The Vermont House of Representatives on Thursday passed S.5, the clean heat standard bill, by a vote of 98-46. Every Republican present voted no. Only seven members listened to their constituents and broke with their parties to vote “no,” six Democrats and one Progressive.
“S.5 will give people two options: pay significantly more in fuel costs or spend thousands of dollars to install electrical heating systems, when most don’t have the financial means to do either.”
Advocates for S.5, dubbed “The Unaffordable Heat Act” by critics, continue to lament and challenge Agency of Natural Resources Secretary Julie Moore’s estimate that the program will add $0.70 to each gallon of heating oil, propane, natural gas and kerosene.
A controversial policy overhaul that seeks to tax existing heat sources while subsidizing new technologies had its carbon-credit trading scheme reviewed on Tuesday in the House Appropriations Committee, and a top state economist warned that the policy’s costs will “likely be greater” in future budgets.
S.5, with its multi-billion-dollar price tag that will add at least $500 a year to the average household’s annual heating bill, is just the tip of the iceberg for what legislators have in store. Once S.5 passes, the plan is to bring forward a similar carbon tax on gasoline and diesel motor fuels.
The estimates are that S.5 will add somewhere between $0.70 and $4.00 to each gallon of oil, propane, natural gas, and kerosene sold in Vermont. That means it will cost Vermont sugar makers somewhere between an extra $2.80 and $16.00 to produce a gallon of syrup.
Joyce Manchester testified that one aspect of the bill would be “challenging” to live up to in reality: the social equity promises to protect low-income Vermonters from the spike in home heating fuel prices brought about by the requirement to purchase clean heat carbon credits.
“We have this elite group that has come up with a policy that proposes to totally disrupt an entire industry in the state of Vermont without the transparency that the legislators are being led to believe happened at the Climate Council.”
As the House Environment and Energy Committee moves toward wrapping up its deliberation of the clean heat standard bill, there is still a serious misconception out there that the amendment added to the bill requiring a “check back” in 2025 effectively makes this a study bill.
Smith asked Clark again if she thought she could win a suit against the CLF, and again Clark refused to directly answer the question, or acknowledge the premise that meeting the goals of the GWSA, despite all the best efforts of the legislature and the Administration, is not possible.
As Vermont’s push toward net zero emissions in the coming decades goes full steam ahead, the cost of making the transition feasible for the state’s low- and moderate-income residents has become a growing concern. Members of the House Committee on Environment and Energy are looking at ways of offering benefits to residents in both income brackets.
The committee heard from several different perspectives, among them a fuel dealer specializing in clean heat options, a home renovation and construction contractor, and a finance expert. They all shared a common thread — this bill will hurt low-income Vermonters.