I have been trying for a long time to get a letter to the editor published in the Albany Times Union. In early June they finally published my summary of flaws on the New York Cap-and-Invest Program. Dennis Higgins had another letter published describing issues raised by the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) Power Trends report. This post provides both letters.
I published a guest post by Dennis Higgins on the importance of nuclear energy to a sustainable future in May. He spent most of his career at SUNY Oneonta, teaching Mathematics and Computer Science. He has been involved in environmental and energy issues for a decade or more. Although he did work extensively with the ‘Big Greens’ in efforts to stop gas infrastructure, his views on what needs to happen, and his opinions of Big Green advocacy, have served to separate them.
I have been following the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) since it was first proposed. I submitted comments on the Climate Act implementation plan and have written over 300 articles about New York’s net-zero transition. I have devoted a lot of time to the Climate Act because I believe the ambitions for a zero-emissions economy embodied in the Climate Act outstrip available renewable technology such that the net-zero transition will do more harm than good. The opinions expressed in my letter to the editor do not reflect the position of any of my previous employers or any other company I have been associated with, those comments are mine alone.
Our letters follow.
State needs to alter ‘dumb’ climate plan
Dennis Higgins, Otego
The Climate Action Council released the state’s energy scoping plan last year. The state continues to ignore criticism that its scheme, cooked up out of slogans, utterly disconnected from reality, will fail. The grid operator, New York Independent System Operator, just released its 2023 Power Trends report, which slams the plan. Will state leaders listen?
The state plan requires tripling energy imports and exports. New York hopes to sell — rather than dump — excess solar midsummer but wants neighbors to provide us with energy the rest of the time. What if there’s none to be had? The report states: “These reduced margins potentially limit the ability to import electricity from neighboring regions, putting greater importance on available supply and transmission within New York.”
NYISO indicates that the proposed solar and wind buildout will cause dangerous reliability issues. NYISO is constrained by federal tariffs to ensure that outages don’t happen. The report states: “Increasing levels of intermittent generation combined with increasing demand in response to electrification are expected to result in at least 17,000 MW of existing fossil-fueled generating capacity, which must be retained to continue to reliably serve forecasted ‘peak’ demand days in 2030.”
NYISO says that, with Indian Point’s closure, fossil fuels now provide half the state’s electricity. Since 2019, emissions have increased by tens of millions of tons yearly. If, in 2030, fossil fuels still provide 40 percent to 50 percent of our electricity, state leaders may realize that the 70 percent-renewable goal failed.
Texas and California show how critical it is to have sufficient grid capacity. France and Sweden decarbonized with nuclear power in 10-15 years. Canada, Britain and Japan will build emission-free nuclear. Perhaps New York will revise its dumb plan.
Flaws In New York’s Cap-and-Invest Proposal
Roger Caiazza, Liverpool
The Hochul Administration has started its process to develop an economywide Cap-and-Invest Program that will “establish a declining cap on greenhouse gas emissions, limit potential costs to New Yorkers, invest proceeds in programs that drive emission reductions in an equitable manner, and maintain the competitiveness of New York businesses and industries.”
There is an unrecognized dynamic between the stated goals. The New York Independent System Operator has stated that the CLCPA net-zero transition is “driving the need for unprecedented levels of investment in new generation to achieve decarbonization and maintain system reliability”.
The Administration must provide an estimate of how much these investments will cost in order determine how much money must be raised by the Cap-and-Invest program. If the investments are insufficient then the energy system will fail to meet the cap limits. Also needed is a feasibility analysis for the transition schedule that considers supply chain and trained labor constraints. Even if the money is available, it may not be possible to build it fast enough to meet the arbitrary CLCPA schedule.
The Cap-and-Invest program is described as a simple solution that will address the Administration’s goals. The ultimate compliance strategy for the program is stop using fossil fuels. If there is no replacement energy available that means that compliance will lead to an artificial energy shortage. H.L. Mencken noted that “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.”
Discussion
Higgins agrees with my opinion that the Power Trends report raises serious issues about reliability. It is notable that he brought up issues I did not address in my article about the report. We are in complete agreement New York’s Climate Act Scoping Plan is a dumb plan and that the NYISO Power Trends supports our position.
Pragmatic Environmentalist of New York 