FYI MD passes major climate bill but removes the heat pump building code language - MD residential rate for NG is around $1,30 a therm compared to NJ at $1 per therm and their electric cost is lower.  Basically HP compared to NG should be economical.  Sierra Club should find out what happened here - this would be a major issue for BET moving legislation

CLIMATE: The Maryland state senate passed a major climate bill Monday night that checked off a lot of boxes for climate activists but didn't deliver on a major wish-list item: banning fossil fuel-fired heating in new buildings. (Baltimore Sun) 

Michael Winka
Sustainable Lawrence
Mercer County Sustainable Coalition

> On 03/15/2022 8:51 PM Bob <> wrote:

> Steve
> Pat
> Mike
> Attached is an updated version of the 2030 % Target spreadsheet. You
> had reviewed a prior version.
> The major additions are to add a column for the 1,000,000 residences
> converted to electric target discussed in BE subteam meeting and a
> prior meeting.  And to add a column for the implied % and number of
> residences to be converted based on the Acadia study, which is also
> very close to the 1,000,000 column.
> Also, I have added titles to the columns, and some other format updates.
> Any inputs/comments welcome.
> I suppose it could be used if necessary in a meeting to attempt to
> help justify the 1,000,000  number. In a relative sense I suppose it
> provides some razzle dazzle  to seem to give the choice some relative
> justification, but still the column choices are more or less at
> arbitrary percentages unless one wants to use the Acadia implied
> figure (for which rounding to 1,000,000 is just fine it seems to me).  
> So, at least we can now reference the Acadia report as the choice for
> our number (accepting the rounding).
> Bob
> PS.  This remains a tab in my general model spreadsheet still not yet
> released (which pends further updates I intend as well as
> review/incorporation of two emails from Mike that I have not yet
> worked on)....a long slog on this model.
> PPS.  Another valid non arbitrary choice would be to chose the Mass
> percentage, but I guess this would be aspirational, and it was pointed
> out that NJ administrations might not appreciate choosing a Mass target.
> PPPS.  It occurs to me that we could probably also add an imputed NY
> column based on their statements, but its not included at this time.