{"id":413563,"date":"2025-11-17T09:00:02","date_gmt":"2025-11-17T08:00:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=413563"},"modified":"2025-11-17T09:00:04","modified_gmt":"2025-11-17T08:00:04","slug":"new-york-at-the-green-energy-wall-what-is-the-exit-strategy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=413563","title":{"rendered":"New York At the Green Energy Wall — What Is the Exit Strategy?"},"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

When New York passed its utopian Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act <\/a>back in 2019, it set mandatory targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from the state\u2019s energy consumption. But none of the mandates were scheduled to take effect prior to 2030. The earliest mandates were: 70% of electricity from \u201crenewables\u201d by 2030, and 40% overall reduction in GHG emissions by the same year. (Still more ambitious mandates were also set for 2040, followed by a \u201cnet zero\u201d mandate for 2050.). These dates all seemed so terribly far away \u2014 plenty of time for somebody to invent some new gizmos in the off chance that new technology might be needed to hit the goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our legislators, innumerate to a person, had bought into the fantasy \u2014 peddled by lightweight academics like Mark Jacobson and Robert Howarth, and by grifting promoters like the American Wind Energy Association and investment bank Lazard \u2014 that wind and solar were now the cheapest way to make electricity. To abolish the evil fossil fuels, all that was needed was some political will.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The legislators definitely did not pay the slightest attention to the Manhattan Contrarian. Beginning in 2016, and consistently from then until the CLCPA was enacted in mid-2019, this site published one clear warning after another that the costs of a wind\/solar energy system that would work full time would inevitably be a large multiple of those claimed by the promoters. If you want to entertain yourself for a while on this subject, you might be interested in my series \u201cHow Much Do The Green Energy Crusaders Plan To Increase Your Cost Of Electricity?\u201d Part I (August16, 2016)<\/a>, Part II (August 20, 2016)<\/a>, and Part III (November 29, 2018)<\/a>. Well, I tried.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There actually was one other important deadline in the CLCPA, which was not a deadline for emissions reductions themselves, but rather a deadline for the state Department of Environmental Conservation to publish regulations to direct how the mandated emissions reductions would be achieved. The text from the CLCPA setting this deadline was codified in Section 75-0109 of the state\u2019s Environmental Conservation Law. It states that DEC \u201cshall . . . promulgate rules and regulations to ensure compliance with the statewide emissions reductions limits.\u201d The deadline to promulgate these regulations was January 1, 2024.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

January 1, 2024 came and went, and then another year went by, and still no regulations, nor any indication of when or whether they would be forthcoming. A reasonable inference would be that Kathy Hochul (who had taken over as Governor in 2021), or more likely some people on her staff, had figured out that this was not going to work. But they also knew that saying that out loud would be political suicide. Thus, silence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By March of this year, the environmental zealots had had enough. In that month, a collection of environmental groups \u2014 Citizens Action of New York, People United for Sustainable Housing Buffalo, Sierra Club, and We Act for Environmental Justice \u2014 filed what we call an \u201cArticle 78\u201d proceeding in the state Supreme Court of [Ulster] Albany County, to compel the DEC to comply with the statute and issue the regulations. (Article 78 is a part of the state procedural statute that provides for lawsuits to compel state agencies to comply with the law.). The case was assigned to Justice Julian Schreibman (who normally sits in Ulster County).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The court held a hearing on July 25, and then on August 11 took a supplemental letter submission<\/a> from the New York Attorney General\u2019s office on behalf of the DEC. Then the court issued its decision on October 27<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Attorney General\u2019s August 11 letter submission is truly a remarkable document. Basically, it states that the emissions-reduction mandates of the CLCPA are \u201cinfeasible,\u201d and it asks the court to refrain from enforcing the mandate to issue regulations on the ground that because the emissions reductions are infeasible the regulations to compel them to happen would cause \u201cdamage to the public interest.\u201d As a little background, the letter frequently refers to the state\u2019s draft \u201cEnergy Plan,\u201d which was issued on July 25<\/a>, and which I covered here at Manhattan Contrarian in a post on August 11 titled \u201cNew York\u2019s Official Energy Plan Is No Plan,\u201d<\/a> where I called the Energy Plan \u201chundreds of pages of fluff.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here are a few excerpts from the state\u2019s August 11 letter for your enjoyment:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The draft [Energy Plan] itself shows that a 40% greenhouse gas reduction from 1990 levels by 2030 is infeasible under the Climate Act\u2019s accounting methodology and unaffordable for consumers. . . . [W]hile New York\u2019s current policies and additional action would be expected to raise economywide costs for the state energy system in 2040 by less than 10%, the two net zero scenarios the Board considered raise energy-system costs by at least 35% in 2040, which is $42 billion in additional costs for that year alone. . . . In sum, under even the most aggressive scenario the State Energy Planning Board considered\u2014one that by 2040 would lead to an added $42 billion in annual energy costs\u2014New York would not meet the Climate Act\u2019s 2030 goal. While the draft plan shows that ambitious progress under the Climate Act is achievable, the 2030 goal itself is not practically feasible due to costs consumers simply cannot bear.