sw-1-31.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {The Select Committee on Recycling and the Environment (SCORE) Report is an annual examination of Minnesota waste management, providing detailed program information and data at the statewide and county-level. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) uses SCORE information to detail trends in waste generation, management, and disposal, and to help develop sound policy and plans to manage waste in a manner that protects the environment and human health. Currently, annual SCORE reporting includes six forms that each county must fill out in the state reporting system, Re-TRAC Connect, by April 1st. These surveys include: 1. SCORE Program Details (Once every 5 years) 2. Source Reduction 3. Materials Collected for Recycling 4. Waste Generation 5. Licensed Haulers 6. Revenue and Expenditures Additional detail about each of the forms is available in sections below.},
  langid = {english},
  annotation = {https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/mpca.data.services/viz/2021SCOREReport/2021SCOREreport?:tabs=n}
}

@report{mpcaPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority Climate Action Plan},
  shorttitle = {Minnesota {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{MPCA} and Kohlasch, Frank and Knuth, Kate and Pemberton, Brenna and Hagen, Linda and Coleman, Nick},
  date = {2024-02},
  number = {aq1-70},
  pages = {1--91},
  institution = {Minnesota Pollution Control Agency},
  location = {St. Paul, Minnesota},
  url = {https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/aq1-70.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-01},
  abstract = {The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) led the development of the state’s Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) in collaboration with the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), University of Minnesota Duluth, and the Climate Change Subcabinet. This plan is a deliverable of the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program and builds on the state’s climate change planning work, including and the state’s greenhouse gas emissions inventory. 7 This PCAP applies to the area within the boundaries of the state of Minnesota and focuses on climate change mitigation actions in four Climate Action Framework goal areas: Clean Transportation, ClimateSmart Natural and Working Lands, Clean Energy and Efficient Buildings, and Clean Economy. Climate Pollution Reduction Grants program overview The EPA Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program8 provides \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, Tribes, and territories to develop and implement ambitious plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful air pollution. Authorized under Section 60114 of the Inflation Reduction Act, this two-phase program provides \$250 million for noncompetitive planning grants and \$4.6 billion for competitive implementation grants. The CPRG program is part of the Biden Administration’s Justice40 initiative, which sets a goal that 40 percent of the benefits of certain federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized, underserved, and overburdened by pollution. Planning grants MPCA accepted a planning grant on behalf of the state of Minnesota in June 2023. In addition to the state, the EPA awarded planning grants to the following entities within the geography of Minnesota: • Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community • Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe • Midwest Tribal Energy Resources Association (MTERA) (covering a consortium of Tribal Nations in the region) • Metropolitan Council (for the Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington metropolitan statistical area) EPA maintains a list of the lead organizations for planning grants. 9 The planning grant includes three deliverables: the Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP), and a Status Report. For the state’s planning grant, the deliverable deadlines are: • PCAP: March 1, 2024 • CCAP: June 28, 2025 • Status Report: June 28, 2027},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {State PCAP}
}

@report{mpcaSustainableMaterialsManagement2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Sustainable Materials Management and Solid Waste Policy Report},
  author = {{MPCA}},
  date = {2023-12},
  number = {lrw-sw-1sy23},
  pages = {1--68},
  institution = {Minnesota Pollution Control Agency},
  location = {St. Paul, Minnesota},
  url = {https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/lrw-sw-1sy23.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-23},
  abstract = {A detailed look at Minnesota’s management of materials and solid waste, including ways that policy and programs can improve waste reduction, reuse, recycling and organics, and safe disposal.},
  langid = {english}
}

@online{mpcaUnderstandingSolidWaste2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Understanding Solid Waste},
  author = {{MPCA}},
  date = {2023},
  url = {https://www.pca.state.mn.us/air-water-land-climate/understanding-solid-waste},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The MPCA studies Minnesota's solid waste composition and processes to inform policy recommendations, legislative proposals, education and outreach messages, and waste reduction efforts. Nearly two-thirds of what ends up in landfills and garbage incinerators in Minnesota could have been reused, recycled, or composted. If the current trends continue, nearly eight million tons of additional waste will be sent to landfills over the next 20 years. Reducing the amount of waste going to landfills will improve public health, conserve energy and natural resources, and reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Policy report Every four years, the MPCA issues a report to the Minnesota Legislature that provides an update on the state of sustainable materials management and solid waste across Minnesota, including progress towards current goals and program-specific highlights. It also identifies opportunities for further research and action and proposes recommendations for new or modified policies to advance efforts statewide.  2023 report The report identifies and ranks in priority order seven focus areas for the state to pursue in the next several years:  Food systems   Require the reduction of wasted food, annual reporting, and proper food management for large generators of wasted food.    Data collection and analysis   Require waste composition studies at solid waste facilities statewide on a recurring basis.   Expand waste reporting to require measurement of all waste streams (MSW, C\&D, Industrial).   Reuse, rental, and repair   Establish an ongoing statewide waste reduction and reuse grant program.   Buildings and materials   Establish a statewide deconstruction requirement for state and local government-owned buildings.    Extended producer responsibility   Implement a statewide extended producer responsibility program for packaging and paper products. Implement a statewide deposit refund program.   Organics and recycling services   Require organics curbside collection or drop-off sites by city size and distance from an organics facility or transfer station.   Solid waste recovery and disposal facilities   Develop a guidance for consistently incorporating environmental justice in solid waste permit review and issuance.   Establish clear regulations for when closed landfills can exit the formal post-closure period.  Sustainable materials management and solid waste policy report (lrw-sw-1sy23) Visit the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library to find previous reports in this series. The SCORE report Minnesota's SCORE laws provide funding for recycling programs and support waste reduction and management of household hazardous wastes and problem materials. The Governor’s Select Committee on Recycling and the Environment (SCORE) proposed the laws in 1989. The annual report on SCORE programs presents information submitted by solid waste officers in all 87 counties and the Western Lake Superior Sanitary District. It summarizes waste management efforts in the state, including funding and costs, waste reduction activities, recycling, composting, household hazardous waste programs, and problem materials collection. This information is used to calculate the cost of managing waste and recycling in Minnesota. 2022 report Report on 2022 SCORE programs – An interactive tool shows 2022 data on Minnesota's waste management programs. Key findings: In 2022, Minnesota posted a combined recycling rate of 45.2\%, which is the highest rate in the history of the SCORE program. Municipal solid waste tonnage increased by 3.7\%. Minnesota counties reported 31,857 tons of reuse in 2022. Tracking reuse separately from recycling allows the MPCA to represent environmental benefits from waste management decisions more accurately. Minnesota saved about the equivalent of 4.57 million metric tons of carbon dioxide due to waste management practices, which is roughly the annual emissions of 970,000 passenger vehicles. Reducing, reusing, or recycling waste reduces greenhouse gas emissions, while landfilling increases them. Learn more: SCORE overview and data SCORE guidebook (w-sw-1-31) Check the Legislative Reference Library's collection for older SCORE reports. Solid waste plans Extensive work goes into planning for solid waste management around the state. The MPCA prepares the Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Policy Plan every six years with input from state agencies, county staff, and other stakeholders. Counties and solid waste management districts outside the seven-county metro area prepare and implement detailed solid waste management plans every 10 years. The MPCA also assists local government to implement the plans, develop projects for waste prevention and resource conservation, and measure their impact. The plans describe the volume and composition of waste collected; reuse, recycling, organics, and household hazardous waste management; the facilities used for collection and disposal; waste reduction goals; and more. Learn more: Solid waste planning Waste characterization The MPCA commissioned a study in 2013 to determine what Minnesotans were putting in the trash. The data is useful for identifying opportunities to divert materials through prevention, reuse, recycling, and composting. Minnesota statewide waste characterization study (2013) (w-sw1-60) The study pinpointed areas for improvement: food waste (519,400 tons) — could be composted mixed recyclable paper (285,400 tons) — could be recycled bag and film plastic (192,600 tons) — could be recycled wood waste (168,000 tons) — could be diverted beverage containers made of aluminum (12,000 tons) and PET plastic (23,000 tons) — could be recycled Waste collection systems An MPCA study compared open and organized collection systems for residential waste and recycling in 50 Minnesota cities with populations greater than 10,000. Open collection systems mean residents select and hire their own garbage haulers, while in organized collection, the hauling is managed by local government. Analysis of waste collection service arrangements (w-sw1-06) The study compared the collection systems based on collection cost, scope of services, environmental and infrastructure impacts, efficiency and effectiveness, and specific MPCA goals such as fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Recycling and waste infrastructure An MPCA report assessed Minnesota’s recycling and mixed municipal solid waste infrastructure in the context of the state’s needs, and analyzed Minnesota’s recycled materials and markets. The report also summarizes the county institutional arrangements supporting multi-county cooperation. Recycling and solid waste infrastructure evaluation (w-sw1-09) Hazardous waste Minnesota solid waste and landfills can also be a source of pollution when toxic chemicals and products containing them are disposed of. Many consumer products contain the same chemicals as strictly regulated industrial wastes and pose similar environmental and health problems. Minnesota counties administer household hazardous waste programs to help prevent toxic chemicals from getting into the environment and harming human health. Commercial entities that produce any amount of hazardous waste are regulated by the MPCA as hazardous-waste generators.},
  langid = {english},
  organization = {Minnesota Pollution Control Agency}
}

@report{municipalityofsanjuanpuertoricoSanJuanBayamonCaguasPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {San {{Juan-Bayamon-Caguas Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {San {{Juan PCAP}}},
  author = {{Municipality of San Juan, Puerto Rico}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--33},
  institution = {Municipality of San Juan, Puerto Rico},
  location = {San Juan, PR},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/msa-san-juan-puerto-rico-pcap-cprg.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {Climate change including the effects of global warming has several significant impacts on islands such as Puerto Rico who are vulnerable to extreme weather events. Some of these impacts are increased temperatures, sea level rise, more intense hurricanes, changes in precipitation patterns and impacts on tourism, ecosystem, economy, health, and more. To counteract the effects of climate change in Puerto Rico, Law 33 of 2019 was created. The Mitigation, Adaptation, and Resilience to Climate Change (Law 33 of 2019) has as its purpose reduce the greenhouses gas emission transitioning to a more sustainable and renewable energy system. Also, this law includes aims to decrease the vulnerability of the island from the impacts of climate change. The main objective of the Mitigation, Adaptation, and Resilience to Climate Change Law of Puerto Rico is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote the transition to a more sustainable and renewable energy model. Additionally, it aims to decrease the island's vulnerability to the impacts of climate change, ensure access to energy as a common good, and encourage citizen participation in the development and evaluation of climate policies. To reduce greenhouse gas emissions the law establishes a variety of measures like transition to renewable energy, implementing policies that includes mitigation, adaptation, implementation, and resilience strategies. These strategies include initiatives as establishing energy saving and water use efficiency in buildings, waste generation reduction measures and more. Other measures include the transportation sector with the introduction of low carbon dioxide emission vehicles, electrics, or hybrids. Also, this law includes education initiatives; this is related to Implementing a school curriculum on mitigation, adaptation, and resilience to climate change. These measures aim to not only reduce GHG emissions but also promote sustainable development and resilience in Puerto Rico that will include low-income and disadvantaged communities. This law includes the creation of a committee. In Puerto Rico, the Committee of Experts and Advisors on Climate Change is dedicated to addressing climate change issues. This committee is composed of nine members, including three ex official members with voting rights: the President of the University of Puerto Rico, the Secretary of the Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, and the Secretary of Economic Development and Commerce. The remaining members are appointed by the Governor of Puerto Rico with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Representatives of Puerto Rico. The committee operates autonomously and independently to advise and prepare the Mitigation, Adaptation, and Resilience to Climate Change Plan for evaluation by the Joint Commission on Mitigation, Adaptation, and Resilience to Climate Change. At this moment, the committee is working on the final version of the Mitigation, Adaptation, and Resilience to Climate Change in Puerto Rico Plan. To support reducing these gases in States, MSA, and Tribes, the Environmental Protection Agency has created the Climate Reduction Pollution Grant. The Autonomous Municipality of San Juan obtained and is the leader from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of grant 5D 96211700-0 to develop the Plan to Reduce Climate Pollution (CPRG) in English. This program has a grant to develop strategies to reduce climate pollution, including reduction measures  Page 7 of 33 San Juan MSA Priority Climate Action Plan – EPA Grant \# 5D-96211700 throughout the entire San Juan-Bayamon-Caguas metropolitan area in commitment to vulnerable and low-income communities. The CPRG program is divided into two phases. Phase 1 is planning grants, and the second phase is the competitive implementation grants. This planning phase has three deliverables over 4 years. The first document, the PCAP includes priority short-term greenhouse gas reduction measures and is a prerequisite for the grant. This is the document we are elaborating. To elaborate the PCAP we used the Puerto Rico 2019 and 2021 Greenhouses Gas Emission Inventory Report. Puerto Rico 2019 and 2021 Greenhouses Gas Emission Inventory Report provide us with information related to the quantity of emission, types of gases, measures, and more. The report shows us that the three highest gas emissions are power supply, transportation, and waste management.}
}

@report{murphyStateLocalPlanning2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {State and {{Local Planning}} for {{Energy}} ({{SLOPE}}) {{Platform}} – {{City Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Methods}}},
  shorttitle = {{{NREL SLOPE City Emissions}}},
  author = {Murphy, Caitlin and Schleifer, Anna and Zhou, Jaden},
  date = {2024-06},
  pages = {1--3},
  institution = {NREL},
  location = {Golden, CO},
  url = {https://gds-files.nrelcloud.org/auto-sync/slope/SLOPE-City-GHG-Methodology-June2024.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-06-25},
  abstract = {City-level GHG emissions for the year 2020 are estimated for each sector and energy type in units of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) based on the 100-year time horizon global warming potentials relative to CO2. Data points are rooted in a variety of detailed, open-source, sector-specific models and datasets, which estimate current (and recent) energy consumption at county-level resolution: • ResStock is a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) model of the U.S. residential building stock, developed and maintained by NREL. ResStock represents the energy use of a county’s residential building stock with a realistic diversity of building characteristics. County-level estimates for the consumption of electricity, natural gas, propane, and distillate fuel in residential buildings for the year 2020 underpin the reported estimates of city-level residential building GHG emissions. • ComStock is a U.S. DOE model of the U.S. commercial building stock, developed and maintained by NREL. ComStock represents the energy use of a county’s commercial building stock with a realistic diversity of building characteristics. County-level estimates for the consumption of electricity, natural gas, propane, and fuel oil in commercial buildings for the year 2020 underpin the reported estimates of city-level commercial building GHG emissions. For each state, the sum of county-level electricity and natural gas consumption data are scaled up (proportionally) to match state-level commercial utility sales information for the year 2020 from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). • The 2018 Industrial Energy Databook estimates county-level industrial energy use based on publicly available sources from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), EIA, Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Geological Survey. The Databook county-level projections for industrial electricity consumption for the year 2020 underpin the reported estimates of city-level electricity-related GHG emissions for the industrial sector. • The 2020 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) includes estimates for direct emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O from mobile, on-road vehicles, due to the consumption of gasoline and diesel. Electricity-related emissions associated with on-road vehicles are assumed to be captured in either residential or commercial building electricity consumption, so they are not reported separately. To derive city-level estimates from the county-level datasets, we disaggregated energy consumption data based on the previously published City and County Energy Profiles. For the  residential, commercial, and industrial sectors, we calculated city-to-county ratios for electricity and natural gas energy consumption and applied those ratios to the county-level data described above. The resulting estimates for city-level energy consumption were translated into city-level emissions using regional electricity emissions factors from EPA’s Emissions \& Generation Resource Integrated Database (for the year 2020) and fuel-specific values from the City and County Energy Profiles. The methodology for on-road transportation was similar, except county-level emissions estimates were disaggregated based on a city-to-county ratio of on-road GHG emissions from the City and County Energy Profiles. We supplemented the dataset with city-level information about industrial (point source) emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O from the NEI. These reported data include direct fuel combustion, process-based, and other direct emissions from individual industrial facilities. These emissions were assigned to individual cities using a spatial join of NEI facility locations first within a Census place boundary, then within a 3-mile radius of that boundary, avoiding overlap with a different Census place. For some cities, the above methodology produced zero (or null) values for select sectors and energy types. Cities for which the above methodology produced zero values for commercial natural gas emissions are indicated by a double asterisk. For cities where the above methodology produced zero values for residential natural gas and industrial non-electric emissions, we applied the same methodology, but we calculated the city-to-county ratios from the SLOPE Net Electricity and Natural Gas Consumption and Electricity and Natural Gas Dollars Spent data layers. Individual data points derived from this alternative dataset are indicated by an asterisk. Cities (with a population over 20,000 people) for which data gaps were still observed were excluded from the published estimates. Differences exist between the City Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory data on the SLOPE Data Viewer and the CO2 Emissions results on the SLOPE Scenario Planner. The City Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory layer was produced specifically to provide local insights based on the most recent, publicly available data. The SLOPE Scenario Planner was produced to offer insights into the potential impacts of major transitions in the energy sector, projected through the year 2050. While the starting point of those projections (2022) is an important common anchor, the primary focus was on the magnitude of change that could be realized through different strategies. ResStock and ComStock were used for both SLOPE datasets, but the SLOPE Scenario Planner is based on older vintages of those datasets, in addition to separate sources of energy demand and emissions intensity projections. The table below summarizes key differences between these SLOPE products and is designed to provide insights into discrepancies observed for the most comparable settings (i.e., 2022 emissions in the SLOPE Scenario Planner for a consolidated city-county). There is no universal rule of thumb or directionality to this comparison. For some consolidated city-counties, the City Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory data will include higher CO2 emissions estimates than the SLOPE Scenario Planner (for the year 2022), and for other consolidate citycounties the comparison will be reversed.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{mvrpcMiamiValleyPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Miami {{Valley Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Miami {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{MVRPC} and {Sustainability Solutions Group} and {New Reach Community Consulting}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--139},
  institution = {Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission},
  location = {Miami, FL},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/dayton_kettering-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {Through the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG), the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) appropriates grants to regions and states for developing and implementing plans to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is the first of two plans for the Miami Valley, identifying projects that could be funded in a second funding round from CPRG. It will be followed by the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP), which is a more systematic analysis and engagement process. The PCAP involved the development of a GHG emissions inventory for the three counties in the Miami Valley - Greene, Miami and Montgomery - as well as contextual analysis of trends and drivers of energy and emissions. Miami Valley, like numerous other US regions, faces the dual challenges of electrifying heating and transportation while concurrently transitioning the electricity grid to cleaner sources, both of which will require major investments. Cleaning the electricity system will cut total GHG emissions in half; the technologies required to enable this transition are already cost-effective. Decarbonizing transportation and heating involves technologies that have an incremental upfront cost, but are lower cost to operate. These technologies are also readily available. The residential sector is the largest source of GHG emissions; supporting measures in this sector will not only generate new employment opportunities, but also improve the quality of housing and affordability of housing across the region. The energy transition will be aided by opportunities for efficiency including measures such as building retrofits, increasing the walking, cycling and transit mode shares, as well as by the electrification equipment itself - electric vehicles and heat pumps are more efficient than the incumbent technologies. Maximizing efficiencies minimizes the need for additional electrical capacity, reducing the overall energy transition costs. There is an added benefit in that increased efficiency also reduces the operating costs for households and businesses, and provides a revenue stream to finance the investments required. With these insights in mind, an engagement process identified possible priority projects through a survey to more than 30 people, ten interviews with representatives of interested parties, engagement with relevant agencies, outreach to Low Income and Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) and engagement with committees of MVRPC. Nine possible projects were identified (see the following pages with the summary diagram of the projects identified and Table E.1, in which each of them is described).},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{mwcogPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan Washington-Arlington-Alexandria DC-VA-MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area}}},
  author = {{MWCOG}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--103},
  institution = {Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments},
  location = {Washington, DC},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/dc-cog-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {Air pollution and climate change pose significant threats to communities and ecosystems worldwide, including the Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The diverse communities in metropolitan Washington face health risks like respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses from exposure to air pollutants while climate change leads to additional risks like extreme heat, increased frequency and severity of extreme weather events, and flooding, which all pose additional risks to the safety and well-being of community members. In light of these interconnected challenges, urgent and coordinated action by leaders is imperative to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to combat climate change and safeguard communities, particularly those most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Gross GHG emissions for the MSA in 2020 were 61.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e). Net GHG emissions amounted to 54.2 MMTCO2e after accounting for the sequestration of GHG emissions attributed to the MSA’s forests and green spaces. In a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario, modeling results indicate that gross emissions are projected to increase by 38\% between 2020-2050. Increased emissions are projected to be primarily from the buildings sector due to continued development and increased population growth. Actions to improve air quality and reduce GHG emissions are underway, coordinated by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) staff and participating governments. COG, alongside Maryland, Virginia, Washington D.C., and many county and city governments within the MSA, have set ambitious goals to reduce GHG emissions. They have also created climate action plans and engaged with local residents and organizations to shape the future of climate resilience and mitigation in their jurisdictions. The prospect of receiving funding from the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) to expand and accelerate these efforts would bring additional benefits to the MSA, including low-income, disadvantaged communities (LIDACs). This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) presents eight vital measures to reduce air pollution and GHG emissions in the MSA, summarized in Table 1. These measures were developed through a collaborative and iterative process with the many government offices and committees within the MSA and the states it crosses, as well as other stakeholders such as community-based organizations, private sector actors, utilities, planning boards and committees, and more. These are practical and achievable strategies spanning buildings and clean energy, transportation, waste, and land use sectors. Table 1 represents cumulative GHG reductions or sequestration in the short term (2025 – 2030) and the long-term (2025 – 2050). In some instances, already existing modeling efforts from COG were used, and in other situations new modeling was conducted. The values presented in Table 1 are not additive as there may be areas of overlap between measures. This might result in double counting when comparing it to the clean and renewable energy measure, which also accounts for emissions reductions from cleaner electricity.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@article{nahlikCarbonStorageUS2016,
  title = {Carbon Storage in {{US}} Wetlands},
  author = {Nahlik, A. M. and Fennessy, M. S.},
  date = {2016-12-13},
  journaltitle = {Nature Communications},
  shortjournal = {Nat Commun},
  volume = {7},
  number = {1},
  pages = {13835},
  publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},
  issn = {2041-1723},
  doi = {10.1038/ncomms13835},
  url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms13835},
  urldate = {2024-02-26},
  abstract = {Wetland soils contain some of the highest stores of soil carbon in the biosphere. However, there is little understanding of the quantity and distribution of carbon stored in our remaining wetlands or of the potential effects of human disturbance on these stocks. Here we use field data from the 2011 National Wetland Condition Assessment to provide unbiased estimates of soil carbon stocks for wetlands at regional and national scales. We find that wetlands in the conterminous United States store a total of 11.52\,PgC, much of which is within soils deeper than 30\,cm. Freshwater inland wetlands, in part due to their substantial areal extent, hold nearly ten-fold more carbon than tidal saltwater sites—indicating their importance in regional carbon storage. Our data suggest a possible relationship between carbon stocks and anthropogenic disturbance. These data highlight the need to protect wetlands to mitigate the risk of avoidable contributions to climate change.},
  issue = {1},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Carbon cycle,Wetlands ecology}
}

@article{nanOverviewPM2Health2023,
  title = {Overview of {{PM2}}.5 and Health Outcomes: {{Focusing}} on Components, Sources, and Pollutant Mixture Co-Exposure},
  shorttitle = {Overview of {{PM2}}.5 and Health Outcomes},
  author = {Nan, Nan and Yan, Zhipeng and Zhang, Yaru and Chen, Rui and Qin, Guohua and Sang, Nan},
  date = {2023-05-01},
  journaltitle = {Chemosphere},
  shortjournal = {Chemosphere},
  volume = {323},
  pages = {138181},
  issn = {0045-6535},
  doi = {10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.138181},
  url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653523004484},
  urldate = {2024-02-26},
  abstract = {PM2.5 varies in source and composition over time and space as a complicated mixture. Consequently, the health effects caused by PM2.5 varies significantly over time and generally exhibit significant regional variations. According to numerous studies, a notable relationship exists between PM2.5 and the occurrence of many diseases, such as respiratory, cardiovascular, and nervous system diseases, as well as cancer. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of the effect of PM2.5 on human health is critical. The toxic effects of various PM2.5 components, as well as the overall toxicity of PM2.5 are discussed in this review to provide a foundation for precise PM2.5 emission control. Furthermore, this review summarizes the synergistic effect of PM2.5 and other pollutants, which can be used to draft effective policies.},
  keywords = {Co-exposure,Components,Health effects,PM,Sources}
}

@report{ncdeqNorthCarolinaPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {North {{Carolina Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {North {{Carolina PCAP}}},
  author = {{NCDEQ}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--189},
  institution = {NC Department of Environmental Quality},
  location = {Raleigh, NC},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/final-ncdeq-pcap-report.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The NC Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ) developed this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) in response to the requirements of EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program. This program offers funding to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans aimed at reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollutants. The PCAP serves to identify high-priority GHGs in NC. Throughout the development process, NCDEQ focused on transparency and engagement, with ongoing efforts to involve stakeholders in the implementation and refinement of the PCAP. The finalized PCAP reflects a comprehensive strategy to address climate change and reduce GHG emissions in NC. North Carolina’s Climate Context North Carolina’s GHG inventory is a comprehensive assessment of the state's emissions sources and sinks that covers historical data from 1990 to 2020 and projections up to 2050. The most recent inventory was completed in January 2024 and is crucial for understanding the state's contribution to climate change and guiding reduction strategies. The methods used to prepare the state’s GHG inventory are based on those used by EPA to prepare the national inventory. In 2020, combustion activities accounted for 80\% of total gross GHG emissions statewide, with transportation being the largest emissions sector (36\%), followed by electricity generation and use (30\%) and residential, commercial, and industrial combustion (14\%). The COVID-related decrease in 2019–2020 onroad vehicle emissions is noted, with modest increases projected until 2026, followed by significant reductions. By 2030, gross and net emissions are forecasted to be 35\% and 47\% below 2005 levels, respectively, reaching a 64\% reduction in net emissions by 2050. Key findings include a 28\% reduction in gross GHG emissions and a 38\% reduction in net emissions from 2005 to 2020, despite a 20\% population growth and 23\% real Gross State Product (GSP) increase. Carbon dioxide comprises 79\% of 2020 GHG emissions, primarily from fossil fuel combustion, which decreased by 33\% from 2005 to 2020. Methane emissions (12\% of total emissions) are mainly from waste management and agriculture, which have remained stable since 2005. Electricity generation emissions decreased by 49\% from 2005 to 2020, with a 68\% projected reduction by 2030. North Carolina has five existing state goals regarding climate action and GHG reduction targets, including a 50\% reduction from 2005 levels by 2030 and net-zero emissions as soon as possible but no later than 2050. Other goals include electric power sector emission reductions, an increased number of registered zero-emission vehicles, energy consumption reduction in state-owned buildings, and offshore wind energy development. 2 | Page The PCAP highlights challenges such as structural impediments in transportation investments, limitations in energy-efficient building codes, and threats to non-jurisdictional wetlands. Positive developments include the 2021 energy legislation mandating 70\% GHG reduction in the power sector by 2030. Existing policies and programs address climate change, with ongoing efforts to enhance GHG reduction strategies. The NC PCAP builds on existing initiatives and identifies priority areas where opportunities remain. Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities The PCAP outlines NC's approach to engaging with Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities (LIDACs) in the context of climate action as part of the CPRG program. The state used the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) and the NCDEQ North Carolina Community Mapping System to identify LIDACs based on criteria including transportation, health, energy, and climate change burdens. These criteria are determined at or above the 90th percentile for census tracts. Additionally, block group data from NCDEQ’s analysis of Potentially Underserved Communities (PUC) is considered, defining underserved communities by racial/ethnic and poverty composition. The combination of CEJST and PUC data identifies 1,661 Census tracts as LIDACs, constituting 75.7\% of all NC 2010 Census tracts. The identified climate risks for these communities in NC include extreme heat, heavy precipitation, sea level rise, inland and coastal flooding, and hurricanes. Vulnerability to these risks is exacerbated among Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) individuals and communities, low-income households, unhoused individuals, rural communities, and agricultural workers. These communities not only feel the most severe impacts of climate change but are also the least able to prepare for and respond to these impacts due to a lack of resources and socio-political power. North Carolina has experienced escalating economic and societal losses due to weather and climate-related disasters, now ranking second in the nation for these losses. Tropical cyclones account for most of these losses. The NC Office of Recovery and Resiliency (NCORR) mapped impacts from hurricanes Florence and Matthew, showing that the most impacted communities from these events overlapped with some of the state’s most economically distressed counties. Priority GHG Reduction Measures Priority GHG reduction measures in the state’s Climate Action Plan (PCAP) are identified as such for the purposes of pursuing funding through CPRG implementation grants. The measures are considered implementation ready, meaning that the design work or technology for the policy, program, or project is complete enough that it can be included in a CPRG implementation grant application under the second phase of the program. Additionally, they must be achievable within the near term, with all funds expended and projects completed within the five-year performance period for CPRG implementation grants. 3 | Page While the list of priority measures is not exhaustive of NC's climate priorities, it meets the outlined criteria. To ensure cohesive consideration of priorities within each sector, NCDEQ has developed visions for climate action. These sector-specific visions will guide the implementation of measures and will be further developed and expanded upon in the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP). The following priority measures are detailed in the NC PCAP: 1. Increase the number of zero-emission and electric vehicles on the road through partnerships, technical assistance, financial incentives, and other mechanisms. 2. Identify, install, and maintain a public electric vehicle charging network accessible to all North Carolinians. 3. Increase the number of zero emission and electric vehicles in state and local government fleets. 4. Pursue programs to increase efficiency and reduce GHG emissions at port/freight terminals. 5. Pursue programs to improve the quality of life and reduce GHG emissions for all North Carolinians by increasing pedestrian accessibility and providing more options for multimodal transportation. 6. Increase the amount of electricity generated by low- and no-carbon energy resources in NC. 7. Implement measures to increase energy resiliency in NC communities. 8. Reduce per square foot energy usage in buildings in NC. 9. Decarbonize buildings in NC through replacement of fossil fuel combustion sources and reduction of other GHG emissions. 10. Develop programs to support or incentivize implementation of energy efficiency and emission reduction measures in NC industry. 11. Reduce food waste entering the waste management system to reduce the methane emissions from food waste landfilling, direct food to communities in need, and create organic resources through composting or digestion. 12. Decarbonize waste collection to reduce GHG emissions during the collection and transport of wastes through electrification of fleets or through engine conversion from diesel to electric motors. 13. Reduce landfill gas emissions through improved landfill operations to collect gas more efficiently and earlier in a landfill life and utilize the emissions as a renewable energy source. 14. Protect and restore high-carbon coastal habitats and peatlands. 15. Protect, use, and develop agricultural and forest land. Moving Forward State, regional, municipal, and tribal agencies, as well as consortia, are eligible to apply for implementation funding immediately after the finalization of the PCAP. State applications for implementation funding are due April 1, 2024, with awards expected later in the same year. 4 | Page Recipients of PCAP planning grants are required to submit a CCAP two years after receiving the PCAP award. The CCAP will provide an expanded GHG analysis, including both short-term and long-term GHG emission reductions targets, and will articulate a comprehensive set of measures to achieve these targets. The state will begin the CCAP development process in early 2024. In 2027, NCDEQ will provide a CPRG Status Report detailing the implementation status of quantified GHG reduction measures from the CCAP, updated analyses or projections supporting CCAP implementation, and future steps and resource needs for continued implementation.}
}

