WASHINGTON — A U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee hearing held on Sept. 2 examined the costs and implications of state and local restrictions on natural gas use, including effects on housing affordability, energy costs, electric-grid demand and consumer choice.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Energy Policy, and Regulatory Affairs held the hearing, titled “No Flame, More Pain: How State and Local Bans on Natural Gas Increase Costs.” The hearing featured testimony from representatives of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), Prime Mover Institute, National Center for Energy Analytics, and Evergreen Action.

The testimonies featured competing views about the causes of rising energy costs and the effects of policies that restrict natural gas.

Michael Fazio, executive director of the New York State Builders Association, testified on behalf of the NAHB. He said energy mandates that increase construction costs can further complicate the housing affordability crisis.

Fazio cited NAHB research estimating that a $1,000 increase in the cost of a median new home could price approximately 156,000 families out of the market. He also said full electrification can add more than $15,000 to new-home construction costs in colder climates.

Fazio also raised concerns about electrical infrastructure requirements for new all-electric developments. He said providing sufficient electrical capacity from substations to new communities can cost hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars. He also cited utility lead times of 18 to 24 months in some New York cases.

Fazio said builders should be able to offer customers different energy options based on cost, performance, and reliability. He acknowledged that all-electric homes can be built but argued that customers should retain the ability to choose natural gas, propane, or electricity.

James Conde, a partner at Boyden Gray, testified on behalf of the Prime Mover Institute. He focused on federal energy law and restrictions affecting gas appliances.

Conde discussed the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, or EPCA, and argued that its provisions limit state and local regulation of gas appliance energy use. He cited a Ninth Circuit decision involving the City of Berkeley and said federal circuit courts are split over whether federal energy law preempts local restrictions.

Conde also discussed gas furnaces. He said non-condensing gas furnaces are about 80% efficient and can use existing chimneys, while condensing furnaces require dedicated venting and plumbing. He cited a 2023 Department of Energy efficiency standard would effectively remove non-condensing gas furnaces from the market beginning in 2027.

Patrick McCormick, a former chief counsel to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, said state and local natural gas bans can affect equipment choice and electric demand. He noted that natural gas remained the principal space-heating fuel for 47% of U.S. households in 2024. He also said manufacturers shipped 3.2 million new gas furnaces in 2025, even though manufacturers shipped more heat pumps than gas furnaces that year.

Pete Wyckoff, vice president of policy at Evergreen Action and a former Minnesota deputy commissioner of commerce for energy, offered a different assessment. He argued that all-electric construction can be less expensive than installing both electric and gas infrastructure.

Wyckoff said all-electric homes can cost $7,500 to $8,200 less to build and that new homes built to updated energy codes can save owners up to $15,000 over the life of the home. He also acknowledged that upfront costs can be a barrier for existing homeowners considering electrification.

Grid reliability was another central issue. McCormick said converting buildings from natural gas to electricity would significantly increase electric demand while overall load is already growing. He cited concerns from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation about maintaining system reliability.

Wyckoff countered that expanding electric generation, particularly wind, solar and storage, can address growing demand. During questioning, he said wind and solar combined with batteries are currently the cheapest way to add new generation.

The hearing also touched on the changing U.S. energy mix and international supply chains. Rep. Gary Palmer, R-Ala., questioned witnesses about U.S. dependence on foreign supplies of materials used in renewable energy systems. Rep. David Min, D-Calif., highlighted China's expansion of renewable generation and battery storage.

Members ultimately remained divided over whether natural gas restrictions contribute materially to rising energy costs. Ranking Member Maxwell Frost, D-Fla, argued that broader factors, including tariffs, energy policy, and infrastructure decisions, are driving costs. Chairman Eric Burlison, R-Miss., argued that natural gas restrictions can increase costs and reduce energy choice.

For HVAC contractors, the hearing highlights the continuing policy debate over fuel choice, electrification, equipment regulations, and the infrastructure needed to support changing heating technologies. The discussion also underscores the importance of tracking state and local requirements as policymakers continue to debate energy policy and building codes.