May, 02 2023, 09:55am EDT

New York Set to Enact First-in-the-Nation State Law Ending Gas in New Buildings
ALBANY, New York
Today, the State Legislature and Governor agreed to enact a historic deal to end fossil fuels in new buildings via the 2023-24 New York state budget. Once enacted, New York will become the first state to end gas in new construction by law, beginning in 2026 for buildings under seven stories; 2029 for taller ones. The timeline of the law’s effect defers action until the beginning of 2026, one year later than advocates’ demands.
“At the behest of New York’s grassroots climate movement, Governor Hochul and legislative leaders are taking a historic step, making New York the first state in the nation to prohibit fossil fuels in new construction by law. New Yorkers are resisting fossil fuels everywhere they pop up, from the power plants that pollute our air to the pipelines that put our communities in harm’s way. Now buildings can be a part of that solution,” said Alex Beauchamp, Northeast Region Director at Food & Water Watch. “Unfortunately, we’re still moving too slowly, and Governor Hochul is to blame. Instead of fighting for the swift transition off fossil fuels that the climate crisis demands, the governor caved at the eleventh hour, giving the fossil fuel industry another year of delay to profit at our expense. We won’t stop fighting until we end our devastating addiction to fossil fuels.”
The politically popular move will reduce climate-heating pollution, create jobs in clean energy, reduce childhood asthma, and save New Yorkers money — analyses have found that building all-electric leads to hundreds of dollars in energy cost savings for consumers. As the prices of gas and fuel oil rise, New Yorkers across the state, regardless of climate zone, would save more with an all-electric home.
“My family lost everything to a climate disaster. This is a moment of mixed emotions because this policy is a political compromise between what’s needed for the people and the death-dealing fossil fuel industry, the people who hurt my family so badly. On the one hand, New York, my home, will be the first state to end fossil fuels in new buildings by law. That’s huge because my community needs to save money, breathe clean air, and get good jobs in clean energy, not die in an extreme weather crisis, as members of my family have. Sadly, this great new law will go into effect years later than it should. New York is far behind what’s needed for climate justice. We needed Governor Hochul to deliver at the scale of the crisis, but in the end we got a half-measure. I want to thank our bill sponsors, and all the movement leaders who fight for what’s right,” said Rachel Rivera, a member of New York Communities for Change and Sandy survivor who lives in Brownsville, Brooklyn.
Advocacy groups are disappointed that the law will take effect too slowly to maximize benefits to New Yorkers. A delayed start date at the beginning of 2026 threatens to lock in higher energy bills and decades of new pollution from the 40,000 new buildings that are constructed each year. Groups had been backing proposed legislation to mirror New York City’s all-electric new buildings law, to take effect at the beginning of 2024, providing earlier cost savings and pollution reduction. The final deal also drew criticism for exemptions including for fuel cell systems and certain commercial buildings, which wouldn’t have to comply until 2029. Large warehouses and box stores operated by the likes of Amazon stand to benefit from these carve outs, which reduce the bill’s positive impact and further defer to corporate lobbyists.
Each year, the state adds approximately 250,000 metric tons of climate-heating pollution from the tens of thousands of new homes and buildings that are built to be dependent on gas boilers and furnaces, thereby jeopardizing meeting the state’s legally mandated climate targets.
The law does not include a “poison pill” the gas lobby pushed that advocates opposed; the provision, left on the cutting room floor, would have allowed local governments to, in effect, veto the law locally.
Assemblymember Emily Gallagher and Senator Brian Kavanagh, the bill’s prime sponsors, led the charge, with Governor Hochul also proposing this vital policy. With the State Senate and State Assembly’s leaders, Andrea Stewart-Cousins and Carl Heastie, committing to action in budget resolutions released in March, a legislation path opened for this historic, though needlessly delayed, action. In the “end game,” the State Senate pushed for climate and jobs action and remains the clear leader on the issue.
“Facing big spending from the oil and gas industry on disinformation campaigns to stall climate action, New York passed a historic law to move new buildings off fossil fuels. We want to thank the bill sponsors and the thousands of young people that fought with us to make this law happen. However, the Governor and legislative leaders compromised and allowed a too-slow timeline, making it all the more difficult to meet fast approaching greenhouse gas emission reduction benchmarks. For the young people we work with, this is a gamble with their futures,” said Megan Ahearn, Program Director for NYPIRG.
A rising multiracial climate movement fought hard for the policy’s enactment, first winning NYC’s landmark law in December, 2021, then moving to push for action at the state level. Enactment of this policy by Ithaca and Beacon, NY also paved the way to final passage. Activists statewide from a variety of groups also pushed hard, with rallies, protests, and local events across the state building to a people-powered victory.
The resulting legislation ensures that backup generators are allowed for emergencies and includes some exemptions for building uses that still require gas, but these are narrow exemptions that only apply to a tiny proportion of new construction. However, the law takes effect much slower than is justified, locking tens of thousands of new buildings to higher bills and pollution for decades to come.
