The answer is fairly simple.... the elected officials that are "advocating for" (forcing an agenda upon) residents in NYS to become solely dependent on electricity as "their" energy of choice (debate aside on all other forms and their cost efficiency and efficacy to the customer). They've done so, without first building the infrastructure required to allow basic functioning of society so THAT said residents, ya know, don't DIE (sounds morbid now, but recall how many deaths are reported during storms and the like when there is no power), let alone support actual usage that will be required when you really look at the numbers (think about your inconvenience factor when you can't charge a phone, run a refrigerator or electric stove, or if you have a plug in car and whereveryou've gone doesn't have a charging station). So THAT is actually a fairly massive undertaking from a footprint-wide level. And NYSEG was just the company that got the contract to BUILD said infrastructure. There are probably some incentives and funding from the former regime, but basically, that cost gets passed along to the consumers who then USE the electricity... providing has little to do with it (bc NYSEG, Verizon, National Grid etc all use the same poles and so on, mostly). So when someone in Albany says "no more gas A B C item" or "only solar" or "wind is your friend" or whatever thing they're most incentivized by at the moment and you vote for them LIMITING YOUR PERSONAL CHOICE on what best suits YOUR needs? Just know this is the type of thing that results for EVERYONE.