It's official, New York State almost banned gas heating in new construction

[cdev]

in an attempt to get people to switch to electric power only. This will be much more expensive, if they do it.

Many parts of the US are too cold to reasonably expect to be heated with electric power, which costs three or more times as much if used for heat. Why?

Read the fine print in this article to find out how and why New Yorkers narrowly escaped mandated use of electricity only in new construction, construction thats predicted to soar as thousands of postwar natural gas only buildings are torn down in the coming years because they have become obsolete due to LNG export. I think that is what will happen, but I could be wrong. I am basing it on what I know about how redevelopment and eminent domain work, post Kelo. (2006)

A push to export natural gas, the profit, unlike in other countries, does not go to the public. Conversely, many peoples bills may double or triple. According to EIA. Plus they will have to move to new market rate apartments, which may cost them two or three times in rent what they pay now. Housing will likely be in short supply.

In area with lots of multifamily housing the shift will result in a declaration of "blight" for a great deal of multifamily housing and its subsequent redevelopment into full market rate housing. Rents in the newer buildings will be average rents for new construction, (typical rents for US cities are and will have nothing to do with previous rents which were based on rents and the housing CPI. The net effect will be millions of American families may have to move as their buildings are torn down and new buildings replace them, owned by big real estate developers like our former President has always been.

New construction as it has long been, will be immune to rent stabilization laws.

[james_s]

Modern heat pumps work really well, even in cold climates. I'm highly skeptical of it being advantageous to use them though in areas where most of the electricity comes from coal. I have a heat pump but I still prefer to use my gas furnace most of the time for heating, the air it puts out is warmer and it's quieter, cost is pretty much a wash at current prices. Love gas for cooking though, I'd never have an electric stove again, even if I had to put in a propane tank.

[cdev]

Would it be feasible to heat with propane?

(Say you were forced to use that or electricity, because natural gas was not an option, because I think thats coming. Everything public is being privatized because it stands in the way of our essential corporations. It occupies space depriving them of the profits they are now entitled to.

What about oil heat? It and coal are what many used before we paid to have our heating system converted toi modern, efficient natural gas..when Americans could still afford the fuel of the rich countries.. It may be forbidden alog with wood heat, as it causes asthma. That much is true, it does. Diesel fumes also lower children's IQs.

 I am wondering if people like me could somehow switch my heating back to the oil that it used when it was built more than five decades ago, if gas becomes too dear or unavailable.. because electricity is just too expensive to heat with.

It really sucks being cold all the time. I know the US sees itself as the new Saudi Arabia and is hoping to come to Europe's rescue and drive Russia out of business, and many hope to switch to wood or coal, but its just fact that we dont have the natural gas reserves to become a big exporter.  They have been lying for decades, overestimating the size of natural gas reserves, to the point where dozens of investment scams are suspected, based on dishonest overestimates of LNG in the ground. Especially for the East Coast fracking industry which is finding that the natural gas wells are running dry. Fracking was plagued with hype from the beginning. For more on this do a search on "Shale Bubble" for the raw facts. And hold on top your money. And heating fuel. So much is fake now you wont believe it unless you read it yourself. Lots of politicians are involved in this natural gas scam.  Read more here: https://shalebubble.org/  Yes, the Marcellus Shale is greatly overestimated and more and more hype is being produced to enable a theft from the nation. Tax money now is being spent to enable propagenda. Its subsidy thats being paid to liars out of our taxes to lie to us in the media. Shame on them.

Russia is much larger than the US is and frankly has more natural gas. Thats just a fact. Its not political. Social Security deprives banks of business, and inhibits migration for work, a huge moneymaker.

Russia should be compensating countries for the damage they are doing, but because of the WTO we basically now cannot boycott countries legally if they are in the WTO. Can we boycvott China for paying workers almost nothing? Of course not. US coprporations would have a shit fit. We created the WTO to prevent boycotts like the ones that successfully changed South Africa. They are against our state religion.

Money.

Its simple common sense, isnt it? That We should not export away the only heat many Americans can afford. The residents of our cities cannot afford to move en masse, either. But its a lot like famines. Famines are a symptom, when they occur of how much lives are valued by society. As jobs are being shifted elsewhere, the resources are too. And so will scarce resources like housing. After all essential workers, wherever they are, have to make enough to live on, to eat. and non workers become a lower priority. A much lower priority as they no longer are essential, not being employed. The resourses, like housing and retirement funds, will go to the essential workers. Whatever promises which were made that prevented this will be broken. As the need for them has vanished. from the owners perspectives. This is almost unspeakably wrong, I know. But as somebody who has been through it myself, I see it coming.

 I see it coming. As Their affordable rents are tied to natural gas being available that is being sold off. So those cheap postwar apatments will be torn down. Soon. Millions of apartments and no other anything will be available due to the need to use electric heat, only. When they move out their entitlement to get a lower rate of rent loses its legal basis. When they , thanks to their perfect credit and cosigners, move into their new $4500 a month apartment. This will mean huge rent increases - The old postwar apartments started out of public housing, which has now been made illegal by GATS. Worldwide. The postwar buildings, still the kind of apartments that more New Yorkers live in than any others depend on huge common building heaters that mostly now depend on natural gas. In theory they could be converted back to poil but that would involve a large enough investment to be unlikely for landlords who in fact are oftgen looking to get out of the landlord business. The apartments now are renting for stabilized rents, a subsidy that few see as such. No they dont realize they are being subsidized. They dont see the thousands of dollars a month they are getting. But when it vanishes they will realize, its huge.

Right now they may pay 2000 a month in rent or less. They are getting a big subsidy for housing and heat.

substantially less than market rate, a subsidy that is worth thousands of dollars a year to the typical urban family, ends. It wont be available in whatever new apartments they rent as that is new construction and it is always free of rent controls to make it more profitable to build.. The average rent in many US cities hovers around $3000/month for a two bedroom apartment. Thats too much for many families without a hefty wage increase. And if they move there wont be jobs that pay as much wherever they move to. They will have to accept wage cuts because their new homes will be in parts of the country that have available housing at rents they can afford. They will also need to learn how to drive (often late in life) buy cars and parking for them (often $300/month or more) and auto insurance. There wont be widely available public transit in cheaper cities, in fact many of them lack public transit. Public Transit is for the richer cities. Poorer cities have much less of it. The US isnt like Europe, well provided with trollies and trains and subways. They were largely bought up, the tracks torn up and converted to deisel busses and roads for private automobiles, leaviing the US with a permanent underclass. The people whop could never afford cars. Who were stuck paying much more of their incomes for groceries sold at double the prices. Wehn public transit was available, companies l;ike GM's Natiopnal City Lines provided it, if passengers like a certain MS. Rosa Parks, exhausted after a long day at work, would be willing to give up their seats when they were demanded. So riding the bus at a tiome when people wanted to relax might subject them to a very large dose of delibertate humilation.

Well, whats best for General Motors, is best for America, they used to say. They should buy cars. In fact, they were not given any choice in the matter. Nor will they be given choices now. They say history repeats itself and that is so very true. Thanks to our media being subsidized by our taxmoney./. To hide whats really happening, a vast displacement of our people. One thats been planned for decades.

Modern heat pumps work really well, even in cold climates. I'm highly skeptical of it being advantageous to use them though in areas where most of the electricity comes from coal. I have a heat pump but I still prefer to use my gas furnace most of the time for heating, the air it puts out is warmer and it's quieter, cost is pretty much a wash at current prices. Love gas for cooking though, I'd never have an electric stove again, even if I had to put in a propane tank.

Is propane bought like that more affordable than heating and cooking with electricity? Every time I have used more electricity the rapid increase in bill makes me stop. And I live in a fairly mild climate state, New Jersey. Winter is short here and the temperatures rarely dip down into the 0's, 10s and 20s like they do in many other states.

Lacking the money to be able to afford that weather due to LNG being exported, and having low incomes thatnonetheless disqualify them from aid.. Low incomes we should know are often framed by legislators as high incomes so make the working poor ineligible for any substantial help. Also now susidies for health care and subsidies for various corona related services which are incredibly expensive unsubsidized, are ending.

I see many older Americans trying to tough it out and failing to manage. Which might mean suffering greatly, having pipes burst or freezing to death in extreme cold or heat.

Of course this is why natural gas and rents were subsidized for so long. But its ending now. The news is avoiding discussing it. But I see huge related problems due to lack of affordability of heat in the winter and AC in the summer. To see this one only has to look at the difficulties of the many people living in vans throughout the country. They have to buy propane in small quantities. Many of these vans lack ventilation, too so are really not very safe to heat with propane.

California, with its astronomical rents may be the best part of the country to live if we continue to export more and more LNG. as far as climate for that reason. I could easily see the cold states as requiring additional expenditures of $300 to $450 permonth to prevent pipes from freezing in winter and similar in summer for AC.

[james_s]

I'm too tired to read that whole wall of text, but yes, of course it's feasible to heat with propane, a friend of mine does as do millions of other people. It's much more expensive than natural gas though so about 10 years ago he had a heat pump installed which does most of his heating. Natural gas and electric heat pump have similar running cost here but propane is quite a lot higher.

[Someone]

Natural gas and electric heat pump have similar running cost here but propane is quite a lot higher.

Yep, thats pretty much it, except that the relative prices of those two energy sources wildly (and illogically) varies even within countries. Equally the price of appliances (including installation) is all over the place, builders/trades love to stick with what they know which has a surprising effect on the local volume/support for different technologies.

Planning/zoning/permit control of household appliances is a pretty heavy handed tool, but sometimes needed when people are being wasteful (Australia has some similar things, even restricting the W/m2 of lighting allowed).

All gas house here, but that made sense at the time of construction, it would be all electric these days.

[Someone]

Even though heating is not so commonly electrically based, residential cooling usually is AFAIK (electric air conditioning) and if it is somehow energy cost effective to air condition structures maybe 15C below ambient for months out of the year using electricity the same overall electric energy can be used to heat them similarly and the need for both is directly reduced by better insulation / heat exchange conservation.

There was a time when air-conditioner units were cool-only, is that still the case in the US? Even if it is only a small incremental cost increase on the device, given most people (in the US and Australia) take air-conditioning as an essential, getting cheap heating along with that "essential" capital investment makes sense.

[f4eru]

Fossil fuels are really bad for the environment, and heat pumps have a very good efficiency those days.
Installation of new fossil fuel heating gets forbidden in many parts of Europe too, progressively, and it is the right choice to make.

[SilverSolder]

The era of heating homes with fossil fuels has to come to an end...   and it won't happen without some pain, unfortunately.

[Marco]

Given the current cost of housing I don't see how drilling costs for borehole heat exchangers is all that relevant for most new construction.

[cdev]

Unfortunately, many people live on fixed incomes and cant afford these energy transitions. They may have to move to the tropics to afford the shift. And NY state isnt subtropical. Not anywhere near it.

Fossil fuels are really bad for the environment, and heat pumps have a very good efficiency those days.
Installation of new fossil fuel heating gets forbidden in many parts of Europe too, progressively, and it is the right choice to make.

[Marco]

How does that matter for new homes? There is no transition with sunk costs. A little more mortgage cost a little less monthly power cost, it's a wash.

[Stray Electron]

There was a time when air-conditioner units were cool-only, is that still the case in the US? Even if it is only a small incremental cost increase on the device, given most people (in the US and Australia) take air-conditioning as an essential, getting cheap heating along with that "essential" capital investment makes sense.

   Yes, to a very large degree most AC systems in the US are still cool-only units. New construction in the last ten years or so has started installing heat pumps but they're much more expensive than cool-only systems and in most parts of the US, heat pump simply DO NOT work in the coolest parts of the year so heat pumps are not economically justified.  In addition most US made AC systems (with or without heat pumps) in the US are not very efficient to start with.

   I just installed a Mitsubishi mini-split AC in a house in Florida this past summer and I elected not to buy the version with the heat pump.  It's reliability was lower than a non-heat pump version and it used more power even when you weren't using the heat pump and the cost was considerably more. So even though the house was in Florida which is just about a perfect climate for using a heat pump, I decided not to. 

   From everything that I have read, and I did a LOT of research, heat pumps are only practical when the outside air temperature is above about 30F. They will work somewhat down to about 20F but that's it. I have personally seen the temperature in central Florida get down to 17 degrees twice and down to 13F once. Everywhere north of there gets colder!  Note that most if not ALL, heat pump systems also include electrical resistance (I^2 R)strip heaters so the sellers CLAIM that the system works at colder temperatures and the strip heater will but not the heat pump so there is no efficiency to be gained. And I don't see any point in putting a $12,000 heat pump with a strip heater to replace a $49 heat dish.

   All of that said, I'm extremely pleased with the Mitsubishi mini-split AC system!

    For a couple of data points; the AC only Mitsubishi minisplit cost about $4,400 US installed. The same version with heat pump and strip heater was about $6,500 US.  This past winter the coldest temperature that we saw was about 30F but only for about three days and only at night. We never turned on the main heat and we used one heat dish (about 700 Watts) for a few hours per day in the main part of the house to take the chill off in the mornings for about a week.

[cdev]

Marco, so just add a $700 a month heating bill to your palatial mansion's cost, eh? No worries.

Funny, I don't see anybody actually cutting fossil fuels, anywhere, the policies you are espousing would all be nullified by the American push to make all energy policies fuel source agnostic.

The oligarchs money is from the dictatorships on the coast of Africa, who pump and pump and burn and burn, the largest sopurces of CO2 in the world, its likely.

All the oil money is a curse to these countries, a curse of corruption.

The more they make the more they are just pillaging Africa more, and faster. I dont see how selling off the US's last affordable fuel reserves helps the situation, frankly.

They just want it for geopolitical reasons, which are obvious, but not so well thought out. We need to keep the heating cost situation manageable for Americans in the northern Midwest who cant afford to pay more and more on demand, nor can they just move as you seem to be implying, either.

As I brought up, and which is illustrated in dephth on the Shale Bubble site, the pols, who source the propaganda machine, all seem to be in bed with the extractive energy barons,  Ever since we entered Afghanistan its one thing after another. They now have been lying about the fracking yields, in the Marcellus Shale, I'm just saying.. why?  Is it a pump and dump stock market scheme? 

For that matter why do other countries extract far more money in taxes from the "extractive" industries? (The oil and gas industries), while we give them "carte blanche" to steal it all?

[cdev]

How does that matter for new homes? There is no transition with sunk costs. A little more mortgage cost a little less monthly power cost, it's a wash.

Thisi s the problem with the churner politicians. What about the homeowners and renters? Now youre telling them they must buy all this expensive stuff? Instead of the heat they need, which they have budgeted for. But not if it triples in cost.

Its time to flush the TPP, if it requires the export of LNG, without any flexibility whatwoever, that is the problem, inflexible dirty deals are bad.

Energy agnopsticism means that your arguments claiming that changes that improve energy efficiencywould be implemented, are bunk! This is what experts are saying.

. TISA and TTIP too contain these Trojan Horse clauses.. Escape clauses, so they can lie to our faces.. And they will, especially in the US where people are maximally gullible.

What about the prepay energy meters? Are they the next big thing?

