NY Bans Fossil Fuels in New Buildings - Should More Do the Same?
Should more states do the same?
What's the story?
- Starting in 2026, New York state will phase out all-natural gas stoves and furnaces in new builds amid growing research on methane's climate and health impacts.
- Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul and lawmakers who control the New York Senate and Assembly approved the $229 billion state budget, which contained the new provision earlier this month.
- The move has garnered praise from climate activists but will likely receive backlash and be targeted by fossil fuel companies lobbying efforts.
- While New York is the first state to embrace the changes, cities like Berkeley, San Francisco, and NYC have already passed bans on natural gas hookups in new buildings.
What's in the provision?
- The provision will apply to buildings under seven stories by 2026 and to taller buildings by 2029. The law will ban gas-powered stoves, furnaces, and propane heating and promote all-electric heating and climate-friendly appliances.
- The budget also contains efforts to create publicly owned renewable energy projects and green jobs. It suggests a cap-and-invest program that would force higher polluters to purchase permits to pollute, with the revenues going to climate initiatives.
- There are exceptions to the bill, specifically for commercial and industrial buildings like hospitals, laundromats, and restaurants.
What's the background?
- In 2020, New York pledged to have net-zero emissions by 2050 as part of its Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act. Buildings have posed a roadblock to this vision as each year, 250,000 metric tons of pollution are created from new builds and their gas installations. According to a 2022 Department of Environmental Conservation report, buildings account for 32% of New York State's emissions.
- Methane is the main component in natural gas and has 80 times as much warming impact as carbon dioxide. Climate scientists believe the best way to decrease global warming rapidly is to reduce methane use.
- Richard Trumka Jr., a U.S. Consumer Product Safety commissioner, pointed to the hidden dangers of gas stoves in January, sparking concern and controversy when he suggested they were related to childhood asthma.
- A Stanford University study found that the emissions from gas stoves in U.S. homes have the same impact on climate change as half a million gasoline-powered cars. The U.S. Energy Information Administration found more than 40 million gas stoves in U.S. households as of 2015.
What are supporters saying?
- Lee Ziesche, from the nonprofit Sane Energy, said:
"This new study confirms what environmental advocates have been saying for over a decade now, that there is no [such thing as] clean gas – not for our homes, not for our communities and not for the climate."
- The spokesperson for Gov. Hochul, Katy Zielinski, said the new legislation "will protect our families and our residents, while putting New York on a trajectory to a cleaner, healthier future."
- Alex Beauchamp, from environmental nonprofit Food & Water Watch, praised the bill:
"New Yorkers are resisting fossil fuels everywhere they pop up, from the power plants that pollute our air to the pipelines that put our communities in harm's way. Now buildings can be a part of that solution. We won't stop fighting until we end our devastating addiction to fossil fuels."
"I think it's huge that a state is doing it, not only because New York is a big-impact state. It takes it outside of this narrative of these are these fringe cities passing these policies. This is becoming a mainstream policy that a state like New York is taking on."
What are GOP-led states doing?
- 23 GOP-controlled states have passed "preemption laws" prohibiting cities from banning natural gas.
- Fox said of the GOP-backed pre-emptive legislation:
"The natural gas industry realized this was in the water a while ago and has been very aggressive in getting this passed."
"Any push to ban natural gas would raise costs to consumers, jeopardize environmental progress and deny affordable energy to underserved populations."
Do you support the natural gas ban? Should more states do the same?
—Emma Kansiz
The Latest
-
The Long Arc: Taking Action in Times of Change“Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle.” Martin Luther King Jr. Today in read more... Advocacy -
Thousands Displaced as Climate Change Fuels Wildfire Catastrophe in Los AngelesIt's been a week of unprecedented destruction in Los Angeles. So far the Palisades, Eaton and other fires have burned 35,000 read more... Environment -
Puberty, Privacy, and PolicyOn December 11, the Montana Supreme Court temporarily blocked SB99 , a law that sought to ban gender-affirming care for read more... LGBTQIA+ -
Women Are Shaping This Election — Why Is the Media Missing It?As we reflect on the media coverage of this election season, it’s clear that mainstream outlets have zeroed in on the usual read more... Elections
Climate & Consumption
Health & Hunger
Politics & Policy
Safety & Security
Use of fossil fuels in buildings is responsible for 13% of greenhouse gases. It's also responsible for about 286 gasoline explosions/year.
New York legislation banning fossil fuels for new construct of building with 7 floors or less by 2026 and higher than 7 stories by 2029 joins California and Washington (2019) bans implemented through building codes, while 23 states have choice laws sponsored by local fossil fuel utilities and business groups (campaign contributors) to prevent state and local governments from regulating energy sources used by homeowners and business owners.
Despite the choice laws some cities have banned new gas lines due to dangerous explosions, and offer rebates to encourage electrification.
