Editor’s note: Mark Whitworth is president of Energize Vermont, a non-profit organization that promotes sensible energy and climate policies for Vermont.
The Vermont Legislature is about to give its final approval to a bill called “The Global Warming Solutions Act.”
Needless to say, the bill, H.688, does not solve global warming. In fact, the bill is downright bad climate policy because it prioritizes emissions reductions over environmental protection.
Here is what the bill does:
- Establishes targets for the reduction of carbon emissions from fossil fuels (while ignoring other sources, like the carbon-spewing, heat-wasting, tree-burning electricity plant on which Burlington hangs its carbon neutrality claim)
- Creates a council (whose members are unaccountable to the public) to figure out what rules need to be imposed upon Vermonters in order to meet the targets (if they can be met at all)
- Appropriates nearly a million dollars to support the council (while our budget shortfall is in the hundreds of millions of dollars)
- Uses taxpayer money to pay “any person” to sue Vermont if the council fails to bring about sufficient emissions reductions (A similar bill in Massachusetts enabled the Conservation Law Foundation to sue the state. The result will be an environmentally destructive transmission line through Maine.)
The bill gives lip service to the importance of Vermont’s forests and their ability to mitigate climate impacts and absorb CO2 (they absorb more atmospheric CO2 than our cars and trucks emit).
But the bill’s only targets relate to carbon emissions from selected sources. So, the real effect of the bill will be to provide statutory justification for the environmentally-damaging energy projects that a majority of Vermonters oppose.
These high-impact projects provide meager emissions reductions (GMP says its Lowell Mountain turbines avoid the emission of 74,000 tons of CO2 each year — that’s less CO2 than pre-pandemic Metro NYC traffic produced in half a day).
More importantly, these projects degrade the natural resources that defend Vermont from climate impacts like extinctions, increased vulnerability of our infrastructure to storms, and the loss of food and water security.
No doubt, the Global Warming “Solutions” Act will require Vermont to discourage certain types of energy consumption — perhaps with a carbon tax. Tax enthusiasts will trot out studies that show that the tax will be welcomed by low-income Vermonters who live paycheck to paycheck. Other studies will show that it will create jobs and prosperity.
But, higher energy prices will cause more Vermont businesses to relocate to states or countries with cheaper (and dirtier) energy, laxer environmental regulations, and weaker protections for workers. We will continue to buy their products and services, so our actual carbon footprints will grow. But, the Global Warming “Solutions” Act’s flawed metric will show a reduction in emissions, so those of us who can afford to remain in Vermont will feel good about ourselves because we will have solved global warming.
Finally, we must not forget that the Vermont Senate considered this bill under the rules that were set up to facilitate legislation related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The bill’s supporters took advantage of every shortcut those rules offered — refusing to hear testimony, disenfranchising some of their colleagues, and operating with an opacity created by technological glitches and an inadequate Internet infrastructure.
These are some of the reasons that we are asking Governor Scott to veto this bill and to work with legislators to develop real, effective climate policies — policies that do more than enrich the energy developers who profit by exploiting the good intentions of Vermonters.
EAN, VEIC, AND VELCO MAKING A SELF-SERVING JOINT ATTACK TO GAIN THEIR OBJECTIVES
All three entities want to build out solar from 438.84 MW dc, to at least 1000 MW dc, by 2025 (seven years sooner than required by the CEP), even though solar:
– Is, by far, the most expensive electricity in the portfolio of Vermont utilities. Table 3 shows some of solar costs shifted onto ratepayers, taxpayers and added to government debts. See Appendix.
– Imposes the greatest threat to the stability of the grid, due to ever-larger DUCK-curves, as has happened in southern Germany and southern California. The more solar, the larger the DUCK-curves.
– Would make the use of EVs and heat pumps much more costly.
NOTE: The CEP goal is 1000 MW dc, by 2032
1) Self-Serving, Impossible CO2 Reduction Dreams of EAN
“Meeting Paris”: In 2019, EAN made estimates of what it would take to “meet Paris”, i.e., reduce CO2 from 9.76 million metric ton, at end 2016, to 7.46 MMt, at end 2025, or 2.281 MMt. See URL
https://www.eanvt.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/EAN-report-2020-fi…
EAN proposed several measures to reduce CO2, including deploying, by end 2025:
Increase solar from 438.84 dc, at end 2019 to at least 1000 MW dc, at end 2025
See Note and pages 3, 4 and 5 of URL
Vermont had deployed, at end 2019:
3541 plug-in hybrids and pure EVs, increasing at about 750 per year
17,717 ASHPs, increasing at about 2850 per year
The totally unrealistic EAN goals, (increasing plug-ins from 750 to 18000 per year, increasing heat pumps from 2850 to 18000 per year) are beyond rational, even if the 50% of the cost of EVs and heat pumps were donated by ratepayers, taxpayers, and added to government debt. This means “Meeting Paris” is beyond rational.
