In New York, Fossil Fuel Companies Might Pay for Climate Change

If signed by the governor, the Climate Change Superfund Act would help finance climate adaptation efforts on the local, regional and state levels.

From left to right: New Yorkers for Clean Power activist Anshul Gupta, representative Pat Ryan, Ulster County executive Jen Metzger, state senator Michelle Hinchey, assemblymember Didi Barrett and Kingston mayor Steve Noble at the Poughkeepsie train station on Oct. 4, where they helped campaign for the New York Climate Change Superfund Act. Photo by Eric Weltman of Food & Water Watch

Despite linking carbon dioxide emissions to fossil fuel production back in 1977, ExxonMobil has invested millions of dollars into sowing doubt about the science of climate change. Now, the company, and its fellow major oil corporations, may be held accountable for their environmental wrongdoing in New York.

If enacted, the state’s Climate Change Superfund Act would place the biggest fossil fuel companies in charge of contributing capital — $3 billion annually for 25 years — to the state’s climate change adaptation fund. The law would ask companies to clean up their act by helping finance New York’s adaptive measures in response to the impacts of global warming. 

After the State Senate and Assembly passed the act earlier this year, it now awaits a signature by Gov. Kathy Hochul. The governor is planning to “review the legislation,” according to a spokesperson. As climate advocates have pushed Gov. Hochul to sign the bill, a group of regional activists and politicians campaigned at the Poughkeepsie Train Station last month to draw local attention to the act’s significance. 

“There’s the congressman, the state senator, the state assemblymember, a county executive and the mayor of Kingston — they’re standing there saying, ‘Governor, sign the bill.’ That’s what makes a difference,” said Michael Richardson, co-facilitator of Third Act Upstate New York.

Companies held responsible for this funding include those that emitted over one billion tons of greenhouse gasses between 2000 and 2018, the period of time when the science of attributing global warming to fossil fuel emissions became widely known. The fund’s reserves would then finance efforts to adapt to the climate crisis in New York, with at least 35% of spending set aside for environmental justice communities. Examples would include installing energy-efficient cooling in public housing, restoring coastal wetlands or upgrading stormwater drainage systems. 

For instance, a bridge damaged by a storm would normally be paid for by a local government’s highway fund, according to Richardson. But as stronger deluges and unexpected damage to infrastructure occur more frequently, even surplus “rainy day” funds run out. By then, it’s the taxpayers who end up covering the costs, and it is this financial burden that the act aims to remove.

“This really should not be called a climate bill because the bill itself actually has nothing to do with the removal of carbon dioxide or methane from the atmosphere. It has nothing to do with what’s going forward,” said Richardson. “It has everything to do with what’s happened in the past. It really should be called a taxpayer relief bill.”

Although it would be novel in New York, the Polluter-Pays Principle has already gained traction in other states, which includes similar legislation initiated in Massachusetts, New Jersey and Maryland. In May, Vermont solidified its spot as the first state to pass a climate superfund law, and just two months ago, the Polluters Pay Climate Fund Act of 2024 was introduced on the federal level.

“We’re looking to Governor Hochul, who is Co-Chair of the U.S. Climate Alliance, an alliance of governors that are essentially on the cutting edge of climate policy. It would be a shame if someone who is putting herself forward as the national leader failed to sign this bill into law,” said Eric Weltman, senior organizer with Food & Water Watch.

From the record-breaking high temperatures of this past summer and this fall to last year’s deadly flash flooding, the Hudson Valley is no stranger to the effects of global warming. In the region that includes Dutchess County, the annual average temperature is projected to increase up to 6.2 degrees Fahrenheit by the 2050s, and by that same decade, annual precipitation could grow by up to 12%.

But even with a penchant for future predictions, climate change still remains relevant today. Since the Hudson River is an estuary tied to the ocean’s tides, sea level rise poses a direct threat on different levels, whether it be salt intrusion in the drinking water drawn from the Hudson or inundation of the Metro-North Railroad’s riverside Hudson Line. 

“What are we going to do about the things that are going to happen? No matter what we do at this point, there are certain things that are coming,” said Susan Karnes Hecht, who serves in the appointed volunteer position of the Town of Poughkeepsie’s Climate Smart Task Force chair. “In our region, sea level rise coming up the Hudson and the salt front coming up are big issues — and of course, heat.”

The climate superfund legislation itself is based on the Environmental Protection Agency’s existing Superfund program, which calls on responsible parties to clean up hazardous waste in contaminated sites. With the Hudson River serving as the nation’s largest superfund site due to historic PCBs chemical contamination, a climate superfund program would serve a similar purpose when it comes to reparations for past negative actions. 

“It’s an important measure for ensuring some justice for all the people suffering or having their homes destroyed and their communities ruined from the current consequences of climate change that we’re living through,” said Weltman.

One potential example of how those adaptation funds may be distributed lies in New York’s Climate Smart Communities program, which officially certifies municipalities through distributed grants for eligible local climate projects. As per a survey of 95 CSCs administered by the state’s comptroller office, $737 million — about half of all actual and anticipated project spending — goes towards responding to climate change hazards. 

The Town of Poughkeepsie, a bronze-certified CSC, is currently working on drafting its own Climate Adaptation Report. According to Hecht, the Town is also in the middle of a study looking at flooding issues for the residential and commercial properties located on the water in New Hamburg, which is part of Poughkeepsie. “We’re laying out specific goals based on what we call our vulnerable assessment, and that’s where you see the Town’s vulnerabilities to flooding, to heat and to a variety of different climate hazards,” she said.

So far, the Town has made much progress, from completing a greenhouse gas emissions inventory and related Climate Action Plan to engaging with townspeople on a community plan. “New York is very far ahead, but in addition, as I have come to understand from all of these things I’ve been doing for quite a number of years now, the Hudson Valley is a hotbed of this kind of activity,” said Hecht. 

Over 20 co-conveners, including Third Act Upstate New York and Food & Water Watch, are planning an all-day sit-in and teach-in at the state Capitol building in Albany, New York on Dec. 10, should Gov. Hochul not sign the bill by then. On the opposite end of the spectrum, a coalition affiliated with the Business Council of New York State has called the act “bad public policy,” in part because it supposedly fails to blame consumers as the responsible parties behind climate change. 

However, that mantra is one that was created by fossil fuel companies themselves — this industry is where the carbon footprint calculator originated, in an effort to drill down into consumer responsibility and direct attention away from corporate culpability. In fact, 57 producers of fossil fuels have been associated with 80% of global carbon dioxide emissions.

The U.S. oil and gas industry made over $240 billion in 2023, which means that giving a few million dollars a year to New York would comprise only a small share of these companies’ profits. In the words of Weltman, oil is a worldwide commodity with no set price, so the cost of climate funding would fall onto the corporations themselves. “The price of gas to the pump is actually surprisingly competitive. No one is going to pass that cost — that $3 billion a year — onto people at the pump,” he said. 

Proponents argue that the act would be a small price to pay for a climate crisis large enough to impact the entire state, and that it’s up to New Yorkers to get involved. “You’re not going to solve this by recycling your soda bottle or by getting rid of your RV or staying off your jet airplane. Now, I think you shouldn’t do any of them,” said Richardson. “But don’t beat yourself up over this. Beat yourself up because you haven’t made arrangements to go talk to your assemblymember or your senator about legislation to turn this thing around.”