Agriculture and New York’s Energy Transition
Climate change, and the energy transition needed to combat it, affect us all. Agriculture is intimately entwined with the issues of both climate change and this energy transition, and not just because everyone is part of the agriculture system (we all have to eat). Agriculture as an industry has been, and will be, particularly hard hit by climate change. Agriculture contributes to climate change. And the industry will be heavily impacted by the energy transition, both the regulation and the need for land to support the expansion of renewable infrastructure. A recent article from Newsday (Hochul, NYS Legislature deciding who will pay for climate change transition April 1, 2024) does not specifically mention the agriculture sector, but the subjects raised in the article do have implications for the industry.
The article spotlights a serious debate currently raging over who should pay the cost of the transition to a renewable energy system and economy: the state (taxpayers), ratepayers, or fossil fuel-based energy companies? As we wait for New York State’s budget (which is, alas, late again this year - though with the promise of some serious housing policy), two legislative bills are being debated by advocates: the NY HEAT (New York Home Energy Affordable Transition) Act and the Climate Change Superfund Act.
The NY HEAT Act:
Ratepayers and energy companies would share some of the cost, with an option for the state to provide tax credits to subsidize utility bills.
The bill caps utility bills to no more than 6% of a household’s income. This cap primarily benefits lower income households, who pay a disproportionately high percent of their incomes to energy currently. Republican state lawmakers argue that a 6% cap will shift the absolute dollar contribution on energy to the middle and upper class, to which I say… that’s flat taxation, and that feels fair to me. Without a cap on utility bills, energy companies have no incentive not to pass the cost of the energy transition to customers, and these are the energy companies who bear serious responsibility for our current climate crisis.
The bill also ends the 100-foot rule, a law that mandates the construction of gas lines on all new buildings. Ending this rule will save energy companies an estimated $200 million a year, and there is also some poetic justice here. The original 100-foot rule was enacted to encourage moving to natural gas as an alternative to dirtier coal energy. As we transition to cleaner energy once again, it only makes sense that this rule should be revisited.
The Climate Change Superfund Act:
International oil and gas companies would be charged with the full cost of the transition as the price to pay to do business in New York State. According to the Newsday article, the bill was inspired by the Superfund federal and state pollution laws from the 1980s that make polluters pay for industrial clean ups. The challenge with this approach is the risk that these companies would still find ways to pass the cost to customers in the end - higher costs generally demand commensurate adjustments in revenue to offset. Look at the hotly contested rate cases happening currently around New York. Traditional energy providers, like National Grid, are petitioning the state to increase customer rates - significantly - largely to accommodate repairs on existing fossil fuel infrastructure.
This is relevant to the agriculture industry in many ways, and I’ll highlight a couple.
First, the agriculture industry, especially the local production sector, still depends on heavy machinery which largely, or exclusively, operates on fossil fuels. Suitable, cost-effective replacements for tractors, combines, and other equipment has yet to be developed. Increased costs on traditional fossil fuels will increase costs to farmers unless significant investments are made to incentivize the development of the agricultural tools of the future. I don’t see a politically feasible path that involves creating long-term fossil fuel exceptions for farmers and other components of the agriculture industry in New York, because the same argument could be made for almost any industry. Mass exceptions will not get us to a livable future, and in an industry as innovative as agriculture, I would expect to see promising new technologies with the right incentives from the state.
Second, the push for renewables in New York stems from the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) which mandates a rapid energy transition for the state. Meeting the CLCPA’s goals necessitates converting significant amounts of New York land to wind and solar energy generation. I speak at length about these goals and the state’s process to achieve these goals in this report. Agricultural land is ideal for solar development, specifically: it is flat, usually has good drainage, is close to existing power lines and roads, and is typically sunny. There are pros and cons to bringing solar to agriculture country in New York, many of which I review in the report linked above. But a specific note of caution: reckless solar development has the potential to decimate agricultural communities which are already suffering losses at the hands of consolidation and commoditization of the agricultural economy. When a community loses a critical mass of farmers, so, too, can they lose the farm supply store, the tractor repair shop, and emotional support for the farmers who remain. Regardless of who pays for the energy transition, the transition itself must also be just: the communities impacted by solar and wind development must be consulted or risk leaving behind a social legacy perhaps as bad as the legacy left by oil and gas extraction in our rural areas.
All of this said, the transition to renewables must happen, it must happen in New York, and it must happen soon. The Newsday article quotes State Senate Finance Chair, Senator Liz Kreuger: “Saying it’s too early is a little bit like closing your eyes and hoping everything you know about climate change isn’t happening,” Krueger said. “We have to move forward. We can pretend we don’t need to do these things, but we do.” The ask is to ensure that the full cost of the energy transition includes the incentives necessary to creating the tools for a new economy to run on the renewable energy that results.
For more information on organizations actively fighting to democratize the energy transition:
Public Power NY and the fight to pass the Build Public Renewables Act: https://publicpowerny.org/about/
The Sane Energy Project: https://www.saneenergy.org/
Find your local group through the Energy Democracy NY coalition: https://energydemocracyny.org/
All images from the USDA’s Flickr account.