View Single Post
Old Posted Sep 10, 2019, 2:43 AM
kingkirbythe....'s Avatar
kingkirbythe.... kingkirbythe.... is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 589
Originally Posted by craigs View Post
I knew when I clicked on this thread that it would focus on mockery and right-wing culture war, but I also knew there are good reasons for Berkeley and other cities to do this.

For example, the article notes the city was only able to achieve a 15 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions over the last decade, well below its targeted 33 percent reduction, and natural gas appliances currently make up 27 percent of the city’s greenhouse gas emissions. Reducing the city's natural gas appliances over time by attrition will help the city reach its targets.

The article also notes two other good reasons to do this. First, a study showed 12 percent of childhood asthma was attributed to gas stoves used for cooking, and second, and more importantly, this move makes sense in earthquake country.

According to the article, a 2017 U.S. Geological Survey that found that a 7.0-magnitude earthquake on the Hayward fault line (which runs under Berkeley) with the epicenter in Oakland (borders Berkeley) could result in 450 large fires, and the destruction of thousands of homes, and that ruptured gas lines would be a “key fire risk factor.”

The utility that serves Berkeley, Pacific Gas & Electric, supports Berkeley and other cities switching from natural gas appliances: their spokesman told the newspaper "the company is in favor of all-electric construction" and “We welcome the opportunity to avoid investments in new gas assets that might later prove underutilized as the local governments and the state work together to realize our longterm decarbonization objectives."

Unsuprisingly, some 50 other California cities are considering making the same change. Nobody seems to oppose this, except right-wing forum culture warriors seeking to embrace fossil fuels, because MAGA.
Damn right!
Reply With Quote