[Puffer Fish]

California will ban the sale of gas furnace heaters and water heaters, expecting people to replace them with electric powered heat pumps, and apparently electric heating elements for water heaters.

"This week, California implemented a plan aimed at phasing out the use of natural gas heating appliances throughout the state by 2030. The new proposal was passed by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). The decision was passed unanimously. It cements the state as the first to ban natural gas heaters and furnaces." ​

California first state to ban natural gas heaters and furnaces, The Hill, Gianna Melillo, September 23, 2022

"The primary goal of this measure is to reduce emissions from new residential and commercial space and water heaters sold in California. CARB would set an emission standard for space and water heaters to go into effect in 2030. Through meaningful engagement with communities and the process outlined below, CARB would adopt a statewide zero-emission standard which would have criteria pollutant benefits as a key result along with GHG reductions. Beginning in 2030, 100 percent of sales of new space heaters and water heaters would need to comply with the emission standard. CARB would design any such standard in collaboration with energy and building code regulators."​

Proposed 2022 State Strategy for the State Implementation Plan August 12, 2022, page 101,
Zero-Emission Standard for Space and Water Heater

If you read further, part of the plan is to provide subsidies for lower income households to reduce the impact on them of the cost increases. But these will of course end up being paid by other households.
The state already has implemented "progressive tiered" pricing for its electric utilities, where customers are charged differently per unit of electricity depending on how much electricity the household uses and what their income level is.

Right now, only 33.6 percent of the energy on the state's electric grid comes from renewable sources.
50 percent of the state's electric power is produced by natural gas burning power plants.

Isn't California getting a little ahead of itself? Banning things, trying to force everyone to convert over to electric, when the state has not even been able to convert all its electric supply yet to renewable energy? Maybe it's because simply banning things doesn't cost the state government any money, whereas actually building renewable energy is a huge and expensive state investment?

I actually think that trying to convert to heat pumps for space heating actually makes sense in most parts of the state, due to winters being relatively mild, and the fact that heat pumps can double as air conditioning. In the state's climate, this is appropriate. However, higher up in some mountain areas the winters can get colder, and in many of these areas people rely on large propane tanks due to the remote location. And in some of these more remote locations that get lots of snowfall, it can be more common for there to be power outages. Heat pumps may not operate quite as well and do not operate as efficiently when the outside temperatures are very cold (below about 40 or 45°F).

For water heaters, I do not think electric energy is a good idea. That usually requires heating elements (of the type found in common small space heaters). Heat pumps would have difficulty creating the high temperatures required for hot water. It takes a huge amount of electric power to create heat. Heat pumps are not too bad because they are able to pump the heat that outside cold air contains and move it inside to create warmth, using about 4 times less electric power to create warmth than a heater that uses an electric heating element.
With current electric prices in California, it would cost $876 per year in electricity for an electric water heater.

With the older gas water heaters, you can still take hot showers and hot baths if the electric power stops working. Electric outages are probably 15 times more common than the gas ever needing to be shut off.

This seems kind of authoritarian to me, taking away individual choice, raising costs, combined with a bunch of stupid--a policy that is not really well thought out, even considering its intended goal.

[Pants-of-dog]

Electric water heaters work fine and people use them all over the world.

Also, electric baseboard heating is a thing. So is geothermal.

[late]

Electric water heaters work fine and people use them all over the world. Also, electric baseboard heating is a thing.

So is geothermal.

Expensive. Oh well, at least you didn't mention putting electric heat in the floor. In this age, that feels lovely, but you better win the lottery first.

I love the idea of geothermal, but I am old. Both me and the wife get cold easily, and as part of the deal, you have to take out your old heater. Brrrr...

[late]

This seems kind of authoritarian to me

That's hyperbolic.

If Rightwing nuts aren't complaining about seatbelts (yeah they really did), they are complaining about not being able to smoke indoors, or kill most of the life on the planet.

Get a grip.

What you really ought to be complaining about is them sailing into this bright, clean future without a concrete plan to do it without melting the electric grid into a puddle.

That goes for the country, as well. Lofty goals without a plan is damn close to doing nothing.

[Puffer Fish]

That goes for the country, as well. Lofty goals without a plan is damn close to doing nothing.

Seems almost worse than doing nothing. What do you think the efficiency loss is in converting natural gas into electricity and then transmitting over long distances through power lines is, rather than just burning the gas directly for heat?

The way things are right now, this policy might result in even higher emissions. It certainly will result in more expense.

Not to mention making people more reliant on the electric grid, which can oftentimes not be reliable.

[late]

Seems almost worse than doing nothing. What do you think the efficiency loss is in converting natural gas into electricity and then transmitting over long distances through power lines is, rather than just burning the gas directly for heat?

The way things are right now, this policy might result in even higher emissions. It certainly will result in more expense.

Not to mention making people more reliant on the electric grid, which can oftentimes not be reliable.

Only a tiny fraction of electricity is used that way, and that won't change much because of the cost.

Actually, your last point is bumping up against human nature in this country. You can file a dozen studies that an intersection needs a light. It won't get one until someone gets killed. We will build new capacity when there's no other choice. It's a big and complicated system, and should be part of a national plan. But nobody's died yet.

[Puffer Fish]

We will build new capacity when there's no other choice. It's a big and complicated system, and should be part of a national plan. But nobody's died yet.

You're being dumb. What type of capacity will it be?
Old style big cities are not going to be built again. The suburbs are just going to keep sprawling and expanding.
The lot sizes will keep getting smaller.

[Unthinking Majority]

California can better transition to solar power better than most places. It's never cloudy there, to the point of droughts and forest fires.

If their policies turn out to be not wise and has too much economic detriment people will move away, so we'll see how it goes.

[late]

What type of capacity will it be?


Old style big cities are not going to be built again.

The suburbs are just going to keep sprawling and expanding.
The lot sizes will keep getting smaller.

That depends. Here in Maine we can use HydroQuebec. Some places will likely need nuclear. Solar is an option in much of the South and the West. Like I said, we need a national plan to design and build out new generation, and a Smart Grid to make it more efficient.

Why do you keep talking about building cities? You need to learn a little something to be able to talk about it. And you keep coming up short. If you are referring to getting European, that's pretty cheap, it's the politics that are hard.

Suburbs are a bit like a Ponzi scheme, they only make sense when they are growing. Once things settle down, the cost of infrastructure usually exceeds what they can get from taxes.

The problem right now is that there are no starter homes. The price of real estate has gone past what a lot of people will ever be able to pay. The burbs are going to shrink..

[Pants-of-dog]

Seems almost worse than doing nothing. What do you think the efficiency loss is in converting natural gas into electricity and then transmitting over long distances through power lines is, rather than just burning the gas directly for heat?

Not high enough to make this policy unworkable. Again, we do this all over the world all the time and is not a big deal.

The way things are right now, this policy might result in even higher emissions. It certainly will result in more expense.

No, I have used electric water heaters powered by hydroelectric. Costs less than the gas one I have now.

Not to mention making people more reliant on the electric grid, which can oftentimes not be reliable.

Most gas heaters use some electric power for sensors, pumps, et cetera. Mine does. Gas heaters are just as reliant on the grid as electric heaters.

[Rancid]

it would be weird to ban natural gas. The US and Canada are on the verge of becoming the world's largest gas suppliers. With respect to energy, gas is a stepping stone resource we need before we getting on to cleaner stuff like nuclear, solar, wind, etc.

California will change it's tune on gas in 5 years time.

[Pants-of-dog]

it would be weird to ban natural gas. The US and Canada are on the verge of becoming the world's largest gas suppliers. With respect to energy, gas is a stepping stone resource we need before we getting on to cleaner stuff like nuclear, solar, wind, etc.

California will change it's tune on gas in 5 years time.

Yes and no.

For decades, we have had the technology and the motive to move away from hydrocarbon fuel use and thereby avoid significant negative impacts from their use. So in that respect, we should have moved past light natural gas (LNG) by now.

But you are correct that LNG will need to be used as a transitional fuel for now, which is why they are not banning it. Instead, they are going to ban new sales and installations. Buildings with existing gas furnaces and water heaters will continue to use LNG after this date.

[MistyTiger]

Much of the east coast uses natural gas. The company where I work uses natural gas. The whole industrial park runs on natural gas. When I worked at a heating oil company, quite a few areas were using natural gas.

I live in an older neighborhood established in the 1950s and the houses were heated by oil. Some residents switched to propane. Propane costs a little more than heating oil.

I like the fact that I don't have to worry about gas leaks and my house blowing up.

The electric grid throughout the US needs a serious overhaul. It really takes a beating in the summer and winter months but it's an expensive project and lawmakers would rather argue about other stuff than put together funding to rebuild the grid to sustain the growing US population.

