New York State’s fiscal year runs from April 1 to March 31, and thus there is a mandate that the budget for each year must be approved before April Fool’s Day. This year they blew right by that deadline. But today, 8+ weeks late, it appears that a new budget has been enacted for what they call “fiscal year” 2027, that is, April 1, 2026 to March 31, 2027.
Among several contentious issues that held up enactment of this year’s budget, probably the most contentious involved the provisions relating to energy and “climate.” Our climate law, the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act of 2019 (CLCPA) had imposed absurd deadlines for eliminating fossil fuels from the energy system. Seven years in, Kathy Hochul, our lightweight Governor, had finally mustered just enough brain cells to recognize that disaster was approaching. But she faces big legislative majorities of her own Democratic Party committed to “climate action.” And of the members constituting those majorities, most are not moderates open to pragmatism, but rather progressive activists committed to total climate purity. How to get out of this trap?
Hochul adopted a strategy of seeking minimum possible modifications of of the CLCPA, affecting only the most immediate impending deadlines of the Act. The apparent goal is to provide a couple of years of breathing room, sufficient (they hope) to get Hochul safely re-elected later this year.
But then what? It looks like they have traded a very brief reprieve for what will very likely be an even worse subsequent disaster.
First, let’s review the problematical CLCPA provisions. The CLCPA had three near-term deadlines that had become obviously impossible. Those were: (1) a 2024 deadline for promulgating regulations, particularly for what they called a “cap and invest” program, to implement the Act; (2) a 2030 deadline to reduce statewide “greenhouse gas” emissions by 40% from 1990 levels; and (3) a 2030 deadline to get 70% of electricity from “renewables.”
So where was the State with respect to these CLCPA statutory mandates?
- The State had completely blown off the 2024 deadline for the “cap and invest” regs. As a result, environmental groups had sued, and a state court had ordered that the State issue the regulations as required, as painful as that may be. However, the judge had stayed his injunction in order to give the legislature time to act.
- As to the mandate of 40% reduction of GHG emissions from 1990 levels by 2030, the State “Climate Act Dashboard” admits that the reduction so far has been only 14% (data only through 2023, but not much has changed since). Most of that has been a consequence of switching power plants from burning coal to natural gas. There are no more coal power plants to switch. The prospect of major further reductions in GHG emissions between now and 2030 is nil.
- As to renewable electricity generation, the Climate Act Dashboard states that 32% of the goal of 70% or electricity from renewables has been achieved, and another 30% of the goal is supposedly “in the pipeline.” Most of the 32% already achieved consists of Niagara Falls, which existed way before the CLCPA came along in 2019. They don’t give details of what the “in the pipeline” projects are, or of whether they are anything more than pipe dreams. They clearly will get nowhere close to the supposedly mandatory “70% of electricity from renewables” goal by 2030.
So how does the new budget deal change these things? I can’t find exact enacted statutory text, but here is a good summary from a law firm, Greenberg Traurig. With respect to the three provisions identified:
- The 2024 deadline for promulgating “cap and trade” regulations gets moved from 2024 to 2028.
- The mandate for 40% reduction in GHG emissions in 2030 is eliminated. In its stead, we get non-binding target of a 60% reduction in GHG emissions by 2040.
- From what I can tell, the “70% of electricity from renewables” mandate remains in place.
Comments:
(1) The “cap and trade” regulations will be no more feasible in 2028 than they are today. The only difference will be that Hochul will not be up for re-election that year. They will have two options, which will be to blow off the deadline as they did the last time, or extend it again.
(2) The idea that GHG emissions will be reduced 60% by 2040 is even more absurd than the prior idea that emissions would be reduced 40% by 2030. Given that it is no longer a mandate, and has been moved from four years out to fourteen, nobody will even bother to pay attention to this one for at least a decade.
