Florida lawmakers stopped cities from banning natural gas. Climate change plans suffered
This story was reported in partnership with the WLRN News podcast Tallahassee Takeover.
This summer, Miami joined cities across the state in pledging to lower its greenhouse gas emissions in order to stave off the worst impacts of climate change, which could swamp Florida’s coasts with a few feet of sea rise by mid-century.
But Miami’s plan, like others across the state, was weakened by a set of new state laws that block municipalities from regulating fossil fuels in their own communities, as well as direct lobbying from the fossil fuel industry, Miami Herald reporting found.
The laws are part of a wave of gas industry-supported (and in Florida’s case, literally written) bills that are sweeping the nation in response to efforts from cities to tamp down on their emissions. So far, 19 states have passed similar legislation, with another five states considering the bills this year.
Natural gas, a blend of fossil fuels that is mostly methane gas, is primarily used in Florida in power plants. It makes up 70% of the energy generated in the state. It’s also used in homes and businesses to power heat pumps and gas stoves and water heaters — although the vast majority of consumers go with electric appliances. An estimate in Miami found natural gas only makes up about 5% of the city’s total emissions.
Still, many Florida cities — including Miami — eyed that slim figure as a simple way to slash emissions, and an important stand in the fight to get to net-zero emissions. Unlike other sources of emissions, like the cars people drive or the power provided by energy companies, this was something local governments could control with new legislation. Until these bills passed.
Miami Herald reporting found Florida’s version was initially written by utility company lawyers and closely followed model legislation advanced by the America Gas Association. An investigation earlier this year by the Guardian found the association was coordinating lobbying efforts for these bills across the country.
The initial spark for Florida’s bill was not Miami, which floated the idea of banning natural gas hookups in new construction within the decade, but in Tampa, where a city council member suggested a resolution that would have blocked new fossil fuel facilities from being built. That included natural gas pipelines (a bitter source of conflict in North Florida), new power plants, compressor plants — and even gas stations.
That last line is what drew the ire of Florida legislators. Within a few days of Tampa City Council Member Joe Citro introducing his non-binding resolution, there was already a bill specifically drafted to block his proposal.
“It was almost spontaneous, that some of the fossil fuel industry could take offense at wanting to save our city a few dollars and keep our energy clean and protect our environment,” Citro said.
State Sen. Travis Hutson, R-St. Augustine, immediately introduced two bills. The one written by utility lawyers that blocked cities from banning natural gas hookups, and another that stopped cities from restricting any type of “energy infrastructure” in the city. In the initial version of the bill, it would have retroactively applied to every effort in the state to halt the growth of fossil fuels.
Environmentalists were panicked that this far-reaching bill could undo everything from South Miami’s solar panel mandate for new construction to Broward County’s ban on fracking for natural gas within county borders.
Citro said he was inundated with calls and texts from cities begging him to withdraw his legislation before he spoiled their hard-won victories. So he did.
Yet the bills marched on, winning approval in every committee on party-line votes (except for the lone Democratic yes vote from Senate Democratic Leader Lauren Book) and the final OK from the governor’s desk. The versions that passed were slimmed down a little. They no longer applied retroactively, a relief to cities statewide.
However, their impacts were immediate.
In Tampa, Citro re-introduced a watered-down version of his earlier resolution — a suggestion that the city power its own buildings with renewable energy by 2035.
It no longer called for Tampa to block the construction of new natural gas pipelines, fossil fuel power plants or gas stations. Still, Citro argued his new resolution still moves the city in the right direction.
“Are our hands tied? No. Our wallets may be a little constricted, but I feel that we are going to be able to take major steps in getting it done with the consumers, with the businesses and with the administration,” he said.
In Miami, the bills passed in the months between the publication of the city’s draft plan to cut carbon emissions — called Miami Forever Carbon Neutral — and the final version.
The draft version had already been stripped of much of its aggressive language around curtailing natural gas emissions, the result of a successful lobbying campaign by natural gas company TECO, including a proposal to ban new natural gas hookups in new construction.
But the latest version was kneecapped even further by the bill in the Florida Legislature The city could no longer require residents and businesses to comply with its goals to slash natural gas emissions, it could only count on voluntary action.
As a result, the draft plan goal of getting 100% of new construction to net zero emissions by 2035 fell to 5%. The original plan to retrofit 40% of the stock of buildings that still run on natural gas to electricity by 2035 also shifted. The new plan called instead to just reduce all emissions from those natural gas-powered buildings by 60% by 2035, adding in the possibility that buildings could continue using natural gas for years but just become more energy efficient.
Despite the concrete changes to city policies as a result of these bills, some environmentalists say there’s still hope for passing comprehensive energy plans that move Florida toward more renewable energy.
Emily Gorman, the Florida director of the Sierra Club, said they’ve heard from cities all over the state that still want to advance renewable energy in their communities. And Gorman tells them they still can, just with incentives instead of bans.
“In advocate language, we would call this taking away your sticks and leaving your carrots, right?” they said. “When we talk to cities and counties about kind of the menu of options for your planning, we’re always encouraging them to be proactive and to think about the carrots that lead to an overall market transformation. So over time, there should be less and less need to turn towards bans because that market shift is happening.”
This story was originally published December 10, 2021 at 8:00 AM.
