Republicans picked up enough seats in the Legislature to block the implementation of the clean heat standard, a sweeping energy proposal that would reduce Vermonters’ use of fossil fuels to heat their homes. But Democrats still have the power to force the adoption of other large-scale policy changes that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Concerns about energy costs in Vermont were a major reason that Republicans made historic gains of 19 seats in the House and six in the Senate.
The clean heat standard, passed in 2023, became one of the Democrats’ biggest liabilities on Election Day — thanks in part to a vigorous campaign against the policy by Republican Gov. Phil Scott.
“The cost estimates for the Legislature’s clean heat standard are alarming,” Scott warned voters in the weeks before they went to the polls.
House Republicans will introduce a bill to repeal the clean heat standard on day one of the 2025 legislative session. But a landmark law passed in 2020 could force the state to reduce its use of fossil fuels more quickly than the GOP is comfortable with, even if the Legislature repeals the standard.
Vermonters spend more than $3.5 billion a year to power their homes, businesses, schools and vehicles. Where that energy comes from, and how many tons of greenhouse gas emissions it generates, will be one of the most pressing policy questions for lawmakers and the governor when they return to Montpelier on Wednesday.
The clean heat standard
The policy would reduce the use of fossil fuels in home heating by asking companies that import heating fuels to help their customers transition to greener heating technologies.
If those companies can’t or won’t engage in that work, then they’d have to buy clean heat credits from the state. Money from the sale of those credits would be used to subsidize the cost of weatherization activities, or the installation of cold climate heat pumps, or other projects that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions from homes.
Scott said the policy could increase the cost of heating fuel by as much as $4 per gallon. A more recent draft analysis by the Public Utility Commission, by contrast, estimates per-gallon residential price increases of 3 cents in year one of the policy, 4 cents in year two, 10 cents in year five and 32 cents in year 10.
Jared Duval, who spoke to Vermont Public in his capacity as a member of the Vermont Climate Council, said the PUC report refutes the “absurdly high” price impacts that detractors of the clean heat standard used to sow outrage over the policy.
“Any cent of increase that would happen on the fossil fuel side would go directly toward decreasing costs and making it more possible for more Vermonters to weatherize homes, access cleaner fuels and install heat pumps and heat pump water heaters,” Duval said.
The Public Utility Commission will unveil a final set of proposed rules for the clean heat standard later this month, as well as a possible alternative. Republicans, however, appear committed to using their newfound strength in Montpelier to preventing the policy from becoming law, no matter what the PUC delivers to the Legislature.
“It’s a carbon tax. I mean, let’s face it. This is what this is,” House Minority Leader Pattie McCoy told Vermont Public in late December. “It’s a tax on carbon, for all intents and purposes. … You’re taxing fuel oil. You’re taxing gas. It’s a carbon tax.”
While the clean heat standard does not meet the definition of a tax, Republican lawmakers — and many voters — perceive it as one. The governor has vetoed the legislation before and will likely do it again. And there are now more than enough Republican votes in the House and Senate to sustain that veto.
The death of the clean heat standard, however, won’t necessarily reduce the urgency to decarbonize Vermont’s heating and transportation sectors, which account for the majority of Vermont’s overall greenhouse gas emissions.
The Global Warming Solutions Act
A 2020 law called the Global Warming Solutions Act requires Vermont to hit emissions reduction targets in 2025, 2030 and 2050. If the state doesn’t hit those benchmarks, then the same law allows individuals or organizations to sue the state. And if a court finds in their favor, a judge could force the Agency of Natural Resources to identify, and then initiate, a set of emissions reduction activities sufficient to meet the targets.
Secretary of Natural Resources Julie Moore says the 2030 target, which requires a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the levels they were at in 1990, will be especially onerous.
“And that very steep section is hard and expensive,” Moore said.
Vermonters are spending far more than they can afford to to buy fossil fuels to stay warm in the winter.Ben Walsh, Vermont Public Interest Research Group
Even the most ardent supporters of the Global Warming Solutions Act acknowledge that transitioning the state off of fossil fuels will require substantial upfront investments. But they say renewable energy sources will ultimately offer a more affordable and environmentally responsible alternative.
“Yes, there is an upfront investment. But just like in the investing world, where you say, ‘You’ve got to spend money to make money,’ in energy, you’ve got to spend money to save money,” said Ben Walsh, the climate and energy program director at the Vermont Public Interest Research Group. “Vermonters are spending far more than they can afford to to buy fossil fuels to stay warm in the winter. And we’re doing no one any favors by avoiding those investments that’ll ultimately save money.”
Moore said she agrees that Vermonters could benefit from a more gradual move away from fossil fuels. But speeding up the pace of the decarbonization process to comply with the 2030 mandate, she said, could cause economic disruption and financial distress, especially for low- and middle-income residents.
“We I think have not given the same level of attention to thinking about the fact that you have to make an upfront investment in order to generate those long-term savings, and instead a lot of folks are hanging their hat on the fact that the long-term savings exist,” Moore said.
The path ahead
Republicans argue that any climate policy that empowers a judge to force unelected executive branch officials to adopt potentially costly emissions reductions is reckless. Incoming Senate Minority Leader Scott Beck says his caucus will be calling for significant revisions to the law.
“While science has clearly measured the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and linked that increase to a warming planet, (the Global Warming Solutions Act) and its goal of zero carbon emissions by 2050 ignores many scientific and technological realities: economics, the limits of alternative energy, and Vermont’s winter climate.”
Republicans won’t be able to meaningfully change the law, however, unless Democrats cede the point. The GOP has the numbers they need to block the clean heat standard because it only takes 51 votes in the House, and 11 in the Senate, to sustain a gubernatorial veto. Repealing or revising an existing state law, however, would require a majority vote in both chambers of the Legislature. And Republicans are still the minority party in both chambers.
Washington County Sen. Anne Watson, one of two returning Democrats on the Senate Committee on Natural Resources, said the emissions reductions mandates, and legal consequences for failing to comply with them, provide the impetus Vermont needs to take climate action seriously.
“I’m very open to a conversation about thinking about how we go about that. I’m much more inclined to have a conversation about the how rather than pushing back the dates for the when,” Watson said.
The emissions reduction mandates enshrined in Vermont law weren’t pulled out of thin air. They represent commitments outlined in the 2016 Paris Agreement.
It is the most vulnerable people across the planet, including Vermonters, who will be left behind if we don’t lean into the energy system of the future, which is more clean, efficient energy technologies.Johanna Miller, Vermont Natural Resources Council
Vermont has the second-highest per-capita emissions in New England, and has made the least progress toward reaching the Paris Agreement targets of any New England state since 2005. And thousands of Vermonters have watched their homes and businesses flood over the past two years due to rain events made more severe by a warming planet.
Johanna Miller, energy and climate program director at the Vermont Natural Resources Council, said Vermont has an economic and moral imperative to undertake the activities needed to comply with the targets.
“It is the most vulnerable people across the planet, including Vermonters, who will be left behind if we don’t lean into the energy system of the future, which is more clean, efficient energy technologies,” Miller said.
Vermont simultaneously lays claim to emitting the fewest greenhouse gas emissions of any state in the country. And the 7 million metric tons or so of carbon pollution Vermont generates a year account for 0.0001% of global emissions.
“We’re … a blip on the screen," McCoy said. "And yet, we spend all this money.”
Have questions, comments or tips? Send us a message.
_
