GSI Sounded the Alarm on New Jersey’s Energy Master Plan — Sadly, We Were Proven Right

New Report Reveals Billions in Costs, Higher Prices, and Reduced Energy Reliability

Morristown, NJ — The Garden State Initiative (GSI) has released a new report, The Reality of the Renewable Energy Provisions of the New Jersey Energy Master Plan (NJEMP), exposing the staggering economic costs and unrealistic energy assumptions behind the administration’s aspirational goals.

“The New Jersey Energy Master Plan’s (NJEMP) focus on wind and solar will cost $5 billion per year and lead to 35% rate increases and higher cost of goods and services – rate increases that were both foreseeable and preventable,” said GSI President Audrey Lane.  “Our data clearly shows that the issue of rising costs was either not contemplated or, more likely, purposefully ignored when drafting the 2019 NJEMP. The attempt to shift blame for the impact on ratepayers is unfortunate.  However, the blame-game is futile.  It is my hope this research will provide the critical data needed for analysis in the drafting of new energy policy that will provide more affordable, reliable and sustainable energy in our state.”

Last May, GSI issued The Aspirations and Economics of the New Jersey Energy Master Plan, which sharply criticized Governor Murphy’s energy policies and urged a course correction. At the time, we warned that the Governor’s 2035 clean energy mandate was laudable in intent but unrealistic in execution, and that continued implementation would have a catastrophic impact on costs. Sadly, we were proven right.

For years, GSI has cautioned that the NJEMP would drive up costs for families and businesses while undermining the reliability of the state’s energy supply. This latest analysis confirms those concerns with detailed modeling and cost breakdowns.

Read the full report here: The Reality of the Renewable Energy Provisions of the New Jersey Energy Master Plan

Key Findings from the Report

• $5 billion per year: The annual cost to New Jersey taxpayers
• 35% increase: Projected rise in energy costs for residents and businesses
• Higher bills across the board: Households face steeper electric bills; businesses and consumers see higher prices for goods and services
• Shrinking energy supply: Six generation plants decommissioned in the past eight years with no replacement plan

The Questions the NJEMP Fails to Answer

1. What is the true cost of new electricity under the plan? Offshore wind and solar are among the most expensive options, with costs far beyond global climate benefits.
2. Is this the most cost-effective approach to reduce emissions? The plan ignores lower-cost alternatives, prioritizing high-priced offshore wind.
3. Do the benefits justify the costs? With marginal environmental gains and exorbitant expenses, the answer is clearly no.

By the Numbers

• Incremental cost of offshore wind: $3.09 billion per year
• Incremental cost of solar: $1.83 billion per year
• Off-grid solar with battery backup nearly doubles the cost
• Increase of 7 cents per kilowatt hour, driving a 35% overall rise in prices

Expert Analysis from the Report

“It is a fundamental principle of good policy that if the marginal cost of two options is different, policymakers should shift toward the one with lower costs. However, under the 2019 NJEMP, the state has set arbitrary targets for expensive offshore wind while neglecting more cost-effective options.”
— Kenneth Richards, Professor, O’Neill School of Public Affairs

The report also highlights hidden costs of integrating intermittent energy sources: storage, transmission, backup power, and eventual decommissioning. Poor planning, it warns, will exacerbate bottlenecks and raise system costs further.

GSI’s Recommendations

• Adopt a technology-neutral policy focused on emissions reduction at the lowest cost.
• Defer offshore wind projects indefinitely due to their prohibitive expense.
• Implement transparent, system-level planning that accounts for lifecycle costs, grid upgrades, and intermittency.
• Require cost-benefit analysis and transparency in setting energy targets.
• Prioritize strategies that ensure reliability, affordability, and competitiveness for New Jersey families and businesses.