As of mid-April 2026, New York’s average price for regular gasoline is around $4.10–$4.18 per gallon, varying slightly by source (AAA, EIA, NYSERDA data) and higher in the NYC metro area.

This is up significantly from early 2026 lows near $2.86–$3.00 but reflects seasonal demand, crude oil prices, and broader market factors.

New York already has some of the higher baseline prices in the U.S. due to taxes, regulations, and distribution costs.

The New York’s 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) is the core Republican critique in Albany, amplified since a February 2026 NYSERDA memo highlighted projected cost spikes from full, unadjusted implementation of the law’s emissions targets and Cap-and-Invest (NYCI) program.

Current New York Gas Prices (as of April 17, 2026)

New York’s statewide average for regular gasoline is $4.06–$4.12 per gallon:

• EIA data (week of April 13): $4.06 (up for the 10th straight week from $4.01 the prior week; 2026 low was $2.86 in January).
• AAA (as of April 16): $4.118 statewide (national average ~$4.093).

Prices are elevated due to seasonal demand, global crude volatility (including Middle East tensions), and state-specific factors like taxes and distribution. NYC-area prices tend to run higher, but nothing statewide is near $6 yet.

These are market-driven levels, not yet incorporating the full future CLCPA add-ons.

The NYSERDA Memo’s $2.23/Gallon Projection

The internal February 2026 memo (from NYSERDA CEO Doreen Harris to Gov. Hochul’s office) analyzed unmitigated full CLCPA compliance by ~2031 under the proposed economy-wide Cap-and-Invest program:

• Gasoline: +$2.23 per gallon (passed through via carbon allowance costs).
• Combined with early-2026 ~$3 prices: ~$5.25.
• Combined with today’s $4.12 baseline: **$6.35** in that scenario.
• Heating: Upstate oil/natural-gas households could face +$4,100+ gross annually; NYC natural-gas households +$2,300+. Natural gas could rise ~$16.96 per MMBtu. Only partial offsets via rebates or design changes were projected.

Republicans (Senate Leader Rob Ortt, Sens. Borrello, Gallivan, Tedisco, and Assembly members) cite this as evidence of a “financial disaster” and “Cap-and-Tax” that will accelerate out-migration, business flight, and affordability crises.

They demand full repeal of CLCPA mandates.

Even Gov. Kathy Hochul has used the memo to justify delaying key CLCPA elements—pushing enforceable 2030 emissions regulations and timelines later (toward 2030–2040), adjusting accounting, and softening Cap-and-Invest rollout.

She argues it’s irresponsible to impose “crushing costs” on families amid current high utility/gas prices, grid risks, and federal policy shifts.

Environmental advocates and some Democratic lawmakers call the delays a cave-in that weakens climate goals and locks in fossil-fuel dependence.

Budget negotiations remain ongoing as of mid-April 2026.

Broader Context on “Economic and Energy Disaster” Claims

Critics’ view: The CLCPA’s aggressive 40% emissions cut by 2030 (85% by 2050, zero-emissions electricity by 2040) ignores New York’s cold climate, heavy reliance on natural gas/heating oil, slow renewable buildout, and existing high baseline energy costs. Rapid mandates without cheap, scalable alternatives create price shocks, reliability risks, and regressive hits on working families, rural drivers, and small businesses. Electricity rates have already risen sharply since 2019; adding fuel surcharges compounds this.

Proponents’ view: The law targets long-term climate, health, and energy-security benefits by reducing emissions, cutting volatile global oil/gas dependence, and spurring green jobs/investment. Carbon pricing can be designed with rebates to offset burdens for lower-income households.

Reality: The $6/gallon scenario is a projected upper-bound warning under full, unchanged rules + sustained high market prices—not current reality or inevitable. Gas prices are global and fluctuate (OPEC, geopolitics, demand). The memo assumes no tweaks, tech breakthroughs, or federal support. Hochul’s proposed delays show even supporters see the affordability tension.

New York already layers high baseline energy costs (taxes, distribution, prior regulations).

The debate boils down to trade-offs: ambitious decarbonization versus keeping energy reliable and affordable in the near term.

Even Hochul has acknowledged the tension by seeking pauses—suggesting the “disaster” warning has bipartisan resonance on affordability, even if diagnoses differ.

Outcomes will depend on Albany negotiations, courts, federal shifts, and whether low-carbon alternatives scale faster/cheaper than projected.

For drivers and households, near-term relief likely hinges more on global oil than state carbon rules today, but the long-term policy direction matters.