McClaughry: Weatherization savings without taxpayer money

By John McClaughry

A report by Emma Cotton in Vermont Digger (12/14/22) touts the new Weatherization Repayment Assistance Program to be offered to their customers by Green Mountain Power, Vermont Gas, Burlington Electric, and other utilities. It will allow homeowners to spread the cost of weatherizing and installing electric heat pumps over years of utility bills, at an extra cost of as little as $20 per month. Says Maura Collins, executive director of the Vermont Home Financing Agency, “energy savings should more than make up for the new charge that will be on your utility bill.” To assist lower income homeowners and renters, the taxpayers are putting in $9 million.

I don’t know why the taxpayers should be hit up for the $9 million, but overall this is a very responsible program. With the help of the utility, it uses savings from lower energy bills to finance the efficiency improvements that produced the savings.

Forgive me for pointing out that the Ethan Allen Institute has been preaching this gospel since 2011, saying then in a filing on the DPS Comprehensive Energy Plan:

“If such fabulous returns can be achieved through conserving energy, and pocketed by the favored home or business owner, why is it necessary for the rate payers to pay for it? Why don’t the home or business owners invest and pay for the energy improvements, and use their savings on their power bills to pay off their investment, without sending those bills to their neighbors?”

It only took 11 years for these people to catch on.

John McClaughry is vice president of the Ethan Allen Institute. Reprinted with permission from the Ethan Allen Institute Blog.

Image courtesy of Public domain
Spread the love

4 thoughts on “McClaughry: Weatherization savings without taxpayer money

  1. If the democommies really wanted home weatherization, they would allow a 100% tax credit for weatherizing a home. — Its not hard to see what they doing by taxing and spending your money.

  2. Hey , off topic a bit (but still about taxes being wasted way in VT, like taxpayer subsidized weatherization) but I just spotted this in a Wall St. Journal….go read it. It talks of the budget deficts in Calif by Gov. Newsom. But Texas has a budget surplus….quote: “Sacramento has a $22.5 billion deficit, Austin has a $32.7 billion surplus.” Then it highligted the growth in TX vs CA and the actual per capita tax burden. Calif came in SECOND….GUESS WHICH STATE RANKED NO#1 in per capita tax burden nationwide? HEY PHIL….DO somethng!

    “Mr. Newsom claimed Tuesday that California has a more “fair” tax system than the Lone Star State and that Texans pay more in taxes. This is disinformation. According to the Census Bureau, California’s per capita state tax collections ($6,325) were second highest in the country in 2021 after Vermont. Texas’s ($2,214) were second lowest after Alaska.”

      • Adding CO2 to the atmosphere is good news. Greening the planet and accelerating growth of C3 plants, while reducing their fresh water needs.

        If the added CO2 caused some of the global warming since 1975, which seems likely, that’s good news too. The warming since 1975 was mainly in colder nations, mainly in the six coldest months of the year, and mainly at night. Think of warmer winter nights in Siberia.

        Speaking from Michigan, we LOVE the warmer winters with less snow than in the 1970s, and hope for A LOT MORE global warming.

        Summer in the tropics does not get affected much by CO2, and Antarctica does not warm at all from added greenhouse gases.

        There is no problem caused by adding CO2 to the atmosphere — only good news.

        We should be celebrating the current climate and the greening of our planet.

        The only known climate improvement I can think of is getting MORE CO2 into the atmosphere.

        C3 plants (about 90% of about 300,000 species) thrive in higher levels of CO2 — at least 800 ppm, based on scientific studies in the past 50 years. 1600 ppm would probably be better, but the studies rarely test for more than 800 ppm.

        I have advocated for MORE CO2 in the atmosphere since 1997, BASED ON SCIENCE of CO2 enrichment studies I’ve read since 1997, not false beliefs about CO2 being an evil, poisonous gas!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *