I may be reading that wrong, but I'm pretty sure that refers to the CCS cost when you capture at use (e.g. in a power plant). You can't really use CCS when you're heating a house, so the right price to compare to would be direct air capture which is an order of magnitude more expensive IIUC.
Found this article: https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-much-captured-co2-worth that suggests it's about twice as expensive. Though it seems that's the credit that the government pays, not the cost.
If you use resistive heating, heat pump would be 40-50% or so cheaper. Of course with no subsidies the initial cost might be rather high.
Probably have to be an earth-exchange system to deal with temperatures lower than 40°F, given that heating my house in winter is the use case.
* https://mylinkdrive.com/viewPdf?srcUrl=http://enter.mehvac.c...
If you live in US IECC Climate Zone 4 or above look for a cold climate air-source heat pump (ccASHP):
* https://neep.org/heating-electrification/ccashp-specificatio...
You can also get things installed in a dual fuel arrangement where you still have a gas furnace that kicks in if it does ever get 'too cold'.
So... If the article is correct, and electric energy costs 77% more than natural gas, then yes. Natural gas is still cheaper when factoring in emissions.
1 - https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gases-equivalencies-ca...
2 - https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsfs.2019.006...