5 ms·

It seems like a lot of folks think of this ban as a way to tackle climate change when I always thought it was primarily a public health issue[0], with a second-

It seems like a lot of folks think of this ban as a way to tackle climate change when I always thought it was primarily a public health issue[0], with a second-order goal of eventually preventing natural gas explosions[1]. [0] https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2020/5/7/21247602/gas-stove-cooking-indoor-air-pollution-health-risks https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2020/5/7/21247602... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Bruno_pipeline_explosion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Bruno_pipeline_explosion

MomoXenosaga 5y ago
At first I didn't really understand but then I realized this is America. Funding and maintaining infrastructure is not exactly a priority...
- nojito 5y ago
  Because infrastructure is extraordinarily expensive because of how large America is. Go to any small/wealthy town and you’ll see them invest tons into their infrastructure.
  - endianswap 5y ago
    "how large America is" doesn't make sense here when the subject of the discussion is literally New York City
    - b9a2cab5 5y ago
      Most NIMBY cities (like NYC and SF) today no longer allow industrial buildings (like for example power plants or refineries) in their city limits. So yes, "how large America is" does end up mattering because electricity and gas and everything else ends up shipped 1-2 hours' drive away.
      - CameronNemo 5y ago
        Los Angeles gets a good portion of their power from a coal fired power plant in Utah. They are looking to change that by 2025 though. https://www.ladwpnews.com/ladwp-accelerates-coal-power-reduction-with-full-divestment-from-navajo-generating-plant-3-5-years-ahead-of-schedule/ https://www.ladwpnews.com/ladwp-accelerates-coal-power-reduc...
        sitkack 5y ago
        I'd love to see LA get a GWHr++ energy storage battery inside the city limits. They could trickle charge at will and supply cheap power 24/7. LA could have the cheapest power in the NA this way. It would revitalize manufacturing.
        landemva 5y ago
        Los Angeles kicked out their manufacturing a couple decades ago. They literally refused to issue electrical permits to upgrade manufacturing lines. After some years the plants became noncompetitive and employers left town.
      - Dylan16807 5y ago
        Sending gas 100 miles is cheap, and sending electricity 100 miles is extra cheap.
    - teawrecks 5y ago
      > At first I didn't really understand but then I realized this is America. Funding and maintaining infrastructure is not exactly a priority... In the context of this sub-thread, we are talking about America.
- adventured 5y ago
  > At first I didn't really understand but then I realized this is America. Funding and maintaining infrastructure is not exactly a priority As opposed to where? Asia? The US typically spends between as much or slightly more of its GDP on funding infrastructure vs what either the EU or Eurozone do. European spending on infrastructure has been mediocre for decades. 2017 "Europe’s spending on infrastructure at ‘chronic’ low level ... Spending at 20-year low threatens region’s prosperity, EIB report warns" https://www.ft.com/content/51524ab4-cf77-11e7-9dbb-291a884dd8c6 https://www.ft.com/content/51524ab4-cf77-11e7-9dbb-291a884dd... 2017 "Germany’s low investment rate leaves its infrastructure creaking ... The country with Europe’s strongest economy faces potholed roads and crumbling schools" https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/06/17/germanys-low-investment-rate-leaves-its-infrastructure-creaking https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/06/17/germanys-low-inv... https://www.cpr-am.fr/institutionals/Local-content/Actualites-Presse-Recompenses/Decoding-The-European-infrastructure-plan https://www.cpr-am.fr/institutionals/Local-content/Actualite... 2014 "EU Infrastructure Cutbacks Worry Economists" https://www.wsj.com/articles/eu-infrastructure-cutbacks-worry-economists-1405886120 https://www.wsj.com/articles/eu-infrastructure-cutbacks-worr...
  - gibolt 5y ago
    Spending doesn't equal spending efficiency. It also doesn't account for added costs due to age of infra/retrofitting vs new infrastructure. I have no point to make, other than direct comparison misses a lot of nuance.
petermcneeley 5y ago
The quotes from policy implementers suggest this is about climate change. > The bill to ban the use of gas in new buildings will (help) us to transition to a greener future and (reach) carbon neutrality by the year 2050," said City Council Speaker Corey Johnson, noting "We are in a climate crisis and must take all necessary steps to fight climate change and protect our city. Also health issues are almost certainly more likely with existing/older infrastructure and not newer buildings.
- micromacrofoot 5y ago
  cities like nyc leak so much natural gas that you’re probably inhaling a little bit regularly as you walk through the city… there are hundreds and hundreds of detectable leaks cooking with natural gas also exposes you to it, especially if you’re not using an exhaust hood it won’t be as dramatic as lead because it’s not as obviously harmful, bit it could be one of those “wow i’m glad we stopped doing that” thing in 40 years
- jabl 5y ago
  While I applaud this move, too bad they shut down Indian Point NPP, replacing the capacity with gas.
macinjosh 5y ago
Stuffing your house with batteries that are near impossible to extinguish in a fire doesn’t seem like much of a safety upgrade. Gas lines can be shut off upstream.
astura 5y ago
As for your first point about indoor air - Gas for heating doesn't mean gas cooktop and non-gas for heating doesn't mean non-gas cooktop. I have oil heat and a gas cooktop. The gas is propane which is supplied by a company who fills a tank once in a blue moon. My parents have gas heat and a fully electric cooktop. FWIW, One of my burners is definitely unsafe, the fire is too high and there's a distinct smell of gas after using it for a couple minutes. So I don't use that one...

