NEW YORK - State environmental watchdogs are crying foul over Governor Andrew Cuomo's decision to pull $41 million from the state's cap-and-trade program, and placing it in the general fund.

Environmental Advocates of New York says money from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) is supposed to pay for pollution reduction projects. They claim Cuomo is planning to use more than a quarter of the money to fund other work, such as tax relief.

Peter Iwanowicz, the organization's director, says the move could give ammunition to industry associations that oppose the program.

"By raiding the funds, the governor and the Legislature are inviting yet another legal challenge to the RGGI program," he says. "The big concern we have is the governor's climate raid could lead to successful litigation that could throw the whole program out."

The RGGI program took in about $150 million in 2014, and Cuomo's budget for this year would use some of the money to pay for energy tax credits, among other measures. Cuomo's office has defended it as a legitimate use of the funds.

In 2011, the conservative group Americans For Prosperity went to court to try to bar New York from adopting the RGGI program, calling it an illegal cap-and-trade tax. A judge dismissed the suit, but Iwanowicz says Cuomo's budget makes the program vulnerable again.

"When you take a big chunk of the RGGI proceeds and move them into the general fund, those groups are likely to challenge it and challenge it on the grounds that it is an unauthorized tax," says Iwanowicz. "The Legislature is the only one that can approve the collection of proceeds, and this budget language doesn't do that."

Nine states in the Northeast participate in RGGI, which limits carbon emissions and requires power plants to pay for pollution that goes beyond those limits. It took effect in 2008, and has generated more than $700 million in climate change funds in New York.


get more stories like this via email

The Maine Department of Transportation is "going green," with plans to install solar arrays on three state-owned properties in Augusta.

The Transportation Department breaks ground this week on renewable-energy sites at the Augusta Airport and inside the Interstate 95 interchanges, at Exits 109 and 112. Once completed, the arrays will provide low-cost renewable energy to power both the State Capitol complex and East Campus.

Joyce Taylor, chief engineer for Maine DOT, said the agency is putting extra land to good use.

"The DOT, you know, we own a lot of property, but it's not like you can do affordable housing in it," she said. "We can't really put a lot of things in there, so that's a really good use of our land to A) try to get some money back for the taxpayers and B) have a greener footprint."

The solar projects will be owned and operated by Cenergy Power. Taylor said once online, the arrays will generate about 8.5 megawatts of solar energy and reduce the state's carbon emissions by 2,000 metric tons a year.

The projects align with Gov. Janet Mills' "Lead by Example" plan for state government, which calls for the state to use electricity from 100% renewable sources by 2024 and reduce greenhouse-gas emissions from state operations by 45% by 2030. Taylor said she is optimistic that the transportation project be an example for other state agencies.

"I think there's some other state agencies that are definitely looking at it," she said. "It did take some time to be able to pull it together, so I think we're interested in seeing how this goes."

Each solar-array site will include pollinator-friendly vegetation management. Cenergy is beginning work at Exit 109 this week, with the other sites starting later this month.

Next week, North Dakota landowners will get a chance to hear updates on a proposed underground pipeline for transporting and sequestering carbon dioxide. The meeting comes as tension builds between landowners and the company behind the project.

Dakota Resource Council is hosting next Tuesday's meeting, and said it wants affected property owners to learn about the latest efforts by Summit Carbon Solutions to secure land for its multistate pipeline.

The company recently submitted paperwork in North Dakota to pursue eminent domain if it cannot obtain enough voluntary easements.

Eliot Huggins, field organizer for the Council, said Summit is placing unnecessary pressure on those not agreeing to contracts.

"Harassing, threats of eminent domain, things like that," Huggins outlined. "There's folks at the beginning who might have been open to this who are now pretty opposed, and that's largely just due to their interactions with the company."

Summit insists "misinformation" is being used by opponents and said it will continue to work with local leaders and landowners to address concerns. Tuesday's meeting will be held in Bismarck at the Veterans Memorial Library and begins at 6 p.m. For those who cannot be there in person, they can request a Zoom link from the group to participate online.

The Council also urged those concerned to sign up for the grassroots North Dakota Easement Team, which is designed to fight Summit's efforts collectively, including potential legal options, while informing people of their rights.

Brian Jorde, managing partner of Domina Law Group, which is part of the legal team, said the group approach can be more effective than a person taking action on their own.

"You can be as noisy as you want on your own and good luck to you," Jorde noted. "But unless you're part of a larger group, you can't hope to even make a dent or resist these billion-dollar-backed entities."

Similar groups have been formed in other Midwestern states in the proposed project's footprint. Summit wants to capture carbon dioxide from ethanol plants and move it through multiple states before storing it underground in North Dakota. The plan is touted as a solution in reducing harmful emissions.

Groups such as the Resource Council said while they are not opposed to the concept of carbon sequestration, they argued a large-scale approach presents too many challenges.

By 2030, Minnesota wants 20% of all light-duty vehicles on its roads to be electric. But a lot of charging stations are needed to help achieve that goal, and clean-energy advocates say there's positive movement in that direction.

Supporters of electric vehicles, or EV's, point to Xcel Energy's new proposal, which involves adding 750 high-speed charging stations, as a big step in building up the region's capacity.

Along with commitments from other utilities there's also $68 million from the federal infrastructure law to help add locations. M.K. Anderson, senior policy associate for energy transition for Fresh Energy, said these are all important steps.

"So," said Anderson, "if all of this happens, our state will be just incredibly equipped for the EV revolution that is coming."

Xcel's plan, which still needs to be considered by regulators, includes figuring out locations in rural areas where charging stations are harder to come by.

The utility estimates roughly 8,000 public fast-charging ports are needed statewide as Minnesota prepares for the market shift toward EV's. Xcel's plan does call on ratepayers to help cover construction costs.

Right now, less than 1% of vehicle registrations in Minnesota are EV's.

Tim Sexton, chief sustainability officer and assistant commissioner for sustainability and public health with the state Department of Transportation, said boosting infrastructure will play a big role in convincing more car-buyers to change their approach.

"I think it's really important that people see those chargers out there," said Sexton, "you know, to help them think about opportunities for EVs."

As the state bolsters this infrastructure, Sexton said they're trying to be mindful of how people use these vehicles, depending on their location.

"In the Twin Cities metro," said Sexton, "a lot of people, you know, may only be driving 20 miles a day and may have access to charging at work and they don't need, necessarily, the same kind of public chargers - or at least not as frequently - as people who live in rural communities because they need to travel further."