Vermont: Al Gore calls H.520 a "terrific bill" and hopes legislature overrides governor's veto

[bananas]

http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070613/OPINION03/706130324/1039/OPINION03

Veto override is a must Douglas plan shortsighted

June 13, 2007

By PETER SHUMLIN

House Speaker Gaye Symington and I are grateful that Vice President Al Gore endorsed the Vermont Legislature's climate change/energy bill last week. When the leader of the worldwide movement to combat climate change tells Vermonters that we have the opportunity to lead the nation by saving energy, saving money, reducing emissions and kicking our addiction to foreign oil, we know we're onto something good.

As Vermonters we face an inconvenient truth: Gov. Jim Douglas and his veto pen.

<snip>

Al Gore calls H.520 a "terrific bill" and says he hopes the Legislature can rally to override the governor's veto. The bill puts money in Vermonters' pockets, creates jobs, curbs greenhouse gas emissions, and reduces the amount of oil that Vermonters purchase from countries that mostly hate us. It provides incentives for local, renewable energy sources like wind, solar, small hydro and biomass. In short, the bill helps Vermont achieve energy independence and keep more money in the state.

The governor's objection to this bill is equally troubling. He doesn't want Vermont Yankee to pay its fair share in property taxes. In 2003, shortly after he was elected governor, Entergy, which operates Vermont's only nuclear power plant, was given a sweetheart deal that no one else in Vermont was offered. Entergy was granted permission to freeze its property tax rate at the 2003 level, shortly before it invested over $100 million in its plant. With Vermonters facing double-digit property tax increases since 2003, one has to wonder which of us in Vermont would reject a similar sweetheart deal. Last year, Entergy paid $500,000 less in property taxes then it did in 2003. The rest of us made up the shortfall in our property tax bills. Why should Entergy, with revenues of over $10 billion a year, be offered this property tax relief package, when under Jim Douglas, your property taxes have nearly doubled? It pays to have deep pockets.

<snip>

Peter Shumlin of Putney is the president pro tempore of the Vermont Senate.

[IndyOp]

1. Go Vermont! We need leaders! (n/t)

[NNadir]

2. Really? Al Gore said that?

What did Zeus, Thor, Yahweh, Jesus, Bhudda and Shiva say?

All these guys have the power to change the laws of physics of course, and maybe they have changed the laws of physics.

Raising the taxes on electricity in Vermont - and almost all of the electricity generated in Vermont is nuclear - will do zero to reduce climate change, since Vermont contributes close to zero climate change gases to the environment in generating electricity already. It is thus more or less impossible for Vermont to improve its performance in this area.

New York burns fossil fuels to generate electricity; Canada burns fossil fuels to generate electricity, Massachusetts burns fossil fuels to generate electricity and Maine burns fossil fuels (more than ever) to generate electricity, but Vermont, alone among states in the Union burns practically no fossil fuels to generate electricity. In fact, Vermont hasn't burned fossil fuels for years. It is the best state in the Union for generating electricity, the model state.

In general, I approve of raising energy rates to match the external costs of energy. It follows that the worst place to raise taxes on electricity would be Vermont, because Vermont is still (at least where electricity generation is concerned) completely innocent of participating in climate change. There is no way to change that fact except of course, by devine intervention. It may be that Vermont will insist on shutting Vermont Yankee and make itself as dependent on natural gas as say, Maine. In this case it would be appropriate to tax the shit out of electricity in Vermont to account for the enormous external cost of natural gas.

Every single nuclear power plant that has been shut in New England has been replaced by fossil fuels. There will be hell to pay for this in short order, of course, especially when the Sable Island gas field plays out as many people think it will.

I would support raising the taxes on natural gas generated electricity to reflect the cost of burning natural gas on climate change. This of course, would result in everyone in Maine needing to turn out the lights, unless of course, they were living off inheritances or were otherwise wealthy. Raising the taxes on coal to the level of the external cost would almost make coal as expensive as solar energy - essentially out of reach for all but the richest citizens.

Al Gore is running for President. It is a different thing to run for President than it is to govern wisely and successfully. If Al Gore is seated in the office to which he is already elected, he will have a chance of a "Nixon in China" moment with respect to nuclear energy. There is probably no one who could do as much for nuclear energy as Al Gore. But it really comes down to whether he is serious about science. I do not think for a minute that Al Gore is running - as Gerhard Schroeder did in Germany - for a seat on the board of a gas company. Nevertheless the degree of success that Al Gore or Mohammed or Saint Jude of the Cross can have in addressing climate change will remain directly proportional to the amount of nuclear energy they encourage. This is a physical constraint.