Four years ago, Vancouver city council voted to ban the use of natural gas for heating and hot water in newly constructed buildings as part of the city’s efforts to reduce climate-destabilizing greenhouse gas emissions. The decision put Vancouver on track to transition away from fossil fuel use, offering a clear example for other Canadian cities to follow. But on July 23rd of this year, Vancouver Mayor Ken Sim and his right-wing ABC party made a surprise move to reverse the city’s ban, citing a need to speed up housing construction and provide homeowners with a choice of how to heat their homes.
In the months since the decision, it’s become clear that neither of Sim’s justifications stand up to scrutiny. The most important dimension of the decision is the one he left out: the policy reversal would all but ensure that Vancouver won’t achieve its emissions reduction targets. With a final vote on changing the bylaw coming up on November 26th, Vancouverites have a chance to stop Sim’s move and keep the city on track to meet its climate goals.
What makes emissions from space and water heating in buildings so important is that we can rapidly decarbonize them right now, using existing technologies, at a lower cost than continuing to use fossil fuels. With a ban on natural gas in place, new buildings can be heated and cooled by highly efficient and cost-effective heat pumps powered by electricity. Electrifying heating is a tangible and effective climate policy, and a crucial step in meeting our climate commitments. The only thing in short supply is political will.
Ending natural gas hookups brings real emissions reductions
According to the city of Vancouver’s own estimates, burning natural gas for space and water heating in buildings is responsible for 55 per cent of the city’s carbon emissions. Under the provincial Clean BC climate plan, all new buildings in the province will be required to have zero emissions by 2030. Vancouver has committed to halving its carbon pollution by 2030, but the city is not on track to meet that target. Delays in reducing building emissions are one of the main reasons for the city’s climate shortcomings.
To make faster progress on achieving its climate targets, Vancouver also needs to work on retrofitting older buildings to improve energy efficiency, prioritizing active transportation to reduce the number of vehicle kilometers traveled, and focusing on walkable or transit-connected neighbourhoods in urban planning. But there’s no way around the core fact: the city cannot continue burning gas for heating and reduce building emissions to zero in line with its municipal, provincial, and federal climate commitments. Simply put, there is no credible path to decarbonization without eliminating natural gas as a heating source, first in new buildings and then in existing stock.
What about FortisBC and other oil and gas corporations who claim that natural gas is a bridge fuel to a zero-carbon future? When the emissions from burning natural gas are properly accounted for, the industry’s claims go up in smoke. The extraction of gas through fracking or hydraulic fracturing pollutes groundwater and spews out enormous plumes of climate-heating methane emissions in northeastern British Columbia. Recent research has shown that “fugitive emissions” released during gas production are dramatically higher than industry and government reports show. It turns out that so-called “natural” gas is a marketing term developed by the oil and gas industry to hide the dirty fact that their product is primarily composed of methane gas, and burning it only worsens the climate crisis.
Natural gas is bad for your health
Further souring the case for gas heating in homes and buildings is research highlighting the health impacts of burning gas. According to Canadian Physicians for the Environment (CAPE), the production of gas for domestic consumption and export in the fracking fields of BC is responsible for high rates of cancer and other unusual health problems in surrounding regions. The same heightened risk applies in communities like Kitimat, where flaring gas at LNG export terminals releases harmful toxins into the air. Unsurprisingly, burning gas for heating and cooking in buildings can also cause respiratory illnesses such as asthma among residents. Beyond the immediate consequences of extraction and combustion, the most significant public health risk associated with fossil gas is the loss of a habitable climate.
Homeowner choice is a fig leaf for industry profits
Back in July, Sim justified his decision to reverse the city’s ban on new fossil gas connections by positioning himself as the champion of homeowners who like their gas stoves and don’t want the government telling them how to cook or heat up their homes. Ignoring the city’s decarbonization targets as well as the broader climate and health consequences of burning gas, Sim tried to cast the issue as a conflict in the culture war. But the city’s ban never applied to gas cooking, even though the associated health risks make a strong case for electric induction stoves as a better alternative.
Like “natural” gas, the concept of homeowner choice is aggressively promoted by marketers and lobbyists employed by the gas industry to defend their business model. It’s no secret that gas companies like FortisBC stand to lose a lot of money from legislation that restricts the use of their core product. Homeowner choice is a fig leaf for gas industry profits. As the climate crisis heats up, the real choice for homeowners is clear: either we prop up the dangerous business model of fossil fuel companies and risk our collective future, or we urgently transform our energy infrastructure to safeguard the climate.
Like homeowner choice, Sim’s claim that allowing fossil gas hookups in new buildings will speed up construction times doesn’t stand up to scrutiny either. According to a survey of the BC building industry conducted by the Zero Emissions Innovation Centre, eliminating natural gas heating in new homes is both reasonable and achievable. Developers, designers, suppliers and builders across the sector reported being able to meet the city’s building energy regulations, which they said “are not materially driving increased construction costs or slowing down housing development.”
Tell city council to stand up for sound climate policy
The good news is that Vancouver city councilors in Sim’s ABC party may be seeing through the gas industry’s propaganda. After hearing from residents and business representatives, Councilor Rebecca Bligh is reportedly reconsidering her vote ahead of the November 26th council meeting. We need to let Bligh and the other councilors know that keeping fossil gas connections out of new buildings is more important than gas industry profits.
Ready to take action? We’re inviting Council of Canadians supporters in Vancouver to join us at a webinar on Wednesday, November 13th at 7 p.m. PT to learn how we can hold city councilors accountable and ensure that Mayor Sim’s gas ban reversal doesn’t become law. Join us!
