State plan to make polluters pay must be fair

As the Department of Environmental Conservation and New York State Energy Research and Development Authority develop the state’s pollution-pricing program due by year's end, some Long Island communities are overburdened with air pollution from fossil fuels, which causes chronic illnesses like asthma and cancer. But we have yet to hold the biggest culprits accountable. From Island Park to Montauk, the region is home to more than 30 power plants and garbage-burning facilities. For too long, these polluters have operated without accountability for the damage they’ve caused our planet and our people. But now we have the chance to change that.

As a part of our state’s ambitious climate change law, New York is developing a “cap-trade-and-invest” program — a set of policies that limit pollution emissions. The new policy would create permits that businesses could purchase that would allow them a predetermined amount of emissions. As this proposal is being finalized, it is vital that Gov. Kathy Hochul's administration build an equitable system that serves all communities on Long Island.

Done right, an emissions cap program would make corporate polluters pay for their toxic legacy, raising billions of dollars to create good, green union jobs to develop renewable energy infrastructure; direct money to Black, brown, indigenous, and working-class communities through direct grants or investments in pollution reduction in those communities; and lower energy costs for all. Reducing emissions would lower rates of asthma, heart disease and stroke, and increase New Yorkers’ life expectancy. This means longer, healthier lives and lower prescription drug costs and medical bills. 

Done wrong, New York’s cap program could repeat mistakes made by other states — like California, where emissions have been either concentrated in or lowered much more slowly in Black, brown, and working-class communities than in wealthy, white ones. A University of Southern California study found that during the first three years of the program, in-state greenhouse gas emissions actually increased — and pollutant levels rose most in disadvantaged communities and neighborhoods with higher concentrations of people of color.

This could have dire consequences for areas like Brentwood, Central Islip and North Bellport which, like California's San Joaquin Valley or the Los Angeles metro region, have higher concentrations of state-defined disadvantaged communities, low-income residents and people of color. Brentwood is home to multiple power plants, while both Central Islip and North Bellport are near large landfills. Under a flawed cap program, these areas could see pollution increase as in California.

A cap program must be implemented justly. It must have a strict emissions cap with aggressive penalties for companies that exceed levels. It must avoid loopholes that companies can exploit or systems that let corporations trade their greenhouse gas and co-pollution emissions permits. The program must not exempt some of the worst corporate actors from paying for their emissions or give them a free pass to dump toxic pollution in disadvantaged neighborhoods. And the program's proceeds must be used to reduce energy costs for low-and -moderate-income households.

While Long Island is on the front line of impacts, we’re also on the front line of solutions, with planned offshore wind farms and accompanying job training facilities, high rates of residential solar adoption alongside utility-scale solar farms, and ongoing investment in energy efficiency, ground-source heat pumps, and electrical vehicle charging stations. An equitably designed cap-and-invest program could boost these efforts, hold polluters accountable, invest in our communities, and create a better future for our Island. Let’s get it right.

This guest essay reflects the views of Phil Ramos, deputy speaker of the state Assembly, and Ryan Madden, sustainability organizer for the Long Island Progressive Coalition.