Permit approvals, settlements and a sharp political fissure
This week, New York state regulators quietly reopened a front in the fight over how the state will meet its legally binding climate targets. On Nov. 7 the Department of Environmental Conservation issued a permit for the Northeast Supply Enhancement (NESE) pipeline and, on the same day, announced a settlement that allows the Greenidge Generation cryptocurrency mining facility to keep operating for the next five years while it develops a plan to cut emissions. Together those two moves — a federal‑scale fuel pipeline and a compromise that keeps a gas‑fired crypto site online — have environmental groups, progressive lawmakers and climate justice advocates warning that Albany is drifting away from the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, the state’s flagship climate law.
Pipeline and permit reversals
Greenidge, offsets and the limits of compromis
The Greenidge settlement is equally contentious. Once denied an air permit because regulators found its continued operation would conflict with the CLCPA’s emissions limits, Greenidge now has permission to run while it develops a plan to reduce greenhouse gases by roughly 44 percent. DEC and the company framed the arrangement as a path toward emissions reductions and planning. Skeptics, including Assemblymember Anna Kelles, warn the agreed measures could amount to washing away emissions on paper — through offsets or credit purchases — rather than cutting onsite gas combustion or building local renewables. The company’s history of repeatedly appealing permit denials, and the fact the settlement was announced shortly before evidentiary hearings were set to resume, feed the perception that procedural wins are replacing hard regulatory limits.
Legal pressure and a delayed rulebook
Politics, lobbying and an "all‑of‑the‑above" shift
New York’s shifting posture has a political explanation that runs from Albany to Washington. Governor Kathy Hochul has publicly framed some decisions as responses to federal hostility — arguing that her administration must defend New Yorkers from what she calls a campaign against clean energy being waged by Republican officials. Yet her policy language has also shifted toward an "all‑of‑the‑above" energy strategy that places new emphasis on natural gas and nuclear as pragmatic tools for affordability and reliability. That pivot troubles climate advocates because it appears at odds with the CLCPA’s underlying trajectory.
Corporate retrenchment and a national climate headwind
New York’s troubles are part of a broader national pattern of retrenchment and uncertainty. At the federal level, the current administration’s open embrace of fossil fuels and rollback of climate‑oriented rules has signaled to some corporations and financial institutions that ambitious net‑zero pledges are no longer sacrosanct. In several instances large banks and other firms have scaled back or abandoned publicly stated financed‑emissions goals. That corporate pullback has in turn provoked activists, who have shifted from letter campaigns to direct actions against banks and other institutions they see as enabling expanded fossil‑fuel infrastructure.
Activists have also escalated tactics in New York and elsewhere, staging high‑profile civil disobedience aimed at banks that have retreated on climate commitments. Those actions underscore a political feedback loop: as governments pause or walk back regulatory plans, civil society groups intensify pressure on private financiers and public regulators alike.
What the gaps mean for climate targets and communities
Beyond policy headlines, the stakes are concrete. State modelling and health analyses that preceded the CLCPA suggested that an effective cap or equivalent program could prevent thousands of premature deaths and tens of thousands of asthma attacks by reducing pollution in neighborhoods that bear the brunt of industrial emissions. Missing or delayed regulations mean those projected benefits may not materialize on schedule, reinforcing existing environmental injustices. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit also invoke the state’s Green Amendment, arguing that the delay undermines constitutional protections for clean air and a healthful environment.
Paths forward: court, regulation or politics
The next chapter will be decided in multiple arenas. Environmental lawyers have asked a judge to order the state to publish enforceable rules; the DEC maintains it is working on a cap‑and‑invest program and has pointed to incremental measures and the new emissions reporting rule as progress. Lawmakers and candidates running in the 2026 cycle have begun to fold the debate into primary politics — with some Democrats attacking the governor for perceived backsliding and others emphasizing affordability considerations that they say justify a cautious approach.
For activists and frontline communities, court timelines move slowly. Protests and public campaigns, including planned actions aimed at banks and specific projects, are intended to accelerate political will and pressure regulators to act. Meanwhile utilities, developers and industry groups continue to press for clarity on permitting and market rules; investors demand predictability. That web of competing demands — legal, political, economic and moral — will shape whether New York restores the momentum toward the CLCPA’s targets or steers a different course.
The state is at a crossroads: the choices made now will determine whether the CLCPA remains a binding engine of climate policy or becomes, in the eyes of critics, a statute whose deadlines and mandates are negotiable. The immediate weeks and months — court filings, regulatory dockets, and the outcome of high‑profile protests and lobbying campaigns — will show which way the balance tips.
Sources
- New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) — permit and regulatory materials
- New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) — cap‑and‑invest analyses and scoping materials
- Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) — scoping plan and technical appendices
- LittleSis Public Accountability Initiative — report on lobbying related to CLCPA implementation
- NewClimate Institute — analysis of corporate climate claims
- University of Portsmouth and University of Bath — research on corporate communications and "greenhushing"
