RutlandHerald.com - We Are Vermont

Climate action



Toolbox

Published: October 31, 2007

The governor's commission on climate change produced its long-awaited report last week, outlining an ambitious course of action on energy and economic issues.

Gov. James Douglas established the commission two years ago with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2012 and 50 percent below by 2028. Since then Douglas has become embroiled in a variety of climate-related political controversies that, one hopes, the work of the commission will help resolve in a positive way.

Ernest Pomerleau, a pillar of the Burlington area business community, was chairman of the commission, and so the commission's report cannot be dismissed as the work of wild-eyed environmentalists. The climate issue is grounded in the facts of the economy, local and global.

One of the principal conclusions of the commission's report is that to address the climate issue in a meaningful way it must be attacked on all fronts. The report discusses a variety of ways to cut down on fossil fuel consumption and otherwise reduce the state's carbon footprint. And it says the state must do all of them.

One of the significant recommendations of the report is to reduce the consumption of heating fuels in homes and businesses the way that the state has used Efficiency Vermont to reduce the consumption of electricity.

Douglas vetoed a bill earlier this year that would have established just such a program because of differences about the program's funding. But then he sought to implement by administrative action some of the energy-saving goals that would have been addressed by an expanded version of Efficiency Vermont, which suggest he understands there is a need to act.

His own commission has underscored that reality. It will put new impetus behind efforts in the Legislature to craft an all-fuels energy conservation program that will not run afoul of the governor's objections. And it will put new pressure on Douglas to join in the effort to take aggressive action on energy conservation.

Douglas sought to define the agenda of the coming year by conducting a listening tour during which he heard the concerns of Vermonters. The conclusions he drew from his tour were disturbing.

He said he did not hear a great clamor from Vermonters about climate change. He said Vermonters were more concerned about their taxes.

Vermonters are concerned about both. The clamor about climate is out there, and if Douglas hasn't heard it, it is because he hasn't been listening, or he has been listening selectively. Now his own commission has joined the clamor.

The clamor has arisen because of the mounting evidence that climate change is upon us. We have become familiar with the effects of climate change: the shrinking ice caps, the receding glaciers, the imperiled species, the droughts and storms. But now these effects are themselves becoming causes for accelerating change.

Recent reports say that carbon emissions are growing faster even than the worst-case scenarios previously predicted. One report showed that the oceans are no longer absorbing carbon dioxide as they used to, which could speed global warming beyond even the most dire warnings.

The governor's commission has pointed the way, and if Douglas is listening, he will embrace its findings as his own.








READER COMMENTS


One of the significant recommendations of the report is to reduce the consumption of heating fuels in homes and businesses the way that the state has used Efficiency Vermont to reduce the consumption of electricity.

Douglas vetoed a bill earlier this year that would have established just such a program because of differences about the program's funding. But then he sought to implement by administrative action some of the energy-saving goals that would have been addressed by an expanded version of Efficiency Vermont, which suggest he understands there is a need to act.


Suggesting that Governor Douglas vetoed the bill "because of differences about the program's funding" may be true, but you are disingenuous in that, if you recall, you were also against the bill for the exact same reason the governor was against the bill. It is noteworthy that at this time however you leave that out, not to mention the fact that the "differences about the program's funding" was just this little issue the sneaky Shumlin tried to railroad through which amounted to a HUGE, multimillion dollar tax against ONE COMPANY. That bill, then was properly vetoed NOT because of the efficiency aspects as much as for the directed tax at one company.

Furthermore, lefties like to point out that Efficiency Vermont is a non-profit and did (supposedly) all kinds of wonderful things with electricity, and therefore should be able to do the same with oil and every other energy used in the state. What people fail to realize is that just because an unit is a "non-profit" by some definition, they still have to make money to pay the salaries, and some very nice 6-figure salaries, or they, like any corporation do not stay in business. In other words, they are essentially a company that pays no taxes, and they get away with this because they are doing "good". Yah, well, others might suggest that Entergy is doing good for us too, and rather than lowering their taxes Shumlin wanted to tax them out of business.

His own commission has underscored that reality. It will put new impetus behind efforts in the Legislature to craft an all-fuels energy conservation program that will not run afoul of the governor's objections. And it will put new pressure on Douglas to join in the effort to take aggressive action on energy conservation.

Douglas HAS, as much as any other governor taken action. He thankfull did not take the action of directing a tax at Entergy and he was correct in wondering just how much power Efficiency Vermont ought to have. The left's other claim that a non-profit is a non-profit therefore it can't be a beaurcracy is pure garbage. They are a beauracracy and growing larger by the day. This would have given way too much power to this one unit. And the question should be asked, who really profits here?

Douglas sought to define the agenda of the coming year by conducting a listening tour during which he heard the concerns of Vermonters. The conclusions he drew from his tour were disturbing.

He said he did not hear a great clamor from Vermonters about climate change. He said Vermonters were more concerned about their taxes.

Vermonters are concerned about both. The clamor about climate is out there, and if Douglas hasn't heard it, it is because he hasn't been listening, or he has been listening selectively. Now his own commission has joined the clamor.


Jiminy Christmas, you guys are amazing! He did not say, that no one in the state of Vermont was not interested in global warming. He said he did not hear a great clamor, and that may very well be true. Outside of your circles, contrary to what you might believe, global warming is NOT on the top of everyone's mind, and dare I say it, probably not in the top 5 or 10 with many.

That the conclusions were disturbing to YOU does not mean they are disturbing to the average overburdened taxpayer of the state of Vermont. While you sit around waiting on some climate armageddon, the rest of us are more concerned about our property taxes going through the roof, or wondering which of our employers is going to be the next to dash out of our business un-friendly state.

Man-made global warming may or may not be happening, and maybe there are things we can or should be doing, but... and this is not understood in your sauvignon and brie crowd, but there are more urgent day to day issues that are affecting us a whole lot more than whether this year was 0.1 degrees warmer than 1975.

The clamor has arisen because of the mounting evidence that climate change is upon us. We have become familiar with the effects of climate change: the shrinking ice caps, the receding glaciers, the imperiled species, the droughts and storms. But now these effects are themselves becoming causes for accelerating change.

Recent reports say that carbon emissions are growing faster even than the worst-case scenarios previously predicted. One report showed that the oceans are no longer absorbing carbon dioxide as they used to, which could speed global warming beyond even the most dire warnings.


Oh heavens! Don't buy any green bananas!
-- Posted by Allen Kuusela on Wed, Oct 31, 2007, 11:12 am EST

report this comment


You must be logged in to leave a comment. Register | Log In

Logout