Vancouver Council to ban Natural Gas by 2050

[ryanmaccdn]

Get ready for your steak in your downtown restaurants to be cooked via hot plates.

Oh and also an additional $2000 a year increase to your electric bill

Goal is to be 70% compliant by 2020 so it's sooner than you think folks.

[Migrant_Coconut]

I suppose we're supposed to cook food and warm our houses using positive karma, now?

[ryanmaccdn]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

I suppose we're supposed to cook food and warm our houses using positive karma, now?

Maybe it will be powered by internet trolls and all the haters?

[retro_orange]

Seems quite at odds with the Liberals LNG ambitions... I wonder if it was conveniently implemented ahead of the Provincial election

[WarrenC12]

Seems nobody bothered to actually read the story. They want to replace fossil-based NG with renewable NG (biomass, methane from garbage, etc.)

It already happens, Fortis already sells it (albeit at a premium today).

Of course, that explanation doesn't fit on a headline, nor get the uneducated masses riled up and tuning in to the news at 6.

[ryanmaccdn]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Seems nobody bothered to actually read the story. They want to replace fossil-based NG with renewable NG (biomass, methane from garbage, etc.)

It already happens, Fortis already sells it (albeit at a premium today).

Of course, that explanation doesn't fit on a headline, nor get the uneducated masses riled up and tuning in to the news at 6.

Thanks for the uneducated jab there....dick.

Still a lot of infrastructure changes needed, and a short time period/lofty goals.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by ryanmaccdn

Thanks for the uneducated jab there....dick.

Still a lot of infrastructure changes needed, and a short time period/lofty goals.

What infrastructure changes are needed? FortisBC offers this today:

https://www.fortisbc.com/NaturalGas/...s/default.aspx

As for short time period, it's 34 years from now.

Feel free to debate with facts.

[240glt]

If I were to build a house in Vancouver I'd probably install an air-to-air heat pump to condition the space rather than a forced air natural gas furnace anyways. Vancouver is probably one of the few places in Canada you can get away with that

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by 240glt

If I were to build a house in Vancouver I'd probably install an air-to-air heat pump to condition the space rather than a forced air natural gas furnace anyways. Vancouver is probably one of the few places in Canada you can get away with that

Most new condos come with individual heat pumps, I believe many are water source though.

Regardless, I agree Vancouver's climate is perfect for heat pumps, and they also allow cooling, which is increasingly important in this area.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

What infrastructure changes are needed? FortisBC offers this today:

https://www.fortisbc.com/NaturalGas/...s/default.aspx

As for short time period, it's 34 years from now.

Feel free to debate with facts.

From their own website it says that 100% renewable will cost the average household over $1000 more per year.

A restaurant can expect probably a $10,000 increase in natural gas costs.

And that's before factoring in the cost of building the massive amounts of infrastructure to produce the amounts of biogas this idiotic initiative will require.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Jebby

From their own website it says that 100% renewable will cost the average household over $1000 more per year.

A restaurant can expect probably a $10,000 increase in natural gas costs.

And that's before factoring in the cost of building the massive amounts of infrastructure to produce the amounts of biogas this idiotic initiative will require.

That's in today's dollars. Fortis is talking out of both sides of their mouth since they own upstream systems and stand to benefit from fossil fuel sales, but they want to look good offering a renewable option.

We are talking about 2050 here. Any talk of price is pointless. Fortis just raised their rates by 80%.

What is the cost of doing nothing and continuing to release carbon?

If you don't believe climate change is a problem, or if you think the free market will solve everything, there's no point discussing it.

[Jebby]

This is absolutely idiotic.

Natural gas is clean, efficient, and cheap. Biomass NG is incredibly expensive to produce on the scale the CoV would need.

Just another eco-moron policy from a dumbass council.

[s211]

If this doesn't get Vision punted from power come election time, then I can only conclude that the electorate believes we can power our economy solely on hot air generated by city council and the administration.

