From EnergyNow.ca

By Stewart Muir of Resource Works

More News and Views From Resource Works Here

The Practicality of Energy Choice in Vancouver

Vancouver’s decision to reverse the ban on natural gas appliances in new homes should serve as the beginning of a necessary conversation about energy system choices

In a city like Vancouver, where the mountains meet the sea and the urban skyline reflects both our history and our aspirations, policy decisions are often a reflection of our values. Yet, sometimes, even the best intentions can lead us down a perilous path. The recent decision by the City of Vancouver to restore freedom of choice for heating water and space in our homes, reversing an earlier ban on natural gas, is a move I support.

Housing affordability was a major deciding factor, but to me this turn of events – one the nation is watching – also marks a step away from a simplistic and potentially regressive approach to climate action, one that could have stymied our efforts to decarbonize in a meaningful way.

Let me be clear: climate change is real, and the need to reduce emissions is urgent. However, the original gas ban, while well-intentioned, was not the answer. Banning natural gas from our homes might have seemed like a bold move, but it ignored the nuances of our energy system and the challenges we face in transitioning to a low-carbon future.

The gas ban was a decision that felt good for those deeply concerned about climate action; a personal stand against fossil fuels. But feelings alone do not build resilient energy systems, nor do they account for the complex interplay of technologies and fuels that will be necessary to achieve our climate goals. Natural gas, particularly when blended with renewable gases like hydrogen, can and should play a role in our energy future. The idea of banning it outright was akin to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Consider this: hydrogen, a zero-emissions fuel, is already the focus of enormous national and international investment. Canada is positioning itself as a leader in hydrogen production and technology, recognizing its potential to decarbonize sectors that are otherwise difficult to electrify. Banning natural gas infrastructure would have made it difficult, if not impossible, to integrate hydrogen into our energy mix when the technology matures.

Similarly, renewable natural gas, produced from organic waste, relies on the very distribution networks that a gas ban would have dismantled. The infrastructure for delivering gas to our homes is not a relic of the past but a vital component of our future energy system, one that could deliver clean, low-carbon fuels to millions of Canadians.

Let’s not forget the practical realities of energy demand. Suppose gas was revoked as an option for homes in Canada; the energy required to replace it would necessitate the entirety of our current solar and wind capacity several times over. This is not hyperbole—it’s a fact. And it doesn’t even account for the intermittency of these renewable sources, which means they cannot be relied upon to meet demand at all times.

In British Columbia, we’re already seeing the strain on our electricity system. We’ve become net importers of electricity, a situation that underscores the limits of our current infrastructure. As demand continues to rise—for electric vehicles, air conditioning, and the energy-hungry applications of artificial intelligence—our grid is buckling under the pressure. Tens of billions of dollars in upgrades are required, and these projects will take years to complete. Meanwhile, our neighboring provinces and states are facing similar challenges, leading to a regional energy crunch.

This diagram of Canada’s energy system provides, under close examination, a sober realization of how things work:

There is a lot to take in here, showing as it does the sources of all the energy in Canadian life (on the left) and how they flow into particular uses (right).

In grey shading on the right, the box labelled “Rejected Energy” represents energy that goes to waste. It is a staggering five times the amount of all types of energy used in our homes. I can understand that this area of high potential is hard to create excitement about. Nonetheless, it is a real source of ongoing progress, represented by ever more efficient ways of using fuels and upgrading equipment, and we aren’t talking about it.

Energy experts understand that banning a single type of energy without considering the broader system is not just imprudent; it’s dangerous. It could lead to shortages, higher costs, and ultimately, a failure to achieve our climate goals. Yet, I also recognize the appeal of actions that seem to offer immediate, tangible results. There’s a strong emotional pull in taking control of what happens in our own homes, in feeling like we’re doing our part.

This is why I’m calling for more energy education and diverse conversations that are constructive, respectful, and grounded in reality. We need to move beyond the tired narrative of “faceless corporations” versus the environment. The truth is, the people in both policy and industry are striving for the same outcome: a world with lower emissions and better outcomes for all.

The City of Vancouver’s decision to reverse the gas ban is a wise one, but it should be just the beginning. I urge the city to initiate a robust process of energy education, one that equips residents with the knowledge they need to make informed decisions about their energy use. And as a resident of this city, I am more than willing to take part in this vital conversation.

Our future depends on it.

Stewart Muir is the Founder and CEO of Resource Works.