politics
Vermont is the primary state to pass a law requiring fossil fuel firms to pay a portion of the damages brought on by climate change after the state catastrophic floods in summer and damage brought on by other weather extremes.
Republican Gov. Phil Scott allowed the bill to turn out to be law without his signature, saying he was concerned in regards to the costs and consequences the small state would face if it needed to tackle the oil industry by itself.
“Instead of coordinating with other states like New York and California, which have far more resources, Vermont – one of the least populated states with the lowest GDP in the country – has chosen to cover the costs associated with climate change on its own,” Scott wrote in a letter to lawmakers. But he said he understood the need to hunt funds to mitigate the damage brought on by climate change, which has harmed Vermont “in so many ways.”
The floods last July Torrential rains flooded Vermont's capital city of Montpelier, the nearby city of Barre and a number of other southern Vermont communities, destroying homes and washing away roads across the agricultural state. Some called it the state's worst natural disaster since a 1927 flood that killed dozens of individuals and caused widespread destruction. It took months for businesses – from restaurants to shops – to rebuild, losing their summer and even fall seasons. Some have only recently reopened, while dozens of house owners have needed to enter the cold season with flood-ravaged homes.
Under the bill, the Vermont State Treasurer, in consultation with the Natural Resources Agency, would submit a report by January 15, 2026, on the whole costs to Vermonters and the state of emitting greenhouse gases from January 1, 1995, through December 31, 2024. The assessment would examine impacts on public health, natural resources, agriculture, economic development, housing, and other areas. The state would use federal data to find out the quantity of covered greenhouse gas emissions attributed to a fossil fuel company.
It is a polluter-pays model that affects firms that extract fossil fuels or refine crude oil in trade or business and are liable for multiple billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions in the course of the period in query. The funds might be utilized by the state to do things like upgrade stormwater drainage systems; upgrade roads, bridges and railroads; relocate, raise or upgrade wastewater treatment plants; and insulate private and non-private buildings to be more energy efficient. The model is modeled after the federal Superfund pollution cleanup program.
“For too long, giant fossil fuel companies have knowingly fanned the flames of climate change without taking action to put it out,” Paul Burns, executive director of the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, said in a press release. “Finally, perhaps for the first time ever, Vermont will hold the companies most responsible for climate-related floods, fires and heat waves financially accountable for a fair share of the damage they cause.”
Maryland, Massachusetts and New York are considering similar measures.
The American Petroleum Institute, the oil and gas industry's foremost lobbying organization, expressed extreme concern that the law “retroactively imposes costs and liability for past activities that were legal, and that it violates equal treatment and due process principles by holding corporations responsible for the actions of society as a whole. Moreover, it is overridden by federal law.” In a letter to lawmakers before the law took effect, it also said that the measure didn’t inform potentially affected firms of the quantity of the potential fees.
Vermont lawmakers are aware that the state faces legal challenges, however the governor worries in regards to the costs and what a Vermont failure would mean for other states.
Democratic state Rep. Martin LaLonde, an attorney, believes Vermont has good legal arguments. Lawmakers worked closely with many legal scholars to draft the bill, he said in a press release.
“The bottom line is that the stakes are too high for the citizens of Vermont – and the costs are too high – to absolve the companies that caused the mess from their obligation to help clean up the damage,” he said.
image credit : www.boston.com