Public comments are due today by 4:30pm to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) regarding Xcel Energy’s progress in helping to one day deprive Minnesotans of natural gas.
The details on exactly where and how to comment can be found here. A copy of my full public comments to the PUC, on behalf of Minnesota’s Think Tank, can be found here.
The remainder of this article is a CliffsNotes® version of my full submission of 39 pages and 7,629 words. My PUC energy affordability one was much shorter at 23 pages and 4,064 words.
Heat pumps: less heat, more pump
Source (June 26, 2026): https://www.americanexperiment.org/heat-pumps-less-heat-more-pump/
Xcel Energy are currently spending significant sums of money on research and development (R&D), under the auspices of the “Natural Gas Innovation Act” (NGIA). NGIA was signed into law by Governor Tim Walz on June 26, 2021. The relevant Minnesota Statute is 216B.2427 entitled “Natural Gas Utility Innovation Plans.”
Xcel filed their first NGIA report with the PUC on June 15, 2026, based on Xcel’s original NGIA plan filed with the PUC on December 15, 2023, and subsequently approved by the PUC on May 16, 2025. All of these documents, and more, can be found under PUC eDocket 23-518.
One key highlight from the 2026 Xcel report to the PUC is that:
At a high level, the Company hopes to learn more about whether [renewables] can be used to decarbonize our [natural] gas utility system, cost effectively, at scale.
NGIA: ‘No more’ Gas Innovation Act
Source (July 17, 2026): https://www.americanexperiment.org/ngia-no-more-gas-innovation-act/
The NGIA, is yet another example of Orwellian doublespeak. Rather than being about innovation in natural gas, the NGIA’s provisions are about the replacement of natural gas.
The NGIA’s goal, from the second last page, is for “utilities [to] reduce the overall amount of natural gas produced from conventional geologic sources delivered to customers.”
There are twenty one definitions in the NGIA. The key one is “Innovative resource,” which crucially does not include conventional natural gas (CNG) in any form, low carbs or not.
CNG removal appears to be aimed at residential households and non-industrial commercials, even as, according to the EIA:
The industrial sector consumes the largest share of natural gas delivered to consumers in Minnesota and accounts for about three-tenths [30%] of state consumption. The residential sector, where two out of three Minnesota households heat with natural gas, uses about one-fourth [25%] of the natural gas delivered to consumers in the state. The commercial sector accounts for more than one-fifth [20%]. One-fifth [20%] goes to the state’s electric power sector.
Natural gas: the quiet energy affordability crisis
Source (July 28, 2026): https://www.americanexperiment.org/natural-gas-the-quiet-energy-affordability-crisis/
Affordability is as much about the quantity or use of energy as it is the price. Both are determined by market demand and supply, subject to government interventions. Regarding the latter, natural gas (NG) and electricity markets are intertwined and have both been increasingly impacted by renewable mandates and subsidies. As per Chart 1 below:
- Whilst residential and commercial NG use data for MN goes back to 1967, industrial and electric power (EP) data only starts in 1997.
- From 1997 to 2025, EP use skyrocketed by 1,507%, compared to 25.9% industrial, 18.8% commercial and 9% residential.
- NG use ratios (of 100%) went from 1.8% EP, 32.1% commercial, 27.6% commercial and 38.5% residential in 1997, to 20.3%, 28.0%, 22.7% and 29.1% respectively by 2025.
Chart 1
Chart 2 below shows EP use for MN, MW and US as an index, with 2002 as the base year set to 100. Indexes make readily apparent any change over time. Especially when there are large differences in scale, as is the case for NG use in a state compared to that in a region or nation. As per below, NGEP use for 1997 to 2025 grew:
- relatively modestly in the US nation, from 71.7 index points to 230.2, or by 221%;
- very robustly in the MW region, from 68.3 index points to 567.4, or by 731%;
- like gangbusters in the state of MN, from 46.4 index points to 745.8, or by 1,507%.
Chart 2
CleanTechnica recently wrote: “Low cost natural gas began pushing coal out of the power generation business in the early 2000’s.” As is typical with environmentalist narratives, this is a half-truth. The full truth is: A.) activist governments were behind “pushing coal out;” and B.) “low cost natural gas” was “low cost” relative to wind and solar, rather than to base-load coal.
Natural gas affordability: CPI inflation and volatility
Source (August 5, 2026): https://www.americanexperiment.org/natural-gas-affordability-cpi-inflation-and-volatility/
I wrote about natural gas affordability with the aid of official data on prices and quantities from the Energy Information Administration (EIA). Now let’s examine this using the official data on Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Although CPI literally has the term “price index” in the full name, there is an element of quantity index.
Natural gas CPI has largely been contiguous in its trend as well as ups-and-downs from 1978 to 2024, when comparing the Twin Cities (MSP) to both the Midwest (MW) and US. Chart 3 below of natural gas CPI has five stand-out trend periods. Highlights from these, for MSP only, include:
- 1978 to 1984: inflation of 127%; and standard deviation or volatility of 22;
- 1985 to 1999: deflation of -6%; and volatility of 8;
- 2000 to 2008: inflation of 65%; and volatility of 31;
- 2009 to 2019: deflation of -8%; and volatility of 9;
- 2020 to 2024: inflation of 46%; and volatility of 34.
