As of January 1st, the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act is the law in New York. Together, we passed the nation's strongest climate law — but our work is only just starting.
We're demanding that the legislature and governor fund climate action in this year's budget.
On January 27, we'll be in the state capitol to rally, lobby, and flex our power to demand funding for climate justice. Join us!
What: No Empty Promises: Fund Climate Justice NOW!
When: January 27th, 2020 10:30am
Where: Albany State Capitol
Buses provided from NYC, Buffalo, and Long Island
RSVP Here
This day of action comes after the Governor's State and the State and will be critical for centering Climate Justice in this year's budget. We need all of us to show up and demand Climate Justice! If you haven't lobbied before, don't worry. NY Renews will provide training, transportation, and lunch.
RSVP now to join us on January 27th! This is our first Albany day of action since the CCPA fight.
Let's show that we still won't stand for empty promises. We need Climate Justice NOW!
350.org is a global movement that fights for a just and equitable world by stopping the fossil fuel industry from continuing to destroy our climate.
Showing posts with label NY state. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NY state. Show all posts
Sunday, January 26, 2020
Wednesday, June 5, 2019
TAKE ACTION: Demand a Vote on the NYS Climate and Community Protection Act
TAKE ACTION:
Tell our State elected leaders: our Planet, our Health, and our Communities can't wait.
We need New York State to lead on Climate Justice and pass the Climate and Community Protection Act (CCPA) this session.
We have a Majority of Sponsors in the Senate and the Assembly.
Tell our State elected leaders: our Planet, our Health, and our Communities can't wait.
We need New York State to lead on Climate Justice and pass the Climate and Community Protection Act (CCPA) this session.
We have a Majority of Sponsors in the Senate and the Assembly.
We demand a VOTE on the CCPA
NOW!
Click Here to Take Action
NY Renews is a coalition of more than 150 grassroots, state, and national organizations. We aim to make New York State the nation’s leader in tackling the climate crisis while protecting workers and lifting up communities.
Saturday, December 22, 2018
Cuomo supports a Green New Deal for Carbon-Free Electricity by 2040
Cuomo sets Goal for Carbon Neutral Electric System by 2040
By MARIE J. FRENCH
12/17/2018 | 04:44 PM EST
ALBANY — Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Monday set a new goal to reduce emissions from the state's electricity generation and promised to support a Green New Deal to get to a completely carbon-free economy.
Details were sparse on what Cuomo's conception of a Green New Deal would entail or when he'd mandate that the state eliminate carbon emissions across the economy. His current goal for the electric sector is 50 percent renewables by 2030, and for emissions in most sectors of the economy to be cut 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050.
“New York will launch the Green New Deal to make New York’s electricity 100 percent carbon neutral by 2040, and ultimately eliminate the state’s entire carbon footprint," Cuomo said during a speech in New York City, where laid out his agenda for 2019.
Environmental advocates expressed optimism at Cuomo's new goals.
“The new goal is incredibly exciting and motivating,” said Kit Kennedy of the Natural Resources Defense Council. "What happens now is going to be crucial. In other words, is this a goal … and that’s it, or can we get done what we need to get done in New York state on the ground in terms of policy deployment, acceleration of energy efficiency, electric vehicles, Article 10 [the state siting law for large-scale generators] reforms, offshore wind, storage, the whole gamut of zero-carbon technologies."
For advocates who have consistently pushed for more aggressive action, the lack of details or a goal to get to zero percent emissions in the short-run were disappointing.
“A vague pledge of carbon neutrality by the year 2040 is not the bold action necessary to move New York off fossil fuels," said Food and Water Watch's Alex Beauchamp. "Cuomo must go much bigger: A true Green New Deal for New York must include a moratorium on all new fossil fuel infrastructure and a commitment to transition New York to 100 percent renewable energy by 2030."
The Cuomo administration did not respond to questions about what a Green New Deal would include, whether legislative action would be required or whether electric generators would be able to purchase carbon offsets to comply with the 2040 goal.
The Democratic governor has already directed the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority to study how the state could get to 100 percent renewables, not just in the electric sector but across the economy. He's said he supports that goal. The study was expected to be completed by the end of this year.
By MARIE J. FRENCH
12/17/2018 | 04:44 PM EST
ALBANY — Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Monday set a new goal to reduce emissions from the state's electricity generation and promised to support a Green New Deal to get to a completely carbon-free economy.
Details were sparse on what Cuomo's conception of a Green New Deal would entail or when he'd mandate that the state eliminate carbon emissions across the economy. His current goal for the electric sector is 50 percent renewables by 2030, and for emissions in most sectors of the economy to be cut 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050.
“New York will launch the Green New Deal to make New York’s electricity 100 percent carbon neutral by 2040, and ultimately eliminate the state’s entire carbon footprint," Cuomo said during a speech in New York City, where laid out his agenda for 2019.
Environmental advocates expressed optimism at Cuomo's new goals.
“The new goal is incredibly exciting and motivating,” said Kit Kennedy of the Natural Resources Defense Council. "What happens now is going to be crucial. In other words, is this a goal … and that’s it, or can we get done what we need to get done in New York state on the ground in terms of policy deployment, acceleration of energy efficiency, electric vehicles, Article 10 [the state siting law for large-scale generators] reforms, offshore wind, storage, the whole gamut of zero-carbon technologies."
For advocates who have consistently pushed for more aggressive action, the lack of details or a goal to get to zero percent emissions in the short-run were disappointing.
“A vague pledge of carbon neutrality by the year 2040 is not the bold action necessary to move New York off fossil fuels," said Food and Water Watch's Alex Beauchamp. "Cuomo must go much bigger: A true Green New Deal for New York must include a moratorium on all new fossil fuel infrastructure and a commitment to transition New York to 100 percent renewable energy by 2030."
The Cuomo administration did not respond to questions about what a Green New Deal would include, whether legislative action would be required or whether electric generators would be able to purchase carbon offsets to comply with the 2040 goal.
The Democratic governor has already directed the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority to study how the state could get to 100 percent renewables, not just in the electric sector but across the economy. He's said he supports that goal. The study was expected to be completed by the end of this year.
Tuesday, February 27, 2018
Community Solar News: Clean, Cost-Saving Energy for Sisters of St. Joseph -- NY State Expands Maximum Solar Project Size
Sisters of St. Joseph installs community solar power system
Project will provide 1 megawatt of power to the 212-acre Brentwood campus.
By Mark Harrington | February 7, 2018 | Newsday Long Island
Long Island’s first “community” solar installation that allows a group of ratepayers to collectively share in the cost-benefits of a large solar array is officially operating in Brentwood.
The new system, the result of a LIPA-approved rule change in 2016, will provide 1 megawatt of power to hundreds of residents and offices of the Sisters of St. Joseph, a 212-acre campus in Brentwood that is home to the Catholic order of religious women.
The project is owned by NextEra Energy Sources and operates under contract to the Sisters. Construction was completed late last year by EmPower Solar of Island Park.
The system will offset an estimated 63 percent of the campus’ energy needs, and save the Sisters of St. Joseph some $22,000 in electricity costs a year, NextEra said. The contracted price of energy from the system is around 14 cents a kilowatt-hour, said Tara Rogers, spokeswoman for the Sisters. That’s well below the approximately 19 cents average LIPA customers pay.
