House Speaker Mitzi Johnson, D-South Hero, addressing the full House over Zoom during the 2020 legislative session.
By Guy Page
Republicans in Grand Isle County bought a full page ad in the Sept. 23-29 issue of The Islander, a local community newspaper, accusing local representative and House Speaker Mitzi Johnson of preparing the way for a climate tax — despite a petition in opposition signed by 860 constituents.
The ad appears on page 9 and is entitled “The Global Warming Solutions Act. – GWSA”. Paid for by the Grand Isle County/West Milton Republicans, it urges voters to support GOP challengers Leland Morgan (an incumbent) and Mike Morgan, who are running against Democrat incumbent Johnson and challenger Andy Julow.
The ad notes:
- Speaker Johnson led the effort to override Gov. Phil Scott’s veto of H688, the Global Warming Solutions Act
- The GWSA establishes and requires taxpayers to pay per diem costs for an unelected, 23-person Climate Council and subcommittees to set and implement carbon-reducing policies without further legislation.
- 860 Grand Isle residents signed a petition opposing a carbon tax.
Furthermore, the ad claims that the Climate Council will recommend carbon pricing.
“Make no mistake,” the ad says, “the first recommendation by the 23-member council will be to implement a carbon tax (carbon pricing); disguised as a fee or surcharge because only the Legislature can raise taxes.”
“Ms. Jenn Wood wrote in The Islander last week that Maine, New York, Massachusetts and Connecticut have passed similar laws to the GWSA,” the ad says. It notes that all of these states are pursuing carbon pricing. “Don’t pretend a carbon tax will not be a top recommendation by the Council, because it will! Rep. Mitzi Johnson has found a way to ignore 860 of her constituents and implement a carbon tax without it being called one.”
“She must think we are ignorant,” the ad says. “Let’s stop this back-door political strategizing, and allowing special interest groups to write state law filled with regulations and mandates and let’s vote for change. We need Common Sense in Montpelier.”
During discussion of Vermont’s membership in the multi-state carbon pricing initiative, the Transportation Climate Initiative, there was uncertainty about whether a TCI assessment of 5-18 cents at the gas pump would require legislative approval. Both legislative and executive leaders said that a Vermont-based tax or fee would require legislative approval. However, it was also suggested that other states could unilaterally impose a fee on Vermont consumers by assessing “carbon pollution costs” on regional wholesale fuel dealers of gasoline and on-road diesel fuel.
At his press conference today, Gov. Scott would not comment specifically on the Climate Council imposing carbon pricing, but did say it will have wide, almost unlimited latitude. “That’s why I vetoed it, from a constitutional standpoint,” he said. “A 23-person council that is unaccountable in some respects, they could impose almost anything, from our perspective. I think they have a lot of latitude. The legislature abdicated their power and gave it to this council. They could do almost anything.”
This reporter has reached out to Speaker Johnson for comment. An email was received Tuesday afternoon, after the initial post and email was published. The following is Speaker Johnson’s response, printed verbatim:
Planning, strategy, and accountability:
This Global Warming Solutions Act is about building reliance and preventing economic disruption due to weather change that is already happening. The change is already visible to key rural sectors: all agricultural sectors, ski industry and the winter tourism that depends on winter conditions, and water temperature and algae bloom which affects our ecology as well as our summer tourism.
No taxes:
The bill does not create a carbon tax. The bill does not ban any activities. The council cannot raise taxes, spend money on its own, or pass legislation. Those constitutional powers remain with the legislature. There’s no way around that. Nor should there be.
Job creation and keeping money in Vermont:
This is an opportunity to create jobs in weatherization, building trades, sustainable energy and critical solutions. It means we keep more dollars in state helping local businesses. Reducing emissions also means Vermonters save money on heating and transportation costs.
