Latest news with #RegionalGreenhouseGasInitiative
Politico
2 days ago
- Business
- Politico
Rate relief politics
Presented by Good morning and welcome to the weekly Monday edition of the New York & New Jersey Energy newsletter. We'll take a look at the week ahead and look back on what you may have missed last week. Driving the day RATE RELIEF POLITICS — Immediately after the Murphy administration unveiled its $430 million utility rate relief plan last week at a press conference flanked by Democratic lawmakers, Republican lawmakers who were not there began jumping on the plan as a kind of an election year political gimmick. But, reading between the lines of their statements, Republicans seemed not to actually oppose the plan, which will knock from $100 to $250 off electric bills in coming months, depending on a ratepayer's income. Senate Republican Leader Anthony Bucco said his criticism isn't of the plan, it's of the problem the plan is meant to address. 'They have to do something,' he said in an interview. 'But we shouldn't be in this position to begin with. And don't call it relief — it's really not relief — they are taking it from the taxpayers and giving it back to them.' What Bucco means is that money for rate relief package comes from charges and fees that utility customers have paid or will pay in some form or another. In a written press release the governor's office was clear about where the money is coming from — the state Clean Energy Fund, the state Board of Public Utilities' share of Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative proceeds and the Solar Alternative Compliance Payment account, which is funded by payments from utilities that didn't buy enough solar energy credits. Normal customers might be forgiven for not knowing what any of that means, but the Republican criticism is that the rate relief plan is basically a rebate program, though that's the way many government aid programs work. From the Democrats' point of view, by using money that wasn't intended for rate relief — like RGGI and Clean Energy Fund money, in particular — the administration was able to cushion the blow of rising rates without drawing on general fund dollars that could soon be needed for other unexpected costs. 'We have larger issues coming up,' Senate President Nick Scutari said, specifically naming holes in the state budget that could come from cuts the Republican Congress is looking to make to Medicaid. In the near term, the fight over how the rate relief plan is paid for is a sub-fight in the larger one Republicans are itching to have with Democrats over the Murphy administration's clean energy policies, which relied heavily on decarbonizing the grid by boxing out natural gas and relying on an offshore wind industry that hasn't materialized. Murphy, Scutari and Assembly Speaker Craig Coughlin all acknowledged there is a supply-demand problem facing New Jersey and that the rate relief is only a short-term fix for long-term issues. Notably, when they asked about what to do, they talked about solar, nuclear and, in Murphy's case, offshore wind. Former Senate President Steve Sweeney, who is running for governor, put out a statement urging the state, and by implication his former colleagues still in government, to 'embrace all forms of energy,' including natural gas. Republicans have been saying this for a while, but Bucco said Democrats 'conduct their business in an echo chamber' and are not open to talking. Still, Sweeney is not alone among Democrats. Assemblymember Wayne DeAngelo, the Mercer County Democrat who oversees the chamber's utilities committee, has also talked about the need for gas. It's still an open question if New Jersey will go that route, and that is going to be another main tension as Republicans look to use energy policy and power prices in the general election to elect lawmakers and perhaps even a governor who could undo Murphy's clean energy policies. — Ry Rivard TRUMP FUNDING GATEWAY — The Trump administration is recommending $700 million in the 2026 budget for the Hudson River train tunnel, the $16 billion project to bolster the connection between New York and New Jersey. The funding recommendation by the Federal Transit Administration is a sign that President Donald Trump is no longer attempting to upend the Gateway program, as he did by slow rolling it during his first term. Elements of the tunnel project are already under construction and employing union workers. According to a recent Regional Plan Association report, the Gateway program could generate 'close to $445 billion in economic benefits' in coming decades. — Ry Rivard HAPPY MONDAY MORNING: Let us know if you have tips, story ideas or life advice. We're always here at mfrench@ and rrivard@ And if you like this letter, please tell a friend and/or loved one to sign up. Want to receive this newsletter every weekday? Subscribe to POLITICO Pro. You'll also receive daily policy news and other intelligence you need to act on the day's biggest stories. Around New York — Some Long Island residents oppose battery storage, Propel transmission project. — The Times Union takes on biosolids spread on farmland. — Canadian wildfire smoke worsens air quality. — Sen. Chuck Schumer raises concern about summer LI-HEAP benefits. — Trees are under threat from invasive species. What you may have missed TORRES TALKS: Rep. Ritchie Torres is keeping a close eye on the mayor's race as he mulls a run for governor in 2026 and promotes an 'abundance' agenda. And while he remains a steadfast supporter of Andrew Cuomo, he criticized the ex-governor's decision to shutter a nuclear plant during his Albany tenure. While Torres praised Cuomo as an effective governor and 'one of the greatest builders of infrastructure in the 21st century,' there's one major decision he says was a mistake: shutting down the Indian Point nuclear plant, which he said led to more greenhouse gas emissions. 