New York's Climate Activists Not Backing Off

In New York State, the annual budget is due by April 1. Here we are on April 7, and no budget has yet emerged. Word is that the Governor and legislative leaders are hidden away behind closed doors hammering out the details. Word also is that somewhere in this “budget” process, the seemingly unrelated matter of the deadlines of the Climate Act (for starters, 70% of electricity from “renewables” by 2030) are about to get extended.

When the Climate Act (officially “Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act,” or CLCPA) was enacted back in 2019, the deadlines, beginning in 2030, seemed so very far away. The legislation was almost entirely activist-driven, with a willing audience of gullible and innumerate “progressive” useful idiots controlling the Legislature. Normal people generally paid no attention and had little idea what was about to hit them. However, as the deadlines have gotten a little closer, and as the costs of renewable generation have begun show up in utility bills, finally some of those are starting to wake up.

Meanwhile, what is happening over on the activist side? Have any of those dimwits taken the time and effort to examine the realities to see if their great plans might be starting to collapse? The answer is, not as far as I can tell. And there are plenty of examples of activists doubling down and digging in to oppose any wavering.

But first, a few examples of those belatedly joining the realist coalition. On January 9 I had a post titled “New York Business Community Starting To Wake Up About The Coming Energy Train Wreck.” That post reported that a group calling itself the Coalition for Safe and Reliable Energy — consisting of some 34 business and trade associations, one of them being the New York Business Council — had filed a Petition with the Public Service Commission, asking it to postpone the deadlines of the Climate Act with respect to the electricity system. This Coalition is a relatively small subset of New York’s large business community, but still a significant increase from the handful previously willing to speak up on this issue.

And in recent days, here are a couple of additional voices that have emerged:

• On March 30, something called the New York Energy Alliance published a piece titled “The Climate Bill Already Came Due in New York.” NYEA doesn’t say much about itself on its website, but Google AI identifies it as a “grassroots organization advocating for reliable, affordable energy including . . . natural gas, nuclear and hydropower.” The gist of the March 30 piece is a review of documents in recent rate cases of a utility called Central Hudson (one of New York’s upstate utilities) to identify causes of recent extraordinary rate increases. Conclusion: “The documents tell a story of how New York’s climate transition was deliberately financed through the utility rate case process. Politicians and organizations that championed that law, and even applauded the first wave of climate-driven rate increases in 2020, are now pointing at the bill they helped create and calling it evidence of corporate greed.”

• In the world of mainstream media, the Syracuse Post Standard has broken ranks. On April 5 it published an editorial titled “New York’s Climate Ambitions Need a Reality Check.” Brief excerpt: “In 2026, just four years before the first statutory deadline [in New York’s CLCPA], those ambitions are colliding with reality. . . . There is prudence in acknowledging these realities: New York can’t make significant gains while the federal government is pulling in the opposite direction. Nor can it solve the climate crisis on its own.” On the negative side, the Post Standard substantially blames the collapse of New York’s “climate” ambitions on the withdrawal of subsidies by the Trump administration. How could that make sense if the so-called “renewables” were supposed to be cheaper than the existing fossil fuel infrastructure? But whatever the excuses offered, welcome to reality.

Meanwhile, the climate activists are not about to back down. On March 31, the same Post Standard published an op-ed by two of the State’s leading climate activists, Anshul Gupta of New Yorkers for Clean Power and Carole Resnick of Alliance for a Green Economy (AGREE). The headline is “NY should implement its climate law, not dismantle it.” Excerpt:

The Hochul administration, facing legal challenges over its foot-dragging on implementing New York’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA), is attempting to dismantle the law through the budget process. The administration’s stated rationale is untenable, its tactics are dubious, and if it succeeds even partially, the results will ultimately harm New York.

According to Gupta and Resnick, if New Yorkers’ energy costs are going up, the entities to blame are the evil fossil fuel companies. How do we know? From our “lived experience.”

New Yorkers’ own lived experience shows that fossil fuels like oil and gas are the problem, not a solution for affordability. . . . New York should learn from them. Extending the fossil-fuel status quo would only keep the state on its current path of ever escalating energy prices.

And finally, in the proceeding where the state Public Service Commission has asked for comments on the Petition by the Coalition of business associations to extend Climate Act deadlines, 18 progressive members of the State Assembly have weighed in with their thoughts. Politico reports on the legislators’ comment in its April 6 issue (behind paywall). The 18 include Deborah Glick (my own representative, and the Chair of the Environmental Conservation Committee), Chris Burdick (from some of the wealthiest parts of Westchester County) and, of course, all of the members who admit to being affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America. The leader of the group is Emily Gallagher of Brooklyn, herself one of the Democratic Socialists. One of my daughters lives in her district! Here is a picture of Ms. Gallagher from her Wikipedia page:

In its key quote, the Comment argues that the Public Service Commission cannot alter course on the state’s mandate for a zero emissions grid by 2040 until there is “evidence of current impediments to safe and adequate service, such as blackouts and outages.”

Politico comments, “Show us the blackouts!”

The 18 signatories only constitute about 12% of the 150 members of the Assembly, so we can at least hope that some substantial group of Democrats declined to sign.

I say, keep fighting guys. The longer this goes on, the more ridiculous you will look when the final collapse comes.