Energy Transition Case Study: The Huntley Coal Plant in Tonawanda, New York

The United States is undergoing an energy transition. The share of electricity sourced from fossil fuels has steadily declined over the past decade, a consequence of both growing concern over climate change and the availability of low-cost renewable energy. Coal has faced a particularly steep decline—once the source of over half of the country’s electricity, it now supplies less than one-fifth (EIA 2022).This shift away from traditional energy sources puts at risk those workers and communities for whom fossil fuel production or industrial use is a key driver of prosperity. Thus, effective stewardship of the energy transition demands that policymakers prioritize fairness and opportunity for these groups. This concept of fairness for economically dislocated workers and communities is widely known as “just transition.”Facilitating a just transition is no easy task, as the challenges facing communities in transition are diverse and deeply rooted. But as the shift away from fossil fuels accelerates, the need for effective methods of intervention—including thoughtful public policy—to address these challenges becomes acute.The experiences of individual communities that have dealt with the loss of fossil fuel–related economic activity can serve as a valuable guide for how to pursue a just transition. This report examines the experience of one such community, Tonawanda, New York, and its process of dealing with the closure in 2016 of the C. R. Huntley Generating Station, a coal-fired electricity plant. For the purposes of this case study, Tonawanda refers to the town of 72,000 in western New York (US Census Bureau 2021a), not to be confused with the city of Tonawanda, a smaller municipality directly to the north of it, nor with North Tonawanda, a city farther north in Niagara County. Tonawanda includes the village of Kenmore, a semiautonomous suburb of 15,000 people (US Census Bureau 2019) that has its own mayor and board of trustees but is still subject to Tonawanda’s taxing jurisdiction. Kenmore and Tonawanda share a public school district called the Kenmore-Tonawanda Union Free School District, which includes nine schools that collectively serve almost 7,000 students (KTUFSD 2020). To understand the impact of the closure and how the community responded, we analyzed tax documents, pollutant reports, municipal budgets, and news coverage. We also conducted a series of telephone interviews in 2020 with the following individuals: Joseph Emminger, Tonawanda’s town supervisor; Richard Lipsitz, president of the Western New York Area Labor Federation, AFL-CIO; Dave Wasiura, assistant director of the local chapter of United Steel Workers; Cindy Winland, director of strategic priorities at Delta Institute; and staff in the Office of Senator Chuck Schumer.The Tonawanda experience provides illustrative examples of how a single facility’s closure can create challenges for local government budgeting and disrupt a variety of industrial operations in the local economy—some of which may be unexpected. Tonawanda also offers insights into how a diversity of stakeholders—including labor unions, environmental advocates, and local government—can work together effectively to facilitate transition, along with how federal and state government programs can provide important financial support. Given the diversified economy of the broader Buffalo metro area, however, the Tonawanda experience may have limited applicability to communities embedded in larger regions undergoing energy transition, such as Central Appalachia, where coal mining has precipitously declined in recent years. In these areas, communities may face larger economic and fiscal challenges, have more complex stakeholder dynamics, and enjoy less support from state government. That said, insights from the Tonawanda case can be helpful for communities undergoing transition of any kind, taken in context. These insights include the following:Start planning early. A proactive approach to transition is essential for securing funding, coordinating stakeholders, and planning redevelopment. Communities and organizations facing a transition should begin planning as soon as it becomes clear that a facility will shut down, and energy companies should endeavor to provide early warning.Formalize the transition. Without dedicated personnel and funding, transition planning can lack focus and lose momentum. To the extent possible, communities should seek to formalize the transition process, such as by establishing a committee or task force charged with creating an open forum for community deliberation, developing policy solutions, and potentially conducting advocacy and implementation.Engage a diversity of stakeholders. Within the sort of civic forum just described, it is important to engage diverse stakeholders early to ensure representation of the variety of community interests that will ultimately have a say in transition and development decisions.Identify a common objective. Clearly defining a common objective at the outset can provide the platform needed for effective cooperation among stakeholder groups.Expect and plan for indirect consequences. Proactive engagement with a diverse array of stakeholders can also help planners anticipate potential indirect consequences of a facility’s closure. For example, the Huntley closure jeopardized the availability of water for industrial uses in Erie County, which historically depended on pumping facilities at the Huntley plant. Energy transition programs should have sufficient flexibility to address local variations.Procure transition funding from state and federal agencies. The retirement of a coal facility can eliminate local government tax revenue, making it difficult to locally fund transition efforts. Dedicated state and federal transition funding can help local governments mitigate the immediate fiscal impact of the shutdown and provide them with a window in which to plan for an economic transition.