Remix.run Logo
SF may soon ban natural gas in homes and businesses undergoing major renovations(sfchronicle.com)
53 points by mikhael 3 days ago | 156 comments
neonate 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

https://archive.md/jqYs7

ZeroGravitas 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Totally sensible policy that the average American thinks is crazy because their overton window is so skewed.

In Australia they're looking to identify larger areas to remove from the gas grid at the same time. Otherwise the few remaining on gas bear the entire cost of upkeep of the grid.

thegrim33 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

The overton window is skewed? Do you think people 20 years ago would be more likely to agree or disagree with this policy, compared to people today? What about 40 years ago? What about 60 years ago? 80 years? If anything, the window has moved so far in the direction of your ideology that this is the first point in history where such a policy would have any chance of being implemented.

TimorousBestie 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

During the post-war period in the states, natural gas displaced coal and oil for domestic consumption in part because it burnt cleaner. So yes, people in the past did agree with displacing inconvenient fossil fuels for modern alternatives.

antonymoose 2 days ago | parent [-]

Consumers exercising preference for a better technology and nanny-state interference in people’s lives are two very different issues.

TimorousBestie 2 days ago | parent [-]

In both cases I’m talking about people’s preferences, since that’s the way the question was framed.

AIPedant 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not just "direction of ideology," it's direction of science. We know now that stoves are bad for the environment and extremely bad for public health. 60 years ago the environmental impact was seen as minor compared to coal or wood stoves, and the public health impact totally unknown. This is no longer the case.

3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
archagon 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

What are you even talking about? Not everything has to be interpreted in the context of some cataclysmic battle of ideologies. And this sort of policy is not uncommon in other parts of the Western world.

MisterSandman 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’m guessing you’ve never been to SF? The quality of housing in SF is really poor, with most affordable homes being decades behind in renovations and upkeep. This requirement adds unnecessary costs in an already overheated market.

3 days ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
tlogan 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The very big issue in San Francisco is the severe lack of affordable housing. When renovations become significantly more expensive, those costs inevitably get passed on to renters: making the crisis even worse.

If regulations like these are necessary, they should be applied in areas without a housing affordability crisis. But somehow, it’s always the high-cost cities that get hit with even more burdens.

wyre 2 days ago | parent [-]

Yes, it is an issue that SF doesn't have affordable housing. Any price increase by requiring induction stovetops is a rounding error compared to inflation, or is an excuse for greedy landlords to increase rents heavily.

Also, any desirable part of the country with jobs is facing a housing affordability crisis. High rents are caused by greedy landlords and the protections given to them by the government, not because of regulation requiring them to spend a little bit more on an electric range.

tlogan 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

San Francisco home prices have increased approximately 2.5 to 2.6 times over the past 25 years after adjusting for inflation [1]. Nominal prices in San Francisco grew by over four‑fold in 25 years.

I bet the reason for this rule that house price in SF are finally in step with inflation.

Anyway Im not against doing this but let’s be honest here: this is going to make houses just less affordable. The are some benefits of this rule but affordability is not the one.

[1] https://www.redfin.com/city/17151/CA/San-Francisco/housing-m...

culopatin 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

It’s not just the stove that you need to change. You need to get power to the stove. Cutting the wall open, conduit, drywall if you’re lucky, in SF you’ll most likely have the old lath and plaster then electrician and paint.

If rent is 3k, inflation say 3%, that’s 1k. The change is at least 3x that

_tbl6 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

To be fair in houses it's relatively easy to run a gas cooker on bottles of propane, mains gas isn't necessary for this.

fundad 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Exactly I was just thinking people can take responsibility for gas delivery themselves like any luxury.

BTW I went all electric because plumbing costs more than wiring.

3 days ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
refurb 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Sometimes the Overton window is in the right place.

Just add it to the pile of detrimental policies that California has created over the past few decades.

fundad 2 days ago | parent [-]

California has many towns and cities where you can have fossil gas delivered for your use.

SilverElfin 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Gas cooking is still much better. I have both. Induction just isn’t as enjoyable and you can’t do things like move your pan and have it keep heating like with a flame. Not to mention, induction is rough on pans. Banning things is aggressive and uncalled for.

stephencanon 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It’s really not. We built an all-electric ADU for my parents, then ended up living in it while renovating our house. As someone who cooks pretty much all meals, the induction range is better in almost every way than the fancy gas range that came with our house, so we’re replacing it with an induction cooktop in the renovation.

bn-l 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

100% agree. Apart from breathing in the gas (which isn’t good) and combustion products (ditto), setting the heat is very imprecise with gas. How hot? Ah… a “medium heat”. What is that? Or “when the flames are smallish”. With induction you write your recipes with a solid number and get consistent results.

SilverElfin 2 days ago | parent [-]

I disagree with this. The “numbers” that are on induction stoves are not at all consistent. They aren’t even consistent within the same range between different burners.

waste_monk 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Are they intended to be? Assuming the burners are different sizes - I would not expect the same setting to equal the same wattage on different size burners, as intuition would dictate that a large burner would be more powerful for tasks like wok cooking. What does the operator manual say?

