Kathy Hochul Faces Reality: Voters Are Not Going to Be Mollified by Climate Slogans As Green Energy Costs Explode

Guest Post by Roger Caiazza of Pragmatic Environmentalist of New York.

Recently I described the status of the New York Cap-and-Invest Program(NYCI) and reactions to the decision to delay its implementation. In the 2025 State of the State address Governor Kathy Hochul announced a $1 billion climate investment. This post describes the references to climate in the FY2026 NYS Executive Budget Book that described Hochul’s budget for the next fiscal year.

The look on a New Yorker’s face as he realizes where electricity costs are headed under Kathy Hochul’s plans to fight climate change

Stopgap Climate Funding

According to a Perplexity AI search: Governor Hochul announced a $1 billion climate investment as part of her 2025 State of the State address. This investment, described as the single largest climate investment in New York’s history, aims to address the climate crisis and achieve a more sustainable and affordable future for the state. The $1 billion funding package includes:

• Retrofitting homes and incentivizing heat pump installations

• Building sustainable energy networks, including thermal energy upgrades at SUNY campuses

• Expanding green transportation options

• Supporting businesses in their decarbonization efforts

I concluded in the previous articles about NYCI that the costs were incompatible with the political narrative that Governor Hochul is concerned about affordability. At the Energy Access and Equity Research webinar sponsored by the NYU Institute for Policy Integrity on May 13, 2024 Jonathan Binder stated that the New York Cap and Invest Program would generate proceeds of “between $6 and $12 billion per year” by 2030. That certainly would have increased costs for New Yorkers but it also was a primary source of revenue for the emission reduction strategies necessary to meet Climate Act targets.

Colin Kinniburgh’s description in a recent article in New York Focus described the last-minute decision to delay NYCI implementation. Kinniburgh described the reaction of the environmental justice community:

It is not clear where that funding would come from — whether it would be new or “cannibalizing other existing funding sources,” in the words of Stephan Edel, executive director of the climate justice coalition NY Renews.

Even if it is entirely new funding, $1 billion would be considerably less than the $3 billion or more the state had expected to raise in the first year of the cap and invest program.

“We don’t want a band-aid solution here,” Courtin said. “We need a long-term, sustainable funding solution.”

He noted that Hochul explained that more data was necessary to design the program well. “I’m not walking back on all of our commitments… I’m not letting these projects go unfunded,” Hochul said, referring to the stopgap $1 billion in climate funding she announced on Tuesday.

Fiscal Year 2026 Executive Budget

The press release for Governor Hochul’s executive budget was captioned “More money in your pocket”. There are specific recommendations in the FY2026 NYS Executive Budget Book (Budget Book) for programs including the $1 billion in climate funding. Given the dynamic between Hochul and the environmental organizations upset at the pause in NYCI I searched the Budget Book for the work climate to see how she planned to appease them. The complete search is at the end of this article. Here are some highlights.

The Hochul Administration continues to invoke the existential threat of climate change as a driver for budget planning. They do not understand the difference between weather and climate. They attribute every extreme weather event to climate change with the implication that reducing emissions will alleviate those weather conditions. Climate change was listed as a financial risk in several places.

The Budget Book also claims that New York is “leading the nation:

From the beginning of her administration, Governor Hochul has made it clear that responding to climate change remains a top priority for New York State. Acknowledging that the cost of inaction greatly outweighs the cost of any actions we can take together, New York will continue to pursue an aggressive agenda in transitioning to a sustainable green energy economy, in a way that is both environmentally effective and economically affordable for all New Yorkers.

The slogan that the costs of inaction are greater than the costs of action has been the mantra of the Administration regarding costs. However, that statement is misleading and inaccurate as I documented in my verbal comments and in my written comments on the Draft Scoping Plan. I described the machinations based on reality used to mislead and harm New York as a shell game in a summary post.

In brief, one reason that this claim is a shell game is that the cost estimate everyone wants to know is how much it is going to cost to achieve all the New York “Net Zero” targets (85% reduction in GHG emissions and 15% offset of emissions) by 2050 and all the other mandates in the Climate Act.

