"Gas stoves emit nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide and fine particulate matter when they are turned on.... They also release other harmful air pollutants that are known or suspected to cause cancer, and can even leak those chemicals when they are turned off... When it comes to gas bans, Republicans have been the loudest critics and 20 Republican-controlled state legislatures have passed laws prohibiting such bans. But in most households in those red states cook with electric stoves, not gas.... States with the highest percentage of households that use gas for cooking are controlled by Democrats and include California, Nevada, Illinois, New York and New Jersey, according to the analysis...."
Obviously, banning gas stoves is terrible politics. Republicans are opposed in principle and Democrats are the people who have gas stoves and feel deeply emotionally attached to them. This NYT article seems designed to get Biden out of a jam.
I came here from Memeorandum, which presents the headline as "No, Biden Is Not Trying to Ban Gas Stoves." Google confirms that was the original headline:
Too obvious that they're running interference, I presume.
Posts
79 comments:
In Joe "my dementia prohibits me from using stoves" Biden's future version of Auschwitz, all ovens will be solar electrically powered.
Thurnberg recommended. Thurnberg approved.
"When it comes to gas bans, Republicans have been the loudest critics and 20 Republican-controlled state legislatures have passed laws prohibiting such bans. But in most households in those red states cook with electric stoves, not gas...."
Only an idiot would think this a surprising fact.
This was trial balloon by the Biden Administration and, for now at least, it has been withdrawn under intense criticism. They will return to this at some point in the next ten years.
How was 12.7% calculated to the tenths of one percent?
=======
What's responsible for the other 87.3 percent of childhood asthma?
Pets?
House dust?
Pollen?
Heredity?
Junk science.
My city has banned gas stoves in new builds starting 2030. Who knows if it'll really happen.
I recently got rid of mine because I worried about leaving burners on later, in my dotage. Now we have one of those smooth top stoves and hate it. It got discolored in no time. But at least I don't worry as much about ambient gas.
Wish I'd just gotten regular old coils.
Gee a single “study” by a group with a pronounced bias against the Gas industry finds that the Gas industry is the problem. I have a better idea. How about you petroleum haters go on and demonstrate how to live sans fossil fuels and leave the rest of us alone to enjoy our cheap safe heating and cooking fuel, drive our cars that don’t explode when caught in a flash flood and live happily appreciative of the wonderful benefits of oil refining by-products like plastics, synthetic rubber, Vaseline, paraffin, fertilizer and Singer sewing machine oil.
We’ve only used 120 or so of our 300-year stash of this miraculous black gold God blessed us with. The air is cleaner than ever in California. Take the win and the wealth! No need to be starving and miserable, you idiots.
Key phrase: "The nation's top consumer protection agency raised concerns..."
Federal agencies have two relevant characteristics: (1) they employ hyper-dominant political types who want to be tin hat dictators and do everything they can to become tin hat dictators in their tiny and often meaningless realms, and (2) all employees struggle to find something to do to show their worth, maintain their budget, and have an impact.
Remember when the government trashed Mexican food, Chinese food, etc. in the name of better health? Today...soul food is fried...racism...white supremacy!!!!!!! So, instead they push fat acceptance. Those little James-Comey-like dictators will dictate unless and until they are called out and smacked down. Fight that type or learn to live with it. China, Russia, Japan, the UK, and the EU seemingly choose to live with it.
One of the small print regulations that liberals deny vigorously, then, a year later, poof! There it is!
This was a classic case of running something up the flagpole.
They still want to ban gas, but they'll have to find a sneakier way...
12.7%
Not approximately 10-15%, which would be credible to the mathematically literate.
No, 12.7%
Precision to lend an air of credibility to that which cannot be measured precisely.
Banning gas stoves. Ask the folks in California that couldn’t charge their cars or suffer through outages from wildfires what they think about not being able to cook when they need to. We’ll be back to cooking over wood or dung fires like they do in Africa. What’s the health consequences of that? These folks are nuts.
My eyes have been fully opened to the politization of everything. It took me almost 70 years, sadly, to lose my innocence. There is not a single bit of data, news, information, not a single word, not even a single number that has not passed through the political filter. The number 1,723 is totally politicized. So is -38. The word “toenail” is dripping with spin. In the Platonic realm words and numbers and data are pure but we live in this earthly sphere where each square foot of soil has been trod on, fought over, and stolen a dozen times minimum.