Chart 3
Energy affordability has three major dimensions of price inflation, quantity or quality curtailment or deprivation, as well as volatility of these. In electricity, deprivation can take the form of blackouts. Electricity CPI in MN has been more about inflation than volatility, whereas natural gas CPI in MSP has been more volatile but with an inflationary trend upwards. Either way, both electricity and natural gas are significantly less affordable in the 21st century.
Energy affordability misery: electricity and natural gas, inflation and volatility
Source (August 6, 2026): https://www.americanexperiment.org/energy-affordability-misery-electricity-and-natural-gas-inflation-and-volatility/
I have been analysing MN’s energy affordability, but separately as either electricity or natural gas. Let’s now look at these side-by-side, using CPI as published by the BLS. Spoiler alert: Energy affordability is looking miserable for MN; electricity, more so than natural gas, so far.
Chart 4 below presents three types of CPI: all items; electricity; and natural gas. The base of 1982-84 was set to 100 by BLS. Note that 2002 is the key year, as both electricity and natural gas consistently inflate from then. This is no surprise given that wind and solar promotion policies in MN, and MSP, get going from 2001 onwards. Highlights for 2002 to 2024 include:
- all items CPI inflation of 67%, from 180 to 300 index points, and volatility of 34;
- electricity CPI inflation of 131%, from 139 to 321 index points, and volatility of 53;
- natural gas CPI inflation of 60%, from 113 to 181 index points, and volatility of 32.
Chart 4
Chart 5 below compares electricity CPI for MSP to the MW region and the US as a whole. Highlights from this chart, for 2002 to 2024, include:
- MSP electricity CPI inflation of 131%, from 139 to 321 index points, and volatility of 53;
- MW electricity CPI inflation of 92%, from 126 to 241 index points, and volatility of 34;
- US electricity CPI inflation of 105%, from 136 to 279 index points, and volatility of 37.
Chart 5
Hands off my gas! The plan to ban natural gas
Source (August 11, 2026): https://www.americanexperiment.org/hands-off-my-gas-the-plan-to-ban-natural-gas/
The NGIA process is governed by the PUC, which stated in November 2021:
The NGIA establishes a framework to allow natural gas utilities to meet Minnesota’s greenhouse gas reduction and renewable energy goals through innovative resources. … needed to decarbonize natural gas service.
The PUC has a web page devoted to the NGIA, including the following on “Why it matters:”
The NGIA and its innovation plans enable gas utilities to begin testing methods to reduce their emissions, and in some cases, transfer their business away from natural gas entirely. The results of approved pilots will lay the groundwork for future decarbonization efforts in the state and help gas utilities achieve the state’s goal of economy-wide carbon neutrality by 2050.
The PUC approved the initial plans for CenterPoint in October 2024 and Xcel in May 2025. The process for each of these began in June and December 2023 respectively. CenterPoint interestingly noted on page 3 of their plan that:
Decarbonizing the natural gas sector requires a different approach than decarbonizing the electricity sector, and CenterPoint has crafted a plan that uses innovative resources to reduce GHG emissions and natural gas throughput.
Hands off my gas! Xcel is spending your money to ban natural gas
Source (August 19, 2026): https://www.americanexperiment.org/hands-off-my-gas-xcel-is-spending-your-money-to-ban-natural-gas/
CenterPoint Energy and Xcel Energy both filed NGIA annual reports with the PUC, on June 1st and 15th respectively. Xcel’s annual NGIA report is for the period of May 16 to December 31 of 2025. The report is 113 pages in length.
Xcel reports on 13 pilots and 6 research and development (R&D) projects, including:
- Re Industrial Heat Pump (IHP) Field Trial: “…in many instances the payback period and/or increased electric charges are not financially beneficial to the customer.”
- Re Sherco 5MW Hydrogen: “…the hydrogen equipment supplier space has narrowed as a result of declining general market enthusiasm for green hydrogen systems.”
- Re Utility Thermal Energy Network (UTEN): “…whether this technology can be used to decarbonize our gas utility system, cost effectively, at scale.”
Xcel is looking to recover the following level of NGIA costs from rate payers:
- $54,334,960 spend between 2025 and 2029, with 94% pilots, 5% R&D and 1% admin;
- $981,881 has been spent in 2025, with 91% pilots, 3% R&D and 6% admin;
- 2027 has the largest anticipated spend of $18,363,124, with 91% pilots and 9% R&D.
Hands off my gas! CenterPoint says ‘me too’ on natural gas ban spending
CenterPoint Energy‘s (CPE’s) annual NGIA report is for the entire calendar year. The report is 355 pages in length. CPE summarises accomplishments including: “…an update on networked geothermal feasibility within its service area.”
CPE provides updates on 17 pilots, including:
- Re Pilot I (New Networked Geothermal System): “…the actual costs associated with the construction of a networked geothermal pilot have been significantly higher than anticipated.”
