Law 97: A Deadline the Grid Can’t Keep
The Regenerative Strategist
Welcome and thank you for reading The Regenerative Strategist. A weekly update on harnessing the power of decarbonization, digitization, and enhanced data collection, delivering buildings of the future powered by renewable energy & automation.
Want to stay informed?
Subscribe to this series using the button above and let us know what you want to hear about next week using #UrbanAO in the comments below.
🌆 Introduction
New York City likes to legislate as if physics were a suggestion. Local Law 97 (LL97) is a prime example. It demands that more than 50,000 properties over 25,000 sq ft slash their carbon footprints or pay $268 per excess ton of CO₂ starting this year. By 2030, the caps get brutally tighter. On paper, it looks like a clean-air revolution. In practice, it’s a law written for an energy system that doesn’t exist yet.
🔌 The bet: that the electric grid will be clean and abundant by the time buildings switch off oil and gas. ❄️ The reality: New York’s peak demand is shifting to the coldest winter mornings. Grid operators already warn of a 7.3 GW increase in winter peak load by 2033 while renewable targets slip further into the decade. 💸 The outcome: Many owners will discover that paying fines is cheaper than ripping out boilers and rewiring entire towers. LL97 becomes a carbon tax by another name, not a transition.
This isn’t about lack of ambition. New Yorkers want cleaner air, warmer homes, and resilient power. But you can’t electrify a building into a socket that isn’t there. Nor can you force prewar apartments to triple their electrical service overnight without triggering neighborhood-wide upgrades. The law as written assumes electrons will save us. They won’t — not alone.
The good news is that New York doesn’t have to choose between fines and fantasy. We have systems that already work at scale. Manhattan’s district steam loop, south of 96th Street, quietly heats more than 1,500 customers every day. Clean the fuel feeding that network and you instantly cut emissions for hundreds of buildings at once. That’s real leverage. Pair it with heat pumps and envelope retrofits in residential stock, and you’ve got near-term gains that don’t overload the grid.
And then there are the molecules. Future-facing, but essential. Among the strongest candidates is turquoise hydrogen, a process that splits methane into hydrogen and solid carbon. It’s not ready to warm every apartment in Queens — codes and safety say no — but it could decarbonize district plants, data centers, and waterfront industry where siting and controls are manageable. If sequenced right, it shifts hydrogen from a headline to a tool.
So this week we ask the hard question: Can Local Law 97 succeed without collapsing into paper compliance and lawsuits? The answer is yes, but only if we stop pretending one wire can carry the entire transition. The next sections unpack why the math breaks for owners, why geography matters (hello 96th Street), how strategies must split between homes and hubs, and how turquoise hydrogen fits if we play the sequence right.
💸 Section 1 — The Math That Breaks
LL97 sets the rules of the game in blunt numbers: if your building goes over the cap, you pay $268 per excess ton of CO₂. That penalty starts this year, and it ratchets up sharply by 2030. On paper, this is designed to make fines so painful that owners rush to retrofit. In practice, many are doing the math and realizing something odd: it’s cheaper to break the law than comply with it.
Let’s put numbers on the table. A mid-size Manhattan co-op with a steam boiler might emit ~700 tons of CO₂ above its cap in 2025. At $268 per ton, that’s a fine of about $187,600 per year. Painful, yes. But the board’s engineers estimate that replacing the boiler with electric heat pumps, plus rewiring and upgrading the building’s service, would cost $8 million or more. At today’s interest rates, that’s a decades-long payback — if it ever pays back at all.
This is not an isolated case. A real estate advisor recently told the press that eliminating fines entirely for one of his clients would require “15 to 20 times the fine amount” in upfront capital. Another consultant noted budgets of $10 million+ for multifamily retrofits, compared to fines in the hundreds of thousands per year. You don’t need a PhD in finance to see where boards are leaning. Many will treat LL97 as a carbon tax with a cap, budgeting the fine as an operating expense rather than embarking on disruptive and risky retrofits.
📉 This undermines the law’s intent. Instead of cutting emissions, we risk creating a market where paying to pollute is cheaper than fixing the system. And while the city has floated tweaks — like limiting the use of Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) to offset emissions — these don’t solve the core problem. RECs may green the ledger, but they don’t touch the pipes or the grid in the short run.
