Record Gas Use Hits Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island as Cold Pushes Bills Higher Than Usual

As New Yorkers endure a frigid winter, unprecedented demand for natural gas has renewed scrutiny over the city’s dependence on fossil fuels and the growing fiscal burden for households.

On February 7th, natural gas consumption on Long Island reached an all-time high, shattering a record that stood for less than a week. Eight of National Grid’s ten most gas-hungry days in history occurred during the arctic fortnights spanning late January to early February. Nor were the outer boroughs spared: Brooklyn, Staten Island, and portions of Queens all saw their second-highest days for gas use, reflecting just how forcefully winter’s icy grip has settled on America’s largest metropolis.

Utilities, it seems, are only just keeping pace. National Grid, one of the region’s major suppliers, reported it was able to meet surging demand, but only by edging against the limits of its distribution capacity. Con Edison, which provides gas to over a million city and Westchester customers, also registered its third-busiest day on record; January became its fourth-highest month for gas deliveries ever. Amid the cold, the arithmetic is punishing for customers: a state-approved rate hike took effect in January, and National Grid estimates bills for many New Yorkers could leap by over 9.2% compared to last month.

The city’s built environment remains a voracious consumer of gas. Sixty percent of households rely on natural gas for heat, and roughly seventy percent use it for cooking—figures that have barely budged over the past decade, despite copious talk of decarbonisation. During cold snaps, moreover, even electricity is mostly gas-derived, as the grid’s generating plants crank into overdrive. The physics are banal but inescapable: as temperature plummets, demand spikes, pushing up spot prices and household bills in lockstep.

The pressure is felt most acutely among poorer residents, for whom heating costs can consume a puny household budget. Though some relief is available through government assistance, eligibility gaps persist, and landlords are not always quick to remedy leaky windows or inadequate insulation. This year’s rate increases portend further hardship: both Con Ed and National Grid have counselled users to don an extra sweater and dial thermostats down to 68°F, if only to tame the relentless march of the monthly statement. A colder apartment may suit the arctic explorer’s temperament, but it bodes ill for the city’s elderly and infirm.

Second-order ripples extend well beyond this winter’s discomfort. New York State had planned to begin phasing out gas in buildings this year, in line with a 2019 climate law targeting net-zero emissions by 2050. Yet implementation has lagged: Governor Kathy Hochul pushed back compliance until 2027, bowing to practical and political considerations. Building conversions, already costly and bureaucratic, will strain tenant-landlord relations even further. The regulatory pathway remains as slippery as a February sidewalk.

Politically, this bout of cold may stiffen opposition among property owners and working-class voters to rapid electrification mandates and other climate-linked measures. Nationally, the natural gas sector, buoyant from surging demand, is quick to highlight the energy security benefits its product provides. Environmental groups, in turn, fret that every wintry record set for fossil fuel use locks in decades of future infrastructure and emissions. New York, more than most cities, sits at the crossroads of these clashing imperatives.

Globally, New York’s freeze is not unique; energy systems from London to Tokyo have felt the strain of consecutive cold winters. Some European capitals were burned last year by gas shortages and eye-watering spikes in wholesale prices following supply disruptions. Unlike Britain, New York is not at imminent risk of blackouts or household rationing, but the underlying vulnerabilities—ageing infrastructure, patchy insulation, and overdependence on gas—are familiar. Cities as distant as Berlin or Montreal are keenly watching how Gotham balances the competing demands of reliability, affordability, and decarbonisation.

What, then, ought to be done? The state’s reductionist advice—turn the thermostat down, open south-facing shades—offers some paltry comfort to the working poor, many of whom dwell in drafty flats largely impervious to solar gain. Real progress will require a modernisation of building codes, expanded subsidies for electrification, and incentive structures that reward efficiency without penalising low-income renters. The old formula—relying more on consumer thrift than on policy—has plainly run its course.

As buildings brace for a costly transition, policymakers face a tricky balancing act

Decarbonising heating in a city of New York’s scale is a gargantuan undertaking. Retrofitting millions of apartments, particularly the rent-stabilised or pre-war kind, demands not just money but aggressive coordination between city agencies, utilities, landlords, and, perhaps most dauntingly, the state legislature. Absent timely investment, there is every risk that ambitious targets will slip ever further into the future, stymied by technical inertia and political wrangling.

Still, there are grounds for restrained optimism. The city’s emission profile has improved, albeit modestly, with investments in district heating and pilot programs for electric heat pumps showing promise. The lesson from this winter, though, is sobering: until large swathes of the building stock are modernised, New York will remain at the mercy of each passing polar vortex and volatile gas market.

In the short term, smart regulation may help. The Public Service Commission could consider progressive rate structures that shield the most vulnerable while nudging more affluent users toward efficiency. Targeted weatherisation grants, employed at scale, would pay dividends in both carbon and cost over time. Meanwhile, utilities ought to resist the urge to plead helplessness; after all, a reliable network is not just the product of prudent investment but of robust public accountability.

As the mercury rises and falls, New Yorkers will doubtless continue to grumble at their monthly statements and dust off draft stoppers. But this year’s chilling records might finally force policymakers to reckon with the city’s discomforting reality: the warm glow of a gas flame comes with ever-steeper bills, and the clock on large-scale change is ticking. A city built on resilience will need to burn less—by design, not just by decree—if it is to thrive through winters yet to come. ■