The cost of succumbing to radical climate change rhetoric was on full display in a recent Washington Post essay by California-based freelance writer, Katherine Ellison.
The title of her piece, “I made my home fossil-fuel-free. Why did my utility bills nearly double?” might lead readers to conclude that an eye-opening real-world experience had illuminated the writer to the folly of modern “green” doctrine.
But despite setback after setback, Ellison maintains her unshakeable belief that someday, somehow, the climate orthodoxy to which she and others stubbornly adhere will be proven worthy of their blind faith. For now, there’s disillusionment and sticker shock.
In her frank essay, Ellison explains that last December, she and her husband converted their Northern California home from gas to electric.
“We expected a bunch of benefits,” she writes. “Healthier indoor temperatures and air quality. A reduced carbon footprint. Lower energy bills.” The verdict? “The results have been more complicated.”
“More complicated” could be translated into “complete disaster.” Consider these facts from Ellison’s own telling:
- Even after taking advantage of about $13,400 in local and federal rebates and figuring in $3,200 in federal tax credits until 2032, “we still needed a (subsidized) loan,” she confessed—all courtesy of taxpayers.
- Determined to replace an evil gas furnace that was only two years old, “we forged ahead, dropping $21,187 for the purchase and installation of a ducted appliance, which like all HVAC heat pumps has units for inside and outside the house. Another line item: $1,787 for duct-system modifications and insulation.”
- To go fully gas-free required ditching an existing gas range and fireplace, sacrificing them for a $6,750 induction stove (but with a $2,000 tax credit!) and a $500 portable electric fireplace.
“I was thrilled when our utility, PG&E, finally shut off our gas,” Ellison writes. “But then came the chase for promised savings, involving reams of red tape. We had fortunately been able to front more than $41,000, but we really depended on the potentially $17,000 in savings from rebates and credits.”
But the upfront costs and red tape were soon offset by lower energy bills, right? Wrong.
“I couldn’t wait to see our next utility bill,” she writes. “But to my dismay, the now all-electric bill was nearly double the total of what we’d paid a year earlier for both gas and electricity. This is, I’m sorry, a dirty little secret of switching your home to electric.”
While Ellison’s harrowing adventure would likely be a wake-up call to others with similar experiences, her faith is unshaken. She remains convinced that, at the very least, her home is “comfortable, healthier, and even safer.” And those in the know assure her that things will eventually get better.
“A lot of really smart people are working to solve the problems you ran into,” one expert promised. “Contractors are getting better at guiding people. Manufacturers are designing equipment to more easily replace gas furnaces. Activists are pushing for utility rate reforms.”
A lot of “really smart people” should perhaps familiarize themselves with the facts. First, the belief that going “all electric” ends a reliance on fossil fuels is misguided. About 60 percent of U.S. electricity generation is courtesy of fossil fuels, with about 43 percent of that total generated by the very source so concerning to Ellison—natural gas.
And anyone hoping for falling electric bills should be alarmed by the fact that an annual power market auction held last summer by the largest U.S. electrical grid operator for the 2025-2026 season “resulted in prices more than 800% higher than last year as supply dwindled and demand increased,” according to a Reuters report. In reality, natural gas is already 3.5 times more affordable than electricity for the same amount of energy.
Of course, going “all electric” adds to the existing problem in California of routine rolling blackouts—planned outages—during periods of high demand to prevent a collapse of the grid.
As for the environment, studies show that an Energy Star natural gas household could enjoy a carbon footprint 16 percent lower than an Energy Star heat pump. People are taking notice—over the last five years, when deciding on heating options, more than 500,000 families have opted for natural gas space heating rather than electric heat pumps.
The same expert who cited “really smart people” working hard on the problems also told Ellison, “We need millions of homeowners going through the same process you did, so that it gets less painful with each consecutive home.” A better scenario would be for millions of homeowners to see Ellison’s experience as a cautionary tale to be avoided at all costs.
We can only wish the best for Ellison and countless others who have suffered the surprise, aggravation and debt associated with switching to more expensive and less reliable energy sources. Let’s be kind and assure any neighbors in such circumstances that when their electricity goes out, they’re invited over to our place to enjoy the warmth of a gas fireplace and a hot meal from a gas stove.
***
Gary Abernathy is a longtime newspaper editor, reporter, and columnist. He was a contributing columnist for the Washington Post from 2017-2023 and a frequent guest analyst across numerous media platforms. He is a contributing columnist for The Empowerment Alliance, which advocates for realistic approaches to energy consumption and environmental conservation.
Message from the Southern ladies: “bless her heart.”