13/04/26
NY weighs new yardstick to set climate goals
New York, 13 April (Argus) — New York governor Kathy Hochul (D) is asking state
lawmakers for more time to reduce emissions. Potentially more important is how
the state actually measures them. The state's leaders, at loggerheads over
climate policy and other issues, have already blown past a deadline to agree to
a new budget. Hochul frustrated progressives by pushing for changes to the
state's 2019 climate law, which not only mandates deep emissions reductions but
also includes a bespoke system for tracking climate impacts that discourages
natural gas and some biofuels. New York requires a 40pc reduction in
economy-wide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2030 from 1990 levels and an 85pc
drop by 2050. But the state's unique emissions-accounting method effectively
requires deeper cuts to emissions than targets suggest. Environmentalists say
this system will speed New York's transition to renewables and leave the state
less exposed to future oil supply shocks. But it also threatens higher near-term
energy costs in a state that burns more oil for home heating than any other,
where natural gas is the largest source of electricity and where driving
predominates outside public transit-connected New York City. Hochul backed off
prior efforts to change the GHG accounting rules. Now campaigning for
re-election on a platform of making the high-cost state more affordable, she
insists changes are necessary. Methane pain State law requires New York to track
the warming of GHGs on a 20-year timeline, instead of the 100-year timeline used
by nearly all other states. That difference means New York treats a tonne of
methane, which packs a bigger punch than CO2 but dissipates in the atmosphere
more quickly, as having around three times more climate impact than other states
do. Under typical emissions accounting, New York's emissions in 2023 were 24pc
below 1990 levels. But according to the state's unique system, they only fell by
14pc over that period. The difference reflects the state's reliance on natural
gas for heat and power. New York's system then leaves fewer options to bridge
that gap. While incentives in California have helped make renewable diesel more
common there than its petroleum-based counterpart, New York treats many biofuels
— even if made from waste — as akin to fossil fuels by factoring in tailpipe
emissions but not some upstream benefits. Renewable diesel brought into New York
would not just count as only slightly better than oil, but it would also count
the same whether made from recycled cooking grease or from crops, according to
detailed estimates in an energy plan released by state officials last year. New
York would consider more production emissions in-state, effectively treating
renewable diesel made locally as worse for the climate than imports. The reverse
is true for renewable natural gas, which counts as producing negative emissions
if made in-state — since turning rotting dairy manure into energy avoids methane
emissions — but similar to fossil-fuel natural gas if made elsewhere. While the
California system has its critics, the New York energy plan says explicitly that
the GHG accounting required by law "creates an incomplete picture" of biofuels'
climate impacts. But the system is by design reflecting the wishes of
progressive lawmakers who helped pass these requirements into law before Hochul
took office, as well as those of environmental justice groups that hold sway in
the Democratic-controlled state. Advocates want to stop burning any fuels that
worsen air quality and think states like California have overstated the climate
benefits of natural gas and biofuels at the expense of efforts to electrify cars
and homes. Hochul, backed by business groups, disagrees. A recent memo prepared
for her by a state energy agency estimated that polluters will have to pay far
more for their emissions than they do in other states — as much as $180/tonne by
2030 — because of "differing accounting standards" and "inflexible" targets, and
that fuel prices would spike. Carbon market cop out That memo gets at the core
of the debate: rising energy costs are taking precedence in Hochul's policy
calculus, putting the future of a carbon market in question. A task force of
policy advisors in 2022 recommended a carbon market as the best option to
achieve state climate targets. The program, similar to systems in California and
Washington, would require fuel suppliers, industrial facilities and others to
buy a dwindling pool of carbon allowances from the state. But the Hochul
administration missed a 2024 legal deadline to have that plan in place and has
been vague on when it will release even draft rules. After environmental groups
sued, a state court directed the Hochul administration to release carbon market
regulations . Hochul has since been more direct about her concerns and called
for punting the rollout of the market to 2030. Environmentalists resent Hochul's
argument that New York's targets are infeasible when her administration is
slow-walking the rollout of a plan to achieve them. But they recognize the power
governors wield in New York's mostly closed-door budget process. One potential
compromise that has been discussed among advocates is implementing a carbon
market with more typical emissions-accounting rules, while preserving the
20-year warming timeline for other state programs. This could address cost
concerns while containing the backlash from climate advocates. It could also
leave the door open for linkage with other carbon markets, which would be
exceedingly difficult without aligning rules across different programs. Without
changes, biofuel supporters also fear that a state "clean transportation
standard" that regulators are studying could cut out many of the fuels rewarded
by California. Lawmakers likewise have expressed resistance to sweeping changes.
Senator Environmental Conservation Committee chair Pete Harckham (D), an
influential voice on climate, has signaled some openness, however, to "modest
adjustments". "We're committed to working with the governor to find reasonable
solutions here, but in my humble opinion, a complete rollback of the state's
climate law is untenable," Harckham said last week. By Cole Martin and Ida
Balakrishna Send comments and request more information at
feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2026. Argus Media group . All rights
reserved.