This is by far the most bald-faced Sierra Club-fronted inanity to come out of Vision's playbook.

Greenest City on Earth? More like the most laughable.

[SFUVancouver]

Can we have a source, please?

I don't have an issue with using the City of Vancouver building code and development process to implement a phased, medium- to long-term approach to lowering the built environment's GHG emissions. New buildings should have to meet new criteria, whether its for insulation, wheelchair accessibility, fire and earthquake codes, compatibility with district heating, on-site bike storage and electric car charging infrastructure, etc. The issue that I would have is if they were to retroactively apply new building code rules, like a ban on natural gas consumption, to all buildings. Unless that is what is proposed, I have no issue with this policy being phased in over 30+ years.

[Alex Mackinnon]

I think everyone knew this was coming, although I think it makes much more sense to simply raise the carbon tax rather than ban fuels.

One of the biggest things I worry about with this is what may happen during blackouts during cold weather. If someone is without any heat or power for days, and there is no NG backup, or local storage we could be in for a bad time.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

I think everyone knew this was coming, although I think it makes much more sense to simply raise the carbon tax rather than ban fuels.

One of the biggest things I worry about with this is what may happen during blackouts during cold weather. If someone is without any heat or power for days, and there is no NG backup, or local storage we could be in for a bad time.

I agree raising the carbon tax should take care of this GHG issue along with many others. The BC Liberals have been asked many times to raise it and there is no reason to believe they ever will, especially when they still talk about the future of LNG.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by ryanmaccdn

Get ready for your steak in your downtown restaurants to be cooked via hot plates.

Oh and also an additional $2000 a year increase to your electric bill

Goal is to be 70% compliant by 2020 so it's sooner than you think folks.

FUD.

The City of Vancouver is not banning the use of natural gas, despite claims to the contrary in a misinformed opinion piece in The Province newspaper.

Earlier this year, Vancouver City Council adopted the Zero Emissions Building Plan – an action plan that lays out a phased approach to combat and reduce carbon pollution in Vancouver. The plan establishes specific targets and actions to achieve zero emissions in all new buildings by 2030 i.e. the plan does not focus on retro-fitting buildings. Restaurants can continue to cook with natural gas and residents are not being asked to replace their gas appliances.

Fifty-eight per cent of the energy used in buildings (heat, hot water) comes from natural gas use (with the remainder from electricity); because electricity is green energy, natural gas is responsible for 96 per cent of a typical building’s greenhouse gas emissions. The phased approach laid out in the Zero Emissions Building Plan aims to reduce emissions from newly permitted buildings by 70 per cent by 2020, 90 per cent by 2025 and 100% by 2030.

http://mayorofvancouver.ca/news/clar...on-natural-gas

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

FUD.

http://mayorofvancouver.ca/news/clar...on-natural-gas

Thanks, was searching for that. It should be on vancouver.ca under "News", but somehow it's on the Mayor's website... poor media relations.

[SFUVancouver]

The piece in The Province that the Mayor responded to is an op-ed by Jason Bateman of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (excerpt below). That by-line should give one significant pause when it comes to considering the accuracy of the piece and the validity of the negative economic impact numbers he quotes. Indeed, The Province has already issued a correction saying "A previous version of this op-ed incorrectly implied that existing buildings would require retrofitting within the next 10 years. The city’s targets are for all new buildings to have zero emissions as of 2030, and all buildings — including existing ones — by 2050."

After Bateman's central role in the Transit Plebiscite fiasco, particularly his widely reported and repeatedly discredited methodology for calculating the cost per household of the proposed 0.5% PST tax increase (he incorrectly assumed that businesses and tourists would be exempt and only Metro Vancouver residential households would pay), I don't know how he has the credibility to garner the attention he does. Clearly, his opinions, and that of the CTF, align with editorial leadership at The Province. However, I also don't put it past the Province's editorial board that they just keep publishing him to get people's ire up and sell papers and generate page views in the process.