@report{nctcogDallasFortWorthAir2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Dallas-{{Fort Worth Air Quality Improvement Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Dallas {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{NCTCOG}},
  date = {2024},
  pages = {1--155},
  institution = {North Central Texas Council of Governments},
  location = {Dallas, TX},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/dallas-fort-worth-air-quality-improvement-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) is a voluntary association of, by, and for local governments, established to assist in regional planning for 16 counties in North Texas. The counties served by NCTCOG include Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Erath, Hood, Hunt, Johnson, Kaufman, Navarro, Palo Pinto, Parker, Rockwall, Somervell, Tarrant, and Wise. This service area incorporates all of the 11- county Dallas-Fort Worth (DFW)-Arlington Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). NCTCOG is serving as the Lead Agency for the DFW-Arlington MSA under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) Planning Grants Program and was the grantee that developed this Dallas-Fort Worth Air Quality Improvement Plan (DFW AQIP) Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), which serves to fulfill the PCAP deliverable as specified by the EPA under the CPRG Planning Grants Program. NCTCOG consists of 11 departments, including the Environment and Development and Transportation departments. Staff from these two departments led the development of this document and will lead the implementation of proposed priority measures. The NCTCOG Workforce Solutions for North Central Texas Department will join in efforts to develop a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) over the next year. Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Overview and Purpose Overview: Authorized under Section 60114 of the Inflation Reduction Act, the CPRG Program1 provides \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollutions. Phase 1 of the CPRG Program offered noncompetitive funding to all 50 states, the 67 most populous MSAs, and tribes/territories to develop the following deliverables: 1. PCAP -- due March 1, 2024 (states and MSAs) and due April 1, 2024 (tribes, tribal consortia, and territories) 2. CCAP -- due two years after planning grant award, or approximately mid-2025 (states and MSAs) and due at the close of the grant period (tribes, tribal consortia, and territories) 3. Status Report -- at the end of the four-year grant period (approximately mid-2027) Purpose of PCAP: According to the EPA CPRG Planning Grant Notice of Funding Opportunity, the PCAP is a narrative report focused on near-term (i.e., by 2030), high-priority, implementation-ready measures to reduce GHG pollution and an analysis of GHG emissions reductions that would be achieved through implementation. 2 NCTCOG has a long history of working collaboratively with local governments (cities, counties, transit agencies, special districts, and school districts) and other local, state, and federal partners across the region on air quality issues. Air quality collaboration efforts began in the mid-1990s when four counties within the NCTCOG region were designated as nonattainment for the pollutant ozone and have continued to grow and expand as air quality concerns have become more complex. These issues are 1 www.epa.gov/inflation-reduction-act/climate-pollution-reduction-grants 2 www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023- 02/EPA\%20CPRG\%20Planning\%20Grants\%20Program\%20Guidance\%20for\%20States-Municipalities-Air\%20Agencies\%2003-01- 2023.pdf Dallas-Fort Worth Air Quality Improvement Plan – Priority Climate Action Plan March 2024 11 described further in Section 2: Regional Context and Section 3.2: Emissions Inventories for Criteria Pollutants of Regional Concern. The EPA CPRG Program presented a natural opportunity to extend these standing relationships around air quality concerns beyond ozone to other local air quality issues. NCTCOG received support from local governments across the region to take the role of Lead Agency for development of a regional plan and has coordinated across a variety of stakeholders in the region to develop this DFW AQIP, which has been drafted to fulfill the PCAP deliverable. Local governments were major contributors, along with stakeholder input contributed by NCTCOG committee members (which includes nonprofit and business entities), local nonprofits and other organizations, and residents. More detail on this engagement and input is provided in Section 1: Regional Engagement. The purpose of the DFW AQIP, which constitutes the PCAP for the NCTCOG region, is to identify and drive implementation of measures that achieve reductions in GHGs, ozone precursors, and fine particulate matter emissions to achieve comprehensive air quality improvement. DFW AQIP – Overview and Definitions This document contains the following: • Introduction – Information on the CPRG, definitions, scope, and approach to develop the DFW AQIP. • Regional Context – Information on local concerns and how they impacted the development of the DFW AQIP. • GHG Emissions Inventory – A simplified inventory of greenhouse gases produced in the 16-county NCTCOG region. • Emissions Inventories for Criteria Pollutants of Regional Concern – Information on criteria pollutants of regional concern. • Measures – List of implementation-ready measures (i.e., projects, programs, and policies) to reduce greenhouse gases and criteria pollutants. • Benefits Analysis – A high-level analysis of the potential health benefits to the region through the implementation of proposed measures and associated reduction of criteria pollutants. • Low Income and Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) Benefits Analysis – An analysis that identifies where LIDAC are in the region, how they were engaged, potential climate risks LIDAC are facing, and the air quality and other community benefits LIDAC may experience from the implementation of measures. • Review of Authority to Implement – Analysis of the ability of the region to implement proposed measures. • Intersection with Other Funding Availability – A high-level analysis of existing funding sources to implement measures. This information has been incorporated with the measures in Section 4. • Next Steps – A discussion of how NCTCOG and local governments will leverage the DFW AQIP to apply for the CPRG Implementation Grants and develop the next EPA-required deliverable, the CCAP. Scope of the DFW AQIP The geographic scope of the DFW AQIP includes all 16 counties served by NCTCOG. This includes Collin, Dallas, Denton, Ellis, Erath, Hood, Hunt, Johnson, Kaufman, Navarro, Palo Pinto, Parker, Rockwall, Somervell, Tarrant, and Wise counties. The NCTCOG region captures the entire 11-county DFW-Arlington  Dallas-Fort Worth Air Quality Improvement Plan – Priority Climate Action Plan March 2024 12 MSA that NCTCOG was required to include as the Lead Agency for CPRG Planning Grants. Exhibit 1 provides the 2023 estimated population of each county within the NCTCOG region, as well as the total regional population encompassed by the scope of this plan.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{nddeqNorthDakotaPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {North {{Dakota Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {North {{Dakota PCAP}}},
  author = {{NDDEQ}},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--327},
  institution = {North Dakota Department of Environmental Quality},
  location = {Bismark, ND},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/nddeq-pcap-report.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The North Dakota Department of Environmental Quality (NDDEQ) was awarded a Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)1 to develop North Dakota’s first climate action plan, including a comprehensive greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory, and incorporating public input on proposed GHG reduction measures. This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) focuses on creating vibrant economies and bringing innovative approaches to climate planning. NDDEQ produced this PCAP to support investments that create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance quality of life for all North Dakotans. NDDEQ sought the recommendations of North Dakotans over multiple rounds of engagement through in-person dialogue and listening forums.}
}

@report{nebraskadepartmentofenvironmentandenergyNebraskaPriorityClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Nebraska {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Nebraska {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy}},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--84},
  institution = {{Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy}},
  location = {Lincoln, NE},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/nebraska-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy (NDEE) received a Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop Nebraska's first state-wide climate action plans to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollutants in the state. The CPRG planning grant enables Nebraska to develop a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) followed by a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) over a 4-year period. The PCAP focuses on priority measures to reduce GHG and other air pollutant emissions in the six economic sectors identified by EPA (Agriculture, Energy Production, Industry, Waste \& Wastewater, Commercial \& Residential Buildings, and Transportation). The CCAP will focus on long-term emission reductions in these sectors going forward. This PCAP allows the state to compete for federal grant funding to implement measures identified in the plan. These funds would spur investment in Nebraska communities to reduce air pollution, stimulate economic growth, create high-quality jobs, and enhance the quality of life for all Nebraskans. In developing this PCAP, NDEE coordinated with subject matter experts in the six economic sectors identified by EPA as well as with Nebraska citizens, universities, other state agencies, local governments, nonprofits, utilities, industries, and many other stakeholders across the state to collect GHG emission reduction project ideas for inclusion in this plan. The purpose of this plan is to identify voluntary, incentive-based measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions throughout the State of Nebraska. This plan summarizes the results of this process and highlights the selected priority projects that can be readily scaled-up for implementation. In addition to the state-wide plan, the Omaha metropolitan area received its own CPRG planning grant. Omaha has been a key collaborator in the development of the Nebraska PCAP. The emission reduction measures in this PCAP are considered applicable to the Omaha metropolitan area as well. Some tables in this Climate Action Plan may have rows that alternate between white and gray for readability purposes only. This highlighting should not be construed to emphasize priority of any item included in this document.}
}

@report{nevadadivisionofenvironmentalprotectionStateNevadaPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {State of {{Nevada Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Nevada {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Nevada Division of Environmental Protection} and {Nevada Governor’s Office of Energy} and {Sustainability Solutions Group (SSG)} and {Ericka Aviles Consulting} and {CIVIX}},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--241},
  institution = {State of Nevada},
  location = {Carson City, NV},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/state-of-nevada-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) received a grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program to develop plans to reduce Nevada’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is the first of two plans that NDEP will develop with this funding. The primary objective is to identify near-term, high-priority, implementation-ready measures to reduce GHG emissions. These measures are designed to be eligible for CPRG Phase 2 funding and other grants. This PCAP includes a GHG inventory, emission projections, and priority measures across six focus areas. For each focus area, quantified emissions reductions, a low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs) benefits analysis, and a description of authority to implement are provided. The PCAP will be followed by the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP), which will address all sectors of emissions. Additional engagement with the public and interested and affected parties will occur. Following the CCAP, the Final Status Report will provide an update on implementation and next steps.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{newhampshiredepartmentofenvironmentalservicesStateNewHampshire2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {State of {{New Hampshire Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {New {{Hampshire PCAP}}},
  author = {{New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services} and Ohler, Rebecca and Craver, Karen and Galbraith, Jennifer and Wilcox, Jessica and Yuengling, Kurt and Tilley, James},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--171},
  institution = {New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services},
  location = {Concord, NH},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/state-of-new-hampshire-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The New Hampshire Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) was developed by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES) utilizing a planning grant from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The goal of the PCAP is to create a pathway that will support investment in policies, practices, and technologies that reduce pollutant emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all Granite Staters. The PCAP includes the following: a summary of New Hampshire’s past and present greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; a detailed, state-level GHG inventory; a list of priority measures that could reduce the state’s GHG emissions; and an analysis of how those measures would benefit low-income, disadvantaged communities in the state. These priority measures are not intended to be exhaustive but are selected based on their potential to meet EPA’s three broad objectives for the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program and many other programs under the Inflation Reduction Act. The objectives are to: • Reduce climate pollution while supporting the creation of good jobs and lowering energy costs for families. • Accelerate work to reduce environmental impacts to low-income, overburdened communities. • Deliver cleaner air by reducing harmful air pollution in places where people live, work, play and go to school},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{newjerseydepartmentofenvironmentalprotectionNewJerseyPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {New {{Jersey Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  author = {{New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection} and {Rutgers Climate Change Resource Center} and {Helaine Barr} and {Doug Benton} and {Molla Sarros} and {R. Christopher Barry} and {Daniel G. Clark} and {Nicole Provost} and {Karl Hartkopf} and {Gilbert Botham} and {Claire Sugihara} and {Michael Aucot} and {Aishwarya Mukund} and {Kristen Brennan}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--397},
  institution = {New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection},
  location = {Trenton, NJ},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/nj-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {New Jersey is warming faster than the rest of the Northeast region and the world (NJDEP, 2020). Its ci�zens are already experiencing the effects of climate change, from chronic heat to intense flooding and rising sea levels. Recognizing the need for immediate ac�on, in 2021, Governor Murphy signed Execu�ve Order 274 (EO 274), establishing an interim greenhouse gas reduc�on target of 50\% by 2030. This new target, coupled with the State’s previously adopted goal of an 80\% reduc�on by 2050, will require significant near-term investments and comprehensive policy reform. The funding associated with the United States Environmental Protec�on Agency’s (USEPA) Climate Pollu�on Reduc�on Grant program (CPRG) offers a historic opportunity to make substan�al progress towards achieving these goals. About CPRG The CPRG program is a na�onwide, two-phase USEPA grant funded by the Infla�on Reduc�on Act (IRA). Phase 1 provided \$250 million in noncompe��ve planning grants to states and other en��es to develop climate ac�on plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful air pollutants. Phase 2 provides \$4.6 billion in compe��ve grants to implement priority measures included in Priority Climate Ac�on Plans (PCAP). New Jersey’s Priorities The State of New Jersey developed this Priority Climate Ac�on Plan (PCAP), as part of the Phase 1 CPRG grant. This plan builds on the State’s 2019 Energy Master Plan and 2020 Global Warming Response Act 80x50 report to outline a near term roadmap for statewide emission reduc�ons. Six focus areas are iden�fied in this plan: 1) Transporta�on, 2) Residen�al and Commercial Buildings, 3) Electric Genera�on, 4) Food Waste, 5) Halogenated Gases, and 6) Natural and Working Lands (Figure ES 1). These sectors contribute the most to greenhouse gas emissions in New Jersey, or have the poten�al to significantly sequester carbon, and were iden�fied in prior climate planning efforts as key areas on which to focus reduc�on efforts. As part of this PCAP, New Jersey also released an updated Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report, covering statewide emissions from 2006-2021. Similar to preceding years, emissions from the transporta�on sector were the largest source, totaling 37.3 million metrics tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMT CO2e) (GWP100). Residen�al and commercial buildings accounted for 14.9 and 9.9 MMT CO2e in 2021 respec�vely, while emissions from the electric genera�on sector were 19.1 MMT CO2e. Emissions from the State’s waste management sector, which includes food waste, were 6.6 MMT CO2e and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) which are commonly used halogenated gases, accounted for 5.2 MMT CO2e in 2021. Finally, approximately 8.1 MMT of New Jersey’s 2021 GHG emissions were removed via carbon sequestra�on from the State’s natural and working lands, such as forests and wetlands, resul�ng in a net statewide emission total of 97.6 MMT CO2e in 2021. Figure ES. 1 New Jersey’s PCAP Priority Focus Areas  iv | PRIORITY CLIMATE ACTION PLAN State agencies iden�fied 12 priority measures and 68 enabling ac�ons within these sectors (Table ES.1). These measures were developed with extensive stakeholder input and intergovernmental collabora�on, reflec�ng the voices of communi�es and their leaders. Further, each measure was evaluated for its poten�al to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and benefit low-income and disadvantaged communi�es (See Chapter 4 and Appendix 7.4). New Jersey also conducted a workforce planning analysis to understand workforce needs related to successful implementa�on of the priority measures (See Chapter 5 and Appendix 7.5). This PCAP will serve as a guiding document for State and local agencies to secure federal funding to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.}
}

@report{newpragueutilitiescommissionAgendaPacket242022,
  type = {Utility},
  title = {Agenda \& {{Packet}}, 1/24/2022 Meeting of the {{New Prague Utilities Commission}} (Incl. Financial Report)},
  author = {{New Prague Utilities Commission}},
  date = {2022-01-24},
  url = {https://www.ci.new-prague.mn.us/vertical/sites/%7BAD7ECB62-2C5E-4BA0-8F19-1426026AFA3E%7D/uploads/01-24-2022_Utilities_Commission_Meeting_Packet.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-01-24}
}

@report{nmedNewMexicoPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {New {{Mexico Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {New {{Mexico PCAP}}},
  author = {{NMED} and {EMNRD}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--192},
  institution = {{New Mexico Environment Department and the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department}},
  location = {Santa Fe, NM},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/new-mexico-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) charts a course for a healthier, more prosperous New Mexico by prioritizing ten measures that mitigate climate pollution. Measures include projects, programs, or policies. These select measures unlock tangible benefits for the state, including reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, cleaner air, greater availability of high-quality jobs, a growing clean economy, and a higher quality of life for every New Mexican. This PCAP is organized into twelve major sections: 1. Introduction 2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory (GHGEI) 3. GHG Emissions Reduction Targets 4. Priority Measures 5. Emission Benefits Analysis 6. Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) Benefits Analysis 7. Review of Authority 8. Workforce Planning Analysis 9. Coordination and Outreach 10.Conclusion 11.Measure Appendices 12.Technical Appendices The appendices of the PCAP are divided into two components. A detailed description of the ten measures is included in Appendices A-J; then, Appendices K-N are technical or data rich, describing the methodologies, the detailed demographics of the New Mexico LIDAC census tracts and block groups, and the list of identified stakeholders.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{noacaClevelandElyriaMetropolitanStatistical2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Cleveland-{{Elyria Metropolitan Statistical Area Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Cleveland {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{NOACA}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--168},
  institution = {Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency},
  location = {Cleveland, OH},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/cleveland-elyria-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {The region that birthed the modern-day environmental movement has another opportunity to serve as vanguard against a growing, global challenge. When the Cuyahoga River caught fire again in downtown Cleveland in 1969, the event fanned a smoldering movement into a roaring protest against the devastating impact of human pollution on the nation’s waterways, air quality and natural ecosystems. The result was the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) and an unprecedented wave of federal regulation to counter polluters and protect our fragile environment. More than 50 years later, another daunting challenge to our global sustainability in the form of climate change has prompted the US EPA to take dramatic steps to spur regions, states, tribes, and territories across the nation to counter the climate challenge. This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) represents the first key outcome in a major climate planning initiative for the entire Cleveland-Elyria Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). It builds on previous and ongoing climate action plans at the municipal and county level. The regional greenhouse gas inventory highlights the significant contribution of electricity generation and transportation sources to climate change. Given the high contribution from these sources, the projected emissions reductions from the electricity, building efficiency, steel manufacturing and transportation priority measures exhibit relatively high impact toward emissions reduction. These are the greatest areas of opportunity to mitigate climate change in Northeast Ohio, while expansion of forests and restoration of tree canopy offer opportunity for carbon sequestration. The Cleveland-Elyria MSA is an extremely diverse region and spans the full spectrum of legacy industrial, inner-ring suburban, contemporary exurban, and rural communities (including small villages and historical Western Reserve towns). The priority measures in this PCAP evolved from direct, multi-modal engagement with decision-making, technical and public stakeholders. The measures comprise a menu of potential actions to reduce GHG emissions that provide communities with options to best fit their respective needs. The Cleveland-Elyria MSA has significant low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs) in diverse locations. While many stakeholders recognize much of the City of Cleveland meets LIDAC criteria, many inner-ring Cleveland suburbs in Cuyahoga County are also LIDACs. Furthermore, there are LIDACs in legacy industrial towns with high minority populations well outside of Cleveland, such as Elyria, Lorain, and Painesville. There are also LIDACs in rural, eastern Geauga County, due to growing Amish concentrations. The diverse geography of LIDACs undergirds the need for regional climate action planning and spotlights a tremendous opportunity to build consensus to combat a shared challenge. NOACA had already undertaken a regional greenhouse gas emissions inventory prior to the US EPA’s initial CPRG Program announcement. NOACA and City of Cleveland staff worked with ICLEI USA to ensure that the regional inventory reflected the recommended sectors from USA EPA and feedback received from stakeholders during NOACA’s extensive engagement effort. The diagram on the next page illustrates the relationship between these sectors, symbolized by key icons. A subsequent page outlines the priority measures developed for this PCAP, potential actions within those measures, and the icons that represent the emissions sectors most affected by each priority measure.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{norpcSoutheastLouisianaPCAP2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Southeast {{Louisiana PCAP}}},
  shorttitle = {{{NOLA PCAP}}},
  author = {{NORPC}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--125},
  institution = {New Orleans Regional Planning Commission},
  location = {New Orleans, LA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/5d-02f45401-pcap-new-orleans-regional-planning-commission.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06}
}

@report{northernstatespowercompany-wisconsinElectricGasWater2022,
  title = {Electric, {{Gas}} or {{Water Annual Report}} to {{Public Service Commission}} of {{Wisconsin}} (2021)},
  author = {Northern States Power Company - Wisconsin},
  date = {2022},
  url = {https://apps.psc.wi.gov/PDFfiles/Annual%20Reports/IOU/IOU_2021_4220.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-01-24}
}

@article{nowakCarbonStorageSequestration2013,
  title = {Carbon Storage and Sequestration by Trees in Urban and Community Areas of the {{United States}}},
  author = {Nowak, David J. and Greenfield, Eric J. and Hoehn, Robert E. and Lapoint, Elizabeth},
  date = {2013-07-01},
  journaltitle = {Environmental Pollution},
  shortjournal = {Environmental Pollution},
  volume = {178},
  pages = {229--236},
  issn = {0269-7491},
  doi = {10.1016/j.envpol.2013.03.019},
  url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0269749113001383},
  urldate = {2024-05-06},
  abstract = {Carbon storage and sequestration by urban trees in the United States was quantified to assess the magnitude and role of urban forests in relation to climate change. Urban tree field data from 28 cities and 6 states were used to determine the average carbon density per unit of tree cover. These data were applied to statewide urban tree cover measurements to determine total urban forest carbon storage and annual sequestration by state and nationally. Urban whole tree carbon storage densities average 7.69~kg~C~m−2 of tree cover and sequestration densities average 0.28~kg~C~m−2 of tree cover per year. Total tree carbon storage in U.S. urban areas (c. 2005) is estimated at 643 million tonnes (\$50.5 billion value; 95\% CI~=~597 million and 690 million tonnes) and annual sequestration is estimated at 25.6 million tonnes (\$2.0 billion value; 95\% CI~=~23.7 million to 27.4 million tonnes).},
  keywords = {Ecosystem services,Forest inventory,Global climate change,Tree cover,Urban forestry}
}

@report{nrelBusinessasUsualElectricityNatural2019,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Business-as-{{Usual Electricity}} and {{Natural Gas Consumption}} and {{Expenditure Projections}}},
  author = {{NREL}},
  date = {2019},
  pages = {1--4},
  institution = {NREL},
  url = {https://app.box.com/s/t0t3j6zztzan94a4tu1so8pse4btkkn1},
  abstract = {Projected business-as-usual electricity and natural gas consumption is modeled for the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors for each city, county, and state using baseline 2016 estimates developed through the Cities Leading through Energy Analysis and Planning (Cities-LEAP) project (Ma et al 2019).1 The same general approach to project annual natural gas and electricity use and expenditures from 2017 to 2050 is used for the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors. The steps in the approach are summarized as a flow diagram in Figure 1. The data and their sources are summarized in Table 1. The first component of the approach projects an indicator of sector activity—number of occupied households for residential, building footprint (ft2) for commercial, and value of shipments (\$) for industry—using the annual rate of change estimated from time series models2 developed using historical data. The second component of the approach projects an indicator of sector energy efficiency—British thermal units (Btus) per number of occupied households for residential, Btus per building footprint (ft2) for commercial, and Btus per value of shipments (\$) for industry—and an energy price (in \$/Btu) based on sector efficiencies and energy prices calculated from 2016 Cities-LEAP data and the annual rate of change for sector efficiencies and energy prices from the Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2019. The third component of the approach calculates annual projected energy use by multiplying the activity indicator by the energy efficiency indicator; expenditures are calculated by multiplying energy by price. 1 Ma, Ookie, Ricardo Oliveira, Evan Rosenlieb, and Megan Day. 2019. Sector-Specific Methodologies for Subnational Energy Modeling. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-7A40-72748. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy19osti/72748.pdf. 2 Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) time series models are fit to historical data at the county or census tract level. Relevant historical activity data from the National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) are included as an exogenous variable to tie ARMIA model projections to AEO 2019 projections.},
  langid = {english}
}

@dataset{nrelNetElectricityNaturalGas,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Net {{Electricity}} and {{Natural Gas Consumption}}},
  author = {{National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)}},
  publisher = {{State and Local Planning for Energy}},
  url = {https://maps.nrel.gov/slope},
  urldate = {2024-02-21},
  abstract = {Net Electricity and Natural Gas Consumption Data Description NOTE: Estimates are modeled and have a high degree of uncertainty. Projected, business-as-usual electricity and natural gas consumption and expenditures are modeled for the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors using baseline 2016 estimates developed through the Cities Leading Energy Analysis and Planning (Cities-LEAP) methodology. A similar, sector-specific methodology is applied to project annual natural gas and electricity use and expenditures from 2017 to 2050 using historic per household and establishment energy estimates and Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2019 projections. A description of the methodology is here. For data on energy affordability, see the Low-Income Energy Affordability Data (LEAD) Tool.}
}

@dataset{nrelSLOPEStateLocal2017,
  title = {{{SLOPE}}: {{State}} and {{Local Planning}} for {{Energy}}},
  author = {{NREL}},
  date = {2017-06-30T23:32:23-04:00},
  url = {https://maps.nrel.gov/slope/},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {The State and Local Planning for Energy (SLOPE) Platform is an easy-to-access online platform to support data-driven state and local energy and decarbonization planning. SLOPE includes two distinct tools to support jurisdictions’ planning needs: Scenario Planner: Compare scenarios for the future of energy, costs, and emissions for counties and states. Data Viewer: Explore city, county, and state data on renewables, efficiency, and transportation.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{nrelStateLocalPlanning2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {State and {{Local Planning}} for {{Energy}} ({{SLOPE}}) {{Platform Data}}},
  author = {{NREL}},
  date = {2023-03},
  number = {NREL/FS-7A40-82416},
  pages = {1--2},
  institution = {National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)},
  location = {Golden, CO},
  url = {https://www.nrel.gov/docs/gen/fy23/82416.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-21},
  abstract = {The State and Local Planning for Energy (SLOPE) Platform is a free, easy-to-use online platform to support data-driven state and local energy and decarbonization planning.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{nyceconomicdevelopmentcorporationNewYorkCity2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {New {{York City}} – {{Newark}} – {{Jersey City Metropolitan Statistical Area}} ({{NY-NJ MSA}}) {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {{{NYC PCAP}}},
  author = {{NYC Economic Development Corporation} and {NYC Mayor's Office of Climate and Environmental Justice}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--141},
  institution = {City of New York},
  location = {New York, NY},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/ny-nj-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {Climate change has emerged as the defining challenge of the 21st century. In the global economic and cultural center that is the New York-Newark-Jersey City Metropolitan Statistical Area (NY-NJ MSA), state and local policymakers, planners, and program managers have been dedicated to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for decades. The region has been a leader in climate action planning and environmental justice through the creation of ambitious plans, targets, and actions to collectively work towards a carbon-neutral future. But with the climate crisis growing more urgent, there is still considerable work to be done. To effectively reduce GHGs in the NY-NJ MSA, a densely populated region intricately connected through a network of highly trafficked transportation, energy, information, and economic corridors, the region needs substantial intrastate and interstate coordination and investment. The NY-NJ MSA is the nation’s largest metropolitan area by population, home to more than 19 million people across 22-counties.1 If the MSA were a state it would be the 5th most populous state in America. One of the most economically productive regions in the United States (U.S.), the MSA generated \$2 trillion in GDP in 2022.2 This scale of population and economic activity led to the MSA emitting more than 150 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) in 2022. Although a relatively low rate of emissions per capita, this aggregate level of emissions is greater than that of 40 U.S. states.3 In addition to GHGs, the combustion of fossil fuels in this densely population region exposes its millions of residents to other pollutants, such as particulate matter and smog. About 35\% of the population of the MSA – nearly seven million people – reside in low-income or disadvantaged communities (LIDACs) and are both overexposed to this pollution and more vulnerable to the long-term impacts of climate change. The consequences of not mitigating the impacts of climate change are becoming difficult to ignore. Thousand-year floods and once-in-a-generation storm events have already cost the region billions of dollars in damages over the last decade, disproportionately affecting its most vulnerable communities.4 The personal impact on individuals, as well as the broader economic costs associated with climate change, will intensify if the region continues “business as usual,” with activities that contribute significant amounts of GHG emissions in the atmosphere, like burning fossil fuels as a primary source of energy or improperly disposing of waste in landfills. Project Overview and Regional Objectives Funding allocated by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emphasizes the continued threat GHG emissions present to communities. To address this challenge, the EPA is making \$4.3 billion in competitive grants available through the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program to help state, local, and tribal governments accelerate their planning and implementation efforts. This program is specifically 1 Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool. 2023. Communities List Data. https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/downloads 2 U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. December 18, 2023. CAGDP2 Gross domestic product (GDP) by county and metropolitan area. https://www.bea.gov/itable/national-gdp-and-personal-income 3 Energy-Related CO2 Emission Data Tables, U.S. Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/state/ 4 “Ten Years After Sandy: Barriers to Resilience,” New York City Comptroller. 2022. https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/ten-years-after-sandy/ Page | 2 designed to encourage cross-regional collaboration by providing funding for planning activities, such as the creation of regional partnerships and projects designed to reduce GHG emissions while offering direct net-zero co-benefits to LIDACs. The CPRG program presents a unique opportunity for the NY-NJ MSA. Governmental bodies, and other key stakeholders (e.g., private companies, planning organizations, transportation authorities) possess a significant history of expertise and leadership in climate action planning, providing the necessary infrastructure to ensure that these grants are utilized effectively. The first phase of this effort is the creation of this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), an EPArequired document for the MSA to access and apply for implementation grant funding. This PCAP builds on existing work from countless entities and policies operating in the space and details the scope of the challenge the MSA faces, while surfacing an initial set of priority initiatives for consideration for implementation. The objective of this effort is to create an actionable, region-wide strategy to reduce GHGs by 2050 through the introduction of specific interventions that reflect the urgent needs of communities across the region. Table 1. Counties in the NY-NJ MSA New Jersey New York City New York State  Bergen County  Essex County  Hudson County  Hunterdon County  Middlesex County  Monmouth County  Morris County  Ocean County  Passaic County  Somerset County  Sussex County  Union County  Bronx County  Kings County  New York County  Queens County  Richmond County  Nassau County  Putnam County  Rockland County  Suffolk County  Westchester County Through the development of this PCAP, the NY-NJ MSA is focused on the following objectives: 1) Reducing Climate Pollution: By strengthening cross-jurisdictional collaboration regional partners will create comprehensive pathways for reducing pollution and maximizing benefits to communities in the region, especially in low-income and disadvantaged communities. 2) Strategic Positioning: Positioning the region to apply for and receive funding that supports innovative programs and policies that can be scaled up across jurisdictions. 3) Focusing on the Near-Term: Identifying optimized measures to achieve significant emissions reductions by 2030. NY-NJ MSA Region-wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions NYC and regional partners have completed a regional GHG inventory for the NY-NJ MSA PCAP; a first for the 22-county region. Simplified to include just the region’s largest emitting sectors, the inventory indicates that emissions from the NY-NJ MSA’s three largest sectors – Stationary Energy, Transportation, and Waste – equal 158 million metric tons of CO2-equivalent (MMTCO2e), based on 2022 data. At this magnitude, if the MSA was a state, it would be ranked 11th in the nation in terms of GHG emissions (at 19 million residents, the region would be the 5th largest state in the US). Given the infrastructural characteristics of the region, the transportation and stationary energy sectors are the largest sources of GHGs in the NY-NJ MSA  Page | 3 – representing 36\% and 57\% of emissions in the simplified GHG inventory constructed for this PCAP, respectively. For a national comparison, recent U.S. EPA data shows that transportation and commercial/residential buildings contributed 28\% and 13\% of U.S. GHG emissions in 2021, respectively.5 Table 2. Emissions of Largest GHG Sectors by MSA Sub-Region, 2022 (MMTCO2e) 6 Sector Type Emissions from New Jersey counties in the MSA Emissions from New York Counties, excluding NYC, in the MSA Emissions from New York City Total MSA Emissions Stationary Energy (On-site Combustion, Steam \& Electricity Emissions) Residential Buildings 16 17 18 51 Commercial Buildings 13 10 16 39 Transportation On-Road 24 16 14 55 Off-Road - - - 2 Waste Scope 1 (Emissions from the treatment and disposal of waste within MSA boundaries) 0.4 1 0.1 2 Scope 3 (Emissions from waste generated by the MSA but treated outside the MSA) 4 3 3 8 Priority GHG Reduction Measures Nine priority GHG reduction measures have been identified for the NY-NJ MSA. Presented below, these measures are designed to address the region’s largest sources of GHG emissions across the sectors of transportation, stationary energy, and waste. They are further proposed in recognition of existing GHG reduction efforts/initiatives within the region, which have been a part of decades-long climate action planning processes undertaken by various local, regional, and cross-jurisdiction entities operating in the region. These jurisdictions are thus equipped with the organizational experience and capacity to ensure that funding opportunities to support these measures are utilized effectively. By implementing actions that support these measures, the region could see a reduction of nearly 150 MMTCO2e, a 92\% decrease in gross emissions by 2050, compared to 2022 baselines. These reduction levels are consistent with established state and local net zero goals and plans. Spanning the homes, businesses, travel, and commuting habits of millions of people and trillions of dollars of economic output, these GHG reduction measures will require contributions from a broad body of regional stakeholders. The MSA includes the jurisdictional purviews of many entities: from state and local agencies to municipal and county governments to cross-jurisdiction entities such as transit authorities and utilities. These authorities must also work in concert with},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{nysdecClimatePollutionReduction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Climate {{Pollution Reduction Grants Program Priority Climate Action Plan}} for {{New York State}}},
  shorttitle = {New {{York State PCAP}}},
  author = {{NYS DEC} and {NYSERDA} and {NYC DOS}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--42},
  institution = {{New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, and the New York State Department of State}},
  location = {Buffalo, NY},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/nys-cprg-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC), the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), and the New York State Department of State (NYS DOS) have partnered to develop this Priority Climate Action Plan pursuant to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Program. The measures contained herein should be construed as broadly available to any entity in the State eligible for receiving implementation funding under the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Program and other funding streams, as applicable. This project has been funded wholly or in part by the EPA under assistance agreement 96225423 to NYS DEC. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document.}
}

