|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
PUC recommends not adopting obligations; cites lack of data, and harm to low-income Vermonters.
by Rob Roper
Act 18, the Clean Heat Standard law, required the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to design the detailed rules for how the program’s carbon credit market would work in practice. That plan is due, and the PUC’s draft report indicates it doesn’t. Work that it.
One main component of the PUC’s task is to determine who the “obligated parties” (those heating fuel dealers who will be required to obtain carbon credits) and what that credit obligation will be in the first year of the program. Mission fail! The PUC’s excuse for this states, “…there are substantial problems with the fuel dealer registration data that form the basis of our determinations. Accordingly, we strongly recommend against these obligations being adopted.”
So, here’s our plan. Don’t do it!
What are the problems with the data? A big one is that only 110 fuel dealers registered with the PUC by the extended deadline – which is estimated to be less than half of those required to do so – and of those that did the data supplied regarding fuel imported and sold was incomplete or inaccurate. An unspecified number apparently registered late, but what data they supplied has not yet been processed.
Blame here does not fall on the fuel dealers because the PUC was, in the first instance, ill-equipped to inform the companies that they were required to do so. The PUC didn’t know who they were to begin with (and still don’t), so couldn’t directly reach out. Moreover, the PUC says, “… the Commission did not have the resources to pursue unregistered but likely required-to-register entities in this initial registration year.” This just goes to show how the bureaucratic costs of administering this complicated program should it be implemented will be very high.
The second reason for incomplete data was that the law (Act 18) defining what heating fuel is “broad and ambiguous.” Even those fuel dealers who did their best to comply with the data request couldn’t understand exactly what lawmakers were telling them to do because the law was poorly written. Requests for clarification received the response “use your best judgment” — to comply with a poorly articulated law that even those in charge of regulating it didn’t understand.
Another politically promised aspect of the Clean Heat Standard was that it would benefit low-income Vermonters – a promise made without any basis in reality. And, in fact, was always completely contrary to reality, the reality of which is now becoming undeniably apparent.
This decision is an acknowledgment that increasing the distribution of credits serving LMI households increases the cost of the program, as the necessary incentive levels would need to be higher. Because it is not feasible for all LMI households to participate in the program’s early years – and those not able to participate would face higher heating costs as a result of front-loading LMI participation – an increased LMI requirement could potentially cause more harm than good. The Equity Advisory Group, statutorily charged with this consideration, agreed that there are costs and benefits with front-loading credits to LMI households and that there is “insufficient information to determine whether front-loading the LMI targets in the earliest years of the program is ‘reasonably possible’.” (Emphasis added)
This should have been obvious from the outset (and was to folks like, well, me.) Frontloading the program with the most expensive and least efficient greenhouse gas reduction measures was obviously going to spike the initial costs for the program. Those high costs would be borne by those who burn fossil fuels to heat their homes, disproportionately impacting low-income Vermonters. The lack of resources, including an insufficient labor force, meant most folks would be facing high heating bills with no realistic, timely alternatives. And so it is!
All that said, the PUC did do the math to determine – with admittedly flawed data – what the obligated parties obligations would be in year one of a Clean Heat Standard regime:
As an example, if an obligated party is assigned to obtain and retire 25 clean heat credits in year one, the current draft of the TRM indicates that this amount could be earned by installing two 3.5 ton (42,000 Btu/h) single-family residential air-source ducted heat pump systems (specifically homes in which this would fully displace existing oil heat) and delivering 7,251 gallons of 20% biodiesel (“B20”) sourced from soybean oil (displacing fuel oil #2). For the installations, while they would generate only a portion of their carbon reductions in year one, those measures would continue to earn credits for the estimated lifetime of the measure (in this case, the next 16 years).
Now, replacing a fossil fuel heating system with heat pumps to the extent they would fully displace the use of oil heat can cost tens of thousands of dollars, especially if the building in question requires electrical upgrades and weatherization to work. The example here describes what it would take to obtain just 25 carbon credits. But according to the PUC’s report, which outlines all registered fuel dealers’ potential obligations – albeit with flawed data — Champlain Valley Plumbing and Heating, to pick one a lot of readers will recognize, would be required to obtain 12,069.72 carbon credits. The largest obligation goes to Vermont Gas with 76,380.63 carbon credits required. The smallest, Fox Fuel LLC just 1.32.
What the PUC’s draft report doesn’t calculate is what all this will cost consumers, who will inevitably have to pick up the tab in the price per gallon on their heating fuel bill. Dare we say a lot! So, yes to the PUC’s strong recommendation against these year one obligations being adopted by the legislature.