NextEra, of Jupiter, Florida, will maintain the system under a 25-year contract, in which all the power is sent to the LIPA grid, with energy virtually metered and credited to accounts on campus.
LIPA approved “community distributed generation net metering” in early 2016 to allow home and business customers to collectively build green-energy sources and share in the benefits among “members.” It can be cheaper for customers than individual home solar installations because of the members can share in the cost savings of building a larger array, LIPA said.
Community solar has a relatively small impact on the overall LIPA rate base, according to LIPA’s analysis at the time the program was approved. Each 12 megawatts of solar will have $1.95 million cost impact, an amount recovered on the revenue decoupling mechanism on LIPA bills. For the Brentwood project, that means a cost of around $165,000.
The Sisters’ solar array, consisting of 3,192 panels, is located on five acres designated as “degraded woodlands” beside a rain garden. The Sisters have a Sustainable Land Ethic Statement that encourages green building and sustainable uses.
Full article at Newsday
NY Spurs Community Solar by Upping Project Size Threshold
By Sneha Ayyagari & Miles Farmer | February 22, 2018 | NRDC
In a win for solar power in New York, the state’s Public Service Commission (PSC) released an order expected to encourage more communities to pursue shared solar projects by increasing the maximum size of community solar projects eligible for credits from 2 MW to 5 MW.
The initiative, known as the Value of Distributed Energy Resources (VDER) proceeding, aims to credit projects for the benefits that they provide to the electric system and to society. Expanding the size threshold will allow solar developers to reduce soft costs by allowing them to take advantage of the economies of scale afforded by including a larger number of panels within one project, and avoiding the need to arbitrarily divide development sites into multiple discrete projects. Put simply, larger community solar projects will now be eligible for a financial credit, allowing communities to build and finance projects more effectively and efficiently.
As explained in a previous blog, the VDER initiative sets credit rates for customers that subscribe to service from Distributed Energy Resources (DER), smaller energy projects that interconnect to the local utility system. These projects are generally located closer to homes and businesses where electricity is consumed than large power plants, avoiding the need to send power through large high voltage transmission lines. The PSC is phasing in VDER in stages, so while its first order setting up the rules for the new program provides a credit framework for community solar projects (the mid-size projects you see atop big box stores, factories, apartment buildings, or adjacent to communities in previously vacant land), it is expanding this framework to include other technologies like stand-alone energy storage and combined heat and power, as well as smaller projects on individual rooftops.
Read more at NRDC.org
Sunday, November 19, 2017
Pricing Climate Pollution in NY State will generate Billions for Clean Energy Investments and over 100,000 Jobs Annually
Polluters Must Pay their Fair Share to Fund the Needed Increase in NY State’s Renewable
Energy Investments
to Stabilize the Climate and Protect Health
ALBANY, NY -- New York State must increase public clean energy investments by $4-5.5 billion per year in order to exceed its emission reduction targets, according to a groundbreaking report released today by the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at UMass. This level of public investment would generate between 145,000 and 160,000 jobs annually in the first ten years, and could be achieved by placing a fee on climate pollution starting at $35/ton of emissions in 2021. The study is available at this link.
"Governor Cuomo has taken some good steps on climate and clean energy, but New York State is simply not close to being on track even to achieve the state's own goals for renewable energy build out, much less taking adequate action to support global climate stabilization," said Dr. Robert Pollin, lead author of the study and Distinguished Professor of Economics at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. “The Governor has the chance to show visionary leadership on climate change, but he must take action commensurate to the scale and urgency of the problem; this report lays out how."
The release of the study follows on the heels of last month’s announcement from NYSERDA that a total of 150,000 jobs currently exist in clean energy in New York. This level of new clean energy jobs would be created every year with increased state investment in clean energy, according to the PERI study.
“As countries gather for the 23rd U.N. climate conference, this report couldn’t be more timely,” said Jessica Wisneski, Deputy Director at Citizen Action of New York. “Governor Cuomo has pledged to meet and exceed the minimum requirements set by the Paris Climate Accord, and this report demonstrates how he can do that while creating tens of thousands of jobs.”
The study found that these clean energy jobs would cover a range of fields, including engineering, construction, sales, assembly, management, and office support, and that the growth in clean energy jobs would benefit both women and minority workers, who are underrepresented in the fossil fuel sector.
“New York State can protect our families’ health, create hundred of thousands of jobs, and invest in ambitious renewable energy solutions by making corporate polluters pay for the damage they’re doing to our air and our climate,” said Rahwa Ghirmatzion, Deputy Director at PUSH Buffalo. “We’ve known it for decades, and now expert economists are saying it too.”
The authors propose funding the necessary increases in state renewable energy investment with a polluter fee levied per ton of greenhouse gas emissions, rising from $35/ton in 2021 to $75/ton in 2030, which would generate an average of $7.1 billion annually. The study assumes that between a quarter and a half of the polluter fee revenue will be rebated to households. Revenue from a polluter fee will also provide the funding necessary to support workers transitioning out of the fossil fuel industry and into the new energy economy.
The study concludes that this transformative clean energy program can be accomplished at little to no cost to consumers, because the average cost of delivering a given supply of electricity from clean renewable sources will be roughly equal to, if not cheaper than, virtually all fossil-fuel based technologies.
Monday, May 29, 2017
A Diverse NY Coalition Seeks to Pass Landmark Climate Policies Centered on Justice and Equity for Workers and Communities
NY Renews is a coalition of 109 labor, community, environmental, and social justice organizations across the state of New York from Buffalo to Brooklyn. The coalition seeks a transition from dirty fossil fuels to 100% clean renewable energy with good jobs, healthy communities, and climate justice for all New Yorkers.NY Renews is fighting to pass the Climate and Community Protection Act (CCPA), which sets in law that:
- NYS must eliminate all climate pollution by 2050
- 40% of state energy funding must go to disadvantaged and environmental justice communities
- Fair labor standards must be attached to renewable energy jobs
NY Renews is also developing a new bill to fund a just transition to renewable energy by levying a penalty on polluters. This bill should be completed by August. If passed, it would be the first policy of its kind in the country.
Ultimately, NY Renews wants to build a stronger, more diverse climate movement in New York. The coalition wants to use that power to pass landmark climate policies that center justice and equity for workers and communities.
The state climate leadership is going to be critical under Trump. If New York were a country, we’d have the 12th largest economy in the world. We have a huge opportunity to lead the rest of the country, and the world, toward equitable climate policy, and defy Trump’s insane climate denial.
Recently, Senators Jeff Merkley and Bernie Sanders introduced a federal bill, the ‘100 by '50 Act,’ which would provide job training for low-income Americans and Americans of color, as well as those in coal communities, to work in the renewable energy sector.
Similar campaigns are popping up in other states, from Washington to New Jersey.
NY Renews plans to complete the just transition bill this summer, and to launch it together with the CCPA as a package in September. NY Renews will push to pass as much of it as possible in the final state budget scheduled to be released April 1, 2018.
Learn how you can get involved with NY Renews. Sign up for actions and updates by visiting the NY Renews website.
