|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Don Keelan
Two impactful events occurred weeks apart, one in Vermont and the other in New York State. Both have severe repercussions for the large oil and gas producers that provide much, if not all, fuel oil, propane gas, and gasoline to both states.
During the week of May 27, 2024, Governor Phil Scott allowed S-259 to become law by not vetoing the Vermont Legislature’s recently passed bill that would, after the cost is determined, assess the major oil producers a charge for damages within the state caused by their products carbon emissions between 1995 and 2024.
The State Treasurer, working with the Agency of Natural Resources, has until January 2026 to tally up the damages to Vermont caused by the oil companies’ products consumed in Vermont over the noted period.
Meanwhile, according to an article in the June 12th WSJ, the NYS Legislature adopted a bill that “would charge fossil-fuel companies a total of $3 billion a year for 25 years to pay for costs associated with climate change.”
According to the WSJ report, some of the largest oil-producing organizations, such as Saudi Aramco, Exxon Mobil, Shell, Pemex, BP, Chevron, and Peabody Energy, could be impacted. The annual cost charged to each company could range from $644 million to $150 million.
Vermont has received credit for being the first in the Nation to go after big oil. However, it will need 18 months to calculate the cost of climate damage caused by oil/gas pollution. I am sure the underlying study will come at a considerable cost, not including the cost of years of litigation to follow.
If NYS Governor Hochul signs the bill, her state will have the cost ready to be assessed. Maybe Vermont should find out how it was derived so quickly.
Or maybe Vermont should drop this insane idea of going after the oil companies in the first place. By not doing so, we cast ourselves as first-class hypocrites. This State needs oil and gas; otherwise, it will not survive. For example, the ski and tourist industry.
Reporting the week of June 11th, Ski Vermont announced that the 2023/24 ski season was a banner year for the ski industry, with 4.1 million ski days bringing close to $975 million in economic activity to the State.
Meanwhile, earlier this year, the State’s Economic Development agency announced that Vermont had over 13 million visitors in 2023. I can state with a degree of certainty that most visitors who drove to Vermont did not do so in an electric vehicle.
Closer to home, tens of thousands of Vermonters are dependent on fuel to heat their homes and businesses and operate their cars, trucks, and other vehicles. Let us not forget how customers and deliveries travel in Vermont.
A long-time fuel dealer informed me that when asked if fuel deliveries to Vermont could be interrupted by big oil due to pending assessments, he replied that it was quite possible. He said, “Why would they continue?”
The dealer’s point was not lost on me. Why would the oil companies continue to make deliveries if they have been informed that their product is causing damage up through 2024 (2020 in NY)? They know the timeframe will be extended, so just ending the product’s shipment to Vermont would be the common sense thing to do. For Vermonters, then what?
What escapes me is our progressive legislature going after big oil for allegedly causing damage to Vermont when, in fact, it was I who has and continues to send pollutants into the atmosphere. I am the one who heats my home and office with fuel oil. I cook on a gas stove and also drive a car powered by gasoline. I have known this for over 60 years when global warming was the rage and has now morphed into climate change.
It is too bad Vermont and New York legislators can’t be honest. Their states need money to address years of neglect of their infrastructure. So, let’s go after the deep pockets while encouraging more tourists to drive to Vermont.
The author is a U.S. Marine (retired), CPA, and columnist living in Arlington, VT.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary, Energy, Legislation, State Government
What a ship of fools we have in the VT legislature.
Come up with an idea, pass without any thought to the consequences.
Maybe the new Mayor of Burlington can more nonsense.
Time for a class action lawsuit on behalf of the people of Vermont that cannot afford a new heating system?
There all Biden pickle puffer’s they got payed money to vote against the very people who put them there it’s time to vote this people out and remove fake Republicans like Scott Sanders welch and the carpet muncher.
We need oil to make E Vs and solar panels and oh yeah everything we want. Each year more so called renewable energies come on line but the world keeps consuming more oil. The hypocrisy is sickening.
IMO Mr. Keelan is spot on, as usual.
Mr. Keelan almost gets to the irony and hypocrisy of this states legislature, for it will not be the evil major oil producers paying, it will be every Vermont ratepayer, for higher electric costs. Every Vermont driver, for gasoline and diesel, every homeowner for the cost of heating and cooling their residence. Every Vermont resident that consumes food, shall pay for the indulgences of the left to sate the thirst for power and dollars. The Vermont legislature has created a circular firing squad, with the participants not themselves, but every resident of this state.
