{"id":405659,"date":"2025-09-29T10:08:14","date_gmt":"2025-09-29T08:08:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=405659"},"modified":"2025-09-29T10:08:16","modified_gmt":"2025-09-29T08:08:16","slug":"two-takes-on-the-progress-of-new-yorks-energy-transformation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=405659","title":{"rendered":"Two Takes On The Progress Of New York’s Energy Transformation"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"Aerial<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Manhattan Contrarian<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Francis Menton<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"An<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

In the real world, the climate scam is rapidly falling apart, along with the related government-subsidized schemes for worldwide energy transformation. So how should New York react? After all, we claim to have the ultimate program of \u201cclimate leadership\u201d for showing everyone else how easy it is to do this energy transformation thing. We\u2019ve started with mandating under our Climate Act an electricity system having 70% of its generation from \u201crenewables\u201d by 2030 (a mandate known as \u201c70 x 30\u201d). The deadline for 70 x 30 is now just over four years away.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, is this really happening? Fortunately, our Public Service Commission has just come out with a Report with the long title \u201cNEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICE SECOND CLCPA [Climate Act] INFORMATIONAL REPORT ON OVERALL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CLIMATE LEADERSHIP AND COMMUNITY PROTECTION ACT, WITH CORRECTIONS,\u201d bearing a date of September 23, 2025. Today, I will take a look at that to see what we can learn about New York\u2019s progress toward its goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Separately, a different bureaucracy called the New York State Energy Planning Board a couple of months ago (July 25) issued something called the 2025 Draft Energy Plan<\/a> for the state. I had a post discussing that document back on August 11 (\u201cNew York\u2019s Official Energy Plan Is No Plan\u201d<\/a>). That Draft Energy Plan then became subject to a period for public comment, so I took the opportunity to submit my Comment on September 25.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let\u2019s say that the PSC\u2019s Report and my Comment on the Energy Plan are two very different takes on the progress toward New York\u2019s energy transformation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019ll start with the PSC\u2019s Report. The Report came with a three-page press release announcing and summarizing it<\/a>. Oddly, the press release does not contain any link to access the Report itself. Instead, if you want to review the Report, you are instructed to go to the Commission\u2019s page for accessing its case documents<\/a>, where you must then input the correct case number (22-M-0149) in a box provided, and then scroll through the docket entries until you find the Report. Why would they make finding this so difficult? I\u2019ll bet you can guess.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A summary of both the press release and the Report itself is this: a lot of empty talk about all the wonderful plans, without any quantitative information on whether any progress is being made toward the 70 x 30 mandate, or toward any of the various other mandates (including 100% of electricity from zero-emissions sources by 2040, or \u201c100 x 40.\u201d). From the press release:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The New York State Public Service Commission (Commission) today received an update from Department of Public Service (DPS) staff regarding progress toward the clean energy goals of the 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act or Climate Act. The report details actions taken in pursuit of these ambitious clean energy goals while working to keep ratepayer costs manageable with benefits that are widely shared. . . . The Climate Act\u2019s directives require the Commission to build on its existing efforts to deploy clean energy resources and energy storage technologies, implement energy efficiency and building electrification measures, and support electric vehicle charging infrastructure. This year\u2019s update included: Progress on achieving the targets mandated within the renewable energy program.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