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So they have actually calculated that the attempt to reach \u201cnet zero\u201d emissions on the statutorily-mandated schedule will cost consumers an extra $42 billion per year<\/em> by 2040. They don\u2019t give us numbers for other years, but presumably other years would be comparable. So figure, $42 billion per year. Let\u2019s say that that is slightly different from wind and solar being \u201ccheaper\u201d than our existing fossil fuel infrastructure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Frankly, I think that the $42 billion per year is a very low-ball estimate. But for today, I will take it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The state\u2019s August 11 letter essentially advocates that the deadlines should be allowed to slip while we implement these policies more slowly. What the letter does not mention is whether the total cost of this transition will be reduced in any way by stretching it out or, alternatively, whether the cost will be equal or more if spread over a longer period of time. I can\u2019t think of any reason why spreading the cost over a longer period of time would reduce the total cost. And thus, if the cost is \u201cinfeasible\u201d for consumers, it will be equally infeasible if stretched out.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Justice Schreibman was extremely unimpressed by the very weak argument made by the state. From the court\u2019s opinion (page 8):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Faced with this [statutory] mandate, DEC does not have the discretion to say no or to decide that it has the authority to choose not to follow the express legislative direction at issue. Under our system of separation of powers, upon concluding, based on its subject-matter expertise, that achieving the goals of the Climate Act might be \u201cinfeasible\u201d for the reasons stated, the DEC had just two options. One, it could issue compliant regulations anyway, and let the chips fall where they may for the State\u2019s political actors. Or, two, it could raise its concerns to the Legislature. . . .<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The court\u2019s decision gives the state until February 6 to issue the regulations. The reason for the three month window is that the state Legislature will not come back into session until January, and thus the option to ask the Legislature to reconsider is kept open.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But what is the exit strategy? Will they soon start spending $42 billion per year on a crash emissions reduction program that still will clearly be insufficient to meet the ridiculous mandates of the CLCPA? Or will they ask the state Legislature to revise the statute? The second option will bring a huge outcry from the dominant progressive group in the Legislature and their environmentalist backers, all of whom are convinced (without ever having done serious analysis) that wind and solar are cheaper than fossil fuels and only corrupt influence from oil and gas interests is preventing the energy transition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Maybe they postpone the deadlines for a year or two. But when the year or two is up, the problem will be back bigger than ever.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is no graceful exit strategy. The CLCPA will inevitably be abandoned. Exactly when or how, I don\u2019t know, but it will happen.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

When New York passed its utopian Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act back in 2019, it set mandatory targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from the state\u2019s energy consumption. But none of the mandates were scheduled to take effect prior to 2030. The earliest mandates were: 70% of electricity from \u201crenewables\u201d by 2030, and 40% overall reduction in GHG emissions by the same year. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":413566,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"Explore the challenges New York faces with its Climate Leadership Act and the implications of unfunded mandates on energy costs.","jetpack_seo_html_title":"New York's Climate Act: Infeasibility and Future Strategies","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_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":true,"token":"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.uWeCROudzZYw2L56ky3YgxLP4cQIhZwxA5KDfXDHXhwMQ"},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691839696,691829386,691837312,691818463,691818154,691819094],"class_list":{"0":"post-413563","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-42-billion-per-year","9":"tag-clcpa","10":"tag-climate-leadership-and-community-protection-act","11":"tag-ghg-emissions","12":"tag-net-zero","13":"tag-renewable-green-energy","15":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/AQMetzDdI3XmBgpHxmS-EAYNW5lIHVTcZwZHeG7x44SA6BomvA1_41CStkXorXV6iaTy6f9KfafT4jjd-neHsijX6S5XF4_3u1EPWy938E698mxd1iO0y84W6m5JYQz-dNj8U_nvAxiXv6F0_yQcm5RFgHTsEg.jpeg?fit=1280%2C1280&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1JAn","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":426145,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=426145","url_meta":{"origin":413563,"position":0},"title":"New York Climate Act