Dedicated to Empowering and Informing the Burlingame Community

Banning Natural Gas in B’game

With several study sessions under their belts, the City Council is moving towards a ban on natural gas for new developments in town.  We first heard this out of Berkeley and discussed it last July here.  As the idea moves closer to home (the Daily Journal wrote it up here), I have some thoughts that I have just shared with the council via email.  Here is my letter

Dear Councilmembers,

I am intrigued by the discussions regarding banning natural gas hook-ups in future Burlingame developments including commercial, multi-family and single-family residences.  It strikes me that perhaps the councilmembers who support such a ban should lead the way in this change.  I suggest that each councilmember take the initiative to change out the gas appliances in their own homes first.  The community should be provided insights into both the capital and operating costs of this change.

It would be enlightening to understand the relative costs of electric furnaces, water heaters and high-end electric stoves and fireplaces that meld with typical Burlingame design aesthetics.  Similarly, if any councilmember has a pool or outdoor hot tub, it would be good to understand the options available to heat these amenities.  I can foresee some potential changes and additions to our existing building codes that might be revealed by councilmembers’ changeover projects.  Understanding these changes first would save residents and developers time and money as well as bringing our building inspectors up to speed.  The need for 220V power in many more home locations as well as the need for battery back-up and potentially back-up generators (with appropriate fuels if available) should be examined and shared with the community.  In my nearly 30 years living in Burlingame, I cannot recall a single natural gas outage, but electrical outages are frequent and not likely to improve in the mid-term future.

Lastly, we should all be provided with actual operating cost comparisons for the newly refurbished homes.  If these changeovers could be finished by next winter, a six-month cost comparison for the colder months of October to March would be ideal for assessing the true impact on Burlingame residents.

I look forward to the Council’s leadership on this important issue.

Sincerely,

Joe Baylock

————————————

I'll let you know what I receive in the way of responses. 

Gas Ban

  

Posted in , , , ,

62 responses to “Banning Natural Gas in B’game”

  1. Barking Dog

    Nice work Joe and thank you for writing your well thought out letter to the city council.
    Mr. Brownrigg’s investment/family members home on Columbus Ave(not his family residence on Columbus ) was just sold for north of 3.5 mil) after a total teardown and remodel of the property. There is a gas line that that connects to the property…I’m sure with a high end Viking/Wolf range in the kitchen. Before this sold recently, Mr Brownrigg from what I had read, his reservations about banning natural gas, but once this property was sold at a high dollar amount(and a lower cost amount to build out with natural gas hookups) he is now want to ban natural gas. Come on Mike…dont be that Limousine Liberal to garner a votes. Practice what you preach to your constituents. You are a better man than that.
    I think it was in the winter of 82 or 83 a huge eucalyptus tree fell on Burlingame Ave by the Rec Center. My family was without power for 4 days. Thankfully we had(have) a gas stove, waterheater and wood burning fireplace…

  2. Peter Garrison

    Thanks Joe.
    Good nudge on the Golden Rule for this council and study session:
    If they don’t want to bear the personal expense and hassle, then they may not ask others to suffer the expense and hassle.

  3. Bruce Dickinson

    Folks, Bruce Dickinson thinks this idea is borderline preposterous, considering over 40% of energy in California is produced via natural gas, which is still a cleaner source of energy over its full life cycle and is extremely cheap to produce. Look how low natural gas prices are–that’s right multi-year lows!
    With so much of California’s baseload electricity produced by natural gas, that a theoretical “all electric home” is still consuming electricity produced by natural gas. It might make sense if solar/renewables make far greater than the 20% of baseload electricity generation, but as of now, seems like an idea being used to generate votes and tap into popular feel-good environmentalism versus making a decision that makes practical and economic sense.
    If at a certain point, natural gas becomes too expensive or unpalatable for consumers, then just let them “cut the pipe”, cancel their gas service and go all solar. No need for a nanny-state to dictate what is best for us while we wait decades to become 100% renewable. Not even sure that will fully happen as massive loads of electricity is tough to store (giant battery farms built, which also use high mining-intensive/not environmentally friendly production of rare earth minerals) and what happens when the sun isn’t shining or winds aren’t blowing?
    Also, what about all the gourmet home chefs in our midst that will have to deal with an electric stove!!? Will this mean that older houses that will continue to have gas connections become MORE valuable than homes that don’t!!!
    Bruce Dickinson, despite being a registered Democrat, finds it rather amusing how this “Nanny-State” mentality is so patronizing to CA’s citizens. Yes, these politician-geniuses, the same people who came up with HSR, allowed PG&E to go bankrupt twice through their crazy rules, cannot balance a budget during a recession, allowed other cities to ship their homeless to our cities (without any of our politicians noticing), believes that building more affordable housing solves homelessness, and oversaw the continuous decline of California’ state education programs to nearly last place in the nation, while continuously raising income and sales taxes with very little to show for it… are now telling us how to run things!!!???!
    Thanks but no thanks, with such a terrible track record, the less they are in charge of and the fewer decisions they make for us the better! The incredibly lousy record speaks for itself!!!