OK, so the press release specifically says that the update includes \u201cprogress on achieving the targets mandated,\u201d but what exactly does that progress consist of? There\u2019s nothing about that in the press release, so we must go over to the Report itself. The Report is some 63 pages, including appendices. Most of it is about qualitative descriptions of the various schemes (e.g., \u201crenewable energy and energy storage,\u201d \u201ctransmission and distribution investment and development,\u201d etc., etc.). Finally at page 37 we get to a section headed \u201cProgress Toward CLCPA Green Energy Targets.\u201d Surely, this is where we will get the quantitative information we are seeking on the progress toward New York\u2019s plans? Here is the entire text of that section:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The subject of this subsection has been covered in depth in the Draft CES Biennial Review. 109<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wait a minute! I thought the press release had specifically said that the PSC Report itself<\/em> contained an update on this progress. But in fact the update is completely missing. Following that footnote 109, we find out that this CES Biennial Review came out on July 1, 2024 \u2014 over a year ago \u2014 and must in turn be hunted down on another PSC docket, this one numbered 15-E-0302. This time the Report is some 98 pages long. If we make it to page 53, we find a section titled \u201cThe Path to the 70% Goal.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This section of some 7 pages entirely discusses how many GWh of demand are in the state\u2019s load forecast for 2030, and how many GWh of generation from renewables it will take to produce 70% of that. Excerpts:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Under the base case load forecast assumption of 164,910 GWh by 2030 as described above, the 70% goal equates to 115,437 GWh.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On page 56 in a Table 8, we find the amount of renewables \u201coperational as of 2022\u201d \u2014 29,289 GWh. That\u2019s barely one-quarter of the 115,437 needed by 2030, and by the way more than half of the 29,289 GWh comes from one source, Niagara Falls, that cannot be replicated. The same table on page 8 indicates that an additional approximately 36,000 GWh of renewable generation, consisting of onshore and offshore wind and solar, has been \u201ccontracted\u201d by 2024. After substracting a few small miscellaneous items, they come up with a \u201cgap to 70% (2030)\u201d of 42,145 GWh. Then, after further assuming large additions to offshore wind and rooftop solar will provide about half of that, they get to this bottom line:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To achieve this pathway, just over 3,900 GWh of onshore large-scale renewables resources would need to be procured per year, or approximately 5,600 GWh per year with attrition.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Well, in the time since this CES document was issued in mid-2024, all of the off-shore wind has been shot down by the federal government, and all of the federal subsidies for additional wind and solar developments have disappeared. None of the 5,600 GWh per year of additional renewables procurements is in the works. All of this was known and obvious by the time the most recent PSC Report came out on September 23, and yet they don\u2019t mention any of it. I guess they figure that nobody will take the time and effort to track through their references to figure out the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And one more thing: There is not one word in these reports mentioning that wind and solar do not produce electricity at the same time that consumers use it, meaning that there must be storage or batteries or backup of some kind. The entire approach is to assume that if the amount of electricity generated is equal to the amount consumed, the two can be easily matched up somehow, without any issues or costs worth discussing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In summary, New York\u2019s PSC is entirely engaged in throwing up a smokescreen to obscure the fact that the state\u2019s energy transformation is dead in the water.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now let\u2019s turn to my Comment on the Draft \u201cEnergy Plan.\u201d Although I submitted it a couple of days ago, I can\u2019t yet find it on the website, so I don\u2019t have a link to provide. As an alternative, I\u2019ll provide some extensive excerpts. The bulk of my Comment focused on a chart, Figure 19, appearing on page 22 of a portion of the Plan called the \u201cPathway Analysis,\u201d purporting to show how the Climate Act mandates, like 70 x 30 and 100 x 40, would be achieved. Here is that Figure 19:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"A<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Here are some portions of my reactions to this chart:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  • Installed capacity of natural gas power plants declines from about 25 GW today to about 15 GW in 2035 \u2013 and then completely disappears by 2040.\u00a0 What will keep the lights on 24\/7\/365 when the natural gas generation is gone?\u00a0 There is no answer here.<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • In the same Figure, a new generation category called \u201cZero-Carbon Firm\u201d suddenly appears in 2040, with 17.2 GW of capacity \u2013 about three-quarters as much as our entire current fleet of natural gas power plants.\u00a0 They have no idea what this \u201cZero-Carbon Firm\u201d category might be.