The Scoping Plan cost estimates only include a subset of the total costs by excluding costs of programs that are needed to meet the Climate Act targets but were implemented before the Climate Act was passed. The argument is that the “already implemented” projects were not mandated by the Climate Act itself so they are not included.

This is a political document, so it is not surprising that the Budget Book bragged that:

Governor Hochul is directing New York to embark on the single-largest climate investment in the history of the state budget, directing over $1 billion in new funding towards achieving a more sustainable future. This landmark investment will generate new jobs, help reduce household energy bills, and cut down on harmful pollution and its impacts on our families.

What is missing is the specifics about the expenditures. The $1 billion is intended to “reduce the State’s carbon emissions by building out thermal energy networks at SUNY campuses, making clean energy investments in State-owned buildings, retrofitting homes and incentivizing the installation of heat pumps, expanding green transportation options across the State, and supporting businesses of all sizes in their decarbonization journey.”

I asked Perplexity AI how many buildings does New York State own. The response said it was not possible to provide an exact number but noted that the Office of General Services manages 22 state office facilities. A quick check indicates that the NYSERDA office building is not listed so I believe that the buildings used by the various state authorities are not included.

There are 64 SUNY campuses. I went to school at one and it had a thermal energy system. I suspect that is the rule and not the exception. Presumably the plan is to convert all those systems to zero carbon emissions. In round numbers there are 100 buildings and campuses operated by New York State. I would not be surprised if the average price to convert is at least $10 million. To convert them all would cost a billion dollars.

The bottom line is that the one billion dollars is just a fraction of the amount needed to reduce carbon emissions as needed to meet the Climate Act targets.

Discussion

The Climate Act requires the State to invest or direct resources in a manner designed to ensure that disadvantaged communities receive at least 35 percent, with the goal of at least 40 percent, of overall benefits of spending. Last year’s NYCI proposal included carveouts from the proceeds for this mandate.

Hochul is being pilloried for delaying implementation of NYCI and the distribution of these funds. The Climate Justice Working Group has” had an important advisory role in the Climate Action Council process, providing strategic advice for incorporating the needs of disadvantaged communities in the Scoping Plan.”

That process is in disarray. I have been told that there was a working group meeting recently but could not find any announcement for the meeting or other descriptive documentation. I also found out that three prominent members of the Working Group resignedbecause Governor Hochul was not moving ahead fast enough.

Against that backdrop Hochul’s announcement of the $1 billion, the single-largest climate investment in the history of the state budget, appears to be a bid to maintain her credibility with the environmental justice political constituency. In my opinion, this demographic will never be happy.

The leaders of the movement require a problem for their business model to succeed. They never can admit that the problem is solved or even progressing satisfactorily because then the reason for their organization to exist disappears.

Keep in mind that a common recommendation in all the funding proposals is for local control of how the proceeds will be invested and who better to provide that expertise than the members of the Climate Justice Working Group.

Conclusion

Reality bats last. The reality that the Climate Act transition has affordability and reliability issues can no longer be ignored by Progressive Democrats.

I believe that they are insurmountable issues, but it is now apparent that even Governor Hochul has recognized that costs are an issue. The slogan that the costs of inaction are more than the costs of action does not resonate as it becomes obvious that the costs to New Yorkers are real and significant.

When the public figures out that the benefits are biased and mostly imaginary, the illusion will be completely shattered. Hochul’s re-election campaign is coming to grips with the reality that voters are not going to be mollified by any political slogan. Stay tuned.

#Caiazza #Climate #Hochul #GlobalWarming #ClimateAct #Wind #Solar #NewYork #ClimateJustice #NYCI

Roger Caiazza blogs on New York energy and environmental issues at Pragmatic Environmentalist of New York.  This post represents his opinion alone and not the opinion of his previous employers or any other company with which he has been associated. Roger has followed the Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (Climate Act) since it was first proposed, submitted comments on the Climate Act implementation plan, and has written over 490 articles about New York’s net-zero transition.