7 ms·

It is amazing that gas stoves as something to think about have entered into the public space so rapidily from nowhere. It's so deeply deeply bizarre. Am I the

It is amazing that gas stoves as something to think about have entered into the public space so rapidily from nowhere. It's so deeply deeply bizarre. Am I the only one wondering not about the topic but about how these topics occur?

JimtheCoder 4y ago
Slow news week?
mc32 4y ago
Not taking sides on this, but this is a great case-study on effective propaganda (n.b. propaganda in a neutral context) It's pretty amazing how this can dovetail with ideology to ride coat-tails so effectively. This is how the CCP and others can so effectively mobilize their population to change course on a dime.
coryrc 4y ago
People coordinate. It's, like, what makes us people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList for example. Or all the climate activists meet at conferences and things.
peteradio 4y ago
Whats bizarre about it? There is apparently serious discussion about banning gas stoves and that is spawning discussion/debate among the rabble.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
conradev 4y ago
This unfortunately won’t be the last you will hear about them, either The Inflation Reduction Act, passed last year in the US, has rebates to pay for 50% or 100% of the cost to convert a gas stove to an electric one That means that there are people who stand to make a lot of money by convincing you to go electric at no cost to you :)
- ananonymoususer 4y ago
  "at no cost to you" other than the devaluation of your money via rampant inflation caused by irresponsible multi-trillion dollar spending bills.
  - LargoLasskhyfv 4y ago
    C-entral P-anel (for) S-hitting C-itizens? ;->
dpkirchner 4y ago
A scientific article was recently published (within the last week IIRC), so it's natural to see a lot of coverage and discussion. The effect of gas stoves on health has been investigated for a long, long time, however.
- ananonymoususer 4y ago
  True, but suddenly, after this new questionable paper appears, the current US administration is now considering a ban on gas stoves in all new construction. https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-is-coming-for-your-gas-stove-consumer-product-safety-commission-richard-trumka-environmental-protection-agency-11673303864 https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-is-coming-for-your-gas-st...
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    I'd be cautious treating the WSJ editorial page as accurate news coverage.
    - ananonymoususer 4y ago
      The WSJ editorial was in response to the flood of mainstream coverage about the administration's announcement yesterday. I knew it was an editorial when I linked it and it should be obvious to anyone who reads it. Is there any question about the facts of the administration's policy statement?
      - ceejayoz 4y ago
        > Is there any question about the facts of the administration's policy statement? Yes, there is; there wasn't a policy statement. One commissioner (out of five) made an off-the-cuff, vauge mention about regulation (which could easily encompass something like a ventilation or emissions standard for them) in an interview. The usual suspects are now trying to turn it into the next culture war battle.
FooBarBizBazz 4y ago
Yeah, it had "this comes from industry lobbyists" written all over it. The link to "climate" is so obviously strained. We're talking about a minor energy user, and we're not seriously addressing the source of the electricity. We should be talking about electricity generation first. And if we're going to be talking about homes, we should be talking about HVAC, starting with insulation. I know there's the "we can do both!" argument, and the "this will get us ready for when the grid finally switches to renewables" argument (like electric cars). So maybe this makes sense for new construction? But in a world with little nuclear and precious few renewables, it just seems premature, and like a lot of noise directed at the wrong things. Our impulse when we want to "save the environment" should not be to run out, buy a bunch of new shit, and send perfectly good appliances to the landfill.
- rayiner 4y ago
  > I know there's the "we can do both!" argument, and the "this will get us ready for when the grid finally switches to renewables" argument The problem with "do both" arguments is that it doesn't consider the costs and inconvenience of all those little changes on public support. That's particularly true banning gas stoves, because how people cook is deeply intertwined with culture and tradition. My Bangladeshi immigrant relatives think banning gas stoves is preposterous. You're telling them they need to get a high-end induction range to be able to brown meat as well as the cheap propane stoves they learned to cook on back home. (And somehow get their landlord to install a 240v line in the kitchen of their crappy Queens apartment.) They need to unlearn how their mom taught them to cook, and learn new techniques that don't involve lifting the pan off the induction range, new ways of using pressure cookers, etc. You're telling Mexicans they can't directly heat tortillas (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fybeV8uWCQI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fybeV8uWCQI) or char peppers on the flame. You're telling Asians they can't use woks the way they're used to. If you're going to step into a hornet's nest like that, the pay off had better be huge! Otherwise you're just setting the environmental movement's political capital on fire for little payoff.
  - johnny22 4y ago
    is anybody talking about banning gas stoves for existing homes? You mentioned "crappy queens apartment", but I didn't think that would require any change at all.
encoderer 4y ago
An acquaintenance in my network is a founder in the climate space. Two years ago he mentioned that for climate activists, eliminating gas stoves is the next target. About a year later the trickle of bad news about gas stoves began. And it’s somehow all about the health risks of having a gas stove. I’m not a conspiracy guy but it seems to me like climate activists are driving this message and they know full well you will never convince people to stop cooking over a flame, without resorting to “protect the children” nonsense.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  > About a year later the trickle of bad news about gas stoves began. Nah. Here's an article from 1996. (The "now, ladies" dates it pretty well to sometime outside the last decade, heh.) https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-04-02-ls-54048-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-04-02-ls-54048-... "And now, ladies, one more reason to get out of the kitchen: Cooking may be hazardous to your health. Or so suggests controversial new research into the relationship between the use of gas stoves and respiratory problems in women. The major pollutant released by the combustion of gas is nitrogen dioxide, an odorless, reddish-brown compound that irritates the linings of the respiratory tract and causes shortness of breath."
  - encoderer 4y ago
    Great citation but it really can support the point either way. Something known for decades is now getting new attention, scrutiny and oversight. What changed? Is it just a coincidence it’s become a target for the climate industry at the same time?
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      What changed? "Climate change isn't happening" ceased to be a sustainable political position in most of the world; even in the US it's moved from "climate change isn't a thing" to "humans can't cause climate change" to "it's real but we can't stop it". Same thing that happened to tobacco in the 1990s; the fossil fuel industry stopped being able to bullshit their way out of admitting the problem's existence.
red-iron-pine 4y ago
Most of humanity's housing used to be centered around fireplaces burning wood. Many still are. Why is it a surprise that we switched to gas?

JimtheCoder 4y ago

Slow news week?

mc32 4y ago

Not taking sides on this, but this is a great case-study on effective propaganda (n.b. propaganda in a neutral context) It's pretty amazing how this can dovetail with ideology to ride coat-tails so effectively. This is how the CCP and others can so effectively mobilize their population to change course on a dime.

coryrc 4y ago

People coordinate. It's, like, what makes us people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JournoList for example. Or all the climate activists meet at conferences and things.

peteradio 4y ago

Whats bizarre about it? There is apparently serious discussion about banning gas stoves and that is spawning discussion/debate among the rabble.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

conradev 4y ago

This unfortunately won’t be the last you will hear about them, either The Inflation Reduction Act, passed last year in the US, has rebates to pay for 50% or 100% of the cost to convert a gas stove to an electric one That means that there are people who stand to make a lot of money by convincing you to go electric at no cost to you :)

ananonymoususer 4y ago
"at no cost to you" other than the devaluation of your money via rampant inflation caused by irresponsible multi-trillion dollar spending bills.
- LargoLasskhyfv 4y ago
  C-entral P-anel (for) S-hitting C-itizens? ;->

dpkirchner 4y ago

A scientific article was recently published (within the last week IIRC), so it's natural to see a lot of coverage and discussion. The effect of gas stoves on health has been investigated for a long, long time, however.

ananonymoususer 4y ago
True, but suddenly, after this new questionable paper appears, the current US administration is now considering a ban on gas stoves in all new construction. https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-is-coming-for-your-gas-stove-consumer-product-safety-commission-richard-trumka-environmental-protection-agency-11673303864 https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-is-coming-for-your-gas-st...
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  I'd be cautious treating the WSJ editorial page as accurate news coverage.
  - ananonymoususer 4y ago
    The WSJ editorial was in response to the flood of mainstream coverage about the administration's announcement yesterday. I knew it was an editorial when I linked it and it should be obvious to anyone who reads it. Is there any question about the facts of the administration's policy statement?
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      > Is there any question about the facts of the administration's policy statement? Yes, there is; there wasn't a policy statement. One commissioner (out of five) made an off-the-cuff, vauge mention about regulation (which could easily encompass something like a ventilation or emissions standard for them) in an interview. The usual suspects are now trying to turn it into the next culture war battle.

