HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc - Moore (Reach Code) 8/26/2019
Tonikian, Victoria
From:CityClerk
Sent:Monday, August 26, 2019 5:42 PM
To:Steve Moore
Cc:Betz, Ryan; Read, Chris
Subject:RE: I Oppose the ban on Gas Fireplaces!
Dear Mr. Moore,
Thank you for taking the time to contact the City Council on this topic. This is a policy related issue for the City
Council’s consideration that is scheduled to be heard at the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on
rd
September 3. Your message has been provided directly to them.
If you have any questions, please contact the Administration Department at (805) 781-7589.
Sincerely,
Victoria Tonikian
Administrative Assistant II
City Administration
City Clerk's Office
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
E vtonikia@slocity.org
T 805.781.7105
slocity.org
From: Steve Moore <
Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2019 11:17 PM
To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org>
Subject: I Oppose the ban on Gas Fireplaces!
Hello City Council Members,
Although I heartily agree with reducing the city's carbon footprint, I oppose banning penalizing the use of natural gas
fireplaces or appliances for several reasons.
1. Burning Natural Gas to create electricity is worse for the global environment than burning natural gas directly.
Without the ability to ensure the electricity for a fireplace, electric heater or appliance is coming exclusively and always
from renewable sources potentially increases the city's carbon footprint. Electricity provided by PG&E during colder
months (fewer hours of sunlight) or at night is unlikely to come from solar and creating electricity from burning natural gas
to run a steam turbine to produce electricity is inefficient and produces more emissions than burning the natural gas
locally. While our city's emissions might appear infinitesimally reduced, the net negative effect on the environment would
be greater.
2. Don't support the PG&E monopoly
Forcing your constituents to rely on PG&E for more electricity will increase PG&E profits and subject homeowners and
renters to the skyrocketing cost of electricity. I'm currently installing solar panels on my home to reduce my carbon foot
1
print and my reliance on PG&E, but I still want my gas fireplace for aesthetics and for heat in case of a prolonged PG&E
power outage.
3. SLO should lead and not follow.
This proposed ban, while well intended, is misdirected and mostly symbolic. I doubt city staff can even accurately
calculate the amount of natural gas burned via intermittent fireplace usage compared to stoves, dryers, water heaters and
furnaces. If the city council wants to lead, lead boldly. Do something radical. Be the first city to reduce or eliminate permit
fees for any new home that installs all solar appliances and the solar production and storage capacity to truly produce
zero emissions, and not just push those emissions to another area of the state. I would be that one home that doesn't
require any natural gas to be drilled, transported, or burned to create electricity would do more for the environment than all
the bans on fireplaces combined. That would make a big difference, get great news coverage for our city and be an
example for other cities to follow. I know it feels good to do "something", but this "thing" is more about our feeling good
than our doing meaningful good for our planet.
Finally, I can (and do) put restrictions on my children, but I'd prefer to incentivize good decisions, not just take away the
possibility of bad ones. Plus, your constituents are not children and assuming they're unable to make wise/grownup
decisions (so you have to make decisions for them) is why congress has a lower approval rating than our current
President.
Steve Moore
2