Ellenbogen Tries to Talk Sense to an Irate Ratepayer

The ongoing Consolidated Edison Company (Con Ed) rate case is going to raise rates. Unsurprisingly, ratepayers are upset.  This post describes an email that was sent to the distribution list for the parties in the case by an individual who I think lives in New York City. She argues that the cost increases are unacceptable because “Hard working New Yorkers shouldn’t have to decide between a doctor’s visit or keeping the lights on.”  She goes on to say this problem is made worse by climate change and claims “Con Ed continues to perpetuate our state’s dependence on fossil fuels by advocating for infrastructure like gas pipelines that would increase the cost burden on New York consumers and fail to adequately address the peak energy demands of our state and city.”

Unfortunately, she hasn’t made the connection that the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act is part of the reason for the higher rates.  Richard Ellenbogen and I share the same frustration that people like this fail to connect the dots.  This post publishes his response to her email.

Ellenbogen Background

Richard Ellenbogen has been speaking to NY State policy makers and regulators since 2019 regarding the deficiencies inherent in NY State Energy policy.  He has a proven record implementing carbon reduction programs at his own manufacturing business in Westchester County where it has reduced its electric utility load by 80% while reducing its carbon footprint by 30% – 40% below that of the downstate system.  I have previously published other articles by Ellenbogen including a summary description of his issues with the Climate Act.  In addition, he and I have submitted several joint filings in different venues.

STOP STOP HIKING RATES

On 10/28/2025 12:10 PM, Annie Pahlow sent an email about the Consolidated Edison rate case.

To whom it may concern New York electric and gas bills are already some of the highest in the country. It is absolutely inexcusable to approve a rate hike that would increase the cost burden on New Yorkers across the state when the company already makes billions in revenue. The monopoly Con Ed has on New York City delivery upcharges consumers while hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers struggle to pay their bills or even have their utilities shut off as a result. Energy is a human right and an absolute necessity. Hard working New Yorkers shouldn’t have to decide between a doctor’s visit or keeping the lights on.

With the worsening effects of climate change, summer heatwaves are becoming worse and more frequent, making summertime cooling essential for vulnerable populations. Due to the high cost of energy nearly 20% of New Yorkers who own air conditioners can’t afford to run them because of the financial burden to do so.

In the face of the climate crisis, Con Ed continues to perpetuate our state’s dependence on fossil fuels by advocating for infrastructure like gas pipelines that would increase the cost burden on New York consumers and fail to adequately address the peak energy demands of our state and city. They might claim this hike would fund clean energy investments but these are in bad faith as they continue to advocate for additional pipeline infrastructure that is unwarranted and unnecessary. It is abhorrent that Con Ed would dare to request a rate hike when failing to commit to transitioning away from fossil fuels completely, in accordance with our own state’s goals of being net zero by 2030.

30% of New Yorkers struggle to pay their energy bill and these rate hikes would only increase the cost for folks to stay cool in the summer, and warm in the winter. The proposed rate hikes for electric and gas would cost New Yorkers $30-$50 more per month and has drawn widespread criticism from elected officials across the board. That is why the New York Public Service Commission should outright reject the proposed rate hikes for electric and gas from Con Ed.

Ellenbogen Response

On October 28, 2025 2:34 PM Ellenbogen sent the following response:

You should get out of your ideological bubble and look at the math.  The rates in the downstate region are too high but your proposals will raise them faster.  I suggest that you read the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) 2025-2034 Comprehensive Reliability Plan.  It would be great to transition away from fossil fuels except the electricity doesn’t exist to do so and won’t exist for decades.  Figure 16 from that report is included below.  Everything below the black lines at “0” is a power failure and the margins will soon be supported by generation that is well past its usable life.  Good luck running a heat pump with no electricity. 

Source NYISO 2025-2034 Comprehensive Reliability Plan. 

Further, the downstate region is only 5% renewable.  That can be seen in the following pie chart from page 8 of the same document.  Con Ed’s reliability analysis stopped at their borders but what happens when the electricity isn’t there for Con Ed to supply?  The NYISO isn’t lying or exaggerating.   I was called anti-electrification by someone on this email distribution list but the reality is that you can’t electrify without having enough electricity.  This is quickly becoming a crisis that will result in loss of life.   What I am against is killing people to support a policy that won’t have any environmental benefits.

The next graph is one I did for engineers at NYSERDA in 2019 and updated in 2023.   Their engineers confirmed the numbers and the underlying math.   I haven’t recalculated the rates for 2025, but electricity costs have been rising faster than gas making the disparity even higher, so if you really want to bankrupt ratepayers have them install electric heat.  That’s why certain parties have been trying to get a special utility rate for heat pumps as part of this tariff hearing but those rates have to be subsidized by other ratepayers.  Once everyone is on the special rate, who will subsidize it?  And what about the rising costs for other ratepayers that have to pay the subsidies for a heating technology that doubles costs?  If you want to replace oil combustion with heat pumps, that will lower people’s bills and you wouldn’t even need subsidies, but replacing locations with gas will not lower bills or emissions.  

Another aspect of the New York transition is ignoring results elsewhere.  Ellenbogen explains the problem:

If your answer is to install more solar and wind to increase electrical output, Germany has been trying that for 35 years since 1990 and has reached 34% renewable generation with electric rates 2 – 3 times higher than France next door despite spending hundreds of billions of dollars attempting it.  They claim 42% but the last 8% is wood combustion with a higher carbon footprint than coal and far higher particulate emissions that cause respiratory diseases.   The same time frame of 35 years would take New York State to 2061 with still no viable solution installed.  If Germany is an example, the rates would be much higher than they are now.  I could explain why that is the case, but it would take another full email. 

The renewable technologies can help to lower CO2 emissions, but they don’t have the energy density or the reliability to fully support a modern society.  Germany has added gas generation recently because the renewables can’t generate enough electricity.  Further, the areas of NY State where there is room to install renewables are cloudy for a significant portion of the year and there is no existing storage technology that will carry energy for 6 months to heating season.  Even if it could be built, the cost would be trillions of dollars (Yes, Trillions).  The cost to install that storage technology would raise rates beyond anything we have seen to date.  The money must come from somewhere so the people of New York State will either pay it through their utility rates or their taxes.  Either way, it will make New York State less affordable.

There is another unacknowledged challenge for New York.  Our renewable energy resources are less than other jurisdictions.

Extreme cold kills a lot more people every year than extreme heat but ideology promoting solutions that won’t work is going to waste time and resources that could be applied to fixing things.  It will also raise utility rates with no climate benefit.  You can’t compare New York State to California, Australia, Texas, or the Iberian Peninsula.  Those are all warmer climates with a far superior renewable profile when compared to New York State so they have more efficient renewables and they don’t have nearly as large of a heating issue and in some cases, they have no heating issue which greatly reduces energy requirements.

Ellenbogen explains the basis for his claims.

And before someone tells me that I am inflammatory and unprofessional, keep in mind that I own two solar arrays, both installed in 2007, a home with the most efficient geo-thermal heat pump system in New York State,  and my factory recycles 99% of its waste byproducts and generates 80% of its electrical energy onsite with a carbon footprint 30% – 40% lower than the Con Ed system.  I have also driven a Tesla since 2017.  I have 47 years of experience with energy systems, and I have written papers for the Public Service Commission, one of which was used to initiate a utility conference on line loss.  As a result of that experience and training, I understand what works and what doesn’t because I understand the math and physics underlying the systems.  My factory’s utility bills in the Con Ed Service Area have gone down by 4% over the past two years while everyone else has had theirs increase by about 14% because I have applied that knowledge to implement solutions that will work.  Between October 2022 and October 2023, the factory’s utility bills were $69,999 and over the past twelve months through October 2025, they were $67,265.  That amounts to $1.20 per square foot for the 55,000 square foot facility or about one-third the energy costs of the average commercial/industrial facility in NY State.  Those are total energy costs for the facility and include both electricity and gas.

Ellenbogen concludes:

Ideology cannot supersede math, physics, or thermodynamics.  In the end, reality will always rear its ugly head because it doesn’t care what anyone has to say about the issue.  A failure to recognize that fact will reduce reliability and raise costs which is already happening across the state.

Final Comment

As shown in his response, Ellenbogen has the background and experience to build a low carbon system that works and knows what will not work.  He has shown that the current New York plan will not work.  I seriously doubt that people like Annie Pahlow will listen to his expertise until the blackouts he expects occur.  I give him an E for effort.