z-logo
Premium
Cities and “budget‐based” management of the energy‐water‐climate nexus: Case studies in transportation policy, infrastructure systems, and urban utility risk management
Author(s) -
Sperling Joshua B.,
Ramaswami Anu
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
environmental progress and sustainable energy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.495
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1944-7450
pISSN - 1944-7442
DOI - 10.1002/ep.12765
Subject(s) - greenhouse gas , water security , incentive , business , sustainability , corporate governance , nexus (standard) , environmental resource management , environmental economics , water resources , environmental planning , economics , environmental science , finance , engineering , ecology , embedded system , biology , microeconomics
This article reviews city case studies to inform a framework for developing urban infrastructure design standards and policy instruments that together aim to pursue energy efficiency and greenhouse gas mitigation through city carbon budgets and water use efficiency and climate risk adaptation through city water budgets. This article also proposes combining carbon and water budgeting at the city‐scale for achieving successful coupled city carbon and water budget (CCCWB) programs. Under a CCCWB program, key actors including local governments, infrastructure designers/operators, and households would be assigned a GHG emissions and water “budget” and be required by state or federal levels to keep within this budget through the use of flexibility mechanisms, incentive programs, and sanctions. Multiple incentives and cross‐scale governance arrangements would be tied to energy‐water systems integration, resource‐efficient transportation and infrastructure development, and effective monitoring and management of energy use, emissions, climate risks to, and security of energy‐water‐transport‐food and other critical systems. As a first step to promote strategies for CCCWB development, we systematically review approaches of and shortcomings to existing budget‐based programs in the UK and US, and suggest improvements in three areas: measurement, modeling effectiveness of interventions for staying within a budget, and governance. To date, the majority of climate action or sustainability plans by cities, while mentioning climate impacts as a premise for the plan, do not address these impacts in the plan. They focus primarily on GHG mitigation while ignoring resource depletion challenges and energy‐climate‐water linkages, whereby water supplies can begin to limit energy production and energy shifts to mitigate climate change can limit water availability. Coupled carbon‐water budget plans, programs, and policies—described in this study‐ may address these concerns as well as the emerging trends that will exacerbate these problems—e.g., including population growth, climatic changes, and emerging policy choices that are not coordinated. Cities and “Budget‐Based” Management of the Energy‐Water‐Climate Nexus: Case Studies to Inform Strategy for Integrated Performance‐ and Incentive‐Based Design and Policy Instruments. © 2017 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Environ Prog, 37: 91–107, 2018

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here