• Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    5 months ago

    The more infrastructure they lay and the more customers they connect, the harder to shut them down. The more bail-worthy they become.

      • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Shamu would have succumbed to a .308 to the brain pan. There ain’t shit that is “to big to be killed”, just those unwilling to do the killing.

  • Nik282000@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    5 months ago

    The boat salesman says you need a boat.

    YOU pay for the infrastructure, YOU pay for the maintenance, YOU pay for the gas. Why would they stop now?

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    That’s great for climate goals, but can someone tell me how we’re supposed to heat our homes? Electricity?

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago
      1. Better insulation.
      2. Heat pumps.
      3. By the time gas heating is eliminated, climate change will have solved that problem.
      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        Climat change won’t magically remove heating needs. It will bring hotter summers, colder winters, bed weather etc.

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Heat pumps sounds like a good way forward. I haven’t looked into the cost to replace a heater in a home, but I guess new homes could just have them installed by default.

        What about natural gas use in home cooking/restaurants? Surely, you can’t just replace that easily.

        EDIT: And what about heating water? I mean, natural gas is used for more than heating the space in a home.

        • tiredofsametab@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I have a 200v induction cooktop. My only complaint so far is that I don’t quite have as fine-grained control as I did with gas, but that doesn’t matter most of the time. It also isn’t heating up and around the pan. In any case, I have a portable casette gas stove if I really want to make Chinese in a wok with high heat and the flame coming up the sides.

          My water heater is an eco-cute and does quite well for energy efficiency. It was a bit of a change coming back from instant on-demand gas water heaters, but it’s fine now that I’m used to it.

        • rtxn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Surely you can. Modern electric stovetops use infrared radiation from a wire coil to heat cookware. The stovetop is covered with a ceramic that allows infrared radiation to pass through, and if you put something on it, it’ll absorb the radiation as heat. The technology is also scalable to industrial applications.

          I’ll let Brown Jacket Man explain the principle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ff04ecF9Dfw

          (edit) My house has an electric water heater that was built in the Soviet Union. It uses a ~200-litre tank with a large heating element inside.

          • Pxtl@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Those ceramic/glasstop ovens are shit. An old school coil will always be better, or modern induction.

            • ebits21@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Meh they’re fine. Yes induction is better but they’re not shit.

              • Policeshootout@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Ceramic/glass top electric is shit. I’ve used gas and induction a fair amount, but at home I have a mid range priced electric ceramic and it’s terrible compared to the other two options.

            • SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              Don’t confuse the old school glass flat tops with the induction ones. They use different methods and work very differently even though they look alike.

          • Revan343@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Shitty modern electric stove tops use infrared radiation. Good modern electric stove tops are induction

        • saigot@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          And what about heating water?

          A heat pump water heater is pretty great, if my basement ever gets too hot I run the dishwasher or take a shower and the water heater cools things down nicely. In winter I close the door and vent to the utility room and it doesn’t hurt the heating very much. It’s smaller than my previous gas water heater but it lasts significantly longer and heats up faster if you do end up using all the hot water. My house of 4 uses about 50kWh of hot water a month, which works out to about 5bucks a month. I’ve messed with it a bit so it runs mostly during off peak hours.

          I replaced my water heater, got a heatpump and improved insulation at around the same time (through the greener homes loan program) and on the whole saved about 50bucks a month overall, and will save another 30 when I cap off the gas pipe and get to stop paying all the bullshit fees for just having it connected. I live in southern Ontario, away from the lakes, so -30 - 30 weather typically. (All this week has been 40+ though, wonder why…).

          Oh and fwiw, I would take my current induction stovetop over a gas stove anyway, much more consistent, easier to clean and heats up faster, and doesn’t heat up the whole house to run.

    • acargitz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Um, yes? Heat pump until -15C, baseboards for the relatively fewer days that go below that. Plus good insulation.

      In Quebec we have cheap hydroelectric of course, but I mean, between nuclear power, renewables and hydro, that’s basically how.

  • InternetUser2012
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 months ago

    The problem is, they aren’t going anywhere. They’ll just funnel money to politicians to stop any attempt to stop them.

  • Auzy@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    Probably same reason as here in Australia.

    The gas companies have managed to create a multifaceted cult where they’ve brainwashed people into thinking electricity is unclean (despite things like heat pumps being 500% efficient), unreliable and expensive.

    Also, it helps that people who paid too much for their ICE cars are scared and they know that their cars will increasingly drop in value as people transition away from gas and fossil fuels.

    • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I don’t see a lot of people worrying about their cars devaluing. Except for the recent blip, most cars devalued fast, and the cars that held value before didn’t retain it because of their utility.

  • asg101@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    Natural gas infrastructure and heating could be transitioned to hydrogen or biogas.

    • pbjamm@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      Most hydrogen is produced from natural gas so would not really be a replacement for the foreseeable future. Gas infrastructure is not designed for transporting hydrogen so leaks would be significant. Hydrogen can also penetrate into steel piping and cause it to crack and deteriorate more rapidly.

      Biogas, sure if there were enough production available.

      • delirious_owl@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        No reason we can’t produce hydrogen from solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal.

        Add carbon dioxide to the hydrogen, and you get methane that you can transport through existing gas pipelines without the issues of hydrogen

        • saigot@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          A perfect Electrolysis reaction takes about 39kwh to produce 1kg of hydrogen that if burned at 100% efficiency would yield 33kwh of power. More realistically it takes 50-60kwh to produce 1kg that is burned to produce ~25kwh of usable energy.

          I’m not too sure about converting hydrogen to methane but that will have energy overhead as well, and then you have to deal with the fact that 6% of natural gas production today is leaked into the air, which both further hurts the efficiency of synthesizing it and also has a significant climate impact.

          I think it willl almost always be cheaper to just provide electricity directly except in cases where energy density is far more important than efficiency, which is not the case for stationary homes.

          • delirious_owl@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            It doesn’t have a negative climate impact if the source is renewables. That’s the point. Its basically free gas.

            Solar energy doesn’t run at night. Wind doesn’t always run. Hydro doesn’t work during droughts.

            This is a battery that solvers these issues.

            • saigot@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              If you take co2 and convert it to methane and then release that methane you are increasing the impact of that co2 by 6x.

        • pbjamm@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Something like 90% of hydrogen is produced from methane and coal, so there clearly are reasons. Most likely cost effectiveness.

          Add carbon dioxide to the hydrogen, and you get methane that you can transport through existing gas pipelines

          Well sure, since those pipes are already transporting methane. I dont think requiring each home to have its own methane pyrolysis infrastructure is particularly practical or efficient either.

          • delirious_owl@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Because its a waste product, but once we make digging up fossil fuels illegal, that will change. Then we can repurposed the infrastructure in ways that are not harmful

            • pbjamm@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              I have no idea what to make of this vacuous comment, so unless you have something meaningful and specific to say I think I am done with this conversation. Good Day.

  • MikeOToxin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Because eastern Canada still needs the oil subsidies from the Prairies.

    Forestry just isn’t cutting it out there, and like it or not, the country needs money.

  • delirious_owl@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    We can make synthetic methane with renewable energy though. I don’t have a problem with building such infrastructure becsuse it can be used with renewable energy

    • Nik282000@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      5 months ago

      Unless the round trip efficiency of synthesized methane (synthesis, transportation and re-capture) is better than solar/hydro/nuke electricity it doesn’t make sense build our own hydrocarbons. There are also the cumulative health effects of burning methane in your house and that it is serious greenhouse gas.

      • delirious_owl@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Its a battery. It makes more sense than electricity because its extremely energy dense, can be transported long distances far more efficiently than electricity, and can be stored indefinitely in low-tech gas tanks instead of electrical batteries

        • Nik282000@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Methane has to be compressed for both transportation in pipes and storage in tanks, a very energy expensive process. Or it can be chilled down and condensed to a liquid for bulk transportation in ships, also a very energy expensive process. Every single joint and valve in the distribution network has the potential to leak, and many of them do, the same goes for storage tanks. Also pressure regulators (like the one on the side of your house) have to vent to bring down the pressure when the network house pressure is too high.

          Natural gas distribution networks are extremely leaky.

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Also pressure regulators (like the one on the side of your house) have to vent to bring down the pressure when the network is too high.

            No. They have to vent if your household pressure is too high. If, for example, cold gas was admitted into your lines, and that gas heated up, the pressure in your lines would increase. The regulator can’t push that gas back into the high pressure main, so the regulator would have to bleed off the excess pressure.

  • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    5 months ago

    Natural gas heating is very efficient and huge BTUs for low cost. When you live where it actually gets cold, it’s important. As is heating water. Cooking at restaurants also important.

    Not everything is binary. We don’t need 100% renewables and 0% gas and 0% plastic and 0% ICE vehicles. Renewable energy is 68% in Canada or 20% in the USA in terms of energy production. Getting those USA numbers to 50% or both to 80% is more important.