  4. Papes Fan

    Me thinks the council people should stock up on old-fashion charcoal and lighter fluid and a Weber because the meat they cook on an electric stove or electric grill will be yuck yuck yucky.

  5. Barking Dog

    Bruce, well said and articulate as always. You sure you lean left of center in today’s California??
    Papers Fan bring up a good point, does this include outdoor gas grills?
    Mr Brownrigg disappoints me with this. Maybe he was just playing to the Advocate crowd in the room pushing the issue. All I know is he lost my vote next Tues. I hope the 15 Advocate votes Mr Brownrigg garnered in that room, was worth the many more he lost by pushing this “reach” code.
    Ms Beach, go sell this to the small Massachusetts town you grew up in. My guess is it wont fly up there. Go tell the people of Mass, in Dec, we a cutting off your gas/oil to heat your home…

  6. Citizen

    Dear Pols,
    Natural gas is relatively cheap, safe, clean, abundant, and affordable.
    Leave it alone.
    Regards,
    Citizen

  7. Paloma Ave

    Why is our city council even thinking out loud about limiting choices?
    This is America!
    Stick with the business of filling potholes, repairing broken sidewalks and keeping traffic moving.
    And please don’t feel the need to follow the practices of the Peoples Republic of Berkeley.

  8. resident

    Does anybody really think this is not the nose of the camel sneaking under the tent to eventually outlaw gas in single family homes? Just read the letter in today’s Chronicle from a woman in Walnutty Creek. I quote “A great next step for California to achieve net zero carbon emissions is to help current homeowners transition to electric appliances with incentives or a tax break to replace gas furnaces, stoves and water heaters with electric appliances”

  9. Burglingame Voter

    ZERO impact on climate but negative consequences for our town and for our citizens.
    I’m writing in Joe Baylock on my ballot.

  10. Bruce Dickinson

    Also, Bruce Dickinson has to laugh about that Walnut Creek woman proclaiming how morally great it would be for California in achieving zero net carbon emissions. Well, sorry, but never gonna happen, because guess what?
    California is the largest importer of electricity in the US!! That’s right, we don’t generate enough for our own baseload, so we need to buy nearly 30% of our power out of state! And how is that power generated? Let me tell ya, it ain’t all solar panels and wind farms. It’s natural gas, nuclear, and “big beautiful coal” (Trump’s quote).
    https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/news/california-electricity-imports-us/
    So Brownrigg, latching onto this ridiculous proposal, is clearly pandering to a bunch of eco-ignorants. Maybe that’s what it takes you get you elected!?? But seriously, the only “statement” that Burlingame is really making by banning natural gas is “we are eliminating one of your choices for heating and cooking even though it has almost zero impact on making the world a greener place”.
    Dumb is a four-letter word! The less time our City Council spends on this “issue”, the better off we are!

  11. Joe

    Dear Burglingame Voter, thank you for the laugh today. I’m going to assume your screen name is not a typo but a comment on people burglarizing your rights. I may plagiarize your term in the future. I only wish I had thought of it when the last sales tax measure came around. “Burglingame”. Love it.
    BruceD, Thank you as well. You are a font of wisdom on a number of fronts. We are already importing 30% of our electricity! Who knew?

  12. Bruce Dickinson

    Joe, yes, you read that correctly, over 33% of California’s electricity is imported, to be more precise. What’s even crazier is that the amount imported has actually increased from 25% in 2010!!! So much for this push for renwables, which by the way helped all of your power bills be 45% above the US average! See below:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/judeclemente/2016/04/03/californias-growing-imported-electricity-problem/#40d44f134469
    Guys, yes, the Bruce Dickinson in about 5 minutes, pretty much obliterated any possible argument for getting rid of natural gas in Burlingame by exposing the hypocritical politicians who love to prey on emotions and totally ignore cold hard facts. And if you vote for their crazy proposal, guess what? Your power bill will be even higher!
    I just saved everyone from wasting a bunch of time and money!! This proposal is DOA. My campaign advice to Brownrigg, drop it and move on to something more defensible that can have a real impact on bettering people’s lives.
    So, maybe Bernie Sanders is wrong in saying that all multimillionaires and billionaires shouldn’t exist!!!?!??

  13. Barking Dog

    Do the property tax paying residents even have a chance to vote for/against this proposed “reach” code? Or doe it just take 3 of 5 council members to vote in favor of and become the new code?

  14. Michelle

    They will take my gas stovetop when they pry it out of my cold, dead hands. Do any of the council members even cook?

  15. Joe

    I have gotten a response to my letter, but so far only one of our five councilmembers has responded to the direct question of “Will you swap over to all-electric” by stating they are in the process of getting quotes.
    Still waiting on the other four.

