|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Annette Smith
The concept of carbon capture has been in the news for years. Is it hype? Is it real? As with so much “news” these days, it is hard to tell.
What Vermonters can now bray far and wide is that this small state has achieved total success in the deployment of carbon capture.
No, it is not a technology. Nor is it something that results in reducing carbon emissions from the atmosphere.
Rather, it is a result of the long game played by Al Gore, with his Inconvenient Truth movie, and Vermont’s own New Yorker Bill McKibben, with his endless writings about the end of the world, to turn environmentalists’ focus worldwide solely on carbon emissions. Their message to our children: “live in fear.”
Nothing matters anymore except global warming, climate change, climate emergency, rising CO2 emissions. Forget about birds, bees, bats and bears. All public policy must be laser focused on reducing carbon emissions, no matter the cost. It is our North Star, our moral imperative!
European policies led the way, with massive build-out of “renewable” energy, albeit reliant on coal fired electricity to produce wind turbine components and polysilicon for solar panels. Europe is burning lots of trees exported from America’s southeast forests that meet the definition of “renewable” because it’s “biogenic CO2” — a nifty term to magically erase emissions that are worse than those from coal plants.
The United States is well on its way to assuring massive wind turbines and fields of glass-covered, aluminum-supported polysilicon arrays will cover the country’s rural landscape — to feed the electric vehicles resulting that require fossil-fueled mineral extraction in remote previously-intact ecosystems throughout the world.
No worries, Vermont is not being left behind. As everyone knows, Vermont must be a leader, and lead we will, with Vermont’s “environmental groups” banding together to teach our elected leaders what they must do and set an example for everyone to follow.
The Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA) was the great achievement of the “environmental groups.” Vermont must now reduce its tiny emissions by unrealistic levels by specific deadlines, or anyone can sue the state to make it require the Agency of Natural Resources to enact rules to achieve the emissions reduction requirements.
While the GWSA Act gives lip service to nature, the only mandate is carbon emissions reduction.
Strap on your boots, we are now on the rough ride to assure the state achieves those unachievable mandates.
(Wait. Queue the attack dogs: “She is a climate change denier. Don’t listen to her.”)
The next achievement of the “environmental groups” as they have aggressively lobbied Vermont’s legislators into submission with the passage of the GWSA is the creation of the Climate Council. An elite body consisting primarily of people with high salaries or personal wealth living in the I-89 to I-91 corridor, a/k/a the “Burlington/Montpelier Bubble,” they set to work to meet the GWSA’s unrealistic one-year deadline to draft a Climate Action Plan that was thrown together and released the night before the deadline, assuring that few on the Climate Council read it before voting on it. And vote to approve, they did.
One of the elements in the Climate Action Plan is the Clean Heat Standard, the next achievement of the “environmental groups”-led legislature who will do what they are told. Though barely discussed by the Climate Council because it was developed by a private working group from Vermont Gas Systems, Regulatory Assistance Project, and Energy Action Network, it was in the Plan, so the legislature had to act. It is a moral imperative, remember?
The Clean Heat Standard takes aim at the evil fuel dealers, and makes them change their business models from selling liquid fossil fuels to installing technology or weatherizing homes. Or they can pay for credits. The Public Utility Commission is currently struggling with the impossibly-complicated task handed to them by the legislature.
Now comes the Renewable Energy Standard, “modernized” to assure that more of Vermont’s forests are cut and fields are covered with technologies manufactured using coal energy in China. Fully captured by the carbon-reduction mantra, Vermont’s legislators praise the bill, H.289, as the result of a collaborative processbetween the utilities, the “environmental groups,” and more.
Except there were interests missing from the discussions, namely: rural communities and the people who live here, as well as the real environmentalists who focus on water, wildlife, forests, soils, toxins, and the beauty of Vermont. During all those collaborative meetings, not one member of the “environmental groups” on the panel – Vermont Natural Resources Council, Conservation Law Foundation, Sierra Club, Vermont Public Interest Research Group – said one word about the land use impacts of increasing the requirement for in-state renewables.
Welcome to the new world of Vermont environmentalism and our legislature, all of whom are now fully captured by carbon.
Annette Smith of Danby is Executive Director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment, the only organization working to protect Vermont’s natural environment and the people who live here from inappropriately-sited industrial renewable energy developments.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary, Environment
Bravo, Annette! Have you tried to get this into Digger, whose readers REALLY need to hear this point of view….? It sure is amazing that environmental concerns have become so perverted and, yes, so carbon captured…. Thank you, Annette, for this great commentary.
What are the metrics to measure progress/success? VT will never know if their tax money achieved anything other than hurting the poorest folks.
Thank you. I submitted it to Digger on Monday. On Tuesday I got this response: “Hi Annette, confirming we’ve received your submission. We’ll be in touch if we have questions or plan to publish.” Digger didn’t publish my last commentary. Prior to this year I have never had a commentary rejected by Digger. My commentary ran in the Rutland Herald yesterday alongside a commentary that ran on Digger yesterday, which says to me it was submitted around the same time. So as of now, it appears my writings are not welcome at Digger.
Vermont Digger practices Herbert Marcuse’s “Repressive Tolerance”. Free expression and free exchange of thought isn’t the objective. The propagation and indoctrination of thought is.
Digger has much to gain financially from the GWSA and it’s plethora of laws, standards rules and regulations. Views that diverge need not be considered.
What seems forgotten- or obfuscated by the draconian rules for energy- is the lawsuits. The GWSA has, courtesy of the NGO’s that wrote the legislation- a clause to allow suits against the state to force and recover damages and expenses by the plaintiff. Factor those costs into the equation for a real delight.
