Hochul Claims the Climate Act Can Be Affordable
18 hours ago Guest Blogger
Roger Caiazza
A couple of days ago an article republished here by Robert Bradley described New York Governor Hochul’s retreat from climate activism. On March 20, 2026 Hochul claimed in an exclusive opinion piece in New York Empire Report she outlined her vision. She claimed that climate action and affordability “can and must” go hand in hand. She did not provide substantive evidence to support that claim and her claims do not address other Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) affordability issues.
Status
The Climate Act established a New York “Net Zero” target (85% reduction in GHG emissions and 15% offset of emissions) by 2050. It includes an interim reduction target of a 40% GHG reduction by 2030. Two targets address the electric sector: 70% of the electricity must come from renewable energy by 2030 and all electricity must be generated by “zero-emissions” resources by 2040.
Progress on the Climate Act is at an inflection point. I recently described two affordability aspects of the implementation process that are causing confusion for almost everyone. Hochul’s administration has recognized two aspects but has covered up a third component. I provide details of these aspects in the Status section of the companion post at my blog.
I believe that the primary reason for Hochul’s announcement is her gubernatorial election this year and her affordability theme. In February the Hochul Administration “leaked” a New York Energy Research & Development Authority (NYSERDA) memo that said that “full compliance” with Climate Act New York Cap-and-Invest (NYCI) regulation could cost upstate households more than $4,000 a year – on top of what they are already paying today”. This NYSERDA memo that Hochul points to as justification includes information that is just now convenient to release. Hochul knew these costs in 2024 when the original analysis was done. To keep prices down then, NYSERDA conjured up policy scenarios meant to keep costs at whatever level they thought they could get away with and not the higher cost the cap-and-dividend theory says will be necessary to meet the 2030 interim mandates.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2026/03/22/hochul-claims-the-climate-act-can-be-affordable/