\u00a0 Text seems to indicate that they might be thinking about new nuclear or maybe so-called \u201crenewable\u201d gas from landfills.\u00a0 In fact nuclear is completely blocked in this state, although Governor Hochul has supposedly started a process to build one 1 GW nuclear plant starting now.\u00a0 That plant has not even yet gotten to the stage of site selection, and will not possibly be ready by 2040 even if construction started today.\u00a0 And it is also only 1 GW, when the \u201cEnergy Plan\u201d is saying that 17.2 GW of \u201cZero-Carbon Firm\u201d is needed by 2040.\u00a0 And landfills can produce only a tiny fraction of the gas they are talking about here, while meanwhile the Pathway Analysis admits elsewhere (see page 14) that this supposedly \u201crenewable\u201d gas does not count as zero-emissions under the Climate Act.<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • Professor Lindsay Anderson of Cornell did an analysis of the New York electricity system, which found that if natural gas generation was eliminated and demand increased as projected, the actual amount of firm emissions-free resources needed to meet the state Climate Act mandates would be about 37 GW of capacity.\u00a0 NYISO analysis of the same issue comes up with a requirement 35 GW of firm emissions-free generation.\u00a0 Where did the Energy Plan come up with the ridiculously low figure of 17.2 GW?\u00a0 I guess it doesn\u2019t really matter, because the \u201cfirm emissions-free resource\u201d is just magical thinking anyway, and does not exist in the real world.<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • The same Figure shows a massive increase in capacity of solar generation, from about 7 GW today to supposedly 35.4 GW by 2040.\u00a0 That capacity, if built (it won\u2019t be), will be lucky to generate electricity at 15-20% of rated capacity over the course of a year in cloudy and snowy upstate New York, and will be next to useless to provide electric heat in the winter, when we have 15 hours of darkness per day.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n

    My Comment goes on and on from there. Some concluding lines:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    [T]he so-called \u201cEnergy Plan\u201d is not an energy plan at all.  It would more accurately be described as random musings and wishful thinking by some completely incompetent people who have no idea what they are doing.  The so-called \u201cPlan\u201d envisions a future of a fully transformed energy system within the next 15-25 years.  Yet it contains no meaningful feasibility analysis, nor any meaningful cost analysis. . . . It\u2019s time to start over, with some people in charge who know what they are doing.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    So I think the vision of New York\u2019s politicians and bureaucrats is to put their heads in the sand until this all falls apart, and then try to blame somebody else. We are living at peak absurdity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    In the real world, the climate scam is rapidly falling apart, along with the related government-subsidized schemes for worldwide energy transformation. So how should New York react? After all, we claim to have the ultimate program of \u201cclimate leadership\u201d for showing everyone else how easy it is to do this energy transformation thing. We\u2019ve started with mandating under our Climate Act an electricity system having 70% of its generation from \u201crenewables\u201d by 2030 (a mandate known as \u201c70 x 30\u201d). The deadline for 70 x 30 is now just over four years away.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":405665,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","advanced_seo_description":"Explore the flaws in New York's ambitious renewable energy plans and the gap between rhetoric and reality in achieving climate goals.","jetpack_seo_html_title":"New York's Energy Transformation: A Reality Check on 70 x 30","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691838385,691823454,691838386,691819231,691818154,691818867,691833013,691819233],"class_list":["post-405659","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-climate-leadership-2","tag-climate-act","tag-draft-energy-plan","tag-energy-transformation","tag-net-zero","tag-new-york","tag-onshore-and-offshore-wind-projects","tag-solar-energy","fallback-thumbnail"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQMxi-TJNqMAp5BlvipBGnMQMDUUIq9OhtaKMnTmlLzDvewE5LRIKPl6-BLzc272QwSs31wU3Vd9Kyz8DlbWY5CyMdi_uyZnLXOBgcfq18dBeivN7QXIobFIjbQvOy0y9EhBqtRSxu4zjWCLalvWSoaqG0ng.jpeg?fit=1280%2C1280&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1HwT","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":421941,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=421941","url_meta":{"origin":405659,"position":0},"title":"New York’s Ridiculous Energy Policy Way Off the Edge of the Cliff","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"01\/18\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"In the case of New York State, the statute in question is the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA or Climate Act). Among the many requirements of that statute, the most immediate are a mandate for 70% of electricity from \u201crenewables\u201d by 2030 (known as \u201c70x30\u201d), and another mandate\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate Act\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate Act","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-act"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Screenshot-2026-01-18-164925.png?fit=1200%2C583&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Screenshot-2026-01-18-164925.png?fit=1200%2C583&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Screenshot-2026-01-18-164925.png?fit=1200%2C583&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Screenshot-2026-01-18-164925.png?fit=1200%2C583&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Screenshot-2026-01-18-164925.png?fit=1200%2C583&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":417431,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=417431","url_meta":{"origin":405659,"position":1},"title":"New York Must Reconsider the Climate Act","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"12\/16\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"At the December 1, 2025, State Energy Planning (SEP) Board meeting\u00a0there were presentations that gave overwhelming evidence that implementing the Climate Act as presently written will be unaffordable and the 2030 CLCPA 40% emission reduction target and 70% renewable energy in the electric system mandate will not be achieved.\u00a0","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act)\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-leadership-community-protection-act-climate-act"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/AQOJ1Q8LHIbeIVPp_8QJp1ONwHJBJL71-EfXOwmWEFqwqaSs_4oR3KtG60CmARaAylIJZcnbLyIdKCvC13C4j3xlhN-apvilW_OZs0il69aKOkbFr99pXzoheGip-Gwo-1.png?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/AQOJ1Q8LHIbeIVPp_8QJp1ONwHJBJL71-EfXOwmWEFqwqaSs_4oR3KtG60CmARaAylIJZcnbLyIdKCvC13C4j3xlhN-apvilW_OZs0il69aKOkbFr99pXzoheGip-Gwo-1.png?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/AQOJ1Q8LHIbeIVPp_8QJp1ONwHJBJL71-EfXOwmWEFqwqaSs_4oR3KtG60CmARaAylIJZcnbLyIdKCvC13C4j3xlhN-apvilW_OZs0il69aKOkbFr99pXzoheGip-Gwo-1.png?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/AQOJ1Q8LHIbeIVPp_8QJp1ONwHJBJL71-EfXOwmWEFqwqaSs_4oR3KtG60CmARaAylIJZcnbLyIdKCvC13C4j3xlhN-apvilW_OZs0il69aKOkbFr99pXzoheGip-Gwo-1.png?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/AQOJ1Q8LHIbeIVPp_8QJp1ONwHJBJL71-EfXOwmWEFqwqaSs_4oR3KtG60CmARaAylIJZcnbLyIdKCvC13C4j3xlhN-apvilW_OZs0il69aKOkbFr99pXzoheGip-Gwo-1.png?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":416486,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=416486","url_meta":{"origin":405659,"position":2},"title":"Even “Progressives” Are Now Allowed to Notice That New York’s Climate Plans Are Crumbling","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"12\/07\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Today I spent the day with my excellent collaborator Richard Ellenbogen cross-examining witnesses at the New York Public Service Commission\u2019s hearing on whether the pending rate increase request of our utility Con Edison should be approved. We had a lot of fun. Although the hearing was theoretically open to the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"\u201cclimate\u201d regime\"","block_context":{"text":"\u201cclimate\u201d regime","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-regime"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/AQMqMmQokZhSf57SBrGq5qSj2FQwPYb2-n_Ng4m6m67EzBc7AXMfJGrcc4s2UNxzgaOT4IuGptXkJts-82fhSxEL_iJvzs_0V-VRho-zcQ5OAucO6ES3HVVgAM9QTKg3CwpmPaq2KHkhYtfGenKKTbW7dfMvcg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/AQMqMmQokZhSf57SBrGq5qSj2FQwPYb2-n_Ng4m6m67EzBc7AXMfJGrcc4s2UNxzgaOT4IuGptXkJts-82fhSxEL_iJvzs_0V-VRho-zcQ5OAucO6ES3HVVgAM9QTKg3CwpmPaq2KHkhYtfGenKKTbW7dfMvcg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/AQMqMmQokZhSf57SBrGq5qSj2FQwPYb2-n_Ng4m6m67EzBc7AXMfJGrcc4s2UNxzgaOT4IuGptXkJts-82fhSxEL_iJvzs_0V-VRho-zcQ5OAucO6ES3HVVgAM9QTKg3CwpmPaq2KHkhYtfGenKKTbW7dfMvcg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/AQMqMmQokZhSf57SBrGq5qSj2FQwPYb2-n_Ng4m6m67EzBc7AXMfJGrcc4s2UNxzgaOT4IuGptXkJts-82fhSxEL_iJvzs_0V-VRho-zcQ5OAucO6ES3HVVgAM9QTKg3CwpmPaq2KHkhYtfGenKKTbW7dfMvcg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/AQMqMmQokZhSf57SBrGq5qSj2FQwPYb2-n_Ng4m6m67EzBc7AXMfJGrcc4s2UNxzgaOT4IuGptXkJts-82fhSxEL_iJvzs_0V-VRho-zcQ5OAucO6ES3HVVgAM9QTKg3CwpmPaq2KHkhYtfGenKKTbW7dfMvcg.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":426145,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=426145","url_meta":{"origin":405659,"position":3},"title":"New York Climate Act Issues","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"02\/14\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"The Climate Act established a New York \u201cNet Zero\u201d target (85% reduction in GHG emissions and 15% offset of emissions) by 2050.\u00a0 Among its interim 2030 targets is a reduction target of 40% less GHG emissions and a 70% renewable energy electricity mandate.\u00a0","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate Act\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate Act","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-act"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/00AQOlQDvL4uu5p_oOka3qjeO-3CvfPJ-rChkJwg9qk-xmOvAqVtre5pA6ZpDGA_jhuPzLUjrGxZv-LxSwtvxsu1FXSzD0exy_TDjXMpWmHH7Q12OZ3nB4J3OrTpzimxN9-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C599&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/00AQOlQDvL4uu5p_oOka3qjeO-3CvfPJ-rChkJwg9qk-xmOvAqVtre5pA6ZpDGA_jhuPzLUjrGxZv-LxSwtvxsu1FXSzD0exy_TDjXMpWmHH7Q12OZ3nB4J3OrTpzimxN9-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C599&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/00AQOlQDvL4uu5p_oOka3qjeO-3CvfPJ-rChkJwg9qk-xmOvAqVtre5pA6ZpDGA_jhuPzLUjrGxZv-LxSwtvxsu1FXSzD0exy_TDjXMpWmHH7Q12OZ3nB4J3OrTpzimxN9-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C599&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/00AQOlQDvL4uu5p_oOka3qjeO-3CvfPJ-rChkJwg9qk-xmOvAqVtre5pA6ZpDGA_jhuPzLUjrGxZv-LxSwtvxsu1FXSzD0exy_TDjXMpWmHH7Q12OZ3nB4J3OrTpzimxN9-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C599&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/00AQOlQDvL4uu5p_oOka3qjeO-3CvfPJ-rChkJwg9qk-xmOvAqVtre5pA6ZpDGA_jhuPzLUjrGxZv-LxSwtvxsu1FXSzD0exy_TDjXMpWmHH7Q12OZ3nB4J3OrTpzimxN9-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C599&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":419641,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=419641","url_meta":{"origin":405659,"position":4},"title":"Hochul must reveal the \u201cruinous cost\u201d of the Climate Act","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"01\/03\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Governor Kathy Hochul should publicly disclose internal state assessments showing extremely high costs for fully implementing New York's Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA), enacted in 2019.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate Act\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate Act","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-act"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMEnx_hkh4WfG70op6cnHRa7RtyQtrxAnCI62SBeUlbcpS2ETpCuCsHnGFDsrz_QcEAaLgwx3X43GpkJ7PkzZdGYuZyaoBxx2uymbT17Xjx401dq2420qWtJtrEP2L0.jpeg?fit=1200%2C597&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMEnx_hkh4WfG70op6cnHRa7RtyQtrxAnCI62SBeUlbcpS2ETpCuCsHnGFDsrz_QcEAaLgwx3X43GpkJ7PkzZdGYuZyaoBxx2uymbT17Xjx401dq2420qWtJtrEP2L0.jpeg?fit=1200%2C597&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMEnx_hkh4WfG70op6cnHRa7RtyQtrxAnCI62SBeUlbcpS2ETpCuCsHnGFDsrz_QcEAaLgwx3X43GpkJ7PkzZdGYuZyaoBxx2uymbT17Xjx401dq2420qWtJtrEP2L0.jpeg?fit=1200%2C597&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMEnx_hkh4WfG70op6cnHRa7RtyQtrxAnCI62SBeUlbcpS2ETpCuCsHnGFDsrz_QcEAaLgwx3X43GpkJ7PkzZdGYuZyaoBxx2uymbT17Xjx401dq2420qWtJtrEP2L0.jpeg?fit=1200%2C597&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/AQMEnx_hkh4WfG70op6cnHRa7RtyQtrxAnCI62SBeUlbcpS2ETpCuCsHnGFDsrz_QcEAaLgwx3X43GpkJ7PkzZdGYuZyaoBxx2uymbT17Xjx401dq2420qWtJtrEP2L0.jpeg?fit=1200%2C597&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":438375,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=438375","url_meta":{"origin":405659,"position":5},"title":"New York’s Climate Activists Not Backing Off","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"04\/09\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"In New York State, the annual budget is due by April 1. Here we are on April 7, and no budget has yet emerged. Word is that the Governor and legislative leaders are hidden away behind closed doors hammering out the details. Word also is that somewhere in this \u201cbudget\u201d\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Alliance for a Green Economy (AGREE)\"","block_context":{"text":"Alliance for a Green Economy (AGREE)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=alliance-for-a-green-economy-agree"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-New-Yorks-Climate-Activists-Not-Backing-Off.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-New-Yorks-Climate-Activists-Not-Backing-Off.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-New-Yorks-Climate-Activists-Not-Backing-Off.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-New-Yorks-Climate-Activists-Not-Backing-Off.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/0-New-Yorks-Climate-Activists-Not-Backing-Off.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/405659","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=405659"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/405659\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":405666,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/405659\/revisions\/405666"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/405665"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=405659"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=405659"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=405659"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}