"Fossil fuel combustion in buildings, mostly for heating, is responsible for about 13% of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, according to 2019 figures from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency."
https://www.millerweisbrod.com/preventing-gas-explosions
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/28/new-york-ban-gas-furnaces-stoves-new-buildings-00094411
https://www.npr.org/2023/05/04/1173724432/new-york-state-is-set-to-ban-fossil-fuels-in-new-construction-starting-in-2026
https://stateline.org/2023/05/03/new-york-to-ban-fossil-fuels-in-new-buildings-23-states-have-forbidden-such-bans/?amp=1
https://stateline.org/2022/01/06/natural-gas-bans-are-new-front-in-effort-to-curb-emissions/
I think there should be an exception for restaurants and possibly an up charge for homes who plan to install a professional cooktop. I say this because there are truly are no electric equivalents for some types of cooking. For the average cook, electric is fine. For an advanced cook wanting the performance of a professional appliance electric can't do it all at this point in time.
Local story: after multi year delay partially due to pandemic and all permits etc done w new build near completion. Chef José Andrés was going to back out of opening his new restaurant here, because the city had enacted a ban on new buildings with gas (late term in the process). He stated there was no electrical equivalent that could produce the quality and type of dishes planned for this location. I looked up the status just now, and the story posted an hour ago, the city reversed its position (there was a pending lawsuit) and Chef Andrés can go ahead as planned.
This I why I think restaurants should be the exception. I don't want avid home cooks to be forced to give up their hobby, so I think there should be definite financial incentives to go electric, but I don't think it should be enforced as a complete ban until electric can fully be equivalent to gas.
I believe we are pushing the cart ahead of the horse. No alternative backup.
Usually yes, but sometimes it's just impractical.
It's time to move away from fossil fuels in every way possible, especially since we know that the current format of gas stoves are polluting our indoor air and exacerbating asthma and other health problems.
I don't think we should force current housing stock and homeowners to get rid of these stoves, even though they're harming their own health, but there's no reason to allow them to be put into new houses.
Even if the appliance manufacturers did make them burn cleaner and safer, we'd still be burning fossil fuels which our planet cannot afford.
Electric stoves are the way of the future, at least until something better comes along, and this is a good phased transition that we should be making.
But hey, if those on the right want to keep subsidizing the oil & gas companies, I'm sure they'll fight and rant about this.
Glad New York is helping reduce the carbon foot print.
Methane is a renewable resource. It occurs naturally and is a byproduct of organic matter decomposing. Some forward thinking people have managed to pipe it off landfills for heating homes and generating electricity. This reduces it's presence in the atmosphere. Why would anyone be against using natural gas (methane)?
At one time in AZ you could not use gas furnaces, water heater, or ranges, all new homes were total electric. What I found from this ban on gas furnaces was that electic heat pumps were not very effective. I found this to be true also in colder states where I have lived. Total electric when the temp was 20 degrees did not keep the house warm. I do think we must do something about climate change, but how we go about it must be done with not only care to protect the climate, but also what do we do if the electric grid goes down as it did in Texas and the east coast. Is gas powered generators that add polution the answer? Also, we must come together as Americans who have accomplished great things, and not allow the solution to be decided by politics.
Vote yes on the debt extension proposal
Despite my love for cooking with gas, I endorse the transition toward abandoning using natural gas. The argument prevalent in California is that the current electrical grid cannot handle the strains. This is true. Thus, abundant, affordable electricity needs to become accessible to everyone before removing natural gas.
Suppose all new constructions were required to supply enough electricity to sustain their occupants. I believe in California; this might be possible. It might reduce or do away with new highrise buildings, but population density is also a climate issue. If our country addresses climate change, we need to use our ingenuity. We must cast off the idea of returning to the way it used to be. It is time to go forward into a new future.
We are feeing the impact of fossil fuel usage, today. What will tomorrow bring if we don't stop these bad habits?
The energy of the sun, wind and water is ours to harness and we are turning our backs on it in order to make the wealthy oil companies more wealthy. It is time to think about climate reforms, instead of money for the already rich.
We must out of office those that are unwilling to address these issues. Yes it is a process, but we need it sooner than later!
Congress must act...
NO this is stupid!
We need to shut down the use of fossil fuels, period!!! It will take time to make a total transition, but if we don't start somewhere we will never get started! The time for transition is now! New construction is a golden opportunity to make the change.
Just wanting blackouts. Speaking of which, when is something going to be done about wind turbines killing bald eagles?
I'm glad NY is taking this step. There are also steps to be taken that can lower the carbon footprint of building materials such as cement and steel.
The red states won't, they really could give a rats ass about the safety of their constituents
At this point, with evidence of climate change overwhelming us, it is incumbent on every person, organization and governmental agency to ramp up efforts to save the environment. Governments and their agencies, as well as large companies, should bear the most responsibility since their actions have the likelihood greater change and improvement of the situation. I wish lawmakers, Republicans in particular, would take their heads out of the sand and start to get serious on this issue.
It's a bit over the top. Can we use reason?
YES!!!
The fact that Illinois isn't using wind power by now is beyond me.
I love my gas stove but methane is a problem
This is a good step you guys needs to support clean energy for my generation millennials and gen z
We need to make better choices of transistioning from fossil fuels to greener energy. However, we're dealing with stubborn who fear or deny change. As long as those people exist, green transistion will be difficult.
Hurt us, help China