[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6125936,"mediaKeyId","2674172-5ff653c28a5f9720794ecde9bdad0bbc","parentId",2674172,"title","Industry witness tells Senate energy committee the clean‑energy transition needs detailed modeling, suggests combined‑cycle retooling and carbon capture","audioSeconds",865,"startMs",823000,"endMs",1688000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2674172-5ff653c28a5f9720794ecde9bdad0bbc&start=823&end=1688","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2674172-5ff653c28a5f9720794ecde9bdad0bbc/thumbnail_823000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6125936/New-York/Industry-witness-tells-Senate-energy-committee-the-cleanenergy-transition-needs-detailed-modeling-suggests-combinedcycle-retooling-and-carbon-capture","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6125936-3e1c70233a0041e86014a922c317dab2/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448240&Signature=T6SBShxNEnCb16rm-WO867qWHxrK2y4zMHwCq22wTXlC0QLMHeXg3QGvUiiit23JnmJemeZfJbKvFHNo6Lqs-UbjQ7exPHuDsrCMXYHQysjkZLELcE7Qsy1efG875JxrN2mwVbnlwNTF2pWkzPmvlpKthHRYrFMhvOvqOgLWV9iT97l7nN1KVf9RoSuHdNfvSCSTMkfOzGLse21sGNEmfv6Y0ThPjoUjlKPMXMtEkG01gjwOBFOzCOpScfRQ1uDQTnQTDJWIK6TsI5vrE-QkYkSjNtfEmfTsSEma4qV~i8SGrB5qt5hsnt4mnIIS-tR0mkAmlE5Mdo751QVC7PvCYQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","NYSenate","date","2025-03-18T00:00:00Z","article","State Senator Kevin Parker opened the committee hearing by introducing guest witness Rich Allen Logan, who described himself as an electrical engineer with a Cornell bachelor’s and master’s degree and as a business owner who has built and operated highly energy‑efficient industrial and residential facilities.

Logan told the committee that New York’s push to electrify buildings and transportation and to replace fossil generators with intermittent wind and solar requires more detailed technical and logistical modeling. He said concerns include limits in workforce availability, transformer and materials supply chains, the short life span of current lithium‑ion battery systems and the high capital expense of grid‑scale storage.

“This is not a partisan issue to me. This is an issue purely an issue of science and physics,” Logan said, adding that some academic papers and models he reviewed rely on assumptions he considers flawed.

Why it matters: Committee members debating the Just Energy Transition Act asked the witness whether the bill’s planning timeline and statutory direction give NYSERDA sufficient flexibility to avoid reliability problems and undue rate pressure. The witness urged the committee to include retooling existing combined‑cycle generation, targeted carbon capture and a realistic assessment of storage needs as part of the state’s transition planning.

Key points from testimony and committee exchanges

- Reliability and storage scale: Logan said that without sufficient energy storage the system “breaks down,” and that NYSERDA’s storage estimates translate into very large capital needs. He quoted an estimate for battery capacity capital needs of about $3.4 trillion and a broader transition cost estimate of about $4.2 trillion; he said those figures came from analyses he had reviewed and asked the committee to request the underlying calculations.

- Combined‑cycle retooling and carbon capture: Logan said converting existing fossil plants to combined‑cycle operation can reduce fuel use and CO2 emissions by roughly 30–40% immediately, and that pairing combined‑cycle retrofit with carbon capture could yield larger reductions while maintaining high capacity factors. “When you go to a combined cycle plant, you’re reducing the carbon emissions by 30 to 40% because they’re so much more efficient,” he told the committee.

- Technology, supply chains and fire risk: Logan highlighted workforce shortages (electricians), transformer and materials bottlenecks, and fire risks associated with lithium‑ion battery storage, pointing to the Moss Landing incidents as an example. He suggested alternative storage approaches such as iron‑based batteries or electrostatic storage (supercapacitors) could reduce some risks and that first‑responder protocols need development.

- Microgrids and on‑site generation: Logan said he had built a microgrid at his facility and recommended greater attention to on‑site and distributed generation that reduces distribution costs.

Committee reaction and next steps

Members probed Logan on his cost estimates and asked for the underlying models. Senator Welch and others asked whether the committee should withdraw or pause bills until the committee heard testimony; Parker declined and proceeded with committee votes. Several members requested that NYSERDA and the Public Service Commission provide comparative modeling — including scenarios that incorporate combined‑cycle retooling, carbon capture, renewables plus storage and demand‑side measures — so the committee can compare costs and reliability outcomes before advancing final policy decisions.

Logan offered to supply his calculations and papers to committee staff for technical review. The committee did not adopt any immediate policy changes at the hearing; multiple bills were sent to either third reading or the Finance Committee for fiscal review.

