City of Rossland:
Communities Adapting to Climate
Change Initiative
Final Report
September 30, 2010
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Executive Summary
In October 2009, the City of Rossland and Rossland Sustainability Commission commenced a
one-year project as part of the Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative funded by
Columbia Basin Trust (CBT). Rossland was one of the phase two communities selected to
participate in this CBT initiative. This report contains an outline of the process followed in that
project, the key climate impacts and vulnerability and risk findings and the final
recommendations of the project Steering Committee for consideration by Rossland City Council.
Project Milestones
Key project milestones included:






the selection of a thirteen member Steering Committee and Local Resource Team
comprised of residents, members of the Sustainability Commission, City Councillors, and
City Staff (November 2009);
completion of Two Preliminary Reports on Rossland’s Historic and Future Climate and
Rossland’s Socioeconomic Base Case by the Adaptation to Climate Change Team
(ACT) at Simon Fraser University (February 2010);
completion of a Local Observation Survey of changes that long-term residents have
noted in the climate (February 2010);
a public Impact Mapping and Priority Setting event to prepare impact maps for six
issue areas and to select four priority issue areas – water availability, infrastructure
and built environment, energy prices and availability and food security – (March 2010);
researching and assessing vulnerability and risk for the four priority issue areas to
prepare a Vulnerability and Risk Backgrounder (May – June 2010); and
preparation of an Action Planning Data Base and Action Plans for the four priority
issue areas (August – September 2010).
Projected Climate Changes
There is substantial evidence that our climate is changing. The Intergovernmental Panel for
Climate Change’s (IPCC) 4th Assessment Report and downscaled climate models for the
Columbia Basin suggest that key climate changes that Rossland is likely to experience by 2050
include:

higher average summer and winter temperatures, in the potential range of 2C;

increased overall precipitation in the range of 10.5%, but decreases in precipitation in
the summer in the range of 3%;
decreases in snowfall and snowpack;

Page ii
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report

earlier spring-run off by about 15 to 40 days;

lower summer stream flows for longer periods; and

increases in extreme events, such as heavy precipitation, droughts and windstorms.
These are likely conservative estimates, based on the best information available at the time of
the IPCC 4th Assessment Report, which include optimistic assumptions regarding the success of
international negotiations to limit global greenhouse gas emissions and peer-reviewed literature
dating only to 2006. The views outlined in more recent scientific literature are more pessimistic.
Vulnerability and Risk
Rossland’s vulnerability and risk for the four priority issue areas were assessed in detail.
Highlights of those vulnerability and risks are as follows:
Infrastructure
Rossland’s infrastructure is aging. Climate change could contribute to greater infrastructure
deterioration and damage as a result of increased basement floods and sewer back ups in
heavy rainfall events, increased freeze thaw stress on road surfaces, buildings and pipes, and
more snow weight on roofs. Extreme events such as wildfires or windstorms could cause
significant infrastructure damage. Rossland is preparing an Infrastructure Plan to outline a
schedule for future upgrades and has an opportunity to consider climate change impacts in this
plan at little additional cost. However, extensive City-wide infrastructure upgrades to address
climate change impacts are unlikely given current funding levels. Thus adaptation measures
may have to focus on maintenance and other practices, such as promoting increased on-site or
subdivision water retention.
Water
Climate change could result in moderately reduced water capture in Rossland’s reservoirs in
most normal years due to decreased snowpack, earlier and faster spring run-off that no longer
matches peak demand, and reduced summer precipitation. However variability in precipitation
and temperatures and/or the increase in the incidence of extreme events could result in years
where water capture is significantly lower than normal. Rossland’s high relative demand
compared to other jurisdictions provides for significant opportunities to address these potential
challenges through adaptation measures.
Energy
Due to a multitude of non-climate change related factors, such as increased global energy
demand and the rising cost of processing for many energy sources, global energy costs are
expected to rise. Climate may exacerbate some energy pricing and availability challenges.
Reductions in summer river flows could cause increases in hydroelectric prices and extreme
Page iii
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
events may cause temporary or extended power outages or price increases for fuels such
natural gas or oil. Adaptation measures to decrease Rossland’s energy demand and identify
alternate sources of energy make sense in the context of expected overall global price
increases and mitigation requirements.
Food
The majority of Rossland’s food is imported and thus the implications of climate change for food
security must be considered at a global level. While the scientific literature suggests that overall
global food production will not decline as long as global average temperature increases do not
exceed 3C, this must be taken with a considerable note of caution. Climate changes are
expected to cause significant shifts in agricultural productivity, with temperate regions such as
Canada becoming more productive, while productivity in tropical regions and the world’s oceans
may decline substantially. Thus the geopolitical implications of climate change on food
production alone may have significant impacts on Rossland’s access to food imports. Extreme
events, pests and diseases may have significant further impacts on global food production.
Non-climate change factors such as increase energy prices will also have an effect. In the
context of the wide array of unknowns surrounding global food production, adaptation measures
that promote increased local and regional food production would be prudent.
High Priority Actions
Nineteen high priority actions were identified in the context of key adaptation goals and
objectives for each priority issue area. Many of the priority actions also include more detailed
strategies that outline how the action can be achieved – the more detailed strategies are listed
in the Action Planning Data Base in section four.
The actions were assessed with respect to their urgency, potential cost, lead implementer and
links to the City Strategic Sustainability Plan and Official Community Plan. While some of these
details are presented here, the rest are contained in section four of this report. Section four also
outlines actions that were also identified as important second priorities in each issue area.
A key element of many of the high priority actions are that they are actions that the City and
Sustainability Commission should be doing anyway. Many of them have already been identified
in the Strategic Sustainability Plan (SSP) or Official Community Plan. Many of them are win-win
solutions that will achieve a multitude of sustainability goals in addition to adaptation goals.
Thus they can be viewed as no regrets actions that move our community towards our SSP
Vision for 2030 even if the expected changes in climate did not occur. The fact that they are
important from a climate change adaptation perspective just provides additional impetus to
actions that we already intended to undertake.
Page iv
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
The 19 priority actions selected at a public event in September 2010 are outlined below with
their associated adaptation goals.
General
Key Adaptation Goals:


ID
1.1.1
Residents are knowledgeable and continue to learn about climate change adaptation
Climate change adaptation is mainstreamed into City and community operations
Action
Undertake a public outreach
regarding specific climate
change adaptation actions as
they are implemented.
Urg
Lead
Cost
Funding
Source
H
City/
SC
L
City/SC
Description
The outreach should be low-cost and simple
i.e. mention of adaptation in conjunction with a
City initiative in a City or Sustainability
Commission newsletter, or as part of an event.
The intent is to help residents to understand
that adaptation is part of the rationale for
certain actions, such as water conservation
and fire smarting and to foster greater buy in
for those actions.
Ensure City committees,
1.5.1
H
City
L
City
The intent of this action is to ensure that
plans and processes consider
climate change is considered in City decisionclimate impacts/adaptation in
making. It is not intended to be onerous, but
their decision making.
rather a lens that is applied to major decisions,
much in the manner that the Strategic
Sustainability Plan has been referenced as a
standing line item in Staff memos to Council.
Urgency: High – Implement in 1-3 years; Medium – Implement in 3-5 years; Low – Implement in next 5-10 years
Cost: High – < $50,000; Medium – $10,00 to $50,000; Low – > $10,000
Lead: SC – Sustainability Commission; WSTF – Water Stewardship Task Force; ETF – Energy Task Force
Infrastructure
Key Adaptation Goals:
 Rossland’s infrastructure is resilient to climate change
 Climate change is considered in infrastructure upgrades as well as new residential
development and renovations
 Alternate management approaches (such as conservation, on-site or neighbourhood water
retention etc.) are considered in place of infrastructure upgrades
ID
Action
Urg
Lead
Cost
Funding
Source
Description
Page v
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
Give consideration to climate
change in the new City of
Rossland infrastructure
upgrade assessment and
plan, and encourage Council
to implement the plan.
H
City
L
City
2.1.5
Encourage other agencies at
the regional, provincial and
federal level, such as CBT, to
prepare best practices guides
and provide funding for pilot
programs to address climate
change in mountain climates.
H
SC
L
SC
2.6.3
Prepare climate change
design guidelines for new
builds and renovations to
reduce overheating, basement
flooding, fire risk and extreme
event damage.
M
City/
SC
M
Grants
2.10.1
Revise the Subdivision and
Development Servicing Bylaw
to require on-site or
subdivision water retention
and minimized runoff design
in new developments.
H
City
M
City
2.10.2
Promote on-site water
retention, active storage
capacity and permeable
surfaces on existing
residential properties through
education and incentives.
H
SC/
City
M
SC/
City
Given that the City is preparing an
Infrastructure Plan, this is an opportunity to
ensure that consideration is given to climate
change impacts in that plan with limited
additional cost. The potential for more
frequent and intense extreme events and
earlier spring run off will likely have some
infrastructure implications and should be
considered in the new plan.
Local governments have limited resources to
develop best practices guides and pilot
innovative climate change adaptation
measures such as new drainage and road
paving techniques. If other agencies were to
provide funding for such projects, they could
be potentially adopted on a larger scale. The
Sustainability Commission (SC) could play an
important advocacy role in encouraging these
types of pilot programs.
Voluntary guidelines for builders outlining how
to build a climate change resilient home could
increase the number of these types of homes
in Rossland. The guidelines need not be
extensive, but grant funding would probably be
necessary to facilitate their development. The
SC could play a role in developing grant
applications.
The Subdivision and Development Servicing
Bylaw was prepared in 1998 and variances are
required for some innovative on-site or
subdivision water retention techniques, such
as swales. These water retention techniques
are broadly supported in the OCP and can be
less expensive than more conventional stormwater management approaches, such as curbs
and gutters. Revising the Subdivision and
Development Servicing Bylaw to remove
barriers to their application might encourage
their greater use. The Subdivision and
Development Servicing Bylaw has recently
been budgeted for revision.
Minimizing runoff through water retention
techniques is a major theme in the OCP and
could be critical low-cost adaptation measure
reducing the need for some infrastructure
upgrades. The SC and City could play a
partnership role in promoting these measures.
Page vi
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Water
Key Adaptation Goals:
 Rossland has accurate information regarding annual stream flows, snow pack and water use
 Rossland manages its existing water supply without the need for additional reservoir capacity
 The impact of potentially decreased water supply in late summer/early fall as a result of
climate change is minimized without creating additional costs to tax payers
 Rossland is prepared to respond to droughts
 Ecosystem needs are considered in Rossland’s strategic water management
ID
Action
Urg
Lead
Cost
Funding
Source
Description
The City is already taking significant action on
this front with the installation of water meters
to measure usage and the planned increase
in manual monitoring on our creeks.
Prioritization of this action is intended as a
show of support for those actions to ensure
that they continue and to provide impetus for
the analysis and publication of the data once it
is available.
Rossland’s per capita water use is very high
compared to many other jurisdictions in North
America and the world. Measures to reduce it
just make sense from many perspectives –
climate change adaptation, sustainability,
reduced future infrastructure costs, reduced
sewer treatment costs and the potential to
maintain downstream flows. These measures
do not have to be high cost, particularly with
the range of billing options made possible with
water meters, and potentially grants available
through CBT Water Smart for education.
This has been recommended in both the SSP
and OCP and could be accomplished at
limited cost by updating the existing draft plan.
A plan could encompass many of the water
actions outlined in this report including a
drought plan (3.3.1) with trigger points for
water restrictions in extreme climate change
event years.
Communities around the world use rainwater
3.1.1
3.1.2
Improve our data regarding
water supply and demand.
H
City
L
City
3.2.1
Reduce per capita water use
through a combination of
regulation, education,
incentives and targets.
H
City/
SC/
WSTF
L-M
SC/City/
CBT
Water
Smart
3.4.1
Create a watershed and/or a
water management plan.
M
City/
WSTF
M
City
3.5.1
Encourage residents to utilize
M
SC/
L
SC
Page vii
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
alternative water sources for
non-potable water use needs.
WSTF
and greywater for non-potable water use
needs such as lawn or garden watering.
Although provincial legislation currently
restricts the range of uses of greywater, this
could change in the future. Although
rainwater barrels (as opposed to cisterns) do
not provide a significant reduction in potable
water demand, they promote an ethic of
conservation and could be promoted at low
cost through the education strategies adopted
for action 3.2.1. They also assist in on-site
water retention. Wide use of cisterns could
have a notable impact on Rossland’s water
demand.
Energy
Key Adaptation Goals:
 Rossland’s vulnerability to the impacts of rising energy prices is minimized
 Rossland’s vulnerability to temporary and long-term energy supply interruptions is minimized
 Rossland has a diversified energy supply through local renewable energy generation
ID
Urg
Lead
Cost
Funding
Source
Description
A Community Energy Plan with targets and
measures for community and corporate energy
management has been suggested in the SSP,
OCP and by the Energy Task Force (ETF). It
would assist the City in achieving both climate
change adaptation goals and carbon neutral
commitments, while potentially on a Corporate
level reducing City costs if energy savings are
achieved. It is also a symbolic issue,
establishing the City’s willingness to lead by
example. Templates exist and this could likely
be done at low cost with the help of the ETF.
The City is already taking significant action on
this front and the intent of prioritizing this
action is to provide support to those initiatives
and ensure that they continue and are
reflected in Council decisions.
In the absence of a Community and Corporate
Energy Plan, the City can start taking actions
to implement energy conservation measures,
such as the use of lower wattage bulbs in
streetlights, or a green fleet program. These
actions will both help to reduce City costs and
4.1.2
Develop a Community and
Corporate Energy Plan.
M
City/
ETF
M
City/
SC/
Grants
4.1.5
Control sprawl and promote
infill development.
H
City
L
City
4.1.8
Identify and implement energy
conservation measures on a
Corporate City level.
H
City/
ETF
M
City/
Grants
Page viii
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
4.3.1
Provide incentives for the
development of renewable
energy facilities.
M
City
H
City/
Grants
contribute to the achievement of carbon
neutral commitments. Although the City’s
contribution to community energy use is
relatively small, it was repeatedly noted that
the City must lead by example if they want
residents to take action on energy
conservation.
Renewable energy is a significant contributor
to community energy needs in many European
countries at reasonable rates of return.
Although renewables have yet to achieve grid
parity in BC, there is significant interest in
them, and small pilot projects could be
fostered through the use of incentives.
Renewable energy is supported in the OCP.
Ultimately this kind of initiative could produce
economic development spin-off benefits, but at
the outset might require grant funding.
Food
Key Adaptation Goals:



Rossland is a food secure community and its vulnerability to potential declines in global food
production are minimized
Local farmers and residential growers are supported
Agricultural lands are identified and protected
ID
Urg
Lead
Cost
Funding
Source
Description
This could include measures such as
encouraging backyard gardening, mentoring
programs and workshops. Rossland REAL
Food is already playing a significant role in
this area and with a continuation of their
funding may be able to continue to do so at a
relatively low cost.
For limited expenditure, the City could further
designate unused public lands suitable for
growing as additional community gardens
and incorporate garden designations into
development density bonuses. While
moving towards food self-sufficiency may
require a regional level solution, the City
could provide assistance promoting
additional backyard gardening or small-scale
5.1.2
Promote increased local food
production and processing.
H
REAL
Food/
SC
M
SC/City/
Grants
5.3.1
Ensure local growers have
sufficient land access.
M
City
L
City
Page ix
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
5.4.1
Establish a community
composting system.
M
City
M
City/
RDKB
5.5.1
Protect agricultural land and
topsoil through incentives,
education, planning and
regulation.
M
City/
REAL
Food
L
City
agriculture through in greenhouse
development or the purchase of private land
for demonstration farms. This would require
a higher level of funding and the potential
water consumption implications might have
to be assessed.
A community composting system for yard
and/or food waste system would not only
provide benefits for food production, but also
for reducing Rossland’s contribution to the
waste stream. Yard waste could be
composted in dispersed neighbourhood
sites.
Protecting potential agricultural land from
development and ensuring that development,
renovations and landscaping are done in a
manner that protects topsoil are critical
components of maintaining the potential for
future agriculture. With some funding,
Rossland REAL Food could play a role in the
education component of this action, but the
City has a key land-use planning role to play.
Conclusions and Next Steps
Climate change is a critical challenge facing the City of
Rossland. Its impacts will likely start to become more
evident as we move towards 2050. Climate change can also
be viewed as a potential opportunity to undertake some key
adaptation actions that the City has already identified in the
SSP and OCP as being desirable for Rossland to promote
sustainability, reduce City costs and encourage economic
development. The fact that these actions are also important
from a climate change adaptation perspective provides
further impetus for their implementation.
“Win-win” climate change
adaptations are “actions that
provide adaptation benefits while
meeting other social,
environmental or economic
objectives, including climate
change mitigation.” ~ Pew Center
on Global Climate Change
The nineteen priority adaptation actions identified in this report are presented to the City and to
the Sustainability Commission for their consideration and implementation. Each priority action
has been flagged with regard to whether the City or Sustainability Commission might best play a
lead role in its implementation.
The City is already undertaking a few of the priority actions. Including those actions in the
recommendations here is intended to provide further support to the actions that the City is
Page x
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
already taking. Other priority actions are additional
to the work that the City is already doing and will
require some budget planning by both the City and
the Sustainability Commission. When selecting
priority actions, consideration was given to their
affordability. In most cases, the priority actions can
be accomplished if they are incorporated into
regular budget planning and implemented as part of
the sustainability initiatives that the City would likely
consider as part of the SSP implementation. Other
actions may require grant funding if they are to be
implemented. The Sustainability Commission may have an important role to play in assisting in
the preparation of appropriate grant applications.
“Even with mitigation efforts, climate
change will continue to unfold for decades
due to the long atmospheric lifetime of past
greenhouse-gas emissions and the gradual
release of excess heat that has built up in
the oceans. Climate change adaptation is
thus a necessity for our nation and the
world.” ~ Scientific American, US Needs a
Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change,
September 30, 2010
Ultimately a plan is only as good as its implementation, and it is the hope of the Steering
Committee that the priority actions identified in this report form the basis for the City’s ongoing
response to climate change.
Climate change is already occurring. The precise manner in which it will manifest in Rossland is
not completely known. This report provides some best guesses based on the science available.
Even if mitigation strategies prove successful, some level of climate change is inevitable. Local
governments will be forced to be at the forefront of climate change adaptation and the choices
they make today might affect their capacity to adapt in the future. Incorporating climate change
adaptation considerations into regular planning cycles is a critical step for local governments to
start taking today. Communities that anticipate and prepare for climate change now will position
themselves to be the resilient sustainable communities of the future.
“Many decisions that will affect how
communities fare in a changing climate
will be made locally.” ~ Rosina Bierbaum,
Dean of University of Michigan's School of
Natural Resources and Environment.
Page xi
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Acknowledgements
This project was made possible through the funding and support of numerous individuals and
organizations. Some of the key supporters include:

The project Steering Committee – Les Carter, Kathy Moore, Ken Holmes, Kelvin Saldern,
Mike Maturo, Hanne Smith, Dirk Lewis and Michelle Laurie, with special mention to the
Steering Committee Chair, Aaron Cosbey, and deputy chair Don Thompson.


The Local Resource Team – Don Mortimer, Steve Hilts, Deanne Steven and Chris McLean.
The Rossland Sustainability Commission for offering supplemental funding and support at
the public events.
City staff, with special mention to Mike Maturo and Mike Thomas who offered time and
critical expertise.
Michelle Laurie and Rachael Roussin of CBT, who offered ongoing, patience, support and
coordination assistance.
Project Assistant, Cindy Hall, who was always there with an extra set of hands when
needed.
The project Technical Support Team, with significant thanks to Cindy Pearce, Hans Shreier,
Stewart Cohen, David Lapp, Trevor Murdock and George Penfold. Without the ongoing and
repeated reviews by Cindy Pearce, few of the documents associated with this process
would have been produced.






The Coordinators of the other Phase 2 projects, Tim Sander and Kristen Aasen, who offered
camaraderie, shared ideas and contributed their time to several of Rossland’s events.
The Simon Fraser research team, Deb Harford, James Watson, Christie Spry and Emily
Willobee.
This report was prepared by Jennifer Ellis, Project Coordinator.
Many thanks to the Columbia Basin Trust (CBT), the Rossland Sustainability Commission and
the City of Rossland for funding this project.
Page xii
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... ii
Project Milestones ......................................................................................................................................................... ii
Projected Climate Changes......................................................................................................................................... ii
Vulnerability and Risk................................................................................................................................................. iii
Infrastructure .................................................................................................................................................................................. iii
Water ................................................................................................................................................................................................... iii
Energy ................................................................................................................................................................................................. iii
Food...................................................................................................................................................................................................... iv
High Priority Actions ................................................................................................................................................... iv
General ..................................................................................................................................................................................................v
Infrastructure ....................................................................................................................................................................................v
Water .................................................................................................................................................................................................. vii
Energy .............................................................................................................................................................................................. viii
Food...................................................................................................................................................................................................... ix
Conclusions and Next Steps ........................................................................................................................................ x
Acknowledgements.................................................................................................... xiii
Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... 1
I: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 4
Project Overview ............................................................................................................................................................ 4
Key Project Milestones ................................................................................................................................................ 5
Step 1: Get Started (Oct – Dec 2009) ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Step 2: Learn About Climate Change (Jan – Feb 2010) ................................................................................................. 5
Step 3: Identify Priorities in Your Community (March 2010)..................................................................................... 6
Step 4: Assess Vulnerability and Risk (April – July 2010) ............................................................................................ 6
Step 5: Develop Adaptation Strategies and Actions (August – September 2010) ............................................. 6
Purpose of this Document .......................................................................................................................................... 6
Other Key Project Documents................................................................................................................................... 7
Original Socioeconomic Focus .................................................................................................................................. 8
Why Climate Change Adaptation? ........................................................................................................................... 9
II: Critical Projected Climate Changes for Rossland ............................................... 12
Temperatures ................................................................................................................................................................ 14
Hydrological Regime and Processes .................................................................................................................... 15
Variability and Extreme Events ............................................................................................................................. 17
Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................... 18
III: Vulnerability and Risk Assessment...................................................................... 20
Page 1
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Steps .................................................................................................................................................................................. 20
Definitions....................................................................................................................................................................... 20
Vulnerability Assessment ..........................................................................................................................................................21
Risk Assessment ............................................................................................................................................................................21
Rossland’s Approach .................................................................................................................................................. 23
Priority Area 1: Infrastructure and Built Environment .................................................................. 24
Current and Future Non-Climate Related Stresses and Opportunities ................................................. 24
City-wide Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................................................24
Roads ..................................................................................................................................................................................................25
Buildings and Residences ..........................................................................................................................................................26
Storm-sewers, Culverts and Sewers .....................................................................................................................................27
Future Climate Change Infrastructure Impacts for Rossland .................................................................... 28
City-wide Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................................................28
Buildings and Residences ..........................................................................................................................................................28
Storm-sewers, Culverts and Sewers .....................................................................................................................................29
Roads ..................................................................................................................................................................................................29
Water Pipes ......................................................................................................................................................................................29
Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................... 30
Priority Area 2: Water Supply .................................................................................................................. 31
Current and Future Non-Climate Related Stresses and Opportunities ................................................. 31
Supply .................................................................................................................................................................................................31
Demand .............................................................................................................................................................................................32
Matching Supply and Demand.................................................................................................................................................33
Quality ................................................................................................................................................................................................34
Future Climate Change Water Impacts for Rossland .................................................................................... 34
Supply .................................................................................................................................................................................................35
Demand .............................................................................................................................................................................................35
Matching Supply and Demand.................................................................................................................................................35
Quality ................................................................................................................................................................................................35
Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................... 36
Priority Area 3: Energy ............................................................................................................................... 37
Current and Future Non-Climate Related Stresses and Opportunities ................................................. 37
Demand .............................................................................................................................................................................................37
Supply and Prices ..........................................................................................................................................................................40
Future Climate Change Energy Impacts for Rossland .................................................................................. 48
Demand .............................................................................................................................................................................................48
Supply and Prices ..........................................................................................................................................................................48
Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................... 49
Priority Area 4: Food Security ................................................................................................................... 50
Current and Future Non-Climate Related Stresses and Opportunities ................................................. 50
Demand .............................................................................................................................................................................................50
Supply .................................................................................................................................................................................................51
Page 2
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Matching Supply and Demand.................................................................................................................................................56
Future Climate Change Food Impacts for Rossland....................................................................................... 56
Local Food Production ................................................................................................................................................................56
International Food Production ...............................................................................................................................................57
Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................... 57
IV: Action Plans ........................................................................................................... 59
Action Planning Process ............................................................................................................................................ 59
Goals and Objectives ....................................................................................................................................................................59
Action Planning Data Base ........................................................................................................................................................59
Review of the Action Planning Data Base ...........................................................................................................................59
Prioritization of Potential Actions .........................................................................................................................................60
Further Analysis of Priority Actions .....................................................................................................................................60
Approval of Priority Actions ....................................................................................................................................................61
Priority Climate Change Adaptation Actions .................................................................................................... 61
General ...............................................................................................................................................................................................61
Infrastructure .................................................................................................................................................................................62
Water ..................................................................................................................................................................................................63
Energy ................................................................................................................................................................................................64
Food.....................................................................................................................................................................................................65
Action Planning Data Base ....................................................................................................................................... 66
Categories of Actions ...................................................................................................................................................................67
Interpreting the Tables ...............................................................................................................................................................67
I: General ...........................................................................................................................................................................................68
II: Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................................................................73
III: Water ...........................................................................................................................................................................................82
IV: Energy .........................................................................................................................................................................................87
V: Food ...............................................................................................................................................................................................95
V: Conclusions and Next Steps ............................................................................... 101
References ................................................................................................................. 103
Page 3
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
I: Introduction
Project Overview
In October 2009, the City of Rossland and Rossland Sustainability Commission commenced a
one-year Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative project funded by Columbia Basin
Trust (CBT). The Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative is a one of a kind initiative
to assist communities in the Columbia Basin to prepare for the effects of climate change, one of
the greatest challenges our communities will face in the coming decades.
“No person, people or nation
will be spared. Only the
degree by which we will have
to adapt is in question.” ~ Ron
Sims, King County Executive
Rossland was one of the phase two communities selected to
participate in this CBT program. This report contains an
outline of the process followed in that project, the key climate
impacts and vulnerability and risk findings and the final
recommendations of the project Steering Committee for
consideration by Rossland City Council.
The goals of the Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative project were to: research
potential climate change impacts in Rossland, establish community priorities for adapting to
climate change and develop action plans in association with those community priorities. In
accordance with the Initiative guidelines from CBT, the project consisted of six steps:
1) Get Started – Establish local coordinators/consultants and
Steering Committee, and develop workplans
2) Learn about Climate Change – Review local climate knowledge
and climate change projections for Rossland
3) Identify Priorities in your Community – Identify potential
climate change impacts in Rossland and determine community
priority areas to be addressed through adaptation plans
4) Assess Vulnerability and Risk – Conduct sensitivity analysis
and probability assessment on priority impacts
5) Develop Adaptation Strategies and Actions – Develop
adaptation strategies and actions for priority areas
Oct 2009 – Dec 2009
6) Implement and Monitor Plans – Incorporate action plans into
existing and future plans and bylaws
Ongoing following the
project
Dec 2009 – Jan 2010
February 2010 – March
2010
March 2010 – July 2010
July 2010 – September
2010
This project was managed by a Steering Committee comprised of four members of the public,
two representatives of the Sustainability Commission, two City Councillors, one City Staff
member, one representative of Columbia Basin Trust, and a Coordinator and Assistant under
Page 4
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
contract to the City of Rossland. In addition, five members of the public and two City Staff
members comprising a Local Resource Team were kept informed of all project activities, invited
to all project events and provided important input at various stages of the project.
Broader public input was sought at various stages of the project, including public events in
February 2010 to learn about climate change, March 2010 to identify priority issue areas, and
September 2010 to identify priority actions. Expertise in various areas was directly sought at
multiple stages of the project from groups such as Rossland REAL Food, the Rossland
Sustainability Commission and associated Task Forces, City Staff, CBT Technical Support
Team, long-term Rossland residents, the Phase One and Two Coordinators and consultants
from other communities participating in the Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
and other community members.
Key Project Milestones
The key project milestones completed by the project Coordinator with the assistance of the
Steering Committee are as follows:
Step 1: Get Started (Oct – Dec 2009)