By phil scott not vetoing S.259 creates an open season on lawsuits and for taxpayers, the expenses to litigate those suits. Good work and great income for the NGO’s that seize the opportunity to litigate and collect.
Just another “hidden” tax added to Vermont’s already crushing tax liabilities.
Thank you, Ms. Smith, for your public skepticism on this matter. While it’s ironic that the ‘collaborative meetings’ you reference not only ignore the exorbitant land use requirements of their recommended energy policies, that they do so in order to reduce CO2, one of the most essential compounds supporting all life on the planet, is equally telling.
Not only will Digger not publish Ms. Smith’s commentary, our legislators won’t respond to reasonable questioning either. Why? Because they won’t/can’t explain exactly how reducing CO2, actually a trace gas accounting for only 4/100ths of one percent of our atmosphere, reverses or even reduces the earth’s warming trend.
Want proof in the pudding?
Just count the comments to Annette Smith’s missive here on VDC from our legislators and the so-called environmental groups pushing this dystopian energy policy. And yes, that’s a challenge to anyone advocating this nonsense.
If Climate Change is making the weather unpredictable, why do we want all our energy to come from the weather?
“President Joe Biden has given permission to Ukraine to strike inside Russian territory with American munitions, though he has restricted their use so Kyiv can only hit targets over the border close to Kharkiv after Russia made significant advances around the city in the northeastern part of the country close to the Russian border, two US officials told CNN on Thursday.” (You see the trial distraction was to esculate more death and destruction abroad – no peace talks eh?)
You think this will impact the climate? I opine we are all hostages in an undeclared war by an installed, belligerent regime who is hellbent on destroying the USA. Nuclear tactical weapons are not out of the equation – just a matter of who has the itchiest trigger finger. How much fuel is being spent killing and maiming civilians abroad? Is this effecting the USA carbon foot print? What is the USA social credit score at this juncture? Is $34+ trillion in federal debt to fund the war machine part of the green new deal? How many solar panels and wind turbines does it take to build bombs, tanks, and fighter jets? Is General Dynamics, General Electric, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Honeywell, Northrup Grumman et. al., included in the mandates to be 100% green energy by 2030? I’ll wait.
Don’t you think the ultimate goal might to expand the American Empire over Russia to gain dominance of that country’s vast mineral, gas and oil, precious metals, and including minerals connected to the EV industry; all the while trying to make it look like the U.S. isn’t involved. It’s a fight for world dominance on both sides of the equation while literally heating up the climate.
China and the silk road has more dominance and control currently over the USA. The delusion fed to the American people is “Russia, Russia, Russia,” while selling us out to China, China, China. Meanwhile, China cuts a deal with Russia and both make deals with African nations, Middle Eastern Nations and Latin Nations to throw the USA fiat petro currency into worthlessness. The big lie of climate change has nothing to do with the climate and everything to do with thievery and fraud. Wake up.
They don’t care about carbon capture. They make laws that cause extreme carbon waste without a care in the world about how much extra carbon is going to be used. They make laws that remove “green potential” though destruction of wealth.
For example, lets take a look at the carbon waste from this 72hour waiting period for purchasing life saving constitutionally protected equipment known as firearms.
FBI Statistics show that
Year 2023 24043 Firearm purchases
Year 2022 44722 firearm purchases
Year 2021 51549 firearm purchases
year 2020 57965 firearm purchases
The average purchase before the 72hr law was put into effect was 51,412 transactions per year. Why were they dropped in 2023 so much? Probably because people were driving to New Hampshire (more carbon) to complete transactions.
Now let’s calculate how much carbon waste they are creating per year. Let’s assume the average distance for each purchase is 40 miles away, and the average vehicle is getting 20mpg. People need to drive to the store and back 1 extra time that wouldn’t have been needed prior to this law.
This law has created an extra 4,112,960 miles of required travel per year, and 205,648 gallons of fuel wasted for no reason. The federal rate of vehicle wear and tear plus fuel cost is 67 cents which is about $2,755,683 a year. That money could have gone to higher order uses such as carbon reduction, instead of waste. All the extra wear and tear on the roads which will need to be repaired sooner that they would have to be if this law wasn’t put into effect. The usage of extra resources sooner than otherwise would have been use also disrupt the market where more supply of resources will be used up sooner than they otherwise would causing a compounding effect. This just gets worse as the years pass in 10 years that would be over 2 million gallons of just fuel that is being wasted by a single law. 51,000 hours of human time and human life that could have been used on more productive things such as investing in being green.
Lets take a look at another one. Non-serialized firearms that require people to, yet again travel and waste resources. It’s difficult to get statistics on how many of these things there are, but I calculated more than 80,000 Non-serialized firearms are currently in Vermont. This would require 6,400,000 miles of travel to rectify, using up 320,000 gallons of fuel, and around 100,000 hours of human time, etc etc.
If you go through every single bill they pass, these things are only causing more carbon usage potential. Being green is a luxury that we can only afford if the government doesn’t destroy wealth and assault its people. They need to repeal every law that causes waste and disorder. If you tell them this information they don’t give a crap. They don’t truly care how much carbon is being used, they just want you poor and miserable.
“…All public policy must be laser focused on reducing carbon emissions, no matter the cost. It is our North Star, our moral imperative!…” Such sentiments…to force constituents to do something where you’ve failed to develop a consensus will inevitably undermine the legitimacy we invest in our legislative process.