|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Guy Page
Gov. Phil Scott Thursday, May 23 vetoed H.289, the revised Renewable Energy Standard that would more closely tie the Vermont power grid to instate renewable power and cost ratepayers an additional $350 million – $1 billion over 10 years.
At issue is the Legislature’s plan to reach 100% renewable electricity vs. the governor’s plan to reach 100% carbon-free power.
On January 30, Public Utilities Commission energy analyst TJ Poor said in House testimony that the RES would “cost $1 billion to Vermont ratepayers.” Aware of the potential for sticker shock, the Renewable power trade group REV said the price tag is closer to $350 million.
Both figures are considerably higher than the PUC plan, which estimates $164 million to reach zero carbon emissions. Rather than significantly enlarging Vermont’s wind and solar generation – which Scott says threatens local control of the siting process – he wants utilities to contract for more out-of-state, non-renewable, zero-carbon nuclear and hydro power.
Vermont already receives power from New England’s two remaining nuclear power facilities, Seabrook in New Hampshire and Millstone in Connecticut. The Scott plan would contract for more from those two plants and elsewhere.
“I don’t believe there is any debate that H.289 will raise Vermonters’ utility rates, likely by hundreds of millions of dollars.,” Scott said. “And while that in itself is reason enough to earn a veto, it is even more frustrating when you consider our Department of Public Service proposed to the Legislature a much stronger plan at a fraction of the cost. Their proposal was crafted after 18 months of engagement with Vermonters about what they want their energy policy to look like. It would get us to where we all want to go faster, more affordably and more equitably than H.289.”
“With a better alternative to this bill available, I sincerely hope that the Legislature will think about Vermonters
and the cost of living, and sustain this veto,” Scott said.
No way, House supermajority leaders said today.
They say the bill’s development instate renewable generation and infrastructure will benefit the local economy, reduce the state’s carbon footprint, and wean utilities off the up-and-down prices of fossil fuel power.
“The legislation accelerates Vermont’s transition to 100% renewable energy by 2030 while supporting expanded in-state and regional renewables, ensuring price stability and affordability for utilities and ratepayers, and implementing safeguards against double-counting of renewable energy credits,” House Speaker Jill Krowinski (D-Burlington) and Environment and Energy Committee Chair Amy Sheldon (D-Middlebury) said in a joint statement today. “The bill is a result of collaborative efforts with Vermonters, utilities, energy developers, environmentalists, housing advocates and legislators.
“Having a vision through the Global Warming Solutions Act and a Plan through the Climate Action Plan and taking action to implement the plan is the leadership that Vermonters expect from us to address climate change,” Sheldon said. “Accelerating the pace of cleaning up the electric grid is key to cutting carbon emissions and slowing climate change. Moving to 100% renewable energy for most Vermonters by 2030 while meeting the needs of our diverse utilities is a hallmark of H.289 and represents the hard work of many stakeholders.”
“Today’s veto undermines Vermont’s commitment to a sustainable future,” said Vermont Speaker of the House Jill Krowinski. “Our collective efforts in crafting H.289 epitomize the collaboration needed to combat climate change. We must remain steadfast in our resolve to accelerate renewable energy adoption, ensuring a resilient and cleaner future for generations to come. As Speaker of the House, I am committed to ensuring that the will of the people and the urgency of addressing climate change are not derailed, and we will be addressing this bill in our veto override session in June.”
The veto session meets June 17.
Categories: Energy, Legislation
Krowinski is a brainwashed idiot subject to the demands of other brainwashed idiots.
Vermont produces so little co2 that this is a gigantic waste of money. https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.eia.gov%2Fenvironment%2Femissions%2Fstate%2Fexcel%2Ftable1.xlsx%3Ffbclid%3DIwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR3fRFo_Z8MmgHepS7pDdvFRQ0Rugiol9Up-9uq2tiw2B3PVLYZ8ZmoyHK8_aem_ARcp5hdHYDY-hLDjcfqvtC7c-G0x2zyVU_ubt0C8dpidjNJnrhB-af1AnFs6OBUI2AeEhUYunWaeI_xP6PkMrPEZ&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR3Y9q_J6WGZ-fIggk_EAesp3DXr2fVbwTrD_28I6retrNY3sHLdyiafe6k_aem_AYTkjy1lVViz9xOT5xa4dQMGZqU-JFRLki4j06JUZnXsk8ZFsM1Fy7vieMBGXBAvLV7HHmi3Nh19y9LcHla7D5Hd
Another concerning issue is that renewal energy isn’t reliable energy. When there is no wind or sun, there is no energy, meaning no electricity. I recently heard an interview with Larry Fink of Black Rock. He explicitly stated that renewable energy is not reliable. Therefore, it can’t be used to power the new AI data centers being built globally, as these data centers have to be powered at all times. I believe that home owners access the US and globally are being required to transition to wind and solar because electricity will be redirected to the new AI data centers. According to Larry Fink these data centers will need exorbitant amounts of energy to operate.