Initial public outreach regarding project and advertising for Steering Committee members
Development of a detailed work plan
Selection of SFU Adaptation to Climate Change Team (ACT) as researcher for project

Selection of thirteen member Steering Committee and Local Resource Team comprised of
residents, members of the Sustainability Commission, City Councillors, and City Staff

Attendance by Steering Committee members, City Council, City Staff and Sustainability
Commission representatives at a CBT regional workshop on climate change adaptation
Step 2: Learn About Climate Change
(Jan – Feb 2010)

Development of a local climate change
observation survey to determine residents’
observations of climate change

Steering Committee prioritization of research
topics for SFU researchers
Steering Committee review of Preliminary
Reports regarding Rossland’s Historical and
Future Climate, and Economic and Policy
Outlook from SFU ACT
Steering Committee meeting with TST experts to discuss four key climate change
adaptation questions


Page 5
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative

Public event featuring TST experts discussing key climate change adaptation issues

Completion of local observation report with 17 long-term Rossland residents identifying
changes observed in the climate
Step 3: Identify Priorities in Your
Community (March 2010)

Completion of a public Impact Mapping and
Priority Setting Event to prepare impact maps
and identify four priority issue areas – water
availability, infrastructure, energy prices and
availability and food security
Step 4: Assess Vulnerability and Risk
(April – July 2010)




Preparation of Food Security Backgrounder for Rossland, Castlegar and Kaslo Area D
Review of SFU draft Vulnerability and Risk Assessment for water, infrastructure and energy
Completion of group Food Security Vulnerability and Risk Assessment
Completion of Supplemental document to final SFU Vulnerability and Risk assessment for
water, infrastructure and energy
Step 5: Develop Adaptation
Strategies and Actions (August –
September 2010)

Preparation of an action planning data
base for water, infrastructure, energy and food

Completion of a public event to prioritize
actions for water, infrastructure, energy and
food

Preparation of final Climate Change
Adaptation Report
It is the hope of the Steering Committee that the City of Rossland and Sustainability
Commission continue with the important work of this initiative and complete Step 6: Implement
and Monitor Plans.
Purpose of this Document
This final report compiles the key findings of the many documents that were prepared over the
course of this project including the preliminary reports prepared by SFU, the Vulnerability and
Page 6
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Risk Assessment Backgrounder, the Food Security Backgrounder, and the Action Planning
Data Base.
This final report was written for several audiences:
1) The City of Rossland Staff, Mayor, and Council for consideration in future City policy
and plan development and City operations.
2) City of Rossland residents to foster understanding of climate change adaptation and to
promote the changes that may be necessary to ensure Rossland is a sustainable
community in 2050.
3) CBT and other Communities interested in developing climate change adaptation
plans as part of Rossland’s obligations under its Contribution Agreement to CBT and to
provide as much information as possible to other communities that wish to undertake
similar planning processes.
The views contained in this document reflect the composite perspectives of the project Steering
Committee with considerable input from City Staff. To the extent that it was possible to verify
facts, this was done. However some of the views contained herein represent the opinions and
best guesses of the Steering Committee.
This report is organized into four major sections. The first provides an introduction and overview
of the project. The second outlines in detail the climate changes Rossland is expected to
experience. The third section outlines Rossland’s potential vulnerability and risk for the four
priority issue areas. Finally the detailed action plans are presented in section four.
Other Key Project Documents
As outlined above, many documents were developed over the course of this project. The key
findings of these other project documents are summarized in this report. These documents can
be found on the Sustainability Commission website www.visionstoaction.ca in the climate
change adaptation section. These key documents include:
1) Historical and Future Climate in Rossland, British Columbia – Prepared by the
Adaptation to Climate Change Team (ACT) at Simon Fraser University. This document
provides an overview of Rossland’s historical climate, spatial climate trends, climate
variability and future climate projections for temperature, precipitation, hydrological
projections, implications for biodiversity and agriculture and extreme weather. Note: Due
to its size, this document is not available on the website. Hard copies can be obtained
by contacting Jennifer Ellis at visionstoaction@rossland.ca or City Hall.
Page 7
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
2) Economic and Policy Outlook Rossland, British Columbia: Preliminary Report –
Prepared by the Adaptation to Climate Change Team (ACT) at Simon Fraser University.
This document reviews Rossland’s status and outlook with regard to key economic
indicators including population, income, labour force, housing, transportation, industry,
mining, tourism, land use, water and energy and Rossland’s existing policy frameworks
including the Official Community Plan (OCP) and Strategic Sustainability Plan (SSP).
3) Local Observation Survey – Prepared by Cindy Hall, Project Assistant. This report
reviews the quantitative and qualitative results of interviews with seventeen long-term
Rossland residents with regard to their observations of changes in precipitation,
temperature, seasons, water bodies, insects, birds, animal species, and plants.
4) Food Security Backgrounder – Prepared by Jennifer Ellis, Project Coordinator. This
report was prepared to assess regional food security for the Phase 2 communities
Rossland, Castlegar and Kaslo/Area D. It reviews the scientific literature with regard to
the implications of climate change for global food production and assesses the potential
for regional food self-sufficiency from both a biophysical and socioeconomic perspective.
5) Impact Maps for the Key Issue Areas – Prepared by the public at a public event held
March 3, 2010. Impact mapping is a method of visualizing pathways of how changes in
climate can lead to ecosystem responses and in turn community impacts. The
brainstormed maps prepared at the public event provide an immediate visual of how
Rossland could be impacted by various changes in climate.
6) The Food Security Vulnerability and Risk Group Assessment – Prepared by the
Steering Committee and representatives of the Watershed Stewardship Task Force and
Rossland REAL Food. This is a joint assessment of Rossland’s vulnerability and risk
with respect to climate change impacts on international food production and local food
production and served as the basis for the development of the priority actions for food.
Original Socioeconomic Focus
In keeping with the Sustainability Commission priority of promoting economic development
established at its strategic planning session in October 2009, the original intent was to take a
socioeconomic focus in Rossland’s Climate Change Adaptation project. The original project title
was Adapting to Climate Change: A Socioeconomic Priority, and the Steering Committee
focused many of its initial discussions on how climate change might affect Rossland from a
socioeconomic perspective, both in terms of the potential impacts of climate change on
Rossland’s key employers, and the potential costs associated with climate change impacts on
infrastructure and other community assets. The Adapting to Climate Change Team at Simon
Page 8
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Fraser University was contracted to conduct a multiple accounts analysis of the economic
impacts of climate change and a cost benefit analysis of potential adaptation measures to
respond to climate change.
For various reasons the socioeconomic focus did not come to fruition as expected. First, at the
public impact mapping and priority setting event conducted in March 2010, Rossland’s major
economic drivers were presented as one of the potential priority issue areas. However major
economic drivers was not selected as a priority by the public at that event and in fact was
ranked last by the public as a potential priority issue area.
Second, adding the socioeconomic analysis to our project was acknowledged from the
beginning to be a more challenging second layer to our analysis. In order to develop adaptation
actions, it is necessary to consider the potential impacts of climate change on the biophysical
environment. The potential community impacts including those of an economic nature, which
may arise from these biophysical impacts are then assessed. This is a challenging undertaking.
Our data and understanding with respect to biophysical impacts of climate change are at best
uncertain, despite the presence of a considerable body of research. It is even harder to predict
how the economy is going to be impacted by climate change and the resultant costs and
benefits that may arise. The economic impact of climate change is an area of research that
economists are just beginning to consider.
As a result, given that Rossland’s major economic drivers were not ranked as a priority by
community members, it was decided that adding the socioeconomic analysis to our project was
too challenging based on our current state of knowledge and the resources available to the
Steering Committee. While multiple accounts and cost benefit analyses could have been
undertaken, the complexity of doing so, and the absence of accurate economic forecasts and
other data on which to base the analyses would have limited our ability to produce meaningful
quantitative results. As a result, the socioeconomic focus and title were dropped in favour of a
more conventional analysis of biophysical and community impacts.
The foregoing is not to suggest that the potential economic impacts of climate change are not
important. They are, and were considered in the development of adaptation actions. We were
just unable to undertake a quantitative assessment of them. Thus climate change adaptation
remains a socioeconomic priority, as per the original name for this project. However the project
highlighted that there are many other equally compelling reasons for adaptation actions.
Why Climate Change Adaptation?
Climate change adaptation is premised on the assumption that the climate changes outlined in
detail in the second section of this report are going to occur and that Rossland and other
communities around the world will have to adapt to those changes, including both risks and
opportunities. It is differentiated from climate change mitigation, which is related to initiatives to
Page 9
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
reduce our emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere in order to reduce further climate
change. Mitigation is a critical strategy to help safeguard our planet for future generations, but
mitigation alone will unlikely be enough.
Climate change has been identified as the greatest
“Climate change is one of the greatest
environmental challenge of the 21st century. Even if
economic and environmental challenges
we were able to eliminate all greenhouse gas
of our times. Not only does local
emissions on a global level tomorrow, the climate
government have an important role in
would still continue to change due to past emissions.
reducing greenhouse gas emissions to
Over the past few decades, some Rosslanders have
reduce the magnitude of global warming,
already observed changes to the climate (see Local
local government will also be at the
Observation Survey) and changes that have already
forefront of managing the impacts of
occurred in the climate are well documented in the
climate change.” ~ Malcolm Turnbull
scientific literature for the Columbia Basin and the
Australian Minister for the Environment
world. Thus climate change adaptation actions and
and Water Resources
strategies are imperative no matter what future emissions scenario occurs.
Adaptation must occur at all levels of government, including local governments. While the
responsibility for broader policy regarding our response to climate change rests with provincial
and federal governments, it is on the local level that many climate change impacts, such as
potentially reduced water availability and wildfires, will be experienced. Thus local governments
must be involved in adaptation initiatives.
Climate change adaptation requires local governments to anticipate future climate changes that
will affect municipal operations and community well-being. It involves making adjustments in
planning and decisions now, to reduce the impacts and take advantage of the opportunities of
climate changes in the future. While the impacts of climate change cannot be completely
eliminated, their effects can be reduced through successful adaptation initiatives.
Above all, the goal of climate change adaptation processes
are to build resilience into communities and ensure they
have considered and prepared for a wide range of
potential futures and can respond to and recover from the
impacts of climate change. Moreover, if the worst
predictions with respect to climate change come to pass,
those that exceed the conservative estimates outlined in
this report, and we are not able to negotiate an
international agreement to limit emissions, community
resilience in the broader sense may become a critical determinant of how we adapt to the
climate changes that may shape our future. The set of actions and strategies required to adapt
to that future will undoubtedly be different than those contained within this document. However
Resilience implies action, as in
“building resilience”. To be
resilient suggests an inner
toughness: the strength, as its
etymology tells us, to “jump back”
to a previous state ~ Andrew
McMurray, Alternatives Journal
Page 10
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
the spirit of resilience will remain a critical component of adaptation approaches in that less
optimistic future.
It is in that spirit of fostering resilience and preparedness that this plan is offered. While climate
change is one of the world’s greatest challenges, it also could be one of our greatest
opportunities to undertake win-win no regrets actions that are good for sustainability and our
communities, while safeguarding us from the worst impacts of climate change.
Page 11
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
II: Critical Projected Climate Changes for
Rossland
This section reviews the projected climate changes expected to occur in Rossland over the next
century that will likely have implications for Rossland’s water supply, infrastructure and built
environment and energy supply and prices. In an effort to present this assessment in a
sequential manner and to recognize that some climate change impacts are caused by more
than one projected climate change, this section will identify the projected climate changes with
respect to temperatures, hydrological regime and processes, and variability and extreme
events. Discussion regarding the impacts that could occur in Rossland as a result of these
projected climate changes is located in section three.
“Warming of the climate
system is unequivocal as is
now evident from observations
of increases in global average
air and ocean temperatures,
widespread melting of snow
and ice and rising global
average sea level.” ~
Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC, 2007)
There is little dispute that the global climate is changing. This
section focuses on specific changes that are expected to occur
in Rossland as a result of these broad global changes.
Nevertheless, when considering the implications of climate
change for Rossland, it is critical to keep the global projected
climate changes in mind, particularly the ranges of projections,
and underlying assumptions associated with those global
projected climate changes. The projected climate changes
presented here for Rossland likely represent a conservative
scenario, consistent with the forecasts incorporated into the
Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC). Many of the IPCC forecasts for broad global systems hinge upon the
stabilization of temperature increases at 2°C. Considerable debate occurred at the Steering
Committee with respect to whether we should recognize and stress the very likely possibility
that this stabilization may not occur, and the resultant feedback loops in global systems that
may then result.
The conclusions presented in this report rely heavily on the emissions scenarios created by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its Fourth Assessment Report (IPCC,
2007a). The IPCC is the foremost international authority on climate change science, but the
science contained therein is now somewhat dated. Thus the Steering Committee felt it was
critical to outline some of the caveats associated with the IPCC models.
The Fourth IPCC Assessment Report was issued in 2007, and is based on peer-reviewed
literature. The timing of publication cycles means, in practical terms, that any empirical
observations or modeling undertaken after mid-2006 could not be considered. Since that time
there has been a wealth of new science that has led us to a more pessimistic judgment of the
Page 12
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
likely emissions scenarios and resulting climate changes (UNEP, 2009; Levin and Tirpak, 2009;
Richardson et al, 2009). Highlights include:

Positive feedback mechanisms that were theoretically posited as significant by 2007
have since been confirmed as actually occurring. These include the thawing of the
Canadian and Siberian permafrost, which emits enormous quantities of the powerful
GHG methane (Schuur et al., 2008)1 and the thawing and release of methane from
under-sea crystal-like formations (clathrates) in which an enormous amount of the gas is
trapped by pressure and cool temperatures. The rapid opening up of the arctic sea ice is
another such mechanism, since the dark water absorbs heat that used to be reflected by
ice and snow. All of these mechanisms would lead to more rapid and significant
temperature changes than predicted.

The IPCC figures did not take account of the increased speed of ice flow from the
Greenland and Antarctic glaciers, since those observations were not yet complete and
the dynamics not well understood. We now know that many of those glaciers flowing into
the sea at up to double their previous rates. The implication is a doubling or almost
tripling of the estimated sea-level rise from all sources by the end of the century
(Lemonick, 2009; Levin and Tirpak 2008; Allison et al. 2009).
Secondly, it should be highlighted that through concerted action we should in theory be able to
limit climate change to something like a 2oC increase in global average temperatures—the
negotiating objective for a number of countries including the EU-27. However, the likelihood of
that is low. Even in the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report—which, as noted above, may be too
optimistic —only the most optimistic of the six emission scenarios delivered that result as a best
estimate, while the other five ranged from 2.5o to 4o increases (IPCC, 2007a)
The reality is that we are nowhere near agreement at the international or national levels on the
kinds of actions that would get us to a 2o future. The pledges contained in the Copenhagen
Accord—agreed to by key emitters in December 2009—in fact gives us a 50% chance of
exceeding a 3o temperature rise (Rogelj et al., 2010). And recent negotiations actually show that
countries are quickly backing away from even those commitments (IISD, 2010). Above 3oC,
there is widespread agreement in the scientific community that we are looking at “serious risk of
large scale, irreversible system disruption” (ISSC, 2005). Climate change based on the current
emissions reduction commitments does not look like a smooth set of predictable changes. It is,
rather, a set of unpredictable discontinuities – rapid shifts to new equilibrium states driving
crises in global ecological and socio-economic systems (such as trade and investment) to which
adaptation will be challenging at best.
In the end, this analysis assumes the most conservative case possible in light of the evidence in
front of us. This is not because we are unconvinced by the thrust of the evidence toward more
1
They estimate that the stock of carbon locked in the permafrost is about double that contained in the atmosphere.
Page 13
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
dire predictions, but because we are pragmatic in our expectations about our ability to convince
others as well. The actions recommended herein are useful nonetheless, and we hope that in
future work of this type we can explore the implications of scenarios that better reflect the
growing consensus on the likely condition of Rossland in a world affected by climate change.
Moreover it is critical to stress that even if the most optimistic of emissions reduction scenarios
are achieved and the world is able to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, temperatures in BC are
still projected to rise by 1oC due to past emissions. This is still a significant increase,
underscoring the need for climate change adaptation strategies no matter what future emissions
scenario occurs.
With those caveats in mind, the following sections outline the expected climate changes for
temperatures, hydrological regimes, variability and extreme events identified in the scientific
literature.
Temperatures
Temperatures have and will likely
continue to increase overall. Increases
are projected for mean, minimum and
maximum temperatures for BC. Increases
in annual daily minimum temperatures
(+1.7°C), daily maximum temperatures
(+0.6°C) and daily mean temperatures
(+1.2°C) have already been observed on a
provincial basis (Rodenhuis et al., 2009).
An estimate based on a multi-model ensemble projects average annual temperature of +1.7°C
in BC and of +2.0 °C in the Columbia Basin by 2050 compared to the baseline 1961-1990
climate (Lane et al., 2009; Rodenhuis et al. 2009). Summer temperatures in the Columbia
Basin are projected to rise by 2.3°C by 2050, higher than the projected provincial summer
temperature increase of 1.8°C by 2050 (Lane et al., 2009).
It is important to note that these projected increases provide only averages and can mask a lot
of ups and downs. Increases in average temperatures can occur because the hotter days get
hotter or because the cooler days become less cool. The difference between these scenarios
has implications for what communities must adapt to and cannot be easily discerned from the
existing models.
Winter temperature increases will likely result in a greater frequency of daily low
temperatures of 0°C. Rossland already has mild winters compared to many interior locations.
As a result, there are already many days in which the temperature hovers around or just below
0°C. An increase in winter mean temperatures even by a small amount could result in an
increased incidence of freeze thaw cycles. According to the Weather Network historical data,
Page 14
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Castlegar’s temperature hovers around 0°C 2 to 4 days per month from November through
March.
The number of growing degree days will likely increase. Growing degree days are an
heuristic device that is utilized to forecast plant growth. Growing degree days are calculated
each day as the mean temperature minus the base temperature (or the temperature below
which plant growth is zero). Growing degree days are accumulated by adding the growing
degree contribution of each day as the season progresses. Projections for the Columbia Basin,
based on a 5oC base temperature, forecast an increase in growing degree days from the
baseline of around 1,500 (1961 to 1990) to around 2,000 (2041 to 2070) (Werner and Murdock,
2010).
Hydrological Regime and
Processes
Precipitation will likely increase.
Provincially, precipitation increased 22%
from 1900-2005 (Rodenhuis et al., 2009)
Downscaled Global Climate Models (GCMs)
for BC estimate that, by 2050, the province
will likely be about 6% wetter than the
baseline period of 1961-1990. Most of the
increase in precipitation is projected to occur
in the winter. Summers are expected to be 3% drier than the baseline period. But these are
provincial projections and there is up to 13% regional variation in the average precipitation
across BC. Historically, mean annual precipitation in Rossland area has ranged from 750-1,250
mm from 1900 to 2004 (PCIC, 2010). This is based on low resolution provincial scale maps but
likely is within the range of historical precipitation. Environment Canada station data for
Rossland shows that total precipitation increased slightly from 1905-1998. Columbia Basin
modeling suggests that the Basin will be 10.5% wetter than the baseline measurements (~1000
mm) by the 2050s (Murdock and Werner, 2010).
Climate modeling projects less snowfall in the Columbia Basin. Werner et al., (2007)
estimate that snowfall has declined 6% between 1913 and 2002 for the Columbia Basin. The
amount of snowfall is dictated by the amount of precipitation (expected to increase) and the
degree to which mid-winter temperatures hover around freezing (Murdock et al., 2007). Thus
snowfall is expected to decrease more at the Coast and less in the interior. According to
Environment Canada station data, Rossland has experienced decreasing annual snowfall since
the 1970s. However Rossland is milder than some interior locations, but is located at higher
elevation than many communities in the southern interior and therefore the extent to which
winter temperatures are likely to exceed freezing will be a critical determinant of snowfall versus
Page 15
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
rainfall levels. Low resolution maps based on a single Regional Climate Model for the Columbia
Basin suggest that snowfall in Rossland will likely decrease from 250 to 500 mm in the baseline
period (1961 to 1990) to 0 to 205 mm by the 2050s (Murdock and Werner, 2010).
Snowpack in BC overall is projected to decrease. An 18% decline in snowpack is projected
by the 2050s, with stronger effects in the mountains (Murdock et al., 2007). Snowpack must be
distinguished from snowfall. Snowfall refers to the amount of precipitation falling as snow,
whereas snowpack refers to snow accumulation. Snowpack reduction is expected to be more
significant in the Coastal Mountains (Rodenhuis et al., 2009) and the geographical complexity of
mountains prevents a simple interpretation of results. It is believed that April 1 snowpack in the
Basin has decreased from 1950 to 1997 with some fairly significant reductions in the Pacific
portion of the Basin in the United States (Murdock et al., 2007). An IPCC study indicates that,
for every degree Celsius increase in temperature, the snowline could rise about 150 m. In the
European Alps, a projected 4°C shift in winter temperatures is predicted to result in a 50%
decrease in snow duration at altitudes of 2000m and a 95% reduction at altitudes less than
1000m (IPCC, 2007b). Rossland is at an elevation of 1036m. April 1st snowpack in the
Canadian portion of the Columbia Basin is projected to decrease by 3.6% by the 2020s and
11.5% by the 2040s on average in the entire Basin (Murdock et al., 2007). Effects will likely be
larger in lower elevation areas. Thus Rossland may experience slightly less than the projected
average decrease.
Rossland is expected to experience earlier melt run-off over a shorter time period, and
lower mid to late summer flows that extend over longer periods. Studies show that spring
run-off was already occurring 20 days earlier in the Columbia Basin in the period from 1984 to
1995 compared to 1970 to 1983 (Murdock et al., 2007). It is projected that by 2050, many rivers
will likely be running 15-40 days earlier than in the period from 1984 to 1995 and by 2100 melt
could occur an additional 30-40 days earlier (NRCan, 2007). These changes could create
enhanced potential for winter and spring floods, landslides and debris torrents and insufficient
summer flows (Murdock et al., 2007). Because there is expected to be less snowpack, these
spring runoffs will also likely extend over a shorter period of time thereby contributing to reduced
summer flows. As stated above, reduced summer flows will likely also occur as a result of
reduced summer precipitation. In the Columbia Basin, models suggest that while overall run-off
could be 85 to 110% of base case flows, summer run-off (April through September) could
decrease to 75 to 90% of the base case flow (Rodenhuis et al., 2009).
It is important to note that most of the studies that have confirmed earlier spring run-off have
focused on rivers like the Columbia rather than high elevation streams. Nevertheless, the
Columbia is fed by high elevation streams and it is expected that Topping, Hanna and South
Murphy Creeks in the Rossland area will likely reach peak flow earlier in the spring, with lower
flows for longer periods during the summer.
Page 16
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Glaciers play a crucial role in determining low flows for 48% of British Columbia’s rivers. In the
Columbia Basin, glaciers feed 10 to 20% of annual flows and 30% of summer flows, so changes
in melt rates could amplify summer droughts in some areas of the Basin (NRCan, 2007).
Rossland does not rely on glacier-fed flows for its water resources so this does not pose a direct
threat to the City, though it may affect provincial electricity prices (see Energy section).
Increased evapotranspiration and evaporation will likely contribute to reduced soil
moisture, which will likely reduce summer flows further. It is likely that there will be
increased evaporation and evapotranspiration in the spring as a result of earlier snowmelt and
warmer spring temperatures (Murdock et al., 2007). Increased evaporation and
evapotranspiration will likely reduce soil moisture, which will reduce summer streamflows
(because more water will be absorbed into the ground) (Murdock et al., 2007). This is also likely
to contribute to potential increases in the incidence of water shortages and droughts.
It is critical to note that the impacts of a changing climate on the hydrological regime (rain, snow
and ice) and on hydrological processes (streamflow, evaporation) are all intertwined and many
initial impacts, such as lower summer flows could have further hydrological effects, such as
increased stream temperatures, and lower groundwater recharge rates and in turn broader
ecosystem effects, such as increased fish and animal morbidity. This section has attempted to
highlight some of the main water supply changes arising from climate change, but the
complexity of the hydrological system should always be kept in mind.
Variability and Extreme Events
There are no detailed projections for historical or future
potential changes in extreme weather events for the Basin
(Murdock et al., 2007). The following information is based
on sources outside the Canadian Columbia Basin.
There will likely be increased variability in
precipitation and increased incidence of both
droughts and heavy rainfall events. It is believed that
the frequency and severity of drought and heavy rainfall
events is increasing – however lack of analysis regarding
the occurrence of these events in the past means that
these events cannot necessarily be connected to climate
change (Murdock et al., 2007). Nevertheless the IPCC believes that in mid to high latitude
areas in the Northern Hemisphere the proportion of annual precipitation falling in heavy and
extreme events has increased by 2 to 4% (Murdock et al., 2007).
As noted above with respect to precipitation, climate models also predict that precipitation will
likely be subject to greater seasonal variability. Although annual precipitation will likely increase,
Page 17
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
less precipitation will likely fall in the summer, potentially increasing the incidence of drought.
Drought is harder to forecast as there is no evidence of increases in drought events in Southern
BC over the last century (Murdock et al., 2007). However the IPCC does believe that there is
greater risk of summer drought for continental land areas in the next century (Murdock et al.,
2007). Further, the more the average precipitation falls in extreme events, the less able that
moisture is to be retained and used to prevent moisture stress and drought.
Temperature extremes will likely increase in incidence. The projected mean temperature
increases mask the potential that there may be more variability in temperatures.
Extreme weather events including snowstorms, hailstorms, and windstorms will likely
increase. The provincial data indicates that, from 2003-2005, economic losses associated with
extreme events rose dramatically, in particular due to wildfire, freezing rain and rain-on-snow
events that led to flooding (NRCan, 2007). Temperature increases are also expected to cause
an increase in the intensity and frequency of windstorms (Nielson, 2007). BC currently spends
an average of $86 million per year on natural disaster response, including wildfires, compared to
an average of $10 million from 1999-2002 (NRCan, 2007). However 1999 to 2002 were
particularly low cost wildfire years. The costs of fighting wildfires in an individual year can be
dramatically higher. According to the Ministry of Forests (2010), wildfire costs were as high as
$400 million in 2009 and $371.2 million in 2003, while the ten year average from 1998 to 2008
was $115.9 million. While Rossland lacks detailed historical data and high-resolution future
projections for extreme weather events related to climate change (Rodenhuis et al., 2009), it is
expected that they will increase. Two notable windstorms have occurred in Rossland in the last
few years, one in 2007 and one in 2008. The 2008 windstorm resulted in the loss of 50 trees
within the City boundaries.
Higher summer temperatures, summer drought, decreased soil moisture and potential
increased tree mortality due to biogeoclimatic zone shifts and pests could increase the
incidence of forest fires. BC is already experiencing more total area burned by wildfires,
longer fires seasons and more critical fire weather days. A variety of factors such as
forest/structural fuels, topography and weather and new policies of fuel management outlined in
the City’s Community Wildfire Protection Plan put Rossland at a lower risk for catastrophic
wildfires than in some other areas of the province. However issues such as beetle kill and
forest morbidity could increase this risk, and climate change will likely increase the chances of
forest fires in the Rossland area.
Summary
The expected climate changes for Rossland to 2050 can be summarized as follows:

Increases in mean, maximum and minimum temperatures;
Page 18
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report

Increases in overall precipitation but decreases in precipitation in the summer;

Decreases in snowpack;

Earlier spring run-off, and lower summer flows for longer periods;

Increases in extreme events, including heavy precipitation events, drought and
windstorms; and

Increased variability in temperatures and precipitation.
How all of these projected changes manifest over the years and how they affect Rossland is still
subject to considerable uncertainty and complexity. Of all the expected changes, the increases
in extreme events and variability might be the most challenging to plan for. The interaction
among the projected changes, and which ones occur to what extent each year will matter to day
to day life in Rossland. Decreased snowpack may be of less consequence if spring
temperatures remain colder resulting in a more gradual run-off. The most significant challenges
may occur in the years in which there are greater extremes and/or the various expected climate
changes occur in combination to produce a worst-case scenario.
Page 19
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
III: Vulnerability and Risk Assessment
Assessing vulnerability and risk is a standard component of most climate change adaptation
projects and there are many methodologies available for doing so including both vulnerability
focused assessments, risk focused assessments and hybrid assessments that combine both
risk and vulnerability (See Zukiwsky, 2010). The intent is to undertake an impartial review of the
vulnerability and risks associated with potential climate change impacts and establish priority
actions based on a clear ranking of vulnerability and risk.
Steps
The steps for a vulnerability and risk assessment for climate change adaptation as outlined by
the Center for Science in the Earth System et al., (2007) often referred to as the ICLEI
Guidebook for local governments were selected for utilization in Rossland. According to the
ICLEI Guidebook the seven steps in a vulnerability and risk assessment are as follows:
1. Complete Sensitivity Analysis
2. Evaluate Adaptive Capacity
3. Assess Vulnerability
4. Consider Consequence
5. Estimate Probability
6. Assess Risk
This is the Vulnerability Assessment
Also known as “finding the weak spots”
This is the Risk Assessment
Also known as “what to pay attention to first”
7. Establish Priority Risks and Opportunities
Low Vulnerability
High Vulnerability
High Risk
MAY be priority action
planning area
SHOULD be a priority
action planning area
Low Risk
UNLIKELY to be a
priority action planning
area
MAY be a priority action
planning area
Definitions
Page 20
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Vulnerability Assessment
Sensitivity – The degree to which a built, natural, or human system is directly or indirectly
affected by changes in climate.
'Will the systems associated with this planning area be significantly affected by projected
changes in climate?' If the system is likely to be affected as a result of projected climate change,
it should be considered sensitive to climate change." ~Climate Impacts Group. Questions to
ask in considering sensitivity are: How exposed is the system? Is it subject to existing stress
i.e. are demand and supply already almost equal? Does the system have impact thresholds?
Sensitivity can be:

Low: System unlikely to be significantly affected by changes in climate.

