Vermont Climate Council members tell House committee Clean Heat and other recommendations show net benefits; warn against counting land sinks in near‑term goals

Members of the Vermont Climate Council said Tuesday that careful economic studies show the climate action pathways the council recommended are likely to deliver net societal savings, and they cautioned lawmakers against using ‘‘net’’ accounting that counts uncertain land‑based carbon sinks in near‑term targets.

Jared Duvall, an appointed member of the Vermont Climate Council and chair of its Science & Data Subcommittee, told the House Energy and Digital Infrastructure Committee that cost‑effectiveness is explicitly required by the Global Warming Solutions Act and that the council’s recommended pathways have not been shown to impose net costs on society. "For many consumers, adopting measures to reduce emissions will save money," Duvall said while citing analyses commissioned by the Agency of Natural Resources and the Public Utility Commission.

Duvall summarized key findings he said should be on the record: a 2021 economic analysis contracted by the Agency of Natural Resources estimated roughly $6.4 billion in net societal savings from modeled economy‑wide pollution‑reduction pathways tied to the Global Warming Solutions Act; a later 2023 ANR‑commissioned report on building thermal policies showed net societal benefits ranging from about $2 billion to $3.5 billion through 2050; and a Public Utility Commission analysis of a draft Clean Heat Standard estimated net benefits of more than $1.5 billion by 2030. He also said Vermont households collectively spend about $2 billion a year on fossil fuels, "about 75% of that leaving the state economy."

Duvall said those topline numbers show why analysts look at lifetime costs and benefits rather than only upfront price changes. "Are there upfront costs to the energy transition? Of course there are. But upfront investment costs do not automatically mean that something is not cost effective," he said.

The council members framed affordability as an equity issue: lower‑income households often pay a disproportionate share of their budgets on high‑cost, price‑volatile fossil fuels such as propane and fuel oil, while higher‑income households more readily afford the upfront investments that capture long‑term savings. Duvall emphasized the need for dedicated, sustainable revenues — grants, incentives and financing — to ensure lower‑income households are not left behind.

On accounting methods, Duvall argued most U.S. states with greenhouse gas statutes use gross emissions accounting for near‑term targets rather than a net framework that counts land‑use sequestration. He cited Vermont’s greenhouse gas inventory and methodology documents, which he said note "a lack of reliable data" and "low confidence" in land‑use and forestry flux estimates. "A major risk is that sequestration numbers that may not be real or accurate would significantly offset emissions from fossil fuel burning that are very real," he said. He quoted the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Sixth Assessment Report to underline that combustion of fossil fuels accounted for roughly 81–91% of anthropogenic CO2 emissions in the last decade.

Richard Cowart, another appointed council member, echoed the call for a long‑term perspective and pointed to Vermont’s experience with utility‑sponsored energy efficiency programs. He said efficiency investments — funded largely through an energy efficiency charge — have been expensive up front but have yielded multi‑billion‑dollar lifetime savings: "We spent about $964 million and over the lifetime of those measures we are going to save about $3.4 billion," Cowart said, adding that the avoided social costs of reduced carbon add further value.

Cowart described a policy gap he said leaves the thermal (building heating) sector with the least public policy support despite its high emissions and high cost to households. He urged scaling and funding weatherization, replacing old fossil equipment, and designing revenue‑sensitive programs that prioritize low‑ and moderate‑income households. "If you want to reduce housing costs for vulnerable providers, you need to tackle the high cost of fossil heat," he said.

Committee members pressed for written testimony and follow‑up materials; both council members said they would submit slides and written testimony and recommended further meetings to discuss concrete financing options.

Why it matters: Committee members heard that analyses commissioned by state agencies project net savings from the transition measures under discussion, but council members also warned that counting uncertain land‑based sequestration in near‑term targets risks understating the changes required to reduce fossil emissions. They urged lawmakers to pair emissions goals with targeted funding strategies to protect lower‑income households.

The committee did not take formal votes on policy or funding at Tuesday’s session.