The Climate Council:
It’s a diverse group representing climate scientists, rural communities, fuel industry, small businesses, environmental groups, transportation, farmers and foresters, manufacturers, youth, low-income Vermonters, towns, and others. Led by the Governor’s cabinet, they will create a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions per the Paris Climate Accord, a long-time statutory goal shared by 25 states. At some point the U.S. will rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement. This makes sure that Vermont isn’t left behind.
It narrows, not expands, a right to sue:
Citizens and groups can already sue the state. This bill removes the ability to sue for damages. It allows people to hold their government accountable in the courts. And there is no basis for a lawsuit if the state holds to the basic standards.
“We believe maintaining this commitment and the U.S. leadership on climate change is the right action for the protection of our children, grandchildren and future generations.” remarked Gov Scott when the U.S. parted ways with 187 countries and pulled out of the Paris Climate Accord. But he has not taken action. Vermont is the only regional state with increasing emissions. We must act. We need leaders who understand climate science, realize the local impact of global warming, and are committed to implementing solutions that work for our communities and for our future.
Read more of Guy Page’s reports. Vermont Daily is sponsored by True North Media.
Just an ordinary citizen’s take on this: If our personal property taxes are a portent of the direction in which we are heading — I would like to share that mine went up $1,000 in one year this year! I am a middle-class, native Vermonter. Will I soon have to choose whether to eat or pay my taxes? These elitist and virtue-signaling Democrats and Progressives are implementing the UN Global Warming Agenda while disguising it under a different name. The UN Climate Change Conference of 1992 is behind this. The globalists have reached their tyrannical fingers all the way down into little Vermont and our Legislature. We are being ruled, not governed. The will of the people is being ignored. The elitists in Montpelier are bent on controlling every aspect of our lives in the name of saving the planet — while they live their lives of privilege in the rarified air above us. Just who are they representing?? Their Utopian goals cannot be met while still following the Constitutions of both Vermont and the U.S.A. Their decrees will be forced into every aspect of our lives. Mitzi is lying to us. She hands out platitudes and soothing words from the novel 1984. She and the rest of the folks in the Vermont Legislature know they have put the thumbscrews to Vermonters. Just wait until they start to turn them. That is why they voted away their Constitutional authority to make law and turned it over to an unelected Commission — thus allowing their climate tyranny to be able to be blamed on the Commission while insulating themselves from the results of their ill-thought-out Utopian policies. There is no accountability. They did this to us during the pandemic via Zoom meetings. Where were the open public hearings? Where was citizen testimony and input? Where was the honesty? Mitzi Johnson does not bother with her constituents. She doesn’t return phone calls or answer letters or emails from the vast majority of us. Did she call for open town meetings to hear what we Islanders had to say to her about the GWSA? No, she simply could not do that openly because — don’t you know — there was a pandemic going on. This is an appalling example of misrule, taking advantage of the pandemic to pass this behind our backs. Our legislators are supposed to serve we the people. Who are they serving? Themselves and the elite globalists? America’s Founding Fathers hated Commissions because the kings and lords of England used Commissions to tyrannize the people. They were arbitrary and unaccountable, as they were not elected. That is why there are no Commissions authorized in the U.S. Constitution. There was a good reason why not. THAT is what our Legislature just did to us. They abdicated their Constitutional authority to make law and rules, and turned it over to an unelected Commission, thus leaving their constituents no recourse when the taxes and control continue to increase, and the rules strangle our liberty and our economy. Vote these petty tyrants out! Seems to me this is a Constitutional misstep that begs for (1) A lawsuit; and (2) Change in the makeup of the Legislature. The super-majority is out of control. They are not listening to the people!
I wrote to every senator who voted for H.688 and asked them to sign a pledge to never use air travel of any kind for the rest of their lives. After all – we have a crisis on our hands and must act now. You know what Vermonters? YOU must act now – they don’t have to do anything. You know what I got? Crickets. If any one of those fools believed ONE WORD they say about the imminent dangers we face with climate change – I don’t think it would be too much of a stretch for them to give up the single biggest contributor of carbon emissions. They are a bunch of hypocrites. Each and every one of them who voted for this nonsense need to be VOTED OUT!.