@report{officeofclimateinnovationandresilienceMassachusettsPriorityClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Massachusetts {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Massachusetts {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Office of Climate Innovation and Resilience}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--147},
  institution = {{Office of Climate Innovation and Resilience}},
  location = {Boston, MA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/massachusetts-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {Massachusetts is boldly rethinking how its residents will power the electric grid, heat buildings, and move around communities in a fossil fuel-free future. Decades of dependence on fossil fuels have created a climate pollution crisis that now affects every aspect of our lives from public health to state and local economies.1  This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) details some of the most effective and implementation-ready ways that state agencies and municipalities across Massachusetts can reduce climate pollution under the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) Phase II Implementation process.2 Massachusetts communities felt the impacts of climate change in new, widespread, and dire ways in 2023. In June, great expanses of forest in Quebec burned, sending clouds of harmful smoke over the eastern half of North America.3  Later that summer, historically intense rainstorms caused flooding across inland New England, including western Massachusetts.4  In August, a Merrimack Valley storm dropped over six inches of rain within six hours.5  In September, Leominster experienced life-threatening flooding when ten inches of rain fell in the span of six hours.6  For Massachusetts, the signals are clear that urgent change is necessary if we are to avoid the most severe impacts from greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The impacts of recent climate events across Massachusetts build upon the disproportionate impacts that some Massachusetts communities have experienced over many years as a result}
}

@report{ohioepaPriorityResiliencyPlan2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Resiliency Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Ohio {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Ohio EPA}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--144},
  institution = {Ohio Environmental Protection Agency},
  location = {Columbus, OH},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/state-of-ohio-prp.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) is a program administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and authorized by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The CPRG, a two-phase program, provides up to \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) and other air emissions. GHGs are gases that trap heat in the atmosphere and contribute to a long-term shift and change in temperatures and weather patterns.1 Measuring and reducing GHG emissions is crucial to creating a more resilient future. Reducing emissions can also lead to other benefits, such as healthier Ohioans, especially those in high-risk groups like children and the elderly. This can also lead to new economic development created to support emerging technologies in the energy sector. On behalf of the state, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA), received planning grant funding from the CPRG and prepared this Priority Resiliency Plan (the Plan) in the first phase of planning for the broader GHG reduction goals for Ohio. We will develop a Comprehensive Resiliency Plan (CRP) in 2025, which will provide greater detail and analysis of the state’s GHG reduction measures and implementation plans. A key component of Plan development was our engagement with Ohioans, including leaders across the state representing different regions, communities, and areas of expertise. Outreach efforts and community engagement included one-on-one and small group interviews, a focus group with rural municipalities, two public webinars, a web-based survey, and by attending recurring meetings with target stakeholder groups. Through each conversation, we received feedback and recommendations for additional engagement and continuous process improvement. For this reason, the engagement approach resulted in a comprehensive, representative Plan. This Plan summarizes: • A statewide GHG inventory detailing the major sources of emissions in Ohio • The primary emission reduction measures that the state will focus on to reduce emissions in the priority sectors in the near-term • Our stakeholder engagement plan and efforts to date • A preliminary analysis of the impact of the reduction measures on low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs) in Ohio This Plan focuses on near-term reduction measures that address GHG emissions by 2030 and can be implemented given current technological, programmatic, and regulatory capabilities. 1 https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases 3 In Ohio, the largest sources of GHG emissions come from electric power production, energy used by residential, commercial, public, and industrial buildings, and energy used for transportation. Additional emissions come from sources such as waste, agricultural processes, industrial processes, and others, as detailed in the GHG Emissions Inventory section of this report. Emission-generating activities occur across the state but are generally concentrated in cities, where large volumes of energy consumption occur. Four of Ohio’s largest metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) have also received funding from the CPRG to develop their own emission reduction plans: • Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN Metro area; • Cleveland-Elyria, OH Metro area; • Columbus, OH Metro area; and • Dayton‐Kettering, OH Metro area. Ohio EPA is working with these regions to coordinate planning and considering reduction measures that will benefit regions of the state that did not receive funding from the CRPG. The priority reduction measures identified in this Plan focus on GHG emissions from the largest sources in Ohio: electric power production, buildings, and transportation. Specific regions in Ohio identified waste as a priority sector; for that reason, we have included select measures to reduce emissions from waste. Additional non-priority measures are documented based on stakeholder feedback related to other sources of emissions.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{okdeqOklahomaPriorityAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Oklahoma’s {{Priority Action Plan}}: {{OKLAHOMA}}’{{S PATH TO POLLUTION REDUCTION AND ENERGY GROWTH}}},
  shorttitle = {Oklahoma {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{OK DEQ}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--236},
  institution = {Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality},
  location = {Oklahoma City, OK},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/oklahoma-cprg-priority-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {Oklahomans are known for resilience, work ethic, and innovation – they have not only survived but flourished after the dust bowl, the Murrah Federal Building bombing, tornadoes, and most recently COVID. This resilience to tragedy exemplifies the “Oklahoma Standard” of hard work and innovation. This Standard makes Oklahoma a state of outstanding people. As a state with 39 tribes, the people of Oklahoma believe in protecting the land, air, and water as part of their heritage. A common cultural philosophy that applies to Oklahoma centers around the idea that decisions made today should result in a sustainable world “seven generations” into the future. Through Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) funding, Oklahoma has a unique opportunity to further support their Energy and Environmental Plan and build upon this cultural belief. Oklahoma’s path to pollution reduction and energy growth is outlined in this Priority Action Plan (PAP). Over 75\% of the state’s Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions are generated by three sectors: Industry, Transportation and Electric Power Generation. Oklahoma’s pathway to GHG emissions reductions will lead to increased renewable energy production and will bring low-carbon hydrogen to market. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Oklahoma only consumes approximately one-third of the energy it produces. This PAP supports the reduction of GHG emissions through priority measures designed to increase energy production – thereby allowing the state to export even more clean energy than it does today. Overall, Oklahoma’s PAP will result in three outcomes: increased economic growth, improved environmental and health benefits, and most importantly, social benefits to low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDAC).}
}

@report{okircogThriveTogetherSustainability2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Thrive {{Together}}: {{A Sustainability Playbook}} for {{Greater Cincinnati}}},
  shorttitle = {Cincinnati {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{OKIRCOG} and Meyer, Andy and Miller, Travis and Kalina, Ava and Sheridan, Jacob},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--54},
  institution = {Ohio-Indiana-Kentucky Regional Council of Governments},
  location = {Cincinnati, OH},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/cincinnati-region-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {In 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) was passed by the United States Congress and signed into law by President Biden. Within the IRA were the provisions for the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to create the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants program (CPRG), in a larger effort to tackle climate pollution, advance environmental justice and deliver cleaner air to communities. The CPRG program provides states, metropolitan statistical areas, tribes and territories with grants to develop and implement local plans to ultimately reduce GHG emissions from their economies in six key sectors (electricity generation, industry, transportation, buildings, agricultural and working lands, and waste management). This two phase program provided noncompetitive planning grants to applicants in summer 2023 to fund the creation of the Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). The purpose of the PCAP is to understand current and future GHG emissions, design policies and programs to reduce these emissions, and begin collaboration with other entities and communities which will benefit and be affected by implementation. The PCAP also provides support to the Phase 2 Competitive Implementation Grants. Any project proposed within a metro region, state, or tribal area for inclusion in a Phase 2 Grant application must be supported by one or more Implementation Measures included in that area’s PCAP. The planning grant to develop the Priority Climate Action Plan for Cincinnati’s Metropolitan Statistical Area was awarded to OKI Regional Council of Governments as the lead developer. OKI collaborated with Green Umbrella and other agencies in the Plan Working Group to develop the PCAP. The group invited community members across the region to form the Plan Steering Committee, consisting of representatives from a plethora of local governments, non-profit organizations and industr},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{oregonmetroPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro}}, {{OR-WA Metropolitan Statistical Area}}},
  shorttitle = {Portland {{Metro PCAP}}},
  author = {{Oregon Metro} and {Parametrix Consulting} and {JLA Public Involvement} and Rose, Eliot and Lightsey-Walker, André and Ellis, Kim and Cooney-Mesker, Molly and {Lakeeyscia Griffin} and Visse, Dana and Sandoval, Luis},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--132},
  institution = {Metro Oregon},
  location = {Portland, OR},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/portland-metro-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {Climate change is the defining global challenge of the twenty-first century. And as the recent increase in climate-induced wildfires and extreme weather events has demonstrated, it is likely to have significant impacts on the Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA, Metropolitan Statistical Area MSA (MSA). The MSA includes seven counties (Clark and Skamania Counties in Washington and Clackamas, Columbia, Multnomah, Washington, and Yamhill Counties in Oregon). The CPRG program, and particularly this PCAP, are focused on “expeditious implementation of investment-ready policies, programs, and projects.” This PCAP reflects this focus on implementation-ready climate measures. Cities, counties, and regional agencies across the MSA have conducted exhaustive climate planning, and Metro drew on 15 adopted or in-progress plans in creating this PCAP. This abundance of existing plans means that there is no shortage of ideas about how public agencies in the MSA can use their existing authority to dramatically reduce GHG emissions. Metro developed this PCAP based on a strong foundation of established climate action planning and implementation in the MSA. Over the past two decades, agencies in the MSA have collaborated across all levels of government to reduce GHG emissions. As part of this PCAP, Metro conducted an MSA-wide community GHG inventory. The priority measures primarily address the sectors with the highest contributions to community-level emissions and that are within the unique role that local and regional agencies in the MSA play in reducing GHG emissions. This PCAP contains nine priority strategies to reduce GHG emissions, shown in Table 1, that support, rather than duplicate, state-level programs and policies. Table 1: Priority Climate Action Plan strategies Transportation Trans-1: Implement high-capacity transit across the metropolitan area Trans-2: Redesign streets and infrastructure to reduce delays for transit vehicles Trans-3: Expand transit signal priority Trans-4: Expand bicycle and pedestrian network Trans-5: Expand use of parking pricing Trans-6: Expand the use of clean fuels in the region’s transit fleets Commercial and Residential Buildings Res-1: Expand existing residential energy efficiency retrofit programs, with a focus on low-income households Res-2: Fund additional energy efficiency measures in publicly funded, newly constructed affordable housing units Materials and Waste Management Waste-1: Expand the availability of residential composting programs Implementing the measures included in this PCAP is anticipated to result in a broad range of cobenefits, including air quality improvements, improved public health outcomes, economic benefits, and increased climate resilience. Through review of community-based equity- and  Priority Climate Action Plan for the Portland-Vancouver MSA (EPA Grant \# 02J36101) ES-2 environmental justice-focused plans and engagement with community partners, Metro also designed the priority measures to intentionally benefit low income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs). Local agencies with the capacity and existing level of planning required are preparing CPRG implementation grant applications related to the measures identified in this PCAP. More planning funds in the region could help support more local agencies to complete the comprehensive planning necessary to participate more fully in future implementation grants.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{osceWisconsinEmissionsReduction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Wisconsin {{Emissions Reduction Roadmap}}},
  shorttitle = {Wisconsin {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{OSCE}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--60},
  institution = {{Office of Sustainability and Clean Energy - Wisconsin Department of Administration}},
  location = {Madison, WI},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/wi-emission-reduction-roadmap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The Wisconsin Department of Administration, Office of Sustainability and Clean Energy (OSCE) leads the state of Wisconsin in addressing the effects of climate change through programs and policies that support the use of clean energy resources and technology. Governor Tony Evers’ Executive Order \#38 created the office and charges the OSCE to partner with other state agencies and state utilities to achieve the goal of ensuring all electricity consumed within Wisconsin is 100 percent carbon-free by 2050. i By consistently facilitating interagency coordination, the OSCE elevates and aligns clean energy and sustainability work across agencies. Additionally, the OSCE serves as an information and resource hub for Wisconsin local governments, businesses, and residents. This is done by providing energy information and meeting with stakeholders (businesses, Native Nations, local governments, utilities, etc.) to discuss and support the advancement of policy and projects and gather input on state-led efforts. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (US EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program is a \$5 billion investment over four years that provides states, local governments, Native Nations, and territories with funding to develop and implement plans for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollution. The OSCE serves as the designated state lead for the CPRG Program and developed the Wisconsin Emissions Reduction Roadmap (roadmap) with support from the phase one planning award to the state of Wisconsin. Along with the OSCE, one Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) in Wisconsin (Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI Metro Area) received a planning grant along with two MSAs outside of the state in Minnesota (Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Metro Area) and Illinois (Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI Metro Area) that cover a small portion of Wisconsin. In addition, multiple Native Nations located in Wisconsin opted into the CPRG program, including the Midwest Tribal Energy Resources Association (representing five Nations in Wisconsin), St. Croix Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin, Sokaogon Chippewa Community - Mole Lake Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Forest County Potawatomi, and Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa. The elements in the scope of Wisconsin’s roadmap support the US EPA’s Fiscal Year 2022-2026 Strategic Plan Goal 1 (Tackle the Climate Crisis); Objective 1.1 (Reduce Emissions that Cause Climate Change) through: • Emissions reductions associated with the priority measures identified during strategic planning. • Justice40 metrics identified and tracked (health, social, and economic).ii • Individuals and communities who have been most impacted by pollution and climate change are involved in the planning and decision-making process. • Transparency on applicable laws, rules, and regulations. • Actions aligned with state, local, private, Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductor and Science Act (CHIPS), America Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), and other funding and programs. 5 • Number of community members participating in roadmap development; Meetings, events, stakeholder sessions, etc.; and/or, dissemination of project/technology information via listservs, websites, and outreach events. This roadmap is based on extensive strategic planning and analysis with key stakeholders to set priorities, via the identified sectors. As part of the process to develop this roadmap the OSCE also reviewed existing local climate action planning processes and overlayed them with the statewide strategies. This provided a more holistic statewide view of the priorities in the state, outlined in the approach section below. The OSCE conducted stakeholder outreach, which is outlined in the engagement section below. This roadmap is flexible and tailored to Wisconsin’s specific resources and capacity and includes a mix of key sectors responsible for emitting and absorbing GHG.}
}

@article{oscoSegmentAnythingModel2023,
  title = {The {{Segment Anything Model}} ({{SAM}}) for Remote Sensing Applications: {{From}} Zero to One Shot},
  shorttitle = {The {{Segment Anything Model}} ({{SAM}}) for Remote Sensing Applications},
  author = {Osco, Lucas Prado and Wu, Qiusheng and de Lemos, Eduardo Lopes and Gonçalves, Wesley Nunes and Ramos, Ana Paula Marques and Li, Jonathan and Marcato, José},
  options = {useprefix=true},
  date = {2023-11-01},
  journaltitle = {International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation},
  shortjournal = {International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation},
  volume = {124},
  pages = {103540},
  issn = {1569-8432},
  doi = {10.1016/j.jag.2023.103540},
  url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1569843223003643},
  urldate = {2024-04-05},
  abstract = {Segmentation is an essential step for remote sensing image processing. This study aims to advance the application of the Segment Anything Model (SAM), an innovative image segmentation model by Meta AI, in the field of remote sensing image analysis. SAM is known for its exceptional generalization capabilities and zero-shot learning, making it a promising approach to processing aerial and orbital images from diverse geographical contexts. Our exploration involved testing SAM across multi-scale datasets using various input prompts, such as bounding boxes, individual points, and text descriptors. To enhance the model’s performance, we implemented a novel automated technique that combines a text-prompt-derived general example with one-shot training. This adjustment resulted in an improvement in accuracy, underscoring SAM’s potential for deployment in remote sensing imagery and reducing the need for manual annotation. Despite the limitations, encountered with lower spatial resolution images, SAM exhibits promising adaptability to remote sensing data analysis. We recommend future research to enhance the model’s proficiency through integration with supplementary fine-tuning techniques and other networks. Furthermore, we provide the open-source code of our modifications on online repositories, encouraging further and broader adaptations of SAM to the remote sensing domain.},
  keywords = {Artificial intelligence,Image segmentation,Multi-scale datasets,Text-prompt technique}
}

@report{padepCommonwealthPennsylvaniaPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Commonwealth of {{Pennsylvania}}’s {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Pennsylvania {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{PA DEP}},
  date = {2024-03},
  number = {7200-RE-DEP5710},
  pages = {1--89},
  institution = {Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection},
  location = {Harrisburg, PA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/7200-re-dep5710-pa-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) developed this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) to meet the requirements of the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program. The CPRG program provides funding to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollution. As the lead organization for CPRG planning deliverables, DEP was awarded a CPRG planning grant in June 2023 and partially used those funds to develop this PCAP. The funds will also be used to develop a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) by mid-2025, which will serve as a comprehensive update to this PCAP. The Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), the Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD MSA, and the Pittsburgh, PA MSA also received CPRG planning grants. DEP coordinated closely with the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission (LVPC), Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC), and the Southwest Pennsylvania Commission (SPC) as the lead organizations responsible for the MSAs’ CPRG plans, to align priorities within the state to jointly engage with interested parties across Pennsylvania. 1.1 CPRG Program Overview The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), signed into law on August 16, 2022, directs federal funding to reduce carbon emissions, lower healthcare costs, fund the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and improve taxpayer compliance. The IRA contains provisions that directly or indirectly address issues related to climate change, including reduction of GHG emissions and promotion of adaptation and resilience to climate change impacts.1 The CPRG program, authorized under Section 60114 of the IRA, provides \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans for reducing GHG emissions and other harmful air pollution. The program consists of two phases: planning and implementation. The planning phase provides \$250 million in noncompetitive planning grants for state and local agencies to develop PCAPs and CCAPs aimed at reducing GHG emissions and providing other benefits to communities. The implementation phase provides \$4.6 billion for competitive implementation grants to eligible applicants to implement GHG reduction measures identified in a PCAP developed under a CPRG planning grant.}
}

@report{paqcSouthCarolinaPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {South {{Carolina Priority Climate Action Plan}} ({{PCAP}})},
  shorttitle = {South {{Carolina PCAP}}},
  author = {{PAQC} and {South Carolina Office of Resilience}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--192},
  institution = {Palmetto Air Quality Collaborative},
  location = {Columbia, SC},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/sc-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {Executive Summary The Palmetto Air Quality Collaborative (PAQC) is a four-year planning initiative co-led by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC) and the South Carolina Office of Resilience (SCOR). The EPA-funded initiative runs from July 2023 to June 2027. The PAQC prioritizes interagency coordination and community engagement. Additional key partners include the South Carolina Energy Office and South Carolina Ports Authority. The PAQC is funded by the EPA Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program. Phase I Planning Grants support states, local governments, tribes, and territories to conduct climate planning. The State of South Carolina, the Catawba Nation, and the Charleston-North Charleston, Columbia, GreenvilleAnderson, and Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia metropolitan areas qualified for and opted to receive the planning grants. This document, the Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), is the first deliverable required by the CPRG program. The PCAP includes a greenhouse gas inventory, identifies near-term and implementationready measures to reduce GHG pollution, and assesses the multiple economic, environmental, and community benefits that can be achieved by reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Over 100 individuals participated in the PAQC “Action Teams.” These groups assisted DHEC and SCOR in developing the PCAP and identifying and recommending measures to reduce GHG emissions in the state. Individuals represented state, regional, and local government agencies; utilities; industry, business, and private sector entities; non-profit organizations and community groups; and universities. The South Carolina PCAP is intended to help decision makers and communities understand the state’s GHG emissions and identify strategic and collaborative measures that can be taken to reduce emissions and enhance sinks. These measures will include actions that can be taken by all levels of government, the private sector, communities, other stakeholder groups, and private citizens. The PCAP identifies priority greenhouse gas reduction measures that can be implemented in the near term and have significant impact. Priority GHG reduction measures recommended in the PCAP are voluntary and build on existing activities occurring in the state. Greenhouse gases are found in the atmosphere and are exceptionally good at trapping heat. Gases included in this inventory are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Decision makers and planners use inventories to identify the primary sources of GHG emissions and which land uses, and land use types serve as sinks. SCOR and DHEC used the EPA State Inventory Tool (SIT) to develop the South Carolina GHG inventory. The SIT consists of interactive spreadsheets and state-level default data obtained from federal and state agencies, trade and industry associations, and research and academic institutions. Emissions are measured by the weight of the gas emitted in million metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent (MMT CO2e). One million metric ton is equal to 2.205 billion lbs. As South Carolina does not have a designated agency or entity that collects GHG emissions data, the SIT provides a starting point to understand the relative contributions of different activities to the state’s net GHG emissions. This initial inventory will help SCOR and DHEC identify data gaps and potential opportunities to improve future inventories.}
}

@report{pdeqPimaCANClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Pima {{CAN}}! {{Climate Action Now}}! For {{Pima County}}, {{AZ}}},
  shorttitle = {Tuscon {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{PDEQ}},
  date = {2024},
  pages = {1--85},
  institution = {Pima County Department of Environmental Quality},
  location = {Tuscon, AZ},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/pima-county-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) was awarded a \$1 million four-year Climate Pollution Reduction Planning Grant (CPRG) from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop plans to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollution within the Tucson Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), located in Pima County, Arizona. Pima County chose to participate in the CPRG program because it will allow the region to work with community partners to reduce GHG emissions, ultimately improving air quality to protect public health, while addressing longstanding environmental injustices and providing opportunity through building a clean energy economy. PDEQ established a coalition of local jurisdictional partners including the City of Tucson, City of South Tucson, Town of Oro Valley, and the Tohono O'odham Nation to develop this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). The purpose of this PCAP is to identify the sources and sectors of GHG emissions within the Tucson MSA, determine the priority measures that can be implemented in the near term to reduce GHG emissions, while simultaneously addressing environmental injustices, empowering community-driven solutions in overburdened communities, and delivering cleaner air for the residents of Pima County. PDEQ conducted a broad stakeholder engagement process, including the development and implementation of a public survey for Pima County residents, a business survey for business owners and leaders, and worked with local community-based organizations (CBOs), as planning grant subrecipients, to collect input from residents who live in low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDAC). PDEQ also worked with the Pima Association of Governments (PAG) to utilize their 2021 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory (GHG EI) as the base year GHG EI and collected project submissions from a wide variety of Pima County Departments and local jurisdictional partners to develop a detailed list of projects that are included in this PCAP. PDEQ and PAG staff utilized ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability ClearPath cloud-based emissions management software to develop the base year EI and GHG emissions reductions projections for the years 2025-2030 and 2030-2050, in order to estimate the regional GHG emissions benefit of implementing each of these projects. This PCAP also outlines the copollutant and LIDAC benefits analysis of the proposed measures, as well as the review of authority to implement each measure and the intersection with other funding opportunities that could potentially provide additional resources toward implementation.},
  langid = {english}
}

@article{phillipsHighSoilCarbon2023,
  title = {High Soil Carbon Sequestration Rates Persist Several Decades in Turfgrass Systems: {{A}} Meta-Analysis},
  shorttitle = {High Soil Carbon Sequestration Rates Persist Several Decades in Turfgrass Systems},
  author = {Phillips, Claire L. and Wang, Ruying and Mattox, Clint and Trammell, Tara L. E. and Young, Joseph and Kowalewski, Alec},
  date = {2023-02-01},
  journaltitle = {Science of The Total Environment},
  shortjournal = {Science of The Total Environment},
  volume = {858},
  pages = {159974},
  issn = {0048-9697},
  doi = {10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.159974},
  url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969722070747},
  urldate = {2024-05-09},
  abstract = {Managed turfgrass is a common component of urban landscapes that is expanding under current land use trends. Previous studies have reported high rates of soil carbon sequestration in turfgrass, but no systematic review has summarized these rates nor evaluated how they change as turfgrass ages. Here we conducted a meta-analysis of soil carbon sequestration rates from 63 studies globally, comprised mostly of C3 grass species in the U.S., including 24 chronosequence studies that evaluated carbon changes over 75 years or longer. We showed that turfgrass established within the last ten years had a positive mean soil C sequestration rate of 5.3 Mg CO2 ha−1 yr−1 (95\% CI = 3.7–6.2), which is higher than rates reported for several soil conservation practices. Areas converted to turfgrass from forests were an exception, sometimes lost soil carbon, and had a cross-study mean sequestration rate that did not differ from 0. In some locations, soil C accumulated linearly with turfgrass age over several decades, but the major trend was for soil C accumulation rates to decline through time, reaching a cross-study mean sequestration rate that was not different from 0 at 50 years. We show that fitting soil C timeseries with a mechanistically derived function rather than purely empirical functions did not alter these conclusions, nor did employing equivalent soil mass versus fixed-depth carbon stock accounting. We conducted a partial greenhouse gas budget that estimated emissions from mowing, N-fertilizer production, and soil N2O emissions. When N fertilizer was applied, average maintenance emissions offset 32\% of C sequestration in recently established turfgrass. Potential emission removals by turfgrass can be maximized with reduced-input management. Management decisions that avoid losing accrued soil C—both when turfgrass is first established and when it is eventually replaced with other land-uses—will also help maximize turfgrass C sequestration potential.},
  keywords = {Carbon sequestration,Chronosequence,Greenhouse gases,Lawns,meta-analysis,Urbanization}
}

@report{planrvaRichmondVAMetro2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Richmond, {{VA Metro Area Metropolitan Statistical Area Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Richmond {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{PlanRVA}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--69},
  institution = {PlanRVA},
  location = {Richmond, VA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/richmond-msa-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {PCAP Overview and Scope This PCAP covers the geographic area outlined in Figure 1. Richmond Metropolitan Statistical Area. The Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) is Census-defined and extends beyond PlanRVA’s usual geography. The region also includes the following Tribes: Chickahominy, Chickahominy Eastern Division, Rappahannock, Pamunkey, and Upper Mattaponi. The state of Virginia has developed its own PCAP and PlanRVA is coordinating with state CPRG leads at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality to align GHG reduction priorities. This PCAP identifies high priority, ready-to-implement, GHG reduction measures that will provide significant GHG reductions and other benefits to the MSA and the communities within it. A measure being included within the MSA’s PCAP is a pre-requisite for eligible agencies and organizations within it to compete for implementation grant funding in the second phase of the CPRG program. Accordingly, the measures identified in this PCAP are designed to be broad enough to encompass regional and local priorities for addressing climate pollution. The PCAP serves as a starting point for a larger, more comprehensive climate planning effort to be conducted through 2024 and 2025 to develop the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP).},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@article{polaskySupplyTerrestrialCarbon2006,
  title = {The {{Supply}} of {{Terrestrial Carbon Sequestration}} in {{Minnesota}}},
  author = {Polasky, Stephen and Liu, Yang},
  date = {2006},
  journaltitle = {Minnesota Terrestrial Carbon Sequestration Project},
  pages = {1--25},
  abstract = {This study derives a “supply curve” for carbon sequestration in Minnesota that describes the amount of carbon that could be sequestered for various levels of credit payments. We examine a range of different land-use and land-management practices identified by soil scientists as having potential to sequester large amounts of carbon and having sufficient information upon which to base estimates. These land-use and land-management practices are: land retirement, afforestation, agroforestry, wetland restoration and cover crop adoption. We estimate the costs to landowners of land-use or land-management changes on a per-acre basis. The costs of carbon sequestration include the opportunity costs of agricultural land and conversion costs to alternative practices. We combine information about cost with biophysical information about carbon sequestration rates to calculate the cost of carbon sequestration per ton. We estimate the costs of carbon sequestration for each alternative land-use and land-management practice in each NASS (National Agricultural Statistical Survey) region. The regional supply curve for sequestration is derived by allocating land to the use or practice that gives has the lowest cost per unit of carbon first and sequentially adding in more costly uses or practices. A state-wide carbon supply curve is constructed by aggregating the regional curves. We find that planting a cover crop appears to be the least costly carbon sequestration alternative in most regions. However, the cover crop sequestration rate is based on a single study. This sequestration rate may not be accurate for all soil types or all regions in Minnesota. More research is needed on this option before policy conclusions can be reached regarding this practice. Wetland restoration and afforestation are the next most cost-effective practices. By restoring wetland on wet soils and planting trees on dry soils, more than 20 MMT of carbon can be sequestered in Minnesota annually. This figure is likely to be far higher than can be realized in practice as it assumes a 100\% adoption rate. The marginal cost of sequestration ranges from below zero for extremely low-quality agricultural land to \$135/MT for the most fertile land.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{polkcountypublicworksWhatNextCentral2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {What's next {{Central Iowa}}? {{Central Iowa Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Central {{IA PCAP}}},
  author = {{Polk County Public Works}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--43},
  institution = {Polk County Public Works},
  location = {Des Moines, IA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/central-iowa-des-moines-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The Polk County Public Works Department (hereinafter “Polk County”) prepared this priority climate action plan (PCAP) to support investment in policies, practices, and technologies that reduce pollutant emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life in Central Iowa. This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under assistance agreement 96704601 to Polk County. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document. The measures contained herein should be construed as broadly available to any entity within the geographic scope of this PCAP that is eligible to receive funding under the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Implementation Grants (CPRG) and other funding streams, as applicable. PLANNING AREA The EPA Phase I guidance defines the CPRG planning area for our region using 2020 U.S. Census data for metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) to identify metropolitan areas eligible for funding. The Des Moines-West Des Moines MSA includes Guthrie, Dallas, Polk, Jasper, Madison, and Warren Counties. However, due to the nature of our region and its interconnected economics, transportation, workforce, and more, Story County was invited to join Central Iowa’s CPRG effort. From the outset of this planning process, Polk County staff met with Story County staff and leadership to discuss the inclusion of their county in the CPRG process. After a productive dialogue between the representatives, Story County accepted the invitation. Therefore, our regional CPRG planning area extends beyond the EPA prescribed MSA boundaries and has expanded to seven counties instead of the original six. Figure 1, below, depicts the region this plan will refer to as “Central Iowa}
}

@report{porterCarbonFreeBoston2019,
  title = {Carbon {{Free Boston}}: {{Transportation Technical Report}}},
  author = {Porter, Christopher and Chang, Xiao Yun (Jane) and Cleveland, Cutler J and Fox-Penner, Peter and Walsh, Michael J and Cherne-hendrick, Margaret and Perez, Taylor and Atkins, Janet and Cook, Christopher and {al}, et},
  date = {2019},
  pages = {1--117},
  institution = {Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy},
  location = {Boston, MA, USA},
  url = {https://sites.bu.edu/cfb/carbon-free-boston-report-released/technical-reports/},
  urldate = {2021-10-04}
}

@report{pscaaPriorityClimateAction2024,
  title = {Priority Climate Action Plan for the {{Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue Metropolitan Statistical Area}} ({{MSA}}), on Behalf of All Cities and Counties in the Four-County {{Puget Sound Region}} of {{King}}, {{Kitsap}}, {{Pierce}}, and {{Snohomish Counties}}},
  shorttitle = {Seattle {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{PSCAA}},
  date = {2024-02-01},
  pages = {1--174},
  institution = {Puget Sound Clean Air Agency},
  location = {Seattle, WA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/pcap-puget-sound-msa.pdf},
  abstract = {The Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA), as well as the State of Washington, received Phase 1 funding through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) to develop plans to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollution. The CPRG planning grant enables states, MSAs, and tribal governments to develop a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), followed by a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) and Status Report, over a four-year period through 2027. EPA requires that all PCAPs include a Greenhouse Gas Inventory, quantified priority GHG reduction measures, a Low Income/ Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) Benefits Analysis, as well as a review of authority to implement each priority measure. The Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (Agency or PSCAA) is serving as the Lead Entity for the Phase 1 CPRG Planning Grant on behalf of the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue MSA, which covers all cities and counties in the four-county region of King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish counties. This Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue MSA PCAP presents a focused list of measures to reduce GHG emissions and harmful air pollution and maximize the benefits of climate action in overburdened communities in the Puget Sound. Many of the quantified priority measures in this PCAP are based on the wedge analysis from the Puget Sound Region Emission Analysis (PSREA) Project completed in 2022, which provides comprehensive GHG emissions data and innovative tools to advance local climate action for each of the four counties in the region. The list of priority measures included in Section 4 of this PCAP is not intended to be inclusive of all possible emissions reduction actions available to local jurisdictions. Instead, these priority actions focus on measures for which an eligible entity is planning to seek Phase 2 CPRG funding. The Agency will explore a comprehensive list of GHG reduction measures in the CCAP, including consideration of additional measures submitted as part of informal comments received on the PCAP. A summary of these comments can be found in Appendix F. This PCAP was informed by, and is a continuation of, the many climate planning efforts already underway by regional, county, and local jurisdictions across the Puget Sound. The Agency also coordinated closely with the Washington State Departments of Commerce and Ecology, as well as the Governor’s Office, in the creation of the PCAP. This PCAP serves as a resource and guide for implementing near-term priority GHG reduction strategies and actions in furtherance of CPRG Phase 2 Implementation Grants for the MSA.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@dataset{publicservicecommissionofwisconsinPSCInteractiveService2021,
  title = {{{PSC Interactive Service Area Maps}}},
  author = {{Public Service Commission of Wisconsin}},
  date = {2021-05},
  url = {https://psc.wi.gov/Pages/ForConsumers/Maps.aspx},
  urldate = {2024-02-02},
  abstract = {The locations of electric facilities and service territories are accurate only to the extent that the various sources supplied accurate data. PSC staff will continue to update and improve the geographic information system (GIS) data and maps.}
}

