HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions

About The Ads  This week the ad company used in the forum will be monitoring activity and doing some tests to identify any problems which users may be experiencing. If at any time this week you get pop-ups, redirects, etc. as a result of ads please let us know by sending an email to forum@skyscraperpage.com or post in the ads complaint thread. Thank you for your participation.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2019, 10:10 PM
llamaorama llamaorama is offline
Unicorn Wizard!
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,462
Do we really need town gas systems to residential areas in warm climates anymore? Electric can do everything gas can with the benefit of integrating into home solar and battery installations and various smart grid smart meter stuff. People who want cooking gas could use lpg-sng tanks with regulators so it delivers the same characteristics of piped natural gas.

There’s money to be saved to non gas users in the form of lowered utility relocation costs in construction and public works and lowered fire risk and insurance costs probably?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2019, 11:11 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by sopas ej View Post
Under Berkeley's law, building owners would still be able to apply for exemptions: https://www.npr.org/2019/08/05/74505...t-climate-push

Obviously for homeowners who don't care about having a gas stove, this will be great. Electric water heaters are becoming more and more popular, so it's possible that more people will start making their homes all electric.
Oh yes...applying with the government to receive exemptions...one of my favorite pastimes! Begging the government for permission, love it.

Why is this great for homeowners? Choice seems better than no choice.

Btw..I love your signature. Big words from a guy that ran his country off of oil revenue LOL
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2019, 11:14 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,218
Delete please. I apoligize for getting political and contributing to the "right-wing culture war." I don't know how culture war got included in this discussion but I don't want any part of it lol
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2019, 11:25 PM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 8,693
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2019, 11:33 PM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 8,693
It seems overkill to ban them but certainly their prerogative.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2019, 11:35 PM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 8,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by cabasse View Post
eh, even here in bf georgia, we get a 3rd of our power from nuclear, 10% from renewables, and building two additional reactors which will serve atlanta... gotta start taking steps somewhere to get away from fossil fuels, it won't all happen at once.
That's because of geography. I would bet natural gas will replace coal as the main source of global power before renewable overtake it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:01 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Colebrook, NH (as well as QC & FL)
Posts: 25,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasPlaya View Post
It seems overkill to ban them but certainly their prerogative.
Well, it does make sense at this point to quit having to build the natural gas distribution infrastructure in any new developments. It's the 21st century.

Restaurants are almost certainly going to be in zones that already have it, so, they can apply for a "sauté chef between 80th and 90th percentile intelligence" exemption, I imagine. It would be trivial to let them use it, even new restaurants. I don't expect the city's currently sprawling to the point there are new restaurants opening in the fringes...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:02 AM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Belt View Post
Berkeley bans natural gas in new buildings, the first U.S. city to do so
By ALI TADAYON


https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2019/07...new-buildings/

Now that is WOKE, gang.
Cool now they will use electricity which is by far worse in terms of fossil fuel use. 80% of Electricity is still generated via Coal gas and Oil power plants.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:12 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Colebrook, NH (as well as QC & FL)
Posts: 25,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chef View Post
The problem is the nature of the heat. When you turn a gas burner up or down you get an immediate change in the temperature of the burner. With a standard electric range the heating element gradually heats up and cools down. This means it is easier to have precise control of the temperature of your pans with gas. When you are working a saute station having your pans at the temperature you want them is important in cooking things correctly. I've worked on electric ranges before. The challenge is that you have to anticipate the speed at which they heat up or cool down, it is much more difficult and throws off the timing of cooking. Also they will still cook your pan even after you have turned them off. This means that you have to remove your pan from the range and find a place to put it while you are doing other things. That little bit of time is a big deal when you are cooking 8 or 12 pans at once. It is easier to be able to turn off the gas and leave it there. Cooking on an electric range in a restaurant is possible but it is about twice as difficult as working a gas range and requires completely relearning how to cook saute.

