label helps them appreciate that, that there are externalties. and bringing that externals in to that floor and it is we, and we argue is, in the essential part of changing people's attitude and beliefs so we can create the stronger price signals as you know, 2015, is greenhouse gas, transportation, and cap and trade and rules applied to the transportation. and so that is that. so the idea, the end result of the labels is to bring about this, and this term is cognitive, and it is making consumer dissatisfied with the current technology of what we are using now and creating greater demand for policy change for new technology for land use changes and better transit option and so on.

so, the idea is kind of set the stage for that type of thing. this is just another term it is about you know, changing the social context and the labels are out of the public relevant sxm they are changing the social context around the fossil in the society. and this is a canadian study on smoking labels, and as you can see, virtually everybody notices them, and they have read the label and they understood what it said and

they perhaps talked about it with somebody else and their meeting and that worked and that is social interaction is a key part of the campaign. and of actually talking about the climate change and talking about the issues like that. >> and so, but i, they, and it is the most important thing is how labels change policy and so this is a flowchart that we did for, you know, the and how, and this is a smoking label flowchart and so the labels have an interactive impact and so they changed and they were implemented in 1965, the first labels were implemented in 65, and just the whole anti-tobacco campaign started in 64 with the surgeon general, and that came in about 20 years of good, solid evidence, that smoking caused all kinds of health

problems and so, as you can see, and this interaction between policy, and attitudes and changing in behavior and all of them strengthen the behavior change as time went on and it is not just the label, and it is actually the effect on policy, and so the policy became more restrictive as the time went on and that helped to reinforce the behavior change and so this is what we are arguing here with this type of campaign. and it is to put it out into the social realm, and in order to instigate these broader policy changes, because it will be just a, and it will be complimentary to the price signals and so and on and so forth. >> that is it. >> thank you very much. >> anyone... did you have someone else from 350 or that

was it? >> that was it, yeah. >> okay. so, questions? >> commissioners? >> could i also say that a staff has bought some staff come up. >> that will be great. >> yeah. >> so bob, from our transportation program, and i asked him to think about the ordinance in the context of what we are doing and give you some thoughts on that. >> okay. >> we have had conversations with supervisor avalos's office, on this as being developed, and generally, our feeling is anything that is effective in getting people to realize their impact on climate change is effective and anything that we can do to help with a wake up call to achieve personal behavior change is positive. and specifically, with respect to transportation, anything that we could do to make it so that people realize that they

have choices other than automobiles, that are far less impactful on the climate change, is useful. and further, if they, do use automobiles that they have choices and the types of automobiles and the types of fuels that propel those automobiles. and so, one of the aspects of the ordinance as it was introduced by supervisor avalos, does direct people or in viet people to go to our website at the department of environment and the age of the website to get the further information and so that is useful and it is not a direct statement of trying or urging people to move into other forms of transportation, or cleaner vehicles, but it certainly puts them to the information source where they can easily find that information. but, a couple of, just specific more detailed and in some ways,

administrative points on the proposal, one of the aspects of the wording as it was introduced, is that it points out that almost 20 pounds of carbon dioxide are generated by burning fuel for a car. and that is certainly true, according to the epa records, in data. and in the california resources board data for petroleum fuel and i think that it is important for us to realize that if we have a specific number in an ordinance like this, it probably should either identify it as pet trol um feel or if we drop a number it makes it broad enough there that it applies to any types of fuel, even some that are cleaner like compressed natural gas and electricity for the evs

which have dramatically lower greenhouse gas emission component. the enforcement of the label and authorizes enforcement, i would app that there are other departments and agencies within the government, and the city government, that currently do have enforcement activists with gas stations, and are, and they have processes of doing inspections and we might want to think about that as a place where actually placing the enforcement or the activity it

is currently under 100 gas stations, and for the context for you somewhere between 70 and 90, and depending on which department records are correct. >> thank you for that, commissioners, questions? >> while we are thinking, maybe we have been thinking about it and for the staff time, and for going through a process of developing the actual rules to the extent that they would be needed for enforcing this and for coming up with the design of the graphics, for the labels

and for printing them. it is staff time and probably more than 60,000 and somewhere over 60,000, probably in the first year, >> and for the burning of fossil fuels. >> nothing that specifically addresses it this way, we have a great deal of out reach activities related to climate change, generally. but there is nothing aimed at

the vehicle users. i sympathize th the goals of this proposed ordinance and we should do everything that we can to reduce unnecessary driving, and reduce, co2, emissions and i have three concerns, the first is that i think that the label has too many words, have you to figure

out a way to community graphically and immediately and even if the people read it once, i don't believe that they are going to read it again. figure out how to use the message graphically in an interesting way so that the people will actually look at the label. the second i am concerned about what i wonder what thought you all had given of how to measure the efficacy of this effort if you go ahead with it, and we have seen, you know, smoking, numbers decrease. and here, there is a var sophisticated operation, and

distance that tracks who is smoking and what age they are, and that whole thing. give some thought about whether or not this is having a desired effect and where it is having the desired effect and who it is having the desired effect on. and to establish some kind of reporting element so that everybody will know the effort is accomplishing or is not, the desired goal which is to reduce, i guess, is it to reduce the purchase of gasoline or to reduce driving?

