California Regulators Ban Gasoline Home equipment In San Francisco Bay Space
California regulators on Wednesday voted to ban gas stoves and water heaters in one of the state’s most densely populated regions, a move that will likely require locals to make costly home renovations.
The Bay Area Air Quality District Board, a panel of appointees tasked with curbing pollutants in nine California counties, voted Wednesday to block the installation of gas-powered appliances beginning in 2027. The board acknowledged that homeowners will have to spend thousands of dollars installing electrical appliances and that moving away from natural gas will increase energy bills.
The ban comes as Democrats nationwide target natural gas. The Biden administration has proposed a rule change that would effectively ban the sale of half of all gas stoves in the United States, a move Democrats have said is not on the table.
The Bay Area ban doesn’t apply to gas stoves, although that brings little relief to local residents. The ban will raise the cost of living in the overpriced Bay Area, whose residents are already moving sooner than anyone else in the nation. Locals objected to the proposal in public statements, with one Palo Alto resident noting that his gas furnace could cost up to $45,000 to replace.
One resident worried that residential buildings in San Francisco and Oakland might not meet the rule because new electrical units require floor space they don’t have. Others noted that the move would add to already skyrocketing energy bills and real estate prices.
Californians’ electricity prices have already risen nearly 70 percent since 2010, when the state began to move away from fossil fuels. Households in California pay nearly 83 percent more than the average for homes in other parts of the United States.
Regulators acknowledged in their report that the rules could add $243 million to $1 billion in infrastructure spending in addition to the cost to individual homeowners. The board assured concerned locals it would be keeping an eye on the costs of banning it and boasted that the rule could save 37 to 85 lives annually.
The board found that 404 out of 565 public comments supported the rule. However, about 200 of these came from the Sierra Club. Most supportive comments reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon were form letters.
Click here for the mobile version of this story (with comments)