'I feel like there's a growing recognition in the Democratic Party that we undervalued the role of nuclear in decarbonizing,' Torres said. Cuomo defended his decision, pointing to the safety risks of a terrorist attack or earthquake to the plant located near a major population center. 'Do you understand the danger that Indian Point poses? It would be catastrophic if anything happened at Indian Point,' Cuomo told reporters. Cuomo said he supported nuclear power upstate. The governor backed massive subsidies to keep those plants open. Torres said he had a 'bias' toward clean energy, although he didn't completely rule out gas power plants to maintain the reliability of the electric grid. Torres sees permitting as a major barrier for clean energy in New York. Earlier this week, he sent a letter to Hochul, Adams and Trump celebrating a Supreme Court decision limiting federal environmental reviews. 'As an abundance Democrat, there is a presumption against rules and regulations that inhibit the building of new clean energy, affordable housing and infrastructure,' Torres said. — Marie J. French $430M FOR NJ RATE RELIEF — POLITICO's Ry Rivard: New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy's administration is providing customers with $430 million in electric bill rate relief, a sum that the Democrat and his allies in the Legislature acknowledge is only a short-term solution for rising energy costs. The relief package includes $100 for all 3.9 million residential ratepayers in the state and another $150 for low- and moderate-income ratepayers. SLIMMED-DOWN GAS MEASURE — POLITICO's Marie J. French: Democratic lawmakers in New York are planning to include major changes to a gas transition bill that are aimed at addressing regional concerns and clearing the way for its passage. Planned amendments to the NY HEAT Act, which were obtained by POLITICO and are not yet final, include renaming the bill and allowing more flexibility for gas utilities to opt out of the transition. Limits on gas utilities expanding their service territory and language on a 6 percent affordability goal are also on the chopping block. 'There's still some changes as we speak,' said Democratic Sen. Liz Krueger, who's sponsoring the bill. SENATE MOVES MORE UTILITY BILLS: New York Senate Democrats passed another handful of utility measures aimed at reining in rate increases and expanding customer protections on Thursday. The push reflects mounting frustration with rate hikes, as another utility is expected to file a proposed increase in the coming months and several are pending before the Public Service Commission. The bills join several others on utility regulation the Senate passed in January that haven't moved in the Assembly. Only one from that earlier tranche is headed to the governor's desk — Sen. Michelle Hinchey's and Assemblymember Jonathan Jacobson's measure to limit and standardize estimated billing by utilities. The package slated for passage on Thursday includes Sen. Leroy Comrie's expanded requirement for utilities to notify customers of proposed rate hikes. Currently, utilities are required to publish in local newspapers and send notices in bills. The Department of Public Service also posts on their website. This would require utilities to additionally text or email customers. That's moving in Assembly committees and is sponsored by Assemblymember Zohran Mamdani, who is running for New York City mayor. The Senate also passed a bill allowing the commission to consider non-economic damages when penalizing utilities. Hinchey also shepherded through a measure to change the Public Service Commission by expanding it to eight members with another with consumer advocacy experience. An even number of commissioners raises the theoretical possibility of a tie vote. Her bill also bars utility employees from serving on the commission for two years. Hinchey also has a measure to require more reporting on planned capital expenditures by utilities, including specific details about projects. The rate case process includes substantial information about proposed utility capital spending, which is scrutinized by the DPS and other parties. That bill has already passed the Assembly and will head to the governor's desk. Sen. Shelly Mayer, who has slammed Con Ed's proposed rate hike, also advanced a bill to extend the time period for rate cases from 11 to 14 months. That could alleviate rate compression when utilities are entitled to recover revenues deferred during a lengthy settlement process. Mayer also proposed returning 100 percent of excess returns earned by utilities over their authorized return on equity to ratepayers. Currently, shareholders get to keep a portion while the rest is returned to customers. Policymakers view this as encouraging utilities to be as efficient as possible and preserving benefits for customers. Other bills advanced include notification requirements if customers exceed a certain cost of usage (S8062) and a 24/7 toll-free number to report outages, which utilities already maintain, according to the department (S6200). The package does little to address significant drivers of rate hikes cited by Public Service Commission members and utility officials including investments to maintain and upgrade the systems — in some cases driven by growing electrification supported by state policies — and local property taxes on new and existing infrastructure. Con Ed, the largest taxpayer in New York City, estimates that a third of customer bills go toward paying taxes. 'What we're saying is that we need transparency, we need accountability,' said Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins. 'Until we get that, until we have the Public Service Commission work on consumers' behalf, not just listening to the utility, I think we'll be at a better point.' 