But beyond that, Act 18 must be fully repealed in 2025. It is an unpopular, unworkable, unaffordable disaster. I suspect the new legislature will not move forward with implementation at this time – and that’s good — but this legal weed needs to be pulled out by the roots. Hey, Vermont Republicans, you ran on this. You won big on this. Where’s the bill you’re putting forward to actually do this?
Rob Roper is a freelance writer who has been involved with Vermont politics and policy for over 20 years. This article reprinted with permission from Behind the Lines: Rob Roper on Vermont Politics, robertroper.substack.com
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary, Energy, Environment, Legislation, State Government, Taxes
This is the time for phil “mr. affordability”scott to step to the podium and demand that the legislature repeal this bill. Scott Beck, senate minority leader and Pattie McCoy, house minority leader can stand with scott, along with any legislator that sees Act 18 for what it is, a carbon tax. Long ago was time to stop the pretending about the motives for Act 18- reducing and eliminating carbon was never the goal- nor can it be done. Fattening NGO coffers at Vermont residents expense is and was the real goal- and it’s time to repeal this vulgar legislation. It would seem an easily attainable goal to repeal by scott’s budget address, if we keep the pressure on the legislature and the good governor decides to expend some political capital.
Rob Roper, Annette Smith, and Myers Mermel, among others, have been writing and testifying about this fiasco since it was first proposed. Their criticisms have proved amazingly accurate. I suggest the legislature pay close attention to their opinions on the next round of planet saving proposals and have a bit more skepticism about the lobbying efforts of REV, VPIRG, CLF, Blittersdorf, and the Climate Caucus.
Thanks, Steve. You might recall I went out on a limb and testified to Senate Natural Resources & Energy after they renamed it the Affordable Heat Act, and told them if they are going to rename it, I was calling it the “Stupid Heat Standard”. This message was not well received, one Senator stormed out of the room and slammed the door.
On Nov. 1, a man I don’t know submitted this comment to the PUC in the Clean Heat Standard case:
“It takes a very special kind of stupid to even consider adding a greater cost to heat our home. As a fixed income Family, the current inflation rate has almost doubled our heating estimate. We have had to lower our thermostat and wear extra clothing due to the cost increases from D.C. As bad as that is, we are even more upset that people in control of Vermont are now going to make the situation worse. California has people moving out in droves, and as God knows, if I could afford to move South, I would, but as stupid Vermonters are unconcerned about the cost of living, we are being forced to move in with our kids. Congratulations to the ignorant people in the Vermont House and Senate who are more concerned with the appearance of controlling the climate change than the wellbeing of their constituents. You all deserve the stupid of the decade award.
Disgusted and colder again, Arnold Clough, Rutland, VT.”
“…it’s time to repeal this vulgar legislation.”
High time, I would say. Vulgar people create vulgar legislation, to serve their own envy, vanity, and other selfish ends.
Back in the fall I posted a poem with some advice: “Don’t end up like this mouse: Vote Republican.” I’m glad some people took it to heart. But we need to finish the job.
THE FROZEN MOUSE
By Ellin Anderson
Poor little mouse, whose cozy nest
Was meant for ease and winter joy,
In your own house, you’ve found your rest,
Stiff as a toy.
You slept in safety from all blame
With puffs of fluff, and food in store
In wood-stacked shed, but winter came,
And you won’t scurry any more.
Though your intentions were benign,
A life is harsh, a life is cruel,
And circumstances will align
Such that we play the fool.
You did not make your home with me —
I wonder where a mouse should light
Between the devil and the sea:
A cat’s mouth, or a waste of white.
I’ve set you in a snowy fold
Beneath a dark and sighing pine —
Was it by chance, or by design
You died here in the cold?
Do you know what 0.04% looks like? That 0.04 looks like a tiny pencil point in the midst of a 5″x5″ square. 0.04% is how much of our air is Carbon dioxide. Not very much at all. It is what our plant environment needs for healthy plants to grow and provide us with our food and also adds oxygen to the air.
vthope.net/S5.html portrays this example and gives scientific evidence of the whole CO2 scam that has been tugging our legs for years.
– More CO2 helps to feed more people worldwide.
– There is a 140-million-year trend of dangerously decreasing CO2.
– Current CO2 levels are near record lows. We are CO2 impoverished.
– The warming effect of each molecule of CO2 declines as its concentration increases.
– CO2 emissions began accelerating in the mid-20th century.
– Our current geologic period (Quaternary) has the lowest average CO2 levels in the last 600 million years
– Melting glaciers confirm modern warming predated increases of CO2.