FooBarBizBazz 4y ago

Yeah, it had "this comes from industry lobbyists" written all over it. The link to "climate" is so obviously strained. We're talking about a minor energy user, and we're not seriously addressing the source of the electricity. We should be talking about electricity generation first. And if we're going to be talking about homes, we should be talking about HVAC, starting with insulation. I know there's the "we can do both!" argument, and the "this will get us ready for when the grid finally switches to renewables" argument (like electric cars). So maybe this makes sense for new construction? But in a world with little nuclear and precious few renewables, it just seems premature, and like a lot of noise directed at the wrong things. Our impulse when we want to "save the environment" should not be to run out, buy a bunch of new shit, and send perfectly good appliances to the landfill.

rayiner 4y ago
> I know there's the "we can do both!" argument, and the "this will get us ready for when the grid finally switches to renewables" argument The problem with "do both" arguments is that it doesn't consider the costs and inconvenience of all those little changes on public support. That's particularly true banning gas stoves, because how people cook is deeply intertwined with culture and tradition. My Bangladeshi immigrant relatives think banning gas stoves is preposterous. You're telling them they need to get a high-end induction range to be able to brown meat as well as the cheap propane stoves they learned to cook on back home. (And somehow get their landlord to install a 240v line in the kitchen of their crappy Queens apartment.) They need to unlearn how their mom taught them to cook, and learn new techniques that don't involve lifting the pan off the induction range, new ways of using pressure cookers, etc. You're telling Mexicans they can't directly heat tortillas (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fybeV8uWCQI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fybeV8uWCQI) or char peppers on the flame. You're telling Asians they can't use woks the way they're used to. If you're going to step into a hornet's nest like that, the pay off had better be huge! Otherwise you're just setting the environmental movement's political capital on fire for little payoff.
- johnny22 4y ago
  is anybody talking about banning gas stoves for existing homes? You mentioned "crappy queens apartment", but I didn't think that would require any change at all.

encoderer 4y ago

An acquaintenance in my network is a founder in the climate space. Two years ago he mentioned that for climate activists, eliminating gas stoves is the next target. About a year later the trickle of bad news about gas stoves began. And it’s somehow all about the health risks of having a gas stove. I’m not a conspiracy guy but it seems to me like climate activists are driving this message and they know full well you will never convince people to stop cooking over a flame, without resorting to “protect the children” nonsense.

ceejayoz 4y ago
> About a year later the trickle of bad news about gas stoves began. Nah. Here's an article from 1996. (The "now, ladies" dates it pretty well to sometime outside the last decade, heh.) https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-04-02-ls-54048-story.html https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-04-02-ls-54048-... "And now, ladies, one more reason to get out of the kitchen: Cooking may be hazardous to your health. Or so suggests controversial new research into the relationship between the use of gas stoves and respiratory problems in women. The major pollutant released by the combustion of gas is nitrogen dioxide, an odorless, reddish-brown compound that irritates the linings of the respiratory tract and causes shortness of breath."
- encoderer 4y ago
  Great citation but it really can support the point either way. Something known for decades is now getting new attention, scrutiny and oversight. What changed? Is it just a coincidence it’s become a target for the climate industry at the same time?
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    What changed? "Climate change isn't happening" ceased to be a sustainable political position in most of the world; even in the US it's moved from "climate change isn't a thing" to "humans can't cause climate change" to "it's real but we can't stop it". Same thing that happened to tobacco in the 1990s; the fossil fuel industry stopped being able to bullshit their way out of admitting the problem's existence.

red-iron-pine 4y ago

Most of humanity's housing used to be centered around fireplaces burning wood. Many still are. Why is it a surprise that we switched to gas?