Posted on 11/21/2019 5:23:36 PM PST by karpov
NO: A Ban Looks Good—Until You Do the Math
Those seeking to ban natural-gas hookups in new buildings say it will reduce local pollution and greenhouse-gas emissions, while saving end users money. Some also point to safety benefits: Fewer natural-gas lines means less potential damage during earthquakes.
When you compare the benefits and costs of such policies, however, you will find that their claims have little or no merit.
For starters, if consumers had an economic incentive to use electricity instead of natural gas, there would be no need for bans in the first place. With these kinds of analyses the devil is in the details, and one small detail is that in areas where natural gas is available, it is generally less costly to burn natural gas directly in homes and buildings for things like heating and cooking than to rely on electricity to provide equivalent end-use service.
Consider California, the state at the forefront of natural-gas-hookup bans. Last year, the average price of natural gas in California was about $12.30 per million British thermal units (a measure of the heat content of the fuel), according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. For a homeowner with a new, 95% efficiency natural-gas furnace or water heater, that translates into a cost of just under $13 per million BTUs.
Compare that with the cost of electricity, which averaged 18.84 cents a kilowatt-hour in California in 2018, about 50% higher than the national average. That works out to $55 per million BTUs, more than four times the cost of natural gas. Even heat pumps for space and water heating can’t bridge that gap.
Environmentalists also tend to ignore things like comfort, reliability and usability. A ban on new natural-gas hookups in Berkeley, Calif, for example, means restaurants [can't] install gas ranges
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
The author goes on to mention that gas appliances can be used when there is a power outage, an important consideration in California.
I see that near where I live, in Brookline, a town adjacent to Boston, residents voted 207 to 3 at the town meeting to ban oil and gas in new buildings: Brookline’s ban on oil and gas in new buildings could just be the start. Of course, most of those people live in homes with oil or natgas heat and will not be affected. What would the vote have been if the law required them to rip out heating oil and gas lines from their homes?
Natural gas is a great American energy resource, only a dunderhead would suggest reducing its use.
Liberals want to ban fossil fuels and crimp our lifestyle choices.
Climate change is simply an excuse. What they want to do is to run our lives.
[[[What would the vote have been if the law required them to rip out heating oil and gas lines from their homes?]]]
LOL that’s coming.
Morons
Cooking with gas is much better. So no.
And electricity is so reliable here in California.
What about cooking on a wood stove? While Democrats are at it, they might as well ban civilization altogether.
I say we should at least test out their theory by Mandating ALL Public Employee’s go All Electric. After 5 years they can tell us how it worked.
And how do these utter morons think they get the electricity?
.S. electricity generation by source, amount, and share of total in 20181
Energy source Billion kWh Share of total
Total - all sources 4,171
Fossil fuels (total) 2,653 63.6%
Natural gas 1,469 35.2%
Coal 1,146 27.5%
Petroleum (total) 25 0.6%
Petroleum liquids 16 0.4%
Petroleum coke 9 0.2%
Other gases 13 0.3%
Nuclear 807 19.4%
Renewables (total) 703 16.9%
Hydropower 293
7.0%
Wind 273 6.5%
Biomass (total) 58
1.4%
Wood 41 1.0%
Landfill gas 11 0.3%
Municipal solid waste (biogenic) 7 0.2%
Other biomass waste -1 <0.1%
Solar (total) 64
1.5%
Photovoltaic 60
1.4%
Solar thermal 4
0.1%
Geothermal 16 0.4%
Pumped storage hydropower3 -6 -0.1%
Other sources 13 0.3%
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
Choice , you’ll get none
Here’s a better energy solution: Whale oil! Yeeeeaaaahhh! 1800s old-school baby!
It’s less expensive, and for some strange reason, you are warmer using natural gas. I switched from all electric to gas park (electric AC and gas heat) and the difference was really noticeable
Democrats seem to think electricity is simply a matter of plugging it and flipping a switch.
We’re blessed with idiots in our country.
I heard California is getting ready to ramp up Lung Killing candle production
Not to mention its cheaper.
Even NYs tinpot dictator Cuomo knows which is why he’s blasted the utility company for not hooking up natural gas.
I wish Democrats would make up their damned minds.
“Cities” need to butt out of the Kitchen...
Only so long as natural gas powered electrical generating stations use only electricity.
Take away choices. Create monopolies. There’s no limit to how high costs could go.
Many lefties (teachers, retirement funds and the like) have investments in electric companies. They want to force everyone else to send more money their way.
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.