The only gaslighting going on here is being done by the author of this rant. HB1589 as it was originally written banned new gas hookups and also changed state law so that PSE would no longer be obligated to offer gas service to anyone in their service area. It was clearly written with the intent to ban gas as an energy source and was only changed at the last minute because the legislature didn't have the votes to get it through. Even then this sorry excuse for a bill was put through at 2am in the morning after significant pressure from both the gov and leadership on members who were holding out. The provisions in this bill allow PSE to depreciate capital assets related to gas usage faster than they normally would. The net result of that depreciation will drive up costs for PSE and in turn require them to raise rates to make up for the accelerated depreciation of assets.

There are two other larger issues with this legislation though. If gas service is sunsetted many homes who use gas today will need to be completely retrofitted. PSE was offering a consultation so I had them come out and look at my house to get a sense of what the cost would be. I already have a heat pump in use so the rep said it was very efficient as gas goes however if I were to move to complete electrification at a minimum I would need a new panel ($7-$8k) and most likely need a new service line because my house only has 110 and most need 240. The cost of a new service line is $25-$30k. So to remove gas from my house I'm looking at $35-$40K not including new appliances.

Beyond that though, gas makes up 30% of our energy utilization today. A forecast by the energy council recently shows we currently are not generating enough power to meet our future needs especially give the demands of the new AI data centers coming online. If we remove an additional 30% where is that power coming from? You can not build enough solar panels and wind farms to generate that power. The cost of electricity is going to sky rocket and you know what? It won't make one iota of different when it comes to global climate change. We will live in a society where we have power shortages driven by demand and price and nothing will be improved. We need to keep gas until and only until alternatives are available to replace what we have lost plus meet new demand. Vote yes on this initiative and don't let the power companies (yes PSE supports this because they are going to rake in money) and climate activists create an energy crisis in this state.

Facts about HB 1589

BELLEVUE, Wash. (3/29/2024) HB 1589, passed by the state legislature in March 2024, is a planning bill. It will help PSE, under the supervision of the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC), thoughtfully plan for the electric and natural gas choices of our customers consistent with our state’s aggressive climate goals.

There has been a lot of misinformation about HB 1589 as it changed over the course of two legislative sessions, from when it was first introduced in January 2023 to passage by the legislature in March 2024.

HB 1589 does not include a ban on natural gas, and it does not change PSE’s obligation to serve natural gas to our customers.
There is no rate increase associated with HB 1589. It’s a planning bill, and there will be three years of rulemaking and work before we submit an integrated system plan to our regulators. That will only be a plan—it will not include a request to increase rates.
Nothing in the bill forces electrification. What it does is requires PSE to develop a scenario demonstrating the costs of electrification that will be part of the integrated system plan we submit to our regulators in 2027.

[..]
Accelerated Depreciation: The bill requires PSE to file new depreciation schedules for the natural gas business each time the company files a multi-year rate plan (which PSE did in the filing we made in February). It requires the UTC to set depreciation rates for all the gas plants in service as of July 2024 so that those assets are fully depreciated by 2050. Accelerated depreciation ensures that current customers who are benefiting from the gas infrastructure pay their fair share of the costs before leaving the system, helping to protect against an undue cost burden falling on an increasingly smaller group of customers, particularly those who can least afford it.
https://www.pse.com/en/press-release/details/Facts-about-HB-1589

How much does it cost to run a new electrical service line [in Seattle]?
$10 – $25 cost per foot installed (underground)
$5 – $15 cost per foot installed (above ground)
https://homeguide.com/costs/cost-to-run-power

Thus $25k is 1/2 mile above ground and 1/4 mile underground.

@2 maybe you should read my post before commenting. The original bill that passed the house in Jan 2024 absolutely contained a gas ban

https://mynorthwest.com/3947555/bill-ban-natural-gas-revived-passes-washington-house/

"The bill would ban any gas company that serves more than 500,000 customers — specifically, Puget Sound Energy (PSE) — from connecting new natural gas lines to new residential or commercial buildings — with limited exemptions for certain manufacturing, medical care, correctional, and military facilities. PSE would also no longer be required to provide natural gas service to existing customers, which state law currently mandates."

That language was passed by the house....let that sink in....It was actually passed. The only reason the bill was amended is because they didn't have the votes to get it through the Senate. If you think they won't try again you're a fool or willfully ignorant or both.

The cost of upgrading your house is also legit. The panel alone costs in the $7-$8K range and then running service (dependent on terrain) will be anywhere from $10-$15K.

