Efficiency Vermont official says S.65 would reprioritize greenhouse‑gas reductions; urges PUC oversight

For the record, my name is Peter Wach. That's I'm the managing director of this. It's my chance to speak with you again.

Peter Wach, wearing his VESC/Efficiency Vermont hat, told the Vermont Senate Natural Resources & Energy committee that S.65 would place greenhouse‑gas (GHG) emission reductions ahead of other metrics that currently guide the state's energy‑efficiency utilities. He described the bill as a reprioritization — not a removal of other values — and urged that the Public Utility Commission and Department of Public Service continue to exercise oversight and measurement.

Wach said the bill "simply moves greenhouse gas emissions to the top," while leaving in place "many important measures to ensure that the EUs continue to drive ratepayer value." He told the committee that Efficiency Vermont has helped Vermonters save more than $3,000,000,000 over 25 years and developed a network of contractors and suppliers to deliver lighting, weatherization and heat‑pump measures.

Why it matters: S.65 would change how energy‑efficiency programs are evaluated and funded. Wach said consolidating separate budgets into a fuel‑neutral pot could let programs pursue the most cost‑effective GHG reductions across fuels, but that the change raises questions about implementation, metrics and how low‑income and other equity priorities will be preserved.

Details from testimony and committee discussion: - Cost‑effectiveness and priorities: Wach said the bill moves GHG reductions to the top of the utilities' performance goals while retaining other statutory performance indicators. "We will still need to manage a significant number of different metrics as we do now," he said, noting Efficiency Vermont already tracks roughly 19 qualitative and quantitative performance indicators. - Fuel‑neutral budgeting: Wach described the proposal to combine existing revenues into a single, fuel‑neutral program budget so the utilities can fund measures that reduce fossil fuels or electricity depending on where the largest GHG benefit lies. - Low‑income and small organizations: Wach welcomed the bill’s approach to low‑ and moderate‑income households, saying it removes those expenditures from standard cost‑benefit balancing that can squeeze equity‑focused work. He noted the current low‑income spending requirement is 12% and said a 25% target for combined low/moderate income was a "reasonable starting point" for discussion. - Progressive rates and affordability: S.65 directs the PUC to consider progressive rate structures and low‑income electric rates; Wach called such tools helpful to address regressivity in energy charges. - Implementation and oversight: Wach said Efficiency Vermont will work with regulators to establish measurement and verification so the Legislature can see outcomes. He urged the committee to consult the PUC on how to operationalize the reprioritization and its weighting among competing statutory goals.

What was not decided: The hearing recorded testimony and questions but no committee vote. Wach repeatedly said he had only reviewed the bill briefly and would return with more detailed, line‑by‑line comments.

Ending: Wach said he was "cautiously optimistic" about the bill’s aims but asked the committee and regulators to clarify how priorities would be weighed and measured. Committee members signaled they would seek additional technical input from the PUC and other stakeholders as the bill is revised.