Banning Natural Gas: Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics

I sort of get it.  You're just back from the long Labor Day weekend.  The news is slow unless you want to talk about the heat and blackouts.  So what to do as a Daily Journal reporter?  Curtis Driscoll pulled out his abacus and dashed off an article about the percentages of supporters who want to ban natural gas in San Mateo.  It's an impressive show of support!

Public sentiment is in favor of more stringent reach codes in San Mateo around new construction and home renovations to eliminate gas, with most speakers at an Aug. 30 meeting supporting the city’s potential updates.

Polling at the end of the meeting following discussions found the vast majority strongly supported stricter electric reach codes around home renovations, new construction and electric vehicle infrastructure. More than 80% strongly supported requiring heat pump water heater installation for projects, including a water heater replacement in homes, requiring new pools to use electric or solar heating, and prohibiting extending the use of gas fire pits, grills and water heating in residences.

Wow!  Four out of five dentists recommend it.  Go big on Green.  Save the planet now.  I guess the message is getting through to people.  But wait!

The poll had 25 respondents of the 35 people who attended the meeting.

Now hold on.  Depending on which data source used and which iteration of some data sources, like the US Census, San Mateo has between 102,200 and 105,674 residents.  You don't have to spend 30 years in market research like I did to know that somethin' ain't right.  Were the 25 respondents self-selected by attending in the first place?  Yup.  Were they all even from San Mateo?  Dunno, but knowing how these greenie flash mobs go, I'll bet maybe half were.  Were the votes visible to all?  Did the 10 people who did not respond feel pressure to support the natural gas ban, but chose to abstain because they don't?  Good bet.  So the headline should read "Will apathy allow climate fanatics to load new costs on homeowners?"  With the meeting in question taking place virtually on Aug. 30, that is closer to the true story.

If you learned nothing from this week's events, it is that putting all of your household energy eggs in one basket is unwise.

Here is some additional information to buttress the argument about dual-sourcing your energy needs:

Birds, squirrels, balloons, Oh My.

Comments

[Joe]

Yesterday's Daily Post had a front-page article titled "Heated meeting over natural gas" that noted:

The Los Gatos city council voted 3-2 on Tuesday to do a cost analysis for property owners to make the switch (to all electric).

Council received HUNDREDS of emails from residents opposing the city's consideration of "reach codes".

The minority on council--Anita Enander and Lynette Lee Eng--voted to have the city STOP WORKING ON REACH CODES AND INSTEAD FOLLOW THE STATE'S BUILDING CODES.
-----------------
I'm not sure that is the best answer since Sacramento may likely be infected by the idea soon, but it's better than nothing.

[MBGA]

We should be aware how this works: once the building codes for new construction and upgrades are firmly in place, the (D)ems will create new codes at a local, state and fed level (assuming that the elections in 2022 go like 2020 with miracle come back from behind ballots found at 2am) that restrict sale of any property that has not been upgraded to the new standards. And as an added benefits, enforcement for resale of older homes will be the most significant thing they can do to strip generational housing wealth and help the new americans.

For example one could buy a new condo, with all the new environmental stuff built by the new americans, or… buy an older place from a legacy american fleeing the area, who intends to collect a wad of cash from the home he bought for a fifth of that back in another era. Hmmm.

How about telling the legacy americans that their homes are unsellable by law, unless they are upgraded to the latest eco standards? Seems the right thing to do, right? if we are all supposed to care for the planet and the hot summer somewhere was on people’s minds. You can’t sell your home until the city and county and state and federal government inspectors all sign off on a whole lot of work required to bring it up to Agenda 2030 standards. It’s a heck of a jobs program for the new american construction industry and is an awesome generational and racial equity wealth transfer. How ya gonna beat that?

That million dollar old home now requires $400,000 of permitted and quadruple inspected environmental work to be able to sell it. New americans get lots of jobs, both in construction, and in permitting and inspection, and all that money the landed gentry expected to get from their home is transferred. There’s a fairness there if you are a (D)emocrat, and lord knows we have plenty of those these days.

These environmental codes aren’t just for new construction or remodels.

[Paloma Ave]

That is why I refer to them as democRats. At one time they tried to portray themselves as for the average man. BUT that is no longer the case.

The democRATS will flog you into compliance!!!

Remember that next time you vote. You will be literally stepping on your own ....'s next time you vote for a democRAT.

[Helper]

It's true that this author oversells the stats. If he wanted to report the poll results, he should have just reported them for exactly what they were, without extrapolating to "public sentiment." But it strikes me as pretty rich and hypocritical for you to speculate, in the same breath, that 1) half the attendees were from out of San Mateo, 2) 10 abstained due to pressure, and 3) they are “climate fanatics.” Then you say your unsupported speculation is closer to the truth. That’s BS, sorry.