It really depends on the quality of the appliance; something like the Breville Control Freak can give you induction cooking with temperature control down to the degree, whereas my cheap countertop Tefal induction hob just gives a few settings with broad power ranges and you have to figure out what works best for you.

bn-l a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Ok so “burner 1, power 6, 10 minutes”

BoorishBears a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I bought my parents an induction range too and had the same revelation visiting them: I actually cooked more, despite the higher friction of having to cook in an unfamiliar kitchen, because it was so much faster to get things going.

Even for something as simple as pasta, having boiling water in 2 minutes instead of 7 or 8 minutes is huge. I can wait for the former, but with the latter I usually end up doing something else for a bit, and then suddenly 7 or 8 rounds up to 10 or 15 minutes.

fcpk 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I use both for complex cooking. I find myself using induction 90% of the time. It heats faster, it heats more consistently and it's much easier to clean. The only time I find gas useful is when doing things that require a lot of moving the pan work(sauteeing food in the air, flambée, and similar). Induction hobs with a temperature sensor are absolutely amazing to use for exact temperature cook. Also it is a lot safer with toddlers and children around.

I haven't found it to be rough on pans, but I only use thick stainless steel pans with aluminium/copper core.

PS: yes, gas is enjoyable as it gives you this primal heat feeling:)

SilverElfin 2 days ago | parent [-]

Which pan do you use? I’ve used heavier steel pans and they too eventually warp (like within a year’s use).

ViewTrick1002 a day ago | parent | next [-]

Do you let your pans heat up before use? Do you let your pans slowly cool down instead of dunking them in cold water?

I haven’t had a pan warp on me for years just being mindful of letting it heat and cool at a reasonable paces rather than blasting them with the ”power” mode. And this is in Europe with our 400v kitchen outlets.

Doxin a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not who you're replying to, but I use cast iron and steel on my induction stove and I've not had any warping over a period of 4 years now. One thing might be using the stove on the maximum setting? max power on an induction stove is going to be heating your pan MUCH quicker than on gas. Personally I only use settings over 8 (out of 10) for pots with water in them, not for skillets etc.

fcpk a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm in europe but if any relevant: I use mauviel and cristel pans.

jemmyw 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not much better. It's slightly better at specific things and worse at most things. I've had plenty of gas hobs. I think I'd prefer normal electric over them just for being easier to clean and not having to deal or worry about gas. You learn to deal with the shortcomings of electric. Induction is great though. When we remodeled our kitchen we went from electric, gas for 3 months, induction. Life has improved.

The only thing I don't like about induction are those cooktops where they put the controls as touch buttons on the surface. I'm glad we rented a place in the past with that to learn how stupid it is so as to get one with proper knobs that don't you can't accidentally get hot.

worthless-trash 2 days ago | parent [-]

You're not providing any information.

> easier to clean

I haven't found this to be the case, they both require effort to clean.

> not having to deal or worry about gas

Maybe its local specific, what do you worry about ? Whats the hassle in dealing ? The biggest worry I have with gas is remembering to pay the bill.

Nullabillity 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> I haven't found this to be the case, they both require effort to clean.

Electrics are (generally) a smooth flat surface. Of course you're not getting out of it entirely, but it's still a question of night and day compared to the mess of a gas stove.

shawn_w 2 days ago | parent [-]

Electric stoves generally use raised exposed heating coils (that are rarely able to stay level, making oil and other liquids run to one side of the pan, making frying etc. stuff a headache). I've lived in one place over 40+ years that had a flat top electric stove, and it suffered from being even slower to heat up than regular electric.

I'd kill to have a gas stove and be able to do serious stovetop cooking.

Nullabillity 2 days ago | parent [-]

Any modern (made within the last ~20 years) electric stove is going to just have a flat top with markings, just like an induction stove.[0] Before that you'd have a flat surface with a cast iron disk protruding for each hot surface.[1] Less trivial than the flat surface, but still not too bad. I've seen.. maybe.. one with an exposed coil in my entire life, and that thing was ancient. Faaaaar from "generally use".

[0]: https://www.electrolux.se/services/eml/asset/782bdf32-f709-4...

[1]: https://www.electrolux.se/services/eml/asset/fe80a43d-0b1c-4...

shawn_w a day ago | parent [-]

Your experience with stoves has been vastly different than mine.

>flat surface with a cast iron disk protruding for each hot surface.

Never seen a design like that.

Given those URLs maybe it's a country thing? Are you in the USA?

Nullabillity a day ago | parent [-]

> Are you in the USA?

Sweden.

shawn_w 15 hours ago | parent [-]

That's what I figured. Yeah, no wonder your experience is different.

jemmyw 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The smell, worry about it being left on. I've got kids, they like to cook, I'm sure they'd be capable of dealing with a gas cooktop (we've got a bunsen burner for science stuff) but it's just nice not having that.

We don't get gas pipeline connections here, we get bottles that a company comes and replaces.

Compared to gas, I find induction just as responsive, more powerful on the highest setting. A nice feature is the auto heat which gives it more power until the pan is at the target level then reduces. I also think (but not sure) that the lowest level is far cooler than the lowest gas setting was, making it easier to use for baking - melting butter, chocolate, things that require gentle warming.

So, as I say, other than the specific flames around a wok, it's better overall. I do have an induction wok, it's not as good. It's fine though, I wouldn't trade or bother with a separate gas cooktop just for that.

johnisgood a day ago | parent [-]

Regarding kids + induction vs gas. I think it is much easier for kids to harm themselves in case of induction. They surely have learned that fire burns, thus they are conditioned to avoid touching fire, whereas induction is different. My two cents.