Moderate: System may be affected by changes in climate.

High: System will likely be affected by changes in climate.
Adaptive Capacity – Ability of built, natural and human systems to accommodate or adjust to
changes in climate, moderate potential damages, cope with consequences or take advantage of
opportunities with minimum disruption or minimum additional cost. A community might already
be taking actions to accommodate changes in climate or may be able to do so easily with
minimal cost. If so, the community’s adaptive capacity is high. Adaptive capacity can be:

Low: Actions are difficult and costly.

Moderate: Actions possible with some disruptions and/or costs.

High: Actions possible with minimum disruptions and cost.
Vulnerability = Sensitivity X Adaptive Capacity
Vulnerability – Degree to which a system is susceptible to harm from climate change due to its
sensitivity and adaptive capacity. Vulnerability can be:


Low: If sensitivity is low and adaptive capacity is low or high, or if sensitivity is high and
adaptive capacity is also high.
Moderate: If sensitivity is moderate and adaptive capacity is moderate.

High: If sensitivity is high and adaptive capacity is low.
Risk Assessment
Page 21
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Consequence – The seriousness or degree to which a community would be affected if the
identified climate stress occurred. Questions to consider in assessing consequence are: How
costly would the impact be? Would it result in potential loss of life? How many people would be
affected? Would there be significant property damage or ecosystem damage? Would it result
in loss of livelihood? Consequence can be:



Low: Minor costs or inconvenience are possible. Very unlikely that loss of life or
livelihood, large financial costs to the municipality or community, or significant property
or ecosystem damage would occur.
Moderate: Moderate costs or significance inconvenience are possible. Unlikely that loss
of life or livelihood, large financial costs to the municipality or community, or significant
property or ecosystem damage would occur.
High: Possible or probable loss of life or livelihood, large financial costs to the
municipality or community, or significant property or ecosystem damage.
Probability – The likelihood that the identified climate stress, resulting in harm to a system, will
occur and the frequency of occurrence. Some climate change impacts such as higher
temperatures are virtually certain and will occur most years, while others such as rainstorms
severe enough to cause flooding are less certain and may only occur every 10 years. In
assessing probability it is important to note whether the event will be ongoing or a single event.
Probability can be:



Low: Probability of an ongoing or single event less than 30%; Potential frequency of
occurrence of a single event once every 30+ years.
Moderate: Probability of an ongoing or single event between 30 and 60%; Potential
frequency of occurrence of a single event once every 5 to 30 years.
High: Probability of an ongoing or single event greater than 60%; Potential frequency of
occurrence of single events once every <5 years to several times a year.
Risk = Consequence X Probability
Risk – Degree to which a system is susceptible to harm from a particular climate change stress
due to the probability and consequences of this stress. Risk can be:

Low: If consequence is low and probability is low, or if consequence is low and
probability is moderate.

Moderate: If consequence is moderate and probability is moderate, if consequence is
high and probability is low, or if consequence is low and probability is high.
Page 22
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative

City of Rossland – Final Report
High: If consequence is high and probability is high, or if consequence is high and
probability is moderate.
Rossland’s Approach
The approaches outlined above were undertaken in the form of a group vulnerability and risk
assessment for food security (See Food Vulnerability and Risk Assessment –
www.visionstoaction.ca). This vulnerability and risk assessment was utilized to form the basis
of the food security action planning. The same approach was undertaken for water,
infrastructure and energy by ACT at Simon Fraser University. However the Steering Committee
felt that the results did not sufficiently capture the local context. Redoing the vulnerability and
risk assessments as a group, in the same manner that the food security vulnerability and risk
assessment were completed, was considered. Nevertheless, due to the limited time and budget
remaining for the project, it was decided that action planning would be undertaken for water,
infrastructure and energy utilizing a vulnerability and risk backgrounder prepared by the
Coordinator.
While the backgrounder does not explicitly evaluate vulnerability and risk in the same manner
that an assessment does, it does provide many of the critical facts that would form the basis for
a vulnerability and risk assessment. Moreover, it was felt that Steering Committee members
and other participants in the action planning process would carry their own perceptions of
vulnerability and risk into the action planning process.
Page 23
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Priority Area 1: Infrastructure and Built
Environment
Infrastructure and the built environment will be forced to
withstand many different stresses as a result of the projected
climate changes identified in section one, particularly,
temperature changes, heavy precipitation events, and other
extreme weather events. This section first reviews Rossland’s
current non-climate related infrastructure and built environment
stresses and opportunities and then considers the additional
challenges that climate change could impose. Water related
infrastructure, such as storm-sewers, are considered only as
they affect flooding and therefore cause damage to other
infrastructure, rather than impacts on water supply, which were
considered in the previous section.
Infrastructure is often designed for a long life span, ranging up to 50 years for water supply
infrastructure and sewers and over 100 years for buildings and bridges (Infrastructure Canada,
2006). These long life spans create a significant challenge for climate change adaptation, as
often it is not realistic to replace infrastructure to address potential future climate change
impacts. Nevertheless, infrastructure needs regular upgrading and refurbishment, and much of
the municipal infrastructure in Canada is aging and requires replacement. Thus, there is an
opportunity to incorporate and ‘mainstream’ climate change adaptation as a routine element of
infrastructure design (Infrastructure Canada, 2006).
Current and Future Non-Climate Related Stresses and
Opportunities
City-wide Infrastructure
Much of Rossland’s infrastructure and built environment is old and there are limited
funds available for upgrading them. Rossland is currently undertaking an infrastructure
planning process. While some infrastructure, such as the Ophir Reservoir and the water
treatment plant is relatively new other infrastructure such as the storm-sewer system, roads,
water pipes, buildings, and sewer system are relatively old and will need upgrades even in the
absence of climate change. These infrastructure upgrades are expected to be very costly and
government grants and borrowing will be required to undertake them. The City also has
regional infrastructure commitments and is part of the liquid waste management planning
process with Warfield and Trail. Rossland’s required commitments to these regional
Page 24
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
infrastructure upgrades could mitigate against having the funds available for local upgrades.
The availability of government grants will play a key role in determining when infrastructure
upgrades occur. Nevertheless, the City is doing what it can as it is financially able to do so.
Some infrastructure upgrades are occurring in 2010/2011 including the Columbia Avenue
resurfacing and concurrent storm sewer upgrades. These projects are discussed in more detail
below.
Rossland’s geography is characterized by steep slopes that could be vulnerable to
landslides, but professional assessment and planning is required before development
occurs. Much of Rossland’s development occurs on slopes of between a 10-30% grade, and
slopes over 30% grade also characterize a large portion of the City. Rossland’s Official
Community Plan (OCP) requires that development on all “lands with slopes in excess of 30%,
shall be required to submit a report prepared by a qualified professional, prior to the removal of
trees or slope alteration” (City of Rossland, 2008).
Rossland has a comprehensive Emergency Plan that was prepared in 2009. The
Emergency Plan identifies key risks, including climate-related issues, assesses critical risk
areas, and outlines immediate response measures, as well as long-term remediation measures.
The City has also prepared an Evacuation Plan. However the Emergency and Evacuation
Plans have not yet been tested in a mock or real emergency to test their effectiveness.
Rossland has an Emergency Program Coordinator, and City staff members have been fully
trained in roles and responsibilities in an emergency, including site-specific training for some
Public Works staff. Work is underway to integrate Rossland’s Emergency Plan with those of
Red Mountain Resort, Teck and the City of Trail.
Rossland has a Community Wildfire Protection Plan, which was completed in 2009. The
Community Wildfire Protection Plan assesses the risk from a wildland-urban interface fire to the
City of Rossland and identifies the measures necessary to mitigate those risks. The measures
in the Protection Plan are being implemented. Funding for fuel clearing has been acquired
through the Regional District and Province and several areas in the interface have been
identified for brush clearing, which will occur this summer. Detailed treatment prescriptions
have been prepared for 23 hectares of City owned land that has been designated as a priority
area. Public consultation will be undertaken before the treatment occurs. The treatment will
include thinning from below, removal of dead and discarded trees and the removal of ladder
fuels and surface debris. Many of the priority treatment areas are adjacent to Rossland’s water
reservoir, which will help promote watershed protection.
Roads
Rossland’s roadways are aging. Rossland has under 40 kilometres (km) of paved roads, not
including Red Mountain. The City is currently undertaking a pavement condition assessment.
Thirty km have been identified for assessment while the remaining 10 km have already been
Page 25
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
identified as not requiring assessment, due to deterioration. Only 12 km of the 40 have been
paved in last 20 years, which means over 50 percent are due for replacement. Some of that 28
km of older pavement is in adequate condition and might last another 5 to 10 years because it
was well built, is on a hill with good run-off or doesn’t have a lot of traffic. The assessment will
result in a priority matrix outlining an order for repairing the roads and all the assets underneath
(road bed, storm-water, sewer). The assessment will be completed before 2011.
Rossland’s current roadway maintenance projects are limited by budget. Maintenance and
roadway repair is typically done on a capital project basis. Approximately 100 meters per year is
currently replaced. Expenses for resurfacing often include additional infrastructure upgrades
such as sewer, sidewalk or storm-water system upgrades. If well maintained, under current
conditions, asphalt has a lifespan of approximately 25-30 years. Paving 15 km of roads will cost
$15 million or $1000/metre. It is not anticipated that all of the infrastructure upgrades that are
required in Rossland will be affordable over the next 20 years – managing the deterioration of
infrastructure may become the priority rather than upgrading it. Rossland is currently preparing
an infrastructure upgrade plan that will outline how roads will be upgraded over the next several
years.
Buildings and Residences
Rossland’s housing stock is aging. Dwellings built before 1945 make up approximately 45%
of the houses, while another 20% were built between 1945 and 1960. Much of the older
housing stock was built with hand-mixed concrete, which is more porous than aggregate
concrete, and some is built on creek beds that may still direct water during the spring melt
season when flow is at its peak. In addition many of the older homes were built without
foundations and the basements were dug out later using concrete walls sitting on concrete slab
which was poured first creating a crack at the bottom, which allows for seepage. Nevertheless
the building quality of Rossland’s housing stock varies significantly. Some pre-1945 houses
are better built than the ones between 1945 and 1960 due to the use of better building
materials. The Building Code was not established until 1977. As a result, the age of the house
is not the only factor that must be considered in evaluating its vulnerability to climate change
factors. Changes in climate can dramatically impact housing stock. For example, a 25%
increase in peak wind speed can cause a 6.5-fold increase in damage claims to buildings
(Nielson, 2007).
Current building codes in Rossland include high load bearing requirements on roofs
although earlier built housing stock may not meet specifications. Building codes for new
construction in Rossland set the roof load bearing at 159 pounds per square foot (psf) in town
and 172 psf at Red Mountain. The National Building Code requires load bearings of 50 psf. As
stated above, dwellings built before 1945 make up approximately 45% of the houses, while
another 20% were built between 1945 and 1960, meaning that 65% of the City’s housing stock
may not meet these specifications.
Page 26
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Rossland residents are not currently required to install backflow prevention systems.
Homes without such systems are more sensitive to damage caused by wet conditions, although
this precaution may not be required in all houses depending on their elevation vis a vis that of
the sewer pipes. This issue is being partially addressed via upcoming by-laws designed to
improve planning and regulation for perimeter drainage.
There is a tension between new housing standards and increasing taxes and maintaining
affordability, but in some cases this may be just a perceived tension. A key element of
Rossland’s attractiveness as a community relates to the relative affordability of housing relative
to places such as Vancouver or Calgary. Incorporating any additional regulations on building
that significantly increase the cost of building, or increasing taxes to pay for infrastructure
upgrades may be challenging in light of the need to maintain affordability. Nevertheless, some
changes in building requirements, such as perimeter drainage or other requirements for more
on-site water retention, do not significantly increase the cost of building and increases the
lifetime of the building by reducing water damage, as well as achieving broader municipal
infrastructure maintenance goals. The Planning Department is already evaluating the viability of
many of these affordable changes in housing standards. In some cases, however, the
perception of greater cost must be addressed.
Storm-sewers, Culverts and Sewers
Rossland currently has limited flood risk due to steep slopes but the storm-sewer system
is stressed during high storm flows. Rossland’s storm-sewer system is very limited. The
inlet capacity on the storm-sewer pipes that do exist, which allows for storm-water drainage and
reduces risk of flash floods, is limited. To date the storm-sewer pipes are generally adequate
and flow quickly due to Rossland’s steep grades. Some locations currently experience stormwater overflows, but these are generally not an issue at present precipitation levels.
The wastewater system is seriously stressed by inflow and infiltration. Inflow and
infiltration of storm and melt water into sewer pipes, and in particular the sewer interceptor line
to Trail, presents a significant challenge. In the spring, sewer pipe flow more than doubles as a
result of this inflow and infiltration. Much of the infiltration occurs when groundwater comes into
the joints or cracks in the sewer pipes. However many residents and commercial operations
dispose of basement spring groundwater flow through sump pumps pumped into sewer pipes or
roof gutter water flowing directly into the sewer pipes, especially on Columbia Avenue. One of
the main challenges is that it is not clear where storm-water should go, as Rossland does not
have a complete storm-water drainage network. Rossland is working on a storm-water
separation plan for the downtown core in 2010-2011 to reduce the amount of water that ends up
in the wastewater system. However this will just apply to the downtown core.
Inflow and infiltration, exacerbated by the significant number of roots blocking sewer pipes, can
cause sewer backups into residences and other buildings. The interceptor line to Trail has
already experienced overflows and needs to be further examined for replacement based on
Page 27
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
population projections.
Inflow and infiltration also increases wastewater treatment expenses for Rossland and impacts
the regional district, which shares wastewater infrastructure with Rossland. Currently Rossland
pays an agreed upon percentage, established in 1967, of the sewage treatment costs. This
service agreement is under review but Trail and Rossland have been unable to reach an
agreement, due to challenges acquiring accurate flow volumes. The Regional District could start
charging Rossland a percentage based on flow, which could result in significant increase in
costs for the municipality.
Replacing the sewer pipes is part of the infrastructure plan. The order in which segments
of the sewer in Rossland will be replaced will be established in the infrastructure plan. At this
time, it is planned that sewers will be fixed at the same time as the priority roads. At some point
the sewer not under the roads may be replaced, but there is no date set for that. There is also
currently no set date for the replacement or upgrading of the interceptor line to Trail.
Managing storm-water through on-site water retention is becoming a higher priority. Onsite water retention measures, such as permeable driveways, driveways that divert water onto
lawns and perimeter drains can reduce the need for costly infrastructure upgrades such as
storm-sewers. The Planning Department is currently developing systems that promote this type
of on-site water retention.
Future Climate Change Infrastructure Impacts for Rossland
Although they are divided into sections specific to certain infrastructure for the sake of clarity,
several of the infrastructure impacts that could result from projected climate changes could
cascade into other infrastructure damages. For example, failure of a culvert could cascade into
damage to buildings and roads. This is particularly true with respect to storm-sewers, culverts
and sewer systems.
City-wide Infrastructure

Winter rains, early onset and rapid spring melt, increased frequency of heavy rainfall events
and increased rain-on-snow events may increase the probability of landslides and debris
torrents damaging roads, buildings and other city infrastructure and potentially resulting in
loss of life.

Extreme weather events such as snowstorms, forest fires, windstorms or heavy rainstorms
could damage roads, buildings and other city infrastructure, as well as private property, and
potentially result in loss of life.
Buildings and Residences
Page 28
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report

Rain on snow events and heavier wetter snow may build up on roofs and result in structural
failure, particularly of older housing stock, and other weight-bearing infrastructure.

An increased incidence of freeze-thaw cycles could stress roofs, building foundations,
driveways, retaining walls and shallowly buried pipes.

More winter precipitation in the form of rain that runs off roofs could reduce stress on roofs
and reduce costs of winter snow removal on buildings.
Storm-sewers, Culverts and Sewers

Increased overall precipitation, more rapid runoff as well as more frequent heavy rainfall
events and storm-sewer backups could increase the incidence of small floods, particularly
basement floods, resulting in property damage.

Increased overall precipitation, more rapid spring runoff or heavy precipitation events could
cause more storm-water to infiltrate the wastewater system causing residential sewer back
up and sewer overflows.

A major precipitation event could cause the culvert along Trail Creek to give way, resulting
in property damage along Cook Avenue.
Roads

Increased winter temperatures could reduce snow removal costs and road damage as well
as clean up from salt and gravel.

More frequent freeze-thaw cycles could damage pavement and asphalt, decreasing their
lifespan and causing cracking and potholes, while higher summer temperatures may cause
buckling or rutting, particularly on high-traffic routes requiring more frequent and potentially
more expensive repaving and more road shut downs and may require investment in asphalt
that exhibit higher tolerance to freeze-thaw cycles as well as heat and surface stress.

Increased overall precipitation, more rapid spring run off, heavy precipitation events and or
storm-sewer backups might cause road floods and damage the foundations beneath
roadways.

A major precipitation event could cause the culvert along Trail Creek to give way, resulting
in roadway damage along Cook Avenue.
Water Pipes

Reduced insulation from snow cover could cause water pipes to more easily freeze and
burst in cold snaps.

Increased winter temperatures could reduce the incidence of water pipes freezing.
Page 29
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Summary
Many of the expected climate
change impacts on infrastructure
will manifest in the form of
increased costs to residents,
either through property damage or
upgrades or impacts on taxes, and
contribute to the overall
deterioration of Rossland’s
infrastructure. A few expected
climate changes, such as warmer winter temperatures and reduced snowfall, may possibly
reduce infrastructure maintenance costs. In most cases, infrastructure impacts will be minor,
such as basement floods, increased cracking of road pavement and freezing of water pipes, and
will contribute to the continued aging and degradation of Rossland’s infrastructure. However
some impacts, especially those resulting from extreme events such as forest fires, windstorms
and heavy precipitation, while potentially less frequent, could cause significant infrastructure
damage, including loss of life. Nevertheless, in evaluating how to address these climate change
risks, one must consider the costs associated with eliminating or reducing the risks and the
likelihood of success, versus the probability of the event occurring.
Although much of Rossland’s infrastructure is being evaluated for upgrading, as part of the
Infrastructure Plan and climate change considerations can be incorporated into those upgrades,
the fiscal reality for the City and for other levels of government that fund infrastructure upgrades,
is that not all of the necessary or desired infrastructure upgrades are likely to occur in the next
20 years. Thus it may not be a wise adaptation strategy to focus exclusively on addressing
potential climate change impacts through the incorporation of climate change considerations
into infrastructure upgrades. Some of the climate change impacts will have to be adapted to
through approaches other than infrastructure upgrades. Some of these potential approaches,
such as greater on-site water retention practices, have already been outlined above. A key
adaptation action may be to develop a database of less expensive actions that could reduce the
need for infrastructure upgrades or expansion, such as demand-side water management, or
policies that prevent the diversion of basement waters into the wastewater system.
Page 30
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Priority Area 2: Water Supply
Rossland’s water supply will likely be
affected in multiple ways by the projected
climate changes outlined in the previous
section, particularly changes in precipitation
patterns and hydrological flow regimes.
This section first outlines the current and
future non-climate related stresses and
opportunities, to provide an overview of
Rossland’s water situation in the absence
of climate change. Then some of the main
water related impacts that Rossland could
experience as a result of climate change
are examined. This section examines
water related infrastructure for water supply. Flooding is addressed in the next section.
Current and Future Non-Climate Related Stresses and
Opportunities
Supply
Rossland has well developed water infrastructure with a historically consistent level of
supply. Rossland’s water supply is 100% gravity-fed surface water from the Topping, Hanna
and Murphy Creeks. Observations of overflow rates as well as consumption versus overflow
data suggest that stream flow rates in Rossland range from 2,000 cubic meters per day during
the dry summer months to 50,000 cubic meters per day during the spring thaw. Two reservoirs
(Ophir and Star Gulch) serve Rossland and have a combined capacity of 285,000 cubic metres
(Star Gulch at 120,000 cubic metres and Ophir at 165,000 cubic metres).
Rossland’s reservoirs can fill within 40 days if they are empty during the spring melt but at this
point in time remain full to overflowing year round with the exception of a few weeks in late
August. September typically brings cooler wetter weather that allows the reservoirs to rebound
to capacity. Creek flow continues during the winter at about 2,000 cubic metres per day.
Currently, the timing of peak flow matches the timing of the summer rise in demand fairly well,
allowing for the increased rate of inflow into the reservoirs to be utilized as it is arriving, reducing
reservoir overflow. The reservoirs currently offer enough storage to accommodate demand.
Downstream flows in Rossland’s water supply creeks are limited in summer months.
During low summer flow months, all of the water from Topping, Hanna and Murphy Creeks is
Page 31
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
captured, with any reservoir overflow directed back into Topping Creek, leaving no downstream
flows in Hanna and Murphy Creeks. Changes to provincial water policy are currently being
considered under BC’s Water Act Modernization process in 2010, including riparian ecosystem
maintenance. It is possible that resulting policy changes may affect Rossland’s ability to divert
water from one creek to another, and to leave no downstream flows in two creeks during the
summer months. The issue of leaving no downstream flows for ecosystems should potentially
be addressed regardless of provincial legislation.
Rossland has limited water flow monitoring. Currently, manual flow monitoring is employed
on Rossland’s creeks. Properly assessing available supply through creek monitoring, stream
gauges and flow metering would provide better data on the volume of water available to
Rossland and better inform policy.
Demand
Rossland’s historical water usage is compared to high national averages. Water
consumption remains stable for most of the year at about 2000 cubic metres per day, and then
rises to 3500 to 5500 cubic metres per day in July and August. Flow volumes from Rossland’s
treatment plant suggest that from 2001-2007 average annual domestic use was 483 litres per
capita per day (lcd). This exceeds the national domestic use average of 329 lcd per day and the
average domestic use of Europeans which ranges from 150 to 200 lcd (UNEP, 2003). Note that
all of these comparative use numbers exclude commercial use. In the summer months, water
usage in Rossland jumps substantially, especially when temperatures exceed 25 degrees, to
780 lcd per day (Lepsoe, 2009). Over the last six years from 2004 to 2009, Rossland has
utilized on average 878,355 cubic metres of water per year with a range of 815,903 in 2005 to
919,542 in 2007. There are currently no large-scale commercial water users. Rossland has no
commercial agriculture and the Redstone golf course has its own groundwater supply.
Rossland has many options in terms of reducing demand, and is implementing some, but
it is unclear how successful demand-side management measures will be. Previous
studies have argued that demand side management could save Rossland over 470,000 cubic
meters of water annually (Lepsoe, 2008). This is almost half of Rossland’s annual water
consumption and seems very optimistic. Given the extent to which our consumption exceeds
national and European averages, it could be achieved, but it would be ambitious and potentially
costly. The City already imposes some demand-side management measures. Restrictions on
watering that allow residents to water only every other day and during certain hours, start every
year on July 1st. City Staff are considering changing these restrictions to make the date on
which they commence to be more flexible so it can be adjusted to reflect the annual water level.
Further demand-side management measures have been established in the form of voluntary
water meters. By January 2011, in accordance with the draft Water Service bylaw, all dwellings
in Rossland will be required to install water-metering equipment. This is allowing for billing
based on water consumption and will provide important data regarding water consumption
Page 32
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
patterns. A graduated fee structure in which residents pay more if they utilize more water has
already been established through the Water Rate Bylaw. However at this point in time, a
deadline for meter installation followed by a rate structure that would impose higher fees on
those who do not have a meter has not been established. Rossland has a highly-educated,
fairly affluent population, highly trained City staff members and well established mechanisms for
community engagement which could improve Rossland’s chances at driving demand-side
management and water conservation measures. Nevertheless there has been opposition to the
water meter program, in part because the current water rate structure does not provide an
incentive for the installation of water meters.
Leaks do not appear to be a major component of Rossland’s water use. Leaks from City
pipes are currently considered by City staff to be a minimal factor in water consumption,
potentially accounting for around 10% of Rossland’s water usage. This is based on an analysis
of water consumption rates – rates of leakage in the winter are likely to be higher due to a
decrease in the dynamic pressure in the pipes, and yet winter consumption rates are low. This
is not uncommon and most municipalities experience water losses in pipes of around 10%. It is
possible that leaks account for a higher percentage of Rossland’s water use. Once water
meters are installed in all Rossland households, the City will be able to get more accurate
information regarding the amount of water loss through leakage. Eliminating leaks entirely
would be a very costly undertaking that does not seem warranted given current supply levels
and the significant potential to reduce demand.
Matching Supply and Demand
Current supply will be sufficient to meet low-end population growth scenarios and, with
conservation measures, should be sufficient for moderate-end scenarios. The City OCP
estimates that permanent and seasonal population growth over the next 20 years could range
between 1-1.5% annually. At the high-end, this would result in a combined permanent and
seasonal population of 5738 by 2027, compared to Rossland’s population of 3,532 in 2009.
Low-growth scenarios forecast by BC Statistics see Rossland’s population contracting by –
1.25% to 2694 by 2028. It is hard to predict which growth scenario will occur. Water supply will
likely be adequate to meet demand in the low-growth scenario. In the higher OCP growth
scenario, if per capita water consumption remains unchanged, demand could be almost double
current levels. While there is currently an excess of supply of water that could accommodate
some of this increased demand, conservation measures reducing overall per capita demand
may be necessary. A formal city water management plan providing more detailed analysis of
these potential population growth scenarios, per capita consumption scenarios and storage
capacity requirements is needed.
Rossland has generally adequate storage for current population levels. At current
summer use rates (which are high and are significantly linked to lawn watering), Rossland has
47.5 days of storage capacity in a no stream flow situation. If water consumption were
Page 33
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
restricted to winter consumption rates, that storage capacity would jump to 142.5 days in a no
flow situation. However, at current low summer flows, the streams provide about 2000 cubic
metres of water per day. Assuming that current low-flow stream rates remain at around 2,000
cubic meters per day and peak usage during drier seasons ranges between 3,500-5,500 cubic
meters per day, Rossland’s water supply would last approximately 81-190 days, in an extended
low flow situation.
Rossland does not have a drought plan that identifies when water restrictions are to be
put in place. The provincial government has prepared a provincial Drought Response Plan
(econnics, 2010). As part of the Plan, the Province assesses regional drought levels and puts
local governments on restrictions based on the assessed level of drought. At level two,
restrictions are voluntary and a target of 10% reduction in consumption has been set, at level
three the target is 20% reduction, and at level four maximum restrictions will be imposed with a
potential regulatory response from the provincial government (econnics, 2010). In 2010, the
region was temporarily placed at a level three drought rating for the month of May. It would be
helpful to formalize Rossland’s approach to drought management.
Some of Rossland’s water infrastructure is aging, particularly the pipes beneath the
roads, but Rossland does not have a large enough residential tax base to fund significant
infrastructure expansion. In high and low population growth scenarios, financing capital
projects, such as water pipe renewal, increased water filtration, or increased storage capacity
will be difficult given the available residential tax base. The City invested $3 million into
expanding storage capacity with the Ophir Reservoir project in 2008 (total project cost was $5
million; the provincial government contributed $2 million). Infrastructure upgrades are discussed
in the next section, which focuses specifically on infrastructure. The availability of government
grants will be a key factor in determining whether infrastructure upgrades can be undertaken.
Quality
Rossland’s water quality is generally very high. Rossland’s Treatment Plant was built 17
years ago and provides slow sand filtration and chlorination to Rossland’s water.
Rossland’s water quality is monitored on an ongoing basis. Continuous monitoring of free
chlorine residual readings, temperature and pH in the drinking water is undertaken in the Water
Treatment plant. Samples of drinking water from the plant are tested on a daily basis by City
staff. On a weekly basis, free chlorine residuals are tested by City Staff test at separate
locations (i.e. the presence of chlorine in the water).
Future Climate Change Water Impacts for Rossland
The key future climate change impacts for Rossland with respect to water supply that could
result from the projected climate changes outlined above are:
Page 34
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Supply

Higher spring temperatures shift spring runoff earlier, over a shorter period when reservoirs
are already full (and peak demand has not commenced), result in less total stream flow
captured for community use.

