11/7/2019 |
Karim |
Beers |
Cce Tompkins program coordinator |
Ithaca |
New York |
The framework looks good. The cap and invest program won't be enough to meet climate targets. Starting in early 2022 is not soon enough. Can you pilot this next year on a smaller level to... read more The framework looks good. The cap and invest program won't be enough to meet climate targets. Starting in early 2022 is not soon enough. Can you pilot this next year on a smaller level to work out kinks and answer questions? Thank you |
- |
11/7/2019 |
steve |
gagliardone |
Vermont Resident |
Sharon |
Vermont |
To TCI Planners- Thank you for taking the time to listen to my input.
Vermont is bound by law to significantly reduce carbon and increase renewable energy sources. Many critics... read more To TCI Planners- Thank you for taking the time to listen to my input.
Vermont is bound by law to significantly reduce carbon and increase renewable energy sources. Many critics of carbon reduction proposals have argued that the small state of Vermont cannot do it alone. TCI provides a prime opportunity to take a regional approach to carbon pollution reduction. And it has the data of a similar and very successful RGGI program to back it up. Of course, Vermont needs to do this and much more. We need a suite of complementary policies to help us meet our legal obligation, but TCI is an opportunity that we cannot pass up. In planning the TCI program I hope that you consider these 3 priorities in your design:
1. Prioritize equity so that low income Vermonters without access to public transportation are the primary beneficiaries of low carbon transportation options.
2.Polluters, including fossil fuel companies should pay the real costs for the environmental and health consequences of their product.
3. Start the cap low and drop it rapidly. Vermont is way behind in our obligation to meet the reduced carbon goals, and we need an aggressive approach to get back on track.
Thanks for listening!
Steve Gagliardone
Sharon, VT |
- |
11/7/2019 |
Steve |
Pileski |
Maine tax payer |
Franklin |
Maine |
This policy goes against the law of phisics, Maine economy cannot support this initiative. Please reconsider This policy goes against the law of phisics, Maine economy cannot support this initiative. Please reconsider |
- |
11/7/2019 |
Wolfger |
Schneider |
Retired engineer |
Charlotte |
Vermont |
I'm told that: TCI is a multi-state plan to cap emissions from the transportation sector, auction off permits to distribute fossil fuels in the participating states and use the auction... read more I'm told that: TCI is a multi-state plan to cap emissions from the transportation sector, auction off permits to distribute fossil fuels in the participating states and use the auction revenues to invest in low-carbon transportation solutions.
This approach, if understood by me, seems to lead to scarcity followed by higher prices (an indirect fuel tax/fee). Where's the equity in this?
I'm also told that: Despite RGGI’s success regionally, carbon pollution is rising in Vermont (as I suspect is so in other states). The increase is driven primarily by an increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector, our cars and trucks.
As I look around the parking lots, I see larger and larger automobiles and pickup trucks every year with the concomitant worse mileage in most cases. Manufacturers' pursuit of greater profits push for larger vehicles for safety and indirectly for status. Since we wouldn't want to/can't limit vehicle choice, maybe we should have a CO2 mileage levy on each vehicle that is dependent on annual mileage driven, and EPA mileage rating. This levy could be established at the annual inspection from odometer readings and be progressive with the EPA mileage rating, so that unnecessarily large vehicles in effect pay more for the mostly unnecessarily greater CO2 emission. Mileages could be reported to the DMV and car registration renewal would be dependent on the payment of the levy. |
- |
11/7/2019 |
Gretchen |
Elias |
community member and parent |
MONTPELIER |
Vermont |
I strongly support this initiative. I would like to see TCI revenues invested in an equitable way, so that low and middle income households do not bear the brunt of this necessary transition.... read more I strongly support this initiative. I would like to see TCI revenues invested in an equitable way, so that low and middle income households do not bear the brunt of this necessary transition. Investments should target policies and initiatives that help transform our region from a car-dependent one to one in which gas-powered single occupancy vehicles are no longer the norm. That means significant investment in public transit as well as in alternative transportation options, EV infrastructure and subsidies/incentives for lower income households to purchase EVs, as well as smart growth land use policies, transit-oriented development, and affordable housing that is transit-accessible. |