@online{publicservicecommwisconsinAnnualReportsView2022,
  type = {Government/regulatory filings},
  title = {Annual {{Reports}} : {{View PDFs}}, {{Queries}}, and {{Programs}}},
  author = {{Public Service Commission of Wisconsin}},
  date = {2022},
  url = {https://apps.psc.wi.gov/ARS/annualReports/default.aspx},
  urldate = {2024-01-23},
  organization = {Annual Reporting}
}

@report{refedAcceleratingActionReduce,
  type = {Non-profit},
  title = {Accelerating {{Action}} to {{Reduce Food Loss}} and {{Waste Across Our Food System}}},
  author = {{ReFED} and Buck, Sam and Mukhebi, Vanessa},
  institution = {ReFED},
  location = {Long Island City, NY},
  url = {https://refed.org/uploads/digital-version-2023-refed-annual-impact-report-final.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-29},
  abstract = {Dear Friends, 2023 was a landmark year for those working to reduce food waste. Investing in solutions that feed people instead of landfills became more than just a nice idea — it became a priority. The U.S. federal government released its first comprehensive food waste strategy, drawing on the collective powers of three major agencies. Businesses embraced pre-competitive collaboration to reduce food waste and drive profitability. The climate community, which has historically overlooked the agriculture sector, celebrated food waste reduction for its potential to curb methane emissions. Major media outlets ran headlines that introduced the topic to millions of new readers. And the world’s leading philanthropists rallied around an ambitious new roadmap to address the root cause of waste in our food system. ReFED’s fingerprints are on each of these advancements — as an advisor, a researcher, a translator, a convener, and a catalyst — and it shows how far we’ve come since we issued the first Roadmap to Reduce U.S. Food Waste in 2016. We’ve added tools to our toolkit, grown our sphere of influence, and cemented our place as the primary source of information for food loss and waste. As noted by our partners, ReFED has become the “accelerator in chief” of the food waste movement. This year’s Annual Impact Report theme — Acceleration — is a tribute to that evolution and the rapid progress that’s been made. In the pages ahead, you’ll find collections of stories and moments that underscore that feeling of acceleration — moments that we will be able to point to ten years from now as having altered the trajectory of food waste in this country and beyond. This report is also a thank you letter. Systems change is by nature a collective effort. Our acceleration — and the entire food waste movement’s acceleration — is the product of profound generosity. This year, we welcomed new partners that went all in on ReFED. Their fingerprints are on every page, every story, every word in this report. Thank you for believing in our work and accelerating us toward a world that makes the very best use of the food we grow. Warmly}
}

@report{regnierSystemsRetrofitTrends2020,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Systems {{Retrofit Trends}} in {{Commercial Buildings}}: {{Opening Up Opportunities}} for {{Deeper Savings}}},
  author = {Regnier, Cindy and Mathew, Paul and Robinson, Alastair and Shackelford, Jordan and Walter, Travis},
  date = {2020-02},
  number = {DE-AC02- 05CH11231},
  pages = {1--77},
  institution = {Lawrence Berkeley National Lab},
  location = {Berkeley, CA},
  url = {https://buildings.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/Regnier%20C%20-%20System%20Retrofit%20Trends%20Study%20Updated%205-8-20%20Final.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-29},
  abstract = {Commercial building retrofits present a prime opportunity to improve building energy efficiency. This is increasingly happening, but usually through simple upgrades of individual building components such as equipment or lamp replacements. These equipment- or component-level retrofits, however, have been shown to have less potential for whole building energy savings as compared to comprehensive systembased approaches (Regnier et al. 2018a). A system-based approach goes beyond a single component, such as by incorporating additional elements or controls within an end use system, or leverages interactions with other building components or end use systems to achieve deeper levels of energy savings. Systems retrofits hold the potential for much greater savings and are critical to achieving aggressive energy reduction goals in the existing commercial building stock. This study sought to answer three questions: 1. To what extent are systems retrofits taking place in the building marketplace today? 2. Are systems retrofits more prevalent in high energy saving projects? 3. What kinds of efficiency measures are most prevalent in system retrofits? This study also solicited input from industry stakeholders on the state of system retrofits currently, as well as perceived barriers to further uptake. The results of the study revealed several findings: Key Finding \#1 Systems retrofits are relatively uncommon, representing less than 20 percent of total projects Key Finding \#2: Systems retrofits show a greater occurrence in high energy saving projects Key finding \#3. Lighting measures are the most prevalent in all types of retrofits, while there is a higher prevalence of HVAC measures in systems retrofits than in non-system retrofits. Key finding \#4. Several barriers prevent wider deployment of systems, including a lack of awareness of system retrofit opportunities, perceived higher costs, ease of system design, installation and operation, and in some cases policy barriers. The study addressed these questions by examining commercial building retrofit data from an array of sources, including utility customer incentive programs, federal government facility retrofit programs and energy service company (ESCO) retrofit data. These were supplemented by retrofit project data from several case study repositories, including the U.S. Department of Energy’s High Performance Building Database, the New Building Institute’s Getting to Zero Database, and the U.S. General Service Administration’s Deep Retrofit program. The final cleansed dataset included over 12,000 retrofit projects, including over 4,500 projects that included energy savings data. A wide range of commercial building types were represented, with office and retail most prevalent.}
}

@report{ridemRhodeIslandPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Rhode {{Island Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  author = {{RI DEM} and Stone, Elizabeth and Calabro, Rachel},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--107},
  institution = {Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management},
  location = {Providence, RI},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/rhode-island-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {On April 14, 2021, Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee signed into law the 2021 Act on Climate, which set mandatory, enforceable climate emissions reduction goals culminating in net-zero emissions by 2050. • 10\% below 1990 levels by 2020 • 45\% below 1990 levels by 2030 • 80\% below 1990 levels by 2040 • Net-zero emissions by 2050 This legislation updated the previous 2014 Resilient Rhode Island Act, positioning the state to boldly address climate change and prepare for a global economy that will be shifting to adapt to clean technology. The Act on Climate required that the Executive Climate Change Coordinating Council (RIEC4) deliver an updated climate plan to the Governor and General Assembly by December 31, 2022 (referred to as the ‘2022 Update’). After a fourteen-month process involving substantial stakeholder engagement, research, and compilation and coordination among the 13 state agencies of the RIEC4, the 2022 Update was completed and serves as a benchmark and updated foundation for Rhode Island’s future climate work. The RIEC4 then turned its attention to the 2025 Climate Strategy, which will include a set of “strategies, programs, and actions to meet economy-wide enforceable targets for greenhouse gas emissions” due by December 31, 2025. The 2025 Climate Strategy will be developed via a robust stakeholder process modelled closely on the process used for the 2022 Update and will address areas such as environmental injustices, public health inequities, and a fair employment transition as fossil-fuel jobs are transitioned into green energy jobs. The 2025 Climate Strategy will be a comprehensive working document that will be updated every five years thereafter. Rhode Island intends to closely align the development of the 2025 Climate Strategy with the priorities identified in this PCAP and the larger CCAP (due later in 2025). Robust stakeholder engagement and explicit consideration of equity and justice will be critical to the success of each process. The measures contained herein should be construed as broadly available to any entity in the state eligible for receiving funding under the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Implementation Grants (CPRG) and other funding streams, as applicable. Rhode Island has prioritized GHG reductions measures that maximize emission reductions, deliver benefits to low-income and disadvantaged communities, and leverage existing programs, policies, programs, and related federal funding sources to advance the state’s climate priorities via cost-effective measures. RIDEM would like to extend its gratitude to the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) team and sub-contractors for assisting with many of the technical aspects of this plan.}
}

@online{russellCarbonMinnesotaTrees2020,
  title = {Carbon in {{Minnesota}} Trees and Woodlands},
  author = {Russell, Matthew},
  date = {2020},
  url = {https://extension.umn.edu/managing-woodlands/carbon-minnesota-trees-and-woodlands},
  urldate = {2024-05-10},
  abstract = {Carbon production and management in forests},
  langid = {english},
  organization = {University of Minnesota Extension}
}

@report{sacmetroairdistrictCapitalRegionClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Capital {{Region Climate Priorities Plan}} 2024},
  shorttitle = {Sacramento {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Sac Metro Air District}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--204},
  institution = {Sacramento Metro Air District},
  location = {Sacramento, CA},
  url = {https://epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/sacramento-roseville-csa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The greater Sacramento region is already feeling the effects of climate change resulting from anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These effects include more frequent and extreme weather events, including atmospheric rivers and extreme heat, higher flood risk, reduced snowpack, droughts, and wildfires. These events impact the life and livelihoods of Sacramento’s residents by deteriorating human health, decreasing the longevity of transportation and electrical infrastructure, and reducing crop yields. Air pollution from wildfires and exposure to more frequent and extreme heat events is threatening public health, especially for those who are most vulnerable including children, older adults, the unhoused, and those with preexisting health conditions such as asthma and chronic lung and heart disease. Recognizing the need for climate action, the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program aims to create regional and statewide plans to combat the effects of climate change by reducing GHG emissions and associated co-pollutants that compromise air quality. As a national and global leader in climate research and planning, other states and countries look to California to lead the way in planning for the future. Assembly Bill (AB) 1279, the California Climate Crisis Act of 2022, calls for statewide net-zero GHG emissions by no later than 2045 and directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to coordinate with local agencies to reach the target. As the local agency with the primary responsibility to help the capital region reach its air quality and climate goals, the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (Sac Metro Air District), in coordination with local jurisdictions, agencies, and tribal partners, is leading in the development of a regional climate action plan with strategies to reduce GHG emissions and address disproportionate impacts from air pollution exposure on vulnerable communities.  CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION | 2 The Sacramento region already deals with significant air quality challenges from transportation emissions which are exacerbated by certain geographical features. These geographic characteristics expose the region to a diverse range of climate risks over its dense urban areas, valley farmland and agricultural fields, rolling foothills, and high Sierra Nevada mountains. Each of these distinct environments has its own set of issues and opportunities. Fortunately, the CPRG program is facilitating a collaborative process that enables several local agencies to identify commonalities in each jurisdiction’s respective climate goals and formulate a set of regional priorities that can be scoped and funded to deliver benefits throughout the capital region. These strategies will be shared with others in the country who face similar environmental challenges. Through this climate action planning process, the Sac Metro Air District engaged residents, local agencies, multiple cities, and seven counties to build the relationships necessary to implement local climate actions. A steering committee (Table 1) consisting of staff from El Dorado, Placer, Nevada, Sacramento, Sutter, Yolo, and Yuba counties, cities within these counties, the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG), the Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT), and the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) was formed to guide the development of the SacramentoRoseville, California Combined Statistical Area (Sacramento-Roseville CSA) priority climate action plan. To signify the importance of regional collaboration, on November 9, 2023, more than 50 elected officials from around the region attended a joint meeting of the Boards of Directors for the Sac Metro Air District, SMUD, SacRT, and SACOG where executive approval was given to execute a joint resolution in support of continued collaboration on regional priority projects. Cooperation ensures greater efficiencies and swifter attainment of mutual goals, which leads to improved wellness and quality of life for the region’s residents. Regional priorities identified by the Sac Metro Air District Board and its partners relate to mobility and the reduction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT), grid resiliency, infill development, wildfire reduction, biomass energy, hydrogen production, and energy efficiency. The CPRG program is accelerating work to decarbonize the transportation, industry, electric power, and natural and working lands sectors and address environmental injustice by supporting grant recipients in enacting solutions that are community driven.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{sandagSanDiegoRegional2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {San {{Diego Regional Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {{{SANDAG PCAP}}},
  author = {{SANDAG}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--127},
  institution = {San Diego Association of Governments},
  location = {San Diego, CA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/san-diego-regional-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The San Diego region is situated in the southwest corner of the United States and shares a border with Mexico, giving it a dynamic binational economy. The region is home to 3.3 million residents and has a rich diversity of peoples and cultures, including 17 federally recognized Tribal Nations with jurisdiction over 18 reservations – the most of any county in the United States (U.S.). The consequences of climate change are increasingly affecting this unique region year after year, with sea level rise, more frequent and severe weather events, and wildfires. Widespread regional action and coordination are necessary to implement the climate mitigation measures necessary to significantly reduce the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) into the atmosphere that are driving the climate crisis. This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) was informed by data and deep knowledge of local communities across the San Diego region to identify actionable strategies and measures to reduce regional GHG emissions by 2030. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) prepared the PCAP in accordance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) guidance for Phase 1 of the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) Program. The scope of the San Diego Regional PCAP comprises the San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and covers San Diego County. The PCAP includes actions that will significantly reduce GHG emissions, that can be implemented before 2030, and that benefit low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs) in the San Diego region. Due to historic disinvestment and under-resourcing, many LIDACs in the San Diego region are disproportionately impacted by and have a compromised ability to adapt to the effects of climate change. The PCAP prioritizes actions that will benefit LIDACs in the San Diego region vulnerable to climate impacts to ensure they are not left behind in the transition to a decarbonized transportation, building, and energy future. While stakeholders in the region are working to reduce GHG emissions from all sectors, the PCAP focuses on specific measures where stakeholders and partners have the authority and jurisdiction for implementation. As such, the focus of GHG reduction strategies in the PCAP is in the transportation, building energy, energy supply, and water sectors. Transportation - With transportation representing over 50\% of emissions – the largest source of GHG emissions in the San Diego region – it is critical to increase zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) adoption, increase public transit use, and expand active transportation opportunities. Building Energy - On-site fossil fuel combustion in buildings provides energy for space heating, water heating, cooking, and other functions, which accounts for 12\% of GHG emissions in the San Diego region. Switching to high-efficiency electric appliances and equipment will both improve indoor air quality and reduce the GHG emissions from buildings as the electric grid continues its transition to 100\% renewable resources. Clean Energy - Electricity emissions account for about 20\% of the San Diego region’s GHG emissions. Increasing onsite clean energy supply through solar and battery storage will help reduce GHG emissions, provide localized energy redundancy to the grid, and accelerate the electrification of the transportation and building energy sectors. San Diego Regional Priority Climate Action Plan 7 Water - Water sector emissions occur during extracting, treating, transferring, and distributing water to the region’s communities, businesses, and agricultural lands. More efficient treatment of stormwater and wastewater reduces the need for imported potable water and decreases GHG emissions associated with treating and storing wastewater. The San Diego Regional PCAP builds on the climate leadership of many partner agencies, including for instance the Climate Action Plans (CAPs) adopted by local jurisdictions and the Regional Decarbonization Framework (RDF) developed by the County of San Diego. It also draws on the knowledge in communities gathered through stakeholder engagement and assessments from SANDAG’s past Regional Plans. The result is a PCAP that recognizes the need for not only significantly lessening of GHG emissions, but also reducing the emission of harmful air pollutants which are overburdening many communities. To support the transition to a decarbonized economy, it also highlights the importance of addressing workforce development needs and providing technical assistance, particularly in LIDACs to ensure effective deployment of and participation in GHG reduction programs. SANDAG is committed to continued coordination with other climate, housing, transportation, and equity efforts to advance this vision for near-term climate action in the region.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{sarasotacountyPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan}} - {{Clean Air Coalition}} - {{Sarasota-Manatee Region}}},
  shorttitle = {Sarasota {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Sarasota County}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--103},
  institution = {Sarasota County},
  location = {Sarasota, FL},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/north-port-sarasota-bradenton-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {Sarasota County is the lead agency and grantee of the North Port – Sarasota - Bradenton, Florida Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), EPA Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG). The development of the Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) integrates existing sustainability plans, implementation programs, regional priorities, as well as community priorities identified during engagement. FIGURE ES-1. Sarasota-Manatee region MSA and the low-income and disadvantaged communities (Justice 40) The existing plans that were reviewed include Sarasota County and City of Sarasota’s climate vulnerability assessments, Sarasota County and City of Sarasota’s sustainability assessments, City of Venice vulnerability assessment and resilience plan, Sarasota-Manatee MPO 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan, and Sarasota County Post Disaster Redevelopment Plan. The regional effort to develop the PCAP was rebranded as ‘Clean Air Coalition Sarasota-Manatee Region’. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PR IORIT Y CL IM AT E A CTI ON PLA N - CL EA N A IR COALITI ON - SA RASOTA-MA NAT EE R EGI ON 3 Regional priorities were identified through inter-agency coordination and include need for 1) communitywide cooling centers that can serve as local resilience hubs, 2) renewable energy for water and sewer facilities, school, community centers and municipal buildings, 3) methane recovery from landfills, and 4) decarbonization of the bus (schools and transit) fleet. The PCAP identified the low income and disadvantaged communities (LIDAC) and analyzed the socioeconomics of the area in comparison to the region. Community engagement sessions were specifically calibrated to LIDAC areas. Community priorities were identified through workshops with community-based organizations with a history of working with low-income and disadvantaged communities and through a community-wide survey. The top challenges identified were 1) high energy costs, 2) exposure to extreme heat, and 3) lack of access to reliable, convenient, safe, and affordable public transportation or mobility options. GHG emissions inventory for the North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton Metropolitan Statistical Area was assembled and divided by key economic sectors. The top GHG emission or air pollution contributors in the region are: Transportation and mobile sources– 49\%, Residential energy – 21\%, and Commercial energy – 19\%. The prioritized GHG reduction measures in the Sarasota-Manatee region and the corresponding LIDAC benefits analysis are noted below. The implementation authority for each of these measures is with Sarasota and Manatee Counties and the cities in the region under the provisions of the Florida State statues. Additional information is provided in the document.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{scagAngelesLongBeachAnaheimCA2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {The {{Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim}}, {{CA Metropolitan Statistical Area Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Los {{Angeles PCAP}}},
  author = {{SCAG}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--231},
  institution = {Southern California Association of Governments},
  location = {Los Angeles, CA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/5d-98t76801-los-angeles-long-beach-anaheim-msa_pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) serves as a high-level roadmap for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across the Los Angeles‐Long Beach‐Anaheim, California metropolitan statistical area (MSA). This effort is born of the Biden Administration’s and the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) commitment to address climate change, and is made possible through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program. The CPRG program is providing the means for local governments and other agencies to develop climate action plans to reduce GHG emissions and collectively support United States’ and California’s commitments to aggressive GHG reduction targets, including those under the Paris Agreement and Justice 40 Initiative policy goals. This PCAP is focused on the geographic areas within southern California’s Los Angeles County and Orange County, encompassing 122 cities, 164 unincorporated areas, and over 13 million residents. Southern California faces significant air quality concerns; the region is in extreme nonattainment for ozone and serious non-attainment for fine particulate matter. Almost half of the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim MSA’s census tracts are identified as low-income and disadvantaged communities and face historic and disproportionate impacts from climate change hazards. To address these issues and accelerate deep emissions reductions, this PCAP addresses GHGs from the region’s most critical sectors – Transportation, Energy, and Solid Waste. Emissions reductions and improvements within these sectors will yield considerable benefits for Los Angeles and Orange counties, primarily by improving the region’s air quality and reducing the significant hazards associated with air pollution. These sectors represent the largest sources of GHG emissions in the MSA. Implementation-ready measures for reducing emissions in the PCAP’s key sectors will provide many co-benefits for the region, help grow the economy, improve public health, and address the needs of the most vulnerable communities. Emissions reduction measures within the PCAP are included based on their readiness for implementation, their near-term GHG reduction potential, their critical need for funding, and their co-benefits to low income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs). The PCAP builds from over a decade of climate action across Los Angeles and Orange counties, utilizing a multi-sector approach to cutting GHG emissions—while providing maximum benefits to vulnerable communities that have historically borne the cost of harmful environmental practices. This PCAP builds from a strong foundation of state, regional, and local policies and a multitude of existing climate action plans that have been developed by local and sub-regional government agencies throughout the region. Since 2010, more than 50  Executive Summary March 2024 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim MSA 2 Priority Climate Action Plan jurisdictions in the region have completed a climate action plan or equivalent or are in the process of doing so. These existing efforts and collaborations are elevated within this PCAP and provide the foundation for a strategic and comprehensive approach to addressing climate change in the Los Angeles‐Long Beach‐Anaheim MSA.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{scagRiversideSanBernadinoOntarioMSA2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Riverside-{{San Bernadino-Ontario MSA Priority Climate Action Plan}} ({{PCAP}})},
  shorttitle = {Riverside {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{SCAG} and {MDAQMD} and {SCAQMD}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--278},
  institution = {Southern California Association of Governments},
  location = {Riverside, CA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/5d-98t76601-riverside-san-bernardino-ontario-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) serves as a high-level roadmap for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions throughout the Riverside−San Bernardino−Ontario metropolitan statistical area (MSA), which includes the Counties of Riverside and San Bernardino, California. Three councils of government represent the city and county governments in the MSA: Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG), San Bernardino Council of Governments (SBCOG), and Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG). The PCAP builds from a strong foundation of state, regional, and local policies as well as GHG inventories and existing climate action plans (CAPs) that have been developed by these sub-regional government agencies as well as local governments throughout the region. The lead organization for purposes of the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) Planning Grant Program is the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA)/San Bernardino Council of Governments (SBCOG).1 Henceforth, will be referred to as SBCOG. This PCAP provides a plan to reduce GHG emissions for the entire MSA based on a compilation of existing and new analysis that includes GHG inventories across all sectors (energy, transportation, solid waste, water \& wastewater, and agriculture), assessment of reduction potential across each sector based on existing climate action plans, and the development of three regional measures deemed by stakeholders to be the highest priorities for implementation based on their near-term GHG reduction potential, need for funding, and anticipated co-benefits to low income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs), to name a few key prioritization criteria. In addition, the PCAP assesses the cost of implementing the regional measures, the authority of the MSA’s local jurisdictions and agencies to implement the measures, and the workforce implications of implementing each measure. Existing GHG Inventories and Climate Action Plans Many local jurisdictions in California have looked to provide consistency with the state’s GHG targets (e.g., 2030, 2045, and 2050) by developing local GHG inventories and CAPs. The state’s latest scoping plan (2022) for addressing climate change emphasized that when establishing GHG reduction targets, local governments should consider their respective share of the statewide reductions necessary to achieve the state’s long-term climate target for each target year, and to best support those overall goals.2 The California Air Resource Board (CARB) recommends that 1 SBCTA and SBCOG are a dual entity, with transportation being the focus of SBCTA. In 2016, the agency sponsored Senate Bill 1305 (Morrell), consolidating the County Transportation Commission, local transportation authority, service authority for freeway emergencies and local congestion management agency into a single entity, San Bernardino County Transportation Authority. The bill passed through both houses and was signed by the Governor in August 2016; it became effective January 1, 2017. (San Bernardino Associated Governments continues as a Joint Powers Authority functioning as a Council of Governments (SBCOG). 2 See California’s 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023-04/2022-sp.pdf  1.Introduction Riverside−San Bernardino−Ontario MSA ES-2 March 1, 2024 Priority Climate Action Plan jurisdictions focus on developing locally appropriate, plan-level targets that align with the California trajectory to carbon neutrality. The foundation of existing CAPs in the region include the Western Riverside Subregional CAP originally completed by WRCOG in 2014 and updated in 2022, and the San Bernardino Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan originally completed by the SBCTA/SBCOG in 2014 and updated in 2021. In addition, more than 25 local CAPs have been completed in the region since 2010, including 7 in the WRCOG subregion, 8 in the SBCOG subregion, and 10 in the CVAG subregion. These efforts are described in more detail in Chapter 2, Existing Climate Action in the Region. The Subregional CAPs developed for the SBCOG and WRCOG subregions include emissions targets that align with the California goal of reducing emissions levels statewide to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Neither of these CAPs, however, provide emissions targets beyond 2030. Partnerships including the Inland Regional Energy Network (IREN)3 provide programs and support for the energy sector in conjunction with these local climate actions. Often operating in conjunction with climate action planning, GHG inventories serve to track GHG emissions within a defined geographic region and serve as the basis for establishing emissions forecasts and reduction targets. GHG inventories for the member jurisdictions of SBCOG and WRCOG were recently updated when the subregional CAPs were updated for those subregions, while a new subregional GHG emissions inventory was created for the CVAG subregion as part of this PCAP. These subregional GHG inventories are summarized below by sector in Table ES-1 and Figure ES-1, along with an estimate of total emissions for the region.4 The totals by sector indicate that on-road transportation contributes the largest share of regional emissions, at 50.8 percent, followed by building energy (consumption of natural gas and electricity) at 35.4 percent, solid waste disposed at landfills at 6.0 percent, mobile offroad equipment and agriculture each at 3.0 percent, water conveyance at 1.2 percent, and wastewater treatment at 0.6 percent. The inventory results indicate clearly that the biggest opportunities to achieve deep reductions in regional GHG emissions are within the on-road transportation and building energy sectors, which both play a critical role in the regional economy. The GHG reduction measures found in the MSA’s existing local and subregional CAPs, as well as the collective subregional GHG inventories, inform the efforts of this PCAP. The PCAP builds on the existing measures to establish a more cohesive, regional approach to reducing GHG emissions. The PCAP does not represent an exhaustive list of all possible local and regional measures for reducing emissions, but rather an early-stage framework that sets the stage for a more coordinated Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) that will advance long term climate action and sustainability across the MSA.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{schleiferSLOPEScenarioPlanner2023,
  title = {{{SLOPE Scenario Planner}} 2023 {{Data Sources}} \& {{Methodology}}},
  shorttitle = {{{NREL Scenario Planner}}},
  author = {Schleifer, Anna and Irish, Matt and Murphy, Caitlin},
  date = {2023-07},
  pages = {1--35},
  institution = {NREL},
  location = {Golden, CO},
  url = {https://gds-files.nrelcloud.org/auto-sync/slope/SLOPE-Scenario-Planner-Methodology-July2023.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-06-25},
  abstract = {The U.S. Department of Energy’s State and Local Planning for Energy (SLOPE) Platform, published by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), aims to empower data-driven state and local energy planning. This documentation explains SLOPE’s web-based map interface called the SLOPE Scenario Planner, which delivers energy system scenario data down to a county-level spatial resolution. The SLOPE Scenario Planner offers users the chance to compare how various energy strategies would influence energy consumption, associated carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, air pollutant (SO2 and NOx) emissions, and energy system costs out to 2050 at the county, state, and quasi-national (conterminous United States) levels. This document outlines the data that can be accessed via the SLOPE Scenario Planner, the sources of the data, and the methodologies used to create them.},
  langid = {english}
}

@online{SCOREOverview,
  title = {{{SCORE Overview}}},
  url = {https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/mpca.data.services/viz/SCOREOverview/1991-2021SCORE},
  urldate = {2024-01-19},
  abstract = {SCORE Overview},
  langid = {english},
  organization = {Tableau Public}
}

@report{scrcogImpact2045Climate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Impact 2045: {{A}} Climate Action and Equity Plan for {{New Haven County}}},
  author = {{SCRCOG}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--233},
  institution = {South Central Regional Council of Governments},
  location = {North Haven, CT},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/new-haven-milford-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {New Haven County’s Priority Climate Action Plan, Impact 2045, is led by Connecticut’s South Central Regional Council of Governments, with support from the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments. The Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) is a major federal program designed to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions through local actions in multiple metropolitan areas throughout the United States. The South Central Regional Council of Governments (SCRCOG) received a grant from this program to create a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) for the New Haven-Milford Metropolitan Statistical Area, which encompasses New Haven County, Connecticut. New Haven County is served by two Councils of Governments (COGs): SCRCOG, the lead agency on this project, and the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments (NVCOG). The success of this plan will require close collaboration between the two COGs, as well as agencies and municipalities throughout the region. This PCAP will serve as a resource for municipalities, COGs, and other entities seeking grant funding to implement near-term, high-impact mitigation strategies. It will be submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for review in March 2024 after public feedback has been incorporated. The Need for a Priority Climate Action Plan Climate change is caused by the emission of greenhouse gases (GHG) from human activities such as electricity production, transportation, residential heating and cooling, industrial processes, and landuse change. These gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, trap heat as it is reflected out of the Earth’s atmosphere in a process called the greenhouse effect (IPCC, 2022). While the existence of the process is natural, its acceleration due to human activities is the major driver behind rising atmospheric temperatures (2022). In turn, this affects sea levels, extreme weather events, precipitation and temperature trends, and ecological systems (2022). The mission of Impact 2045 is to create pathways to an equitable climate future and to improve the quality of life for all in New Haven County. Impacts of climate change: • Increased extreme weather events such as tropical cyclones • Extreme and irregular precipitation patterns • Droughts • Extreme heat days • Water, foodborne, and vector-borne illness • Ocean acidification • Biodiversity loss and altered ecosystems This plan has been created under the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program, authorized under the Inflation Reduction Act. It focuses on mitigation measures, although adaptation measures may appear as co-benefits. Human exposure to these impacts can lead to loss of life and property, damage to infrastructure, crop loss, and general decreases in human welfare, including physical and psychological harm (IPCC, 2023). Climate change may also impact economic and political stability in certain regions (2023), straining global systems and increasing the risk of conflict. Across all impacts, people may also suffer an increased risk of internal and external displacement, spurring migration to other areas not as impacted by climate change hazards.  6 | Impact 2045 While climate change exists on a global scale, the importance of reducing emissions at the municipal and regional level cannot be understated. This effort will require regions to work simultaneously to reduce emissions, as in the CRPG program, to achieve the reductions that are needed to curb global warming. Cities are at the center of climate action; they not only produce the most GHG emissions but are also home to the populations most impacted by climate change. The CPRG program equips cities and their surrounding dependent communities (i.e., Metropolitan Statistical Areas) with the ability to address this global issue by strategically planning for climate mitigation through a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). The PCAP provides a focused list of near-term, high-priority, implementation-ready measures to reduce climate pollution from GHG emissions. Additionally, the plan aims to provide 40\% of the benefits of these measures to low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs) under the Justice40 initiative. As required by the Environmental Protection Agency, this PCAP contains: • A GHG Inventory • Quantified GHG reduction measures • Low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDAC) benefits analysis • A review of authority to implement The PCAP also provides a further layer of analysis through scenario planning, uses an expanded definition of LIDACs to include more vulnerable communities, and includes a public engagement strategy for the forthcoming Comprehensive Climate Action Plan.},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@article{selhorstNetCarbonSequestration2013,
  title = {Net {{Carbon Sequestration Potential}} and {{Emissions}} in {{Home Lawn Turfgrasses}} of the {{United States}}},
  author = {Selhorst, Adam and Lal, Rattan},
  date = {2013-01},
  journaltitle = {Environmental Management},
  shortjournal = {Environmental Management},
  volume = {51},
  number = {1},
  pages = {198--208},
  issn = {0364-152X, 1432-1009},
  doi = {10.1007/s00267-012-9967-6},
  url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00267-012-9967-6},
  urldate = {2024-05-09},
  abstract = {Soil analyses were conducted on home lawns across diverse ecoregions of the U.S. to determine the soil organic carbon (SOC) sink capacity of turfgrass soils. Establishment of lawns sequestered SOC over time. Due to variations in ecoregions, sequestration rates varied among sites from 0.9 Mg carbon (C) ha-1 year-1 to 5.4 Mg C ha-1 year-1. Potential SOC sink capacity also varied among sites ranging from 20.8 ± 1.0–96.3 ± 6.0 Mg C ha-1. Average sequestration rate and sink capacity for all sites sampled were 2.8 ± 0.3 Mg C ha-1 year-1 and 45.8 ± 3.5 Mg C ha-1, respectively. Additionally, the hidden carbon costs (HCC) due to lawn mowing (189.7 kg Ce (carbon equivalent) ha-1 year-1) and fertilizer use (63.6 kg Ce ha-1 year-1) for all sites totaled 254.3 kg Ce ha-1 year-1. Considering home lawn SOC sink capacity and HCC, mean home lawn sequestration was completely negated 184 years post establishment. The potential SOC sink capacity of home lawns in the U.S. was estimated at 496.3 Tg C, with HCC of between 2,504.1 Gg Ce year-1 under low management regimes and 7551.4 Gg Ce year-1 under high management. This leads to a carbon-positive system for between 66 and 199 years in U.S. home lawns. More efficient and reduction of C-intensive maintenance practices could increase the overall sequestration longevity of home lawns and improve their climate change mitigation potential.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{semcogSoutheastMichiganHealthy2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Southeast {{Michigan Healthy Climate Plan}}: {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Detroit {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{SEMCOG}},
  date = {2024-02},
  pages = {1--122},
  institution = {Southeast Michigan Council of Governments},
  location = {Detroit, MI},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/detroit-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {The purpose of this Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is to prioritize measures that will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and enhance natural areas that capture climate pollution. Extensive stakeholder outreach, community engagement, and cross-sector coordination are integral to this goal and ensuring that these priority actions will benefit the region, with a focus on equity and environmental justice.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{sfrcccSoutheastFloridaPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Southeast {{Florida Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Southeast {{FL PCAP}}},
  author = {{SFRCCC}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--175},
  institution = {Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact},
  location = {Miami, FL},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/southeast-florida-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact (“Compact”), on behalf of Broward, Miami-Dade, Monroe and Palm Beach counties, is leading the development of a regional greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction plan, covering the entire geographic extent of the four-county region, as well as the Miccosukee and Seminole Tribal Governments. The plan will be developed in two phases, with an initial phase complete in March of 2024 and a final, comprehensive plan complete in the Summer of 2025. The opportunity to develop a first-of-its-kind regionally comprehensive GHG reduction plan has been made possible through the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program, funded by the Inflation Reduction Act. Through the CPRG, each of the 67 most populous metropolitan areas in the country was eligible for a \$1 million planning grant, inclusive of the Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). Given the long-term and considerable partnership across the four Compact counties, the Compact’s climate mitigation plan will cover the entire geographic scope of the Compact region, inclusive of Monroe County. The grant was officially awarded on August 4, 2023. The planning work advanced under this grant will position all local and tribal governments and other eligible entities as defined by the EPA in the four-county region to be eligible to apply directly for discretionary awards (\$4.6 billion in funding) from the EPA to implement the GHG reduction measures included within this PCAP. Miami-Dade County has served as the lead organization (grantee) on behalf of the Compact counties in managing and executing deliverables under this planning grant},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@article{shahfahadPredictionLandUse2022,
  title = {Prediction of Land Use Changes at a Metropolitan City Using Integrated Cellular Automata: Past and Future},
  shorttitle = {Prediction of Land Use Changes at a Metropolitan City Using Integrated Cellular Automata},
  author = {{Shahfahad} and Naikoo, Mohd Waseem and Das, Tanmoy and Talukdar, Swapan and Asgher, Md. Sarfaraz and {Asif} and Rahman, Atiqur},
  date = {2022},
  journaltitle = {Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes},
  volume = {0},
  number = {0},
  pages = {1--19},
  publisher = {Taylor \& Francis},
  issn = {null},
  doi = {10.1080/24749508.2022.2132010},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2022.2132010},
  urldate = {2024-04-05},
  abstract = {In the cities of developing countries like India, rapid and uncontrolled urbanization has been taking place due to continuous population growth in last few decades. As a result, land use/land cover (LU/LC) is changing very fast in the cities of developing countries. Therefore, this study aims to examine the changes in LU/LC pattern in Delhi during 1991–2018 and simulate the future LU/LC pattern of Delhi for 2030. The LU/LC pattern mapping was done from Landsat datasets using k-means clustering technique. The cellular automata (CA) technique was integrated with artificial neural network (ANN) for simulating the future LU/LC patterns. The projected LU/LC pattern shows that Delhi’s built-up area will increase to nearly 60\% of the total area of city, while cropland and open land will decrease to 19.86 and 0.15\%, respectively. The highest increase in built-up area was observed in the northern, western, and south-western sub-districts of Delhi. Outcomes of the study may be used for future land use planning in Delhi and other cities. In addition, they can also provide valuable insights for the development of transportation network and other facilities and amenities in the areas of future urban expansion.},
  keywords = {artificial neural network,cellular automata,delhi,Future urban expansion,land use change}
}

