Editor,
For those of us who wanted a climate leader in Sacramento, we got one in Josh Becker. On day one he introduced two bills, SB67 and SB68 and co-authored AB33 (Ting).
Editor,
For those of us who wanted a climate leader in Sacramento, we got one in Josh Becker. On day one he introduced two bills, SB67 and SB68 and co-authored AB33 (Ting).
What stands out to me is how the lessons learned from COVID-19 relate directly to our crisis with the climate. Both rely on science for answers and necessitate urgent and diligent action on our parts. SB 68 is calling for 1 million electric buildings ... as stated in the bill to “help the state achieve its climate and air pollution reduction goals in the building sector through actions such as reducing barriers to upgrading electrical service panels or accommodating additional electrical appliances within existing service panels.”
Believe it or not, California lags behind the rest of the United States with 95% of buildings built with natural gas furnaces compared with new homes built in the rest of the country (60%) who build with electric. This is according to the NRDC Expert Blog, Nov. 19, 2020.
In conjunction with Becker’s bill, it is time for the California Energy Commission (CEC) to revise Title 24 codes to require all new construction to be electric, and for cities to adopt even stricter reach codes. Kudos to state Sen. Becker for fueling this effort. We must act on climate change the way we should have acted on COVID-19.
Ellyn Dooley
San Carlos
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(5) comments
It seems Becker is oblivious to the reality of electricity supplies. Nationwide, only 20% is now coming from renewable resources, the rest from nuclear, coal and natural gas. All of the latter three are now considered unsustainable in California so this may become an issue of NIMBY. Electricity will still come primarily form those sources in the foreseeable future, so the alleged pollution will be spewed in other areas. This is no leadership, but political pandering and folly.
So Dirk, is your solution to do nothing? Most scientists espouse the position to go all electric in order to fight climate change. If you live in San Mateo county, you have to opportunity to have all your electricity be provided by wind power. Every little bit helps in our effort to save our planet.
Rel - I did not say that nothing should be done but that all-electric is simply not feasible. Residential electric load in San Mateo County may be supplied with renewable resources but there is a finite amount of that source available. That means other communities outside our County will need to continue to rely on 'brown' electricity. That is a poster child for "provincialism"; to heck with our neighbors! BTW, the renewable energy credits that the PCE purchases are part of a numbers game and are not always physical renewable electrons. So, we may go all electric in our homes but commercial and industrial enterprises will move elsewhere. Also, how do you intend to pay for all-electric heat? If you think your PG&E gas bill is high now, wait for it to quadruple with electricity.
Sorry Dirk, your position defies the facts. Going all electric taps into an infinite source while fossil fuels are finite and will get more expensive over time. My all wind electric bill only increased about $10 per month - a worthwhile contribution to the planet.
I guess Rel doesn’t understand the facts from Mr. van Ulden regarding how 20% of electricity is coming from renewable sources and how energy accounting is fungible. Maybe Rel thinks electricity grows on trees? Either way, we should thank Rel for subsidizing electrical costs for the rest of us who don’t care where our electricity comes from – and it’s not from trees, unless we’re burning them to run those electrical generators.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.