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/energy/energy-supply/get-help-paying-your-bills/you-cant-afford-to-top-up-your-prepayment-meter/
. Flush.

[nctnico]

New homes that are well insulated and have indoor air conditioning (including heat recovery & humidity control) + solar panels can certainly do without gas heating. In the long run it will be worthwhile due to energy savings. It is a shame that they didn't manage to ban gas heating.

[Marco]

Marco, so just add a $700 a month heating bill to your palatial mansion's cost, eh? No worries.

If you are having new construction made which costs 700$ a month of electricity to heat at COP 4 it better be the size of a palace, or you got screwed.

[james_s]

Even though heating is not so commonly electrically based, residential cooling usually is AFAIK (electric air conditioning) and if it is somehow energy cost effective to air condition structures maybe 15C below ambient for months out of the year using electricity the same overall electric energy can be used to heat them similarly and the need for both is directly reduced by better insulation / heat exchange conservation.

There was a time when air-conditioner units were cool-only, is that still the case in the US? Even if it is only a small incremental cost increase on the device, given most people (in the US and Australia) take air-conditioning as an essential, getting cheap heating along with that "essential" capital investment makes sense.

Air conditioners are by definition cool-only, if they can heat also they're called heat pumps. Cool-only AC is still very common here, I just put one in my brother's house last fall paired with a high efficiency gas furnace. It's true that a heat pump is just an AC unit with a few extra components but they are considerably more expensive. Sizing of the system is more critical though and a big consideration with a retrofit into an older house is duct sizing, a heat pump requires MUCH more airflow than an older gas or oil furnace.

[james_s]

The era of heating homes with fossil fuels has to come to an end...   and it won't happen without some pain, unfortunately.

Eventually perhaps, but we're a long way from that, natural gas is still plentiful in much of the world, and there are other ways to make methane.

Personally I quite like supplemental heating with wood, it is a plentiful, renewable and carbon neutral fuel source in my part of the world, but the politicians have been making it increasingly harder to build a house with a wood stove.

[Marco]

The UK would need around the UK worth of forest to heat itself with wood.

It really depends on population density if wood is plentiful.

[james_s]

The UK would need around the UK worth of forest to heat itself with wood.

It really depends on population density if wood is plentiful.

Hence the qualifier "In my part of the world". I also specifically stated supplemental heat, ie using the wood stove on the coldest days, not as the main heat source.

[themadhippy]

The UK would need around the UK worth of forest to heat itself with wood.

Only government approved wood can be burnt in your government approved wood burner here in the uk ,and if you live in a smoke free zone things get even stricter

[Zero999]

The UK would need around the UK worth of forest to heat itself with wood.

Only government approved wood can be burnt in your government approved wood burner here in the uk ,and if you live in a smoke free zone things get even stricter

It depends on the burner. and it's not very enforced.

[themadhippy]

and it's not very enforced.

still early days as it was only introduced in january this year

[Someone]

From everything that I have read, and I did a LOT of research, heat pumps are only practical when the outside air temperature is above about 30F. They will work somewhat down to about 20F but that's it. I have personally seen the temperature in central Florida get down to 17 degrees twice and down to 13F once. Everywhere north of there gets colder!  Note that most if not ALL, heat pump systems also include electrical resistance (I^2 R)strip heaters so the sellers CLAIM that the system works at colder temperatures and the strip heater will but not the heat pump so there is no efficiency to be gained. And I don't see any point in putting a $12,000 heat pump with a strip heater to replace a $49 heat dish.

All of that said, I'm extremely pleased with the Mitsubishi mini-split AC system!

    For a couple of data points; the AC only Mitsubishi minisplit cost about $4,400 US installed. The same version with heat pump and strip heater was about $6,500 US.  This past winter the coldest temperature that we saw was about 30F but only for about three days and only at night. We never turned on the main heat and we used one heat dish (about 700 Watts) for a few hours per day in the main part of the house to take the chill off in the mornings for about a week.

Thanks for the numbers, seems like the US is an anomaly for pricing of residential reverse cycle HVAC (commercial units dont have such premiums). The technology has been moving quickly to alternative refrigerants, so low temperature operation is becoming limited almost entirely by icing of the heat exchanger. Ground source or defrost cycling can make it practical in freezing climates. Have personally run old/inefficient heat pump HVAC in sub 20F which was the practical limit then, should be a fair bit lower with the newer units that maintain higher COP even below freezing. Again these sorts of things may not be available in your markets due to lack of demand (or ignorance? or protectionism?).

Even though heating is not so commonly electrically based, residential cooling usually is AFAIK (electric air conditioning) and if it is somehow energy cost effective to air condition structures maybe 15C below ambient for months out of the year using electricity the same overall electric energy can be used to heat them similarly and the need for both is directly reduced by better insulation / heat exchange conservation.

There was a time when air-conditioner units were cool-only, is that still the case in the US? Even if it is only a small incremental cost increase on the device, given most people (in the US and Australia) take air-conditioning as an essential, getting cheap heating along with that "essential" capital investment makes sense.

Air conditioners are by definition cool-only, if they can heat also they're called heat pumps. Cool-only AC is still very common here, I just put one in my brother's house last fall paired with a high efficiency gas furnace. It's true that a heat pump is just an AC unit with a few extra components but they are considerably more expensive. Sizing of the system is more critical though and a big consideration with a retrofit into an older house is duct sizing, a heat pump requires MUCH more airflow than an older gas or oil furnace.

Still regional based, to be pedantic air-conditioning includes the case of dehumidification with minimal cooling. Most places air-conditioning is synonymous with cooling, but in Australia cool-only is the exception rather than the norm, so air-conditioning is almost all reverse cycle and cool-only is the one with the extra name.

So I hear reverse cycle is more expensive over there? more than 20% extra? (common cost premium elsewhere in the world) An additional appliance just for heating is a huge expense if its a whole box similar in price, or even half the price (before installation, services, etc).

[james_s]

So I hear reverse cycle is more expensive over there? more than 20% extra? (common cost premium elsewhere in the world) An additional appliance just for heating is a huge expense if its a whole box similar in price, or even half the price (before installation, services, etc).

If you want to see the sort of equipment that is available in the US and the prices, a good place to look is https://hvacdirect.com/
I've bought a few systems from them, they mark it up over wholesale of course but it's still typically less than a HVAC company will mark it up. The whole industry here is full of protectionism and BS. Most HVAC trade counters will flat out refuse to sell to an individual and the HVAC message boards absolutely prohibit discussing prices or giving DIY advice, unlike pretty much any other trade.

[Marco]

The cost for retrofit a single home are far higher than a flat or renovation of a whole street any way. The costs of drilling increase highly sub-linearly. The future for new homes assuming widespread technological civilization survives for much longer, is district heating/cooling with ground source heat pumps (running airconditioning from the same system can go a long way to net zero heat exchange for the borehole). Hydrogen might be competitive for retrofits but I doubt it will ever be for large scale new homes.

In 3 decades there is supposed to be no natural gas, no propane, no fuel oil, no nothing ... hydrogen and GSHP are the only scalable renewable ways with significant technological readiness to heat homes. Worrying about increased bills is somewhat silly with only 3 decades to work with.

Status quo will die, with this time schedule defossilization has to be treated like a war, a long war.

[SilverSolder]

So I hear reverse cycle is more expensive over there? more than 20% extra? (common cost premium elsewhere in the world) An additional appliance just for heating is a huge expense if its a whole box similar in price, or even half the price (before installation, services, etc).

If you want to see the sort of equipment that is available in the US and the prices, a good place to look is https://hvacdirect.com/
I've bought a few systems from them, they mark it up over wholesale of course but it's still typically less than a HVAC company will mark it up. The whole industry here is full of protectionism and BS. Most HVAC trade counters will flat out refuse to sell to an individual and the HVAC message boards absolutely prohibit discussing prices or giving DIY advice, unlike pretty much any other trade.

I would have thought the US would be far more "capitalistic" than that...   but it is actually not.   Don't get me started on the whole road resurfacing industry, where companies are paid lots of money to repair roads every year instead of using higher quality materials and techniques to make it less necessary to do that...

[NiHaoMike]

Most HVAC trade counters will flat out refuse to sell to an individual and the HVAC message boards absolutely prohibit discussing prices or giving DIY advice, unlike pretty much any other trade.

Thank the EPA for that, they required a license to handle ozone depleting gases such as refrigerants. That then got phased out but HVAC supply stores found that not selling to unlicensed individuals cut down a lot on hassle (customers guessing what they needed and then returning a part that wasn't the problem, for example) so that practice stayed. Not sure if things have changed with the common availability of HVAC parts online, those online places usually sell for cheaper so the supply stores are more for getting a replacement part the same day.

[David Hess]

Would it be feasible to heat with propane?

In the past propane heating was common in any area where piped natural gas service is not available but electrical service is available.  I do not know about now.

There was a time when air-conditioner units were cool-only, is that still the case in the US?

I would say that cooling only air conditioning, with a separate furnace for heating, is still more common than a heat pump where natural gas is available.  Back in the 1960s when "electricity too cheap to meter" was right around the corner, some "all electric" homes were built with heat pumps and no natural gas service.

[nctnico]

Most HVAC trade counters will flat out refuse to sell to an individual and the HVAC message boards absolutely prohibit discussing prices or giving DIY advice, unlike pretty much any other trade.

Thank the EPA for that, they required a license to handle ozone depleting gases such as refrigerants. That then got phased out but HVAC supply stores found that not selling to unlicensed individuals cut down a lot on hassle (customers guessing what they needed and then returning a part that wasn't the problem, for example) so that practice stayed. Not sure if things have changed with the common availability of HVAC parts online, those online places usually sell for cheaper so the supply stores are more for getting a replacement part the same day.

Over here there is a healthy competition and many companies will sell HVAC equipment to consumers. Last year I bought a multi-split unit (pre-filled) and installed it myself. It is not really difficult if you have some affinity with doing pipe work. A vacuum pump is cheap from Aliexpress and based on recommendations from a refrigeration service / repair forum, I used a sealant on the connections to avoid leaks.

[Marco]

We have to do that illegally, but AFAIK Americans can do online F-gas exams for like 50$ and allowed to do it legally.

[NiHaoMike]

Perhaps a more gradual approach would be that rather than outright banning natural gas in new construction, just require that natural gas heating is allowed only if there's also a heat pump installed with an outdoor thermostat to select which gets used?

[rfeecs]

Berkeley (California) did it years ago:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/23/berkeley-natural-gas-ban-environment

Of course they are also a nuclear free zone.

[BrokenYugo]

My question is how does this work in a freezing climate prone to extended power outages? You won't be running a heat pump, nevermind with resistive backup, off some cheap little 3-5kW one lung genset that runs a gas furnace easily with power to spare for a fridge and the TV. So I just don't see it working on a household level without gas backup, unless we're all expected to buy a 10+kW multi cylinder generator.

[james_s]

Thank the EPA for that, they required a license to handle ozone depleting gases such as refrigerants. That then got phased out but HVAC supply stores found that not selling to unlicensed individuals cut down a lot on hassle (customers guessing what they needed and then returning a part that wasn't the problem, for example) so that practice stayed. Not sure if things have changed with the common availability of HVAC parts online, those online places usually sell for cheaper so the supply stores are more for getting a replacement part the same day.

No, that's not it at all. I have an EPA license, HVAC trade counters won't sell to me because I'm not a professional with a contractor license, nothing to do with the EPA or refrigerants.

It may cut down on hassle, but the same would be true of any trade counter. I can buy a gas water heater at a plumbing supply house but I can't buy a gas furnace at a HVAC supply house. It's protectionism, nothing more.

[james_s]

My question is how does this work in a freezing climate prone to extended power outages? You won't be running a heat pump, nevermind with resistive backup, off some cheap little 3-5kW one lung genset that runs a gas furnace easily with power to spare for a fridge and the TV. So I just don't see it working on a household level without gas backup, unless we're all expected to buy a 10+kW multi cylinder generator.

That's precisely why I have a dual fuel system with a gas furnace paired with a heat pump. I can easily run the furnace off my little 2kW generator. I only use the heat pump when it's relatively warm outside, the furnace is quieter and I'd rather save wear on the heat pump for cooling. I have multiple heat sources but only one way to cool.

[james_s]

Berkeley (California) did it years ago:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/23/berkeley-natural-gas-ban-environment

Of course they are also a nuclear free zone.

Berkeley is also a sanity-free zone, it's pretty well known as one of the most nutty corners of the whole nation.

[David Hess]

Perhaps a more gradual approach would be that rather than outright banning natural gas in new construction, just require that natural gas heating is allowed only if there's also a heat pump installed with an outdoor thermostat to select which gets used?

If the natural gas furnace is not regularly tested, by for instance being used, then it will fail when it is needed.

There is a much simpler and fairer solution.  If natural gas has negative externalities, then account for them:

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

But of course they will not because politically powerful users will be subsidized.

My question is how does this work in a freezing climate prone to extended power outages? You won't be running a heat pump, nevermind with resistive backup, off some cheap little 3-5kW one lung genset that runs a gas furnace easily with power to spare for a fridge and the TV. So I just don't see it working on a household level without gas backup, unless we're all expected to buy a 10+kW multi cylinder generator.

I faced that in the 2007 North American ice storm.  The solutions are either sufficient backup power to operate the heating system, or a backup heating system like propane, kerosene, or wood.

[Marco]

At net zero the only scalable way to account for the externalities would be enough taxes to pay for direct air carbon capture (burying trees deep enough they won't decompose back into the carbon cycle is not scalable) since capture at the source is unlikely to be feasible.

I don't think there will be any takers for taxes that high, slowly growing taxes up to that point will just create a huge bottleneck in the future where everyone wants to transition at the exact same time.

[NiHaoMike]

My question is how does this work in a freezing climate prone to extended power outages? You won't be running a heat pump, nevermind with resistive backup, off some cheap little 3-5kW one lung genset that runs a gas furnace easily with power to spare for a fridge and the TV. So I just don't see it working on a household level without gas backup, unless we're all expected to buy a 10+kW multi cylinder generator.

No need to run the heating to prevent the pipes from freezing. Instead, a hot water recirculation pump can run for a very long time on batteries.

burying trees deep enough they won't decompose back into the carbon cycle is not scalable

Just make products out of the wood.

[David Hess]

At net zero the only scalable way to account for the externalities would be enough taxes to pay for direct air carbon capture (burying trees deep enough they won't decompose back into the carbon cycle is not scalable) since capture at the source is unlikely to be feasible.

But they do not apply *any* externalities, and even subsidize it which is the opposite.

I don't think there will be any takers for taxes that high, slowly growing taxes up to that point will just create a huge bottleneck in the future where everyone wants to transition at the exact same time.

Do you mean like that massive switch to electric vehicles happening right now, which is not happening?

The bottleneck in production requires capitol expansion, which would be paid for by higher prices anyway.  Politicians are solving the problem by ignoring it, creating a future crisis which conveniently will require more expansion of government.  Now you know why I assume all politicians are lying when they discuss global climate change, so far they are.

[uer166]

Even in the colder states (let alone Florida) it is beneficial to burn the natural gas at an electric powerplant, and use a heat pump for heating with reasonable CoPs. You'd need less gas to do the same work, and emissions would improve as the grid slowly shifts to renewables. There is maybe 1-5 days a year where the heatpump would be less efficient than a gas furnace, but who gives a crap? It still works just fine, and 99% of the time it is way, WAY more efficient.

It is so infuriating when people parrot the same old "heat pumps don't work in the cold", when that is verifiably false. I'm glad some states simply just force you to do the right thing, since the goals would never be achieved otherwise.

Some touch on the reliability of the heat pumps, and, well, it's no different than dealing with a broken furnace if you don't have backups such as electric space heaters or something redundant. Technology Connections goes into great detail with the math in a way that is accessible to anyone, so there is no excuse for ignorance anymore: . There seem to be some major issues with the HVAC industry based on some comments here, but that is something to be solved, and nothing to do with any engineering or technology issues.

[NiHaoMike]

Even in the colder states (let alone Florida) it is beneficial to burn the natural gas at an electric powerplant, and use a heat pump for heating with reasonable CoPs. You'd need less gas to do the same work, and emissions would improve as the grid slowly shifts to renewables. There is maybe 1-5 days a year where the heatpump would be less efficient than a gas furnace, but who gives a crap? It still works just fine, and 99% of the time it is way, WAY more efficient.

Even better to run the heat pump with a CHP generator if you're dead set on burning gas. It would be reasonable that in any place that needs heating for a significant part of the year, require new gas heating to be CHP, with or without a heat pump in addition. The generators and heat pumps could even be spread across separate buildings.

[nctnico]

It is so infuriating when people parrot the same old "heat pumps don't work in the cold", when that is verifiably false.

It is not false. Again, whether a heat pump is good enough on cold days highly depends on how well your home is insulated. Older houses are typically not insulated well enough to be heated by a heat pump throughout the year. Over here in the NL people install hybrid heating systems for that reason. These hybrid heaters combine a gas burner and heat pump in one system.

What even works better is burning gas in a power plant and use the residual heat for warm water and heating in a district heating system.

[Marco]

whether a heat pump is good enough on cold days highly depends on how well your home is insulated.

Poor insulation in and of itself is just a question of power, buy a bigger heatpump (and maybe increase total waterflow to the radiators). The fundamental problem is the thermal resistance between the water and the room air, if the radiators can't work on 40-45 degree water during worst case cold the radiators should be swapped or fan boosted.

Running the heatpump at high watertemperature is what makes them fail at cold temperature (cold for the Netherlands at any rate). The home insulation is a related issue but does not need to be a bottleneck.

Installing high water temperature district heating now based on natural gas generators when they have to be turned off in 30 years would probably be wasteful. Any new large scale systems have to be designed for the net zero future, unless the projected cost of electricity (or hydrogen) is so low that COP 1 heating is viable in 30 years that means low water temperature heating.

[Monkeh]

whether a heat pump is good enough on cold days highly depends on how well your home is insulated.

Poor insulation in and of itself is just a question of power, buy a bigger heatpump (and maybe increase total waterflow to the radiators).

.. no, that's exactly the wrong way to go about it.

Also, low flow temperatures are why hydronics need to be going the way of the dodo.

[Marco]

Also, low flow temperatures are why hydronics need to be going the way of the dodo.

For truly modern housing hydronic floor/ceiling heating can put enough power into the room even at 35 degrees water temperature ... forced air won't be able to win much COP wise.

[Monkeh]

Also, low flow temperatures are why hydronics need to be going the way of the dodo.

For truly modern housing hydronic floor/ceiling heating can put enough power into the room even at 35 degrees water temperature ... forced air won't be able to win much COP wise.

Underfloor heating is a serviceability nightmare. Leave it to bathrooms. Bonus of forced air: You get cooling! For once, the Americans are on to something.

[Marco]

The inside of ducts has its own serviceability problem when used for cooling, if warm air diffuses back into cold ducts after air conditioning turns off you have a problem which eventually will require servicing. Also not really suitable for retrofit for radiator heated homes.

Hydronics can do forced air heating and cooling too, just needs fan coil units.

[Nauris]

   Yes, to a very large degree most AC systems in the US are still cool-only units. New construction in the last ten years or so has started installing heat pumps but they're much more expensive than cool-only systems and in most parts of the US, heat pump simply DO NOT work in the coolest parts of the year so heat pumps are not economically justified.  In addition most US made AC systems (with or without heat pumps) in the US are not very efficient to start with.

   I just installed a Mitsubishi mini-split AC in a house in Florida this past summer and I elected not to buy the version with the heat pump.  It's reliability was lower than a non-heat pump version and it used more power even when you weren't using the heat pump and the cost was considerably more. So even though the house was in Florida which is just about a perfect climate for using a heat pump, I decided not to. 

   From everything that I have read, and I did a LOT of research, heat pumps are only practical when the outside air temperature is above about 30F. They will work somewhat down to about 20F but that's it. I have personally seen the temperature in central Florida get down to 17 degrees twice and down to 13F once. Everywhere north of there gets colder!  Note that most if not ALL, heat pump systems also include electrical resistance (I^2 R)strip heaters so the sellers CLAIM that the system works at colder temperatures and the strip heater will but not the heat pump so there is no efficiency to be gained. And I don't see any point in putting a $12,000 heat pump with a strip heater to replace a $49 heat dish.

   All of that said, I'm extremely pleased with the Mitsubishi mini-split AC system!

    For a couple of data points; the AC only Mitsubishi minisplit cost about $4,400 US installed. The same version with heat pump and strip heater was about $6,500 US.  This past winter the coldest temperature that we saw was about 30F but only for about three days and only at night. We never turned on the main heat and we used one heat dish (about 700 Watts) for a few hours per day in the main part of the house to take the chill off in the mornings for about a week.

Those Mitsubishi mini-splits are very good and our house actually has two of them. But them not working below 30F I think that is pretty outdated information from a time before modern japanese mini-splits. Mitsubishi has models for example the MSZ-RW that work reasonably down to -13 F and somewhat down to -30F. It is quite new model did not find any test report for it but here is graph for the older MSZ-LN. As you can see it puts out twice heat compared to it electrical consumption still at -22F. Problem is output is quite small only 2 kW (input is 1kW) at these temps. Newer MSZ-RW is better in this regard because of it's bigger compressor but unfortunately I did not find any actual grahps.

The strip heater thing it is market specific if it is fitted or not. For the units intended for colder markets (eg nordics) there is no strip heater normally but for units intended for warmer climates I think it is usually fitted. But you can unplug it on the indoor unit control pcb when it starts to annoy you too much.

Cost for the MSZ-RW25 is typically 2300€ installed

Generator operation - We have tested that and they work fine with small 3 kW gasoline generator. Input is just bridge rectifier with passive PFC it is quite tolerant and the compressor is ramped up slowly so not much inrush.

Lifetime - that is a bit open question still but typically more than 15 years in normal use (nordic region). Maybe longer but there is no data on that. Some units die earlier but rarely before 10 years old that is what we are seeing.

[nctnico]

Also, low flow temperatures are why hydronics need to be going the way of the dodo.

For truly modern housing hydronic floor/ceiling heating can put enough power into the room even at 35 degrees water temperature ... forced air won't be able to win much COP wise.

Underfloor heating is a serviceability nightmare. Leave it to bathrooms. Bonus of forced air: You get cooling! For once, the Americans are on to something.

You don't need to service underfloor heating. It is just pipes running through the floor.

[Monkeh]

Also, low flow temperatures are why hydronics need to be going the way of the dodo.

For truly modern housing hydronic floor/ceiling heating can put enough power into the room even at 35 degrees water temperature ... forced air won't be able to win much COP wise.

Underfloor heating is a serviceability nightmare. Leave it to bathrooms. Bonus of forced air: You get cooling! For once, the Americans are on to something.

You don't need to service underfloor heating. It is just pipes running through the floor.

And when you need access under the floor? Wait, don't tell me.. you cut a hole in the ceiling and have to replaster and paint the entire thing?

[nctnico]

Why would you need access under the floor? Over here floors are made from pre-fabricated concrete slabs. There is nothing that needs accessing.

[Monkeh]

Why would you need access under the floor? Over here floors are made from pre-fabricated concrete slabs. There is nothing that needs accessing.

Because most floors aren't made that way, and services run in them.

[james_s]

It is so infuriating when people parrot the same old "heat pumps don't work in the cold", when that is verifiably false. I'm glad some states simply just force you to do the right thing, since the goals would never be achieved otherwise.

I like heat pumps and use mine when it's not too cold out, but I sure wouldn't want one as my only heat source. I can't run the heat pump on my generator, and that would be true of even a modern super high efficiency unit. They also put out much lower temperature air from the vents than a gas furnace, I like that I can fire up the furnace and make a cold house nice and toasty in a short period. It's nice that you don't mind being forced by the government to do things but I loathe it.

[james_s]

And when you need access under the floor? Wait, don't tell me.. you cut a hole in the ceiling and have to replaster and paint the entire thing?

Well yes, of course, what other option is there? Tear out the carpet or rip up the hardwood and cut into the subfloor? That sounds like a nightmare, it's WAY easier to cut a hole in the sheetrock ceiling, I've never heard of anyone going in through the floor to access the wiring or plumbing in the cavity. You don't replaster and paint the entire thing, you patch it, match the texture if it has any and then use a bit of the paint you hopefully saved for touching up the repair. It's fairly easy. It's not normally necessary to get in there for servicing anything though, we're not permitted to have inaccessible electrical splices or plumbing valves. Anything like that must be accessible without cutting into anything.

[Stray Electron]

Why would you need access under the floor? Over here floors are made from pre-fabricated concrete slabs. There is nothing that needs accessing.

  In floor heating is uncommon in every place that I've been in the US other than California, but I do like it and I wish that it was more widely used.  But FWIW floors (the ground floor) in the US are usually cast in place. I've never seen one that was made from a precast slab. Even in houses that are built with precast walls are built on a cast in place slab and all of their water pipes are run through the attic. In many areas they do install the water supply pipes before casting the floors so they are in the floor but OTOH it's pretty common for the cast floors to settle slightly with time and to crack the pipes and they will develop leaks and it's very difficult and expensive to repair them. A lot of the newer construction runs the water supply pipes through the attic but that's even worse if you have a leak. They're easier to repair but will usually do a lot more damage to the house interior before it is caught and repaired.

   I think that in floor water heating isn't popular in the US mainly because of the known problems  with water systems but OTOH I think that those problems are also usually caused by using shoddy materials and shoddy construction such as not properly packing the soil before casting the concrete floors.

  My daughter just remodeled her 1928 built house in Arlington and she had in floor heating installed in their 2nd story and she loves it!

[Stray Electron]

Those Mitsubishi mini-splits are very good and our house actually has two of them. But them not working below 30F I think that is pretty outdated information from a time before modern japanese mini-splits.

Generator operation - We have tested that and they work fine with small 3 kW gasoline generator. Input is just bridge rectifier with passive PFC it is quite tolerant and the compressor is ramped up slowly so not much inrush.

Lifetime - that is a bit open question still but typically more than 15 years in normal use (nordic region). Maybe longer but there is no data on that. Some units die earlier but rarely before 10 years old that is what we are seeing.

   We've had this Mitsubishi mini-split for less than a year so time will tell. But yes, so far we're very happy with it and if I ever built a new house I would also strongly consider just installing a couple of them instead of a central AC system. 

     In many parts of the US, and in Florida in particular, most people buy based on nothing other than price so junk abounds! We had a lot of trouble trying to get any reliable information about any of the mini-split systems. Most of the mini-splits sold in the US are sold as "DIY" kits that come in a box with absolutely no information. And there are a few dealers around that will sell you a Mitsubishi but when you talk to them you find out that none of them are actually Mitsubishi dealers and they know nothing about the systems. It took me a coupe of weeks of searching to find a dealer that actually carried Mitsubishi products in stock and that used trained installers that had experience with properly installing Mitsubishi systems.

   For anyone that is interested, this is the model that we installed:  MSZ-FH09NA / MUZ-FH09NA.  Here are links to the indoor and outside portions:

   A link to manual for the outdoor part of first system  <https://www.gemaire.com/mitsubishi-muy-gl09na-u2-m-series-9k-btu-h-outdoor-air-conditioning-unit-r410a-muy-gl09na-u2>

  Link to the manual to the indoor portion of the first system <https://www.gemaire.com/mitsubishi-msy-gl09na-u1-m-series-9k-btu-h-wall-mounted-indoor-air-conditioning-unit-r410a-msygl09nau1>

   The manuals are quite good and those and Mitsubishi's reputation for quality are why I decided to go with that system.


   

[Someone]

I've never heard of anyone going in through the floor to access the wiring or plumbing in the cavity.

Well now you have, did that last weekend because it was the easier route in an all timber framed house. These sorts of things are entirely dependent on the specifics, just as stupid as:

Why would you need access under the floor? Over here floors are made from pre-fabricated concrete slabs. There is nothing that needs accessing.

Because most floors aren't made that way, and services run in them.

Citation required! Given the percentage of the population who live in medium to high density buildings (almost universally suspended slab) concrete slab floor might be the most common type, certainly in modern housing.

[Marco]

It's nice that you don't mind being forced by the government to do things but I loathe it.

You aren't mining your own gas, your community allows you to use natural gas ... it's not the fruit of your own labour. Your community can deny it to you, not by force but simply by not providing you with the fruits of their labour. Government is a fruit of the labour of the community, without it no gas would flow at all ... someone's gotta build the roads

Which is not to say force would not be justified here even from a purely libertarian point of view, your actions affect other people's property after all.

[Monkeh]

And when you need access under the floor? Wait, don't tell me.. you cut a hole in the ceiling and have to replaster and paint the entire thing?

Well yes, of course, what other option is there? Tear out the carpet or rip up the hardwood and cut into the subfloor? That sounds like a nightmare, it's WAY easier to cut a hole in the sheetrock ceiling, I've never heard of anyone going in through the floor to access the wiring or plumbing in the cavity. You don't replaster and paint the entire thing, you patch it, match the texture if it has any and then use a bit of the paint you hopefully saved for touching up the repair. It's fairly easy. It's not normally necessary to get in there for servicing anything though, we're not permitted to have inaccessible electrical splices or plumbing valves. Anything like that must be accessible without cutting into anything.

Carpet is easily removed and refitted. I live in a country where hardwood floors are not common. And cutting into the floor is a normal, easy process which is subsequently hidden by the floor covering.
I've seen the results of cutting into ceilings out of laziness. You can spot the difference in paint from across the room, let alone any poor attempt to match say, artex.

Access is necessary if you need to modify things - which you know, people do. Especially when we're talking about housing stock which predates most of us.

Citation required!

< Citation under username. I am talking about houses, however, be unfortunate enough to live in a block of flats and the situation is different - and far worse in every single way.

[tszaboo]

Such political nearsightedness. The issue isn't natural gas. The issue is where you get your natural gas.
You can turn CO2 and H2O into any combination of propane and butane. And you can store gas for as long as you want it as CNG or LNG.
Install more solar power, and turn the excess into gas during the summer. Its easy, and renewable. Thank you for listening to my TED talk.

[Marco]

You can turn CO2 and H2O into any combination of propane and butane.

You can, but it makes hydrogen generation look efficient.

[cdev]

I've herd this from neighbors too, that heat pumps often dont work at all in the winter, for what its worth, thanks for reminding me, I'd forgotten. Temps here are mild compared to Minnesota but there its very cold in the winter, often way down below zero for a long time. the so called "arctic vortex"

Yes, many have AC here but few people have anything different. As they don't work too often. 

   Yes, to a very large degree most AC systems in the US are still cool-only units. New construction in the last ten years or so has started installing heat pumps but they're much more expensive than cool-only systems and in most parts of the US, heat pump simply DO NOT work in the coolest parts of the year so heat pumps are not economically justified.  In addition most US made AC systems (with or without heat pumps) in the US are not very efficient to start with.

   I just installed a Mitsubishi mini-split AC in a house in Florida this past summer and I elected not to buy the version with the heat pump.  It's reliability was lower than a non-heat pump version and it used more power even when you weren't using the heat pump and the cost was considerably more. So even though the house was in Florida which is just about a perfect climate for using a heat pump, I decided not to. 

   From everything that I have read, and I did a LOT of research, heat pumps are only practical when the outside air temperature is above about 30F. They will work somewhat down to about 20F but that's it. I have personally seen the temperature in central Florida get down to 17 degrees twice and down to 13F once. Everywhere north of there gets colder!  Note that most if not ALL, heat pump systems also include electrical resistance (I^2 R)strip heaters so the sellers CLAIM that the system works at colder temperatures and the strip heater will but not the heat pump so there is no efficiency to be gained. And I don't see any point in putting a $12,000 heat pump with a strip heater to replace a $49 heat dish.

   All of that said, I'm extremely pleased with the Mitsubishi mini-split AC system!

    For a couple of data points; the AC only Mitsubishi minisplit cost about $4,400 US installed. The same version with heat pump and strip heater was about $6,500 US.  This past winter the coldest temperature that we saw was about 30F but only for about three days and only at night. We never turned on the main heat and we used one heat dish (about 700 Watts) for a few hours per day in the main part of the house to take the chill off in the mornings for about a week.

Those Mitsubishi mini-splits are very good and our house actually has two of them. But them not working below 30F I think that is pretty outdated information from a time before modern japanese mini-splits. Mitsubishi has models for example the MSZ-RW that work reasonably down to -13 F and somewhat down to -30F. It is quite new model did not find any test report for it but here is graph for the older MSZ-LN. As you can see it puts out twice heat compared to it electrical consumption still at -22F. Problem is output is quite small only 2 kW (input is 1kW) at these temps. Newer MSZ-RW is better in this regard because of it's bigger compressor but unfortunately I did not find any actual grahps.

The strip heater thing it is market specific if it is fitted or not. For the units intended for colder markets (eg nordics) there is no strip heater normally but for units intended for warmer climates I think it is usually fitted. But you can unplug it on the indoor unit control pcb when it starts to annoy you too much.

Cost for the MSZ-RW25 is typically 2300€ installed

Generator operation - We have tested that and they work fine with small 3 kW gasoline generator. Input is just bridge rectifier with passive PFC it is quite tolerant and the compressor is ramped up slowly so not much inrush.

Lifetime - that is a bit open question still but typically more than 15 years in normal use (nordic region). Maybe longer but there is no data on that. Some units die earlier but rarely before 10 years old that is what we are seeing.

I live in a neighborhood of homes that originally were all the same (small) size. Since they were built most of these homes have been upgraded in different ways, many are twice the size now. I think that my house is perhaps one of the most energy efficient, judging by the utility bills and snow melt rate on the roof in the winter. I would say that despite sving a lot more energy than we did in the past, our energy bill has basically doubled in the last two years. I dread to think of how much mkore it would be if we hadnt done everything we could to save electricity. It would be over $400 a month when right now its usually well below that. But, its literally doubled almost.

We mostly heat with gas, and I am dreading the cost of heating with only electricity if it comes to that. Just dreading it because its so much more expensive. I see the country being set up for a big mess, due to the greed of the well connected. We dont have the mild Mediterranean climate in most of the US so people really need adequate heat in the winter. And there is not enough elasticity in wages to support heating with electricity in many communities. In contrast they are reeling from loss of jobs. The media keeps trying to tell people how great the economy is doing but they are not seeing it at all. People are not just starting to complain about how out of touch the media is. Many are really struggling. And now they are unable to drive their cars as much as they need to, because of the rising costs. They dont understand that their wages value is lower. Because they are not moving forward as fast as others they are actually going backwards.

Its my understanding that natural gas is in very high demand in many countries.  Where it is in high demand it costs more, and sells for much more. . Before people wise up to not being able to afford electric heat and start clamoring for cheap gas energy again they want to sell it. But by then, because of ISDS which is new, it will be too late to stop the outflow. People in the coldest parts of the country will be stuck. 

That context is why I first heard about ISDS, in the energy context. A decade ago. The plan is to lock the US into the energy export using ISDS isnt new..

[tszaboo]

You can turn CO2 and H2O into any combination of propane and butane.

You can, but it makes hydrogen generation look efficient.

How many times do we have to debunk this?
Germany is investing 200B EUR into the technology.
It uses existing infrastructure, and wins every renewable discussion because of just that.

[themadhippy]

They just want to sell the LNG because they get so much more for it elsewhere. 

Exactly my thoughts,lets ban gas in the usa ,pretend its for environmental issues,then ship it half way round the world in a nice diesel burning ship and flog it to europe,cant have those pesky commies  making all the money.

[cdev]

They just want to sell the LNG because they get so much more for it elsewhere. 

Exactly my thoughts,lets ban gas in the usa ,pretend its for environmental issues,then ship it half way round the world in a nice diesel burning ship and flog it to europe,cant have those pesky commies  making all the money.

The Russian oligarchs are as far from communist as anybody could be, they have yachts that are worth hundreds of millions of dollars.. The capture and selling off of all the varisus industries made them rich in the 1990s. Energy especially.

The US politicians so envied them. So in the early 90s they started trying to catch up with the so called New Russians in corruption.

The Energy Charter Treaty has been a rats nest of ISDS suits. Of so I hear. Energy is what ISDS suits are about, more than any other thing.

[Marco]

Germany is investing 200B EUR into the technology.

Germany is not investing 200B into power to methane/propane/butane. The little there is uses CO2 from capture from fossil fuel burning ... direct air capture will tank the efficiency even more.

Hydrogen, sure, that's getting big investments.

[cdev]

And when you need access under the floor? Wait, don't tell me.. you cut a hole in the ceiling and have to replaster and paint the entire thing?

Well yes, of course, what other option is there? Tear out the carpet or rip up the hardwood and cut into the subfloor? That sounds like a nightmare, it's WAY easier to cut a hole in the sheetrock ceiling, I've never heard of anyone going in through the floor to access the wiring or plumbing in the cavity. You don't replaster and paint the entire thing, you patch it, match the texture if it has any and then use a bit of the paint you hopefully saved for touching up the repair. It's fairly easy. It's not normally necessary to get in there for servicing anything though, we're not permitted to have inaccessible electrical splices or plumbing valves. Anything like that must be accessible without cutting into anything.

Carpet is easily removed and refitted. I live in a country where hardwood floors are not common. And cutting into the floor is a normal, easy process which is subsequently hidden by the floor covering.
I've seen the results of cutting into ceilings out of laziness. You can spot the difference in paint from across the room, let alone any poor attempt to match say, artex.

Access is necessary if you need to modify things - which you know, people do. Especially when we're talking about housing stock which predates most of us.

Citation required!

< Citation under username. I am talking about houses, however, be unfortunate enough to live in a block of flats and the situation is different - and far worse in every single way.

When those apartment complexes  and neighborhoods were built they were either public housing for GIs returning from World War II. Or private but affordable houses for the rapidly growing middle class we had then. Now almost all of those complexes have been systematically bought up with the intent of soon tearing them down in a huge wave of redevelopment, subsidized by our tax money. Putting people out on the street with condemnation, due to the use of natural gas, it providing an excuse.. They are allegedly obsolete..Successfully being labeled as  Blight.  As New public housing is forbidden by international law, often, because it inhibits housing as investments, the replacement buildings will all be market rate meaning out of the price range of almost the entire country's current people..Its going to be an epic fail, in the way hubris often is.  That all made land insanely expensive, and its going up and up. Almost every single city in the US is going up, many by a lot. More than ever before in history. People cant afford a decent home so many have neglected to have children. This has led oligarchs to fantasize about replacing us with people who do. To protect the value of their investments. Well its better than the waves of arson we had in the 70s and 80s, when some urban landlords were burning their own buildings down for insurance money. There was a real epidemic of that. More recently, it seems we're walking into a trap. People were stupid to withold rent when they lost jobs due to coronavirus. The timing of it all seems suspicious.




...

[themadhippy]

The Russian oligarchs are as far from communist as anybody could be,

compared to your trumpton or bidet,or our doris  and  stammer there commies in the eyes of the western mass media readers and as uncle joe  fish told us the only good commie is one thats dead.

New public housing is forbidden by international law,

[cdev]

Things like solid gold bathroom fixtures make a statement. A $25000 toilet seat on your yacht, for example. These idiot journalists should recognize what it says.

Read up on Article;1:3 "b" and especially "c" of the General Agreement on Trade in Services. It defines what can be considered to be "services supplied in the exercise of governmental authority". Which is a legally defined definition.

The Russian oligarchs are as far from communist as anybody could be,

compared to your trumpton or bidet,or our doris  and  stammer there commies in the eyes of the western mass media readers and as uncle joe  fish told us the only good commie is one thats dead.

New public housing is forbidden by international law,

[themadhippy]

Read up on Article;1:3 "b" and especially "c" of the General Agreement on Trade in Services. I

you mean the scope and definitions section? nothing there says building social housing is illegal.Might want to buy a new tinfoil hat ,the one you got aint working properly

[Nauris]

   I just installed a Mitsubishi mini-split AC in a house in Florida this past summer and I elected not to buy the version with the heat pump.  It's reliability was lower than a non-heat pump version and it used more power even when you weren't using the heat pump and the cost was considerably more. So even though the house was in Florida which is just about a perfect climate for using a heat pump, I decided not to. 

    For a couple of data points; the AC only Mitsubishi minisplit cost about $4,400 US installed. The same version with heat pump and strip heater was about $6,500 US.  This past winter the coldest temperature that we saw was about 30F but only for about three days and only at night. We never turned on the main heat and we used one heat dish (about 700 Watts) for a few hours per day in the main part of the house to take the chill off in the mornings for about a week.

For anyone that is interested, this is the model that we installed:  MSZ-FH09NA / MUZ-FH09NA.

But MSZ-FH09NA / MUZ-FH09NA is rather decent heating-capable unit (without strip heater) if I am reading the spec correctly?

[james_s]

You aren't mining your own gas, your community allows you to use natural gas ... it's not the fruit of your own labour. Your community can deny it to you, not by force but simply by not providing you with the fruits of their labour. Government is a fruit of the labour of the community, without it no gas would flow at all ... someone's gotta build the roads

Which is not to say force would not be justified here even from a purely libertarian point of view, your actions affect other people's property after all.

My "community" is run by people I help to elect, we do not have a dictatorship. If my elected officials try to take away something from me that I want, I will vote for somebody else. It's not like I as a natural gas consumer are some kind of fringe, the vast majority of homes in my region are heated with natural gas.

[f4eru]

That's not a viable situation in the future.

[james_s]

It's a viable solution for more than a few decades, natural gas is plentiful here, it's not going away in my lifetime. The vast majority of homes in this region use it for heating and hot water, it is not feasible to change that.

[Marco]

The US could get to the moon, it could drill boreholes for ground source heat pumps for a lot of homes.

[cdev]

WTO rules require it be sold to the highest bidder, period. According to PIIE. Thats unlikely to be the American pensioner. The demand for energy is vast especially in Asia.

It's a viable solution for more than a few decades, natural gas is plentiful here, it's not going away in my lifetime. The vast majority of homes in this region use it for heating and hot water, it is not feasible to change that.

Much of the hype around natural gas, particularly the Marcellus Shale is inaccurate and very much overoptimistic, its intent is to permit more exports. But when the time comes to buy the energy, money talks.

[cdev]

The US could get to the moon, it could drill boreholes for ground source heat pumps for a lot of homes.

Any area where there is no commercial activity and no competition, such as one competitor, as long as no competition exists, a country can provide a service. the government can get involved. For example, lighthouses.

 As far as who actually is hired to do the work, the GPA lays out a bidding process. See e-gpa.wto.org . Look up the LDC Services Waiver and what it does, also. The developed countries are obligated to follow the rules based trading system when procuring services.  (If any tax money is involved)

LDC countries have the lowest incomes (and wages) in the world. As long as they remain poor the services preferences they will be given will give them a several percent advantage in winning bids, in other words, they might be permitted to win a bid that is as much as several percent higher than a country that is not an LDC. For example, despite having wages that are typically 1/10 those in the US,  India may no longer be able to claim benefits intended only for LDCs.  (Still because of their specialization in services a great many services contracts are expected to go to Indian firms.)

India has specialized in services and Gujarati merchants evolved into the first explorers of the Indian Ocean as they traded slaves as well as African goods such as ivory and tortoise shells. The Gujaratis were participants in the slavery business at Nairobi, Mombasa, Zanzibar and to some extent on the South African region. Indonesians were also participants, and brought spices to Africa's shores. They would have returned via India and Sri Lanka with ivory, iron, skins, and slaves. This trade is described as it ended in the early modern era at the beginning and middle of the 20th century in VS Naipul's novel "The Bend in the River". The protagonists family was said to had engaged in it in the past.

 So as you see, India was involved in various kinds of labor brokerage for thousands of years, and Indian Muslims were a major economic force for example in East Africa and Zanzibar.

See, for example: "The Voyage around the Erythraean Sea" (ancient history account of a ancient Egyptian mariner of his journeys in the Indian Ocean off the coast of East Africa) http://depts.washington.edu/silkroad/texts/periplus/periplus.html

[james_s]

The US could get to the moon, it could drill boreholes for ground source heat pumps for a lot of homes.

Sure, and some do that, but who pays for it? Where do you locate the equipment in an existing home? How do you make a tankless hot water heater with a heat pump? Then what about cooking, using natural gas for cooking is far more efficient than an electric stove, you can't cook on a heat pump.

I'm not just talking out my backside, I have a heat pump for heating my house, I still would never want to give up natural gas.

[Stray Electron]

WTO rules require it be sold to the highest bidder, period. According to PIIE. Thats unlikely to be the American pensioner.

   Really?   Prove it. 

   I would add that most American "pensioner"s can afford to pay more than most of the world's population.

   If the EU didn't ban fracking then there would be more (non-Russian) LNG available in Europe and at an affordable price.  Take a look: https://www.bloomberg.com/quicktake/fracking-europe

[nctnico]

The US could get to the moon, it could drill boreholes for ground source heat pumps for a lot of homes.

