City of Seattle officials like to claim they are showing "leadership" on climate change. To bolster that image, the city recently released a report showing progress in cutting carbon emissions. The Seattle Times reported, "Seattle’s greenhouse-gas emissions are on a downward trend, dropping 6 percent between 2008 and 2014 despite a building boom and 13 percent surge in population, according to a report released Wednesday by the city’s Office of Sustainability and Environment."

These claims of success help justify and expand the current policy approach, subsidizing a range of government programs and limits on transportation in the city.

A close look at the numbers, however, show that Seattle's emissions numbers are mostly a result of poor economic times, not successful policy. Here are some of the problems with the report.

Celebrating the Great Recession

The city chose 2008 as the starting point for its analysis. That just happens to be the year when the city's greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) peaked. After that, emissions fell dramatically due to the economic downturn. For purposes of cutting GHGs, the Great Recession is portrayed as a good thing.

This becomes more clear when the 2014 numbers are compared to the city's first GHG inventory in 2005. Since 2005, Seattle has reduced its total GHG emissions by only three percent, half the rate since 2008. Put simply, the Great Recession, not policy, dominates the numbers.

Global Warming is the Cure for Global Warming

On the other end, 2014 was a warm year, that "reduced heating needs," in the words of the report. The report notes that weather accounts for 20 percent of the total reductions between 2008 and 2014.

Seattle vs. The National Average - A 91 Cent Difference

City officials frequently highlight Seattle's "leadership" on climate policy. Jessica Finn Coven, the Director of Seattle's Office of Sustainability and Environment, introduces the GHG inventory by noting, "with strong political leadership from our mayor and engaged community," the city is in "a great position to drive innovate [sic] and ambitious climate action."

The numbers, however, show that Seattle is doing about the same as the nation as a whole.

From 2005 to 2014, Seattle reduced per capita GHG emissions by 17.5 percent, according to the report. During that same time, data from the Energy Information Administration shows the U.S. reduced emissions by 16.3 percent per capita, despite lacking a comprehensive climate policy.

How significant is that difference? If Seattle had reduced emissions at the same rate as the nation, that would have amounted to a 91 cent difference in CO2 reduction per Seattle resident per year using California's carbon reduction price. Put another way, this amounts to 0.03% of the city's non-utility budget.

Ultimately, even the city admits it isn’t on track to meet its self-imposed goals. Unfortunately, to fix that the city proposes many of the same costly policies that failed to make a significant impact during the last decade. As long as city officials are fixed in that mindset, we shouldn't expect the city's next report will show much improvement on the current trend.