And then you mention Los Gatos and hundreds of letters. Heh heh. Let me help you out. That’s a miniscule fraction of the population of Los Gatos (as you know) and those people are definitely self-selected and might even be “fanatics” on this issue (as you know). But you forgot about that in this case, so … at your service. The truth is that you can’t say much anything about the general sentiment of Los Gatos residents with that information.

But enough about statistics, I was just keeping you honest. More importantly, down with Democrats! Boo! I’m thinking of some more names we can call them – will get back to you all after I consult with the neighborhood children.

[Joe]

You don't have to keep someone honest who is already being honest. Even you note that I was speculating about aspects of the piece. See above for words like "I'll bet", "dunno" and "maybe".

Let me help you to not lose the forest for the trees. Climate change is polling way down the list of priorities for most voters. That's not speculation:

https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/climate-voters/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fewer-americans-see-climate-change-as-priority-opinion-poll-2022-04-22/

If you add on a requirement for property owners to take out functioning systems and appliances and replace them with electric at their own expense, it is highly doubtful the polling priority will go up. Does that help frame the issue? :-)

[Phinancier]

Just running the numbers here. Los Gatos is about 32,000 people that is one third of San Mateo. Depending on how many hundreds of emails the LG council got (300, 400?) it could be getting into the range of statistically significant. Add to that, big climate people often write to many other cities than their own about their agenda while regular let me keep my water heater people only write to their own city. I don't think Helper is helping his cause very much by adding cred to Joe's point.

[Joe]

Everyone is very excited about "Grid-scale batteries" as the next wave of greenery. PG&E down at Moss Landing has been the poster child. But apparently there is still a lot of work to be done.

A portion of Highway 1 in Monterey County was closed for most of Tuesday after a fire broke out at a nearby Pacific Gas & Electric Co. substation, prompting roadway closures and a shelter-in-place advisory in Moss Landing, Caltrans officials said.

A fire broke out at one Tesla Megapack — a battery the company makes — at PG&E’s Elkhorn battery storage facility in Monterey County at about 1:30 a.m. Tuesday, according to PG&E spokesperson Jeff Smith.

“There is an ongoing hazardous materials incident in Moss Landing. Please shut your windows and turn off your ventilation systems,” Monterey County officials wrote on Facebook on Tuesday morning.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/california/article/Portion-of-Highway-1-closed-due-to-fire-at-PG-E-17454145.php

[Spurinna]

Meanwhile a drive down 101 to Santa Barbara takes about $25 worth of gas for two people.

[Joe]

Here's some more detail on the Tesla fire(s) from today's WSJ:

As if California doesn’t have enough wildfire hazards, its drive to banish fossil fuels from the electric grid is creating another. On Tuesday a Tesla battery at a utility storage site in Monterey County caught fire, triggering the shutdown of the state’s scenic coastal highway and shelter-in-place warnings for local residents.

California utilities have been installing large-scale batteries to back up renewables and provide power when the sun goes down. But now we’re learning that batteries have their own reliability problems. It’s not clear how utility PG&E’s enormous 182.5 megawatt Tesla battery caught fire Tuesday, but the site had to be disconnected from the grid.

The PG&E facility is located adjacent to another 400 megawatt battery storage site, which has experienced two overheating incidents in the past year that forced part of the system to shut down. Lithium-ion battery fires are notoriously hard to extinguish because they burn at extremely high temperatures and produce dangerous fumes.

Hence Tuesday’s warning by Monterey County officials asking residents to “Please shut your windows and turn off your ventilation systems.” Fire drills may need to be modified for battery blazes that are becoming increasingly common and destructive.

Recall how a cargo ship transporting electric vehicles to the U.S. in February caught fire on the open seas. The 22-person crew had to be rescued, and hundreds of millions of dollars of merchandise was lost. A fire last July at a Tesla battery storage site in Australia required three days and a hazmat firefighting team to put out.

Australians were lucky that the fire didn’t occur during their summer when it might have been even harder to control. Californians can likewise be grateful that Tuesday’s battery fire didn’t occur during the state’s heat wave two weeks ago when the state power supply was tight. PG&E filed for bankruptcy in 2019 amid tens of billions of dollars in liabilities for wildfires linked to its equipment, and now it has a new risk to worry about.

The larger point is that there is no free lunch in producing energy. All sources have costs and carry risks. The difference is that while climate lobbyists and the media fret about oil spills, gas leaks and nuclear meltdowns, they ignore the very real costs and risks of renewables.

[Paloma Ave]

The environmental zealots (aka democRATS) are not pro-choice on how you can heat your home.

Even though 90% of the planet's pollution comes from other countries, they will force you to comply.

And the majority of voters keep electing them to office. I hope you are happy when you will be forced to upgrade your electric panel and pay a much higher price for new appliances.

Also, that $250 to $300 a month utility bill will at least double.

Go ahead and pat yourselves on your naive backs.

[Paloma Ave]

So, no BV readers disagree with my previous posting?