Posted on 12/22/2025 7:07:03 AM PST by Red Badger
What about propane for rural folks? Do we have to give up gas furnaces and stoves? Who will pay? Will electric bills go way up?
Flames emerge from burners on a natural gas stove, Wednesday, June 21, 2023, in Walpole, Mass. Gas and construction trade groups sued to block New York state’s controversial ban on gas stoves and furnaces in new buildings. (AP Photo/Steven Senne) Credit: AP
================================================================================
News that Colorado has set hard target dates for an end to burning natural gas in our daily lives prompted many “wait, what?” questions from Colorado Sun readers. And we are here to help.
The Public Utilities Commission approved a “Clean Heat Plan” that calls for the state’s natural gas utilities to cut emissions from delivering and burning natural gas by 41% in the next 10 years, and all natural gas emissions entirely by 2050. We talked to state regulators, clean energy officials and advocates, and consumer groups for answers to your most urgent questions.
Q: What about propane? Many rural and mountain Colorado homes have a propane tank. Must those homes convert to expensive electric heating, hot water and cooking appliances, and if so, who pays?
A: The newly approved plans do not cover propane tanks or propane distributors. They task the big utilities delivering natural gas to homes in pipelines with the mandate to hit the targets. That means Xcel, Atmos Energy and Black Hills Energy. Homes using existing propane tanks are not directly affected, though clean energy advocates still encourage those homeowners to seek rebates and other help in converting to more efficient electrical appliances that will be cheaper to operate.
Q: As a homeowner, do I have to do something about my gas appliances or furnace?
A: The new rules are not aimed at homeowners. They are requirements for the utilities. The utilities will be the ones planning internal changes and consumer and business incentives to both limit harmful methane leaks and convince people to switch to electric appliances. Utilities will still be delivering natural gas to consumers, but they must now start taking concrete steps toward gradually reducing use and emissions. If a utility believes it will take hundreds of millions of dollars in rebate incentives to get an adequate number of installed electric appliances, thereby cutting fossil fuel emissions, they would also have to get that spending and potential rate increases approved by the PUC. Under current rules, no one is showing up at your door to rip out a gas water heater against your will.
Q: If I am interested in making appliance changes but don’t have the capital to do it, can I get help?
A: Yes, from multiple sources. In fact, the Colorado Energy Office recently announced new rebates aimed at low- and middle-income households in mobile or manufactured homes. Each utility also has pools of money for rebates for electric appliances. Nonprofits and government agencies often have appliance and weatherization programs that can provide thousands of dollars for projects. The energy office recommends you start here.
Q: Won’t the transformation to all-electrical energy overwhelm current generating capacity, and also raise my electric bills?
A: Certainly the growth in electrical demands — from a host of new EVs plugged in, to giant power-sucking data centers for AI, to electric heat pumps and tankless water heaters — will put more strain on Colorado’s power generation. Utilities are moving to add more generating capacity. For now generation capacity is adequate but tight. That’s why when Xcel’s Comanche 3 coal-fired unit went down, the PUC approved keeping Unit 2 running even though it was supposed to close Dec. 31.
Some groups — not just environmental advocates, but businesses as well — question whether utilities are overstating electric demand, and whether they’ve properly managed the power plants they’ve already got. Expect more questions and more reports on whether the growth in solar and wind clean power sources can match growing demand.
As for rising costs?
“I think people have an assumption that if we’re adding new load to the electric system, that that is going to add a lot of cost. And in fact, that can be true, but it isn’t always true,” Colorado Energy Office director Will Toor said.
He cites studies showing that even without growth in electrical demand, there are fixed costs required in coming decades that would raise consumer electric rates. Those unavoidable costs include a vastly upgraded power line system throughout Colorado to link new solar and wind farms to the grid, as well as hardening transmission lines against growing wildfire risk. If demand is stagnant, then current consumers will have to pay those extra unavoidable costs. If demand grows in a planned and controlled way, Toor said, then the new consumers will help pay for those fixed costs and limit price increases for all.
Q: Can the electrical system handle the planned increase in demand if we give up fossil fuels for cars and homes?
A: It will take planning and growth of clean resources, but the demand news is not all bad, Toor explained. For example, people with EVs tend to plug their cars in the garage overnight, when overall electrical demand drops. Moreover, Colorado is currently a “summer peaking” state, meaning more demand spikes happen in high summer heat when people come home in the afternoon and turn the air conditioning on. If installation of electric home heat pumps and water heaters means more electrical demand in cold winter months, much of that capacity already existed for the summer spikes.
Spreading out the changeover from natural gas through 2035 and 2050 targets, Toor noted, means demand will grow more gradually.
“You still need to make some distribution level investments,” he said. “But when it comes to sort of the big transmission and generation, we’ve got excess capacity in the winter.”
Q: If everything in the Clean Heat plan is so reasonable, why did two state agencies want the timetable for the natural gas switchover to be less aggressive?
