Environmental groups were disappointed after the legislative session in Albany failed to enact measures that would reduce trash and climate emissions. But some progress was made to protect water and air quality, as well as advance renewable energy.
On the plus side, according to Environmental Advocates of New York, state lawmakers agreed to make investments that will have long-term benefits for the climate and for water quality.
The Environmental Protection Fund was renewed at a level that Deputy Executive Director Katherine Nadeau said will make significant progress, “a historic year with $425 million which funds essential services across the state from solid waste recycling to climate resilient farming to land acquisition, things that are within our land and climate goals. So, we’re excited to see that level of funding maintained.”
State leaders also agreed to invest $525 million into improving drinking water and sewage systems. Water Protection Manager Rob Hayes says that will have real impacts.
“I bet all of you over the past winter had a water main break in your community or got an indication that there was a sewage overflow in your local creek or lake. This funding helps prevent exactly those types of threats by getting local governments the resources to upgrade our aging and failing water infrastructure,” said Hayes.
Hayes added that the state has now spent more than $6 billion dollars on water systems in the last five years.
Environmental Advocates’ Claire Walsh Winsler said myriad concerns from residents were addressed in a data center moratorium, such as, “My water quality is being affected; the noise is up; my energy bills are going up because the data centers are making the costs rise.” She noted there were few answers to such questions, “So, what made the most sense was a moratorium on citing and new data center facilities in New York State.”
That moratorium passed both houses but has not been signed yet by Governor Kathy Hochul.
Finally, while solar and wind power face opposition from Washington, passage of the SUNNY act was considered a win. It will allow people to use plug-in solar units, called balcony solar, to get power anywhere they can harvest the sunshine.
At the same time, environmental groups had their eyes on several bills to protect public health and the planet but were disappointed where their advocacy fell short.
Perhaps the developments that drew the loudest outcry were changes to the state’s climate law, the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, CLCPA. A key shift stopped the monitoring for fossil fuels used here but sourced elsewhere.
Nadeau explained how changes were made from a 2019 law, “we were responsible not only for our emissions here, but also those tied to fossil fuels that came into our state.” Now the impacts of those gas and oil supplies would not be counted as part of the state’s carbon footprint, which she said weakens the law.
She added another change in greenhouse gas monitoring hides the impacts of methane on our climate. And, she noted, targets for renewable energy growth and fossil fuel reductions, became just goals instead of mandates.
Also left on the table – or in our trash cans – was a failure to pass the Packaging Reduction and Recycling act. Environmental Advocates’ Claire Walsh Winsler said the bill known as PRRIA fell short.
“This is a bill that would reduce the overall amount of trash but also reduce the toxic chemicals in our packaging as well. Unfortunately, we did not see PRRIA move in the assembly; it did pass in the senate. And we will be back to fight the big, massive load on our environment,” Winsler said.
The measure would also have required producers of packaging to reduce it, and to pay to help dispose or recycle it.
Environmentalists further lamented inaction on bills that would have outlawed PFAS chemicals, linked to cancer and illness.
Drinking Water Protection Director Rob Hayes says bills to prohibit them from cosmetic products and a range of household items, failed to come to a vote.
“PFAS are so ubiquitous, the problem is so multi-faceted that you have to be addressing the contamination that’s already happened and taking action to prevent further contamination, because these chemicals are still being put in products.”
A measure did pass the legislature to maintain low limits for PFAS in drinking water, but the bans on the so-called “forever chemicals” in products did not.
These failed measures are not dead, say advocates, who plan to fight for their passage next legislative session.