(3) The “70% of electricity from renewables by 2030” mandate will be missed by a mile. But there is no one to hold accountable. Utilities? They are not in the business of generating the power any more. The people who do generate the power are independent operators who run one or a few power plants or wind farms or whatever, but have no responsibility for the overall generation mix. The people who are supposedly responsible for the generation mix are an alphabet soup of brainless state agencies (NYSERDA, NYISO, CAC, etc.) with no skin in the game. The whole idea of holding such bureaucracies accountable is antithetical to their very nature.
But meanwhile, as time will continue its march, New York’s energy situation will continue to worsen:
- The provisions of the CLCPA and New York’s environmental laws that currently make it impossible to build new natural gas power plants, or repower old ones to new technology, will remain in place. The natural gas fleet will continue to age, and some plants will retire.
- The termination of federal subsidies plus restrictions on offshore wind mean that little wind or solar generation will be built either.
- New York City’s Local Law 97, mandating conversion to electric heat for most large buildings, remains in place. Where is the electricity going to come from? Nobody knows.
- And then there is RGGI, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. New York is a member, along with all the other states along the Atlantic Coast from Maine to Virginia (except Pennsylvania). There are limited allowances for GHG emissions from power plants, and the amount of those allowances is scheduled to decrease by approximately 10% per year every year through 2033. The very idea is to force many of the natural gas power plants to close, and to force the price of electricity from the remaining ones to skyrocket. As of now this remains in place. If you think this scheme is so ridiculous that no state could possibly be part of it, remember that Virginia just re-joined a couple of months ago.
Here is some related advice from the State of New York: if you should ever find yourself in a car hurtling toward a brick wall at 100 mph, your best strategy is to close your eyes and pretend it is not happening.
If it is any consolation, the Greenberg Traurig summary of the CLCPA amendments reports that another change in the statute is that the percent of “benefits” of the Act directed to “disadvantaged communities” is to go from 40% to 45%. So at least there’s that.
New York state can reduce its emissions by 100% and it will have absolutely no effect on a GLOBAL atmosphere that weighs 5.5 quadrillion (5,500,000,000,000,000) metric tons.
The good news is the landmark climate law has been pretty well gutted. What made the mandated regs a killer was they had to “ensure” the impossible 2030 targets were met. That is gone so they can make the regs harmless.
Grant everyone that claims to vote the right way an exception.
(Selectively enforce)
(Leave in obvious loopholes)
(Make non-compliance a small penalty tax)
“Cap and invest-the-tax” is a rationing program where the rations are taxed. I discuss it in detail here:
http://www.cfact.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/NYS-Climate-Act-Risk-Report-Final-v2.pdf
Yet another clear example of unaccountable government. This needs to end. We know exactly who is responsible for this mess, every politician who voted for this program and every bureaucrat or administrator who pushed for it. They were told from the beginning that the legislation, mandates and regulations were unworkable. Absolutely no one is surprised it hasn’t worked out. If I had it in my power I would withhold pay and benefits for everyone involved, they knowingly passed or lobbied for unworkable programs and mandates. They shouldn’t be paid and none of their staff should be paid for one year. If they leave office their wages should be garnished for one year. There is no excuse for this kind of crap.
When you are saving the world, exceptions to solid reasoning can be made.
If anyone thinks NYS is bad CT has the 1st or 2nd highest electric rates in the nation. The government has never met a subsidy that they did not want the electric companies/ratepayers to fund. Thus the electric bills are so high that some of the people cannot pay their bill——no problem. CT has a solution for this. They allow/mandate the electric companies to add a 20% surcharge on to the bills of the ratepayers that do pay to cover the loss from the people that don’t!
Search Assist says: “The average residential electricity rate in Connecticut is approximately 30.47 cents per kWh, …”
In the central part of Washington State, with large hydro on the Columbia River, (2025) rates are:
Douglas County, WA the rate is 2.35¢/kWh in 2026
Chelan County 2.7¢/kWh
Grant County 5.9¢/kWh
Kittitas County 10.21¢/kWh [I’m here] + $26/month “facility charge”
John, do all the WA rates quoted above include ‘wire’ (T&D) charges?
