The New York Power Authority’s decision to buy a $7.5 million private plane has detonated into a rare moment of bipartisan outrage in Albany, with lawmakers in both parties questioning how a climate-focused agency justifies luxury air travel for its executives. The uproar is not just about optics, it cuts to whether a public authority that markets itself as a clean energy leader can square that image with a fuel-hungry jet and a history of internal decisions that kept it flying.
At the center of the fight is a $3.4 billion public power provider that Governor Kathy Hochul has tasked with cutting emissions in state buildings, even as its own leaders log trips on a plane that burns thousands of gallons of jet fuel each year. I see the clash over this aircraft as a revealing test of how seriously New York’s political class takes its own climate rhetoric when convenience and status are on the line.
How a climate agency ended up with a $7.5 million jet
The controversy starts with the basic facts: the New York Power Authority, or NYPA, acquired a $7.5 million aircraft to move its executives and engineers around a state it is supposed to help decarbonize. That purchase has now become a political lightning rod because NYPA is a $3.4 billion public authority charged by Hochul with reducing carbon emissions in state buildings, yet its leadership chose to invest in a fuel-burning jet rather than rely on commercial flights, trains, or video calls. Critics have seized on the disconnect between NYPA’s clean energy branding and the reality of a plane that, according to reporting, consumes large quantities of jet fuel every year for trips that often begin and end in the same small circle of New York airports, a pattern that has helped trigger the current bipartisan backlash detailed in one account of critics.
Lawmakers’ anger did not materialize in a vacuum. Earlier reporting laid out how NYPA executives and guests were using a fuel-burning $7.5M private jet even as the authority trumpeted its role in New York’s clean energy transition, with flight logs showing patterns of VIP travel that raised questions about whether the agency could have saved itself significant money by flying commercial. One detailed look at the plane’s operations asked bluntly, “Could NYPA have saved itself $2M on flights?” and pointed to past audit findings that flagged the cost of maintaining an in-house aircraft. Another investigation into how the New York Power Authority trumpets clean energy while operating a jet that is “spewing jet fuel every year” helped set the stage for the current storm, documenting how the authority’s own sustainability messaging sits uneasily beside its travel habits.
Bipartisan outrage and a widening credibility gap
Once those details were public, the political reaction was swift and unusually unified. NY Democrats and Republicans, who rarely agree on much in Albany, have lined up to condemn NYPA’s use of the $7.5 million plane, arguing that the authority is sending the wrong message to ratepayers and taxpayers who are being asked to shoulder the costs of New York’s climate agenda. In one account of the backlash, Democrats and Republicans are described as united in blasting NYPA for flying executives on the $7.5 aircraft while burning thousands of gallons of jet fuel every year, a rare bipartisan alignment that underscores how politically toxic the optics have become. I read that unity as a sign that the plane has crossed from a technocratic budgeting issue into a symbol of elite privilege at odds with the sacrifices climate policy often demands of ordinary residents…