Eliminating natural gas in housing could cost $5.9B–Just in San Fran!

To create jobs it takes money.  To educate your children, it takes money.  To pay rent, a mortgage and the water bill, takes money.  Government action based on ideology, not science is going to cost those staying in San Fran $5.8 Billion a year—for the added costs of energy when we do away with the use of safe, clean, efficient, natural gas.

“Electrifying homes currently using natural gas could go a long way in reducing San Francisco’s greenhouse gas emissions, but the effort is no small undertaking and could cost up to $5.9 billion, according to a new report.

About 38 percent of San Francisco’s greenhouse gas emissions comes from natural gas combustion in buildings. In residential buildings, the largest use of natural gas is for appliances like water heaters, furnaces, ovens and laundry dryers.

That is just for one city.  Imagine the costs statewide as city after city and finally the State outlaws natural gas—we are talking in the neighborhood of $00 billion a year add to the cost of families and businesses.  This is one way to force the middle class out of the State—make it too expensive to live here.  Oh, the replacement?  Solar and wind turbines—unreliable and very costly.  Worse, you would have to fill all available land in the state with solar farms and wind turbine farms—no room for much else.  I would expect Gov. Abbott and the State of Texas will donate heavily to keep Newsom in as Governor—the longer he and the Democrats control California, the more jobs  Texas will have—and the more middle class will move to that State.  It would be a great investment of Texas to support Newsom.

Eliminating natural gas in housing could cost $5.9B

City weighs options including mandatory replacement of appliances in homes

Joshua Sabatini, SF Examiner,  4/28/21  

Electrifying homes currently using natural gas could go a long way in reducing San Francisco’s greenhouse gas emissions, but the effort is no small undertaking and could cost up to $5.9 billion, according to a new report.

About 38 percent of San Francisco’s greenhouse gas emissions comes from natural gas combustion in buildings. In residential buildings, the largest use of natural gas is for appliances like water heaters, furnaces, ovens and laundry dryers.

Supervisor Gordon Mar, who requested the budget analyst report, said there is no way for The City to meet its climate goals without electrifying its residential buildings. San Francisco hopes to become net-zero carbon by 2045.

“Electrifying our homes is a monumental challenge and an environmental necessity,” Mar said.

The “key barrier” to achieving an electric retrofit of existing residences is the “financial burden,” the report said, but The City’s greenhouse gas emissions “could be significantly reduced.”

“This could be accomplished by compelling all property owners by legal mandate to replace all gas appliances with electric at their expense,” the report said. “Rebates and low interest loans could be used as tools to make mandated retrofits less financially burdensome to property owners. Partial or full city funding of these costs is another approach that could be used.”

The estimated cost of an electrical retrofit of appliances in residences ranges from a low of $14,363 per housing unit up to $19,574 for multi-family units and $34,790 for single-family homes, the report said. Costs include disposal of old appliances, purchase of new appliances, labor and electrical panel upgrades.

In San Francisco, an estimated 240,231 housing units, about 61 percent of the total housing stock, use natural gas for some or all of the appliances. The total includes 76,470 single-family homes and 163,761 multi-family homes. That means the cost to swap out natural gas appliances for electric is estimated at between $3.5 billion and $5.9 billion.

Mar has requested a hearing on the report to “assess the scope of this challenge and consider strategies both near and long term we can use to address it.” A date has yet been set. According to the Department of the Environment, natural gas consists mostly of methane, “a greenhouse gas that is 86 times more potent than carbon dioxide.”

There are a number of options The City could entertain. The main variables for a residential electrification effort are cost, who would shoulder the cost and how fast San Francisco wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The report suggests The City could implement requirements that there is an electric appliance retrofit on all residences at the time of a sale or when gas-fueled appliances will have to be naturally replaced at the end of their lifetime. Another possibility is imposing a fee on natural gas buildings that would be lifted once they convert.

“While each of these approaches would help reduce San Francisco’s greenhouse gas emissions, their impact would take decades to achieve,” the report said.

A way to speed up the effort is having The City fund a retrofitting program through issuing debt.

The electrification effort may also mean more jobs.

The report estimated about 423 to 774 construction jobs could be created annually over a 25-year period.

Charles Sheehan, a spokesperson for the Department of the Environment, said that the report “is an important addition to the conversation about decarbonizing San Francisco’s buildings.”

He said that residential buildings are responsible for 23 percent of The City’s greenhouse gas emissions.

