Connect with us

Vermont

Q&A: New Legislation in Vermont Will Make Fossil Fuel Companies Liable for Climate Impacts in the State. Here’s What That Could Look Like – Inside Climate News

Published

on

Q&A: New Legislation in Vermont Will Make Fossil Fuel Companies Liable for Climate Impacts in the State. Here’s What That Could Look Like – Inside Climate News


From our collaborating partner “Living on Earth,” public radio’s environmental news magazine, an interview by host Paloma Beltran with Pat Parenteau, an emeritus professor of law at Vermont Law and Graduate School. 

Vermont’s House and Senate have approved a bill that would make fossil fuel companies financially liable for their carbon pollution and its role in the climate crisis. Lawmakers pointed to consequences of these carbon emissions, like the flood in July 2023 that put parts of the state capital underwater for weeks and caused over a billion dollars in damage.

The bipartisan bill is known as the Climate Superfund Act because it demands that fossil fuel companies cover at least part of the growing costs of climate change. Similar bills are being considered in New York, Massachusetts and Maryland, but Vermont is the first state to pass this kind of legislation. The bill passed with a supermajority, enough to override a potential veto. It is now headed to Governor Phil Scott’s desk.

Living on Earth spoke with Pat Parenteau, former EPA regional counsel and emeritus professor at Vermont Law and Graduate School, to unpack the details. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

Advertisement

We’re hiring!

Please take a look at the new openings in our newsroom.

See jobs

PALOMA BELTRAN: What is the Climate Superfund law in Vermont? What does it say?

PAT PARENTEAU: It’s basically asking fossil fuel companies to contribute to the costs for adaptation to the unavoidable impacts of climate change, including protection of homes and businesses threatened by flooding, building resilience in floodplains by moving structures out of harm’s way, investing in wetland protection and natural systems that absorb carbon emissions and provide for more resilience to extreme weather events. It’s a new approach, and Vermont is the first state in the country to try it.

Advertisement

BELTRAN: How is this law different from the climate deception lawsuits like the one we’ve seen filed in the state of Hawaii?

Emeritus Professor Pat Parenteau. Credit: Vermont Law and Graduate School
Emeritus Professor Pat Parenteau. Credit: Vermont Law and Graduate School

PARENTEAU: This law doesn’t depend on proof of deception, or false advertising, or the campaign to sow doubt about climate change that the companies are accused of in over 30 lawsuits across the country. The companies are liable by virtue of what they do. It’s not that they’ve committed anything wrong, necessarily—”polluter pays” is the concept here. 

The fact that your product creates carbon pollution, which is driving climate change, that’s enough to make you liable, in the same way, or at least a similar way, to how the Superfund law at the federal level makes you responsible for contamination of soil and groundwater as a result of your activities at a site. You may have generated chemical waste that wound up at the site, you may own the site, you may operate a landfill or other facility that’s become contaminated. 

The Superfund law says, by virtue of the fact that you own or operate or generate waste, you’re liable. In the same way, this law is saying the fact that you extract and burn fossil fuels is enough to make you liable for the damage that results from that.

BELTRAN: How might the state of Vermont go about calculating which companies owe what? What are the possible methods they could use here?

PARENTEAU: That is the big question. The formula that the law is using—and the state treasurer will have to flesh this out—is to say, what is the individual company’s share in the global emissions? The law also directs the state to use the Environmental Protection Agency’s greenhouse gas inventory as a starting point. 

Advertisement

The greenhouse gas inventory has something called emission factors. For example, for the big oil companies, they can disaggregate among the different companies, what their emissions factor is for the amount of oil and gas they’re producing. So it’s going to be a proportionate share, based on what the individual company’s emissions are. That’s going to be the basic formula.

BELTRAN: It’s a big job, to calculate all of that.

PARENTEAU: Yes. And then from there, you have to say, well, what percentage of harm is the emissions doing on top of the natural cycle of flooding, for example, just sticking with the flooding example. 

There are other impacts of climate change in Vermont. There’s impacts on the ski industry, there’s impacts on the sugar-making industry—our famous syrup. 

But just in terms of flooding, what you have to calculate is, by how much has climate change increased the damage from flooding that normally would occur in Vermont? The flooding of Montpelier was definitely much greater than any prior flood we’d ever had. But you have to calculate how much worse was it as a result of the emissions from these companies? That’s another tricky calculation.

