Hey, there! Log in / Register

Boston moves to make natural-gas hookups more expensive in new construction

The Boston City Council yesterday approved a proposal by the Wu administration to encourage builders and contractors to turn away from natural-gas systems and towards all-electrical ones in new buildings and buildings undergoing major renovations, in part by requiring potentially expensive higher-efficiency systems and wiring to allow for future electrification.

The "Specialized Stretch Energy Code" could go into effect Jan. 1.

Councilors Michael Flaherty (at large), Ed Flynn (South Boston, South End, Chinatown, Downtown), Frank Baker (Dorchester) and Erin Murphy (at large) voted against the measure. Flynn said he was not opposed to the basic idea but said he wanted to defer a vote to give construction unions and developers more time to comment on the measure, under which the city would adopt building codes already allowed by the state.

Neighborhoods: 
Free tagging: 
AttachmentSize
PDF icon Wu's "stretch" request158.02 KB


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

That stretch energy code requires wiring for "AC level II" charging. Is that beefy enough? If I were building a house with 2-car garage today, I'd want a 200-amp panel in the garage with 4-gauge copper going to the charging outlets. If that requirement isn't in the building codes, then the builder will charge the buyer $$$$ for that customization.

I'd also want 240-volt outlets available in a few places inside the house for computer equipment, because power supplies are more efficient with 240 than 120.

up
Voting closed 2

Our power grid can't handle what we have now, but let's electrify all the cars and force builders to make all our heat electric.

Oh and yeah, the power companies just doubled what the charge from $.11/kwh to $.22/kwh.

Geniuses.

up
Voting closed 1

Good luck everyone during the next blackout!

up
Voting closed 0

works during a blackout? Lucky you! Mine needs electricity to run.

up
Voting closed 1

so much for a career digging the gas pipe

up
Voting closed 1

I'm sure you can find other things to dig.

up
Voting closed 0

i can dig it if you want to pay

up
Voting closed 0

At this point in the climate crisis, building a brand new building with fossil fuels is a step backwards. Put another way, it's a lost opportunity for building it the right way from the start (high efficiency, all-electric systems). To be clear, the Specialized Stretch Code doesn't fully ban gas hookups, but says you have to build to a higher standard if you do, and include the electric wiring for future heat pumps.

up
Voting closed 0

where does this electricity come from, hydrogen ?

up
Voting closed 1

MIT scientists are secretly working on it right now, financed by VC, unrelated to SVB, actually out of Freedonia.

up
Voting closed 0

Not just what makes it, but how do you get it? The grid is already fairly stretched and it doesn't help when folks are trying to stop the construction of new substations.

up
Voting closed 0

Per WBUR, as of 2019, 9% of MA’s electrical supply was from renewables, and 7% was from hydro. That’s a small slice of the whole, but it grows each year. So, if you opt to have electrical appliances or heating, at least some of the supply is sourced in a renewable way.

Why let perfect be the enemy of good?

up
Voting closed 2

The mlbs of gas needed to make the electricity to power an electric boiler to make one mmbtu of heat is more than 16% higher than mlbs of gas it takes to make one mmbtu in a gas boiler. Eventually the percentage of renewables on the grid will flip that, and a building could install solar to offset it some, but for now it is not a net improvement.

up
Voting closed 1

Sure, renewables are growing, but the MA grid is pretty much Natural Gas powered which is in extremely tight supply - neither of which is going to change in the next decade unless miracles happen. We have the third highest electricity prices in the country and adding more demand onto that is only going to make things worse until our underlying problems are solved which are just going to be passed onto the consumer/homeowner further increasing our already sky-high cost of living.

Electric is good - especially for things like heat pumps, but the MA legislature needs to vastly improve pipeline supply in the short-term and long-term plans for the replacement of the natural gas plants if we don't want to keep making things worse.

up
Voting closed 1

Not near-100%, which you seemed to be implying. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) You can see the current mix here: https://www.iso-ne.com/ (Not a yearly average, unfortunately, and ISO-NE does weird things like treat rooftop solar as "demand reduction" rather than a power source, and puts hydro outside of the renewables category.)

It also sounded like you were saying that people switching from gas to electric would put more pressure on the gas supply. But that's not true; it should actually *lessen* the demand on our natural gas supply. Ignoring transmission losses and efficiency differences (unless you want to figure out how to account for those) switching an appliance from 100% natural gas to 50% natural gas should reduce demand.

up
Voting closed 1

ISO-NE says that in 2022, there was a "3% demand reduction" from behind-the-meter solar panels. That actually means that approximately 3% of power was generated by solar *on top of* the solar they list on their charts. (For some reason they refuse to call it power generation, and list it as demand reduction.) So that's roughly 20% renewables total.

