[Peak Oil Action] "Challenging but realistic" goals for building efficiency are too little

[Vermont Peak Oil Political Action Alerts]

Hi folks,

I just put up a blog post on the peak oil testimony Wednesday, 
contrasting it with the Regulatory Assistance Project testimony 
Thursday. You can read it here:
http://www.vtcommons.org/node/1061

The post begins:
The legislature is grappling with tremendously important issues 
related to energy. This work, however, has tacitly accepted the most 
optimistic projections of future oil availability, without any 
detailed consideration of how likely the projections are. Two 
hearings this week illustrated the gap between the amount of energy 
use reduction the legislature is striving for and what may be forced 
upon us by reduced oil availability.

On Wednesday, the Senate Natural Resources and Energy Committee heard 
testimony about peak oil, its effect on oil prices and availability, 
Vermont's vulnerability, and policies that could reduce our 
vulnerability. On Thursday, the House Natural Resources and Energy 
Committee heard testimony about the benefits and funding of a 
buildings efficiency program. Everyone testifying agreed about the 
direction the state needs to move, yet the two sets of testimony 
displayed quite different assumptions about the need for speed.

(Continue reading at http://www.vtcommons.org/node/1061)

Cheers,
Carl

-- 
Carl Etnier
Peak Oil Awareness
carl @ etnier.net
225 Sparrow Farm Road
Montpelier, Vermont 05602  USA
Tel +1 802-498-4443
Relocalizing Vermont radio show: http://www.wgdr.org/relocalizingvermont.html
Archived radio segments: http://www.vtpeakoil.net/community/folder.php?id=29
Relocalizing Vermont blog: http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/257
Archived Energy Matters columns: 
http://vtpeakoil.net/community/folder.php?id=33