ALBANY — Environmental groups, after praising much of Gov. Hochul’s climate-related budget policies, are up in arms over an 11th hour attempt in the state budget bill to overhaul how New York measures methane emissions.
The governor is reportedly pushing to include legislation in the state’s already-late spending plan to make the change, which proponents say would spare New Yorkers higher energy bills.
Opponents say the change, which is backed by fossil fuel companies, would derail the state’s attempts to achieve its ambitious climate and energy goals and slow the conversion to renewable energy.
”This is absolutely disturbing. The fossil fuel industry has been looking to delay, delay, delay. We know that’s their tactic. And that’s exactly what this proposal will do,” Liz Moran, a policy advocate with Earthjustice, said during rally at the Capitol on Monday. “It will harm communities by having us rely on dirty gas longer than we should be.”
Under the legislation, proposed by Sen. Kevin Parker (D-Brooklyn), New York would tabulate the warming effect of methane gas on a 100-year scale as opposed to a 20-year scale.
The change, if enacted, would enable utilities to keep burning methane, often called natural gas, and other fossil fuels for longer than called for under the 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, which set goals of achieving 70% renewable energy by 2030 and 100% zero-emission electricity by 2040.
It also mandates the state reduce emissions 40% from 1990 levels by 2030 and 85% by 2050.
Across much of the U.S. and the world, methane emissions are typically reported in terms of carbon dioxide equivalents using a metric that looks at the global warming potential of greenhouse gases over 100 years.
Since methane is much more short-lived than carbon dioxide — but has far greater heat-trapping potential — there has been a push in the scientific community to use the 20 year metric to better gauge its impact on climate change.
“By working with industry in a backroom deal to delay climate action, Gov. Hochul is setting New Yorkers up for both higher energy costs and a prolonged dependence on the fossil fuels that hurt New York’s frontline communities,” said Raya Salter, a member of the New York State Climate Action Council and founder of the Energy Justice Law and Policy Center.
Hochul’s office told Politico earlier this week that the administration is focused on affordability when it comes to the budget and climate policies.
In an op-ed published by lohud.com on Monday, state Department of Environmental Conservation commissioner Basil Seggos and Doreen Harris, president and CEO of the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, said easing costs for consumers as the state seeks to reduce pollution is the driving force behind weighing the change.
“The reality is that we are advancing this transformation to fight climate change at a time in which many New Yorkers are struggling financially and economically,” the administration officials wrote. “Now, under Hochul’s direction, we are taking a close look at consumer cost impacts to ensure we will reach our climate goals while protecting New Yorkers.”
Hochul garnered praise from many environmental groups earlier this year for including a host of climate-friendly measures in her $227 billion executive budget proposal.
Among the policies the governor pitched are a proposed $5.5 billion in state funds to promote energy affordability, reduce emissions and invest in clean air and water. She also proposed plans for a cap-and-invest program to charge polluters and a phase out of fossil fuel hook ups in new construction.
Assemblywoman Michaelle Solages (D-Nassau), chair of the Black, Puerto Rican, Hispanic, and Asian Legislative Caucus, said the methane change could make emissions appear less damaging than they are, which would “reduce the state’s response to emissions reduction and decrease the amount of revenue collected under a pollution pricing system.”
“We cannot renege on our commitment to Black, Latino, & AAPI communities, and we must aggressively defend our capacity as a state to address long standing harms caused by negligence and environmental racism,” Solages added.
Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz (D-Bronx) and Sen. Liz Krueger (D-Manhattan) say a better alternative to the methane change would be to include their proposed Climate Change Superfund Act in the budget.
The legislation would require companies that produce and distribute fossil fuels to pay into a fund to cover environmental damages rather than taxpayers footing the bill.
”Gov. Hochul’s excuse that New York needs to gut its nation-leading climate law in order to save New Yorkers money is flat-out wrong, especially when there’s a real solution to this problem right in front of her,” the pair said in a statement.
The bill is modeled on existing superfund laws, which make polluters financially responsible for contaminating land and drinking water.