Also, don't forget that "net imports" part. We get a lot of power from Quebec, which has a ton of hydro.

up
Voting closed 0

Its upwards of 50% carbon free most of the time when you consider renewables AND hydro/nuclear.

I will also admit there is a considerable amount of nuance that cant be summed up by a few bullet point buzzwords in the electricity generation game, but natural gas itself is a finite resource during peak demand events. Even for power generation.

I think there are valid arguments that gas power generation could benefit from fewer residential gas users - taking delivery, burning cleaner, and generating energy more efficiently*.

*lots to unpack here, but leaky pipes and poorly (over)sized short cycling furnaces lead to hidden waste behind the nice residential 96% furnace sticker. Also calcs for peaker gas efficiencies vs heat pump COP need to be factored too. These figures are close on the surface assuming this a zero sum game - but the grid is also (often) around 50% carbon free...

But then there is also the added heat pump efficiency benefit doing better than window ACs during the summer, not a gas furnace issue but takes pressure off of the grid (which includes gas) in the summer... To many variables. lol

up
Voting closed 1

It would be one thing if this was in isolation. But add this to the increased number of below market rate units being mandated by the city plus higher interest rates plus a banking crisis plus a labor shortage plus inflation...and the mayor is aiming for a population number of 800k. This doesn't add up to a solution to the insanely high cost of housing in Boston.

up
Voting closed 1

All of the above means there will be exactly zero new units getting built, which in turn means you better get ready for quite a sticker shock come next lease renewal.

up
Voting closed 1

Turn the clock back a bit -- February 2021
Texas had a shortage of electricity combined with cold weather for a sustained period

The result a lot of broken water pipes [not just in residences but in the streets] leading to a boil water warning to about 12 million people in the state including Houston.

Many of the newer subdivisions in and around Houston didn't have natural gas pipes -- so either they were all electric homes or they might have a propane tank.

So -- with no electricity -- no heat and more significantly --NO safe Water!
a lot of the stores had issues so even bottled water was hard to obtain for many.

No -- the idea of being "Climate Virtuous" by banning or restricting natural gas is ins

up
Voting closed 0

Its problems would have been avoided had it had more than token interconnections with grids in other states, but, you know, Texas, and regulatory capture, so you wound up with a system in which the utilities didn't invest in weatherizing their systems and when the state grid collapsed, they couldn't call on reserves from other states.

up
Voting closed 1

I concur that this issue was isolated to Texas.

tbh if we have power issues, its localized most of the time. Like a down'd power line or a transformer blew. Or the occasional 'trip the breaker' and several city 'circuits' go down.

We've had nothing by comparison to what Texas has. I give Eversource that, we have redundancy and they are not afraid to buy power from others sources to keep the lights on. Of course we paid thru the nose for it, but it was lights on for NYE because of it.

Even during the blackout in 2011 (?) New England faired pretty well, as we were the only part of the Northeast that still had power. (thanks to some quick thinking folks who disconnected us from the rest of New England, that and we are more connected to Canada than we are to Eastern New York)

up
Voting closed 0

Even their natural gas power plants shut down, since they had decided to skimp on weatherization even after this had already happened before. The pipelines were freezing! I don't know what Texas's natural gas delivery systems look like, but I would be surprised if they 1) didn't need electricity and 2) weren't affected by the freeze.

The New England grid isn't perfect, but it's a lot more robust.

up
Voting closed 0

You know.. its real hard to take this move away from natural gas when my electricity rates are astronomical. I use less and less electricity to try to save costs, but yet the bill keeps going up and up.

Its a very hard sell to me as a homeowner to switch (or support this) when the folks over at Eversource are licking their chops at 100% electricity customers because you know, more money for them.

Maybe co-currently with doing this measure.. that politicians should start to look at why electricity rates are so high and look at ways to get the rates to go down too. But to do this while New England electrical rates are the most expensive in the country is just silly and would be a very hard sell to me.

(and yes I know this is for new construction and retrofit only, but there is an initiative statewide to move away from gas and homeowners get large breaks from MassSave to do so)

up
Voting closed 1

Who is telling you to switch.

What part of New Construction baffles you?

up
Voting closed 1

Your electricity rates are derived from the rates the electric company pays to produce the electricity, which is largely dependent on the price of natural gas, which is just finally coming down from record highs.

up
Voting closed 1

you can still use gas heat as long as you are below a particular home energy rating system index score.

Just means a lot more insulation, triple glazed windows, etc.

up
Voting closed 1

We can pay the price for electricity up front, or we can pay the costs of fossil fuel use later, 100-fold. That up-front cost can be a hard sell, but it's what we have to do.

up
Voting closed 2

That's a nice argument.