President Barack Obama
January 2008
“Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”
“If somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can — it’s just that it will bankrupt them…”
Another reason that Obama was and still is despised by any rational person.
It’s even much worse. Mayor Mamdani is hell-bent on running New York City into bankruptcy, both by running billionaires out of the city and by increasing social spending (buying votes!). Then Governor Hochul has commissioned a State of New York study of Reparations for persons of color, including how much, when, and how to finance it. New York might actually beat out Kalifornia to the bottom. Wait for it.
They, the mayor and governor are following the Cloward-Piven Strategy almost word for word. The US Democrats want to replace the existing system with pure Socialism/Communism.
Interesting question: How would one disqualify an applicant.
ie “You’re not colored enough”
or “You’re colored but your ancestors were not victimized enough”
The law would have to be written in a way that locks down a definition of “persons of color” and that definition might have to involve investigation of a person’s grandparents from 100 years before records were computerized. IF the lawmakers cared.
As far as reparations go, why stop with minorities in the US? After all the families that remained in Africa lost their relatives to the slave traders.
Most of the slave traders were either Arabs or fellow Africans.
…or “You’re colored but your colored ancestors also owned slaves”.
Hitler and the Jewish question did just exactly that, then gassed them-don’t misunderstand me-I’m speaking of the madness that this sort of deep research would provoke, not about killing people.
You’re asking people who can’t define “woman” to define “POC”?? Good luck with that!!
If the definition of woman is, anyone who thinks they are a woman is, then why shouldn’t the definition of POC be the same. If you feel like you are a minority, then you are.
Any law based on color ought to be unconstitutional.
But don’t underestimate the shysters. So, when such a law is enacted challenge it not on what it says but on what is missing, namely the repatriation provision. Because if reparations are supposed to undo a past injustice, returning the offspring to the roots of their ancestors must be part of that undoing.
U.S. Census Bureau
Population NY state 2020: 20.2M
Population NY state 2025: 20.0M
So long as NYers don’t do anything dumb like shut down working power plants, convert to electric heating or adopt EVs, they’ll be fine.
They won’t remain ‘working power plants’ for long if they’re not maintained or replaced by same.
It’s funny to see a generation of politicians who thought they were very clever legislating ‘irreversible climate change action’ with statutory short-term and long-term emissions targets to prevent future backsliding being ‘hoisted on their own petard’.
The UK Climate Change Act passed in 2008 was an early example.
Tony Blair out of office by then (UK PM 1997 – 2007) but was instrumental in creating the mood for the legislation and subsequent economic stagnation has now reneged by advocating fossil fuel use to power AI in UK.
For what it’s worth, I prompted Grok on X to summarize the changes and adjustments in the recent NY budget package and to give an update on vehicle rules that are in place separately.
https://x.com/i/grok/share/fc148732b6c84e019f01866ed2ffbf14
The train is still barreling toward a missing bridge, but it’s a bit farther away, that’s all. Elections matter, and it seems all designed to deal with the 2026 election cycle.
“The “70% of electricity from renewables by 2030” mandate will be missed by a mile. But there is no one to hold accountable.” Not sure about that. If someone sues the state for not meeting legislated mandates, a judge might order the state to immediately comply. If the only way to comply is to shut down natural gas powered electrical plants, then that would be the order issued by the judge. Consequences by damned.
Another question, how does NY plan to power new AI data centers?
What happens if the elected officials simply ignore the judges order?
In other worlds, the leftists would once again be doing what they inaccurately accuse Trump of doing.
This is typical problem (trap) with triggers of all types set in state laws, whether automatic tax rate cuts or energy policy nonsense. Flexibility and votes along the way with rational assessment and reassessment of conditions is a better way. NY will stumble down the wrong policy path for years with this, but they already the AI excuse for the blame game.
