Welcome! Here are the website rules, as well as some tips for using this forum.
Need to contact us? Visit https://heatinghelp.com/contact-us/.
Click here to Find a Contractor in your area.

Age old question updated - gas vs. electric hot water heating?

2»

Comments

  • hot_rod
    hot_rod Member Posts: 22,021
    jonquiljo said:

    That analysis misses a lot of points. Gasoline is cheap out here, then again - people have a long way to go to get anywhere by car. I've never even heard of heating oil out here, so it's kind of irrelevant to factor in. The biggest thing the article misses is that there have been a number of rates increases in both gas and electricity - likely in retribution for the fines and bad press that PG&E was given after they blew up a large area in San Bruno a while back. That explosion opened up a can of worms, exposing an extremely old infrastructure that PG&E had been letting rot for many years.

    California has two populations - middle class Americans that work hard for a living and are stuck in a very expensive state. They probably account for the lion's share of the people in California. Then there are the "well off" which range from the excessive amounts of $250K households which range to well over $1-10M. The well off have all the political clout (big campaign donors), and out of guilt tend to be very liberal. Unfortunately they are out of touch with how the rest of the state lives and support fish and trees more than they support social programs. If you earn $1m a year, how do you relate to those earning 20x less? It's easy, but they don't. PG&E and the Southern utilities tend to go unchecked for that very reason.

    The same is true with water - very expensive and (against conventional wisdom) very abundant in the northern part of the state. Water costs are as unfair as utilities are. If I get a $1000 utility bill, I just get annoyed. Most people get wiped out. Most people as fortunate as I am do not understand that many people get wiped out. These people cannot afford energy efficient heating/cooling systems too - double whammy.

    So as political as this thread may be - it has a lot to do with heating (and cooling). If you can't afford it, there is no technology that will dig you out of it. And we have a wide diverse climate range in most places. California weather is not all like LA; those who think so watch too much TV.


    Well I know what I would do if the utilities, state government, and wealthy influencers bugged me that much :) Have truck, will travel.

    You may not be able to move away from wealthy influence anymore, looking at how our nation is run. But you could relocate to a lower cost of living area.

    In the meantime HH can help with suggestions on how to squeeze the most efficiency from you home and energy.
    Bob "hot rod" Rohr
    trainer for Caleffi NA
    Living the hydronic dream
    KC_Jones
  • Sal Santamaura
    Sal Santamaura Member Posts: 529

    BobC said:

    ...It's strange that rates were much better BEFORE they gave us the gift of deregulation...

    Nothing strange about it. Corporate America always wants government off its back so it can increase profit. What else would one expect when monopolies are freed from constraint?

    ...To one of @Sal Santamaura 's points: of course a business wants to increase its profit. That's what business is all about! That said, there are some areas which should be regulated, something which seems to have escaped the brains of the so-called liberals who want consumer choice. Those areas are what are termed, technically, natural monopolies: that is, there is some aspect of the activity which tends to make it very difficult, if not impossible, for two or more entities to serve an area...

    First, just to be clear, I completely understand that Corporate America / business is a machine designed to maximize profit. That's the way our system is structured and, unless it gets changed, no one can blame those entities from living up to the fiduciary responsibility they owe their owners.

    Second, haven't conservatives have been the major driver of deregulation?

    Finally, my post was made as a reaction to the description of post-deregulation rates as 'strange.' The monopolies I mentioned are precisely those natural ones Jamie defines. That rates are higher is neither strange nor was it unpredictable. The businesses that lobbied for deregulation did so for a reason. :)
    Canucker
  • jonquiljo
    jonquiljo Member Posts: 22
    hot rod said:


    Well I know what I would do if the utilities, state government, and wealthy influencers bugged me that much :) Have truck, will travel.

    You may not be able to move away from wealthy influence anymore, looking at how our nation is run. But you could relocate to a lower cost of living area.

    In the meantime HH can help with suggestions on how to squeeze the most efficiency from you home and energy.

    There is no state in this country that doesn't exercise that kind of influence or run it's government is a more fair an just manner. That's life. As for leaving - first off, there is no better place to go. Secondly - the last thing I will ever do is let a group of people or government indirectly force me to relocate. You have to draw the line somewhere.

    There is generally very little wealthy influence, but rather a lot of wealthy acceptance. Those in this state who can afford to -- simply avert their eyes. I have never been able to do that.
  • jonquiljo
    jonquiljo Member Posts: 22
    edited May 2017

    Nothing strange about it. Corporate America always wants government off its back so it can increase profit. What else would one expect when monopolies are freed from constraint?

    ...To one of @Sal Santamaura 's points: of course a business wants to increase its profit. That's what business is all about! That said, there are some areas which should be regulated, something which seems to have escaped the brains of the so-called liberals who want consumer choice. Those areas are what are termed, technically, natural monopolies: that is, there is some aspect of the activity which tends to make it very difficult, if not impossible, for two or more entities to serve an area...

    I don't think all business is necessarily out to make a buck and hurt people while doing it. Then again I've never been involved in a very large business such as a public utility. When I was younger, I worked in many companies where we wanted a handsome profit, but had the conscience to keep our greed in check. It's also not a good way to do business unless you have a monopoly - as you will eventually alienate all those who are "feeding" you.

    Currently we own pieces of a number of smaller companies that involve rental real estate - basically private equity (not sold on an open market). These companies are run responsibly with profit in mind - yet still don't go out and try to fleece the public. And that is very easy to do in Real Estate - especially when it has to do with large residential buildings. It's a seller's market. The difference between what we are a part of and something owned as a monopoly is that we know that if rents go out of control, we lose tenants to the competition. We also know that it's wrong. You just don't bite the hand that feeds you. If you have any morality, you can't live knowing that's what pays your bills. And, after a while (though it has been a while since we were in that position), excessive cash in your pocket does not really make you any happier. If anything it makes you more miserable as you become more and more insulated from the realities of the world. Technology becomes a toy - not a means to save time and money.

    Again, the fundamental difference with corporate greed in general is the lack of competition. Where I personally choose to live has one choice - PG&E. They are not really "regulated" by our government - and that is the problem. "De-regulation" of an industry is to lower costs and not a free ticket to take advantage of people. Yet somehow these utilities find a way to make it one. And when competitive industries like solar energy threatened the bottom line of these utilities (in some manner), they fight hard to fleece people more. But solar is not free or cheap, so it will never totally displace a larger utility company. So again, technology loses to the corporation without competition. We supposedly got that under control in the early 1900's. Apparently not.

  • Sal Santamaura
    Sal Santamaura Member Posts: 529
    edited May 2017
    jonquiljo said:

    ..."De-regulation" of an industry is to lower costs...

    That's the marketing pitch for deregulation. You and other seem to have believed it, i.e. striving to throw off regulatory shackles started out as a sincere desire for 'efficiency.'
    jonquiljo said:

    "...not a free ticket to take advantage of people. Yet somehow these utilities find a way to make it one...

    It has always been exactly a free ticket to take advantage of people. The way utilities found was lobbying for deregulation in the first place. :smile:
    Brewbeer
  • Beehelp
    Beehelp Member Posts: 5
    I own a gass water heater and it makes my pockets empty!!!
  • Gsmith
    Gsmith Member Posts: 431
    I'm 67 and grew up in a "redi-kilowatt" household, my dad worked his entire career at a Pennsylvania electric utility. I can tell you first hand that the old-timers at the utility were proud to be a "public utility" and of the fact that for many many years after World War II the price of electricity at the residential meter went down year after year. The utilities, at least in PA, were getting a reasonable about 10% return on investment, and attracted sufficient capital. The line workers got good salaries and good but not extravagent benefits. The managements got reasonable salaries for people managing very large, complex operations, but not excessive salaries (look at 20 or 25 year old proxie notices the shareholder got each year). For example the president of one PA utility that I know of retired 30 years ago with a pension while he lived of $75,000 per year. That's the pension the top manager at what was then a $2 billion revenue utility got, certainly a nice pension but not excessive by today's standards for sure. That all changed with de-regulation, in exchange for some competition in generation (none on distribution since it is indeed a natural monopoly) the utility companies restructured their operations and now are essentially purely profit driven entities with none of the former ethos of the 'public utility" they once were. The "public" in public utility used to mean the companies were owned by the public (they were stock issuing entities) and managed for the benefit of the public, not just the stockholders. And the PUC at the time regulated them in a way that assured they were managed for the benefit of both the shareholders (with a reasonable return on capital) AND for the public consumers of electricity. Now, management gets really excessive salaries and benefits, workers get no better than before, maintenance is deferred, storm response is bad, outages more frequent---but we have competition in generation. Was it a good trade, maybe yes, I think probably not. But given Wall Street's ethics in recent years and the magnitude of the tech industry profits showing company managers the way, perhaps that old "public utility" mindset was on the way to extinction anyway. Just my 2 cents.
    MilanDBrewbeer
  • Jamie Hall
    Jamie Hall Member Posts: 23,161
    @Gary Smith -- my point, exactly, and well put. Thank you!
    Br. Jamie, osb
    Building superintendent/caretaker, 7200 sq. ft. historic house museum with dependencies in New England
  • Brewbeer
    Brewbeer Member Posts: 616
    Electricity and gas are expensive in California because of supply and demand. Tons of people live there and the population is growing quickly, which puts heavy demand on resources like energy.