Longer periods of drought and higher temperatures in the summer result in very low creek
flows over longer periods of time in the summer leading to greater reliance on storage,
greater reservoir draw down and longer periods of low or no downstream flows in the
summer.

Increased precipitation falling as rain, rather than snow, in the winter result in greater soil
infiltration and evaporation reducing the overall amount of water flowing into Rossland’s
reservoirs.

Evaporation off the reservoirs will increase as temperatures increase.

An increase in the incidence of drought events and higher temperatures in the late
summer/early fall would increase the risk of insufficient creek flows to refill Rossland’s
reservoirs at a time when the reservoirs are already drawn down and water use is high
extending the period over which the reservoirs are at less than capacity.

A wildfire in one of Rossland’s watersheds could have negative implications for Rossland’s
water quantity.
Demand

Longer periods of higher temperatures and drought in the spring/summer/fall result in
greater evaporation and evapotranspiration, reducing soil moisture and resulting in higher
water demand for longer periods.

A wildfire on the urban interface could result in a heavy demand for water leading to
significant reservoir draw down.
Matching Supply and Demand

Reduced total streamflow storage and higher water demands for longer periods create the
potential for low reservoir levels creating water shortages, or the need for more serious
restrictions on use.
Quality

Extreme precipitation events, a more rapid spring run-off, and rain on snow events could
result in flash floods, landslides and greater sediment and turbidity in the water supply
resulting in water quality issues and increased water treatment costs (these events also
have infrastructure implications and are addressed in that section).
Page 35
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report

Streams and reservoirs operating at lower capacity in higher summer temperatures have a
higher likelihood of contamination by algae and bacteria growth, which may result in water
quality issues during late summer and fall.

A wildfire in one of Rossland’s watersheds negatively impacts water quality.
Summary
Rossland has had a historically consistent and adequate level of water supply and storage.
Climate change is expected to cause slight increases in annual precipitation, but decreased
snowpack, earlier spring run-off and reduced summer precipitation. This could result in
moderate decreases in water capture in some years. Given that there are reasonable
opportunities to reduce current demand levels, these climate change impacts with respect to
water may not pose a significant challenge in most years, provided that Rossland’s population
remains stable or declines. Developing and implementing a set of demand-side management
policies to promote reduced water consumption in the short term would be a prudent adaptation
measure to ensure that longer term fluctuations in supply can be more easily accommodated.
Despite the generally optimistic outlook for Rossland’s water supply, an increase in the
variability in precipitation and temperatures from year to year and/or extreme events are also
expected and should be prepared for. Flow monitoring and a drought plan to allow for early
intervention in years where supply is significantly lower than expected could be essential climate
change adaptations. If the spring freshet becomes significantly faster and shorter on an
ongoing basis, additional storage capacity or height on Ophir could be required to capture the
available water.
In addition, population increases matching the higher-end growth scenario outlined in the OCP
or increased demand from other sources, such as increased local agriculture, or provincial
requirements to maintain downstream flows, while unlikely, could change the current supply and
demand profile and result in the need to adjust demand accordingly through demand-side
management or consider approaches to increasing storage capacity. A City water management
plan that formalizes flow monitoring and outlines total demand trigger points for a combination of
demand side management increases and/or supply side increases, based on various
permutations of per capita consumption and/or droughts would be a helpful climate change
adaptation tool.
Climate change may also produce changes in water quality as a result of increased
temperatures, increased spring flow rates and decreased summer flow rates. Continued water
quality monitoring will be critical to ensuring the safety of Rossland’s water supply.
Page 36
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Priority Area 3: Energy
The impacts on energy availability and pricing that could arise as a result of projected climate
changes are not as immediately obvious as those for water and infrastructure. As with food
security, because much of
Rossland’s energy comes from
beyond Rossland’s boundaries,
energy also requires more of a
global level evaluation. This is
provided in the non-climate related
stresses and opportunities section.
Potential energy impacts related to
Rossland as a result of climate
change are identified in the section
that follows.
Current and Future Non-Climate Related Stresses and
Opportunities
Demand
Rossland consumes energy in the form of transportation fuels, natural gas and
electricity. By gigajoules, the Ministry of Environment estimates that Rossland uses 444,354
GJ of energy annually broken down by consumption type in the following table:
Rossland Energy Consumption by Type and Resulting CO2 Emissions
Consumption Type
Electricity
Natural Gas
Gasoline & Diesel
TOTAL
Usage (GJ)
100,880
137,349
206,125
444,354
% of Energy Usage
22.7%
31.0%
46.3%
100%
Source: Ministry of Environment, 2007
This works out to an average of approximately 127 GJ per person which compares quite
favourably to BC per capita energy consumption of 239 GJ per person in 2003 (Statistics
Canada, 2003). However it is critical to note that this includes commercial and industrial energy
use. Thus given that Rossland has relatively fewer industrial energy users than many other
communities, it may not be useful to draw this comparison.
A significant proportion of Rossland’s energy use is in the form of transportation fuels.
It was estimated by the Ministry of Environment that in 2006 83.1% of residents depend upon
Page 37
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
automobiles to travel to and from work. The transportation fuel consumption figures must be
interpreted with some caution however. While the estimates are in part based on reasonably
accurate information regarding the number and types of vehicles licensed to Rossland owners,
the Vehicle Kilometres Travelled (VKT) are based on an algorithm using odometer readings
from the Fraser Valley Regional District as the baseline (Ministry of Environment, 2010). While
some regional coefficients were incorporated, including the median per capita income, ages and
sexes of the drivers and model age of each vehicle, as well as actual odometer readings on
Transfer Tax forms that are completed when vehicles are sold (Ministry of Environment, 2010),
they remain estimates that might not effectively account for the short commute distances of
many Rossland drivers, thereby resulting in an overestimate for the number of GJ consumed
through transportation.
In addition, the City’s Energy Task Force’s Community Energy Survey, which received
responses from 141 households (representing under 10% of Rossland households), found that
40% of respondents do not travel to work, either because they are retired, unemployed or work
from home and 37% of respondents drive to work on a regular basis. Thus the Ministry of
Environment figures must be interpreted with some caution.
Rosslanders consume slightly more than the provincial average of electricity. According
to the Ministry of Environment, Community Energy and Emissions Inventory for Rossland,
electricity consumption in 2007 was 28,022,478 kWh, of which 17,954,312 kWh was residential
and 10,068,166 was commercial/small industrial (Ministry of Environment, 2007). Using
Statistics Canada’s 2006 numbers of 1656 households for Rossland, this works out to an
average of 10,851 kWh per year. By comparison, the average BC household consumes 10,000
kWh per year (Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, 2010).
A large number of Rosslanders use natural gas as a primary heating fuel. According to
the Energy Task Force’s Community Energy Survey, 72% of respondents utilize natural gas as
a primary heating fuel. While these numbers cannot be extrapolated without some margin of
error, it can likely be assumed that over half of Rossland households use natural gas as a
primary heating fuel.
A large number of Rosslanders have a secondary heating source. According to the Energy
Task Force’s Community Energy Survey, 62% of respondents indicated that they had a
secondary heating source, (34% wood, 17% natural gas, 14% electricity, 34% no reply). The
availability of secondary heating sources enhances local resiliency in the face of temporary
power outages. However natural gas furnaces will not work without electricity. Wood as a
secondary heating source could allow Rosslanders to offset increased energy prices through
increased usage of wood heat. However increased use of wood heat presents some challenges
in the form of air quality concerns. A small number of homeowners also have solar and
geothermal heat sources.
Page 38
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Opportunities exist to reduce Rossland’s energy demand. Although the City has not
currently chosen to take on a significant role in community energy planning and management,
the potential exists for the City of Rossland to implement demand-side management to reduce
dependency on natural gas, transportation fuels and electricity usage. Rossland has been
successful at engaging the community in community planning and may be able to achieve
similar success in energy demand side management measures. Innovative programs such as
localized transit or car cooperatives and electricity usage conservation measures (district
heating or burn smart programs) could be undertaken.
Teck, the region’s largest employer, relies on affordable hydroelectric energy and
transportation fuels for its Trail operations to maintain competitive lead and zinc
operations. The inter-relationship of price, supply and demand for electricity, lead and zinc is
important to Teck’s competitiveness and therefore Rossland’s economic outlook. If energy
prices increase significantly, Teck may struggle to maintain its competitiveness in the face of a
number of other potential market changes. Given Teck’s ability to generate its own
hydroelectricity at low cost, it may have a long-term competitive advantage on this front.
However, given its location, it may be at a competitive disadvantage if faced with increased
transportation fuel prices.
Global and BC energy demand are forecast to continue to increase to 2030 if no changes
are made to government policies around the world. According to the International Energy
Agency (IEA) World Energy Outlook 2009 Reference Scenario, which provides a baseline
forecast of how global energy markets will evolve if governments make no changes to their
existing policies, world primary energy demand is projected to increase by 1.5% per year
between 2007 and 2030 (IEA, 2009). This will mean an increase from 12,000 million tonnes of
oil equivalent (Mtoe) to 16,800 Mtoe driven by both population increase and development in
Asian countries (IEA, 2009). Relevant to Rossland and BC is the fact that as part of this
scenario fossil fuels are projected to remain the dominant source of primary energy and
therefore the subject of increased demand, and the majority of the increased demand will be for
power generation (IEA, 2009). It is also critical to note that BC electricity demand is forecast to
increase by 25 to 45% from current levels by 2025 (BC Hydro, 2006). Increases in global
demand for fossil fuels and BC demand for hydroelectricity could have implications for energy
supply and prices in Rossland.
Climate change mitigation policies will likely increase energy costs. We can expect to
see, in the next decade, significant policies worldwide and in Canada to address climate change
by reducing, among other things, energy-related emissions of GHGs. A number of G-8
countries, including Canada, have pledged to halve their GHG emissions by the year 2050. One
of the sets of tools that is bound to be used is a range of policies that penalizes fossil fuel
production and consumption. This would affect Rossland in two ways. First, it would increase
the costs of transport fuels and, if technology remains unchanged, of transport. Second, it
would result in increased demand for clean energy sources such as hydro-generated electricity.
Page 39
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Given BC’s ability to export electricity to Alberta and the US West Coast, this would tend to drive
up the price of electricity for BC consumers.
Supply and Prices
Rossland’s current electricity supply is primarily from hydroelectric sources and is
provided by Fortis through recently refurbished transmission lines. Rossland currently
receives electricity from Fortis, BC via a 25 KV line. Both Fortis’ sub-station and the distribution
system were completely refurbished in 2000. Rossland has no local commercial renewable
energy providers, and a very small number of residents utilize geothermal and solar energy for
heat.
Currently Rossland households pay a lower price for electricity than many other
provinces and US States. According to the BC Energy Plan, BC households pay on average
6.41 cents per kilowatt hour (cents/kWh), compared to some American households which can
pay up to 23.82 cents per kilowatt hour and many Canadian households, which can pay
between 10 and 12 cents/kWh (Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, 2010).
Rising demand for electricity and potentially limited supply may impose new stresses on
the energy grid. Beyond the challenges associated with the simple supply of energy, the
delivery of electricity could become challenged by increased demands, either through increased
local consumption, increased population or increased external demands, coupled with an aging
infrastructure resulting in more temporary power outages.
The City currently has an Emergency Plan to address temporary power outages. In
emergencies, the City’s Emergency Plan is to call an emergency and trigger its Provincial
Emergency Program (PEP) account. Once PEP has been triggered, an Emergency Operation
Centre will be established and the Red Cross and RCMP will be called in as necessary.
Emergency shelters will be established. City staff have been trained in how to address an
emergency.
External factors are expected to significantly affect energy supply and prices over the
next century. The cost of all of the main types of energy utilized in Rossland, (electricity,
natural gas and transportation fuels), are expected to rise due to many factors, including
increases in global energy demand, carbon pricing, and declines in stocks of readily available
fossil fuels necessitating more expensive production techniques. Outlooks for some of our main
sources of energy are as follows:
Oil. There has been considerable debate regarding when global oil production may start
to peak and decline. In official documents, the IEA and many government agencies say
little about the potential for peak oil and when declines in oil production may start to
become noticeable in terms of dramatic price increases or supply shortages. According
to the IEA (2008), estimates for proven global oil reserves in 2007 ranged from 1,322
Page 40
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
billion barrels to 1,120 billion barrels. In 2008, the IEA estimated that the global
reserves-to-production ratio, based on current levels of production were about 40 to 45
years, and suggested that peak oil production could occur in 2030 (IEA, 2008).
Nevertheless the reserves-to-production ratio is a figure that has remained stable for
many years despite dramatic increases in consumption, due to continued increases in
the reserves estimates and our ability to access previously uneconomically viable
sources of oil. The IEA places a lot of emphasis on the US Geological Survey’s
estimates of undiscovered reserves, which are in the range of 805 billion barrels (IEA,
2008). This does not even account for oil reserves currently unrecoverable or
uneconomically recoverable (which would raise total global reserves to 9 trillion barrels)
(IEA, 2008). However there have been whistleblower incidents at the IEA, including
statements by the IEA chief economist Dr. Faith Birol, in which claims have been made
that the official IEA estimates are vastly optimistic and are a result of efforts to please
the US and avoid panic buying (Macalister, 2009; Murray, 2009). Birol stated to the
press in 2009 that global oil production was likely to peak in 10 years and that
governments are very underprepared (Murray, 2009). The failure to make official
statements regarding peak oil is consistent across many governments, although many of
them also have peak oil committees or parliamentary groups. The BC government for
example states in its most recent Energy Plan that the debate within the government
regarding peak oil is “lively” (Ministry of Energy Mines and Petroleum Resources, 2010).
It is important to emphasize though that even if we were to reach peak oil, it would not
mean the end of oil, but rather likely the end of cheap oil.
Overall, peak oil is very hard to predict. There are many remaining potential oil reserves
that are currently considered uneconomical to produce (i.e. oil shales). As other forms
of production decrease and prices potentially increase or new production techniques are
developed, it is very possible these additional reserves will come on line as economically
viable. However, at the very least, the decline in conventional oil reserves and increase
in reliance on nonconventional oil reserves will mean an increase in oil prices. We will
be forced to rely on oil resources that are more and more difficult to access and higher
costs will result in higher prices. The IEA forecasts that due to the eventual increase in
reliance on nonconventional oil reserves in the IEA Reference Scenario, oil prices will
increase from $60 per barrel in 2009 to $100 per barrel by 2020, and the long term
supply cost curve is expected to continue to rise (IEA, 2008; IEA, 2009).
Natural Gas. Natural gas supplies are considered very secure globally with over 850
trillion cubic metres (tcm) in long-term global recoverable gas (IEA, 2009). To date only
66 tcm have been produced (IEA, 2009). However, many of the traditional proven gas
reserves are located in the Middle East and Russia. Transportation of this liquefied
natural gas over oceans is very expensive. Canada and the US have some supplies of
unconventional natural gas, to which new technology is increasingly allowing access
Page 41
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
(IEA, 2009). However, these supplies are not limitless (Alberta is considered to have 47
years of natural gas reserves – 75 percent unproven), and some of the unconventional
reserves may prove too expensive or too environmentally damaging to access. In
addition, due to the higher costs of accessing unconventional natural gas, as well as
rising material costs and rig rates, natural gas costs are expected to rise in North
America over the next several decades (IEA, 2009). Tougher environmental controls
over unconventional recovery, as the technology is more widely used, will likely
contribute to the trend of higher natural gas prices.
Hydroelectricity. Even the cost of hydroelectricity could rise. The National Energy
Board (NEB) of Canada notes that hydro-based jurisdictions (e.g. Québec, Manitoba,
BC) are also experiencing moderate rate increases due to rising operating costs and the
cost of new generation (NEB, 2010). BC is already a net importer of energy in the range
of about 1700 to 7400 GWh per year, which is less than ten percent of BC’s energy use,
as domestic demand is outstripping domestic energy supply. As outlined above,
domestic demand is expected to continue to increase and therefore without expanded
supply, domestic hydroelectric supply will increasingly be insufficient in the coming years
(BC Hydro, 2006). Closing this electricity gap will require either conservation, more
independent power projects (IPP), larger purchases of electricity from other jurisdictions
or new provincial power projects (BC Hydro, 2006). Site C on the Peace River remains
an identified hydroelectric option and could provide 900 MW of electricity, or 4,600 GWh
per year (BC Hydro, 2006).
Locally, BC Hydro has two projects under consideration on the Columbia at Murphy
Creek and Boundary each estimated to be capable of producing 275 MW. There are
also many IPP proposals in the Columbia Basin.
Coal. Coal is identified as an electricity generation option by BC Hydro for BC given our
abundant coal resources (BC Hydro, 2006). BC Hydro stresses that coal could provide
a stable energy supply provided sufficient lead time is available to build an appropriate
plant (BC Hydro, 2006). While cleaner coal options, such as carbon capture and
sequestration technology, are under development, there are still many uncertainties
associated with them. Coal may provide BC and Rossland with some level of energy
security, but it could have some serious environmental costs that would have to be
overcome. At present, however, new coal-fired generation in BC can only be built if it
incorporates carbon capture and storage, which given the expense and untested nature
of this technology, makes coal as a future BC fuel unlikely.
In addition, tighter environmental regulations in other countries, particularly the United States
could increase external demand for clean energy, such as the hydroelectric energy generated in
Canada, resulting in higher prices and more demand competition for Rossland.
Page 42
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Energy investment in terms of the identification and development of new supplies has declined
significantly over the past year due to the economic downturn raising concerns regarding global
energy security and shortfalls in supply due to the long lead times associated with the
development of many energy projects, especially electricity and oil (IEA, 2009). This will also
likely lead to increased energy costs.
Increased energy costs and decreased supply of some energy sources could be partially
offset by external factors such as energy efficiency technology improvements, new
forms of energy production, and energy efficiency incentive programs at all levels of
government. Climate change mitigation is becoming a driver at all levels of government to
develop clean sources of energy, promote energy efficiency and reduce consumption. Although
these measures do not yet appear to be dramatic enough to generate significant change, if
these measures do ultimately go far enough, they could result in an increased security of energy
supply and a decrease in energy costs. In the IEA 450 Scenario, in which rapid and
coordinated policy action is taken all across the world to stabilize greenhouse gases in the
atmosphere at 450 ppm, electricity demand is lowered by 40 percent through energy efficiency
investments and the total global reduction in energy bills in transport, buildings and industry is
$8.6 trillion over the period 2010 to 2030 (IEA, 2009).
In BC, and in Rossland, reduced energy consumption could be fostered through the multitude of
policies and programs outlined in the new BC Energy Plan including policies promoting
improved building efficiency, hybrid and electric cars, and incentive programs such as the
provincial LiveSmart BC Energy Efficiency program, the Innovative Clean Energy Fund and the
LocalMotion Fund (Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, 2010).
The City has limited ability to impact electricity production and prices on a macro level.
Many of the factors that will influence energy supplies and prices will play out on international,
national and provincial levels. The City of Rossland will have limited to no influence over these
events. As a small user, Rossland residents are currently price takers with respect to energy
and have too limited a population to influence energy prices.
Diversifying its energy sources through local renewable energy generation would be a
challenging proposition for Rossland. The costs of developing electricity generation using
alternative and renewable resources such as wind, biomass, solar, and small hydro have
decreased considerably over the last two decades due to technological advances.
Unfortunately, the Return on Investment (ROI) on renewable energy projects is often still poor in
some cases compared to traditional energy sources, particularly in BC where hydroelectric rates
are comparatively very low. However if the marginal costs of electricity, the true costs of carbon
and the social and economic impacts electricity are taken into consideration (full cost
accounting), the ROIs of alternative energy projects improve significantly.
Even with current ROIs, municipalities across Canada have undertaken solar thermal, biomass,
biogas and geothermal projects; district heating programs and combined heat/power generation
Page 43
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
are viable ways to build community energy resiliency (FCM, 2009). However, these programs
require capital investment and technical expertise and as the Federation of Canadian
Municipalities (FCM) points out, “many of the … best practices in energy sustainability are being
advanced by larger, urban municipalities. These solutions are not getting much uptake in the
smaller, urban or rural municipalities. This is a trend that may continue in the short- to mediumterm unless additional resources can be identified to help [them]” (FCM, 2009, p. iii). Without the
economies of scale afforded to larger communities, the start-up costs and expertise
requirements of many renewable energy projects present challenges, e.g. upgrading municipal
buildings in Halifax cost $3.6 million dollars, while estimated savings from the retrofits were
$250,000 annually (FCM, 2009).
Options for renewable energy in Rossland would have to be further explored. Some of the key
ones that could be further investigated include:
Solar Photovoltaics. Solar energy systems come in two forms: active or photovoltaics,
utilized to generate electricity and passive or solar thermal, used to generate heat,
usually to heat water. PV modules currently cost about $6 to $8 per watt to purchase,
but there are additional costs associated with the other parts of the system including
wiring, batteries etc. (BC Sustainable Energy Association, 2010). However these only
increase the system cost per watt to about $9.50 to $10. The industry is utilizing the
levelized cost of energy (LCOE) as its basis for doing price comparisons. The LCOE
takes into account the infrastructure cost, its lifespan and the amount of energy the
system will produce over its lifetime based on the number of sunlight hours an area is
expected to receive, the sophistication of the system (whether the panels tilt to follow the
sun or not) and the size of the system. On a kilowatt-hour basis, assuming a lifespan of
25 years, on a 10 MW plant in Arizona (which is a large and more efficient installation)
current photovoltaic technology costs about 15 to 22 cents per kWh, versus
hydroelectricity in BC, which costs 6.41 cents/kWh (US Department of Energy, 2007). In
comparison, on a residential 4 kW system in Phoenix, the LCOE was 32 cents/kWh in
2005 and is projected to decline to 15 cents/kWh in 2011, and 9 cents/kWh in 2020 (US
Department of Energy, 2007). Modelling for a 150 kw commercial system shows a
LCOE of 18 cents/kWh in 2005, 10 cents in 2011 and 6 cents in 2020 (US Department of
Energy, 2007). There have been major advances in PV module technology in the last
few years reducing production costs of the modules to below $2/watt. This could result
in significant reductions of LCOEs. However LCOEs cannot yet be calculated for these
new modules as the lifespan of the modules is as yet unknown and is a critical factor in
the LCOE calculation (US Department of Energy, 2007).
Due in part to our low cost hydroelectricity, BC dramatically lags the rest of the world in
both residential and commercial solar installations. Currently over 5.5 GW of power is
being produced globally in solar power plants in places such as Germany, Spain and the
United States (RENI, 2010). In lower latitude sunny parts of the world, such as the
Page 44
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Middle East, India and the southern US these installations are very close to reaching
grid parity (whereby they cost the same as grid supplied energy) (RENI, 2010). In more
northern countries, such as France and the Czech Republic, grid parity is thought to be
five years away (RENI, 2010). Although Rossland will never have optimal sunlight hours
for solar photovoltaics, it could be viable as technology advances reduce costs.
In BC, the T’Souke First Nation on Vancouver Island has the largest solar installation in
BC totaling 75 Kw (Kimmett, 2009). The cost for this project was $1 million, supplied in
part by the BC Innovative Clean Energy Fund (Kimmett, 2009). But it must be
emphasized that much of this funding was devoted to capacity building within the First
Nation. Rossland has limited current local examples of photovoltaic installations with a
few potential off grid residences, backcountry lodges and highways equipment
installations.
The City of Berkeley established a solar financing program in 2008 that is being
considered a potential model for the rest of the US in financing residential photovoltaic
systems (City of Berkeley, 2010). Property owners were invited to borrow money from
the City’s Sustainable Energy Financing District for the installation of photovoltaic
systems (City of Berkeley, 2010). Loans would be repaid through the homeowner’s
property tax bill over 20 years (City of Berkeley, 2010). Thirteen property owners took
advantage of the loan, while 27 who originally were interested in the program installed
photovoltaic systems but secured their own lower cost financing (City of Berkeley, 2010).
The cost of the systems after rebates ranged from $17,000 to $36,500 installed and they
are expected to provide the residents with 75 to 100 percent of their energy needs (City
of Berkeley, 2010).
Solar Thermal. Solar thermal systems can be utilized for space heating, water heating
and pool heating. They cost in the range of $2000 to $4500 for a single residence and
can be quite efficient for pool and water heating (US Department of Energy, 2003). The
solar hot water component of the T’Souke First Nation installation consists of 25 systems
on residences, which provide enough hot water in the summer to serve all of those
residences’ hot water needs (Kimmett, 2009). A few Rossland residents have recently
installed solar thermal water heaters. Two solar thermal companies have recently been
established in Rossland. One of these companies indicated that systems cost about
$8500 to install (Rossi, 2010). Changes to the BC Building Code were being considered
to require new residences to be solar hot water ready, but this has not yet occurred.
Incentives will likely be required to make the ROI on solar thermal reasonable enough
for Rossland residents to consider it in large numbers.
Solar thermal concentration plants, which use lenses or mirrors to concentrate a large
amount of sunlight into a small area, are also a possibility, but unlikely to be viable at
current hydroelectric rates. A plant of this nature is under consideration in Medicine Hat.
Page 45
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Micro Hydro. Micro hydro works with small dams or diversion structures to divert water
from small rivers or streams to a generating station. Micro hydro operations generally
provide less than 100 kw. Small hydro ranges up to 30 MW. Key to whether a stream is
suitable for micro hydro is its head (or elevation drop) and flow rate. Some handbooks
suggest that to be suitable for micro hydro the creek must have a flow rate of 300
gallons per minute (GPM) and that flow must be at about this rate throughout the year
(Western North Carolina Renewable Energy Initiative, 2007).
There are many examples of micro hydro at backcountry lodges in the area and Nelson
Power operates a small hydro plant at Bonnington Falls on the Kootenay River that can
generate 16 MW. BC Hydro did an assessment of creeks in the province to determine
their potential for micro hydro (BC Hydro, 2000). The Trail portion of Murphy Creek,
which has more flow, and is closer to users and power lines, was identified with a flow of
0.95 m3/s and a head of 60m and the ability to supply 400 kw of power (enough for
around 100 homes) at a cost of 1.1 cents/kWh (BC Hydro, 2000). The flows on Hanna
and Topping creeks are not likely consistent or large enough to for micro hydro. The
Rossland portion of Murphy Creek could perhaps offer enough flows for a micro-hydro
operation.
Geothermal and Groundsource Heat. There are two types of geothermal energy –
one which is true geothermal energy in the form of steam or hot water reservoirs with
temperatures higher than 170 degrees C, which would allow for power generation (BC
Sustainable Energy Association, 2010) and the other which is more for individual
residential purposes that accesses lower temperature reservoirs and utilizes them for
home heating. The number of sites with water at sufficient temperatures to allow for
power generation is limited and can generally be found in areas with recent volcanic
activity and tectonic plate boundaries (BC Sustainable Energy Association, 2010). This
water often appears at the surface in the form of hot springs.
Although geothermal experts have argued that geothermal sources could supply half of
BC’s energy needs (Vancouver Sun, 2007), in BC, only the Meager Creek Area north of
Whistler has been extensively studied and is under development as a site for true
geothermal power generation. Work has also been undertaken in the North Meager and
Mount Cayley areas (Meech and Ghomshei, nd). The Garibaldi Pemberton range and
Haida Gwaii are also thought to be promising areas of geothermal activity (Vancouver
Sun, 2007). Rossland is identified by the Ministry of Energy Mines and Petroleum
Resources (1992) as an area of “moderate geothermal potential containing some
characteristics of geothermal resources” but limited investigation has been undertaken in
this area.
Globally 9600 MW of power are produced in geothermal plants with the US as the
leading producer (BC Sustainable Energy Association. 2010). Geothermal power
Page 46
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
generation is very cost efficient with a LCOE of about 3.3 to 3.9 cents/kWh (BC
Sustainable Energy Association, 2010). Future costs could be as low as 1 cent/kWh.
Groundsource heat pumps access lower temperature geothermal energy to heat homes
and offices in the winter. The cost of groundsource heat pumps ranges from $6000 to
$10,000 depending on the size of the house and average winter temperatures.
Groundsource heat pumps can reduce heating bills by 50 to 70 percent with payback in
5 to 12 years (BC Sustainable Energy Association, 2010). There are currently 30,000
geothermal heat pumps in Canada with an energy cost of about 2 to 4 cents/kWh
(Meech and Ghomshei, nd). A groundsource heat pump installed at the Lynne Valley
Care Centre in North Vancouver supplies heat for 180 residents saving $28,550/year
with an initial investment of $90,000 (Meech and Ghomshei, nd). There are a few
households in Rossland with groundsource heat pumps. Old mines are considered
especially promising for geothermal heat pumps as they allow water to move laterally
and vertically. The Britannia Mine in BC is being examined for this purpose, and a
coalmine in Nova Scotia provides heating and cooling to a 14,000 m2 industrial park
(Meech and Ghomshei, nd). Rossland is situated on top of a water-filled mine.
Wind. Wind energy provides energy at a very competitive rate ranging from 6 to 8
cents/kWh at windy sites and up to 12 cents/kWh at less windy sites (6 m/s) (BC
Sustainable Energy Association, 2010). Wind energy potential in an area is determined
by the speed and consistency of the wind with anything over 7.0 m/s or 25 km per hour
considered to be a good resource (BC Hydro, 2010). BC Hydro has done some very
large scale mapping of wind resources in BC and Rossland falls into a zone that is
considered poor to fair for wind energy with wind speeds of less than 6 m/s and possibly
less than 4 m/s (BC Hydro, nd). Mountainous regions are challenging to assess for wind
energy potential as they are often characterized by very localized wind regimes. In an
overall assessment for the BC southern interior, for BC Hydro, Garrad Hassan
concluded that the lower speed and consistency of winds in the southern interior would
result in a very high wind energy cost (Garrad Hassan, 2008).
Waste, Biomass and Waste heat. Waste to energy is a common form of disposing of
municipal solid waste and generating energy in many other countries, especially Japan
and China. The most common form of waste to energy is through incineration of the
waste, but this approach raises many concerns regarding local air emissions and acid
rain. Other approaches that might produce fewer emissions exist or are under
development including gasification and fermentation. The waste-to-energy facility in
Burnaby BC turns about 280,000 tonnes of Metro Vancouver’s waste (about 20 percent)
into steam and electricity. The electricity (400 MWh) is sold to BC Hydro and is sufficient
to power 12,300 homes (Metro Vancouver, 2010). However a much larger waste stream
or a regional waste operation would likely be necessary to make a waste to energy
operational viable.
Page 47
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Biomass could be very viable possibility for local energy production in Rossland,
possibly as part of the wildfire fuel reduction initiative, using waste from the local sawmill,
or accessing wood waste elsewhere. A study was undertaken for the RDKB using
biomass specifically grown to produce energy and could be revisited. There are many
local examples of the use of wood waste and wood pellets to produce heat including
Nakusp High School, the Revelstoke Community Energy Corporation and the Dockside
Green project in Victoria. The Kettle Falls plant in Washington State consumes 542,00
tons of wood waste per year and produces 46 MW of electricity. Biogas from biomass
gasification is should also be considered.
Waste heat from equipment such as air conditioners and chillers (in the arena) also
presents possibilities, albeit likely more limited. The Rossland pool gets its heat from the
waste heat given off by the City Hall air conditioning units.
Future Climate Change Energy Impacts for Rossland
Demand

Higher winter temperatures may result in lower demand for winter heating.

