Recently, New York set a precedent by being the first state to relax a mandatory climate law enacted by its own legislature.
This decision was influenced by Governor Kathy Hochul, a moderate Democrat who has frequently expressed concerns that climate initiatives raise consumer costs. After extensive negotiations behind closed doors, the legislature agreed to modify the 2019 law in several ways, most significantly by extending the deadline for achieving mandated emissions reductions by ten years.
The initial law, recognized as one of the most ambitious in the U.S., mandated New York to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent by 2030, using 1990 emissions as a benchmark in line with United Nations standards. The law’s stringent accounting measures required the state to transition away from natural gas, which powers most of its electricity and heating.
However, as the decade progressed, New York struggled to reduce its reliance on natural gas. Opinions differ on the cause, with some attributing it to President Donald Trump’s resistance to renewable energy, while others believe state politicians prioritized natural gas over clean energy investments. Regardless of the cause, the state lagged significantly behind schedule, making it unlikely to meet the 2030 target without drastic measures such as taxing or banning fossil fuel use.
In addition to extending the 2030 deadline by a decade, the agreement will adjust the law’s accounting to place less emphasis on natural gas and will delay the implementation of a cap-and-trade system that would compel polluters to negotiate to remain under a fixed emissions cap. Hochul has justified these modifications as necessary to shield New Yorkers from climbing costs, citing Trump as a factor in the state’s sluggish progress. She cautioned that adhering to the law’s strict emissions targets—mandated by a court last year—would necessitate hefty pollution taxes, escalating utility and gasoline costs, and costing households thousands. The budget agreement also incorporates provisions to evaluate the financial impact of climate regulations on household budgets.
Proponents of the original climate legislation, including legislators and activists, contend that Hochul pushed through these changes without giving lawmakers the opportunity to discuss future climate strategies for the state.
“This was completely unexpected, and understanding what was happening proved challenging,” remarked Marcella Mitaynes, a progressive state assembly member who represents several working-class neighborhoods along Brooklyn’s waterfront.
Experts specializing in decarbonization in New York argue that the state’s legally binding emissions target had become nearly unattainable amid broader resistance to a national or global shift away from fossil fuels.
“Achieving the target was going to be extremely challenging, as the economy wasn’t cooperating,” noted Al McGartland, who served as the chief economist at the Environmental Protection Agency from 2005 to 2025. McGartland, a carbon tax expert, suggested that the law’s revision “isn’t entirely negative as it provides time to thoroughly consider and execute the process correctly.”
The most significant adjustment is the delay. The new budget targets a 60 percent reduction in state emissions by 2040, a goal that the governor’s office considers more realistic than the original 40 percent by 2030. It also postpones the launch of a “cap-and-invest” system, initially scheduled for last year, to 2028. This system would impose additional fees on polluters, such as power plants and oil terminals, directing the revenue to climate initiatives like electric vehicle chargers and heat pumps. While many climate experts view such systems as efficient in steering economies away from fossil fuels, Hochul became increasingly worried that the system would increase gas prices and utility bills, especially when many consumers are already burdened by fuel costs.
The agreement also revises two key aspects of how the state calculates emissions. Previously, New York had to include emissions from fossil fuel extraction processes in other states. For example, if a natural gas field in Pennsylvania released methane before transporting the gas to New York, the latter had to account for those emissions as its own, as well as those from burning the fuel for energy. Most states do not follow this practice. With this change, New York’s apparent emissions will decrease by about 15 percent overnight, as the state imports most of its natural gas.
This situation was exacerbated by the state’s previous accounting system, which gave extra importance to methane, the second most prevalent greenhouse gas after carbon. Methane warms the Earth approximately 80 times faster than carbon dioxide but dissipates from the atmosphere after about 20 years. While most countries assess greenhouse gas emissions over a 100-year horizon, New York’s 20-year perspective made methane appear more damaging relative to carbon.
The 20-year assessment favored certain polluting sectors while disadvantaging others. Under the new system, for instance, the warming impact assigned to the state’s livestock industry and landfills will reduce by two-thirds. Unlike the change for imported fuels, the shift to a 100-year framework can be seen as more climate-conscious: The 100-year framework aligns with the United Nations climate secretariat overseeing the Paris Agreement, and many climate scientists have criticized the 20-year framework for misrepresenting the true costs of warming. (In essence, prioritizing methane over carbon might limit short-term warming but cause greater long-term effects.)
Even with these adjustments, the state remains off course to meet its initial 2030 goal, mainly due to limited progress on major carbon sources: cars, power plants, and residential buildings.
Natural gas accounts for about 50 percent of the state’s electricity and heats nearly all large apartment buildings in New York City and its suburbs. To eliminate fossil fuels entirely, the state must convert all these buildings to electric systems like heat pumps and replace all its natural gas power plants with emissions-free sources such as wind and solar.
These are formidable tasks. Electrifying a region like New York is costly. Replacing gas boilers with electric heaters in century-old apartment buildings can cost tens of millions of dollars, leaving landlords struggling to find funds without financially straining tenants. The New York City Council enacted Local Law 97, mandating large buildings to make this transition by 2030 or face steep fines. Yet, some building owners argue that the fines might still be more affordable than converting systems.
The 2030 target remains a strong motivator for decarbonization, even if some buildings struggle to meet the deadline, according to John Foley, an executive vice president at First Service Project Management.
“While reaching the goals may be tough, they are crucial to have,” Foley said, whose company manages construction projects for numerous multifamily buildings. He noted that while advancements in heat pump technology have facilitated decarbonization for some buildings, achieving the Local Law 97 target will rely heavily on the state’s electrical grid.
“The solution seems to be leaning more towards electrification, and for electrification to be effective, energy production must be cleaner,” he added.
Replacing gas-fired power plants with clean electricity sources has also been challenging. A new transmission line bringing clean power from Canadian hydropower dams to New York City will be operational this month, despite delays caused by litigation and environmental approval processes. Two significant offshore wind farms, Empire Wind and Sunrise Wind, are also set to launch this year, despite efforts by the Trump administration to obstruct them. However, they will only replace a small portion of the state’s gas supply and will not provide substantial power during peak summer demand. (Coastal winds are typically weakest in summer when the oceans are warm and storms are few.) Furthermore, developers have shown limited interest in constructing more offshore wind farms due to opposition from Trump.
Some challenges, however, are self-inflicted. The state increased its electricity grid’s pollution levels when it closed the Indian Point nuclear power plant in 2011 over environmental concerns, leading to an increased reliance on imported gas to compensate for the loss.
In Brooklyn, where residents living near seasonal power plants suffer from asthma and respiratory issues, the complexity of this transition is evident. For nearly a decade, the state has attempted to shut down especially polluting “peaker” gas plants that operate during peak summer demand when other power sources are insufficient. Yet, even after the Hudson transmission line and Empire Wind become operational, the state’s independent grid operator predicts New York City could still need these peaker plants to avert blackouts by 2031.
“The essence of the climate law was to reinvest in our communities and counteract this legacy of pollution,” said Mitaynes, the Brooklyn assembly member representing residents near such peaker plants, including the Gowanus Generation Station. She noted that the delayed cap-and-trade system would have allocated 35 percent of its revenue to disadvantaged communities, potentially improving air quality and supporting the development of an offshore wind manufacturing site on the waterfront. “This law positioned us as pioneers, and [Hochul] has chosen to dismantle it,” she stated.
Hochul’s spokesperson, Ken Lovett, described the changes as “commonsense reforms” and affirmed the governor’s commitment to climate action.
“Governor Hochul has made it clear that her primary focus is maintaining power supply and controlling costs for all New Yorkers,” Lovett told Grist.
The state continues to invest in decarbonization: One agency is heavily investing in large batteries to store clean energy and partially replace natural gas, while another plans to purchase $100 million in new renewable energy this year. Additionally, the state budget has increased a tax credit for New York City landlords who electrify their buildings, and the budget deal boosts the share of future cap-and-trade revenues allocated to disadvantaged areas.
Despite these efforts, Hochul has shown limited interest in a comprehensive plan for phasing out gas. In fact, she seems to have concluded that gas will remain necessary for the foreseeable future. Last year, she approved water permits for a new Trump-backed pipeline project carrying natural gas from Pennsylvania to Queens. The pipeline approval was part of an agreement to shield the Empire Wind project from Trump’s intervention, although the Interior Department attempted to block Empire Wind a few months later regardless.
The new gas pipeline commenced construction in April at a Brooklyn ceremony attended by Trump administration officials: Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, and Environmental Protection Agency head Lee Zeldin. Hochul did not attend.
