Even if I wasn't against fossil fuel based appliances in principle, this was enough to make me actively worry about living in a house with a gas stove.
May be swapping ours soon since the gas stove is malfunctioning anyway (won't hold temp, have to constantly screw with it).
I'm happy about improving air quality, but not happy that it's gonna be significantly more expensive than getting another gas stove :-/
I'm glad I can afford it but every time I see one of those "electric's not god-awful anymore, induction's amazing!" posts on Twitter or Reddit or whatever it's like... yeah, great solution for us folks with plenty of disposable income, I guess.
Not sure how I'm going to make certain kinds of flatbread that I heat directly on the flame. I'll figure something out I suppose.
Reports of the tops being easy to crack worry me, too. I don't like having to baby kitchen equipment.
[EDIT] Hrm. Reading about cooking technique on them, I'm not sure I'd be able to make scrambled eggs (that didn't suck). My technique relies heavily on being able to move the pan on and off the burner. I guess... I could live with just not making scrambled eggs.
Most of this new controversy is bullshit seeded by PR. Getting rid of residential gas is a movement of sorts now, and people are eager to sell their wares. Open a window or use the vent fan and 90% of your risks go away.
Or buy an induction cooktop, which costs more, works more poorly and has a 5 year expected lifespan.
In what ways does an induction cooktop underperform compared to gas? It dumps more heat into the pan and less waste heat into the room, doesn’t produce any combustion byproducts, can be dialled into a specific temp, including very low simmering ones, and is safer as there is no hot element or open flame.
3 of these have to do with the induction cooktop chosen, not induction. And the other two with the type of cookware. But yes woks are not really compatible with induction, but then they also are not the best with coil or residential gas cooktops either.
There are lot of floor plans out there with the kitchen nowhere near a window. Certainly was true of the last apartment I rented (gas stove) and my current house (electric appliances, 1979).
Probably more so than average where I live (Baltimore), since a lot of the housing here is row homes instead of detached.
Just tangentially we've had a couple big gas explosions in the last half decade, too.
Depending on how much cooking you do, you could trial keeping your stove for anything requiring the open flame and using an induction hotplate for the majority of your other cooking. They are available for ~$50 and you can get dual-burner versions for under $200 (e.g. https://www.amazon.com/Cuisinart-ICT-60-Double-Induction-Coo...)
Well, the reason for maybe switching in the first place is that the oven interior doesn't hold temp correctly, so we'll have to replace it at some point. And the health concerns have me not wanting to get another gas stove... but I've had electric and will probably just stop using the stovetop at all if I have to go back to that. Which leaves induction.
Do what a lot of people already do, and use one of those butane-powered single-burner units. Just about any asian grocery store will have them + the fuel for sale. I use one for when I need a flame char, or flame control for something finicky that my induction top can't handle, and they work great.
I've found my induction stove to be way more consistent in cooking eggs (and well, most things, really) than when I had gas in the past. Also, not sure which induction you're looking at, but on my stove, when I remove the pan it turns off the power to that unit, and turns it back on when you put the pan back (within about a second or so, both ways), so when I do feel the need to remove the pan briefly, it's not any different than when I do it on gas.
> I'm glad I can afford it but every time I see one of those "electric's not god-awful anymore, induction's amazing!" posts on Twitter or Reddit or whatever it's like... yeah, great solution for us folks with plenty of disposable income, I guess.
Most of what I see isn’t necessarily cost prohibitive, but looks like it’s built to fail. What products are people using where the experience has been pleasant?
Doubly so for people like me who don't have a 220V line to the kitchen (and we would need a new breaker panel to install one; we looked into getting an induction top when we moved in).
Part of the cost factor is that it's pretty easy to find (even quite good) gas stoves on the used or factory dent-n-ding market. Electric, even easier. Induction, not so much. That can mean in effect 4x or more the price, for a similar-quality stove (effects on air quality aside).
Retail prices do also seem to be somewhat more expensive at similar feature/"trim" levels, too. Unless that's changed since the last time I was thinking about this (maybe a year ago).
