4 ms·

Wow, this is oddly stupid. I thought just weirdos wanted this kind of change and this is the first I’ve heard of a municipality. Gas is so efficient for heatin

Wow, this is oddly stupid. I thought just weirdos wanted this kind of change and this is the first I’ve heard of a municipality. Gas is so efficient for heating (and great for cooking), it seems bad for climate change to not allow it. Theater seems to be catching on and I hope we don’t see more climate change theater regulations.

stefan_ 5y ago
How is it "so efficient for heating"? It's much more efficient to burn the gas for electricity then use the electricity to run a heat pump.
- usrusr 5y ago
  And it only gets better when you use the waste heat from the powerplant for even more heating.
- hunterb123 5y ago
  No you lose energy in the transfer. While burning nat. gas is efficient, you do lose energy in the process. A coal plant is 50% efficient, and CHP plant is 80-90% efficient. A nat. gas heat pump is 80%-93% efficient depending on the money you want to spend. A standard efficiency nat. gas furnace is at least 80% efficient, they top out at 98% efficiency. Pretty obvious that converting from heat to electricity to heat is going to be less efficient than just converting to heat. Not to mention the furnace is more efficient than the gas plant (max of 98% compared to a max of 90%). Also the transmission and storage of nat. gas vs electricity is more efficient.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - johncolanduoni 5y ago
    You’re comparing Carnot efficiencies for heat pumps with nominal efficiencies for natural gas heaters. Heat pumps have nominal efficiencies well over 100%. They can move more joules of heat from outside than the number of joules of energy they consume.
    - hunterb123 5y ago
      The efficiency depends on the temp. outside. That's why nat. gas is used for heating more in the north and less so in the south. At a certain point it's more efficient to burn the gas directly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance
      - johncolanduoni 5y ago
        Unless you’re heating your house in the arctic, a modern heat pump is still going to have a nominal efficiency well over 100%. So if you’re claiming your heat pump numbers above are nominal efficiencies, I’m really curious as to where you’re getting them.
        hunterb123 5y ago
        It's a simple formula, the CoP, I linked it in my above post. The below PDF has a chart of temps to efficiencies. 47F will be around 100% efficiency or a CoP of 1. New York winter days are generally below that. https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/04/f34/2_32219_Shen_031417-0900.pdf https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/04/f34/2_32219_... That's a potential 40% energy loss. 20% at the plant, 20% at the house. It all depends on the region's temperature. Electric heating is more efficient in some places, less efficient in some, and equal in some. For New York, it does not make sense to use a heat pump: https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/New-York/Places/new-york-city-temperatures-by-month-average.php https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/New-York/Places/new-y...
        johncolanduoni 5y ago
        That document lists the COP for an electric heat pump with an external temperature between 35F and 40F at around 3.25. The definition from the article you linked defines COP as “ ratio of useful heating or cooling provided to work (energy) required”. So at that temperature range, it’s still heating more than it’s consuming energy. A natural gas space heater cannot exceed a coefficient of performance of 1 (it would violate energy conservation). You’re still not comparing the same types of efficiencies, they have different denominators.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
vkou 5y ago
> Gas is so efficient for heating Heat pumps are multiple times more efficient than gas for heating.
dml2135 5y ago
Heat pumps and induction ranges have changed the game. Dirty gas does not have the same advantages over electric that it used to.
tyronehed 5y ago
aaronbrethorst 5y ago
Per reporting from the beginning of 2020, fossil gas is far worse than was previously suspected. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/super-potent-methane-in-atmosphere-oil-gas-drilling-ice-cores https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/super-pot...
brtkdotse 5y ago
> Gas is so efficient for heating Nope. Put one kWh of gas in, get maybe 0.9kWh of heat out. Put one kWh of electricity into a heat pump and get at the very least 3 kWh of heat out.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  > Put one kWh of electricity into a heat pump and get at the very least 3 kWh of heat out. Even when it is below freezing outside?
  - brtkdotse 5y ago
    It’s -10C here right now and my heat pump is pulling less than 3kW to heat the whole house.
  - teaearlgraycold 5y ago
    It’s a matter of the refrigerant you use. Don’t worry about the freezing point of water.
    - dpark 5y ago
      Heat pump efficiency drops as the difference between the indoor and outdoor temperature grows. No one specifically cares about the freezing point of water for this, but it’s a good proxy for “big temperature difference”.
  - insaneirish 5y ago
    > Even when it is below freezing outside? Yes. For instance, one of the heat pumps in my house has a coefficient of performance of 3.2 at 17F/-8C. Reference: https://ashp.neep.org/#!/product/51106 https://ashp.neep.org/#!/product/51106
  - tzs 5y ago
    Heat pumps such as Mitsubishi's "Hyper-Heat" models should be above 3 to 1 down to a little below freezing, and better than 2 to 1 down to around 0℉ (-18℃). They are down to about 1 to 1 at -15℉ (-26℃).
mangoman 5y ago
Gas is actually less efficient for cooking than induction https://www.treehugger.com/which-more-energy-efficient-cooking-gas-or-induction-4858206 https://www.treehugger.com/which-more-energy-efficient-cooki... however, for heating, it does seem like gas can be more efficient depending on where it is installed. I don't think it's quite right to call it stupid though. Gas is, on net, worse for the environment.
- RhysU 5y ago
  Cooking efficiency is an odd metric. Probably boiling (via induction-heated water) or microwaving heats things best but blech for taste.
redis_mlc 5y ago
[dead]
white_hacker 5y ago
TulliusCicero 5y ago
How is gas better for cooking than induction? Induction seems flatly better to me. Just as fast and flexible, but no indoor air pollution, greater efficiency, easier to clean.
- b9a2cab5 5y ago
  Induction is great but most budget apartments/homes are going to have resistive electric, either coil or glass top. These are objectively worse than gas for cooking, not least of which because you can't even lift up the pan 1 inch without losing heating completely. Glass top also has the problem of having to heat up a massive block of glass whereas gas heats up instantly. If you've ever tried to make something that requires a hot pan (like a lot of Asian foods, or certain meats that you want to sear but not overcook on the inside) you know the difference is easily visible in the final result.
  - TulliusCicero 5y ago
    Which is silly, since induction isn’t inherently expensive. I got an induction stovetop in Germany in 2016 for 200€.
diebeforei485 5y ago
People used to say that coal is great for cooking, and the coal industry had PR campaigns around this just like the gas industry does today. Personally I think that for anyone looking to buy a new cooking range today, induction is the obvious choice.
Teknoman117 5y ago
Gas is only efficient for heating when compared to resistive electric heating. Modern heat pump systems are capable of producing 2.5x the thermal energy as they consume electrical energy even when it's below freezing. The hotter it gets from there, the more efficient they get. The main issue about doing electric heating in a very cold zone is what the reliability of the electrical system is. New York has a pretty good record with their hydroelectric generation though.

