4 ms·

Nice. I hope this goes through, although there's approximately a 0% chance that it will, or if it does, conservative justices will likely strike it down pretty

by japhib 4y ago

Nice. I hope this goes through, although there's approximately a 0% chance that it will, or if it does, conservative justices will likely strike it down pretty quickly.

tastyfreeze 4y ago
Ok, lets think this through a bit. About 48% of homes in the US are heated with natural gas. This is mostly because it is the cheapest option available in many areas. The immediate result of banning natural gas heating is more expensive heating for 48% of homes. The longer term result is more expensive home ownership. More expensive home ownership means less people able to afford a home. People are going to use the cheapest option to heat their home. If you truly want people to switch from natural gas then make a cheaper option. Forcing change is rarely the best course. Make something cheaper or easier and people will change on their own. You don't see many horse and buggies or gas lights around much anymore. They were supplanted by better options not forced.
- smileysteve 4y ago
  I'm in a new home partly heated (thanks to the gas company subsidizing installs) by natural gas, it's a fleece of the Monopoly power granted by my state. In the southeast, my furnace is used 3 months a year, my highest bill is $50 in the last 12 months. But in ~9 months of 0 therm usage, the minimum bill is $30. (That's right, 3/5 of every home in my region is likely to overhead) But it's not just a fleece from the billing and the rate. Maintaining the infrastructure is supported by my property taxes and state income taxes (and the additional overhead of unneeded infrastructure in road maintenance, disasters, or simple things like utility marking. Then there are other fleeces involved that are strictly job creation. "De-regulation" where every year I have to play a game to get the best teaser rate to get the same gas (that might be traded differently) (when the state commissioner can require rates be a certain point in the market as they do of the - same company by the way - electric infrastructure.) So I have to pay with my time, and in many ways money, just to play this game. The heat is quick, the gas stove is slower than induction (I have a single induction unit I use most of the time), and the fireplace is comforting.

by japhib 4y ago

Nice. I hope this goes through, although there's approximately a 0% chance that it will, or if it does, conservative justices will likely strike it down pretty quickly.

tastyfreeze 4y ago

Ok, lets think this through a bit. About 48% of homes in the US are heated with natural gas. This is mostly because it is the cheapest option available in many areas. The immediate result of banning natural gas heating is more expensive heating for 48% of homes. The longer term result is more expensive home ownership. More expensive home ownership means less people able to afford a home. People are going to use the cheapest option to heat their home. If you truly want people to switch from natural gas then make a cheaper option. Forcing change is rarely the best course. Make something cheaper or easier and people will change on their own. You don't see many horse and buggies or gas lights around much anymore. They were supplanted by better options not forced.

smileysteve 4y ago
I'm in a new home partly heated (thanks to the gas company subsidizing installs) by natural gas, it's a fleece of the Monopoly power granted by my state. In the southeast, my furnace is used 3 months a year, my highest bill is $50 in the last 12 months. But in ~9 months of 0 therm usage, the minimum bill is $30. (That's right, 3/5 of every home in my region is likely to overhead) But it's not just a fleece from the billing and the rate. Maintaining the infrastructure is supported by my property taxes and state income taxes (and the additional overhead of unneeded infrastructure in road maintenance, disasters, or simple things like utility marking. Then there are other fleeces involved that are strictly job creation. "De-regulation" where every year I have to play a game to get the best teaser rate to get the same gas (that might be traded differently) (when the state commissioner can require rates be a certain point in the market as they do of the - same company by the way - electric infrastructure.) So I have to pay with my time, and in many ways money, just to play this game. The heat is quick, the gas stove is slower than induction (I have a single induction unit I use most of the time), and the fireplace is comforting.