Less insulation from snow cover may result in higher demand for winter heating.

Higher temperatures paired with longer hot periods in late summer may increase the
demand for air conditioning,
Supply and Prices


Extreme weather events such as hot dry conditions leading to wildfire, snow or ice
storms, or heavy wet snow may knock out power lines more frequently resulting in
temporary or extended power outages, which could result in the need for:
o
expanded emergency services for vulnerable populations in cold weather and/or
extreme heat, and
o
use of backup heat/power sources that may compromise air quality.
Changes in river flow regimes, especially flow reductions could cause changes in levels
of electricity generation that (total aggregate hydropower reduction for the Columbia
Basin is projected to be 3% - but summer reductions could be as high as 15%) (Lane et
al, 2009). In addition, changes in air temperature, wind patterns and humidity may also
indirectly affect hydroelectric energy generation by impacting reservoir and river
dynamics potentially contributing to higher hydro-electricity prices across the province.
Page 48
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative

City of Rossland – Final Report
Extreme weather events in other parts of the world could cause temporary oil or natural
gas shortages or price increases, which could impact Rossland residents who depend
on their vehicles and those who heat their homes with oil or natural gas as well as
affecting the cost of products transported into Rossland, such as food, thereby impacting
residents through higher prices and the viability of businesses.
Summary
Energy differs from water and infrastructure in the sense that the energy that Rossland relies
upon comes from external sources that are beyond the City’s control. Moreover, many of the
supply and pricing challenges that are likely to affect energy over the next century are
significant, but are not related to local climate changes, such as increased global energy
demand, climate change mitigation measures and the rising cost of processing for many energy
sources. Nevertheless climate change may exacerbate expected supply and pricing
challenges.
Many alternative energy sources exist, including renewable options, such as solar, geothermal
and biomass that would make Rossland more energy self-sufficient. However the start up costs
and returns on investment do not make these options attractive at this point in time on either a
community or a household level, compared to existing energy sources. Rossland also has the
option of implementing measures to promote greater energy efficiency and conservation to
reduce our overall energy demand. The value of pursuing these energy efficiency and
conservation measures must be considered against the cost of implementing them. Perhaps
more importantly, it must be recognized that to have the greatest effect these measures must be
pursued at the household and business level rather than merely at the corporate City level, and
that the City does not have as much power to affect change on households and businesses with
respect to energy as it does for water or infrastructure.
Cities in the past have not typically considered themselves to have a large role in community
energy security, but this is increasingly changing. Alternative energy generation, energy
efficiency and conservation measures all provide benefits through increased energy security
and reduced carbon emissions that make them worthwhile even if the straight ROI calculations
do not make sense in the short-term. Nevertheless, climate change adaptation considerations
alone may not make these actions worthwhile.
Page 49
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Priority Area 4: Food Security
Like energy, the impacts on food security that could arise as a
result of projected climate changes are not as immediately
obvious as those for water and infrastructure. Because much of
Rossland’s food comes from beyond Rossland’s boundaries,
food also requires more of a global level evaluation. This is
provided in the non-climate related stresses and opportunities
section. Potential food impacts related to Rossland as a result
of climate change are identified in the section that follows. This
food section was taken from a larger Food Security
Backgrounder and Vulnerability and Risk Assessment
undertaken for this project. The food security backgrounder was
undertaken for both the Regional Districts of Central Kootenay
and Kootenay Boundary, collectively defined in this analysis as
the region, not just for Rossland. Thus the analysis here reflects
that regional outlook. It is included here for completeness and to
reflect the four priority issue areas selected in March, 2010.
The Kootenay Food Strategy Society defines food security as follows: “A community enjoys food
security when all people, at all times, have access to nutritious, safe, personally acceptable and
culturally appropriate foods, produced in ways that are environmentally sound and socially just”
(KFSS, nd).
The analysis below addresses trends in both global food production and the potential for local
food production.
Current and Future Non-Climate Related Stresses and
Opportunities
Demand
There is no information available regarding the precise amount of food consumed in
Rossland but it is believed that food production requires less than 0.542 hectares of land
per person per year. The BC Ministry of Agriculture and Lands (MAL) indicates that given the
production technology available in BC today, 0.524 hectares (1.3 acres) of farmland are
required to produce healthy food sufficient for one person annually (MAL, 2006). The guidelines
utilized for healthy food were those set out in the Canada’s Food Guide to Healthy Eating (MAL,
2006). According to the Ministry to produce a healthy diet for all British Columbians, farmers
Page 50
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
would need 2.15 million ha of farmland, of which 10 percent (215,000 ha) would need to be
irrigated, for economic fruit, vegetable and dairy production (MAL, 2006).
Extending this analysis to the Central Kootenay and Kootenay Boundary Regional Districts at
the 2006 combined population of the two Regional Districts of 86,625 people (Central Kootenay
– 55,883 ha, Kootenay Boundary 30,742 ha) (Penfold, 2009) that 45,392 ha of farmland would
be required to support the existing population, of which 4540 ha would have to be irrigated.
Estimates based on a less meat-centered diet (but still some meat, to make use of forage land
that cannot be utilized for crops) suggest that 0.2 hectares of land per person annually is
required (Peters et al., 2008).
Supply
Experts have suggested that BC could not be self-sufficient in food production. Moura
Quayle, former Dean of the University of British Columbia Faculty of Land and Food Systems,
has said with regard to BC: “it’s unlikely we’ll ever get all our food from local sources, but more
small-scale agriculture would provide a balance to the current agricultural model, and a mixed
food supply system may give us more choices in the future” (Somerton, 2008:2). However it
has been stated that conclusion is based on the current composition of BC’s population and the
limited capacity of some components of the agricultural system.
It is believed that 100 years ago, the Kootenay region was a net exporter of food. Moreover
even mountainous communities, such as Rossland, were believed to be relatively food selfsufficient at the turn of the century. However this is only anecdotal and a more detailed analysis
of historical data should be undertaken.
There is a limited amount of agricultural land in BC and the Kootenay region. In BC only 5
percent of the land base is suitable for growing crops. Prime farmland (Classes 1 – 3 of the
Canada Land Inventory), also called ‘dependable’ agricultural land, comprises less than 1
percent of the land base (948,600 ha) and is primarily concentrated near urban areas in the
Lower Mainland and Okanagan (Hofmann, 2001). There are many ways of estimating the total
amount of potentially productive farmland in the Kootenay region:
Agricultural Land Reserve land. There are 63,924 hectares of Agricultural Land
Reserve (ALR) land in the Central Kootenay and 53,443 hectares of ALR land in
Kootenay Boundary (Penfold, 2009). Approximately one third of the ALR in the region is
believed to be of lower quality agricultural classifications (i.e. lower than class 1-3) land
and therefore limited in its productive capacity (Brynne, 2009).
Area of Farms. The total area of farms in 2006 was 27,338 hectares (67,554 acres) in
the Central Kootenay, and 53,260 hectares of farms (131,260 acres) in the Kootenay
Boundary (Penfold, 2009). It is unclear how much overlap there is between the area of
farms and ALR land.
Page 51
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Area currently in crops. The amount of land currently in crops in the RDCK and the
RDKB is under 18,027 ha many of which are hay/fodder and alfalfa crops (Penfold,
2009).
British Columbia farmers currently produce 48 percent of the food that is consumed in
BC (MAL, 2006; Brynne, 2009). If healthy diet considerations are incorporated, BC produces
only 34 percent of the food its citizens would need (MAL, 2006). In the Columbia Basin, local
production is considered to be an even smaller percentage of the food consumed (Brynne,
2009).
In some areas BC is fairly self-sufficient, including the production of chicken, eggs and dairy,
and there is significant provincial sufficiency in the production of vegetables, beef, fish and fruit
(Serecon Management Consulting, 2009). However in some areas it is not self-sufficient at all,
such as in the production of grains (14 percent self sufficient) and oils (10 percent self sufficient)
(MAL, 2006).
Most of the agriculture within the RDKB and the RDCK is small scale but a wide variety of
items are grown. Because of their size, these operations do not at the moment have the
capacity for investments in things such as mechanization that would increase their production
and reduce their costs (Brynne, 2009). Nevertheless a wide variety of fruit and vegetable crops
are grown in the two regional districts. It is very likely that the production of some crops, such
as fruit crops, are concentrated in only some areas, such as Creston and Grand Forks.
Regional capacity for grain production could be a limiting factor in regional food self-sufficiency.
Grains are grown in Grand Forks and Creston and efforts are being made to foster an
expansion in grain production through the Local Grain Revolution in which residents purchase
shares in grain crops in advance of planting to provide farmers with stability and assurance of
markets. Meat is produced within the region on a number of farms, most of which are small
holdings. In the RDCK, there are over 10,000 cattle and calves and over 12,000 poultry on over
400 farms (RDCK, 2010). Sheep, goats and pigs are also raised in the RDCK in smaller
numbers (under 826, 423 and 189 animals respectively) (RDCK, 2010). Similar numbers are
not available for RDKB at this point in time. Both Regional Districts are undertaking Regional
Agriculture Area Plans in the next year to provide some information on crops that can be grown
in the region. There is little information on the range of crops that can be grown in Rossland.
Regional farmers face many barriers including low returns on their products and there
has been a considerable deskilling of the population. Farmers face huge challenges getting
their products into major grocery chains (Brynne, 2009). Roughly half of the region’s farmland
lies fallow on a regular basis (Brynne, 2009).
Currently, given global food markets and the large amounts of food that are available at very low
prices, achieving reasonable economic returns through local food production is very
challenging. Average farm sales were below $60,000 in both Central Kootenay and Kootenay
Page 52
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Boundary Regional Districts (Penfold, 2009). The average net return for farms in the region is
extremely low ($5,422 in Central Kootenay and $1,680 in Kootenay Boundary) (Penfold, 2009).
At those net returns, there is simply no incentive now for farmers to expand their crops or new
farmers to enter the market. Thus the number of people engaged in farming in the population
has declined dramatically over the last century. In 2006, there were 29,870 farm operators in
BC, comprising 0.7 percent of the population (Statistics Canada, nd). Moreover, over half of
those farm operators in BC have off-farm jobs or businesses (Statistics Canada, nd). In the
region, there were 1445 farm operators (855 in Central Kootenay and 590 in Kootenay
Boundary) (Penfold, 2009). The mean age of farmers is also rising and hovers between 50 and
60 in the region. Most young people are not interested or do not have the capital to take up
farming. If this trend continues, valuable farming skills could be lost, and there will be
insufficient people to take over the operation of existing farms.
It is very challenging to get estimates of the number of backyard farmers or gardeners
producing food in the region or the quantity of food they produce. At the height of the US Victory
Garden program in the US, 40 percent of US vegetable needs were produced in backyard
gardens (Brynne, 2009) raising concerns whether in a less favourable climate such as Canada,
we could not actually produce enough food to be regionally self-sufficient.
Buyer expectations of low food prices (10 percent of total household expenses in 2005 versus
19 percent in 1961) are a significant barrier to profitability in local agriculture and therefore to
regional food self-sufficiency. Local producers often cannot compete with industrial scale
producers with more productive land and very low labour costs in other countries.
Nevertheless there has been a significant revival in interest in local food production. This has
resulted in the establishment of a multitude of local groups such as the Kootenay Food Strategy
Society, the Kootenay Local Agricultural Society, the Kootenay Organic Growers Society, and
Rossland REAL food specifically geared to promoting local food production and preserving and
enhancing local food production skills.
There is limited food processing capacity within the region. The region currently has no
freezing or canning facilities (RDCK, 2010). There is also a lack of storage facilities
(Hackenbrook et al., 2010). Grain milling can be done on a small scale in Creston, Nelson and
Grand Forks (Pride of the Valley milling), but also can be undertaken through home milling.
Packaging is done on a small scale by local farmers, such as those selling under the Kootenay
Mountain Grown label.
Local meat processing and egg sales are seriously constrained by government regulation.
Under BC legislation passed in 2004, all meat for human consumption must come from a
provincially or federally licensed slaughter facility, or abattoir. Many small abattoirs closed their
operations due to the costs associated with getting licensed. The closest poultry abattoirs are in
Salmon Arm, and Keremeos. A Kootenay Mobile Poultry Abattoir, that processes as many as
500 chickens a day, based out of Cranbrook, was established in 2009 (Stueck, 2010). A red
Page 53
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
meat abattoir, Tarzwell Farms, is situated in Creston and a second transitional slaughterhouse
for red meat, which is pursuing licensing, is located in Rock Creek (BC Centre for Disease
Control, 2010).
Local eggs also cannot be sold (except at the farmer’s place of residence or in a farmer’s
market) unless they are graded and marked in accordance with the Canada Agricultural
Products Act. There are two licensed egg-grading stations in the area in Creston and in Rock
Creek (Zwicker, 2010).
Current distribution channels are also problematic. Many of the food items sold in multi-national
grocery store chains, such as Safeway, even if grown locally, are often transported to a central
warehouse, which can be in a different province, and then back to the grocery store, adding
many unnecessary kilometers to their travel (Brynne, 2009). These transportation channels,
and the policies of the grocers, or the ownership of the grocery stores, would have to be
reoriented to have regional food self-sufficiency. While independent grocers in the region, such
as the Kootenay Country Store Co-operative and Ferarro Foods, are often highly supportive of
local producers and will allow direct transport of foods from the producer to the grocery store,
these independent grocers are becoming increasingly uncommon (Brynne, 2009).
Global agricultural output projections are positive but could be negatively affected by a
number of issues including increased energy and input costs. On a global level, long-term
food production projections from the FAO are optimistic (WBGU, 2007). For example, the
annual growth rate for world cereal production is projected to increase from 1 percent to 1.4
percent by 2015, eventually falling to 1.2 percent over the long-term (WBGU, 2007). However,
these projections and conclusions are not completely supported by ongoing trends. Food
demand is currently outstripping production and as a result reserves for some major crops have
been declining (Bals et al., 2008). Food prices, particularly for cereals, have already been
increasing around the world and may continue to do so (Bals et al., 2008). This could be offset
slightly by higher food prices driving more investment in agriculture (Bals et al., 2008). As
outlined above the following trends could negatively affect global food production.
Increased energy and input costs. Increasing energy and input costs (decline in
supply, decrease in hydroelectric production capacity, regulated carbon economy) and
increasing energy demand in all parts of the world could have a significant effect on
global agriculture (Bals et al., 2008). Food production, processing and distribution are all
highly energy intensive. It is estimated that producing one calorie of food requires 10
calories of fossil fuels, leading some researchers to suggest that we are literally eating
fossil fuels (Pfiefer, 2006). Many of our gains in food production in the last century have
been based largely on increases in the use of fossil fuel inputs, especially fossil-fuel
based fertilizer (Pfiefer, 2006). If fossil fuel prices increase over the next several
decades, which they are projected to as a result of declines in global oil production due
to peak oil, so too will the costs of food production, processing and distribution (Pfiefer,
Page 54
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
2006), and if fossil fuels reach a point whereby they are significantly less available,
overall global food production could decline significantly.
Food distribution systems, which rely heavily on fossil fuel dependent modes of
transport, such as trucks and planes, will also be dramatically affected if energy prices
increase and will result in higher food prices and potentially reduced food security.
The costs of other agricultural inputs are also increasing including fertilizer and pesticide
costs, in part because of increasing energy costs but also because of depletion and
therefore increasing prices of certain other inputs. Water costs may also increase in the
future as a result of increasing water demand due to lifestyle changes and urbanization
in many countries (Bals et al., 2008).
Population Increases. The global population is projected to continue to increase (from
6.5 billion people to 9 billion people in 2050) and the population of many countries and
regions of the world including British Columbia is expected to increase. Food insecurity
already exists on a global level for many populations (FAO, 2008) with 850 million
people, mostly in developing countries, chronically hungry or malnourished (Bals et al.,
2008). At the moment this is primarily an access issue. Sufficient food is available but
these people do not have adequate income to access it (Bals et al., 2008). The global
food security situation has improved dramatically over the last thirty years, largely due to
improvements in food accessibility with lower food prices and significant income growth
in developing countries (Schmidhuber and Tubiello, 2007). The increases in agricultural
output required to meet global population increases are forecast to occur and it is
expected that the number and/or percentage of undernourished people in the world will
decline by 2080 (Schmidhuber and Tubiello, 2007).
Dietary Shifts. Changes to a more meat, dairy and cereal centered diet in many
countries, such as China and India has and will continue to increase requirements for
cropland globally (Bals et al., 2008). Meat consumption has doubled globally in the last
25 years (Bals et al., 2008). If this trend continues and a meat, dairy and cereal
centered diet are adopted globally, global production of some crops may have to double
to meet demand (Bals et al., 2008).
Loss of Arable Land. Arable land is being lost and degraded around the world
(possibly as much as 0.5 percent annually) due to a number of factors (Bals et al.,
2008). Urbanization of farmland in both developed and developing countries including
Canada is a key trend leading to not only loss of farmland but also the contamination of
adjacent farmland (Bals et al., 2008; Serecon Management Consulting, 2009). This
trend is predicted to continue in developed countries shifting greater reliance for food
production on developing countries (WBGU, 2007). There is also a trend towards the
increased use of agricultural production land for biofuels crops. This trend will be driven
partly by increases in oil prices, but also by the desire to reduce GHG emissions in the
Page 55
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
transport sector (Bals et al., 2008). Diversion of cropland to non-food crops will likely
reduce global food production. This is already a critical problem in British Columbia
where the Fraser Valley is one of our most agricultural productive areas, but is subject to
significant pressures from urbanization. Development pressure is also high locally in
some orchard areas in Creston (RDKB, 2010), as well as in the airport lands around
Castlegar. Analyses of the implications of biofuels for food security have been both
positive and negative (Schmidhuber and Tubiello, 2007).
Matching Supply and Demand
In theory there is enough land to supply the region’s food needs. Based on the MAL
estimate of 0.542 hectares per person, 45,392 ha of farmland would be required to support the
existing population, of which 4540 ha would have to be irrigated. This total amount is far less
than the existing ALR land of 117,367 ha within the region, and in farms in the region of 80,598
ha, but far exceeds the amount of land currently in crops in the region (under 18,027 ha)
(Penfold, 2009). This is a back of the envelope calculation that does not take into consideration
what percentage of the ALR or farmland is arable, the kinds of crops that can be produced on
the arable land, and how much is irrigated or has the potential to be irrigated in the region. It is
consistent with other estimates however that suggest that in the Kootenay agricultural region
there are about 0.5 to 1.5 ha of farmland per person (Hackenbrook et al., 2010). Thus on the
face of it, it seems that there is sufficient land within the region to be food secure. However,
initial GIS analysis of the ALR land in Kaslo and Area D suggested that over 80 percent of the
ALR land however is still forested and not used for agricultural purposes (Hackenbrook et al.,
2010). In addition, more information is required regarding the amount of class 1-3 land in the
region.
Other factors will influence regional food security. Although there may be enough land in
the region to support food security, many other factors will determine regional food security. For
example, BC government agrologists have stated that water will be an extremely limiting factor
for any agricultural production outside the Fraser Valley (Vancouver Sun, 2007). Theoretically,
at the right price, and if water is available, much of the agricultural land could be irrigated, if the
market forces supported production of certain crops on a more profitable basis.
Future Climate Change Food Impacts for Rossland
Local Food Production

Higher annual temperature averages could result in a longer local growing season
allowing for a broader array of crops and increased local yields.

Higher summer day and nighttime maximums, averages and minimums may alter plant
growth.
Page 56
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report

Decreased precipitation and increased evaporation may result in increased watering
needs.

Increases in pests and diseases may result in decreased local yields.

Increases in frequency and severity of extreme precipitation events (hail, rainstorms)
may result in crop destruction and damage and increased soil runoff.

Increases in frequency and severity of wildfires may result in crop destruction.

Higher summer temperatures may result in greater thermal stress for livestock.

Higher winter temperatures may result in less winter kill and lower overwintering feed
and heating costs for livestock.

Increase in unpredictability of temperatures may make it more challenging for growers to
know what to plant from season to season and negatively affect pollinators.
International Food Production

Extreme events, such as wildfire or snowstorms, could result in road closures and
regional food shortage.

Temperature increases, reduced rainfall and extreme events in other parts of the world,
could result in higher food prices internationally and in Rossland.

Temperature increases, reduced rainfall and extreme events in other parts of the world
could result in less food available for purchase from outside the region.

Indirect effects of climate change (i.e. political unrest, economic collapse) could result in
reduced food supply to the region.

Increased temperatures, pollution from rising sea levels and CO2 in atmosphere
increasing the acidification of oceans could result in significantly reduced ocean food
production.