But at the end of the day, most people only care how much they are paying. Yes people are that selfish, myself included.

You want people to care about the environment? Make it cost effective to do so. Its not the best argument but its how you are going to get people to switch. And until rates go down, you're going to have people like me.. and many others who will be darned to switch when rates are high.

I'm sorry that this is an inconvenient truth. But it is exactly that. The truth. People will not care when the power companies are taking customers to cleaners for power.

Of course I always love the uhub crowd, preachin about income inequality and housing issues. But what good trying to fix that when you're going to pay 300-400/mo for heating cost in the winter? Yup low income people can get waivers and payment plans for discounted power, but in the end, someone else pays for that, and that cost is passed on to the rest of the consumers. We buy more power than we generate. Eversource has to make up that. You think the CEO is gonna take a paycut? Nah, they are going to pass all of this onto the consumers.

Maybe the problem is Eversource and how we buy power here... so we're back to the core of my argument. Reduce power rates and you'll get more people that might think about switching from natural gas.

up
Voting closed 1

More than half the gas bill I see is a delivery charge, one that includes a monthly hookup fee 12 months a year.

As gas hookups and residential use declines, who do you think is going to get saddled with the remaining delivery bill? I'm not thinking environmentally long term here, but a growing impact over the next 10 years.

Granted, gas power generation and electricity will still have delivery charges - but economy of scale is more on their side then a a declining patchwork of residential hookups.

There are many rational arguments against this from a cost point of view, but I'd bet on electric over gas at some key decision making point - such as needing a new furnace. Heck, one could hedge and do a heat pump/furnace combo and get the best of both worlds while they still last today.

Also rag on eversource all you want, but I don't find national grid that much different. They gonna bill you on cost+, I'd bet on the team that has growing economy of scale though.

up
Voting closed 1

Sometimes doing the right thing costs more.

I mean, I *have* answers, like taxing the bejeezus out of the ultra-rich, who made a lot of their money off of extractive industries, and using that to subsidize renewables, efficiency improvements, pay UBI etc. But of course that's not going to make everyone happy either.

You *can't* make everyone happy. But getting off of natural gas is the thing we have to do, one way or another. So I'm very much in favor of this (deeply limited) measure, even in isolation.

up
Voting closed 0

... On building your new house in Boston.

Oh ... wait ...

Nobody is demanding that you switch over. This is about new buildings.

I might be getting rid of gas for heating in my older house simply because my 30 year old steam boiler is on its last legs and the cost of replacing it versus installing air source heat pumps that run off my solar panels (effectively) - and getting AC in the bargain - tips the balance to electric.

up
Voting closed 1

Nobody is demanding that you switch over. This is about new buildings.

Read for once before commenting. I even said this as the last line. I never said the word "Demand" at all. Don't be a D bag just because you can.

Regardless, you are aware that this is the eventual goal of MassSave to move people over. I wish I could find the article from last year where it states that MassSave had ambitious goals to move people over, when less than 10% of homes in this state have switched. I think the state promised over 50%. And we've not even close to that.

So yes there is a huge push to do this across the state. No, not a mandate. But you know eventually it will happen. There is money tied to all of this.

Regardless of your reply, my argument still applies. Its real rich for politicians to even suggest this when electrical rates are ridiculous. Same rates apply for new construction as it does for old. It doesn't matter if its me or anyone else.. same rates apply. So the argument remains

Also don't be a d bag just because you can.

up
Voting closed 2

Heat pumps have been great for the shoulder seasons and the AC but I don't find the heat as comfortable as our radiators in true winter. Dryer and less even. However if your boiler is truly at the failure point that may be irrelevant.

up
Voting closed 1

Who needs fact checking when there are plenty of right wing talking points!

I got blackout bingo here.

up
Voting closed 0

Who did the Plumbers and Gasfitters endorse in the Mayoral campaign?

up
Voting closed 0

New construction is too cheap right now, let’s make it more expensive!

up
Voting closed 1

Don't people remember what happened to Lawrence and North Andover just a few years ago when the gas lines exploded? That kind of event doesn't happen with electricity. Gas is inherently dangerous not only for the future environment, but also in the present.

up
Voting closed 1

eversource was the vendor designated to mange the fiasco in lawrence gas , taking over the company that provided service. national grid is an english company that has the other piece of the action gas wise in mass. both provide gas and electric to the masses, no one is safe from greed.

up
Voting closed 0

Seems like this should go hand in hand with efficiency guidelines and solar roof requirements. New construction in this town is not being built with particularly high standards - these buildings are drafty and cheap. Insulation and mitigation via solar panels should be part of this effort.

up
Voting closed 0

you are going to pay one way or another

up
Voting closed 1