- |
11/6/2019 |
Anne |
Damrosch |
Independant |
Burlington |
Vermont |
Please support the Transportation and Climate Initiative. It is crucial now, more than ever, for states to lead in climate action. We can't afford to wait for a new administration. We must... read more Please support the Transportation and Climate Initiative. It is crucial now, more than ever, for states to lead in climate action. We can't afford to wait for a new administration. We must join other states in solutions that work. |
- |
11/6/2019 |
Matt |
Macunas |
Connecticut Green Bank |
Rocky Hill |
Connecticut |
Please see attached comments from Electrify America, CT Green Bank, and Climate Neutral Business Network. Please see attached comments from Electrify America, CT Green Bank, and Climate Neutral Business Network. |
EVCCC Input on TCI Nov 2019 Final.pdf |
11/6/2019 |
Bryan |
Garcia |
Connecticut Green Bank |
Rocky Hill |
Connecticut |
Please see attached Please see attached |
Green Bank TCI input.pdf |
11/6/2019 |
Jeanne |
Cahill |
citizen |
Northborough |
Massachusetts |
I appreciate the stakeholder engagement process of the TCI. I attended the public workshop held at Roxbury Community College, Boston, on October 30. My concerns are:
1)complementary state... read more I appreciate the stakeholder engagement process of the TCI. I attended the public workshop held at Roxbury Community College, Boston, on October 30. My concerns are:
1)complementary state policies may be delayed or inhibited by the multistate TCI,
2) cap and invest alone will not change the consumption-culture driving habits,
3) evaluate promising or implemented greenhouse gas reduction programs, to vett pros/cons, to minimize unintended consequences and maximize effective reductions, payback, and public buy-in.
1) Massachusetts has pending legislation that puts a price on both transportation and heating fuels. H. 1726 bears consideration as a model that individual TCI states could adopt/adapt to fund green infrastructure and rebate equitably.
Massachusetts has fast-tracked gas pipeline infrastructure permitting even as leaking gas contributes 10% of state greenhouse gas emissions. The state's 2008 mandate to reduce GHG 80% below 1990 (25% by 2020) impels action toward a low to net-zero energy future. This lack of policy coordination and decision making needs focus, among different state and multistate entities.
Another complementary policy introduced in the state Senate is the Future Act S.1940, which pilots converting leaking gas infrastructure with a geothermal microgrid.
2) If producers profit more from low efficiency vehicles than non-luxury, high efficiency electric sedans, they push consumer choice to the former. Higher fuel prices then anger and derail public buy-in. The universally unpopular gas tax and ever-more popular large pickup truck are the result of how consumption is driven by producers. CAFE standards are needed for trucks.
3) continue the TCI stakeholder involvement and feedback process. Identify near and long-term win-wins for people and environment. Prioritize the least costly and healthiest alternatives - provide biking and walking trails everywhere!
Thank you! |
- |
11/6/2019 |
bernardo |
alayza mujica |
coasap |
Sioux City |
Iowa |
|
- |
11/6/2019 |
Richard |
Wissler |
retired, well OLD, craftsman/artist |
Middlebury |
Vermont |
Who collects and decides how to employ the collected funds? This could easily be or devolve into just another layer of misappropriated bureaucracy. Who collects and decides how to employ the collected funds? This could easily be or devolve into just another layer of misappropriated bureaucracy. |
- |
11/6/2019 |
Barbara |
Wynroth |
none |
Burlington |
Vermont |
My two major concerns are Lake Champlain and other bodies of water, and air quality - particularly in Burlington.
The degradation of Lake Champlain due to road runoff, sewage spill... read more My two major concerns are Lake Champlain and other bodies of water, and air quality - particularly in Burlington.
The degradation of Lake Champlain due to road runoff, sewage spill, algae and farming practices, as well as Vermont's
lakes and rivers, is deeply concerning.
The concentration on roads and parking lots at the expense of solutions such as light rail and rail connecting Vermont is repeating
the past and compounding present problems. |
- |
11/6/2019 |
Jack |
Widness |
None |
Wilmington |
Vermont |
I support the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI). This is both a regional and national problem. How can anyone think otherwise. Duh! As one measure, I would like to see government begin... read more I support the Transportation and Climate Initiative (TCI). This is both a regional and national problem. How can anyone think otherwise. Duh! As one measure, I would like to see government begin raising—by a large margin—the costs of fossil fuels over a period of years as advocated in the attached letter published this past September by the Ithaca Journal (NY) by my friend, Richard "Dick" Booth. Dick is an environmental lawyer who teaches in Cornell University’s Department of City and Regional Planning. In recommending this, I recognize that doing this will not be easy—particularly for low income, margin households, but it needs to somehow begun ASAP and with some sort of accommodations for households that will mitigate, or soften, the impact on them. |
ITH JOUR LETTER, September 22.docx |
11/6/2019 |
Karen |
Wagner |
Northfield Energy Group |
Northfield |
Vermont |
Having a number of north-eastern states work together to deal with Climate Change related to transportation sounds like an excellent idea. Infrastructure such as fast electric rail, park and... read more Having a number of north-eastern states work together to deal with Climate Change related to transportation sounds like an excellent idea. Infrastructure such as fast electric rail, park and rides, electric buses and other public options plus fast charging stations for electric cars and policies to help low income people switch to electric cars could all be implemented better if we co-operate together. |
- |
11/6/2019 |
Anne |
Reynolds |
Alliance for Clean Energy New York |
Albany |
New York |
I am re-sending the comments we submitted on November 5th as an attached file. I am re-sending the comments we submitted on November 5th as an attached file. |
TransportationClimateInitative 11 06 19.docx |
11/6/2019 |
Kieran |
Edraney |
Vermont Resident |
Burlington |
Vermont |
It's important that the policies we enact on climate change make sure that the big polluters pay the most money, and we need to ensure that we do everything we can to make sure that the... read more It's important that the policies we enact on climate change make sure that the big polluters pay the most money, and we need to ensure that we do everything we can to make sure that the people living in more rural areas (I know there are many in Vermont) are not dealt a horrendous blow in terms of rising costs they can't handle. Finally, we need to make sure that when we institute a cap that it's done to keep us on track to address climate change. |
- |
11/6/2019 |
Linda |
Sukop |
Concerned Vermont citizen |
BURLINGTON |
Vermont |
Please prioritize equity. Low- and moderate-income and people in rural areas without access to public transportation should be the primary beneficiaries of the low-carbon transportation... read more Please prioritize equity. Low- and moderate-income and people in rural areas without access to public transportation should be the primary beneficiaries of the low-carbon transportation investments.
Polluters should pay. In this case, the fossil fuel companies that are buying permits at auction should be required to pay for the environmental and health damages associated with their products.
The cap should start low and drop quickly, in line with the latest science on the necessary pace of climate pollution reductions. |
- |
11/6/2019 |
Rebecca |
Boulos |
Maine Public Health Association |
Augusta |
Maine |
Climate change is a pressing issue, and it makes sense for Maine to work with neighboring states through TCI’s bipartisan, proven policy model, to address contributing transportation factors in... read more Climate change is a pressing issue, and it makes sense for Maine to work with neighboring states through TCI’s bipartisan, proven policy model, to address contributing transportation factors in our region. The plan that states are developing can reduce pollution, expand public transportation, encourage use of electric cars, trucks and buses, and develop safe ways for people to walk and bike in small towns and rural areas through a clean transportation fund. We know this approach works because over the past 10 years, Northeastern states have done the same thing with the electric sector through RGGI. We created jobs, grew our economy, and reduced our pollution. Now, we have the same opportunity with TCI. The Maine Public Health Association supports this effort because Maine people deserve safe, clean, equitable, modern transportation solutions that are affordable, reliable, and reduce air pollution. |
- |
11/6/2019 |
Michael |
Ingle |
PMG |
Annapolis |
Maryland |
These proposal are very unreasonable and unrealistic. I am good with trying to reduce carbon prints and taking care of our environment.
But all of this must be done in conjunction with what... read more These proposal are very unreasonable and unrealistic. I am good with trying to reduce carbon prints and taking care of our environment.
