We Really Can “Live Better Electrically”

OPINION

Pasadena at night (Photo – ©W.K.)

“Nobody is taking away my O’Keefe & Merritt gas stove.” Whenever I bring up building electrification, someone will take that stand with the fervor of Charlton Heston defending the Second Amendment.

By Carl Selkin

Relax, please. No climate police will confiscate your gas range. My own spouse would stand in the doorway wearing her commemorative Spanish Civil War “No Pasaran” tee to protect her right to cook on our seventy-five-year-old beauty.

The building electrification ordinance moved forward by the Pasadena City Council on at its June 13, 2022 meeting would require new construction of mixed-use buildings, commercial buildings (except food service establishments and commercial kitchens), and multi-family buildings with more than three units to utilize electric energy only. Single-family dwellings, accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) are exempt from the ordinance, but staff will return to the City Council within a year with a recommendation as to whether these buildings should also be included. The ordinance is scheduled for its first reading on July 11, 2022 and would go into effect in August 2022. Switching to electricity generated from 100% non-carbon sources is the complement to this ordinance Pasadena’s utility, Pasadena Water and Power, should be required to complete the transition to a livable future.

When our stove was born

When our stove was born, the world’s climate had not yet begun to visibly slide into crisis, although scientists predicted this inevitability in the 19^th century and the predictions became more dire from the 1950’s. The fact that appliances persist in the environment for decades and typically are replaced by similar units, gas or electric, means that we need to consider the lifespan of buildings and their power sources.

Methane is much worse

Natural gas is not the right choice. While fossil fuel companies portray natural gas–that is, methane—as a cleaner option for heat and power than oil or coal, it is not. Corporate tactics remind me of the perfidy of tobacco companies claiming the newer cigarettes were safe alternatives to the traditional, deadly products. The basis for the misinformation about gas is that, when burned, it generates less carbon dioxide than do heavier villains. True, but carbon dioxide is not the most detrimental greenhouse gas. Methane, in fact, is much worse. It is 80 times more damaging to our atmospheric heat shield. It persists for less time than CO2, which can last hundreds of years, but during the crucial next decade or two, methane is at its greatest potency. In the critical short time left before the concatenating catastrophes overwhelm human ingenuity and adaptability, methane does the most harm.

Methane gets into the atmosphere not only in those few tenths of a second before your electric pilot sparks a flame, but it also seeps into the atmosphere from leaky wells, fracking and coal mining. If we want to stop the ever-steeper slide toward a world far too hot for humans to handle, we need to cut the demand for and mining of all fossil fuels. Electricity from solar, wind, and other non-carbon sources is less expensive and within reach. With declining demand for gas, market forces will hasten the extinction of the fossil culprits.

Pasadena City Council

The Pasadena City Council will consider the Building Electrification ordinance outlined by staff this summer. Let your voice be heard in support of this sensible step on the journey to a sustainable future.

Carl Selkin, a long-time Pasadena resident, is co-chair of the Social Justice Committee of Pasadena Jewish Temple and Center, which participates in the Pasadena 100 and Building Electrification coalitions.