Ending: Committee members said they will seek additional modeling and fiscal analyses from NYSERDA, NYISO and staff before final floor action on major transition legislation.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Standing Committee on Energy and Telecommunications - 03/18/2025","oneSentenceSummary","An energy-industry witness told the Senate Standing Committee on Energy and Telecommunications that New York’s current planning for rapid electrification and storage is under‑modelled and could be very costly; he urged the committee to study combined‑cycle retooling and carbon capture alongside renewables and storage.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature NY, New York","taxId",77685,"location","New York","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6125941,"Senate energy committee advances multiple energy bills; Just Energy Transition Act sent to finance",710,86000,796000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2674172-5ff653c28a5f9720794ecde9bdad0bbc&start=86&end=796","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2674172-5ff653c28a5f9720794ecde9bdad0bbc/thumbnail_86000.jpg","/articles/6125941/New-York/Senate-energy-committee-advances-multiple-energy-bills-Just-Energy-Transition-Act-sent-to-finance","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6125941-d2c8103642e606b07a222aaf21c62c8d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448240&Signature=C~4pybRtWrto4vKX7bUeBFwU1sun-JrR1vrI1AVfPJmEIJgm2W4XAJwmr3yBD9dgMFsnqa0qflEC2lVTPbMmwdCXoD6q1VTZFRMKKDtrRlWyHKDXJ~URrA6YQfHXzWjzOs3gmpGpG3mh90YfAG-5M7HBi363vWkBdeE9Yo8zDjOab0cy1p4wdqcprJHG-vP~MdSgQ3JR-BPSBcvbaHE-hjWmxTNsb~03Y16ngdf-GNrJtqfsu~Xx3-s0c~txql5TwKTT-2he8PXUhan7e~M~aubdSNID1BwjnN1E270mwJg-qWORmW-Bfz31kjZtgBB4UjxEFh-rGS6PM05zdtzzRA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","State Senator Kevin Parker, chair of the Senate Standing Committee on Energy and Telecommunications, presided over votes on six energy-related measures and moved the Just Energy Transition Act to the Senate Finance Committee during a May committee meeting.

The committee approved or advanced bills that would direct studies, set planning tasks for state energy authorities and require implementation planning for electric-vehicle fast charging. One bill directing a NYSERDA study of independently constructed microgrids passed the committee unanimously.

Why it matters: The measures will shape how New York studies and plans energy storage, grid upgrades and EV charging deployment. Several bills direct or expand responsibilities for the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) and the Public Service Commission (PSC), and are intended to influence how the state meets the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) targets.

Most important actions

- S.2484 (sponsor: Sen. Parker) — Directs the State Energy Planning Board to study time frames for replacing or upgrading battery energy-storage systems at renewable facilities. The committee moved the bill to third reading after recorded opposition from two members; substitutions and a motion to strike in favor of a small modular reactor feasibility bill were ruled out of order.

- S.4191 (sponsor: listed on the agenda) — Would amend energy law relating to code requirements for heavy distribution centers. The committee moved the bill to third reading; committee discussion recorded two no votes and one recorded “without recommendation.”

- S.5111 (sponsor: Sen. Barker) — The committee considered the Just Energy Transition Act and, after discussion and multiple procedural appeals, moved the bill to the Finance Committee for further consideration. Committee members raised questions about cost, reliability and overlap with other pending bills; attempts to substitute other proposals were ruled out of order.

- S.5189 (sponsor: Sen. Comrie) — Requires NYSERDA to develop a comprehensive EV fast-charging station implementation plan. The committee moved the bill to Finance with one recorded nay.

- S.6171A (sponsor: Sen. Parker) — Directs NYSERDA to study feasibility and efficiency of independently constructed microgrids for homes and neighborhoods. The committee passed the measure unanimously and advanced it to third reading.

Procedure and context

Chair Kevin Parker repeatedly ruled substitution motions out of order during the meeting; members appealed those rulings and the appeals failed on hand-counts recorded by the clerk. Several members also asked that guest testimony scheduled after the votes be heard before final action; the chair declined and votes proceeded. Committee counsel Justin Cher (committee director) staffed the meeting and the chair indicated staff will consider scheduling other bills for future agendas.

What’s next

Bills advanced to third reading will appear on the Senate floor calendar for further action. Measures sent to the Finance Committee will be reviewed there for fiscal impact and potential amendment before any further Senate action.

Votes at a glance (committee action)

- S.2484 — Moved to third reading; committee recorded two no votes.
- S.4191 — Moved to third reading; committee recorded two no votes and one “without recommendation.”
- S.5111 (Just Energy Transition Act) — Moved to Finance Committee after debate and procedural appeals; vote counts not specified on the floor transcript excerpt.
- S.5189 — Moved to Finance Committee; one recorded nay.
- S.6171A — Passed committee unanimously; advanced to third reading.

The meeting adjourned following scheduled guest testimony and additional committee discussion.","The Senate Standing Committee on Energy and Telecommunications moved several energy-related bills forward on a mostly party-line and procedural record and sent the Just Energy Transition Act to the Finance Committee for further review. A separate microgrid study bill passed the committee unanimously.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Industry witness tells Senate energy committee the clean‑energy transition needs detailed modeling, suggests combined‑cycle retooling and carbon capture

Senate energy committee advances multiple energy bills; Just Energy Transition Act sent to finance