by Alison Despathy

Despite all of the problems with the Clean Heat Standard, a/k/a Affordable Heat Act, issues now bubbling to the surface, several influential members of Vermont’s Climate Council refuse to let it go. 

They still want to mandate carbon reduction – albeit at a slower rate. 

The high cost estimates, the increased financial burden on already struggling Vermonters, the heavy hit to our small local fuel dealers which for some has led to closures, and the fraudulent carbon market have all been identified by the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and Vermonters as core reasons this proposal should not move forward. 

Yet, the Cross Sector Mitigation Subcommittee of the Vermont Climate Council has just submitted their 2025 priority recommendations for Vermont’s updated Climate Action Plan which includes a modified Clean Heat Standard.  According to Climate Council member Jared Duval, this version has a price cap and a slower roll out of this same, highly controversial and complex credit system already deemed by the PUC to be ripe for fraud and economically devastating. 

On top of an affordability crisis hitting Vermonters from every side, unnecessarily raising prices on heating fuel will only intensify this situation and make it more difficult for Vermonters to cover basic living expenses as these price spikes reverberate through our economy, increasing costs on all products and services.

After a recent and thorough review, the PUC has offered alternatives and recommended against the Clean Heat Standard (Act 18). Vermonters’ votes made it perfectly clear that they were not happy with the way the supermajority was conducting business. From steep increases in property taxes and healthcare insurance to rising DMV fees, and electricity prices, Vermonters voted to bring more balance and demand action on this out of control spending spree. 

Still, several influential members of the Climate Council are not listening – but then,  they do not need to. The Climate Council is an unelected 23 member council dictating climate policy. Many members have a mission to move forward in Vermont and will not be deterred. They are unaccountable and relentless in their desire to thrust their agenda and this corporate carbon market based ‘solution’ on Vermont. 

Climate Council member Richard Cowart, of the Regulatory Assistance Project, has a lot at stake here. He is the primary architect of this Clean Heat Standard and has already raked in 100,000s of dollars selling this carbon market scheme to the state of Massachusetts. If they can force it through Vermont, maybe Massachusetts will consider and then possibly more states will buy into this nightmare of an “Affordable Heat Act” so all can suffer together as essential products become less accessible, more expensive and our small local economies struggle while energy monopolies flourish. 

Climate Council member Jared Duval is also Executive Director of Energy Action Network (EAN) of Vermont, an entity with a mission and history to transform Vermont’s energy sector and achieve specific goals. It appears this will be done without regard for costs or negative impacts which have become more apparent. EAN is developing controversial policy such as the Clean Heat Standard as both a network and organization, as well as through Duval’s position on the Climate Council. 

Alternatively, Jared Duval, Richard Cowart and another Climate Council member, Peter Sterling, Executive Director of Renewable Energy of Vermont, could lobby on behalf of their members, interest groups and personal benefit versus being placed –not elected– on a council intended to design and implement policy which directly favors their bottom line and special interests and continues to ignore real world impacts on Vermonters 

NEXT STEPS

In 2020, the Vermont Democratic majority passed the Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA), by overturning Governor Scott’s veto and ignoring constituents. The GWSA mandated the formation of Vermont’s Climate Council and legally requires Vermont to reduce emissions by 26% below 2005 by the year 2025, 40% below 1990 levels by the year 2030 and 80% below 1990 levels by the year 2050. If these requirements are not met, the state can be sued. A lawsuit filed by the Conservation Law Foundation is already in the works due to Vermont failing to be on track to achieve the mandated emission reductions. 

During the 2024 legislative session, Representative Higley (R-Orleans-Lamoille) sponsored House Bill H.74, which proposed to amend the GWSA specifically shifting emission reduction requirements to goals and repealing the Vermont Climate Council. 

Legislation which compromises Vermonters, our small businesses and the economy by unnecessarily increasing costs for basic expenses such as as heating and transportation will continue to emerge as long as Vermont’s GWSA is law. 

Representative Higley has announced. that he has indeed reintroduced his bill to repeal the GWSA, stating “The mandates not goals are unrealistic for Vermonters to achieve without great hardship.”

He further explained that, “Vermont has had a Comprehensive Energy Plan (CEP) for many years, which has goals for all energy sectors (electric, thermal and transportation). The CEP was recently updated in 2022.” Progress towards these goals has been moving at a steady pace and is assessed and monitored by several state agencies and departments. 

In contrast to the CEP, the GWSA is solely focused on emission reductions, it does not include a well rounded approach to stewardship of natural resources, weatherization, infrastructure updates and recovery, overall energy reductions, the reality of energy demands for heat and transportation in our cold, rural state or targeted support for those in need. 

The problem and risks associated with this extreme carbon reduction obsession in Vermont was summed up perfectly at the Vermont Climate Council meeting on December 16, when Climate Council member and soon to be retired Commissioner of the Department of Public Service, June Tierney, stated, 

“With all due respect, as someone who lost her home in Irene, I think the emphasis of this council is completely misdirected. We need to be thinking about how we use our resources and we should be directing those at resiliency in my opinion and also frankly in recovery because we can think large thoughts about remission reductions…….our emissions at the end of the day and our reductions of them may be morally just and therefore compelling but it is a compulsion to focus on them when the immediate needs of keeping people safe, directly knowing that we’ve got storms coming, are being sidelined and neglected in order to pursue those measures. And by that I mean every cent that goes into polices that are directed toward reductions when we need to be directing every cent towards hardening our systems and helping people to survive here. I would urge this council to rethink where it’s putting its intellectual capital…. I cannot overemphasize how wrong I think what it is we are doing, those are my parting words to the council.”

Supporting Representative Higley’s bill to repeal the GWSA is the first key step to set Vermont’s energy policy back on the right track.