Maleficent_Rope_7844 t1_jec7n66 wrote on March 30, 2023 at 11:13 PM

Reply to comment by Real-Pierre-Delecto2 in Letter to the editor: Is it all hands on deck, or will this planet sink? by RamaSchneider

>Sliding scale for some means the rest will have to pick up the tab.

Yes, that's literally what a "sliding scale" is. Some pay below-average rate, others pay above-average rate.

Your concerns could be resolved by simply factoring the number of people in the residence. It would have to be for it to be fair anyway, since it's people that use electricity, not residences.

Real-Pierre-Delecto2 t1_jedx8st wrote on March 31, 2023 at 9:18 AM

The heat in my house cares not how many people are inside. Some utilities yes but not all. I would also guess that the major driver in my elec use is water pumps, fans etc all things that would be running regardless. Cheers!

Maleficent_Rope_7844 t1_jedydom wrote on March 31, 2023 at 9:34 AM

True, true. I said that just because you said you'd probably be a heavy user with a family of 5, as if the additional people were directly contributing.

Real-Pierre-Delecto2 t1_jeeds55 wrote on March 31, 2023 at 12:28 PM

Then there is another issue I would take with all this as well and that is why should the govt have a list of my appliances like heat pumps etc that may or may not qualify for a different rate as suggested in the article. There really is an issue with collecting and qualifying it. Imagine the cost of keeping and collecting all that info. Only new heat pumps or what about one you had installed 2 years ago are you out of luck? Who will verify the claims as I am sure many will be tempted to claim more new items to lower the bill? That's just human nature. I agree with much of the intent of these bills but as usual I find them to not be well thought through and completely ignoring of collateral consequences.

Maleficent_Rope_7844 t1_jefzfdg wrote on March 31, 2023 at 7:02 PM

There certainly are issues with it. I personally think something like a carbon tax would be more effective, and it would better target actual sources of carbon.

There'd need to be something to limit the impact on lower income Vermonters, though (the ones least likely to have an EV or live close to where they work). I don't know what that'd look like.