In addition to cost, the Main thing preventing me from switching to induction is knobs. I just know up front that digital/touch controls will be a headache (for me).
Oh shit, I forgot about that part. The one time I've gotten to cook with induction, that indisputably sucked. They all want to put touch controls on something that gets water drops on it, or is operated with wet hands, with some regularity. What a terrible idea.
Also, I've never met a flat-top stove that wasn't a terror to keep clean. Maybe induction's different, but that's another worry.
Same size stove, similar number of heat elements. One has a bunch of grates to move, potentially wash elsewhere. Then there's knobs to remove to clean under them, the knobs themselves having various curves and flat sides to clean. The whole thing is a bit of a pan itself, so there's stuff to clean around that. The burner heads are round protrusions from that pan so you need to clean around them and then clean them as well.
Compared to the other stove, which is just a flat piece of glass. No protrusions. No edges. Just a single flat surface. To me, that single flat glass surface is way easier to clean. I don't even get how one could argue the other is easier to clean, there's far more parts with their own geometries involved.
On top of that, the glass cook top is more or less flush with the rest of the counter, does not have any grates or any other uneven surfaces, so its useful even as just additional counter top. I can easily put other small kitchen appliances on top of it and those appliances have a flat, solid bottom to them instead of trying to get the feet just right on a grate and then have them be inches above the rest of the counter top.
We have an older GE Profile glass cooktop with touch buttons on the right side. I was originally planning on tearing it out and putting in a gas stove when we moved in, which wouldn't have been too difficult as there's a gas line in the wall capped off as I guess a previous owner had a gas stove before they redid the kitchen with electric appliances. The benefits of it being a completely flat nearly counter flush surface and being far easier to clean in my opinion make up for the loss of more instant heat from a gas stove, so we're going to keep it for a while.
I guess I'm used to the flat-tops that have some kind of weird plastic coating. Over time (and not that long) they get crap stuck to them that just won't come off, and various scratches and gouges make them impossible to ever get totally clean. [EDIT] Which is to say, yeah, maybe all-glass ones don't have that problem (brittleness issues aside)
And I consider removability a benefit. It's much easier to scrub something at the sink than on the stove itself.
Voice from experience: See the model you are looking at will beep annoyingly every time you pick up a pan to flip something.
My mid range portable and expensive built in both do this. I get they want to let you know you've nudge a pan out of effect, but give me three seconds! That's all I want, three seconds before you fire the most annoying piezo buzzer on the planet.
i remove the metal disk from the pezio element. you can still hear it, but just barely. you dont actually have to unsolder it, just pop the plastic top off.
not that i would want to do that with an expensive built in range. but it removes a major source of annoyance when using the little ones.
The thread author appears to have mistaken the acceptable NO2 level for 5.3ppb when it’s actually 53ppb. The averages on his chart never met or exceeded that value.
The EPA current standard is 53ppb, but actually the WHO in September set their recommended AQG target at 10 micrograms per cubic meter with 3 step-down interim targets of 40,30,20.
10 micrograms per cubic meter of NO2 is 5.3ppb. (conversion factor is 1.88ugm3/1ppb)
Source? The closest I could find is [1], which says 10 μg/m3 annual mean and 25 μg/m3 24-hour mean. It is for outdoor levels, but I can't imagine why the same chemical would be safer to breathe depending on whether you are inside or not as you breathe it.
I've just replaced my hood vent to something larger, and am installing a duct fan above it, in the duct that exhausts outside. I think this can be a good mitigation, without the need for worry. Doing a "candle smoke" test, very little makes it out from under the hood, as is, and the fan I'm installing is about 5x the airflow of what's there now. Most vents have very poor fans built in, in my experience. Of course, this only works if you're in a climate where a large exchange of outside air won't cause a problem.
If you have a smart oven (or a little heat detecting sensor with an esp32), you can buy a smart switch to turn the fan on whenever the oven is on.
You'll have to quote it, since I don't see that in the peer reviewed research. Here's the entirety of mentions of hoods that I found:
> In fact, some kitchens have “ductless” hoods that recirculate fumes through activated charcoal filters, which are generally less effective at cleaning the air.
Where I am, it's illegal to have a gas stove without ducted vents since activated carbon filters won't prevent death from carbon monoxide. As mentioned, I have a ducted fan.
> Vented hoods have a range of effectiveness and function best when overhanging the stove. (12,13)
As mentioned, this is my experience, too. The average hood has abysmal CFM. If you've ever bought a range hood, you'll see know that the higher CFM come at nearly triple the cost, with fancy buttons and grills. There's no way to purchase a cheap AND high CFM vent from a common retailer. I think most people don't go for these high end fans. A duct fan that sucks 5x of a high end fan is probably on the "effective" side of things.
> Because exhaust hoods are separate from the stove and must be operated manually, vented hoods in practice are used only 25–40% of the time.
> Previous modeling-based approaches suggest that residents are exposed to NO2 levels above outdoor acute (1 h) exposure guidelines 62% of the time while using their stove but not using their range hoods, (36) and people use their range hoods only 28–36% of the time. (15)
This is why I suggested it should be automated, otherwise it's forgotten sometimes. Mine turns on with about 1 second of the oven turning on, and stays on for a few minutes after it shuts off. I think this is very important, and I would worry without this.
Perhaps one of the citations in that paper say they're not effective, but it's only suggested that they can be ineffective.
We know range hoods can work since they're used for noxious gases in basically every chemistry lab in the world. So, it's a bit silly to claim they can't work (there are standards to measure effectiveness). I think it's safe to claim that the average range hood is insufficient, but I don't think it's safe to claim that all are insufficient. :)
Regardless, the purpose of my comment was to show that steps can be taken to minimize risk and worry. I think the steps I've taken, according to the peer-reviewed research, do just that.
Adverse health effects have been observed among children with a functional but unused oven or stove such as higher rates of diabetes and asthma and other life-long effects.
Well, we can think about why, and try to to minimize risk.
If it's unused, and they didn't control for diet, then it could be that they're eating processed foods. I would be extremely interested in seeing the diet of a family that didn't use a range/oven, and the relative amount of phthalates and the like.
Assuming they are getting good quality food, then an old stove will always have a pilot light on, even if it's unused. I think it would be hard to ventilate the emissions from a pilot light, since most ducted vents have flaps that only open when a fan is on. But...
If it's a modern stove, then an unused gas stove is the same as not having a gas stove at all, since there's no pilot light, unless you have a gas leak.
In my case, I have a modern stove, and no gas leak (it was tested), so I think my situation is probably different than whatever study you have in mind, assuming everything is properly ventilated while it's on.
I watched the NOVA episode on methane bubbling out of the defrosting arctic. Made me wonder if instead of pumping gas out of the ground here, we should be collecting that gas instead and piping it south.
I.e. since it's bubbling out anyway, use it to replace our natural gas burning, for a total reduction.
If there were a small number of sites where the gas was emitted, akin to the way rivers tend to combine into one larger river, then the idea would be good. The problem is that the emissions are happening over hundreds of thousands of square miles. Putting a dome over all of it to capture the gas is not possible.
Watch the NOVA show, they showed it bubbling fairly vigorously out of a lake. They speculated it was coming from a large reservoir 500 feet below the permafrost.
It's typically considered not worth it collect methane from oil-producing wells, even though it comes out in such volume that it needs to be appropriately vented and flared (burned) which is why you can see burning torch-like pipes out in the middle of nowhere all over oil producing areas. Given that is much more concentrated than thousands of kilometers of bogs and tundra, the odds of this being practical, much less profitable, are basically zero.
It's very spread out, in far northern locations, where roads and infrastructure don't exist. These are microscopic bubbles released very slowly over all of Russia and northern Canada. It'd be an economic money pit to attempt to harvest gas that way. Better to put all that money towards making batteries to supplement renewables.