'We're trying to save the planet as well as save access to utilities,' said Stewart-Cousins. Hinchey also noted that gas utilities are investing heavily in their systems, including expanding the system. 'We know a lot of this is also fossil fuel infrastructure,' she said. Mayer said a significant portion of Con Ed's proposed rate hike is improving their existing system, not moving to renewables. 'Obviously they need to upgrade their existing structure, but we're trying to strike a balance here with the investment in renewables at the same time,' she said. Utilities don't build renewable generation, but do have to upgrade their systems to accommodate growing amounts of distributed renewable energy and more electric demand from EVs and building heating. The PSC has also approved billions in transmission projects to support the climate law. Upstate United, a business group, criticized Senate Democrats for failing to acknowledge costs driven by the climate law. The group backs a bill sponsored by Comrie to break out costs from state policies on utility bills. ''While it may be politically convenient to obscure the cost of government mandates buried in a utility bill, what everyday New Yorkers need is a better explanation of the factors driving up the cost of energy supply and delivery. New Yorkers deserve transparency, not finger-pointing,' said Justin Wilcox, Upstate United's executive director. — Marie J. French ATLANTIC SHORES' 'RESET' — Atlantic Shores asked the Board of Public Utilities to terminate the formal project award it received in 2021. The offshore wind farm, a joint venture of Shell and French energy company EDF, was the first in the state to receive all the federal permits necessary to build but for several years it struggled to make its project pencil out, citing supply chain issues and inflation. A petition filed this week with the BPU blames the Trump administration for canceling a necessary permit and asks the state to considered the project canceled. But the company is not giving up on building a wind farm off the New Jersey coast and called the current era a 'reset period' after which it hopes a version of the project can be built. 'This filing marks the closing of a chapter, but not the end for Atlantic Shores,' CEO Joris Veldhoven said in a statement. The project was in trouble before Trump took office and then things got worse. Gov. Phil Murphy's administration decided in February not to provide financial backing to new offshore wind projects. Atlantic Shores had previously said it needed more money to make its project work; by closing that door, Murphy killed the project, a decision even some of the governor's environmental allies have questioned. Atlantic Shores' messaging contrasts with Danish energy giant Orsted's behavior in 2023, which was to abruptly kill two wind farms planned in the state and then try to get out of paying a fee for backing out of one of the projects. Atlantic Shores' arrangement with the state, which predated the one Orsted was fighting over, does not include a penalty for exiting. Indeed, it was inked in an era of exuberance about offshore wind that has proven at very least premature if not unfounded. As Atlantic Shores notes in its filing, every single offshore wind deal between 2019 and 2022 in New Jersey, New York and Massachusetts resulted in projects either being canceled or renegotiated. Even though the offshore wind industry is on shaky ground, Murphy still seems to be confident it will eventually happen. At an unrelated event on Thursday, the governor pointedly talked about the wind industry — where every project ever approved in New Jersey is dead or delayed — in the present tense. 'We have — still, I'm going to use the present tense because we haven't given up — we have the largest offshore wind program in America,' he said. — Ry Rivard REVENGE OF THE COWS: Republican lawmakers and dairy farmers are slamming what they call a 'crazy' idea to cap the number of cows allowed on dairy farms. The proposal, advanced by New York City Democrats and environmental groups, would prohibit new permits for dairy farms with more than 700 cows. 'We're going to force these folks out and force those cows to be relocated to other states,' said Republican state Sen. George Borrello, referring to the measure's potential fallout. Milk is big business in New York, which ranks fifth in the U.S. in production. Dairy is the largest part of the state's agricultural industry too, and the state is supporting new dairy processing facilities. But dairies have also been going out of business over the past decade, facing rising costs and thin margins. The number of cows in the state, meanwhile, hasn't dropped. Lawmakers and environmental groups supporting the bill, including Food and Water Watch and Third Act, say they want to protect family farms and the environment. 'These farms, known as CAFOs, prioritize profit over the well-being of animals and the health of our environment, cramming thousands of animals into confined spaces,' said Democratic Assemblymember Linda Rosenthal, who's sponsoring the bill. CAFO stands for concentrated animal feeding operation. Assemblymember Chris Tague, a Republican from Schoharie, called it the 'most ridiculous bill' he's ever seen. Expanding dairy operations is often the only way for families to keep their operations financially viable, he said. The measure is also a non-starter for key upstate Democratic lawmakers. 'I am disappointed that a bill like this was introduced without consulting anyone involved in the dairy industry,' said Democratic Assemblymember Donna Lupardo, chair of the agriculture committee. 