A: The PUC settled on a 41% target in cutting natural gas-related emissions by 2035. Environmental groups wanted at least 50% out of the system by then. The energy office and the Air Pollution Control Division, meanwhile, argued for a 30% target for the interim 2035 year.
“The 41% target, from our perspective, is a pretty challenging target for utilities. We certainly hope that utilities get there. I think we thought that 30% was probably more realistic,” Toor said. Reaching the more aggressive target may prompt the utilities to seek more rate increases to pay for their appliance rebates and system changes.
That said, Toor added, the PUC may have a more comprehensive view of cost pressures. Maintaining natural gas systems and extending them to new houses and buildings also require major investments from utilities, Toor noted. Environmental groups call those “stranded costs,” for example paying hundreds of millions of dollars for a pipeline to deliver less and less natural gas each year as the emissions cuts come into play. The utilities’ ability to now avoid those natural gas investments could free up money to pay for the switch to electricity.
“I’m confident that they will be able to strike the appropriate balance going forward,” Toor said.
=====================================================================
Corrections:
This story was updated Dec. 10, 2025, at 6:58 p.m. to correctly describe the Public Utilities Commission's rationale for allowing the coal-fired Comanche 2 unit to continue operating beyond its Dec. 31 shutdown date.
Type of Story: Q&A
An interview to provide a relevant perspective, edited for clarity and not fully fact-checked.
“...Nat gas beats electricity for heating hands down for 1/5th the price...”
Therein, lies the “problem”. ALWAYS follow the money trail when it comes to these moronic communists.
They keep voting for this stuff. They need to feel the pain of what they voted for.
While at Boulder (’69-’74) locals were saying:
Don’t Californicate Colorado.They lost.
Yet at the same time if you wanted to build a nuclear power plant in Colorado, to supply cheap and clean electricity, they would have a conniption fit and turn it down........Liberalism is truly a mental disease.............
Even in 1974, Boulder was known as the most liberal part of the state.
Their cancer spread..................
WHY?
These people are NUTS!
“Idiots. Nat gas beats electricity for heating hands down for 1/5th the price.”
Check your facts.
“..I’m glad I got to see Colorado before it went to hell..............”
Same here. We went a few times long before the communist takeover. Beautiful place to visit. At one point, we even entertained the idea of actually moving there. Once the communists gained control, banned guns and legalized drugs, it went downhill.....fast. We quickly changed our minds...big time.
The last time we were in Durango, druggies were staggering around everywhere..whadda shame, and that was it for us. We never went back, have no plans to and, needless to say, our dollars left too.
I live it. I know.
Been on the downhill slide for decades. Colorado in the 60’s was fun. 3.2 beer joints*, carefree folks. Now? Not so much.
*Does anyone remember 3.2 beer joints? I wonder if Coors had anything to do with that? Yeah, I’m that old. Band played in a lot of those places.
Let’s see, no gas no coal,no wood very limited electricity equals no heating for the winter months means people will die.
Mean while those passing these laws are living high with plenty of everything. Can’t feel sorry for you, you voted for this and now live or die with it.
Ny forc8ng n3w home c9nstruction to i stall el3ctric only, and lo and behold, electric prices have risen- doubled almost.
Let’s see, no gas no coal,no wood very limited electricity equals no heating for the winter months means people will die.
Mean while those passing these laws are living high with plenty of everything. Can’t feel sorry for you, you voted for this and now live or die with it.
-This is unwise, today. Prevailing temperature trends over the span of the grand solar minimum will make this plan even more unwise.
It’s to defeat that omnipotent bogey-man Climate Change AKA Globull Warming.............
I have some neighbors who are of the leftist persuasion (they are very nice people, and we don’t talk politics with them) and they just went all electric in their house, and they now have two electric cars.
During this past wind storm, they lost power for two days.
They called us to see if they could come over with their infant, toddler, and two cats because their house temperature was dropping!
Sigh. They’re very nice people. I classify them more as liberals rather than leftists, they are very young couple, and into raising their two very young children, so I am not sure how much they actually spend thinking about politics. I think they’re too nice to actually make that full jump to leftists. I view them as kind of the harmless types who might someday make the jump over to conservatism, but that might take some time.
I knew from the get go when they asked us to go over to do something in their house with their cats while they were on vacation, And I saw the gigantic Obama coffee table book. I’m not exactly flying the Gadson flag outside my house, but I don’t think they have any illusions about who or what I am… :-)
I would have thought they would have more sense than to go all in electric and everything, but they did.
They have already banned fireplaces and wood heating in new homes. Now natural gas is too. No nuclear power generation, natural gas generation, coal generation. Just solar and wind.............
“All the homes I had in Colorado used natural gas heating.
Liberals are morons.”
No, they are NOT morons. They have an agenda and they know exactly what they’re doing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.