5 ms·

Your gas stove isn't a heating appliance and therefore is probably exempt. "In a vote held late Wednesday, the board of directors of the Bay Area Air Quality M

by giarc 4y ago

Your gas stove isn't a heating appliance and therefore is probably exempt. "In a vote held late Wednesday, the board of directors of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) adopted rules that will require new water heaters and furnaces to have zero emissions of nitrogen oxides, or NOx."

mercyandgrace 4y ago
Looks like the AVG low in the Bay Area is about 45? I suppose that isn't that cold, however, in the event of an extended electrical outage, those with gas appliances can still heat their homes. Those without cannot. I think the merit of the parent comment still stands. I live in New England and utilize heating oil primarily. Even that won't work without electricity.
- fsh 4y ago
  A forced air gas furnace doesn't work without electricity.
  - brocklobsta 4y ago
    True, but I could run my gas heat with a portable generator. Most of my neighbors with electric heat could not. Same with my pellet stove, it requires power for the auger and blower, but significantly less than an all electric system. I think the right thing to do is to ensure the public is aware of the tradeoff and if indoor air quality is a concern, then ensure proper ventilation in the building code. I worry about going all in on electric when reliability is not robust.
  - mercyandgrace 4y ago
    Very true. But that is not the only alternative gas heating appliance available either.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- UncleMeat 4y ago
  My furnace doesn't run if the electricity is off. The fan needs electricity. The safety circuits in the furnace need electricity. If we want to talk about power outages causing loss of life due to freezing then we can talk about that problem. But I'm pretty confident that "put today's gas furnaces in everybody's home" is the appropriate way of attacking that problem. Especially in a place like the bay area where you just aren't seeing 10 degree lows.
  - schiffern 4y ago
    When they said "those with gas appliances can still heat their homes," I assume they meant using the gas stove as a contigency heat source. Recommended? Of course not. But a lot of (especially rural propane) users do it to avoid freezing pipes and people. SF maybe not so much, but in climates where you can literally die without heat (often because you're simultaneously "snowed in"), you really really want dissimilar redundancy. (obviously NEVER heat with a stove, because as we all know you'll burn down your house and/or asphyxiate from carbon monoxide)
    - mercyandgrace 4y ago
      This is it. I run oil mostly, but have a propane fire place insert in the event of a power outage. While it is insuficient to heat my entire home, and every pipe in my house may burst from the cold, at least my family will be able to stay warm.
    - yamtaddle 4y ago
      My experience is that those duffel-bag-sized portable kerosene heaters are almost as common as pickup trucks, out in the sticks. At least in places that have real winters.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
  - mercyandgrace 4y ago
    >But I'm pretty confident that "put today's gas furnaces in everybody's home" is the appropriate way of attacking that problem. Did you mean "is not". And I never suggested this. But certainly there are vulnerable populations that should be considered. If the purpose of this legislation is to improve "indoor air quality", as another poster suggested, why not educate the populace and allow them to make the decision for themselves?
CoffeeOnWrite 4y ago
It's part of a bigger movement away from gas, eg. https://barc.ca.gov/whats-happening/news/berkeley-becomes-first-us-city-ban-natural-gas-connections-new-buildings https://barc.ca.gov/whats-happening/news/berkeley-becomes-fi... It seems like a big deal to me to go from two redundant energy sources to one without discussing the trade offs in resiliency. I agree with OP, that there will be a large of human cost to giving up gas heat without making a corresponding investment in the reliability of the electric grid (which I have never seen mentioned). My impression is that the total cost to the decision to phase out gas has not been crunched. Pushing it to individuals to be prepared for electric grid failure is pretty bad for carbon and pollution. All those generators (and other emergency backup appliances) manufactured and maintained. I personally prefer having gas and electric, I feel that gives me adequate reliability, so I don't need to own a generator: I have my gas heat (millivolt pilot generator requires no AC power), gas hot water, candles, and flashlights. And I like not owning a generator (or emergency propane heater (aren't these commonly implicated in structure fires? [0]), etc). Plus many people can't afford generators. [0] https://www.nfpa.org/News-and-Research/Data-research-and-tools/US-Fire-Problem/Heating-equipment https://www.nfpa.org/News-and-Research/Data-research-and-too...
proc0 4y ago
Now that you mention it, I also have a gas stove and that day the temp. was in the 30's. I was still able to stay warm at night. So it's the same problem.

