Editor’s note – The following article originally appeared as an op-ed in the Boston Business Journal.

By Brooke Thomson
President & CEO

Massachusetts has rightly positioned itself as a national climate leader, setting some of the most ambitious clean-energy goals in the country. Under the Healey-Driscoll administration, the state has laudably prioritized decarbonization and the transition to a cleaner energy future.

But the transition will succeed only if the commonwealth maintains all of its energy options to ensure that homeowners and businesses alike are able to afford to keep the lights on. Massachusetts consumers need price stability and reliability above all, and that means a balanced and diversified energy approach that brings down utility costs, supports businesses and fosters a healthy economy through responsible, sustainable policies.

Federal regulatory headwinds, capacity issues and recent price spikes underscore the fact that the journey toward sustainable energy generation is a long and winding road. We need — as Gov. Healey has stated — an “all of the above” portfolio that includes natural gas, wind, solar, energy storage and other renewables as the commonwealth moves toward its decarbonization objective.

This is more than an academic argument — it affects real people, real families, real homes, real jobs and real companies that form the backbone of the Massachusetts economy. Massachusetts residents currently pay among the highest electricity rates in the country, and estimates show that New England families will see their annual residential electric bills increase by approximately $100 per year, while commercial and manufacturing businesses will see eye-popping increases of nearly $500 and $5,300 per year, respectively, unless the methods by which we provide our residents and businesses with energy are adjusted.

Start with the proposition that our energy grid needs to be more reliable for consumers before major resources, like the former Mystic station, are shut down. Prematurely moving the state away from natural gas without building enough stable renewable generation risks pushing us into a situation where we increase load on the energy grid, decrease the reliability of our dominant source of energy, and are not prepared with alternative options.

The results could be catastrophic. New England’s independent grid operator, ISO-New England, has repeatedly sounded the alarm on the region’s vulnerability during the winter months and for the future. ISO has warned that “fuel supply constraints and limited reliability margins” could leave the region exposed to blackouts during cold spells. Top energy regulators have also been clear that pursuing electrification without proper reliability planning is a recipe for trouble and could cause power outages and damaging service disruptions.

Perhaps the most important consequence of the state’s energy trajectory is that it threatens to exacerbate one of the state’s most pressing problems — lack of affordable housing.

Massachusetts finds itself in the throes of a housing crisis that is preventing thousands of families from realizing the American dream and forcing thousands more to flee the state for less expensive areas. But building new housing requires reliable and affordable power. Expanding energy infrastructure must be based on systems that can meet increased demand without delay. Natural gas provides that dependability and capacity, enabling new homes to be quickly and cost-effectively connected to the grid. Policies pending on Beacon Hill, such as the Clean Heat Standard (CHS) and the Specialized Stretch Energy Code, could drive costs even higher while constraining access to the reliable and affordable power that housing production needs.

The CHS aims to drive a transition from fossil fuels to electric heat in buildings; however, it functions like a hidden energy tax, raising costs on heating oil, propane, and natural gas users without providing affordable alternatives. Meanwhile, the Specialized Stretch Energy Code, already adopted by dozens of cities and towns, mandates all-electric new construction and stricter building performance standards while also imposing a steep cost of compliance: up to $23,000 more for construction of a median single-family home, according to the Home Builders and Remodelers Association of Massachusetts. These and other policies with similar goals must be further evaluated by lawmakers. In a state already facing a housing affordability crisis, adding these costs risks deepening inequality and slowing needed development.

The march towards electrification at all costs also, ironically, harms the green-technology industries that are central to the economic future of Massachusetts. Industries such as climate tech, green tech, and AI often involve energy-intensive processes that demand consistent, scalable, and economical power. Until alternative sources can meet these demands at scale, natural gas remains an essential bridge to a more sustainable and prosperous future.

At AIM, we support a diversified energy approach and remain at the table to support the administration in efforts to create a smooth and equitable transition to clean energy.

Being bold on climate and pragmatic on economics is how the commonwealth will lead the nation not just in goals, but in how we achieve them fairly, reliably, and affordably.