– Rising sea levels confirm modern warming predated increases of CO2.
– Temperatures changed dramatically during the past 10,000 years. It wasn’t us.
https://co2coalition.org/facts/
Re: “…do the math to determine – with admittedly flawed data – what the obligated parties obligations would be in year one of a Clean Heat Standard regime:”
In Rob Roper’s missive on this subject, he expressed, in one sentence, an excellent description of Vermont’s current Clean Heat legislative processes. It’s amazing, in fact, that Rob and Paul are able to articulate this chaos as well as they do.
But more important is the colossal waste of time and money resulting from this process. Clearly, consultants from every affected sector are being paid millions of Vermont taxpayer dollars with little if any productive results.
Does this sound familiar? Of course it does. It’s not just the PUC and our energy sector that are in a state of chaos. Anarchy is pervasive in our healthcare system and, especially, in our education system. In other words, our government (legislative, executive, and administrative) is not only in a state of chaos, it’s corrupt.
In the final analysis, the chicken and egg debate, whether or not the corruption caused the incompetence, or the incompetence allowed the corruption, is beside the main point – which is that government, by its nature, tends to be both incompetent and corrupt – which is why our Founders sought to limit government power at every turn in the road.
And yes. I’ll say it again. We Vermonters must finally begin to understand, not only what the system of private free enterprise is, but that a free market system “… is the most effective system we have discovered to enable people who hate one another to deal with one another and help one another.”
Anyone who disagrees, especially after watching the Vermont government in action for the last 30 years, is either corrupt or incompetent
Excuse me, i have to put more wood in my wood stove.
Me TOO!
When we send ignorant people to represent us, this is what they come up with. And yet, democrats still manage to get elected. Does anyone have an idea how to open the closed minds of the fools that keep voting for the loony democrats that spend our hard earned money so recklessly. They really need to be accountable for bad legislation beyond losing an election!
I’ve been around a long time and have lived in Vermont except for a brief time elsewhere. Most people here are so involved with their own self importance and what they think they know that they will not listen to anyone tell them they are wrong or they are misinformed. Some of it could be stubbornness but that isn’t enough to explain what you are asking. Rural Vermonters tend to vote democrat or not vote at all and most of them are conservative in thought. They aren’t big news junkies but the ones that do vote follow the path of their parents who also voted democrat since Phil Hoff was elected in the 60s.
Then along came the progressives and with them came control and the idea they could fix everything after they broke it or just kick the can and start working on something new they can blame on something else. They invaded the democrat party and then came the (out of state) big fish in a small pond, carpetbaggers who now control the legislature and all of the state’s institutions which happened over the last 4 decades at least. A couple republican governors managed to get elected but had to deal with the legislature controlled by the democrats and progressives. The democrats even elected a woman from Switzerland and her brother to the senate.
We know that the VT cities are mostly liberal and there are a few republican voters scattered around the state but not enough to gain more votes than the cities in
Chittendon County and Washington county being the most votes. The problem in my opinion is that no one told the old VT democrats that the progressives had stolen their party and have been in the process of ruining everything the democrats used to stand for, so they continue to vote democrat and will not change. I have talked to some of these people about the issues that they have never heard about like the Clean Heat Standard, the Global Warming this or that, the child care bill and on and on. Many of these people are uninformed and they don’t vote, they say it’s a waste of time.
There is a lot more to this story and it includes the liberal media censorship, VPR and NPR being the only radio stations capable of being heard all over the state is a factor. Talk radio programming like when Rush was on for three hours on WSNO and other stations has disappeared on AM stations and even satellite radio is spotty due to the mountains. And then theirs the education monopoly both K12 and the college indoctrination centers droning out new activists that can’t spell or finish a sentence but they know the earth is dying in 10 years and men can be women and vice versa and they vote liberal. Including our out of state students who are allowed to vote in VT. And the advent of the welfare state where able bodied young men can get an EBT card and some cash forever it seems.
And then the new crime wave and homeless invaders who have been welcomed with open arms by the progressive cult and supported by all the NGOs funneling money in from out of state from their national sponsors. You ask, how can this be changed and open the minds that are closed for change? The only answer available to me is it can’t until it gets so bad that the people actually revolt. I’m too old to wait it out, the Vermont people are uninformed, the republican party leadership is nowhere to be found, the good old boys club doesn’t want to be bothered and unless people are reading VDC there is very little hope. While the rest of the Red country is in a realignment unfortunately, Vermont has been occupied by the enemy and we let it happen.