> I have gas appliances and would not trade them for anything.
Why? I have gas, but induction, and the new one's that support temperature control of the pan itself, seem really neat. For baking, when I had electric, I would add a little container of water to maintain a little humidity, when needed.
Being able to maintain heat, while lifting the pan, is nice.
Totally agree better than coal, and to each their own on your personal risk tolerance. Although if it's the heat control/speed of gas that you love maybe look into induction? I've heard great things and thats what I plan on using (coil stoves are just not very good) once I buy a stove (currently a renter).
That's not my experience. The dynamic range of our induction hob is phenomenal. We can boil water faster than anything else, and the low mode is just excellent for very low temperatures (you can leave it on just to stay warm). I just wish the buttons worked better!
I have yet to come across an induction unit that handles low temp settings well- even the best ones I've tried use low-frequency PWM to approximate lower temperatures, and you need to have enough thermal mass in your pan to smooth it out that rapid adjustments aren't possible in the way that with using gas is. If you can recommend a specific model, I'd like to take a look at it.
Yeah it certainly uses pwm with about a 1 second period, and most of our pans are a good weight. It's effective though. The hob is a fairly fancy neff one, but I wouldn't necessarily recommend it for other reasons (the low and boost buttons stopped working after <4 years).
This is the thing I think is missing from all of these analyses; does the fume hood vent to the outside? I have lived in plenty of houses/apartments/condos with gas stoves, and external venting has always been a hard requirement for me.
>NO2 concentrations in the kitchen and bedroom did not significantly change following ventilation hood installation.
These are outdoor vented:
>Ventilation hood: Range hoods [BROAN® (Hartford, WI, USA) Range Hood model numbers 433611, 403001, or 423001] with ventilation fans to the outdoors and secure seal to minimize energy loss were installed over existing gas stoves.
I keep seeing this study referenced. However, I find it pretty glaring that the Range Hoods they used are not even adequately rated for gas stove usage.
For instance, they listed "flow rates for the models used as 160–220 cubic feet per minute".
These are range hoods typically used for electric models - not gas. 400 CFM is generally considered a baseline hood for gas stoves (100 CFM / 10000 BTU).
I would feel much more confident in their results had they used more powerful range hoods that were more appropriate for the stoves in question.
I've never had a kitchen with a 400CFM+ range hood, despite 50-50 gas appliances. All but one have been micro-hood combos and those don't move much air at all.
I hope they all do, where they exist anyway. But that’s a far more open system than a wood/coal stove which only has small air intakes, sometimes configured to draw from outside so the whole system is sealed from inside air
As an aside, I lived in an old house with electric range which just blew the air up at a 45 deg angle, but as people have gotten taller, it would just blow into my face.
While cooking for sure, but what's interesting is that because these things leak (parent article) unless you have your range-hood running all the time you're probably pumping at least a little bit of natural gas into your kitchen 24x7.
Same. Nothing compares to gas appliances when it comes to putting raw energy into your cookware. Also, nothing compares to broiling food in a gas oven. You can also use the burner flame as a utility to do things like toasting tortillas.
Health concerns are real (methane and potentially CO), but they are one thing - vastly more energy efficient.
So if you're in to energy efficiency gas appliances make some sense.
There's something ridiculous about burning a ton of gas [to boil water and spin turbines], which generates and sends electricity (with enormous losses at every step) to a stove which heats a coil ... to boil water.
Literally every time someone tries to figure out how much methane there should be based on published leak rates and such, and then goes to measure out there somewhere, they find radically more methane in the air than there "should be." And it's very hard to track back to where it's all coming from.
It seems methane leaks from just about everything, and it's far from the "climate savior" it's been made out to be. It's not carbon emissions, it's just far worse over the short term.
I remember reading somewhere that much of the emissions blamed on the meat and dairy industry were actually due to the oil industry not being transparent. I may have misremembered or misunderstood, but it all seems very fishy to me.
