BCBC Statement on the City of Vancouver’s Proposal to Reinstate a Natural Gas Ban in Buildings
The Business Council of British Columbia (BCBC) represents over 200 of the province’s largest employers across a range of industries, including energy producers and commercial and residential building developers. BCBC opposes a ban on natural gas connections for new buildings. Such a ban would unnecessarily restrict homeowner heating choices, increase housing costs, and fail to deliver meaningful reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
Vancouver has the highest cost of living in Canada, primarily driven by high housing costs, which break down into two components: capital costs (the cost to buy or build a home) and occupancy costs (ongoing costs like heating and maintenance). Space heating alone accounts for 50% of household energy use. Restricting natural gas—a cost-effective and widely available heating option—will raise heating expenses and, in turn, increase occupancy costs.
Lessons from Other Jurisdictions
Examples from California, a place that British Columbia has used as source of policy ideas, shows the unintended consequences of banning natural gas. By 2019, 70 cities in California implemented natural gas bans in local bylaws. However, as of 2024, residential GHG emissions in the state remain largely unchanged. Most of these cities have since rescinded their natural gas bans, acknowledging that the policies failed to achieve their intended environmental goals while imposing cost burdens on residents. [1],[2],[3] Representatives from energy choice and business advocacy groups in the state have praised the decision that has led to a reversal of the ban.
Impacts on Affordability and Innovation
More generally, we know government actions that prescribe solutions, such as banning natural gas, often create inflationary pressures that disproportionately impact lower-income households, who have the least capacity to absorb higher costs. Measures like banning a fuel or picking a type of equipment impairs innovation by restricting market-driven solutions, stalling private investment, and eliminating price competition for alternative technologies. Furthermore, they raise everyday costs for households and businesses, which in turn dampens economic growth.
In Metro Vancouver, two-thirds of residents polled in the summer of 2024 expressed a clear preference for retaining the ability to choose between electricity and natural gas for heating.[4] This aligns with broader affordability concerns:
Efficiency and cost: Electricity is less efficient for heating than natural gas, leading to higher energy bills for residents. Heat pumps, while an alternative, are costly to install and often require government subsidies to make them affordable, creating additional burdens for taxpayers.
Reduced alternatives: Restricting natural gas connections for new buildings and retrofits limits affordable heating options for existing and future homeowners and renters, reducing their ability to choose cost-effective solutions that best meet their needs.
A Call for a Balanced, Evidence-Based Approach
We urge the City of Vancouver to confirm their summer 2024 motion to allow natural gas as a heating fuel. Now is the time to pause, reflect, and conduct a comprehensive analysis of policy options, costs, and environmental impacts. A thoughtful approach is needed to develop solutions that are both effective in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and affordable for residents.
BCBC believes that balanced, technology-neutral policies are essential for fostering innovation, maintaining affordability, and achieving meaningful progress toward environmental goals. Such policies are best developed and implemented at the provincial level, as local prescriptive measures can prove ineffective and may be seen as municipal overreach.
[2] Berkeley's natural gas ban overturned by federal appeals court CRA V. CITY OF BERKELEY