The second break in the math is structural, not just financial. Converting thousands of old buildings to electric heat is not just a matter of budget lines. It’s physics. Most prewar and postwar towers were never designed for the loads that full electrification demands. Even if an owner is willing to spend millions, Con Edison often has to approve service upgrades, add transformers, or even build out new feeders. The timeline for that isn’t months — it’s years. And that’s before you deal with the practical limits of space in basements and risers.
❄️ Winter electrification makes this worse. New York’s grid was built for summer peaks — think air conditioners on a sweltering August afternoon. But as heating flips to electric, the peak shifts to January mornings. NYISO’s latest outlook projects 7.3 GW of new winter peak load by 2033, more than three times the projected summer growth. That is like bolting an extra Boston onto New York’s winter demand. Every new heat pump, every electric boiler adds to that peak. Without massive storage or generation, those January mornings could mean stress, blackouts, or emergency gas burn at power plants.
This is why owners hesitate. It’s not just the ROI. It’s the fear of investing tens of millions into electrification that may not actually reduce their carbon footprint if the grid is still gas-heavy — or worse, leaves them with unreliable service in the coldest weeks. As one co-op president put it bluntly: “Why should we spend $10 million to plug into a socket that doesn’t exist?”
There’s also the timing mismatch. Only about 8–11% of covered buildings exceed the caps in the first compliance window (2024–2029). But by 2030, that jumps to over 70%. Which means the real crunch comes later this decade. And unless policy shifts, we’re staring at a cliff: thousands of buildings suddenly out of compliance, with fines stacking into billions, and still no feasible retrofit path for most of them.
In sum, the math breaks in three ways:
1. Financially — fines are cheaper than retrofits.
2. Structurally — the grid and buildings can’t upgrade at the required pace.
3. Temporally — the caps tighten before the infrastructure is ready.
Unless those mismatches are addressed, LL97 will not drive the retrofits it promised. It will drive a compliance strategy of fines, RECs, and legal challenges.
🗺️ Section 2 — Geography Matters: South of 96th Street
New York’s building stock isn’t one uniform canvas. Geography shapes the path to decarbonization just as much as policy. And nowhere is that clearer than the invisible line at 96th Street.
🔽 South of 96th on the West Side (and to 89th on the East), buildings plug into one of the largest district steam systems in the world. Operated by Con Edison, it spans more than 100 miles of mains and service pipes and heats around 1,500 customers — from the Empire State Building to Rockefeller Center. That network quietly does the work of thousands of boilers every winter morning.
🔼 North of 96th (and in the boroughs beyond), most buildings don’t have that luxury. They burn oil or gas in their own basements. To decarbonize, they face the heavy lift of full electrification or complex fuel switching.
This boundary matters for LL97 because buildings on steam have a collective option: clean the input fuel at a handful of plants, and thousands of properties instantly drop their emissions profile. Instead of retrofitting 500 buildings one by one, you decarbonize a single node — the East River steam plant — and the effect ripples through the network.
That’s already happening. Con Edison is installing industrial-scale heat pumps to harvest heat from the East River and feed it into the steam loop. They’re building heat recovery systems to reclaim waste heat from steam condensate. Each upgrade lowers the carbon intensity of the steam that flows through Midtown. For a building owner south of 96th, that means emissions drop without touching a pipe inside the property.
Contrast that with a co-op on the Upper West Side at 100th Street. No steam hookup. The board faces quotes in the millions for heat pumps and electrical upgrades. They’re told the fines will start modestly but grow over time. They’re looking at years of disruption to tenants and basements torn up for new risers. Geography has made their compliance path exponentially harder.
🌍 This isn’t unique to New York. Cities with district energy consistently find that greening central plants beats retrofitting each building in isolation.
The lesson is simple: where networks exist, leverage them first. LL97’s rigid building-by-building caps ignore this. The law treats a Midtown office on ConEd steam and a Bronx walk-up on oil as the same compliance unit. In reality, they’re worlds apart.