The above EAN CO2 reductions per EV, and per ASHP, are grossly overstated, because of flawed/deceptive analyses.
As a result, many more EVS and ASHPs would be required to achieve the EAN CO2 reductions.
See URL and below ASHP and EV articles
http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/response-to-energy-acti…
NOTE: All of Europe (550 million people, excl. Russia) is not “meeting Paris”, and neither are China (1.4 billion people), India (1.4 billion people), etc.
If the heavy hitters are absent, why should ultra-light-featherweight Vermont “meet Paris”?
So Willem,
What is your take on the new smaller nukes that in large part reprocess nuclear waste if I have this right. Would something like this provide a needed base power source and could it be located at the old Vernon site? It would seem to be a way of providing in-state zero carbon emissions utilizing existing already built electrical infrastructure. I think you may know more about this than myself.
John,
It is best for legislators, etc., not to get fixated on generating electricity in Vermont.
No matter what we do, it will be charged to the utility rate base at 2 to 5 times the wholesale price of the NE grid.
That is untenable for Vermont’s crippled, near-zero, real-growth economy, with no prospect of any let-up for years.
See my below comment of what is best for Vermont.
EAN, VEIC, and VELCO Goals of 1000 MW of Solar by 2025 are Self-Serving and Unrealistic
Their goals appear to be extremely dubious with:
1) The Federal EV tax credit having been cancelled
2) The solar Investment Tax Credit expiring in 2022
3) The multi-year recession and high unemployment due to the virus economy.
4) ASHPs Marginally Effective for Reducing CO2 in Average Vermont Houses. See ASHP URL
5) EVs Minimally Reducing CO2 Compared with Efficient Gasoline Vehicles. See EV URL
6) The recent FERC PURPA update to ensure proper competition, i.e., no sweetheart deals.
Major increases of taxes, fees and surcharges on ratepayers, taxpayers, and adding to government debt to pay for their self-serving, dubious claims, likely would not be a palatable option
In Vermont, the only thing that makes any sense is to stop “emulating” California, immediately scrap GWSA, and concentrate on:
1) Energy conservation
2) Energy efficiency
3) Building net-zero-energy houses and other buildings by the thousands each year
4) Using high-mpg vehicles
The above 4 items would save money for Vermonters, and make the state economy more competitive
All of the rest is just expensively subsidized hogwash that would not make one iota of difference regarding climate change.
It merely serves to subsidize the OWNERS of RE companies in Vermont, AT THE EXPENSE OF EVERYONE ELSE.
YOU GIVE TO PAUL, YOU HAVE TO ROB PETER
THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH
They know the plan is to rob Peter to pay Paul!, it’s called socialism and that’s the true goal.
This GWSA has nothing to do with global warming but rather is a vailed attempt at control and increased taxation. In addition it limits representative government to say the least.
For those of us who are life long Vermonters, it is not hard to notice how much we have been over-taxed and over-regulated since Progressives took control of our government.
Time to remove the Progs and Liberal Democrats from office!!!!!
This GWSA has nothing to do with global warming but rather is a vailed attempt at control and increased taxation. In addition it limits representative government to say the least.
For those of us who are life long Vermonters, it is not hard to notice how much we have been over-taxed and over-regulated since Progressives took control of our government.
It is my opinion that Vermonters begin to push back against these oppressive and perhaps unConstitutional laws being imposed against us.
Why is Scott silent on this bill? Its hard to have any faith in a man who says nothing about a bill that is bad for the people.
Ed,
Governor Scott has raised his concerns over provisions being considered in this bill which has not yet been finalized many times. When helping get in hay with a friend who has followed racing in Vermont for many years, I asked him what kind of driver Governor Scott is. He replied, “Phil is a very patient driver, bides his time carefully and then makes his move”.
I suspect that this will be the case on this bill. It is important in the meantime that people like Mark Whitmore and ourselves point out the obvious flaws in this legislation and the harm it holds for our state.
John,
GWSA is improper legislation.
It is iiredeemable
It is flawed from A TO Z
It should not exist in a free country.
It disfranchises Vermonters
It is a means toward wholesale coercion of the people of Vermont, just to please the OWNERS of RE companies who stand to enormously gain for DECADES (at the expense of all others), while engaging in useless/damaging activities that would not make ONE IOTA of impact regarding the climate.
This craziness has got to end in NOVEMBER
Vote the fanatic idiots out.
Drain the bureaucratic RE swamp
Most sane legislators would oppose GWSA, if it were not for golden calf of PARTY UNITY.
Liberal Dem/Prog supported/subsidized VTDigger and SEVENDAYS have been suggested/ordered to not allow comments, because they were 10 to 1 AGAINST GWSA and other such “legislation”
THE VOICES OF THE PEOPLE ARE BEING MUFFLED/SNUFFED OUT, right here in Vermont
Chairman Phil’s “concerns” are likely with potential legal issues. There’s no doubt that he supports much of what the Democrats want and is willing to give it to them. That’s because he – like many in this state – claim to be Republicans while opposing President Trump and supporting the killing of babies in the womb, gun control, and full domination of citizens via executive orders. His speech may be couched in emotional appeals, but he is one power-mad individual. And anyone who respects him is just another totalitarian.