While magnanimously declaring their self righteous indignation regarding all things Climate Change™, select NGO’s and their legislative slaves shall be the only beneficiaries of this law. Shame on phil Scott for not adding this to the veto pile.
I recently wrote to the U. of Michigan and you could substitute the State of Vermont.
“I received my BBA and MBA from the University in 1956. Then my education in energy and geopolitics began with employment and field experience with Stan-Vac (the Oil for the Lamps of China company), Mobil Oil, including strategic planning, teaching economics, private business and State and Federal government. My final 10 years where as DOE Senior Representative to the Far East (Eastern Siberia to NZ) and Energy Attache to the Ambassador in Japan. I attended COP-3 in Kyoto and almost every major international energy conference until just the last few years.
There is no climate crisis. Climate is always changing and is still too complicated for meaningful modeling.
The increased global population and their standard of living requires more energy. Until there is a technical breakthrough energy of all kinds is necessary. Just look at the effect of natural gas being less expensive than coal for power generation. Remember, last year China set new records for production, importation and the consumption of coal.
This “Carbon Neutrality” madness in not new. Under Carter, but more under Clinton, the ball started rolling. “If the laws of physics won’t allow it we will change those too.” But, now there is additional experience and findings in Japan, China and the EU, which identify more problems identified with increasing dependence on variable, renewable, carbon free energy, for base load needs. Also identified is the need for diversification of the sources of power.
For these, and other identified reasons, the University should be focused on measuring costs and returns to truly maximize its returns and reduce measurable costs instead of pursuing utopian goals which are, for now, unmeasurable and unattainable.”
Our Legislature is a reincarnation of the Club of Rome’s misguided conceit.
Re: “Our Legislature is a reincarnation of the Club of Rome’s misguided conceit.”
Mr. Eaton makes an important observation. It’s been stated before and should be repeated whenever relevant discussion ensues. The World Economic Forum and its United Nations cronies are the latest iteration of these Club of Rome folks. The climate issue is their contrivance. To promote centralized control, in its 1991 publication, The First Global Revolution, on page 115, the Club of Rome globalist admit to “… searching for a new enemy to unite us, …”.
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. – The Common Enemy of Humanity Is Man”
Ironically, these people have demonized one of the most important compounds supporting all life on planet Earth. It’s a complete reversal of scientific logic. CO2 is not the boogeyman it’s being made out to be. Carbon Neutrality is an oxymoron. Without carbon there is no life. And as this reality becomes more and more apparent, we will see more financial chaos and collapse involving this Ponzi scheme… e.g., the SunCommon and iSun bankruptcy being its most recent local manifestation.
I’ve asked my Vermont legislators to comment on this issue. To date… crickets.
I’ve said this before, regarding increased taxes for every new law that’s passed. With the influx of tourism and the thousands of vehicles crossing our borders, a 25 cent toll, electronically captured at our interstate highways would generate enough revenue to fund the budget. It could quite possibly generate a refund to Vermont residents. Simple solution to fund every aspect of state government.
Read this book sometime. Chaos is a book written by James Gleick. It’s a heavy read but explains a lot about climate and it’s unpredictability. Meaning you can not predict it nor model why or when or where it does what it does.
I would love to see the oil companies being sued by VT and other states stop all services to the state. Maybe in January, when it will hurt the most.
The state legislature could do a trial run at their homes and offices to see how it goes.
“ Vermont’s new law ought to be viewed for what it is: a shakedown to benefit the state’s favored constituents at the expense of the public. “
https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2024-5-11-even-stupider-than-the-stupidest-litigation-in-the-country
Any corporation or any business has to pay a fine. tax, penalty that cost is attached the the product or service. As mentioned: “The annual cost charged to each company could range from $644 million to $150 million” (believe it’s Billion) The little guy user of such has to pay those costs. Politicians think they are punishing the corp or business is crazy. In this case “a charge for damages within the state caused by their products carbon emissions between 1995 and 2024. “This is total bogus crap by craplogists” There’s no reality thinking.
In essence this is wealth redistribution- proceeds from any successful litigation become property of “the state” to distributed as whatever group has power sees fit. Those that penned this legislation and control the legislators know full well that the end user, which is us- pays all the costs involved- either in tax to fund the litigation or increased cost to satisfy the “judgement”. Yet another illustration of today’s buzz word, “democracy”.
Have things gotten bad enough for Vermonters? I guess not. They still have these people acting as their representatives in the legislature. Sheesh!