11 ms·
Gas utilities used tobacco tactics to avoid gas stove regulations
- bilsbie 3y agoLet’s let adults be adults and buy whatever stove they want.
- dangus 3y agoAnd what about their kids that didn’t choose to get asthma? And what about the adults who wouldn’t have chosen a gas stove if they had balanced and factual information rather than information tainted by corporate influence? https://youtu.be/gCMzjJjuxQI https://youtu.be/gCMzjJjuxQI
- CharlieDigital 3y agoWhen my daughter was younger, I thought she might have respiratory issues from being born premature due to mild coughing fits almost her entire life. Tested for allergies and nothing came up. When she was 5, we moved to a new house. When I read the recent research, I realized that this coughing declined around when we moved. The difference? The old house had a microwave over the stove and vented inside. The new house vented outside. Anecdotal, but the research connected the dots for me.
- saalweachter 3y agoIt blows my mind that the fake microwave hood is a thing. It's barely filtration, yet it successfully masquerades as ventilation.
- zdragnar 3y agoYou're also overlooking a ton of other things, hidden mold being a significant one.
- CharlieDigital 3y agoPlot twist: new house actually had the mold issues; gutted the basement and added bathroom ventilation to address.
- asystole 3y agoKids wouldn't even exist if it weren't for their parents being able to make their own choices. Plus, by your logic, nobody living in cities should have kids at all.
- BeFlatXIII 3y agoEnforce building codes for adequate ventilation instead of banning the better stoves.
- dangus 3y agoEven then people don’t turn their vents on universally. I’ve had to train the whole family on the habit because nobody is motivated to turn them on when they’re heating up water for Mac and cheese or something that seems “clean.” I could maybe be more okay with gas stoves not being banned in new builds if there was automatic venting that turned on as soon as a burner turns on.
- noutella 3y agoA very comprehensive video on that topic : https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hX2aZUav-54 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hX2aZUav-54
- cassepipe 3y agoI love this guy, well-researched and fun.
- dfgfek 3y ago[flagged]
- haizhung 3y agoYou don’t care about the impact on your health or your children’s health? That seems short sighted to me.
- dfgfek 3y agoI ventilate because I'm not an idiot, and still, the studies are contradictory at best.
- firtoz 3y agoCan you link to some studies, and, why do you feel gas is better?
- fullspectrumdev 3y agoA proper extractor fan mitigates the problem entirely. For a lot of cooking, gas is simply superior in almost every way to induction or electric. Induction has a few advantages in certain situations, but not many - gas is more flexible. Now there is something to be said about people using insufficient extraction or not maintaining their ventilation/extraction systems for sure, or grossly underspeccing them so that they aren’t worth a shit.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- k__ 3y agoI once read, that regularly lighting stuff on fire near your home is generally a bad for your health.
- koheripbal 3y agoThat's why furnaces have a chimney.
- k__ 3y agoAs far as I know, they're still bad. Especially when everyone in the neighborhood has one.
- thorncorona 3y agoIt seems funny people get upset about gas stoves, and not that modern houses are not constructed to allow for adequate ventilation.
- nulbyte 3y agoThis just means adequate ventilation isn't practical. It is, however, something that is more relatable to most folks than greenhouse emissions, which is arguably the bigger problem.
- Gigachad 3y agoI’ve never once seen a gas stove with adequate ventilation. New or old build. You’d need something resembling a lab fume hood with a blind you can pull down and negative air pressure in the enclosed space.
- lucidguppy 3y agoI switched to electric radiant. I miss being able to manipulate the pan yes. I like that it's more efficient. Gas kicked a LOT of heat into the kitchen. I like that it didn't scorch the side of the saucepans. Ultimately I switched to avoid burning fossil fuels. Every bit counts.
- asystole 3y agoHow is your local electricity generated?
- Shawnecy 3y agoFor 99% of the electricity in my state: * natural gas (42%) * nuclear power (29%) * coal (12%) * solar energy (10%) * hydroelectric power (5%) * and wind (1%)
- melling 3y agoThat’s what people say about EVs. The short answer is that it doesn’t matter. Switching out billions of stoves, cars … to electric counterparts is going to take a long time. The thousands of power plants are much easier to convert.
