Vancouver Council to ban Natural Gas by 2050

[GMasterAres]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Wow, guess people in support of this also think growing corn to make fuel is a sound ecological idea too?

It's not because the land use requirements and impact to food growth outweighs the benefits. That said we do sort of do this today in the sense a lot of corn grown in the Fraser Valley is exclusively for use as feed for cattle who are sizable contributors to climate change. People just see "Chilliwack" corn at small shops and think it is all for food but the majority isn't. So the corn around here is largely grown as "fuel" for cows.

One of the first changes made to the building code by council was to ban wood burning fireplaces years ago, but now it's okay to use biomass fuels again. Can I expect them to allow woodstoves?

They probably should. As long as you aren't burning plastics or non-organic items, they're fine. My question though is were they banned because of climate change or where they banned because of fire hazard?

Council should stick to improving building codes further. Mandating triple pane low e windows on new construction would be something they could impose pretty quickly and reduce energy consumption not divert it.

It is also something they could impose on renovations which would help with newer buildings. If you want to renovate your house and replace the windows, you must use more energy efficient ones for example. I don't disagree with you, but the biggest energy suck in a house is heating and appliances. So it has the biggest overall impact.

You do have a point though, my townhouse has triple pane windows and we have our heater completely off. It has never been on. In my apartment it is facing South with windows and great insulation also. Same deal, we never ever had the heater on.

Even in the winter we could leave our balcony door open and never had to turn the heater on. It always maintained 16-22C in if it was -5 outside. So right there our heating impact became _0_ and even if we had natural gas heating, 0 = 0.

[officedweller]

Originally Posted by jhausner

My question though is were they banned because of climate change or where they banned because of fire hazard?

As far as I know the ban is because of particulates - ash and smoke.

[mezzanine]

a regular fireplace also is inefficient for heat generation. even a purpose-built wood stove lacks the economy of scale of a district energy plant (no scrubbers, varying quality of fuel, etc.)

[Vin]

Banning all clean natural gas use will not make up for the huge ecological footprint imposed on this planet due to the City's policies that lead to the tearing down of existing concrete buildings and even the viaducts, and urban sprawl by discouraging massive densification. Simply pointless. Hope people realize that.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Vin

Banning all clean natural gas use will not make up for the huge ecological footprint imposed on this planet due to the City's policies that lead to the tearing down of existing concrete buildings and even the viaducts, and urban sprawl by discouraging massive densification. Simply pointless. Hope people realize that.

Comparing fossil sourced natural gas to the viaducts is desperate and ridiculous.

[cairnstone]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Yep. That's the direction to move toward.

As an aside, Van City proper requires 2 x 8 exterior walls for all of their wood-frame construction (SFDs, townhouses, etc.) - the only jurisdiction in Metro Van that I am aware of. The reason? Higher insulation standards.

All others in Metro Van still utilize a 2 x 6 exterior wall standard.

the city of vancouver can do this do to their charter. Total waste of material as there would be negligible savings in energy. Last time i checked our lows very rarely dip below-10. might as well ban windows

[cairnstone]

Originally Posted by jhausner

It's not because the land use requirements and impact to food growth outweighs the benefits. That said we do sort of do this today in the sense a lot of corn grown in the Fraser Valley is exclusively for use as feed for cattle who are sizable contributors to climate change. People just see "Chilliwack" corn at small shops and think it is all for food but the majority isn't. So the corn around here is largely grown as "fuel" for cows.



They probably should. As long as you aren't burning plastics or non-organic items, they're fine. My question though is were they banned because of climate change or where they banned because of fire hazard?



It is also something they could impose on renovations which would help with newer buildings. If you want to renovate your house and replace the windows, you must use more energy efficient ones for example. I don't disagree with you, but the biggest energy suck in a house is heating and appliances. So it has the biggest overall impact.

You do have a point though, my townhouse has triple pane windows and we have our heater completely off. It has never been on. In my apartment it is facing South with windows and great insulation also. Same deal, we never ever had the heater on.

Even in the winter we could leave our balcony door open and never had to turn the heater on. It always maintained 16-22C in if it was -5 outside. So right there our heating impact became _0_ and even if we had natural gas heating, 0 = 0.

so you are on the ground floor? I moved from top floor electric heat to a slightly larger ground unit. my bill tripled as i heat the whole building it feels like

[cairnstone]

Vancouver could go NG free easily. 1st most new strats are designed to be more efficient using ground source heat pump systems. Commercial buildings are putting money into energy recovery units and heat storage.This is a big savings over what they pay for central heats steam.

As houses replace furnaces they will move toward heat pumps as that gives cooling and heating.

Renewable gas has been marketed in vancouver for at least 15 years. The first clients were the cement plants and the greenhouses in Delta. The reason they bought in to the program was the cost savings. Greenhouses burn the same or more NG in the summer than in the winter as the CO2 is injected into the greenhouse during the growing season.

One of the biggest flaws we have is our waste management. We have been forced into a green agenda that is not sustainable in our climate. We have to compost everything now. This is all carbon neutral energy that can be used in a biomass facility. I have et to see compost produced. I see wood mulch with a semi composted material used by the city and sold to suckers.

We also forget about our own waste. This gets 2nd processing and sent out to see. It can all be turned into energy.

Someone brought up ethanol from corn. THis is a market skeme in the USA very political. What can be done is biodiesel incubator farms that use algea designed to create energy. They also are carbon nuetral as they capture CO2 during there process.

As for the trend to go to electric heat. The micro Hydro systems are not being developed for domestic use. These are private hydro agreements that sell power to server farms city halls and business throughout North America. The problem is Hydro has to transmit the power so it gets political. I have worked on a few and none of the out put goes to BC. 1st one I did was owned by Epor and was built for green credits. Power went south to California if I recall. Second one the output went to apple. If you look at there stores they have a green logo saying how great they are.

If you start to combine a few of these things together 35 years from now we will be NG free. Look back 35 years ago where were we. A computer was wow new. No cell phones etc.

I do have 1 question those. Why has the BC government never supported a green transportation industry. We have Ballard etc but if you were to buy a cng car you have a choice of about 5 stations to fill it and if your lucky 3 are open the day you need filled.

Sorry all for the rant but I hate to see so much miss information posted.

[ryanmaccdn]

But don't you find in just 3 years and a 70% target compliance crazy?

Originally Posted by cairnstone

Vancouver could go NG free easily. 1st most new strats are designed to be more efficient using ground source heat pump systems. Commercial buildings are putting money into energy recovery units and heat storage.This is a big savings over what they pay for central heats steam.

As houses replace furnaces they will move toward heat pumps as that gives cooling and heating.

Renewable gas has been marketed in vancouver for at least 15 years. The first clients were the cement plants and the greenhouses in Delta. The reason they bought in to the program was the cost savings. Greenhouses burn the same or more NG in the summer than in the winter as the CO2 is injected into the greenhouse during the growing season.

One of the biggest flaws we have is our waste management. We have been forced into a green agenda that is not sustainable in our climate. We have to compost everything now. This is all carbon neutral energy that can be used in a biomass facility. I have et to see compost produced. I see wood mulch with a semi composted material used by the city and sold to suckers.

We also forget about our own waste. This gets 2nd processing and sent out to see. It can all be turned into energy.

Someone brought up ethanol from corn. THis is a market skeme in the USA very political. What can be done is biodiesel incubator farms that use algea designed to create energy. They also are carbon nuetral as they capture CO2 during there process.

As for the trend to go to electric heat. The micro Hydro systems are not being developed for domestic use. These are private hydro agreements that sell power to server farms city halls and business throughout North America. The problem is Hydro has to transmit the power so it gets political. I have worked on a few and none of the out put goes to BC. 1st one I did was owned by Epor and was built for green credits. Power went south to California if I recall. Second one the output went to apple. If you look at there stores they have a green logo saying how great they are.

If you start to combine a few of these things together 35 years from now we will be NG free. Look back 35 years ago where were we. A computer was wow new. No cell phones etc.

I do have 1 question those. Why has the BC government never supported a green transportation industry. We have Ballard etc but if you were to buy a cng car you have a choice of about 5 stations to fill it and if your lucky 3 are open the day you need filled.

Sorry all for the rant but I hate to see so much miss information posted.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by ryanmaccdn

But don't you find in just 3 years and a 70% target compliance crazy?

You really need to review the information, again.

http://vancouver.ca/news-calendar/cl...tural-gas.aspx

[Vin]

I guess we need to replace all the gas-powered stoves, furnaces, piping, and everything else related, and replace them with electric-powered stoves, furnaces, piping, and everything else related. On top of that, we need to de-commission all the natural gas supplying plants, and replace them, at least here in BC with more power-generating dams after clearing more forests and covering more valleys with large tracts of reservoir water.

I wonder if these are considered before they plan about the ban on Natural Gas. If there is no better solution for heating/cooking, etc, like installing solar panels on all roof-tops or start using high-tech solar power absorbing windows to power home battries, the City should not be making such a hasty and irresponsible announcement, as I believe using natural gas is a great transition to green energy in the future.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Vin

I guess we need to replace all the gas-powered stoves, furnaces, piping, and everything else related, and replace them with electric-powered stoves, furnaces, piping, and everything else related. On top of that, we need to de-commission all the natural gas supplying plants, and replace them, at least here in BC with more power-generating dams after clearing more forests and covering more valleys with large tracts of reservoir water.

I wonder if these are considered before they plan about the ban on Natural Gas. If there is no better solution for heating/cooking, etc, like installing solar panels on all roof-tops or start using high-tech solar power absorbing windows to power home battries, the City should not be making such a hasty and irresponsible announcement, as I believe using natural gas is a great transition to green energy in the future.

Keep up the FUD. Don't let the facts get in your way...

[whatnext]

The Globe & Mail on the misguided mayor of Vancouver:

...Even at today’s low electricity rates, the Canadian Taxpayers Association estimates that switching from natural gas would cost the average family $1,400 more a year, plus thousands to rip out and replace furnaces and water heaters.

And the source of all that additional electricity is to be, as Mr. Robertson envisions, wind and solar. We only have to look at Ontario, where contracts priced at multiples of existing rates enriched solar and wind power companies while driving that province from one of North America’s lowest electricity-cost jurisdictions to a job-killing highest.

It’s ironic that Vancouver City Council targets natural gas, by far the cleanest and lowest-emission fossil fuel as its first step toward carbon-free nirvana. But even if the people of Vancouver are forced down that path, what difference would it make to global emissions?

Here’s the simple calculation: Over the past 15 years, global carbon emissions have grown at the rate of 1,125 megatonnes a year, or 3.1 Mt a day. Vancouver’s natural gas emissions are 1.5 Mt a year. So global growth would overcome that tiny emissions reduction in less than half a day. This policy amply qualifies Mr. Robertson as charter member of the Canadian Misguided Mayors Club.....
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle32203851/

[Migrant_Coconut]

One carbon-free CANDU reactor - problem solved. Unfortunately, the province's only frame of reference for nuclear energy seems to be The Simpsons and Godzilla movies.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

One carbon-free CANDU reactor - problem solved. Unfortunately, the province's only frame of reference for nuclear energy seems to be The Simpsons and Godzilla movies.

There is no such thing as "carbon free" energy. However, nuclear power does seem to be one of the least carbon intensive energy sources and once it's up and running is basically carbon-emissions free.

There was even an article about how reservoirs for dams are huge greenhouse gas emitters, especially of methane.

That said, BC would be a great place for nuclear power, especially if combined with hydro.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by Jebby

There is no such thing as "carbon free" energy. However, nuclear power does seem to be one of the least carbon intensive energy sources and once it's up and running is basically carbon-emissions free.

There was even an article about how reservoirs for dams are huge greenhouse gas emitters, especially of methane.

That said, BC would be a great place for nuclear power, especially if combined with hydro.

That's generally more of a problem in tropical countries, at least if the reservoir is properly stripped ahead of time.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Alex Mackinnon

That's generally more of a problem in tropical countries, at least if the reservoir is properly stripped ahead of time.

Sure, but aren't most of the artificial lakes in BC over old forests?

I've been canoeing and kayaking on many of them, and they're full of organic matter, especially tree trunks half submerged and logs floating around. They also receive a lot of organic matter and nitrogen and phosphorous from upstream rivers.

[Stingray2004]

Originally Posted by Jebby

Sure, but aren't most of the artificial lakes in BC over old forests?

That may have been the case many, many decades ago. But the areas to be submerged by BC Hydro's Site C dam, fr example, are being logged and stripped of remaining residue:

[Vin]

Originally Posted by Vin

I guess we need to replace all the gas-powered stoves, furnaces, piping, and everything else related, and replace them with electric-powered stoves, furnaces, piping, and everything else related. On top of that, we need to de-commission all the natural gas supplying plants, and replace them, at least here in BC with more power-generating dams after clearing more forests and covering more valleys with large tracts of reservoir water.

I wonder if these are considered before they plan about the ban on Natural Gas. If there is no better solution for heating/cooking, etc, like installing solar panels on all roof-tops or start using high-tech solar power absorbing windows to power home battries, the City should not be making such a hasty and irresponsible announcement, as I believe using natural gas is a great transition to green energy in the future.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Keep up the FUD. Don't let the facts get in your way...

Tell that to yourself please. And where are your so-called "facts", WarrenC12?



How timely~ Thanks whatnext and Stingray2004. I guess by WarrenC12's logic, The Globe and Mail lets "facts get in the way".

Originally Posted by whatnext

The Globe & Mail on the misguided mayor of Vancouver:

...Even at today’s low electricity rates, the Canadian Taxpayers Association estimates that switching from natural gas would cost the average family $1,400 more a year, plus thousands to rip out and replace furnaces and water heaters.

And the source of all that additional electricity is to be, as Mr. Robertson envisions, wind and solar. We only have to look at Ontario, where contracts priced at multiples of existing rates enriched solar and wind power companies while driving that province from one of North America’s lowest electricity-cost jurisdictions to a job-killing highest.

It’s ironic that Vancouver City Council targets natural gas, by far the cleanest and lowest-emission fossil fuel as its first step toward carbon-free nirvana. But even if the people of Vancouver are forced down that path, what difference would it make to global emissions?

Here’s the simple calculation: Over the past 15 years, global carbon emissions have grown at the rate of 1,125 megatonnes a year, or 3.1 Mt a day. Vancouver’s natural gas emissions are 1.5 Mt a year. So global growth would overcome that tiny emissions reduction in less than half a day. This policy amply qualifies Mr. Robertson as charter member of the Canadian Misguided Mayors Club.....
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...ticle32203851/

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

That may have been the case many, many decades ago. But the areas to be submerged by BC Hydro's Site C dam, fr example, are being logged and stripped of remaining residue:

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

That may have been the case many, many decades ago. But the areas to be submerged by BC Hydro's Site C dam, fr example, are being logged and stripped of remaining residue:

Interesting. Thanks for the info on Site C, I hadn't looked anything up on it.

Yeah, the ones I've camped/canoed are probably decades old (can't remember the names, it's been over a decade). Still, for those concerned about climate change it they must have a big impact considering the amount of organic material flooded over.