“Following enactment of New York’s nation-leading climate law, thanks to the voices of thousands of New Yorkers, New York has made a historic move to end fossil fuels in new buildings. But as the state with the highest building-sector emissions and most premature deaths in the country from fossil fuel combustion in buildings, it is disappointing that the Governor and Legislature caved to fossil fuel industry lies and delayed the implementation timeline. We thank the bill sponsors and our partners for their work leading to this victory,” said Liz Moran, New York Policy Advocate for Earthjustice.
The groups and legislators defeated a multimillion dollar effort by the gas industry and its allies to defeat this legislation. Nonetheless, lawmakers were influenced by the lies, backed by deep pocketed lobbyists, to push off the policy effective date.
Food & Water Watch mobilizes regular people to build political power to move bold and uncompromised solutions to the most pressing food, water, and climate problems of our time. We work to protect people's health, communities, and democracy from the growing destructive power of the most powerful economic interests.
(202) 683-2500LATEST NEWS
National Team Member Becomes at Least 265th Palestinian Footballer Killed by Israel in Gaza
Muhannad al-Lili's killing by Israeli airstrike came as the world mourned the death of Portugal and Liverpool star Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva in a car crash in Spain.
Jul 04, 2025
Muhannad Fadl al-Lili, captain of the Al-Maghazi Services Club and a member of Palestine's national football team, died Thursday from injuries suffered during an Israeli airstrike on his family home in the central Gaza Strip earlier this week, making him the latest of hundreds of Palestinian athletes killed since the start of Israel's genocidal onslaught.
Al-Maghazi Services Club announced al-Lili's death in a Facebook tribute offering condolences to "his family, relatives, friends, and colleagues" and asking "Allah to shower him with his mercy."
The Palestine Football Association (PFA) said that "on Monday, a drone fired a missile at Muhannad's room on the third floor of his house, which led to severe bleeding in the skull."
"During the war of extermination against our people, Muhannad tried to travel outside Gaza to catch up with his wife, who left the strip for Norway on a work mission before the outbreak of the war," the association added. "But he failed to do so, and was deprived of seeing his eldest son, who was born outside the Gaza Strip."
According to the PFA, al-Lili is at least the 265th Palestinian footballer and 585th athlete to be killed by Israeli forces since they launched their assault and siege on Gaza following the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. Sports journalist Leyla Hamed says 439 Palestinian footballers have been killed by Israel.
Overall, Israel's war—which is the subject of an International Court of Justice (ICJ) genocide case—has left more than 206,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing, and around 2 million more forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened, according to Gaza officials.
The Palestine Chronicle contrasted the worldwide press coverage of the car crash deaths of Portuguese footballer Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva with the media's relative silence following al-Lili's killing.
"Jota's death was a tragedy that touched millions," the outlet wrote. "Yet the death of Muhannad al-Lili... was met with near-total silence from global sports media."
Last week, a group of legal experts including two United Nations special rapporteurs appealed to the Fédération Internationale de Football Association, the world football governing body, demanding that its Governance Audit and Compliance Committee take action against the Israel Football Association for violating FIFA rules by playing matches on occupied Palestinian territory.
In July 2024, the ICJ found that Israel's then-57-year occupation of Palestine—including Gaza—is an illegal form of apartheid that should be ended as soon as possible.
During their invasion and occupation of Gaza, Israeli forces have also used sporting facilities including Yarmouk Stadium for the detention of Palestinian men, women, and children—many of whom have reported torture and other abuse at the hands of their captors.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Highly Inspiring' Court Ruling Affirms Nations' Legal Duty to Combat Climate Emergency
"While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections," said one observer.
Jul 04, 2025
In a landmark advisory opinion published Thursday, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights—of which the United States, the world's second-biggest carbon polluter, is not a member—affirmed the right to a stable climate and underscored nations' duty to act to protect it and address the worsening planetary emergency.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change," a summary of the 234-page ruling states. "Any rollback of climate or environmental policies that affect human rights must be exceptional, duly justified based on objective criteria, and comply with standards of necessity and proportionality."
"The court also held that... states must take all necessary measures to reduce the risks arising, on the one hand, from the degradation of the global climate system and, on the other, from exposure and vulnerability to the effects of such degradation," the summary adds.
"States must refrain from any conduct that reverses, slows down, or truncates the outcome of measures necessary to protect human rights in the face of the impacts of climate change."
The case was brought before the Costa-Rica based IACtHR by Chile and Colombia, both of which "face the daily challenge of dealing with the consequences of the climate emergency, including the proliferation of droughts, floods, landslides, and fires, among others."
"These phenomena highlight the need to respond urgently and based on the principles of equity, justice, cooperation, and sustainability, with a human rights-based approach," the court asserted.
IACtHR President Judge Nancy Hernández López said following the ruling that "states must not only refrain from causing significant environmental damage but have the positive obligation to take measures to guarantee the protection, restoration, and regeneration of ecosystems."
"Causing massive and irreversible environmental harm...alters the conditions for a healthy life on Earth to such an extent that it creates consequences of existential proportions," she added. "Therefore, it demands universal and effective legal responses."
