Berkeley, CA becoming first city in U.S. to ban natural gas in new buildings

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Except my gas range has a burner that is 20,000+ btu's. That range you just posted has a max of 3600 Watts which is approximately 12300 btu, far below my gas range output. Not to mention the oven. Maybe as a new build its fine, but not conversion.

And then the question, what's it cost to run? Solar systems aren't free, and if you didn't have one, my electricity is TOU.
TOU for evening for me is upwards of 40 cents per KWhr on SCE! That just can't compete with gas.

Look, as a new install, maybe the prices come out even, but converting to electric from gas is not worth it.
 
As I mentioned, you lose a lot of heat with transfer losses with gas so will have no problem with induction pot/pan temperature. That’s a negative feature for the gas range as they lose up to half their heat this way. In fact, the actual amount of energy transferred might be higher for induction in this case.

Then, if it’s summer time, you spend extra energy to cool your home from the waste heat from gas.

And yes, they ship to your house free.

We’re still on tangents here. No one is asking you to do it, again the article is about NEW homes in Berkeley.

And no, prices not even on install. See early in this thread, costs ~$6k to plumb a new house with gas.
 
The upper limit of an inductive heater on something the size of a frying pan exceeds the power supplied by a 50 amp 240v circuit.
It's probably limited by the manufacturer as to not burn, warp or melt the object being heated.

iPlug said:
Oilpan4 said:
...Some one said "induction ranges aren't more expensive than gas" and that is total BS. On Lowe's when I search induction ranges the cheapest 2 are $999 and $1,040. If you don't like either of those to the 3rd cheapest is $2,000.
The oven in an induction range is no different than the oven in a standard electric range so no efficiency gains there.
With gas ranges I see 7 under $500.
Right now everything is on sale too so those numbers are subject to change.
You continue to dispense purposefully false information and the fact that you did not bother to report that my references above refuted your lies shows your continued disservice to the new folks here who aren't yet wise to your childish games and agendas. One more time, go back and read again, "Recommend interested parties head over to homedepot.com and sort for induction cooktops by price if this was your impression."

Too many incessant false items from you to be worthy of anyones time, but let's just address this one further since you were not capable of going to the website above and reporting that it completely disproved your misinformation:

$297
https://www.homedepot.com/p/True-In...p-Vertical-Orientation-Black-TI-2BN/306165033

$370
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Empava-...-Elements-Booster-Burner-EMPV-IDC30/309421162

$590
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Ancona-...g-Individual-Boost-Function-AN-2412/302454308

$809 (the one we bought and better than the nicest gas cooktop costing $1k+ more)
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Frigida...in-Black-with-5-Elements-FFIC3626TB/304289285

All can be ordered online as we did.


SageBrush would likely be described by most here for his perpetual grouchiness, but he is no fool and does have you pegged correctly. Maybe he would be a little less angry if you would cease spreading knowingly false information.

Please spare danrjones your intentional fiction. He at least shows some interest in learning here even if he does not have all the means to pick high hanging fruit.

Wow you're an idiot.
That's not a range. Not even close. It's called a galley cook top, galley stove, diner stove top ect.
Claiming that galley cooker is a range is a lie.
Plus I have seen gas galley cookers in the low $200s. So gas is still cheaper.
Still confused?
Image search galley cook top and then an electric, gas, inductive range.
This is like trying to explain the difference between sandals and shoes.
 
Oilpan4 said:
Wow you're an idiot.
That's not a range. Not even close. It's called a galley cook top, galley stove, diner stove top ect.
Claiming that galley cooker is a range is a lie.
Plus I have seen gas galley cookers in the low $200s. So gas is still cheaper.
Still confused?
Image search galley cook top and then an electric, gas, inductive range.
This is like trying to explain the difference between sandals and shoes.


Hey stupid, can you read, once again, go back yet again: "Recommend interested parties head over to homedepot.com and sort for induction cooktops by price if this was your impression." Amazing that you can even breathe. It would be forgivable if this happened to you occasionally, but you are consistently lacking in the most basic intelligence. Stop the lies.
 
I was comparing full size inductive stand alone ranges to full size gas ranges. Because that's what most people use.
You were comparing tiny cheap little built in inductive galley stile cook tops to full size gas ranges.
Not fair or even remotely comparable.
Plus gas galley style cookers are still cheaper.
Homedepo, magic chef gas galley cook top, $199.