Buffalo-area members of the NY Renews Coalition include:
Buffalo Coalition for Economic Justice
Climate Justice Coalition of WNY
Grassroots Gardens WNY
Interfaith Climate Justice Community of WNY
Massachusetts Avenue Project
OPEN Buffalo
Partnership for the Public Good
PUSH Buffalo
Sierra Club
UAW Region 9
Ujima Company
Urban Chamber of Commerce
WASH Project
WNY Council on Occupational Safety & Health
New York State is Betting Big that by Switching to Cleaner Power it will become a Jobs Magnet
How New York Is Building the Renewable Energy Grid of the Future
This is a story of ripping up old incentives that encouraged selling as much electricity as possible, then unleashing the entrepreneurs.
By Leslie Kaufman, InsideClimate News
May 25, 2017
New York State is making a $5 billion bet that by making its power cleaner, it can become a magnet for the clean energy jobs of the future.
To get utilities to embrace a changing electricity system, the state is establishing ways for the companies to be reimbursed for some of the savings from energy efficiency programs that are reducing demand for their services. It also is allowing them to reap more return on their investments in equipment needed to bring more renewable energy into the grid. And it is investing in entrepreneurs who are inventing the technology to make it all work.
The state is so gung-ho that its rules require utilities to come up with demonstration projects that test out a new business model, in partnership with at least one private sector company.
The result, say the state's regulators, is that New York is already attracting hundreds of innovative companies of all stripes. The plum opportunities are not only in installing wind turbines and solar panels, which are generating new employment opportunities across the country, they are also in emerging technologies related to smart grid management and storage. These jobs are largely invisible to the public and, in some cases, didn't even exist a few years ago.
While the state hasn't yet projected overall how many jobs are in the new energy economy, they have released enticing tidbits. In January, the New York State Energy and Research Development Authority (NYSERDA) released a report projecting that by 2030, New York's energy storage industry could realize annual revenues between $5.6 billion and $8.7 billion, with total job growth between 17,300 and 26,800 employees. Jobs in the energy storage industry already grew by 30 percent between 2012 and 2015 to 3,600.
"We are now the leading market for energy storage companies," boasts John Rhodes, president and CEO of NYSERDA, pointing to companies like NOHMs Technologies in Rochester and BessTech in Troy. "And probably microgrid technology as well."
One of the companies that has been drawn to New York's new markets is Opus One Solutions. New York's vision relies on distributed, independent power operations that ramp up and down with the intermittent sunshine and wind, as well as with the fits and starts of demand for power. Opus One has software that can understand how those waves of power from distributed resources interact with traditional power flows. Just as important, its software can make real-time price estimates for the value of those local power sources.
"Why New York?" asks Alison Smith, the start-up's director of markets, gazing out at the Manhattan skyline from a conference room at the Urban Future Lab, a state-sponsored incubator for start-ups.
"It is the most forward-thinking state in North America in considering how we build the critical elements of a distributed grid," she answers.
Incubating Clean Energy Innovation
Three years ago, New York announced that it would spend $5.3 billion toward meeting its goal of having 50 percent of its electricity come from renewable sources by 2030. (The state only had 24 percent renewable generation in state this year.) Mandates related to these standards have resulted in significant additions of wind and solar to the grid—but that is just the most readily visible part of the changes New York is undergoing.
According to Richard Kauffman, the state's chairman
of energy and finance, it didn't take long to figure out that "New York
cannot cost effectively make this transition just by bolting wind and
solar onto the grid of Westinghouse and Tesla," referring to two of the
original creators of the grid, George Westinghouse and Nicola Tesla.
Instead, New York wants a new "hybrid grid" that integrates intermittent
and distributed resources like wind or solar or microgrids.At the core of the problem to getting that grid was a stodgy, legacy financial model for utilities that didn't support innovation. Utilities have historically been rewarded with 9 percent rate increases when they add capital expenditure for transmission and distribution to new central power stations, which in New York are historically gas and coal with some nuclear and hydro. The result is that New York has added so much base load capacity to meet peak demand (largely in these traditional forms of energy generation) that on an average day the state uses just 54 percent of generation capacity.
"Technology is not what is holding us back," said Kauffman. "Could I tomorrow install smart meters in every home and save energy? Absolutely. But until now, there has been absolutely no financial incentive to do this."
Friday, March 31, 2017
TALKS: 100% Renewable Energy in NY State by 2030 and Electric Vehicles
Transitioning NY State to 100% Renewables by 2030
and State of Climate Action in NYS
Mark Dunlea and Betta Broad
Mark Dunlea and Betta Broad
WHEN: SUNDAY, April 2 at 7:00PM
WHERE: Network of Religious Communities, 1272 Delaware Ave., Buffalo [Map]
View Facebook Event
 Mark Dunlea is chair of the Green Education and Legal Fund (GELF) and
helps coordinate the statewide campaign to transition to 100%
renewables in NYS by 2030. He will provide an update on state efforts
around renewable energy, including a new study just announced by the
Governor. He will also discuss state legislation for a carbon tax; the
Attorney General's effort to investigate the fossil fuel industry role
in promoting climate denial; divesting the state pension funds from
fossil fuels; and, Governor Cuomo's $7.6 billion bailout of the nuclear
industry. |
Sponsors: WNY Drilling Defense, and Environmental Justice Task Force of the WNY Peace Center
Wednesday, January 25, 2017
Call on Gov. Cuomo to Defy Trump and Make Climate Change a Priority
Resist Trump, Press Cuomo
We’re not even a week in, and the Trump administration has already begun burying climate science, dialing back progress, and pushing our planet toward the brink of catastrophe.
In the face of federal denialism, it's up to the great State of New York to lead the fight to save the world.
How can Governor Cuomo lead the fight? He can start by including the Climate and Community Protection Act (CCPA) in the state's 2017 budget.
How can Governor Cuomo lead the fight? He can start by including the Climate and Community Protection Act (CCPA) in the state's 2017 budget.
CLICK HERE to sign up for a 'Thunderclap' and join thousands of other New Yorkers who are calling on Governor Cuomo to defy Trump and make climate change an urgent top priority.
What is Thunderclap? It’s a website that allows participants to pledge to post a message (our scripted message to Cuomo in this case) to Facebook or Twitter (or both) all on the same day--and at the exact same time--in order to achieve maximum impact (i.e, get Cuomo's attention and attention of all friends and followers that the message reaches).
What is Thunderclap? It’s a website that allows participants to pledge to post a message (our scripted message to Cuomo in this case) to Facebook or Twitter (or both) all on the same day--and at the exact same time--in order to achieve maximum impact (i.e, get Cuomo's attention and attention of all friends and followers that the message reaches).
On Monday, January 30th at 10:30AM, the Thunderclap will automatically launch on Facebook and Twitter, echoing across the state, and calling on the Governor to lead on climate in this moment of crisis by making climate action a top priority in the state budget.
Just 10 days after Trump’s inauguration, help us make sure we’re setting New York on a course to lead the nation in tackling climate change.
Our futures depend on it.
Thursday, July 21, 2016
Want to Pay for Cuomo's $8 Billion Nuclear Bailout? Comment Today!
It's Time to Hit the Brakes on Governor Cuomo's Extravagant 12-Year Nuclear Bailout
The push for a massive nuclear power bailout in New York just got a lot worse -- and the state agency pushing it doesn't want to consider other options or give the public any time to make our voices heard.
