Apart-Bad-5446 t1_iuimg3y wrote on October 31, 2022 at 4:44 PM

Reply to comment by jdolbeer in Adams Vows to Flip 100 Fossil Fuel-Burning Schools to All-Electric by 2030 by LittleWind_

None of what you said has anything to do with what is being proposed.

jdolbeer t1_iuis2ac wrote on October 31, 2022 at 5:21 PM

I was under the impression that moving all new schools to fully electric would encompass more than just heating. I may be wrong.

Apart-Bad-5446 t1_iuitx0s wrote on October 31, 2022 at 5:33 PM

Lights, computers, etc., are already powered electrically generated primarily by natural gas. This new electrical boiler, that they plan on installing, will be powered electrically using natural gas. For the amount they are spending, there are better ways to reduce CO2, namely, reducing the amount of vehicles on the road, reducing traffic so cars aren't sitting idle and burning gas while not moving, and improving public infrastructure for transportation so people are incentivized to use public transportation. Create better roads for bus lanes so people can go from A to B without hassle. They are investing in green energy generation but it's going to be a looooong time before that replaces natural gas.

stewartm0205 t1_iuj2sfj wrote on October 31, 2022 at 6:32 PM

They can do both.

Apart-Bad-5446 t1_iujdrcn wrote on October 31, 2022 at 7:46 PM

There is something called a budget and every budget has to be appropriated for a specific cause. Wasting money to electrify a school just to reduce a small impact of CO2 emissions when the bulk of CO2 emissions is coming from transportation is silly and lazy policy. It will cost $40 million to retrofit each school. That's not a good way to spend money.

jdolbeer t1_iuizz5s wrote on October 31, 2022 at 6:13 PM

Yeah I was never arguing that there weren't more optimal ways to reduce emissions. I also don't think it has to be mutually exclusive. Just have to hope that the infrastructure for your last sentence comes sooner than we expect.