Doxin a day ago | parent [-]

With induction it's basically impossible to burn your house down, which is very doable with gas, so there's that.

johnisgood a day ago | parent [-]

I suppose it is all about trade offs, like with everything else in life. :)

Doxin 10 hours ago | parent [-]

for what it's worth I switched from gas to induction, and to me it's a clear upgrade in almost all aspects. Induction is worse at spreading the heat, but other than that it's just... better.

ponector 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

>>I haven't found this to be the case, they both require effort to clean.

Unless you start cooking with dirty induction cooktop, they are much easier to clean simply because the temperature is much lower, the surface is flat and easy to clean

seanmcdirmid 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

China has a bunch of induction hobs that are wok shaped designed for high heat precise heat control wok cooking. I think they want to replace propane eventually as the primary stir fry cooking energy, which matches their moves to replace ICEs with EVs.

AIPedant 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I would say that using a high-pollution method of cooking when cleaner options are easily available, simply because it's more enjoyable, is aggressive and uncalled for.

"Yes, this is bad for kids with asthma who have the misfortune of living in my neighborhood, but it's great for quesadillas! So you have to look at both sides."

SilverElfin 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

The pollution from gas stoves is far less from the pollution all cooking generates (from the food itself). It’s really not material at all. And if you have a hood fan there’s really no difference.

nullc 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Cooking itself produces considerable pollution. If you have adequate ventilation for that the additional contribution from gas is absolutely insignificant.

AIPedant 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

That is not true:

https://archive.is/A23eV

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/6355613

Simply running a gas burner generates about twice as much PM2.5 emissions as pan-frying a chicken breast on an induction stove. And of course gas generates pollution when you're boiling or steaming things, quickly reheating, or anything that doesn't involve burning / Malliard reactions / etc. Using gas means you are at the very least doubling the amount of pollution, and in most cases it's much worse than that.

On top of all that, ventilation does nothing for the environmental impact: https://concernedhealthny.org/2022/10/burning-fossil-fuel-in...

nullc a day ago | parent [-]

> https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/6355613

The cited study performed no measurement of gas cooking.

> On top of all that, ventilation does nothing for the environmental impact:

Gas used for cooking is not a meaningful contributor to our overall gas usage.

a day ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
cute_boi 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I’ve lived in many apartments, and the vents just scatter air randomly i.e. they don't suck air and vent it outside. So getting proper ventilation isn’t really feasible unless you’re willing to open the window every time.

nullc 2 days ago | parent [-]

Right, but gas vs not gas remains irrelevant. You're poisoning yourself w/ cooking in those apartments.

The only fix is proper ventilation. Which is unfortunate, because as you note many apartments and homes are not built for it... even in new construction.

Which might be a useful action point for regulatory intervention, rather than something which is much more performative than useful.

kelipso 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Gas cooking definitely doesn’t affect anyone outside the house lol, much less neighborhood.

AIPedant 2 days ago | parent [-]

Gas extraction and transmission certainly affects people outside the house, so anything to reduce gas consumption is a win. Also, gas burning absolutely affects the entire neighborhood: https://concernedhealthny.org/2022/10/burning-fossil-fuel-in... I could not find the link but the problem is especially acute for people who live near restaurants in NYC. And that comment about how it's cooking food that's the problem, not the fuel, is 100% wrong: https://archive.is/A23eV

This comment and the other reply are just jaw-droppingly naive and ignorant. The indoor air quality while using a gas stove jumps to wildly unhealthy levels. But those pollutants do not just disappear! Much of it is deposited on indoor walls or residents' lungs, but much of it also leaks out of the building. Yes it is true that one teeny widdle stove won't hurt anyone except yourself, but that's why this is a tragedy of the commons that requires government regulation.

justlikereddit a day ago | parent [-]

>the problem is especially acute for people who live near restaurants in NYC.

A simile to this is saying electric bikes are dangerous and should be banned because they are motorized transports, and as my neighbor died in a frontal collision between his car and 18 wheeler it's highly irresponsible to let a teenager ride on e-bikes.

Magnitude soup.

jfim 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Gas cooking doesn't really have good temperature control though. Using a temperature probe, I can set my stock pot to 98°C on the induction cooktop and it'll stay exactly there for hours with no worrying about the burner set too high or low for the stock to gently simmer.

There's also no worrying about combustion gases in the house.

harvey9 3 days ago | parent [-]

You described a completely different requirement from the post you replied to. A kitchen could accommodate both by having more than one hob type, or a gas hob and a plug-in dedicated slow cooker gadget.

jordanb 3 days ago | parent [-]

Inconsistent heat is never good for cooking.

harvey9 2 days ago | parent [-]

It is unusual to go into a professional kitchen and not find open flame hobs. I conclude that it is possible to use these to prepare high quality food.

bradlys 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

What’re you doing to move the pan all the time? If you’re working with a wok and doing a lot of fast paced work you’d find in a restaurant, I’d understand because induction wok surfaces are hard to come by in the US.

But I don’t get it otherwise. I’m rarely moving the pan so much that induction wouldn’t be usable.

SilverElfin 2 days ago | parent [-]

A number of cooking techniques require it. Basting, flambé, etc. It’s also much easier to change temperature quickly by moving or tilting pans. And you can use a wider range of materials that let you cook food differently.