whatever it is, i think that it is important to figure out what it is and thing figure out how we are going to tell people and then just of all, and what bob said about the enforcement, i do think that if this is worth doing, it is worth funding, the agency that is going to be charged with developing the program, and enforcing it rather than asking a department to do with their spare time and their, you know, their spare staff. if this is going to work it needs to are very carefully thought out and in consultation with graphic artist and clearly i have talked to some and there needs to be some kind of a reporting and recording component as i have said, thank

you. >> did you want to ask if any of the speakers could answer those questions? >> yes, have you thought about the reporting component and have you thought about funding the agency, and what kind of thought have you given to really very few words on this sign, and just, you know, griping picture. >> great, we have thought about simplifying the language and working through the ideas and one possible, shorter version that we have come up with is the u.s. environmental protection agency has determined that burning fuel contributes to the global warming and the combat warming to go to sfclimate.org. >> and it is shorter >> i have heard the feedback that it should include the

carbon dioxide that contribute to global warming. and so, yeah, i think that it is something along those things and the longer message that we had in there, and definitely like the ideas of the graphics and we appreciate the graphs and that 350 that came up with the co2 cloud, and yeah, and interested in any other ideas, of the folks had to measure effectiveness, have the folks go out to the gas pump and interview them and have you seen the signs and think of them once a year or six months or so and that could be a way to gauge, effectiveness, and yeah, definitely, i like to give that more thought and hear

any other thoughts that the folks have about the good way to measure how these things are working. and yeah, i mean, enforcement, absolutely, i think that if we are going to do this, like you said we want to be sure that we are doing it in the way that is going to be effective and going to be enforced, and i believe that the burkely city council proposal was to have a passive and enforcing model that you would not have the inspect are going around the station its would be a complaint-driven, enforcement process and if someone saw a gas pump that did not have a label on it, they could call in and file a complaint, and mr. hayden referenced the departments that have the regular contact with the gas stations and the, department of public works, and the fire department, and apparently, carry out the regular inspections of the gas station and so they might be a better department to house the enforcement mechanism and we have not approached them yet and that will have to be the conversations to carry and i think that would be a way to

add it to the regular duties without having to reinvent the wheel >> so i think that it is fas tas tick and i think that the cognitive processing that you were talking to us about is exactly what the issue is on a lot of these things, consistent, daily small, recognizable, you know, reinforcements, of matter a lot, especially when you are talking about the climate change and repeating the conversation over and over again, matters a lot. and i share commissioner wald's concerns about the language and the way that this is articulated. and a prior life, i ran a business that this is what we did every single day, five days a week, we sent out a little note to people to how to be more green in the day-to-day life and through the five years, i learned a lot about 20

pounds of co2 means nothing to me, but if you can articulate that in a way that is unfortunately racking my brain through this information for an example, it is hard and because a lot of times the examples are if you do this it is the same as taking x-cars off of the roads which does not translate to this very well at all. and i feel like there needs to be some around that piece, 20 pounds is nice, but we don't understand it when it comes to co2. and the third thing was that

speaking in second person and puts them in the situation and sources and footnotes and i don't think if this flies for the city stuff like this, but we mentioned the epa twice and no one cares where the data is coming from unless they are going to go down and read the fine print and you might as well throw it into the fine print and put the gist of the message up front and who it came from later. the icon needs to be incretibly compelling, and as just another point, and another example on this, my 3-year-old loves the chevron cars and loves them, you have a lot to go up against. and so you know, there are years and years and years of you know getting to see fun

things on the other side and so i think that making it as compelling of an icon as possible is important. and finally, offering an alternative action, in an easy manner. is imperative and you need to do this and you need to use your light bulb less often if you don't give an option to make the life easy or easier they are not going to do it. >> i don't think that asking someone to get in the car and write down a url is not a good option and i think that we put, and i know that people are looking on one side of the pump with the label hanging down and i want to commend that if that could be the place to go and

get the information on cycling and the safe streets and there should be something else that i can do that makes me feel empowered as opposed to just, preach to you a little bit. so, those are my areas, and that is my long list of feedback and i do, in spite of all of that, i think that this is genius, because this is exactly the kind of thing that makes the feel think about something that daily we are just doing this and plugging this into our car, and we are not thinking about it and over all the idea is fantastic and i would just like to see the expression done in a simpler way. >> i hope that you got all of that down. >> it is a valuable suggestion. >> just a couple of it. >> and first i echo the guarding the key messaging and i think that it has to be day-to-day and how the people impact the life just like the commissioner, stephenson says that it does not matter so that