What an disingenuous article. Yes natural gas appliances help to cook the climate. Farting also releases methane and helps cook the climate.
Can we focus on the real issues. USA natural gas kitchen appliances aren’t the main contributor to climate change. I’d be surprised if it’s even in the top 1000 issues.
You might say you can work on multiple issues - sure, but people only have so much time to research on issues and so much attention to spare.
Furthermore who is going to fund all of this conversion to induction? Whose going to require the tens of millions of homes to high gauge and high voltage wiring?
Induction or electric stoves doesn't need high gauge, insane current wiring to work. In EU, You can power one from a 220V/16A fuse, and you don't even need to dedicate that circuit to it. Mine is connected to a bog standard wall outlet (It came with a plug).
I am not a physicist but from high school physics I've got an impression that the DC power is VxI, and AC power is less than that (averaging the instantaneous VxI value) so the 220Vx16A is going to give at most 3.5K watt, right?
I've checked the specs and my stove's burners are 3 x 18K and 3 x 15K BTU/h. Which is approximately 5K and 4K watt. Even one of the small burners is more powerful than the entire stove you mentioned.
I am sure an induction stove does not waste any energy and everything goes only in the heating the pan but I don't see how can this account for an order of magnitude in power difference.
220 V is already in RMS [1] so its just 220V * 16 A = 3.5kW (current is also rms)
Of course, thats truly only correct for a resistive load (but, without knowing much about induction stoves, its probably within 10% - modern power electronics are amazing)
[1] Root Mean Square. Basically the measure needed to make a simply multiplication give you the power. Other ways to measure line voltage are
Amplitude. This would be the A in V(t) = Asin(wt). A = sqrt(Vrms)
Peak to peak. This is 2xA.
They’re all useful ways to thinking of the same thing. If you’re designing insulation you’re designing for A, or peak to peak. If you’re designing a water kettle, you’re interested in Vrms.
Great, let's say it can draw 4Kwatt from the wall. It's still nowhere close to a 100K BTU stove (~28Kwatt). To have this much of electric power in the US you'd need a 120A 220V (actually 240 nowadays) outlet. I don't even know if codes allow this much current inside the house.
The heat of the fire is not completely transferred to the cooking utensil due to air and losses, on induction and resistive stove tops, the heat losses are much lower since you don't heat anything in inductive (magnetic field heats the metal directly), and electric stovetops have no air-gap to transfer heat.
So, in the end, 90% of the time you're looking at the same cooking duration at the end of the day. So, you don't need that 120A load.
In other words, if the box says 5 minutes on medium, it's 5 minutes on medium. Regardless of gas, electric or induction.
Yeah, I know that, I've even mentioned it above as I mentioned that gas does not lose nearly as much heat as necessary to make a 3.5Kwatt stove as efficient as a 28Kwatt one.
You cannot replace a gas oven and 5 burner stove as shown in the paper with a 16A induction stove.
Furthermore the oven you use will likely be resistive and inefficient, likely being derived from dirtier energy like coal. Or ironically also from natural gas to begin with.
You can get a set or get them independently. Bosch is recommending 16A even for sets for ~20 years (we had one?).
Both ovens we have (the older and the newer ones) are hidden element, isolated units which spend most of their time off after reaching to the desired temperature, and they're not burning through energy all the time.
And the ceramic coating inside them are self cleaning with the cooking heat too.
You can't guarantee renewables everywhere, can you?
Perhaps that’s true but USA wiring is 120V /15A per breaker without rewiring so your point isn’t really relevant. Older houses might even be 110V and not have dedicated circuits in the kitchen.
Not sure why you even brought up anywhere that’s not the US when the paper is talking specifically about US kitchens
I'm talking about the possible technology, and isn't US electrical code allows 220V outlets for high power applications like washer/drier sets? Do I have been lied to?
All US homes have 220V at the breaker [1]. That doesnt mean its available anywhere else in the home since the only appliance that is necessarily 220V is AC (dryers, ovens, all come in gas) and the AC is typically hardwired.