- lucidguppy 3y agoWhale oil.
- deleted 3y ago
- nephy 3y agoI have a gas range, gas water heater, gas logs, and gas backup heat. My gas bill is around $15 a month. My home has proper ventilation to the outside and I have no intention of converting a cheap gas bill into a high electric bill.
- ahoka 3y agoDo you also just dig a hole in your backyard and dump used oil there?
- nephy 3y agoNo, but my electric company buried tons of coal ash that leaked into the surrounding water table.
- korhojoa 3y agoSounds like they should be held responsible for environmental harm, perhaps part of their their restitution could be installing a bunch of renewable energy sources (kind of like dieselgate). Seems awfully dumb to let them not do anything about it, but doesn't seem like a valuable counterargument to stay with a energy method that directly contributes to poorer health.
- dangus 3y agoInduction ranges heat up water faster and use less energy than gas ranges: https://www.treehugger.com/which-more-energy-efficient-cooking-gas-or-induction-4858206 https://www.treehugger.com/which-more-energy-efficient-cooki... Since you mentioned that you have backup heating, I assume you don’t live in a very cold climate, in which case a heat pump for your backup heat and water heater is your most efficient lowest cost option, not a gas system. Part of your gas bill is just paying the gas company for a line. Your bill would be around $10 even if you use 0 gas. So basically having two different bills costs you extra money already. Then there’s the fact that you can get a solar system and generate your own electricity, which you can’t do with gas. Solar systems can have a payoff period in the 5-10 year range which is very reasonable. If you pair it with an electric car you’re almost never paying a utility or oil company for your fuel needs. I’m not saying you should run out and retrofit your whole home because that would never pay itself off, but in your climate I would never touch gas in a new build.
- jwie 3y agoWith any sufficiently large industry if that industry produces externalities powerful lobbies will emerge to make the harms as unclear and detached from the industry as possible. We only see the failures of this activity. There are many more big lobby success stories, where the externalities a line of business produces are removed from public discourse. In some cases, veggie libel laws for one, the lobby is so successful that criticism is practically illegal.
- ahoka 3y agoReading the comments here, these tactics were very successful!
- draw_down 3y agoAnother shill paid off by Big Induction, I see!
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y ago> "In my field, we know who those groups are, and we know that work that's done by those groups is not really trustworthy because they have never taken a stance on the side of public health," says Laura Vandenberg, professor of environmental health sciences at University of Massachusetts Amherst. Notice how she does not criticize their methods or analysis, but rather the conclusions. Sounds like some groups have a preferred outcome and will not tolerate any dissent and engage in ad-hominem attacks and innuendo (for example see the title of the article).
- _0ffh 3y agoEven better, she effectively says that anyone who does not advertise the "correct" bias is untrustworthy. Do these people have no shred of self-awareness?
- the_third_wave 3y agoSeeing how "pro-gas" comments tend to get greyed-out reminds me very much of the way those who went again the "current thing" were treated during the SARS2 pandemic. Why do many people here have to be so religious about these issues? Why has "supporting the current thing" been turned into something resembling a mantra? I wrote a fairly long comment [1] on my experience with different types of heat sources for cooking. Once I hit the "reply" button I noticed the comment a few levels upstream had been killed [2], probably for bluntly stating the author's preference for gas cookers. This comment section is full of all sorts of hyperbole about hurting children and destroying the planet and such by those who insist on using gas stoves but those comments are left alone - why? Until 2 years ago people could choose their own cooking appliance without the risk of being considered morally bankrupt but now that the current regime has made gas cookers into a "current thing" this has suddenly changed into a choice with decided moral implications. In other words, it seems like the tactics used by the current regime are successful in that gas stoves have been turned into a "current thing". [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38771676 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38771676 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38771305 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38771305
- nemo44x 3y agoInduction limits how I can cook compared to gas burners. There are fewer techniques and methods available and is unacceptable for how I like to cook. Induction is great for some people but for many people it comes up short. Cooking anything inside requires proper venting as cooking byproducts are harmful. Cooking isn’t just about getting a pan hot quickly.