That said, this study is more B.S. than normal.
The End.
The way Biden shambles around, he clearly isn't behind the push to ban gas stoves. Nobody thinks that he's in charge of the agenda. According to the NYT article, Mr. Trumpka of the CPSC wanted to restrict gas stoves, and the other four members were against it. Both sides of the aisle should be pushing for Mr. Trumpka to be removed from the CPSC, and no longer welcome to work for the federal government.
The study is BS. The 12.7% of asthma cases gives it away. A long time ago, Bill Nye taught us that, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". With gas grills, ventless gas fireplaces, exhaust hoods over gas stoves and people not cooking so much, the data would have to be decisive.
Currently, I don't think anyone trusts the federal government or government scientists. Any restriction on gas stoves won't be viewed as concern for the health of our children, but as government tyranny.
Alternative NYT headline, if Biden were Republican:
"Biden wants children to get asthma."
Don’t put all your eggs in one energy delivery system.
This study was based on a hermetically sealed 8x10 room. These people are so fucking stupid.
https://twitter.com/iowahawkblog/status/1613267868074012673
If you read the article carefully, the Biden official is saying only that he won’t make existing gas stoves illegal — “any regulations would apply to new products.” So the Biden administration is in fact actively considering the sale of new gas stoves. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
If children’s health was such a big priority, they would not have been so poorly planned for by Covid health authorities.
As always the children are just pawns in their larger schemes to remake the world in their utopian image.
A study? Hey, it's a paycheck.
This NYT article seems designed to get Biden out of a jam.
I thought the sole function of the NYT was to get Biden and any other democrat out of a jam and then spin it to make it look like nothing to see here.
How do they know red staters use predominantly electric ranges? Are we too uncultured in their minds to appreciate the more connoisseur usage of gas? I call bullshit on this statistic.
This whole issue seemed to come out of nowhere. I don't get it.
“A study finds…”
“Experts say…”
The “tell” phrases. Run, don’t walk, from whatever is said next.
If the gas stoves are modern- they aren't leaking anything when off. Electronic ignition, not pilot loghts.
And stoves/ranges are external combustion. Combustion byproducts are almost all CO2 and water vapor. Everything else is miniscule.
Fine particulate matter? From where? If they're measuring it in the exhaust- it means it was in the combustion air supply, which comes from the house.
Oh man. This 'study' just screams BS. I love how we cherry pick bizarre, small, poorly run 'studies' and get ready to change entire societal structures over them. Just- snap- like that! Why...it's almost as if they have a plan to move the Overton Window and just need something to push it up a bit more.
I don't think that this was a serious effort. This was throwing red meat to the liberal base who've pushed for gas stove bans in cities like NYC. Still stupid, but I doubt that it will hurt the Biden admin too much.
Big Mike said...
Junk science.
**********************
Indeed. Go here to see it fisked into tiny pieces.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/01/10/no-new-study-does-not-link-gas-stoves-with-asthma-in-children/
It's not even a "study": it's a cherry-picked meta-study that left out all null results.
It's bullshit, bullshit all the way down. I am 99.378% confident that statement is true..
'Banning gas stoves. Ask the folks in California that couldn’t charge their cars or suffer through outages from wildfires what they think about not being able to cook when they need to.'
We had 2 power outages the past 2 weeks due to the crap weather in CA.
When the first one hit, I just turned the knob on my stove, lit a match, and made delicious scrambled eggs for dinner : )
OTOH. Making greater demand for electricity hastens the day when atomic energy will have to come back bigly.
Ban gas stoves?
Where will the electricity come from?
How many dozen nuclear plants will be needed? Assuming 1gw each
John Henry
'If you read the article carefully, the Biden official is saying only that he won’t make existing gas stoves illegal — “any regulations would apply to new products.” So the Biden administration is in fact actively considering the sale of new gas stoves. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.'
Sure, it's called a grandfather clause, but people who support this are still nanny-state assholes.
If they are banned and I ever sell my house, I'm bringing my stove with me...
Gas ovens are good for committing suicide. I say, keep 'em.
And yes, I'm skeptical that 12.7 percent of childhood asthma was caused by Gas ovens. I can see them showing that number as correlation, but not as causation. In any case, that just means people with kids at risk for Astham shouldn't get Gas ranges/ovens. All of the rest of us can.
What other factors correlate with Childhood asthma?
Carol: Be careful you don't place your hand on your hot electric stove. I find of mine did this (in Illinois, a solid blue state...) and burned his hand very bad.
Feel free to quote my study: Electric stoves have caused 100% more third degree burns than gas stoves, and a hazard in households with people and pets. The majority of these burns occur in blue states.
"This NYT article seems designed to get Biden out of a jam."
#Evergreen
- gas water heaters in general
- those enviro friendly just-in time gas water heaters?
- fireplaces?
- propane stoves?
- cng stoves?
- furnaces?
a slippery slope
I recently got rid of mine because I worried about leaving burners on later, in my dotage.
Like everyone else here, I call BS on the 12.7%. I'd also like to see stats on how much of a problem it is that forgetful people leave burners on. I know it happens, but is it sufficiently common to justify the remedy, or are there technological solutions we could apply to prevent it?
(Preferably after market devices that could be fitted to existing stoves to prevent burners' being left on without a pot or pan on them, etc. My new car has so many fail-safes on it that it's kind of annoying to drive - I'd hate to see every new stove preventing me from heating tortillas directly over the burner, for instance.)
When it comes to gas bans, Republicans have been the loudest critics...
I was about to joke, what's next: farts?
But they've already been going after farts for years!
They will just ban new gas hookups and pipelines. The climate protection tax on gas usage and appliances is in the works.
Kate said...
How do they know red staters use predominantly electric ranges? Are we too uncultured in their minds to appreciate the more connoisseur usage of gas? I call bullshit on this statistic.
This whole issue seemed to come out of nowhere. I don't get it.
Republican heavy areas- ruralville like where I live - the houses don't have NG run to them. I have oil heat, and the boiler also makes the hot water through an extra tank, not a coil. I'd need to have a propane tank to have a gas stove. People who have propane heat and/or hot water are more likely to have a gas range. But there's no guarantee of that.
Almost everyone in a city - Democrat areas - has a NG line going to the house or apartment. NG runs the heating unit, furnace or boiler, the water heater, and heck, it's already there, why not the range? And- often the dryer.
So the numbers aren't BS, they're based on gas distribution.
And the issue hasn't come out of nowhere. At least not if you've been paying attention. Most people don't pay attention to such things, unless it's sudden;y brought to their attention. And this was.
There are a lot of decisions based on energy availablity. In NY- prisons are put into rural areas as a job program. The inmates need to be housed somewhere- and the middle of nowhere in return for jobs isn't going to object to a prison being dropped in. Try putting one in Orange County NY... the public would be outraged. I worked in one of them for a while. A natural gas spur from a nearby major pipeline was installed in order to provide heat. The electric company brought in a 3 phase power line. Because the 3 phase power line was there, private interests invested in building a sawmill nearby. Could have been built elsewhere- but the cost of bringing in 3 phase power would have made it unprofitable. With the power already available... the math worked. The closest town to the prison has NG available since the spur line went through it. My town doesn't.
I’d be willing to entertain a bet that in most of those red states, propane stoves account for a higher percentage of cooking than electric.
BillyBobThorton @ 9:47: "...I thought the sole function of the NYT was to get Biden and any other democrat out of a jam and then spin it to make it look like nothing to see here."
With all due respect, I think you need to give NYT more credit. Its first unction is, as you say, to get Biden and other D's out of jams; but its next function is to do more than "spin it to make it look like nothing to see here." NYT goes beyond that, and works to characterize any critics --of the original jammers or of its cover-up-- as evil hater Republicans pouncing, harassing, hyperventilating, etc over one more nothing burger.
This latter (counteroffensive) function is key. Not only is "a good offense is the best defense" but, as Saul Alinsky taught us all long ago, it encourages the base and demoralizes the enemy.