Sure, and some do that, but who pays for it? Where do you locate the equipment in an existing home? How do you make a tankless hot water heater with a heat pump? Then what about cooking, using natural gas for cooking is far more efficient than an electric stove, you can't cook on a heat pump.

For heating and hot water, existing installations can easely be connected to a district heating system. Over here several big cities are putting pipes for district heating networks in the ground. The hot water can come from a power plant, geothermal, hydrogen (burning and/or residual heat from conversion losses), etc.

And cooking on gas isn't more efficient. Not by a long shot. At least 50% of the heat gets lost while an induction stove gets 95% of the energy into the pan. Induction stoves can also reach higher temperatures.

[cdev]

So I hear reverse cycle is more expensive over there? more than 20% extra? (common cost premium elsewhere in the world) An additional appliance just for heating is a huge expense if its a whole box similar in price, or even half the price (before installation, services, etc).

If you want to see the sort of equipment that is available in the US and the prices, a good place to look is https://hvacdirect.com/
I've bought a few systems from them, they mark it up over wholesale of course but it's still typically less than a HVAC company will mark it up. The whole industry here is full of protectionism and BS. Most HVAC trade counters will flat out refuse to sell to an individual and the HVAC message boards absolutely prohibit discussing prices or giving DIY advice, unlike pretty much any other trade.

I know that name! We bought our HRV from them ages ago..

I bought an HRV from them which has probably saved my wife and I thousands of dollars on electricity by ventilating our home year round, (It saves 65% of the heat in the winter) The effect of this balanced air ventilation setup is to make air conditioning much less necessary and reduce the need for energy. Its probably the best $600 we ever spent on our home. Its not glamorous or flashy, it makes practically no noise but I know that it must save us a shitload of money because month in and month out our neighbors are running their AC while we are comfortable without it.

For those of us who do a lot of soldering, the HRV is even a better purchase as it will exhaust air from any point in your home (workbench used for soldering) replacing the stale air with fresh air. Its better than any filtration gadget of any kind because the return air is exhausted to the outdoors and that air replaced with fresh.  So no consumables are needed. Every few months I take the (aluminum) core out to the backyard and clean it out with a hose. The filters are also reusable and washable.

[Stray Electron]

The US could get to the moon, it could drill boreholes for ground source heat pumps for a lot of homes.

  Haven't you ever been inside of a cave? Go inside of one, anywhere, and then come back and tell us again how warm it was.

   Boreholes don't generate heat or deliver it to homes. You still need an energy source.  Boreholes only make heat pumps slightly more efficient IN THEORY since the underground is warmer than the outside air temperature, at least in the winter and in the north.  But in practice, they rarely work. My neighbor two doors away spent $$$$ to put one in and it never worked and I don't know anyone that has one that has ever seen an increase in efficiency with either a borehole or a ground water coupled system.

   Around here, any borehole deeper than about 3 feet rapidly fills with water! Absolutely serious about that!

[cdev]

Marco, I know what you mean, but I dont think you caught what I meant.

Actually, under certain conditions which are not as uncommon as you seem to think, "Holes in the ground" as you put it likely can save tons of money in both winter and summer because the average temperature of the earth in many areas is a comfortable and cool temperature. In some areas homes that utilize this effect by being partially buried in the earth (Earthships) are very popular.  Taos, New Mexico is where I have seen them.

"Digging holes" to allow the use of the Earth's residual heat and cooling would definitely help me, I could utilize that right now. But it wouldnt replace the need to heat, or even reduce it that much... It would a little most definitely..Because energy is way expensive, even that  could save people lots of money.  I have been in these "Earth Ship" homes. They are cool in summer, warmer in winter. I also have a ventilation system that I know very well and Ive often wished that I could take the incoming air from a 50 degree hole in the ground rather than the cold cold air or the hot humid outdoor air temps that some parts of the year are my only choices.. You bet, that would be great. Roughly two months in the winter and two months in the summer, that 50 degree air would be super nice to have.. No doubt in my mind about this.

Adobe homes are similar. (Not talking about the software company) Adobe homes are made from earth thats made into a clay like mud substance and shaped. And then dried out. In the arid climate of the southwest these homes last a long time, and because the walls have so much thermal mass they keep a uniform temperature indoors, saving a lot on energy costs.

Adobe is used extensively all around the world. Mali, in Africa has a style of building that intrinsically air conditions homes.. Those kinds of homes would work well in Australia too. Its quite sophisticated as far as energy use goes. It makes very good use of the energy from sunlight and wind, year round. And its also quite livable, Ive heard. As is adobe.. 

Its also super flexible and can be made to look very modern.. Also, its a free building material, almost. Modern adobe homes make really good use of the earth and I tend to really like the curvy aspect of it. Ive spent a lot of time in the Southwest. I like the lifestyle, I like the art, I like the food.. and I like all that Nature.. People make incredibly beautiful homes out of adobe.. And it also doesnt get more eco friendly than that.

As I just explained I have an HRV. That means that I have a ventilation system that brings air in fresh air from outdoors. Year round. Lots of it.  It works a bit like a human or animals nose, to tell you the truth. (My Samoyed dog, who is now a "silent dog" used to be able to sleep outdoors in very cold places. He used his tail to warm his nose. The HRV does this too. The air its bringing in from outside, it warms.. using the outgoing stale air. What this means is that it can be below zero outside and the air thats coming in is a great deal warmer. (But its still often too cool to be called comfortable) Thats why I still need heat. And also why one of these boreholes appeals to me as a means of moderating the temperature of the incoming air a bit more, for free. In the winter.

What I was also trying to explain is the ideology at work now - as the world has changed. To protect the businesspeople of the world, who were worried that governments would take over their profit making centers, especially if jobs were traded all over, people would be asking the government to step in. This is why they had to prevent this, and so they did. Otherwise the market mechanism that regulates wages and prices would be broken. (This is how they frame it, I partially disagree because I dont think the market is capable of doing some things - especially when the parties are so unequal. )  Take the example, of when there is an essential service that operates under a market failure situation. When its simply not profitable.


In order to keep politics off the site I'll leave it there.
Its taken over the world. To put it bluntly governments are not allowed to compete with businesses. To stand between businesses and their prey, so to speak, is basically forbidden now. I'll leave it there. 

The US could get to the moon, it could drill boreholes for ground source heat pumps for a lot of homes.

The ground is an energy source.. Not a super lot of energy but it does help. Because its not absolute zero? I dont know. But it is much warmer than the winter air.

  Haven't you ever been inside of a cave? Go inside of one, anywhere, and then come back and tell us again how warm it was.

   Boreholes don't generate heat or deliver it to homes. You still need an energy source.  Boreholes only make heat pumps slightly more efficient IN THEORY since the underground is warmer than the outside air temperature, at least in the winter and in the north.  But in practice, they rarely work. My neighbor two doors away spent $$$$ to put one in and it never worked and I don't know anyone that has one that has ever seen an increase in efficiency with either a borehole or a ground water coupled system.

   Around here, any borehole deeper than about 3 feet rapidly fills with water! Absolutely serious about that!

[cdev]

Stray Electron, I am not you and I have not seen the homes youre describing. I know what youre saying and in a way I feel the same way when I hear people telling me that heat pumps will solve the energy situation for people who just need cheaper energy.. I see them as being dishonest and as having serious ulterior motives.. So no I dont trust them or the campaign to ter down the fossil fuel using buildings.. so they can sell off the natural gas they use..

On the other hand, (read on and I'll explain my viewpoint)

The US could get to the moon, it could drill boreholes for ground source heat pumps for a lot of homes.

  Haven't you ever been inside of a cave? Go inside of one, anywhere, and then come back and tell us again how warm it was.

   Boreholes (meaning an heat exchange of some kind, in this case usually a long run of pipes located some distance, say five feet underground.. intended to be used to allow the earth to be used to moderate extreme temperatures.. which it does work for..It dones't generate heat or deliver it to homes.

 (In theory its already there.. we both know.. But...)

>You still need an energy source.  (I hear you on that) Boreholes only make heat pumps slightly more efficient IN THEORY since the underground is warmer than the outside air temperature, at least in the winter and in the north.  But in practice, they rarely work. My neighbor two doors away spent $$$$ to put one in and it never worked and I don't know anyone that has one that has ever seen an increase in efficiency with either a borehole or a ground water coupled system.

   Around here, any borehole deeper than about 3 feet rapidly fills with water! Absolutely serious about that!
[/quote]

Sounds like you have a lot of real world experience thats relevant..  I am just a beginner.. only starting to try to make these kinds of ideas into a bread and butter improvement in my home before heat becomes too expensive for us to afford what we need.. We're just trying to keep ourselves warm, despite the energy price hikes, which they were planning all along and lying about..

and its hard.

[cdev]

Fracking isnt the panacea some make it out to be, not by a long shot. It has a great many problems not the least of which is the one Ive been trying to explain, its been way hyped when the fact is the natural gas in many areas is not as plentiful as they claim, and also its so difficult to get out its cost (to extract) basically makes it almost worthless once the costs are added up, or even less than worthless. Because the water and environment is polluted.

Which reminds me, know what they have been doing? Most Americans think energy jobs even after trade deals were signed, would pay well, and also go to local workers, or at least Americans and Canadians.. Ha.. Well, let me leave it at this, they may be in for a big surprise.. a very unpleasant one. All of these deals soundly reject LCRs or local content requirements. See the attached discussion of LCRs.

Because of the allegedly "strategic" nature of energy its entirely possible that huge gifts in the form of elimination of regulations that make those jobs decent ones, up until now that make it possible to support a family on them, the good aspects of these jobs, deemed too expensive and unsustainable,  may be jettisoned. Look at the Middle East and the so called kafala system. Its the model for GATS Mode Four, the global system for managed migration (non-immigration, or intra corporate transfer, the new global guest worker programs. Thats whats getting borrowed from to set up an entirely different global paradigm of work. Sometimes many compare it to slavery, as do many others because that really is a valid comparison, for many reasons.. And I know a lot about slavery throughout the ages, and the economic forces that brought and bring it about. Its been making a comeback..

WTO rules require it be sold to the highest bidder, period. According to PIIE. Thats unlikely to be the American pensioner.

   Really?   Prove it. 

>PIIE has a position paper on their web site that explains the argument completely. I think their URL is PIIE.org


   >I would add that most American "pensioner"s can afford to pay more than most of the world's population.

A lot less than many think. Sure they may slit pills in half that they need to take. Or turn down the thermostat, cut back on energy, but they can only do that so much, if they dont maintain adequate heat, for example, their pipes may also freeze. Making their homes uninhabitable. Maybe they saved a bit of money but it costs them their homes. So its no savings. Where will they live? The cost of healthcare keeps going up and up, and health insurance is bankrupting a great many people. Many can see that Obamacare is designed to prop prices up, not lower them. But there is nothing else, at least not if they stay here in the US. They may have to leave the country to be able to survive. Mexico? A great many American retirees indeed have moved to Mexico. Will they go on the road in RVs, descending upon RV communities in the warmer states in the winter? That is definitely happening a lot. Many people are selling their homes and attempting to live in RVs. Many young people are too. Ive met quite a few of them. They dont seem that happy. Many of them want to have children but feel they cant. I dont envy them. And this huge change will make their situation even more tenuous here, as the jobs they were counting on wont be here for them anymore. Their expectations, their elders, the oligarchs claim, are "unrealistic".  Asia? Indeed, many older Americans have moved to countries in Asia they feel they can survive in. Their savihngs are alleged to go much further there. But there is no escaping the fact that they are in another country where they have much fewer rights.

Whats happening now isnt going to age well. In retrospect they will see and be unafraid to bring out the ugly fact that they had been conned. Its not going to just vanish. Of curse everything has been readied to make this totally inconsequentiua when it comes to the economics. A few million Americans more will loikely go elsewhere. Foreign countries are already bracing for them.

Read the very first paragraph of the Annex legal document pictured below.  Also consider that a great many jobs have basically been promised away - Jobs now located in the US. So many that we could lose half of our jobs within just a few years. Thats according to Princeton economist Alan Blinder and two Harvard students who attempted to double check his conclusions, and came to the conclusion that he was actually underestimating the magnitude of the risk we were facing. Substantially.

Imagine that the gains (which IMHO come from science, not extreme right wing neoliberal trade ideolohy of the imperialism it represents the revival of. ) are a sort of inheritance. Well who should get that inheritance? Who says the gains came from them tells us a bit about who expects the gains to accrue to them, doesnt it? The problem is its not their making. Also, everybody cannot get this inheritance unless some people agree to take less of it, when they already have taken out looas on that increase of wealth. And are spending it. Others have gone on assuming things would stay the same while the foundation has been dug out from underneath them. Others have had to put off promised equality having been given in effect an IOU. But the check is coming back. "Insufficient Funds" .

What now?

We have been kept in the dark while this huge sea change was being maneuvered into place. Huge amounts of effort has been expended to keep us ignorant of this change thats in the works.Profoundly ignorant. And those efforts have been extremely successful.

 

   If the EU didn't ban fracking then there would be more (non-Russian) LNG available in Europe and at an affordable price.  Take a look: [url]https://www.bloomberg.com/quicktake/fracking-europe[/url]

Good, I'll trust you, I am actually not expecting the situation toi be much different in Europe as far as energy nomatter what they do. Unless we make some energy breakthrough that I have not seen or heard of yet. I suspect they all know that "nothing will fundamentally chnge" as Biden said. I dont doubt him. If he's right, all that needs to happen is for the situation that exists today to follow its inmexorable choices and path as it almost certainly will for large numbers of people to be forced into very bad economic situations because the vested interests have had their profits guaranteed in such a way that makes problems impossible for elected officials to fix. If they could that would nullify the whole goal of all the treaties we are pushing on everybody. Wouldnt it?

The very wealthy of the world are doing just great the way things are set up now. So very great.

[cdev]

Fracking causes a lot of environmental damage, including polluting drinking water and causing neurological problem in infants. In short, the cost is arguably unacceptably high to get the shale gas out. Bringing in foreign firms and worker in large numbers and paying them very low wages wont solve any of these problems, it may make them worse.

Nor is it likely to make natural gas cheaper as prices are not likely to fall, as the demand for natural gas is allegedly rising.

The GHG footprint of natural gas may also be much more significant than many thought. See the paper by Howarth, entitled "a bridge to nowhere"

[f4eru]

natgas is a stopgap measure, that is slowly but very surely coming to an end.
Putin may make this end come much sooner, worldwide.

[Siwastaja]

The US could get to the moon, it could drill boreholes for ground source heat pumps for a lot of homes.

Sure, and some do that, but who pays for it? Where do you locate the equipment in an existing home? How do you make a tankless hot water heater with a heat pump? Then what about cooking, using natural gas for cooking is far more efficient than an electric stove, you can't cook on a heat pump.

You are going to pay for it.

Days of dirt cheap fossil fuels are simply over. Not overnight, but the expense of fossils will increase, either due to:
1) Artificial regulation e.g. taxes,
2) Laws of free market, limited resource will be more expensive than abundant resources.

