TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

Earth is being exploited by those who are fracking, drilling for oil, and removing other natural resources. It is imperative that the carbon emissions be capped as soon as possible and other means of transportation developed as well as other sources of natural energy. I fully support the initiatives and goals of TCI.

Weather and its relationship to long term Climate Change dynamics have always been a subject of professional interest and application for me during my active service with the United States Navy and in retirement in matters of communication with similarly interested colleagues and community members, including members of the Rhode Island House of Representative and Senate and local City Council members as it related to shoreline degradation and change and changes in the characteristics of our waterways. I am seriously concerned that much of the advocacy of persons with public administrative and political policy responsibilities have, too often identified with activities more focused on "consensus" rather than knowledge acquisition both directly and indirectly to the causes and effects of weather and long term climate results and trends and cycles. Unfortunately, for Rhode Island, the TCI Regional Policy design finds itself as completely unsatisfactory for the people of this state and needs to be rejected outright. Our Governor may have good intentions but she has been misled by the politicization of a topic which recommends a directions which may well rebound negatively to the economic and well being environment of RHode Island residents and visitors. Recent former NASA scientists and climate professionals have, in an macro set of analyses, that actions and directions as indicated by the TCI policy design begin to have a deleterious effect when about one third of the actions undertaken begin to have a negative macro effect on various carbon creation remediation activities, increasing rather than decreasing the overall carbon footprint based on the realistic need for reliable energy generation to support expansion of alternative energy activity. Additionally, this effect then expands to log kinds of trend proportions, meaning that attempts to reduce this effect until alternative energy balance is achieved costs even more than replacement benefit intended. The cost to taxpayers and ratepayers and mobile replacement remediation replacement would be enormous, again, even if only one third of the TCI policies were implemented. Recall, that tax benefit already exists to support commercial viability of alternative mobile and energy operations. The windmill experiment is supported by an infinite cost of operation escalator to keep viable. At the same time, climate claims about the albedo of the earth are being placed into doubt as the sun seems to have moved into its cooling posture and plate tectonic movements now are causing some scientists to indicated that waters are not rising in some costal venues. Rather subsidence of large portions of plates may be the cause of "deeper" waters. These conclusions need long term analysis and warn that consensus oriented policies regarding climate need much further studies before the first penny of added taxation or fees are dedicated to what in reality is consensus exaggeration. This is critical, in that, in Rhode Island, long term neglect of the infrastructure of the state has resulted in poor bridges, dams, public buildings and schools, not to mention health care facilities and the need for alternative rail and road access to places like Hartford, CT, which is going thru an economic renewal. The current TCI policy supporters have been luuled to sleep by some who claim that energy production needs from oil and natural gas are on their way out. tell that to the citizens of Middletown and Newport and some of Portsmouth. In 2019, we have a the smallest state in the union which does not have 100% residential access to natural gas lines or water lines that have been renewed or electric transmission lines that leak badly. Much need to be done now before RI decides to go on a radical "consensus" exploration. Very bad, Governor. Time to examine what benefit we get from regional committees who have done nothing for the state to have full flowing access to traditional energy, some of which leaks from Boston ports that get very cold or hot weather LNG from Russia. Time to stop this foolishness. The governor is on her way out and appears to be seeking camaraderie with public political endeavors that her party presidential candidates are highlighting to the public, it seems with not much success. Stop this endeavor. It is wrong.

I am concerned about the cost of this initiative and would like to know the expected cost increase to a gallon of gasoline

I am in favor of anything we can do, especially in terms of transportation, to mitigate the effects of climate change. This is for the sake of our children and grandchildren.

1. need a dedicated source of funding for this initiative.
2. Need more fast charging stations, with standardized hookups, distributed in strategic locations.
3. Need to move quickly in providing incentives for electric busses and medium commercial vehicles.
4. Need to move much more quickly with onshore wind, solar pv, solar hot water, and energy efficiency’s.
5. Above all, we need to proceed quickly with a variety of initiatives. We don’t have decades, we have a few years at best. Please convey to the decision makers that we act quickly.

This is an excellent and comprehensive bottom-up regional initiative, but it cannot supplant the necessary comprehensive and overarching national clean transportation policy and regulations. States must continue to press Congress and the Administration to recognize and address the acute and interlinked climate change, energy and transportation crisis. More emphasis is needed on a smooth transition to clean energy sources for transportation vehicles and to rebuilding decayed infrastructure, or developing and deploying new infrastructure, such as chargers for electric buses and cars.

A clean, efficient and fast train line from the mid-Atlantic states to Maine would be a big step to reducing air polution.

With an average per capita income in Maine of slightly over $53K and 25% of its residents receiving Social Security...myself included) it occurs to me that most residents would not be able to afford to buy a $55K vehicle, regardless of which fuel it uses! My income certainly would not allow me to buy one. Has this not occurred to anyone in the current administration? And, adding taxes onto already high gasoline prices would be punitive to those who are already financially struggling, just to enable those who CAN afford an expensive vehicle. This policy is like punishing someone who can only afford a used Chevy, in order to subsidize the driver of a Mercedes!