You also have a lot less versatility in how you use 220 in the US (just look at the size of the NEMA outlets)
[1] Europe was poorer than the US at the turn of the last century and adopted 220 to save on copper. 110, all else equal (and its not) safer. In the US, two phases of 110 come in from the transformer box outside to your box 180 degrees out of phase. Taking both phases, you get 220V.
The Brits, to save even more copper, did something insane - ring circuits
I'm from the US. Every home I've lived in (9) has had at least one or more 240V 30A circuits in the kitchen, my current home has 2 and it was built in the 80s so not exactly a modern build. There usually aren't a lot of outlets, as things like built-in ovens and ranges are often hardwired and not on a plug. Though the stand-alone oven/range units do often have a plug, but you don't normally see it unless you're swapping out units. They'll usually have a NEMA 14-30 or 10-30.
A one-story house with an unfinished basement makes it sooo easy to do a lot of common home upgrades. I'm jealous, everything around me is just slab-style houses so it can be a pain to do anything like plumbing work without just resorting to having stuff in the attic.
I can't see the paywalled article, but I believe the main point of the underlying research was not climate change but the impact on indoor air quality and unrecognized hazard to human health.
It is kind of amazing how often the "next big thing" turns out to be less than promised. Natural Gas was supposed to be this great transition away from coal and heating oil and it seems like it has nearly as many issues.
Shockingly, burning stuff in millions of micro scale instances is drastically less efficient and polluting than burning it all in one big, hyper efficient well managed place and converting it into electricity.
Natural gas as a source of energy is a lot less clean than advertised, almost as bad as coal, even without gas stoves, (due to fugitive methane emissions, yes, but not in your home)
FFS read about it. It burns clean at use site but causes tons of largely unmeasured methane emissions at extraction site, to the point where it's 50%-70% as bad as coal. Except it's worse because clueless people think it's great so they're building even more gas plants which will work for decades to come, whereas coal at least is being shut down.
This has been out for a while now. It's paywalled but I recognize the half-a-million cars figure. The passive leakages from stoves and the infrastructure right?
You know what else emits the CO2 of half a million cars? Half a million cars, and there are 580 halfs of millions of cars in the U.S. alone.
Caring about the greenhouse impact of gas appliances is like profiling your computer system and then trying to optimize the thing at the bottom of the list.
Or like telling folks in California to stop watering their lawns and take shorter showers when there's a water shortage. BUT keeping the focus on personal responsibility rather than industry is the name of the game.
Yeah, 90% of it is industry and growing stuff in a desert, but those people watering their roses is the problem. Lol it's more of the elite making sure they get their profits while blaming the general public and also pushing the cost to them.
This us a faulty analogy. In the case of the atmosphere we all share it and it blows around all over the world. In the case of domestic water distribution systems, the water system that supplies your garden hose and the one that supplies orchards and fields are completely distinct, unconnected, and not interchangeable. If your local California water utility is running low on water there is nothing that an almond grower in Fresno County can do for you.
Isn't the assumption that you're working in serial? Given that this work can be done in parallel and many areas will take a long time, why not work on as many as possible?
We are working in serial. There is limited public attention, government budget and political capital available to regulate these industries. This creates significant opportunity cost.
In order to actually change the world, we need to spend all our efforts stopping the biggest polluters such as chinese industry and fossil fuels. Worrying about smaller problems such as methane or cryptocurrency is a waste of time at best and a malicious distraction at worst.
The public's attention and cognitive powers are finite, so it is best to not confuse the issues. The front and center message about climate change to the public and to regulatory agencies needs to be "cars".
Why? I've cooked on all different sorts of heating sources and haven't noticed a big enough difference to justify health and climate issues. If cooking is the application of heat to food, a skillful chef should be able to use a variety of heat sources, no?
Complete freedom of what you're cooking on/with, complete predictability, it's fine. It's not the 90% problem with the environment. Most apartments I've had were resistive elements or inductive and I disliked it, plus like other I have some aluminum and copper cookware that I inherited and have special meaning to me
The most annoying thing for me about cooking on resistive electric is that changes in temperature are extremely slow. I can't add heat as quickly as gas, and when I want to take it away, the heating element retains heat for a long time.