Replying to Carol: I have a glass top electric stove and I love it. It gets hot really fast compared to the old coil types. It is much easier to clean with a razor scraper device used to remove the inspection sticker from inside your car windshield and some Creama Bryte cleaner you can buy at Lowes or Home Depot. I dislike the unpleasant smell of the gas odorant. This may no longer be an issue with modern gas stoves.
I also think electric might be safer than gas.
That being said, I am opposed to banning gas.
A study. You mean the same study that said two masks would keep you from covid. Or the same study that said the vaccines would KEEP you from getting AND spreading covid?
Sorry, need a whole lot more than some climate zealot study.
Abdul Abulbul Amir said...
They will just ban new gas hookups and pipelines. The climate protection tax on gas usage and appliances is in the works
Yeah I'm starting to think that unlike SoCalEdison our friends at the Gas Company failed to grease enough palms here in CA.
Apparently the “scientists” who wrote the study at issue have never heard of windows. You can’t make this stuff up.
First, childhood asthma is mostly a disease of cleanliness, like polio was. The lowest incidence of asthma in children is in dirty places with cattle and other animals. Just like peanut allergy is common in kids never exposed to peanuts early.
Next, the lefties will have you all cooking and heating with wood. Talk about pollution ! In Europe, they are cutting down remaining forests to use wood for heat. Going back 200 years in one generation.
I'd be curious to know how the "study" rigorously excluded the effects of gas-powered water heaters and furnaces, isolating the bad asthma effects to just the ovens. (Doesn't Hochul's bill in NY ban all 3?)
I grew up in houses with gas stoves and lived in rentals that had them. Rarely if ever vented. I'd even use the burners for extra heat lol.
No asthma for me or family. I attribute my weak lungs to mid century LA smog.
Do not believe the 12.7% claim.
The Left have been cooking up bans on gas stoves and natural gas utilities for a bit. I first become worried that the Democrats were coming for my gas stove, when around 3 years ago I heard multiple stories in a few weeks on NPR about how bad gas stoves were. The stories cited safety concerns regarding natural gas without saying what they exactly were or how they knew that, they painted Republican state legislatures as bad guys for passing state laws that prohibited local municipalities from forcing electrification plans on current and new developments, and they suggested that people only adopted natural gas decades ago because of a propaganda campaign by the natural gas industry.
As an aside I think I've had gas utilities everywhere I've lived as an adult for all but a couple years during college. During that time period never once have I lost gas service, whereas I've lost electrical power dozens and dozens of times, the worst times lasting 2 to 3 days. Also as person who isn't particularly skilled at cooking but still enjoys cooking, I really enjoy my gas stove and absolutely do not want an electric coil stove top, or one of those induction top stoves.
As Instpundit has pointed out, there's a deeply troubling uniformity to the *sudden* explosion of concern over the dangers of gas stoves. From people who said nothing about this until yesterday. Drawing on a single report that so far as I can tell is deeply flawed.
This is part of a larger pattern. Nudging or pushing or simply forcing everyone to switch to electric for everything.
Why? Why is the left (and this pattern is most noticeable on the political left) trying to do this? I think their long term goal is control. If (1) we depend on electricity for everything (transportation, cooking, all the rest) and (2) the government at some point controls generation of and access to electricity then (3) the entire population can be controlled far more effectively than if we can use fossil fuels to *eat* and to *get around*.
If we resist the revolution they can shut us down fast and hard.
I say that as someone who thinks climate change is a serious problem and we need to shift away from using fossil fuels.
Blue flames and cast iron
Otherwise you are just playing culinary games
I grew up in the 60's, never knew anyone who had asthma. Or peanut allergies, for that matter.
In most cases gas-stoves don't just magically appear in unvented rooms.
I've yet to encounter a natural-gas or propane supplier that didn't check before installation & "turning on" that national fuel gas code NFPA 54, which has some pretty specific requirements for where a gas appliance can be put, has been adhered to.
• These requirements are based upon what we have known well for decades about the hazards of open combustion indoors, and also upon the worst case of all the burners being used simultaneously for extended periods of time.
• If people are going to go for unusually powerful stoves, then they're probably more aware of the air-supply and extraction venting that they may have needed to add, but I suspect that most don't notice what's already there, or know that sufficient ft³ of room volume really helps ameliorate the risk, and that normal building leakage, movement and door opening between indoors and outdoors, etc. will change out the air.