Advertisement

BELTRAN: How are these oil companies expected to respond?

PARENTEAU: We know that the oil companies are not going to start sending checks to Vermont. The oil companies have been fighting tooth and nail against all of the other lawsuits that have been brought against them. And we can expect the same thing here. 

The companies have a choice to make. They can either file what’s called a preemptive strike and challenge the law on constitutional grounds. For example, they may argue that this is a violation of due process to make them liable, when they haven’t, quote, done anything wrong. They’re producing a valuable product that people are still buying to put into their automobiles, to heat their homes and so forth. They’re going to say, “You’re making us liable for engaging in economic activity that’s lawful? How can you do that? That’s not constitutional.” 

Similar arguments were made against Superfund, the federal law. And it took several years for those arguments to finally be resolved in the court. Ultimately, it went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. In the Superfund case, there is precedent for establishing liability for the damage that legal activity is causing. 

But whether that precedent under Superfund extends to the climate liability context, that’s going to be a major issue; that’s a novel issue. 

Advertisement

One option for the companies might be to challenge the law on its face. The other option would be to wait until Vermont actually sends them a bill, a demand for payment, and then not pay, in which case Vermont would have to initiate a lawsuit to collect the money that they’ve demanded. 

Either way, this issue is sure to end up in court. And it will take the usual long time for it to finally get settled.

BELTRAN: What are some of the concerns raised by opponents of the law other than these oil companies?

PARENTEAU: The opposition to passage of the law came from those who are concerned that Vermont is too small a state to take on these major multinational corporations, that, as we’ve discussed, isn’t going to just happen without litigation. 

The litigation that’s underway in other states has shown just how expensive it is to sue these companies. These companies really fight hard, which means the cost of litigation can be measured easily in the millions. Some of the people who questioned this law were saying Vermont is too small to take this on; let some of the bigger states do it—let New York do it. And we can follow in their wake, but don’t take the first hit from these companies. 

Advertisement

The costs of litigating against the oil companies, not only are they not small, but there’s not enough money in Vermont to do everything that needs to be done. The big question is, what’s the best use of the money we have? Is it to fight the oil companies to try to get them to pay? There’s a good case to be made that that’s appropriate. But the contrary case is that’s going to take a really long time, with uncertain results. And so maybe the better approach is to spend the money you do have with direct assistance to the communities most affected by climate change, and let some of these other states go first.

This story is funded by readers like you.

Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.

Donate Now

BELTRAN: What are the broader consequences of this law in Vermont? How will this impact the rest of the country, and potentially the rest of the globe?

Advertisement

PARENTEAU: I do think we’re going to see other states adopting similar legislation. And I do think the underlying theory of these laws, that the oil companies should pay their fair share to address the damage that’s being done, even if their product was a valuable product for many years, the truth is, we now know, it’s causing damage. 

Under the “polluter pay” rule, which is one of the pillars of environmental law and policy, what Vermont is doing and what I think many other states are going to be doing is looking to the oil companies, which are some of the wealthiest companies on earth, to pay their fair share for the damage that’s being done. 

In that sense, I think this movement that Vermont has begun has merit. And I think it will put greater pressure on the oil companies to either agree under some circumstances to contribute to the costs of dealing with climate or be forced to do so by a court at some point. There’s a legal and a moral case to be made for holding companies responsible. And we’ll now see how fast that can happen.



Source link

Advertisement

Vermont

White out: Vermont’s tallest peak buried under record-breaking powder – VTDigger

Published

on

White out: Vermont’s tallest peak buried under record-breaking powder – VTDigger


A snowy scene on Mt. Mansfield, the state’s highest peak. Photo by Molly Walsh/CNS

More than 5 feet of snow currently blanket Vermont’s tallest peak — the deepest powder in recorded history for Mount Mansfield on this date.

The Mount Mansfield snow stake hit 63 inches Thursday, said Burlington-based National Weather Service meteorologist Adrianna Kremer, more than 3 feet deeper than the average 22-inch depth expected this time of year. As of Tuesday, the snow depth at the stake was 61 inches, falling 2 inches due to compaction, Kremer added. 

“We do have such a good snow pack early in the season,” Kremer said. “But, as always, there’s a lot of variability as the season goes on.”