After saying for months that the proposed nuclear subsides would cost only $270 million over 12 years, a new proposal released just a few days ago raised the projected price to almost $8 billion. Yes, you read that right, Governor Cuomo and the New York Public Service Commission now want to spend $8 billion of New Yorkers’ money on bailing out the nuclear industry, and in particular, one company: Exelon. The cost will be paid by every electricity consumer in New York -- residents, businesses, and municipalities -- with higher energy bills.
This may be the largest corporate bailout or subsidy to one company in New York history. And the public has been given only 10 business days to comment on this new expensive plan. They are rushing to try to make a decision by August 1.
IMPORTANT: If we want to stop this, we need thousands of people to comment by Friday, July 22. So I am writing to ask you to please raise your voice.
Click here to comment today. It's Easy! Just send a form email message or personalize it.
This plan is so much worse than even the original plan to bail out most of New York's nuclear power plants. If it goes through, New York will end up spending two times more money on bailing out dirty, old, dangerous reactors than on building safe, clean, affordable renewable energy. And we would be locked into paying this nuclear tax for over 12 years, until 2029.
The PSC hasn’t even considered other options. They have done no
analysis to see what it would look like if we replaced nuclear power in
New York with efficiency or renewables.
The plan is outrageous and dangerous:
- It risks nuclear meltdowns on the shore of Lake Ontario, drinking water for 9 million people, just miles from Syracuse and Rochester.
- It steals billions of dollars from building the clean-energy economy New York needs and deserves.
- And it blocks real climate solutions for over a decade, just to make more and more radioactive waste.
Please send a message to the Public Service Commission and Governor Cuomo now.
Thank you for raising your voice!
Jessica Azulay
Alliance for a Green Economy
Tuesday, September 29, 2015
Sunday, June 28, 2015
Climate Activist, Bill McKibben, looks at Green Energy Solutions in relation to Electric Utility Practices
Power to the People
By Bill McKibben | The New Yorker | June 29, 2015 Issue
Mark and Sara Borkowski live with their two young daughters in a century-old, fifteen-hundred-square-foot house in Rutland, Vermont. Mark drives a school bus, and Sara works as a special-ed teacher; the cost of heating and cooling their house through the year consumes a large fraction of their combined income. Last summer, however, persuaded by Green Mountain Power, the main electric utility in Vermont, the Borkowskis decided to give their home an energy makeover. In the course of several days, coordinated teams of contractors stuffed the house with new insulation, put in a heat pump for the hot water, and installed two air-source heat pumps to warm the home. They also switched all the light bulbs to L.E.D.s and put a small solar array on the slate roof of the garage.
The Borkowskis paid for the improvements, but the utility financed the charges through their electric bill, which fell the very first month. Before the makeover, from October of 2013 to January of 2014, the Borkowskis used thirty-four hundred and eleven kilowatt-hours [3411 kWh] of electricity and three hundred and twenty-five gallons of fuel oil [325 Gal.]. From October of 2014 to January of 2015, they used twenty-eight hundred and fifty-six kilowatt-hours [2856 kWh] of electricity and no oil [0 Gal.] at all. President Obama has announced that by 2025 he wants the United States to reduce its total carbon footprint by up to twenty-eight per cent [28%] of 2005 levels. The Borkowskis reduced the footprint of their house by eighty-eight per cent [88%] in a matter of days, and at no net cost.
I’ve travelled the world writing about and organizing against climate change, but, standing in the Borkowskis’ kitchen and looking at their electric bill, I felt a fairly rare emotion: hope. The numbers reveal a sudden new truth—that innovative, energy-saving and energy-producing technology is now cheap enough for everyday use. The Borkowskis’ house is not an Aspen earth shelter made of adobe and old tires, built by a former software executive who converted to planetary consciousness at Burning Man. It’s an utterly plain house, with Frozen bedspreads and One Direction posters, inhabited by a working-class family of four, two rabbits, and a parakeet named Oliver. It sits in a less than picturesque neighborhood, in a town made famous in recent years for its heroin problem. Its significance lies in its ordinariness. The federal Energy Secretary, Ernest Moniz, has visited, along with the entire Vermont congressional delegation. If you can make a house like this affordably green, you should be able to do it anywhere.
Most of the technology isn’t particularly exotic—these days, you can buy a solar panel or an air-source heat pump at Lowe’s. But few people do, because the up-front costs are high and the options can be intimidating. If the makeover was coördinated by someone you trust, however, and financed through your electric bill, the change would be much more palatable. The energy revolution, instead of happening piecemeal, over decades, could take place fast enough to actually help an overheating planet. But all of this would require the utilities—the interface between people and power—to play a crucial role, or, at least, to get out of the way.
An electric utility is an odd beast, neither public nor exactly private. Utilities are often owned by investors, but they’re almost always government-regulated, and they are charged with delivering power reliably and at an affordable price. Utilities are monopolies: since it would make no sense to have six sets of power poles and lines, utilities are granted exclusive rights to a territory. When you buy or rent a house, you automatically become the customer of the local utility, assuming that you want electricity and you don’t plan to generate all of it yourself. To keep the nation’s utilities honest, they are typically regulated at the state level by a public-service commission that sets rates, evaluates performance, and enforces mandates, such as a requirement that a certain amount of power come from renewable sources.
Whereas most enterprises are about risk, utilities are about safety: safe power supply, safe dividends. No surprises. As a result, the industry “has not attracted the single greatest minds,” David Roberts, who has covered energy for various outlets for a decade and is now a reporter for Vox, told me. “If you’re in a business where the customer is the public-utility commission, and after that your profits are locked in by law, it’s the sleepiest business sector there is, if you could even call it a business sector. They build power plants, sit back, and the money comes in.” The entire realm is protected, he added, by “a huge force field of boringness.”
But what has been a virtue, by and large, is now almost certainly a vice. Scientists insist that in order to forestall global warming we need to quickly change the way we power our lives. That’s perhaps most easily done by giant companies with big budgets for new technology; Google, Apple, and Ikea have all announced major plans to switch to renewable energy. For average Americans, however, the biggest source of carbon emissions is their home, so the utilities’ help is crucial in making the transition. And, even without climate change, utilities face a combination of threat and opportunity from disruptive new technologies.
Consider the Borkowskis’ new air-source heat pumps, which use the latent heat in the air (down to about zero degrees) to heat their home and provide hot water. These devices have made it practical for electricity to be used for tasks traditionally performed by oil and gas. Smart thermostats, such as the Nest, allow you to make your home far more energy-efficient—and can even, when connected to the “smart meters” that are now appearing on many houses, permit the utility to turn your demand down for a few seconds in response to fluctuations in the supply of sun and wind. Electric vehicles provide a major new use for electricity and, perhaps soon, the opportunity for huge numbers of idle car batteries to serve as a storage system for reserve power. (Solar and wind power can be a challenge to incorporate into the grid, because they’re intermittent—cloudy days happen, the wind fails. Affordable batteries are essential to making renewable energy widely available.)
“Americans spend eight per cent of their disposable income on all forms of energy,” David Crane told me. Crane is the C.E.O. of NRG, the country’s biggest independent power provider; the company operates more than a hundred energy-generation facilities, selling electricity to utilities that, in turn, sell it to customers. Nobody wants that eight-per-cent figure to rise, Crane said, because when energy prices go up the country tends to trip into recession. But plenty of companies, including Crane’s, would like to see a larger slice of that eight per cent. “I’m interested in electric cars, for instance, not just because of the effect on air quality but because I want to take market share away from oil,” Crane said. “It’s a brutal fight for market share.”