What’s at stake is scale. Every retrofit north of 96th is bespoke: engineers, contractors, financing, tenant disruption. Every retrofit south of 96th can, in theory, be pooled: decarbonize the plant and let the network distribute the benefit.
And yet, policy doesn’t flex around that reality. Owners on steam are still staring at fines, even as ConEd’s decarbonization projects are underway. Owners outside the steam zone are asked to make building-level investments that may not pencil out until the grid itself is greener. Both groups are locked into the same compliance clock, even though their underlying systems move on different timelines.
⚖️ This is where LL97 risks creating perverse incentives. If the city doesn’t formally recognize and reward network-level decarbonization, building owners might underinvest or double-pay — fines plus rising steam rates to cover ConEd’s clean investments. Conversely, buildings north of 96th might simply pay fines because their individual options are prohibitively expensive, leaving whole neighborhoods behind.
The fix isn’t complicated: policy should follow geography.
In other words, put the heavy lift where it counts. Use district steam to decarbonize dense cores quickly. Use targeted retrofits in areas without networks. Stop pretending the whole city runs on the same infrastructure.
Because if LL97 keeps ignoring geography, it won’t just fail on numbers. It will fail on fairness.
🏠 vs 🏢 Section 3 — Homes and Hubs Need Different Playbooks
Local Law 97 treats every covered property the same: a cap, a fine, a deadline. But the reality on the ground is split. What works for a six-story co-op on the Upper West Side won’t work for a 60-story office tower in Midtown. To avoid mass non-compliance, LL97 has to diverge into two playbooks.
1. Homes: Keep it simple, keep it proven
NYC has more than 3.5 million residential units, and tens of thousands fall under LL97. Most are in buildings built before 1970, many before 1940. These structures were designed for oil or gas boilers, not heat pumps. They often have electrical service rated at 60–100 amps per apartment — nowhere near what’s needed for whole-building electric heat.
So the residential pathway must emphasize low-disruption, proven solutions:
💸 Costs matter. A typical pre-war 20-unit building faces retrofit bills of $1–2 million for a full heat pump conversion. With incentives, that might drop by a third, but it still dwarfs early-period fines (in the $50k–100k range). Many boards will rationally pay fines unless the math changes.
This is why policy must lean on carrots, not just sticks for residential. ConEd and NYSERDA programs that fund up to 50% of heat pump installs need to scale. Financing models like PACE (Property Assessed Clean Energy) can spread retrofit costs over 20+ years. And LL97 compliance should credit partial reductions — if a co-op cuts emissions 25%, that should count, even if the cap still isn’t met.
🚫 What homes should not do: chase hydrogen. The UK government cancelled its hydrogen-heating town pilot in 2024, concluding that safety, storage, and cost make it unfit for homes. That’s a cautionary tale: New York’s residential stock should stick with electrification and efficiency, not experimental gas mixes.
2. Hubs: Think scale, think sequencing
Large commercial and institutional hubs are a different animal. Consider:
For these giants, piecemeal retrofits won’t cut it. They need system-level solutions:
📊 The economics differ here too. A Fortune 500 tenant in a Midtown tower might see annual fines of $5–10 million by 2030 if no action is taken. For them, retrofitting or signing a long-term green power deal can pay back quickly relative to fines. Large owners also have access to green bonds, corporate PPAs, and capital markets that small co-ops do not.
But timing is everything. The grid isn’t on track for 70% renewables by 2030; NYISO sees that milestone slipping to 2033. Offshore wind projects meant to deliver 9 GW to NYC are delayed into the early 2030s. If a major hub electrifies too soon, it plugs into a grid still running on gas, eroding the carbon benefit. If it waits too long, fines pile up. Sequencing upgrades with real grid milestones — CHPE line in 2026, offshore wind phases around 2030–33 — is critical.
Split strategies, shared principle
LL97 must evolve to recognize this split. Otherwise, residential boards will default to fines, and hubs will stall investments until the last minute. Either way, the law misses its purpose.
🧪 Section 4 — Turquoise Hydrogen: A Molecule With Timing
Hydrogen has been hyped as the miracle fuel — but in reality, its role is nuanced. For New York, one pathway deserves serious attention: turquoise hydrogen.
