Three Republican state senators say a proposed carbon tax that’s estimated to cost residents 55 cents more per gallon of gas would disproportionately impact North Country citizens and could hike home heating costs by 26 percent.

In St. Lawrence County this would hit particularly hard as the county already imposes a 4-cent tax on home heating fuels already.

The senators are opposed to what they describe as a “gas tax” bill that has been advanced in the State Senate.

Senators Joe Griffo, R-Rome; Patty Ritchie, R-Heuvelton; and Dan Stec, R-Queensbury have released statements saying the tax could increase home heating fuel costs.

The bill “would impose a carbon tax of $55 per ton on fossil fuel emissions in New York. This would mean a roughly 55 cents per gallon increase in gasoline prices. In addition, consumers who heat their homes with propane, natural gas or fuel oil would be hit with an estimated 26 percent price increase,” Ritchie’s office said.

“While we must continue to take action to protect our environment, evidence has shown that New York’s emissions have fallen by as much as 95 percent since 1990,” Griffo said in a prepared statement. “We can continue on this trajectory to reduce our carbon footprint but must remain mindful of the effect that proposals such as this will have on the many New Yorkers who use a vehicle every day and who will be severely punished by this new ‘gas tax.’”

“This proposal will disproportionately impact Upstate residents who don’t have access to mass transit and already have high home heating costs due to extreme winter cold, where it’s common to have below zero temperatures for days at a time,” Ritchie said in a prepared statement. “To even try and impose these tax increases during a time when so many are struggling and our fragile economy is trying to rebound is unconscionable and I will continue to do all I can to fight back against this disastrous proposal.”

“Imagine being someone who can’t afford to heat your home learning that lawmakers in Albany are hard at work wanting to make it even more expensive. Legislation that may be called aspirational by some means something entirely different to the person or family who suffers through the winter. This isn’t progressive, it is regressive because it would hurt lower-income New Yorkers the most,” Stec said in a prepared statement.