BobaFloutist a day ago | parent [-]

Ok but how routinely do you flambé

archagon 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

FWIW, most high-end restaurants rely on induction these days. (Sometimes, though not always, exclusively.)

_heimdall 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Thanks, this was going to be my main question here.

I haven't been in a commercial kitchen in years, at that time everything was gas. It was obvious that chefs preferred gas over electric, but at that time induction was still too new for commercial use.

latchkey 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Oh, that sounds interesting, source?

archagon 3 days ago | parent [-]

I don't really have a source, but here's a bit about it: https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2022-1-spring/notes-here-t...

I've seen it first-hand, too. Pastry chefs in particular seem to appreciate the stability and evenness of low heat that high-end induction brings to the table. You can often see Cedric Grolet use an induction burner on his channel, for example: https://www.instagram.com/cedricgrolet/

gajjanag 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

+1 - there are just so many Asian recipes that can not be done anywhere near as easily on induction stovetops (high heat from direct flame for flatbreads, etc).

Plus a whole bunch of cookware doesn't work with induction (clay pots, non ferromagnetic bases, etc). I do wonder if any of these "environmental" estimates factor in the environmental cost of replacing a bunch of cookware just to satisfy induction requirements.

g8oz 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Simply not true. There are induction woks available for East Asian recipies.

South Asian flatbreads like naans, rotis, dosas and parathas can definitely be made well with induction. Plus the precision control of heating opens up new possibilities with all cuisine types.

As for embodied replacement costs - that talking point has been used or rather misused to dismiss everything from solar panels to EVs to wind turbines. Just because there is a payback period doesn't mean that it's insurmountable. What's the payback period on fast fashion and other consumerist nonsense? Infinity right?

gajjanag 2 days ago | parent [-]

I guess you have never worked with a slow induction cooktop. Literally we had to spend 15 minutes more for cooking things on induction compared with our previous apartment's gas connection.

Maybe they are better now but it is certainly not the case that all induction cooktops have these magical properties; many are cheap and skimp on something. While in the 5+ apartments I have been in gas has always delivered the same heating experience that I can rely on.

And to your point about rotis, no - it can not be done unless you get a different, heavier bottomed pan suitable for induction. Exactly what I was saying regarding the replacement costs.

SilverElfin 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Yep - a gas ban basically bans major parts of various cultures. But also even for typical recipes, you can’t do things like tilt a pan to use the flame to heat different parts differently.

As for environmental costs - the thing that surprises me is that induction easily warps even higher end pans. But yes you’re right, you can’t use many different materials.

ponector 2 days ago | parent [-]

Gas stove is a modern invention. Culture will be fine with other ways to heat the pan.

SilverElfin 2 days ago | parent [-]

It’s a modern invention that replaces cooking over a flame. Like from wood. Having a flame to cook over is core to many cultures.

ViewTrick1002 a day ago | parent [-]

Buy a propane torch? Or a tiny single pan portable gas stove? Or just use your gas barbecue? Or use your charcoal fired barbecue?

aeternum 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes, liberal used to be about increasing freedom, now it seems to be more about bans and penalties for non-conformers

dietr1ch 3 days ago | parent [-]

I don't see the biggest difference being about freedom, but what to maximise, individual or society as a group.

Individuals excel when there's absolutely no rule stopping them, but enough to not make others a threat, and groups excel when there's rules to prevent individuals from taking an advantage over the rest, be it not paying their fair share on maintaining society, ignoring costs that society pays as a whole.

Here the idea is that natural gas is a greenwashed technology and that society would be better off moving away from it, so through this ban you'll start the migration away from natural gas. The individual standpoint is that natural gas is probably cheaper, so fuck the planet if that gets you a better price.

Are there other things to change if you care about the planet? Sure, but that's not the point and doing only one of them isn't going to make a dent on the upcoming climate catastrophes.

_heimdall 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Not sure why the GP got down voted, you two are saying effectively the same thing.

Liberalism used to be about the individual and individual rights/freedoms. The term has been redefined (at least in the US) to focus on social and collective issues. When you focus on collective issues you inevitably ban things deemed worse for the collective and enforce those bans on anyone who doesn't conform.

_heimdall 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Are there other things to change if you care about the planet? Sure, but that's not the point and doing only one of them isn't going to make a dent on the upcoming climate catastrophes.

It's really interesting to me that this argument comes up often in environmental issues but is treated like the plague in other areas.

There was a thread a few days ago about the potential defunding of federal weather reporting services. I raised this same basic point, that we must do something about our deficit and even small cuts will help relative to doing nothing.

That landed like a lead balloon, the pain caused by any spending cuts just aren't acceptable to most people, unlike the pains caused by any regulations intended to help the environment.

PretzelPirate 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Being able to use natural gas isn't a valuable public good.

I used to live in an area with regular tornadoes, having public weather data is life saving. People shouldn't have to die from tornadoes because they're poor.

_heimdall 2 days ago | parent [-]

I currently live in an area with regular tornadoes. There's a huge gap between a federally subsidized weather prediction program and making sure people in your community can be alerted.

Most even small towns in my area, the kind with one stop light at best, have community storm shelters. Granted those ultimately are partly subsidized by the federal government, but that is still different than a federal agency program.

To that end, if the concern is tornado safety why doesn't the government give communities or individuals storm shelters for free rather than partially subsidizing them for those who are at least well enough off to throw a few thousand at a small unit?

justinrubek a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Can you provide any evidence or reasoning that cutting the weather services would help move the needle on our deficit? Are you sure that not having them won't cause an increase instead, for example if the lack of data causes destruction or worse crop yields? Are the groups advocating for doing this taking steps to reduce the deficit elsewhere, or are they increasing it instead? Do we actually need to address the deficit?

_heimdall 15 hours ago | parent [-]

Cutting spending to any existing program will decrease the deficit relative to where it would be without cutting that spending. I'm not sure what evidence you'd really need there, say the budget is currently $150m and you reduce it to $0 - the deficit decreases by $150m. Given that the government doesn't use a zero-based budget, for better or worse, that decrease extends into all future years as the default otherwise is for that same $150m to be spent every year.

We absolutely do need to address the deficit as well as our debt. Expenses just to service the debt are a large chunk of our annual budget now. Do you know of any example of a country that ran up a debt to GDP (or similar) ratio this high and didn't have meaningful economic issues? Similarly, do you know of any country that debased its own currency through aggressive money printing and didn't end up collapsing, hyper-inflating, or both?

seanmcdirmid 15 hours ago | parent [-]

> say the budget is currently $150m and you reduce it to $0 - the deficit decreases by $150m.

Interest accrued on debt must be added to the deficit as well, unless you are including that in the budget? I'm not sure how defaulting on debt payments would play out though.

The Republicans went nuts when Bill Clinton started reducing debt with a surplus. They thought debt reduction was a really really bad thing. American is actually pretty average in debt/gdp ratio for developed countries, however. Nowhere near as crazy as Japan.

_heimdall 7 hours ago | parent [-]

> Interest accrued on debt must be added to the deficit as well, unless you are including that in the budget?

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. I'm talking only about reducing the deficit, any debt already owed would still be there and interest on it would still be owed. Cutting spending to reduce deficit would just slow down how quickly the debt grows.

> American is actually pretty average in debt/gdp ratio for developed countries, however. Nowhere near as crazy as Japan.

Oh sure, though in my opinion that's a sign of how many countries are in similar debt trouble rather than it being okay.

The US debt to GDP is currently around 124%. Until very recently it was broadly agreed in economics that over 100% was a huge risk and over 120% was effectively a point of no return before you follow in Japan's footsteps.

Those warning sign levels only got moved once the US passed them. Maybe they're right and it isn't actually a problem, but I can say those original levels came with specific historical examples of countries that failed after those levels and today's understanding of what ratios are okay seem to come with vague explanations and hand waving.

myvoiceismypass 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

When the cuts are paired with other things that explode the deficit, it seems pretty meaningless.

_heimdall 2 days ago | parent [-]

With that we totally agree. I take huge issue with any increase in federal spending, and didn't vote for this administration in case that matters here. I wouldn't throw out funding cuts just because we are still spending elsewhere though, that seems like a move that just gets us closer to the edge faster.

Gigachad a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Induction is not rough on pans, it just has a massively higher range of power output. The higher end options should only be used for boiling water. Usually a 6-7 out of 9 on induction is equivalent to full flame gas.

ViewTrick1002 a day ago | parent [-]

Or if you are deep frying and seeing the temperature drop from adding too much at the same time.

pshirshov 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You can. https://www.siemens-home.bsh-group.com/uk/en/mkt-product/coo...

mensetmanusman 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

High power electric stove tops are better than induction. I can cook as well with these as with natural gas. Induction sucks.

Natural gas emits particles we would rather not breath in…

franktankbank 2 days ago | parent [-]

Everyone should have a vent to the outside regardless of stove type. My folks got induction which replaced a top that had a built-in fan vent. Every time they cook its really terrible.

archagon 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

When I was looking for an apartment in SF, it seemed like half the places we viewed smelled a bit like gas in the kitchen. And then the apartment we ended up renting turned out to have leaking gas pipes basically throughout the entire plumbing run. (Fortunately, the landlord was able to coordinate a brand new gas line installation in a matter of days.)

I think a lot of people live with gas leaks without even knowing, especially in older buildings. This is a good change from a public health and safety perspective.

burnt-resistor 3 days ago | parent [-]

And that's why dozens of homes go boom every year. My dumbass aunt nearly blew up her 100+ year old house because of 60+ year old under-maintained gas lines that caused a minor fire.

johnnienaked 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Natural gas is burned to generate electricity in the peaker plants near Reno that supply SF with their power needs.

That's hundreds of miles of power lines running through Northern California forest to get power to SF because of state regulations. Downed power lines are directly responsible for a pretty large % of wildfires.

Same thing in LA, where a significant amount of power is sent from peaker plants near Las Vegas.

These regulations can't do anything to lower demand, they'll only serve to make things even more expensive.