Cooking saute well, especially in a busy upscale restaurant, requires a lot more brain power than non-restaurant people realize. Most great fine dining saute cooks are in about the 80th percentile of intelligence or higher. One of the challenges of a head chef is to find people who are smart enough to get an advanced degree but are instead willing to work for $16 an hour in a hot, cramped, unpleasant space without breaks and live completely detached from normal life (which is why cooks tend to be immigrants or weirdos, that is where you find smart people without degrees). By changing from gas to electric and making saute harder, you now may need a saute cook in the 90th percentile of IQ rather than the 80th. That is going to make staffing the kitchen harder.
I was very aware of those features of gas ("instant" heat and "instant" no-heat-anymore) but I appreciate all the extra info... and it's true that in my case, it was a very small, very exclusive restaurant (always full and you had to reserve way ahead of time) with ONE chef who was one of this city's best and I assume he knew his equipment extremely well. When you're familiar with your stove you pretty soon will be able to tell exactly where to set the elements and how long to wait. He also had counter space to put anything he wanted to get off the heat anytime.

If you have big volume and several chefs, I agree that in this case it's a factor that makes things more complicated (with no advantage at the restaurant level, as you don't "see" the reduction in GHG vs clean electric).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:14 AM
craigs craigs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
Cool now they will use electricity which is by far worse in terms of fossil fuel use. 80% of Electricity is still generated via Coal gas and Oil power plants.
Cool story, bro.

Meanwhile, in reality, PG&E has already provided the breakdown on how they produce power for Caifornia cities, including Berkeley: 33% renewable (solar, wind, geothermal, biomass and waste, small hydro), 27% nuclear, 20% natural gas, 18% large hydro, and 2% market purchases. They make a point of putting coal into the chart, and it's 0%.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:21 AM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,893
Ontario Hydro tried to push electric heating back in the 1970s, which totally backfired on those who bought homes with that kind of heating. Baseboard heating in a cold climate is inefficient, guarantees an uncomfortable house in winter and out of control electric bills.

Also, the Ontario government pushed green energy for power generation, which escalated electric rates far above inflation rates, to the point that it now has one of the highest electricity rates in North America.

Interestingly, the first electric oven was demonstrated in the Windsor Hotel in downtown Ottawa, Canada in 1892 by inventor Thomas Ahearn who also invented the electric heater for streetcars.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:24 AM
pj3000's Avatar
pj3000 pj3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pittsburgh & Miami
Posts: 4,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
Cool now they will use electricity which is by far worse in terms of fossil fuel use. 80% of Electricity is still generated via Coal gas and Oil power plants.
First, once again, it’s for NEW construction... so there’s no “now they will use electricity”. Existing buildings can still use natural gas.

Second, not in California. And not in PG&E service territory. PG&E power sources are only like 20% natural gas now, and zero coal. Mostly renewables, nuclear, and hydropower.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:31 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Colebrook, NH (as well as QC & FL)
Posts: 25,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend View Post
Ontario Hydro tried to push electric heating back in the 1970s, which totally backfired on those who bought homes with that kind of heating. Baseboard heating in a cold climate is inefficient, guarantees an uncomfortable house in winter and out of control electric bills.
I had no idea that Ontario was that cold. Here in Quebec, everyone has had electric baseboard heating for almost two generations now (many people alive have never known anything else - I have older buildings with hot water systems and often new tenants if they're young have no idea there are valves on these radiators) and it's perfectly fine.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:32 AM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Colebrook, NH (as well as QC & FL)
Posts: 25,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigs View Post
Cool story, bro.

Meanwhile, in reality, PG&E has already provided the breakdown on how they produce power for Caifornia cities, including Berkeley: 33% renewable (solar, wind, geothermal, biomass and waste, small hydro), 27% nuclear, 20% natural gas, 18% large hydro, and 2% market purchases. They make a point of putting coal into the chart, and it's 0%.
Exactly. Thanks for the figures.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:36 AM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigs View Post
Cool story, bro.

Meanwhile, in reality, PG&E has already provided the breakdown on how they produce power for Caifornia cities, including Berkeley: 33% renewable (solar, wind, geothermal, biomass and waste, small hydro), 27% nuclear, 20% natural gas, 18% large hydro, and 2% market purchases. They make a point of putting coal into the chart, and it's 0%.
First, once again, it’s for NEW construction... so there’s no “now they will use electricity”. Existing buildings can still use natural gas. Second, not in California. And not in PG&E service territory. PG&E power sources are only like 20% natural gas now, and zero coal. Mostly renewables, nuclear, and hydropower.

