Cost-Carbon-Benefit Analysis
In the fall 2009, Spring Hill Solutions - a Burlington based carbon-management, clean energy , and business sustainability consulting firm – was hired to filter, analyze and prioritize the 200+ strategies developed by the eight workgroups. The goal of this process was to define a set of actionable GHG mitigation strategies that will: (1) form the foundation of the City’s CAP; (2) provide the City with a framework to guide decisions on emissions reductions strategies; and (3) better prepare the City to reach its GHG reduction target of 20% of 2007 emission levels by 2020.
This report discusses the results of a cost-carbon-benefit analysis and their graphical representation in a cost-abatement curve. Through providing a detailed description and illustration of the relative “carbon bang for each investment buck” for each strategy analyzed, this report is intended to be a decision-support tool for the City of Burlington in its climate action planning process.
In the next few months, the City will consider this analysis, along with other strategies that were not analyzed, to determine which strategies correspond best with the City’s priorities, financial resources, co-benefits, public and political will and a range of other factors.
To read the full report by Spring Hill Solutions, follow this link: City of Burlington Climate Action Plan Cost-Carbon-Benefit Analysis Final Report.
Cost-Carbon Abatement Curve
To most effectively support the selection of actionable carbon reduction strategies and to provide a foundation for the City’s CAP, the strategies analysed are presented in a customized cost-carbon abatement curve in the figure below. This graphical format, based directly on results from the strategy analysis, illustrates the strategies that will reduce GHG emissions most cost-effectively.
Cost-Carbon-Benefit Analysis
The purpose of the analysis process was to analyze and describe the financial characteristics and GHG reduction potential of the strategies previously deemed suitable for analysis: and to determine which strategies reduce emissions most cost-effectively. The analysis utilized seven assessment parameters for each strategy:
- Initial capital investment
- Total capital investment
- Average annual costs/savings
- Internal rate of return
- Net present value
- Average annual avoided emissions
- Cost per ton of avoided emissions
The results of the Cost-Carbon-Benefit Analysis is summarized in the table below, sorted by annual cost or savings per ton of avoided emissions ($/tCO2e). Following international standards, we express GHG emissions in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e). This reflects the fact that there is more than one type of GHG considered in this assessment and each has a different climate impact relative to carbon dioxide. Please note that negative numbers and costs are in red and in parenthesis.
For more information on next steps in the climate action planning process and how you can get involved, click here.