- Re Pilot J (Decarbonizing Existing District Energy Systems): “…no customers selected to study a full decarbonization/electrification scenario.”
- Re Pilot K (New District Energy System): “…0 customers completed a study.”
- Re Pilot O (Small/Medium Business GHG Audit): “…most customers are not opting for this high cost measure.”
- Re Pilot P (Residential Gas Heat Pumps): “…the planned supplier of combination space and water heating gas heat pumps had suspended all business operations.”
CPE is looking to recover the following level of NGIA costs from rate payers:
- $2,427,787 spent in 2025, with 93% for pilots and 7% research and development (R&D);
- $5,114,820 spent so far under NGIA, which is 5% of the approved 5-year spend of $105,701,516, with the latter having 90% earmarked for pilots and 10% for R&D.
Yet another Minnesota fraud? Natural Gas Innovation Act
Source (September 1, 2026): https://www.americanexperiment.org/yet-another-minnesota-fraud-natural-gas-innovation-act/
Although probably not actionable in a court of law, this fraudulently titled statute is actionable in the court of public opinion. And, the NGIA may not be within the letter, but is certainly within the spirit, of the legal definition of fraud:
For a statement to be an intentional misrepresentation, the person who made it must either have known the statement was false or been reckless as to its truth.
The NGIA is one of the purportedly more than 40 state climate laws and programs in the Climate Action Framework (CAF), which aim to:
- reduce GHG emissions by 50% by 2030;
- 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040;
- achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.
The PUC is pursuing reduced natural gas use through other means. This includes the Energy Conservation and Optimization (ECO) program, which encourages heat pumps over central air conditioners for some new homes. This also includes the Gas Integrated Resource Plan (IRP), which will evaluate specific dual-fuel heating models that use electricity for most heating and switch to natural gas only during the coldest hours.
Nukes and natural gas: End two bans, for the price of one
Source (September 3, 2026): https://www.americanexperiment.org/nukes-and-natural-gas-end-two-bans-for-the-price-of-one/
Electricity prices have been inflating in a sustainable way since 2002, as renewables increased, coal decreased and nuclear stayed [largely] the same, through to 2025. Natural gas prices, on the other hand, have slightly deflated over this same period of time.
- Chart 6 below shows that electricity prices, in dollars per one million British thermal units ($/MMBtu), rose by +118% from $16.99 in 2002 to $37.12 in 2025.
- Chart 6 also shows that natural gas prices ($/MMBtu) fell by -9% from $5.33 in 2002 to $4.86 in 2025.
Chart 6
Revenues, which are prices times uses, started to noticeably pile up for electricity public utilities in the renewables era, from 2002 onwards, and for natural gas companies in the electricity generation era, from 1997 onwards. The former has since reinforced the latter.
- Chart 7 below shows that electricity revenues increased by 131% from $3.6 Billion in 2002 to 8.3 Billion in 2025.
- Chart 7 also shows that natural gas revenues grew by 145% from $979 Million in 1995 to 2.4 Billion in 2025.
Chart 7
Source (October 15, 2026): https://www.americanexperiment.org/puc-energy-affordability-investigation-public-comments-due-october-16/
In Chart 8 below, MN’s electricity generation mix of both renewables and natural gas grew from 3% each in 2004 to 31% and 27% respectively by 2024, whilst coal and nuclear both shrunk from 65% and 25% respectively in 2004 to 20% each by 2024. Renewables include hydro, solar and wind.
Chart 8
Chart 9 below shows a comprehensive Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE), where nuclear at $37.18 per MWh is:
- 3.1x less expensive than natural gas at $115.83;
- 7.9x less expensive than wind at $296.97; and
- 13.3x less expensive than solar at $496.16.
Chart 9
Conclusion
In summary, Minnesota’s electricity affordability has worsened due to the meteoric rise in renewables generation, especially that of wind, and to a much lesser degree solar. However, this has been mitigated, to some extent, by the almost parallel rise in natural gas generation. But natural gas is far better suited to peak-load generation, whereas wind and solar are suited to supplemental generation. Coal and nuclear are best suited for base-load.
In conclusion, the NGIA is a very bad idea. It is all about moving towards effectively banning natural gas use for residential and commercial customers, but not industrials and generators, and in an opaque manner and unspecified timeframe. Natural gas in this state is vastly cheaper than electricity. NGIA will massively cost a majority of Minnesota households and businesses, to the benefit of a minority of climate “Baptists” and renewable “Bootleggers.”
The NGIA is a MN law, but one with no deadlines for either achieving the “Throughput goal,” nor for when the PUC needs to “evaluat[e] a utility’s annual report” by and decide to “approve,” “require” or “disapprove” utility pilot programs or plans. Prudence would strongly suggest that the PUC puts the NGIA process on hold until early 2027, given that is when:
- there will be a new governor and legislature, that may keep or repeal the NGIA;
- there will be a new nuclear power report, that may keep or repeal the moratorium;
- the PUC’s current electricity and natural gas affordability investigation concludes.