Gov. Phil Scott’s administration is proposing a budget cut that would stymie a program dedicated to developing Vermont’s renewable energy economy.
The Clean Energy Development Fund is a state-administered initiative within the Department of Public Service that offers financial incentives for homes, businesses and other institutions to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels.
Andy Perchlik, the fund’s manager, said that it has focused primarily on “advanced wood heating” in recent years. Unlike old-fashioned wood stoves and early pellet stoves, according to Perchlik, such systems have the convenience and technological sophistication of fossil fuel-powered heating systems but run on wood fuel that can be purchased locally.
The Scott administration’s proposal to remove $500,000 from the fund would effectively end that work, Perchlik said.
“We think it’s going to be very disruptive to the advanced wood heating sector in Vermont that we’ve been nurturing,” he said. “I think this will be a backwards step and a real blow to this industry we’re trying to build.”
Scott said in his budget address in January that he, too, would like to increase the use of that energy source in Vermont.
“Our Clean Energy Plan identified wood heat as a critical way to achieve Vermont’s goal of 90 percent renewable energy by 2050,” Scott said. “So, at the recommendation of my Climate Action Commission, we will invest $300,000 to help homeowners replace old, non-EPA certified wood stoves with modern efficient ones.”
In the budget proposal Scott submitted to the legislature, that investment actually consisted of a $200,000 addition to an existing $100,000 appropriation that the CEDF has administered.
But even if those funds materialize, according to Perchlik, he would be unable to make use of them. That’s because the $500,000 cut would leave the fund with about $2 million — just enough money to meet its current obligations and pay the administrative costs of closing down the program. There wouldn’t be enough for new grants or incentives, he said.
In the governor’s original budget proposal, $500,000 was to come out of DPS coffers and move to the general fund. After the budget passed the House, Finance Commissioner Adam Greshin sent a memo to Senate Appropriations Committee chair Jane Kitchel (D-Caledonia) describing some “technical issues” with the budget. One of those issues: The $500,000 should come out of the clean energy fund, not the Department of Public Service.
The Vermont Public Interest Research Group caught wind of the change and wrote Kitchel a letter opposing the move. In the letter, the group argues that Vermont’s climate change and energy goals require about 40,000 advanced wood heating systems in the state by 2050. There are fewer than 500 currently in place.
“The CEDF has the opportunity to continue positive momentum, but that will stop if funds are withdrawn or withheld,” wrote VPIRG lobbyist Ben Walsh. “This will jeopardize local businesses and jobs and our ability to meet our clean energy goals.”
Perchlik said the proposal to strip the funding didn’t come from him or DPS. He said he’s been working with grantees and telling local businesses that incentives will likely be in place next year. If approved, the cuts would change that.
Wood-heating companies are telling customers, “‘Yeah, there’s gonna be incentives,'” according to Perchlik, “So we don’t want to pull the rug out from beneath them.”
Reached Wednesday afternoon, Greshin didn’t appear familiar with the issue.
“They’d taken it out of the wrong special fund, I think,” Greshin said. “I have not spoken with VPIRG. Honestly, I don’t know what they’re referring to.”
Greshin referred further inquiries to Perchlik and the Department of Public Service.
The proposal’s fate will be decided as part of the larger debate around the state budget, which is currently under consideration by the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
By “draining”, you mean “stealing”, right? Stealing money from renewable energy subsidies has got to be the most short-sighted action in the history of humanity at this point. Scott is a Republican, right?
If Governor Scott really wants to meet Vermont’s goal to reduce the use of fossil fuels and make immediate progress toward cleaning up our atmosphere and our water, he should look again at the $60/80M/year that the state has been allocating for the past forty years to the Vermont’s largest polluter and its largest welfare dependent: conventional dairy. Taxpayes would not only save some very large portion of what they have been spending to prop up this industry but they would also not have to raise an additional $70M for twenty years that Secretary of Natural Resources Julie Moore is telling us is necessary to clean up the lake. Isn’t this exactly what he has been telling us he wants: results for no new taxes and no new fees?
It seems that Gov Scott has recovered from his “liberal” stupor buy signing a very small bit of Gun Control legislation and is back to being a Right Wing Koch Brother hugging Republican. Will we get a visit from EPA science dunce Scott Pruitt anytime soon?
It appears that there is nothing more un-American to the GOP than clean air, clean water, and safe food.
@Tyler Dobbs, now that you have thrown this half baked story out there at the request of VPIRG, I hope you have the decency to follow up with all the facts once you have gathered them. You are getting lazy!
Vermont leadership is seriously misdirected. Dairy farms are not a problem. They are a big resource in providing food security, among the many other benefits for a well maintained rural state. The fertilizer runoff added to surface water is a valuable product if used for aquaculture. Adopting the practices to assure adequate oxygenation of the water is what needs to be provided. Farmers might even merit compensation for the fertilizer that they add to water.
Global warming climate change from CO2 is no longer supported by science. The Solar output is the driver of climate changes. Right now, we are on the threshold of a Grand Solar Minimum, a reoccurring cycle of 400 years. Solar output is plunging, and a much cooler, wetter, cloudy Vermont, with shorter growing seasons is starting, and will last a decade or more.
The concerns should be about maximizing the availability of fuels, of increasing home gardens and greenhouse food production, and using the conditions of our lakes and streams for aquaculture that will use the excess fertility, to again, contribute to food security while cleaning the waters of Vermont.
Population decline is also a consequence for Vermont as people chose to move to warmer, more hospitable climates.
These are real issues. None of these seem to be in consideration by the Governor or the Legislature. Why?
No, no Governor, drain the Montpelier swamp, not the clean energy fund. On the other hand, if Ben Walsh is involved, maybe drain both of them.