    FYI, in the USA natural gas is about 32% of the USA’s energy use. 15% of natural gas is used by residences. That’s 4.8% of the power. Which means this entire debate goes out the window if you just installed 5% more solar or wind energy.

    Making people fight and become tribal over trivial things that mean nothing is an easy way to prevent anything from happening. Idiots are fighting over trying to reduce 4.8% of energy that is perfectly fine at what it’s doing. Meanwhile the natural gas companies are happy to keep supplying the remaining 27% of the USAs entire power via gas, and not a damn thing is being done. Use your energy to get that 27% down to 22% and you’ve done better than you ever will with demanding residences be built with shitty alternatives.

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        We actually do need 0% emissions and 100% renewables.

        Yes. The sooner the better.

        But on the way there we have to take the wins we can get and not let perfect be the enemy of good.

        • LeFantome@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          The way we truly save the world from everything is exactly your philosophy. Continuously improve. Don’t refuse to do good things that are not perfect ( unless your true goal is to do nothing ).

      • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        5 months ago

        Which is not physically possible as most modern life relies on things that are not renewable.

        The little that is done to reduce on a personal scale is meaningless compared to what is needed to be done globally and by industry.

        Doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do your part. But it’s stupid to believe any of it will help at all. At best it causes discourse for no reason. At worst, you’re being played as a fool by large corporations to put off actual change longer and longer.

        And just because it seems Lemmy can’t seem to understand not everything is binary, I have had 10KW of solar for 15 years. I have had hybrid cars for 20 years. I’ve had pure electric cars for 13 years. I am one of the few that have installed heat pumps. I also have electric (solar) powered radiant water heating because water is a good energy store. I do way more than your average person. But I’m not stupid enough to think “0 emmisions” is possible. And nobody after a 5 minute google shouldn’t understand commercial and industrial energy usage versus residential usage.

        • heavy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Not that it matters, but I don’t think you should be getting down voted for expressing your perspective. I will say it comes off like you’re some kind of captain planet villain advocating for gas expansion.

          • Victor Villas@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            getting down voted for expressing your perspective.

            How do you know this is the case? Maybe there are other reasons to downvote?

            • heavy@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              I dunno, the long text and count I guess? It could be their username?

              I guess I assumed but I don’t doubt people just downvote what they don’t agree with.

          • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            People on Lemmy seem more tribal than even reddit. You must be “for” or “against” something, black and white.

            For example if tomorrow every house in Canada and the USA stopped using natural gas, like the supply just stops and electric equivalents are installed, emmisions would go UP.

            A 100k BTU furnace is about 29kwh. My old high efficiency furnace was 96%. The crappy ones are usually 80% efficient. Assuming 80% efficiency, the worst sold is installed everywhere then you need 23kwh per hour.

            If the energy source is coal, your electric furnace produces 50.6 CO2e. 22.3 CO2e if the source is natural gas itself (natural gas plant making electricity for you to make heat). If it’s an average USA KWh of 0.86 CO2e/kWh, then that’s 19.5. And it’s 11.7 CO2e if you just burn it for heat in your house.

            For some areas in Canada, like BC, the electricity is cheap, renewable, and awesome. In that case it’s almost 2x better to run electric heat than the 80% natural gas furnace. But not everywhere is BC.

            And that’s part of the point. You have to look at the whole picture. There’s really no reason to not run a natural gas line to a new residential property. It’s a high pressure pipe connecting everyone’s house. Maybe in the future that’s where the organic smell-o-vision inlet comes in for our holodecks. All the power and heat being electric, but saving individual deliveries of thousands of compounds to every house versus one. Repurposing utility scale infrastructure is common. You don’t have to know what the need is today. But knowing how ridiculously expensive it is to install later should be all the warning people need.

            • Nik282000@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              5 months ago

              If the energy source is coal

              Comparing one fossil fuel to a worse one is not a valid argument. Electricity generation is being pushed towards nuclear and renewables for the foreseeable future.

              You don’t have to know what the need is today. But knowing how ridiculously expensive it is to install later should be all the warning people need.

              Humans don’t need any additional gasses to survive. The only reason we use methane is that it was once very cheap and we didn’t know how bad it was in the longterm. All of our other needs are met by electricity (energy), water, or a trip to a store, if for some reason the xXxBox9080 needs a compressed gas cylinder in 2030 you can go pick it up. Throwing resources in a literal hole in the ground today because we might find a use for it tomorrow is not good planning.

    • VelvetGentleman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Not everything is binary. We don’t need 100% renewables and 0% gas and 0% plastic and 0% ICE vehicles.

