By Carolyn Kissane
About the author: Carolyn Kissane is the associate dean of the NYU-School of Professional Studies Center for Global Affairs, and the founding director of the SPS Energy, Climate Justice, and Sustainability Lab.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul halted implementation last week of the All-Electric Buildings Act, a 2023 state law that banned gas in most new residential developments. She cited affordability, technology readiness, and consumer-choice concerns for the reversal. Critics raised these issues when the law was passed in 2023. It wasn't until New Yorkers' energy costs and utility bills soared that Hochul heard them clearly.
Within just two years, New York has shifted from an ambitious all-electric housing plan to approving a $1 billion gas pipeline expansion. This recourse is a case study in what happens when political aspiration and economic realities collide. When policy signals outrun operational reality, markets and voters eventually force a correction.
The All-Electric Act was a symbolic victory for climate advocates when it passed, but one detached from system fundamentals. New York produces almost no natural gas, yet it consumes over 1,200 billion cubic feet annually. It has to import more than 99% of its supply, primarily from Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale. This recalls the dissonance of former-Governor Andrew Cuomo's fracking ban of 2014. Despite the ban, natural-gas-fired plants continued to supply roughly half of New York's electricity.
Political opposition to production doesn't change dependence on consumption. That contradiction is now shaping New York's infrastructure decisions.
Earlier this month, regulators in New York and New Jersey approved the Williams' Northeast Supply Enhancement Project, a long-delayed $1 billion expansion of an existing pipeline that will bring additional Pennsylvania natural gas under Raritan Bay to Long Island and New York City, enough to serve more than 2 million homes. Cuomo rejected the project three times. Hochul, who is facing re-election in 2026, revived it. Energy reliability and cost containment have become political imperatives.
Hochul also launched an initiative to develop at least one gigawatt of new nuclear capacity. It is a striking departure from her predecessor's approach.
In 2017, Cuomo ordered the closure of the Indian Point Energy Center, a nuclear power plant that supplied roughly a quarter of New York City's power and 10% of the state's electricity. He cited safety concerns -- the plant sits on a fault line. Clean alternatives, he argued, would fill the gap. That never materialized.
After the plant was shut down, gas-fired generation rose from 36 to 40%, and emissions increased. The loss of 2,000 megawatts of carbon-free baseload power left a gap filled by fossil fuels. The decision revealed the cost of prioritizing short-term symbolism over longer-term stability.
Hochul's embrace of nuclear power acknowledges what grid operators have long understood: firmly reliable, zero-emission baseload capacity is a nonnegotiable in order to achieve decarbonization and affordability in energy. Labor unions, manufacturers, and energy developers have lined up in support of Hochul. They understand nuclear expansion as a way to secure both climate and economic competitiveness.
The governor's motivation is as much electoral as it is economic. Attracting investment, specifically for artificial intelligence development, is a cornerstone of her reelection agenda. She is positioning New York as a hub for AI, advanced manufacturing, and semiconductor production, all of which depend on vast and reliable electricity supplies. The New York Independent System Operator projects the state will require an additional 2.5 gigawatts of generation by 2035. Some 40% of that new energy demand will come from central New York, where semiconductor fabrication and AI-driven industries are expanding.
These facilities cannot operate on intermittent renewables alone. To attract and retain capital, New York must accelerate permitting, expand grid capacity, and secure dependable baseload power. Hochul is realizing that, and tech firms are responding. Anthropic recently announced plans for a new data center in New York as part of a $50 billion investment in computing infrastructure
Energy transitions span decades; political cycles do not. That mismatch produces policy whiplash. Bans, pauses, and pivots send mixed signals to investors, developers and data-center operators. For them, the energy question isn't just about current costs, but also about predictability: Will New York provide reliable, affordable power at scale regardless of how political winds shift in the future?
New York's experience reflects a broader truth for the rest of the nation. High-cost states risk losing investment as industrial electricity demand surges. States that legislate through prohibition and political signaling risk higher costs, slower growth, and eroded credibility. States that pair ambition with realism and invest in renewables, nuclear, and dependable gas supplies will attract capital.
New York's pipeline approval, nuclear revival, and retreat from the all-electric mandate amount to a belated acknowledgment of that truth.
Guest commentaries like this one are written by authors outside the Barron's newsroom. They reflect the perspective and opinions of the authors. Submit feedback and commentary pitches to ideas@barrons.com .
This content was created by Barron's, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. Barron's is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal.
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
November 18, 2025 13:31 ET (18:31 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.