Federal judge issues key ruling on new law banning some household appliances: 'It's a clear win'

A federal judge in New York dismissed a lawsuit against the city's ban on natural gas in new buildings, providing another precedent for other cities looking to make similar changes.

In 2021, New York City adopted Local Law 154, which set air emission limits for indoor combustion of fuels in new buildings, with a standard of "any substance that emits 25 kilograms or more of carbon dioxide per million British thermal units of energy" being prohibited, per Gizmodo. That limit effectively banned gas-burning stoves, furnaces, water heaters, and any other fossil-fuel-powered appliances. It went into effect last year for buildings under seven stories and will go into effect in 2027 for taller structures.

Trade and industry groups argued in their complaint that the law preempted the Energy Policy Conservation Act of 1975, which sets national efficiency standards for heat-trapping pollution and includes a clause that cities and states can't set policies that would contradict it.

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed those claims in its ruling, stating in its opinion that the plaintiff's argument expanded the scope of the EPCA beyond reasonable bounds.

TCD Picks » Induction Cooking

💡Discover the induction option that’s just right for your needs and your home

"It's a clear win in that regard, because the 9th Circuit decision has had a really chilling effect on local governments," said Amy Turner, director of the Cities Climate Law Initiative at Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law told Gizmodo, referring to a previous ruling on a similar case in Berkeley, California, that was struck down.

She continued: "Now there's something else to point to, and a good reason for hope for local governments that may have back-burnered their building electrification plans to bring those to the forefront again."

Watch now: How bad is a gas stove for your home's indoor air quality?

The plaintiffs' attorney, Sarah Jorgensen, told ENR they plan to appeal, and Politico noted that if the disputes continue, the case could end up in front of the U.S. Supreme Court.

There are untold benefits to electrifying homes and businesses, but the cost can be prohibitive and limit housing accessibility to those struggling financially. The Cato Institute also reports that an outright ban, like the one in Berkeley, makes poor economic sense, stating that less than 9% of U.S. carbon pollution comes from the direct use of natural gas in buildings.

But there is still an argument for regulation. Vincent Nolette, a fellow of Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, told ENR: "This decision demonstrates that building decarbonization laws that focus on performance standards rather than outright bans are on strong legal footing, especially when considered alongside other successful local performance-based building decarbonization laws."

Should the government be able to control how we heat our homes?

Definitely 👍