Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Efficiency Utility Jurisdiction topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rep. Logan pitches bill to let efficiency utilities fund heat pumps, weatherization and emissions reductions
Summary
Representative Kate Logan presented H.196, which would expand the statutory scope of Vermont’s efficiency utilities to include thermal measures and greenhouse‑gas emissions reductions and allow electricity efficiency funds to be used for non‑electric measures targeted at low‑income households, nonprofits and small businesses.
Representative Kate Logan introduced H.196 to the House Energy and Digital Infrastructure Committee as a pre‑crossover briefing on a bill expected from the Senate. The proposal would update the statutory priorities for Vermont’s efficiency utilities so they can pursue greenhouse‑gas reductions and multi‑fuel measures — for example, weatherization and heat‑pump installation — in addition to traditional electricity efficiency programs.
Logan said the bill is intended to broaden the utilities’ focus so programs can reduce overall energy use and emissions even when electricity consumption rises because customers electrify heating. "It will increase overall electricity usage, but will decrease overall energy usage, and will also decrease greenhouse gas emissions," Logan said, summarizing the policy tradeoff the bill intends to formalize.
The bill would apply to existing efficiency utilities, including Efficiency Vermont and the municipal utility program model (Burlington Electric) and would allow funds collected as an efficiency charge on electric bills to be used for thermal measures. Committee members asked whether fees or customer bills would change; sponsors and staff said utilities must still seek budgets and approvals through the Public Utility Commission process and that the bill includes language to cap budgets (the total annual budget comparable to a 2026, inflation‑adjusted cap was discussed).
Several questions focused on practical and fairness issues: how to avoid duplicative programs with tiered utility responsibilities, whether the cost‑recovery mechanism could shift burdens between ratepayer classes, and how funding decisions would target low‑ and moderate‑income customers. Logan said the bill includes a study provision to examine progressive or income‑based rate options for energy bills and asked the committee to consider program safeguards to address fairness.
Logan said she had coordinated with Senate sponsors and with some stakeholders while drafting the bill; she also said details were still being refined and the committee would have the bill — as amended in the Senate — before crossover.
Next steps: committee staff will monitor the companion Senate bill (S.65), review the text when it arrives, and consider amendments related to budget caps, program targets for low‑income households, and mechanisms to avoid duplication with other utility programs.
