It’s clear that we have our share of cloudy days and rain — especially in windward and mauka areas. I serve a number of customers in these areas. It seems that there’s a lack of discussion about the realities of why homeowners need an instantaneous gas water heater as an option.

I disagree with the arguments by the Sierra Club and the Hawaii Solar Energy Association that the state DBEDT (Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism) is “rubber-stamping” nearly all variances to a solar-water requirement (“Hawaii Gas files motion for solar water heater ruling,” Star-Advertiser, Feb. 26). It is not. I advise clients on various heating sources and they determine which best serves their needs. They elect to apply for these variances, which were being approved by DBEDT up until this case was heard. For many of my clients, forcing solar water heaters over other available options would not be their choice.

The argument that solar water heaters are completely independent from fossil fuels and generate enough savings to make it on par with a gas water heater does not add up. What consumers should be offered are choices to meet their needs. An instantaneous gas water heater is cost-effective, energy-efficient and reliable, which is why people choose it. However, it seems that choice is not an option.

Permits for gas water heating are already being rejected.

I’ve had to call clients who had gas in their plans and now have to go to solar. They are upset and tell me this puts a financial burden and adds more costs for an architect to redraw plans, which are now interrupted by a court’s decision.

This decision will increase the cost of homes and will put home ownership further out of reach.

Solar costs are four times higher than gas. Also, it’s not a simple heating process: For example, an extended family typically would run out of hot water and be forced to use electric. Solar heating also has a slow recovery time for general use.

Little public input was taken into consideration to this law, which is now being rewritten by the First Circuit Court for communities that don’t have a say. The burden of this decision is being forced on the consumer without any thought for those who are in the process of building their homes, with a legal option for a variance allowing for instantaneous gas water heaters.

What happens to the homes that are surrounded by a canopy of trees — do we need to cut down trees now? Also, county planning and permitting departments will not allow installation of a stand-alone-only solar system without having some form of back-up like electric or gas. So, what happens with homeowners who have photovoltaic systems that cannot run on electric back-up and need gas?

I recently visited my hometown of Panama City, Fla., which is still recovering from a major hurricane. The devastation five months later is breathtaking. In this total destruction, without gas on-demand, my friends and family would not be able to bathe, wash clothes and dishes. There are no roofs left to put solar on. If roofs are not fully repaired, electricity cannot get reconnected to homes. Gas is the only choice for some who need reliable energy. During times of emergency, you need reliability.

If solar was viable in all applications, solar would sell. But the truth is, it’s not viable for every home. Judges and elected officials need to consider our state and federal constitutional rights and the views of citizens before putting their personal views into public policy.

Vinny Canniff is owner of Canniff Plumbing on Hawaii island.