Vermont has seen significant snowfall so far this winter, with over 3 feet recorded in November in some areas of the northern Green Mountains, Kremer said. 

Advertisement

With 192 inches of overall snowfall Tuesday, Jay Peak has been graced with the most snow of any ski mountain in the U.S. so far this season, surpassing West Coast ski resorts in powder.

Northern Vermont ski resorts Smuggler’s Notch and Stowe are also keeping pace, with overall snowfall hitting 116 inches and 108 inches, respectively, as of Tuesday.

But warmer temperatures this Thursday will spur some snow melt. While that may bring modest river rise, Kremer said the service does not expect flooding, as the increase in temperature is predicted to be short-lived and this year’s powdery snow is less dense with liquid. 

Hazardous travel conditions could arrive Friday, though, Kremer warned, as the snap back to colder temperatures brings the potential for a flash freeze and bursts of snow. 





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Vermont

Visitors spent over $1B in Chittenden County in record VT tourism year

Published

on

Visitors spent over B in Chittenden County in record VT tourism year


Vermont’s tourism industry set new records in 2024, with 16 million visitors spending $4.2 billion, according to a community announcement.

The increase in both visitation and spending marks a modest rise from 2023, according to a study by Tourism Economics.

Visitor spending accounted for 9% of Vermont’s gross domestic product, significantly higher than the 2023 national state average of 3%. The tourism sector directly supports 31,780 jobs, or 10% of the state’s workforce, compared to the national average of 4.6%.

Advertisement

Direct spending by visitors in 2024 included $1.5 billion for lodging, $876 million for food and beverages, $680 million in retail, $678 million for transportation and $462 million for recreation and entertainment. The spending generated $293.5 million in state and local taxes, equivalent to $1,089 per Vermont household.

“As we think about economic impact, it is important to recognize that visitors to Vermont are essentially temporary taxpayers, bringing in outside money that helps to make Vermont more affordable for all of us,” said Department of Tourism and Marketing Commissioner Heather Pelham. “Every guest who buys a meal, stays the night, or heads to the mountain is supporting our businesses, sustaining jobs for Vermonters and funding the essential services that keep our communities strong.”

When considering the broader economic impact, including supply chain purchases and employee spending, the ripple effects of visitor spending amounted to $7 billion in economic activity in 2024.

The report also provided county-specific data, showing increased spending in every county. Chittenden County accounted for the highest share of visitor spending at 24.5%, at well over $1 billion. Lamoille, Rutland and Windsor counties each represented more than 10% of statewide visitor spending.

Advertisement

In Caledonia County, direct spending from visitors reached $109 million, a 7.7% increase from 2023.

“During the 2024 total solar eclipse, the positive impact of tourism on a rural community like St. Johnsbury was clear,” said Gillian Sewake, director of Discover St. Johnsbury. “An estimated 23,000 people came to our town alone. It was wonderful to feel that vibrancy in our downtown, with visitors filling sidewalks, enjoying the attractions that we know and love, and helping businesses break revenue records.”

In Bennington County, tourism generated almost $300 million in direct spending in 2024.

“Tourism is one of our region’s most powerful economic drivers, supporting nearly 13% of our workforce,” said John Burnham, executive director of the Manchester Business Association. “But its value reaches far beyond jobs. Visitor spending strengthens our economy, sustains small businesses, and helps fund the local services and amenities we all rely on, from restaurants and trails to cultural attractions and community events. Tourism also inspires us to preserve our historic character and adds a vibrancy that enriches everyday life. Simply put, the visitor economy helps keep our region the welcoming, thriving place we’re proud to call home.”

The 2024 economic impact report comes at a time when resident support of tourism is strong. In the University of Vermont Center for Rural Studies 2025 Vermonter Poll, 85% of residents agreed with the statement “Tourism is important to my local economy,” and 78% agreed with the statement “Increased tourism would have a beneficial impact on my local community.”

Advertisement

To read “Economic Impact of Visitors in Vermont 2024,” learn more about the report’s methodology, and the additional indirect and induced effects of visitor spending, visit the Vermont Department of Tourism and Marketing Tourism Research webpage, accd.vermont.gov/tourism/research.

This story was created by reporter Beth McDermott, bmcdermott1@usatodayco.com, with the assistance of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Journalists were involved in every step of the information gathering, review, editing and publishing process. Learn more at cm.usatoday.com/ethical-conduct.



