NYPIRG’s Post

Climate superfund bills are gaining traction in state legislatures across the country. How do they fit into the broader movement to hold Big Oil accountable? Legal experts and the bills' advocates give their take: https://lnkd.in/gFxWdV3t

Go Vermont, Go 👏🙏💪 https://lnkd.in/ehSfs4-X The hard fights start now, with 30 lawsuits in the US alone to make Big Oil pay: https://lnkd.in/ezK-FZvb Part of the wider Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) approach to addressing climate change: https://lnkd.in/etpfgKpX Crossing fingers that EU states will join the fight: https://lnkd.in/eZSeTbyu

The Climate Change Superfund Act is having a moment in the spotlight now that a similar law passed both houses in Vermont‘s legislature, mounting the pressure on lawmakers to get New York’s version across the finish line. The bill applies the “polluters pay” principle to climate change: if a company spills oil and pollutes a river, it’s required to pay for the clean up. The legislation proposes the same for those that wrecked the atmosphere and contributed to climate change. https://lnkd.in/etkTWF8j

As we finish #BS4CL asking “who pays for for the climate transition” Vermont has passed the Climate Superfund Act, requiring major fossil fuel companies to pay for climate damages based on their emissions from 1995 to 2024. This bill, supported across party lines, mandates contributions to a fund for disaster recovery and climate resilience efforts. Despite expected legal challenges and a potential veto from Governor Phil Scott, the legislature's strong support suggests it could become law, setting a precedent. More to come? #imdimpact https://lnkd.in/eypBB9Eb

The Mass. legislature is on the verge of passing a major climate bill—but time is running out. This bill would streamline clean energy development in Massachusetts while protecting forests, farms, and environmental justice communities. Right now, the House and Senate conference committee is at an impasse, putting this critical climate bill at risk. In less than 48 hours, they must get a final version to Governor Healey’s desk, or we’ll have to wait another session before accelerating clean energy in Massachusetts. Climate change isn’t waiting, so neither can we. Help get this crucial bill across the finish line by sending an email to House and Senate leadership today: https://bit.ly/46nDmZ6 

Read the story at KQED Public Radio, “Proposition 4: California Approves $10 Billion Climate Bond,” by Ezra David Romero—November 6, 2024. “Californians overwhelmingly supported Proposition 4, a $10 billion climate bond to help the state prepare and adapt for the impacts of climate change. With more than half the votes counted, nearly 58% of votes favored the bond…. Proponents of the environmental bond, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, argued over the course of the campaign that it could prevent billions of dollars in damages from extreme storms, wildfires, drought, and rising sea levels... ‘With so much at stake, we’re eager to see a positive result that enables California to lead on climate action and secure a greener, more equitable future for our communities,’ said Mike Young, senior political and organizing director with California Environmental Voters… Lawmakers ultimately crafted a measure that funds work in eight key areas: water, wildfires, coastal resilience, nature-based solutions, clean air, outdoor access, extreme heat and climate-smart working lands. The bond also sets aside $475 million for offshore wind. ‘It prioritizes and enables robust, decisive action to advance our climate goals and enhance community resilience against climate impacts,’ said state Senate Majority Leader Lena Gonzalez (D-Long Beach)…”  See the full story below and at this link. https://lnkd.in/gdjTawVG #offshorewind #floatingwind #cleanenergy #renewables #climate #offshorewindca #pacificoffshorewindsummit

NYPIRG On Passage Of Climate Superfund Act: Listen to NYPIRG Environmental Policy Director Anne Rabe discuss how the bill passed and what steps are needed to convince Governor Hochul to sign it. https://lnkd.in/eT2ZnsG6

Bad news good news for climate in New England. Let's get the bad news out of the way. Despite the efforts of Elizabeth Turnbull Henry, her team at Environmental League of Massachusetts (ELM) and countless others, the Massachusetts legislature was not able to pass the omnibus climate bill last week https://lnkd.in/eXJwMpds. If we are going to move the needle on our climate transition, and we expect Massachusetts to be a leader on global climate, we need to pass bills like these. On the good news front, I learned this week about how Massachusetts and other New England states (Power Up New England) were able to secure federal funding through the 2021 bipartisan Infrastructure Act to improve the technical capacity for offshore wind development. This follows the news last month where a New England coalition of states secured funding through the EPA to deploy more heat pumps in the region. https://lnkd.in/ep8_Btr9 I think the lesson here is that it's going to take a collective effort (where we share the costs, risks and benefits) to take meaningful action on our transition for climate adaptation.

The climate revolution will not be televised - it will be fought in courts all over the US. Local, state, federal - new jurisprudence is being created to help fight for the planet and the future. #climatejustice

As we have discussed previously, New York is engaged in one of the nation’s most ambitious efforts to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as required by the 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act. One way the State plans to do this is through an economywide New York Cap-and-Invest program (NYCI) that will set a declining cap on the amount of GHG emissions in the state. The stated goal of NYCI is to incentivize residents and businesses to transition to lower-carbon alternatives by applying a price to the amount of GHG emissions. It is anticipated that large-scale GHG emissions sources and distributors of heating and transportation fuels will be required to purchase or obtain allowances for the emissions associated with their activities. So, gasoline distributors will need to raise prices at the pump to accommodate fees, and utilities, like National Fuel, will need to collect fees from customers and remit them to the state. These fees will then be used to fund New York’s energy transformation. Ultimately, NYCI would impose significant costs all around. A POLITICO article, linked below, states, “the potential added cost for a gallon of gas under the program, for example, would range between 18 cents on the low end and 30 cents on the high end in 2025, according to an analysis by POLITICO. In 2027, that could rise to between 33 cents and 70 cents.” Noting “significant potential cost[s] for consumers,” the article highlights concerns raised by business groups who estimate NYCI could cost New Yorkers “up to $12 billion a year.” As the future of NYCI continues to be debated in Albany, cost concerns for New Yorkers have repeatedly become part of the conversation. Most recently, Gov. Hochul suspended a congestion pricing program citing concerns about costs. POLITICO quotes Michael Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, on the issue, who concludes that the governor's suspension of the congestion pricing program "sends a signal that [she] won't support measures that cost people money, and 'cap and invest' will inevitably cost a lot of people a fair amount of money.” Given these cost concerns, development of an economy-wide cap-and-invest program like NYCI should be pursued with the utmost caution and, if implemented, should be done in a careful, measured manner with sufficient flexibility. A poorly designed, overly aggressive program could impose unsustainable costs on residents and businesses and disproportionately burden certain parts of the state, including Western New York which has a greater reliance on heating and transportation fuels than other regions. Establishing such a program to generate monies to fund the state’s energy transformation could do more harm than good if it results in greater financial burdens on some residents and emissions and economic leakage as businesses are driven from the state. Learn more about NYCI and its implications here: https://ow.ly/xRug50Sm2Mj