Extreme events, such as droughts or hurricanes, in important growing regions could
cause temporary shortages of some foods or increases in food prices.
Summary
The food security portion of this document is provided to ensure that this vulnerability and risk
backgrounder is complete. For the full analysis of how climate change might affect food security
on a global and local level, the Food Security Backgrounder and Group Vulnerability and Risk
Assessment should be consulted.
Page 57
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
The biophysical impacts of climate change on food systems are expected to cause regional
shifts in agricultural production with the higher latitude temperate regions of the world
experiencing increases in agricultural production, where water supplies are adequate, and the
lower latitude tropical regions of the world experiencing degreases in agricultural production.
Global food security is not expected to be impacted significantly by climate change on a
biophysical level, however developing nations are expected to have to start importing more of
their food. However current analyses of climate change and food security do not sufficiently
account for indirect impacts of climate change on socioeconomic and geopolitical structures. In
addition, all of the models that provide a relatively optimistic overall outlook for food security
generally assume mean climate change of 3° C or less, and do not consider the possibility of
major abrupt climate or socioeconomic change, or a significant increase in the number of
extreme events. The non-climate change factors, such as population increases and increases
in input costs, also must be considered. Thus overall, while some outlooks for global and
therefore local food security are optimistic, these are highly uncertain and it would be prudent
from an adaptation perspective to start considering opportunities for increased local food
production.
On a local level, the region
does not currently produce a
significant proportion of the
food it consumes and there
are barriers to increasing
local food production in
terms of the regional
processing capacity, regional
base of farmers and the
current low returns on
agricultural production.
However there are
opportunities to change this and from an agricultural land perspective, the region does have the
potential to be more food secure. Projected climate changes, such as increased temperatures,
increased precipitation, and increased growing degree days, may provide more opportunities for
agricultural production in Rossland. However other climate change impacts, such as a greater
incidence of pests and diseases, increased variability and an increase in extreme events, could
negatively impact local agricultural production. Nevertheless, Rossland alone is not likely to
have sufficient agricultural land or a long enough growing season to be locally food secure so
regional initiatives will likely have to be pursued. Most adaptation actions that increase local
food production will nevertheless help to contribute to local food security and given the
uncertainties associated with global food production levels would be advisable to consider.
Page 58
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
IV: Action Plans
The action plans section is further divided into three subsections. First the action planning
process is presented, then the priority actions are identified and finally the more detailed action
planning data base, from which the priority actions were selected is provided. The more
detailed action planning data base also includes the goals and objectives for each issue area
that are not included in the priority action tables.
Action Planning Process
Action planning was undertaken in a number of steps:
Goals and Objectives
First, key adaptation goals and objectives were developed for each issue area. Goals are
broadly stated and represent the community vision. Objectives are more specific guiding
statements that detail what will be done to meet the goals. A general set of goals and
objectives that cross-cut the four issue areas was also developed relating to community
education and awareness, emergency preparedness and finding synergies.
Action Planning Data Base
Second, climate change adaptation plans from jurisdictions around the world were scanned,
including notably, Keene, New Hampshire, London, England the governments of Australia and
Germany, and Elkford, Kimberley, Castlegar and Kaslo/Area D in BC. Actions in these plans
potentially relevant to Rossland were identified and a data base of actions relating to Rossland’s
four issue areas was developed and organized in accordance with the key adaptation goals and
objectives. Actions provide detailed direction regarding what actions will be taken by who and
when to achieve the objectives. Potential strategies to achieve the actions were also
incorporated for some actions.
Review of the Action Planning Data Base
The Action Planning Data Base was reviewed by Steering Committee members to identify any
actions that they felt were missing from the data base. These additional actions were
incorporated. The Data Base was then reviewed in the context of ongoing City initiatives and
plans, most importantly the Strategic Sustainability Plan and the Official Community Plan to note
where the City is already taking action, or where similar recommendations have already been
made. Finally most of the actions were reviewed with City Staff to identify further what the City
is already undertaking or plans to undertake, and discuss issues of cost, feasibility and
applicability of the actions. These comments were incorporated into the data base.
Page 59
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Prioritization of Potential Actions
A public event was conducted on September 9, 2010. The Action Planning Data Base and
Vulnerability and Risk Backgrounder were circulated and posted on the Visions to Action
website a week in advance of the event. It was suggested that the principles for prioritizing
could include selecting actions that:







are “no­regrets” climate change adaptations that provide benefits to the community
whether anticipated climate changes materialize or not;
are more urgent based on our Vulnerability and Risk Assessment;
complement other community initiatives;
will be acceptable to the community;
are likely to promote the achievement of the goals and objectives for their issue area;
are affordable based on current City budgets; and
are consistent with existing provincial programs or grant funding.
At the event the group was divided into five working tables, one for each issue area and the
general section. At each table, participants were given N/3 yes votes for each issue area where
N= the number of actions for that issue area in the data base. For most of the issue areas,
except infrastructure, this was a total of 4 yes votes. In the case of infrastructure, participants
received 7 votes. They were given the same number of no votes for each issue area.
Participants were asked to work independently to identify their 4 to 7 priority actions and
comment on those actions. Then they each presented their priorities to the group and provided
their comments. The group worked through each person’s priorities and participants were
permitted to change their priorities based on the input of other group members. The groups
were also asked to make comments on any goals or objectives that they disagreed with. The
Action Planning Data Base for food was taken to a Rossland REAL Food event to allow
participants in that event to vote in the same manner as the participants at the public event.
Subsequent to the public event, other groups such as the Energy Task Force and Water
Stewardship Task Force as well as Sustainability Commission and Steering Committee
members that were unable to make the event were invited to vote in the same manner.
The votes were then tallied and the 19 priority actions were identified.
Further Analysis of Priority Actions
The priority actions were then further analyzed to identify their urgency for implementation, the
potential lead in implementing, the potential cost of implementing and potential funding sources,
including the likelihood of requiring grant funding. These are very preliminary assessments and
if the City and Sustainability Commission are proceed with implementing certain actions, more
detailed analysis will have to be undertaken, most importantly with respect to grant funding
opportunities.
Page 60
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Approval of Priority Actions
The final report including the list of priority actions were submitted to the Steering Committee
and Sustainability Commission for review on September 23, 2010. The Steering Committee
and Sustainability Commission met on September 28, 2010 to recommend final minor
adjustments and vote to approve the action planning package for submission to CBT and
recommendation to Council.
Priority Climate Change Adaptation Actions
This section lists the 19 priority actions, and their associated adaptation goals, selected at the
public event in September 2010. They are organized in accordance with their issue area with
preliminary thoughts with regard to urgency, lead, cost and funding sources. The larger action
planning data base which includes all of the goals and objectives for each issue area, the lower
priority actions, potential strategies for many of the actions and the analysis of what the City is
already doing, is provided in the next section.
General
Key Adaptation Goals:


ID
1.1.1
Residents are knowledgeable and continue to learn about climate change adaptation
Climate change adaptation is mainstreamed into City and community operations
Action
Undertake a public outreach
regarding specific climate
change adaptation actions as
they are implemented.
Urg
Lead
Cost
Funding
Source
H
City/
SC
L
City/SC
Description
The outreach should be low-cost and simple
i.e. mention of adaptation in conjunction with a
City initiative in a City or Sustainability
Commission newsletter, or as part of an event.
The intent is to help residents to understand
that adaptation is part of the rationale for
certain actions, such as water conservation
and fire smarting and to foster greater buy in
for those actions.
Ensure City committees,
1.5.1
H
City
L
City
The intent of this action is to ensure that
plans and processes consider
climate change is considered in City decisionclimate impacts/adaptation in
making. It is not intended to be onerous, but
their decision making.
rather a lens that is applied to major decisions,
much in the manner that the Strategic
Sustainability Plan has been referenced as a
standing line item in Staff memos to Council.
Urgency: High – Implement in 1-3 years; Medium – Implement in 3-5 years; Low – Implement in next 5-10 years
Cost: High – < $50,000; Medium – $10,00 to $50,000; Low – > $10,000
Lead: SC – Sustainability Commission; WSTF – Water Stewardship Task Force; ETF – Energy Task Force
Page 61
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Infrastructure
Key Adaptation Goals:
 Rossland’s infrastructure is resilient to climate change
 Climate change is considered in infrastructure upgrades as well as new residential
development and renovations
 Alternate management approaches (such as conservation, on-site or neighbourhood water
retention etc.) are considered in place of infrastructure upgrades
ID
Action
Urg
Lead
Cost
Funding
Source
Description
Given that the City is preparing an
Infrastructure Plan, this is an opportunity to
ensure that consideration is given to climate
change impacts in that plan with limited
additional cost. The potential for more
frequent and intense extreme events and
earlier spring run off will likely have some
infrastructure implications and should be
considered in the new plan.
Local governments have limited resources to
develop best practices guides and pilot
innovative climate change adaptation
measures such as new drainage and road
paving techniques. If other agencies were to
provide funding for such projects, they could
be potentially adopted on a larger scale. The
Sustainability Commission (SC) could play an
important advocacy role in encouraging these
types of pilot programs.
Voluntary guidelines for builders outlining how
to build a climate change resilient home could
increase the number of these types of homes
in Rossland. The guidelines need not be
extensive, but grant funding would probably be
necessary to facilitate their development. The
SC could play a role in developing grant
applications.
The Subdivision and Development Servicing
Bylaw was prepared in 1998 and variances are
required for some innovative on-site or
subdivision water retention techniques, such
as swales. These water retention techniques
are broadly supported in the OCP and can be
less expensive than more conventional stormwater management approaches, such as curbs
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
Give consideration to climate
change in the new City of
Rossland infrastructure
upgrade assessment and
plan, and encourage Council
to implement the plan.
H
City
L
City
2.1.5
Encourage other agencies at
the regional, provincial and
federal level, such as CBT, to
prepare best practices guides
and provide funding for pilot
programs to address climate
change in mountain climates.
H
SC
L
SC
2.6.3
Prepare climate change
design guidelines for new
builds and renovations to
reduce overheating, basement
flooding, fire risk and extreme
event damage.
M
City/
SC
M
Grants
2.10.1
Revise the Subdivision and
Development Servicing Bylaw
to require on-site or
subdivision water retention
and minimized runoff design
in new developments.
H
City
M
City
Page 62
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
2.10.2
Promote on-site water
retention, active storage
capacity and permeable
surfaces on existing
residential properties through
education and incentives.
H
SC/
City
M
SC/
City
and gutters. Revising the Subdivision and
Development Servicing Bylaw to remove
barriers to their application might encourage
their greater use. The Subdivision and
Development Servicing Bylaw has recently
been budgeted for revision.
Minimizing runoff through water retention
techniques is a major theme in the OCP and
could be critical low-cost adaptation measure
reducing the need for some infrastructure
upgrades. The SC and City could play a
partnership role in promoting these measures.
Water
Key Adaptation Goals:
 Rossland has accurate information regarding annual stream flows, snow pack and water use
 Rossland manages its existing water supply without the need for additional reservoir capacity
 The impact of potentially decreased water supply in late summer/early fall as a result of
climate change is minimized without creating additional costs to tax payers
 Rossland is prepared to respond to droughts
 Ecosystem needs are considered in Rossland’s strategic water management
ID
Action
Urg
Lead
Cost
Funding
Source
Description
The City is already taking significant action on
this front with the installation of water meters
to measure usage and the planned increase
in manual monitoring on our creeks.
Prioritization of this action is intended as a
show of support for those actions to ensure
that they continue and to provide impetus for
the analysis and publication of the data once it
is available.
Rossland’s per capita water use is very high
compared to many other jurisdictions in North
America and the world. Measures to reduce it
just make sense from many perspectives –
climate change adaptation, sustainability,
reduced future infrastructure costs, reduced
sewer treatment costs and the potential to
maintain downstream flows. These measures
do not have to be high cost, particularly with
the range of billing options made possible with
water meters, and potentially grants available
through CBT Water Smart for education.
3.1.1
3.1.2
Improve our data regarding
water supply and demand.
H
City
L
City
3.2.1
Reduce per capita water use
through a combination of
regulation, education,
incentives and targets.
H
City/
SC/
WSTF
L-M
SC/City/
CBT
Water
Smart
Page 63
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
3.4.1
Create a watershed and/or a
water management plan.
M
City/
WSTF
M
City
3.5.1
Encourage residents to utilize
alternative water sources for
non-potable water use needs.
M
SC/
WSTF
L
SC
This has been recommended in both the SSP
and OCP and could be accomplished at
limited cost by updating the existing draft plan.
A plan could encompass many of the water
actions outlined in this report including a
drought plan (3.3.1) with trigger points for
water restrictions in extreme climate change
event years.
Communities around the world use rainwater
and greywater for non-potable water use
needs such as lawn or garden watering.
Although provincial legislation currently
restricts the range of uses of greywater, this
could change in the future. Although
rainwater barrels (as opposed to cisterns) do
not provide a significant reduction in potable
water demand, they promote an ethic of
conservation and could be promoted at low
cost through the education strategies adopted
for action 3.2.1. They also assist in on-site
water retention. Wide use of cisterns could
have a notable impact on Rossland’s water
demand.
Energy
Key Adaptation Goals:
 Rossland’s vulnerability to the impacts of rising energy prices is minimized
 Rossland’s vulnerability to temporary and long-term energy supply interruptions is minimized
 Rossland has a diversified energy supply through local renewable energy generation
ID
4.1.2
Develop a Community and
Corporate Energy Plan.
Urg
Lead
Cost
Funding
Source
Description
M
City/
ETF
M
City/
SC/
Grants
A Community Energy Plan with targets and
measures for community and corporate energy
management has been suggested in the SSP,
OCP and by the Energy Task Force (ETF). It
would assist the City in achieving both climate
change adaptation goals and carbon neutral
commitments, while potentially on a Corporate
level reducing City costs if energy savings are
achieved. It is also a symbolic issue,
establishing the City’s willingness to lead by
example. Templates exist and this could likely
be done at low cost with the help of the ETF.
Page 64
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
4.1.5
Control sprawl and promote
infill development.
H
City
L
City
4.1.8
Identify and implement energy
conservation measures on a
Corporate City level.
H
City/
ETF
M
City/
Grants
4.3.1
Provide incentives for the
development of renewable
energy facilities.
M
City
H
City/
Grants
The City is already taking significant action on
this front and the intent of prioritizing this
action is to provide support to those initiatives
and ensure that they continue and are
reflected in Council decisions.
In the absence of a Community and Corporate
Energy Plan, the City can start taking actions
to implement energy conservation measures,
such as the use of lower wattage bulbs in
streetlights, or a green fleet program. These
actions will both help to reduce City costs and
contribute to the achievement of carbon
neutral commitments. Although the City’s
contribution to community energy use is
relatively small, it was repeatedly noted that
the City must lead by example if they want
residents to take action on energy
conservation.
Renewable energy is a significant contributor
to community energy needs in many European
countries at reasonable rates of return.
Although renewables have yet to achieve grid
parity in BC, there is significant interest in
them, and small pilot projects could be
fostered through the use of incentives.
Renewable energy is supported in the OCP.
Ultimately this kind of initiative could produce
economic development spin-off benefits, but at
the outset might require grant funding.
Food
Key Adaptation Goals:



Rossland is a food secure community and its vulnerability to potential declines in global food
production are minimized
Local farmers and residential growers are supported
Agricultural lands are identified and protected
ID
5.1.2
Promote increased local food
production and processing.
Urg
Lead
Cost
Funding
Source
Description
H
REAL
Food/
SC
M
SC/City/
Grants
This could include measures such as
encouraging backyard gardening, mentoring
programs and workshops. Rossland REAL
Food is already playing a significant role in
this area and with a continuation of their
funding may be able to continue to do so at a
relatively low cost.
Page 65
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
5.3.1
Ensure local growers have
sufficient land access.
M
City
L
City
5.4.1
Establish a community
composting system.
M
City
M
City/
RDKB
5.5.1
Protect agricultural land and
topsoil through incentives,
education, planning and
regulation.
M
City/
REAL
Food
L
City
For limited expenditure, the City could further
designate unused public lands suitable for
growing as additional community gardens
and incorporate garden designations into
development density bonuses. While
moving towards food self-sufficiency may
require a regional level solution, the City
could provide assistance promoting
additional backyard gardening or small-scale
agriculture through in greenhouse
development or the purchase of private land
for demonstration farms. This would require
a higher level of funding and the potential
water consumption implications might have
to be assessed.
A community composting system for yard
and/or food waste system would not only
provide benefits for food production, but also
for reducing Rossland’s contribution to the
waste stream. Yard waste could be
composted in dispersed neighbourhood
sites.
Protecting potential agricultural land from
development and ensuring that development,
renovations and landscaping are done in a
manner that protects topsoil are critical
components of maintaining the potential for
future agriculture. With some funding,
Rossland REAL Food could play a role in the
education component of this action, but the
City has a key land-use planning role to play.
Action Planning Data Base
This data base presents the goals and objectives and all of the actions considered in the action
planning process. The goals and objectives were evaluated and endorsed at the action
planning event with some minor changes. Many of the actions have associated potential
strategies, which are also provided. It was decided not to vote on the strategies in the action
planning process, as it was felt they might be too prescriptive. Nevertheless they are included
with the intention of providing some suggestions to implementers as to how the actions could be
achieved based on approaches undertaken in other jurisdictions.
Page 66
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Categories of Actions
To assist in interpretation with regard to what is involved, most of the strategies and some of the
actions have been categorized based on the types of activities that local governments can
undertake. The categories utilized are a follows:










Conducting research or gathering more information regarding priority issue areas and
climate change adaptation; (Res)
Motivating and educating the community and increasing the capacity of City Staff;
(Educ)
Setting an example through demonstration projects and management of City facilities;
(Examp)
Setting community targets for behavioral change; (Targ)
Providing incentives or establishing programs for behavioral changes or other
actions; (Incent)
Establishing regulations through approval functions or bylaws; (Reg)
Planning for emergency and other climate change situations; (Plan)
Engaging and investing in appropriate land management (City land, and land in the City
interface) to reduce climate risks; (Land Man)
Investing appropriately in infrastructure upgrades to reflect future climate scenarios;
(Infra) and
Working collaboratively with partners, such as other levels of government. (Coll)
Interpreting the Tables
The priority actions are highlighted in bold and in green. An additional 15 actions that received
some level of public and Steering Committee support, but not as much as the priority actions,
are highlighted in green but are not bolded. The other actions that were not identified as priority
actions are included for consideration at some later date. Actions that were not supported are
shaded in pink. The comments made regarding actions at the public event, and the
considerations associated with the actions identified in the review of what the City is already
undertaking and what is feasible are also included. References to where actions are supported
by strategic actions in the Strategic Sustainability Plan (SSP) and by measures in the Official
Community Plan (OCP) are included. Strategies that received particular endorsement are
italicized.
Page 67
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
I: General
This section presents general action items related to community education and awareness, emergency preparedness and finding
synergies, that cross-cut all four priority issue areas.
Key Adaptation Goals:




Residents are knowledgeable and continue to learn about climate change adaptation
Rossland is prepared for climate related emergencies
Synergies between climate change adaptation actions and other sustainability and City initiatives are recognized
Climate change adaptation is mainstreamed into City and community operations
Objectives and Actions:
Type
Action
Votes
Potential Strategies
Considerations
Objective 1: Educate the public and City staff regarding climate change adaptation
1.1.1
1.1.2
Undertake a public outreach
regarding specific climate
change adaptation actions
as they are implemented.
Encourage other agencies,
such as Columbia Basin Trust
to continue climate change
adaptation capacity building
5




Incorporate climate change adaptation
education into existing events such as Earth Day
and city newsletters (Educ)
Encourage businesses, residents and
institutions to prepare for the challenges and
opportunities of climate change (Educ)
Public Comment: Make the education very
specific around certain actions when they are
implemented
SSP/OCP: SSP Strategic actions #88 and #127
support information dissemination to the
community and training for teachers with regard
to sustainability and other key policy issues.
Encourage other agencies to develop climate
change adaptation guides for residents,
developers and City staff (Coll)
Encourage other agencies to undertake focused
capacity building exercises for City Staff to be
accessed on an as need basis (Coll)
Public Comment: Encourage CBT to fund
implementation.
Page 68
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Objective 2: Ensure the City is prepared for all Climate Change related emergencies
1.2.1
Identify all areas at risk of
wildfire, flood and landslide
(Res)
1.2.2
Ensure that the City
Emergency Plan sufficiently
addresses climate change
related emergencies





1.2.3
1.2.4
Increase public awareness of
what to do in extreme weather
events and emergencies
(Educ)
2


Review the Emergency Plan for its coverage of
heatwaves, ice storms, windstorms or other
climate related emergencies (Plan)
Review the Emergency Plan to ensure a
communications plan incorporating provisions
for cellular failure, local and regional
communication, and chains of command are
addressed (Plan)
Ensure that alternate routes for emergency
situations are identified (Plan)
Ensure that shelters are designated for extreme
weather events including heatwaves (Plan/Infr)
Identify and publicize distribution points for lifeessential goods and services (Plan)
Provide the public with copies of the Emergency
Plan or “what to do in an emergency pamphlets”
(Educ)
Run emergency simulations (Educ)
Review Comment: There is limited area
vulnerable to flooding in Rossland, although
some basements are at risk. Wildfire risk areas
are identified in the Community Wildfire
protection plan. Landslides have been a low
historical risk but could be assessed.
Review Comment: A City Emergency Plan has
been prepared, but did not specifically address
climate change considerations. Major City
emergencies are dealt with through PEP (the
Provincial Emergency Preparedness Program).
Any major emergency requiring evacuation or
outside assistance would trigger PEP and the
Red Cross and RCMP would come to assist.
Some areas such as the arena and the Prestige
(which has a generator) have been designated
as emergency shelters.
Review Comment: Although the City has an
emergency plan it could benefit from additional
public awareness.
Create programs to provide
assistance after the
emergency events (Plan)
Page 69
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
1.2.5
1.2.6
1.2.7
1.2.8
Train City staff with regard to
what to do in a weather
related emergency (Plan)
Review and update the
emergency plan every five
years (Plan)
Ensure the Community
Wildfire protection plan
continues to be implemented
(Land/Incent)
Review Comment: City staff have received
emergency preparedness training, but not
weather related emergency training
3

Consider adding to the
Community Wildfire Protection
Plan (Plan)



Develop a joint plan with the local forest tenure
holder (Atco) to proactively manage the forests
in Rossland’s watershed to reduce the risk of a
major wildfire (Plan)
Determine whether fire retardant chemicals can
be utilized in the watershed (Plan)
Develop a list of locally available light-footprint
machinery that can be utilized to cut access and
fire break corridors (Plan)
Maintain and improve communications with the
SE Fire Centre in Castlegar (Coll)
Public Comments: Wildfire needs to be more on
the radar. The City needs a continuous,
comprehensive wildfire interface plan that
includes viewscapes. Publicize the fire angle on
climate change so people understand why fire
smarting is necessary and are not upset when
trees are cut.
Public Comment: Need to determine the impact
of a serious fire in the watershed on water
supply.
Review Comment: Some of these may not be
within the City’s jurisdiction to decide i.e.
chemicals in the watershed as large wildfires are
addressed by the provincial government.
Objective 3: Seek and recognize synergies in climate change adaptation actions
1.3.1
and
1.3.2
Seek synergies between
sustainability, climate change
mitigation and climate change
adaptation measures
2



Review climate change mitigation requirements
and plans to identify synergies between
mitigation and adaptation actions (Plan) Outline
how adaptation actions will achieve
sustainability objectives as well as adaptation
actions (Educ)
Link adaptation actions to the Strategic
Sustainability Plan and Rossland’s Vision for
2030 when implementing (Educ)
Incorporate the goals and objectives of this
Public Comments: Embed the Climate Change
Adaptation plan in the SSP. Build on the
momentum of the provincial policy to be carbon
neutral.
Review Comments: There are opportunities for
overlap between adaptation actions and the
requirement that Rossland be Carbon Neutral by
2012, particularly in the energy section. SSP
actions consistent with potential adaptation
actions have been identified in this data base.
Page 70
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
adaptation plan into Rossland’s OCP and SSP
(Plan)
1.3.3
Regularly scan for
opportunities associated with
climate change, such as
different types of tourism or
agriculture (Plan)
Objective 4: Continue to learn about climate change and update climate change adaptation action plans as required
1.4.1
Pursue the establishment of a
permanent meteorological
station in Rossland or work
with Red Mountain Resort to
expand their monitoring (Coll)
1.4.2
Review emerging climate
change information and
update climate change
adaptation action plans and
City procedures every five
years to factor in new climate
patterns and extremes
(Res/Plan)
3
Public Comments: Weather data is crucial and
this is an action much more important than
planning. Our last data was in 1990.
Red Mountain Resort has monitored snow, wind
and temperature since 2004 and reports the
information on their website. Rain could be
added to the monitoring with some sort of
agreement. People are motivated and usually
surprised by data.
We should have a climate professional confirm
what we should be monitoring.
Page 71
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Objective 5: Mainstream climate change adaptation into City operations
1.5.1
Ensure City committees
plans and processes
consider climate
impacts/adaptation in their
decision making (Plan)
3


Review City committees and processes that
would benefit from adding a consideration of
climate impacts/adaptation to their decision
making (Plan)
Require identified committees and processes to
consider the climate change adaptation goals,
objectives and actions in this plan (Plan)
Public Comment: If this doesn’t occur, then
educating the public becomes a bit of a waste.
Page 72
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
II: Infrastructure
Key Adaptation Goals:




Rossland’s infrastructure is resilient to climate change
Climate change is considered in infrastructure upgrades as well as new residential development and renovations
Climate change impacts to infrastructure are monitored and addressed
Alternate management approaches (such as conservation, on-site or neighbourhood water retention etc.) are considered in place
of infrastructure upgrades
Adaptation Objectives and Actions:
All Infrastructure
Type
Action
Votes
Potential Strategies
Considerations
Objective 1: Ensure climate change is taken into consideration in the design of future infrastructure
2.1.1
Ensure that City staff remain current
with Engineering best practices for
Infrastructure Design (Res)
1

Ensure City Staff have the opportunity to
attend appropriate conferences and learning
events
2.1.2,
2.1.3
and
2.1.4
Give consideration to climate
change in the new City of Rossland
infrastructure upgrade assessment
and plan, and encourage Council to
implement the plan (Plan)
6

Ensure all new infrastructure is located,
designed and constructed for the climate it
will experience over its design life
Elements that are difficult to change during
the design life of the infrastructure including
the location, orientation, thermal mass and
structural materials should be given highest
priority

Public Comment: This is important –
sustainability is larger than climate change.
Review Comment: City Staff already remain
current with best practices for Infrastructure
Design.
Public Comment: This should be a matter of due
course (x2). Climate change should be
considered in all City decisions – infrastructure as
well as everything else.
Review Comment: Climate change will be
considered at a high level in the new
infrastructure plan. Best practices already
account for minor and major storms within
existing expected impact levels. In some cases,
old infrastructure presents design restrictions (i.e.
can’t upgrade pipes higher in the system if the
lower pipes are not built to take the flow.)
Page 73
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
2.1.5
Encourage other agencies at the
regional, provincial, and federal
level, such as CBT, to prepare best
practices guides and provide
funding for pilot programs to
address climate change in
mountain climates (Coll)
5




Encourage Engineers Canada to upgrade
their best practices guide to reflect climate
change
Encourage CBT to prepare a Storm-water
best practices manual for the Columbia
Basin with collaboration of Basin
communities that includes templates and
examples
Encourage CBT to fund demonstration sites
for storm-water best practices
Encourage other agencies such as
Columbia Basin Trust to develop a better
Catch Basin Design and provide grant
funding for trials
Public Comments: Look at what happened in
Aosta, Italy. We need pilot projects to establish
the feasibility of some of these adaptation
actions.
Objective 2: Improve the resilience of existing infrastructure
2.2.1
Monitor existing infrastructure and
slopes for climate change impacts
and threats
2.2.2
Protect and improve the resilience of
existing infrastructure to the impacts
of climate change
2

Visually monitor at risk slopes and retaining
walls for signs of subsidence or instability
(Infra)

Specific strategies are addressed in the
infrastructure sections below. This section
covers only the key strategies.
Shovel roofs if there is snow build up
Seal cracks in roads
Minimize development and vegetation
removal on slopes exceeding 30 percent
(Reg)
Put grates on the front of culvert inlets to
reduce debris




Review Comment: Infrastructure is already
monitored for impacts on an issues basis (i.e.
when problems are observed or reported).
Retaining walls are being addressed by City Staff
through identification of at risk walls and the
Retaining Wall Bylaw passed in 2009. Slope
subsidence is less of a problem and not
inspected. Residents call in if their yards are
subsiding and they are checked by Engineering .
Public Comments: This should be included in the
infrastructure plan and incorporated into action
2.1.4.
Review Comments: Preventative maintenance is
already undertaken on City infrastructure. For
example, the arena roof was upgraded to
increase its snow load capacity. Road damage
may be too advanced to be prevented through
crack sealing, but it could be helpful on some
specific roads. Development is already reviewed
on a site by site basis and vegetation stripping
and/or building are not allowed on at risk slopes
or in some cases are only permitted if certain
Page 74
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
design requirements are met. Grates are put on
culverts on a one off basis if work is being done
in the area.
Objective 3: Promote greater affordability and quality in future infrastructure upgrades
2.3.1
Explore creating a cooperative of
neighbouring local governments to
share equipment and manpower for
civic infrastructure projects such as
road paving (Coll)
Review Comments: This is already done with
Warfield and Castlegar. Machinery is rented out,
parts are exchanged on a cost return basis and
manpower is exchanged on a fee basis.
Public Comments: This is probably not possible
and is not sufficiently related to climate change
(x2).
Roads
Action
Votes
Potential Strategies
Considerations
Objective 4: Ensure all future road upgrades take climate change into consideration
2.4.1
Reduce freeze-thaw and heat damage
through the use of different road
materials


Use less frost-susceptible foundation
materials to combat freeze-thaw cycles (Infra)
Explore heat and cold resistant roadway
materials (Infra)
Review Comments: New roads already do this.
Doing this on existing roads that are being
upgraded would double the cost and would not
provide assurance that frost heave would not
occur. Asphalt is heat and cold resistant. There
is only one asphalt provider in BC, so options
are pretty limited.
Page 75
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
2.4.2
Improve road drainage systems and
update the Subdivision and
Development Servicing Bylaw to allow
for road drainage system options
4


Retrofit side drains on road structures (Infra)
Adapt roads to increase infiltration through
the use of swales or French drains potentially
connected to a wetland or pond (Infra)
Public Comments: Identify what adaptive
Subdivision and Servicing bylaw models exist –
has there been a good one identified? The
Subdivision and Development Servicing bylaw
needs to be updated to allow for creative
options.
Review Comments: Side drains are retrofitted on
an as need basis (if it is broken or there is a
safety concern) but is not a priority. When
storm-water system gets replaced (when roads
are repaved) the inlets often get replaced – but
we can only replace these things as part of a
whole new design in some cases. There is no
storm-water system on a lot of roads and there
are not runoff issues. Swales are done where it
works i.e. swales in Caldera going to a pond.
But it is challenging to find a location for
wetlands on a hillside.
The Subdivision and Servicing Bylaw would
need to be rewritten to facilitate this without a
variance.
Objective 5: Ensure existing roads are maintained as much as possible
2.5.1
Increase the frequency and intensity
of road maintenance
1

Seal cracks in roads
Public Comments: Well-maintained roads
enhance civic pride. We need to educate people
on how climate change affects roads.
Review Comments: More frequent road
maintenance would not help on most roads
because they have been left too long without
maintenance. More crack sealing might help.
Page 76
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Buildings
Type
Action
Votes
Potential Strategies
Considerations
Objective 6: Ensure City building design standards or guidelines reflect climate change in new builds and renovations
2.6.1
Research and incorporate climate
change considerations into City
building design standards for new
builds and renovations to reduce
overheating, basement flooding, fire
risk and extreme event damage
2





2.6.2
2.6.3
Incorporate a Wildland-Urban
Interface covenant into for new builds
in the interface requiring wildfire
mitigation measures such as fire
resistant roofing, fuel buffer
dimensions and spark arresters for
wood stoves
Prepare climate change design
guidelines for new builds and
renovations to reduce overheating,
basement flooding, fire risk and
extreme event damage (Educ)
Ban roofing that will not retain snow under
most snowfall conditions (Reg)
Require the installation of backflow valves in
buildings and residences (Reg)
Require fire safe construction methods (Reg)
Promote an increase in tree cover by 5
percent (Plan/Educ)
Promote passive cooling in buildings such as
cool roof technology (highly reflective well
insulated roofs), green roofs shading
elements, reduced lighting building
orientation, and ventilation (Educ)
2
6
Public Comments: Our current housing stock is
inefficient – let’s build better. Discourage
shingle roofs.
Public Comment: This is hugely important.
Fires will become more prevalent.


