WolfeNotes.com

Electric Ratepayers Subsidize Corporate Air Polluters

The Public And The Press Are Totally In The Dark

No Legislative Policy Allows DEP To Shift The Burden Of Pollution Fees To Electric Ratepayers

(Source: NJ DEP SIP)

The Murphy DEP today adopted an EPA approved amendment of the NJ Clean Air Act’s State Implementation Plan (SIP). (read the amendment)

The DEP amendment shifts the burden of paying *$36.8 million for federal Clean Air Act mandated air pollution fees from corporate polluters to electric ratepayers!

That’s right: at a time when the NJ Legislature is holding oversight hearings on the high and increasing costs of electricity and ways to lower them, the Murphy DEP just increased your electric bill and gave a subsidy to corporate air polluters.

The federal Clean Air Act imposes air pollution fees on polluters in State’s that fail to meet the air quality standards of the Act. DEP’s SIP explains:

The primary purpose of this document is to demonstrate an acceptable equivalent alternative program to fulfill the Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 185 fee requirement for the New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island (NY-NJ-CT) Nonattainment Area classified as Severe-17 for the revoked1979 1-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). CAA Section 185 applies to ozone non-attainment areas classified as Severe or Extreme which fail to attain by the attainment date. The fee, applicable to major sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx), must be collected for every year following the failure to reach attainment until the area attains the NAAQS.

These pollution fees are significant: (see Table 2 above)

Pursuant to CAA Section 185(b), the fee shall be equal to $5,000 per ton (adjusted annually for inflation beginning after 1990) emitted by the major source during the calendar year more than 80 percent of the baseline amount. USEPA publishes inflation adjusted fee rates periodically. The inflation adjusted fee rate of $8,511.33 per ton and $8,755.33 per ton for 2008 and 2009, respectively, are used to calculate fee obligations.

Instead of imposing these mandatory pollution fees on major polluters, the Murphy DEP crafted an “alternative”.

The DEP’s alternative to industry fees is your electric bill:

This document demonstrates that New Jersey’s Clean Energy Program (NJCEP), which collects fees from electricity ratepayers on a statewide basis and uses the proceeds to fund energy efficiency and renewable energy in New Jersey, is an acceptable alternative program to satisfy the Section 185 fee program requirements for the revoked 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS.

It’s bad enough that polluters cause people of NJ to breath unhealthy air, that the DEP has failed to meet the Clean Air Act’s mandated compliance dates, and that NJ’s air is classified as Severe or Extreme non-attainment.

It’s bad enough that NJ electricity bills are already too high.

And the DEP has diverted $36.8 million of “proceeds to fund energy efficiency and renewable energy”, – which include low income energy assistance – to subsidize corporate polluters!

But it is outrageous and unacceptable that DEP subsidizes corporate polluters and shift their pollution fee burden to your electric bill.

There is no legislation passed that allows DEP to do this.

The legislature seems totally unaware of this DEP policy.

The media and public are unaware as well.

Buried in Appendix 3 of the subject SIP amendment, the Department wrote:

“During the comment period, no comments were received on the proposed program.“

Not one comment. Think about that. Do you really think if people knew about this that no one would have objected?

Given the widespread public support for clean air and the importance of equitable and adequate funding of clean air programs to all NJ’s residents, that statement is deeply troubling and strongly suggests that the Department’s public education, outreach, and public participation program is completely broken.

Corporate polluter subsidies on the back of your monthly electric bill: nothing could more clearly expose the corrupt political power of corporate polluters in NJ, who have captured DEP.

Of course, these are the kinds of decisions made by a DEP Commissioner who was a former lawyer for corporate polluters.

Who will hold him accountable for that?

* corrected version – sorry for the math error!

Fascist Consolidation

Collapse Of Climate, US Empire, & The New Deal/Post WW II Orders

Why Is NJ League Of Conservation Voters “Corporate Advisory Board” Secret?

Corporate Influence On “Environmental Group” Raises Flags About Recent Endorsement of Mikie Sherrill For Governor

On February 10, 2025, the NJ League Of Conservation Voters co-sponsored a “conversation with Gubernatorial Candidates”. The event was broadcast by co-sponsor NJ Spotlight, see:

• Candidates for governor share common ground on environmental issues

During the debate, candidate Mikie Sherrill called the problems with offshore wind in New Jersey

“a real failure of permitting and regulation in our state. ….. We, because of many regulatory and permitting problems, took way too long. That cost us.”