@report{shakopeemdewakantonsiouxcommunityPriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority Climate Action Plan: {{Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community}}},
  shorttitle = {Shakoppe {{Mdewakanton PCAP}}},
  author = {{Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community}},
  date = {2024},
  pages = {1--42},
  institution = {Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community},
  location = {Prior Lake, MN},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-04/shakopee-mdewakanton-sioux-community-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-05-24},
  abstract = {This Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) was developed by the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community (SMSC). The PCAP was created under the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program, authorized under the Inflation Reduction Act. Within the guidelines of this program, the SMSC has completed this PCAP to identify priority greenhouse gas reduction measures in preparation for implementation. This PCAP builds upon the SMSC’s existing Sustainability Plan that seeks to achieve carbon neutrality by 2035 and work toward a sustainable future that meets the needs of future generations. CPRG OVERVIEW The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) established the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants program within the Environmental Protection Agency. The program provides up to \$5 billion in grants over two distinct but related phases: 1. Planning grants: \$250 million was made available for states, U.S. territories, municipalities, air pollution control agencies, and tribes to develop plans that identify priority measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 2. Implementation grants: \$4.6 billion is available for competitive grants to eligible applicants to implement GHG reduction measures identified under a PCAP developed in the first phase of this program. Funding is available under a general competition and a tribes and territories competition. The CPRG implementation grants represent the largest investment in state, local, and tribal efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, prioritizing those most at risk from air pollution and the increasingly harmful impacts of climate change. As global warming accelerates and disrupts the Earth’s natural systems, communities across the country are facing more deadly wildfires, damaging storms, extreme drought, and water scarcity, among other impacts. Like many other areas of the country, Minnesota is experiencing the effects of a changing climate. Warmer winters disrupt ecosystems, allowing the establishment of invasive species. Poor air quality and more frequent heat waves threaten health and outdoor activities. These changes also threaten the traditional practices of SMSC Community Members, including the impact on the health of maple trees for tapping and rice fields for harvesting. The EPA is committed to its responsibility to protect human health and the environment. Accordingly, the CPRG implementation grant competitions are designed to enable states, municipalities, tribes, and territories to achieve the following goals: 1. Implement ambitious measures to achieve significant cumulative GHG reductions by 2030 and beyond; 2. Pursue measures that will achieve substantial community benefits, particularly in low-income and disadvantaged communities; 3. Complement other funding sources to maximize these GHG reductions and community benefits; and, 4. Pursue innovative policies and programs that are replicable and can be scaled up across multiple jurisdictions. SMSC chose to participate in the CPRG program because of the opportunities offered to 1) complete a more detailed assessment of priority actions to meet GHG reduction goals, and 2) to access available federal funding for the implementation of priority actions. This PCAP details the selected priority GHG reduction measures that the SMSC intends to implement in the near-term and how those measures will affect the Community’s climate goals.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{slcgreenGreaterSaltLake2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Greater {{Salt Lake Area Clean Energy}} and {{Air Roadmap}} ({{SL-CLEAR}})},
  shorttitle = {Salt {{Lake City PCAP}}},
  author = {{SLCgreen} and {Collaborative Climate} and {ICLEI}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--104},
  institution = {Salt Lake City},
  location = {Salt Lake City, UT},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/sl-clear-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The Salt Lake City metro area was provided a historic opportunity to create a regional climate plan and pursue project implementation funding through the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program led by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This regional effort, titled the Greater Salt Lake Clean Energy and Air Roadmap (SL-CLEAR), is led by the Salt Lake City Sustainability Department with input and support from local governments across Salt Lake County and Tooele County along with a diverse set of stakeholders across multiple sectors in the region. SL-CLEAR is a multi-part, multi-year effort with its first major milestone being the publication of a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) to highlight potential measures that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions while often cutting local air pollution and enhancing energy affordability for households, business, and other organizations. The team will build from PCAP development to encourage grant applications for CPRG Implementation Grants funding while also harnessing momentum to inform a more Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) that identifies regional solutions to reduce GHG emissions and improve local air quality. “SL-CLEAR is the first regional opportunity to holistically focus on climate solutions and deliver stakeholder-informed plans with ambitious goals for the SLC metro area.“ This PCAP includes numerous elements foundational to climate planning such as calculation of a regional GHG footprint, identification of implementation measures to mitigate GHG emissions, evaluate implications for Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities (LIDACs), review authority to implement solutions, and more. The PCAP should be viewed as a starting point for sustained collaboration across the Salt Lake City metro area on climate and clean air solutions that move our community forward and demonstrate leadership and innovation that can be replicated across the state and beyond. 1 SL-CLEAR Priority Climate Action Plan 1.1 Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Overview The EPA CPRG program was created to provide climate planning and implementation support to states, local governments, tribes, and territories in the U.S. The program encourages the development of ambitious plans that reduce GHG emissions and other harmful air pollution across all sectors while also advancing equitable outcomes within communities. Salt Lake City chose to participate in the program and lead development of a metro area climate plan addressing emissions across Salt Lake County and Tooele County. This endeavor is a multi-year effort that is informed by input from local governments and other key stakeholders and experts across the region. The CPRG program includes development of two significant plans, a PCAP and a CCAP, plus completion of a status report. Key elements of the CPRG deliverables are included in Figure 2 below. Figure 1 Walkable community space in Salt Lake City along 900 South (Image Source: Salt Lake City Corporation). 2 SL-CLEAR Priority Climate Action Plan Figure 2. Deliverable requirements from the EPA Program Guidance document (2023) for CPRG Planning Grants. There are four major milestone dates associated with the CPRG process. Three relate to the Planning Grant process and deliverables listed in Figure 2 above and there is also a CPRG Implementation Grants deadline for organizations seeking funding to implement solutions. All major milestone deadlines are summarized here: • March 1, 2024: Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) due to EPA • April 1, 2024: Applications for Implementation Grants due to EPA • August 4, 2025: Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) due to EPA o This August 2025 deadline is specific to the SL-CLEAR plan based on grant award. • August 3, 2027: Status report due to EPA o This August 2027 deadline is specific to the SL-CLEAR plan based on grant award. 3 SL-CLEAR Priority Climate Action Plan The Salt Lake City Sustainability Department will continue working with local governments and other stakeholders across the SLC MSA throughout this process to complete all planning requirements and encourage eligible entities to pursue funding opportunities to implement solutions.}
}

@report{spcSouthwesternPennsylvaniaRegional2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Southwestern {{Pennsylvania Regional Climate Pollution Reduction Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Pittsburgh {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{SPC}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--114},
  institution = {Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission},
  location = {Pittsburgh, PA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/epa-95318101-regional-priority-climate-action-plan-for-swpa.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-05},
  abstract = {The Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) is a pre-requisite for competing in the second phase of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program, which will provide competitively-awarded Implementation Grants (CPRG-IG) of \$4.6 billion for projects and programs that reduce climate pollution. To compete for implementation funding, a project needs to be associated with a quantified greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions-reduction measure in the PCAP. The PCAP also may include additional measures that will not be part of an implementation grant application. The Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC) comprises a 10-county region in Southwestern Pennsylvania. The Commission is the federally-certified Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Economic Development District (EDD), and Local Development District (LDD) for the region that is comprised of the counties of Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler, Fayette, Greene, Indiana, Lawrence, Washington, and Westmoreland, plus the City of Pittsburgh. Their mission is to help direct the use of funds allocated to the region by working closely with counties, municipalities, and townships to access funding and support their planning needs. The CPRG implementation grants build on \$250 million in planning funds that the EPA awarded to organizations across the country. Our organization received a \$1 million-dollar CPRG planning grant for the 8-county Pittsburgh Metropolitan Statistical Area, plus the adjacent counties of Greene and Indiana, to create a Regional Climate Pollution Reduction Plan. Our planning process is currently underway, and will cover the 10-county planning region within Southwestern Pennsylvania, including the City of Pittsburgh.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{srpeddProvidenceWarwickMetropolitanStatistical2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Providence-{{Warwick Metropolitan Statistical Area Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Providence {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{SRPEDD}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--44},
  institution = {{Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District}},
  location = {Taunton, MA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/providence-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-06},
  abstract = {The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) program was created through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 and aims to reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions, as well as other harmful pollutants, across the United States. The CPRG planning program is taking place in two primary phases, known as the Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), and the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP). This document, the PCAP, identifies GHG emission sectors and reduction actions that are implementation ready and will create significant reductions in GHG emissions shortterm. The CCAP, estimated to be released in Summer 2025, will expand upon the work of the PCAP, going into a more thorough analysis of what the impacts of implementation will be based on the PCAP identified GHG reduction actions. Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District (SRPEDD) is participating in this important work by leading the planning process for the ProvidenceWarwick Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The Providence-Warwick MSA covers the entire State of Rhode Island, as well as the 27 municipalities within Southeastern Massachusetts that are served by SRPEDD, as these communities share a high level of economic and social integration. To identify the needs of the Providence-Warwick MSA, SRPEDD worked alongside various volunteer municipal stakeholders and the public. In doing so, SRPEDD was able to identify 12 high priority, implementation ready, GHG reduction measures that not only reflect the needs of the community but will also create measurable reductions in annual GHG emissions if implemented.}
}

@report{st.croixelectriccooperative2021AnnualReport2022,
  title = {2021 {{Annual Report}}},
  shorttitle = {2021 {{Annual Report}} - {{April}} 2022},
  author = {St. Croix Electric Cooperative},
  date = {2022},
  url = {https://scecnet.net/elm-2022}
}

@online{statecartographersofficeWisconsinRoadData2021,
  title = {Wisconsin {{Road Data}}},
  author = {{State Cartographer's Office}},
  date = {2021-01-29},
  url = {https://www.sco.wisc.edu/data/roads/},
  urldate = {2024-01-06},
  abstract = {It is difficult to point to a single, "best" roads dataset for Wisconsin.~ While the Wisconsin DOT does maintain roads data, many GIS users who have statewide or regional needs opt to use data from the Open Street Map (OSM) project, or the U.S. Census Bureau. ~For local government roads, start with GeoData@Wisconsin.},
  langid = {american},
  organization = {University of Wisconsin-Madison}
}

@report{stateoflouisianaLouisianaPriorityClimate2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Louisiana {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Louisiana {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{State of Louisiana} and DeJong, Allison and Kane, Patrick and Tebyanian, Nastaran},
  date = {2023-12-20},
  pages = {1--253},
  location = {Baton Rouge, LA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/louisiana-5d-02f36401-0-pcap-final-with-appendices.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-01},
  abstract = {The State of Louisiana, along with the Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) of New Orleans and Baton Rouge, received funding through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) to develop plans to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollution. The CPRG planning grant enables states, MSAs, and tribal governments to develop a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), followed by a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan and Status Report, over a four-year period. EPA requires that all PCAPs include a Greenhouse Gas Inventory, quantifed GHG reduction measures, a Low Income/ Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) Benefts Analysis, as well as a review of authority to implement each measure. The Louisiana Priority Climate Action Plan presents a focused list of cross-sector measures to reduce GHG emissions and harmful air pollution and maximize the benefts of climate action in overburdened communities. Section One Sets the Stage and highlights background information, including a summary of the 2022 Louisiana Climate Action Plan which the Louisiana Priority Climate Action Plan builds on. Section Two focuses on the Process of development of the priority measures and elaborates on the outreach and engagement conducted to solicit input and feedback for the development of the focus areas and priority actions. Section Three contains the Priority Measures and provides information and details on the 13 focus areas, 29 priority outputs, and 89 priority actions, including quantifed GHG emission reductions and a review of authority to implement. Within each of the focus areas, a status update and transformative impact of the respective measures are provided. An intersection with federal funding overview where Louisiana has pursued and/or received funding through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and Infation Reduction Act (IRA) is also provided. Section Three concludes with the LIDAC Beneft Analysis. Section Four contains activities and plans as we look ahead to the next three years of the CPRG. The Louisiana Priority Climate Action Plan concludes with references, a glossary of terms, and appendices in sections fve, six, and seven respectively. The Louisiana Priority Climate Action Plan is a continuation of climate planning eforts commenced by the Climate Initiatives Task Force and serves as a resource and guide of implementing strategies and actions as part of the second phase of the CPRG and through eligible entities and beyond.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {State PCAP}
}

@report{stcroixvalleynaturalgascompanyElectricGasWater2022,
  title = {Electric, {{Gas}} or {{Water Annual Report}} to {{Public Service Commission}} of {{Wisconsin}} (2021)},
  author = {St Croix Valley Natural Gas Company},
  date = {2022},
  url = {https://apps.psc.wi.gov/PDFfiles/Annual%20Reports/IOU/IOU_2021_5230.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-01-24}
}

@article{stevensDoesCompactDevelopment2017,
  title = {Does {{Compact Development Make People Drive Less}}?},
  author = {Stevens, Mark R.},
  date = {2017-01-02},
  journaltitle = {Journal of the American Planning Association},
  volume = {83},
  number = {1},
  pages = {7--18},
  publisher = {Routledge},
  issn = {0194-4363},
  doi = {10.1080/01944363.2016.1240044},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2016.1240044},
  urldate = {2024-02-26},
  abstract = {Problem, research strategy, and findings: Planners commonly recommend compact development in part as a way of getting people to drive less, with the idea that less driving will lead to more sustainable communities. Planners base their recommendations on a substantial body of research that examines the impact of compact development on driving. Different studies, however, have found different outcomes: Some studies find that compact development causes people to drive less, while other studies do not. I use meta-regression analysis to a) explain why different studies on driving and compact development yield different results, and b) combine different findings from many studies into reliable statistics that can better inform planning practice. I address the following questions: Does compact development make people drive less, and if so, how much less? I find that compact development does make people drive less, because most of the compact development features I study have a statistically significant negative influence on driving. The impact, however, is fairly small: Compact development features do not appear to have much influence on driving. My findings are limited to some extent because they are derived from small sample sizes. Takeaway for practice: Planners should not rely on compact development as their only strategy for reducing driving unless their goals for reduced driving are very modest and can be achieved at a low cost.},
  keywords = {compact development,meta-regression analysis,publication bias,residential self-selection,vehicle miles traveled (VMT)}
}

@report{streetlightdataAllVehiclesTravel2024,
  type = {Industry},
  title = {All {{Vehicles}} Travel Modes},
  author = {{StreetLight Data}},
  date = {2024-01-26},
  url = {https://support.streetlightdata.com/hc/en-us/articles/360034538232-All-Vehicles-travel-modes},
  urldate = {2024-02-13},
  abstract = {Use All Vehicles to analyze the traffic of all vehicles on the road. Some analysis types let you choose between multiple types of All Vehicles travel modes. All Vehicles CVD+ primarily uses Connect...},
  langid = {american}
}

@report{streetlightdataStreetLightAllVehicles2023,
  type = {Industry},
  title = {{{StreetLight All Vehicles Volume Methodology}} and {{Validation White Paper}} - {{United States}}},
  shorttitle = {{{StreetLight All Vehicles Volume}}},
  author = {{StreetLight Data}},
  date = {2023-11},
  number = {November 2023},
  pages = {1--24},
  url = {https://support.streetlightdata.com/hc/article_attachments/20771176488091},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {StreetLight Data, Inc. (“StreetLight”) All Vehicles Volume provides a quick, easy, and costeffective way to measure average hourly or daily traffic at the yearly, monthly, or user-defined time period. StreetLight’s Volume estimates are available for any location, such as a road, park, Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ), or a user-defined area. It can also be used to estimate zone-tozone traffic, providing comprehensive estimates for projects such as intersection studies and travel demand modeling. StreetLight All Vehicles Volume metrics are available for both the U.S. and Canada. Over the years, StreetLight has provided Volume metrics estimated from both Location-Based Services (LBS) data and Connected Vehicle Data (CVD) sources. In July 2023, StreetLight updated its All Vehicles CVD+ Volume metric, leveraging Connected Vehicle Data (CVD), to take advantage of expanded validation data. All Vehicles CVD+ Volume metrics are available for data months starting with January 2022. For months prior to January 2022, we continue to offer All Vehicles LBS+ Volume. This most recent version of this white paper describes the methodology and validation for both CVD+ and LBS+ All Vehicles Volume metrics. This white paper provides technical detail about the methodology, algorithm development, validation, and data sources used in StreetLight’s All Vehicles Volume output for the U.S. This white paper was first published in October 2019 and is updated periodically to reflect the most recent methodology and validation.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{streetlightdataStreetLightDataSources2022,
  type = {Industry},
  title = {{{StreetLight Data Sources}} and {{Methodology Whitepaper}}},
  author = {{StreetLight Data}},
  date = {2022-12},
  number = {December 2022},
  pages = {1--11},
  url = {https://support.streetlightdata.com/hc/article_attachments/20493014027163},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {StreetLight Data, Inc. (“StreetLight”) pioneered the use of Big Data analytics to shed light on how people, goods, and services move, empowering smarter, data-driven transportation decisions. StreetLight's proprietary data processing engine, Route Science® algorithmically transforms its vast data resources to measure travel patterns of vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians, accessible as analytics on the StreetLight InSight® SaaS platform. StreetLight provides innovative digital solutions to help communities reduce congestion, improve safe and equitable transportation, and maximize the positive impact of infrastructure investment. This white paper describes the data sources and methodology employed by StreetLight to develop travel pattern Metrics. This document is relevant for all StreetLight InSight® Metrics, whether they are available via the StreetLight InSight® platform, data API, or custom delivery.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{streetlightdataStreetLightGHGEmissions2023,
  type = {Industry},
  title = {{{StreetLight GHG Emissions Methodology}} and {{Validation White Paper}}},
  author = {{StreetLight Data}},
  date = {2023-09},
  number = {1.0},
  pages = {1--20},
  url = {https://learn.streetlightdata.com/hubfs/White%20Papers/GHG%20Emissions%20Metrics/StreetLight%20GHG%20Emissions%20Methodology%20and%20Validation%20White%20Paper%20-%20September%202023.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {To develop accurate baseline emissions inventories and appropriate reduction strategies, transportation agencies need reliable data to accurately measure on-road greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions within their jurisdictions and track progress over time. StreetLight Data, Inc. (“StreetLight”) now offers GHG Emissions Metrics at both the area and segment levels. GHG Emissions Metrics are provided for different vehicle classes and different trip types. To create these metrics, StreetLight leverages its best-in-class Volume Metrics for both commercial and All Vehicle types, combined with data about local fleet composition and fuel economy. This technical document describes the data sources and methodology employed by StreetLight to develop our GHG Emissions Metrics, along with validation exercises that demonstrate the validity of StreetLight Metrics compared to reference datasets for two sample states.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{streetlightdataStreetLightIndex2023,
  type = {Industry},
  title = {{{StreetLight Index}}},
  author = {{StreetLight Data}},
  date = {2023-11-17},
  url = {https://support.streetlightdata.com/hc/en-us/articles/360018552772-StreetLight-Index},
  urldate = {2024-01-06},
  abstract = {The StreetLight Trip Index is one of our output types, and represents a relative volume of trip activity but is not an estimated count of trips or vehicles. Our normalization process differs slight...},
  langid = {american}
}

@report{streetlightdataStreetLightTruckVolume2022,
  type = {Industry},
  title = {{{StreetLight Truck Volume Methodology}} and {{Validation}}},
  shorttitle = {{{StreetLight Truck Volume}}},
  author = {{StreetLight Data}},
  date = {2022-09},
  number = {September 2022},
  pages = {1--23},
  url = {https://support.streetlightdata.com/hc/article_attachments/20493302319515},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {Transportation professionals rely on commercial vehicle volume metrics for a wide range of projects, including pavement and bridge design and management, roadway capacity planning, environmental impact analysis, and infrastructure investment decisions. Traditional data collection methods, such as permanent and temporary traffic counters, can be expensive and challenging, have coverage limitations, and often have data quality issues. StreetLight Data, Inc. (“StreetLight”) has developed Truck Volume Metrics for the U.S. that provide average daily traffic estimates for all roads. This white paper summarizes the methodology and presents validation results for StreetLight’s Truck Volume Metrics, as developed for the years 2019 to 2021. This document is updated regularly, so please check our website or reach out to your StreetLight contact to ensure you have the most up-to-date version of this document.}
}

@report{streetlightdataTruckTravelMode2023,
  type = {Industry},
  title = {Truck Travel Mode},
  author = {{StreetLight Data}},
  date = {2023-11-17},
  url = {https://support.streetlightdata.com/hc/en-us/articles/8358369620507-Truck-travel-mode},
  urldate = {2024-01-10},
  abstract = {Use the Truck mode of travel to understand the movement of medium- and heavy-duty trucks. This mode of travel is available for Advanced Analytics subscription levels and above. StreetLight Metrics ...},
  langid = {american}
}

@report{streetlightdataWhatSingleFactor2023,
  type = {Industry},
  title = {What Is Single Factor Calibration?},
  author = {{StreetLight Data}},
  date = {2023-11-17},
  url = {https://support.streetlightdata.com/hc/en-us/articles/360019181272-What-is-single-factor-calibration-},
  urldate = {2024-01-06},
  abstract = {This series of articles is about getting estimated trip counts for different travel modes using calibration. To calibrate in StreetLight Insight® you must choose the Single Factor Calibrated Index ...},
  langid = {american}
}

@article{sudmantandrewAnalysisNetZeroCarbona,
  title = {An {{Analysis}} of {{Net-Zero Carbon Options}} for the {{Belfast Region}}},
  author = {{Sudmant, Andrew} and {Gouldson, Andy} and {Higgins-Lavery, Ruaidhri}},
  doi = {10.5281/zenodo.8075492},
  url = {https://zenodo.org/records/8075492},
  urldate = {2023-12-06},
  abstract = {A technical and economic assessment of more than 750 measures that could be taken to reduce GHG emissions from the Belfast economy.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{swprcMetropolitanMilwaukeePriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Metropolitan {{Milwaukee Priority Pollution Reduction Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Milwaukee {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{SWPRC}},
  date = {2024-02},
  number = {CAPR 349},
  pages = {1--60},
  institution = {Southewastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission},
  location = {Waukesha, WI},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/metropolitan-milwaukee-priority-pollution-reduction-action-plan-report.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Program Overview The action plan is the first deliverable prepared with funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant planning program. The plan encompasses the four-county Milwaukee Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), comprised of Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Washington, and Waukesha Counties. Future deliverables include a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan by June 2025, and a Status Report due by May 2027. The purpose of this action plan is to identify baseline greenhouse (GHG) emissions, identify priority strategies to reduce these emissions, quantify the emissions benefits of the priority strategies, analyze impacts to low-income and disadvantaged communities, and summarize stakeholder engagement. Approach to Developing the Priority Pollution Reduction Action Plan The foundational document for this action plan is the Milwaukee Climate and Equity Plan, adopted on June 23, 2023, which provides the vision for climate action in Milwaukee.1  The plan has two primary objectives: 1) establishing a joint City-County goal of a 45 percent reduction of county-wide GHG emissions by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2050, and 2) improving racial and economic equity by creating green jobs that pay a minimum of \$40,000 per year and focusing recruitment on people of color. The plan is the direct outgrowth of over three years of public discussions and planning through the City-County Taskforce on Climate and Economic Equity. Community members played an important role in developing Milwaukee’s Climate and Equity Plan and work continues to amplify the voices of residents. The Milwaukee Climate and Equity Plan outlines 10 Big Ideas for Action with strategies that can be achieved in collaboration among government agencies, business, community-based organizations, and numerous other partners. The opportunity provided through the Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program continues to foster and expand these partnerships to pursue transformative change that results in significant GHG reductions, equitable development, and improved public health. This action plan encompasses the robust public engagement effort conducted as part of the Milwaukee Climate and Equity Plan. Contributing agencies to the Priority Pollution Reduction Action Plan include the four counties in the Milwaukee MSA and those communities that have signed a letter of support for the grant (see Map 1). • City of Wauwatosa • City of West Allis • Village of Bayside • Village of Shorewood • Village of Whitefish Bay • Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District • Office of Sustainability and Clean Energy • Milwaukee County • Ozaukee County • Washington County • Waukesha County • City of Milwaukee • City of Mequon • City of Muskego • City of Waukesha Multiple meetings were held with coordinating workgroup members to discuss the planning process, identify priority measures, and share draft materials. A survey was conducted in December 2023 to gather information on each communities’ levels of interest in potential priority measures. A meeting was also held that provided an opportunity for all municipalities within the Milwaukee MSA to learn about the grant and become engaged in the planning process.1 In addition to the municipalities supporting the planning effort, state and regional partnerships contributed to the plan and assisted the team with identifying GHG inventory data, connections with statewide organizations, and priority strategies. Specifically, these partners included the University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee, the Waukesha County Green Team, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and the Wisconsin Local Government Climate Coalition.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{tbrpcCleanAirTampa2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Clean {{Air Tampa Bay}}: {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Tampa {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{TBRPC}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--103},
  institution = {Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council},
  location = {Tampa, FL},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/tampastpeteclw-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 provided tools to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution through programs such as the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) Program. With funding from the IRA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) coordinated the development and implementation of climate action plans to reduce GHGs for states, U.S. territories, municipalities, air pollution control agencies, tribes, and other regional organizations. CPRG is a dual-phase program: • Phase One o Planning Phase: \$1 million was provided to the 67 most populous MSAs to develop climate action plans to reduce GHGs. o A 4-year grant period • Phase Two o Implementation Phase: \$4.3 billion for grants to implement GHG reduction measures developed through the phase one planning grants. o A 5-year grant period Through Phase One, the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council (TBRPC) received the \$1 million planning grant funding from the EPA to lead the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater MSA developed of a climate action plan. By participating in Phase One, the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) jurisdictions, municipal agencies, departments, other municipal government offices, council of governments, metropolitan planning commissions, or other regional organizations comprised of multiple municipalities are eligible to apply for grant funding through Phase Two. The Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater MSA Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) analyzed high-priority, implementation ready projects in the largest GHG sectors in the MSA. The analysis showed that the energy and transportation and mobile combustion sectors as the largest emitters with 45.3\% from the energy sector and 43.2\% from the transportation sector. Jurisdictions and agency partners prioritized near-term, implementation ready projects in all sectors, but there was a large focus on the energy and transportation sectors. Projects that were identified were solar installation, deep energy efficiency retrofits, extend public, and converting on-road vehicles to electric vehicles. Using the identified projects in those sectors, a benefits and reduction measures analysis was completed. With a medium population growth in the MSA, implementing the prioritized projects in the energy and transportation sector is projected to decrease in GHG by 2.14\% by 2030 and 51\% by 2050. These projects could be focused on areas in the low-income and disadvantaged communities (LIDAC) that were identified, and engage with community stakeholders to establish community needs. Moving into the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP), these areas will be expanded on to develop a robust plan that sets actionable goals and measures to help create a more resilient future.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@report{tdecTennesseeVolunteerEmission2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Tennessee {{Volunteer Emission Reduction Strategy}} ({{TVERS}})},
  shorttitle = {Tennessee {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{TDEC}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--152},
  institution = {Tennessee Department of Environment \& Conservation},
  location = {Nashville, TN},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/tn-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {The Tennessee Volunteer Emission Reduction Strategy (TVERS) is a collaborative emissions reduction plan developed by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) with partners statewide. The intent of this plan is to support investment in programs and strategies that reduce pollutant emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all Tennesseans. This plan is built so future generations can enjoy the economic prosperity and abundant natural resources, including our clean air, that we enjoy today. It highlights and honors our natural heritage while providing pathways to economic growth. TVERS is funded through the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program, which was established in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA). The CPRG program is providing \$5 billion in grants to states, local governments, tribes, and territories to develop and implement plans for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollutants. EPA has organized the program into two phases: Phase 1 provides \$250 million in noncompetitive planning grants and Phase 2 provides \$4.6 billion for competitive implementation grants (\$4.3 billion available to states and municipalities, and \$300 million available to tribes and territories) for eligible entities to implement measures identified in a plan. The first deliverable in the planning phase of the CPRG is a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP). The PCAP is focused on a simplified GHG Inventory and near-term, high-priority, implementation-ready measures. The measures contained herein should be construed as broadly applicable to any entity in the state eligible for receiving funding under the CPRG implementation grants and other funding streams. This plan serves as the basis and requirement to position Tennessee for additional federal funding for programs that will benefit Tennessee communities and Tennesseans statewide. This plan includes the following required elements, established in the CPRG guidelines: • GHG Emissions Inventory, • Priority Measures and Reduction Estimates, • Benefits Analysis, 10 • Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) Benefits Analysis, • Review of Authority to Implement, • Intersection with Other Funding Availability, and • Coordination and Engagement. TDEC contracted with Civil \& Environmental Consultants, Inc. (CEC) and Ernst \& Young (EY) to complete the required technical sections of the PCAP, specifically the GHG Emissions Inventory (TN PCAP Inventory or Inventory), priority measures and reduction estimates, and benefits analyses. TDEC, CEC, and EY represent the Project Team for the PCAP. In selecting priority measures for inclusion in the PCAP, TDEC focused on voluntary or incentive-based activities that resulted in significant GHG emissions reductions. The development of the PCAP involved extensive coordination with Tennessee (TN) citizens, other state agencies, local governments, nonprofits, utilities, industries, and other diverse stakeholders. TDEC coordinated with the three metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) in Tennessee that received CPRG planning grants: Knoxville, Memphis, and Nashville. The resulting plan is meant to encompass and represent the entirety of the state and allow for state, regional, and local adaptations regarding projects and programs that can reduce emissions and benefit all Tennesseans. TDEC utilized data handling procedures to condense meaningful information into an accessible format for a broad audience in the PCAP. For each table and figure, data were carefully truncated/rounded to accurately represent data estimates and trends while avoiding extraneous details. Data rounding was dependent on the magnitude and type of data being presented and varied across data sets. Certain data sets were truncated to two decimal places, while others were not. These differences in data presentation occasionally resulted in minor discrepancies when comparing data across various tables and figures. The Project Team will explore a standard method of data rounding for the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP). Next Steps The PCAP is the first deliverable in EPA’s CPRG program. In Summer 2025, TDEC will submit the next deliverable to EPA: a CCAP. The CCAP will touch on all significant GHG sources/sinks and sectors present in Tennessee, establish near-term and long-term GHG emissions reduction goals, and provide strategies and identify measures to achieve those goals. TDEC intends to build upon the foundation established in the PCAP in developing the  11 CCAP. This includes further refining the TN PCAP Inventory to understand county-level emissions, broadening measures to achieve the state’s GHG emissions reduction goals and continuing comprehensive coordination and engagement.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {State PCAP}
}

@report{texascommissiononenvironmentalqualityClimatePollutionReduction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Climate {{Pollution Reduction Grants Program Priority Climate Action Plan}} for the {{State}} of {{Texas}}},
  shorttitle = {Texas {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Texas Commission on Environmental Quality}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--110},
  institution = {Texas Commission on Environmental Quality},
  location = {Austin, TX},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/texas-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {This Priority Action Plan (PAP) was developed by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grants (CPRG) Phase I Planning Grant. Texas is highly committed to improving air quality and places a priority on reducing pollutants that have a direct health impact to Texans. Priority measures were identified by TCEQ with extensive input from a variety of stakeholders. This PAP focuses on incentivized, voluntary measures with co-pollutant benefits from the three largest greenhouse gas (GHG) emitting sectors in Texas: industry, transportation, and electric power. Those three sectors emit almost 90\% of the GHG emissions in Texas. Measures included in this plan are voluntary actions that are available statewide for implementation by eligible entities. TCEQ is the primary implementing agency for these measures. Estimates show that implementation of these measures could reduce GHG emissions in Texas by 174 million metric tons (MMT) from 2025 through 2030 and 592 MMT from 2025 through 2050. Co-pollutants could also be reduced by 0.6 MMT from 2025 through 2030 and 3.0 MMT from 2025 through 2050. Measures by sectors are summarized below. Industry Measures: • Electrify industrial process equipment or modify to produce or use hydrogen; • Promote energy efficiency; • Decarbonize cement; • Promote the improvement/expansion of carbon capture; • Replace hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) with ultra-low global warming potential (GWP) refrigeration equipment; • Replace pneumatic controllers, motors, and pumps, add surveillance, add monitoring, and remove redundant equipment to reduce fugitive emissions from oil and gas activities; • Reduce flaring and capture methane from oil and gas activities; and • Remediate and/or plug low producing and abandoned wells. Transportation Measures: • Decarbonize sea and inland ports and associated support equipment; • Add infrastructure for electric vehicle (EV) charging and hydrogen fueling; • Expand programs for zero emissions medium- and heavy-duty trucks; • Incentivize school bus replacement with zero emission school busses; • Expand rebate programs for light-duty zero emission vehicles; • Create a medium- and heavy-duty third party scrappage program; • Replace government fleets with zero emission vehicles; • Decarbonize airports with lower emission support equipment and vehicles, and use of low emission jet fuels; and • Promote low emission passenger or freight locomotives. Electric Power Industry Measures: • Upgrade transmission lines to improve capacity; ES-2 • Promote nuclear energy with molten salt reactors and modular reactors and promote geothermal energy by using oil and gas infrastructure; • Add grid scale renewable energy storage; • Lower demand with load shifting, load management, and energy efficiency; and • Add infrastructure to capture, use, and store carbon from both power plants and industrial processes. Other Measures: • Create biofuels through methane capture from landfills and wastewater treatment plants, or by using surplus biomass; • Combine solar arrays with biogas at closed landfills and add solar to commercial and residential buildings; • Switch to electric heat pumps; • Increase energy efficiency and weatherization in homes and commercial buildings; • Support projects to increase recycling, reduce waste, increase composting, and add recycling infrastructure; • Promote sustainable agriculture practices to reduce emissions and restoration of coastal landscapes to sequester carbon; and • Reforest agriculture lands no longer in use, promote efficient pumps and irrigation systems in agriculture, and increase urban tree canopy. These measures will provide cleaner air, improve health, improve quality of life, reduce heat risk, create jobs, mitigate extreme weather risks, and increase community engagement for all Texans including those in low income and disadvantaged communities (LIDACs). Texas will continue to seek input from both these communities and other stakeholders as more comprehensive plans are developed.}
}

@report{traceElasticityHandbookElasticities1999a,
  title = {Elasticity {{Handbook}}: {{Elasticities}} for {{Prototypical Contexts}}, {{TRACE}}; {{Costs Of Private Road Travel And Their Effects On Demand}}, {{Including Short And Long Term Elasticities}}},
  author = {{TRACE}},
  year = {1999 30 june},
  pages = {1--70},
  url = {https://trimis.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/project/documents/trace.pdf},
  abstract = {TRACE is a comprehensive research programme, carried out by a consortium of European consultants and Universities (ARPA from Italy, Hague Consulting Group from the Netherlands, Heusch/Boesefeldt from Germany, Stratec from Belgium and the University of Cergy-Pontoise from France), which started in January 1998 with the financial support of the European Commission (DGVII).},
  langid = {english}
}

@article{trammellUrbanSoilCarbon2020,
  title = {Urban Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Converge at a Continental Scale},
  author = {Trammell, Tara L. E. and Pataki, Diane E. and Pouyat, Richard V. and Groffman, Peter M. and Rosier, Carl and Bettez, Neil and Cavender‐Bares, Jeannine and Grove, Morgan J. and Hall, Sharon J. and Heffernan, James and Hobbie, Sarah E. and Morse, Jennifer L. and Neill, Christopher and Steele, Meredith},
  date = {2020-05},
  journaltitle = {Ecological Monographs},
  shortjournal = {Ecological Monographs},
  volume = {90},
  number = {2},
  pages = {e01401},
  issn = {0012-9615, 1557-7015},
  doi = {10.1002/ecm.1401},
  url = {https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecm.1401},
  urldate = {2024-05-09},
  abstract = {In urban areas, anthropogenic drivers of ecosystem structure and function are thought to predominate over larger-scale biophysical drivers. Residential yards are influenced by individual homeowner preferences and actions, and these factors are hypothesized to converge yard structure across broad scales. We examined soil total C and total d13C, organic C and organic d13C, total N, and d15N in residential yards and corresponding reference ecosystems in six cities across the United States that span major climates and ecological biomes (Baltimore, Maryland; Boston, Massachusetts; Los Angeles, California; Miami, Florida; Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota; and Phoenix, Arizona). Across the cities, we found soil C and N concentrations and soil d15N were less variable in residential yards compared to reference sites supporting the hypothesis that soil C, N, and d15N converge across these cities. Increases in organic soil C, soil N, and soil d15N across urban, suburban, and rural residential yards in several cities supported the hypothesis that soils responded similarly to altered resource inputs across cities, contributing to convergence of soil C and N in yards compared to natural systems. Soil C and N dynamics in residential yards showed evidence of increasing C and N inputs to urban soils or dampened decomposition rates over time that are influenced by climate and/or housing age across the cities. In the warmest cities (Los Angeles, Miami, Phoenix), greater organic soil C and higher soil d13C in yards compared to reference sites reflected the greater proportion of C4 plants in these yards. In the two warm arid cities (Los Angeles, Phoenix), total soil d13C increased and organic soil d13C decreased with increasing home age indicating greater inorganic C in the yards around newer homes. In general, soil organic C and d13C, soil N, and soil d15N increased with increasing home age suggesting increased soil C and N cycling rates and associated 12C and 14N losses over time control yard soil C and N dynamics. This study provides evidence that conversion of native reference ecosystems to residential areas results in convergence of soil C and N at a continental scale. The mechanisms underlying these effects are complex and vary spatially and temporally.},
  langid = {english}
}

@article{tulbureRegionalMattersUsefulness2022,
  title = {Regional Matters: {{On}} the Usefulness of Regional Land-Cover Datasets in Times of Global Change},
  shorttitle = {Regional Matters},
  author = {Tulbure, Mirela G. and Hostert, Patrick and Kuemmerle, Tobias and Broich, Mark},
  date = {2022},
  journaltitle = {Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation},
  volume = {8},
  number = {3},
  pages = {272--283},
  issn = {2056-3485},
  doi = {10.1002/rse2.248},
  url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/rse2.248},
  urldate = {2024-04-05},
  abstract = {Unprecedented amounts of analysis-ready Earth Observation (EO) data, combined with increasing computational power and new algorithms, offer novel opportunities for analysing ecosystem dynamics across large geographic extents, and to support conservation planning and action. Much research effort has gone into developing global EO-based land-cover and land-use datasets, including tree cover, crop types, and surface water dynamics. Yet there are inherent trade-offs between regional and global EO products pertaining to class legends, availability of training/validation data, and accuracy. Acknowledging and understanding these trade-offs is paramount for both developing EO products and for answering science questions relevant for ecology or conservation studies based on these data. Here we provide context on the development of global EO-based land-cover and land-use datasets, and outline advantages and disadvantages of both regional and global datasets. We argue that both types of EO-derived land-cover datasets can be preferable, with regional data providing the context-specificity that is often required for policy making and implementation (e.g., land-use and management, conservation planning, payment schemes for ecosystem services), making use of regional knowledge, particularly important when moving from land cover to actors. Ensuring that global and regional land-cover and land-use products derived based on EO data are compatible and nested, both in terms of class legends and accuracy assessment, should be a key consideration when developing such data. Open access high-quality training and validation data derived as part of such efforts are of utmost importance. Likewise, global efforts to generate sets of essential variables for climate change, biodiversity, or eventually land use, which often require land-cover maps as inputs, should consider regionalized, hierarchical approaches to not sacrifice regional context. Global change impacts manifest in regions, and so must the policy and planning responses to these challenges. EO data should embrace that regions matter, perhaps more than ever, in an age of global data availability and processing.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {earth observation,earth observation-based datasets,global change,land-use datasets,regional studies,satellite data archives}
}

@online{u.s.energyinformationadministrationHowMuchElectricity2023,
  title = {How Much Electricity Is Lost in Electricity Transmission and Distribution in the {{United States}}?},
  author = {U.S. Energy Information Administration},
  date = {2023},
  url = {https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=105},
  urldate = {2024-01-31},
  organization = {Frequently Asked Questions}
}

@online{u.s.energyinformationadministrationWhatAreCcf2023,
  title = {What Are {{Ccf}}, {{Mcf}}, {{Btu}}, and Therms?},
  author = {U.S. Energy Information Administration},
  date = {2023},
  url = {https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=45&t=8},
  urldate = {2024-01-24},
  organization = {Frequently Asked Questions}
}

@report{ubriOneRegionClimate2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {One {{Region}} for {{Climate Action}}: {{Buffalo Niagara}}’s {{Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Buffalo {{NY PCAP}}},
  author = {{UBRI} and {State University of New York at Buffalo, School of Architecture and Planning}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--72},
  institution = {University at Buffalo Regional Institute},
  location = {Buffalo, NY},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/buffalo-ny-msa-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {The Buffalo-Niagara Falls Metropolitan Statistical Area (Buffalo Niagara) is a region of 64 municipalities across 2 counties (Erie and Niagara) on the western edge of New York State. Situated on the border with Ontario, Canada, the region lies at the confluence of two Great Lakes and is home to Niagara Falls, one of the wonders of the natural world and the source for New York’s biggest clean energy producer. Home to \textasciitilde 1.2 million residents, Buffalo Niagara has two central cities: the City of Buffalo (New York’s second largest urban area) and the City of Niagara Falls. Surrounding are a collection of towns, villages, and small cities, each with their own unique characteristics and local identities. Collectively, the region continues to find new ways to work together to address the big challenges of the 21st century, including addressing climate change and a transforming energy economy},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Regional PCAP}
}

@article{UseEPAEmission,
  title = {Use of {{EPA}}’s {{Emission Factors Hub}}’s {{Waste Emission Factors}} vs. the {{Waste Reduction Model}} ({{WARM}}): {{Guidance}} for {{Organizations}}},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{useia2020ResidentialEnergy2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {2020 {{Residential Energy Consumption Survey}}: {{Consumption}} and {{Expenditures Technical Documentation Summary}}},
  shorttitle = {{{EIA RECS}}},
  author = {{US EIA}},
  date = {2023-06},
  pages = {1--44},
  institution = {U.S. Department of Energy},
  location = {Washington, DC 20585},
  url = {https://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2020/pdf/2020%20RECS%20CE%20Methodology_Final.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-01-31},
  abstract = {We conduct the Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) periodically to provide detailed information about energy usage in U.S. homes. RECS is a multiyear project consisting of a household survey, data collection from household energy suppliers, and end-use consumption and expenditures estimation. The 2020 RECS, the 15th iteration of the study, was the largest in program history, with 18,496 household survey respondents. The Household Survey (HS), a voluntary survey, collects data on energy-related characteristics and usage patterns from a representative sample of homes that are occupied as a primary residence. We selected the sample to provide statistically reliable energy-use estimates at the national, regional, division, and state levels. The Energy Supplier Survey (ESS), a mandatory survey, collects data from energy suppliers on how much site electricity, natural gas, propane, and fuel oil were consumed in the sampled homes during the reference year. The ESS also collects data on actual dollar amounts spent on these energy sources. We use models (energy engineering-based models in the 2015 and 2020 survey) to produce consumption and expenditures estimates for heating, cooling, refrigeration, and other end uses in all homes occupied as a primary residence in the United States using the data collected from the HS and ESS. Wood-use estimates are also included as part of RECS. The scope and purpose of RECS differ slightly from similar EIA products that report residential energy data. For RECS, we sample homes occupied as a primary residence, which excludes secondary homes, vacant homes, military barracks, and common areas in apartment buildings. As a result, RECS estimates are not comparable with sector-level totals defined in other EIA products. They are best suited for comparison across different characteristics of homes within the residential sector. These RECS estimates represent the site energy consumption for occupied, primary homes, which excludes accounting for losses in generation and transmission of electricity. This document provides methodological descriptions for three parts of the overall RECS process: • Energy Supplier Survey (ESS), which provides details on billing data collection, coverage rates, response rates, and billing data editing and quality • Consumption and Expenditures Annualization and Imputation, which provides details on the consumption and expenditures estimation for calendar year 2020 using the ESS billing and delivery data • End-use Estimation Modeling and Calibration, which provides details on the consumption estimation of household end uses and method changes from previous years The methodology for the RECS Household Survey and household energy-related characteristics, including sampling and weighting, is provided in a separate document called Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) 2020 Household Characteristics Technical Documentation Summary. We collaborated with Leidos and Westat to conduct the RECS ESS.},
  langid = {english}
}

@online{useiaGuideEIAElectric2018,
  title = {A {{Guide}} to {{EIA Electric Power Data}}},
  author = {US EIA},
  date = {2018},
  url = {https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/guide/},
  urldate = {2024-02-15}
}

@report{usepa2020NationalEmissions2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {2020 {{National Emissions Inventory Technical Support Document}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-03},
  number = {EPA-454/R-23-001a},
  location = {Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2020-national-emissions-inventory-nei-technical-support-document-tsd},
  urldate = {2024-01-25},
  langid = {english}
}

@standard{usepa40CFRPart2018,
  title = {40 {{CFR Part}} 98 {{Subpart A}} “{{Global}} Warming Potential or {{GWP}}”},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2018-01-01},
  number = {40 CFR Part 98 Subpart A},
  url = {https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-98/subpart-A?toc=1},
  urldate = {2023-12-08}
}

@standard{usepa40CFRPart2023,
  title = {40 {{CFR Part}} 98 {{Fuel}} Heating Values and {{CO2}} Emission Factors},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-06-05},
  number = {40 CFR Part 98},
  url = {https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-98},
  urldate = {2023-12-08}
}

@dataset{usepaEGRIDEmissionsGeneration2021,
  title = {{{eGRID}} ({{Emissions}} \& {{Generation Resource Integrated Database}}) 2021 {{Summary Data}}},
  author = {USEPA},
  date = {2021},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/egrid/summary-data},
  urldate = {2024-01-24}
}

@dataset{usepaEmissionsFactorsGreenhouse2021,
  title = {Emissions {{Factors}} for {{Greenhouse Gas Inventories}}},
  author = {USEPA},
  date = {2021},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-04/emission-factors_sept2021.pdf}
}

@online{usepaEPACenterCorporate2024,
  type = {Data and Tools},
  title = {{{EPA Center}} for {{Corporate Climate Leadership}}: {{Target Setting}}},
  author = {US EPA, OAR},
  date = {2024-03-08},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/target-setting},
  urldate = {2024-06-26},
  abstract = {EPA provides tools and recognition for companies setting aggressive GHG reduction goals, which can galvanize reduction efforts at a company and often leads to the identification of many additional reduction opportunities.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{usepaFactSheetAreas2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Fact {{Sheet}}: {{Areas}} Where Differences between State {{GHG}} Inventories and the {{EPA}}’s {{Inventory}} of {{U}}.{{S}}. {{GHG Emissions}} and {{Sinks}} by {{State}}: 1990-2020 Estimates May Occur},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-08},
  pages = {1--2},
  institution = {EPA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-03/fact-sheet-differences-epa-and-offical-state-ghgi.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {The EPA recognizes that there will be differences between the EPA’s state-level estimates and some inventory estimates developed independently by individual state governments. Inventories compiled by states may differ for several reasons and differences do not necessarily mean that one set of estimates is more accurate, or "correct”. The EPA has strived to ensure that the coverage, methodological and accounting approaches are clearly described so that users can clearly understand differences with how states may compile their inventories. The results should be viewed as complementary and supplement existing state data. • Organization of sectors. The EPA has organized estimates by sector and their respective source and sink categories consistent with the national Inventory and international reporting guidelines1 . Standardization of sectors in international reporting promotes comparability across countries and supports cooperation on climate action. States may use alternate organization of data, such as economic sectors, for presenting emissions rather than IPCC sectors. Some states may use IPCC sectors as the basis of their inventory, but allocate some categories differently across sectors, such as reporting some Industrial Process and Product Use categories in the Energy sector (e.g., SF6 from electrical transmission and distribution). Comparability also depends on similar coverage. The completeness and geographic disaggregation of the report are consistent with the national Inventory, meaning in addition to estimates for states, the methods also address emissions and removals occurring in the District of Columbia, U.S. territories, and tribal lands. • Methods and data. In some cases, the EPA may be using different methodologies, activity data, and emission factors, or may have access to the latest facility-level information through the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP). The EPA used as a basis, or starting point, the same methods or methods based on those used to compile the national-level estimates. States may use the same methods but use different sources of activity data. • Accounting approaches. In other cases, states may have adopted different accounting decisions that differ from those adopted by the IPCC and UNFCCC, (e.g., use of different category definitions and emission scopes consistent with state laws and regulations). For example, the EPA’s approach is to focus on emissions that occur within geographic state boundaries (“Scope 1”), whereas some states include emissions that are caused by activity within their borders but which actually occur in other states (“Scope 2 or 3”) or use consumption-based accounting approaches. For example, some states include emissions from imported electricity, or electricity production that occurs outside state boundaries. EPA’s use of geographic state boundaries to allocate emissions is consistent with IPCC guidelines.2 Differences in accounting approaches also include differences in the approach to estimating transportation, crossborder aviation and marine emissions, or treatment of biogenic CO2. For example, the EPA does not include biogenic CO2 emissions in state energy sector totals because, in accordance with IPCC},
  langid = {english}
}

@dataset{usepaGHGEmissionFactors2021,
  title = {{{GHG Emission Factors Hub}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2021-09},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-04/emission-factors_sept2021.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-01-31},
  abstract = {EPA's GHG Emission Factors Hub was designed to provide organizations with a regularly updated and easy-to-use set of default emission factors for organizational greenhouse gas reporting. Key sources for emission factors include: EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program EPA's Emissions \& Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID) Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks EPA's Waste Reduction Model (WARM) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) The most recent version of the Emission Factors Hub (March 2023) includes updates to emission factors for purchased electricity from eGRID, mobile combustion, upstream and downstream transportation, business travel, product transport, and employee commuting. Download the latest version of the Emission Factors Hub as well as previous versions in the table below. Guidance on the use of EPA's Emission Factors Hub's waste emission factors versus the Waste Reduction Model (WARM) is also available.},
  version = {2021}
}

@online{usepaGHGReportingProgram23,
  type = {Overviews and Factsheets},
  title = {{{GHG Reporting Program Facility-level Local Information}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {0023-10-05},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/data-sets},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {GHG Reporting Program Data Sets},
  langid = {english}
}

@dataset{usepaGHGReportingProgram23a,
  type = {Dashboard},
  title = {{{GHG Reporting Program Facility-level Information}} on Greenhouse Gases Tool ({{FLIGHT}})},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {0023-08-18},
  url = {https://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/main.do},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {FLIGHT provides information about greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from large facilities in the U.S. These facilities are required to report annual data about GHG emissions to EPA as part of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP). Take a tour of what you can find in FLIGHT, or use one of the view options at the right to get started.}
}

@online{usepaHeatIslandEffect2014,
  type = {Collections and Lists},
  title = {Heat {{Island Effect}}},
  author = {US EPA, OAR},
  date = {2014-02-28T11:04:46-05:00},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/heatislands},
  urldate = {2024-02-26},
  abstract = {EPA's Heat Island Effect Site provides information on heat islands, their impacts, mitigation strategies, related research, a directory of heat island reduction initiatives in U.S. communities, and EPA's Heat Island Reduction Program.},
  langid = {english}
}

@dataset{usepaInventoryGreenhouseGas2023,
  type = {Reports and Assessments},
  title = {Inventory of {{U}}.{{S}}. {{Greenhouse Gas Emissions}} and {{Sinks}}: 1990-2021},
  shorttitle = {Inventory of {{U}}.{{S}}. {{Greenhouse Gas Emissions}} and {{Sinks}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-02-01},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2021},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {View the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2021 (published 2023), developed by the U.S. Government to meet annual commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).},
  langid = {english},
  version = {EPA 430-R-23-002}
}

@dataset{usepaLocalGreenhouseGas2017,
  title = {Local {{Greenhouse Gas Inventory Tool}} ({{LGGIT}})},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2017-06-30T23:32:23-04:00},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/statelocalenergy/local-greenhouse-gas-inventory-tool},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {Use EPA's Local Greenhouse Gas Inventory Tool to evaluate community greenhouse gas emissions and compile a local- or municipal-level GHG inventory.},
  langid = {english}
}

@online{usepaLocalGreenhouseGas2017,
  type = {Data and Tools},
  title = {Local {{Greenhouse Gas Inventory Tool}}},
  author = {US EPA, OAR},
  date = {2017-06-30T23:32:23-04:00},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/statelocalenergy/local-greenhouse-gas-inventory-tool},
  urldate = {2024-01-31},
  abstract = {Use EPA's Local Greenhouse Gas Inventory Tool to evaluate community greenhouse gas emissions and compile a local- or municipal-level GHG inventory.},
  langid = {english}
}

@software{usepaMotorVehicleEmission2023,
  title = {Motor {{Vehicle Emission Simulator}}: {{MOVES4}}},
  shorttitle = {Motor {{Vehicle Emission Simulator}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-08},
  origdate = {2020-04-20T15:14:19Z},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/moves},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {Estimating emissions for mobile sources},
  version = {4.0.0}
}

@report{usepaMOVES2014Guidance,
  type = {Government},
  title = {{{MOVES2014}}, {{MOVES2014a}}, and {{MOVES2014b Technical Guidance}}: {{Using MOVES}} to {{Prepare Emission Inventories}} for {{State Implementation Plans}} and {{Transportation Conformity}}},
  shorttitle = {{{MOVES2014b}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2018-08},
  number = {EPA-420-B-18-039},
  pages = {1--73},
  institution = {{Office of Transportation and Air Quality}},
  location = {Ann Arbor, MI},
  url = {https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P100V7EY.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-19},
  abstract = {MOVES (MOtor Vehicle Emissions Simulator) is a state-of-the-art model designed by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to estimate air pollution emissions from mobile sources. MOVES can be used to estimate exhaust and evaporative emissions as well as brake and tire wear emissions from all types of onroad vehicles for any part of the country, except California.1  MOVES2014 and its subsequent minor updates, MOVES2014a and MOVES2014b added the capability to estimate exhaust and evaporative emissions from most types of nonroad equipment. This guidance covers the use of all three versions of MOVES2014, and hereafter the term “MOVES” is used to apply to all of these versions unless otherwise noted. To distinguish between the onroad and nonroad components in MOVES, this guidance refers to them as “MOVES-Onroad” and “MOVES-Nonroad,” respectively. 1.2 Purpose of This Guidance This document provides guidance on the use of MOVES for inventory development in State Implementation Plans (SIPs) and for regional emissions analysis for transportation conformity determinations (“regional conformity analyses”) in states other than California. This document adds guidance on developing nonroad inventories using MOVES as well as some additional guidance on fuels inputs for onroad vehicles. A “regional emissions analysis” for transportation conformity purposes involves estimating onroad motor vehicle emissions at the regional level. However, this term could be confused with the process of creating an inventory for a SIP. To avoid that confusion, an analysis done for transportation conformity is referred to as a “regional conformity analysis” in this document. This document presumes that users already have a basic understanding of how to run MOVES through attending MOVES training and reviewing the MOVES User Guide available on the Help menu of MOVES and on the MOVES web site (www.epa.gov/moves/latest-version-motorvehicle-emission-simulator-moves). It also presumes a basic understanding of SIP and conformity regulatory requirements and policy. This document applies to MOVES2014, MOVES2014a, and MOVES2014b. MOVES can estimate onroad motor vehicle emissions at various scales: National, County, and Project. The County scale domain is required for estimating onroad emissions for SIPs and regional conformity analyses. The onroad portion of this guidance covers the use of the County scale only.2  Sections 2, 3, and 4 of this guidance focus on determining what the appropriate inputs are and how MOVES should be run to develop emissions estimates for onroad vehicles for SIPs and 1 In California, a different onroad emissions model, EMFAC, is used for regulatory purposes instead of MOVES. 2 See Section 1.5 for a list of guidance documents that address use of MOVES at the Project Scale. 6  regional conformity analyses. MOVES-Nonroad only operates at National Scale. Section 5 includes further discussion of how to develop county-level nonroad emissions estimates. MOVES-Onroad includes a default database of meteorology, vehicle fleet, vehicle activity, fuel, and emission control program data for the entire United States. The data included in this database come from a variety of sources and may not be the most current or best available information for any specific county. This guidance describes when the use of that default database is appropriate for SIPs and regional conformity analyses. This document covers the input options in MOVES that are most relevant for SIPs and regional conformity analyses. Use of MOVES to analyze certain specific control programs, such as diesel retrofit programs and programs to reduce extended idle emissions from diesel vehicles, are addressed separately in updates to guidance documents for those programs.3 MOVES users should always check with their EPA Regional Office if there is any question about the applicability of guidance to any specific situation. Refer to Section 1.7 for a link to the EPA Regional contacts. This document has fi}
}

@online{usepaoarGHGEmissionFactors2015,
  type = {Overviews and Factsheets},
  title = {{{GHG Emission Factors Hub}}},
  author = {{USEPA OAR}},
  date = {2015-07-27T15:39:15-04:00},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/ghg-emission-factors-hub},
  urldate = {2024-01-19},
  abstract = {This resource provides organizations with an easy-to-use and transparent set of default emission factors for organizational greenhouse gas reporting.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{usepaOverviewEPAMOtor2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Overview of {{EPA}}’s {{MOtor Vehicle Emission Simulator}} ({{MOVES4}})},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-08},
  number = {EPA-420-R-23-019},
  pages = {1--74},
  institution = {{Office of Transportation and Air Quality}},
  location = {Ann Arbor, MI},
  url = {https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P10186IV.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-14},
  abstract = {EPA’s MOtor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) is a state-of-the-science emissions modeling system that estimates air pollution emissions for criteria air pollutants, greenhouse gases and air toxics. MOVES covers onroad vehicles such as cars, trucks and buses, and nonroad equipment such as bulldozers and lawnmowers. MOVES does not cover aircraft, locomotives, and commercial marine vessels. MOVES accounts for the phase-in of federal emissions standards, vehicle and equipment activity, fuels, temperatures, humidity, and emission control activities such as inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs. MOVES models calendar year 1990 and 1999 through 2060. Emissions from onroad and nonroad sources can be modeled at the national or county scale using either model defaults or user-supplied inputs. Emissions from onroad sources can also be modeled at a more detailed “project” scale if the user supplies detailed inputs describing project parameters. The onroad module uses operating modespecific emission rates to create a consistent approach across all three scales. MOVES is a bottom-up emissions model that is designed to estimate emissions from separate physical emission processes depending on the source. MOVES models “fleet average” emissions, rather than emissions from individual vehicles or equipment types. And MOVES adjusts emission rates to represent real-world conditions. This document provides a high-level overview of MOVES4, the latest official version of the MOVES model. The model and supporting}
}

@report{usepaPopulationActivityOnroad2016,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Population and {{Activity}} of {{On-road}}  {{Vehicles}} in {{MOVES2014}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2016-03},
  number = {EPA-420-R-16-003a},
  pages = {1--168},
  institution = {{Office of Transportation and Air Quality}},
  location = {Ann Arbor, MI},
  url = {https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P100O7PS.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-19},
  abstract = {The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator— commonly referred to as MOVES—is a set of modeling tools for estimating emissions produced by onroad and nonroad mobile sources. MOVES estimates the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), criteria pollutants, and selected air toxics. The MOVES model is currently the official model for use for state implementation plan (SIP) submissions to EPA and for transportation conformity analyses outside of California. The model is also the primary modeling tool to estimate the impact of mobile source regulations on emission inventories. MOVES calculates emission inventories by multiplying emission rates by the appropriate emission-related activity, applying correction and adjustment factors as needed to simulate specific situations, and then adding up the emissions from all sources and regions. An inventory can be pictured as a stool; the three legs of the stool are the emission rates, activity, and populations, while the seat is the inventory. The emission rates are inputs to the model specified for various “processes” including running exhaust, start exhaust, and a number of evaporative processes, among others. These processes also define the activity, populations, and technology inputs required. Vehicle population and activity data are critical inputs for calculating emission inventories from emissions processes such as running exhaust, start exhaust, and evaporative emissions. In MOVES, most running emissions are distinguished by operating modes, depending on road type and vehicle speed. Start emissions are determined based on the time a vehicle has been parked prior to the engine starting, known as a “soak”. Evaporative emissions modes are affected by vehicle operation and the time that vehicles are parked. Emission rates are further categorized by source bins with similar fuel type, regulatory classification, and other vehicle characteristics. This report describes the sources and derivation for onroad vehicle population and activity information and associated adjustments as stored in the MOVES2014 and MOVES2014aa default databases. This data has been extensively updated from MOVES2010b and previous versions of MOVES. Emission measurement and rates, correction factor values, and information for nonroad equipment in the default database are described in other MOVES technical reports.1 There have not been any major updates between this final report and the earlier released public draft in July 2015.2 However, this final report does have some notable revisions from the draft, namely some added or improved explanatory tables and figures, a new introductory subsection on vehicle model year groups, movement of content to different sections and appendices for better readability, clarifications to ambiguous descriptions, and a new appendix documenting peer review comments along with EPA’s responses to those comments. The MOVES2014 default database has a domain that encompasses all onroad (highway) vehicle and nonroad equipment activity and emissions for the entire United States, Puerto Rico, and the a In this report, “MOVES2014” refers to both MOVES2014 and MOVES2014a unless specified otherwise. 4   Virgin Islands. Properly characterizing emissions from the onroad vehicle subset requires a detailed understanding of the cars and trucks that make up the vehicle fleet and their patterns of operation. The national default activity information in MOVES2014 provides a reasonable basis for estimating national emissions. The most important of these inputs, such as VMT and population estimates, come from long-term systematic national measurements. Given the availability of these national measurements when MOVES2014 was being developed, 2011 was chosen as the base year for future year projections. Like in previous versions of MOVES, users may analyze emission inventories in 1990 to correspond with the last Clean Air Act amendments as well as every year from 1999 to 2050. In addition to uncertainties associated with projections, the uncertainties and variability in the default data contribute to the uncertainty in the resulting emission estimates. In particular, when modellers estimate emissions for specific geographic locations, EPA guidance recommends replacing many of the MOVES fleet and activity defaults with local data. This is especially true for inputs where local data is more detailed or up-to-date than that provided in the MOVES defaults. MOVES has been specifically designed to accommodate the input of alternate, usersupplied activity data for the most important parameters. EPA’s Technical Guidance3 provides more information on customizing MOVES2014 with local inputs. This report documents the sources and calculations used to produce the default population and activity data in the MOVES2014 database for computing national-level emissions. In particular, this report will describe the data used to fill the tables listed below in Table 1-1. Population and activity data are ever changing. As part of the MOVES development process, the model undergoes major updates and review every few years. As MOVES progresses, the development of fleet and activity inputs including projections will continue to be an important area of focus and improvement.}
}