by giarc 4y ago

mercyandgrace 4y ago

Looks like the AVG low in the Bay Area is about 45? I suppose that isn't that cold, however, in the event of an extended electrical outage, those with gas appliances can still heat their homes. Those without cannot. I think the merit of the parent comment still stands. I live in New England and utilize heating oil primarily. Even that won't work without electricity.

fsh 4y ago
A forced air gas furnace doesn't work without electricity.
- brocklobsta 4y ago
  True, but I could run my gas heat with a portable generator. Most of my neighbors with electric heat could not. Same with my pellet stove, it requires power for the auger and blower, but significantly less than an all electric system. I think the right thing to do is to ensure the public is aware of the tradeoff and if indoor air quality is a concern, then ensure proper ventilation in the building code. I worry about going all in on electric when reliability is not robust.
- mercyandgrace 4y ago
  Very true. But that is not the only alternative gas heating appliance available either.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
UncleMeat 4y ago
My furnace doesn't run if the electricity is off. The fan needs electricity. The safety circuits in the furnace need electricity. If we want to talk about power outages causing loss of life due to freezing then we can talk about that problem. But I'm pretty confident that "put today's gas furnaces in everybody's home" is the appropriate way of attacking that problem. Especially in a place like the bay area where you just aren't seeing 10 degree lows.
- schiffern 4y ago
  When they said "those with gas appliances can still heat their homes," I assume they meant using the gas stove as a contigency heat source. Recommended? Of course not. But a lot of (especially rural propane) users do it to avoid freezing pipes and people. SF maybe not so much, but in climates where you can literally die without heat (often because you're simultaneously "snowed in"), you really really want dissimilar redundancy. (obviously NEVER heat with a stove, because as we all know you'll burn down your house and/or asphyxiate from carbon monoxide)
  - mercyandgrace 4y ago
    This is it. I run oil mostly, but have a propane fire place insert in the event of a power outage. While it is insuficient to heat my entire home, and every pipe in my house may burst from the cold, at least my family will be able to stay warm.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    My experience is that those duffel-bag-sized portable kerosene heaters are almost as common as pickup trucks, out in the sticks. At least in places that have real winters.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- mercyandgrace 4y ago
  >But I'm pretty confident that "put today's gas furnaces in everybody's home" is the appropriate way of attacking that problem. Did you mean "is not". And I never suggested this. But certainly there are vulnerable populations that should be considered. If the purpose of this legislation is to improve "indoor air quality", as another poster suggested, why not educate the populace and allow them to make the decision for themselves?

CoffeeOnWrite 4y ago

It's part of a bigger movement away from gas, eg. https://barc.ca.gov/whats-happening/news/berkeley-becomes-first-us-city-ban-natural-gas-connections-new-buildings https://barc.ca.gov/whats-happening/news/berkeley-becomes-fi... It seems like a big deal to me to go from two redundant energy sources to one without discussing the trade offs in resiliency. I agree with OP, that there will be a large of human cost to giving up gas heat without making a corresponding investment in the reliability of the electric grid (which I have never seen mentioned). My impression is that the total cost to the decision to phase out gas has not been crunched. Pushing it to individuals to be prepared for electric grid failure is pretty bad for carbon and pollution. All those generators (and other emergency backup appliances) manufactured and maintained. I personally prefer having gas and electric, I feel that gives me adequate reliability, so I don't need to own a generator: I have my gas heat (millivolt pilot generator requires no AC power), gas hot water, candles, and flashlights. And I like not owning a generator (or emergency propane heater (aren't these commonly implicated in structure fires? [0]), etc). Plus many people can't afford generators. [0] https://www.nfpa.org/News-and-Research/Data-research-and-tools/US-Fire-Problem/Heating-equipment https://www.nfpa.org/News-and-Research/Data-research-and-too...

proc0 4y ago

Now that you mention it, I also have a gas stove and that day the temp. was in the 30's. I was still able to stay warm at night. So it's the same problem.