Photo: Jeff Chiu / Associated Press

San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors has voted unanimously to ban gas appliances in new and significantly renovated city buildings. It’s just the beginning, officials say: The board also passed a law to give incentives for all-electric construction, paving the way for a possible gas ban in all new buildings this year.

“I look forward to collaborating with environmental advocates, labor unions, developers and all stakeholders to end the use of natural gas in new buildings in San Francisco,” Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, who plans to introduce the follow-on legislation, said in a statement.

Tuesday’s action is the latest in a controversial wave of laws across the Bay Area to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from buildings by phasing out gas. San Francisco’s Environment Department said buildings produced 44% of the city’s emissions in 2017, the most recent year data were available.

“We can’t ignore that we are seeing the consequences of the climate crisis every day,” Supervisor Catherine Stefani said at Tuesday’s City Hall meeting. “Whether it’s the impact of sea level rise on our sea wall or the wildfires that are devastating communities locally and around the globe, we will be paying for the consequences of our climate decisions for a very long time.”

The change in the city’s environmental code, which awaits a second vote by the board as a formality, could impact hundreds of construction projects costing billions of dollars, laid out in the city’s capital plan for the next decade. Facilities that process water and wastewater are exempt, as are buildings related to electric utilities, vehicle charging and maintenance and emergency backup power.

Some environmentalists think the new rules don’t go far enough. Mayor London Breed pledged net-zero emissions for new construction by 2030 and for existing buildings by 2050. In September, two dozen environmental organizations pushed city officials in a letter to make all buildings electric.

Stefani said Tuesday the change was an important “first step” in finding new ways to limit natural gas in our buildings. She told The Chronicle on Friday that she plans to introduce legislation to spur builders to go all-electric through tax rebates.

“Anything we can do to incentivize building owners to go electric, we’re exploring that now,” Stefani said. “I think incentives are the way to go.”

That’s instead of an all-out gas ban in new construction, which other local municipalities have enacted. Berkeley, San Mateo, Menlo Park, San Jose and Marin County either prohibit gas appliances in new homes or require the homes to be energy efficient if gas is used.

Fifteen other communities have passed similar laws, pending approval from the California Energy Commission. Redwood City is considering its own ban on natural gas in new homes, with possible exceptions for affordable housing projects, the San Mateo Daily Journal reported.

Gas bans have prompted resistance from some businesses. The California Restaurant Association sued Berkeley over its ban, and developers in Windsor took their town to court. Opponents argue that people deserve a choice, not least because the electric grid is unreliable thanks to power shut-offs.

The Board of Supervisors’ Budget and Finance committee estimated that buildings with all-electric equipment had up-front construction costs comparable to those with gas — ranging from $1.35 less expensive per square foot to 65 cents more expensive. That analysis doesn’t take into account the cost of installing natural gas or consider the lifetime cost of the electricity or gas the appliances use.

The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission provides renewable electricity to city buildings; Pacific Gas and Electric Co. supplies gas. PG&E seemed in favor of the city’s move in a statement Friday.

“PG&E supports local government policies that promote all-electric new construction when cost effective,” spokesman Jason King said in an email.

King said that “beyond new construction, PG&E believes a multifaceted approach is needed to cost-effectively achieve California’s greenhouse-gas reduction objectives,” including greater use of electricity and the use of alternatives to traditional natural gas, like renewable natural gas and hydrogen. He said PG&E welcomes the opportunity to avoid investing in new gas infrastructure that might be underused if local governments and the state work together to rely more on electricity.

The California Public Utilities Commission recently approved $44 million worth of incentives to boost the installation of electric heat-pump water heaters in new and existing buildings. It’s part of $830 million invested over five years under a program to encourage local generation and energy storage systems.

Mallory Moench is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: mallory.moench@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @mallorymoench