GWSA is here. If Scott can’t stop it with a lawsuit, WE ARE ALL SCREWED!
SR,
Here are some numbers to show you the impact of the SCREWING TO COME.
GWSA-REQUIRED GROSS EMISSION REDUCTIONS AND COSTS; THREE PHASES
The below CO2 emissions reductions for Phases 1, 2, and 3 are based on the VT-CEP mandated goals.
The Phase 1 turnkey capital cost estimate is based on the various measures listed in the EAN report. See URL
https://www.eanvt.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/EAN-report-2020-final.pdf
According to the EAN plan, the measures would reduce CO2 from 9.76, in 2016 to 7.46, in 2025, a reduction of 2.28 MMt.
The turnkey capital cost of the EAN measures would be about $9.25 billion. See table 1.
Because the CO2 reduction of Phase 1 is “only” 1.56 MMT, the turnkey capital cost of Phase 1 (using the EAN plan as a basis) would be about 1.56/2.28 x $9.25 billion = $6.32 billion.
However, it gets a lot worse, because the EAN analysis was based on faulty assumptions, which grossly overstated the CO2 reduction of electric vehicles and of heat pumps. As a result, many more EVs and HPs would be required to achieve the EAN reductions.
The “adjusted” turnkey capital cost would become about $13.70 billion. See table 1.
Should we expect less, after all she refers to herself as Vermont’s “Nancy Pelosi”
Follow the money to see who the GWSA benefits. Think VPIRG, Conservation Law Foundation, Sun-Common (among others), Bittersdorf, et. al.; All of whom support the Progressive Democrat Party financially.
It is long past due that Speaker Mitzi Johnson be sent packing since she does not represent her constituents but rather is firmly attached to the teat of the Progressive donor class.
If liberal Dems are so hot about reducing CO2 in the atmosphere, why aren’t they driving electric vehicles, heating and cooling their houses with heat pumps, giving up propane barbecue grills, and jet travel? Is it, do as we say not as we do? They could give up their lake yachts for electric boats or sailboats, or ride electric motorcycles.
Isn’t leadership about leading by example? Declarative governing produces autocrats.
Tax and regulate … one way rye other you folks in VT are going to get a carbon tax… it not a matter of if… it’s a matter of when. Let that sink in when your considering your future domicile
Google says that Grand Isle has 2,067 residents. Working with round numbers, let’s assume that these residents are all voters and that 1/3 of them will not or cannot vote. That leaves about 1,300 residents that can vote. If just the 860 residents that signed the anti-GWSA petition vote against Ms. Johnson, she gets to stay home for at least two years.
Grand Isle voters, please think about the tremendous service that you will be doing for the entire State of Vermont if you keep Ms. Johnson home. For all our sakes, please make what ever effort it takes to keep Ms. Johnson in her home and not in our House.
Here, here 😀
Amen!!!!!
GWSA 23-Member Council
The Council likely would be the sole decider how hundreds of millions of $dollars would be spent, each year, for decades, with no relief ever, because:
The Council make-up would include:
1) Eight Government Secretaries and Commissioners
2) Eight members appointed by the Speaker of the House
3) Seven members appointed by the “Committee on Committees”, C of C
The members of the C of C are the Lt Governor, Senate president pro tem, and a “third member” elected by the Senate
See URL
https://legiscan.com/VT/text/H0688/2019
The Governor’s Secretary of Administration would be the Chairman.
He/she has the power to call meetings.
If he/she delays calling meetings, any 12 of 23 members could call a meeting.
NOTE: The Governor would have only 8 votes, plus may be a few more, but likely not 5, i.e., the Governor could not override the 12 members calling a meeting.
The action sequence would be as follows:
Council would approve plans.