Now this is a statement by Mark Whitworth,
Needless to say, the bill, H.688, does not solve global warming. In fact, the bill is downright
bad climate policy because it prioritizes emissions reductions over environmental protection.
I hope all Vermonter’s read this article and then contact the Governor and your legislator
and voice your dismay about H688……….. Agenda driven costly foolishness !!
Wake up people, they don’t care about the state or your wellbeing, this scam is all about
an agenda
And that agenda is to drive the oil companies out of VT for two reasons: (1) Those menacing oil companies are making too much money and we (the environmental loonies) cannot control it;what’s worse to them, is those obscene profits mostly go out of state. (2) Is total lack of control over their conduct in other states.
This is very much like the concept(s) that drove VT Yankee out of Vernon, with the loss of some of the most economical,cleanest, cheapest electricity ever seen in VT, produced right here in VT along with over 600 excellent jobs… down the tubes forever all of these things because of their inability to control and get the money. Same with petroleum business in VT now. This same thinking is why they do not particularly care for Hydro Quebec. There is no end to their nonsense.. If GWSA becomes law, it will not end there folks. These people never are without a cause or crisis. At least they haven’ t been in my 80 + years of living in VT. It is time the people came out of the woodwork and just say “NO” in the most profound, loudest terms possible. I won’t be around here long, but my grandkids will be somewhere. The way things are here, my guess is it will be somewhere else. One is already in FL, one is in school still on the West coast, but she is looking at FL as well.
Grandkids: Forgot…. another is in Oklahoma, been there about 10 years, and another moved to New Hampshire. Actually we only have 1 left in VT. Smart kids.
I bet it’s a great bill for socialism! we have a bunch of dirt bags representing us.
The global warming debate has created more hot air than the folks in Vermont have in my lifetime. Let’s start working on dealing with solvable real problems such as high taxes, eliminating the legality of marlijuana, assisted suicide. eliminating same sex marriage, improving the business climate, making a concentrated effort to bring high paying jobs to Vermont to provide employment for our educated young. Once these problems have been solved, we can move on to the next set of opportunities to make VERMONT GREAT AGAIN!!!!!
Vermont has one of, if no the most restrictive licensing for vehicles that get 100+ mpg. Motorcycles and scooters regularly get above 80mpg and 100+ mpg….but we make it almost impossible.
Making it easier to ride, for example a 50cc scooter or moped without a license, but perhaps passing a course on education would offer the poor, the frugal and those getting their life back together say after alcohol or drug rehab a way to function in society.
Why is the majority in Vermont so defiant about making life easy for those who earn less?
It’s one of the many big hoaxes going on within our state and county.
It would be better for all, if Vermont’s government got out of the education, healthcare and energy sectors.
Just leave them alone, with minimal rules of any kind.
That would great reduce state government and the state budget.
Looking to bureaucrats to help run your life should be a non-starter, because almost all of could hardly run their own lives, if it was not for all the state coddling, everyone else has to pay for.
“Making it easier to ride, for example a 50cc scooter or moped without a license, but perhaps passing a course on education would offer the poor, the frugal and those getting their life back together say after alcohol or drug rehab a way to function in society.”
In my state no license is required for mopeds. It really makes a lot of sense. If an individual makes a bad decision in life and gets a DUI, looses their license your prospects for keeping a job are nill to none. At least here they can drive a moped to get to work, instead of beginning the downward spiral to drugs and homelessness. Although down here you can drive a moped on the road 365.
It’s really a great thing for everyone, it would be tough to ride a moped year round in Vermont, I’ll give you that….maybe they’d come up with a 3 wheel one.
It’s never been about the environment, it’s never been about the poor, it’s never been about women, it’s never been about education……it’s all really a big con. It drives me nuts that there isn’t a unified voice demonstrating how little the majority party actually does.
All the while they keep you in an engineered poverty trap, making millions and billions off you, taxpayers paving the way.
They could care less about the environment, they are very interested in socialist control, which coincidentally, their environmental bills always seem to fit perfect.
Neil, you speak all truths above. It has never been about the environment it always been about control. I’ve never been a big Phil fan as we was just getting settled in when I left VT. But I have always considered him a very marginal conservative. I can tell you that he in the ONLY thing that is keeping the progressives from taking total control of you and the sate. If Zuckerman gets elected you best just pack your bags. This was always my concern and I saw it happening when Shumlin was at the helm. He at least could see that universal health care was dead in the water. From then on though I knew the collective (Progressives) wouldn’t stop. At some point the road block in VT government isn’t going to be there to stop them, the progressives will get their way: total control. I wasn’t willing to be a lab rat for their experiment. It’s sad to watch this happening from outside but the folks in Vermont are like frogs in a pot of slowly boiling water.