That is a false and misleading statement and reflects a corporate ideological view of the “negative” role of environmental regulation and government oversight.

Sherrill then called for an “all of the above” energy policy, rehashing the failed Obama policy and serving to support expansion of nuclear power and fossil natural gas.

In response to a direct Yes or No question, Sherrill also refused to support a moratorium on new fossil infrastructure and instead offered a misleading and diversionary rambling word salad of a response about a “complex issue” (listen at time 29:50)

In contrast, candidate Fulop supported the moratorium concept (and even got the process right by mentioning the need for Gov.’s support (Executive Order) that leads to Legislation. That’s exactly how Gubernatorial leadership has been used in NJ for major environmental wins):

“It’s not reasonable to say, ‘Tomorrow it ends,’” Fulop said. “What you do with the goals and legislation moving forward that speaks to a moratorium is it sets an agenda on where you prioritize your money, how you interact with PSE&G and companies like that. And I think that’s important, that you get via legislation and the governor leaning into that. I think that’s why it’s important to have somebody that’s committed to that sort of ideology with understanding that it doesn’t happen tomorrow.”

In my view, Sherrill was the weakest Democratic candidate and closer to Republican candidate Bramnick – who openly attacked DEP and regulations – than the other more progressive Democratic candidates.

Curious, just 8 days later, NJ LCV endorsed Sherrill.

I was told by a reliable source that at the NJ LCV endorsement press conference, they wouldn’t make core sustainability commitments publicly and repeatedly wouldn’t commit to issues around electrification, truck standards etc…  This source advised that it was embarrassing for them or anyone that was watching.

I’ve long been a critic of NJ LCV, particularly their weak policy positions and sycophantic cheerleading of Gov. Murphy and his former corporate lawyer DEP Commissioner Shawn LaTourette.

In just now doing some “follow the money” research on NJ LCV, I found some troubling information on their IRS 990 filings, including the fact that revenues have increased 6 fold since 2017. It is not clear where all that money is coming from, including $2 million in new assets.

Worse, in trying to understand influence, my access was denied to NJ LCV “Corporate Advisory Board” webpage.

The Chairman of the Board of NJLCV is Randy Jones, a man with a very corporate background, according to his LinkedIn account.

So, the fact that the corporate influenced NJ LCV endorsed another corporate Democrat is not surprising.

But the lack of transparency certainly is troubling and raises questions about the credibility of their endorsement of Sherrill.

Will the press ask NJLCV and Sherrill tough questions about all that?

[End Note: I’ve taken no money from any group, individual, or politician and I do not endorse candidates.]

[Update: Here is how Ed Potosnak, Executive Director of NJ LCV, “responded” to my criticisms and concerns:

You should know that Bill Wolfe is quite out of touch and as a matter of practice I do not read his conspiracy rhetoric

That’s known as an ad hominem.

That’s Ed, second from the left, embracing Gov. Murphy.

Why Can’t US Media Be Specific And Call This Out?

Tell me why – tell me why – is it hard to make arrangements with yourself. ~~~ Neil Young(1970)

I just watched another excellent Chris Hedges Q&A video, where he responds to readers’ questions.

Again, I came away extremely frustrated (and it’s not because he again failed to answer my questions).

Don’t get me wrong, I love Hedges and have read all his books. I love the life of the mind and try to keep up my reading and thinking.

But there is a huge gulf between the ideas Hedges lays out, and the “average” American citizen and “voter” (and forget about the ignorance of Trump’s MAGA base).

Let me offer just two examples:

Millions of people have fought for decades to protect western lands, forests, national parks, and clean air and clean water. They have spent millions of hours reading technical documents, going to meetings, making phone calls, writing letters, testifying at hearings, and attending street protests.

Yet ALL – and I mean ALL – of that work of many people’s lifetimes and careers is completely wiped out by JUST TWO TRUMP EXECUTIVE ORDERS: Google:

• UNLEASHING ALASKA’S EXTRAORDINARY RESOURCE POTENTIAL

• UNLEASHING AMERICAN ENERGY

Read them! You don’t need to be a lawyer or policy wonk to see exactly what’s going on!

This is rape and pillage.

Yet none of this CONCRETE REALITY is reported by the media and effectively criticized by environmental groups.

Why doesn’t Hedges use his talents to be more specific?

How else are we to win the war against the Trump fascists if we don’t tell the people specifically how Trump is destroying what they care so deeply about?