- kasey_junk 3y agoThe issue isn’t that there are some cases and users where gas is the default it’s that for most cases and users it shouldn’t be. And there is significant cost to the default being gas that hasn’t been caught by our current legislative regimes. And that the gas companies are using dodgy tactics to keep it that way.
- CaptWillard 3y ago[flagged]
- koheripbal 3y agoNon-Western powers are doing the exact same thing online. ... and have been caught and demonstrated to be doing it explicitly. Not sure why you focus on the less demonstrated western powers doing it.
- CaptWillard 3y ago> Non-Western powers are doing the exact same thing online. Yeah, I'm saying it used to be a clear distinction. Most of what we were told about living in the USSR or China is true here now.
- TheAceOfHearts 3y agoIt's surprising that one of the most obvious solutions is generally only seen in both extremes of wealth: outdoor kitchens! Although I can see that still being an issue for people who live in places with terrible weather conditions. And with modern innovations like induction stoves it has probably become a less attractive alternative... Edit: gas is also really important for places without reliable access to electrical power.
- bob1029 3y agoI'm looking at doing an outdoor kitchen setup. Even with extremely high CFM on your range hood, a meal prep session is likely still going to make your house smell like a restaurant for an entire afternoon. For me, the type of heating seems irrelevant after a certain point when we are talking about air quality. If you make a big pan full of oil and other stuff hot for a long time, it doesn't really matter how it got there.
- liveoneggs 3y agoI have gas-everything and no ventilation except for bad construction and bathroom fans. Ideally I'd like both induction and gas eyes on my countertop. Resistive stoves just suck and putting the elements under glass panels is the worst of all worlds. Having a gas oven (like the one integrated into my unit) is stupid, slow, and smelly. I try to remember and open the window if I'm using it for very long.
- glimshe 3y agoI hope they do. Leave my gas stove alone until you have enough nuclear-originated electricity for an induction oven.
- Aspos 3y agoThat's a great example of the free market© at work.
- elzbardico 3y ago[flagged]
- pinkmuffinere 3y agoMany of the comments here just don't care about the potential harmful effects called out in the article. But I think there are two important questions: 1."Should I be worried about Nitrogen Dioxide from my stove?" 2."In the absence of trustworthy, detailed research, how would I know to be worried about Nitrogen Dioxide?" I feel the focus should be on the second question -- "big stove" seems to have prevented us from making an informed decision on the topic, and that should make us all concerned regardless of the particular dangers of Nitrogen Dioxide. Personally, I'd like to know whether it matters for my health. With the existing data, I can't tell.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 3y ago> "In my field, we know who those groups are, and we know that work that's done by those groups is not really trustworthy because they have never taken a stance on the side of public health," says Laura Vandenberg, professor of environmental health sciences at University of Massachusetts Amherst. This sounds like we disagree with any science that disagrees with our preferred policy. Notice how she does not criticize their methods or analysis, but rather the conclusions. This is not how science should be done.
- perihelions 3y ago- "Environmental epidemiologist Josiah Kephart studies pollution from cooking. In this 2021 photo he measured nitrogen dioxide levels from cooking in his kitchen. At right: A nitrogen dioxide air monitor shows 0.159 parts per million, or 159 parts per billion. That's above the World Health Organization hourly guideline of 106 ppb. Kephart has since replaced the gas stove with an electric one." That's *barely* above the 1-hour guideline, and as evident in that photo it's an (illegal?) stove with no hood or ventilation. This just reinforces my prior beliefs—that this is a complete non-issue for normal, code-compliant stoves. (Was NPR unable to take a photo of a NOx meter next to a normal stove?)
- lupusreal 3y agoNPR could do so, but that wouldn't advance the agenda. This non-issue isn't being pushed by mistake.
