To the editor: Studying this text may lead one to consider that banning fuel home equipment, akin to water heaters and house heaters, and changing them with electrical home equipment would remove 100% of NOx emissions from fuel home equipment (“Regulators search to section out gas-powered home equipment in Southern California,” June 4). This isn’t true, as a result of pure fuel is used to generate electrical energy in California — in 2023, it made up 43.68% of our producing power, in line with the California Power Fee.
I feel this Air High quality Administration District initiative to section out fuel home equipment ought to be postponed till such time as 0% of California’s power is generated with fossil fuels. And because the value to transform from fuel to electrical is substantial contemplating the prices of latest home equipment, installations and upgrades of family electrical panels, the state and AQMD ought to rebate all of those conversion prices to households. If this AQMD initiative is deemed by the state to be essential, then it ought to pay for its implementation.
Greg Zebrowski, Manhattan Seaside
..
To the editor: There are two issues with adopting electrical water heaters. One is retrofitting the provision, in all probability not a difficulty with new building however a critical consideration when substituting fuel for electrical energy. The opposite is paying for that electrical energy. Our utilities have made electrical energy so costly that, even with photo voltaic panels mitigating among the value, home equipment that use important energy are a luxurious for use solely the place mandatory. The AQMD must give attention to these sensible issues as a substitute of the chimera of targets. Any idiot can mandate a share determine and so seem like doing one thing, nevertheless it takes finesse to seek out sensible options that don’t themselves create new issues.
Martin Usher, Thousand Oaks