Consider the same strategies outlined above
in 2.6.1 i.e. Promote passive cooling in
buildings such as cool roof technology (highly
reflective well insulated roofs), green roofs
shading elements, reduced lighting building
orientation, and ventilation
Include pilots, incentives and demonstration
sites
Public Comments: Start voluntary and then
move to standards. This is a building bylaw
issue.
Review Comments: This is intended to be the
more flexible option compared to 2.6.1, making
them guidelines rather than standards, but would
have less effect.
Page 77
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Objective 7: Increase the number of climate change resilient buildings in Rossland through regulation, education, incentives and pilot programs
2.7.1
and
2.7.2
2.7.3
Prepare residential climate change
renovation and maintenance
guidelines for existing housing stock
that reflect the design guidelines for
new housing stock and encourage
residents to consider them
4




Consider the same strategies outlined above
for standards for new housing stock in 2.6.1
Encourage residents to clear rain gutters and
drains on a regular basis (Educ)
Publicize the residential climate change
design guidelines (Educ)
Offer incentives to residents and developers
to incorporate new climate change design
guidelines into their building (Incent)
Public Comments: Citizens need to take
responsibility. Education and incentives for
renovation and maintenance are good. Support
incentives (Revitalization Tax Exemption) to
promote renovations (x2). Neutralize
disincentives to renovate. Look at the provincial
green Building Code (expected) for guideline
ideas.
Review Comments: This could be linked to
proposed Revitalization Program Bylaw
(residents can apply for their taxes to remain the
same for 5 years after $10,000 in renovations).
Establish a green house tour/energy
efficient tour to serve as an example
of sustainable climate change resilient
building (Examp)
Objective 8: Ensure City facilities are climate change resilient
2.8.1
Conduct a critical review of existing
and proposed City buildings for
climate change resilience
2.8.2
Upgrade existing and build new City
buildings to reflect the City’s climate
change design standards

2



Ensure all new City facilities undergo a
climate change checklist based on the
climate change design standards before
development can proceed (Infra)
Showcase best practices in climate change
adaptation building design in City facilities
(Examp)
Avoid locating City facilities in flood or fireprone areas
Design new City facilities for ease of future
adaptation i.e. with room for shade addition or
removal
Review Comment: City facilities are already
undergoing an audit for GHG emissions.
Public Comment: The City has to take the
initiative.
Review Comment: There is unlikely to be
significant investment in City facilities in the
short-term.
Page 78
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Storm-sewers, Culverts and Sewers
Action
Votes
Potential Strategies
Considerations
Objective 9: Ensure storm-water infrastructure will meet future needs
2.9.1 –
2.9.5
Create an integrated overland flow and
storm-water/surface water
management plan for future expected
run off levels
3







Map out all areas that could be potentially at
risk of flooding identifying weak/low points in
the system (Plan)
Identify areas where increased storm-water
infrastructure capacity is needed to
hold/divert water.
Develop a basement flood/storm-water
overflow incident reporting system to better
identify areas of risk (Plan)
Undertake a storm-water risk assessment
that incorporates all bridges, culverts, dykes,
dams and sewers (Plan)
Review and if necessary update the stormwater maintenance program, particularly in
priority areas
Ensure storm-water flows are kept separate
from wastewater sewers (Infra)
Coordinate storm-water upgrades with road
repair.
Public Comments: We need to do an overland
flow study/route plan. Integrate 2.9.1-2.9.5 into
an overland flow plan, identify areas of risk and
implement mitigation as required. This cannot
be ignored on the basis of past experience. A
chinook winter event could lead to heavier
flooding for specific sites. Removing stormwater
from the sanitary sewer may create the
requirement for more storm sewers. Look for
the old storm-sewer studies our institutional
memory is not good.
Review Comments: The Infrastructure Plan will
do some of this and there have been past
studies. The City already knows where the
weak points and priority areas are. Few
basements floods in past five years as a result
of heavy rainfall events alone. For the most part
most basement floods have occurred for
reasons other than weather related events. The
City does storm-water models for new
subdivisions. There is limited flood risk in
Rossland as for the most part excess water just
flows down the road, but some basement
flooding is likely, and there is the possibility of
some sort of flash flood in a restricted area.
There is no written maintenance manual – if
frequency of storm events increased then the
City would increase maintenance.
Page 79
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Objective 10: Reduce need for storm-sewer infrastructure upgrades through innovative planning approaches
2.10.1
Revise the Subdivision and
Servicing Bylaw to require on-site
water retention and minimized
runoff design in new developments
5




2.10.2
Promote on-site water retention,
active storage capacity and
permeable surfaces in existing
residences through education and
incentives
9


Ban non-permeable driveways, parking lots
and sidewalk surfaces (Reg)
Require permeable driveways, absorbent
landscaping and retention of natural features
(Reg)
Create a Net Zero Runoff site plan
requirement (Reg)
Establish slow release retention drainage pits
in new construction sites
Develop an experimental and demonstration
program for permeable driveway, parking lot,
sidewalk surfaces and green streets (Educ)
Prepare a greywater reuse package for
residents explaining how household
wastewater can be utilized to irrigate garden
areas (Educ)
Public Comments: This is important for both
infrastructure and water. Greater retention is
important especially in water deficient Rossland.
Provide incentives.
We need a plan for increased weird weather –
we need to better understand the impacts of big
water events. Borrow Red Mountain Resort’s
guidelines.
Review Comments: This is already a priority of
the City and is done in most cases where it can
be done. There might be an advantage to
formalizing it in the Subdivision and Servicing
Bylaw. The key would be to make it not too
prescriptive.
SSP/OCP: Already strongly recommended in
SSP #116 and #115 and OCP 23.3.3, 23.3.1
and 23.3.5.
Review Comment: Some on-site water retention
strategies will increase snow removal costs. The
allowable uses for greywater are limited by
provincial legislation due to health concerns but
there may be some applications.
SSP/OCP: Pilot projects at Red Mountain
Resort and Redstone recommended in SSP
#117.
Objective 11: Maintain the existing storm-water system
2.11.1
Conduct annual inspections/ and clean
ups/clearing of culverts to reduce
flooding risk (Infra)
Review Comment: The storm-water system is
already maintained and cleared on a regular
basis.
Page 80
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
2.11.2
Ensure the existing storm-water system
is maintained and inspected (Infra)
City of Rossland – Final Report
Review Comment: The storm-water system is
already maintained and cleared on a regular
basis.
Objective 12: Ensure that upgrades to the sewer system consider climate change implications
2.12.1
2.12.2
2.12.3
Identify areas where there are existing
sewer system capacity constraints
(Res)
Design future sewer upgrades to
prevent overflow events during extreme
precipitation events (Infra)
If sewer infrastructure upgrades are
cost prohibitive, plan for regular system
reviews to consider climate change
effects and conduct staged upgrades
(Plan/Infra)
Review Comment: This will be addressed in
Infrastructure Plan.
Review Comment: Don’t have that many intown sewer overflow events – There are more
on the regional line and the ones in town are
related to blockage, not the capacity of line. It is
not likely that we would get a rainfall event that
would exceed the amount of infiltration that
already occurs in the spring from ground thaw.
Public Comment: This should be part of the
Infrastructure Plan.
Review Comment: Staged upgrades will likely
be necessary anyway.
Page 81
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
III: Water
Key Adaptation Goals:
 Rossland has accurate information regarding annual stream flows, snow pack and water use
 Rossland manages its existing water supply without the need for additional reservoir capacity
 The impact of potentially decreased water supply in late summer/early fall as a result of climate change is minimized without
creating additional costs to tax payers
 Rossland is prepared to respond to droughts
 Rossland’s water quality is high
 Ecosystem needs are considered in Rossland’s strategic water management
Potential Water Objectives, Actions and Strategies:
Action
Votes
Potential Strategies
Considerations
Objective 1: Ensure that our information regarding water supply and demand is accurate
3.1.1
and
3.1.2
Improve our data regarding water
supply and demand
10




Increase the manual stream flow monitoring
(Res)
Support continued Ministry of Environment
monitoring of snowpack data (Coll)
Use water meter data to determine average per
capita use rates in all seasons and typical use
profiles (Res
Evaluate total water usage against water meter
data to ensure that leaks are not a factor in
overall water consumption (Res)
Public Comment: This is crucial – we have no
data. Data regarding supply and demand are
both important (x2). Improved data regarding
current supply will help us measure change
as it happens. It is important to determine
use rates so we can create a comprehensive
conservation plan. Universal metering
provides critical data – consumption meters
are cash registers – utilities need meters (x2).
Review Comment: The City is planning to
improve manual monitoring of Murphy and
Topping this year i.e. monthly or weekly
manual measurements. Digital monitoring is
not always accurate. The City also plans to
measure usage as soon as water meters are
installed in all residences.
SSP/OCP: Reflected in OCP 23.4.4 –
Develop “initiatives to measure flows and
temperatures through the year.”
Page 82
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Objective 2: Reduce community water consumption by 15 percent
3.2.1
Reduce per capita water use through
a combination of regulation,
education, incentives and targets
9












Amend Water Rate Bylaw to establish an
appropriate rate structure with higher flat fee for
non-metered residences, and or seasonal pricing
(Reg)
Undertake water use education and awareness,
such as the Province of BC’s Water Smart Home
Assessment, the Australian Water Smart
Challenge or CBT’s Water Smart Initiative
(Educ)
Research and determine baseline water
consumption data for a typical residence and
publish the results (Educ)
Continue to provide incentives for low-flow
fixtures (Incent)
Provide low-flow fixtures as an incentive for
homeowners that participate in water
conservation programs (Incent)
Establish a community nursery of free xeriscape
plants that can be utilized to replace lawns
funded through the water treatment cost savings
(Incent)
Publish water consumption on a meter by meter
basis (Educ)
Promote the use of water efficient appliances
and hardware and consider providing incentives
for their purchase (Incent)
Undertake a Water-Smart Garden program in
which resident are encouraged to xeriscape, use
low-loss irrigation and information is provided on
appropriate plants (Educ)
Ban lawn watering (Reg)
Incorporate more water efficient standards into
the City building design standards/code (Reg)
Require low-flow plumbing in all new buildings
(Reg)
Public Comments: Focus on tools and
education – no buy in, no compliance (x2).
Requiring low flow plumbing in new buildings
is overkill – encourage – don’t insist. Set a
high price flat rate structure in 2011 (x2).
Report average use. No meter by meter
reporting but recognize low use households.
Reducing water use particularly in the
summer relieves stress on ecosystems and
infrastructure. Need to leave water in the
stream below our water intakes. Provide a
water allowance for gardens. Don’t ban lawn
watering – green is a valuable amenity that
we do have.
Review Comments: The City is already
providing incentives for low flush toilets and
low flow plumbing is required in new
buildings. The City will be able to publish
average use rates. Renovations could be
linked to proposed Revitalization Program
Bylaw (residents can apply for their taxes to
remain the same for 5 years after $10,000 in
renovations).
SSP/OCP: These types of water
conservation approaches are encouraged in
SSP #121 and OCP 23.4.3 and 23.4.2.
Page 83
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
3.2.2
Reduce the City’s corporate water use
in City Hall, on City trees and hanging
baskets and in City Parks
1


Xeriscape local parks and the City streetscape
(Examp/Land Man)
Use harvested storm-water to water City parks
and playing fields (Land Man)
Public Comment: The City needs to lead by
example.
Review Comments: The City does not do a lot
of maintenance on City parks now and this
would increase the maintenance
requirements. There could be potential health
concerns associated with using storm-water
to irrigate.
Estimate drought creek flows incorporating
future climate change scenarios (Plan)
Establish trigger points for water restrictions
based on stream flow, snow pack monitoring
and/or reservoir levels (Plan)
Establish procedures for equitable allocation of
water in a drought situation (Plan)
Public Comments: This is one of the most
important objectives to ensure community
resilience and safety. It is linked most
strongly to climate change imperatives but
maybe could be addressed in 3.4.1.
Scenarios should be addressed and
implemented in crafting education and
prevention plans.
Objective 3: Prepare for droughts
3.3.1
Prepare a Rossland-specific Drought
Plan that addresses community water
use and reservoir management, and
future expected precipitation levels
4



Objective 4: Engage in long-term strategic management and enhancement of our current water supply
3.4.1
Create a watershed and/or a water
management plan
5






Determine the limits of current water supply for
future population growth including tipping points
whereby reservoir capacity would have to be
increased
Develop a water budget for Rossland’s
watershed
Ensure the water resource implications of new
developments are assessed and consider a
policy of water neutrality
Prepare for the potential requirement for greater
maintenance of downstream flows in Rossland’s
water supply creeks
Identify the demand or summer drought point at
which an additional reservoir or additional height
on Ophir reservoir will be required (Infra)
Require regular review of the watershed
management plan
Public Comments: Update the 2003 Dobson
Report and get it adopted and implemented
but take climate change into account in the
update (x2). Create a water resource
management plan to guide the City in the
development of water resource resilience.
Without a plan, nothing will happen. The plan
should precede all other water measures.
There is little or no creek biota sufficiently
numerous or unique to warrant the
maintenance of downstream flows.
Review Comments: The POLIS program
might be more useful than watershed
management plan – it is a process of
backcasting whereby you identify where you
want to be in 20 years. The City may not ever
be required by the province to maintain
downstream flows.
SSP/OCP: Watershed management and
Page 84
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
water management plans are suggested in
SSP #11, #120 and OCP 26.2.10.
Maintaining downstream flows is suggested in
SSP #127 and OCP 14.3.4.
3.4.2
3.4.3
3.4.4
Determine the validity of applying to
Ministry of Agriculture and Lands for
Watershed Reserve status for
Rossland’s domestic supply (Res)
Develop a plan for alternate drinking
water if there is a fire in Rossland’s
watershed (Plan)
Adjust the water infrastructure
maintenance program to reflect climate
change and maintain a secure water
supply (Infra)
1
Public Comment: Mining or logging in our
watersheds could easily undo any or all other
supply and conservation measures.



Consider the implications of more sedimentation
and turbid flows on infrastructure maintenance
(Infra)
Consider the implications of more freeze thaw
cycles (Infra)
Mulch the reservoirs with balls to reduce
evaporation (Infra)
Review Comment: Water quality issues
associated with a fire could likely be dealt with
through a boil water advisory.
Review Comments: The spring freshet is
already turbid. Topping is turned off in the
spring due to turbidity. The City has the
capacity to turn off one or more creeks if there
was a landslide. The implication of more
freeze thaw cycles would be that burst pipes
would have to be replaced more frequently –
leaks are already fixed as they are identified
in the spring.
Objective 5: Evaluate the potential for other sources of water
Page 85
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
3.5.1
3.5.2
Encourage residents to utilize
alternative water sources for nonpotable water use needs
5
Engage in corporate City use of
alternative water sources
1




3.5.3
Identify, establish and protect wetlands
to allow for natural recharge of aquifers
(Land Man)
3.5.4
Undertake a cost-benefit analysis of
other watersheds as back-up water
systems or additional sources of supply
(Res)
Prepare a guide on rain water recycling/roof
water harvesting (Educ)
Devise greywater storage and reuse guidelines
(if greywater use becomes legal) (Educ)
Install rainwater cisterns on municipal buildings
(Examp)
Explore options to reuse water within the City
where possible (Examp)
Public Comments: Rainwater capture could
offset garden watering. Greywater and
rainwater reuse are good ideas. More
education is required. There should be
incentives for installing on-site cisterns,
rainwater harvesting, or
reward early adopters at least by profiling
them and learning from their experiences.
However these will only work in the summer.
Review Comments: Typical rainwater barrels
(250 litres) hold limited water. Rainwater
cisterns at 10,000 litres make a larger
difference in water use.
SSP/OCP: Suggested in OCP 23.3.6 and
23.3.7.
Public Comment: The City should lead by
example.
Public Comment: Wetlands require flat land –
relevant in Rossland?
Review Comment: Not a lot of locations for
wetlands in Rossland. Emcon lands a
possibility.
Review Comment: The other watersheds
would be very expensive to bring on line.
Objective 6: Maintain a high level of water quality
3.6.1
Develop strategies to maintain water
quality
1


Consider increasing water quality monitoring so
that climate change related water quality impacts
are identified early (Res)
Develop strategies to address the potential for
higher more turbid flows (Plan)
Public Comments: Consider lobbying to
change water legislation to place the onus on
households to filter water to make it potable
(x3).
Review Comments: The City already monitors
e coli on daily basis. Most bugs are killed by
chlorine – if the treatment kills e coli then it
Page 86
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
will kill the other bugs as well. Rossland
already has turbid flows and does turbidity
tests on treated water on a daily basis.
IV: Energy
Key Adaptation Goals:
 Rossland’s vulnerability to the impacts of rising energy prices is minimized
 Rossland’s vulnerability to temporary and long-term energy supply interruptions is minimized
 Rossland has a diversified energy supply through local renewable energy generation
Page 87
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Potential Energy Objectives and Actions:
Action
Votes
Potential Strategies
Considerations
Objective 1: Decrease Community Energy Consumption by 25 percent
4.1.1
Hire or designate a City Energy
Manager
4.1.2
Develop a Community and Corporate
Energy Plan (Plan)
Public Comments: Hire a second building
inspector. Don’t hire an energy manager
unless there is money to support this
position/perhaps an initial contract position.
Review Comments: A City the size of
Rossland cannot realistically afford to hire an
energy manager – rather an energy
‘champion’ from within staff should be
designated to promote energy as a
consideration in all aspects of the City’s
business.
Public Comments: Need to have overall plan
to have chance of success (x4). If done
properly, could engage, educate and
galvanize community to action. This will set
targets and ensure long-term commitment –
but how many more plans do we need. The
plan will likely incorporate some of the other
actions below (x2). Encourage community
wide time of use and zero net metering,
perhaps negotiated municipally with the
mutual goal with Fortis to achieve power
resiliency.
SSP/OCP: An Energy Plan is suggested in
SSP #103 and OCP 14.4.2. The OCP also
contains a non-binding commitment for
Rossland to reduce its community emissions
by 33% by 2020.
9
Residential and Commercial Buildings
4.1.3
Develop and implement a City energy
code/building energy conservation
standards for new building and


Adopt LEED and carbon neutral standards for all
new developments (Reg)
Promote better building insulation, ventilation and
Public Comments: It would be better to
encourage increased building density in City
Centre. Making the building codes to energy
Page 88
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
renovations

4.1.4
Encourage improved energy efficiency
in existing residences
3






shade trees in new developments to reduce
cooling requirements (Reg)
Require Smart meters (legislated for 2012?) to
take advantage of dual rate systems (Reg)
Implement a Home Energy Efficiency Strategy
(Educ)
Require Smart meters (legislated for 2012?) to
take advantage of dual rate systems (Reg)
Begin a “Switch it Off” campaign (Educ/Incent)
Encourage residents to purchase and install
energy efficient appliances or participate in the
EcoRetrofit program (Educ)
Hold workshops, such as the burn smart
workshop, that inform residents regarding energy
efficient alternatives and government grant
opportunities (Educ)
Publish the results of the Community Energy
Survey (Educ)
standards will be much more effective in the
long run for energy conservation than builders
voluntarily building to energy efficient
standards.
Encourage building houses that are “big
enough.” Conservation standards are easily
overwhelmed by super-sized single-family
dwellings. Shade trees need water – this is a
trade off.
Review Comments: Could be linked to
proposed Revitalization Program Bylaw
(residents can apply for their taxes to remain
the same for 5 years after $10,000 in
renovations). LEED standards might be too
prescriptive.
SSP/OCP: Green/LEED equivalent
standards for new developments are
suggested in SSP #106 and OCP 14.4.4.
Public Comments: There is a big opportunity
here. Good idea but lower priority. Too
costly.
SSP/OCP: SSP #108 and #110 encourage
energy efficiency in homes
Page 89
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
Resident and Commercial Transportation
4.1.5
Control sprawl and promote infill
development (Reg)
3
4.1.6
Implement Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) incentives and
programs
4
Public Comments: Very important form
energy and environmental perspective – will
enable us to have green space. City Staff is
doing a great job on this and should keep
going on it.
Review Comments: The City is already doing
this and it is addressed in the OCP
SSP/OCP: Promoted in SSP #2.




4.1.7
Publicize and enforce the vehicle idling
bylaw (Educ)
Provide assistance to or expand the rideshare
program from Rossland to Trail (Incent)
Increase multi-modal trail infrastructure (Land
Man)
Lobby for improvements in transit system (Coll)
Work with partners to establish a shuttle between
downtown Rossland and Red Mountain Resort
(Coll)
Public Comments: Educate regarding the
difference between transportation needs and
mere lifestyle wants. The biggest GHG issue
for Rossland is transportation. Need to get
the community going with rideshare shuttle to
Trail etc.
Review Comments: The City is already
increasing multi-modal trail infrastructure with
the BEAT study and trail development.
Working with BC Transit to improve transit
service has been tried in the past with little
success.
SSP/OCP: The SSP and OCP contain
multiple suggestions to increase ride-sharing,
shuttling and transportation options. See
SSP #65, 64, 63, 60 and OCP 15.2.1 and
14.4.1.
1
City Buildings and Infrastructure
Page 90
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
4.1.8
Identify and implement energy
conservation measures on a
Corporate City level
6




4.1.9
Ensure all new City computers, copy equipment
and other appliances are energy efficient (Examp)
Investigate the potential for on-site renewable
technology for street lighting/ or conversion of
lights to lower wattage bulbs (Examp)
Create a City green fleet program (Examp)
Conduct audits of City facilities and work to
improve City energy use (Examp)
Build a green City building to serve as
an example of sustainable climate
change resilient building
Public Comments: Lead by example (x3).
Don’t expect residents to get on board if the
municipality isn’t.
Get some low watt street lights – and fewer of
them (x3). For ultimate conservation and
potential economic benefit, I propose the Dark
Sky concept for Rossland and area. No
longer in favour of LED due to massive RF
discharge.
Review Comments: The Subdivision and
Development Servicing bylaw would have to
be rewritten to facilitate this but Fortis does
provide some funding for this. Audits are
already being done as part of the City’s GHG
reduction program to be Carbon Neutral by
2012 (but carbon neutrality can also be
achieved through the purchase of offsets).
SSP/OCP: The OCP supports a reduction or
replacement of street lights in 14.4.5. The
SSP recommends greening the city fleet in
#66.
Public Comments: A green retrofit might be
better – new buildings have a big carbon
footprint. Only build a new building of it is
planned anyway (x2).
Objective 2: Reduce the potential and prepare for temporary energy disruptions
4.2.1
Reduce the potential for energy supply
disruptions
1



Require that utility lines be buried in new
construction (Reg)
Work with local energy providers to ensure that
distribution infrastructure is resilient to climate
impacts (Coll)
Ensure any city owned energy generation systems
are designed to be climate change resilient (Plan)
Public Comments: Energy redundancy just
makes sense. It is pretty hard to dig in utility
lines on rock.
Review Comment: There are no City energy
generation systems at present.
SSP/OCP: Locating utility lines underground
is suggested in OCP 23.2.8.
Page 91
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
4.2.2

Prepare for temporary energy
disruptions



Ensure the city has some backup power
generation capacity, potentially from renewable
sources, especially for emergency centres (Infra)
Ensure the City's water supply will continue to
gravity-feed during interruptions in our electricity
supply (i.e. electric equipment. or electric
interlocks, can be manually operated or
overridden) (Infra)
Consider a back-up power source for the pump
delivering water to residents at the Red Mountain
base area (Infra)
Encourage residents to have backup energy
sources (Educ)
Public Comments: Wood stoves must include
burn smart low emission stoves. A few
designated emergency centres are feasible.
The gravity tank will handle the present
population for days – back up power is
unnecessary.
Review Comments: A back up pump to Red
Mountain is required by insurance and is
budgeted for.
Objective 3: Increase local energy generation by 15 percent by 2015
City or Commercial Renewable Energy Systems
4.3.1 Provide incentives for the
development of renewable energy
facilities
6
Public Comments: Put a turbine on the sewer
interceptor. There are many KW available
and wasted. Lots of people are thinking
about renewables, they just need a push in
the form of incentives.
Review Comments: The ETF considered the
installation of a turbine on the sewer but
found it would be uneconomic. The line
would have to be pressurized and closed
(which it is not currently). Replacing the
interceptor would cost approximately $9
million and would generate only enough
electricity for 50 homes. Unless there is
another reason to replace the interceptor and
pressurize it, this is unlikely to be an
economic option.
SSP/OCP: Support for renewable energy
Page 92
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
facilities is encouraged in OCP 26.2.17.
4.3.2

Undertake a renewable energy supply
demonstration project/or establish a
small energy utility



Conduct a wind assessment specific to the City
and install a wind generation facility if feasible
(Buffalo Ridge location?)
Investigate the potential for biomass energy
production in Rossland
Undertake a feasibility study to utilize renewable
energy in a City building and identify appropriate
funding to finance implementation
Investigate the feasibility of micro-hydro on
Murphy Creek or a micro hydro power installation
at the biathlon loop
Public Comments: Encourage municipal
geothermal in mine shafts (x2). Like the idea
of a demonstration project but not sure about
wind – try geothermal in the mines, or solar.
Generate power from waste collection
system.
SSP/OCP: Small municipal renewable energy
utilities or pilots are recommended in SSP
#102, #104, and #70.
Residential Renewable Energy Systems
4.3.3
Ensure City bylaws allow for renewable
energy systems
4.3.4
Promote renewable energy systems to
residents
5

Incorporate provisions for passive solar, micro
hydro, geothermal and micro wind into building
codes and bylaws

Set targets for solar hot water heating in
residences (i.e. 20%) (Targ)
Get accurate ROI numbers for renewable energy
sources and provide to residents (Educ)
Provide incentives for the installation of renewable
energy resources or publish lists of agencies that
do so (Incent)
Provide renewable energy guides and lists of
vendors (Educ)



4.3.5
Require all new developments to
include 15% on site renewable energy
generation (Reg)
Public Comments: Work with residents on
passive solar designs – develop a plan book?
Knowledge is not something that everyone
seeks out.
Public Comments: This could be difficult in
this economic climate and might discourage
development – would need big incentives to
work.
Page 93
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Objective 4: Promote provincial energy security
4.4.1
4.4.2
Lobby for the provincial government to
keep energy produced in BC in BC
(Coll)
Lobby BC Hydro to undertake local
hydro projects on the Columbia at
Murphy and Boundary creeks (Coll)
1
Public Comments: Lobby for true cost pricing
of fossil fuels instead. Too late for
hydroelectricity.
Public Comments: Not if it is done like the
IPPs so far – must be almost zero footprint
and or very very small (x4). There are far
better ways to get power. Encourage – don’t
demand.
Page 94
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
V: Food
Key Adaptation Goals:




Rossland is a food secure community and its vulnerability to potential declines in global food production are minimized
Local farmers and residential growers are supported
Agricultural lands are identified and protected
Agriculture and value added products are supported and promoted as a local economic development strategy
Potential Food Objectives and Actions:
Action
Votes
Potential Strategies
Considerations
9



