471–480 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Basic chemistry, burning methane cleanly produces water and CO2. Neither is anywhere near as dangerous as lead or asbestos.
Yes, but natural gas isn't pure methane and CO2 isn't good for the brain. Burning something without a vented hood in a closed space can be incredibly dangerous. Especially if you're talking about high rise apartment buildings where... well... hot gas rises.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but this regulation targets everyone in the state of New York, not just renters, and the research I've read seems to indicate that fume hoods protect against this indoor pollution.
I have never seen an actual fume hood in any residential home in my life (close to 800 homes across the South and New England. I have seen plenty of faux hoods that do absolutely nothing. Maybe it's something they only add in luxury homes.
(Note: I'm a New Yorker but not an expert in building code.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the average American, 4 devices in their home - water heaters, furnaces, stoves and gas powered clothes driers - account 95% of residential emissions [1]. Residential energy use accounts for ~20% of US annual carbon emissions [2]. The 2nd figure accounts for carbon footprint of electricity generation used in the home as well as gas combusted in the home. The 4th chart from [1] suggests this is about a 50/50 split…
I appreciate you digging up this information, this is exactly what's been lacking in press coverage of the issue. If you're telling me that fully eliminating gas stoves in the U.S. (something that will not happen in our lifetimes and will come at great political and personal cost) is going to reduce U.S.-specific emissions by just 1%, I think I'm even more convinced that this regulation should not have been passed. W…
This regulation feels quite frustrating to me, and several comments in this thread illustrate why. This change is being promoted as a critical step in the fight against climate change. (See most news articles over the past two years covering this.) But when you dig into the details, it seems like the regulation may not have much effect on climate change at all. When you point this out to advocates, you'll get an enti…
I _rent_ a home, as do a full half of new york state residents. I'd love an electric stove. Every rental I've ever lived in has a gas stove and no fume hood. The full half of new yorkers who rent - almost 20 million people - mostly get whatever theirlandlord picked. So when I read posts like this, decrying government overreach, I wonder if you've ever been poor? Have you ever lived here? Do you know what youre talkin…
Anyway, yes I'm a New Yorker and also rent.
This regulation feels quite frustrating to me, and several comments in this thread illustrate why. This change is being promoted as a critical step in the fight against climate change. (See most news articles over the past two years covering this.) But when you dig into the details, it seems like the regulation may not have much effect on climate change at all. When you point this out to advocates, you'll get an enti…
I don’t buy the climate argument. However, banning gas appliances comes from the same place as banning lead paint. Gas appliances are a major source of indoor pollution. Gas heating leaks pollution inside the home, especially as furnaces age. Plus, many residents don’t own their own property. This helps protect renters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Regarding heat pumps phasing out gas heat, in NY it isn’t feasible. It gets too cold. Not true, heat pumps are widely used as primary heat sources in environments as cold or colder than NY, like in Montreal and other parts of Canada. The take that heat pump tech only works in very moderate temperatures is stale at this point.
> Not true, heat pumps are widely used as primary heat sources in environments as cold or colder than NY, like in Montreal and other parts of Canada. As the owner of a 5 year old heat pump in a milder climate in Indiana, I can tell you this: * When it is under 10°F, my heat pump switches to emergency heat... forced air electric and is very expensive to run. * Often the temperature swings are pretty wild... 40-50 degr…
Only 24% of my state (Washington) has gas stoves. We have already begun the process to ban Natural Gas into new buildings. Nothing major is happening and the sky is not falling. If you are curious about your state's ratio of gas to electric stoves, you can check here [PDF warning]: https://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2020/state/...
Having a backup method of ensuring my pipes don't freeze and my family is (mostly) comfortable is great. But if you're an electricity purist who hates cheap, available natural gas for some reason, enjoy sitting in the cold while your house destroys itself. Or spend thousands of dollars more on a device that BURNS GAS to run your electric furnace anyway
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What can be stepped up fast is wind and solar energy. And a heat pump is superior to gas even if the grid consists 100% out of gas. Further, you don't build a building built for gas when have to switch to electricity in the future anyway when the grid is even cleaner.
Um. Aren't we talking about stoves? Heat pumps aren't usable for this application. Even in the furnace case you need fairly ideal numbers for the heat pump to overtake the loss of 50% you're taking just in the generation step. And I don't know what's up with your claim about solar and wind energy.
Electricity is a universal protocol - you can generate it with multiple different energy sources, ranging from gas to nuclear. I think this change future-proofs constructions, and makes our infrastructure less fragile.
Energy technology is so weirdly unevenly distributed. This debate could have taken place in 1940 - with the exact same arguments.