the people of about 20 pounds and that they have no understanding of what it translates into the daily life and the other questions is any of these message be transmitted to the different languages because of the diversity of the city and i think that it needs to be translated out of the major languages that most people use in san francisco and also i want to ask if there will be any public awareness campaign before we launch this labeling on this. and so that the people get educated and understand why we are doing it and what the story is behind it. >> and sorry that i did not have the time to read the entire brochure. and that does include the other ways that you can reduce your gas use and i think that it is valuable and those things should be made available. and as it was already said and the people need to know what the alternatives not just what you are about to put a bunch of gas in your car and you are bad and at that point you have your

credit card out and you have the gap off and you are going to say that oh, my gosh i am going to drive away and not buy gas toetd that is not going to happen, and sometimes i am questioning whether this particular the point of sale is a good place to educate people because they can stop and go home and not buy the cell phone or whatever, the electric knife sharpener, or whatever they were about to buy, how many people are going to change their behavior at that point, i don't know, i do wonder if that is on the bus, by riding the bus you will put x-amount of co2, but i agree that the pounds, i know what 20 pounds of oranges is, because i have carried them, but 20 pounds of

co2 is hard for me to imagine, and maybe a little more thought to not necessarily other place to put these labels instead of at the gas station or to begin to launch a broader campaign, where a consistent logo and a consistent message is put in other places besides hanging off of the nozzle or the hose. and it might help, and be more effective and then in the ten days to reduce the gas use, as i read this i am constantly seeing and reinforcing the idea that i do own a car and that i am being asked not to drive it as much and something that my fellow commissioners have heard me rant about and i apologize, but instead of saying, make sure that your next car gets better miles per gallon, how about make sure that your next car if you really need one, gets better miles per gallon, next time that you move or buy a house, find a place close to transit or consider an apartment or condo that does not have a garage because you don't need one, or consider one

that was a car sharing pod instead of private parking spaces, think about car rentals, when traveling look for the highest fuel efficient vehicle, well, maybe, if you don't own a car, you are not going to use a car rental, when you travel you might use it to buy groceries and so i just like the folks to rethink all of this with an eye towards trying to reduce car ownership. and not just vehicle miles traveled regardless of whether those vehicle miles are buy electric car or gasoline car and any way that is my soap box for now. >> and any more commissioner comments before we open it up. commissioner stephenson? >> some of the questions, could we have the different labels for the different fuel types? stead of trying to reduce the over all number to make it work

for everything? >> you are saying like a different label for the diesel verses gasoline? >> yes. >> yeah, i suppose that would be up to the policy makers to decide what the best way to do it was and i think that eyer original thinking was simpler was easier and better to have just one label so that we can save on the printing cost and design costs and confusion, but, yeah, i think that is a decision for the policy makers to decide, if you want to have the specific customized labels for each of the fuel types. >> we don't have that many, that would be a a little better. one thing that i just wanted to jot down this is something along these lines and each gallon of this fuel that you use, produces an average of whatever, we say that the thing is, 20 pounds of, and co2, the

gap, and something as simple as that and with the food note of the epa and it is talking to me, right? and i am doing something. yes, go ahead. >> and so, wow, heather you are really inspiring me and those are great, great ideas and they bring up one of the point that i just want to talk about with funding, is that it is great to think about the capacities but the big cost to the department is in designing this thing, and many of you have said, and rightly so that this needs to be part of a bigger campaign and there are dollars on that too. donny, can you talk about, how would we, and where would we

fit this in do we have grants? how would we do this? >> what i think they ought to do. >> how could we do it? >> great, the department of the environment, and so we are looking at the opportunity to commissioner stephenson point that we really want to leverage and continue to make it a repetitive asset, right? and added to other campaigns and so we have been looking at, and the bigger pictures, and the climate related and the communication through the ambassador trainings and through the grant program that we are running, and any time that we can tap into the climate change and the impacts that every action have and every action and every day, to

because right now we don't have the funds that are directly associated does that make sense? >> it doesn't mean that we would not get the funding, it is just that we were and if there was not funding associated we would have to write a grant to do it, because there is nothing in our funding right now, it is not that we are not willing to write a grant, i would love to write a grant but it is not guaranteed. the questions for jeremy and the picture that we all really liked of the tag and it looked like it had a hard, metal or a

plastic sleeve, or something that the thought that at service station woulds pay for that, it is not in the ordinance. >> that is a point that we are open to the discussion on what is the best way to go about it and the plastic sleeve, i guess that it is called a hose talker and it is the standard size and you know, distributers and they carry them and i think that as the ordinance is written, the department of the environment role would just be to provide the guidelines on the label and it would be up to the stations themself to provide them. and yeah, i think, yeah, happy to work with you all on what you think is the best way to implement that is, and yeah. if it would be to provide the labels or just give them minutes up to them to put them on themselves, so yeah. >> thank you. >> and just the point of information that the question of visualizing and