DEC rejects Astoria power plant upgrade
/
The Department of Environmental Justice officially rejected NRG Energy’s request to upgrade the natural gas peaker plant in Astoria on Wednesday. Rendering courtesy of NRG
By Rachel Vick
Queens climate activists rejoiced Wednesday after Gov. Kathy Hochul and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation denied construction permits to a controversial fossil fuel power plant in Astoria.
The decision against proposed upgrades to the Astoria Gas Turbine, a fossil fuel-fired peaker plant owned by NRG Energy, came on the heels of more than a year of arguments and 6,000 public comments from the latest review period.
Food & Water Watch Northeast Regional Director Alex Beauchamp said the rejection is a “critical blow to the fossil fuel industry, providing a huge victory for New York’s climate movement.”
Officials including State Sen. Michael Gianaris and Borough President Donovan Richards echoed the excitement of advocates, claiming that the decision against new fossil fuel energy sources marks what could be the next phase in the transition to green energy.
“Our community drew a line in the sand against new fossil fuel infrastructure and won,” Gianaris said. “Let this be a statement of what our policy should be as we fight the ravages of the climate crisis. No more fossil fuel plants should get approved, period!”
DEC found that upgrading the plant for continued use of greenhouse-gas emitting energy sources without a solid plan to switch to renewables – which the company had promised – was incompatible with goals to reduce the state’s fossil fuel emissions and transition to net-zero energy.
“Our review determined the proposed project does not demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act,” said DEC Commissioner Basil Seggos. “The proposed project would be inconsistent with or would interfere with the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limits established in the Climate Act. Astoria NRG failed to demonstrate the need or justification for the proposed project.”
Reasons for rejecting the project were outlined in a letter by Daniel Whitehead, director of the DEC Division of Environmental Permits, based largely on a perceived inability to meet emission reduction goals, both from running the plant and the emissions associated with transporting the necessary natural gas to the site.
By January 1, 2024, the DEC will have established regulations on all greenhouse gas emission sources to ensure compliance with limits - including the greenhouse emissions associated with the production and transmission of the natural gas or other fossil fuel burned on sites like the Astoria Peaker.
The project, Whitehead wrote, was “inconsistent with or would interfere with the attainment of the Statewide [greenhouse gas] emission limits” which include the state goal of emission free electricity by 2040, citing the creation of a new source of greenhouse emissions and the lifespan of the upgrade well beyond the countdown.
It “would constitute a new and long-term utilization of fossil fuels to produce electricity without a specific plan in place to comply with the requirements of the Climate Act,” they wrote. “The projections are uncertain, rely on potential reductions in [greenhouse gas] emissions at other facilities.”
The DEC said that even if the company had successfully proven a need for the project, the community health concerns would still stand in the way.
Though the state has yet to officially designate disadvantaged communities, the Astoria neighborhood near the plant — nicknamed “Asthma Alley” for the higher-than-average asthma rates — would be considered a “Potential Environmental Justice Area.”
The existing facility, which is used to jumpstart the grid or support energy needs during high use periods, emitted 41,809 short tons — the gas equivalent to about .9 metric tons — of greenhouse gases per year during a baseline period. The DEC found that despite increased efficiency, the projections of increased use would result in 8,000 additional short tons annually — equivalent to the annual emissions of 1,566 cars.
NRG Energy Vice President of Development Tom Atkins maintained that the plant would have been able to run on hydrogen power “in the future. ”
The application submitted did not seek a permit for green hydrogen and acknowledges that hydrogen power is not yet a viable energy source at a commercial scale, according to DEC. It also stated the energy company would not rely on transition to renewable fuel for CLCPA compliance.
“NRG is reviewing the state’s decision, but it’s unfortunate that New York is turning down an opportunity to dramatically reduce pollution and strengthen reliable power for millions of New Yorkers at such a critical time,” Atkins said.
The plant will continue operations as usual.
