New York’s fracking ban is “misguided policy,” former Big Apple mayor Michael Bloomberg told the Wall Street Journal yesterday.

“To keep coal-fired plants in upstate New York and not frack doesn’t make any sense at all,” he said, adding that the benefits outweigh any potential risks.

Bloomberg’s criticism of the ban is noteworthy; as the Journal notes, he’s donated heavily to environmental groups, including $80 million to the Sierra Club and $6 million to the Environmental Defense Fund.

Of course, his opposition makes perfect sense. Natural gas produces far fewer emissions than other traditional energy sources, and the Energy Information Administration has cited it as a central reason why U.S. carbon emissions in 2012 dropped to their lowest level in two decades. The majority of New York homes heat with natural gas, and even New York’s radical leftist mayor, Bill de Blasio, cited the energy source’s role in reducing greenhouse-gas emissions.

 In other words, want cleaner air? Frack away.

As I noted recently in National Review, New York’s fracking ban is based on terrible science, motivated far more by politics than by objective inquiry.

 The state’s first draft of the environmental-conservation report actually recommended allowing fracking, so it was sent back for politically palatable revision. The Department of Health’s final report claims fracking may pose a public-health risk, but its justifications are laughable.

 Among the fracking bogeymen the report warns of: “Community impacts associated with boom-town economic effects.” Thank heavens Andrew Cuomo and Co. are here to save New Yorkers from the deleterious side-effects of prosperity.