The advisory opinion builds on two landmark decisions last year. In April 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Swiss government violated senior citizens' human rights by refusing to abide by scientists' warnings to rapidly phase out fossil fuel production.
The following month, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea found in an advisory opinion that greenhouse gas emissions are marine pollution under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and that signatories to the accord "have the specific obligation to adopt laws and regulations to prevent, reduce, and control" them.
The IACtHR advisory opinion is expected to boost climate and human rights lawsuits throughout the Americas, and to impact talks ahead of November's United Nations Climate Change Conference, or COP30, in Belém, Brazil.
Climate defenders around the world hailed Thursday's advisory opinion, with United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk calling it "a landmark step forward for the region—and beyond."
"As the impact of climate change becomes ever more visible across the world, the court is clear: People have a right to a stable climate and a healthy environment," Türk added. "States have a bedrock obligation under international law not to take steps that cause irreversible climate and environmental damage, and they have a duty to act urgently to take the necessary measures to protect the lives and rights of everyone—both those alive now and the interests of future generations."
Amnesty International head of strategic litigation Mandi Mudarikwa said, "Today, the Inter-American Court affirmed and clarified the obligations of states to respect, ensure, prevent, and cooperate in order to realize human rights in the context of the climate crisis."
"Crucially, the court recognized the autonomous right to a healthy climate for both individuals and communities, linked to the right to a healthy environment," Mudarikwa added. "The court also underscored the obligation of states to protect cross-border climate-displaced persons, including through the issuance of humanitarian visas and protection from deportation."
Delta Merner, lead scientist at the Science Hub for Climate Litigation at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement that "this opinion sets an important precedent affirming that governments have a legal duty to regulate corporate conduct that drives climate harm."
"Though the United States is not a party to the treaty governing the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, this opinion should be a clarion call for transnational fossil fuel companies that have deceived the public for decades about the risks of their products," Merner added. "The era of accountability is here."
Markus Gehring, a fellow and director of studies in law at Hughes Hall at the University of Cambridge in England, called the advisory opinion "highly inspiring" and "seminal."
Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans at Earthjustice, said that "the Inter-American Court's ruling makes clear that climate change is an overriding threat to human rights in the world."
"Governments must act to cut carbon emissions drastically," Caputo stressed. "While the United States and some other major polluters have chosen to ignore climate science, the rest of the international community is advancing protections for all from the realities of climate harm."
Climate litigation is increasing globally in the wake of the 2015 Paris climate agreement. In the Americas, Indigenous peoples, children, and green groups are among those who have been seeking climate justice via litigation.
However, in the United States, instead of acknowledging the climate emergency, President Donald Trump has declared an "energy emergency" while pursuing a "drill, baby, drill" policy of fossil fuel extraction and expansion.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Quietly Approves Massive Crude Oil Expansion Project
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest," said one environmental attorney.
Jul 04, 2025
The Trump administration has quietly fast-tracked a massive oil expansion project that environmentalists and Democratic lawmakers warned could have a destructive impact on local communities and the climate.
As reported recently by the Oil and Gas Journal, the plan "involves expanding the Wildcat Loadout Facility, a key transfer point for moving Uinta basin crude oil to rail lines that transport it to refineries along the Gulf Coast."
The goal of the plan is to transfer an additional 70,000 barrels of oil per day from the Wildcat Loadout Facility, which is located in Utah, down to the Gulf Coast refineries via a route that runs along the Colorado River. Controversially, the Trump administration is also plowing ahead with the project by invoking emergency powers to address energy shortages despite the fact that the United States for the last couple of years has been producing record levels of domestic oil.
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) issued a joint statement condemning the Trump administration's push to approve the project while rushing through environmental impact reviews.
"The Bureau of Land Management's decision to fast-track the Wildcat Loadout expansion—a project that would transport an additional 70,000 barrels of crude oil on train tracks along the Colorado River—using emergency procedures is profoundly flawed," the Colorado Democrats said. "These procedures give the agency just 14 days to complete an environmental review—with no opportunity for public input or administrative appeal—despite the project's clear risks to Colorado. There is no credible energy emergency to justify bypassing public involvement and environmental safeguards. The United States is currently producing more oil and gas than any country in the world."
On Thursday, the Bureau of Land Management announced the completion of its accelerated environmental review of the project, drawing condemnation from climate advocates.
Wendy Park, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, described the administration's rush to approve the project as "pure hubris," especially given its "refusal to hear community concerns about oil spill risks." She added that "this fast-tracked review breezed past vital protections for clean air, public safety and endangered species."
Landon Newell, staff attorney for the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, accused the Trump administration of manufacturing an energy emergency to justify plans that could have a dire impact on local habitats.
"This thinly analyzed decision threatens the lifeblood of the American Southwest by authorizing the transport of more than 1 billion gallons annually of additional oil on railcars traveling alongside the Colorado River," he said. "Any derailment and oil spill would have a devastating impact on the Colorado River and the communities and ecosystems that rely upon it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular