The unholy crusade against gas appliances

Eco darling natural gas gives way to wind, solar and battery electricity – and slave labor

Duggan Flanakin

When Berkeley, California last year became the first U.S. city to ban the installation of natural gas lines to new homes, Mayor Jesse Arreguín proudly stated, “We are committed to the Paris Agreement and must take immediate action in order to reach our climate action goals. It’s not radical. It’s necessary.”

Phasing out natural gas-fired electric power generation by 2030 is bedrock dogma in the Green New Deal. In fact, it’s become an unholy crusade. So it should be no surprise that climate alarmists would jump at the chance to ban new natural gas lines. Many other cities in California have already followed Berkeley’s lead, as has Bellingham, Washington. More gas bans are in the offing nationwide. Connecticut lawmakers actually want a law that would pressure insurers to stop insuring homes that have gas appliances or heating systems!!

But Takoma Park, Maryland, which proudly bills itself as “the Berkeley of the East,” wants to go even further. City officials have proposed to ban “all gas appliances, close fossil fuel pipelines, and move gasoline stations that do not convert to electric charging stations outside city limits by 2045.” The Takoma Park proposal also mandates all-LED lighting by 2022 for all buildings, including single-family homes. Composting would also become mandatory.

For hardliners whose only focus is ridding the world of carbon (dioxide), the moves are obvious and necessary. With wind and solar prices dropping, they argue, natural gas is no longer needed as a “bridge fuel.” They envision an all-electric future, magically, right away, co-friendly, sustainable. Or not.

The price claim is nonsense. It’s based on comparing operating costs for wind and solar installations. It deliberately ignores the far larger capital investment and environmental costs: building thousands of wind turbines and millions of solar panels, hauling and installing them across millions of acres, connecting them to the grid, backing them up with batteries or pumped storage (or coal or gas power plants), replacing them far sooner and more often that we’d have to replace coal, gas or nuclear plants, and disposing of broken and worn out panels, blades and other parts that cannot be burned or recycled.

The phony price parity claim also ignores the massive amounts of overseas mining for metals and other materials, which are needed in far greater amounts per megawatt for wind, solar and battery power than for stand-alone gas, coal or nuclear plants. And that mining is done under horrific conditions, with little attention to air and water pollution, workplace health and safety, fair wages, or rampant child labor.

That’s reason enough to rise up in anger. But natural gas companies, gas appliance manufacturers, restaurants and ordinary citizens have additional reasons for not taking these radical demands lying down.

If implemented , the Takoma Park proposal would force those with gas stoves, hot water heaters, clothes dryers, furnaces, outdoor grills and propane heaters (for outdoor winter dining venues) to replace them with electric units. That could double electricity demand – and turbine and panel numbers and impacts.

Homeowners, landlords and businesses that currently rely on natural gas would have to upgrade their electrical systems to handle the additional load from going all-electric. Estimates run s high as $25,000 per resident (not household) to make the switch.

Last November The California Restaurant Association filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court, claiming that Berkeley’s action violates “long-established state and federal law.” The CRA further claims the action is invalid and unenforceable under the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act and under California’s Energy Code and Building Standards Code, and that it is an unlawful to use police powers to amend state building codes.

A CRA press release further explained that the natural gas ban would force higher energy costs on businesses and consumers alike and, wurst of all, “effectively prohibit the preparation” of flame-seared meats, sausages and charred vegetables, and the use of intense heat from a flame under a wok (the essence of Chinese cooking). Top chef Robert W. Phillips explains: “An overwhelming majority of chefs and cooks are trained using natural gas stoves, with pots and pans over a flame produced by natural gas.”

SoCalGas, whose service area covers half the state, is also a strong opponent of building electrification.

Alarm over this fast-spreading virtue signaling has spread to Washington and Oregon, where the Seattle Times says gas companies are forming a coalition of unions, businesses and consumer groups to tout the benefits of natural gas and help “prevent or defeat” initiatives that would inhibit or prohibit its use.

Comparisons between electric and gas appliances show that gas appliances often cost more up front (especially if you have to run a gas line) but save money while in use. More important in many parts of the country is the fact that gas stoves can operate even when the electricity goes out – and a small generator will allow gas furnaces to continue operating during power outages. (Prolonged outages have become frequent in California of late, due to efforts to reduce catastrophic wildfires associated with power lines but caused by the state’s failure or refusal to thin and manage brush, grass and trees.)

Until now, people have been able to choose between electric and gas. One energy choice service notes that gas water heaters typically cost about $30 a month, while electric heaters cost $42 on average. Gas units also heat water more rapidly and provide hot water during power outages.

Gas dryers average about 8 cents less per load to run than electric units, partly because they heat up instantly, whereas electric units use a coil that can make loads take twice as long to dry. Electric dryers can also be harder on clothes because of their longer drying times. Electric dryers do not require a gas line, can be installed wherever there is a 220-volt power outlet, and do not require vents for carbon monoxide. On the other hand, an improperly grounded electric dryer can be dangerous.

Gas stoves provide instant heat for top burners, but gas ovens heat up more slowly, according to TopTenReviews. Gas stoves may be harder to clean, and there is a risk of fire from the open flame. Both gas and electric stovetop burners remain hot long after the knob is turned off. Most importantly, gas stoves are cheaper to operate, because gas prices have fallen some 85% since their historic high in 2006.

In sum, both gas and electric appliances have their pluses and minuses. However, “choice” (for women or men) is not high on the list for many virtue-signaling politicians today, except in one other acrimonious arena, which Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) recently addressed in the context of a pending Supreme Court case. They therefore push the envelope every time – and sometimes get their way. Yet in the process, they make new enemies of people who previously were not politically motivated at all.

In Takoma Park, which four decades ago became the nation’s first “nuclear-free city,” sustainability manager Gina Mathis says, “Yes there are ways that we could soften” these policies, “but we know that voluntary programs are not going to get us to net zero.” As in net-zero plant-fertilizing CO2 emissions.

The mandates tend to generate anger. According to the Washington Post, one Takoma Park resident complained that “the number of times the word ‘require’ is used in this [proposal] is stunning.”

It could get far worse. Socialist Senator and presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is committed to 100% “renewable” energy for electricity and transportation “by no later than 2030.” His plan would also take our entire energy system out of the private sector, and put it in government hands, with more mandates.

Meanwhile, China already has 900,000 MW of coal-fired power plants and has another 350,000 MW under construction or in planning. It’s also building or financing hundreds of coal and gas power plants in Africa and Asia. India likewise has hundreds of coal-fired units and is planning nearly 400 more. They will not stop using fossil fuels to build their economies, create jobs and improve living standards.

So even if manmade CO2 is a major factor in climate change, these scattered, silly natural gas bans might reduce future warming by 0.0001 to 0.001 degrees 80 years from now. But the con goes on.

Duggan Flanakin is director of policy research for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of many articles on energy, climate change and environmentalism.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
81 Comments
not you
March 7, 2020 2:07 pm

“climate action” = pay 2-3x more for 1/2 as much

March 7, 2020 2:11 pm

Well done, Duggan!

As a teammate of the writings of Duggan and Paul Driessen’s, I am thankful their intellectual firepower and breadth of their knowledge.

“When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it.” -Henry Ford

sendergreen
March 7, 2020 2:11 pm

I very much want a coal/wood stove and heat stove. I hear Boris’s Government is banning home use coal. With our climate mad Trudeau in temporary power I am worried about Canada freezing in the dark.

Tom Abbott
March 7, 2020 2:23 pm

Using natural gas in the home in water heaters and furnaces and stoves is even more efficient than using natural gas in a gas-fired powerplant.

March 7, 2020 2:25 pm

When these environmentalists show Americans that the “green new deal” electricity is affordable, then lets take another look. Green New Deal Germany pays 3 times for electricity as California pays, and California’s electricity is so expensive because the “wise people” in Sacramento have been spending all the states money on green new deal electricity production. And when the solar and wind can’t keep up, they have to buy coal or natural gas produced electricity from out of state. Who is the idiot?

Chris Hoff
March 7, 2020 2:48 pm

Here in Vancouver, I just finished upgrading my gas fired hot water heating system. Now the idiot greens who run the city and province want to force everybody to go electric. Even if it’s just the heater elements for the hot water heating system it’s idiocy when gas is so much cheaper than electric. You can see how once they force everyone to convert and there’s no going back they’re going to jack up the price of electricity.

Arno Arrak
March 7, 2020 2:59 pm

Use ga in electric generators and disrtribute electricity as energy source. Don’t holl back your engineers.

SMC
March 7, 2020 3:04 pm

“Gas units… provide hot water during power outages.”

Not necessarily true. If the gas unit uses a pilot light, sure. But, if it uses an electric heating element (as mine does) to ignite the gas, then you’re S.O.L. for hot water when the electric goes out.

March 7, 2020 3:09 pm

Depressing posts here at WattsUpWithThat occur with increasing frequency.

SMC
March 7, 2020 3:16 pm

California could go the way of the East Coast. Take a look at PADD 1 and tell me when the Philadelphia refinery blew up.
https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/supply/weekly/pdf/figure1.pdf

All California needs to do is have a couple of refineries blow up and they can be well on their way to a fossil free utopia.

Taphonomic
March 7, 2020 3:26 pm

“We are committed to the Paris Agreement and must take immediate action in order to reach our climate action goals. It’s not radical. It’s necessary.”

Now, that’s the same Paris Accords which China, India, and the third world are taking advantage of to massively increase their CO2 emissions?

Bob Johnston
March 7, 2020 3:30 pm

I argued back and forth with a Bellingham City Councilman for awhile just for kicks. I read the meeting notes from the task force that looked into the viability of essentially outlawing gas and it was based entirely on best case estimates for their plan to work out. They believe that Washington state will be 100% renewable by 2045 (yeah, right), that batteries will make up for the times that the wind doesn’t blow and the sun isn’t shining (uh huh…) and that costs for electricity will stay the same or go lower, despite the fact that California, German and South Australia are all proof that isn’t going to happen.

The funny part is that nowhere in the proposal did the City Council mention how much warming will be alleviated by their actions, something you’d have thought would be there. Using Bjorn Lomborg’s estimate for how much CO2 emissions will be lowered due to the Paris Accord I calculated that Bellingham’s contribution to decreasing warming will be 0.0000012 degrees Celsius… even if 100,000 cities the size of Bellingham adopted similar rules the effect wouldn’t be measurable.

These people are certifiable, there’s no reasoning with them. As Thomas Sowell said “It is usually futile to talk facts and analysis to people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance”.

commieBob
March 7, 2020 3:44 pm

The good news is that I can take a crappy house built in the 1950s and insulate it such that it is almost doesn’t need a furnace. The bad news is that it would probably be cheaper to tear down the house and start fresh. link

One of my friends has a wonderful old house in the Netherlands. To insulate the house enough so he can afford electric heat means making the walls a foot thicker. He can’t do that on the outside because of the historical value of the house. So, the extra insulation goes on the inside. Rooms that were formerly tiny will become useless so it will probably be necessary to rejig the floor plan.

John Robertson
March 7, 2020 3:53 pm

Banishment Works.
What these swelled heads are saying,is that the current infrastructure is no good,our current technologies are no good and nobody but them knows the true way forward,to the glorious future where their wonderous virtue will be appreciated by all.
Well they have self identified,they and their ilk have run for positions of authority and now have the (temporary) power.
So now their malice is naked for all to see,ban them from the society they so openly despise.
Tarring and Feathering people who abuse your hospitality and pee in your reserves is not an antisocial act at all.
The preservation of civil society requires that such ungrateful freeloaders be sent out to work their wonders,free of the limitations imposed by practical people.

As many have noticed,the Cult of Calamitous Climate members are notable by their lack of any useful skills.
They shriek loudly and insist they must rule,yet have been of zero benefit to any society they have successfully overrun.

Now the sheer ignorance of burning fuel to produce electric heat is pitiful and painful..
Like I say they self identify.
I am more than happy to allow them to demonstrate the life style they demand we embrace.
We need an Island.
For them.

Rob_Dawg
March 7, 2020 4:44 pm

> “gas prices have fallen some 85% since their historic high in 2006.”

Unless you are in Soviet Kaliforinia where we pay as if our state regulated suppliers were paying 2006 prices.

ScottR
March 7, 2020 4:52 pm

In New Zealand our coalition government with the Greens has banned new exploration for oil and gas despite the fact that our known and probable gas reserves will only last another 8 years or so at current usage rates. Of course, to find the gas, drill more wells, and get them into production takes several years so by the time we start running out it will be too late to do anything about it. Meanwhile, hospitals, dairy companies, commercial buildings and industry have started converting to electric heating so the load on our already stretched power stations is starting to go up. Our largest thermal station at Huntly has 50% of its output able to be generated by dual fuel coal/gas units so they are busy stockpiling and burning coal. Our climate change warriors haven’t cottoned on to this yet and are still actively trying to disrupt the gas exploration that was under way before the ban. New Zealand’s CO2 emissions are 0.17% of global emissions so the effect of the ban will be ruinous for our country but will have negligible effect on global temperatures.

March 7, 2020 4:55 pm

“Mayor Jesse Arreguín proudly stated, “We are committed to the Paris Agreement”

Is Berkeley a member of the United Nations? And a signatory to the UNFCCC? such that it is a “Party” to this agreement that attends Conferences of Parties?

Did Berkeley participate in the Paris COP in 2015? Did Berkeley submit an INDC? What is Berkeley’s Intended Nationally Determined Contribution? Duh!

Davis
March 7, 2020 5:04 pm

I still use incandescent light bulbs throughout my home. They do give off waste heat, which is what I want considering that I heat my home 8 months of the year. Two electricians have confirmed that a watt of heat is a watt of heat, one 1500 watt baseboard heater, or fifteen 100 watt light bulbs, same difference. The other 4 months of the year? The sun doesn’t go down long enough to use the lights…..

Keith Minto
March 7, 2020 5:30 pm

Must be some strange central lefty philosophy as Canberra’s new suburbs are being built without natural gas connection.
I like the diversity of gas/wood heater/electricity.

Dr. Bob
March 7, 2020 5:40 pm

All you have to do is “Mandate” that all Solar and Wind energy projects practice what they preach and use on renewable energy in all steps of manufacture and instillation of the facility. It is only logical that no fossil energy be used to produce renewable energy. Same goes for Corn Ethanol. All electric tractors and trucks for planting, harvesting and converting corn into fuel. If that cannot be done, then the whole thing is a scam.
Which it is!
Just imagine it, an electrically heated cement plant to produce “Renewable Cement”. An electrically heated steel smelter. CO2 derived plastics and resins for the turbine blades. The list goes on and on.

March 7, 2020 5:52 pm

Using an electric stove, dryer or water heater instead of a natural gas one is a bad idea before there is enough non-fissil-fuel electricity for all electricity demand. Adding an electrical load while some of the electricity demand is met by fossil fuels will increase the demand for fossil fuel electricity, with typical combined generation, transmission and distribution efficiency around 35-40 %. Forcing people to use electricity in place of natural gas will increase burning of natural gas in the name of decreasing it.

markl
March 7, 2020 6:04 pm

Let’s see what happens when home owners are forced to go all electric ….. home and car. Remember the “all electric home” fad in the 1960’s? They turned out to be white elephants due to the high cost of electricity and replacement cost of the replacement appliances. This is a virtue signaling fad that will fade when reality sets in.

Richard Patton
March 7, 2020 6:08 pm

Besides using a gas that would just be flared off as waste (still putting the CO2 in the atmosphere), I save $125 per MONTH by using natural gas instead of electricity. Since I had a gas furnace and water heater installed over ten years ago, the cost of natural gas has gone down and down. Cost per therm (100,000 BTU) of natural gas has dropped 14% in the ten years, while the cost of electricity has risen 72%. My combined energy bill is LOWER than just my electric bill was before switching to natural gas.

Being on a fixed income that $125 difference is two weeks worth of groceries. The greens motto appears to be “save the planet starve a senior citizen.” Oh wait! They want 7.8billion people to die off, 200 million is supposedly all the humans the planet can support.

john york
March 7, 2020 8:25 pm

“(Prolonged outages have become frequent in California of late, due to efforts to reduce catastrophic wildfires associated with power lines but caused by the state’s failure or refusal to thin and manage brush, grass and trees.)”

Not to mention CA state, counties, and cities demanding the utilities sink millions of dollars into “renewables” instead of upgrading lines and other infrastructure.

TRM
March 7, 2020 8:52 pm

If the natural cycles scientists are correct we will see just how “serious” they are as the temperatures drop. My guess is a pair of cold winters with prices to heat their homes doubling or tripling they will quit. If not then they can freeze or pay through the nose.