For "normal" apartment stoves the required venting sometimes is met by an openable window, but if people aren't using that, I think the better solution might be (as some jurisdictions have done) requiring mechanical venting rather than banning gas stoves.
This IS part of a wider effort -- as the Euro "Just Stop Oil" people are explicit in expressing -- many want to end all use of petroleum fuels by whatever means.
That the inefficiencies of electrical distribution might make CO2 production increase if we switch away from point-of use burning of fuel to fossil-fuelled electricity generation is not lost on the numerate amongst these activists, but they seem to believe that we can eliminate the need for fossil fuels in generation also.
Also, especially in the NE USA such as New York City and New England, the successful blocking of pipeline improvements and capacity increase has made restrictions on gas-use almost inevitable.
I did see someone had tracked this study back to an entity with a vigorously anti-fossil fuel CEO with ties to the WEP.
This is a continuation of the war on residential natural gas. The residential portion of NG usage went to 15% in the early 1970s and has been consistent over the last 50 years. Some counties in NY are banning new NG hook ups. The NYC housing dept is abandoning steam heating for individual apt heat pumps. No real evidence they are building up the electrical distribution grid to accommodate the shift.
"The residential sector uses natural gas to heat buildings and water, to cook, and to dry clothes. About half of the homes in the United States use natural gas for space heating and water heating. In 2021, the residential sector accounted for about 15% of total U.S. natural gas consumption, and natural gas was the source of about 23% of the U.S. residential sector's total energy consumption." --US EIA
The amusing part is that there is not much to a gas stove and one would be easy to fabricate, though runs the risk of government violence if the "betters" deem the young shall not have what the old people have grandfathered in.
When they said that the stove leaked methane, you knew it was BS. Maybe if they tampered with the valve, but gas valves are very reliable and fail in the closed position. The study authors don't seem to know that methane is a constituent combustable gas so burns but also would carry the odorant added to NG to signal leaks.
12.7%
This reminds me of those old Star Trek episodes when Spock would give their chances of survival out to multiple decimal points. (They were trying to show that the Vulcan was a genus, but to the mathematically inclined, it showed that Spock was a major league BS artist.)
The left is fundamentally against freedom. It's as simple as that. They think they are smarter than the great unwashed, and they have an authoritarian streak a mile wide.
Not mentioned in the NYT article:
Two of the four authors of the "study" are policy wonks (not scientists) from an advocacy group called "RMI, Carbon-Free Buildings", which also partially funded the study.
One of the authors from RMI is the author to contact for correspondence about the study and the other did the analysis and drafted the text of the study. (The other two authors are academics in the field of public health.)
RMI describes itself as "an independent, non-partisan, nonprofit organization of experts across disciplines working to accelerate the clean energy transition and improve lives."
It's not a stretch to say that it's a paper commissioned and carried out by an advocacy group with a couple of like-minded academics to provide window dressing.
At a minimum, the funding information and author affiliation should be disclosed any time the study is introduced in a news article.
You can find the original study at https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/1/75.
The study itself rests on a meta-analysis of a small number of studies by other groups, which is not at all a strong basis for sweeping regulatory changes. (To be fair, I did not read the studies that were selected for meta-analysis.)
"Trumka encouraged all participants “to keep that possibility of a ban in mind” while adding that regulatory authority is “a powerful tool in our toolbox and it’s a real possibility.”"
Powerful tool to what end? Banning natural gas entirely seems the likely goal.
The extensive quotes in that article make it clear this was no rogue operation.
people emit CO2
eliminate people
problem solved.
"When it comes to gas bans, Republicans have been the loudest critics and 20 Republican-controlled state legislatures have passed laws prohibiting such bans. But in most households in those red states cook with electric stoves, not gas..."
Is that meant to be some kind of "own the Republicans" statement? Could it possibly be that those that object to a ban on gas don't want to force people to use gas, but just want people to have the choice?
I must add that leaky old houses are the best. Forget these airtight death traps.
Dems should start by banning cobalt.
You absolutely cannot even consider setting policy based on mere epidemeological associations.
What this initial 'attributed to gas stoves' association gives you is a hypothesis that you actually prove one way or the other. Then, resulting from that, you know where gas stoves stand vs wood, charcoal, electric, and consider also mitigations like hoods to pull away whatever, if anything, is especially harmful.
As usual, the story went in one day from "Democrats propose...." to "Republicans pounce." The Biden regime is an inexhaustible source of loony ideas but the Media is always ready to change the subject.
Just replaced our electric range with a 36-inch gas one. Did it now because Inslee's been making noise about banning them and we wanted to get grandfathered in.
Haven't cooked on gas in years. I'll never go back to electric.
Good policy is good politics. The reverse holds true for bad policy. But the government thugs don't care because they think they'll never be held accountable. They may end up learning a painful lesson if they push people too far.
If gas is responsible for 12.7, then electric, propane (and wood) must be responsible for 87.3%
Recent independent studies indicate that 12.7% of those who study the effects of gas stoves on childhood asthma are idiots. The remaining 81.7% are lobbyists
The "study" is junk science paid for by the Sierra Club (it's literally in the acknowledgments).
The study was underwritten by a company that specializes in removing gas lines from homes and replacing infrasturcture with 'Green' alternatives - that's what I read. In other words, a vested interest in the outcome and findings. Alarms have been raised over their methodology and its relation to real-life usage. And finally, the Consumer Product Safety Clown that says he 'isn't after your gas stove' was on record a few months ago saying precisely that, word for word. So they got caught.
Underlying this, two things: (1) the dreaded specter of N02 has been raised as a reason to take action, the same 'climate-change pollutant' that the Dutch environmentalists are using as their pretext for shutting down thousands of productive farms. And never mind about that new city we're building on the land. and (2), If you think gas stoves are bad, did you now that Olive Oil, heated up to cooking temperature, releases even more noxious and toxic pollutants? No? Didn't know that? Didn't know that Olive Oil is Bad For The Planet?
"Could it possibly be that those that object to a ban on gas don't want to force people to use gas, but just want people to have the choice?"
Well, sure. But for progressives, giving people choices is a bad thing. Everybody needs to do everything the same way. The way progressives say to.
First they come for your gas stove, then for your propane barbecue.
I love cooking with gas. Cooking with fire! It's natural and good.
12.7 percent. The study is bullshit. 88,672% bullshitl.
@Estoy_Listo: The only thing I love more than cooking on my gas barbecue is cooking on my charcoal barbecue (BGE). Now that's primal.
Do people still say, "Now you're cooking with gas"?
A couple of years from now they may not be allowed to.
When the electrical grid goes down for good due to the overload by electric cars and stoves, I want to be able to grill the steaks in my freezer before they rot, for one final meal on pure, clean burning gas.
At least we know what the plaintiff lawyers are going to use to replace the Roundup and Camp LeJune ads.
“The Federal Government has determined that gas emissions cause many serious illnesses. If you or anyone you know has ever used or been around a gas stove or any other gas appliance and suffered injuries or even died, don’t hesitate, call the injury lawyers at Dewey, Cheatam, and Howe at 1-800-GAS-KILLS, you may be eligible for significant cash compensation.”
I also think electric might be safer than gas.
A 2020 report by the National Fire Protection Association – NFPA Research – found that “Households that used electric ranges showed a higher risk of cooking fires and associated losses than those using gas ranges.”
Delving further into the study's statistical nitty-gritty – as it notes, “Unless otherwise specified, the statistics presented in this report are estimates derived from the United States Fire Administration’s National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) and NFPA’s annual Fire Experience Survey” – they conclude: [quoting, page 8…]
Households that use electric ranges have a higher risk of cooking fires and associated losses than those using gas ranges. Although 60 percent of households cook with electricity,[15] four out of five (80 percent) ranges or cooktops involved in reported cooking fires were powered by electricity. Population-based risks are shown below,
• The rate of reported fires per million households was 2.6 times higher with electric ranges.
• The civilian fire death rate per million households was 3.4 times higher with electric ranges.
• The civilian fire injury rate per million households was 4.8 times higher with electric ranges than in households using gas ranges.
• The average fire dollar loss per household was 3.8 times higher in households with electric ranges. See Figure 10. [on page 10]
[/unQuote]
Post a Comment