  16. Duff Beach

    No one is taking anyone’s already installed gas appliances (nor their replacements). This is about new infrastructure.
    If you want to know more, read the information the city provides or ask your council member (or both).
    I don’t speak for Emily, but she does–just ask her. Not everyone will agree on this issue, or others (that’s the nature of things), but I know she doesn’t make any decision on the council on a whim or without doing her homework.

  17. Joe

    Thank you, Duff. Most people get that existing appliances aren’t targeted, I certainly do. That is not the essence of the request. The above letter went to all five members, so we’re just waiting for responses to come in.

  18. Duff Beach

    I’m not addressing the policy, but I will address the other question. The Beach family is blessed with a comfortable income that has allowed us to afford a nice home in Burlingame that we probably couldn’t afford to buy today. We do not have the money lying around to replace infrastructure in our home for no reason. We don’t have multiple homes, pools, etc.
    However, if we needed to re-wire or re-plumb our house, it is obvious that only re-wiring, not also re-plumbing, would be less expensive. Additionally, when the power goes out, our gas heat and hot water also go out (because they also require electricity—as most modern gas furnaces do).

  19. Sign me up

    It looks like we have a situation where some people do the homework and still fail the test.
    This whole thing is waste of time and should be put to bed now. Don’t we have enough real issues in town.

  20. Barking Dog

    “The Beach family is blessed with a comfortable income that has allowed us to afford a nice home in Burlingame that we probably couldn’t afford to buy today. We do not have the money lying around to replace infrastructure in our home for no reason. We don’t have multiple homes, pools, etc.”
    Replace the Beach name with any other families name. Rings true with most families in Burlingame. I know it does mine.
    Yes re-wiring less expensive, but unnecessary now and I still don’t have the money to accomplish that if it was required. What I have works just fine(most of the time), safe, somewhat economical and I have to say, pretty reliable in my neighborhood. The $1100 investment I made 10yrs ago on a low noise gas generator enables my family to have a safe environment with heat and hot water when the power goes out or in an emergency situation.
    Will agree to disagree with you Beach Duff, as I hope that the final outcome of this is common sense prevailing.
    Common…. economical, cost efficient, environmental/sustainable, customer preferred…sense.

  21. Joe

    I don’t spend a lot of time on NextDoor. The commercial features of it affect the design of the user interface which I find a little distracting. But when a topic “heats up” like this proposed natural gas ban, I tune in. With his permission, I am reposting a comment from Mark Hammitt–a guy I don’t know–that I found exceptionally well-stated:
    There’s nothing wrong with a constituent asking his or her councilmember about various issues, going to meetings, and poring over meeting minutes. But we elect people based on a general trust that they’re aligned with our interests and will represent us accordingly, which should relieve us from having to dedicate this degree of oversight.
    I’m disappointed both in the authoritarian tendency in Burlingame city government and the pack mentality (“all the other kids are doing it”) used to justify these interventions (I’m looking at you, higher-than-mandated grocery bag fee).
    Natural gas is really efficient at generating heat, just as electricity is really efficient (via LEDs) at generating light. Let them be.
    —————–
    That sense of a “general trust” in our electeds is critical for me. I have endorsed most of our current councilmembers for election at one time or another–sometimes more than once. And I GET IT, you sometimes disagree with an elected that you MOSTLY agree with. That’s life in politics. Heck, I disagreed with one or two of my own wife’s votes in 12 years (can anyone say “Roundabout”??).
    So, thank you, Mark-that-I-don’t-know. It’s good to read a coherent statement about limiting the long arm of the council.
    The original request of the councilmembers that started this post still stands as a legit request. Let’s take this out of the realm of Staff Reports and into the real-world of bids, building code, reliable appliances, and even a nicely grilled piece of fish.

  22. Bruce Dickinson

    Listen guys, to be clear, Bruce Dickinson knows that the no natural gas proposal only applies to new homes, not existing homes. My point is why should this rule be imposed on new construction, when natural gas is very cheap (multi year lows), is fairly clean burning, is a major component of our baseload electricity generation, is a major component of California’s IMPORTED electricity (33%), and is already fairly clean. Burlingame doing this for new homes isn’t going to create any sort of dent in any greenhouse emissions. Also, with those who believe we must move away from natural gas by storing wind/solar power must also realize that rare earth mining of metals and minerals (for battery farms) is extremely environmentally unfriendly! Just because mining these elements in Russia or China and not here doesn’t mean they don’t affect the global environment.
    Point is, if people are so worried that by switching to all electricity helps their conscience (in spite of natural gas driving so much electricity generation as mentioned above), let them, on THEIR OWN volition, either choose (at their sole discretion) to have their new home be all electric or keep the gas, or for existing homes, choose to “cut the pipe” and not use gas and get electric appliances, solar panels, Tesla battery or what not. Or they can choose to keep their existing gas appliances and continue to be amateur gourmet chefs to their hearts’ content.
    No need for “Nanny State” approaches in forcing action (removing any prospect for natural gas in new construction) down people’s throats when there is very little economic or rational justification of doing so, considering that California’s own and imported electric generation is dependent on natural gas, and the fact that this huge push to renewables has actually INCREASED our electric rates to 45% above the national average and put us in the position of importing more electricity than any other state as increasing capacity in solar and wind is a slow and expensive process. The “nanny state” track record of our elected officials at the State level is nothing short of abysmal as I highlighted in so many of the issues above. Choice needs to move down more to the local level given that trust with State officials has been breached in so many different capacities on dozens of important issues, thereby adversely affecting the health of our State.
    My expectation is that Burlingame’s elected officials should embrace more micro-local choices, and you can’t get closer to true freedom of choice than to have each household decide on the direction of how to use their energy and appliances, especially when the economic and rational justification in maintaining the status quo is so overwhelmingly compelling.
    Consider the “homework” already done!

  23. Joe

    From today’s Chronicle opinion piece by San Jose mayor Sam Liccardo:
    The result would be hefty rate hikes that force customers to pay hundreds of millions of dollars more to Wall Street through their monthly utility bills. PG&E optimistically projects that electricity rates will increase by a third over the next three years, but more realistic assumptions would push energy bills even higher.
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/There-s-a-better-way-out-of-the-PG-E-bankruptcy-15087364.php

  24. CB

    I can chime in as someone who voluntarily went almost all electric during a large remodel about two years ago. I put solar panels in, replaced my ancient gas heating (radiators) system with a forced air heat pump system, and replaced my gas water heater with a heat pump water heater (resistance heat as backup). Now only my stovetop and fireplace use gas, so my gas usage is practically negligible.
    I really don’t get the “re-wiring” comments above. Yes, you have to re-wire, but that is only part of it. You have to buy and maintain the electric appliances, and they aren’t cheap in the case of a heating system and water heater. Heat pumps are really the only way to go because electrical resistance heat is very inefficient. Heat pumps are expensive and complicated (i.e., things go wrong).
    The cost of the electricity to heat your home and water is enormous at our very high rates, even with an efficient system. It takes massive amounts of electricity to replace that gas. My solar panels were a necessary part of the plan because I could essentially lock in my electricity rates by prepaying for 20-25 years of electricity.
    Anyway, I can tell you that I have had numerous minor problems with the heat pumps, and even when nothing is wrong, they are really poor at heating when temps get in the 30s.
    Would I do it again knowing what I know now? It would be a close call.
    The cost, simplicity, reliability, and longevity of gas heating systems are way better than their electric counterparts right now. Then add in the very high and rising cost of our electricity. Then add in the points that Bruce made about much of the electricity coming from gas plants anyway.
    All in all, I wouldn’t force people to go all-electric at this point in time. If people like me want to do it, great, but it should be a choice. I sure would pity the person who has an all-electric house and is at the mercy of our crazy electric rates.

  25. $$$Envi – ous $$$$

    I made the mistake of going with resistance heat for a really small space. Maybe 100 square feet. I thought how bad could it be. The unit comes from Envi and is sleek and wallmounted so it doesn’t take up much space in the small space. But boy is it expensive for just minimal heat in a space that is really just storage. Ouch.

  26. Barking Dog

    Thank you CB. That’s real information. Not a staff report or an opinion of a politician who doesn’t have this form of all electric power/heating in their own homes.

  27. Charged Up

    Good plan. Kill the business providing the cheapest, cleanest, most reliable, easy to cook with fuel. Are you all nuts? Answer= YES

  28. Phinancier

    Any response from any of the city elders, Joe?

  29. Barking Dog

    I assume this has been placed on the back burner as of right now. But I do have a couple of questions
    1)Any other council members replay to your request Joe?
    2)Is the new 100mil Rec Center going to be 100% electric if gas is banned?

  30. Laura

    New Rec Center is going solar but unsure about gas. It is supposed to be net zero, meaning total energy used by building, equals amount of renewable energy created.

  31. Joe

    @Phinancier and @Barking Dog
    You know what happens when you assume….so thanks for asking. I do not assume this crisis will go to waste for the gas haters.
    Ms. Colson has responded that she will be getting a quote on making the change-over. The only other responses were, well, non-responsive. I was reminded several times that this proposed ordinance was just for new construction which I already knew and was not the point of the question/request. I heard nothing from the two men on council. Still waiting.

  32. Barking Dog

    Thanks Laura and Joe

  33. Joe

    Tonight’s the night:
    Staff is recommending “all newly constructed buildings, including single family residences, multi-family buildings and commercial buildings, shall meet all-electric building requirements. All-electric is defined as a building that has no natural gas or propane plumbing installed within the building…………”
    “This provision also applies to substantial remodels of single family homes where more than 50% of the valuation of the existing structure is being remodeled, provided the remodel also includes a new kitchen and new heating, cooling and ventilation systems.”
    —————-
    Six predictions:
    1. Midnight plumbing becomes a viable industry
    2. Second-hand, nearly new all electric ranges become ridiculously affordable.
    3. An all-electic range rental business becomes viable.
    4. Home remodels of 45% of valuation increase.
    5. Existing gas-fueled homes increase in value faster than new homes.
    6. Propane tank sales and refilling increase.
    Bonus prediction: The Law of Unintended Consequences remains intact.