@report{usepaPopulationActivityOnroad2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Population and {{Activity}} of {{Onroad Vehicles}} in {{MOVES4}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-08},
  number = {EPA-420-R-23-005},
  pages = {1--233},
  institution = {{Office of Transportation and Air Quality}},
  location = {Ann Arbor, MI},
  url = {https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P101867U.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-01-10},
  abstract = {The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator— commonly referred to as MOVES—is a set of modeling tools for estimating air pollution emissions produced by onroad (highway) and nonroad mobile sources. MOVES estimates the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), criteria pollutants and selected air toxics. The MOVES model is currently the official model for use for state implementation plan (SIP) submissions to EPA and for transportation conformity analyses outside of California. The model is also the primary modeling tool for estimating the impact of mobile source regulations on emission inventories. MOVES calculates emission inventories by multiplying emission rates by the appropriate emission-related activity, applying correction and adjustment factors as needed to simulate specific situations and then adding up the emissions from all sources and regions. Vehicle population and activity data are critical inputs for calculating emission inventories from emissions processes such as running exhaust, start exhaust and evaporative emissions. In MOVES, most running emissions are distinguished by operating modes, depending on road type and vehicle speed. Start emissions are determined based on the time a vehicle has been parked prior to the engine starting, known as a “soak.” Evaporative emission modes are affected by vehicle operation and the time that vehicles are parked. Emission rates are further categorized by grouping vehicles with similar fuel type, regulatory classification, and other vehicle characteristics into “source bins.” This report describes the sources and derivation for onroad vehicle population and activity information and associated adjustments as stored in the MOVES default database. In particular, this report describes the data used to fill the default database tables listed below in Table 1-1. Note that technical details on the default database values for emission rates, correction factors and other inputs, including information on nonroad equipment, are described in other MOVES technical reports.1 These data have been updated for MOVES4 from previous versions of MOVES. In MOVES4, we have updated vehicle activity based on newer data from Annual Energy Outlook, Highway Statistics, Transportation Energy Data Book, and School Bus Fleet Fact Book. We also updated vehicle distributions based on IHS2020 and relative mileage accumulations based on FHWA analysis. In addition, updates have been made for gliders, Class 2b and 3 light heavy-duty (LHD) vehicles, and electric vehicles for MOVES4. Properly characterizing emissions from onroad vehicles requires a detailed understanding of the vehicles that comprise the national fleet and their patterns of operation. The MOVES default database has a domain that encompasses the entire United States, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. In MOVES, users may analyze emission inventories in 1990 and every year from 1999 to 2060. The national default activity information in MOVES provides a reasonable basis for estimating national emissions. As described in this report, the most important of these inputs, such as vehicle miles travelled (VMT) and population estimates, come from long-term systematic national measurements. 7  Due to the availability of these national measurements, the most recent year of measured data in the model and the base year for projected emissions, is 2021. It is important to note that uncertainties and variability in the default data contribute to the uncertainty in the resulting emission estimates. Therefore, MOVES has been specifically designed to accommodate the input of alternate, user-supplied activity data. In particular, when modellers estimate emissions for specific geographic locations, EPA guidance recommends replacing many of the MOVES fleet and activity defaults with local data. This is especially true for inputs where local data is more detailed or up to date than those provided in the MOVES defaults. EPA’s Technical Guidance2 provides more information on customizing MOVES with local inputs. Population and activity data are ever changing as new historical data becomes available and new projections are generated. As part of the MOVES development process, the model undergoes major updates and review every few years. The significant updates made to MOVES since the MOVES2014 release were peer-reviewed under EPA’s peer review guidance3 in two separate reviews conducted in 2017, 2019, and 2020. Materials from each peer review, including peerreview comments and EPA responses are located on the EPA’s science inventory webpage.4 5 The development of fleet and activity inputs will continue to be an important area of focus and improvement for MOVES.},
  langid = {english}
}

@online{usepaPublicationsToolsData23,
  title = {Publications, {{Tools}}, and {{Data}} for {{State}}, {{Local}}, and {{Tribal Governments}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {0023-06-05},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/statelocalenergy/publications-tools-and-data-state-local-and-tribal-governments},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {This page contains resources for State, Local, and Tribal governments},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{usepaQualityAssuranceHandbook2017,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Quality {{Assurance Handbook}} for {{Air Pollution Measurement Systems Volume II}}},
  shorttitle = {Quality {{Assurance Handbook}} for {{Air Pollution Measurement Systems}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2017-01},
  number = {EPA-454/B-17-001},
  pages = {1--346},
  location = {Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards},
  url = {https://www3.epa.gov/ttnamti1/files/ambient/pm25/qa/Final%20Handbook%20Document%201_17.pdf},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {This document is Volume II of a five-volume quality assurance (QA) handbook series dedicated to air pollution measurement systems. Volume II is dedicated to the Ambient Air Quality Surveillance Program and the data collection activities inherent to that program. This guidance is part of a quality management system designed to ensure that the Ambient Air Quality Surveillance Program: (1) provides data of sufficient quality to meet the program’s objectives, and (2) is implemented consistently across the Nation. The purpose of the Handbook is twofold. First, it provides additional information and guidance on the material covered in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) pertaining to the Ambient Air Quality Surveillance Program. Second, the document is intended to assist technical personnel at tribal, state and local monitoring organizations1  in developing and implementing a quality system for the Ambient Air Quality Surveillance Program. A quality management system (QMS), as defined by The American National Standard-Specifications and Guidelines for Quality Systems for Environmental Data Collection and Environmental Technology Programs (ANSI/ASQ E4),2 is:  “a structured and documented management system describing the policies, objectives, principles, organizational authority, responsibilities, accountability, and implementation plan of an organization for ensuring the quality in its work processes, products, and services. The QMS provides the framework for planning, implementing, and assessing the work performed by the organization and for carrying out required quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) activities”. A monitoring organization’s QMS for the Ambient Air Quality Surveillance Program is described in its quality assurance project plan (QAPP). Therefore, the Handbook has been written in a style similar to a QA project plan as specified in the document EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Environmental Data Operations (EPA QA/R5)3 . Environmental data operations (EDO) refer to the work performed to obtain, use, or report information pertaining to natural surroundings and conditions. The information in this Handbook can be used as guidance in the development of detailed monitoring organization QAPPs.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{usepaStateGreenhouseGas2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {State {{Greenhouse Gas Inventory Tool User}}’s {{Guide}} for the {{Wastewater Module}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2024-01-31},
  pages = {1--18},
  institution = {{State Energy and Environment Program}},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/wastewater-users-guide_508.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-13},
  langid = {english}
}

@dataset{usepaStateGreenhouseGas2024a,
  type = {Government},
  title = {State {{Greenhouse Gas Inventory}} and {{Projection Tools}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2024-01-31},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/statelocalenergy/download-state-inventory-and-projection-tool},
  urldate = {2024-02-14},
  abstract = {Use the links to download modules and guides of the State Inventory and Projection Tool.},
  langid = {english},
  version = {2024.1}
}

@online{usepaUnderstandingGlobalWarming2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Understanding {{Global Warming Potentials}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-04-18},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials},
  urldate = {2024-01-22},
  abstract = {Greenhouse gases (GHGs) warm the Earth by absorbing energy and slowing the rate at which the energy escapes to space; they act like a blanket insulating the Earth. Different GHGs can have different effects on the Earth's warming. Two key ways in which these gases differ from each other are their ability to absorb energy (their "radiative efficiency"), and how long they stay in the atmosphere (also known as their "lifetime"). The Global Warming Potential (GWP) was developed to allow comparisons of the global warming impacts of different gases. Specifically, it is a measure of how much energy the emissions of 1 ton of a gas will absorb over a given period of time, relative to the emissions of 1 ton of carbon dioxide (CO2). The larger the GWP, the more that a given gas warms the Earth compared to CO2 over that time period. The time period usually used for GWPs is 100 years. GWPs provide a common unit of measure, which allows analysts to add up emissions estimates of different gases (e.g., to compile a national GHG inventory), and allows policymakers to compare emissions reduction opportunities across sectors and gases. CO2, by definition, has a GWP of 1 regardless of the time period used, because it is the gas being used as the reference. CO2 remains in the climate system for a very long time: CO2 emissions cause increases in atmospheric concentrations of CO2 that will last thousands of years. Methane (CH4) is estimated to have a GWP of 27-30 over 100 years. CH4 emitted today lasts about a decade on average, which is much less time than CO2. But CH4 also absorbs much more energy than CO2. The net effect of the shorter lifetime and higher energy absorption is reflected in the GWP. The CH4 GWP also accounts for some indirect effects, such as the fact that CH4 is a precursor to ozone, and ozone is itself a GHG.  Nitrous Oxide (N2O) has a GWP 273 times that of CO2 for a 100-year timescale. N2O emitted today remains in the atmosphere for more than 100 years, on average. (Learn why EPA's U.S. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks uses a different value.) Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) are sometimes called high-GWP gases because, for a given amount of mass, they trap substantially more heat than CO2. (The GWPs for these gases can be in the thousands or tens of thousands.)},
  langid = {english}
}

@online{usepaUSGHGInventory2023,
  title = {{{US GHG Inventory}} by {{State}}},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-10-09},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/state-ghg-emissions-and-removals},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {State GHG Emissions and Removals},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{usepaWARMBackgroundChapters2020,
  title = {{{WARM}} - {{Background Chapters}} (Version 15)},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2020-11},
  pages = {1--61},
  institution = {{US EPA Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, Prepared by ICF}},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/documents/warm_background_v15_10-29-2020.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-07},
  abstract = {During the last century, population and economic growth have caused increased consumption of materials such as minerals, wood products and food. Materials consumption continues to accelerate while simultaneously shifting away from renewable materials like agriculture and forestry products toward non-renewable products such as metals and fossil fuel-derived products (EPA, 2009b). Source reduction, reuse and recycling of materials are ways that we can manage materials more sustainably. Extracting, harvesting, processing, transporting and disposing of these materials result in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, in part due to the large amounts of energy required for these life-cycle stages. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Waste Reduction Model (WARM), the focus of this documentation, is a tool designed to help managers and policy-makers understand and compare the life-cycle GHG, energy, and economic implications of materials management options (recycling, source reduction, landfilling, combustion with energy recovery, anaerobic digestion, and composting) for materials commonly found in the waste stream. By comparing a baseline scenario (e.g., landfilling) to an alternate scenario (e.g., recycling), WARM can assess the economic, energy, and GHG implications that would occur throughout the material life cycle. 1.1 MATERIALS MANAGEMENT CONTEXT The United States and the international community are focusing increasingly on a life-cycle materials management paradigm that considers the environmental impacts of materials at all life-cycle stages. Recognition is growing that, since traditional environmental policies focus on controlling “end-ofpipe” emissions, they do not provide a means for systematically addressing environmental impacts associated with the movement of materials through the economy. While “end-of-pipe” policies are often effective in controlling direct pollution, they may result in some environmental impacts being overlooked or shifted from one area of the life cycle to another (EPA, 2009b). The EPA Office of Land and Emergency Management (OLEM) (formerly the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response) found that 42 percent of U.S. 2006 GHG emissions were associated with the manufacturing, use and disposal of materials and products (EPA, 2009a). As a result, changing materials management patterns is an important strategy to help reduce or avoid GHG emissions. Reducing the amount of materials used to make products, extending product life spans, and maximizing recycling rates are examples of possible materials management strategies that can significantly reduce GHG emissions (EPA, 2009b). Private and public entities globally are moving toward life-cycle materials management. For example, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the Kobe 3R Action Plan (a plan issued by the Group of Eight) have recommended that member countries pay increased attention to life-cycle approaches to material flows. Companies in the metals, cement, agribusiness, food and retail industries are also formulating approaches to increase efficiency and reduce environmental impacts by taking a life-cycle view of materials and processes (EPA, 2009b).},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{usepaWARMBackgroundChapters2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {{{WARM}} - {{Background Chapters}} (Version 16)},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-12},
  number = {EPA-530-R-23-017},
  pages = {1--61},
  institution = {{US EPA Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery}},
  location = {USEPA Office},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-12/warm-background_v16_dec.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-07},
  abstract = {During the last century, population and economic growth have caused increased consumption of materials such as minerals, wood products and food. Materials consumption continues to accelerate while simultaneously shifting away from renewable materials like agriculture and forestry products toward non-renewable products such as metals and fossil fuel-derived products (EPA, 2009b). Source reduction, reuse and recycling of materials are ways that we can manage materials more sustainably. Extracting, harvesting, processing, transporting and disposing of these materials result in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, in part due to the large amounts of energy required for these life-cycle stages. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Waste Reduction Model (WARM), the focus of this documentation, is a tool designed to provide high-level comparisons of potential greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions, energy savings, and economic impacts when considering different materials management practices. Materials management practices include - source reduction, recycling, anaerobic digestion, combustion, composting\,and landfilling. WARM is a comparative tool rather than a comprehensive measurement tool. WARM was not developed for and, as such, should not be used for final site-specific materials management decisions, when other human health and environmental impacts of the different management methods may need to be considered (such as air pollution, water pollution, noise, etc.). It also should not be used for developing GhG inventories, which need to establish a baseline and measure reductions over time on an annual basis for an entity.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{usepaWARMManagementPractices2019,
  type = {Government},
  title = {{{WARM}}  - {{Management Practices Chapters}} (Version 15)},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2019-10},
  pages = {1--132},
  institution = {{US EPA Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, Prepared by ICF}},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-10/documents/warm_v15_management_practices_updated_10-08-2019.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-07},
  abstract = {This chapter describes the development of material-specific emission factors for source reduction in EPA’s Waste Reduction Model (WARM). Source reduction, or waste prevention, refers to practices that reduce the amount of materials entering the waste stream, including changes in the design, manufacture, purchase or use of materials. This document provides examples of source reduction and a summary of how EPA estimated the GHG benefits from source reduction of materials. 1.1 TYPES OF SOURCE REDUCTION Source reduction can result from any activity that reduces the amount of a material or agricultural input needed and therefore used to make products or food.1 Some specific examples of source reduction practices are:  Redesigning products to use fewer materials (e.g., lightweighting, material substitution).  Reusing products and materials (e.g., a refillable water bottle).  Extending the useful lifespan of products.  Avoiding using materials in the first place (e.g., reducing junk mail, reducing demand for uneaten food). In addition to the activities above, there are limited circumstances where the emission factors can be used to estimate GHG benefits of substituting one material or product for another material or product. Section 1.3.2 presents considerations for estimating the GHG effects of material substitution. 1.2 A SUMMARY OF THE GHG IMPLICATIONS OF SOURCE REDUCTION When a material is source reduced, GHG emissions associated with producing the material and/or manufacturing the product and managing the post-consumer waste are avoided. Consequently, source reduction provides GHG emission benefits by: (1) avoiding the “upstream” GHGs emitted in the raw material acquisition, manufacture or production and transport of the source-reduced material; (2) increasing the amount of carbon stored in forests (when wood and paper products are source reduced); and (3) avoiding the downstream GHG emissions from waste management. Because many materials are manufactured from a mix of virgin and recycled inputs, the quantity of virgin material production that is avoided is not always equal to the quantity of material source reduced. Therefore, to estimate GHG emissions associated with source reduction, WARM uses a mix of virgin and recycled inputs, based on the national average for each material. However, WARM also allows users to evaluate the benefits of source reducing materials manufactured from 100 percent virgin inputs, instead of a mix of virgin and recycled inputs. For some materials, such as food waste and some wood products, it is either not possible or very uncommon to use recycled inputs during material production, so WARM always assumes material production using 100 percent virgin inputs. WARM assumes that source reduction of paper and wood products increases the amount of carbon stored in forests by reducing the amount of wood harvested. For more information on the calculations that went into creating the forest carbon storage offset, see the Forest Carbon Storage chapter. In order to measure the full GHG impact of source reduction, the user must compare the GHG emissions from source reduction to the GHG emissions of another materials management option. For example, a user could compare the benefits from source reducing one short ton of office paper instead},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{usepaWARMManagementPractices2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {{{WARM}} - {{Management Practices Chapters}} (Version 16)},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2023-12},
  number = {EPA-530-R-23-018},
  pages = {1--128},
  institution = {{US EPA Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery}},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-01/warm_management_practices_v16_dec.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-07},
  abstract = {This chapter describes the development of material-specific emission factors for source reduction in EPA’s Waste Reduction Model (WARM). Source reduction, or waste prevention, refers to practices that reduce the amount of materials entering the waste stream, including changes in the design, manufacture, purchase or use of materials. This document provides examples of source reduction and a summary of how EPA estimated the GHG benefits from source reduction of materials. 1.1 TYPES OF SOURCE REDUCTION Source reduction can result from any activity that reduces the amount of a material or agricultural input needed and therefore used to make products or food.1 Some specific examples of source reduction practices are: • Redesigning products to use fewer materials (e.g., lightweighting, material substitution). • Reusing products and materials (e.g., a refillable water bottle). • Extending the useful lifespan of products. • Avoiding using materials in the first place (e.g., reducing junk mail, reducing demand for uneaten food). In addition to the activities above, there are limited circumstances where the emission factors can be used to estimate GHG benefits of substituting one material or product for another material or product. Section 1.3.2 presents considerations for estimating the GHG effects of material substitution. 1.2 A SUMMARY OF THE GHG IMPLICATIONS OF SOURCE REDUCTION When a material is source reduced, GHG emissions associated with producing the material and/or manufacturing the product and managing the post-consumer waste are avoided. Consequently, source reduction provides GHG emission benefits by: (1) avoiding the “upstream” GHGs emitted in the raw material acquisition, manufacture or production and transport of the source-reduced material; (2) increasing the amount of carbon stored in forests (when wood and paper products are source reduced); and (3) avoiding the downstream GHG emissions from waste management. Because many materials are manufactured from a mix of virgin and recycled inputs, the quantity of virgin material production that is avoided is not always equal to the quantity of material source reduced. Therefore, to estimate GHG emissions associated with source reduction, WARM uses a mix of virgin and recycled inputs, based on the national average for each material. However, WARM also allows users to evaluate the benefits of source reducing materials manufactured from 100 percent virgin inputs, instead of a mix of virgin and recycled inputs. For some materials, such as food waste and some wood products, it is either not possible or very uncommon to use recycled inputs during material production, so WARM always assumes material production using 100 percent virgin inputs. WARM assumes that source reduction of paper and wood products increases the amount of carbon stored in forests by reducing the amount of wood harvested. For more information on the calculations that went into creating the forest carbon storage offset, see the Forest Carbon Storage chapter. In order to measure the full GHG impact of source reduction, the user must compare the GHG emissions from source reduction to the GHG emissions of another materials management option. For example, a user could compare the benefits from source reducing one short ton of office paper instead},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{usepaWasteReductionModel2020,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Waste {{Reduction Model}} ({{WARM}}) {{Tool User}}'s {{Guide}}, Version 15},
  author = {{USEPA}},
  date = {2020-11},
  number = {EPA530-R-19-002},
  pages = {1--17},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/documents/warm-users-guide_v15_10-29-2020.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-02-07},
  abstract = {The Waste Reduction Model (WARM) was created by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to help solid waste planners and organizations estimate greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions and economic impacts from several different waste management practices. The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to WARM users in downloading, installing, and using the WARM Tool, including an overview of the tool’s key functions and capabilities. WARM calculates GHG emissions, energy, and economic impacts for baseline and alternative waste management practices, including source reduction, recycling, combustion, composting, and landfilling. The model calculates emissions in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2E) and metric tons of carbon equivalent (MTCE), energy in millions of BTUs (MMBTU), wage impacts, tax impacts, and labor hours supported across a wide range of material types commonly found in municipal solid waste (MSW). The user can construct various scenarios by simply entering data on the amount of waste handled by material type and by management practice. WARM then automatically applies material-specific emission, energy, and economic factors for each management practice to calculate the GHG emissions, energy use, and economic impacts of each scenario. Several key inputs, such as landfill gas recovery practices and transportation distances to MSW facilities, can be modified by the user. The GHG emission factors used in WARM are based on a life cycle perspective. The model documentation describes this methodology in detail. The WARM model was implemented in the free, open source life-cycle assessment (LCA) software called openLCA. The resulting openLCA database is used for the calculation of impacts in the WARM Tool described in this guide. The WARM version implemented in this software is WARM v15 (November 2020)}
}

@report{utahdivisionofairqualityBeehiveEmissionReduction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Beehive {{Emission Reduction Plan}}: {{Priority Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Utah {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{Utah Division of Air Quality}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--198},
  institution = {Utah Department of Environmental Quality},
  location = {Salt Lake City, UT},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/utah-final-priority-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {(CPRG) funding to engage in greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction planning in Utah through the Beehive Emission Reduction Plan initiative. In this capacity, UDEQ will play a key role in helping Utah secure broader emissions reduction-related funding under the IRA, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), and other sources. UDEQ has extensive emission reduction planning experience and has worked with stakeholders and partners to help ensure such funding is leveraged to support balanced, state-driven solutions that pave the way for continued growth while maintaining a high quality of life in Utah. UDEQ has tasked the Utah Division of Air Quality (UDAQ) with leading the Beehive Emission Reduction Plan initiative. In this capacity, the Division has partnered with a wide BEEHIVE EMISSION REDUCTION PLAN • PRIORITY PLAN 5 of 162 array of stakeholders and partner agencies to produce this Priority Plan to support 1 investment in measures, practices, and technologies that reduce emissions, create high-quality jobs, spur economic growth, and enhance the quality of life for all Utahns. This plan includes several required, encouraged, and optional CPRG program plan elements as depicted in Table 1 below.2 Table 1. Required, Encouraged, and Optional Plan Elements Included in this Priority Plan Plan Element Required / Encouraged / Optional GHG Inventory Required GHG Emissions Projections Optional Quantified GHG Reduction Measures Required Benefits Analysis Encouraged Low-Income and Disadvantaged Communities Benefits Analysis Required Review of Authority to Implement Required Intersection with Other Funding Availability Encouraged Workforce Planning Analysis Encouraged This project has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under assistance agreement 5D-00105400 to the UDEQ. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the EPA, nor does the EPA endorse trade names or recommend the use of commercial products mentioned in this document. The measures and associated example projects contained in this Priority Plan should be construed as broadly available to any entity in the state eligible for seeking funding under 3 the EPA’s CPRG Phase II Implementation Grant program and other funding streams, as applicable. 3 See CPRG Phase II Implementation Grant General Competition Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for eligibility information: https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-01/cprg-general-competition-correction.pdf 2 See page 49 of the CPRG Planning Grants Program Guidance. 1 This Priority Plan was developed in fulfillment of EPA’s CPRG Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) deliverable requirement and includes the required Plan Elements identified in EPA’s CPRG Planning Grant guidance: https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-02/EPA\%20CPRG\%20Planning\%20Grants\%20Program\%20 Guidance\%20for\%20States-Municipalities-Air\%20Agencies\%2003-01-2023.pdf BEEHIVE EMISSION REDUCTION PLAN • PRIORITY PLAN 6 of 162 The remainder of this Priority Plan is organized into ten sections: 1. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventory 2. Emissions Projections 3. Priority Measures (Quantified GHG Reduction Measures) 4. Benefits Analysis 5. Low-Income and Disadvantaged Community (LIDAC) Benefits Analysis 6. Review of Authority to Implement 7. Intersection with Other Funding Availability 8. Workforce Planning Analysis 9. Coordination and Outreach 10.Appendices}
}

@report{vadeqCommonwealthVirginiaPriority2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Commonwealth of {{Virginia Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Virginia {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{VA DEQ}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--463},
  institution = {Virginia Department of Environmental Quality},
  location = {Richmond, VA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/commonwealth-of-virginia-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {This document is the Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP) for the Commonwealth of Virginia, which is the first deliverable under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) program. The PCAP is intended to be used in the context of the CPRG program. The purpose of the PCAP is to identify all possible actions to reduce climate pollution. It is not meant to be prescriptive in any way and does not commit the Commonwealth to any specific carbon reduction strategy or path. The PCAP will be used to inform both the CPRG implementation grant and the Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) process. However, it does not set the priorities for grant application purposes. The factors noted in the CPRG Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) evaluation criteria will be the main determinants of what projects may be submitted to the competitive grant process. The Virginia PCAP includes GHG emission reduction measures reflecting the Commonwealth’s priorities as they relate to implementation funding opportunities through the CPRG program. The high-level PCAP measures are designed to be inclusive of all projects, programs, and measures that Virginia’s state government, local governments, regional planning agencies, and other stakeholders submitted to the Virginia DEQ CPRG team. The Commonwealth has a clear and vested interest in promoting cleaner air, reliable and affordable clean energy generation, and improved resilience to increased storm frequency and intensity. Many areas of Virginia and its critical infrastructure are vulnerable to changing climatic conditions. Therefore, the Commonwealth of Virginia and DEQ submitted an application, workplan, and budget to the U.S. EPA for a CPRG planning grant under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) to support Virginia’s climate action initiatives. DEQ submitted this grant application to EPA on April 27, 2023, and received a notice of the \$3 million dollar planning grant award on June 27, 2023. The planning grant is being used to develop a statewide plan of opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) and co-pollutant emissions in two phases: • A PCAP to identify immediate innovative and cost-effective actions and projects targeting key source sectors to implement to reduce GHG and co-pollutant emissions in the shortterm. These actions are focused on reducing high-potency GHGs, such as methane and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and reducing GHGs from growing source sectors with high energy demands, such as data centers. This plan is informed by the current DEQ statewide GHG inventory, as well as public outreach and input. Particular effort has been focused on seeking input from disadvantaged communities. • A CCAP to develop a longer-term plan and strategies to reduce GHG and co-pollutant emissions that aligns with statutory goals and requirements for reducing these emissions and increasing deployment of clean energy generation in an efficient, cost-effective, and environmentally responsible manner. This plan will cover all source sectors of the GHG  Virginia Priority Climate Action Plan 2 inventory and provide substantial outreach and input opportunities, particularly input from disadvantaged communities. The CCAP will be developed and submitted to the EPA no later than two years after the award of the planning grant (summer 2025). DEQ employed the following high-level goals to guide the process through the development of this PCAP and will continue to employ the same goals for the CCAP: • Develop short- and long-term climate action plans through the CPRG program. • Assist localities to develop or update GHG inventories and action plans (program to be developed as part of the CCAP). • Expedite the permitting and deployment of renewable energy and low-carbon resources in an environmentally responsible manner (ongoing). • Develop measures to reduce GHGs from high energy demand industries. • Accelerate the deployment of alternative and low-carbon transportation technologies and infrastructure. • Investigate immediate measures to reduce high-potency GHG emissions. Virginia’s PCAP explores all the major economic and GHG emission generating sectors and identifies ten priority GHG reduction measures through the CPRG program as described below: • Measure 1: Reduce GHG emissions from the on-road transportation sector through vehicle electrification and other zero- and low-carbon fuels. • Measure 2: Support alternative modes of transportation, micro-mobility, and active transportation to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). • Measure 3: Reduce GHG emissions from the off-road transportation sector, including ports and airports. • Measure 4: Increase residential and commercial building energy efficiency and identify and implement GHG emission reduction solutions at homes, businesses, and institutions. • Measure 5: Increase industrial energy efficiency and identify and implement opportunities for GHG emission reduction solutions at industrial facilities. • Measure 6: Reduce GHG emissions from the electric power sector and improve grid reliability and security. • Measure 7: Deploy renewable energy, energy efficiency, energy storage, and low-carbon and resilient solutions for state and local government buildings and public fleets and transit, including infrastructure. • Measure 8: Identify and implement strategies to reduce high-potency GHG emissions from industrial processes, energy production, agriculture, waste, and wastewater treatment. • Measure 9: Reduce GHG emissions from manufacturing and industrial processes, materials, and products. • Measure 10: Protect and restore high-carbon coastal habitats, wetlands, agricultural, forest and tribal lands. Virginia Priority Climate Action Plan 3 A preliminary analysis of the estimated cumulative short- and long-term GHG emission reductions (or carbon sequestration) from these ten measures using standard EPA and other accepted modeling tools are presented in Table 1 below. Table 1: Cumulative Estimated GHG Emissions Reductions by Measure PCAP Measure Cumulative Short-Term Reductions (2025-2030) Cumulative Long-Term Reductions (2025-2050) Measure 1 17.14 MMTCO2e 278.68 MMTCO2e Measure 2 4.74 MMTCO2e 60.88 MMTCO2e Measure 3 1.33 MMTCO2e 23.71 MMTCO2e Measure 4 Efficiency – 14.95 MMTCO2e Other Solutions – 4.79 MMTCO2e Efficiency – 111.72 MMTCO2e Other Solutions – 46.83 MMTCO2e Measure 5 1.93 MMTCO2e 45.41 MMTCO2e Measure 6 35.89 MMTCO2e 321.07 MMTCO2e Measure 7 1.95 MMTCO2e 9.74 MMTCO2e Measure 8 19.08 MMTCO2e 87.70 MMTCO2e Measure 9 22.18 MMTCO2e 125.41 MMTCO2e Measure 10 1.12 MMTCO2E 11.36 MMTCO2E The estimates provided above reflect the implementation of each measure with all the identified actions included, to the extent data were available to support the analysis for this PCAP. Since a number of these measures cover the same activity sector, their impacts are not additive as they sometimes overlap with each other. Further, due to limited time for PCAP analysis, interactions between certain measures were not captured. These interactions will be captured in the GHG reduction analysis completed for the CCAP. However, it can clearly be seen that the measures and underlying actions identified have the potential to significantly reduce carbon pollution in Virginia. It should be noted that the individual actions identified in each measure may not be feasible for all sources or activities covered by that measure. The measures identified are intended to cover a broad range of possible projects for the EPA CPRG Phase 2 competitive implementation grant process. Program and project ideas under each measure, and other ideas, may be further evaluated and possibly selected to be included in one or more applications to be submitted to the EPA CPRG Phase 2 competitive implementation grant process.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{vtanrClimatePollutionReduction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Climate {{Pollution Reduction Grant Priority Climate Action Plan}}},
  shorttitle = {Vermont {{PCAP}}},
  author = {{VTANR}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--93},
  institution = {Vermont Agency of Natural Resources},
  location = {Burlington, VT},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/vermont-cprg-priority-climate-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {Heavy rain throughout the summer of 2023 caused severe flooding in Vermont, leaving lasng damage and a changed landscape throughout the state. Due to climate change these storms and weather paterns are the new normal, and Vermonters will connue to be impacted by the hazards caused by severe storms. Vermonters are also experiencing increased periods of prolonged drought, extreme temperatures, and poor air quality due to wildfire smoke; these condions highlight the increasingly urgent need for investment in climate migaon to address the myriad impacts of climate change. In 2020, the Vermont legislature adopted the Vermont Global Warming Soluons Act (GWSA), which converted Vermont’s greenhouse gas (GHG) reducon goals into statutory requirements, created the Vermont Climate Council, and charged the Council with adopng, and subse quently updang, a Climate Acton Plan. Vermont is required to reduce its GHG emissions by no less than 26\% below 2005 GHG emission levels by January 1, 2025; by no less than 40\% below 1990 GHG emission levels by January 1, 2030; and no less than 80\% below 1990 GHG emission levels by January 1, 2050. The Inial Vermont Climate Acon Plan was adopted on December 1 of 2021 and includes 234 unique acons to migate, adapt to, or be more resilient to climate change. Achieving these goals will require enormous effort and investment in Vermont’s economy and landscape. Vermont is making good progress to reduce its climate polluon through policies and recent federal funding from the American Rescue Plan Act, the Biparsan Infrastructure Bill, and now the Inflaon Reducon Act. Specifically, the Inflaon Reducon Act (IRA) offers a historic opportunity to make investments that will be crical to achieving those goals. The Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR), Climate Acon Office, developed this Priority Climate Acon Plan as part of the Environmental Protecon Agency (EPA) Phase 1 Climate Polluon Reducon Grant Program. The grant program is one of many funding opportunies provided in the federal IRA and has the stated objecves to priorize measures: 1) that achieve maximum reducons in greenhouse gas emissions while driving benefits to surrounding communies, and 2) to invest in measures that are ready to receive funds to use over the next several years. This plan is not designed to address all the necessary and needed acons for emission reducons in Vermont. Instead, it is connuing the story of climate acon in Vermont. It has been developed to achieve the most impacul reducons, and in the most crical sectors, where other funding is not currently available. The Climate Acon Office (CAO), working collaboravely with the members of the Inter-Agency Advisory Board to the CAO, idenfied the measures included in this plan to meet EPA’s criteria provided in the Noce of Funding Opportunity for the CPRG Implementaon grant. This plan builds upon the migaon work already advancing in Vermont by enhancing the scale and scope of exisng frameworks, analyses, policies, and programs. The four main mi�ga�on sectors iden�fied in this plan are 1) transporta�on, 2) residen�al and commercial buildings, 3) natural and working lands, and 4) waste and materials management. The first three categories contribute the most to greenhouse gas emissions in Vermont, making up more than 90\% of the state’s emissions. In addi�on, mi�ga�on ac�ons related to waste management have not advanced as far or as fast as other sectors, making it a high priority for ac�on in this PCAP while u�lizing the exis�ng framework and partnerships developed by solid waste policies and priori�es in ANR.  4 Transporta�on – the movement of people and goods – is essen�al to the state’s economy and Vermonter’s quality of life. The state’s rural character and low popula�on density also means that Vermonters depend primarily on cars and trucks to get around. Vermont’s auto-reliant system is fueled almost en�rely with carbon-intensive gasoline and diesel, making transporta�on the largest source of climate pollu�on – a full 40\% of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions. The combina�on of our mostly rural nature, dispersed land use paterns and heavy reliance on fossil-fueled vehicles is a significant reason why Vermonters emit more greenhouse gases per capita than any other state in New England. This reality makes transforming the state’s transporta�on system essen�al to mee�ng the emissions reduc�on requirements of the GWSA. Incen�vizing zero-emission vehicles in all classes of vehicles and developing the necessary trainings to give consumers the confidence to buy these vehicles will achieve significant reduc�ons in GHGs. Co-benefits include improved public health in communi�es that are nearest to transporta�on corridors by lowering tailpipe emissions of criteria pollutants such as diesel par�culate mater, and toxic air pollutants such as benzene. Vermont also proposes to increase the use of idle reduc�on technologies as a bridge to further reduce emissions in this sector. Vermont’s housing stock is dominated by homes built before 1975, with over a quarter of them built before 1939. Thermal energy use for these buildings produces over a third of the state’s GHG emissions and represents roughly 35 percent of our energy expenditures. Replacing carbon-intensive fossil-fueled hea�ng sources with available, lower carbon alterna�ves will significantly contribute to mee�ng Vermont’s climate goals. Further incen�ves are needed to improve the efficiency of exis�ng and new buildings, promote the transi�on to clean equipment and appliances, and increase building weatheriza�on to realize the pace and scale of the transi�on needed by 2030. In addi�on, further investments in support systems are needed to help low-income Vermonters easily access incen�ves. Cobenefits include improved indoor air quality (including from wildfire smoke) and saving homeowners, business owners, and renters money on hea�ng and cooling. Vermont farmers and forestland owners are mo�vated to be part of climate change solu�ons, and many already include climate mi�ga�on as a major goal in managing their woodlots and farms. Carbon sequestra�on in agricultural landscapes and working forestlands is the mi�ga�on strategy that yields the greatest co-benefits, is the easiest and most immediate to implement, has equitable impacts, and has been priori�zed by the global and scien�fic communi�es as a cri�cal mi�ga�on strategy. Vermont envisions further suppor�ng restora�on ac�vi�es, land acquisi�on, and agronomic prac�ces through increased funding and capacity. The handling of waste and materials is an addi�onal contributor of GHGs in Vermont, and while Vermont’s Universal Recycling and Compos�ng Law has made significant advancements in reducing emissions from this sector, there are opportuni�es for more mi�ga�on-focused related to waste reduc�on and management. The EPA es�mates that wasted food generates nearly 60\% of methane emissions from landfills. Reducing the amount of food wasted and improving food scrap diversion programs at schools, hospitals, nursing homes, and other instuons will have a meaningful impact. Addional non-energy measures beyond waste management include addressing high global warming potenal refrigerants in two ways. Vermont plans to increase the rate of recovery of refrigerants from systems and appliances at the end of their life and replace refrigeraon equipment with technology that ulizes non “f-gas” or natural refrigerants.  5 This priority plan lays out the crical measures that will leverage federal investments to accelerate Vermont’s climate migaon acvies and make sustainable emissions reducons throughout the economy. As this work advances, we envision robust engagement with Vermonters to realize the transformave changes needed to meet both the challenges and opportunies of climate change.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {State PCAP}
}

