Posted on 01/04/2021 12:24:59 PM PST by Vendome
California's top energy bosses soon will decide when to snuff out natural gas flames in new homes.
The seismic move toward omitting some gas appliances comes as the California Energy Commission retools state building codes for energy-efficient homes.
The agency now plans to tighten rules on natural gas for home heating and hot water, a code update that would take effect in 2023.
Environmental groups want a complete ban on natural gas in new homes, but the state commission has signaled that isn't likely right now.
The California Building Industry Association, a trade group whose members develop 85% of new buildings in the state, is girding for ever-tougher rules over the next five years.
"The writing's on the wall," said Bob Raymer, technical director with the industry group. "They're going to want electric space and water heating come 2026."
(Excerpt) Read more at scientificamerican.com ...
Prices of existing homes will skyrocket further.
Hysterical. Cali is unaffordable for many and keeps finding ways to make it worse.
Increased use of Natural Gas is the only reason we have been able to lower CO2 emissions for 8 straight years, an accomplishment no other country has come close to doing.
Sounds like more blackouts in their future.
All I Have done is use google earth and take a look out there. You have to take a close look though,because the lots show up as white dots in the hills. Look mostly in Southern California,Volcano Country down there. Thats wher their mostly at. I don’t have a direct link.Sorry.
“What else can we do to get those smelly middle class people off my beaches and highways?”
Also, out of our favorite restaurants beach homes.
See my tagline.
Doesn’t California have rolling blackouts on a regular basis?
Both planned and unplanned blackouts!
It all sounds illogical until the real goal is understood: It is about control. The state cannot turn your gas off remotely, but they can do so with electricity using “smart” meters, as they do now. That the program makes absolutely no sense whatsoever in a practical way is beside the point. It expands control, and so it is the focus of the leftists. The notion of shivering families begging for the state to turn their electricity on if only for a few hours to keep them from freezing to death is an irresistible siren to them.
nothing like cooking with gas.....
I agree. I cancelled my Scientific American subscription a couple years ago.
So California is going to eliminate natural and propane gas as a source of fuel to heat your house, it’s insane to remove a very good source of energy like that, especially when the alternative can be more expensive...
So what’s the alternative, individual home owners using solar ?? Good luck with that, it’s to expensive for a mass number of people....
The California electrical grid is screwed up already. People are going to be rationing heat and hot water and cooking in shifts. Never mind no power to charge the batteries on electric cars. If California can’t get energy from Nevada they are screwed!
“Boy, these leftist really hate the petroleum/oil/gas industry.”
That industry provides way too many middle class jobs, goes against the plan.
Besides you won’t need much energy for a tiny home or 150 sq. ft. micro-apartment.
From the state that can’t guarantee you’ll have electricity.
Maybe they can burn some of that firewood in the forests that burns every year.
Yes, and they are already starved for electricity. Rolling blackouts, you know.
Sneak in a 1000 lbs propane tank and bury it at night. Slip a couple of hundred dollar tip for a SUN AM refill every year.
Stupidity. Electric heat is much less efficient. The electricity will come from.....you guessed it, natural gas. More narural gas will be burned because of the reduced efficiency. Do these people have any scientific understanding?
The generator at the Pelosi house must be huge to cover all her appliances.
You wouldn’t like a report I viewed yesterday.
The investment guru made the case for electric cars
overtaking and replacing almost all ICE cars within
about seven years, as far as sales go.
He covered the issue of cars that drive themselves
and how that alone would drive things. And when
insurance companies saw how many fewer deaths and
accidents there would be, that would also drive it.
He also mentioned that they won’t even want us to
drive once this kicks in, since most accidents are
human error.
I didn’t care for the presentation, but the points
he was making did make quite a bit of sense.
He thinks electric cars will drop below ICE cars in
cost within a few years.
He talked about major societal technological changes
and pointed to a stat that says, if one system
becomes 10-20% of the overall cost or impact of the
other, it always becomes the replacement.
He believes that electric cars will be going 600-
1000 miles on a charge in the not too distant
future. With technological advances what they
are, he may be on to something there. If you look
at the improvements over the last decades it is
hard to argue with his logic.
I will have as much as a 7.5 kilowatt capacity by
the end of the year, and about ten by the end of
the next year.
The point is, this happens without grid involvement.
More on this a little later.
I’ll be able to charge up my vehicle (if I had one)
a little each day and fill it in a week or so. I may
be able to reduce that figure to two or three days.
If the costs of these cars drop. If their range does
increase as he predicts. If insurance rates drop
significantly. Most folks will want one.
Presentations regarding electric cars impact on the
grid sometimes don’t touch on this potential.
If you are connected to the grid, your car can
function as a power bank for the grid. If tens of
thousands of cars are accessible to the grid and
you have used your solar or wind power to charge it,
you could sell the power to the grid. (you could
either way, recharging at night and selling back
at peak rates)
You could sign on to a web site, tell the web site
how much you could spare on any given day, and let
the utility draw from your batteries.
Some folks have been upset that electric cars are
getting some subsidies. Let’s think about that.
Given the choice to build more power plants or
supplement the grid with power drawn from electric
vehicles and homes, which makes more sense?
I’ve had a few people tell me that the amount of
power that could be drawn from vehicles would not
amount to much in the overall scheme of things. It
would seem to me that homes that are self-sufficient
and could contribute, would augment that also.
One last thing here. With homes and vehicles not
drawing from the grid, there would be less need for
long range power lines. That would lessen the
problems during high wind periods.
So there is a lot to think about here.
No matter our thoughts on this, this is very possibly
the way things are headed.
Real smart, eh? There’s an electricity shortage in the state, and these morons want to add make it worse. More of those faggy, Prius thingies will make it even worse.
The electric grid is very vulnerable to all kinds of disasters, natural and man-made.
Common sense requires a plan B in every home and commercial building, at an absolute minimum.
I agree, and it is going to be quite possible to do that
in the near future.
Strategically, is takes the grid out of the equation as far
as vulnerability also.
Of course a neutron attack would still be a downer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.