Governor Hochul has proposed delaying implementation of the 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act for four years; it’s already two years behind. Delay puts-off implementing the state’s “cap and invest” program that would fine out-of-compliance polluters and generate billions to help residents reduce energy consumption, transition to cheaper clean energy, and assist the neediest families afford utility bills.
The Governor insists that enforcing emission regulations right now will cost residents too much money; not mentioned is that electricity costs are going through the roof regardless of clean energy mandates. Average electric bills are expected to increase by 50-90% over the next 15-20 years because the electrical grid is old and needs to be upgraded; because climate change is causing more frequent heat spikes that increase demand for electricity to cool buildings; and, because of huge electricity and transmission needs for AI data centers and micro-chip manufacturing.
A big question is who can, and who can’t, afford to pay for upgrading the grid and new energy generation? The cost of electricity has already been rising rapidly. In New York City average electric bills rose over 45% from 2019 to 2024. Last summer average summer electric bills rose by nearly 10%, up to $747 per household. These energy burdens are not equitable. Low-income, especially Black and Latino, households tend to live in older and more poorly insulated buildings and pay more than others per square foot for heating and cooling. It’s no wonder that many can’t afford to keep their lights on. Con Ed disconnected 88,000 households in New York City and Westchester for non-payment in the first half of 2025 alone; this year will be worse. Without a dramatically new and accelerated approach, electricity will become entirely unaffordable for increasing numbers of New Yorkers.
What can the State and City do to keep down the cost of electricity? Lots of things. They can help residents use less electricity by aggressively funding programs to retrofit drafty old buildings so that it costs less to heat and cool them. They can use public land to build industrial-sized geothermal plants–using constant underground temperature (around 50 degrees) for heating in the winter and cooling in the summer. They can ramp up installing solar panels on rooftops all over. Ironically, wealthy households are more likely to do all these things for their own properties and avoid rising electricity fees, leaving lower-income people to pay for upgrading the grid.
The State and City could take additional quick actions to bring down electricity costs. New York City already subsidizes big batteries for large manufacturers so that they can purchase electricity during off-peak hours (at night) when prices for electricity are far cheaper. During the day, the companies draw electricity from the batteries which both eases pressure on the grid and saves the companies money. Why not do the same thing for low-income communities?
Government could also help organize communities to get paid by utilities for better managing their collective use of electricity. When large numbers of residents install “smart” internet-connected thermostats that allow utilities to raise the temperature in their building a few degrees during peak hours on a hot day, it reduces demand for electricity and the utility’s need to bring online outdated, dirty, and expensive power plants just to avoid blackouts. Such community-utility compacts are called “Virtual Power Plants” (VPPs) because they can eliminate the need for additional actual power plants. Utilities will pay ratepayers for VPP compacts because it saves money, maintaining backup power plants costs about $500 million/year in New York City alone. Seeing a business opportunity, Google, which manufactures a type of smart thermostat, is one of several companies setting up VPPs among their own customers. The State and City could help residents negotiate good transparent deals with these private VPPs. Even better, government could help set up community-owned VPPs that don’t have to share benefits with private company investors.
VPPs can also give the grid some needed breathing space, spreading the cost for grid upgrading over a longer period. Although grid operators are warning that the grid is nearly “at capacity,” this is only the case on exceptionally hot and cold days. These peak periods average less than a few days per year, the rest of the time energy demand takes up far less of the grid’s capacity. VPPs reduce the risk of grid overload (blackouts) during these peak periods and mitigate the capacity crisis.
While New York is moving more quickly than many other states on clean energy, this is a very low bar. Clean energy programs are moving too slowly to hold down escalating electric bills. A new clean energy infrastructure will cost money, but it will cost less than new gas and nuclear power plants over time. Moreover, it’s hard to imagine a better investment for worker pension funds than clean energy programs that reduce energy consumption, purchase energy when it’s cheaper, and enable the use of nature (sunlight, wind, or the inner Earth) to bring down energy costs. On top of that, a vigorous clean energy transition program would create an estimated 300,000 good blue-collar union jobs in the state while reducing billions in healthcare costs from respiratory illnesses like asthma. Green jobs can be a way out of poverty for lots of young people. Clean energy creates hope for the future. Delay kills it.
J. Phillip Thompson is Professor of Urban Planning and Politics at MIT and former Deputy Mayor in the De Blasio Administration. The views expressed in this column are solely those of the writer. The Urban Agenda is available on CSS’s website: www.cssny.org