Trying to ban gas stoves is such a weird hill to die on. Miniscule impact on the environment (can be a net negative in regions with very dirty electricity sources), very tiny safety wins, but makes a lot of people upset. And to some might not be super bad on its own, but becomes straw that breaks the camel's back on "government overreach trying to control everything in our lives".
(And for some specialized applications like stir fry or wok just objectively worse)
@BartWronski I think we need to decarbonize everything if we don’t want to fuck up the planet. Stoves are a small piece of the puzzle, but the health impacts make it possible to accelerate that transition from a legislative point of view.
Listened to it a long time ago, but I found this episode informative: https://www.volts.wtf/p/fine-were-doing-gas-stoves
@castano it has a negligible impact (what percentage of emissions are stoves? And we'll never "decarbonize everything", but luckily, don't have to!), and it makes people hate fighting climate change and politicians who want to do it - this is "pick your battles" but gone 100% wrong and the other way around.
@BartWronski@castano There's a perfectly reasonable way to discuss it but the alarmist "you don't know what's good for you" tone is super dumb. But it's also played up by the other side for dunking. Just ignore this sort of mass media silliness.
@mtothevizzah@BartWronski@castano fwiw I suspect the gas stove problem if any might not the the home burning but leaks all along the route, at least these seem to be often an issue with methane? Also there is some evidence that they are bad for your health and induction is great. That said i agree it sounds like the wrong battle and a distraction even.
@c0de517e@mtothevizzah@BartWronski We may not have to decarbonize everything, but stoves are relatively easy to replace. Enforcing this in new construction and providing incentives for people to upgrade are policies that I think are worth fighting for.
As Angelo points out, the main issue are the methane leaks along the pipelines. Removing the gas infrastructure would have a significant short term impact and would reduce construction costs.
@castano I feel like the bigger battle w.r.t. gas infrastructure would be heating, though? Especially in the northeast. That's a tough pill to swallow.
@ataylor Quite the opposite! Heat pumps are in every way better than gas furnaces or water heaters. There’s really no reason not to switch, at least for new installations. For stoves on the other hand you can make the case that gas is better for certain types of cooking.
@castano@ataylor Heat pump + gas burners for really super cold days (which ironically will happen more often because of climate change) is a fantastic solution. Reduces 90% of the gas use, and everybody gets air-con into the bargain.
Agree that removing perfectly good working gas stoves is dumb. Just going to piss people off for no good reason.
It's like banning petrol cars without doing something about trucks. You're just fucking up peoples lives and enthusiasms for trivial benefit.
@andrewwillmott@castano@ataylor sorry what infrastructure are you saying is missing for heat pumps here? In the Highlands here, we’ve seen 50% of houses switch to heat pumps in the last 3 years. They are working great!
@neilhenning@castano@ataylor There is a big shortage of suppliers and particularly experienced installers. In England and Wales at least. Great that this is not such an issue in the Highlands.
E.g., from a recent FT article, "it helps to explain why UK heat pump sales last year were a puny 1.9 per 1,000 households, putting the country a distant last behind 20 other European nations." France is 20, Ireland 10.
@neilhenning@andrewwillmott@ataylor In California it's also hard to find experienced installers, but I was recently in Minnesota and was surprised to see many houses had heat pumps (including our airbnb).
It makes sense that adoption is faster in the north. The colder it is, the faster the return on your investment.
Add comment