Post

Hi Bluesky! We're a nonprofit think tank that uses data science to shed light on state climate policies. Our newest report, on NY’s planned Cap & Invest program, was commissioned by @earthjustice.bsky.social, @envdefensefund.bsky.social, and We Act. Let's dig into the findings, and please AMA! 1/14

Under C&I, pollution is no longer free: polluters must buy permits—"allowances", in the jargon—for each ton of greenhouse gas they emit. This raises the $ of fossil fuels, which incentivizes households & businesses to cut emissions, whether by using fewer ff's, or by switching to clean energy. 2/14

Using data from @nyserda.bsky.social, we looked at two different scenarios: one with high allowance prices, and one with low ones (first chart). Because polluters must buy these allowances from the state, that creates revenue the state can spend on decarb or return to consumers (second chart). 3/14

What kinds of savings are we talking about? Depends on the home, of course, but the median household would save an average of $54 a month, or $648 a year. Under higher allowance prices, savings go up: to $804/yr under the low price scenario, $1020 under the high. 5/14

Why does that happen? The higher the allowance price, the higher the cost of heating your home w/ fossil fuels. But electricity prices would not rise, even though NY’s grid is only ~50% clean, because the sector would likely be exempt, as it already participates in multi-state C&I system RGGI. 6/14

Okay, so those are the savings if people switch to heat pumps & in many cases weatherize. Where does C&I revenue come in? Our report models what would happen if the state used 1/4 of it to offer generous incentives, so everyone can afford these upgrades when their current heating system dies. 7/14