Utility companies are sounding the alarm in the Northeast, as a history of state energy policies have over-prioritized sustainability and ignored economic impact.
Consolidated Edison Inc’s (ConEd) new plan for the New York City area to raise electricity costs by more than eleven percent next year has consumers understandably panicked, but blame shouldn’t only be on their shoulders.
ConEd’s reasoning behind the price hike is not an individual business decision, rather it is a response to New York’s aggressive climate policies. ConEd has made it clear rising electricity costs are not the company’s fault nor are they the fault of other companies involved in providing essential energy to consumers. Rather, the situation is a direct consequence of New York policymakers’ decisions, with no regard as to the impact on residents and businesses.
The utility has said its business plans have followed New York’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, an overly ambitious climate plan that sets the target of one hundred percent zero-emission electricity by 2040. With lofty climate goals that require large investments, companies like ConEd are forced to place part of the burden on consumers, which is exactly what is playing out in New York City.
Consumers’ anger over the price hike may force ConEd to trim its budget, and it is no surprise what cost expenditure will be cut first. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Nikki Hsu explains:
“Green spending probably will be the first one to go. That’s the only thing in the toolbox.”
At Reuters Global Energy Transition 2025 Conference, ConEd’s Chief Executive Office Tim Cawley admitted there is a clear connection between a push towards sustainability and an increase in consumer burden:
“A number of our customers are on lower income or moderate income and it is a heavier burden for them, particularly as we’re investing more toward resiliency and clean and reliability.”
Regional Attacks on U.S. Energy
New York’s misguided 2040 climate plan is far from the state’s first reckless action against U.S. energy companies.
As Energy in Depth has previously analyzed, the state has long pursued policies to limit the supply of affordable, reliable natural gas in the region with restrictive actions like pipeline blockades and rejections of environmental permits.
Additionally, the state has a long record of pursuing litigation against energy companies, yet another action attempting to punish and restrict energy companies, with no thought for the economic implications.
New York’s anti-energy policies and high costs are reflective of the wider region’s policy decisions that have restricted energy companies from meeting increased demand in constrained markets throughout the Northeast.
Energy project after energy project has been delayed or cancelled in the region. With no pipelines to bring affordable natural gas to consumers, it is no surprise costs skyrocket.
Nationwide electricity costs have risen by over five percent over the past year, but those prices are regional, and no region is facing higher prices than the Northeast. The majority of the region’s states comprise the top 10 most expensive average electricity rates for states, with Connecticut facing the third highest electricity rates in the country. High costs like this don’t happen overnight, rather they are the result of years of poor policy decisions.
New Jersey and Pennsylvania are two other Northeast region states that exemplify the consequences of state policies have made it nearly impossible to build sufficient dispatchable generation, Todd Snitchler, President and CEO of the Electric Power Supply Association explained:
“But the problem goes deeper. Some New Jersey legislators continue to work to make sure that no new dispatchable generation can be built in state, no matter how badly it is needed. Just two years ago, the state actively fought against bringing in more natural gas — arguing that it wasn’t necessary…New Jersey still serves as a potent warning of how bad policy choices can mean higher electric bills for everyone.” [emphasis added]
New York Attempts to Pivot to Affordability
With consumers struggling with affordability, New York policymakers, particularly Governor Kathy Hochul, have been forced to pivot from their over-ambitious climate policies and finally stop ignoring economic feasibility.
Still, this shift l stands in sharp contrast to Hochul’s historic anti-energy decisions, including denying gas permit plants and calling for aggressive natural gas bans. Finally, it seems New York is paying attention to a key piece of energy policy—affordability.
NYSERDA President and CEO Doreen Harris emphasized the need for New York to support various energy sources, including natural gas:
“All major fuels used today in New York will continue to contribute … so we need to continue to invest in all fuel systems, particularly to meet peak day needs.”
Let’s be clear: Gov. Hochul’s attitude shift is not enough. Her openness must be backed by policies that prioritize affordability and reliability, including investing in natural gas infrastructure, streamlining permitting, and allowing new regional gas pipelines.
Bottom line: The Northeast region’s current electricity crisis emphasizes the consequences of policymakers continuously prioritizing sustainability over affordability, climate goals over consumer concerns, and politics over economics. If lawmakers want to fix these issues, they need to stop attacking energy companies and instead ensure policies support providing affordable, reliable energy like natural gas to all consumers.
The post New York Ignores Consumer Costs for Climate Goals—And Pays the Price appeared first on .
This post appeared first on Energy In Depth.
