All positions on this important public policy matter will be considered, and individual responses held in confidence.
In the name of transparency, I would like you to know I voted ‘NAY’ on Connecticut’s Clean Air Act in May of 2022. I did so NOT in opposition to a clean energy transition but for its rushed timing, overall, the vote was contentious and divided. If you’d like to understand my reasoning, I’ve summarized below.
I have significant concerns about the timing and unintended consequences of the proposed bans, beginning with their potential financial impact on families and businesses already grappling with the high costs associated with today’s high inflation and interest rates. We live in one of the nation’s most energy-expensive states, in part due to Connecticut’s very fragile electric grid. You need only look at your electric bill to see federal and state governments are already taxing CT consumers with a “Congestion” surcharge, as well as infrastructure subsidies. Our grid itself is a limiting factor and, in my studied opinion, along with my experience working with California on its 2008 Global Warming Solutions Act, I do not believe Connecticut’s present grid will be ready to shoulder the load of a rapid move to full electrification of transportation – now, or by 2035. The problem is, California has had a 15-year head-start working on solutions for their motor vehicle regulatory edicts and technology.
While I believe it is foregone conclusion that CO2 emissions reduction, cleaner transportation and green energy generation are our future, I’ve always been of the mind that transitions are best handled in stages, and only accelerated to the point of emergency action in terms of the rush to develop solutions, the technology needed for a diversified transition, and in ways that do not damage our economy or leave us without solutions for toxic byproducts we may unintentionally create without immediate mitigation strategies.
The 2035 standards being proposed by Governor Lamont and DEEP Commissioner Dykes were adopted from California’s 2008 Global Warming Solutions Act, our nation’s most aggressive emissions regulations. Our fragile grid and a profound lack of charging infrastructure, puts us at a 15-year disadvantage versus our friends in California.
As a happy owner of a plug-in vehicle, I experience our lack of infrastructure first-hand every day, and have very few options, other than doing 95% of my charging at home, for lack public charging. In Connecticut, we are late to California’s party and will need more time and resource flexibility to develop and build-out practical, affordable capacity.
Thank you in advance for your consideration. As with all state matters, please feel free to reach out with questions, or for further discussion.
[Sign up for updates via text message]
Be Well. Stay safe. Spread only Kindness…
Sincerely,