Source link

Continue Reading

Vermont

Obstacles for Vermont refugees is focus at roundtable

Published

on

Obstacles for Vermont refugees is focus at roundtable


BENNINGTON — Sitting in a circle at the Bennington County Multicultural Community Center, Jack Rossiter-Munley shared the story of two families with whom he had worked.

The families had immigrated from South Sudan to Bennington, which was designated as a refugee site in October 2022. Since then, about 205 refugees have immigrated to the town. But the lives that they had hoped for in the United States haven’t necessarily come to fruition.

“These are folks who needed more orientation to work in the United States, but also the line is moving, and so you’re no longer on the line,” said Rossiter-Munley, the director of the Bennington County Multicultural Community Center. “Because their actual work here was unstable, they decided, ‘we’re just going to try to find work somewhere else.’”

Advertisement

Some of the family members moved to the Midwest, where they hoped to find a larger South Sudanese community and more support from their relatives. Those still in Bennington are looking to follow, he said.

Rossiter-Munley and about a dozen other people were gathered on Dec. 5 at BCMCC for a roundtable on Employment Support for New Americans, part of Gov. Phil Scott’s “Capital for a Day” initiative. That day, Scott and several of his cabinet members stationed themselves around Bennington County, holding meetings and hosting conversations with local leaders as they heard how to better support Bennington County.

The roundtable came at an especially pressing time for local immigrants. On Dec. 2, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration services under President Trump announced that it would pause its review of applications for green cards, asylum and citizenship following the shooting of two National Guard officers deployed in Washington, D.C. The pause applies to 19 countries — including Afghanistan and the Republic of Congo — from where many new Americans in Bennington emigrate.

People also come to Bennington from Venezuela, South Sudan and Iraq as part of the resettlement programs, Rossiter-Munley said. At the following Monday’s Select Board meeting, he read a statement on behalf of Afghan women in Bennington, condemning the violence in Washington, D.C. and asking for the community’s understanding. And at the roundtable, he was clear about the legal implications for those already living in Bennington: “nothing has changed.”

Kendal Smith, commissioner of the Department of Labor, was in attendance at the Dec. 5 meeting and represented Vermont. She sought to understand how the state could better support immigrants and refugees in Bennington County.

Advertisement

The biggest challenges Smith identified were language access support, transportation and licensing attainment, she said.

Translation is an area that gets highlighted the most in Bennington because the town is “uniquely deficient” in providing such community support, Rossiter-Munley said. Bennington county was almost 95 percent white, according to the latest census data.

Smith said that the Department of Labor is exploring funding the purchase of more translation devices to help overcome language barriers at work. The state currently contracts with Propio, an AI-based interpretation service. BCMCC uses Boostlingo to translate their speech into languages like Swahili and Dinka.

Another difficulty in Bennington is access to transportation to work. Wendy Morris, the Department of Labor’s regional manager, said that even commutes between Bennington and Manchester can pose serious challenges for new Americans.

“We help them get a job — let’s say we could do that, and we get them to Manchester,” she said. “We do the interview with them. How do we get them there every single day?”

Advertisement

The Department of Labor will explore “creative ways” to fund and provide driver’s licenses to immigrants and refugees, said Rowan Hawthorne, the policy and legislative affairs director at the Commissioner’s office. The Department will also work with the Office of Professional Regulation to “overcome licensing transfer barriers.”

Nearly every member of the roundtable stressed that immigrants and refugees in Bennington faced difficulties finding jobs that suited their training — for example, as pharmacists or engineers — and often were met with employers who were skeptical about hiring them.

All of it means that volunteers and leaders working with refugees are stretched thin.

“I can’t say enough how everybody in this room is doing more than their job,” said Sean-Marie Oller, director of the Tutorial Center, a Bennington nonprofit that provides adult education and literacy classes.

Still, Rossiter-Munley tries to be optimistic. He cited a study that showed refugee resettlement provided a net benefit of $123.8 billion to local, state and federal economies. And he’s encouraged by the state Department of Labor’s openness to growth.

Advertisement

“When we are sitting down to meet with employers, or offering support or working alongside the Department of Labor, the more of that knowledge can become just part of the day-to-day work of a how a local department … functions,” he said.

“This is part of how we work, and it’s not a special one-time project.”



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending