Citing concerns about affordability, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul is proposing revising the state’s 2019 climate law, asking to delay implementation by several years and to adopt a different greenhouse-gas accounting method.
The changes would effectively water down a law viewed as one of the most ambitious state climate policies in the U.S.
Hochul called the law’s current targets “costly and unattainable” in a statement released Friday. “This is solely out of necessity — to protect New Yorkers’ pocketbooks and economy,” she said.
The Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act targets a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2030 and an 85% cut by 2050. As of 2023, the state had lowered its emissions by about 14%.
Meeting the 2030 deadline would drastically drive up energy bills for New Yorkers, Hochul, a Democrat, has said. Regulations to implement the law are already delayed; Hochul wants to push them back to 2030 and create a new emissions target for 2040.
Energy bills have surged around the U.S., partly as a result of AI-driven demand. As of November, the average residential electricity price in New York was 26.5 cents per kilowatt-hour, ranking eighth highest in the country, according to Empire Center, a nonprofit think tank in Albany. The Iran war has sent oil and gas prices surging.
The proposed weakening of the law comes amid the Trump administration’s dismantling of federal climate regulations and clean energy incentives, which environmentalists have looked to Democrat-led states and cities to counter.
“Lots of people around the country — really around the world — have been looking to see how New York does in implementing this strong climate law,” said Michael Gerrard, a Columbia University law professor who directs the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law.
“If a very blue state like New York moves backwards on climate change as well, that’s a negative sign for the country,” he said. “If you can’t do it here, can you do it anywhere?”
Hochul, who is running for reelection this year, is seeking to advance changes through the state’s budget, which is due April 1. The proposal is expected to meet resistance from some Democratic lawmakers.
“We will negotiate with the governor,” said State Sen. Pete Harckham, who chairs the body’s environmental conservation committee. “We’ll be able to get to, I think, a resolution of this.”
Policymakers including Harckham and State Sen. Liz Krueger, who chairs the finance committee, penned a letter to Hochul earlier this month urging her not to back a delay.
Given Washington’s war on climate policy, they wrote, “it is incumbent on states like New York to reject this new wave of climate denial and put forward bold policies that will save New Yorkers money, reduce pollution and protect a livable climate.”
Krueger said Friday the proposed changes would increase the likelihood that the climate law will never be fully enacted.
“This is a serious problem,” she said. “We need to be spending the money for the infrastructure to help meet the targets.”
Business groups and Republicans in Albany have argued that implementing the law as it stands would drive up costs and worsen the affordability crisis. State Sen. Tom O’Mara has urged changes. “It is time [to] amend the CLCPA to account for economic realities,” he said in a statement. The Business Council, representing New York companies, last month said the deadlines stipulated “are proving unachievable.”
Even some Democrats have advocated for amendments. State Assemblymembers Carrie Woerner and John T. McDonald said last week that “the reality is difficult to ignore: New York is not on track to meet the CLCPA’s targets on the timeline written into law.”
“The real question is whether New York can remain committed to deep decarbonization while adapting its strategy to today’s conditions,” they added. “The goal should not be abandoning ambition. It should be pursuing it intelligently.”
In 2025, environmental groups sued Hochul’s administration after the state failed to set up a regulatory program for the climate law.
“The main effect of these proposed changes is to allow the Hochul administration to do nothing for at least the next four years,” said Rachel Spector, deputy managing attorney at Earthjustice, an environmental law organization that represents the groups. “These proposals will do nothing to benefit New Yorkers. The only beneficiaries would be Hochul along with gas utilities and corporate polluters.”
Hochul also wants to align New York’s emissions-counting standards with other U.S. states and the international community. That might mean switching from a 20-year emissions-counting methodology to a 100-year one. The shorter timeframe highlights the pollution impact of methane, a short-lived but potent greenhouse gas and the main component of natural gas. The 100-year metric essentially balances out short- with longer-lived gases like carbon dioxide.
“It’s ultimately a way to cheat on a test,” said Liz Moran, New York policy advocate at Earthjustice.
In October, a judge ruled in favor of the environmental groups, putting pressure on Hochul to enact a so-called cap-and-invest program that would help generate revenue for the state to transition to renewable energy.
However, a memo released in February by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority concluded that implementing the policy would result in rocketing energy bills for New Yorkers.
It modeled a scenario in which the law were “implemented with regulations to meet the 2030 targets” and found that upstate New York households relying on oil and natural gas “would see costs in excess of $4,000 a year.”
Many Democrats and environmental advocates have pushed back on the narrative that climate policy is spiking costs. Harckham said the solution to improving affordability and lowering emissions is clear: “It’s renewable energy.”
“We set a law for ourselves,” he added. “We should be held accountable to it.”
Raimonde writes for Bloomberg.