What a gas stove ban means for restaurants • Hacker News Board

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#221

Post by ryukafalz » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 6:35 PM UTC

gkop wrote: post #149

ryukafalz wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Gas allows you to set the exact temp you need No gas stove I’ve used has had this functionality. They let you set the exact output you want, which is not the same (and induction cooktops can do that too). Yes, if you want to set a specific temperature induction cooktops will cycle, but you can also use them the same way you’d use a gas stove and then they don’t.

Would you spell it out for us? If induction cooktops are capable of continuous control of their output, why do they cycle significantly in set temp mode? At least, I would expect them to cycle minimally for fine tuning, relying on the continuous control of output as much as possible instead of cycling.

This made me look it up because you’re right, that should also be possible. It looks like some indeed are capable of that, while others are not.

My experience with induction cooktops is admittedly mostly with portable ones, because I’m renting for now and can’t install my own stove. I suspect mine’s just not sophisticated enough. :)

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#222

Post by CamperBob2 » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 6:36 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #134

mananaysiempre wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m suspicious of the appropriateness of the even in this phrase. Massive bureaucracies with no competition produce late, cost-ineffective megaprojects, and a nuclear reactor is essentially megaproject bait even if does not actually have to built as one (unlike, say, a hydroelectric station). I’m reminded of how Higgs physics on the LHC is done on two completely independent detectors, ATLAS and CMS, because only buil…

The problem at the root cause is the public's (reasonable!) expectations about safety. Humanity has experienced twice just how much damage a nuclear reactor blowing up can cause, not to mention how brittle they are and how lax people treat safety - just look at how many accidents happened at Sellafield - or the terrorism risk. Many of the experimental design ideas add the question of nuclear weapons proliferation on…

There is nothing reasonable about the public expectation of safety when it comes to nuclear energy.

Coal plants cause orders of magnitude more premature deaths, but since they happen in hospitals and cancer treatment centers rather than homes, nobody cares. You can't make a 'Chernobyl' miniseries about cancer and emphysema patients scattered over an entire country (or planet.)

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#223

Post by the_third_wave » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 6:36 PM UTC

taylodl wrote: post #59

breadloaf wrote: post #44

I always find laughable when governments are scolding or limiting peasants for basically nothing, while ignoring the elephant in the room. * You need to conserve the water, California peasant! Ignore the fact that 80% of water in California is consumed by agriculture and we are not going to do anything about it. * You need to stop using your gas stove, peasant! Ignore the fact that we are going to switch off Diablo N…

Ignore the fact that we are going to switch off Diablo Nuclear Power plant and replace it with gas plants. That's a bit disingenuous. Those units were brought online in 1985 and 1986 and are licensed to operate through 2025. That's forty years - which is the life span of a power plant, especially a nuclear power plant. So, they're not being "switched off", they've hit end-of-life. Building a new nuclear power station…

If the US is no longer able to create nuclear power stations the reason for the failure is to be found in the regulatory overload, not in the technical ability. The solution therefore is to prune the regulators, not in building new gas-firing plants to replace nuclear power stations whose life can be extended while saving billions of dollars while keeping emissions at the same (very low) level as they've done since they were put on-line.

Here in Europe eyes seem to have been wrenched open and the resistance against nuclear power is being seen for what it is by many, a form of Luddism which is partly pushed by fossil fuel industries. Several countries - the Netherlands and the UK among them - are now planning to build new nuclear power stations. France seems to have been saved from the brink of switching their mostly nuclear power fleet to non-nuclear and is now planning to continue its reliance on nuclear power. Then there is Germany, the black sheep (probably due to it grazing next to a coal-fired power station) of Europe where 'die Grüne' (the Green party) and their ideological allies have managed to increase Germany's emissions substantially by forcing the closure of all nuclear power stations. Germany is one of the better examples on how not to manage power production and distribution.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#224

Post by guerrilla » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 6:36 PM UTC

wolverine876 wrote: post #178

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep... BP can cause a huge maritime catastrophe (deepwater horizon spill), but let's blame Johnny Average here for drinking soda by using a straw. The whole carbon footprint thing was created to shift blame from the dirty industry to inviduals - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/23/big-oi...