@manual{walkerTigrisLoadCensus2023,
  type = {manual},
  title = {Tigris: {{Load}} Census {{TIGER}}/{{Line}} Shapefiles},
  author = {Walker, Kyle},
  date = {2023},
  url = {https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=tigris},
  annotation = {R package version 2.0.4}
}

@report{walshCarbonFreeBoston2019,
  title = {Carbon {{Free Boston}}: {{Energy Technical Report}}},
  author = {Walsh, Michael J. and Fox-Penner, Peter and Zheng, Kevin and Pollack, Adam and Cleveland, Cutler J.},
  date = {2019},
  pages = {1--54},
  institution = {Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy},
  location = {Boston, MA, USA},
  url = {https://www.bu.edu/igs/2019/05/20/carbon-free-boston-technical-reports/},
  urldate = {2023-12-08},
  abstract = {The adoption of clean energy in Boston’s buildings and transportation systems will produce sweeping changes in the quantity and composition of the city’s demand for fuel and electricity. The demand for electricity is expected to increase by 2050, while the demand for petroleum-based liquid fuels and natural gas within the city is projected to decline significantly. The city must meet future energy demand with clean energy sources in order to meet its carbon mitigation targets. That clean energy must be procured in a way that supports the City’s goals for economic development, social equity, environmental sustainability, and overall quality of life. This chapter examines the strategies to accomplish these goals. Improved energy efficiency, district energy, and in-boundary generation of clean energy (rooftop PV) will reduce net electric power and natural gas demand substantially, but these measures will not eliminate the need for electricity and gas (or its replacement fuel) delivered into Boston. Broadly speaking, to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, the city must therefore (1) reduce its use of fossil fuels to heat and cool buildings through cost-effective energy efficiency measures and electrification of building thermal services where feasible; and (2) over time, increase the amount of carbon-free electricity delivered to the city. Reducing energy demand though cost effective energy conservation measures will be necessary to reduce the challenges associated with expanding the electricity delivery system and sustainably sourcing renewable fuels.},
  langid = {english}
}

@article{wangComparativeAnalysisEnergy2016,
  title = {Comparative Analysis of Energy Intensity and Carbon Emissions in Wastewater Treatment in {{USA}}, {{Germany}}, {{China}} and {{South Africa}}},
  author = {Wang, Hongtao and Yang, Yi and Keller, Arturo A. and Li, Xiang and Feng, Shijin and Dong, Ya-nan and Li, Fengting},
  date = {2016-12-15},
  journaltitle = {Applied Energy},
  shortjournal = {Applied Energy},
  volume = {184},
  pages = {873--881},
  issn = {0306-2619},
  doi = {10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.07.061},
  url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261916310029},
  urldate = {2024-02-27},
  abstract = {Currently almost all wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) require a large amount of energy input to process the influent, mostly as electricity, and the associated carbon emissions are in aggregate significant. In order to achieve carbon neutrality, it is important to understand direct and indirect carbon emissions generated by WWTPs. Here, we focused on electricity use in WWTPs as it is a major source of carbon emissions. Specifically, we compared the electricity intensity and associated carbon emissions of WWTPs in four countries: the USA, Germany, China, and South Africa. We found that 100\% energy self-sufficient WWTPs are feasible by a combination of increased energy efficiency and energy harvesting from the wastewater. Carbon emissions of WWTPs depend strongly on the electricity fuel mix, wastewater treatment technologies, treatment capacity, and influent and effluent water quality. A few WWTPs operating in developed countries (USA and Germany) have already achieved almost 100\% (or higher) electricity self-sufficiency through energy efficiency and harvesting biogas and electricity. In comparison with Germany, WWTPs in the USA are more heterogeneous and the range of unit carbon emission intensity is much wider. In some areas where the organic content in wastewater is lower and less biogas is produced, it is still possible to achieve energy self-sufficiency by using thermal energy from wastewater. Industrial wastewater in China in general consumes more electricity and the carbon intensity of electricity is also higher, resulting in much higher unit carbon emissions as compared with other countries. In megacities such as Shanghai, larger capacity of centralized WWTPs can decrease the unit carbon emissions significantly. These findings provide a global perspective on the state of WWTPs and are helpful to improve the understanding, designing and operating of WWTPs from the perspective of achieving carbon neutrality.},
  keywords = {Carbon neutrality,Energy efficiency,Energy harvesting,Greenhouse gas emission,Wastewater treatment plant}
}

@report{washingtonstatePriorityClimateAction2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Priority {{Climate Action Plan}} ({{PCAP}})},
  shorttitle = {Washington {{State PCAP}}},
  author = {{Washington State}},
  date = {2024-03-01},
  pages = {1--70},
  institution = {Washington State Department of Commerce},
  location = {Olympia, WA},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/washington-cprg-pcap.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-04},
  abstract = {The State of Washington (Washington) received funding through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) to develop plans to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other harmful air pollution. The CPRG planning grant enables states, metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), and tribal governments to develop a Priority Climate Action Plan (PCAP), followed by a Comprehensive Climate Action Plan (CCAP) and Status Report (state and MSAs only), over a four-year period through 2027. EPA requires that all PCAPs include a GHG Inventory, quantified GHG reduction measures, a Low Income and Disadvantaged Communities (LIDAC) Benefits Analysis, as well as a review of authority to implement each measure. Washington also received funding for an MSA grant. The Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (Agency or PSCAA) is serving as the Lead Entity for the Phase 1 CPRG Planning Grant on behalf of the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue MSA, which covers all cities and counties in the four-county region of King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish counties. Skamania and Clark counties are included in the Portland, OR metro area MSA grant. The Washington PCAP presents a focused list of measures to reduce GHG emissions and harmful air pollution and maximize the benefits of climate action in overburdened communities in Washington. Many of the quantified priority measures contained in this PCAP are based on existing state, local and tribal, climate and clean energy plans and programs. The Department of Commerce (Commerce) was responsible for developing the PCAP, in partnership with the entities named in the Acknowledgements section. Commerce is aware that that are many additional priority actions for each sector that could be included in this PCAP and acknowledges that the list of priority measures included in Section 2.2 is not intended to be inclusive of all possible priority actions available to tribes, state agencies and local jurisdictions. Instead, these priority actions focus on measures for which an eligible entity is planning to seek Phase 2 CPRG funding, rather than an exhaustive list of all possible priority measures available to reduce emissions in the state. Commerce and the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) will develop a comprehensive list of GHG measures in the CCAP, based on informal comments received on the PCAP, as well as existing state plans and other sources. A summary of measures that will be explored further in the CCAP can be found in Appendix C. Commerce also coordinated closely with the PSCAA, state agencies, and the Governor’s Office, in the creation of the PCAP. This PCAP was informed by, and is a continuation of, the many climate planning efforts already underway by state, regional, county, and local jurisdictions across Washington. This PCAP serves as a resource and guide for implementing near-term priority GHG reduction strategies and actions in furtherance of CPRG Phase 2 Implementation Grants for tribes, state agencies and local communities in Washington.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {State PCAP}
}

@article{weitekampSystematicReviewHealth2020,
  title = {A Systematic Review of the Health Effects Associated with the Inhalation of Particle-Filtered and Whole Diesel Exhaust},
  author = {Weitekamp, Chelsea A. and Kerr, Lukas B. and Dishaw, Laura and Nichols, Jennifer and Lein, McKayla and Stewart, Michael J.},
  date = {2020-01-02},
  journaltitle = {Inhalation Toxicology},
  volume = {32},
  number = {1},
  eprint = {32100584},
  eprinttype = {pmid},
  pages = {1--13},
  publisher = {Taylor \& Francis},
  issn = {0895-8378},
  doi = {10.1080/08958378.2020.1725187},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/08958378.2020.1725187},
  urldate = {2024-02-26},
  abstract = {Background: Diesel exhaust is a complex mixture comprised of gases and particulate matter and is a contributor to ambient air pollution. To reduce health risks, recent changes in diesel engine technology have significantly altered the composition of diesel exhaust, primarily by lowering emissions of particulate matter. However, animal toxicological studies continue to report health effects following exposure to diesel exhaust from engines employing particulate filters. The cause of these effects remains unclear. Objective and methods: To gain an understanding of the role of both particle-filtered and whole diesel exhaust on specific health outcomes, we conducted a systematic review in which we examined animal toxicological and controlled human exposure studies that included a comparison between inhalation of particle-filtered and whole diesel exhaust on any health endpoint. Results: We identified 26 studies that met both the inclusion and study evaluation criteria. For most health outcomes, the particle filtration methods employed in the included studies did not appreciably attenuate the health effects associated with exposure to whole diesel exhaust. There were also several health endpoints for which significant effects were associated with exposure to either particle-filtered or whole diesel exhaust, but not to both. Conclusions: Overall, the results from this systematic review demonstrate that exposure to different components in diesel exhaust can have distinct and independent health effects. Thus, to better inform human health risk assessments, future studies aimed at elucidating the health effects from diesel exhaust should include exposure to both particle-filtered and whole diesel exhaust.},
  keywords = {Diesel exhaust particles,filtered exhaust,nitrogen dioxide,particulate matter,traffic-related air pollution}
}

@report{wisconsindnrGreenhouseGas2021,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Wisconsin {{Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Report}}},
  author = {{Wisconsin DNR}},
  date = {2021-12},
  number = {AM-610-2021},
  pages = {1--45},
  location = {Madison, Wisconsin},
  url = {https://widnr.widen.net/view/pdf/o9xmpot5x7/AM610.pdf?t.download=true},
  urldate = {2024-01-26},
  abstract = {The 2021 Wisconsin Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Report was developed by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Air Management Program to provide a high-level perspective of GHG emissions from various economic sectors in Wisconsin. This inventory is a tool that can be used to support climate planning priorities in state agencies such as the Wisconsin Office of Sustainability and Clean Energy. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) State Inventory Tool (SIT) was used to develop this report. To compare greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across time, the report includes a GHG emissions inventory for 2005 and 2018 as well as a description of the GHG emissions trends in Wisconsin from 1990 through 2018. Greenhouse Gases and Emissions Sources The 2021 Wisconsin Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Report includes emissions of seven major GHGs: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). For the purposes of this report, HFCs, PFCs, NF3 and SF6 are reported together as “F-gases.” The emissions are then allocated to nine economic sectors: electricity, residential, commercial, industrial, transportation, industrial process, natural gas and oil, waste and agriculture. Additionally, annual carbon storage from natural and working lands is reported in the land-use, land-use- change and forestry (LULUCF) sector. Results and Key Findings Figure ES-1 provides a summary of GHG emissions by economic sector. Figure ES-2 shows long-term emission trends from 1990-2018 by sector. Some key findings of the inventory report and analysis include: • Gross GHG emissions in the state decreased by 6.1\% from 2005 to 2018, and net GHG emissions decreased by 9.1\% from 2005 through 2018. • The electricity sector emitted the most GHGs in 2018 (32.3\% of gross emissions); the largest decrease in emissions from 2005 to 2018 (11.8 MMTCO2E) also came from this sector. • Coal remained the largest source of CO2 emissions from the electricity generation sector in 2018, 81.6\%. • The transportation, industrial, natural gas and oil and waste sectors also showed modest emission decreases from 2005 to 2018. • Between 2005 and 2018, agriculture emissions increased by 3.5 MMTCO2E, the highest increase among all sectors. • Emissions from the residential, commercial and industrial process sectors also increased from 2005 to 2018. • LULUCF sector stored 19.1 MMTCO2E in 2018, a 20.1\% increase from the carbon stored in the sector in 2005. • Carbon dioxide accounted for most of the GHG emissions in 2018, 81.4\%. In Executive Order \#38, Gov. Tony Evers committed Wisconsin to meeting U.S. climate targets set in the 2015 Paris Agreement; that is, a 26-28\% reduction in GHG emissions from 2005 values by 2025. While GHG emissions in the state have decreased since 2005, the state will need to do more to meet these emission reduction targets.},
  langid = {english}
}

@report{wisconsingasElectricGasWater2022,
  title = {Electric, {{Gas}} or {{Water Annual Report}} to {{Public Service Commission}} of {{Wisconsin}} (2021)},
  author = {Wisconsin Gas},
  date = {2022},
  url = {https://apps.psc.wi.gov/PDFfiles/Annual%20Reports/IOU/IOU_2021_6650.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-01-24}
}

@report{WisconsinGreenhouseGas2021,
  title = {Wisconsin {{Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Report}}},
  date = {2021-12},
  pages = {14},
  institution = {Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources},
  url = {https://widnr.widen.net/view/pdf/o9xmpot5x7/AM610.pdf?t.download=true},
  urldate = {2024-01-29}
}

@dataset{wisconsinlegislatureWisconsinCitiesTowns2023,
  title = {Wisconsin {{Cities}}, {{Towns}} and {{Villages}} ({{July}} 2023)},
  author = {{Wisconsin Legislature}},
  date = {2023-08-01},
  number = {LTSB::wi-cities-towns-and-villages-july-2023},
  publisher = {Legislative Technology Services Bureau (LTSB)},
  url = {https://gis-ltsb.hub.arcgis.com/datasets/LTSB::wi-cities-towns-and-villages-july-2023/explore},
  urldate = {2023-12-21},
  abstract = {Wisconsin Cities, Towns, and Villages collected in July 2023 through LTSB's GeoData Collector.},
  langid = {american},
  version = {July 2023}
}

@dataset{wisconsinpublicservicecommissionElectricServiceTerritories2024,
  title = {Electric {{Service Territories}}},
  author = {Wisconsin Public Service Commission, Division of Energy Regulation and Tomaszewski, Tyler},
  date = {2024},
  url = {https://maps.psc.wi.gov/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=bb1a9f501e3d472cbde970310540b466},
  urldate = {2024-01-24}
}

@dataset{wisconsinpublicservicecommissionNaturalGasService2024,
  title = {Natural {{Gas Service Territories}}},
  author = {Wisconsin Public Service Commission, Division of Energy Regulation and Tomaszewski, Tyler},
  date = {2024},
  url = {https://maps.psc.wi.gov/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=a412f6ab20fb4ef8afe361621847c472},
  urldate = {2024-01-24}
}

@legislation{wisconsinstatelegChapter196Regulation2024,
  title = {Chapter 196, {{Regulation}} of {{Public Utilities}}},
  author = {{Wisconsin State Legislature}},
  date = {2024-02-14},
  journaltitle = {35.18},
  pages = {1--83},
  url = {https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/196}
}

@online{wisdotTCMapWisDOTTraffic,
  title = {{{TCMap}}: {{WisDOT Traffic Count Map}}},
  author = {{WisDOT}},
  url = {https://wisdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=2e12a4f051de4ea9bc865ec6393731f8},
  urldate = {2024-01-18},
  abstract = {The WisDOT Traffic Counts Map Application (TCMap) contains traffic statistics collected and analyzed by the Data Management Section of the Bureau of State Highway Programs in the Division of Transportation Investment in the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. These statistics are intended for use by transportation management, business, and the public. Traffic information is used in planning, programming, highway design, maintenance, traffic control and general administration of highway systems.  The traffic information contained in this map is Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) on road sections of the State Highways or Local Federal-Aid roads. The AADT represents traffic in both directions of travel and is the average for that particular section of route. Programs in the Division of Transportation Investment in the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. Wisconsin Traffic Data information can be found on the WisDOT Traffic Count website. This data was created for use by the WisDOT. Any other use or recompilation of the information, while not prohibited, is the sole responsibility of the user. WisDOT expressly disclaims all liability regarding fitness of the use of the information for other than WisDOT business. No liability, either expressed or implied, is assumed by WisDOT, or their employees, for the accuracy of the data delineated herein. The DTIM Traffic Count Map (TCMap) is subject to change or removal at any time without notice. More information on the application.}
}

@dataset{wisdotTrafficCountsWisconsin2023,
  type = {Feature Layer},
  title = {Traffic {{Counts}} ({{Wisconsin Station Locations}})},
  author = {{WisDOT}},
  date = {2023-07-05},
  publisher = {WisDOT Open Data},
  url = {https://data-wisdot.opendata.arcgis.com/},
  urldate = {2024-01-06},
  abstract = {This data set contains roadway annual average daily traffic (AADT) statistics data, which is the estimated mean number of vehicles that travelled over a traffic point each day for the reporting year. These statistics are intended for use by the government for transportation management and used by businesses and the public. Transportation management uses this information for transportation planning, programming, highway design, maintenance, traffic control, and general administration of highway systems The Wisconsin Traffic Counts dataset combines traffic count data with GIS mapping technology to display data in a tabular format, on a map, or both. Traffic\_Count\_AADT is a source of Wisconsin DOT traffic data information for road sections of the State Highways or select Local Federal-Aid roads. Traffic counts are reported as the number of vehicles expected to pass a given location on an average day of the year. This value is called the "annual average daily traffic" or AADT. The AADT is produced for either continuous count sites or short duration count sites. WisDOT collects continuous count data from about 320 permanent data collection locations primarily located on the State Trunk Highway System. Data at continuous count sites are scheduled to be collected in hourly intervals each day of the year. A short duration traffic count usually collects hourly intervals for a 48-hour period, taken at the specific locations throughout the state. Using continuous count data, short duration counts are then adjusted for the variation in traffic volume that occurs throughout the year. Short duration counts are collected over three, six, or ten-year cycles at more than 26,000 rural and urban locations throughout the state. In addition to Wisconsin DOT use for transportation management purposes, Wisconsin DOT is required to collect and report these statistics to the Federal Highway Administration monthly and annually.},
  langid = {american}
}

@report{wisdotTransportationPlanningManual2023,
  type = {Government},
  title = {Transportation {{Planning Manual}} - {{Chapter}} 9  {{Traffic Forecasting}}, {{Travel Demand Models}} and {{Planning Data}}},
  author = {{WisDOT}},
  date = {2023-05},
  pages = {1--110},
  institution = {{Bureau of Planning and Economic Development, Traffic Forecasting Section}},
  url = {https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/projects/data-plan/plan-res/tpm/9.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-01-18},
  langid = {english}
}

@dataset{wisdotWisconsinVehicleClassification2020,
  title = {Wisconsin {{Vehicle}} Classification Data},
  author = {{WisDOT}},
  date = {2020-06},
  publisher = {wisconsindot.gov},
  url = {https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/data-plan/traf-fore/default.aspx},
  urldate = {2023-12-28},
  abstract = {Vehicle classification data is used to describe the mix of passenger cars and trucks. Data is available for specific locations and for statewide averages. Data is collected based on the number of axles a vehicle has or the vehicle length.}
}

@dataset{wisdotWisconsinVehicleMiles2021,
  title = {Wisconsin {{Vehicle}} Miles of Travel ({{VMT}})},
  author = {{WisDOT}},
  date = {2021},
  publisher = {https://wisconsindot.gov/},
  url = {https://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/projects/data-plan/veh-miles/default.aspx},
  urldate = {2023-12-28},
  abstract = {Vehicle miles of travel (VMT) is a measure of all the miles driven within a specified area and timeframe. Most traffic counts are reported in terms of annual average daily traffic (AADT) and represent an estimate of the number of vehicles traveling along a given point on a highway on an average day in the year. VMT estimates, while based on AADT estimates, include the distance traveled element and thus provide a measure of highway vehicle travel usage over a geographic area, such as a county, state, or highway system. VMT captures aggregate trends on a broad range of corridors.}
}

@report{wvoeEnergyWiseWestVirginia2024,
  type = {Government},
  title = {{{EnergyWise West Virginia Priority Energy Action Plan}} ({{PEAP}})},
  shorttitle = {West {{Virginia PCAP}}},
  author = {{WVOE}},
  date = {2024-03},
  pages = {1--64},
  institution = {West Virginia Office of Energy},
  location = {Charleston, WV},
  url = {https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-03/wv-priority-energy-action-plan.pdf},
  urldate = {2024-03-08},
  abstract = {West Virginia has long been a national leader in producing Reliable, Efficient, Affordable, and Local (REAL) energy. By maintaining clean fossil fuels, strengthening the grid, and improving energy efficiency – plugging abandoned gas wells, exploring new technologies such as nuclear and geothermal, and building on existing collaborative networks – the CPRG Planning and Implementation grants will help West Virginia maintain its status within the nation’s energy sector while effectively and efficiently reducing GHG emissions. West Virginia’s CO2 emissions fell 32.9\% from 2005-2020, outpacing reductions in the US at large (25\%) and demonstrating that the allinclusive approach to electric generation does not conflict with appreciable reductions in greenhouse gas emissions (Figure 1.1). These CO2 reductions have primarily been the result of significant transitions in electric power generation across the country, leading to large, negative economic impacts across West Virginia and highlighting the historic interdependence between economic activity, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions. Energy consumption and emissions are dominated by the industrial sector, with 45\% of energy consumption (primary consumption and electricity) from industrial sources (see Figure 1.2). Any successful Energy Action Plan must have a focus on job creation and retention, create equitable economic outcomes for residents of the state, and position West Virginia for both resilient and reliable future energy generation. West Virginia has a disproportionate share of disadvantaged communities as defined by the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, with more than 60\% of census tracts in West Virginia in this category compared to 37\% nationwide. While this highlights the need for outreach to disadvantaged communities, it also illustrates the magnitude of the issue and the need to grow tangible, impactful relationships with, and drive outcomes in, these communities. Finalizing the Priority Energy Action Plan is the first step in this process. Figure 1.1. West Virginia Emissions by Economic Sector, in Million Metric Tons (MMT) of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2e). Figure 1.2. Emissions by Sector and Energy Consumption by Sector. Source: EPA State Energy Profiles. Source: EIA Beta. 180 160 140 2 120 \textasciitilde{} 1100 S 80 u {$>$}- ::;: 60 ::;: 40 20 0 West Virginia Emissions by Economic Sector, MMT CO2 eq. O"N\textasciitilde{} \textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde O"N\textasciitilde{} \textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde O"Nm \textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde o ;;;;;;;;\textasciitilde;\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde\textasciitilde{} Year WV Energy Consumption by Sector (2019) ■ Industrial ■ Residential ■ Commercial ■ Transportation  EnergyWise West Virginia PEAP March 2024 10 1.1.1 Responsible Entities The State of West Virginia has designated the West Virginia Office of Energy (WVOE) as the Lead Organization under the WV CPRG Planning Grant. The WVOE is the State Agency responsible for the formulation and implementation of fossil, renewable and energy efficiency initiatives designed to advance energy resource development opportunities and provide energy services to businesses, communities, and homeowners in West Virginia. As such, they are responsible for submitting the three (3) key deliverables of West Virginia’s CPRG Planning Grant: 1. Priority Energy Action Plan (PEAP) 2. Comprehensive Energy Action Plan (CEAP), and 3. Status Report 1.1.2 Coordinating Entities The WVOE has identified a strong set of coordinating and partnering organizations to ensure the success of this proposal. The list of coordinating partners includes: ● West Virginia University (WVU) – WVU is the largest university in West Virginia, a public landgrant research university, and the only R1-ranked research university in the state. ● Marshall University (MU) – Marshall is the second largest university in West Virginia and is a public research university. ● In-2-Market, Inc. (I2M) – In-2-Market, Inc. is a Pennsylvania-based 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation serving the tri-state region of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. In-2-Market accelerates industrial innovation with a focus on modern manufacturing, advanced materials, and energy. Cooperative agreements through the form of Memorandums of Understanding have been executed between the organizations to define expectations, roles and responsibilities, and required deliverables. 1.2 CPRG Scope Under this project, the WV CPRG Project Team has identified, evaluated, and utilized existing data resources1 to develop a statewide inventory of the major sources of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions within West Virginia and used that inventory data to develop an energy action plan. At the inception of the CPRG Planning Grant, the baseline GHG inventory and options analyses developed under this project were designed to be utilized by the WVOE CPRG Project Team for planning purposes to support West Virginia’s development of the following three deliverables: − West Virginia’s Priority Energy Action Plan (PEAP), submitted via this report on March 1, 2024. The plan includes near-term, implementation-ready, priority GHG reduction measures and is a prerequisite for any Implementation Grant. − West Virginia’s Comprehensive Energy Action Plan (CEAP), which is due in 2025. This plan will review all sectors that are significant GHG sources or sinks, and include both near- and longterm GHG emission reduction goals and strategies. 1 EPA, Environmental Information Quality Policy, CIO 2105.3, 03/07/2023 (p. 8) provides common examples of environmental information used to support the EPA’s mission at https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-04/environmental\_information\_quality\_policy.pdf.  EnergyWise West Virginia PEAP March 2024 11 − West Virginia’s Status Report on progress towards its goals, due in 2027. This progress report will include updated analyses, plans, and next steps for key metrics. For each deliverable, the Project Team was tasked with completing a series of five subtasks: 1. Develop a comprehensive GHG inventory for the largest sources within each sector, 2. Develop options for reducing emissions within each sector, 3. Develop estimates or ranges of estimates for the reductions achievable under each option, 4. Develop forecasts for economic impacts of the options, and 5. Present the inventory, options listing, and associated analyses in a technical report for consideration by state policymakers with the authority to approve the deliverables under the CPRG planning grants. This report is an accounting of the subtasks for the first deliverable, the Priority Energy Action Plan (PEAP)}
}

@article{yangSoilCarbonSequestration2019,
  title = {Soil Carbon Sequestration Accelerated by Restoration of Grassland Biodiversity},
  author = {Yang, Yi and Tilman, David and Furey, George and Lehman, Clarence},
  date = {2019-02-12},
  journaltitle = {Nature Communications},
  shortjournal = {Nat Commun},
  volume = {10},
  number = {1},
  pages = {718},
  publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},
  issn = {2041-1723},
  doi = {10.1038/s41467-019-08636-w},
  url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-08636-w},
  urldate = {2024-05-07},
  abstract = {Agriculturally degraded and abandoned lands can remove atmospheric CO2 and sequester it as soil organic matter during natural succession. However, this process may be slow, requiring a century or longer to re-attain pre-agricultural soil carbon levels. Here, we find that restoration of late-successional grassland plant diversity leads to accelerating annual carbon storage rates that, by the second period (years 13–22), are 200\% greater in our highest diversity treatment than during succession at this site, and 70\% greater than in monocultures. The higher soil carbon storage rates of the second period (years 13–22) are associated with the greater aboveground production and root biomass of this period, and with the presence of multiple species, especially C4 grasses and legumes. Our results suggest that restoration of high plant diversity may greatly increase carbon capture and storage rates on degraded and abandoned agricultural lands.},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Carbon cycle,Climate sciences,Ecosystem ecology}
}

@article{zomerGlobalSequestrationPotential2017,
  title = {Global {{Sequestration Potential}} of {{Increased Organic Carbon}} in {{Cropland Soils}}},
  author = {Zomer, Robert J. and Bossio, Deborah A. and Sommer, Rolf and Verchot, Louis V.},
  date = {2017-11-14},
  journaltitle = {Scientific Reports},
  shortjournal = {Sci Rep},
  volume = {7},
  number = {1},
  pages = {15554},
  publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},
  issn = {2045-2322},
  doi = {10.1038/s41598-017-15794-8},
  url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-15794-8},
  urldate = {2024-02-26},
  abstract = {The role of soil organic carbon in global carbon cycles is receiving increasing attention both as a potentially large and uncertain source of CO2 emissions in response to predicted global temperature rises, and as a natural sink for carbon able to reduce atmospheric CO2. There is general agreement that the technical potential for sequestration of carbon in soil is significant, and some consensus on the magnitude of that potential. Croplands worldwide could sequester between 0.90 and 1.85 Pg C/yr, i.e. 26–53\% of the target of the “4p1000 Initiative: Soils for Food Security and Climate”. The importance of intensively cultivated regions such as North America, Europe, India and intensively cultivated areas in Africa, such as Ethiopia, is highlighted. Soil carbon sequestration and the conservation of existing soil carbon stocks, given its multiple benefits including improved food production, is an important mitigation pathway to achieve the less than 2\,°C global target of the Paris Climate Agreement.},
  issue = {1},
  langid = {english},
  keywords = {Agroecology,Climate-change mitigation,Ecological modelling,Ecosystem services}
}

@report{zotero-3504,
  type = {report}
}