Phil Murphy’s ‘Green New Deal’ is a disaster for New Jersey
My latest oped for IWF/WEX
New Jersey residents were facing a 20% hike on energy bills this month, thanks to bad policymaking designed to force consumers into using 100% renewable energy. Some customers already pay over $500 a month. But the Board of Public Utilities is bailing out Trenton lawmakers by delaying the rate increase until Sept. 30.
While it’s easy to scapegoat the regional grid operator and artificial intelligence data centers for skyrocketing energy bills, the blame falls squarely on Gov. Phil Murphy’s (D-NJ) net-zero climate policies born out of his Energy Master Plan.
The Murphy Energy Master Plan, an executive order signed in 2023, mandates that the Garden State achieve 100% clean energy by 2035 through solar, wind, electric vehicles, and batteries.
Unsurprisingly, New Jersey isn’t on track to meet this goal. The BPU recently canceled an offshore wind project bid, citing the Trump administration’s executive order that paused leases for renewed or new offshore projects. In late 2023, Ørsted canceled two offshore wind projects in the Atlantic Ocean.
New Jersey is also behind on its energy storage goal. As of May 2025, there are 10 operating battery storage projects with a combined operating capacity of 110 megawatts, well below the 2021 goal of building 600 MW of energy storage.
Economists forecast that Murphy’s green transition plan will cost $1.4 trillion in lost income, or $140,000 per New Jerseyan across the next 25 years, with little environmental benefit. This isn’t tenable for families already struggling to pay their energy bills.
The Murphy administration’s forced closure of six reliable power plants has led to higher energy costs. Since 2017, five coal plants and the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant, producing 20% of the state’s electricity capacity, have shut down.
As a result, New Jersey relies on imported electricity from out of state, mostly from fossil fuel sources. Currently, the state is primarily powered by natural gas (49%) and nuclear (42%) for electricity generation. Renewables, including solar energy, barely account for 8%.
PJM Interconnection, a grid operator servicing New Jersey and 12 other states, warned that prematurely retiring power plants and replacing them with wind and solar could jeopardize grid stability this summer. This concern was echoed in the North American Electric Reliability Corporation’s 2025 Summer Reliability Assessment that warned solar and battery additions “introduce more complexity and energy limitations into the resource mix.”
Unless the Murphy administration abandons its war on reliable energy, there may be rolling blackouts this summer coupled with higher energy prices for all 9.5 million residents. Since New Jersey consumes more energy than it produces, intermittent power sources can’t meet growing electricity demand from AI data centers that consume 5% of the state’s electricity load.
If the Murphy administration were serious about shoring up reliable clean energy sources, it would promote new nuclear energy projects. But it doesn’t acknowledge nuclear energy as a top solution.
That’s a mistake: Nuclear power is the most reliable electricity-generating source available, functioning for nearly 93% of the time and producing zero emissions while operating. There are two operating nuclear plants in the Garden State producing 42% of net electricity generation. A typical gigawatt facility powering upward of 875,000 homes only requires a square mile of land to operate, while equivalent solar and wind plants require 75 and 360 times more land to generate the same amount of electricity, respectively. Therefore, the BPU should be studying the feasibility of small modular reactors, as others are doing.
New Jersey politicians facing voters in November must be relieved that utility companies postponed the coming pain of higher prices that will inevitably result from the governor’s pursuit of unrealistic green energy goals. Voters shouldn’t be fooled. The pain is coming, unless the state ditches its scarcity mindset and, instead, embraces energy abundance. Residents should reject this extreme energy agenda — and the policy leaders who support it. Murphy’s plan hurts taxpayers, burdens businesses, and fails to improve the environment meaningfully.
Gabriella Hoffman is the director of the Independent Women’s Center for Energy and Conservation. Follow her on X at @gabby_hoffman.
Originally posted on Washington Examiner.
VERY well-done article for many people in this country ... who really need to consume, and will pass on to friends ...
well said. now, we just have to make mr murphy read it!