Energy is abundant thanks to the thing called the Sun*. Fossil fuels are less abundant than people have thought, and enabling fossil fuels requires quite advanced politics (including spending billions and billions in equipment and training for the war machine, side effect of which is also misery in many forms). Fossil fuels have been indirectly enabled by the taxpayers, always have been. My crystal ball says this won't last forever.

*) and PV or wind are not the only thing that tap into solar energy. Heatpumps, too!

And I'm not saying fossils completely stop being used, no way. Just that their share of the total will diminish. Price per energy will continue increasing. For example, it's a good idea to burn fossil fuels in conditions where renewable or free energy is not available. Harsh winter days in countries such as Finland, Norway or Canada is such example. But for such few days, neither the cost nor CO2 matters. I burned oil this winter for maybe 10 days, for about 1000kWh of heat. At the same time, I used 5000kWh in heatpumping, producing approx. 14000kWh of heat. See how it works?

You are just making up excuses, small irrelevant details like "How do you make a tankless hot water heater with a heat pump". Well, by adding a tank! This is no rocket science, and also it's not expensive at all. Energy price for the fossil fuels is right when it is obvious to make those trivial investments people have been holding up because they are so "expensive" or "difficult" in their mind.

Fossil energy is too cheap now. If you have to pay $1000 per year for heating, it does not seem a good investment to spend $5000 once to make that go down to $800 a year. But triple the first number and you will see what is happening.

[nctnico]

The US could get to the moon, it could drill boreholes for ground source heat pumps for a lot of homes.

Sure, and some do that, but who pays for it? Where do you locate the equipment in an existing home? How do you make a tankless hot water heater with a heat pump? Then what about cooking, using natural gas for cooking is far more efficient than an electric stove, you can't cook on a heat pump.

You are going to pay for it.

Days of dirt cheap fossil fuels are simply over. Not overnight, but the expense of fossils will increase, either due to:
1) Artificial regulation e.g. taxes,
2) Laws of free market, limited resource will be more expensive than abundant resources.

Energy is abundant thanks to the thing called the Sun. Fossil fuels are less abundant than people have thought, and enabling fossil fuels requires quite advanced politics (including spending billions and billions in equipment and training for the war machine, side effect of which is also misery in many forms). Fossil fuels have been indirectly enabled by the taxpayers, always have been. My crystal ball says this won't last forever.

And I'm not saying fossils completely stop being used, no way. Just that their share of the total will diminish. Price per energy will continue increasing. For example, it's a good idea to burn fossil fuels in conditions where renewable or free energy is not available. Harsh winter days in countries such as Finland, Norway or Canada is such example. But for such few days, neither the cost nor CO2 matters. I burned oil this winter for maybe 10 days, for about 1000kWh of heat. At the same time, I used 5000kWh in heatpumping, producing approx. 14000kWh of heat. See how it works?

You are just making up excuses, small irrelevant details like "How do you make a tankless hot water heater with a heat pump". Well, by adding a tank! This is no rocket science, and also it's not expensive at all. Energy price for the fossil fuels is right when it is obvious to make those trivial investments people have been holding up because they are so "expensive" or "difficult" in their mind.

Fossil energy is too cheap now. If you have to pay $1000 per year for heating, it does not seem a good investment to spend $5000 once to make that go down to $800 a year. But triple the first number and you will see what is happening.

Where this reasoning falls apart is when you look at the huge number of people that already have trouble paying for their energy bills. Fossil fuels must not be made more expensive artificially, the alternatives must be made cheaper for real. Making fossil fuels more expensive artificially only drives up inflation.

[Siwastaja]

Where this reasoning falls apart is when you look at the huge number of people that already have trouble paying for their energy bills. Fossil fuels must not be made artificially expensive, the alternatives must be made cheaper for real.

As you say. But fossil energy price has been held artificially low. I agree it doesn't need to be made artificially expensive either, but it will become naturally more expensive, most prominently in Europe due to the current events.

I completely agree the target should be to make the alternatives cheaper, and it's happening, but I'm afraid this process is slower. End result will be decreased living standards. Not extreme poverty, but you need to make different choices when energy is more expensive: for example, lowering room temperature and wear more clothes, or live in smaller apartments/houses. Or if you did spend money on luxury items like expensive clothing or watches etc., you need to reconsider spending that "luxury money" in supporting large house or high room temperature instead.

Another thing to do is making the required investments. One could hope that the nature of expenses just changes, from buying large amounts of cheap energy, into buying less, and instead spending the money into improvements to decrease energy consumption. But I'm afraid it won't go like this: while the investments make financial sense with the new, higher energy prices, when you compare to the Good Old Days, you will have less money left at the end of the day. It's also mentally easier to pay $1000 every year instead of having to pay $10000 right now and then $500 every year.

What is worst, because people start to make those required investments all at the same time, there will be semi-shortage of equipment (such as heatpumps) and installation labor (electricians, plumbers, carpenters, whatever), which, per free market rules, leads to increase in the prices. (One of the reasons I think the heatpump is such a great device for solving the energy crisis, is the fact that it uses manageable amount of natural resources; it's fairly easy to ramp up production quickly, without large investments! Compare this to PV and li-ion batteries, for example, which struggle to scale up.)

At the same time, food is getting more expensive. Modern-day Western lifestyle is quite luxurious, has been for decades. The days of almost everyone being at least "middle-class" are just over. And it feels bad for people, because of the negative derivative. In 1960's, living standards were not that great but the direction was up, so people were happy. Now we are better off than ever, and even after the required adjustments, we are still better than in 1960's, but it sure feels bad to go down.

But I'm OK with it. Concentrate on what's really important; health, having loved ones, and so on.

[nctnico]

I agree that one of the problems is that making the investments is worthwhile long term however a lot of people don't have the amount of money available to make those investments. Another problem is that people who rent homes are hugely depending on their landlords to improve their homes. In the NL the least insulated houses are cheap in rent but become unaffordable to the people (usually with a low income) due to the energy cost. The people renting these homes can't do anything to improve their situation; they are litterally trapped. It is up to the government to get landlords to improve these homes.

[Siwastaja]

It is up to the government to get landlords to improve these homes.

This, or just the free market mechanisms. Both will work separately or in combinations.

The only thing we don't want is strong governmental actions that artificially try to help maintain the current situation, i.e. direct or indirect subsidizing of fossil fuels.

Installing a ground source heatpump is now, on average, a 18000EUR investment here. In current situation, typical payback time is maybe 15-20 years (if your heating expenses were around 1500EUR/year). This is hard to motivate financially only. But if you just double the energy price, and this drops to 8-10 years. Now it's completely different game!

People like me, who like to DIY everything and always having done that have no mental barriers, benefit the most. I have made 20000EUR worth of energy upgrades for around 5000EUR, because I don't have to pay plumbers, electricians and worst, marketing and planning.

[Marco]

A lot of that is the cost of drilling, doing it for an entire street at once is a lot cheaper so a little central planning can be appropriate.

[nctnico]

It is up to the government to get landlords to improve these homes.

This, or just the free market mechanisms. Both will work separately or in combinations.

The only thing we don't want is strong governmental actions that artificially try to help maintain the current situation, i.e. direct or indirect subsidizing of fossil fuels.

Installing a ground source heatpump is now, on average, a 18000EUR investment here. In current situation, typical payback time is maybe 15-20 years (if your heating expenses were around 1500EUR/year). This is hard to motivate financially only. But if you just double the energy price, and this drops to 8-10 years. Now it's completely different game!

In such a situation governments are more likely to subsidize fossil fuels though. You see it happen all over Europe right now. I 200% agree fossil fuels are a dead end but I'm also 200% against leaving people behind (literally in the cold) who can't afford to change away from fossil fuels.

People like me, who like to DIY everything and always having done that have no mental barriers, benefit the most. I have made 20000EUR worth of energy upgrades for around 5000EUR, because I don't have to pay plumbers, electricians and worst, marketing and planning.

That is for sure. I too saved a lot of money that way and make things exactly the way I want. I Just scored a couple of new (better) windows for my office. But we are the exceptions.

[NiHaoMike]

I 200% agree fossil fuels are a dead end but I'm also 200% against leaving people behind (literally in the cold) who can't afford to change away from fossil fuels.

Make the pricing "progressive"? That is, keep it reasonably cheap for small amounts (determined by average use in an area) but more and more expensive above that.

[f4eru]

Progressive price is BS.

Fossil driving is already more expensive than renewable.
Crossover point is coming very soon for heating.

Market forces will make the transition happen over a decade.
Stop subsidizing fossil. Stop subsidizing Putin.

[nctnico]

I 200% agree fossil fuels are a dead end but I'm also 200% against leaving people behind (literally in the cold) who can't afford to change away from fossil fuels.

Make the pricing "progressive"? That is, keep it reasonably cheap for small amounts (determined by average use in an area) but more and more expensive above that.

That doesn't work because people with the lowest incomes have the worst homes and thus need the most heating.

[Siwastaja]

I 200% agree fossil fuels are a dead end but I'm also 200% against leaving people behind (literally in the cold) who can't afford to change away from fossil fuels.

Make the pricing "progressive"? That is, keep it reasonably cheap for small amounts (determined by average use in an area) but more and more expensive above that.

That doesn't work because people with the lowest incomes have the worst homes and thus need the most heating.

I would not say so. Poorest people live in smallest apartments. Heating expense is directly proportional to the surface area of outer walls. Small apartments consume tiny part of what large houses do. Of course, insulation matters, but somehow people with good income do not magically build eco houses, because they think they can afford the heating costs. So in the end, surface area matters the most, by far.

I would say it's worst for people who live over their income, pretending to be higher class than their actual income allows, usually on loans; or people who had very good income but lost their jobs. It's mentally very difficult to downshift when you are used to high standard of living. And you may need to downshift a lot and do it quickly.

If you have a nice big house which consumes 30MWh a year for heating/cooling and 500 000 kEUR mortgage, it sure will hurt if you lose your high paying job, and then energy price doubles. At that point, it's also too late to do the energy investments you should have been making when better off financially.

If you were already living in a tiny crappy apartment, consuming less than 5MWh/year for heating, living with minimum wage and/or benefits, the doubling of energy price will hurt you but you are used to dire situations, your whole life won't collapse, you won't kill yourself and your family. This is the difference.

And yes, I have lived with very little, basically homeless for a few years in the past. From that, I learned not to define my lifestyle based on my current or expected income, because that can change for whatever reason.

In the end, it's just so that people who make very bad decisions will need to face bad consequences; it's really the only way to learn, and go forward, doing the right decisions. Artificially supporting the bad decisions only makes the inevitable even worse. You could blame the media about the fact that people are not very well informed about things that really matter, while being flooded with totally insignificant crap, and instructed to virtue signal by replacing plastic straws with paper straws.

[uer166]

I 200% agree fossil fuels are a dead end but I'm also 200% against leaving people behind (literally in the cold) who can't afford to change away from fossil fuels.

Make the pricing "progressive"? That is, keep it reasonably cheap for small amounts (determined by average use in an area) but more and more expensive above that.

That doesn't work because people with the lowest incomes have the worst homes and thus need the most heating.

Yeah I would not say that, at least anecdotally. The bigger the place, the bigger the bills. I am paying $500 a month for heating expenses because it's all (non-shared) concrete walls/floor and resistive heating (developer couldn't be arsed to install efficient heating, even though the apartment building roof is covered in solar). A tiny apartment, or a room with shared walls uses a small fraction of this.

Not an attack at you, but I swear some individuals here have an immovable mindset: no matter how much evidence is provided their opinion will not change. It's really baffling to me how people in Canada, Minnesota, and Finland use heat pumps with great success, and individuals in UK claim that somehow their climate is "too cold for heatpumps" 

[Someone]

I 200% agree fossil fuels are a dead end but I'm also 200% against leaving people behind (literally in the cold) who can't afford to change away from fossil fuels.

Make the pricing "progressive"? That is, keep it reasonably cheap for small amounts (determined by average use in an area) but more and more expensive above that.

This is the pricing for water in many regions, cheap for the essential quantity, expensive if you want more to water your lawn. But for HVAC (the only life critical electricity use for most people) the amount of energy required varies much more than water use, and is more expensive.

Or you can make it a fundamental part of a residence like much of Russia (traditionally unmetered and/or uncontrollable by the tenant), check out the problems that causes!

[nctnico]

I 200% agree fossil fuels are a dead end but I'm also 200% against leaving people behind (literally in the cold) who can't afford to change away from fossil fuels.

Make the pricing "progressive"? That is, keep it reasonably cheap for small amounts (determined by average use in an area) but more and more expensive above that.

That doesn't work because people with the lowest incomes have the worst homes and thus need the most heating.

Yeah I would not say that, at least anecdotally. The bigger the place, the bigger the bills. I am paying $500 a month for heating expenses because it's all (non-shared) concrete walls/floor and resistive heating (developer couldn't be arsed to install efficient heating, even though the apartment building roof is covered in solar). A tiny apartment, or a room with shared walls uses a small fraction of this.

Over here cheap homes are ususally a home in a row of homes  that where built in the first half of the 1900's as homes for factory workers. Don't be surprised to find single pane windows, no insulation between the inner & outer walls, no insulation in roofs and floors, etc. These leak heat like a sieve. Over here small apartments (in apartment building) are usually much more modern and at least have some form of insulation.

Not an attack at you, but I swear some individuals here have an immovable mindset: no matter how much evidence is provided their opinion will not change. It's really baffling to me how people in Canada, Minnesota, and Finland use heat pumps with great success, and individuals in UK claim that somehow their climate is "too cold for heatpumps"

This has to do with how well (or not) homes are insulated. I recon that homes in colder climates are way better insulated compared to homes in areas where you could get by with throwing some extra coal in the stove. In the latter case a heatpump won't do you much good. Over here in the NL heatpumps are considered to be unsuitable for older, insufficiently insulated homes as well. The Dutch home owners association (in Dutch: https://www.eigenhuis.nl/energie/maatregelen/duurzaam-verwarmen/warmtepomp/is-mijn-woning-geschikt#/ ) has as a rule of thumb that homes build after 1995 are suitable to be heated by a hybrid (gas + electric) heatpump. An all-electric heatpump is suitable for newer homes or homes with additional insulation.

All in all, the climate is not the problem but the 'just good enough' construction of the homes is.

[Marco]

Going from 1.5 to 3 COP difference between ordinary radiators and forced air radiators makes such a huge difference that just looking at the heatpump and the age of the house is silly. More difference than insulation even.

The abysmal quality of historical installs has created a warped mindset. Government needs to step in and create some regulations and best practices, then heatpumps can be judged on their merit. It's been a wild west.

[nctnico]

Going from 1.5 to 3 COP difference between ordinary radiators and forced air radiators makes such a huge difference that just looking at the heatpump and the age of the house is silly. More difference than insulation even.

The abysmal quality of historical installs has created a warped mindset. Government needs to step in and create some regulations and best practices, then heatpumps can be judged on their merit. It's been a wild west.

