This is shockingly misguided with numerous faulty assumptions.

1) You conveniently neglect to mention that fracked gas production and distribution is hazardous to human health and disproportionately so to frontline communities

2) You neglect to mention that climate change itself reduces the production of gas, that gas is an extremely potent greenhouse gas, artificially low costs are externalizing costs to the environment and our children

3) You treat the banning of gas as an inherently regressive policy when it does not need to be so- this depends on how prices are constructed- and the costs of renewable energies have dropped dramatically and continue to do so. The billions of dollars costs of climate disasters are indeed getting passed down to these same populations, especially in terms of lost lives and property.

4) The costs of retiring any NEW gas infrastructure will get passed onto new generations even as they must deal with the ongoing threats posed by climate disasters. So why keep building new gas infrastructure when the writing is on the wall in terms of the future of the fossil fuel industry.

5) You neglect to mention the COST of improving ventilation in homes while discussing the different cost of gas. Furthermore, the new UCLA report found that in California, if all residential gas appliances were changed to clean electricity, the state could monetize $3.5 billion in health benefits every year.

... and so much more