- 15457345234 3y agoI'm making a note that you're not supporting the current thing. I'd like to point out, that I _do_ support the current thing. Thank you for your attention.
- JoBrad 3y agoEveryone has an agenda, so it’s a good thing to discuss exactly what the competing agendas could be, and whether they are nefarious. NPR makes money by publishing articles, so obviously they will make more money by publishing content that people are likely to read. Those articles can be in some arbitrary continuum between fluff articles with sensationalistic headlines (aka clickbait) to highly technical articles with tons of references and/or transparently-documented original research. I’d put this one more towards the latter: the intended audience isn’t highly technical, so it includes approachable interviews with key people, but links to the more technical research are clearly called out. Importantly, the substance of the lede is mostly backed up by the supporting research. On the other hand we have an industry with deep connections to the oil industry that, according to the article, has used a well-known playbook of disinformation to stop or reduce regulation of their industry in multiple areas, with apparent success. States have recently passed laws to protect them, and the article also cites regulation that has been stopped or changed. The article also cites the health impact of natural gas and gases that are created by burning it, with general population statistics and studies about specific groups of people. It also cited evidence that the gas industry has funded research to combat these studies, and hidden the fact that this research was funded by them. Their motive for doing this would obviously be the negative impact that regulation could have on their ability to make a profit, which could impact jobs, the price of appliances, or even the choice of products that are available for purchase. Add in the background noise of trillions in subsidies to oil and gas companies, the almost complete capture of the leasing agency in the Federal government back in the early 2000s, and the chronic underfunding and understaffing of inspectors, and it _seems_ really obvious who is actually “winning” in this struggle. Am I missing something? Because the facts as I understand them seem to indicate an industry playing the regulatory capture and PR game on level 1000, while the regulators are playing with both hands behind their back, blindfolded.
- prepend 3y agoJust let people have stoves. I’ve noticed these types of “shade” articles that are strange and boring that an org like NPR dedicates people’s time to writing this. The goal isn’t to eliminate gas stoves. They don’t matter. It seems strange that anyone cares whether I have natural gas for stoves or not.
- fragmede 3y agoReally? The natural gas pipeline in San Bruno exploded in 2010, killing 8 people, and is far from the only disaster with natural gas, and you find it strange that people care what your house uses?
- prepend 3y agoThis isn’t really relevant though, is it? I don’t think anyone claims that infrastructure doesn’t have costs. Of course it does. But the argument is that the benefits are worth the cost. Brining up a gas pipeline explosion as relevant to a discussion about stoves isn’t useful unless you quantify what portion of that pipeline went toward cooking. The argument that all gas should be eliminated because 8 people died in 2010 is too simple.
- fragmede 3y agoPeople don't want to die is too simple?
- klabb3 3y agoI’m not a gas-proponent in any shape or form but this is at the very least an insufficient response. All forms of energy and infrastructure have accidents - a cost in blood. You could argue that gas has a higher total cost of life than other energy forms, perhaps. But it’s not like installing rooftop solar, maintaining windmills or dams are free from accidents. The safest energy in terms of deaths per Wh is fission IIRC. If you’re sitting on statistics that belongs to this discussion, please share it.
- thelastgallon 3y agoUS utility firms offer builders cash and trips to fit new homes with gas appliances: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38724030 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38724030
- fluffyspork 3y agoThe easiest terrorist attack is getting a few people to rent apartments with gas across a city, leave the gas open on the stove for a day or whatever, and then simultaneously ignite. Piping an explosive gas all over cities just seems like a generally bad idea. Why isn't this the discussion?
- regurfvjtdf 3y agoNo one has ever done that. But I imagine if someone does we will all need licenses for gas stoves, or have to take our cast iron pans out of our luggage when traveling, or some other dumb thing.
- peteradio 3y ago[flagged]
- rakeem303 3y ago[dead]
- cykros 3y agoI have an electric stove, and the emissions just from the amount of swearing I do for how obnoxious it is to cook with have got to be approaching a small dairy farm. Electric stoves may at least help us solve the obesity crisis by avoiding letting anyone have food worth eating.