But even then: are the extra installation costs worth it? Looking at efficiency only is a fools errant. You need to look at cost versus benefit. Also, what the Dutch homeowners association states is a rule of thumb. If you want to know what is best for your own home, then you have to call in an expert. On top of that, if heatpumps are poorly installed, then they won't bring the maximum improvement. It is likely that that is being factored in as well.

[Marco]

But even then: are the extra installation costs worth it?

Individually not at the moment with historic gas prices. But assuming the government wants to meet it emission targets there are only two alternatives, conversion to hydrogen burning and heatpumps and I think heatpumps are more realistic. There's not a lot of time to waste either.

Russian gas independence might be an even more pressing problem, historic gas prices might become entirely historic.

[cdev]

Where does the energy come from?

 heat pumps dont actually create any energy.

[nctnico]

But even then: are the extra installation costs worth it?

Individually not at the moment with historic gas prices. But assuming the government wants to meet it emission targets there are only two alternatives, conversion to hydrogen burning and heatpumps and I think heatpumps are more realistic. There's not a lot of time to waste either.

Either require massive changes to the infrastructure. IOW: it is not realistic to think that natural gas can be abandoned this decade. Multiple things need to move forward including hydrogen and better insulation.
 

[cdev]

I think that people cant afford the switch to electricity.. Especially in the north central US. Europeans perhaps are used to the higher prices and taxes.. Energy poverty is quite common in Europe, where its as common as large debt for student loans in the US.


There are large parts of the US where people depend on natural gas being available and affordable. .

They are going to be tearing down the US affordable housing in cities. And many people who cant afford to move will have to move. Their cheap apartments are going to vanish. To redevelopment.

[nctnico]

I think that people cant afford the switch to electricity.. Especially in the north central US. Europeans perhaps are used to the higher prices and taxes.. Energy poverty is quite common in Europe, where its as common as large debt for student loans in the US.

There are large parts of the US where people depend on natural gas being available and affordable. .

Just like in the US, it also depends highly on where people live in Europe. Only problem is that there are 3 times more people in Europe compared to the US living on approx. the same amount of land.

[cdev]

Moving would mean switching to a more recent market rent so new living space further south will be much more expensive and people cant afford to move to it. Its the churning, that the people can't afford. The churners are counting on their churning paying them off...

I think that people cant afford the switch to electricity.. Especially in the north central US. Europeans perhaps are used to the higher prices and taxes.. Energy poverty is quite common in Europe, where its as common as large debt for student loans in the US.

There are large parts of the US where people depend on natural gas being available and affordable. .

Just like in the US, it also depends highly on where people live in Europe. Only problem is that there are 3 times more people in Europe compared to the US living on approx. the same amount of land.

[cdev]

3/4 of the US is pretending its middle class when it isnt. Especially urban apartment dwellers/   Realistically, they cant afford city life. If their cheap apartments go away. Thats like a welfare subsidy of thousands of dollars a month. And it depends on cheap natural gas that doesnt exist any more. They are going to have to buy houses which they cant afford. Where? zDon't say Mars because thats ridiculous.  But thats probably what the powers that be will suggest. Putting the poor people in the middle of nowhere. Where they have to pay lots extra for heat and air and water.

[Marco]

Where does the energy come from?

heat pumps dont actually create any energy.

Nuclear, massively over-provisioned renewables, renewable plus PWh scale storage. Pick your expensive poison.

[Marco]

Either require massive changes to the infrastructure. IOW: it is not realistic to think that natural gas can be abandoned this decade.

I think it's a realistic possibility that both gas and electricity could be rationed next winter in the EU. We're going to have to build next gen infrastructure a lot faster than expected. At completely unrealistic speeds in fact.

Interesting times.

[Siwastaja]

Where does the energy come from?

The Sun. Sun heats up the air (or ground, in case of ground source heatpump; the advantage in ground is, it averages yearly, storing summertime solar into winter, even better than air does). All heatpump does is allow energy flow from colder temperature to hotter temperature. Opposite works passively, "on its own", as you might know. The key is to understand the difference between temperature and energy. It's a bit like voltage vs. energy. Everything which has mass and is at  > -273.15degC stores thermal energy, and it can be harvested! Like you can boost 12V to 24V with a boost converter, transferring energy from the 12V source into 24V, you can totally "boost" -10 degC into 40 degC, there is nothing weird in this physics-wise.

Now as you pull energy from the outdoor air, that air is actually cooling down. That is why those outdoor units have huge fans that process massive volumes of outdoor air.

But, reversing the natural passive heat flow indeed requires some external source of energy. We could call this "pumping energy" or whatever. If our goal is to cool, this energy is literally waste. If we are heating, then we do utilize this waste heat, as well. As a result, if a heatpump uses 1kWh to transfer 3kWh of thermal energy, you can use said heatpump to provide 3kWh of cooling, or 4kWh of heating. Isn't it simple? We did learn this in high school physics lessons, did you not?

From physics, theoretial maximum COP for heating is Th / (Th - Tc) where Th and Tc are hot side and cold side temperatures in Kelvins. Homework for you is to calculate how much heating you could get out of 1kWh of electrical energy, assuming theoretical perfect heatpump, -10degC outside temperature, +20degC room temperature. Don't be surprised at the high number; real heatpumps obviously are much worse.

In strict physical sense, energy is not created, of course. But in practical sense, heatpump "creates" energy, by tapping into the energy stored in Earth's atmosphere, which is replenished by the Sun, but also all the waste energy sources like burning fossils. It literally cools down the atmosphere compared to if the same heating power was supplied by any other mean.

[cdev]

So 40-50 degrees is better than 20 below, thats true. But its still not enough for living decently and heat pumps wont replace natural gas for cooking or hot water.. And they wont have jobs to pay the natural gas bill in advance.

[cdev]

Nuclear fission, been there, done that..


Look at the mutations after Chernoobyl.

Where does the energy come from?

heat pumps dont actually create any energy.

Nuclear, massively over-provisioned renewables, renewable plus PWh scale storage. Pick your expensive poison.

[Siwastaja]

So 40-50 degrees is better than 20 below, thats true. But its still not enough for living decently and heat pumps wont replace natural gas for cooking or hot water.. And they wont have jobs to pay the natural gas bill in advance.

Of course you can't use heatpumps for cooking. Cooking fundamentally is controlled removal of water from the ingredients. This requires at least 100degC, and usually you want to fry something, so even with good contact to the frying pan, you need at least 150-200 degC. But energy used for cooking is totally negligible in grand scheme of things.

Domestic hot water is already different: heatpumps are definitely able to harvest the free energy. Yearly COP for making DHW, in medium climate like middle Europe, would be something like 2.5, without taking any legionella risk. Investing in a heatpump just to produce DHW and nothing else is unlikely to be financially viable, but nobody's doing that. DHW comes as a side effect when you have a heatpump that heats water (primarily for room heating).

Room heating tends to dominate over DHW, in total energy cost. For room heating, low distribution temperature is the key. COP in excess of 4 is well possible. In pathological cases, the COP might be even lower than what you get for DHW - i.e., something like 1.5 which was mentioned above. But tihs is some kind of absolute worst-case. I don't know if it is relevant at all, probably not.

High distribution temperature is a problem in very poorly insulated houses, because they require high power density - i.e., a lot of heating power per room volume. Assuming we don't want to improve the insulation, this is still totally fixable with large standard radiators, but they would be so big they'd look misproportioned in those small rooms; originally, they used underdimensioned radiators at very high temperatures, which is not suitable for heatpumps. Ignoring retrofit in-floor heating system (assuming people do not want to spend on such "large" renovation) for the sake of the argument, this leaves either accepting the visual change of large radiators, or using fan coil units, either using water as the medium, or not forgetting the trivial case of just installing bog standard split type heatpump (or two). And thus, we have arrived at a solution which just works. If the reason not to do it is aesthetical, then I say, grow up. If it is financial, then increasing energy cost is going to do the trick.

No one ever said a heatpump is just a plug in device which requires no planning and no changes at all. It will require some compromises. But the amount of free, renewable (originally solar) energy harvested is well worth some compromises, IMHO, especially if it is something trivial like needing to have a box in a room which makes a tiny bit of noise.

The strengths of a heatpump are:
* simplicity, small amount of materials needed to build it, no significant amounts of special conflict minerals or similar (maybe the compressor uses rare earth magnets and inverter PCB uses one tantalum cap or whatever)
* the fact it harvests renewable (solar) energy
* the fact that it taps into natural overnight and even seasonal energy storage system

If you only abstract the heatpump as a miracle which multiplies the input power by 3-4, you easily forget where this is coming from, and the seasonal storage point alone is huge. In other words, the Space around us is at -273degC. When the sun shines during day, we do get a lot of solar power, with PV, for example. But when the sun sets, PV production is suddenly zero. But our atmosphere does not suddenly cool to -273degC. No, maybe if it was +10degC during the day, maybe it will be -5degC during the night, thanks to the Earth storing that solar energy. And that stored solar energy, at -5degC, during night, can be tapped into by a heatpump. And this extends into seasonal scale. Even during cold, dark winter days, our Earth still stores the solar energy, providing us with conditions where heatpumps can pump; from air, or in the coldest areas (with <1% World's population), from the ground.

It is not the only significant piece of technology, but it probably has most bang for the buck. Even here in Finland, in cold and dark conditions, a simple 700EUR (2000EUR installed, thanks to the cartel, but still) split type unit can harvest 5000kWh of free energy per year, and most of this during times when it's completely dark, and cold as ****. Compare this to a 5kWp PV installation producing approximately the same amount of energy (5000kWh per year), costing 5000EUR, and producing most of that energy during times when it is least needed. And yet, you should still install PV. You should just install heatpumps even more eagerly.

[cdev]

Whomever pays the mostfor it gets it without any kind of discrimination. Thats the WTO aw. If people freeze, it has to be because of money only, not nationality or corporate affiliation. Then its simply a "natural calamity" i.e. a natural occurrence; For example, the US had cheap natural gas for 50 years. So most of us will have had no experience with anything like this.

Either require massive changes to the infrastructure. IOW: it is not realistic to think that natural gas can be abandoned this decade.

It wont be abandoned, it will be bought up, probably by other countries that have the money to buy it. Its worth an awful lot right now, whoever buys it is paying a lot. Its not Russian oligarchs making out like bandits, its other oligarchs, as much as them. Its whomever owns the wells and oil companies. Whoever has the energy leases. Its rationed by its cost. Read Hayek on the function of prices in regulating the global economy. Its like an "invisible hand" that sets prices.  Foods too. Commodities of all kinds are subject toi extreme fluctuations in times of scarcity. Our leaders view that as a force for good that naturally regulates their availability. Maltusians especially . Some people really take Malthus too far, I dont think certain kinds of scarcity really naturally exist, I think they are made up. To manipulate prices. For exampole this happened in California several yers ago when it turned out that Enron, a big energy trading company was creating financial instruments based on energy and making huge amounts of illicit money. Thank God they stopped them.


In order to ration natural gas - it would have to be wherever its rationed, already. Wherever.

I think it's a realistic possibility that both gas and electricity could be rationed next winter in the EU. We're going to have to build next gen infrastructure a lot faster than expected. At completely unrealistic speeds in fact.

Think energy storage, many methods of energy storage are fairly well thought out and energy generated during the day from solar can be released at night. Saving a lot of money.

Interesting times.

Don't worry, it wont be abandoned. Whatever natural gas exists it will be sold.

Its just that previously energy was artificially cheaper in some countries. This allowed much housing to exist that isnt efficient. People wont be able to afford the expensive fuels. Its needed where the jobs are. In the communities that can pay for it.

[SilverSolder]

[...] Cooking fundamentally is controlled removal of water from the ingredients. [...]

There's quite a bit more to it than that...  it is chemical reactions on many levels, organic and inorganic!

[cdev]

I 200% agree fossil fuels are a dead end but I'm also 200% against leaving people behind (literally in the cold) who can't afford to change away from fossil fuels.

Make the pricing "progressive"? That is, keep it reasonably cheap for small amounts (determined by average use in an area) but more and more expensive above that.

That doesn't work because people with the lowest incomes have the worst homes and thus need the most heating.

I have been using an electric heating pad on my lap. That way I dont heat the entire building. We may have to do this , if so we just have to do it. Its better than the alternatives. I'm also sleeping in long underwear. Ive gone most of my life sleeping with minimal clothing, up until now. I think there is a lot about this crisis they arent telling us, and dont plan to discuss with the public.  Who knows?

Some People just dont have the money any more for the most expensive fuels in perhaps some colder climates.

[David Hess]

I have been using an electric heating pad on my lap. That way I dont heat the entire building. We may have to do this , if so we just have to do it. Its better than the alternatives. I'm also sleeping in long underwear. Ive gone most of my life sleeping with minimal clothing, up until now. I think there is a lot about this crisis they arent telling us, and dont plan to discuss with the public.  Who knows?

I turned my thermostat way down and bought my first electric blanket a couple months ago.

[metrologist]

It's on the plan in my town to outright ban gas, even in existing construction, including residential. That means I would be replacing the stove, water heater, and central furnace. 

[cdev]

It's on the plan in my town to outright ban gas, even in existing construction, including residential. That means I would be replacing the stove, water heater, and central furnace. 

Are they putting in prepay meters? Some places have them. You have to pay first, before getting the energy.

[thm_w]

   I just installed a Mitsubishi mini-split AC in a house in Florida this past summer and I elected not to buy the version with the heat pump.  It's reliability was lower than a non-heat pump version and it used more power even when you weren't using the heat pump and the cost was considerably more. So even though the house was in Florida which is just about a perfect climate for using a heat pump, I decided not to. 

    For a couple of data points; the AC only Mitsubishi minisplit cost about $4,400 US installed. The same version with heat pump and strip heater was about $6,500 US.  This past winter the coldest temperature that we saw was about 30F but only for about three days and only at night. We never turned on the main heat and we used one heat dish (about 700 Watts) for a few hours per day in the main part of the house to take the chill off in the mornings for about a week.

For anyone that is interested, this is the model that we installed:  MSZ-FH09NA / MUZ-FH09NA.

But MSZ-FH09NA / MUZ-FH09NA is rather decent heating-capable unit (without strip heater) if I am reading the spec correctly?

Funny, no response to you. That is a heat pump unit.

They do actually sell cool only units: https://www.ecomfort.com/Mitsubishi-MY-GL09NA/p65342.html 9k BTU for $1320
$1524 for the heat pump version: https://www.ecomfort.com/Mitsubishi-MZ-GL09NA/p65347.html

They have the same SEER rating. Would be dumb not to spend an extra $200 to get the heat pump version.

[Seekonk]

I have a friend that manages a grid peaking station.  He has told me that many times he has to shut down generators due to excess household demand of natural gas in winter.  They would rather drop the voltage on the grid than run out of natural gas. Just three years ago our NY utility was pushing gas and brought gas to our street.  Now we are running out.  Just got a letter from our discount gas supplier. They are giving me back to the utility! The party is over.

[NiHaoMike]

I have a friend that manages a grid peaking station.  He has told me that many times he has to shut down generators due to excess household demand of natural gas in winter.  They would rather drop the voltage on the grid than run out of natural gas.