[Puffer Fish]

Berkeley, California - A federal appeals court overturned Berkeley's first-in-the-nation ban on natural gas lines in new buildings.
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The measure, which took effect in 2020, was intended to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming.
The Berkeley law required new residential and commercial buildings to use entirely electrical lines and infrastructure unless a building could not be constructed without natural gas piping, or the city granted an exemption in the "public interest."
The California Restaurant Association contended the ordinance violated the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act.​

Berkeley's natural gas ban overturned by federal appeals court (ktvu.com), April 2023
https://www.ktvu.com/news/berkeleys-nat ... eals-court

I hate electric stoves. They require several frustrating minutes before the coils get hot enough to start cooking, and then after cooking is over the coils remain dangerously hot for 15 or 20 minutes.
(Although it's not true for Berkeley, where I live the electric power often goes out intermittently in the winter, sometimes for days, due to winds and snow knocking out the power lines. It's really nice to be able to heat up some water when it's cold and the electric power has gone out)

[Puffer Fish]

I like the fact that I don't have to worry about gas leaks and my house blowing up.

If you don't have natural gas, what type of fireplace are you going to have?

You might not be aware of this, but many parts of California have now banned wood burning in fireplaces, due to alleged concerns over air pollution.
(Natural gas, by comparison, is very clean burning)

[MistyTiger]

If you don't have natural gas, what type of fireplace are you going to have?

You might not be aware of this, but many parts of California have now banned wood burning in fireplaces, due to alleged concerns over air pollution.
(Natural gas, by comparison, is very clean burning)

My place has a woodstove. It came with the house and this house was built in the 60s. I'll consider switching to propane in the future. My area does not get natural gas. I could ask the city to run a gas line over here but not sure they'd do it if just one person requests it.

[noemon]

This is very idiotic.

Heat pumps are a total con and waste of money.

[Puffer Fish]

This is very idiotic.

Heat pumps are a total con and waste of money.

Well, that's actually not true... it's a little bit complicated. Complicated to explain because it involves some understanding of engineering, math and science.

To produce heat the "normal way", with an electric heat element, it takes a huge amount of electric energy to produce a small amount of heat. Now the conversion of electricity to heat is "100% efficient". (It's one of the rare examples of something that's actually 100% efficient) It's just that heat, by its nature, contains an enormous amount of energy. So it is not very "efficient" to produce heat directly from electric energy.

Heat pumps are about 4 times more efficient than conventional heating elements (meaning it will take 4 times less electric power to warm up the inside of the building by the same amount). Of course, we can debate whether that is still very efficient.
When, on the other hand, we burn something, that releases a huge amount of energy, all of it in the form of heat. (It's not like we have to go to the trouble of converting that heat to mechanical movement or electrical energy)

If we were to burn natural gas in a power plant, to produce electric power, and then transmit that power to a home, the overall efficiency loss would probably be about 65%.
But of course in addition to all that efficiency loss, it would add a huge amount of added expense (for generators, much higher capacity transmission lines) compared to piping natural gas directly. And we have to consider the energy cost of building all that infrastructure in the first place, which could easily be equal to all the energy that infrastructure will ever carry over its lifespan.

Heat pumps also become less efficient when the outdoor temperature is below 6.5 C (45F). At -4 C, the efficiency might drop down 30%, for example. The heat pumps really have to strain when there is less heat available to extract from the outdoor air. It really has to do with heat differential, it becomes harder to create a larger temperature difference between indoors and outdoors. In extremely cold places, with temperatures below -37 C, a heat pump might not be able to adequately warm the inside of a home to a comfortable level.
There are other possible alternatives, like geothermal heat pump (since deep in the ground is not as cold as the air), or take the air that has been warmed by the heat pump and then pass that through a fire-burning furnace to get it up to the desired temperature.

Unfortunately most people don't understand this, aren't going to bother to do all the calculations and thinking, and government can often be stupid and often does not pursue environmental policies based off perfectly logical reasons.

[Puffer Fish]

"Over the past couple years, a wave of progressive cities and states have moved toward banning gas stoves and other appliances in new buildings. San Francisco, Seattle, New York and others have changed the rules in the name of the environment and residents’ respiratory health.

But the wave has been met with substantial backlash, opposing federal legislation and lawsuits seeking to overturn the bans.

Berkeley, California, was the first U.S. city to put in place a ban installing gas piping in new buildings, but the local law was met with a lawsuit by the California Restaurant Association, a trade group representing restaurants."

Are gas stove bans going into place?, Alix Martichoux, News Nation, 9/17/2023
https://phl17.com/nmw/are-gas-stove-ban ... nto-place/