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Magic-Chef-24-in-Gas-Cooktop-in-Stainless-Steel-with-4-Burners-MCSCTG24S/302694358?cm_mmc=Shopping%7CG%7CBase%7CD29A%7C29-15_COOKING%7CMulti%7CPLA%7c71700000032417790%7c58700003840697319%7c92700030735626755&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIwPO-0v-j5AIVh4vICh0eBgLeEAkYBCABEgKy9_D_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

You lose.
Pretty sad you can't even win when you try to cheat.
 
Oilpan4 said:
I was comparing full size inductive stand alone ranges to full size gas ranges....You lose.
Pretty sad you can't even win when you try to cheat.
You can try to change what I said but that won't work as it is all documented here. Doesn't matter how you were trying to lie, you are still completely wrong. You continue to use playground logic, but that doesn't hold water here.

danrjones said:
And then the question, what's it cost to run? Solar systems aren't free, and if you didn't have one, my electricity is TOU.
TOU for evening for me is upwards of 40 cents per KWhr on SCE! That just can't compete with gas.
A bit more on this - as this thread is about new construction only, consider that in 2020 new homes in CA have to be built with solar PV. Take the $6k saved in not having to do natural gas plumbing then parlay that into the upfront solar PV costs, go time of use, and it could cost nothing more upfront and save the home owner lots down the road (aside from the most important and primary winner, the environment).
 
iPlug said:
Oilpan4 said:
I was comparing full size inductive stand alone ranges to full size gas ranges....You lose.
Pretty sad you can't even win when you try to cheat.
You can try to change what I said but that won't work as it is all documented here. Doesn't matter how you were trying to lie, you are still completely wrong. You continue to use playground logic, but that doesn't hold water here.

danrjones said:
And then the question, what's it cost to run? Solar systems aren't free, and if you didn't have one, my electricity is TOU.
TOU for evening for me is upwards of 40 cents per KWhr on SCE! That just can't compete with gas.
A bit more on this - as this thread is about new construction only, consider that in 2020 new homes in CA have to be built with solar PV. Take the $6k saved in not having to do natural gas plumbing then parlay that into the upfront solar PV costs, go time of use, and it could cost nothing more upfront and save the home owner lots down the road (aside from the most important and primary winner, the environment).

Yes, sorry we got off on a tangent in regards to new vs retrofit. But my worry is that someone sees this type of program, and runs with it as a "great idea" and decides we all need to do it! I've seen too many examples of one-size-fits-all thinking by uber liberals or uber conservatives. I've actually lived in both city and now rural areas, and the problem is, what works well for one area tends to NOT work well for another.

A recent perhaps ongoing example is CA mandating or attempting to mandate residential water usage, gallons per day per person. Someone in LA assumes that because they can get by with 50 gallons per day (just an example), then that means that everyone can do it. But they have no idea, for example, that we use swamp coolers out here in a rural area, and that essentially would mean we would have no AC. Not without spending 10k each to convert from swamp and install ducting and AC systems. Plus the 40+ cents per KWHr to run them. Or expensive solar.

$6k here where i live will buy you a 2KW Dc system. Not nearly enough. Coworkers of mine that are all electric tend to have 8-12KW DC systems. Yes, that would be nice to have, but its not free. Its 30k added onto the house cost, at current prices. So it would cost you A LOT more upfront. Not sure where you live, but again, don't assume what works for you works for everyone else. If its a choice between $30k extra upfront, or 40 cents per KWhr to the electric company, or $10 in gas per month, most consumers will probably pick the later. Cost matters. No matter what kind of liberal or conservative Utopia people might dream of, cost matters. Its a bit like the ultimate form of humility. Sadly people mandate anyway, then the 80% can't afford it, and they suffer. Then they vote for some idiot as president as push-back.
 
$3 per watt for roof top is a scam.

Which number is greater?
$199 or $297

The quote I got to install gas in my house, plus buying a gas hot water heater, plus buying a $700 free standing gas range (not a galley cook top), not counting a gas dryer since I still have my old one and buying a gas furnace not installing it would run $7,000 to $8,000.
How is it $6,000 just to run gas in a new build?
 
Who said: “I can buy a nice gas range a lot cheaper than an induction.”