I have not cooked with induction; it should be better on both points.
See, I would be more open to induction, but due to its physics issues it's a non-starter for me. I use some aluminum, copper, and Pyrex cookware in my kitchen and none of those will work with induction. So for me it's between electric and gas, of which I prefer gas.
I don’t know how much truth is in it - but I have been told there the older brown style are the highest quality glass and have better thermal expansion properties such that they can be used on the stovetop. Meanwhile, more recent incarnations are much more likely to fail (catastrophically).
Everyone agrees resistive electric sucks. Induction is what everyone is suggesting you try. I find it to work a lot better and be far more powerful. Boils a pot of water faster than a kettle can.
Did you grow up with gas stoves? I did as well and really can't imagine using anything else. But I've got friends from the Midwest, where natural gas lines are less common that grew up with electric stoves, and they tell them they can't imagine cooking with anything other than electric -- the open flames on gas stoves actually scare them.
Grew up with electric and much prefer using gas ranges now that I have the choice.
I just prefer gas stoves and I don't think that the article or discussions in this thread are going to dissuade me from that. Also, my baseboard _and_ steam boiler in my house (old and new additions to the house) also use gas; it would be very expensive to shift and I have a feeling that I never will short of needing to do so. Gas is very common here in upstate New York.
> they can't imagine cooking with anything other than electric -- the open flames on gas stoves actually scare them
In my country, electric showers are common. The water is in direct contact with an electrical resistance. I've seen people from other countries calling these things "suicide showers" but nobody here bats an eye.
First, I freeking love cooking with our gas stove. It's got zero electronics, and is simply a half-dozen gas valves that output like a blast furnace. I've no doubt it's a danger to me and everyone else on earth, but what isn't?
And I don't like this push to offload all the industrial methane output blame to me, and others like me. My nearest landfill likely outputs more methane daily, than I will in a lifetime. Blame all of us, though.
Modern induction provides a superior cooking experience to gas.
The metal of the cookware is heated directly via the energy field.
Yes there are many risks in modern life, some are longer term and less directly linked. Gas stoves are directly linked to health outcomes and switching away can result in immediate personal benefit.
The first step is governments banning gas for new builds like NYC has. And then offering interest free loans or other incentives to get rid of existing connections.
Sorry, but induction does not replace an open fire for much of the cooking that I do. I'm no luddite, we have an electric car, and ride bicycles most of the time instead.
This is all a big PR ploy to deflect blame from industry. Concrete, anyone?
no it doesn't. See it's just opinion, man. It's hard to deny they're better for the environment but for a lot of us we just enjoy gas and the experience of cooking with it.
Modern gas stoves, esp. in the EU has electronics for safety and relighting if it goes out. So they're not just a bunch of valves like the stoves of the yesteryear.
We use electric stoves for ~20 years and nothing has broken on them except a regular bulb back-light. Current stoves esp. BSH made are not solid state electronics. They are relay powered industrial automations so they don't break twice a week.
OTOH, most probably the landfill nearest to you is using methane trapping technologies to use that methane to generate electricity. Ours is doing it, and it's awesome.
The landfill is full of crap that you threw in it though so that would still be on you. It also probably serves more people than you have days in your lifespan.
This is one of those BS articles to turn a systemic and government issue and break it down to a personal responsibility issue. So that the powers that be don't have to do anything. 70% of climate pollution comes from US Military and Cargo ships. How about we start there.
Its targeting government. NYC recently banned natural gas connections to new buildings. This kind of research will help other governments justify the change.
These articles definitely aren't saying that the US military and cargo ships account for 70% of all climate pollution. If my math is right, the US military is closer to 0.01% of all carbon emissions.
Even if I wasn't against fossil fuel based appliances in principle, this was enough to make me actively worry about living in a house with a gas stove.