    Lots of cheap energy in Nebraska, good place to live if you want low gas and electricity prices.
    Hydronics inspired homeowner with self-designed high efficiency low temperature baseboard system and professionally installed mod-con boiler with indirect DHW. My system design thread: http://forum.heatinghelp.com/discussion/154385
    System Photo: https://us.v-cdn.net/5021738/uploads/FileUpload/79/451e1f19a1e5b345e0951fbe1ff6ca.jpg
  • jonquiljo
    jonquiljo Member Posts: 22
    Brewbeer said:

    Electricity and gas are expensive in California because of supply and demand. Tons of people live there and the population is growing quickly, which puts heavy demand on resources like energy.

    California's population growth is only at about 1% per year. That is probably less than typical among states. There is a large divide between the "haves" and "have-nots." In The SF Bay area, housing prices average well over $1m in most counties, and spread from $700k-$4M. There are homes below and above that range - these figures represent typical costs. Some people walk in, make millions and buy their homes for cash. Those of us who have mortgages, tend to have large ones. So even an income of $1/2M a year will not allow you to live as comfortably as you'd think. Anyone below $100K-$150K is really cutting it tight. Now utility rates are high, and you feel the bite.

    Many people are forced out of the area, but stay in the state. They end up with very long commutes from places much less expensive. Some people are totally forced out of the state. Of the people I came with to the Bay Area in the early 80's - none that I know of are still left.

    Solar seems to be the big "escape" from the utility "bite" - but the companies that lease solar tend to be a very predatory IMO. The cost of buying your own solar system is easily $30K for a small one, and double that for a larger one. They pay for themselves in a short time, though I have heard that many people with excess capacity get very little selling back to the grid. The bottom line here is that the socio-economic atmosphere is abnormal. Most people endure a lot of financial stress to stay here. Some can pay the freight or gain equity. Most often there is a lot of turnover - usually in the under 35 demographic. This is how the utilities get away with it. You can jump every month when you make your $6K mortgage payment, or you can jump when you make your $1K utility payment. No minor heating/cooling modification is going to make that much better. If housing prices were cheaper - the utility costs would have a larger perceived impact. Only now are people complaining because utility prices are a far bigger piece of your income. It's a bit too late for that.

  • Larry Weingarten
    Larry Weingarten Member Posts: 3,272
    Hi, Perhaps this is simplistic, but I'd systematically make the home far more energy efficient and then look into solar for the remaining loads. I power my 1800 foot off grid home with 890 watts of PV
  • jonquiljo
    jonquiljo Member Posts: 22
    What is a reasonable company for purchasing Solar panel systems - who won't rip you off? I'd want a ground-based panel array (i have lots of space). Leasing is not a good idea around here as they are more finance companies than energy companies. Thanks.
  • Larry Weingarten
    Larry Weingarten Member Posts: 3,272
    Hi, I've dealt with these folks: https://www.altestore.com/store/ and this one could be good as well: ;)https://www.wholesalesolar.com/

    Yours, Larry