What it is
Produced by methane pyrolysis, turquoise hydrogen splits natural gas into hydrogen gas and solid carbon. No stack CO₂. When powered with clean electricity or renewable heat, lifecycle emissions drop dramatically. The solid carbon is not waste — it’s a product. Carbon black is used in tires, plastics, and batteries, turning a climate challenge into an industrial feedstock.
📊 Efficiency edge: Methane pyrolysis consumes 30–40% less energy than electrolysis to produce the same hydrogen output. Combine that with co-product sales, and turquoise hydrogen is positioned to undercut the cost of green hydrogen in the medium term.
Evidence on the ground
This is not theoretical.
In other words: turquoise hydrogen is no longer a lab project. It’s commercializing now.
Where it fits in NYC
Here’s the critical pivot: not in apartments. The UK pulled the plug on its “hydrogen town” pilot in 2024, after concluding hydrogen home heating faced safety, cost, and acceptance barriers. That’s a smart boundary. New York should not waste political capital pushing hydrogen into co-ops or prewar walk-ups.
Instead, focus on concentrated non-residential hubs where hydrogen makes sense today:
These sites have the scale, the safety protocols, and the economic incentive to adopt first.
The sequencing principle
Hydrogen’s role is not about if, but when.
1. Now–2027: Launch at least 2–3 NYC pilots at steam plants and data centers. Require transparent lifecycle accounting (upstream methane leakage, carbon black use).
2. 2028–2035: Expand to larger hubs, prove costs below $2/kg H₂, integrate with thermal storage to shave winter peaks.
3. 2035 onward: When pilots succeed, turquoise hydrogen becomes a standing part of NYC’s energy mix — a backbone fuel for the hardest-to-electrify loads.
By 2040, NYC could displace millions of MMBtu of natural gas in hubs with hydrogen blends, cutting hundreds of thousands of tons of CO₂ annually without burdening the residential grid.
Why it matters
NYISO projects 7.3 GW of new winter load by 2033 as heating electrifies. That’s like bolting another Boston onto the grid. Hydrogen provides a parallel lane. Instead of forcing every kilowatt through wires, turquoise hydrogen can carry part of the load — with resilience and redundancy baked in.
The path forward isn’t electrons or molecules. It’s both. Hydrogen will not save LL97 in 2030. But with the right pilots now, it can anchor the 2030s and 2040s, making New York’s decarbonization deeper, cheaper, and more resilient.
🔑 Conclusion — Systems Over Slogans
Local Law 97 is not doomed by ambition. It is at risk because ambition has been stapled to an impossible timeline and a one-size-fits-all pathway. The law imagines a city where every prewar apartment electrifies at once, where the grid is 70% renewable by 2030, and where fines are enough to force capital markets to bend physics. That city doesn’t exist.
But the bones of a smarter system are here. New York has three things most cities would envy:
1. Scale in networks — district steam south of 96th, a grid already threaded through every block, and dense load centers that make shared solutions pay.
2. Policy leverage — LL97’s caps are blunt, but they have put carbon math on every board agenda in the city.
3. Capital markets — a real estate sector worth trillions that can absorb innovation when the path is clear and bankable.
What LL97 needs now is a reset from slogans to systems.
The risk of ignoring these shifts is not just fines. It’s failure at scale:
The alternative is systems thinking. Treat LL97 not as a static penalty regime, but as a living framework that evolves with infrastructure, geography, and technology. Keep the ambition — but let the path bend toward what works.
Because the truth is simple: New York cannot electrify its way to 2030. It can, however, decarbonize its way there if it uses every tool it has — steam, storage, heat pumps, hydrogen, performance markets, and sequencing that matches reality.
⚡🏙️ One wire will not carry the transition. A system will.
Final Thoughts
If you want to talk over your options, click here to schedule a time to chat with our Founder Joe MacDonald see how we can help you revolutionize global project development, management, and delivery.
If you enjoyed The Regenerative Strategist edition, I have a quick favour to ask:
1. Subscribe to The Regenerative Strategist with the button at the top of this post so you don’t miss a single #urbanao post.
2. Share this post with your network on LinkedIn if you think they could benefit from the message using the Share button below.