VT Agency of Natural Resources, ANR, would write rules to implement plans,
Council would approve rules
Approved rules sent to the Governor’s Interagency Committee on Administrative Rules, ICAR
ICAR is composed of Governor Appointees
ICAR can reject the rules, i.e., the Governor can stop the process.
What happens next likely would be lawsuits
Any entity, such as the Conservation Law Foundation, could sue the state, if Council decisions would not reduce CO2 in accordance with GSWA/CEP goals.
Legislators and Other Vermonters Disenfranchised
If mandated goals are not attained, there would be mandated financial penalties, prohibitions (you shall do this; you shall not do that), fees and surcharges
If the Council would decide to impose the equivalent of a carbon tax, so be it.
Legislators would not be allowed to vote on any plan, or any proposed rules.
Legislators would not be voting on GWSA-related financial penalties, prohibitions, and increases in fees and surcharges.
Legislators, and the people who voted for them, would be disenfranchised.
Legislators would be “off-the-hook”.
GWSA Likely is Unconstitutional
On the face of it, GWSA has to be unconstitutional, because the Governor, and his administration, and Legislators, appear to have no effective say in any Council decisions.
Such extremism could only come about due to the present, veto-proof control by Dem/Progs.
This is Centralized Command and Control.
It has nothing to do with Democracy.
GWSA-Required Gross Emissions Reductions and Cost
Phase 1
26%+ below 2005, i.e., (1 – 0.27) x 10.22 = 7.46 MMt, by Jan. 1, 2025, to “meet Paris”
The Council would take about a year to develop plans, which means most of 2021 would have elapsed before any action.
The actual CO2 reduction would be from 9.02, at end 2018 (latest numbers) to 7.46, Jan. 1, 2025, or 1.56 MMt, during the years 2022, 2023, and 2024, effectively a 3-y period.
The turnkey capital cost would be about $6.32 billion
The CO2 reduction appears to be a physical and financial impossibility.
See table 1A and Note.
NOTE:
The EAN plan (see below) lists the measures required to reduce CO2 from 9.76, in 2016 to 7.46, in 2025, for a reduction of 2.28 MMt.
That CO2 reduction has an estimated capital cost of at least $9.25 billion. See table 1
The estimated capital cost of Phase 1 would be about 1.56/2.28 x $9.25 billion = $6.32 billion.
NOTE:
Unfortunately, the EAN plan is based on flawed analyses, as shown below.
EAN would need many more heat pumps and electric vehicles to achieve its CO2 reductions
The turnkey capital cost would increase to at least $13.5 billion. See table 1A
Phase 1 capital cost would increase to 1.56/2.28 x $13.5 billion = $9.24 billion, during the years 2022, 2023, and 2024, effectively a 3-y period.
Phase 2
40%+ below 1990, i.e., (1 – 0.40) x 8.59 = 5.15 MMt, by Jan. 1, 2030
The CO2 reduction would be 7.46, Jan 1, 2025 – 5.15, Jan. 1, 2030 = 2.31 MMt, during the 5-y period
Phase 3
80%+ below 1990, i.e., (1 – 0.80) x 8.59 = 1.72 MMt, by January 1, 2050
The CO2 reduction would be 5.15, Jan. 1, 2030 – 1.72, Jan. 1 2050 = 3.43 MMt, during the 20-y period
Willem,
I really want to know where you are getting these numbers and phases from. Do you know someone inside the government? Is all of this published somewhere? How can the State of VT or this commission mandate (if you buy your heating oil and propane from a solely NH business) another state business to follow your state regulations if they are not written into law? I am very curious and am on your side but I want to know where you get all this info.