'These hard-working men and women are some of the best stewards of the land I know.' — Marie J. French ALL ELECTRIC EXEMPTION DEBATED: The 'reasonableness' of potential exemptions to New York's requirements barring fossil fuels in most new buildings is still being defined. The compromise on all-electric buildings, passed in 2023, required the Public Service Commission to decide how a utility could determine a building is exempt when 'electric service cannot be reasonably provided by the grid.' This caveat was key to getting utility buy-in and Assembly Democrats to sign off on the measure, but environmental advocates worried whether it would gut the effectiveness of the bill aimed at limiting the expansion of the gas system. Those worries are coming into sharper relief as advocates, utilities and others respond to the Department of Public Service's proposed exemption guidelines, which recommends an exemption if necessary grid upgrades are estimated to take more than 18 months longer than providing traditional gas and electric service. The law's mandate for buildings under seven stories is set to take effect at the beginning of next year. Environmental groups in comments filed Tuesday argue this 18-month exemption is too broad and not fully justified. The Environmental Defense Fund said the commission should instead consider the actual additional time beyond a customer's requested date of interconnection and require developers to use technology to reduce electricity demand that might drive longer timelines. 'Though it is important to allow utilities to maintain grid reliability, the Commission can adopt a reasonableness standard that is narrow in scope while ensuring stable grid capacity,' the group wrote in its comments. Gas-only utilities National Fuel, Corning and Liberty Utilities joined with the New York State Builders Association to say the state should also provide exemptions based on costs. If the cost of electric-only exceeds traditional gas and electric costs, then an exemption should be permitted, they argue. The utilities and builders cite concerns about the affordability and demand for housing. An 18-month delay is also too long, they argue. 'If timeline, cost and uncertainty of building in New York become too great, developers and builders may turn to other states where these issues are not present,' they warn. 'To help avoid these unintended but very real consequences, when determining reasonableness for purposes of the Grid Exemption the Commission should consider all relevant factors where full electrification could render a project infeasible, including cost burdens that would price homes out of the reach of New York households and timing concerns associated with the availability and installation of electric infrastructure and equipment.' The state's joint utilities — Con Edison, National Grid, Central Hudson and NYSEG/RG&E — support the 18-month criteria. They also ask that developers seeking an exemption bear all the costs of required studies. The joint utilities indicate a cost-based exemption would be difficult to implement given variation in costs across different utilities. It would also require evaluating costs of both types of hookups. 'Requiring new service requests to evaluate costs based on both all-electric connections and electric/fossil fuel connections would require more resources, extend project timelines, and increase costs,' the utilities wrote in their comments. There's no timeline for the commission to make a decision, although clarity will be needed before the end of the year. The state's building codes council has also not finalized the new requirements for the coming year. — Marie J. French PSE&G MOVES AHEAD — New Jersey's largest utility is rolling out billing changes aimed at protecting electric customers from worst-case scenarios caused by rising rates. PSE&G now won't shut off service to low-income and other qualified customers by extending existing winter shut-off protections to include summer months (now through the end of September). The company is also suspending reconnection fees. Both ideas were floated last month by Gov. Phil Murphy's office and don't require Board of Public Utilities approval. 'There is now widespread recognition that New Jersey needs more power generation to address the forecasted energy supply-demand imbalance,' PSE&G President Kim Hanemann said in a statement. 'PSE&G is not the cause of the 17 percent rise in electric rates, but we can support our customers by advancing critical solutions. These actions should help relieve a burden to families and communities just as the weather is getting warmer and electricity usage hits its peak. We encourage our customers to reach out to us if they are struggling to pay their bill so we can help them access the solutions available.' PSE&G and other utilities are still waiting for the BPU to take up a broader change that would cushion summer bill spikes by deferring parts of those bills and having customers pay them back throughout the year. The plan resembles existing 'level' billing options that customers can choose to get. All these measures are designed to help take the edge off the new rates that took effect Sunday and are expected to increase the average residential power bill by $25 per month — but more in the summer months for many customers. Republicans have blasted the deferred payment concept, first proposed by the BPU, as a political stunt to help Democrats when they face voters this fall. — Ry Rivard NYISO PUSHES GAS FOR RELIABILITY — POLITICO's Marie J. French: The state's grid operator has escalated its warnings that new renewables aren't coming online fast enough to meet growing energy demand, explicitly backing additional fossil fuel plants to keep the lights on. The New York Independent System Operator has for years warned about shrinking reliability margins — the cushion of available generation to keep ACs humming and factories running. With new economic development projects, data centers and other large loads hooking up to the grid, those warnings have taken on new urgency. 'We must consider all options for investing in the grid to provide for reliability and certainty at the most efficient cost,' wrote NYISO President and CEO Rich Dewey in the annual Power Trends report released Monday.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
New Jersey Democrats propose $430M plan to defray electricity price increases
Gov. Phil Murphy announces a plan to give ratepayers $100 minimum to defray a sudden, sharp increase in electricity prices in Newark on June 5, 2025. (Courtesy of the governor's office) New Jersey will send ratepayers at least $100 to defray the impact of a steep rise in electricity prices that took effect this month, top Democrats announced Thursday. The $430 million program, which is not yet approved by state energy regulators, would provide each of the state's 3.9 million ratepayers with $100, with an additional $150 for low- and moderate-income residents. 'We're taking this step today because the fact is the people of New Jersey are being battered by the rising cost of energy, and by the way, this is not unique to New Jersey,' Gov. Phil Murphy said at a press conference in Newark. 'You can look all around the country right now, and certainly all around this region to see that we are not alone. Wholesale electricity prices are up multiples of what they were even a year ago today.' Christine Guhl Sadovy, president of the state Board of Public Utilities, suggested residents enrolled in the state's winter termination program would be eligible for the $150 payment. That program bars utility shutoffs between Nov. 15 and March 15. Officials were deliberating a second $100 payment but had not reached a decision as of Thursday afternoon, Murphy said. It was not immediately clear when or how the benefits would be paid. Murphy suggested they could come in September or October but cautioned that the timeline is hazy as the aid still needs approval from the Board of Public Utilities, whose next meeting is set for June 18. Lawmakers' announcement comes just days after electricity prices rose by roughly 20% at the start of June, pushed upward by the results of price-setting auctions held in July and February, and as hot weather pushed temperatures to roughly 90 degrees in much of the state Thursday. It also comes as all 80 seats in the state Assembly — which Democrats control by a 52-28 majority — are on the ballot in the fall (the primaries are on Tuesday). Funding for the payments would come from the state's Clean Energy Fund, the state's share of Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative money, and the Solar Alternative Compliance Payment, which is paid by electricity suppliers that are unable to meet the state's renewables standard. Some progressive groups took exception to the funding sources. 'We appreciate that the governor and lawmakers are taking seriously the strain high energy costs place on families, but how we deliver relief matters. Diverting funds from RGGI and the Clean Energy Fund risks weakening the very programs that lower long-term costs, strengthen our grid, and create local jobs,' said Alex Ambrose, a policy analyst for New Jersey Policy Perspective. Richard Henning, president of the New Jersey Utilities Association, a trade group that includes the state's four electric distribution companies, said the organization supported the proposal. The price of electricity rose sharply after being roughly level for more than a decade as supply tightened and demand shot upward, driven higher by power-hungry artificial intelligence data centers proposed throughout the footprint of PJM Interconnection, the grid operator for New Jersey, 12 other states, and the District of Columbia. Democrats have blamed PJM for the price spike, charging yearslong delays in its interconnection queue had depressed supply by leaving projects, including 79 in New Jersey, without a line into the grid. 'We in the Legislature have a tone of outrage that New Jersey is being held hostage,' Sen. John Burzichelli (D-Gloucester) said. Murphy said he and legislative leaders would meet with PJM CEO Manu Asthana next week. Republicans have blamed the Murphy administration's renewables-heavy energy plan and the sunsetting of some existing fossil fuel plants for the increases. They and some Democrats have said the state should pursue a more diverse energy mix to stall further price hikes. 'It simply delays the pain to avoid political fallout in an election year,' Sen. Tony Bucco (R-Morris), his chamber's minority leader, said of the plan announced Thursday. 'This is not relief, it's a cover-up. Trenton Democrats are once again trying to deflect the consequences of their own failed energy policies.' Legislators and regulators are considering other methods of reining in energy prices. The Board of Public Utilities is fielding proposals that could delay electricity price increases, leaving ratepayers with deferred balances they would be responsible for paying later. Guhl-Sadovy declined to comment on the status of that proposal or the effect Thursday's announcement would have on it. In recent weeks, legislators have advanced bills that would change how state regulators set utilities' profit margins, require they study data centers' impact on energy rates, and create a new rate-setting process for data centers, among others. 'Like so many states across the country, we recognized early on that the rates would not be sustainable, more importantly, that they just certainly weren't fair. That's why we went to work,' said Assembly Speaker Craig Coughlin (D-Middlesex).
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Pa. justices ask in oral arguments: Is RGGI a tax, a fee, or something completely different?