Create a local food security baseline
Set a target for local food production (Targ)
Encourage households to have emergency food
supplies (Educ)
Establish a food security education campaign that
features the community garden, highlights the
relationship between food and greenhouse gases
and urban agriculture (Educ)
Hold events such as an Iron Chef Local food
Challenge to raise awareness of local food (Educ)
Public Comments: Include food security and
local good growing (Including home gardens
instead of lawns) as a goal in the OCP and
define food security to empower the City to
take action on local food security (x2). All
other actions flow from the recognition of food
security as a high level policy (x2). Create a
local food security baseline – need a starting
point.
This is a good strategy for the municipality – it
could deal with the use of City lands for
agriculture (x2) and call for all of objective 3.
Encourage backyard gardening (Educ)
Provide assistance in starting a backyard garden
(knowledge, soil resources etc.)
Promote awareness of food preservation and
storage techniques (Educ)
Plant native fruit trees on publicly owned lands
(Land Man)
Public Comment: This is important for selfreliance and preparing for potential droughts
and flooding in other areas. Mentor/teach food
production and processing. Rossland REAL
food has models for this. Gardens need water
– provide an allowance without extra cost in
metered systems (x2).
Review Comment: Rossland REAL Food is
already playing an important role in doing this
Objective 1: Promote local food security
5.1.1
Develop a food security strategy and/or
a local food charter


5.1.2
Promote increased local food
production and processing
12




Page 95
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
and could be supported.
SSP/OCP: The OCP encourages urban
agriculture in 26.2.9 and the SSP recommends
retaining the orchards at the Chinese Gardens
in #31.
Objective 2: Support local farmers and residential growers
5.2.1
Support and engage in knowledge
development for local growers
6







Research and develop guides on crops that will be
productive with a warmer climate and changing soil
composition (Res)
Research and develop guides on
agricultural/gardening management tools/systems
that help address climate change and climate
variability (i.e. crop diversification, succession
planting, row covers, greenhouses)
Establish a citizen-based monitoring program to
monitor garden and crop behavior and provide a
baseline for further research
Research and develop a guide regarding the
implications of climate change on the distribution
and abundance of pests, invasive plants and
diseases
Establish the community garden as a
demonstration site for sustainable gardening
practices such as water conservation and drought
tolerant gardening
Educate residents regarding composting for the
cold 6 months of the year
Educate residents regarding what to do about
wildlife problems.
Public Comments: Use local knowledge
regarding food production and crop behaviour.
Make it easier for farmers to grow. Knowledge
of weather and weather trends is important –
monitor this. Rossland REAL food is close to
doing a lot of these things now – Additional
funding would assist to speed up the process.
Page 96
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
5.2.2
Ensure local growers have sufficient
land access
16






5.2.3
5.2.4
Encourage pollinators through City
plantings and establish bee homes on
City property (Land)
Establish a community composting
system (Incent)
Purchase or set aside community/City land
(potentially ALR land) for additional community
gardens a demonstration farm to be run by a
Society
Promote land sharing for gardening and crops as
well as the use of City owned land
Make the establishment of community garden plots
part of a bonus system for developers seeking to
increase density
Encourage the donation of private lands for
community gardens
Assist in the construction of additional community
gardens on City land
Fund and build a greenhouse at the community
garden
Public Comments: Facilitate this through longterm covenants (bigger pieces) and
policy/charter (alleyways, boulevards etc.).
Community gardens are the way to go.
Without access to land for gardening it is hard
to grow anything.
Review Comment: The City has already
supported the establishment of community
gardens with significant assistance by
Rossland REAL food, a volunteer group.
Additional gardens could be established.
Public Comments: This will be easy to do –
Rossland REAL Food is preparing a proposal
for a pilot project right now.
10
Public Comments: Composting is highly
important to encourage healthy gardens
sustainably. For smaller gardens, poor soil can
be improved and become very productive with
added organic matter and pH balancing.
Establish a clue box program for garden
debris, especially weeds and divert food
wastes to composting at RDKB. Shred and
compost yard wastes in Rossland (need
shredder) – Consider neighbourhood sites i.e.
numerous dispersed sites. Region-wide heavy
metals (naturally occurring) are so high that the
composting program tried by the RDKB and
RDCK didn’t meet provincial health standards.
Review Comments: RDKB is looking into
establishing a composting program.
SSP/OCP: The SSP recommends a
Page 97
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
5.2.5
Establish and implement a plan to
minimize noxious weeds (Plan)
5.2.6
Develop municipal guidelines for goats
and chickens (Plan)
3
City of Rossland – Final Report
community composting program in #124.
Public Comments: Noxious weeds are one of
the greatest threats to biodiversity and huge
threats to agriculture too, even in the home
garden. Need an incentive program – promote
free weed pickup.
Noxious weeds in garbage bags will be picked
up on garbage day if the collectors know they
are noxious weeds.
SSP/OCP: A noxious weed plan is
recommended in SSP #140.
Public Comments: This is a new action
recommended at the public session.
Objective 3: Identify and protect agricultural land and topsoil
5.3.1
Make an inventory of local farms,
agricultural soils agricultural land and
residential growers (Res)
3
Public Comments: Consider establishing a
local research facility or network of growers
who all feed into a common database. Also
inventory interest, knowledge and situational
limitations – how many people don’t/aren’t but
really want to (i.e. limitations). The ALR is not
a good enough filter. We have to look at the
ground ourselves.
SSP/OCP: Identifying agricultural lands and
potential are suggested in SSP #28 and OCP
26.2.7.
Page 98
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
5.3.2
Protect agricultural land and topsoil
through incentives, education
planning and regulation
11





Identify sites suitable for additional community
gardens and incorporate them into zoning bylaws
(Reg)
Discourage or prohibit the development of open
spaces and other areas identified as having
potential to be utilized as agricultural land (Reg)
Establish topsoil maintenance objectives, including
control of sediment and erosion in development
permits, the subdivision bylaw or a soil permit
bylaw with penalties for non compliance (Reg)
Research and promote practices such as
permaculture, low-loss irrigation and appropriate
fertilizing practices to improve and maintain soil
fertility (Educ)
Investigate co-ops and growing in hydro rights of
way.
Public Comments: It is very important to
ensure that arable land is preserved for food
production whether for personal or commercial
use. Prohibiting development and refusing to
upzone is key – without land farming can’t
happen. Please save Happy Valley for
farming.
SSP/OCP: The SSP #29 recommends setting
aside Happy Valley and other suitable areas as
an agricultural land bank.
Objective 4: Support agriculture and value-added products as an economic development strategy
5.4.1
Develop a micro incubator business
program for local agriculture and valueadded products
2



Research micro incubator programs in other areas
(Res)
Seek funding for a micro incubator program for
local and value-added agriculture (Res)
Establish a community supported agriculture (CSA)
program (Incent)
Public Comments: Community supported
agriculture (CSA) could help get bulk
membranes for green houses. Allow free
enterprise to develop local agriculture.
Page 99
City of Rossland – Final Report
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
5.4.2
Help establish and promote the farmers
market and a permanent downtown
food coop
2




5.4.3
Work with local growers to develop a
local food marketing strategy (Coll)
8




5.4.4
Support the development of local food
processing facilities (Coll)
2
Help local growers establish a permanent
downtown food coop (Coll/Infra)
Promote the downtown food coop and/or farmers’
market (website promotion, buy local campaign,
development of pamphlets and cards) (Educ)
Coordinate City events with farmers’ market days
Have City employees assist with set-up or teardown of the farmer’s market
Public Comments: Think regional – watch out
that a farmer’s market doesn’t actually work
against local commercial growers. A hobby
grower with a one time windfall can undercut
what is actually a fair price. This is being done
by Rossland REAL food with the help of the
City.
Create a guide of local growers, what they grow
and how to reach them to purchase produce
(Educ)
Undertake a “buy local” and/or “seasonal eating”
campaign with pamphlets and other promotion
(Educ)
Develop a logo to brand locally produced products
(Educ)
Research new market strategies to support local
agriculture and value-added products (Res)
Public Comments: This is being done by
Rossland REAL food with the help of the City.
Develop a local food marketing strategy.
Producers need support. The easier it is for
people to identify what they can buy locally, the
more they will do so.
SSP/OCP: The OCP promotes the support of
locally grown products in 26.2.8 and SSP #44
suggests that restaurants and grocery stores
should be encouraged to purchase local
products.
Public Comments: We need local (regional)
meat processing, freezing, canning and jam
(x2).
Public Comments: Almost all of these actions are necessary and doable – These should all be adopted (x2). All that is needed to advance many
of these and RRF projects is some modest financial support or seed money to act as a catalyst.
Page 100
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
V: Conclusions and Next Steps
Climate change is a critical challenge facing the City of Rossland and its impacts will likely start
to become more evident as we move towards 2050. But
climate change can also be viewed as a potential opportunity “Win-win” climate change
adaptations are “actions that
to undertake some key adaptation actions that the City has
provide adaptation benefits while
already identified in the SSP and OCP as being desirable for
meeting other social,
Rossland for reasons other than climate change adaptation,
environmental or economic
such as promoting sustainability, reducing City costs and
objectives, including climate
encouraging economic development. The fact that these
change mitigation.” ~ Pew Center
actions are also important from a climate change adaptation
on Global Climate Change
perspective provides further impetus for their
implementation.
After a one-year process, the Steering Committee has identified nineteen priority adaptation
actions with respect to infrastructure, water, energy and food to assist Rossland in adapting to
climate change. A further fifteen recommended but lower priority adaptation actions were also
identified for potential implementation at a later date. The tasks of the Steering Committee and
the Coordinator have largely ended and the priority actions are presented to the City and to
the Sustainability Commission for their consideration and implementation. Each priority
action has been flagged with regard to whether the City or Sustainability Commission might best
play a lead role in its implementation.
A few of the priority actions, such as promoting infill, developing better data regarding water
demand, and encouraging more on-site water retention, are already being undertaken by the
City to some degree. Including those actions in the recommendations here is intended to
provide further support to the actions that the City is already taking and ensure that they
continue. Other priority actions, such as developing an Energy Plan or considering climate
change in the City Infrastructure Plan, are additional to the work that the City is already doing
and will require some budget planning by both the City and the Sustainability Commission if
they are to be implemented.
When selecting priority actions, consideration was given to their affordability. In most cases, the
priority actions can be accomplished at limited cost over time if they are incorporated into
regular budget planning and implemented as part of the sustainability initiatives that the City
would likely consider as part of the SSP implementation. Some of the actions ultimately could
reduce the City’s operating and infrastructure upgrade costs. Other actions may require grant
funding if they are to be implemented. If the City and Sustainability Commission are prepared to
Page 101
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
offer matching funding and dedicate some Sustainability
Commission funds for grant application preparation, the
“The only goal of producing this
City may be able to capitalize on available grants as it has
plan is to begin implementing it.”
successfully done for many other sustainability initiatives.
~ Beryl Magilavy, Director,
Planning for Phase 3 of CBT’s Communities Adapting to
Department of the Environment
Climate Change Initiative is underway and assisting the
about San Francisco’s
Phase 1 and 2 communities with implementation either
Sustainability planning process
through support or funding is under consideration. This
may be a good opportunity for the City to explore in seeking implementation support.
“Even with mitigation efforts, climate
change will continue to unfold for decades
due to the long atmospheric lifetime of past
greenhouse-gas emissions and the gradual
release of excess heat that has built up in
the oceans. Climate change adaptation is
thus a necessity for our nation and the
world.” ~ Scientific American, US Needs a
Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change,
September 30, 2010
Ultimately a plan is only as good as its
implementation, and it is the hope of the Steering
Committee that the priority actions identified in this
report form the basis for the City’s ongoing
response to climate change.
Climate change is already occurring. The precise
manner in which it will manifest in Rossland is not
completely known. This report provides some best
guesses based on the science available at the time
of writing. Even if mitigation strategies prove
successful, some level of climate change is
inevitable. Local governments will likely be forced to be at the forefront of climate change
adaptation and the choices they make today might affect their capacity to adapt in the future.
Communities that anticipate and prepare for climate change will position themselves to be the
resilient sustainable communities of the future.
“Many decisions that will affect how
communities fare in a changing climate
will be made locally.” ~ Rosina Bierbaum,
Dean of University of Michigan's School of
Natural Resources and Environment.
Page 102
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
References
Australian Government, Department of Environment and Water Resources, Australian
Greenhouse Office (2007). Climate Change Adaptation Actions for Local Government,
Australian Greenhouse Office: Canberra, ACT.
Bals, Christopher, Sven Harmeling and Michael Windfuhr. (2008) Climate Change, Food
Security and the Right to Adequate Food. Diakonie Katastronhenhilfe, Brot fur die Welt and
Germanwatch: Stuttgart, Germany.
BC Hydro (nd). British Columbia Predicted Wind Speed Map. Retrieved July 11, 2010 from
http://www.bchydro.com/planning_regulatory/energy_technologies/wind_energy/wind_mapping.
html
BC Hydro (2000). Inventory of Undeveloped Opportunities at Potential Micro Hydro Sites in
British Columbia. BC Hydro.
BC Hydro (2006). Challenges and Choices: Planning for a Secure Electricity Future. Retrieved
July 8, 2010 from
http://www.bchydro.com/planning_regulatory/long_term_electricity_planning/past_plans/2006_ie
p.html
BC Hydro (2010). Wind Energy: Weighing Wind Options. Retrieved July 11, 2010 from
http://www.bchydro.com/planning_regulatory/energy_technologies/wind_energy.html
BC Sustainable Energy Association (2010). Renewable Energy Technologies. Retrieved July 7,
2010 from http://www.bcsea.org/learn/get-the-facts/renewable-energy-technologies
BC Stats (2006). Census Profile: Rossland. Retrieved December 10, 2009, from
http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/cen06/profiles/detailed/59005023.pdf
BC Stats (2009). Community Facts: Rossland. Retrieved September 23, 2009, from
http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/dd/facsheet/cf216.pdf
BC Stats (2009). Kootenay‐ Boundary Regional District: Quarterly Regional Statistics. Retrieved
October 23, 2009, from http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/pubs/qrs/rd05.pdf
BC Stats (2009). Projected Annual Growth in Employment Demand: Kootenay Development
Region.
Page 103
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Retrieved December 10, 2009, from
www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/DATA/lss/repm/DR_Kootenay_ind.csv
Brighton and Hove City Council (2006). Climate Change Action Plan for Brighton and Hove.
Retrieved July 16, 2010 from http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=c1130601
Brynne, Abra (2009) Food Security in the Basin: Assessing the role for the Columbia Basin
Trust. Peeling the Onion: Nelson BC.
Center for Science in the Earth System (The Climate Impacts Group), Joint Institute for the
Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean, University of Washington and King County, Washington
(2007). Preparing for Climate Change: A Guidebook for Local, Regional and State
Governments. In association with ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability: King County,
Washington.
City of Berkeley (2010). Berkeley FIRST Initial Evaluation. Planning and Development
Department, Office of Energy and Sustainable Development, City of Berkeley.
City of Keene (2007). Keene, New Hampshire Climate Adaptation Action Plan Summary Report.
City of Keene in conjunction with ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability.
City of Kimberley (2009). Columbia Basin Trust Communities Adapting to Climate Change
Initiative: City of Kimberley Case Study. Kimberley BC.
City of Rossland (2008). Official Community Plan. Retrieved October 23, 2009, from
http://rossland.fileprosite.com/contentengine/Link.aspx?ID=422&Direct=1
City of Rossland (2008).Visions to Action: Strategic Sustainability Plan. Retrieved December 16,
2009, from
http://cfdcmall.com/cms/fileadmin/files/VisionsToAction/PDFs/VisionstoAction_SSP_Final1.1_05
0808.pdf
Collingwood Environmental Planning (2010). The Mayor of London’s Draft Climate Change
Adaptation Strategy: Sustainability Appraisal Report: Non-Technical Summary. Collingwood
Environmental Planning: London, England.
Econnics. (2010). British Columbia Drought Response Plan. Prepared for the Ministry of
Environment. June 2010.
Page 104
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (2009).
Combating Climate Change: The German Adaptation Strategy, Federal Ministry for the
Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety: Berlin, Germany.
Federation of Canadian Municipalities (2009). Research Report: Energy Sector. Marbek
Resource Consultants. Retrieved April 15th, 2010 from
http://gmf.fcm.ca/files/Capacity_Building__Energy/Resources_and_Tools/Energy_Sector_EN.pdf
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). (2008). Climate Change and Food Security: A
Framework Document, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome.
Garrad Hassan (2008). Assessment of the Energy Potential and Estimated Costs of Wind
Energy in British Columbia. Prepared for British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority.
Hackenbrook, Dylan, David Springer and Shannon Swayze. (2010) Agriculture and Food
Security. Student Report GIS 331. Selkirk College.
Hoffman, Nancy. (2001) “Urban Consumption of Agricultural Land,” Rural and Small Town
Canada Analysis Bulletin. 3(2).
Infrastructure Canada (2006). Adapting Infrastructure to Climate Change in Canada’s Cities and
Communities: A Literature Review. Research & Analysis Division.
International Energy Agency (IEA) (2008). World Energy Outlook 2008. World Energy Agency:
Paris, France.
International Energy Agency (IEA) (2009). World Energy Outlook 2009. World Energy Agency:
Paris, France.
International Lead and Zinc Study Group (2009). Lead and Zinc Statistics. Retrieved December
26,
2009 from
http://www.ilzsg.org/generic/pages/file.aspx?file_id=937&field_name=document%20aa_file_id_0
International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) (2010). Summary of the Bonn Climate
Change Talks: 2-6 August 2010. Earth Negotiations Bulletin 12(478).
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC (2007a). Summary for Policymakers. In:
Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the
Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D.
Page 105
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
IPCC (2007b). Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis (Working Group I). Retrieved
December 2, 2009 from http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html
International Scientific Steering Committee (ISSC) (2005). “Avoiding Dangerous Climate
Change: International Symposium on the Stabilization of Greenhouse Gas Concentrations.”
Exeter, UK, 1 – 3 February.
Kootenay Food Strategy Society. (nd.) Food Security Fact Sheet. Kootenay Food Strategy
Society.
Lane, Oliver, Stewart Cohen, Trevor Murdock and Hailey Eckstrand (2009) Climate Change
Impacts and Adaptation in the Canadian Columbia River Basin: A Literature Review – Draft.
Columbia Basin Trust.
Lepsoe, Stephanie (2009). Water Demand Management and Adaptations for Mountain Resort
Communities in the Canadian Columbia Basin. University of British Columbia:Vancouver.
Levin, K. and D. Tirpak (2009). Climate Science 2008: Major New Discoveries. WRI Issues
Brief. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
Kimmet, Colleen (2009). “First Nation Takes Lead on Solar Power,” The Tyee. Retrieved July 8,
2010 from http://thetyee.ca/News/2009/07/24/FirstNationSolarPower/
Macalister, Terry (2009). “Key oil figures were distorted by US pressure, says whistleblower,”
The Guardian, November 9. Retrieved July 7, 2010 from
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/09/peak-oil-international-energy-agency
Meech John A. and Mory M. Ghomshei (nd). Canadian Geothermal Energy Developments: on
the cusp of a new era. University of British Columbia, The Centre for Environmental Research in
Minerals, Metals and Materials.
Mehdi, Bano et al (2006). Adapting to Climate Change: An Introduction for Canadian
Municipalities. Canadian Climate Impacts and Adaptation Research Network. Retrieved
November 22nd, 2009 from http://www.gnb.ca/0009/0369/0018/0006-e.pdf
Metro Vancouver (2010) Waste-to-Energy Facility. April. Retrieved July 11, 2010 from
www.metrovancouver.org/about/.../WasteEnergyFactsheet.pdf
Micklethwaite, W. F. (2008). Rossland’s Water Resources.
Page 106
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources (1992). Geothermal Resources Map.
Retrieved July 11, 2010 from
http://www.em.gov.bc.ca/Geothermal/GeothermalResourcesMap.htm
Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources (2010). The BC Energy Plan: A Vision for
Clean Energy Leadership. Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources: Victoria.
Ministry of Environment (2007). Rossland City Updated 2007 Community Energy and Emissions
Inventory. Retrieved July 5, 2010 from
www.env.gov.bc.ca/cas/mitigation/ceei/.../ceei_2007_rossland_city.pdf
Ministry of Environment (2010). Technical Methods and Guidance Document For 2007 CEEI
Reports: Community Energy and Emissions Inventory Initiative. Ministry of Environment:
Victoria.
Ministry of Forests (2010). Fire Averages, Wildfire Management Branch. Retrieved August 10,
2010 from http://bcwildfire.ca/History/average.htm
Murdock, T.Q., and A.T. Werner (2010). Past Trends and Future Projections for the Canadian
Columbia Basin: 2010, Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium, University of Victoria, Victoria BC.
Murdock, T.Q., J. Fraser, and C. Pearce, editors, (2007). Preliminary Analysis of Climate
Variability and Change in the Canadian Columbia River Basin: Focus on Water Resources
2006. Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium, University of Victoria, Victoria BC.
Murray, James (2009) “IEA official: Peak Oil is closer than we think,” BusinessGreen, Aug 4.
Retrived July 7, 2010 from http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2247241/ieaofficial-peak-oil-closer
Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) (2007). From impacts to adaptation: Canada in a changing
climate 2007. Retrieved November 16th, 2009, from
http://adaptation.nrcan.gc.ca/assess/2007/ch8/index_e.php
National Energy Board of Canada (NEB) (2010). Current Market Conditions. Retrieved May 17,
2010 from http://www.neb.gc.ca/clf-nsi/rnrgynfmtn/prcng/lctrct/crrntmrktcndtn-eng.html
National Round Table on the Environment and Economy (2010). Economic Risks and
Opportunities of Climate Change for Canada: Technical Guidance for “Bottom‐ up” Sectoral
Studies. NRTEE, 26 January 2010.
Page 107
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Neilsen, Debbie (2007). The City of Iqaluit’s Climate Change Impacts, Infrastructure Risks and
Adaptive Capacity Project. City of Iqaluit. Nunavut.
Neumann, James E. and Price, Jason C (2009). Adapting to Climate Change: The Public Policy
Response. Resources for the Future Retrieved May 20th, 2010 from
http://www.rff.org/rff/documents/RFF-Rpt-Adaptation-NeumannPrice.pdf
Ministry of Agriculture and Lands. (2006) B.C.’s Food Self-Reliance: Can B.C.’s Farmers Feed
Our Growing Population? British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture and Lands.
Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium (2010). Climate Overview: Historical Precipitation Trends.
Retrieved August 10, 2010 from http://pacificclimate.org/resources/climateimpacts/overview/
Penfold, George (2009) Agriculture in Central Kootenay and Kootenay Boundary Regional
Districts, White Paper.
Peters, Christian J., Jennifer L. Wilkins, and Gary W. Fick (2008) Land and Diet: What’s the
most land efficient diet for New York State? Rural New York Minute.19(July):1.
Pfiefer, Dale Allen (2006) Eating Fossil Fuels: Oil, Food and the Coming Crisis in Agriculture.
New Society Publishers: Gabriola Island, BC.
Provincial Health Services Authority (2008) A Seat at the Table: Resource Guide for Local
Governments to promote food secure communities. Retrieved July 8, 2010 from
www.phsa.ca/NR/rdonlyres/76D687CF.../PHSAreportaseatatthetable4.pdf
Regional District of Central Kootenay (RDCK). (2010) Request for Proposals: Agricultural Area
Plan.
RENI (Renewables Insight) (2010). PV Power Plants 2010. Industry Guide. Retrieved July 7,
2010 from www.renewablesinsight.com/.../Reply_form_PVPowerPlants_091012.pdf
Richardson, K., W. Steffen, H.J. Schellnhuber, J. Alcamo, T. Barker, D.M. Kammen, R.
Leemans, D. Liverman, M. Munasinghe, B. Osman-Elasha, N. Stern and O. Wæver (2009).
Synthesis Report: Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decisions. Proceedings of a
conference held in Copenhagen March 10-12, 2009.
Rodenhuis et al., D. et al. (2009). Climate Overview (2007). Hydro-climatology and future
impacts in British Columbia. Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium, University of Victoria, Victoria,
British Columbia.
Page 108
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Rogelj, Joeri, Julia Nabel, Claudine Chen, William Hare, Kathleen Markmann, Malte
Meinshausen, Michiel Schaeffer, Kirsten Macey & Niklas Höhne (2010). “Copenhagen Accord
pledges are paltry”. Nature 464, 1126-1128 (22 April).
Rossi, Valerie (2010). “Harvesting sun’s energy.” The Trail Rossland News. Date/Page.
Schneider, S.H., S. Semenov, A. Patwardhan, I. Burton, C.H.D. Magadza, M. Oppenheimer,
A.B. Pittock, A. Rahman, J.B. Smith, A., Suarez and F. Yamin, (2007). Assessing key
vulnerabilities and the risk from climate change. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and
Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van
der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 779-810.
Schmidhuber, Josef and Francesco N Tubiello. (2007) “Global food security under climate
change,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.
104(50):19703-19708.
Schuur, E., J. Bockheim, J. Canadell, and E. Euskirchen, C.B. Field, S.V. Goryachkin, S.
Hagemann, P. Kuhry, P.M. Lafleur, H. Lee, G. Mazhitova, F.E. Nelson, A. Rinke, V.E.
Romanovsky, N. Shiklomanov, C. Tarnocai, S. Venevsky, J.G. Vogel, and S.A. Zimov. (2008).
“Vulnerability of permafrost carbon to climate change: Implications for the global carbon cycle.”
BioScience 58.
Serecon Management Consulting Inc. and Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Consulting Inc. (2009)
Food Secure Vancouver – Baseline Report. Vancouver Food Policy Council: Vancouver BC.
Somerton, Pat. (2008) “Food Self-Reliance,” Legislative Library of British Columbia Current
Issues. 2008:06.
Statistics Canada. (nd.) “Census of Agriculture counts 19,844 farms in British Columbia,”
Statistics Canada. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/ca-ra2006/analysis-analyses/bc-cb-eng.htm
Retrieved 2010-05-04.
Statistics Canada (2003). Primary energy consumption and selected indicators, British
Columbia, 1990 and 2003. Retrieved July 12, 2010 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-621m/2005023/t/4054264-eng.htm
Teck Cominco (2002). 2001 Annual Report. Retrieved May 20th, 2010 from
http://www.teck.com/DocumentViewer.aspx?elementId=106165&portalName=tc
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2003). Freshwater in Europe: Facts, Figures
and Maps. Retrieved August 9, 2010 from
Page 109
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
http://www.grid.unep.ch/product/publication/freshwater_europe.php
UNEP (2009). Climate Change Science Compendium 2009. Nairobi: United Nations
Environment Programme.
US Energy Information Administration. Oil and Natural Gas Projections: Annual Energy Outlook
2010. Retrieved June 4, 2010 from www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/trend_4.pdf
US Department of Energy (2007). Solar Energy Technologies Program: Multi-Year Program
Plan 2007-2011. US Department of Energy. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
Vancouver Sun (2007). “Geothermal energy could meet half of BC’s electricity needs,
researcher says,” The Vancouver Sun. December 24, 2007. Retrieved July 8, 2010 from
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=cfbbf32d-4a3f-48d5-9b697ec6a82a3d5a
WBGU (German Advisory Council on Global Change) (2007). World in Transition – Climate
Change as a Security Risk. Earthscan: London.
Weare, Christopher (2003). The California Electricity Crisis: Causes and Policy Options. Public
Policy Institute, San Francisco CA.
Werner, Arelia, Katrina Bennett, Johanna Runnells, Rick Lee and David Rodenhuis and Brian
Menounos (2007). Preliminary Analysis of Climate Variability and Change in the Canadian
Columbia River Basin: Focus on Water Resources. Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium and
Columbia Basin Trust: Victoria BC.
Werner, A.T., and T.Q. Murdock (2010). Analytical Summary Past Trends and Future
Projections for the Kimberley and Elkford Region, Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium,
University of Victoria, Victoria BC
Western North Carolina Renewable Energy Initiative (2007). Fact Sheet: Microhydro.
Appalachian State University.
Wilbanks, T. J., et al., (2007). Executive Summary in Effects of Climate Change on Energy
Production and Use in the United States. A Report by the U.S. Climate Change Science
Program and the subcommittee on Global Change Research. Washington, DC.
Zumundo Consultants (2009). District of Elkford: Climate Change Adaptation Strategy. District
of Eklford. Elkford, BC.
Page 110
Communities Adapting to Climate Change Initiative
City of Rossland – Final Report
Zukiwsky, Jeff (2010). Risk and Vulnerability Assessment in the Climate Change Adaptation
Process, Webinar, March 25, 2010. Zumundo Consultants. Fernie, BC.
Zwicker, Andrew (2010). “Egg-cellent Opportunity Hatched after Inspector Scrambles
Unlicensed Sales,” The Rossland Telegraph (April 29, 2010).
http://rosslandtelegraph.com/node/5573 Retrieved 2010-05-06.
Page 111