Thanks.
kc
To one of your points – purchasing fuel out of state. The only way the to herd all VTers and businesses into the corral is to implement a tracking system. Don Keelan just did a piece on this and interestingly was slammed by one of the authors of Marxist inspired GWSA Laura Sibellius who flat out called him a liar and also slammed TNR for failing to “factcheck” lol:
Keelan: A government within a government
TNR / 7 days ago By Don Keelan
“…The subcommittee will be charged with finding out exactly how much fossil fuel every Vermonter over the age of 16 consumes in the base year; in this case, it is 2020. This accounting will be accomplished by filing with the subcommittee a signed, sworn application.
In turn, the committee’s staff will provide the consumer with a plastic-coated card, known as a Fossil Fuel Consumption Card (FFCC), about the size of a credit card. This card will enable the cardholder to buy their previously approved quantity of fossil fuel for the year. No gas station, fuel delivery firm, or any fossil fuel outlet will be allowed to dispense fuel without imprinting the consumer’s
card.”
http://www.truenorthreports.com/keelan-a-government-within-a-government
As to the will be using cards imho as has been implemented elsewhere.
Looks like when filing “our papers” we may need to document fuel purchases or be disallowed that portion. I do not understand enforcement mechanism but swearing to the amount of fuel needed can only represent possible criminal charges for any use of fugitive fuels.
Crossposted from story:
From story – Ms. Sibilia:…”it was surprising to realize he’d simply written outright falsehoods without caveat and that the column had not been fact checked prior to publishing. Commenters here have not read the bill (H.688). Commenters may want to question whether their trust in TrueNorth to provide accurate information is deserved.”
No I for one question your veracity as well as honesty – as a Democrat call me unsurprised.
Umm – wrong again. And how do you know what was read or factchecked? That’s right – you clearly don’t as evidenced by your puposefully deceptive wildly inaccurate comment(s). Not the first time you’ve pulled partisan silly stunts. Nothing better to do than make stuff up and attack the writers here who inform us as opposed to the disinformation supplied by the likes of you and your stenographers aka the mainstream media here in VT.
– Cap and Adapt: A Failsafe Approach to the Climate Emergency
By Larry Edwards, Stan Cox, originally published by Resilience.org
August 28, 2019
“…Rationing allowances will be in units of volume or weight of fuel, not dollars or relative carbon content. Individuals will have rationing smart-cards, automatically credited with fresh allowances every week, and then debited when making purchases. ”
https://www.resilience.org/stories/2019-08-28/cap-and-adapt-a-failsafe-approach-to-the-climate-emergency/
***Of note – above article is current but a year old and directly related to implementation of GND. But you expect us to believe you of all ppl knew nothing???
Pants on fire much *again* Ms. Sibilia lol And – yet another one of your brazenly bald lies. You’re too late – Germany has been using cards to ration and track fossil fuel consumption for a very long time.
— The German government asked the U.S Forces in Germany to change from fuel coupons to an automated fuel ration card…Fuel Cards are required for all privately owned vehicles and for all U.S. Government non-tactical vehicles.
— Sponsors or spouses must bring their US POV registration certificate (AE Form 190-1A) the one of the following Exchange facilities for fuel ration card issue and activation.
https://www.aafes.com/exchange-stores/overseas/germany-fuel-ration/issue.htm
— There’s a ration card in your future – and that’s not all bad
There is a need to impose a strict and low ceiling on consumption of fossil fuels while ensuring fair access to them.
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2012/12/1/theres-a-ration-card-in-your-future-and-thats-not-all-bad/
— Card with animated home consumption for Home Assistant Lovelace UI
This is a repo with Home Assistant custom ui card animated-consumption-card.
This card shows a simple animation how much resources your house is consuming:
https://github.com/bessarabov/animated-consumption-card
A socially and environmentally just way to fight climate change
…The money collected — every penny — is distributed as a dividend to all legal residents…every month in your bank account, or on a debit card if you have no bank.
https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/515624-a-socially-and-environmentally-just-way-to-fight-climate-change
Soo – you’ve never heard of ‘cards’ Ms. Sibilia – uh huh. You owe an apology to Mr. Keelan but pretty sure you’ll come up with a pile of qualifiers and other misleading excuses or just skulk off when proven wrong as you’ve done in the past.
Correction:
As to how we will be tracked cards have been used elsewhwere. We may be required to have out-of-state fuel dealers somehow sign off on purchase.
Kc,
Go to my below comment
“Mitzi Johnson is an extreme leftist.“
You will see a URL.
Read the article, which has a large number of URL references
The article explains the Phases, the flawed EAN plan and analysis, based on bogus numbers.
I have about 40 years of energy systems analysis and design experience, and education to match.
Very few people pull the wool over my eyes.
Typically, EAN, and other such self-serving entities, misrepresent reality.
I am very surprised VT-DPS is complicit with EAN regarding using bogus numbers for the electrical sector, to make heat pumps and Electric Vehicles look “extra good”
It is sheer chicanery perpetrated on Vermonters, most of them are lay people/babes in the woods regarding energy systems.
Mitzi Gaynor is smart
Wants to be Nancy Pelosi?
Tear up Scott’s speeches?
There is not a prayer in the world she would achieve that.
For one, Mitzi would need much better hairdos
For two, Mitzi would need designer clothes with matching masks.
Anytime money is extracted from the private sector by government, invariably most of it wasted.
This due to bureaucrats not having any business sense.
They are not evil people.
They do mean well.
But somehow the outcome of their programs is underwhelming, and the funds to get such minimal results are exorbitant.
Just look at all the energy programs Vermont has.
The net result of them has been an INCREASE IN CO2 over at least 20 years, after spending $billions of dollars over these years.
A similar cast of characters want to DOUBLE DOWN to spend tens $billion dollars and likely will have another measly outcome.
The best government, is the least government
It would be nice, if Mitzi Johnson said upfront, GWSA is a hoax, because there is no way Vermont can find and implement any global warming SOLUTION.
It is sheer misguided HUTZPAH to even think along those lines.
A few years ago, some know-nothing folks were advocating Vermont to be ENERGY INDEPENDENT.
For starters,
Vermont would have to disconnect from the NE grid.
Vermont would no longer import any goods.
ALL GOODS would have to be made with local materials and local energy.
The absurdity of the idea must have sank in, because no pro-independence dreamer is again proposing Vermont becomes energy independent
Mitzi Johnson is an extreme leftist.
She is glad GWSA passed, because she is brain-washed mind thinks the 23-member Vermont Council will think up SOLUTIONS regarding global warming.
She must aware, Vermont is just a flea on an elephant’s rear.
She must be aware, the GWSA law will benefit only the RE companies, because demand of their products and services will be MANDATED FOR DECADES.
Here is an example of turnkey capital cost of Phase 1 (CO2 reduction to at least 26% below 2005), which is to be completed by January 1, 2025.
Excerpt from this article.
Make sure to read the entire article to get the complete picture.
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/vermont-s-global-warming-solutions-act-a-disaster-in-the-making
GWSA-Required Gross Emissions Reductions and Cost
Phase 1
26%+ below 2005, i.e., (1 – 0.27) x 10.22 = 7.46 MMt, by Jan. 1, 2025, to “meet Paris”
The Council would take about a year to develop plans, which means most of 2021 would have elapsed before any action.
The actual CO2 reduction would be from 9.02, at end 2018 (latest numbers) to 7.46, Jan. 1, 2025, or 1.56 MMt, during the years 2022, 2023, and 2024, effectively a 3-y period.
The turnkey capital cost would be about $6.32 billion
The CO2 reduction appears to be a physical and financial impossibility.
See table 1A and Note.
NOTE:
The EAN plan (see below) lists the measures required to reduce CO2 from 9.76, in 2016 to 7.46, in 2025, for a reduction of 2.28 MMt.
That CO2 reduction has an estimated capital cost of at least $9.25 billion. See table 1
The estimated capital cost of Phase 1 would be about 1.56/2.28 x $9.25 billion = $6.32 billion.
