As required by the 2019 Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA), the Climate Action Council (CAC) [on Dec. 19] approved a framework for reducing carbon emissions in New York state. As expected, the final scoping plan raised a number of red flags regarding energy grid reliability, costs and feasibility, and does not fully take into account the concerns raised by key stakeholders.

Among the primary concerns are the plan’s unrealistic timeline to transition to a renewables-only energy grid and the still-undefined costs associated with overhauling the state’s energy sector.

  No one questions the need for responsible energy policy that includes clean and renewable-power sources in the future. But this plan simply isn’t based in reality. What has been presented disregards the unprecedented costs needed to implement these changes and what consumers are going to be forced to pay at a time when affordability concerns have never been higher. This plan leaves our energy grid critically vulnerable to extreme seasonal weather and puts residents in serious jeopardy of not having power during emergencies. Energy policy without reliable energy production isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.

Policy analysts in New York have made bleak predictions about the plan. The Empire Center for Public Policy estimates energy deficits could create a supply shortage of as much as 10 percent by 2040. The Assembly Minority Conference has repeatedly expressed these concerns, which are shared by both the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) and New York State Reliability Council (NYSRC). There are also concerns surrounding the need to rush implementation of the plan as the CLCPA only impacts New York, which contributes just 0.4 percent of total global emissions.

Now that the Scoping Plan has been approved, new regulations will be developed by the state Department of Environmental Conservation, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority and other relevant state agencies. This will amount to a complete overhaul of New York’s energy sector. As such, Assemblyman Phil Palmesano (R,C–Corning), ranking member on the Assembly Energy Committee, authored legislation (A.7524) to require a full cost-benefit analysis of the CLCPA before its full implementation.

“Clean and renewable energy should be part of our state’s energy portfolio and policy; however, affordability and reliability are of paramount importance and must be addressed. It is imperative that a full and transparent cost-benefit analysis take place to let our citizens know the true and total actual financial costs this will have on them, our business community and our state before moving forward with the full implementation of the CLCPA,” said Palmesano. “The CAC has repeatedly ignored our requests and their Integration Analysis clearly did not provide these transparent details and cost impacts on ratepayers — seniors, families, farmers, small businesses and manufacturers.”        

William (Will) A. Barclay, 53, Republican, is the New York Assembly minority leader and represents the 120th New York Assembly District, which encompasses all of Oswego County, as well as parts of Jefferson and Cayuga counties. This article is drawn from a release his office issued on Dec. 19 in response to the Climate Action Council approving a framework for reducing carbon emissions in New York state.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has created foreign-policy challenges for the United States. That’s even more true across the Atlantic, where the war has driven up inflation, worsened energy shortages, made refugees of millions of Ukrainians, and unsettled the nations of Eastern Europe.

There is a tremendous need for European leadership to deter Vladimir Putin’s aggression, and Germany is stepping into the role. That is a welcome development.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz addresses the situation in an essay in the journal Foreign Affairs. He writes that the world is facing “an epochal tectonic shift.” New powers are emerging in a “multipolar world,” and Germany has an important role in maintaining peace and stability.

“Russia’s brutal attack on Ukraine in February 2022,” Scholz writes, “ushered in a fundamentally new reality: imperialism had returned to Europe.”

This attitude is a shift for Germany. It is Europe’s economic leader, with the world’s fourth-largest economy, but the nation has been a reluctant leader in foreign affairs, struggling to define its role. This reluctance comes from history. Conflicts between Germany and its neighbors were at the core of the two world wars. Germans are acutely sensitive to the suffering and destruction their nation caused.

At the same time, many questions Europe has faced since World War II have centered on Germany: how to keep it strong so it can contribute to the security of the continent; how to keep it prosperous; and how to keep its government from turning away from international cooperation. While Europe contains a large collection of democratic countries, willing and working to make the world a better place, Germany and France are its leaders.

After World War II, Germany was in ruins; it was divided and occupied. The region that became West Germany rebuilt steadily, producing a “German economic miracle” that paralleled Japan’s postwar recovery. East Germany, part of the Soviet Bloc, struggled. But the outlook brightened after the Soviet Union collapsed and East Germany and West Germany reunified, leading to a remarkable three decades of peace and prosperity.

While the West welcomed the Soviet collapse, Putin, conversely, has called it “the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century” and has tried to restore Russian power. In 2014, Russia illegally annexed Crimea and sent troops into eastern Ukraine. In 2022, it invaded Ukraine.

As Scholz writes, “The world must not let Putin get his way.”

The German response includes spending more on its military, bolstering Europe’s defense industry, strengthening its commitment to NATO, and training and equipping Ukraine’s armed forces. [These are] changes that involve “a new strategic culture” and a new national-security strategy. Germany created a $500 billion fund to support its own military, which required a change in its constitution. It is providing arms to Ukraine, the first time in recent history that it delivered weapons for a war between two countries. Germany has also increased its NATO involvement and supported NATO expansion.

American support is crucial, Scholz adds: “U.S. President Joe Biden and his administration deserve praise for building and investing in strong partnerships and alliances across the globe. But a balanced and resilient transatlantic partnership also requires that Germany and Europe play active roles.”

There was a time when talk of a stronger and more assertive Germany might have unsettled Europeans and Americans. That shouldn’t be the case today. Germany has shown itself to be committed to peace, democracy, and the rules-based international order. With Russia ratcheting up its threats, Europe and the world need German participation and leadership.      

Lee Hamilton, 91, is a senior advisor for the Indiana University (IU) Center on Representative Government, distinguished scholar at the IU Hamilton Lugar School of Global and International Studies, and professor of practice at the IU O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs. Hamilton, a Democrat, was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 34 years (1965-1999), representing a district in south-central Indiana.