But all of this must be done in conjunction with what our economy and jobs that are currently involved. Lets get a proper mix and do it with minimal impacts on the people and the industries that have already provided us such great opportunities.
thanks for your reasonable consideration,
Mike Ingle |
- |
11/5/2019 |
Patrick |
Wood |
Ag Methane Advisors |
Montpelier |
Vermont |
The world is facing a climate emergency. TCI has the potential to have a very large and beneficial impact in reducing GHG emissions from a highly populated region of the US. The Cap and Invest... read more The world is facing a climate emergency. TCI has the potential to have a very large and beneficial impact in reducing GHG emissions from a highly populated region of the US. The Cap and Invest model is a proven and effective model to achieve these reductions but only if it’s done right. The cap must be set at a level that creates financial incentives to reduce emissions. In simple terms it means the price of carbon should be high. This will translate to higher fuel costs and incentivize use of lower carbon fuels. If the cost of carbon is high TCI will generate substantial funds to invest in GHG reductions. That basic framework is well thought out and sound.
However, TCI is based on the model of RGGI. A historical look at RGGI shows that it has not been nearly ambitious enough. RGGI has accomplished a lot but could have accomplished much more. The targets of TCI should be ambitious. The cap should be set aggressively low. As the US is pulling out of the Paris climate accord it is up to subnational jurisdictions like the TCI states to create policies that will lead to the emissions reductions we need to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. California has been aggressive about this for more than 10 years. New York recently passed S.6599 which has aggressive climate targets. Other TCI states should follow suit to be at least as aggressive.
My firm helps dairy farms with methane digesters generate revenue by selling environmental commodities like carbon offsets, RINs and LCFS credits. Over the past several years the price of carbon in California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) has been ~$190/mtCO2e. Dairy digester projects that are connected to common carrier pipelines around the US can sell renewable natural gas into California’s LCFS market. This market provides substantial incentives to digester projects and many are being built to access this market. These projects provide a very low carbon fuel. By avoiding methane emissions that would otherwise be released to the atmosphere and turning that methane into RNG the projects create substantial climate benefits and can have co-benefits that help dairy farms improve water quality and nutrient utilization. In addition, RNG can be used in heavy duty vehicle fleets (trucks, buses, etc) for which electrification is not as viable as it is for passenger cars. TCI should provide incentives for methane digesters to produce renewable low carbon fuels in the TCI states.
At a recent TCI workshop state staff leading the TCI process said that they were considering biofuels but that they have limited resources, and developing TCI at all is “a very heavy lift”. TCI states should commit more employees to development of TCI. This is a prudent investment in the long term health and viability of the people and ecosystems of TCI states. State staff should not be stretched so thin that they cannot devote the time required to thoroughly develop such a necessary program. Of course the vast majority of TCI auction revenues should go to investments in the states, but states will also need staff to manage and implement the program. Speaking from 10+ years in carbon markets we encourage TCI states to make sure that their programs are well staffed with enough highly trained people. This is crucial to having the markets function well to achieve their goals.
Biomethane (aka RNG produced from methane digesters) is a unique form of biofuel. Unlike most ethanol and some forms of biodiesel it is produced from a waste and it’s production does not lead to land use change or impacts to the food supply. Biomethane is produced by dairy, swine and poultry farms of which there are many in TCI states. These segments of the livestock agriculture industry have a major impact on the rural communities (human and environmental) in TCI states. TCI’s model rule should provide specific incentives for production of biomethane from livestock manure. This would help achieve the necessary GHG reductions while supporting a growing industry in TCI states that provides economic benefits to the people and ecosystem service benefits to the environment in the TCI region.
NY S.6599 is an ambitious cap and trade program that will exclude “biofuels” but include livestock anaerobic digestion projects. Since TCI states are home to many dairy and other types of livestock farms they can support their communities and achieve GHG reductions by providing specific incentives for production of biomethane.
TCI can draw on the model of the US EPA Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) or the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard to develop mechanisms to incentivize production of biomethane from livestock manure digesters. EPA and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have worked through many of the complications of providing incentives for low carbon fuels including the life cycle accounting that is the global standard for GHG accounting of fuels. TCI doesn’t need to reinvent the wheel on these subjects. In addition, using “standard EPA emissions factors” to assess the impact of different fuels doesn’t sounds like it would allow individual producers to benefit from innovations in reducing emissions. The RFS has multiple “buckets” of RIN credits which allow the producers of the lowest carbon fuels to benefit in the market. CARB’s LCFS has simplified Tier 1 fuel pathways for efficiency, but also allows producers to apply for a Tier 2 pathway when they think their production process provides additional GHG benefits. Both models could be adopted by TCI.
|
- |