Public Service Department outlines comprehensive energy plan, links it to H.289 at committee hearing

BURLINGTON, March 19 — At a House Energy and Digital Infrastructure Committee hearing, TJ Poore, director of regulated utility planning at the Vermont Public Service Department, presented an overview of the state’s Comprehensive Energy Plan and explained how the plan’s analyses and recommendations relate to pending legislation in H.289.

The plan, Poore said, is grounded in state statute (Title 30 §202b) and is produced on a multi‑year cycle to guide administration priorities. “It is the administration that does this plan,” Poore said, adding that the plan must reconcile competing priorities including affordability, economic vitality, reliability and greenhouse gas reductions.

Poore told lawmakers the plan uses the Low Emissions Analysis Platform, or LEAP, a transparent input‑output modeling framework developed and supported by the Stockholm Environment Institute, to test scenarios for energy demand, technology deployment and emissions. “All these models are wrong. Right? And some of the models are useful,” Poore said, arguing the model’s transparency and ability to capture interactive effects (for example, weatherization plus a heat pump in the same home) make it suitable for planning.

Why it matters: the Comprehensive Energy Plan sets the analytic basis the administration uses to recommend energy policy and to prioritize actions in areas from utility regulation to weatherization and transportation electrification. Poore said H.289 gives the administration an opportunity to translate plan recommendations into an implementation plan that explicitly evaluates Vermont and societal impacts — “including cost” — and to prioritize measures across sectors.

Key points from Poore’s presentation and committee discussion

• Statutory basis and cadence: Poore cited Title 30 §202b as the statutory requirement for the comprehensive energy plan and said the plan is produced on a regular cycle (currently every six years).

• Modeling and assumptions: The department used LEAP for emissions‑and‑energy scenario work and shared model inputs publicly. Poore said LEAP’s openness contrasts with prior “black box” models and allows stakeholders and regional partners to review assumptions. He also said some prior demand projections may be high and noted early data showing certain ductless mini‑split heat pumps are being used more for cooling than anticipated, reducing winter electricity use compared with earlier forecasts.

• Relationship with the Climate Action Plan: Poore described the energy plan as an administration product focused on cost effectiveness and utility planning, whereas the Climate Action Plan is led by the Climate Council and focuses primarily on meeting greenhouse gas reduction mandates. He said the two documents overlap on modeling, public engagement and equity, but can differ on whether cost effectiveness is central to decision making.

• Equity and procedural justice: Poore said equity and environmental justice were elevated to core decision criteria in this plan. He described the plan’s emphasis on distributing benefits to communities and addressing procedural barriers so more Vermonters can participate in policy design and programs.

• Sector recommendations highlighted by Poore: - Electricity: the plan calls for deeper carbon‑free electricity by 2032 and recommends reviews of programs such as net metering, standard offer, and community solar to better match supply and winter demand. Poore said the department’s proposal intended to accelerate emissions reductions while better distributing costs and benefits. - Thermal/buildings: the plan advances demand‑reduction strategies including weatherization and higher building performance for new construction. Poore noted the commonly cited goal of 20,000 weatherizations by 2030 but said the number’s provenance is unclear and that the feasibility depends on workforce and stable funding. - Transportation: the plan emphasizes vehicle electrification, charging‑station deployment, EV rate design, and land‑use measures to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Poore referenced alignment with Advanced Clean Cars II regulations in states that adopt them.

• Clean heat standard and other divergences: Poore said the energy plan recommends studying a clean heat standard rather than immediately adopting one; by contrast the Climate Action Plan favored adopting such a standard sooner. The department urged study to understand market impacts and distributional effects before making a policy choice.

• Nuclear and the renewable/clean energy standard: Poore noted that roughly 18% of Vermont’s electricity portfolio came from nuclear sources in the most recent accounting and that the current Renewable Energy Standard treats those non‑renewable but non‑emitting contracts in a way that can require purchase of renewable attributes. Poore estimated roughly $4 per megawatt‑hour on about one million megawatt‑hours would amount to about $4 million per year in attribute purchases to “cover up” that portion of the portfolio, and he said recognizing existing nuclear in a clean standard can reduce ratepayer costs.

• Resilience and grid evolution: The department has petitioned the Public Utility Commission to open a resilience proceeding to identify reliability and resilience metrics, appropriate geographic granularity, and tools for utilities. Poore said the proceeding could run about a year and will inform how Vermont targets investments that are major drivers of utility bills.

• H.289 and implementation: Poore said H.289 creates an opportunity to require an administration implementation plan that prioritizes actions, clarifies costs and timelines, and links energy plan recommendations with concrete steps.

Committee exchange and technical clarifications

Representative Scott Campbell pressed on how the department balances cost effectiveness and affordability, saying cost‑effectiveness calculations “are actually a problematic calculation” because they require future cost assumptions. Poore responded that the department quantifies what it can (including social cost of carbon) and then considers distributional effects and program feasibility.

James Zorcek, a staff participant in modeling work, said the state converted LEAP datasets to the latest platform and that licenses are shared between the Public Service Department and the Agency of Natural Resources for coordinated use in planning and regional downscaling.

No formal votes or decisions were taken at the hearing. Poore and lawmakers agreed that H.289 and related proceedings offer avenues to move from plan recommendations to implementation steps and that further stakeholder engagement and technical work will continue.