stefan_ 5y ago

How is it "so efficient for heating"? It's much more efficient to burn the gas for electricity then use the electricity to run a heat pump.

usrusr 5y ago
And it only gets better when you use the waste heat from the powerplant for even more heating.
hunterb123 5y ago
No you lose energy in the transfer. While burning nat. gas is efficient, you do lose energy in the process. A coal plant is 50% efficient, and CHP plant is 80-90% efficient. A nat. gas heat pump is 80%-93% efficient depending on the money you want to spend. A standard efficiency nat. gas furnace is at least 80% efficient, they top out at 98% efficiency. Pretty obvious that converting from heat to electricity to heat is going to be less efficient than just converting to heat. Not to mention the furnace is more efficient than the gas plant (max of 98% compared to a max of 90%). Also the transmission and storage of nat. gas vs electricity is more efficient.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- johncolanduoni 5y ago
  You’re comparing Carnot efficiencies for heat pumps with nominal efficiencies for natural gas heaters. Heat pumps have nominal efficiencies well over 100%. They can move more joules of heat from outside than the number of joules of energy they consume.
  - hunterb123 5y ago
    The efficiency depends on the temp. outside. That's why nat. gas is used for heating more in the north and less so in the south. At a certain point it's more efficient to burn the gas directly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance
    - johncolanduoni 5y ago
      Unless you’re heating your house in the arctic, a modern heat pump is still going to have a nominal efficiency well over 100%. So if you’re claiming your heat pump numbers above are nominal efficiencies, I’m really curious as to where you’re getting them.
      - hunterb123 5y ago
        It's a simple formula, the CoP, I linked it in my above post. The below PDF has a chart of temps to efficiencies. 47F will be around 100% efficiency or a CoP of 1. New York winter days are generally below that. https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/04/f34/2_32219_Shen_031417-0900.pdf https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/04/f34/2_32219_... That's a potential 40% energy loss. 20% at the plant, 20% at the house. It all depends on the region's temperature. Electric heating is more efficient in some places, less efficient in some, and equal in some. For New York, it does not make sense to use a heat pump: https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/New-York/Places/new-york-city-temperatures-by-month-average.php https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/New-York/Places/new-y...
        johncolanduoni 5y ago
        That document lists the COP for an electric heat pump with an external temperature between 35F and 40F at around 3.25. The definition from the article you linked defines COP as “ ratio of useful heating or cooling provided to work (energy) required”. So at that temperature range, it’s still heating more than it’s consuming energy. A natural gas space heater cannot exceed a coefficient of performance of 1 (it would violate energy conservation). You’re still not comparing the same types of efficiencies, they have different denominators.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