  34. Concerned

    I just sent an email to publiccomment@burlingame.org
    expressing my strong recommendation against this silly restriction of Burlingame property owner rights to utilize a proven effective and economic resource.
    Please also do so this evening as quickly as possible.
    It’s ridiculous that, with all that is going on and under a government imposed lock down that restricts attendance at City Council meetings, this action would be taken tonight.
    We need to stand up against this nonsense that will take away rights and further exacerbate the housing cost crisis.

  35. Sign me up

    You can take my gas grill when you pry it from my cold, dirty spatula.

  36. Barking Dog

    Comical. Hopefully common sense prevailed last night, but in today’s world, not holding my breath.

  37. Joe

    From Fox & Hounds:
    JULY 17, 2020
    KERRY JACKSON
    At roughly the same time the state Air Resources Board issued a rule forcing trucks and vans to transition from diesel to electric motors, the state moved closer to a policy framework in which new buildings must be all-electric. The smiling environmental lobby feels no mercy toward the poor, who will have to carry the weight of California’s obsession with eliminating more-affordable fossil fuels.
    Within days of each other, Pacific Gas & Electric announced it “fully expects to meet the needs that all-electric buildings will require,” and San Francisco officials announced “legislation that would be much like Berkeley’s ban on natural gas hookups in new construction.”
    “These are all steps toward the possibility that there will be a statewide policy after California officials decide on revisions to the state building code that would take effect in 2023,” The Mercury News reported earlier this month.
    At the end of June, CARB declared it was going to “dump dirty diesel” and mandate today’s trucks be replaced with “zero-emission” models. Within four years, manufacturers will have “to transition from diesel trucks and vans to electric zero-emission trucks.”
    Lawmakers, unelected bureaucrats, and activists are already congratulating themselves for their wisdom and foresight in forcing these policy changes, and confirmed their beliefs that they have impressed their counterparts in other states. But they won’t be harmed for holding “luxury beliefs.” Poorer Californians will.
    Luxury beliefs can be defined as “ideas and opinions that confer status on the rich,” which tends to include quite a few lawmakers who enjoy their own brand of privilege, “at very little cost, while taking a toll on the lower class,” says Air Force veteran and Cambridge University doctorate candidate Rob Henderson.
    There’s no way to better describe California’s rush to kill off fossil fuels by 2045 and run the entire state on renewable energy. Those driving the campaign are anxious to show their green bona fides and won’t be affected by the costs the way the middle and lower economic classes will be.
    Electricity costs in California are among the steepest in the country. Residential customers pay 46% more than the national average while business customers’ rates are 69% higher. When cheaper natural gas is no longer an option, Californians will have no choice but to use costlier electricity that will be generated by more expensive renewables. With 18.1% of Californians living in poverty, according to the Census Bureau’s Supplemental Poverty Measure – only Washington, D.C., at 18.2%, has a higher rate – it’s a setup that will inflict a greater burden on a significant portion of the state.
    Granted, some studies have concluded that all-electric homes would produce overall cost savings in nearly all cases, with only small increases in a few instances. But how will those numbers hold up under a structure in which electricity generation has fully transitioned to renewable sources, which looks as if it will be limited to wind and solar, making the conversion even more expensive? What effect will that have on the cost of power for all-electric buildings?
    There’s no denying renewables have made significant progress in the last decade. They’re more affordable, more widely used. But a refit to renewables-only will still have costs. The toll ranges from “$4.5 trillion by 2030 or even 2040 to $5.7 trillion in 2030” on a national scale, says the Institute for Energy Research. While costs in California would be only a slice of that, the shift will not come cheaply in an economy that alone would be the world’s fifth largest.
    Another factor that tends to get lost in the race to renewables is the question of capacity: Can California even feed itself? The state imported 29 percent of its electricity in 2018, and somehow, in a land sunshine, was the largest electricity importer in the country from 2013 to 2017.

  38. Paloma Ave

    Imagine if the Burlingame City Council decided to ban abortion? After all there can be deep psychological damage down the road.
    Don’t let the tree huggers and end of the worlders (and Bezerklers) dictate the BANNING of anything.
    Freedom of choice, and not just on some topics!

  39. Paloma Ave

    Apparently common sense is NOT very common.

  40. Paloma Ave

    Note that the blackouts start right when the sun goes down, and California’s green solar power mess is helpless.
    Meanwhile, California and Burlingame officials want ban natural gas.
    That’s reliable electricity and they’re throwing it away so they can claim brownie points among fellow Leftists.
    As usual, California has only itself and its dumb politicians and foolish advocacy groups to blame.
    Look in the mirror, California and Burlingame officials…you and your Leftist friends are the real core of the problem.

