3 ms·
> They’re just trying to muddy the waters. Who are They? I am one person, not a group or cabal. There are others who notice the same pattern, also individuals
by the_third_wave 3y ago
> They’re just trying to muddy the waters.
Who are They? I am one person, not a group or cabal. There are others who notice the same pattern, also individuals. Realise that the they is just a applicable to those pushing the current thing.
> News publications started widely publishing articles on gas stoves when research papers came out a couple of years ago
Yes, a couple of years ago. Not decades ago, not even 10 years ago. Recently.
As to the gas industry it is worth knowing that cooking stands for only a tiny fraction of gas use so even if people stopped cooking on gas they would see much of a dip in profits. What is really at play here is that people really like cooking on gas stoves and are not about to give it up without being forced to do so. Rising gas prices will not do that because cooking only uses small amounts of gas. What was needed was some other means to get those pesky gas cookers off the market. Once the gas cooker is gone it will be easier to wean people of gas-fired central heating and gas-fired clothes driers given that most people have less of a preference for those but are likely to keep on using them as long as they need to have a gas hookup for their cookers anyway.
The gas companies know this as well of course so it is not surprising to see them react. While cooking may be only a small part of their income heating does represent a sizeable fraction.
With propaganda from "both" sides it is imperative to use your head when dealing with the issue of air quality inside the home. If you have an air quality meter/monitor you can use that as well but even without one the solution is clear: use ventilation when cooking. Use it no matter which heat source is involved. Problem, solved? From what I gather the answer to that question is mostly, "yes".
- ryandrake 3y agoOK, that all's great, but what specifically is NPR's agenda? What specifically is "their desired narrative?" Are you saying that NPR is in the pocket of the Oil and Gas industry? Or are they in the pockets of someone (who?) against Oil and Gas? It's hard to tell. You said: > NPR/PBS, just like e.g. SVT/SR in Sweden, the BBC in the UK, NOS in the Netherlands and ARD/ZDF/NDR in Germany are better characterised by the term agenda-driven journalism - they tailor what they publish and how they publish to fit their desired narrative.