“The City has a goal of carbon neutrality by 2045,” Sheehan said. “To get there, we know we have to decarbonize our residential buildings and transition off of natural gas in favor of renewable energy.”

The department is having ongoing conversations with affordable housing providers, labor leaders and others about how to achieve this goal.

We will need an equity-first approach to provide incentives and programs that will facilitate this transition first for those that can least afford it,” Sheehan said. “And from there, we need to develop comprehensive policies, incentives, and programs to achieve that transition throughout The City. Setting up this environmental infrastructure will guide the development of a mandate.”

About Stephen Frank

Stephen Frank is the publisher and editor of California Political News and Views. He speaks all over California and appears as a guest on several radio shows each week. He has also served as a guest host on radio talk shows. He is a fulltime political consultant.


  1. Jim Coles says

    Like the gas station sign in the photo says “you assholes voted Democrat.”
    Elections have consequences.
    Stupid is as stupid does.
    This idea sounds consequentially stupid.

  2. Californians need to be concerned with this. Not just the loonbirds in SF, but all over the state. Deep pockets will be needed, some savy, strategy and clear thinking people. May need some help to fight this. As CA goes, so goes the country eventually. So, it’s a concern for everyone who isn’t up with this newly named marxism, as the new green deal. It’s the old red iDEALology. Who are they to tell everyone what they MUST do. ORDER it as if this is a communist country. Granted, marxists are busy little tyrants shoving this environazi stuff down people’s throats. As this looms, legal action is definitely in order.

  3. Totallyfedup says

    Totally asinine idea.
    So, will we all start heating our homes and cooking over the fireplace, burning wood and adding to the problem?
    We can cook on the bbq with LP gas. That will help, right?
    If these brain dead democrats follow the science, they might listen to the “real scientist “ who said If the US got to zero emissions it would make NO DIFFERENCE because the rest of the world will continue with what they are doing.
    They also said, If every living thing in CA disappeared today, it would make NO DIFFERENCE in the “pollution output” of the US.
    There are many small steps we can take to address the problem, we don’t have to get stupid about it.

  4. John the Patriot says

    Hey Supervisor Gordon Mar: shove your “environmental necessity” up your @$$ !

  5. Really??? says

    Once again, the narrow minded idiots of the Left are killing a robust economy for very, very questionable science(?).

    As the volcanic activity of the world has increased so has the temperature. Huh? Think about it the lava has to get to the surface and in the process increases the ambient temperature of the earth the air temperature goes up.

    There has to be a reason why WWII saw a cooling period with the Battle of the Bulge fought during one of the coldest winters on record. There has to be a reason why the headlines in the 1970’s talked about a “new mini ice age.” Both events when there was more green house gases produced then now.

    But then again the Socialist Left has not proven to be all that smart.

  6. People had better wake up and get active. The lunatics are running the asylum. Our electrical infrastructure is already antiquated and beyond its capacity. And these idiots want to increase the load. More blackouts. More fires.

    It’s time for major recalls.

  7. Marcy Berry says

    Carbon neutrality will work as well as San Francisco’s Zero Waste plan. The City removed street trash cans and reduced the size of residential trash cans. Result: Trash all over the streets, including in the once very conventional Sunset District, Supervisor Mar’s kingdom. Heavens help us if San Francisco establishes a City-owned bank. Debt generation for electrification and so many other hare brained programs will grow exponentially. Yes, time for saner officials to replace the lot we have now.

  8. David Z says

    OMG this number doesn’t even take account of the price differential between gas and electricity. If I could run my computer on gas I would.

    There is no discussion at all about the burden this would put on the electrical grid which already can’t support the electricity usage.

  9. Terry L Gherardi says

    Think about it….
    When the glaciers melted and formed Yosemite Valley, there were no SUV’s, no private jets, helicopters, etc.
    Or moo cows emitting methane.
    And do you remember back in the 90’s when the environmentalists were saving the Wetlands. Well, I researched back then and found that Wetlands emit the same or even more methane than cows. In 1992 their banner was NO MOO IN 82,

    Maybe besides shutting down our use of social media, etc from the big tech oligarchy, we should not buy electric cars. It could maybe hurt Nancy & her husband who right after Biden took office and said he wanted all federal vehicles to be electric, they went out and spent a lot of money in the stock market.

  10. There is no such thing as man made climate change and, there is no climate “crisis” It is a smoke screen to gain more power and control. Even AOC’s former chief of staff admitted as much. Man made climate change is another lie.

Speak Your Mind