As A Coastal State, New Jersey Is Heavily Reliant on NOAA’s Work

Over 2,00 scientists signed an open letter to Congress denouncing Trump’s dismantling of NOAA.

There were just 47 sign ons from New Jersey, a rather weak response from a coastal State that relies so heavily on NOAA research and is so impacted by the climate emergency and the ocean. I sense that scientists are intimidated and are self censoring.

Here’s the letter in full (emphases mine) – perhaps it can prompt NJ media, universities, environmental groups, and government officials to wake up and organize a comprehensive strategy to defend NJ from Trump’s dismantling and looting of the federal government.

Or maybe they’ll wait until Elon Musk develops a paid app for weather reports and storm warning information, see:

• Corrupt Crony Capitalism: Elon Musk’s Fingerprints Are All Over Trump’s Project 2025 Radical Dismantling

To:

Representative Mike Johnson, House Majority Leader

Representative Hakeem Jeffries, House Minority Leader

Senator John Thune, Senate Majority Leader

Senator Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader

Howard Lutnick, Secretary of Commerce

An Open Letter to Congress and the Trump Administration

We write to you with great alarm as we watch the critically important science conducted at many US agencies, institutions, and universities come under increasing assault. This includes threats to the budgets, staffing, and scientific work of the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Undermining the ability of scientists at NOAA to produce independent, world-class science will lead to devastating impacts on the United States and global climate and weather research community. These kinds of harms to NOAA would affect people around the world who depend on this life-saving information.

We call on you as the leaders of Congress and the Department of Commerce to take urgent action to stop these attacks, protect the resources and staffing at NOAA, and uphold its scientific integrity policies.

NOAA is one of the foremost US federal science agencies. Its foundational work has immense value for people’s daily lives and for the national and international economy. NOAA is the primary provider of critical, widely used forecasts for a range of extreme weather events, including hurricanes, heatwaves, and drought. It also provides projections of sea level rise and high tide flooding, and monitors wildfire smoke, marine heat waves, and other dangerous but less readily observable threats. This vital information is then used by emergency responders, policymakers, the private sector and the public to help prepare and protect communities, critical infrastructure and commerce. It must remain freely accessible so that all can reliably use it, not just those who are able to pay.

NOAA is a global leader in weather and climate monitoring and prediction, contributing to essential scientific research that helps us understand and respond to changes on our planet. It manages global climate and weather forecasting models; collects, processes, and distributes critical satellite and earth observation data; and conducts rigorous scientific research used by the global scientific community. Further, NOAA provides typhoon and cyclone monitoring systems, maintains famine early warning systems, and assists in international climate model intercomparison projects. The last are crucial in improving models and quantifying uncertainties in projections of climate change. In short, NOAA is the linchpin in global weather forecasting, climate monitoring, and climate research. NOAA staff work collaboratively with scientists around the world, to the benefit of people in the United States and of every other nation.

NOAA was officially created in 1970 by President Nixon and a bipartisan act of Congress. Part of the agency traces its roots back to the 1800s, with the establishment of the Survey of the Coast in 1807 and the Weather Bureau in 1870 (now the National Weather Service). Since 1970, NOAA has been fulfilling its mission to better understand the causes of changing weather and climate and to protect the people and resources of the United States. Dismantling NOAA would have dire consequences for American lives and livelihoods, as well as for the country’s economy and infrastructure. Undermining the agency’s work would also be a significant loss for the world’s weather and climate prediction community, which relies heavily on NOAA data and the expertise of its researchers.

Without a strong NOAA, a cornerstone of the US scientific research enterprise, the world will be flying blind into the growing perils of global climate change. It is unequivocal that human-induced climate change, primarily driven by burning fossil fuels, is the leading cause of the rapid heating of the oceans, the land surface, and the lower atmosphere. The harmful impacts of human-induced increases in heat-trapping emissions are readily apparent in accelerating sea level rise, worsening heat waves and flooding, longer and more intense wildfire seasons, altered rainfall patterns, the retreat of Arctic Sea ice, ocean acidification, and many other aspects of the climate system that are currently monitored by NOAA.

We call on the US Congress and the Trump administration to ensure that NOAA and its sub-agencies remain fully funded and staffed, and that the independent, trusted science the agency produces continues to be protected. A world without NOAA and other leading US science institutions would not only upend decades of invaluable scientific research, it would also signify an abdication of US leadership in climate science, and an erosion of US status as a scientific powerhouse.