The New Clean Heat Standard Spin Is Dangerously Laughable

Part 2: Equity Group concludes program would especially hurt the poor.

Follow BTL on Facebook, on TwitterX, and on YouTube.

The first attempt at spinning the Clean Heat Standard (Act 18) was that it was a “solution” to “global warming” in the thermal sector, hence the name of its mother law, the Global Warming “Solutions” Act. But after bouts of major flooding throughout Vermont made it obvious to everybody that this and programs like it were not going to have any impact on the climate and/or future weather trends, the spin shifted to “resilience!” in the face of “climate change.” The problem with that argument is that a home with a brand-new heat pump and $10k worth of weatherization improvements that is located in a floodplain isn’t any more resilient to being destroyed than one with an old oil furnace that’s insulated with corn cobs.

Which brings us to the latest spin as backers of this moronic policy continue their frantic attempts at political CPR instead of mercifully calling time of death – the old chestnut, “We just want to help the poor.” Heart emoji.

This was articulated by House Energy & Digital Infrastructure Committee chair, Kathleen James (D-Manchester), when she told her colleagues, “So emissions reductions to me are the metric, but the real story is how we're helping Vermonters heat their homes and get around.” Okay. So that’s the REAL story now. Eyeroll.

Others on her committee followed suit with comments like this one from freshman legislator Christopher Morrow (D-Londonderry), who poo-pooed the primary importance of emissions reduction and opined, “Some people like myself are worried about Vermonters being left behind and seeing an increase in burden because they are and fossil fuel prices, a lack of access, a lack of choice as that's transitioning [from fossil fuels to electric].”

But here’s the problem with the “we’re from the government and we’re here to help the poor” argument. The Equity Advisory Group (EAG) that worked with the Public Utilities Commission in designing the Clean Heat Standard concluded rather damningly that the program would, to put it mildly, screw low- and middle-income Vermonters every which way and in every financial orifice imaginable.

Anybody says transitioning to all electric powered by renewables is cheaper, make them explain this graph! https://archive.ph/lZKbb

Here, in a nutshell, is the EAG’s overview of what implementing the Clean Heat Standard would do:

… many disadvantaged communities, including Vermonters of Color, low-income households, moderate income households, renters, and residents of mobile homes, face significant challenges in accessing clean heat measures in their homes. Without additional intervention from the Legislature, these households will struggle to experience the benefits available under the Clean Heat Standard while bearing a disproportionate share of the costs.

So, these lawmakers (all Democrats and Progressives, by the way) are telling us that they are “helping” low- and moderate-income Vermonters by forcing them pick up a disproportionately high amount of the lowball estimated billion-dollar tab for a program they will largely not be able to benefit from. It’s a “wealthfare” program. As the saying goes, with friends like these!

Here are some other conclusions drawn by the Equity Advisory Group regarding the CHS’s impact on lower income Vermonters:

Since low- and moderate-income customers tend to spend a higher percentage of their incomes on heating, higher fuel prices have a disproportionate impact on the households with the least ability to absorb the costs…. The EAG heard from many commenters that any increase in fuel prices would be very difficult to shoulder. Many commenters, especially those living on fixed incomes or paycheck to paycheck, worried about their ability to remain in their homes.

That’s ANY increase in heating fuel prices threatens to drive people out of their homes. The official estimate (which is likely low) points to a 58 cent per gallon near-term increase in heating oil costs. There’s more…

The CHS will particularly impact very low-income households receiving benefits from the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). LIHEAP assistance is based on the MarginOver-Rack (MOR) pricing, or the fixed price participating fuel dealers can charge a customer receiving fuel assistance funds. Under Act 18, the MOR price will be subject to any potential clean heat fee…. LIHEAP recipients will see their total benefit reduced.

In other words, lower-income Vermonters will have to pay more out of pocket for heat and receive less help if and when they need it. That’s caring? And…

Higher price increases in fuel oil, kerosene, and propane will more heavily impact low-income households, who are more likely to use those fuel types.

As for the worry about “leaving people behind”….

Many groups, including but not limited to, households in older homes, renters, households in mobile homes, and low- and moderate-income households, face significant financial and structural obstacles to reducing fossil fuel use in their homes.

…. The Clean Heat Standard ensures low-income Vermonters are left in the dust. This is how Democrats and Progressive insist they’re helping! Is it any wonder we are dealing with an affordability crisis across so many aspects of our state economy?

One last point of warning regarding the Equity Group’s report. They point out that “Installing clean heat measures in low- and moderate-income homes will require larger incentives or, in some cases, will require the project to be fully paid for by another entity.” And, “Substantial investments in companion programs will be necessary to ensure an equitable implementation of the Clean Heat Standard for all Vermonters.”

The costs of these programs, let alone what they would look like, have not yet been explored and are not reflected in the billion dollar price tag/58 cent per gallon impact to the cost of fossil heating fuels. If more revenue generated from clean heat credits is necessary to fund these “substantial investments” the cost for heating fuels would be driven up even higher than the current estimates. Or, Vermonters would be looking at another tax or tax increase somewhere else, making Vermont – you got it! – less affordable. Again.

Conclusion: if you have genuine compassion and really want to help the poor, demand the full repeal Act 18 the Clean Heat Standard, ASAP.

• Rob Roper is a freelance writer with 20 years of experience in Vermont politics including three years service as chair of the Vermont Republican Party and nine years as President of the Ethan Allen Institute, Vermont’s free market think tank.

• Thanks to GoldenDomeVT.com for its committee transcript service, which contributed to this story.

---

Click that ♡ button, please. And don’t forget to subscribe and share. I’m grateful for your help with growing the BTL audience!Thanks to for providing committee transcripts