NOTE:
Unfortunately, the EAN plan is based on flawed analyses, as shown below.
EAN would need many more heat pumps and electric vehicles to achieve its CO2 reductions
The turnkey capital cost would increase to at least $13.5 billion. See table 1A
Phase 1 capital cost would increase to 1.56/2.28 x $13.5 billion = $9.24 billion, during the years 2022, 2023, and 2024, effectively a 3-y period.
Phase 2
40%+ below 1990, i.e., (1 – 0.40) x 8.59 = 5.15 MMt, by Jan. 1, 2030
The CO2 reduction would be 7.46, Jan 1, 2025 – 5.15, Jan. 1, 2030 = 2.31 MMt, during the 5-y period
Phase 3
80%+ below 1990, i.e., (1 – 0.80) x 8.59 = 1.72 MMt, by January 1, 2050
The CO2 reduction would be 5.15, Jan. 1, 2030 – 1.72, Jan. 1 2050 = 3.43 MMt, during the 20-y period
A RATIONAL ALTERNATIVE FOR VERMONT INSTEAD OF GWSA
California: California has had a GWSA law since 2006, which resulted in:
– Rapid increases of electric rates and gasoline prices
– Huge DUCK-curves, due to midday solar electricity surges
– Unwise/untimely/political/ideological shutdown of gas plants, which resulted in rolling blackouts, when, during a multi-day heat wave, solar disappearing in late-afternoon/early-evening (DURING PEAK HOURS), and not reappearing until mid-morning THE NEXT DAY, while all that time wind was minimal.
– A host of rules, regulations, taxes, fees and surcharges, and penalties to enforce behavior modification programs
With high levels of weather-dependent wind and solar, huge storage (multiple TWh) would be required.
That storage would cost several trillion dollars, if materials could be found to build such capacity. It would need to cover:
1) Single and multi-day heat waves over large areas
2) Wind/solar lulls throughout the year, as frequently occur in New England
3) Short-term and seasonal variations.
The ADDITIONAL environmental impact on millions of acres with wind and solar systems, would be enormous all over the US.
It would be much better to build millions of PASSIVHAUS-style buildings all over the US.
They would need only 1/3 the energy of the current energy hogs.
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-vagaries-of-solar-in-new-england
http://www.truenorthreports.com/welcome-to-hell-says-california-policy-expert-where-global-warming-solutions-act-passed-in-2006
Vermont: For Vermont, the only thing that makes any sense is to stop “emulating” California.
Vermont should immediately scrap GWSA, and concentrate on:
1) Energy conservation
2) Energy efficiency
3) Building net-zero-energy, and energy-surplus houses and other buildings, by the thousands, each year. See Appendix
4) Provide incentives to buy vehicles that get more than 35 mpg, EPA combined; the more above the limit, the greater the incentive.
5) Charge annual fees, paid at time of registration, on existing and new vehicles that get less than 25 mpg, EPA combined; the more below the limit, the greater the fee.
The above 4 items would save money for Vermonters, and make the state economy more competitive
Most of the other energy measures are just expensively subsidized hogwash and behavior modifications that would not make one iota of difference regarding climate change.
But nobody wants to move here – they are all moving out. The state is taking our tax dollars and trying to pay people to move here – I looked into it and it could be as high as $10K if you have the kind of job they want to bring here: a remote job that has zero footprint in VT other than you and your computer. And for people like me, I get zero incentives to go solar. No rebates for my income level even though I would very much want to go solar; however I would not give it back to the grid, I would keep for my use because when the power goes out I have no water.
Grand Isle voters, don’t you understand she’s following an agenda and your
concerns or wishes just don’t matter as Liberal Democrats have control of
the state house and Mitzi ” Trust Fund ” Johnson controls the House !!!!
Grand Isle voters, you have a chance to vote her out this year, make your vote count.