Studies · CA Air Quality · Investigation 03

Does Building Electrification Improve Air Quality?

Four scenarios for replacing gas furnaces, water heaters, and cooking appliances with electric alternatives. The effect is real but small, and — unlike transport — carries no ozone penalty. The current policy trajectory is already the optimal one.

B1 Optimal
94.8% Probability
50
Deaths Avoided (2035)
0%
Ozone Offset
$30.7M
EVPI
Four Scenarios

From Current Policy to Aggressive Retrofit

Scenario Description Cost Deaths Avoided (2035)
B1 Baseline Current policy: new construction all-electric + slow retrofit (~2%/yr) $0 50
B2 Accelerated $2B aggressive retrofit, 50% gas replaced by 2035 $2B 118
B3 New Only New builds all-electric only, no existing retrofits $0 27
B4 Cooking First Prioritize gas stove replacement (indoor NO2 co-benefit) $0.5B 55

Deaths avoided relative to no-policy baseline at 2035 (annual, dual-CRF Di/Krewski 50/50, 10K MC). B1 is optimal because its cost is $0 and it still captures most of the benefit through existing all-electric new construction mandates.

Grid Feedback

No Ozone Penalty — A Clean Win

Building electrification produces zero ozone disbenefit across every scenario and every time horizon. Gas furnaces and water heaters emit PM2.5 precursors (mostly NOx) but at far lower rates and at residential stack heights, where the NOx does not feed the same VOC-limited ozone chemistry driven by on-road tailpipes.

Transport Ozone Offset
20%
Every PM2.5 death avoided by vehicle electrification is partially offset by increased ozone mortality.
Building Ozone Offset
0%
Building electrification avoids PM2.5 deaths with no ozone penalty. Every death avoided is a net gain.

Building electrification avoids fewer total deaths than transport, but every death avoided is a net gain. No counter-chemistry, no regime-dependent LA-Basin flip, no ozone offset to subtract. The grid feedback loop is small and benign.

Decision Certainty

Current Policy Is Already Optimal

B1 (current policy) is optimal in 94.8% of Monte Carlo draws; B2 (accelerated retrofit at $2B) wins only 5.2%. The EVPI is $30.7M — an order of magnitude below transport. The current all-electric new-construction mandate plus slow retrofit is already the right answer.

B2 avoids 2.4× more deaths (118 vs 50 by 2035) but costs $2B. In almost every MC draw, those marginal 68 deaths cannot justify the $2B spend at $11.6M VSL — that implies $29M per death avoided, 2.5× VSL. The CRF would have to be steeper than even the supralinear form allows for that ratio to close.

Finding
Current building electrification policy (B1) is optimal with 94.8% probability. The effect is small (50 deaths avoided by 2035) but clean — zero ozone offset, unlike transport. Aggressive retrofit (B2) saves more lives but cannot justify its $2B cost. The EVPI of $30.7M confirms this decision barely changes with better information.

10,000 Monte Carlo draws · 4 scenarios × 4 time horizons (2025–2040) · ISRM source-receptor for PM2.5 · Building emissions from CARB residential combustion inventory · No ozone disbenefit at any scenario/year combination · VOI at 2035 horizon · EPA BenMAP CRFs

← Previous Transport Electrification Next → Combined Scenarios