Back
On Friday, air-quality regulators for Southern California rejected a plan to gradually phase down a major source of pollution: new gas-burning space and water heaters in homes. It’s a blow to efforts to clean up harmful, planet-warming emissions from buildings — in Southern California and possibly beyond.
The rules would’ve reduced smog-forming emissions in the South Coast Air Quality Management District, home to more than 17 million residents across Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties — a region with some of the nation’s dirtiest air, according to the American Lung Association.
“We had the opportunity to pass life-saving legislation that would have significantly reduced air pollution from home appliances sold in our region,” Holly J. Mitchell, an LA County supervisor and SCAQMD board member who voted in favor of the measures, said in a statement. The rules were a chance “to improve health, reduce medical expenses, and fulfill our job of bringing our region into compliance with the Clean Air Act.”
Friday’s 7-5 vote against the rules, which were poised to be the agency’s strongest in three decades, came after more than two years of development and months of intense industry-led opposition.
An investigation published by Floodlight and The Guardian last week found that, since December, the Southern California Gas Co. — or SoCalGas, the nation’s largest gas-distribution utility — and allied groups have spread misleading information about the rules and encouraged mayors and other public officials to send letters, testify, and pass resolutions opposing the measures. On Thursday, the Trump administration threatened to sue if the measures were adopted.
At the end of the six-hour meeting Friday, the board sent the rejected rules back to a committee. They won’t be revisited this year, according to the agency. But what comes of any further rejiggering is “almost without a doubt, going to be weaker than what was initially proposed,” said Christopher Chavez, deputy policy director at the California nonprofit Coalition for Clean Air.
Opponents repeatedly claimed the proposals, updates to rules 1111 and 1121, were a mandate to switch to electric equipment and a ban on gas-burning appliances. But they were, in fact, neither.
The rules would have allowed residents to keep their gas-fueled equipment — and even to replace it at the end of its life with gas systems if that’s what they chose. SCAQMD’s staff had proposed a glide path for manufacturers to gradually increase their sales targets of super-efficient electric heat-pump water heaters and heat pumps: from 30% by 2027 to 90% by 2036. Manufacturers would have also paid a nominal mitigation fee of $50 to $500 per gas appliance sold — far less than the actual health costs associated with them, the agency acknowledged in March.
Heat pumps can cost more or less than conventional appliances depending on the equipment and home type. For example, according to the SCAQMD, installing a heat pump in a single-family home typically costs $1,000 less than installing a gas furnace and AC.
Industry-led pressure had already significantly watered down an earlier draft of the rules that would have effectively barred the sale of gas-burning heaters and water heaters. Still, even the weaker measures would have slashed emissions of nitrogen oxides by 6 tons per day by 2060 in the smoggiest region in the country. In its socioeconomic analysis, the agency estimated the regulations would have saved around 2,490 lives and $25 billion in health costs from 2027 to 2053.
Opponents included the Orange County Business Council, the Central Valley Business Federation, and former LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a Democrat running for California governor. Many claimed the rules would impose a huge financial burden on consumers, referencing a report that puts the cost of the measures at $8.9 billion annually. The report’s author works for the California Business Roundtable, an organization that SoCalGas parent company Sempra paid membership dues to last year.
A SCAQMD staff member called the oft-cited analysis inaccurate, pointing out severe flaws in the modeling approach at Friday’s meeting. The agency’s staff, which is separate from the voting board, maintained that the measures made economic sense, ranging from an estimated price tag of $174 million to an estimated savings of $191 million annually. But even after the staff’s briefing, board members who voted no continued to bring up costs.
Southern California’s decision has put advocates on guard as other jurisdictions aim to develop and implement zero-emissions appliance rules, according to Dylan Plummer, building electrification campaign advisor at the Sierra Club. That includes the San Francisco Bay Area, which adopted a zero-emissions standard for space and water heaters in 2023; the state of California, as air regulators could produce a similar proposal late this year; and Maryland, which is crafting zero-emissions rules for heating homes and businesses.
For SCAQMD’s proposed regulations, the gas industry, real-estate associations, and the California Republican Party mounted an effective campaign of falsehoods about costs and consumer choice, Plummer said. “We have a lot of work to do to inoculate not just the public but regulators and elected decision-makers against those talking points.”
.svg)
