Energy Action Network brief to House panel: Vermont pays $2.2 billion for fossil fuels, transition raises equity concerns

Energy Action Network told the House Energy and Digital Infrastructure Committee on Thursday that Vermonters collectively spent about $2.2 billion on fossil fuels in 2022 and just under $1 billion on electricity, and that the state’s energy transition raises affordability and economic‑transition risks for lower‑income and rural households.

Jared Duvall, executive director of the Energy Action Network, said the group is “an independent nonprofit organization … based in Montpelier” and described EAN’s role as data tracking and neutral convening. “Energy Action Network as a nonprofit organization does not take positions on bills before the legislature,” he told the panel.

The presentation laid out three linked points: where Vermont’s energy comes from, how much Vermonters spend on it, and where greenhouse‑gas emissions originate. Duvall summarized the current picture: most state energy use and spending is in transportation and the thermal sector (home, commercial and industrial heating), while electricity is the smallest sector in consumption but the most renewable in Vermont’s purchased portfolio.

The packet of figures Duvall cited included: roughly 550,000 registered vehicles in the state and about 15,000 electric vehicles as of July of the prior year; electricity accounting that is about 75% renewable, 16% nuclear and roughly 9% fossil fuel under post–renewable energy credit (REC) accounting; and a thermal sector fuel mix that the presentation described as roughly 26% fuel oil and kerosene, 26% fossil (utility) gas, 20% propane and a substantial portion from wood (cordwood, chips and pellets).

Duvall explained the difference between pre‑ and post‑REC accounting: more renewable electricity is generated in Vermont than is counted in the state’s purchased portfolio because renewable energy credits are sold out of state and the legal accounting follows REC sales. “There’s much more renewable energy produced in state than we actually end up accounting for at the end of the REC accounting process,” he said.

On transportation, Duvall said about two‑thirds of transportation fuel consumption is gasoline and about one quarter is diesel; electricity comprised roughly 0.2% of transportation energy use in the 2022 accounting he presented, though he said EV adoption is likely higher in more recent years. He stressed efficiency differences between combustion and electric technologies: “Less than a quarter of the energy that’s put in gasoline ends up actually moving the vehicle,” while modern electric drivetrains transfer a much higher share of input energy to movement.

Committee members questioned several technical points, including how EVs and other technologies are counted (Duvall: EVs are counted in transportation; their emissions are assigned to the electricity sector in the greenhouse‑gas inventory), whether off‑grid generation is reflected (Duvall: it likely is not captured in the utility purchase portfolios he showed), and how REC sales move in‑state generation off Vermont’s accounting. Representatives also asked about renewable natural gas shares (Duvall said he did not have an exact figure on hand and that some RNG is mixed into the gas pipeline) and whether composting or landfill methane changes are reflected in the waste line (Duvall deferred that technical point to the Department of Environmental Conservation experts).

Duvall highlighted price volatility: gasoline and diesel have shown larger price swings historically compared with electricity, and presented a statewide average “cost to charge an EV” line that he said is lower than the equivalent price for gasoline. He noted utilities can offer lower EV charging rates with time‑of‑use or managed charging programs; Green Mountain Power’s EV rate was cited as an example.

Several members and Duvall raised equity and economic‑transition concerns. EAN’s data showed lower‑income households spend less in absolute dollars on energy but a far higher share of household budgets on energy (for example, households below 60% of area median income spend a larger share of income on energy than higher‑income households). Duvall said the state faces a risk that people who can afford upfront investments will access long‑term savings from electrification and efficiency while low‑ and moderate‑income households remain locked into higher‑cost, fossil‑fuel‑dependent systems.

Committee members also discussed market changes and potential consolidation in fuel delivery (for example, fewer oil vendors serving dispersed rural customers), workforce and installation bottlenecks for weatherization and heat‑pump installation, and the need for financing mechanisms to cover upfront costs. Duvall noted Vermont currently sees about 2,000 homes weatherized per year and that accelerating that rate has been difficult because of funding and workforce limits.

Duvall closed by pointing committee members to EAN’s public, interactive dashboards for energy and emissions data and offered to provide additional analysis. Committee leadership said they expect utility witnesses in future meetings to address grid capacity, long‑range transmission planning and impacts of increased electrification.

Ending: The committee heard that Vermont’s emissions trajectory will require further policy and program action to meet the targets set in state law and that the economic consequences of the energy transition — particularly for rural and low‑income Vermonters and small fuel vendors — deserve specific planning alongside measures to accelerate electrification and weatherization.