      As a species, we need to get to zero emissions, and ideally negative numbers. It’s easy to point fingers at others and then do nothing, but there’s too much of that going on right now. Any reduction is a good thing.

      • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        You can’t have 0 emmisions. Even a barren asteroid emits.

        You can have net 0. And net 0 can include petrochemicals.

        • VelvetGentleman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          And net 0 can include petrochemicals.

          Maybe at some point in the future when carbon capture is a viable technology. But we’re already at the point where “we’ll deal with it later” is not a good enough solution.

        • DarthFrodo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          I agree that there’s no way around petrochemicals, and we’ll have to offset the emissions to reach net 0.

          Gas heating has an alternative though. Heat pumps are already cheaper to run compared to gas heating, even without any carbon offsetting.

          The pressure to reach net 0 is only gonna grow as the impacts of climate change get worse. To reach net 0 we’ll have to offset all significant emissions. When the offsets are priced in, using gas heaters becomes insanely expensive in comparison to heat pumps.

          It’s just a matter of time until gas heating is essentially dead. It might be in 10 years or 20 years, but there’s no way around it.

    • chaosmarine92@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I have an air source heat pump for my house and a heat pump water heater. Even in the dead of winter at 0F it kept my house just as warm as always and my water was hot. Heat pumps are not “shitty alternatives” any longer. Maybe in Alaska they would struggle but anywhere else and they work just fine.

      If we want to honestly improve the climate then it is REQUIRED that we become carbon negative, not just net zero. And every little bit of emission that is prevented is a lot of power that isn’t needed later on to suck that carbon back out of the air.

      You can complain that big companies aren’t doing enough to cut emissions and I agree, but that doesn’t mean we should wait till they clean up their act to start working on ours.

      • chrizzowski@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        There are also many ways to build a more efficient building envelope and insulation is one of the cheapest things that goes into a house. That makes the heat pumps even more viable in more climates.

        I also love how people love to hate on heat pumps when there’s so many shit box homes with electric baseboards wasting tons of power.

        • chaosmarine92@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          Yep, the standards for energy efficiency in homes is just barely above being non-existent. We spent decades with cheap energy so no one cared if every house leaked like a sieve. Now that’s coming back to bite us.

  • spyd3r@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    5 months ago

    Gas is cheap, gas is efficient, gas is clean, and gas is reliable.

    If you want your electric bill to be ludicrous switch to electric heat.

    • Policeshootout@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Gas is cheap and it is fairly efficient (debatable) but the rest of your comment is silly. My wife and I and a child of 5 live in a 1000sqft house (two floors total 2k sqft) and heat and cool with a heat pump. Electric on demand water. Nothing crazy about the building as far as insulation and air sealing. 2012 build-to-code. Our electricity bills are NEVER over $200 a month and usually under $150 a month. We haven’t had a power outage in two years and the last one was scheduled for about 1 hour.

      If you want to argue for gas make better points. Electricity is cheap and reliable. I don’t disagree that gas is cheap also and that we shouldn’t entirely abandon gas and I’m a realist in thinking we can’t eliminate it entirely and suddenly.

      • Kelsenellenelvial@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        What are the gas and electricity rates in your area? In Sask, we’re paying about $0.16/kWh for electricity and about $6.40/GJ. There’s about 278 kWh in a GJ, so the electricity cost works out to about $44/GJ, or about 7 times the cost of gas. A good coefficient of performance for a heat pump seems to be about 3, and modern gas furnaces are easily above 90% efficiency so the actual cost difference for gas to electric heat is about 1:3.

        Now, newer houses are better insulated, so your heating load on a 2012 build is going to be a lot lower than a 1977 build. You also didn’t mention your heat source. Ground source pumps are pretty good efficiency year round, but cost a lot for the initial install, while air-source pumps have a large seasonal variation in their efficiency, which is particularly troublesome in central/northern Canadian climates.

        • Policeshootout@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I live in southern BC and heat with a newer Carrier heat pump. The outdoor unit is a 28 seer model paired with an indoor ducted unit. It works fairly well until a week or two when we have -25c and below which I switch to our baseboard. I’m a home builder and built the house and it’s definitely better than a 1990 or older home but nowhere near the efficiency we are building today.

          Our electric rates are $0.142/kWh. I don’t know what gas is as I don’t have the option.

          I do agree that heat pumps struggle with colder temps and northern homes, especially older ones, aren’t going to be able to heat consistently through the winter. Storms and outages also are an issue but gas won’t heat a house if there’s no power either.