Power utilities now face uncertainty of a kind that traditional phone companies faced when cellular technology emerged. A few utilities welcome the challenge; others are resisting it; and the rest are waiting for someone to tell them what to do.
Read the full article at The New Yorker online to learn about McKibben’s interview with the co-founder and C.E.O. of SolarCity. McKibben also interviewed the New York State chairman of energy and finance and learned about his initiative called REV - Reforming the Energy Vision - that is trying to change the rules so that the utilities can both shift direction and make money.
Click here to go to The New Yorker online.
Why the rise of green energy makes utility companies nervous.
By Bill McKibben | The New Yorker | June 29, 2015 Issue
Mark and Sara Borkowski live with their two young daughters in a century-old, fifteen-hundred-square-foot house in Rutland, Vermont. Mark drives a school bus, and Sara works as a special-ed teacher; the cost of heating and cooling their house through the year consumes a large fraction of their combined income. Last summer, however, persuaded by Green Mountain Power, the main electric utility in Vermont, the Borkowskis decided to give their home an energy makeover. In the course of several days, coordinated teams of contractors stuffed the house with new insulation, put in a heat pump for the hot water, and installed two air-source heat pumps to warm the home. They also switched all the light bulbs to L.E.D.s and put a small solar array on the slate roof of the garage.
The Borkowskis paid for the improvements, but the utility financed the charges through their electric bill, which fell the very first month. Before the makeover, from October of 2013 to January of 2014, the Borkowskis used thirty-four hundred and eleven kilowatt-hours [3411 kWh] of electricity and three hundred and twenty-five gallons of fuel oil [325 Gal.]. From October of 2014 to January of 2015, they used twenty-eight hundred and fifty-six kilowatt-hours [2856 kWh] of electricity and no oil [0 Gal.] at all. President Obama has announced that by 2025 he wants the United States to reduce its total carbon footprint by up to twenty-eight per cent [28%] of 2005 levels. The Borkowskis reduced the footprint of their house by eighty-eight per cent [88%] in a matter of days, and at no net cost.
I’ve travelled the world writing about and organizing against climate change, but, standing in the Borkowskis’ kitchen and looking at their electric bill, I felt a fairly rare emotion: hope. The numbers reveal a sudden new truth—that innovative, energy-saving and energy-producing technology is now cheap enough for everyday use. The Borkowskis’ house is not an Aspen earth shelter made of adobe and old tires, built by a former software executive who converted to planetary consciousness at Burning Man. It’s an utterly plain house, with Frozen bedspreads and One Direction posters, inhabited by a working-class family of four, two rabbits, and a parakeet named Oliver. It sits in a less than picturesque neighborhood, in a town made famous in recent years for its heroin problem. Its significance lies in its ordinariness. The federal Energy Secretary, Ernest Moniz, has visited, along with the entire Vermont congressional delegation. If you can make a house like this affordably green, you should be able to do it anywhere.
Most of the technology isn’t particularly exotic—these days, you can buy a solar panel or an air-source heat pump at Lowe’s. But few people do, because the up-front costs are high and the options can be intimidating. If the makeover was coördinated by someone you trust, however, and financed through your electric bill, the change would be much more palatable. The energy revolution, instead of happening piecemeal, over decades, could take place fast enough to actually help an overheating planet. But all of this would require the utilities—the interface between people and power—to play a crucial role, or, at least, to get out of the way.
An electric utility is an odd beast, neither public nor exactly private. Utilities are often owned by investors, but they’re almost always government-regulated, and they are charged with delivering power reliably and at an affordable price. Utilities are monopolies: since it would make no sense to have six sets of power poles and lines, utilities are granted exclusive rights to a territory. When you buy or rent a house, you automatically become the customer of the local utility, assuming that you want electricity and you don’t plan to generate all of it yourself. To keep the nation’s utilities honest, they are typically regulated at the state level by a public-service commission that sets rates, evaluates performance, and enforces mandates, such as a requirement that a certain amount of power come from renewable sources.
Whereas most enterprises are about risk, utilities are about safety: safe power supply, safe dividends. No surprises. As a result, the industry “has not attracted the single greatest minds,” David Roberts, who has covered energy for various outlets for a decade and is now a reporter for Vox, told me. “If you’re in a business where the customer is the public-utility commission, and after that your profits are locked in by law, it’s the sleepiest business sector there is, if you could even call it a business sector. They build power plants, sit back, and the money comes in.” The entire realm is protected, he added, by “a huge force field of boringness.”
But what has been a virtue, by and large, is now almost certainly a vice. Scientists insist that in order to forestall global warming we need to quickly change the way we power our lives. That’s perhaps most easily done by giant companies with big budgets for new technology; Google, Apple, and Ikea have all announced major plans to switch to renewable energy. For average Americans, however, the biggest source of carbon emissions is their home, so the utilities’ help is crucial in making the transition. And, even without climate change, utilities face a combination of threat and opportunity from disruptive new technologies.
Consider the Borkowskis’ new air-source heat pumps, which use the latent heat in the air (down to about zero degrees) to heat their home and provide hot water. These devices have made it practical for electricity to be used for tasks traditionally performed by oil and gas. Smart thermostats, such as the Nest, allow you to make your home far more energy-efficient—and can even, when connected to the “smart meters” that are now appearing on many houses, permit the utility to turn your demand down for a few seconds in response to fluctuations in the supply of sun and wind. Electric vehicles provide a major new use for electricity and, perhaps soon, the opportunity for huge numbers of idle car batteries to serve as a storage system for reserve power. (Solar and wind power can be a challenge to incorporate into the grid, because they’re intermittent—cloudy days happen, the wind fails. Affordable batteries are essential to making renewable energy widely available.)
“Americans spend eight per cent of their disposable income on all forms of energy,” David Crane told me. Crane is the C.E.O. of NRG, the country’s biggest independent power provider; the company operates more than a hundred energy-generation facilities, selling electricity to utilities that, in turn, sell it to customers. Nobody wants that eight-per-cent figure to rise, Crane said, because when energy prices go up the country tends to trip into recession. But plenty of companies, including Crane’s, would like to see a larger slice of that eight per cent. “I’m interested in electric cars, for instance, not just because of the effect on air quality but because I want to take market share away from oil,” Crane said. “It’s a brutal fight for market share.”
Power utilities now face uncertainty of a kind that traditional phone companies faced when cellular technology emerged. A few utilities welcome the challenge; others are resisting it; and the rest are waiting for someone to tell them what to do.
Read the full article at The New Yorker online to learn about McKibben’s interview with the co-founder and C.E.O. of SolarCity. McKibben also interviewed the New York State chairman of energy and finance and learned about his initiative called REV - Reforming the Energy Vision - that is trying to change the rules so that the utilities can both shift direction and make money.
Click here to go to The New Yorker online.
Saturday, June 27, 2015
NY State Tax Incentives to Heat and Cool Homes Efficiently using Geothermal Heat Pumps
 |
| Geothermal heat pumps use the constant below-ground temperature to heat and cool homes. |
The potential for widespread adoption of geothermal heat pumps in New York was recently boosted by the passage of bills in the State Senate and Assembly.