  41. Joe

    Paloma, we are of the same mind, you just beat me to the point–and you put it on the exact post I had in mind. So here is the WSJ editorial from two days ago:
    The California Independent System Operator (Caiso), which manages the state’s power grid, declared a high-level emergency Friday and Saturday evenings and ordered utilities to reduce power usage. California and most of the southwestern U.S. are experiencing a severe heat wave. But other states are managing to keep power flowing. Why can’t California?
    During peak daylight hours, California produces a surplus of solar energy, and power generators may be ordered or paid to cut back their production so the grid isn’t overloaded. On Friday and Saturday Caiso reported about 1,000 mega-watt hours (MWh) were curtailed—enough to power 30,000 homes. This year 1.3 million MWh of power have been curtailed.
    But this means supply shortages can occur in the evening when solar energy plunges but demand for power remains high. That’s what happened this weekend. Many natural gas and nuclear plants that can generate power 24/7 have shut down in recent years because they can’t compete with heavily subsidized green energy. A 10-year-old natural gas power plant in California’s Inland Empire is being decommissioned this year—20 to 30 years earlier than its planned lifespan.
    ——————-
    And the Gavinator wants “an investigation”. I know where to start……

  42. JP

    SACRAMENTO, CA—The state of California, home to some of the world’s most innovative technology companies, is struggling to provide a steady flow of electricity to its residents, sources confirmed Monday.
    “We will continue to be the most advanced hub of technological progress as soon as we get the power back on here,” said Governor Newsom.
    Electricity, which first made its debut in 1882, is a luxury Californians have come to rely upon for modern indulgences such as dishwashers, laundry machines, and indoor lighting. A recent heatwave has sparked the need for rolling blackouts throughout the state that is home to Silicon Valley, technology’s most advanced center for research and development.

  43. Barking Dog

    A Texan, A Floridian, and a Californian all die and go to hell. While there, they spy a red phone and ask what the phone is for.
    The devil tells them it is for calling back to Earth.
    The Texan asks to call Dallas and talks for 5 minutes. When he is finished, the devil informs him that the cost is a million dollars, so the Texan writes him a check.
    Next the Floridian calls Miami and talks for 30 minutes. When he is finished, the devil informs him that the cost is 6 million dollars, so he writes him a check.
    Finally the Californian gets his turn he calls San Francisco and talks for 4 hours. When he is finished, the devil informs him that the cost is $5.00. When the Texan hears this, he goes ballistic and asks the devil why the Californian got to call San Francisco so cheaply.
    The devil smiles and replies, “Since Gavin Newsom took over, the state has gone to hell, so it’s a local call”.

  44. Joe Baylock

    This from today’s SacBee makes me think that we could ban all natural gas in every building for the next 20 years and it wouldn’t come close to the amount of pollution from the first half of this fire season– 2 million+ acres and counting:
    By killing millions of trees in the Sierra National Forest, the historic drought that ended in 2017 left an incendiary supply of dry fuel that appears to have intensified the fire that’s ravaged more than 140,000 acres in the southern Sierra Nevada, wildfire scientists and forestry experts said Tuesday.
    “The energy produced off that is extraordinary,” said Scott Stephens, a wildfire scientist at UC Berkeley. “Large amounts of woody material burning simultaneously.”
    What’s more, the Creek Fire is shaping up as a grim proxy of other wildfires that could occur in heavily forested areas that suffered extensive tree loss.
    “This might provide this first glimpse into the future we’re in for,” said LeRoy Westerling, a climate and wildfire scientist at UC Merced.

  45. Barking Dog

    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-09-23/gavin-newsom-fracking-ban-california-zero-emissions-cars?_amp=true&__twitter_impression=true