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court July, 2024 (Jen Barker Worley/ Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts) The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative could put fossil fuel-burning power plants out of business and significantly increase energy costs for consumers, electricity producers and Republican opponents of the program said Tuesday in state Supreme Court. They argued the state Department of Environmental Protection overstepped its authority and violated the constitution by imposing an impermissible tax on electricity generators who release climate-warming carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro's Department of Environmental Protection says that's not the case, because lawmakers decades ago gave it broad authority to control air pollution. Its lawyer, Thomas Hazlett, argued before the court that requiring power producers to pay for allowances to release climate-warming carbon dioxide is within that authority. 'The policy choice that the legislature made and the duty that it imposed … is to prevent, control, reduce and abate air pollution,' Hazlett said. 'Carbon dioxide is an air pollutant.' Environmental groups argued the state constitution guarantees the protection of public resources including clean air and that the DEP's plan to limit carbon emissions is constitutional because it is part of its program to protect the public's environmental rights. 'Air is a public trust resource, and the department and other trustees have to act to protect it,' Jessica O'Neil, who represented Penn Future, the Sierra Club, the Clean Air Council and the Environmental Defense Fund, said. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE But Brigid Landy Khuri, representing Senate Republican Leader Joe Pittman, President Pro Tempore Kim Ward and Energy Committee Chairman Gen Yaw, said the agency overstepped its authority by joining 11 other northeast states in the carbon credit exchange. 'If the purpose is just to cap and regulate CO₂, that's one thing,' Khuri said. 'If the purpose is … to change the entire dynamic of our electric generation system, that's absolutely a policy decision that must be made in the General Assembly, that was not made here.' Pennsylvania joined the program, known as RGGI, in 2022 under Gov. Tom Wolf's administration. RGGI requires power plant operators to bid for the rights to emit quantities of carbon dioxide as a byproduct of burning coal, oil and natural gas to make electricity. It's designed to reduce emissions by gradually decreasing the number of credits over several years and investing the auction proceeds in energy efficiency and clean energy technologies in each state. In more than two hours of arguments the justices questioned the extent to which the DEP can regulate other sources of greenhouse gas emissions from cars, or even cows. But the main question before the court was whether the lower Commonwealth Court incorrectly determined the requirement to buy carbon credits was an illegal tax. In its 2023 decision, the appellate court said that Pennsylvania's participation in RGGI must be approved through the General Assembly and that the Department of Environmental Protection does not have the authority to impose a tax. Hazlett said the DEP contends that the requirement to purchase carbon credits is actually a fee, but the justices asked whether there is a third option. Justice David Wecht suggested the creation of a marketplace for carbon credits is more like the state is selling a product or an asset. 'It's like environmental Bitcoin,' Wecht said, noting that the credits are different from licenses for which the DEP charges fees because they can be sold on a secondary market. 'What authority does DEP have to create a product that the General Assembly has not authorized them to create … and then reap the profits from the sales, whatever they may be, along with its brothers and sister states who agree to enter into this conglomerate?' Wecht asked. The legislature created the authority for the DEP to regulate the burning of fossil fuels and the emission of pollutants in the Air Pollution Control Act, which was first passed in 1959. The sale of carbon credits was determined to be an efficient way to exercise that authority, Hazlett said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX He added that controlling industrial emissions with credits that can be traded has been around since the 1980s, when the state sought to control acid rain emissions. Hazlett said the intent of the program is not to put the fossil fuel industry out of business. 'The idea of the regulatory regime is to allow the regulated entities to manage their business in the most efficient way,' Hazlett said, noting that generators could reduce their carbon dioxide emissions by improving technology or using other fuels. David Fine, who represents a consortium of generating companies that use fossil fuels, said the case before the court is not about whether RGGI is a good program, but rather, whether the executive branch has the authority to implement such a program. Responding to the court's inquiry about how much RGGI would generate in auction proceeds, Fine said that based on an auction for the other states last year, Pennsylvania would have received $2 billion in costs that electricity producers would pass on to consumers. He argued the court should conclude a cost of that magnitude should not be implemented without legislative approval. 'That's multiple times the entire DEP budget,' Fine said. 'All of that without the General Assembly voted in favor of it. This will cripple an industry. This will imperil jobs, and it will also imperil investment in Pennsylvania business.'
