Vermont in the climate crisis: False solutions or a greener path?

by 350VT Members, Liz Steel and Greg Dennis

photo credit, VPR

This has been a brutal year for many Vermonters, with waves of extreme weather driven by climate change. A late frost in May killed new plant shoots. After that the air was full of smoke from Canadian wildfires. Then came the floods, with many towns and families underwater — literally. 

This is not normal weather and these are not normal times. 

Farmers are struggling amid destructive and unfamiliar climate conditions. Many Vermonters are still awaiting help to restore homes and businesses. The cost to clean up flooded state offices is already over $22 million. 

So where does Vermont go from here? 

We are among the many Vermonters who see the possibility of a strong and resilient state adapting to climate change. A state that lives up to its “green” reputation and — in a just transition to clean energy — leaves no Vermonter behind as we substantially reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

Still, there’s a lot of work to be done before we get there. Starting with an accurate assessment of where we stand and who will control future decision-making.

Despite repeated vetoes from Gov. Phil Scott, the Legislature has on the surface made some progress: It approved a Global Warming Solutions Act and then a Climate Action Plan, with legal commitments to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

There’s also new movement toward divesting state funds out of fossil fuel companies. On the table are bills to protect ratepayers and promote geothermal networks and carbon sequestration.

But in reality, Vermont still relies on false climate solutions. And we are well behind other New England states in addressing climate change. 

Vermont has the second-highest greenhouse gas emissions per capita in all New England. We are the worst in the region at reducing those emissions over the past 15 years (an 11% reduction versus a regional average of 22%).

Why should Vermonters care?

Because even our small state needs to do its part. And because the decisions being made now will affect how our homes, businesses and schools are heated, cooled and lit — and how clean and climate-friendly they will be.

A key shortcoming is that Vermont’s accounting on climate emissions is dishonest. That in turn has misled legislators and other Vermonters into thinking the state is doing well at confronting the climate crisis. 

Take the claim that we have clean electricity. Over 24% of it comes directly from Hydro-Quebec. That number rises to 52% counting “renewable energy credits.” But those credits rarely create new renewable energy. And among New England states, only Vermont counts large-scale hydroelectric as emission-free. The reality is that the flooding of vast Quebec forests (by hydro dams) continues to release carbon dioxide and methane gas.

Another false climate “solution” is Burlington’s reliance on using wood to create electricity at the McNeil plant: It’s the state’s single greatest source of climate-busting carbon emissions.

Even legislation that’s been supported by many environmentalists — such as the Affordable Heat Act — contains loopholes that were crafted by and benefit large corporations rather than average Vermonters. A key element of the AHA is to require utilities and fuel dealers to obtain “clean heat credits.” Good news, right? Well, maybe not all good. After lobbying by Vermont Gas Systems and others, the Affordable Heat Act contains a big loophole: It incentivizes biofuels as “clean heat” even though these fuels (including “renewable” natural gas) do essentially nothing to cut greenhouse gases. 

Moreover, it’s obvious that in the face of the climate emergency, many of the same old Vermont power structures and decision makers remain in place. When it comes to climate policies, our state continues to grant an overly large voice to self-interested corporations.

We’re concerned that the process of relying on false solutions is again being played out in Montpelier. There, a legislative study committee — including GlobalFoundries, Green Mountain Power and several other electric utilities, together with some environmental organizations — is shaping a plan to modify Vermont’s Renewable Energy Standard. The existing standard contains strong elements of greenwashing. It allows utilities to meet state standards not by building cleaner energy facilities such as wind, solar, batteries and geothermal. Instead, they can buy their way out by purchasing “renewable energy credits” from already existing energy sources. Will we get a better renewable energy standard? That depends on whether Vermonters let their elected leaders know they want a standard that requires utilities to create more — and appropriately sited — green energy within Vermont and the region.

Unless we nurture even more participation to elevate the voices of ordinary citizens who want clean energy — including lower-income folks and Vermonters of color — it will be that much harder to create a better climate future for Vermont, one characterized by a sustainable economy that fosters green jobs with livable wages; protects ratepayers; promotes regional food systems; and preserves biological diversity.