Ii p ittsburgh s c urrent emission profile

II. P
ITTSBURGH
’
S
C
URRENT
E
MISSION
P
ROFILE
Pennsylvania is the third-largest emitter of CO
2
in the
country [2]. With approximately 200 major electricity
generation facilities, the Commonwealth ranks second in the
nation in electricity generation, fourth in coal production, and
second in both nuclear and natural gas production [2]. As the
No. 1 state in in the United States for electricity exports,
electricity generation in Pennsylvania has impacts on
neighboring states and beyond.
Pennsylvania thus far has seen a reduction in its overall
carbon footprint, which can be credited largely to retiring
coal-generating plants in favor of natural-gas fired power
plants. In 2005, Pennsylvania was responsible for nearly 281.1
million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions- in 2015, the
state emitted 233.2 million metric tons; this represents a nearly
16% reduction. Although market conditions alone may get us
close to Pennsylvania’s target under the Clean Pow er Plan of a
27% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, there is
considerable room to be made for achieving our
decarbonization targets of an 80% reduction by 2050 and 100
percent soon thereafter (which is needed to avoid the
catastrophic impacts of climate change and extreme weather
events) [3]. In order to achieve this, Pennsylvanians will need
to come together to identify the appropriate range of
infrastructure changes, financial funding, and overall policy
mechanisms that are needed to support Pennsylvania’s
sustainable economic development.
Since the removal of the Clean Power Plan and its
accompanying planning resources, many states are now
turning internally to identify how to best reconcile their
economic paths of development with their overall energy
needs. The State of Pennsylvania is particularly conscious of
its leadership in the nation’s overall energy discussions and is
currently in the process of planning how to combine
economic, energy, and environmental policy in ways that will
best serve its citizens. At the same time, although mitigation
goals have been formed under the Conference of the Parties as
a forum for countries to agree on their long-term contributions
to carbon reductions, there is currently no existing globally-
agreed forum where cities and states can officially understand
how they can best contribute to long-term emissions
reductions through infrastructure decisions now. In an era of
constant regulatory fluctuation, taking effective decisions at
the local level can better contribute to the long-term
challenges of sustainability [1]. The City of Pittsburgh
recently drafted Climate Action Plan 3.0, yet without a state
nor nation-wide agreed upon goal for long-term energy
decarbonization. Pittsburgh as a city is embarking down a
sustainable path for development unseen before in the US, if
ever globally. Pittsburgh is truly choosing and displaying
leadership in energy development in that it is a city, yet is
choosing to define its development path as a nation
traditionally would. If Pittsburgh can clearly understand and