In life, do we behave in every way like the worst person we know? If my neighbor doesn't take out their trash, that doesn't mean I shouldn't do it. In fact, it works the opposite way: We each influence others; if we don't do it, fewer around us will; if we do something good, more people around us will - we set the standards. I try to act like the best person I know (and fail often!). Consumer do emit significant amou…

If 90% of the problem is caused by someone else, then spending 99% of the media coverage and legislation on me is just a highly-effective diversionary tactic! Come on, now.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#225

Post by wolverine876 » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 6:37 PM UTC

Maursault wrote: post #13

ars wrote: post #4

This is such a foolish law, environmentally speaking. I totally understand doing this once we've phased out burning natural gas for electricity. But we are not there today, today we are burning natural gas for electricity. So using electricity instead of natural gas in your home is wasteful. And yes I'm well aware that induction stoves are a thing. But induction stoves of today cannot run all four burners and the sto…

> This is such a foolish law, environmentally speaking. I concur. This is the same thing as blaming Climate Change on road vehicles when most of Climate Change is caused by energy, shipping, construction, concrete manufacture, glass making, etc. Mostly, Climate Change isn't caused by the People. It's business and industry causing it. IOW, greed causes Global Warming. So they're focusing on a space that has negligible…

> This is the same thing as blaming Climate Change on road vehicles when most of Climate Change is caused by energy, shipping, construction, concrete manufacture, glass making, etc.

Do you have data on how much each of those sectors contributes? IIRC, road transportation contributes a relatively large amount.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#226

Post by dralley » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 6:37 PM UTC

kmtrowbr wrote: post #155

I don't see how it makes sense: the electricity has to be generated, which is almost always via burning something to heat a boiler. Then the electricity is sent to houses via the grid, which involves further losses. So you burn something, make heat, make electricity, send the electricity though wires, to make heat. Vs, just making heat directly in the house to accomplish the job. If all our electricity came from rene…

Gas stovetops are pretty terrible about transferring heat to the food. Most of it flies away into the atmosphere.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#227

Post by Jenya_ » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 6:39 PM UTC

kmtrowbr wrote: post #155

I don't see how it makes sense: the electricity has to be generated, which is almost always via burning something to heat a boiler. Then the electricity is sent to houses via the grid, which involves further losses. So you burn something, make heat, make electricity, send the electricity though wires, to make heat. Vs, just making heat directly in the house to accomplish the job. If all our electricity came from rene…

Natural gas heating is very inefficient (e.g. versus electric kettle). There was recent Technology Connections video about that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yMMTVVJI4c

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#228

Post by wolverine876 » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 6:39 PM UTC

guerrilla wrote: post #224

wolverine876 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In life, do we behave in every way like the worst person we know? If my neighbor doesn't take out their trash, that doesn't mean I shouldn't do it. In fact, it works the opposite way: We each influence others; if we don't do it, fewer around us will; if we do something good, more people around us will - we set the standards. I try to act like the best person I know (and fail often!). Consumer do emit significant amou…

If 90% of the problem is caused by someone else, then spending 99% of the media coverage and legislation on me is just a highly-effective diversionary tactic! Come on, now.

> 90% of the problem is caused by someone else

Is that true? Or is it true that no factor is more than 10%, so everyone can use this rhetoric and say '90% isn't me!'

Also, if you think about it, though it's a very trendy take (which you can see repeated many times on this page) - think past the trend: it's a transparent, embarrassing abdication of responsibility. As just one person, only a tiny amount of the world is impacted by me, but I still have full responsibility for it. I don't sh-t in the street and say, '99.99% isn't me'. A soldier doesn't go AWOL and say, 'only 0.0001% of the battle is me'.

> 99% of the media coverage and legislation on me

Is that true? And if so, is it only the things you read about, the media coverage covering things that interest their readers and not generally addressing technical regulations of power plants?

There's such an attempt at a victim position - a common rhetorical tactic to disrupt progress and serious consideration of issues. Instead of pointing the finger and using rhetoric, which accomplishes nothing, what are you doing about climate change?

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#229

Post by macspoofing » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 6:40 PM UTC

Ekaros wrote: post #210

I wonder what are the particulate emissions of gas cooking? Is it entirely sootless? It is not really so big issue with powerplants as those can have more effective control of process and cleaning of output. But at poorly ventilated situations it seems possible to cause lot of harm.

>I wonder what are the particulate emissions of gas cooking? Is it entirely sootless?

Yes. It is entirely sootless[1]. There are no health concerns with gas cooking. There are certainly related concerns, like gas leaks leading to fires or CO poisoning - but of course this isn't the reason for the ban.

[1] Kind of ... all cooking (i.e. the act of applying heat to particles) results in some level of 'harmful' emissions either from the burning of fuel itself, or from the act of heating food particles. In the grand scheme of things, gas stove emissions are just not a big deal.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#230

Post by Kirby64 » Fri, Jun 03, 2022, 6:42 PM UTC

wolverine876 wrote: post #184

gwbas1c wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in MA, and in my old house I heated and cooked with gas. In the summer my gas bill was $30. In the winter my gas bill would go up to about $200. One extremely cold January in 2015 nearly cost $300. So, yeah, space heating uses much more gas than cooking.

I wonder what affected your air quality more? I could see it either way.

Inherently gas furnaces pipe their fumes out outside, so air quality should be better for the furnace than the gas stove, even though the furnace uses way more gas.

Exterior though, obviously the furnace is worse since its all going outside.