Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New York to ban natural gas, including stoves, in new buildings

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 1001 posts

Re: New York to ban natural gas, including stoves, in new buildings

#511

Post by kibwen »

whiddershins wrote: post #406
topaz0 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you try to do exactly what you were doing on the gas stove in the same way, you will have a bad time, but my and many other people's experience is that a decent electric stove is perfectly capable of making good food once you figure out how to use it. Electric stoves in general can heat faster than gas, and in my experience heat more evenly (no hot spots), so you don't need the crutch of a copper bottom to conduct…

It’s not propaganda. I’ve cooked on all sorts of stoves. Electric is way worse than gas. It’s not even up for reasonable debate.

Have you used an induction stove before? It's better than gas, and it's not even close (and yes, I have a gas range). Note that induction is not the same thing as resistive.

Re: New York to ban natural gas, including stoves, in new buildings

#512

Post by nemo44x »

kibwen wrote: post #503
Multicomp wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah if anything this will exacerbate the challenge of building new construction because existing buildings will have this valuable utility that new buildings cannot have.

The alternatives to gas are so good these days that there's no way I'd pay to connect any new house to gas.

Gas alliances are significantly cheaper to run. Also perform better. Gas dryers are awesome compared to electric for example. Plus electric goes out often. Gas doesn’t.

Re: New York to ban natural gas, including stoves, in new buildings

#513

Post by dvzk »

iamdamian wrote: post #365

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…

> When you point this out to advocates, you'll get an entirely different argument

This is a very common argumentation tactic, and it usually exposes that the first argument(s) are just a front for our actual axiomatic belief (which hasn't been disclosed). The core principle is often something that we know is much more controversial.

Re: New York to ban natural gas, including stoves, in new buildings

#514

Post by azemetre »

iamdamian wrote: post #472
azemetre wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

These are common in New York and may even be required by residential building code: https://up.codes/viewer/new_york/irc-2018/chapter/15/exhaust... (Note: I'm a New Yorker but not an expert in building code.)

ah that makes more sense, like those 15+ story buildings? I should have clarified my comment was in regards to SFH or triple deckers. I would honestly think it would be easier to implement in SFH but I'm guessing it's mostly due to developers cutting costs and that there is no regulation to actually make a viable one.

Re: New York to ban natural gas, including stoves, in new buildings

#515

Post by hedora »

iamdamian wrote: post #385
MagicMoonlight wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Because destroying the planet affects everyone and injuring yourself costs everyone else in state spending. We also don’t allow asbestos or releasing poison gas in your garden. 2. Would you consider spreading awareness a suitable solution to knife crime? No? I wonder why.

I haven't seen evidence that this regulation will prevent the planet from being destroyed. Also, personal health is not something that's generally regulated by the government, despite the potential to cause additional state spending.

> I haven't seen evidence that this regulation will prevent the planet from being destroyed.

There is plenty of evidence that a 100% phase out of natural gas is necessary but not sufficient.

Re: New York to ban natural gas, including stoves, in new buildings

#516

Post by paulcole »

iamdamian wrote: post #365

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…

> But when you dig into the details, it seems like the regulation may not have much effect on climate change at all.

The truth is that when you dig into the details, nothing is going to have much effect on climate change at all.

People alive today with any ability to affect change aren’t bothered enough by climate change to make any meaningful changes.

Re: New York to ban natural gas, including stoves, in new buildings

#517

Post by nemo44x »

topaz0 wrote: post #175
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #166

I don't often like to take a "both sides" approach when assessing specific issues, but this one just seems to highlight the stupidity, or at the very least shortsightedness, of both sides. On one hand, for those pushing for a ban, this seems largely performative, a la banning plastic straws. Gas is used for 2 main reasons: for cooking, where it represents a miniscule amount of overall energy use, and for heating, whe…

A big part of the reason for banning gas is not energy but indoor pollution. There's pretty strong and growing evidence that cooking with gas leads to substantial health risks because of various combustion products that end up in your air (especially if not properly vented).

It’s all made up and/or overblown by climate doomers. Vented gas is fine and great and removing them will contribute 0 to climate change.

Re: New York to ban natural gas, including stoves, in new buildings

#518

Post by fafqg »

azemetre wrote: post #447
iamdamian wrote: post #436

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.

Interesting, I live in Spain and every home I've been to has one.

Re: New York to ban natural gas, including stoves, in new buildings

#519

Post by crooked-v »

dathinab wrote: post #493

IMHO it should say "especially stoves". While gas stoves are nicer for cooking then simple electrical stoves, induction stoves have become comparatively cheap and can be roughly as good as gas stoves. At the same time having gas stoves is associated with a non small number of health risk especially with subpar ventilation and also associated with a non small risk for pretty bad accidents of all kinds. So a ban on gas…

Induction stoves are a lot better than gas stoves these days for most purposes. Faster and more consistent heating, easier to clean, less stray heat in your house... basically the only downside is that you can't use a wok or other non-flat pan without specialty equipment.

Re: New York to ban natural gas, including stoves, in new buildings

#520

Post by askvictor »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #459
ahoy wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I hope you don't use that stove to cook, because if you do, you are putting hundreds of times more harmful particulates into the air than the stove puts out alone. This is the same kind of "green"-feeling hypocrisy as the plastic bag bans. After Australia banned plastic bags, they found an increased amount of plastic in their landfills. Why? Because people used to re-use them as trash bags and were now buying much th…

> I hope you don't use that stove to cook, because if you do, you are putting hundreds of times more harmful particulates into the air than the stove puts out alone.

Really depends on how you cook. If you're not frying, this isn't really a problem.

> This is the same kind of "green"-feeling hypocrisy as the plastic bag bans. After Australia banned plastic bags, they found an increased amount of plastic in their landfills.

But a big part of this was to reduce plastic litter. Plastic in landfill isn't really a problem (oil being dug from the ground being put back into the ground). But putting a (small) price on plastics makes people a little less careless with them.

Post reply on HN