Suzanne Sitherwood
Analyst · your question.
I am glad to hear that you don’t agree with it, because obviously, we don’t agree with that either. And part of the reason we don’t agree with it is, first of all, natural gas is only 4%, if you will, the total greenhouse gas emissions. And Steve Lindsey went through a lot of pipeline replacement steps and the amount of methane reductions because of the infrastructure. But more importantly, it’s a domestic fuel, it’s green, it’s abundant, it’s safe, it’s economical, it’s efficient. It’s all those things. And then if you go to electrification side of the house, so to quote electrify the entire energy sector in the United States, and not take advantage of having that natural benefit of natural gas, and the amount of costs that would be shoved onto customers at a residential and small business, and yes, industry level, would make us uncompetitive in the world, and plus our customers at residential small business levels could not afford. I mean, I have heard estimates from $590 billion to $1.2 trillion through 2035. That’s staggering when you think about it as individual customer. And if you think about just a filing rate cases in the process, we go through and trying to contain our costs, and seek these recoveries through commission. It’s just for someone that’s been in this industry for 40 years, I find it very hard to believe that our customers and our regulators are going to have a tolerance for putting that kind of cost structure where the science doesn’t support it, especially again, given as a country have an abundance of natural gas, we have the infrastructure in place. Most gas companies have modernized these facilities and were deploying technology in a way that customers are engaging with us in a way that really benefits. I could sort of go on and on about this topic, but I will just sort of stop there, but…