As for PSE, they have already filed for an 18% rate increase for natural gas next year due to people using less gas. If you think that is the actually true you can join the group who thinks the legislature isn't trying to ban gas. The accelerated depreciation cycle is driving more cost into the system. Meanwhile PSE gets to raise rates and is making buckets of money thanks to the legislature.

https://www.pse.com/en/press-release/details/Puget-Sound-Energy-files-two-year-electric-and-natural-gas-rate-plan

and of course Bob doesn't even try to dispute the biggest problem in all of this. We DONT have enough power today. Removing gas from the grid will lead to rationing and price increases. If you want to create alternative energy that's fine but let's not put the cart before the horse and remove energy from the system until that alternatives are ready. That's crazy.

You should campaign against the existing bill, not the one that didn't pass. Personally, I am for requiring that all new construction be 100% electrified. There are no drawbacks: it's cheaper and cleaner, and methane is a major factor in climate change over the short term. Its use had to be curbed yesterday. Instead we were lied to about a "bridge energy" that is in fact as bad as coal for climate.

"The panel alone costs in the $7-$8K range "

Average national cost for a new electrical panel is $1300. Your quote likely includes rewiring part of the house, which is probably a good idea if it is old.

Your house must be quite far from the street if a new line starts at $10,000 which implies a ~400' underground line or 800' above ground

Decreasing NG demand signals that it is becoming obsolete just like coal and we have to adapt. It would have been easier if charlatans hadn't pushed developing NG infrastructure over the last 16 years instead of pushing renewables.

Electrical power demand is expected to surge by 30% over the next 10 years and it will be challenging to meet demand, especially during extreme climate events that are increasingly shaped by climate change, but grid integration over the entire West should make it possible. There is no reason to panic and again shortchange the absolutely necessary decarbonizing of the energy supply. Increasing demand has been an excuse for far too long.

“You should campaign against the existing bill, not the one that didn't pass. “

That’s what I’m doing. The initiative prohibits the legislature from passing legislation that bans gas service. As I said if you think they won’t try to “perfect” their bill you are being really naive.

I vote for most things that restrict or limit government power. Voting for this initiative.

I don't get the love affair with gas. Burning gas is primitive. We need to evolve and start by getting rid of toxic, flammable fuels. It's the 21st century and the fossil fuel nuts need to pick their knuckles up off the floor.

fossil Fools'll
have us Believe
a Catastrophic Climate's
'Not That Bad!' and if we just
Buck Up those four-season 'Fire
Seasons''re "NO Big Deal!" & that
500-year Floods Every Other year're
just 'Nature's Way!' and, really, there's
just NOTHING WE CAN DO RIGHT NOW!

so, just go Along with Whatever Big Oil
(and Gas!) decide for Us, it'll 'probably'
be 'just fine!' whilst they Pave OUR
way to Global Warming and right
Straight to Hell in the proverbial
Handbasket -- heck, They'll
even supply the Fuel. sure.
for a Price. but we Cannot
afford what it Is they're
Selling: Catastrophic
Climactic Disruption
on a Biblical scale.

our Corporate Stooges
here at the Stranger
want you to Dis-
believe all the
Evidence you
can SEE and
just 'Trust
Them':

They know
what's Best
for you & me.

Do NOT
Believe
them:

they're Lying.

VOTE NO
on I-2066.

oh, look --
it's the NYT
right on Cue!

nyt:
Clean Energy
Is Booming in the U.S.
The Election Could Change That.

Trump has suggested he would dismantle the Inflation Reduction Act, which has reshaped America’s energy landscape. It won’t be easy.

Over the last two years, a surge in clean energy manufacturing has helped push U.S. factory construction to the highest level in half a century. Solar power installations and electric car sales are breaking records. Even Republican-led states like Montana and Utah are writing climate plans to secure federal cash.

Yet the law driving this dizzying transformation of America’s energy landscape, the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, is facing a highly uncertain future as next week’s election looms.

If he returns to the White House, former President Donald J. Trump has suggested he would gut the law, which is expected to pour as much as $1.2 trillion over the next decade into technologies to fight climate change such as wind turbines, solar panels, nuclear reactors, carbon capture and E.V.s, as well as the factories to supply them.

“My plan will terminate the Green New Deal, which I call the Green New Scam,” Mr. Trump said in September, using his catchall phrase for climate policies. “We will rescind all unspent funds under the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act.”

By contrast, Vice President Kamala Harris, who cast the law’s tiebreaking vote in the Senate, hopes to accelerate the growth of clean energy to slash greenhouse gas emissions, though that would require speeding up federal permits while overcoming local opposition and electric grid constraints.

tonnes more on (possibly!)
our Very Last Election:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/30/climate/clean-energy-us-2024-election.html