- Senate Bill S2905 and Assembly Bill A2177a establish a 25% tax credit (up to $5000) for the purchase and installation of geothermal energy systems.
- Senate Bill S4279 and Assembly Bill A5508 provide a tax exemption for the sale and installation of residential and commercial geothermal heat pump systems equipment.
Assemblyman Sean Ryan and Senator Robert Ortt will hold a press conference (Tuesday, June 30th, 12:30PM at 10 Winter St., Buffalo - Map) to call on Governor Cuomo to sign the bills in to law.
TAKE ACTION: Call Governor Cuomo's office urging him to sign into law these important bills that will make geothermal heat pumps more affordable, and will lead to lower energy usage and lower energy bills.
Call 518-474-8390 -- You'll hear a recording: Press 2 to leave your message, or press 3 to speak with a person.
For a detailed description and video on how geothermal heat pumps work, visit the U.S. Dept. of Energy website.
A short description of how the heat pumps work along with a hat tip to the NY legislation is provided in a recent Letter to the Editor of The Buffalo News:
Cuomo could make NY a leader in geothermal energy
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
REV: A Quiet Energy Revolution in New York State
What is the Public Service Commission's 'REV' Initiative and
how will it affect our lives?
By Larry Beahan, Habitat chairman of the Sierra Club Niagara Group
Have you heard of the “REV”? It is a revolution in the supply and regulation of New York’s energy. It is a dramatic and fundamental change and it is a dirty shame that most New Yorkers have never heard of it. REV stands for the NY Public Service Commission’s initiative, Reforming the Energy Vision.
When my mother was 5 in 1911, a man came to the front door. “Do you folks want electricity?” he asked. She said “no,” and shut the door. Grandma overheard and rushed after him to have gas lights replaced with Edison bulbs. Tesla and Westinghouse had built an electric power plant at Niagara Falls and formed a company that shipped power by wire all over the region.
That basic model for electric power is still with us. Investor-owned utilities produce electricity in large central plants with hydro, coal, natural gas and nuclear energy and transmit it to consumers over a complex grid. Doing an affordable and reliable job of it is an increasingly complex puzzle.
Power plants and their transmission systems are aging and energy demands are rising. Unusual weather creates demand peaks. Plants are prime terrorist targets, and fossil fuels have filled the air with pollution and the skies with global warming gasses.
In response, we have shifted away from central sources of power and moved to windmills, solar panels and geothermal installations that are widely distributed and close to consumers. These renewable energy sources don’t pollute or cause global warming. But they raise questions. Who will own them? How will they be paid for? How will they be integrated into a mutually supportive system?
Last April the Public Service Commission issued orders for the REV initiative. The commission staff went to work chiefly with utility company executives to answer these and many related questions. It has come up with a “straw proposal,” a complex technical document that needs an engineer with training in linguistics to understand.
On the insistence of environmental organizations, the PSC has agreed to hold six forums across the state where the REV will be explained and the rest of us will have two minutes before a microphone to make our contributions.
This scanty opportunity to be involved in a titanic change in the power supply to our civilization is a travesty. Tesla’s salesman offered my poor mother as much in 1911.
New Yorkers deserve to thoroughly understand what is being proposed and how it will affect our lives. We deserve an opportunity to have our own experts contribute to the design of a distributive power system for the 21st century.
The Public Service Commission meetings on the REV in Buffalo are at 2 p.m. and 6 p.m. Thursday, January 29th in the Central Library in downtown Buffalo.
~ ~ ~
This article originally appeared in The Buffalo News and at BuffaloNews.com
Monday, January 26, 2015
PUBLIC HEARING: NY State's Energy Vision - Raise Your Voice!
Can't afford your energy bills?
Concerned about climate change?
Want more local control over our energy future?
Raise your voice at the upcoming Public Hearing on NY State's "Reforming the Energy Vision" plan. Each Public Hearing will be preceded by an Informational Forum sponsored by the State Public Service Commission.
DATE: Thursday, January 29, 2015
FORUM / HEARING Times: 2:00PM/3:00PM; 6:00PM/7:00PM
PLACE: Buffalo & Erie County Public Library, 1 Lafayette Square, Buffalo [Map]
The Public Service Commission (PSC) is seeking to inform and obtain public comment on their regulatory component of Gov. Cuomo's "Reforming the Energy Vision" (REV) plan. The plan will promote more energy efficiency, greater use of renewable energy resources such as wind and solar, and “distributed” energy resources, such as micro grids, on-site power supplies, and storage.
As part of the REV process, the PSC is planning a 10-year phase out of government support and subsidies for clean energy development, in favor of a market-oriented approach. The REV proceeding will determine what role New York’s utility companies, like National Grid, will play in the energy system of the future. The PSC proposes to give utilities more control over designing, planning and managing the new energy markets in the hopes of motivating them to promote energy efficiency and renewables.
The Public Service Commission needs to hear the voices of the public, not just those of utility companies.
KEY ISSUES:
Grassroots public interest organizations from across New York have emphasized the following issues in response to the strong influence of utility companies and other for-profit corporations in the REV proceeding so far:
- Every New Yorker should have access to the benefits of clean energy
- New York must set and meet ambitious goals for greenhouse gas reductions
- There needs to be democratic participation in the energy system
- There is a need for regulation and consumer protections
The local Sierra Club is encouraging area residents to testify at the Public Hearing. To read suggestions for Talking Points by the Sierra Club Niagara Group, click here.
Detailed descriptions of Key Issues, additional Talking Points, a brief video and more are available at the Alliance for a Green Economy: click here. To download a printable description of REV plus Talking Points, click here, and a Testimony worksheet, click here.
PSC PUBLIC HEARING:
It is not necessary to be present at the start of the hearing, to make an appointment in advance, or to present written material to speak at the hearing. Persons will be called to speak after completing a request card.
For additional information provided by the PSC, click here.
Saturday, January 24, 2015
Public Service Commission: Reforming NY State's Energy Industry and Regulatory Practices
The energy industry is in transition. Technological innovation and increasing competitiveness of Renewable Energy resources, combined with aging infrastructure, extreme weather events, and system security and resiliency needs, are all leading to significant changes in how electric energy is produced, managed and consumed.
The New York State Public Service Commission (PSC) is conducting informational forums and public hearings across the State to seek public input and comment on the PSC’s regulatory component of Governor Cuomo’s overall strategic energy plan, ‘Reforming the Energy Vision’, or REV.
The REV initiative will lead to regulatory changes that promote more efficient use of energy and a deeper penetration of renewable resources such as Wind and Solar. The PSC is considering a new business model for energy service providers where distributed energy resources (Tomorrow's Energy Model, see below) will become a primary tool in the planning and operation of the electric system.
PSC identified six policy objectives supporting the REV effort:
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Two Informational Forums with Public Hearings will be held in Buffalo, NY on THURSDAY, January 29, 2015:
For more information from the PSC, click here.
The New York State Public Service Commission (PSC) is conducting informational forums and public hearings across the State to seek public input and comment on the PSC’s regulatory component of Governor Cuomo’s overall strategic energy plan, ‘Reforming the Energy Vision’, or REV.