Here is the link I referenced about Larry Fink speaking about energy and data centers at a World Economic Forum event.
https://www.youtube.com/live/PoRVYFHNc6k?si=vZsy_92lNVGWH5im
California is all-in on renewables also. They have the highest electric rates of the 48 states. Seems renewables aren’t low cost. Plus California has many more sunny days than Vermont and uninhabited desert to plaster the landscape with solar arrays. Let’s not trash Vermont with solar arrays and drive up electricity costs.
Update for 2023 statistics — I was looking at older data. Only Hawaii has higher rates than California. Lots of sunshine there also.
Vermont already looks like an episode from Teletubbies. I’m guessing the politicians here were raised on PBS kiddie shows, or at least watched them during the daytime when they were in their dorms at Comrade University.
Who is organizing a voter’s rally for Veto day? It should be massive.
Keep telling the lie long enough, buy scientists to twist the data narrative and buy the legislature and people will believe carbon is bad. Comments on this article buy into the narrative. But the real science indicates the principle driving force behind the changes in climate is H2O. Increase in the water vapor in the atmosphere.
Actually, ‘Don’t Look Up’, …if you don’t care to understand this.
Yes, water vapor affects 95% of the earth’s temperature gradients in relation to the solar radiation it receives. CO2 is relatively benign. It’s a trace gas. That’s right. CO2 accounts for about 1/400th of one percent of the earth’s atmosphere. Water vapor, on the other hand, which fluctuates with temperature, accounts for up to 4% at the equator.
But… just for perspective, 21% of the atmosphere is Oxygen (thank goodness), and 78% is Nitrogen, also essential to life on the planet.
If you want to know what has the major effect on Earth’s temperature, it’s the variability of the sun, and most importantly, earth’s proximity to it, which is cyclical.
The Milankovitch Cycles
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iA788usYNWA
If only we could explain our intellectual dysphoria as easily.
Well, we can explain it. Just follow the money.
More nuclear-if only VT would have ever thought of that?
What good is having a Republican? governor whose veto can be overridden at any time by the Commiecrats that put that governor in office. King Philip the 1st Eunuch King of Castrati is as worthless as the person he voted for president. Joe Biden.
Carbon taxes = ensures their investments (aka stock options) pay off bigly for them and their co-conspirators. Agenda 2030 – the globalist mantra is being forced through lawfare warfare against the People. Belligerent, installed occupiers, enemy combatants will not stop until removed, legally or by force. The Jezebels are double dog daring and doubling down. They intend on destroying everything so they can hand it over to foreign control, per their Master. You all okay with that?
Honestly Melissa
That comment was off the rails. I don’t believe even you can make sense of it.
Re: “Carbon taxes = ensures their investments (aka stock options) pay off bigly for them…”
Melissa, there is no point in engaging Mr. McCormick, as he has been playing dumb about the ‘pay off bigly’ schemes for a while now and seems to be the only one who can’t ‘make sense of it’. Honestly.
All I can say Mr. McCormick, those who are military veterans, served and witnessed regimes overturned and installed on behalf of the US Corporation have a feeling and knowing in their guts – not felt or comprehended by civilians who were not sent into quagmires of blood and bombs.
I managed multiple state and national studies of the economic impacts of various climate-friendly policies for the Center for Climate Strategies in Washington, DC. In almost every case the Renewable Portfolio Standard reduced employment, reduced disposable income and depressed gross state product. In fact New York proposed eliminating their RPS with a Clean Energy Standard. The RPS hurt the New York economy and the CES helped it. Gov. Scott is trying to implement a CES. There is also a basic question about the role of government in here. While most would agree that the government has an interest in reducing pollution, is it appropriate for the government to mandate a particular technology toward that end? The CES requires reduced emissions but it is up to the private sector to decide how to achieve it. The RPS ties the hands of the private sector and forces the use of the ‘favored’ technology (industry) regardless of whether it makes economic or technical sense. What the Vermont legislature is requiring is completely insane; not only will it harm ratepayers, it will result in unreliable electricity, which by the way you MUST use to drive your car.
Re: “…most would agree that the government has an interest in reducing pollution,…?
Perhaps ‘most’ *would* agree. But that doesn’t make the assertion reasonable or lawful.
I don’t agree. After all, who defines what ‘pollution’ is? The grand hoax today is the CES focus on ‘low-carbon energy sources’. Yes. The vilification of carbon dioxide, ironically, one of the planet’s most important compounds for supporting all carbon-based lifeforms. How many scams does it take before people start thinking for themselves?
The Tonkin Gulf Resolution. WMD in Iraq. Hillary Clinton’s illegal home server and her destruction of evidence. Russia, Russia, Russia. Covid, the vaccines, and lockdowns. Hunter Biden’s Laptop and the 51 former intelligence officials who perpetuated the Russian mis-information hoax. Censorship and ‘Zuckerbucks’.
And now it’s the “…electricity, which by the way you MUST use to drive your car.”
Not!
I mean really, – how many scams does it take before people start thinking for themselves?
Our legislature is promoting the Degrowth agenda, while implementing a new technocratic economic model.
Christine: These people are simply promoting snake oil in order to make money. It’s one of the oldest professions on the planet. And, for some reason, most everyone always buys a bottle or two before it makes them really sick.
Live… and learn.