Cool story bro's now all it does is inconvenience Berkeley residents to "make a statement" politically.

Good for them, Just like renaming Columbus Day "indigenous peoples day" (which Berkeley did long ago) Even though it is still a day because of Columbus and the signage still says (Columbus day) in parentheses because otherwise nobody would know what the hell they were talking about. Banning natural gas in New Buildings in Berkeley for heat and cooking does absolutely nothing to effect or change the amount of greenhouse gasses we emit and will have absolutely no impact other than "making a statement".

A bunch of rich lefties making grand meaningless gestures to prove to themselves that they aren't really "that bad" as rich westerners because they "care" oh so much about X topical cause of the day.

The whole thing gets a big eye roll from me dog. But its Berkeley, You know what you are getting into if you move there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:42 AM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 8,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
Well, it does make sense at this point to quit having to build the natural gas distribution infrastructure in any new developments. It's the 21st century.

Restaurants are almost certainly going to be in zones that already have it, so, they can apply for a "sauté chef between 80th and 90th percentile intelligence" exemption, I imagine. It would be trivial to let them use it, even new restaurants. I don't expect the city's currently sprawling to the point there are new restaurants opening in the fringes...
Then let the market decide that. To edit, while it's the 21st century not everywhere has cheap renewable energy or nuclear power.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:52 AM
pj3000's Avatar
pj3000 pj3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pittsburgh & Miami
Posts: 4,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasPlaya View Post
Then let the market decide that. To edit, while it's the 21st century not everywhere has cheap renewable energy or nuclear power.
But we're not talking about everywhere. We're talking about a service territory that does have those power sources (and they're more than adequate), and does not have to invest significant cost in expanding natural gas infrastructure. That is the market deciding.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:58 AM
pj3000's Avatar
pj3000 pj3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pittsburgh & Miami
Posts: 4,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obadno View Post
First, once again, it’s for NEW construction... so there’s no “now they will use electricity”. Existing buildings can still use natural gas. Second, not in California. And not in PG&E service territory. PG&E power sources are only like 20% natural gas now, and zero coal. Mostly renewables, nuclear, and hydropower.

Cool story bro's now all it does is inconvenience Berkeley residents to "make a statement" politically.

Good for them, Just like renaming Columbus Day "indigenous peoples day" (which Berkeley did long ago) Even though it is still a day because of Columbus and the signage still says (Columbus day) in parentheses because otherwise nobody would know what the hell they were talking about. Banning natural gas in New Buildings in Berkeley for heat and cooking does absolutely nothing to effect or change the amount of greenhouse gasses we emit and will have absolutely no impact other than "making a statement".

A bunch of rich lefties making grand meaningless gestures to prove to themselves that they aren't really "that bad" as rich westerners because they "care" oh so much about X topical cause of the day.

The whole thing gets a big eye roll from me dog. But its Berkeley, You know what you are getting into if you move there.
No, it won't inconvenience Berkeley residents or developers. It's much cheaper to build all electric, and never gets cold enough there to necessitate anything more than electric heat.

You're wrong yet again, but just cannot bear to admit it!! Big surprise around here! How do you get through the day being wrong so much?

You shouldn't even bother responding, but rather slink away with your tail between your legs and lay low until we've moved onto the next thread topic. And then you can chime in on that topic and... be wrong again!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 12:59 AM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 8,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by pj3000 View Post
But we're not talking about everywhere. We're talking about a service territory that does have those power sources (and they're more than adequate), and does not have to invest significant cost in expanding natural gas infrastructure. That is the market deciding.
Right, and I was replying to the notion that:

Quote:
Well, it does make sense at this point to quit having to build the natural gas distribution infrastructure in any new developments. It's the 21st century.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2019, 1:02 AM
pj3000's Avatar
pj3000 pj3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pittsburgh & Miami
Posts: 4,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasPlaya View Post
Right, and I was replying to the notion that:
Ah, got it. Sorry, I got confused as to what you were replying to.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:00 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.