Perhaps it's time to have peak time demand charges on natural gas as well?

[coppice]

[...] Cooking fundamentally is controlled removal of water from the ingredients. [...]

There's quite a bit more to it than that...  it is chemical reactions on many levels, organic and inorganic!

The most important part of cooking is denaturing the proteins. That's what makes the food safe to eat.

[Marco]

Perhaps it's time to have peak time demand charges on natural gas as well?

Normal people aren't very responsive to such hugely delayed punishments/rewards until the cost gets really crippling.

[NiHaoMike]

Normal people aren't very responsive to such hugely delayed punishments/rewards until the cost gets really crippling.

Ohmconnect solved that problem by providing quick feedback through an app. It shouldn't be that difficult to extend it to natural gas.

Another solution is to have some sort of remote controlled limiter to limit heating to 68F and cooling to 78F during peak demand, with a discount for having it installed. Or in the case of natural gas, why not just lower the pressure?

[Someone]

Normal people aren't very responsive to such hugely delayed punishments/rewards until the cost gets really crippling.

Ohmconnect solved that problem by providing quick feedback through an app. It shouldn't be that difficult to extend it to natural gas.

Another solution is to have some sort of remote controlled limiter to limit heating to 68F and cooling to 78F during peak demand, with a discount for having it installed. Or in the case of natural gas, why not just lower the pressure?

Was tried, resulted in lols:

As most of these problems exist in other parts of the world, there are solutions:
1) Demand management, digitally broadcast to homes when there is an over/under supply of power in their area. Whatever automatic system is in place can offer to increase/reduce by X kW, requires say fiber optic internet for low latency.

I believe that one came up on the forum before, but will repost the original here:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/06/texans-regret-opting-into-power-plan-that-remotely-raises-thermostat-temps/
Consumer received (likely upfront one-off) payment to participate in minor load shedding, then goes mental when thermostat is raised to 78° F (26° C) from 74° F (24° C).

You'd be amazed how demanding of absolute/selfish convenience the general public are. "why should I slightly modify my behaviour if its for the benefit of others" while completely ignoring the non-linear cost/inconvenience of complete failure/blackout.

Gas is the easy one, consumers* in Australia are seeing the effects of market pricing pushing spot price of gas to be more expensive than the average electricity cost:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-03/gas-crisis-threatens-manufacturers-jobs-and-rising-prices/101114712
(typically more businesses are exposed to the market rate for gas than they are for electricity)

With a well oiled market, gas should be slightly more expensive than electricity since co/tri-generation at large facilities can make better use of the raw input.

* of both/all kinds

[David Hess]

Los Angeles is not far behind:

https://www.latimes.com/food/story/2022-06-02/gas-stove-ban-chinese-korean-bbq-electric-new-buildings-restaurants-future

[NiHaoMike]

Los Angeles is not far behind:

https://www.latimes.com/food/story/2022-06-02/gas-stove-ban-chinese-korean-bbq-electric-new-buildings-restaurants-future

What about renewable fuels like hydrogen or biogas? Instead of completely banning gas cooking appliances in new construction, require them and the plumbing to be able to run on pure hydrogen as well, with the goal of replacing the natural gas with hydrogen.

[Marco]

People making an important cultural ritual out of gas grills which have been used for only a couple generations ... that's a bit myopic. You'd think that given how young it is, they would realise that a tradition is as easily forgotten as it is created.

The petulant children will adapt, the smart ones will get ahead of the game and get together with a manufacturer to start designing high power electric grills. A restaurant can easily use 3 phase 480V, they aren't as restricted for power as consumer appliances.

PS. for wok hei, just have a pilot light next to induction burner ... putting 90% of your power into the kitchen air just to light a bit of the wok oil during tossing is just stupid.

[SilverSolder]

Maybe we are close to a breakthrough in fusion power...   which would suddenly make all this make sense! 

[nctnico]

Los Angeles is not far behind:

https://www.latimes.com/food/story/2022-06-02/gas-stove-ban-chinese-korean-bbq-electric-new-buildings-restaurants-future

Not a problem. They'll use gas tanks. Where I live there is no natural gas infrastructure in most of the city (by design!) and restaurants that need gas for cooking use gas from tanks.

For woks there is also the alternative to go to induction cooking which actually can get a wok pan much hotter compared to gas and might even be better than a gas stove.

[David Hess]

People making an important cultural ritual out of gas grills which have been used for only a couple generations ... that's a bit myopic. You'd think that given how young it is, they would realise that a tradition is as easily forgotten as it is created.

Part of the experience is customers grilling their own food at the table.  Without that, these restaurants have no reason to exist.

Not a problem. They'll use gas tanks. Where I live there is no natural gas infrastructure in most of the city (by design!) and restaurants that need gas for cooking use gas from tanks.

That is what I suggested when I heard about it, but zoning may not allow it.

For woks there is also the alternative to go to induction cooking which actually can get a wok pan much hotter compared to gas and might even be better than a gas stove.

They do not use a pan.  They literally have a gas grill built into each booth where customers sit.

[coppice]

People making an important cultural ritual out of gas grills which have been used for only a couple generations ... that's a bit myopic.

People were happily grilling for many generations using wood. They were pushed off wood and onto gas. Some people still use wood, of course. I've had mesquite BBQs in Arizona, If you look at how long mesquite takes to grow. that's a kinda bizarre use for it.

[coppice]

For woks there is also the alternative to go to induction cooking which actually can get a wok pan much hotter compared to gas and might even be better than a gas stove.

In Europe they make special curved induction hobs for woks, but few people use them. That might be mostly due to cost. In East Asia, where there make 10's of millions of induction hobs per year, nobody heats a wok with an induction hob. They are considered somewhere between annoying and utterly useless. When we remodel our kitchen in the UK I'm not sure what to do about a job that will allow really good wok cooking. The output of European gas hobs is much lower than Asian ones. Have you seen a professional cook using a wok? There's a fearsome fire going on under those things, to get the kind of rapid cooking they expect.

[Marco]

Part of the experience is customers grilling their own food at the table.  Without that, these restaurants have no reason to exist.

Grills can be electric.

[coppice]

They do not use a pan.  They literally have a gas grill built into each booth where customers sit.

If you go to Korean BBQ restaurants in Korea, some of them now use electric radiant grills. They may also be heating electrically from below, but part of the heating is radiant heat from above. In East Asia you can also buy products like these https://www.germanpool.com/eng/products_cat/list_kb.php which work pretty well for home use.

[Marco]

In Europe they make special curved induction hobs for woks, but few people use them. That might be mostly due to cost. In East Asia, where there make 10's of millions of induction hobs per year, nobody heats a wok with an induction hob. They are considered somewhere between annoying and utterly useless. When we remodel our kitchen in the UK I'm not sure what to do about a job that will allow really good wok cooking. The output of European gas hobs is much lower than Asian ones. Have you seen a professional cook using a wok? There's a fearsome fire going on under those things, to get the kind of rapid cooking they expect.

There's a fearsome amount of heat going into the kitchen air.

Lestov has an induction burner which they show to heat water at around 3x the speed of a 150000 BTU burner. Assuming they aren't cheating, that's enough power.

[coppice]

In Europe they make special curved induction hobs for woks, but few people use them. That might be mostly due to cost. In East Asia, where there make 10's of millions of induction hobs per year, nobody heats a wok with an induction hob. They are considered somewhere between annoying and utterly useless. When we remodel our kitchen in the UK I'm not sure what to do about a job that will allow really good wok cooking. The output of European gas hobs is much lower than Asian ones. Have you seen a professional cook using a wok? There's a fearsome fire going on under those things, to get the kind of rapid cooking they expect.

There's a fearsome amount of heat going into the kitchen air.

Lestov has an induction burner which they show to heat water at around 3x the speed of a 150000 BTU burner. Assuming they aren't cheating, that's enough power.

PS. I hate how this forum turns every youtube link into an inline video, I rarely want inline videos, they disrupt the thread too much.

If you simply want to boil water a kettle will beat an induction hob. However, this is pretty unrelated to practical uses of a wok, where the wok is mostly kept in constant motion.

[Marco]

If you simply want to boil water a kettle will beat an induction hob. However, this is pretty unrelated to practical uses of a wok, where the wok is mostly kept in constant motion.

In motion, but staying in contact with the burner. In that respect wok cooking is easier for induction, none of the half lift off which western chefs use for finishing. If a wok is moved around the induction burner is just temporarily putting a little more power into the sides of the wok instead of the bottom, still useful heat.

With a couple of those 18 kW induction burners a Chinese restaurant would still only get close to the power of one fast car charger, a lot of power relative to residential use but still practical. Just need to add a pilot light to light the oil vapours inside the pan for authenticity and bob's your uncle.

PS. or better than a pilot light, have a little cage with a bunch of electrical spark emitters inside near the edge of the pan to light the oil vapours on fire, keeps it all electric.

[nctnico]

Have you seen a professional cook using a wok? There's a fearsome fire going on under those things, to get the kind of rapid cooking they expect.

Quite a few times. Both gas fired and induction. With induction the content is stirred while using fire it is shaken. That would only make a difference to Mr Bond.

[coppice]

Have you seen a professional cook using a wok? There's a fearsome fire going on under those things, to get the kind of rapid cooking they expect.

Quite a few times. Both gas fired and induction. With induction the content is stirred while using fire it is shaken. That would only make a difference to Mr Bond.

We typically use a wok shovel to move the food at home, but I can't imagine a professional chef using something like that to move things around a large commercial wok. Chefs so hot from the waste heat of the gas burners, that I'm sure they'd love the more directed heat of an induction hob, but they wouldn't like the inefficiency with which the food can be moved with a stationary wok and a shovel.

[Marco]

I can't imagine a professional chef using something like that to move things around a large commercial wok.

Moving them around seems to work just fine, he's not doing a couple kg of food at the same time like would often happen in a restaurant ... but 450k BTU gas equivalent should be able to do that too. Only question is if the induction surfaces can take the violence from doing a small bit of lift off to flip the food, but I doubt it's an impossible engineering challenge.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=366793360636764

[nctnico]

Have you seen a professional cook using a wok? There's a fearsome fire going on under those things, to get the kind of rapid cooking they expect.

Quite a few times. Both gas fired and induction. With induction the content is stirred while using fire it is shaken. That would only make a difference to Mr Bond.

We typically use a wok shovel to move the food at home, but I can't imagine a professional chef using something like that to move things around a large commercial wok. Chefs so hot from the waste heat of the gas burners, that I'm sure they'd love the more directed heat of an induction hob, but they wouldn't like the inefficiency with which the food can be moved with a stationary wok and a shovel.

Well, a wok is used to heat single portions anyway otherwise you can't heat the foot fast enough. A cook trying to wok 10 portions at the same time doesn't sound like a professional to me.

You do see Asian cooks using bigger pans but these are more for regular frying (bami goreng for example) or deep frying (submerged in oil). There are several cooking techniques in use by Asian cooks and not all of them are intended to heat food quickly even though the pans they use may look similar.

[coppice]

Well, a wok is used to heat single portions anyway otherwise you can't heat the foot fast enough. A cook trying to wok 10 portions at the same time doesn't sound like a professional to me.

Chefs cook quite a few portions at the same time during the busy times of the day. Even a small place only has to wait 5 minutes to gather up orders for 10 portions or more of the things on the "today's special" list. A big restaurant needs a constant stream of the popular things from its main menu. Even at home I'm usually cooking 3 to maybe 8 portions at a time, depending how many are in the house. A restaurant would go bankrupt cooking everything portion by portion. There's a reason why the woks in restaurants are something like 800mm across.

[Marco]

Which is not a problem, you can build the induction burner as large as you want and the power required is not a problem either.

Induction can replace gas just fine for commercial Chinese kitchens, easier in fact than western kitchens. High power requirements is less of a problem than basting with a tilted skillet.

[coppice]

Which is not a problem, you can build the induction burner as large as you want and the power required is not a problem either.

Induction can replace gas just fine for commercial Chinese kitchens, easier in fact than western kitchens. High power requirements is less of a problem than basting with a tilted skillet.

Well, I wish I knew what to install in our kitchen. Everything available for home use in Europe, gas or induction, does a pretty poor job with an ordinary domestic 40cm 5 ply wok,

[nctnico]

You'd need to look for professional kitchen use. A quick google shows you can buy induction wok furnaces with 6kW and higher power outputs.

[Marco]

5ply? Woks are carbon steel Hendi has a relatively cheap 3.5 kW Wok induction burner, but it's not suited to built into the countertop (well you could do it, but not pretty enough for the misses most likely).

How much money you willing to spend? Here's a 3 phase 7 kW model for countertop integration? Probably around 3000 Euro.

[themadhippy]

Well, I wish I knew what to install in our kitchen.

If the budget allows a   trip to a branch of homepro in thailand should get you sorted

[Siwastaja]

It's not like gas is going completely away or costing so much that no one can afford it for any purposes.

It's just that the humanity has come into the (correct) realization that fossil fuels are a limited and problematic resource and must be used wisely. This reflects in price.

If some certain restaurants absolutely need to provide gas cooking as an experience, this is no problem whatsoever. So you pay, say $30 for the food, and maybe $0.10 went to the gas. Increase price by 3x and it's still insignificant.

Same for using natural gas in industrial processes, not just burn it as heat. Such uses are hard to replace, and very valuable.

Days of totally ridiculous uses of fossil fuels (only because it's artificially cheap) are over, and this is good. Now, mentally concentrate how you are going to heat your house next winter (or how you are going to heat domestic hot water). This is the big question, maybe two-three orders of magnitude larger than what you use to grill foods.

For me, so far, yearly:
Starting point: oil heating 20000 kWh/year + PV -2300kWh/year
-> to heatpump, down to 5000kWh/year + oil/wood 2000kWh/year = 7000kWh/year
Under construction, hopefully finished before next winter:
-> addition of highly efficient heat recovery ventilator, from 7000kWh down to 5000-5500kWh/year
-> Heat distribution improvements for better COP (addition of in-floor and in-ceiling heating pipes), down to 4000-5000kWh/year
-> Addition of more PV, -2300kWh/year to -3500kWh/year

See? Do this kind of very basic napkin calculation. Doesn't need to be exactly accurate, but helps you concentrate on what's meaningful.

[coppice]

5ply? Woks are carbon steel

Cheap woks are carbon steel. The good ones are 5 ply stainless steel and aluminium. They avoid most of the hot spot issues you get with a carbon steel wok.

[Marco]

I don't think they make the really big woks in ply though, so if you do get a professional 3 phase induction burner it will have to use a carbon steel pan. Maybe you could find a ferromagnetic stainless steel wok of the right size, but that's far less conductive than carbon steel.

[coppice]

I don't think they make the really big woks in ply though, so if you do get a professional 3 phase induction burner it will have to use a carbon steel pan. Maybe you could find a ferromagnetic stainless steel wok of the right size, but that's far less conductive than carbon steel.

I should have said the good domestic ones are 5 ply. They have been since the 1990s. I've never seen a large commercial 5 ply wok, though. The chefs would probably consider them too expensive, and just not traditional enough.