  46. Paloma Ave

    Greasy Gavin has done it again. He declares California a ‘Sanctuary State’. Did you get a chance to vote on that? He declares a moratorium on executions. Did you vote on that? NOT the moratorium, but THE PEOPLE did vote for the death penalty. No he pronounces no more gasoline powered cars by 2035. WHO DOES HE THINK HE IS?
    I recently found this article, that I want to share:
    “If you are a liberal who can’t stand Trump, and cannot possibly fathom why anyone would ever vote for him, let me fill you in.
    It’s not that we love Donald Trump so much. It’s that we can’t stand you.
    And we will do whatever it takes — even if that means electing a rude, obnoxious, unpredictable, narcissist (your words not ours) to the office of President of the United States — because the thing we find more dangerous to this nation than Donald Trump is YOU.
    How is that possible you might ask?
    Well, you have done everything in your power to destroy our country.
    From tearing down the police, to tearing down our history, to tearing down our borders.
    From systematically destroying our schools and brainwashing our kids into believing socialism is the answer to anything (despite being an unmitigated failure everywhere), while demonizing religion and faith, and glorifying abortion, violence, and thug culture.
    From calling us racists every time we expect everyone of any skin color to follow our laws equally to gaslighting us about 52 genders, polyamory, grown men in dresses sharing public locker rooms with little girls, and normalize the sexualization of young children, you simultaneously ridicule us for having the audacity to wish someone a “Merry Christmas” or hang a flag on the 4th of July, stand for the national anthem, or (horror of horrors) don a MAGA hat in public.
    So much for your “tolerance.”
    (See why we think you are just hypocrites??)
    We’re also not interested in the fact that you think you can unilaterally decide that 250 years of the right-to-bear-arms against a tyrannical or ineffective government should be abolished because you can’t get the violence in the cities you manage under control. That free-speech should be tossed out the window, and that those who disagree with your opinions are fair game for public harassment or doxing. That spoiled children with nose-rings and tats who still live off their parent’s dime should be allowed to destroy cities and peoples livelihoods without repercussions. That chaos, and lawlessness, and disrespect for authority should be the norm.
    This is your agenda. And you wonder why we find you more dangerous than Donald Trump?
    Your narrative is a constant drone of oppressor/oppressed race-baiting intended to divide the country in as many ways as you possibly can. You love to sell “victim-hood” to people of color every chance you get because it’s such an easy sell, compared to actually teaching people to stand on their own two feet and take personal responsibility for their own lives and their own communities and their own futures. But you won’t do that, you will never do that, because then you will lose control over people of color. They might actually start thinking for themselves, God forbid!
    This is why we will vote for Donald Trump.
    Not because he is the most charming character on the block.
    Not because he is the most polite politician to have ever graced the oval office.
    Not because he is the most palatable choice, or because we love his moral character or because the man never lies, but because we are sick to death of you and all of the destructive crap you are doing to this once beautiful and relatively safe country.
    Your ineffective and completely dysfunctional liberal “leadership”(?) has literally destroyed our most beautiful cities, our public education system, and done it’s damndest to rip faith out of people’s lives.
    However bad Donald Trump may be, and he is far from perfect, every day we look at you and feel that no matter what Donald Trump says or does there is no possible way he could be any worse for our country than you people are.
    We are sick to death of your stupid, destructive, ignorant, and intolerant behavior and beliefs — parading as “wokeness.” We are beyond sick of your hypocrisy and B.S.
    We are fed up with your disrespectful divisiveness and constant unrelenting harping and whining and complaining (while you live in the most privileged nation in the world), while making literally zero contributions of anything positive to our society. Your entire focus is on ripping things down, never ever building anything up. Think about that as there is something fundamentally very wrong in the psychology of people who choose destruction as their primary modus operandi.
    When Donald J Trump is re-elected, don’t blame us, look in the mirror and blame yourselves.
    Because you are the ones that are responsible for the rise of Donald Trump. You are the ones who have created this “monster” that you so despise, by your very actions. By your refusal to respect your fellow Americans, and the things that are important to us.
    You have made fun of the “fly-over states,” the people who “cling to their guns and religion,” the middle class factory workers and coal miners and underprivileged rural populations that you dismissively call “yahoos” and “deplorables.” You have mocked our faith and our religion. You have mocked our values and our patriotism. You have trampled our flag and insulted our veterans and treated our first responders with contempt and hatred.
    You have made environmentalism your religion, while trashing every city you have taken responsibility for. You scream from the rooftops about “global warming” and a “green new deal” while allowing tens of thousands of homeless people to cover your streets in literal sh!t and garbage and needles and plastic waste without doing a single thing to help them or solve the environmental crisis your failed social policies are creating. But we’re supposed to put YOU in charge of the environment while gutting our entire economy to institute this plan when you can’t even clean up a single city??
    You complain — endlessly — yet have failed to solve a single social problem anywhere. In fact, all you have done is create more of them.
    We’ve had enough. We are tired of quietly sitting by and being the “silent” majority. So don’t be surprised when the day comes when we finally respond. And trust me it’s coming, sooner than you might think. And also trust me when I say it won’t be pretty. Get ready.
    When Donald Trump is re-elected it will be because you and your “comrades” have chosen to trash the police, harass law-abiding citizens, and go on rampages destroying public property that we have all paid for and you have zero respect for.
    When Donald Trump is re-elected it will be because we are sick of your complete and utter nonsense and destruction. How does it feel to know that half of this country finds you FAR more despicable than Donald J. Trump, the man you consider to be the anti-Christ?
    Let that sink in.
    We consider you to be more despicable, more dangerous, more stupid, and more narcissistic than Donald Trump. Maybe allow yourself a few seconds of self-reflection to let that sink in. This election isn’t about Donald Trump vs. Joe Biden.
    This is about Donald Trump vs YOU.
    So if on the morning of November 4 (or more likely January 19, by the time the Supreme Court will weigh in on the mail-in ballot fiasco that we are headed towards), and Donald J. Trump is reelected?
    The only people you have to blame is the left-wing media drones and yourselves.
    You did this.
    Yep you.”

