Don’t stake New York’s future on just one climate solution

The New York State Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act was signed into law in July 2019 as one of the most ambitious climate laws in

Brian Sano is National Grid’s director of gas field operations for eastern New York. the world. It requires a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of 40 percent by 2030 and 85 percent by 2050. The law also created the Climate Action Council to develop and implement the plan. A public comment period is about to end, and the outcome will affect every person in the state — but unfortunately, many are unaware of it.

The plan leans heavily towards electricity as a solution, while shifting away from using natural gas as early as 2024 — which is not required by the CLCPA. It’s undebatable that solving climate change will require sweeping emission reductions, but the suggested path has us going in the wrong direction and leaves unanswered questions like: How will we achieve these reductions while maintaining safe, reliable, and affordable energy and while protecting the state’s economy?

As a homeowner and father of three children, I do not take the mission of achieving a greener future lightly. I want to make sure we are making smart decisions when deciding how to get there.

Over the past 22 years, in my roles as a front-line union worker (represented by IBEW Local 97) performing gas and electric work or through the many leadership roles I have held, I have had a front-row seat to one of the most aggressive Leak Prone Pipe Replacement and System Reinforcement programs in the coun

try. This involves upwards of 50 miles of pipe replacement each year in National Grid’s upstate New York territory, with over 85 percent of the distribution system already complete.

The state’s plan is essentially abandoning the natural gas assets that customers have invested in and shifting to an unbalanced energy policy that relies solely on electric. For those who might suggest that my perspective is seen only through a gas lens, I entered the energy industry after receiving a degree in electrical construction, so I’m familiar with the amount of resources and investments that will be required to ensure the electric system can handle the increased demand.

Increased electrification will certainly play a crucial role in meeting our climate goals, but the challenge in front of us requires a range of solutions that are practical, realistic, and cost-effective.

National Grid recently launched a vision (nationalgrid.com/fossilfree) to eliminate fossil fuels from our energy networks, which can achieve the CLCPA’S goals on time in an affordable and reliable way that preserves customer choice and does not place the state’s future in the hands of a single solution. There is broad support for this plan among labor unions, civic organizations, trade groups, customers, academics, scientists, and elected leaders.

We have an opportunity to expand the use of fossil-free fuels rather than retire gas lines and force customers to buy new heating and cooking appliances. It is risky to commit to a single approach that ignores other viable options. A coordinated gas and electric strategy allows for a cleanenergy transition while helping to minimize the affordability and customer adoption challenges that will no doubt emerge.

Opinions vary widely when it comes to the path forward for our low-carbon future. This isn’t a bad thing, as diverse opinions often lead to better outcomes. However, those advocating for a single approach aren’t charged with delivering safe, reliable and affordable energy to customers. I believe that the best outcome is to include a hybrid approach. We all have a stake in the success of decarbonization. Let’s get it right.