MomoXenosaga 5y ago

At first I didn't really understand but then I realized this is America. Funding and maintaining infrastructure is not exactly a priority...

nojito 5y ago
Because infrastructure is extraordinarily expensive because of how large America is. Go to any small/wealthy town and you’ll see them invest tons into their infrastructure.
- endianswap 5y ago
  "how large America is" doesn't make sense here when the subject of the discussion is literally New York City
  - b9a2cab5 5y ago
    Most NIMBY cities (like NYC and SF) today no longer allow industrial buildings (like for example power plants or refineries) in their city limits. So yes, "how large America is" does end up mattering because electricity and gas and everything else ends up shipped 1-2 hours' drive away.
    - CameronNemo 5y ago
      Los Angeles gets a good portion of their power from a coal fired power plant in Utah. They are looking to change that by 2025 though. https://www.ladwpnews.com/ladwp-accelerates-coal-power-reduction-with-full-divestment-from-navajo-generating-plant-3-5-years-ahead-of-schedule/ https://www.ladwpnews.com/ladwp-accelerates-coal-power-reduc...
      - sitkack 5y ago
        I'd love to see LA get a GWHr++ energy storage battery inside the city limits. They could trickle charge at will and supply cheap power 24/7. LA could have the cheapest power in the NA this way. It would revitalize manufacturing.
        landemva 5y ago
        Los Angeles kicked out their manufacturing a couple decades ago. They literally refused to issue electrical permits to upgrade manufacturing lines. After some years the plants became noncompetitive and employers left town.
    - Dylan16807 5y ago
      Sending gas 100 miles is cheap, and sending electricity 100 miles is extra cheap.
  - teawrecks 5y ago
    > At first I didn't really understand but then I realized this is America. Funding and maintaining infrastructure is not exactly a priority... In the context of this sub-thread, we are talking about America.
adventured 5y ago
> At first I didn't really understand but then I realized this is America. Funding and maintaining infrastructure is not exactly a priority As opposed to where? Asia? The US typically spends between as much or slightly more of its GDP on funding infrastructure vs what either the EU or Eurozone do. European spending on infrastructure has been mediocre for decades. 2017 "Europe’s spending on infrastructure at ‘chronic’ low level ... Spending at 20-year low threatens region’s prosperity, EIB report warns" https://www.ft.com/content/51524ab4-cf77-11e7-9dbb-291a884dd8c6 https://www.ft.com/content/51524ab4-cf77-11e7-9dbb-291a884dd... 2017 "Germany’s low investment rate leaves its infrastructure creaking ... The country with Europe’s strongest economy faces potholed roads and crumbling schools" https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/06/17/germanys-low-investment-rate-leaves-its-infrastructure-creaking https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/06/17/germanys-low-inv... https://www.cpr-am.fr/institutionals/Local-content/Actualites-Presse-Recompenses/Decoding-The-European-infrastructure-plan https://www.cpr-am.fr/institutionals/Local-content/Actualite... 2014 "EU Infrastructure Cutbacks Worry Economists" https://www.wsj.com/articles/eu-infrastructure-cutbacks-worry-economists-1405886120 https://www.wsj.com/articles/eu-infrastructure-cutbacks-worr...
- gibolt 5y ago
  Spending doesn't equal spending efficiency. It also doesn't account for added costs due to age of infra/retrofitting vs new infrastructure. I have no point to make, other than direct comparison misses a lot of nuance.

petermcneeley 5y ago

The quotes from policy implementers suggest this is about climate change. > The bill to ban the use of gas in new buildings will (help) us to transition to a greener future and (reach) carbon neutrality by the year 2050," said City Council Speaker Corey Johnson, noting "We are in a climate crisis and must take all necessary steps to fight climate change and protect our city. Also health issues are almost certainly more likely with existing/older infrastructure and not newer buildings.

micromacrofoot 5y ago
cities like nyc leak so much natural gas that you’re probably inhaling a little bit regularly as you walk through the city… there are hundreds and hundreds of detectable leaks cooking with natural gas also exposes you to it, especially if you’re not using an exhaust hood it won’t be as dramatic as lead because it’s not as obviously harmful, bit it could be one of those “wow i’m glad we stopped doing that” thing in 40 years
jabl 5y ago
While I applaud this move, too bad they shut down Indian Point NPP, replacing the capacity with gas.

macinjosh 5y ago

Stuffing your house with batteries that are near impossible to extinguish in a fire doesn’t seem like much of a safety upgrade. Gas lines can be shut off upstream.

astura 5y ago

As for your first point about indoor air - Gas for heating doesn't mean gas cooktop and non-gas for heating doesn't mean non-gas cooktop. I have oil heat and a gas cooktop. The gas is propane which is supplied by a company who fills a tank once in a blue moon. My parents have gas heat and a fully electric cooktop. FWIW, One of my burners is definitely unsafe, the fire is too high and there's a distinct smell of gas after using it for a couple minutes. So I don't use that one...