  47. Barking Dog

    https://www.smdailyjournal.com/news/local/san-mateo-council-adopts-new-rules-to-go-all-electric/article_e5cf5b98-fe1b-11ea-b96d-bbc6ff61ae03
    Comical. Goethals got the pick slip from his other public service job in the DA’s office this year, but thinks he can govern a city. I mean, you have to be pretty s*%#!y at your job to get fired as a public prosecutor

  48. resident

    There is no legitimate evidence that all-electric is cheaper and no prediction that it will get any cheaper. Goethals is talking out the other end.

  49. Phinancier

    One crisp winter morning in Sweden, a cute little girl named Greta woke up to a perfect world, one in which there were no petroleum products ruining the earth. She tossed aside her cotton sheet and wool blanket and stepped out onto a dirt floor covered with willow bark that had been pulverized with rocks.
    “What’s this?” she asked.
    “Pulverized willow bark,” replied her fairy godmother.
    “What happened to the carpet?” she asked.
    “The carpet was nylon, which is made from butadiene and hydrogen cyanide, both made from petroleum,” came the response.
    Greta smiled, acknowledging that adjustments are necessary to save the planet, and moved to the sink to brush her teeth where instead of a toothbrush, she found a willow, mangled on one end to expose wood fiber bristles.
    “Your old toothbrush?” noted her godmother, “Also nylon.”
    “Where’s the water?” asked Greta.
    “Down the road in the canal,” replied her godmother, ‘Just make sure you avoid water with cholera in it”
    “Why’s there no running water?” Greta asked, becoming a little peevish.
    “Well,” said her godmother, who happened to teach engineering at MIT, “Where do we begin?” There followed a long monologue about how sink valves need elastomer seats and how copper pipes contain copper, which has to be mined and how it’s impossible to make all-electric earth-moving equipment with no gear lubrication or tires and how ore has to be smelted to make metal, and that’s tough to do with only electricity as a source of heat, and even if you use only electricity, the wires need insulation, which is petroleum-based, and though most of Sweden’s energy is produced in an environmentally friendly way because of hydro and nuclear, if you do a mass and energy balance around the whole system, you still need lots of petroleum products like lubricants and nylon and rubber for tires and asphalt for filling potholes and wax and iPhone plastic and elastic to hold your underwear up while operating a copper smelting furnace and . . .
    “What’s for breakfast?” interjected Greta, whose head was hurting.
    “Fresh, range-fed chicken eggs,” replied her godmother. “Raw.”
    “How so, raw?” inquired Greta.
    “Well, . . .” And once again, Greta was told about the need for petroleum products like transformer oil and scores of petroleum products essential for producing metals for frying pans and in the end was educated about how you can’t have a petroleum-free world and then cook eggs. Unless you rip your front fence up and start a fire and carefully cook your egg in an orange peel like you do in Girl Scouts.

  50. Joe

    EssEff is following B’game down the path of banning natural gas in new buildings. The Comicle managed to head fake its readers with a long piece about restaurants and exceptions to the ruling. Not a word about how residents will heat their houses, cook their food or take a hot shower when the electricity goes out……or how they will afford the most expensive electricity in the nation. Here’s the Comicle piece:
    When Residential Builders Association President Sean Keighran first heard about San Francisco Supervisor Rafael Mandelman’s proposal to ban natural gas in new construction, he was against it.
    The idea of a new building with all-electric heating and cooking appliances seemed far-fetched and costly. Plus it was far from clear that food-centric Bay Area consumers would be willing to give up the fiery satisfaction of a gas range for the cool efficiency of an electric induction stovetop.
    But the more he learned about technological advances in both all-electric heating systems and induction stoves — and the more he studied the environmental benefits of turning off the natural gas — he realized his initial reaction was wrong. He said he now believes that the future for residential development is all-electric.
    Natural gas accounts for roughly 40% of San Francisco’s overall emissions of greenhouse gases and 80% of building emissions.
    ——————
    And 99.5% of its heat, hot water and cooktops. The online version somehow skips the print version’s bit about protecting the plumbers and steam fitters jobs by adding a recycled (“grey water”) component to the ordinance. And the beat goes on, and the beat goes on.
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/No-more-natural-gas-in-new-San-Francisco-15717658.php

Leave a Reply

RECENT COMMENTS

RECENT POSTS

CATEGORIES

ABOUT THE VOICE

The Burlingame Voice is dedicated to informing and empowering the Burlingame community.  Our blog is a public forum for the discussion of issues that relate to Burlingame, California.  Opinions posted on the Burlingame Voice are those of the poster and commenter and not necessarily the opinion of the Editorial Board.  Comments are subject to the Terms of Use.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

All content subject to Copyright 2003-2026

Discover more from The Burlingame Voice

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading