Earlier this summer, the Vermont Climate Council approved an update to the state’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) by a vote of 16 to 3. The CAP runs 350 pages, including 21 pages that outline ten “Priority Recommendations.”

The CAP is required under the 2020 Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA) and is intended to guide lawmakers and regulators on how to meet the greenhouse gas emission reduction mandates in the GWSA.

Many of the CAP Priority Recommendations are the same as or similar to proposals and concepts that have been discussed for half a decade or more. This includes ideas that have been partially adopted, ignored or left dormant by the Vermont Legislature, many of which are energy taxes or would likely be funded by energy taxes.

The plan does not identify a price tag for any of the Priority Recommendations, or most other concepts, included in the document.

Prepare to Join Carbon Cap & Trade Program(s). We reviewed what a Cap & Trade program would look like for Vermont in March.

Based on a report commissioned by the state and a review of impacts from existing state programs, Vermonters could expect the cost of propane, natural gas, oil, diesel, and gasoline to increase by up to 83 cents per gallon.

A transportation fuel-specific Cap & Trade schemes, like California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard, could raise the price of gasoline and diesel by nearly $1.50 per gallon by 2035.

Utility Upgrades to Support Electric Vehicles and All-Electric Buildings. This recommendation would likely involve making it easier for electric utilities or others to recover the cost of expensive transmission and distribution system upgrades from their customers.

New England’s electric grid operator, ISO-NE, estimates that regional transmission upgrades may run as high as $26 billion to meet state policy goals and connect renewable energy projects to customers.

An independent analysis published in November 2024 found that state renewable energy mandates and goals will cost New England ratepayers $815 billion over the next 25 years. This includes expensive upgrades to generation, transmission and distribution infrastructure that will result in significantly higher electric bills every year from 2025 through 2050:

– Residential: +$99 per year every year ($2,574 higher than 2024 costs)

– Commercial: +$490 per year every year ($12,726 higher than 2024 costs)

– Industrial: +$5,280 per year every year ($137,275 higher than 2024 costs)

Most large-scale transmission projects are regional, and Vermonters will not escape the cost increases associated with the regional shift from 24/7 baseload power (e.g., natural gas) to intermittent generating resources and battery backup (e.g, wind, solar, batteries).

More Energy Taxes for Electrification Rebates. Essentially, an expansion of state-funded or utility customer-funded EV rebates and incentives, along with a modified version of the dormant Clean Heat Tax or other taxpayer- or ratepayer-funded financial giveaways to “fuel switch” from oil, propane, or natural gas to electric heat and appliances.

A Vermont Public Utilities Commission report found the Clean Heat Tax would increase the cost of heating with oil, propane or natural gas by almost $1 billion over its first ten years and add about 60 cents per gallon in year ten. The PUC estimate is on the low end compared to earlier projections, including the Clean Heat Tax’s legislative sponsor (who shared potential increases of $1.70 per gallon).

More Home Weatherization. This recommendation sets a target for comprehensively weatherizing 79,000 additional homes “as soon as practicable” with a focus on low- and moderate-income households.

The document notes that existing publicly funded programs weatherize 4,000 homes per year at a cost of $11,000 per home. The minimum price tag would be $869 million, although the price tag is likely to rise given labor scarcity and inflation.

More Funding to Achieve Climate Goals on Farms and Forests. This recommendation proposes increasing funding for and tailoring existing programs, such as Clean Water Initiative Performance (Ag-CWIP), Best Management Practice (BMP), and Forestry Acceptable Management Practices (AMP), to meet the GWSA emission reduction mandates. Price tag unknown.

This funding would be on top of the more than $500 million that Vermont currently spends on greenhouse gas reduction and climate change mitigation.

Unsurprisingly given the cost and questionable feasibility, NFIB Vermont members STRONGLY oppose these types of expensive schemes:

– 89% oppose adopting a Low Carbon Fuel Standard

– 92% oppose new taxes and fees on transportation to fund subsidies for people who buy electric vehicles or EV chargers/infrastructure

– 98% oppose carbon taxes, which is the heart of Cap & Trade

What’s next? The 2025 Climate Action Plan requires lawmakers to sign off on any of the ideas, which they have so far been reluctant to do because of the price tag.

However, as frequently noted, Vermont remains under threat from these massive energy taxes due to the “Right to Sue” in the GWSA. This lets anyone – including well-funded out-of-state special interest groups – sue the state to enforce the GWSA’s emission reduction mandates if they are not met.

Adding insult, if the lawsuit is successful and forces the state to adopt more energy taxes, Vermont taxpayers will also have to pay the legal bills of the person or group who filed the suit.