-hint, this has still not been shown; most would not consider the most entry level to be "nice" but rather not nice with poor warranty and the most lousy specs

danrjones said:
..$6k here where i live will buy you a 2KW Dc system...
Valid point from the consumer internality perspective and lots of variables based on utility and prices and cost opportunities. Solar PV can be leased at no up front cost to the consumer and this is often cheaper than having no defense to some outrageous peak pricing. Regulations and incentives could certainly align much better than they currently exist in many places in California.

It would also be helpful if the consumer beared the negative externality costs of natural gas instead of dumping these on his neighbor and the rest of the world; at that point natural gas would no longer be so cheap to the consumer.

Since CA has already essentially given up coal, NG is the next step and we have to start somewhere. Since NG is a large part of our carbon footprint it can not simply be ignored because it is not as bad as coal. The work must continue.
 
Obviously gas.
Since a cheap gas galley cook top runs $199 and a full free standing range starts under $500.
Galley cook top inductive setups start at $297 and free standing inductive ranges start at $1,000.

So now it's now it's not which one is cheaper?
Thank you, you're too kind.
Now we are splitting hairs over "nice"? Sure.
I can get a nice gas range for $600 to $900.
For $1,000 you get the cheapest piece of junk inductive stand alone range China can bang out.
The 3rd cheapest free standing inductive range Lowe's has is $2,000.
So it's a full $1000 price increase just to go mid price range with a stand alone inductive range.
If someone is thinking about getting an actual inductive range they better budget at least $2,500 unless they always go and buy the cheapest they can find.
 
Still has not proven “I can buy a nice gas range a lot cheaper than an induction.”

Changes the goal posts again and says "Since a cheap gas galley cook top runs $199 and a full free standing range starts under $500..." Cheap is not nice, it's junk with a junk warranty and junk specs.

Again lies about "free standing inductive ranges start at $1,000." when it was already shown it is $900.

“I can buy a nice gas range a lot cheaper than an induction.” -he said
“I can buy a nice gas range a lot cheaper than an induction.” - he said
now it's I can by a lousy (not nice) gas range cheaper than a decent induction range

There remains no gas cooktop that exceeds the specs of our induction cooktop at $800. Something approaching that costs much more, but then there is no gas range at any price that can match the specs.
 
I think this thread for me has played its course. I've no interest in arguing over range specific pricing, as that was never my point. I already have gas so conversion costs would be real.

Yes, $3 watt. I just had 3 quotes from local installers here to add more solar. That's also how I got the 2k number to upgrade my panel. My conclusion was to eventually do it myself.

And I'm not disagreeing that it's an environmental issue. But unfunded mandates are not going to work. One size does not fit all. We also have much lower hanging fruit we could go after first, that you could get political and popular support to do.
YMMV

Thanks
 
As for gas versus electric cost, here's what I see in Berkeley:

I presently use gas for a tankless water heater, a gas dryer, and a gas range. My gas bill last month was about $11 for 7 therms. The heat value of 7 therms is about the heat value of 200 kWh, but for comparison, I will assume the electric appliances will be twice as efficient (e.g. heat pump water heater, induction range, etc). So I would need roughly 100 kWh to replace that gas consumption. If I could buy those kWh at $0.10/kWh, it would be break-even, but electricity is most expensive than that here.

PVWatts tells me that at my location and with an 8/12 roof, a 1 kW DC PV system will generate about 1,600 kWh per year. So a 750W DC system would generate enough energy over the year to offset the electric equivalent of my current gas usage. At $3/watt, that would cost be $2,250 (not reasonable as a standalone cost, but as an average cost for part of a larger PV system).

If that PV system lasts 25 years, and $2,250 were part of a 25 year mortgage financed at 4% annually, then the monthly payment would be $12/month. So that's within the margin of error compared to the $11/month for gas (given that the 7 therms usage is probably rounded to the nearest integer). The number would be a bit higher if I accounted for PV degradation over time (assuming the PVWatts number is a first year result, I've not looked at it closely enough to know).

Cheers, Wayne
 
@danrjones, apologies for the noise - the beating a dead horse range and cooktop specific pricing has not recently been directed at you.

wwhitney said:
As for gas versus electric cost, here's what I see in Berkeley...If that PV system lasts 25 years, and $2,250 were part of a 25 year mortgage financed at 4% annually, then the monthly payment would be $12/month. So that's within the margin of error compared to the $11/month for gas (given that the 7 therms usage is probably rounded to the nearest integer). The number would be a bit higher if I accounted for PV degradation over time (assuming the PVWatts number is a first year result, I've not looked at it closely enough to know).
Appreciate a local's input and number crunching. Assuming as well costs saved with no NG plumbing install for new residential construction it looks even sweeter.

Do you know if your city has any incentives on heat pumps and such beyond what PG&E offers?
 
danrjones said:
And I'm not disagreeing that it's an environmental issue. But unfunded mandates are not going to work.

Relax, it's Berkeley. They pride themselves in being "the first city to require/ban (whatever). Doesn't mean it's coming soon to a theater near you.
 
Agree, Berkeley has long been a “weird” place, so this should not come as a surprise to potential and current residents.

In the grand scheme of things this is essentially a pilot project.

They already have the right energy mix from PG&E (high mix of renewable/carbon free energy, no coal, and balance of energy comes from natural gas) and climate, both literal and political, to run this experiment. Grid batteries are coming online and in a few months all new homes in CA will have to build in solar PV for net zero for home electricity use.

We can all learn something useful from how things proceed and there’s no time to prepare for the future like right now.
 
iPlug said:
Agree, Berkeley has long been a “weird” place, so this should not come as a surprise to potential and current residents.
It's the People's Republic of Berzerkeley, thank you very much :lol: I spent a lot of time hanging out in Berkeley in my teens and twenties (before that lived right downtown during the Summer of Love), and got really tired of a city having its own foreign policy but an inability/disinterest in taking care of basic civil functions. They've been electing more conservative* people to the city council since then, and the city does run somewhat better, but it's always been an experimental place - I was first exposed to and got interested in passive solar design and energy efficiency when my mom and I visited the Integral Urban House sometime in the mid-70s, started by Sim van Der Ryn (among others): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_Urban_House

Book detailing same (I read it years later):
The Integral Urban House: Self Reliant Living in the City
https://www.amazon.com/Integral-Urban-House-Reliant-Living/dp/1897408161

Here's Van Der Ryn's bio: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sim_Van_der_Ryn

iPlug said:
In the grand scheme of things this is essentially a pilot project.

They already have the right energy mix from PG&E (high mix of renewable/carbon free energy, no coal, and balance of energy comes from natural gas) and climate, both literal and political, to run this experiment. Grid batteries are coming online and in a few months all new homes in CA will have to build in solar PV for net zero for home electricity use.

We can all learn something useful from how things proceed and there’s no time to prepare for the future like right now.


Yes, indeedy.

*On a scale running from Che Guevara to Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren.
 
Going full electric and getting rid of gas appliances makes sense if your area's electricity supply is fully decarbonized, but in any place that will still be running (or importing) a significant amount of fossil-fired generation for the forseeable future it makes more sense to go the other way. Burn the gas where you need the heat instead of in a powerplant where 40-60% of that energy will be thrown away. Better still, especially in higher latitude locations where winters are cold and dark and solar PV output is 1/4 of summer or less, would be cogeneration. Replace the gas furnace with a small natural gas fired generator so the waste heat from the fossil fired electricity generation could be put to good use. If your heating requirement is 10 GJ, instead of burning 10.5 GJ of gas in a furnace you burn 12.5 GJ of gas in your generator and produce 2 GJ (555 kWh) of electricity along with all of the heat you need.
 
wwhitney said:
As for gas versus electric cost, here's what I see in Berkeley:
.
Looks about right for the energy, but three comments:

1, if you are replacing NG entirely, you also do away with the monthly fixed fees
2. Is the $3/watt PV cost net after tax credit ?
3. The social cost of carbon is missing
 
SageBrush said:
wwhitney said:
As for gas versus electric cost, here's what I see in Berkeley:
.
Looks about right for the energy, but three comments:

1, if you are replacing NG entirely, you also do away with the monthly fixed fees
2. Is the $3/watt PV cost net after tax credit ?
3. The social cost of carbon is missing


The $3 watt installed where I live is before credits, assuming you qualify to use them.
Sadly where I am the fixed fees are higher for SCE electricity than PG&E gas. Unless you go off grid, SCE charges a minimum fee of $10 every month. So if I owe $30, its just $30. In the spring if I net produce, they do net metering, but then charge me $10 for that month anyway.
Many months my gas is less than the minimum SCE fee.
 
Back
Top