The REV initiative will lead to regulatory changes that promote more efficient use of energy and a deeper penetration of renewable resources such as Wind and Solar. The PSC is considering a new business model for energy service providers where distributed energy resources (Tomorrow's Energy Model, see below) will become a primary tool in the planning and operation of the electric system.
PSC identified six policy objectives supporting the REV effort:
- Enhance customer knowledge and tools to enable customers to manage their energy bills and provide them more choice in how they use energy
- Animate the market and leverage ratepayer contributions
- Promote system-wide Efficiency
- Increase fuel and resource diversity
- Enhance system reliability and resiliency
- Reduce Carbon Emissions
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Two Informational Forums with Public Hearings will be held in Buffalo, NY on THURSDAY, January 29, 2015:
- FORUM / HEARING Times: 2:00PM/3:00PM; 6:00PM/7:00PM
- PLACE: Buffalo & Erie County Public Library, 1 Lafayette Square, Buffalo [Map]
For more information from the PSC, click here.
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Fracking Forum – Impacts on Environment, Health and Society
Join panelists, Rita Yelda, Sarah Buckley, David Kowalski,
and Robert Cieselski, who will present talks and
answer questions about diverse issues surrounding shale gas extraction and high volume hydrofracking.
Sarah Buckley – Fracking Basics (the process of fracking, from wellpad to pipeline)
David Kowalski – Environmental and Health Issues (an analysis of industry-made arguments vs. other studies and evidence)
Robert Cieselski – Leasing and Legal Issues (signing considerations, Compulsory Integration, landowner rights, flipping, impacts on mortgages, insurance) and Renewable Alternatives to Shale Gas
Rita Yelda – Fracking in New York State (what has occurred the last four years and where we are at now)
For speaker bio's and links to articles about fracking, click here.
- WHEN: March 21, 2013, 7:00pm-9:00pm
- WHERE: Prendergast Library, 509 Cherry St., Jamestown [Map]
Sarah Buckley – Fracking Basics (the process of fracking, from wellpad to pipeline)
David Kowalski – Environmental and Health Issues (an analysis of industry-made arguments vs. other studies and evidence)
Robert Cieselski – Leasing and Legal Issues (signing considerations, Compulsory Integration, landowner rights, flipping, impacts on mortgages, insurance) and Renewable Alternatives to Shale Gas
Rita Yelda – Fracking in New York State (what has occurred the last four years and where we are at now)
For speaker bio's and links to articles about fracking, click here.
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
NY State Won't Fund Hydrofracking Health Impact Study
By David Kowalski
Many lawmakers, as well as the governor and the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), seem bent on moving forward on unconventional shale-gas drilling. Sadly, they ignored sound advice from 250 physicians and healthcare/scientific experts [1] who recognize the lack of a Health Impact Assessment as a major flaw in the DEC’s draft hydrofracking regulations.
Dr. Gina Solomon, a physician with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said health concerns include air pollution, potential contamination of ground or surface water with methane or chemicals used in fracturing fluids, fires or explosions, heavy truck traffic, and altered social conditions.
In a Senate Session on the 2012-2013 Budget last week, Senator Mark Grisanti (R-Buffalo), Chair of the Environmental Conservation Committee, spoke on the budget. He said that "in other states where high-volume hydraulic fracturing is occurring there are health impact studies that I believe that the DOH [Dept. of Health] to the advisory council is going to be taking a look at. It's very difficult to do a health study on high-volume hydraulic fracturing in NY state when it's not occurring here." [see video here]
Human health impacts deserve far more investigation than "a look." A proper study requires research and funding. Also, the fact that high-volume hydraulic fracturing is "not occurring here" in NY did not stop the DEC from hiring a consulting firm, Ecology and Environment Inc., to do an economic study at a cost of $223,000. That study [4Mb PDF] was in fact based primarily on the occurrence of hydrofracking in the neighboring state of Pennsylvania.
The Assembly Majority had already passed a bill calling for a health study. The $100,000 study would include research into other states' experiences with fracking. It would estimate costs of any health impacts to the state, insurers, employers and the health care system and include a long-term plan for monitoring and mitigating health impacts.
The Senate drafted a health impact assessment bill to fund an in-depth $300,000 study. Sen. Tony Avella (D-Queens), the bill's sponsor and a member of the Environmental Conservation Committee, said in a statement, "Before we allow companies to start drilling for gas and pumping chemicals near our watersheds, it is only reasonable that a study be conducted to provide us with more information about the hydrofracking process and the potential health impacts."
At the 2012-2013 Budget session last week, Sen. Avella introduced an amendment to environmental budget legislation that would have included a health impact assessment on hydrofracking. Avella said, "No matter which side of the aisle you are on, whether you are for hydrofracking or against hydrofracking, the very fact that we could do this process without analyzing the seismic or health impacts of hydrofracking, in my opinion is an absolute disgrace." [see video here]
Senator Avella, the Senate Democratic Conference, and the Assembly Majority should be commended for demonstrating their leadership and dedication to protecting the health and well-being of the people of New York. The bill (S.6772) sponsored by Avella is currently in the Environmental Conservation Committee chaired by Senator Grisanti.
Claire Sandberg, Executive Director of Water Defense, said, “One only need to look at the devastation wreaked by fracking in Pennsylvania to see that gas drilling cannot be done safely. There are perhaps hundreds of families just across the border who are without access to safe drinking water because of fracking-related contamination. How can we trust our elected officials who say we can regulate this inherently dangerous practice, if they don't even support basic funding to study its effect on our public health?"
A full assessment of its health impacts must be completed before a decision can be made about whether or not hydrofracking is permitted in New York.
Kate Hudson, Watershed Program Director at NY Riverkeeper said, "We would still call on the governor to take action. He is in a position to accept or reject any of the proposed change. We think this is way too important and we are going to continue to lobby the Legislature."
Dr. Sandra Steingraber speaks to the DEC about their recent Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS) and calls for a comprehensive study on the Health Impacts of hydrofracking. Listen:
[1] Experts included the Medical Society of the State of New York, the American Academy of Pediatrics of New York State, the NY State Nurses Association, the Academy of Family Physicians of New York State, and over 250 individual physicians and scientists.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Gas Industry Gave Campaigns Big Bucks to Back Hydrofracking in NY State
A day before the Department of Environmental Conservation's (DEC) deadline for public comments on hydrofracking (also called hydraulic fracturing or fracking), a report was released by Common Cause indicating that the natural gas industry gave $1.34 million in campaign contributions to New York state politicians and their parties.
“Hydraulic fracturing has raised environmental questions, and now financial ones, about the influence of the natural gas industry over state lawmakers and public policy,” said Common Cause NY Executive Director Susan Lerner, as reported in the NY Daily News. “New Yorkers need to be assured that such a controversial issue will be decided based on merit, not money,” Lerner added.
From January 2007 to October 2011, the Natural Gas industry made 2,349 campaign contributions to state and local level New York politicians and parties, according to the Common Cause report entitled "Expenditures of the Natural Gas Industry in New York to Influence Public Policy - Part III." A breakdown of the $1.34 million in campaign contributions by type is shown in the figure below.
Almost 75% of the natural gas industry money went to
the State Legislature (State Senate candidates, state party soft money,
and State Assembly candidates).
The Cuomo-Duffy 2010 campaign was by far the largest gubernatorial recipient of gas industry money, receiving a total of $153,816.
Two local senatorial campaigns were among the top 10 legislative recipients of gas money: Sen. George Maziarz (R) 62nd District (Buffalo-Rochester area) ranked first at $38,532, and Sen. Michael Ranzenhofer (R) 61st District (Buffalo area) ranked 7th with $21,175. Maziarz is the Chair of the Senate Energy Committee, and Ranzenhofer is a member of that committee as well as the Chair of Corporations and Authorities.
Maziarz voted against the 2010 fracking moratorium bill, while Razenhoffer voted in favor of the bill.
Included in the gas industry are companies that regulate electricity, such as National Grid and Con Edison, which are also involved in natural gas infrastructure. The full list of companies is shown in the Common Cause report.
The Common Cause report raises an important question that New Yorkers should ask their State representatives and officials: What impact does over a million dollars from the gas industry to political candidates and committees in NY State have on the representatives and officials when setting public policy on hydrofracking?
Senator Maziarz, speaking at a conference on hydrofracking hosted by the Independent Oil & Gas Association (IOGA) last year, said “It’s been proven it can be done in a safe way.” He also said that the Buffalo-Niagara region could see an economic “boom” through the creation of an industry to purify toxic fracking fluid (wastewater) at local water treatment plants in Niagara Falls and North Tonawanda.
Concerned citizens have subsequently expressed strong opposition to creating such an industry at public meetings of the Niagara Falls Water Board, which is considering purifying fracking fluid as a means to increase revenues. However, the DEC has no proven plan in the current environmental impact statement (SGEIS) for purifying fracking fluid.
The Common Cause report also expressed concern that regulatory decisions may not be based on facts and science and made with proper deliberation since the study of the impacts of hydrofracking on NY state were done by an outside consulting firm, Ecology and Environment, Inc., which has oil and gas companies among its clients.
Gov. Cuomo indicated to reporters yesterday that there will be no funds for gas-drilling regulation in the budget proposal until the state DEC determines whether to allow high-volume hydraulic fracturing.
A number of NY Senators and Assembly Members are again proposing and sponsoring legislation to ban, or further extend the moratorium on, the controversial fracking method across the State.
For earlier posts about Fracking at Re-ENERGIZE BUFFALO, click here.
“Hydraulic fracturing has raised environmental questions, and now financial ones, about the influence of the natural gas industry over state lawmakers and public policy,” said Common Cause NY Executive Director Susan Lerner, as reported in the NY Daily News. “New Yorkers need to be assured that such a controversial issue will be decided based on merit, not money,” Lerner added.
From January 2007 to October 2011, the Natural Gas industry made 2,349 campaign contributions to state and local level New York politicians and parties, according to the Common Cause report entitled "Expenditures of the Natural Gas Industry in New York to Influence Public Policy - Part III." A breakdown of the $1.34 million in campaign contributions by type is shown in the figure below.
 |
| Figure is from the Common Cause report cited in the text [click image to enlarge] |
The Cuomo-Duffy 2010 campaign was by far the largest gubernatorial recipient of gas industry money, receiving a total of $153,816.
Two local senatorial campaigns were among the top 10 legislative recipients of gas money: Sen. George Maziarz (R) 62nd District (Buffalo-Rochester area) ranked first at $38,532, and Sen. Michael Ranzenhofer (R) 61st District (Buffalo area) ranked 7th with $21,175. Maziarz is the Chair of the Senate Energy Committee, and Ranzenhofer is a member of that committee as well as the Chair of Corporations and Authorities.
Maziarz voted against the 2010 fracking moratorium bill, while Razenhoffer voted in favor of the bill.
Included in the gas industry are companies that regulate electricity, such as National Grid and Con Edison, which are also involved in natural gas infrastructure. The full list of companies is shown in the Common Cause report.
The Common Cause report raises an important question that New Yorkers should ask their State representatives and officials: What impact does over a million dollars from the gas industry to political candidates and committees in NY State have on the representatives and officials when setting public policy on hydrofracking?
Senator Maziarz, speaking at a conference on hydrofracking hosted by the Independent Oil & Gas Association (IOGA) last year, said “It’s been proven it can be done in a safe way.” He also said that the Buffalo-Niagara region could see an economic “boom” through the creation of an industry to purify toxic fracking fluid (wastewater) at local water treatment plants in Niagara Falls and North Tonawanda.
Concerned citizens have subsequently expressed strong opposition to creating such an industry at public meetings of the Niagara Falls Water Board, which is considering purifying fracking fluid as a means to increase revenues. However, the DEC has no proven plan in the current environmental impact statement (SGEIS) for purifying fracking fluid.
The Common Cause report also expressed concern that regulatory decisions may not be based on facts and science and made with proper deliberation since the study of the impacts of hydrofracking on NY state were done by an outside consulting firm, Ecology and Environment, Inc., which has oil and gas companies among its clients.
Gov. Cuomo indicated to reporters yesterday that there will be no funds for gas-drilling regulation in the budget proposal until the state DEC determines whether to allow high-volume hydraulic fracturing.
A number of NY Senators and Assembly Members are again proposing and sponsoring legislation to ban, or further extend the moratorium on, the controversial fracking method across the State.
For earlier posts about Fracking at Re-ENERGIZE BUFFALO, click here.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
TALK: Green Energy in Ontario and NY
Baldy Center Environmental Stewardship
Working Group
Working Group
and the
Canada-United States Legal Studies Centre
present:
Scott Pasternack
Supervisor for Policy Development, Toronto Environment Office
"Who is Building the Better Green Energy Mousetrap? A Comparison of Canadian and US Approaches to Renewables, Energy Efficiency, and Smart Distribution"
A great deal of green energy activity is happening on both sides of the U.S.-Canadian border, whether it's federal smart grid research and development, state or provincial renewable procurement, or local level energy efficiency programs. Although the end goal seems to be the same -- reduce our energy footprint to, in turn, reduce our carbon footprint -- the laws, policies, and economics can differ greatly. For example, which investment approach promises to deliver an increasing, reliable supply of renewable generation to replace fossil fuels -- Ontario's feed-in tariff or New York State's renewable portfolio standard? Which energy efficiency standards for existing buildings promises to reduce energy demand more significantly -- the ones New York City is able to adopt locally for its own jurisdiction or the ones that Toronto hopes to help develop for Ontario to adopt across the province? For an overview of the different ways that Canada, Ontario, and Toronto to the north, and the U.S., New York State, and New York City to the south, have been struggling to build their green energy mousetraps -- and to offer your thoughts and suggestions on whether and how to build a cross-border green energy framework instead -- join us for this lunchtime presentation led by Scott Pasternack.
As Supervisor for Policy Development in the Toronto Environment office, Scott Pasternack is responsible for advising Toronto on climate change, green energy, and environmental sustainability initiatives. He previously served as environmental counsel for the New York City Law Department where, among other duties, he advised Mayor Bloomberg's Office of Long Term Planning and Sustainability on policy matters.
*Please note: The views expressed at this presentation will be those of the speaker only, and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the City of Toronto.*
For more information visit:
http://www.law.buffalo.edu/baldycenter/events.htm
http://www.law.buffalo.edu/baldycenter/events.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)