Posted on 09/06/2019 5:57:38 AM PDT by PROCON
Seattle City Council will soon weigh a complete ban on natural gas in newly-built homes and buildings.
Legislation for the ban will be introduced by Seattle City Councilmember Mike O’Brien. The measure would take effect on July 1, 2020 should it pass.
“The science is very clear — (Puget Sound Energy is) selling a fossil fuel that is destroying our planet, and my hope is that they recognize they need to get out of that business,” O’Brien said.
According to the bill, natural gas in buildings accounts for a fourth of Seattle’s greenhouse gas emissions. Just over half of the city’s single-family homes used natural gas heating in 2018. Twenty-eight percent used oil and 16 percent used electricity.
(Excerpt) Read more at mynorthwest.com ...
Stuck on stupid for sure.
This is when the Gas Company that serves Seattle should SHUT the Delivery of Gas down completely to avoid any mitigating damages that may arise. Let them Freeze to Death for Global Warming.
Seattle is not America.
No representative from seattle should be seated in the US Congress.
No electors from seattle should be seated in the electoral college.
Heh, then the Seattleites get the “priviledge” of spending much more for heating their homes.
Seattle, the word is civil insurrection. Learn it and live it.
Tar and feathers would work well also.
Less than 10 years ago, Sierra Club supported natural gas....until we found it in nearly unlimited quantities right under our feet in this nation.
Socialists never stand behind their ideas ....everything is fluid based on what is needed to obtain power and wealth.
That’s Right Seattle.Ban the use of natural gas to heat your homes and businesses.Whats to prevent you from freezing your Butts of during a bitterly cold winter?
This is going to be interesting.I can’t wait to see what decision these children make.
Stupidity raised to an exponential level. Not just squared, but cubed, or even to the fourth or fifth power...
Natural gas is the bridge fuel that will power our nation into the 22nd Century and perhaps beyond. Somebody REALLY concerned with the environment would be getting behind the development and widespread deployment of Thorium-fueled Molten Salt nuclear reactors as a primary power source for the generation of electricity 24/7/365 on a baseline level, with the natural gas-fired turbines driving dynamos as the standby for periods of either increased or decreased power demands, as the natural gas-fired units can be spooled up in SECONDS, as needed, and later cut back out of the grid with minimal disruption.
Why Thorium-fueled Molten Salt reactors? For one thing, they are much more scalable than the Uranium-fueled light-water reactors, and can fit in a much smaller installation location, even much closer to the point of power usage. If there is a runaway nuclear overheat, the molten salt is dropped in a containment basin, much smaller than the containment towers of light-water reactors. There are virtually no long-lived isotopes with the “spent” Thorium fuel, compared to “spent” uranium fuel rods, which still contain some 98% of the energy with which they started, And yes, the Thorium reactors can “burn” these “spent” uranium fuel rods, eliminating the need for a 10,000 year storage facility that would otherwise never empty out.
Thorium, by itself, while radioactive, is not fissionable, but with addition of elements from the recycled uranium fuel rod, the fission process is initiated, and the end products are (mostly) not themselves radioactive. The safety factor alone should be huge incentive to adopt Thorium-fueled Molten Salt reactors as the older light-water plants are retired.
And there is approximately four times the amount of recoverable thorium ore at or near earth’s surface compared to uranium ore.
Why can we not put this climate change hoax to bed already??? This “settled science” is costing billions of dollars in taxpayer monies for half-baked initiatives and wasted time and effort of thousands of politicians. Ugh!! How frustrating!
Vote with their feet.
The question rises. Is electricity from gas turbines or gas fired steam an illegal derivative?
Lots of luck with only 155 sunny days per year.
Lawsuit...Federal Court. Of course the 9th Circus will uphold it,but...
Sierra Club is a real estate scam. Developer buys land to build a development, factory, whatever. Sierra Club steps in, due mostly to the fact they didn’t get greased from the get go, because it isn’t written down anywhere (you have to higher a ‘planner’, someone who knows the local politics enough to be able to steer you around these sorts of things).
Developer goes for permits. Sierra club protests. EIS study is mandated as a result. Process takes 18 to 24 months depending on what they can contrive. Buy then, if you don’t have the cash, you end up having to sell or default at a fraction of what you bought the land for, given now it is clear that developing it will run afoul of the fascists.
Sierra Club turns to one of their people who then buy the land. That developer proposes ‘mitigation’ - a trade of this ‘environmentally important’ land for other land that is purchased and pledged for perpetual protection.
Up goes the building at a fraction of the costs, and Sierra Club gets their payoff too.
Coca Cola are pros at dealing with this, given they consume millions of tons of water a day globally. Nestle? Not so much.
Studying those two companies will illustrate what I learned the hard way.
They’ll now be able to collect the piles of feces left on sidewalks and streets, allow them to dry out, then burn them to keep warm. Perfect eco-solution to a hoax.
The manufacture of coats and bikinis have a carbon footprint. Just go naked. Ban any heat to take the chill off a rainy day.
And let's discuss the loss of energy when burning natural gas to drive generators, send electricity down transmission lines, through transformers and then used to power a coil to produce heat. What idiots!
The cost is higher to heat and cook with electricity. Not an attractive thing for people with large buildings or for restaurants.
“You fools voted for this.”
Factually the state didn’t except for three counties in Seattle and Tacoma. More than half of the state’s voting population lives in the three counties of King, Snohomish, and Pierce. And King is easily the largest of the three. How King votes is what’s going to pass and they are so large in votes, the out number the rest of the state. Governor Jay Inslee won only eight of 39 counties in 2012 to win the election. Analysis showed his margin was won in liberal-leaning Seattle and his margin was 64% of the vote.
So, we don’t all vote for these things, we are trapped by them.
rwood
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.