EdSchouten a day ago | parent [-]

Those plants likely have a higher efficiency than a gas powered stove, so may be worth it regardless?

johnnienaked a day ago | parent [-]

The point is that the laws are not about efficiency. They merely serve to send California pollution to the poor parts of Nevada and charge a premium for it.

whateveracct 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm in another state with a liberal, climate-oriented govt, and I just got a fresh gas range and new gas car. Felt like my last chance to do so given how long I hold onto such things. Carpe diem.

burnt-resistor 3 days ago | parent [-]

Given that (the better) EVs are cheaper to operate, cheaper to maintain, accelerate faster than ICEVs, and don't create as much net pollution, these should be the preferred option rather than using the sky as a sewer. The problem right now is most of America is fixated upon ancient and harmful technologies and isn't do enough to incentivize buying EVs. And it's actually limiting consumer choice by slapping giant tariffs on international EV options that are surpassing the capabilities of domestic ones. EVs should be (re)incentivized such that they are significantly cheaper to buy than ICEVs.

whateveracct 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

But I like driving ICEVs! Always have, and they're still more fun to drive and deal with. Figured I'd get one last hurrah. Mileage is good and this car will probably last me the next 10-15y. Zoom zoom til 2040, buddy :)

burnt-resistor a day ago | parent | next [-]

Said like a truly irresponsible, selfish, uninformed individual who doesn't think about the total costs and impact of their actions.

whateveracct a day ago | parent [-]

i bet you would say the same about my single family home in the suburbs too :)

pshirshov 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> they're still more fun to drive and deal with

Exemplary reasoning of a grown-up member of the society.

whateveracct 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

driving is partially an activity for fun, yes. my car isn't just a point A to point B tool. when I go A to B, I like to be delighted. And my new car does do that! Zoom zoom :)

This is on top of other reasonable, practical considerations. My choice of car was the best imo in its price range and class overall. Great interior, stylish and sporty, Japanese car. longterm reliability, I can keep my mechanic and do routine stuff myself, I live super near a gas station.

No EV blew me away so why suffer when I can have my car delight me and be a solid price stretched over a bunch of years at 0%? I don't think it's villainous to buy gas in 2025 and it's p out of touch to act like it is (in America)

justinrubek a day ago | parent [-]

Villainous? Probably not. However, making others pay the cost of your pleasure is incredibly rude. You aren't gathering much sympathy for your cause specifically because of the selfishness of it.

whateveracct a day ago | parent [-]

"Making others pay" is hyperbole here. It's a normal car. I'm not doing some fringe thing. I'm doing a normal American activity.

olelele 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Same reasoning is used by a lot of German car owners. ”I like my combustion engine too much!”

whateveracct 2 days ago | parent [-]

If you act like that's not a real thing, you're probably just an out of touch HNer who doesn't like cars (very uncool)

_DeadFred_ 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

What about for low mileage vehicles? As I get older I drive much less and have way less income so I do all my own vehicle work. Is an EV just sitting in the garage going to be ok? Can I work on it without needing new tools? I have 3 generations of car tools. One of my cars is my moms old Jeep Cherokee that was dead in her garage for years. My and my neighbor talk about EVs but this (maybe our last) car cycle we both still went ICE.

https://theonion.com/john-alford/

tlogan 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is an excellent way to solve the housing crisis in San Francisco: sarcasm fully intended.

Stories like this just reinforce the obvious: the housing crisis is a problem of our own making. Wealthy residents and NIMBYs consistently show they have no interest in helping the poor, the homeless, or working-class people who simply want a place to live. The ones hit hardest are usually younger generations.

This should not be a political issue. Whether on the left or the right, rich people will always find a reason (legal, aesthetic, environmental, religious, etc.) to avoid fixing the housing problem. The excuses vary, but the outcome is the same.

danans 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

> This is an excellent way to solve the housing crisis in San Francisco: sarcasm fully intended.

At least for new dwellings, building without gas piping is _cheaper_ than building with it. It's very cheap to run additional 240V/60A lines from the load center to the kitchen and laundry/utility room.

Depending on the renovation, it can be even cheaper to go all-electric, for example, if the kitchen/laundry/heating is being moved.

However, renovations don't have much effect either way on the housing affordability crisis in San Francisco, because renovations don't generally increase housing capacity. Most renovations in SF are done for the purpose of converting existing lower end homes into higher end homes.

cocoa19 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The ones hit hardest are usually younger generations

Reminds me of prop 13. If you challenge grandma having a $3M house paying peanuts for property taxes you are a monster.

If you defend young people that are ready to start a family, "they can kick rocks and move to Bumfuck, Middle-Of-Nowhere, no one is entitled to live in the Bay Area".

linotype 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

Both are unfortunate situations. Neither should be priced out.

seanmcdirmid 3 days ago | parent [-]

Everyone one who wants to live in SF should be allowed to live in SF regardless of their means. I don’t know how this could work in practice, however.

burnt-resistor 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

CA Prop 13 was an unfortunate, short-term bandaid in 1978 that didn't address excessive property taxes for elderly, disabled, and poor people who came after them. It truly was another boomer selfishness moment. The solution is to expand Prop 13 to all who meet low income requirements to make property taxes progressive rather than unreasonable "flat" taxes that punish the poor far more than the rich and moderately rich.

PS: I grew up in south San Jose, graduated from Leland, but can't afford a home anywhere near where I grew up because rich people from all over the world gentrified the Bay Area and boomers went full NIMBY on new developments.

dnissley 3 days ago | parent [-]

boomers were just coming of age politically when prop 13 passed in 1978. the main culprits were actually the silent generation and older greatest gen homeowners—think postwar suburbanites who had bought in cheap and were now watching their property taxes spike in a period of wild inflation + ballooning home values. boomers were still mostly renters or too young to own, especially in california’s pricey metros.

burnt-resistor a day ago | parent [-]

Incorrect. They were buying homes like my parents (born in 47 and 48) did in San Jose, who benefitted greatly from Prop 13. It was the grandparents of boomers (Jarvis and the older bits of the Greatest Gen) who were initially impacted by rapidly rising property values and property taxes who pushed for it.