At least the newly rich reparations recipients will have some money to pay for expensive energy, unless they blow it all on drugs, cars, and trips.
As some sage once said; If all the countries wealth were to be evenly divided between the people, within 20 years, all the people who are rich now, will be rich again, and all the people who are poor now, will be poor again.
The reason for this is simple, whether a person is wealthy or poor depends almost entirely on their personal habits and something like reparations don’t change those.
The Guardian has some savings in mind-
Scrapping 86,000 new car parking spaces could save $5.2bn and drive down rents, Grattan report finds
Battery cars be damned!
The goal has always been to force people back into government transportation. People who are free to move when and where they want, are much harder to control.
Perhaps they are taking the German approach to carbon free energy, buy reliable carbon free nuclear power from a neighboring country to avoid offending green radicals.
Canada is building 10 GW of Nuclear on the other side of Lake Ontario. By extending dates to 2040, the Canadian nuclear might be completed. New York has also agreed to build a 1 GW plant but I doubt that will be ready by 2040. Pennsylvania is also close by and they already a major supplier.
Can New York update and expand the capacity of their grid in the next 14 years? Probably, but it won’t be cheap.
Governor Hochul’s people are currently studying the possibility of new-build nuclear inside the state’s borders, but have not yet made a specific commitment to construct any new reactors.
IMHO, new-build nuclear here in the US must rely on direct government financial support to go forward. New York would be no exception.
Downstate New Yorkers remain adamantly opposed to nuclear power.
Since they control the state legislature and hence the state budget, they can block any plans Governor Hochul might have to use taxpayer money for constructing one or more nuclear power plants in the state.
Constellation Seeks Early Site Permit at Oswego, NY (Neutron Bytes, May 24th, 2026)
From the Dan Yurman article:
“Constellation Energy Corp., which owns and operates three nuclear reactors in upstate New York, announced it will seek an Early Site Permit (ESP) from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to develop one or more advanced nuclear reactors at a site in Oswego County, NY.
The utility will use $30 million in combined federal and state funding to cover the costs of filing for the ESP. The funds include $17.3 million from the U.S. Department of Energy and $12.5 million from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.”
As is said in the Dan Yurman article, the Constellation ESP application does not initially specify which reactor, or reactors, might be constructed if a decision was made to go forward with a nuclear project.
IMHO, the follow-on construction permit application, if one was eventually to be filed, would either be for a large 1200 Mw AP1000 type reactor, or for a 300 Mw BWRX-300 SMR, or possibly even for both.
Does this application for an ESP mean that Constellation is serious about building new reactors in New York state?
IMHO, the only way new reactors can be constructed in New York state is for the State of New York, with assistance from the Federal Government, to directly fund those new reactors using taxpayer money — roughly 6 billion dollars for the first 300 Mw BWRX-300 SMR or roughly 20 billion dollars for the first 1200 Mw AP1000.
Downstate New Yorkers in the New York City area, who control the state legislature and who remain adamantly opposed to nuclear power, would have to vote for the necessary taxpayer funding.
The downstaters who killed Shoram in the late 1980’s and who forced the closure of the two Indian Point reactors in 2021 have to be on board with spending taxpayer money for nuclear as well as for wind and solar.
Which means that new-build nuclear power isn’t likely to happen in New York state any time soon, if it ever happens at all.
$30 million to file for a permit?
While it may look like some Democrats are trying to moderate their unrealistic emissions targets and deadlines, they keep all the restrictions in place that will make it uneconomical to refurbish or build new, practical (fossil fueled) power plants. Energy costs will go up as will the costs for energy-intensive companies. Businesses and jobs will leave the state while the cost of living soars. Living in New York will become increasingly untenable. We are witnessing the destruction of New York by leftists in real time. It sounds eerily similar to what Ayn Rand described in “Atlas Shrugged.” Huh.