So our piece on Vancouver’s impending (and incredibly stupid) natural gas ban has been going gangbusters online, and has sparked many, many conversations across the province. Today, both The Province’s Gord Clark and The Courier’s Mike Klassen weigh in with pieces worth reading.

Klassen looks at City Hall’s nonsensical spin that somehow, some way, there will be enough district energy (powered by waste wood from teardown buildings within Vancouver city limits) to power the city. From his piece:

One of the first countries to adopt mandatory connection to municipally operated district energy systems was Sweden in the late 1990s. Sweden is cited in city reports touting the switch to renewable energy.

Since 2007, Swedish households have paid, on average, US$3,100 per year or more — or about 10 per cent of their disposable income — to heat space and water if they are connected to Swedish city-developed district energy utilities…

In a city where so many people are already struggling to cover their cost of living, why would city hall make it worse?

In a July interview with Vox.com, Sadhu Johnston explained how the city plans to use locally sourced wood waste to generate the district heat supply.

“It has to be from within the city,” said Johnston. “We’ve banned all clean wood from entering the landfill and that’s creating a supply of wood waste that can be used.”

So, exactly how many demolished wood buildings are we talking about here?

Clark absolutely shreds Vision Vancouver’s arrogance in the Province. It’s an amazing piece of writing and perfectly frames Gregor Robertson’s view of the world. From his piece:

[Robertson’s handpicked city manager Sadhu Johnston] also admitted that residents — whom he called “our public” — weren’t on board with plans to eliminate fossil fuels.

“The greatest challenge we face in becoming a 100-per-cent renewably powered city is not a technology, it’s not implementation — it’s our public being able to accept the change and being willing to put up with it,” he said. “I think we’ve not succeeded yet in finding ways to communicate the steps that we’re taking and the carbon reasons to do it. We haven’t figured out how to do that in a way that resonates with people.”

Being willing to “put up with it?” Vision hasn’t figured out how to explain these policies in a way that “resonates with people?” If that’s true, why was the plan shoved through?

Perhaps the problem is that Johnston is unqualified. Normally, city managers have masters degrees in public administration and decades of experience in municipal government before earning that role. Johnston has an undergraduate degree in environmental studies and his previous jobs were political appointments by the mayor of Chicago. He is not here from the U.S. to engage with and work for citizens — he’s here to slam through the ideological agenda of his political masters. Unfortunately, many Vancouver bureaucrats are now partisans.

Like others, I’m not a member of anyone’s “our public.” I’m a citizen and taxpayer of Vancouver and I’m sick of being talked down to and having my actual needs, like functioning roads and an affordable life, ignored.

Finally, one last note. A letter to the editor appeared in the Province today from a Rob Bernhardt of Victoria. He’s fully in favour of Gregor’s gas gouge:

Jordan Bateman’s article opposing Vancouver’s building policies advances several misleading arguments. My experience as a builder and homeowner is that homes such as those encouraged by Vancouver’s building policies improve affordability.

We live in a certified Passive House which uses gas. While the fuel may be cheap, the equipment required to burn gas indoors is expensive for a single-family home to buy and maintain. When the gas equipment needs replacing (as equipment always does) we are considering converting to electric heating and hot water. The energy consumption is so low that simple electrical systems provide a more economical alternative. Our home also offers amazing comfort, air quality and a quiet interior as a consequence of the building quality and ventilation system.

By positioning itself as a global leader, Vancouver ensures its future as a destination for industry and economic activity as an attractive and sustainable city. There is much to be gained from such buildings that are better for people, better for business and better for the planet. Let’s not be distracted from this reality by out-of-context arguments.

A quick Google search shows Rob Bernhardt is the CEO of Passive House Canada, a lobby group with views aligned completely with Vision Vancouver. Talk about a vested interest!

You know what’s better for people? Saving them thousands of dollars in heating and energy costs. It's an outright to suggest that switching from natural gas to electricity, district energy or so-called "renewable" natural gas will save consumers money. Just do the math: when the fuel source is far more expensive, it cannot save anyone money.