Jordan Bateman: Vision Vancouver’s natural-gas ban will cost residents thousands of dollars

Gregor Robertson’s green obsession should be a grave concern for Vancouver taxpayers trying to make ends meet.

Lost in the hubbub over housing prices in the Lower Mainland this summer was the Vision-dominated city council rubber stamping its Renewable City Strategy, committing Vancouver to eliminating natural gas within city limits by 2050. Robertson wants a 70-per-cent cut in natural gas use by 2020, and 90 per cent gone within 10 years on new construction or renovations requiring a building permit.

This will cost individual residents thousands of dollars — and was approved by Robertson and his council without any thought to the affordability crisis in Vancouver. This plan will make it more expensive for people to heat their homes and to buy things from businesses in Vancouver, and it means higher taxes to cover rising costs for hospitals, schools and buses.

Today, 56 per cent of all energy used by homes in Vancouver comes from natural gas, mainly to heat rooms and water. FortisBC has more than 108,000 customers in Vancouver – including homes, condo buildings, medical centres, restaurants and schools.

There are only two energy alternatives that could realistically replace natural gas — a district energy system run by the city, or electricity. Both are roughly the same price. Even with the news that FortisBC is hiking its natural gas price by $82 per year for the average residential customer, natural gas is still far cheaper than these alternatives.

Based on BC Hydro and FortisBC rates and average energy usage, a single-family home could see a $1,400 per year rise in energy bills if it moved from natural gas to electricity — and that’s on top of the up-front cost (likely thousands of dollars more) to convert or replace water heaters and furnaces.

It gets worse. In commercial, institutional and industrial buildings, 37 per cent of energy comes from natural gas. That means higher prices for customers, who will have to pay more to help business and restaurant owners foot the bill for the conversion and higher ongoing energy costs.

Hospitals are huge users of natural gas, not just to heat their buildings, but to sterilize equipment. A mid-sized hospital saves as much as $600,000 per year by using natural gas. Force them to use electricity, and more tax dollars will be needed to fund them.

More than a hundred schools use natural gas in Vancouver. The Vancouver School Board could need another $3.6 million per year for higher electricity costs.

Vision Vancouver is coming after vehicles, too. TransLink has been buying natural gas-powered buses for a few years, but Robertson’s plan may soon force them to buy fuel-cell buses — at more than twice the price. You can bet TransLink will be asking taxpayers for more money to cover it.

[...]

CORRECTION: A previous version of this op-ed incorrectly implied that existing buildings would require retrofitting within the next 10 years. The city’s targets are for all new buildings to have zero emissions as of 2030, and all buildings — including existing ones — by 2050.

http://theprovince.com/opinion/jorda...nds-of-dollars

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

The piece in The Province that the Mayor responded to is an op-ed by Jason Bateman of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (excerpt below). That by-line should give one significant pause when it comes to considering the accuracy of the piece and the validity of the negative economic impact numbers he quotes. Indeed, The Province has already issued a correction saying "A previous version of this op-ed incorrectly implied that existing buildings would require retrofitting within the next 10 years. The city’s targets are for all new buildings to have zero emissions as of 2030, and all buildings — including existing ones — by 2050."

After Bateman's central role in the Transit Plebiscite fiasco, particularly his widely reported and repeatedly discredited methodology for calculating the cost per household of the proposed 0.5% PST tax increase (he incorrectly assumed that businesses and tourists would be exempt and only Metro Vancouver residential households would pay), I don't know how he has the credibility to garner the attention he does. Clearly, his opinions, and that of the CTF, align with editorial leadership at The Province. However, I also don't put it past the Province's editorial board that they just keep publishing him to get people's ire up and sell papers and generate page views in the process.


http://theprovince.com/opinion/jorda...nds-of-dollars

Ugg. Bateman is a such a dud. We don't even have NG busses in the CoV.

If anything, in most of Translinks fleet will be electric long before any of this matters. Battery costs are dropping, and they'll undercut diesel soon enough.