StopDisinfo910 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

How exactly is forcing owners to actually improve their house supposed to make the housing problem worse?

You think it’s going to put house outside of the market at their current price? It’s an insignificant dent in the profit margin.

JumpCrisscross 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

> How exactly is forcing owners to actually improve their house supposed to make the housing problem worse?

This law makes renovations more expensive. That means use conversions, expansions and safety improvements all happen less frequently.

> It’s an insignificant dent in the profit margin

Limited supply means suppliers own the cards. There is zero chance these costs are born by landlords.

StopDisinfo910 2 days ago | parent [-]

> Limited supply means suppliers own the cards. There is zero chance these costs are born by landlords.

Landlords are already pricing their rentals as high as they can so who else would bear the costs? If they could extract more, they would already do.

JumpCrisscross 2 days ago | parent [-]

> Landlords are already pricing their rentals as high as they can

Reducing supply increases the price they can charge because prospective renters have fewer alternatives.

tlogan 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Let me give you a concrete example.

In Sunset (San Francisco), most houses still have 100–150 amp electrical panels. To support full electrification these panels typically need to be upgraded to 200 or maybe 300 amps.

That upgrade alone costs around $10,000, including labor, permitting (which is surprisingly expensive), and inspections. If rewiring the house is also required (which is often the case) that can push the total to $30,000.

But it doesn’t stop there. PG&E’s infrastructure in many areas like Sunset is already maxed out. If your upgrade triggers a red flag, PG&E may require additional capacity upgrades. However, they won’t pay for them (they’ll just refuse the work until you do). These utility-related infrastructure upgrades can cost anywhere from $25,000 to $50,000, and yes, those costs fall on the homeowner.

So in total, you could be looking at $60,000 or more for this.

dehrmann 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I won't go that far, but it's a distraction from larger problems, and it makes housing more expensive. These are the same cities charging $0.10 for paper bags at grocery stores because marginal environmental benefit?

seanmcdirmid 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This doesn’t have much to do with the cost of building housing. If it did, the south east where natural gas is non existent through out much of it wouldn’t have such cheap housing. Yes, they have propane (king of the hill style), but this wouldn’t get rid of propane cooking outside either.

adrianwaj 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

thehappypm 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

How do San Francisco homes get heat? As I understand it, it gets cool enough in SF to require heating a lot of the time. If gas is banned, a lot of people switch from gas to electric heat? Straining an already strained grid?

bradlys 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

Heat pumps are very efficient form of heating. The nice part is that you can use them to cool the home too.

duskwuff 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> As I understand it, it gets cool enough in SF to require heating a lot of the time.

Definitely not "a lot of the time". The coldest it gets is maybe 40°F on a particularly chilly winter night - with a well-insulated house you hardly even need central heat.

3 days ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
balfirevic 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

1. Are houses in SF well insulated?

2. 40°F is 4°C. That's cold. What do you expect the indoor temperature to be in those conditions, without heating?

ben_w a day ago | parent [-]

While I suspect 1. to resolve false, I wish to offer anecdote about what's possible:

I'm currently living in a well insulated German new build, and over this last winter was wearing a T-shirt inside while it was actively snowing outside. The average combined power consumption of all things in this property is about 500 watts. It would be lower, but we didn't know how to correctly configure some of it in the first 6 months.

burnt-resistor 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

While SF has microclimates, the weather goes from barely cold to barely warm. It doesn't really need heating or A/C very much. The thing though is that PG&E's (traditionally) lower costs for natural gas than electricity incentivize(d) the consumption and use of gas water heaters, clothes dryers, and stoves. If the city-county of SF or state wanted to address this as a policy level, they could slap a tax on natural gas. The thing though is they should help people afford the change to electric and on-going higher costs of electricity because people on fixed incomes cannot afford any changes.

_DeadFred_ 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Isn't gas also 4 times cheaper than electricity in San Francisco? Raising the power bill 4x might be worth considering.

edmundsauto 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

A lot of places have centrally pumped steam, believe it or not! It's pretty neat, although difficult to control depending on the system install date. (Many places are quite old)

sugarpimpdorsey 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They could easily get more public support if they pushed this as a seismic retrofit initiative rather than continue to gaslight the public and doubling down on their environmental foolishness. A direct-vent natural gas-fired water heater is probably the simplest, most reliable appliance you could own. It requires no electricity. And now bureaucrats (not plumbers) made them illegal.

SF is probably the only place in the country where this makes sense, solely because of the earthquake problem. (Do you know how to shut off your gas meter in an emergency? Probably not.)

Yet same people who insist hopscotching amongst piles of human feces is part and parcel to living in the city, not the public health hazard it is, want you to believe your gas stove is killing you.

As a wok owner, I'll take that chance.

mcswell 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

"A direct-vent natural gas-fired water heater is probably the simplest, most reliable appliance you could own. It requires no electricity." I won't address the legality issue, but: First, I'm not sure about the no electricity; if the heater has a pilot light, then I suppose no, but otherwise it requires electricity at least for the igniter.