Issues","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"14\/02\/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":417431,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=417431","url_meta":{"origin":413563,"position":1},"title":"New York Must Reconsider the Climate Act","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"16\/12\/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":336540,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=336540","url_meta":{"origin":413563,"position":2},"title":"New York City Local Law 97 \u2013 Don\u2019t Do It","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"15\/07\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"I have the pleasure to announce the availability of a new report prepared for New York Co-op and Condo Boards and Trade Associations regarding New York City Local Law 97 mandated conversion to electric heat. Local Law 97 mandates that \u201cmost buildings over 25,000 square feet are required to meet\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"GHG emission\"","block_context":{"text":"GHG emission","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=ghg-emission"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/00Screenshot-2024-07-15-133746.png?fit=1181%2C614&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/00Screenshot-2024-07-15-133746.png?fit=1181%2C614&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/00Screenshot-2024-07-15-133746.png?fit=1181%2C614&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/00Screenshot-2024-07-15-133746.png?fit=1181%2C614&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/00Screenshot-2024-07-15-133746.png?fit=1181%2C614&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":367857,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=367857","url_meta":{"origin":413563,"position":3},"title":"Amicus Brief Filed in Glen Oaks Village Owners v. City Of New York","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"27\/02\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Back at the beginning of the year, I had a post titled \u201cNew York On The March To Climate Utopia.\u201d The post took note that everything about New York State\u2019s vision for a zero-emissions economy and for \u201cclimate leadership\u201d was in the process of falling apart.","rel":"","context":"In \"Net zero\"","block_context":{"text":"Net zero","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=net-zero"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0DTNnhubX0AUHGrN.jpeg?fit=1200%2C857&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0DTNnhubX0AUHGrN.jpeg?fit=1200%2C857&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0DTNnhubX0AUHGrN.jpeg?fit=1200%2C857&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0DTNnhubX0AUHGrN.jpeg?fit=1200%2C857&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/0DTNnhubX0AUHGrN.jpeg?fit=1200%2C857&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":411725,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=411725","url_meta":{"origin":413563,"position":4},"title":"NY Politicians Face Climate Act Consequences","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/11\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"There has been a new development for New York\u2019s Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) net-zero plan. On Oct. 24, 2025, the New York Supreme Court issued a decision and order in a case pitting environmental organizations against the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/0AQPUqJ2BPYmaGqwSShpVng-Y6DsMzqHe9L0-Uud2RerLLnhuZ0QhmbpJKcCrRXURNvMZWK107l8FRCtqa5eZuki6Nc637dOEVxsxdYbJwwFHDm2fpAvvPPne6QnD0Uw-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C597&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/0AQPUqJ2BPYmaGqwSShpVng-Y6DsMzqHe9L0-Uud2RerLLnhuZ0QhmbpJKcCrRXURNvMZWK107l8FRCtqa5eZuki6Nc637dOEVxsxdYbJwwFHDm2fpAvvPPne6QnD0Uw-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C597&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/0AQPUqJ2BPYmaGqwSShpVng-Y6DsMzqHe9L0-Uud2RerLLnhuZ0QhmbpJKcCrRXURNvMZWK107l8FRCtqa5eZuki6Nc637dOEVxsxdYbJwwFHDm2fpAvvPPne6QnD0Uw-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C597&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/0AQPUqJ2BPYmaGqwSShpVng-Y6DsMzqHe9L0-Uud2RerLLnhuZ0QhmbpJKcCrRXURNvMZWK107l8FRCtqa5eZuki6Nc637dOEVxsxdYbJwwFHDm2fpAvvPPne6QnD0Uw-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C597&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/0AQPUqJ2BPYmaGqwSShpVng-Y6DsMzqHe9L0-Uud2RerLLnhuZ0QhmbpJKcCrRXURNvMZWK107l8FRCtqa5eZuki6Nc637dOEVxsxdYbJwwFHDm2fpAvvPPne6QnD0Uw-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C597&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":248853,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=248853","url_meta":{"origin":413563,"position":5},"title":"NY Climate Act Cap and Invest Plan Going Off the Rails","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"21\/03\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"One of my pragmatic interests is market-based pollution control programs that are a key component of net-zero transition plans everywhere.","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-843.png?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-843.png?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-843.png?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-843.png?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/image-843.png?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/413563","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=413563"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/413563\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":413568,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/413563\/revisions\/413568"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/413566"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=413563"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=413563"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=413563"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}