Boston Globe
11-04-2025
- Automotive
- Boston Globe
New Trump executive orders aim to stop state climate action
In Massachusetts, Trump's edict could mean the erosion of state mandates such as one that says electricity must increasingly come from clean sources — such as offshore wind — and that all passenger vehicles sold in the state are electric by 2035. It's a step that upends a core underpinning of the Republican party as the defender of federalism and a state's right to govern as it sees fit. But it aligns with efforts of conservative think tanks and some Republican states, which have long sought to staunch efforts to move from fossil fuels to clean energy. Advertisement 'Trump is picking and choosing which states to strip of their sovereignty,' Sen. Ed Markey said in an emailed statement, vowing to continue work to 'ensure that Trump's Big Oil cabinet will not stop us from securing a healthy, livable future.' It's all part of a larger picture. Hours earlier, Trump signed an executive order aimed at reviving the coal industry, which has seen major declines in recent years as cleaner and less expensive forms of energy have taken over. Advertisement In New England, the order on coal is unlikely to make much of a difference, experts said, because the two remaining coal plants — both in New Hampshire — are required to close in the coming years based on a legal settlement. It's unlikely that any new coal plants would be built in the region because they are more expensive to build and operate than other kinds of power plants (to say nothing of the cost to the climate). Daren Bakst, director of the Center on Energy and Environment at the libertarian public policy organization Competitive Enterprise Institute, defended the new executive order, calling it 'an important effort to examine what states are doing that undermine our ability to produce reliable and affordable energy.' Bakst said that the order 'rightfully' references policies that states employ to discriminate against out-of-state energy producers that impose major barriers to interstate trade. That argument — that state laws to regulate emissions negatively effect out-of-state energy producers, in violation of federal law — hasn't held up at the Supreme Court, said Ari Peskoe, director of the Electricity Law Initiative at the Harvard Law School Environmental and Energy Law Program. In 2023, the Supreme Court shot down that inter-state argument, he said, so it 'doesn't have a lot of sway now in courts.' Related : Massachusetts has passed several laws that aim to slash planet-warming greenhouse gases, making it a longtime leader in state-adopted climate legislation, while also bringing lawsuits to hold polluters to account. It's also a long-standing member of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a 16-year-old market-based program that sets a declining cap on emissions from power plants and charges them for the carbon they emit. Advertisement In 2019, then-Attorney General Maura Healey sued Exxon Mobil Corporation — the world's largest publicly traded oil and gas company — for deceptive advertising to Massachusetts consumers and for misleading Massachusetts investors about the risks to Exxon's business posed by fossil fuel-driven climate change. That case is ongoing, and now being argued by Attorney General Andrea Campbell. In 2021, Gov. Charlie Baker signed a law requiring the state to slash emissions to half of 1990 levels by the end of this decade, and to essentially zero them out by mid-century. Subsequent laws signed by Baker and Healey have mandated increases in clean energy while offering pathways for some communities to start banning fossil fuels in new buildings. Those laws put Massachusetts on a path. In order to achieve those emissions goals, the state needs to rapidly convert buildings off of fossil fuels, primarily by switching from oil or gas for heat to electric heat pumps; requiring electric vehicles to replace gas ones; and deeming that electricity must come from clean sources, like wind, solar and hydro-electricity. Already, that work is underway, largely by offering a suite of incentives to residents, through Mass Save and other programs, while pursuing the development of clean energy resources, like wind and solar. The latest executive order could put all of that at risk — that is, if Bondi is able to find legal grounds to fight the states. 'Just as the president's tariffs have led to an economic disaster, this latest executive order is yet another unlawful overreach that will undermine the clean energy transition that is creating jobs, advancing new technologies, and protecting communities in Massachusetts and across the United States,' said Maria Hardiman, spokesperson for the state's Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. Advertisement In response to the executive order, Hardiman noted that in recent years, the state has experienced historic floods, heat waves, drought, and wildfires, and that the effects of climate change are expected to get a lot worse. That dire picture includes an estimated additional 400 premature deaths each year due to extreme heat by the end of the century, and, if action isn't taken, a ten-fold increase in coastal flood damage to commercial and industrial areas by 2090, according to the state. The Trump administration argues that states' efforts to slash emissions amount to an abuse of power. 'The president is right to ensure that Americans in both red and blue states are not beholden to State overreach stifling American energy that are unconstitutional or contradict federal law,' said White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers. Arguing a state energy policy is unconstitutional is 'certainly a provocative step,' said Peskoe, of Harvard Law School, but this isn't the first time Trump has tried this — and it hasn't worked in the past. During his first term, Trump took aim at California's cap-and-trade program, which incentives companies to reduce their emissions while penalizing those that fail to meet required limits. The program was named in the recent executive order as a potential target for Bondi's investigation. But the earlier effort to overturn that program failed. 'It's not clear why they think they have a better chance this time around,' Peskoe said. Advertisement The executive order also calls out laws passed in Vermont and in New York state that aim to recover the costs of climate impacts, like flooding, from fossil fuel companies. But those laws were only recently passed. 'Typically, the Justice Department takes the position that until a law is actually implemented or enforced — and that's years away, in Vermont and New York — there is no basis to be in federal court," said Bradley Campbell, president of the Conservation Law Foundation. Larry Chretien, executive director of the Green Energy Consumers Alliance, which works in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, said there's nothing unconstitutional about the laws that govern climate action in either state — which means it's unlikely that Bondi will find anything to challenge in state court. 'I see the executive order as another attempt to throw red meat to the fossil fuel industries,' he said. 'No state should blink.' Sabrina Shankman can be reached at
Yahoo
12-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
With freeze on federal funding, cutting emissions in RI just got harder.
PROVIDENCE – The development of a strategy that is fundamental to the state's efforts to cut planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions is continuing despite the federal funding freeze. But implementing the recommendations of the plan is expected to be more challenging with an administration in Washington that is openly hostile to efforts to fight climate change. The Rhode Island Executive Climate Change Coordinating Council voted this week to approve the transfer, if needed, of $225,000 in state funds to pay the consultants and other groups that have been working on the climate action strategy, a comprehensive plan that will detail what Rhode Island has to do to meet the emissions targets required by the 2021 Act on Climate. Work on the plan started at the beginning of the year and was being paid for through $3 million that had been allocated from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Carbon Pollution Reduction Grant program. The state has been paying the bills for the work up front and then seeking reimbursement from the EPA under the terms of the grant's binding contract. Those reimbursements had continued smoothly until President Donald Trump late last month signed a sweeping order affecting a raft of congressionally mandated programs and another more specific one that targeted climate spending. There have been a series of government directives, lawsuits and court orders since then, but it's still unclear what will happen to Rhode Island's climate planning grant. 'The news is literally changing daily and sometimes hourly,' said Terry Gray, director of the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management and chair of the state climate council. After the EPA froze its online reimbursement portal, Gray asked the climate council for permission to move $225,000 from DEM coffers in case it's needed to continue paying for development of the climate strategy. The money originally came from the climate commission's budget, which is funded by Rhode Island's share of payments from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a cap-and-invest program aimed at cutting power plants emissions in the Northeast. The bulk of the money given to the DEM was going to be used on a pilot program to switch over lawn maintenance equipment used in state parks to electric models. That program will have to wait. 'Because the climate plan is such a priority, I want to have a backup plan,' Gray said at the council's meeting on Monday. The DEM money would pay for work on the plan through the end of the fiscal year on June 30. At that point, if the federal funds aren't flowing, the climate council will have to figure out another funding source. The strategy, which is due by the end of the year, is crucial to the state's climate policies because it will set out a framework for Rhode Island to comply with the Act on Climate, the bill signed into law by McKee that requires the state to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. It will look at everything from switching to electric cars to phasing out the use of fossil fuels for heating. While work on the plan will continue, other federally funded programs that have been helping to cut carbon pollution in Rhode Island have been put on hold by Trump's orders. The state Office of Energy Resources has said that it's facing a freeze on $125 million in federal funding that has put on hold programs aimed at helping businesses and homeowners conserve energy and invest in renewables. The total includes about $35 million that was set to come to Rhode Island through a second allocation from the EPA's Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program, according to acting state energy commissioner Chris Kearns. That money was due to the state from a $450-million grant awarded in July to help half a million homeowners across New England purchase electric heat pumps, which are more efficient than fossil fuel furnaces and can be cheaper to operate. The freeze is also affecting a program that aimed to expand the number of charging stations for electric vehicles in Rhode Island. The state was among the first in the nation to complete phase one of the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program by installing fast-charging stations along the Interstate 95 corridor. It was set to embark on phase two by expanding funding to private and public entities that would have supported the installation of more than 200 publicly accessible charging ports. But after having spent $2 million so far, the state is poised to lose the remaining $21 million that it was awarded, according to the energy office. 'OER and [the Rhode Island Department of Transportation] are monitoring closely all federal matters on electric vehicle charging infrastructure funding,' said Robert Beadle, spokesman for the energy office. 'Clean transportation programs are important in advancing our Act on Climate objectives.' The state energy office has also put a hold on a $32-million program to help homeowners buy energy-efficient clothes dryers and stoves and update wiring. U.S. Rep. Seth Magaziner, D-R.I., has decried the freeze affecting energy programs. 'This could mean higher energy costs, a dirtier environment and fewer jobs for RIers,' Magaziner wrote on X. One state climate program that hasn't been affected, according to Kearns, is Clean Heat RI, which offers incentives to property owners who purchase heat pumps. The $25-million program was funded entirely by COVID stimulus funds from the federal government. So far, the state energy office has awarded 3,800 rebates through the program totaling $15 million. The development of a coastal resilience plan being led by the DEM is also unaffected. The plan, which will identify areas vulnerable to coastal storms, erosion and rising seas, is being funded by the General Assembly. Environmental programs that receive federal funds through the Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank have also continued uninterrupted so far. They include work to help drinking water providers filter so-called forever chemicals from their supplies and replace lead service pipes. The final phase of a decades-long project to protect Narragansett Bay from combined sewer overflows is also still getting federal money through the infrastructure bank. 'If EPA funds were to be frozen, it would have a significant impact on our ability to continue critical projects,' said Ben Smith, a spokesman for the bank. 'Upwards of $180 million could become inaccessible.' On the climate strategy, Gray said that it's still on track for completion by the end of the year. Meeting the goals of the strategy will 'be more challenging now,' he said. 'Not having the federal support and the grants that have already been committed and promised to the state, that makes a big difference,' Gray said. This article originally appeared on The Providence Journal: How Trump's spending freeze will affect RI's climate change goals
