4 thoughts on “Policy Options Brief on Sustainable Energy and New York City”
You make a strong case for the urgency of updating the NYC power grid. I had no idea the grid is the same as it was in the 1950s and that the system burns energy so inefficiently. That’s truly alarming given what we know about climate change and the importance of reducing our carbon footprint.
The options you laid out all sound solid and like they could really change the power grid for the better. I’m curious how much the average NYC taxpayer would save with a city tax credit solar power option, and what the net cost or profit to the city would ultimately be.
I think some combination of city tax credits for solar power and expanding the turbine pilot program are the most cost-effective and efficient options. Since these are both renewable sources of energy, establishing systems now that make them a significant portion of the grid helps the city’s long-term sustainability. And tax credits are one of the most effective ways to get people to change their behavior, so providing city credits for solar could turn a lot of people onto solar as an energy source they’re more than happy to use.
This is a really interesting topic and extremely relevant to the country at-large. One thing I would suggest is adding a bit more about the controversy surrounding the Indian Point, what led to its closure, and what the case is for closing it. I’ve personally heard a lot about the plant, but am still a bit in the dark as to what the replacement solution is.
It would also be really interesting to dive into Gov. Cuomo’s Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) strategy for New York state. It includes a lot of interesting renewable energy and modernized grid initiatives that activists and politicians are beginning to look at more seriously.
I read this with great interest and though I didn’t have a solid understanding of some of the terms, you managed to make it much easier to comprehend. You made a good case as to the dire need for an overhaul of the city’s energy infrastructure and how it can, otherwise, damage the economy and affect the lives of people. I find comfort knowing that Governor Cuomo understands the ardent need to combat climate change.
Among the options you presented, options 2 and 3 may be more viable considering the high cost and security issues of recommissioning of the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant. One country I could think that also decided to shut down nuclear power plants is Sweden, likely due to the high cost as well. They raised nuclear power taxes and increased incentives toward renewable energy production and they’ve achieved their 50% renewable energy share 8 years ahead of their goal for 2020.
Providing tax credits and subsidies as incentives are great ideas to promote and attract more people to participate in renewable energy production initiatives. If the state can also devote their efforts to promote awareness through marketing these incentives I think that would make a huge difference in encouraging participation.
Having a reliable energy source in the future is as important to our quality of life as having the raw materials needed for industry. We have access to convenient electrical energy that affects us intimately every day, so we must use inventive measures to ensure that this energy supply continues in the future. I think the creative example of tidal production shows great promise given the noise complaints that I understand wind farms can create, although I am a fan of wind energy too. These tidal facilities would also be out of sight, which would be a benefit in more pristine, rural areas. This model needs to provide information about its impact on fish migration or shoreline ecosystems, which may only be site specific, before these facilities are put in place as a source of green energy.
Providing the opportunity for individuals to participate in the production of the energy he or she will consume by the use of solar panels is an important conservation tool as well as a production strategy. Besides extending the sites of energy production to every homeowner’s roof, people may value the production process more—and waste less—if they are compensated for the energy they help to supply to the power grid. Power won’t just “come out of the wall socket” but will be observed to be produced most efficiently on very sunny days. It is my understanding that people are compensated for their energy input into the power grid in this fashion. It would be interesting to know how much net income home solar panels and other home-based systems generate for the average homeowner. As for the nuclear option, we have to say “no.” The meltdowns at Chernobyl and Fukushima have made it very clear that local communities, and the world which is eventually affected by weather-borne radiation, cannot afford another nuclear accident. When any reactor comes offline it should stay offline.
You make a strong case for the urgency of updating the NYC power grid. I had no idea the grid is the same as it was in the 1950s and that the system burns energy so inefficiently. That’s truly alarming given what we know about climate change and the importance of reducing our carbon footprint.
The options you laid out all sound solid and like they could really change the power grid for the better. I’m curious how much the average NYC taxpayer would save with a city tax credit solar power option, and what the net cost or profit to the city would ultimately be.
I think some combination of city tax credits for solar power and expanding the turbine pilot program are the most cost-effective and efficient options. Since these are both renewable sources of energy, establishing systems now that make them a significant portion of the grid helps the city’s long-term sustainability. And tax credits are one of the most effective ways to get people to change their behavior, so providing city credits for solar could turn a lot of people onto solar as an energy source they’re more than happy to use.
This is a really interesting topic and extremely relevant to the country at-large. One thing I would suggest is adding a bit more about the controversy surrounding the Indian Point, what led to its closure, and what the case is for closing it. I’ve personally heard a lot about the plant, but am still a bit in the dark as to what the replacement solution is.
It would also be really interesting to dive into Gov. Cuomo’s Reforming the Energy Vision (REV) strategy for New York state. It includes a lot of interesting renewable energy and modernized grid initiatives that activists and politicians are beginning to look at more seriously.
https://rev.ny.gov/
I read this with great interest and though I didn’t have a solid understanding of some of the terms, you managed to make it much easier to comprehend. You made a good case as to the dire need for an overhaul of the city’s energy infrastructure and how it can, otherwise, damage the economy and affect the lives of people. I find comfort knowing that Governor Cuomo understands the ardent need to combat climate change.
Among the options you presented, options 2 and 3 may be more viable considering the high cost and security issues of recommissioning of the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant. One country I could think that also decided to shut down nuclear power plants is Sweden, likely due to the high cost as well. They raised nuclear power taxes and increased incentives toward renewable energy production and they’ve achieved their 50% renewable energy share 8 years ahead of their goal for 2020.
Providing tax credits and subsidies as incentives are great ideas to promote and attract more people to participate in renewable energy production initiatives. If the state can also devote their efforts to promote awareness through marketing these incentives I think that would make a huge difference in encouraging participation.
Having a reliable energy source in the future is as important to our quality of life as having the raw materials needed for industry. We have access to convenient electrical energy that affects us intimately every day, so we must use inventive measures to ensure that this energy supply continues in the future. I think the creative example of tidal production shows great promise given the noise complaints that I understand wind farms can create, although I am a fan of wind energy too. These tidal facilities would also be out of sight, which would be a benefit in more pristine, rural areas. This model needs to provide information about its impact on fish migration or shoreline ecosystems, which may only be site specific, before these facilities are put in place as a source of green energy.
Providing the opportunity for individuals to participate in the production of the energy he or she will consume by the use of solar panels is an important conservation tool as well as a production strategy. Besides extending the sites of energy production to every homeowner’s roof, people may value the production process more—and waste less—if they are compensated for the energy they help to supply to the power grid. Power won’t just “come out of the wall socket” but will be observed to be produced most efficiently on very sunny days. It is my understanding that people are compensated for their energy input into the power grid in this fashion. It would be interesting to know how much net income home solar panels and other home-based systems generate for the average homeowner. As for the nuclear option, we have to say “no.” The meltdowns at Chernobyl and Fukushima have made it very clear that local communities, and the world which is eventually affected by weather-borne radiation, cannot afford another nuclear accident. When any reactor comes offline it should stay offline.