City Unveils Plan to Reduce Natural Gas Use

[Luv2BeFrugal]

Ok, I read this article in our newspaper today...

Doesn't a system upgrade seem like a wiser plan? The main source of home heating here IS natural gas! It gets COLD here...and we're supposed to just not use it?

I can see young people just turning the thermostat down to save natural gas...but, there are a LOT of old people here! And our winters are 6 months long! GRRRR

City Unveils Plan to Reduce Natural Gas Use

Just had to vent...

[Thevail]

The problem with "system upgrades" is A) who pays for it? B) Where do you start upgrading first.. and what area gets to be last? and C) what municipality is responsible when the pipes cross city, county, or even state lines? What if people on the other side of those lines don't want to pay for the upgrades?

This is the whole "infrastructure" crisis that people keep talking about and no one (no state, no county, no political party) wants to be responsible for paying to fix.


As for the fuel saving measures, it sounds like they are less concerned with how much an individual is using than with not having everyone using everything at maximum capacity at the same time. It makes sense because too much stress on the system can cause a malfunction that leaves everybody in a whole neighborhood needing an extra sweater.. or three.

[shoiji]

Read part of the article. If that was me living in ALASKA, I would definately be concerned. It is one thing to be here in Northeastern US to keep the thermostat low. But the thought of having to do that in ALASKA would be unsettling to me especially since the weather would be so much colder. I can put a sweater on but you guys would be wearing outdoor wear inside.

[Luv2BeFrugal]

The problem with "system upgrades" is A) who pays for it? B) Where do you start upgrading first.. and what area gets to be last? and C) what municipality is responsible when the pipes cross city, county, or even state lines? What if people on the other side of those lines don't want to pay for the upgrades?

This is the whole "infrastructure" crisis that people keep talking about and no one (no state, no county, no political party) wants to be responsible for paying to fix.


As for the fuel saving measures, it sounds like they are less concerned with how much an individual is using than with not having everyone using everything at maximum capacity at the same time. It makes sense because too much stress on the system can cause a malfunction that leaves everybody in a whole neighborhood needing an extra sweater.. or three.

A) We would all pay for it through increased user fees - BUT, ya get what ya pay for.
B) It's not a large system - Municipality of Anchorage
C) It's Alaska...there are no state lines to cross; we don't have counties here; the next closest city is pretty far. It would only be the Municipality of Anchorage working within itself.

Oh, and we produce/use our own natural gas...so it's not working out of state in regards to that.

This system has been in use since the early 70's (I know, my dad actually helped set it all up)...no upgrades since, just maintenance. And it is the *primary* source for home heating, cooking, etc.

If the system went down during the winter we would all be in survival gear indoors...not just a few sweaters. Thus...my frustration with the whole situation... (And, though it's Alaska...no...not everyone owns gear that would keep them alive).

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for using energy wisely - I LOVE frugal! But, there are things you definitely shouldn't scrimp on...and this is one of 'em.. (Yeah, I'm still annoyed with it all...erf...).