Second, you're missing another reason for getting a heat pump water heater. We just last week replaced our 13 year old (and therefore on its end of life) gas heater with a heat pump water heater. It requires no gas :). One reason for doing that is that using electricity to run a small heat pump is far cheaper where we live than gas. (We have solar panels, which makes it still cheaper--in fact, free.)

The only things remaining in our house that use gas are the stove and a gas log fireplace. We've used the latter twice during the 13 years we've lived in the house. If we replace the stove (which we'll need to do some day, it's almost 25 years old) with an electric one, then I'd be easily persuaded to turn off the gas fireplace, and end the delivery charge on gas.

As an electric appliance owner, I'll take that chance.

bradlys 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

With electricity hitting rates around $0.70/kwh with PG&E - gas isn’t usually a more expensive way to heat water.

PG&E in CA is criminally expensive. If you’re lucky to be in one of the cities in the bay that isn’t on it, you get incredibly cheap energy in comparison.

There are plenty of water heaters that use a pilot light. I’ve been in many homes where they all use pilot light based gas water heaters.

mcswell a day ago | parent [-]

Wow, that is expensive electricity. Ours (Maryland) is around 12 cents/kwh. As I say, we have solar panels, so we have not paid anything for electricity for the last five years, except for a $6/month connection charge (I think that's going up to $10/month). So far we've gotten back a $couple hundred at the end of each year because our net usage is negative.

bradlys 21 hours ago | parent [-]

You can’t even get money back from PG&E. At most, they’ll neutralize your bill every month to near zero. Any excess you create is typically not credited or rolled over.

They really discourage solar in a variety of other ways as well.

thehappypm 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I had a hybrid electric heat pump water heater, and I didn’t like that it made my house cold in the winter. In winter I’d switch to purely resistive mode. Later on, I moved into a house with a gas water heater and at least for me the gas operating cost is lower.

viraptor 3 days ago | parent [-]

What do you mean it made your house cold? Did you place it inside the house?

thehappypm 3 days ago | parent [-]

Yes, everyone has it in their house in cold climates you’d be crazy to have it somewhere not climate controlled

viraptor 3 days ago | parent [-]

Ok. I was confused because mine's in a service room, attached to the house and enclosed, but now open to the house air.

sidewndr46 a day ago | parent [-]

That is in fact, inside the house

seanmcdirmid 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Is the water heater just in time? I’m guessing not because the heat pump would need some time to startup? Also is it 120V? I have a gas JIT hot water heater that will need to be replaced in a few years and I’m wondering where the tech is at right now.

mcswell a day ago | parent [-]

No, it tries to maintain a full tank of hot water, like other 50 gallon water heaters. I think the just-in-time ones are under your sink. They have their advantages too, I guess.

It's 240v, uses a double circuit breaker, so you need to check your circuit breaker panel to make sure you have two places open.

Our utility company had a special deal--we paid only $240 for the heater, although installation was around $3k (they brought an electrician to run the wire from the panel).

paradox460 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Generally the electricity for the safety and other minor electrical parts is generated by a thermocouple, and a battery or capacitor provides automatic reignition, with a piezo style BBQ igniter as backup

tlogan 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’m not sure where you live, but in my case, I wasn’t even able to get home insurance without an automatic gas shutoff valve. Our policy also required an automatic shutoff for water. So in that sense, earthquake safety is already being addressed through insurance requirements.

Ultimately, mandates like this just make housing even more expensive. Which, frankly, seems to be the real goal. God forbid home prices actually decline or even stop rising.

pengaru 3 days ago | parent [-]

That's not really sufficient for seismically active regions like the SF bay area. The mains are more likely to develop leaks from the frequent tremors and no amount of at-home shutoff valves will change that.

If you allow new construction dependent on existing natural gas distribution lines, they increase the pressure to accommodate the increased demand. This makes explosions from pipes leaking/catastrophically failing more likely.

I thought it was obvious the long-term goal was to reduce if not completely eliminate the need for natural gas distribution _especially_ in these regions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Bruno_pipeline_explosion

LargoLasskhyfv 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

There are induction heated woks in more civilized countries. But again, in the US you're fucked with the third-worldian 120Volts.

_aavaa_ 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

The us is on 240v, but it’s split phase.

Even from a 120V you can get a 1300W induction plate that will transfer heat faster than all but the biggest range burners.

sugarpimpdorsey 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Cookers run on 240 Volts in the US.

LargoLasskhyfv 3 days ago | parent [-]

Only if they have fixed wiring, or specially wired sockets with the according plugs going into them. I should know, because I had my house partially remodeled, including ripping gas pipes out of living-, kitchen-, and bathing rooms. To be replaced by that.

That may be different for professional gastronomic equipment, but I have no experience with that. I think a pizza-oven or larger cooking range could have some sort of thick CEE-plug/coupling like you sometimes see on construction sites.

In Germany that fixed wiring for stoves was/is at 380/400Volts.

Since this was about a Wok initially, I assumed mobility and no fixed installation.

Why this matters in daily life(If you don't want to have gas anymore), everything takes longer to heat(with standard mains electricity), even boiling water for brewing coffee or tea in the US.

Leading to such strange contraptions like induction cooking tops with integrated Liion-battery, to at least be able to compensate for a while for the lack of oomph.

This isn't necessary, or the case in Germany.

3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
xcxhjjg 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]