vkou 5y ago

> Gas is so efficient for heating Heat pumps are multiple times more efficient than gas for heating.

dml2135 5y ago

Heat pumps and induction ranges have changed the game. Dirty gas does not have the same advantages over electric that it used to.

tyronehed 5y ago

aaronbrethorst 5y ago

Per reporting from the beginning of 2020, fossil gas is far worse than was previously suspected. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/super-potent-methane-in-atmosphere-oil-gas-drilling-ice-cores https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/super-pot...

brtkdotse 5y ago

> Gas is so efficient for heating Nope. Put one kWh of gas in, get maybe 0.9kWh of heat out. Put one kWh of electricity into a heat pump and get at the very least 3 kWh of heat out.

lotsofpulp 5y ago
> Put one kWh of electricity into a heat pump and get at the very least 3 kWh of heat out. Even when it is below freezing outside?
- brtkdotse 5y ago
  It’s -10C here right now and my heat pump is pulling less than 3kW to heat the whole house.
- teaearlgraycold 5y ago
  It’s a matter of the refrigerant you use. Don’t worry about the freezing point of water.
  - dpark 5y ago
    Heat pump efficiency drops as the difference between the indoor and outdoor temperature grows. No one specifically cares about the freezing point of water for this, but it’s a good proxy for “big temperature difference”.
- insaneirish 5y ago
  > Even when it is below freezing outside? Yes. For instance, one of the heat pumps in my house has a coefficient of performance of 3.2 at 17F/-8C. Reference: https://ashp.neep.org/#!/product/51106 https://ashp.neep.org/#!/product/51106
- tzs 5y ago
  Heat pumps such as Mitsubishi's "Hyper-Heat" models should be above 3 to 1 down to a little below freezing, and better than 2 to 1 down to around 0℉ (-18℃). They are down to about 1 to 1 at -15℉ (-26℃).

mangoman 5y ago

Gas is actually less efficient for cooking than induction https://www.treehugger.com/which-more-energy-efficient-cooking-gas-or-induction-4858206 https://www.treehugger.com/which-more-energy-efficient-cooki... however, for heating, it does seem like gas can be more efficient depending on where it is installed. I don't think it's quite right to call it stupid though. Gas is, on net, worse for the environment.

RhysU 5y ago
Cooking efficiency is an odd metric. Probably boiling (via induction-heated water) or microwaving heats things best but blech for taste.

redis_mlc 5y ago

[dead]

white_hacker 5y ago

TulliusCicero 5y ago

How is gas better for cooking than induction? Induction seems flatly better to me. Just as fast and flexible, but no indoor air pollution, greater efficiency, easier to clean.

b9a2cab5 5y ago
Induction is great but most budget apartments/homes are going to have resistive electric, either coil or glass top. These are objectively worse than gas for cooking, not least of which because you can't even lift up the pan 1 inch without losing heating completely. Glass top also has the problem of having to heat up a massive block of glass whereas gas heats up instantly. If you've ever tried to make something that requires a hot pan (like a lot of Asian foods, or certain meats that you want to sear but not overcook on the inside) you know the difference is easily visible in the final result.
- TulliusCicero 5y ago
  Which is silly, since induction isn’t inherently expensive. I got an induction stovetop in Germany in 2016 for 200€.

diebeforei485 5y ago

People used to say that coal is great for cooking, and the coal industry had PR campaigns around this just like the gas industry does today. Personally I think that for anyone looking to buy a new cooking range today, induction is the obvious choice.

Teknoman117 5y ago

Gas is only efficient for heating when compared to resistive electric heating. Modern heat pump systems are capable of producing 2.5x the thermal energy as they consume electrical energy even when it's below freezing. The hotter it gets from there, the more efficient they get. The main issue about doing electric heating in a very cold zone is what the reliability of the electrical system is. New York has a pretty good record with their hydroelectric generation though.