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

701–710 of 1001 posts

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

#701

Post by hairofadog »

goodluckchuck wrote: post #698
simplotek wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you buy a home and want it to have a gas stove, why is it the state government's place to say that you can't do so, for your own health? This is the wrong question to be made. You should ask what should be the safety standards you need to adhere to ensure health risks are mitigated. The reason why this sort of thing must at all times be regulated, without any exception, is that the personal interest of a corpora…

First, obviously regulation is a conspiracy. It will is a coordinated activity by multiple individuals. Second, none of this is an argument to ban natural gas appliances. what is the harm? Is the harm acceptable? Should a person be allowed to except the harm? Can the harm be mitigated by education or change in behavior? And who has the jurisdiction to implement these regulations even if natural gas stoves are in unre…

That’s a pretty broad definition of conspiracy that seems like it would include almost all human endeavors, no?

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

#702

Post by HWR_14 »

annexrichmond wrote: post #330
cogman10 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are more reasons to ban gas in buildings than just global warming. There's the fact that you are actually burning fuel, which released noxious fumes into the home [1]. There's mounting evidence that this sort of exposure has pretty negative health implications [2] Gas is also inherently dangerous, more-so than electricity. There's been more than a few examples of exploded homes/buildings due to gas leaks [3]. A…

Why can’t people make safety decisions for themselves? Many people will choose electric/induction stoves, or not rent an apartment with a gas stove. But many people do prefer it, and I don’t think it should be up to you or the government whether something is “good” for them or not.

Because in an apartment building your neighbor's apartment being on fire has a high degree of correlation to if your apartment catches on fire (or gets smoke/water damage).

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

#703

Post by oblio »

uwagar wrote: post #686
kleiba wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such baloney - there's so many way more relevant factors to the taste of food then which power source was used to provide heat. I bet if you did a blind tasting you'd not be able to tell the difference.

i like to roast my aubergine for babaganoush on an open flame. try that on an induction cooker and let me know?

Is it something that you cook daily? If it's occasional, maybe you could get a small butane gas burner or something equivalent?

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

#704

Post by throwaway2990 »

ramraj07 wrote: post #669
lostlogin wrote: post #661

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really think you can tell the difference between food cooked with electricity and food cooked with gas?

I am pro banning gas stoves but that doesn’t mean electric is great. Electric sucks ass, even ignoring some things you just cannot do without gas (like make proper rotis) their heating is slow and uneven. At the least induction is fast.

If you’re talking about roti flatbread. It’s always cooked on a flat surface so gas/electric has 0 influence on it.

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

#705

Post by HWR_14 »

collegeburner wrote: post #599
jnwatson wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

im from a part of the country where we get hurricanes the power will go out and usually we also have a boil water notice for those days it is extremely helpful to have a gas stove, we can still cook and get clean water rather than just eating cold cans and hoping we have enough bottles

But you are, by definition, not from NY. So this shouldn't impact you.

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

#706

Post by Cthulhu_ »

SoftTalker wrote: post #439
greedo wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the same reason that they can say not to use lead paint, or asbestos siding...

Basic chemistry, burning methane cleanly produces water and CO2. Neither is anywhere near as dangerous as lead or asbestos.

I mean your argument is sound enough in that a household's CO2 emissions are trivial compared to big industry or global ecosystem collapse, but that's not the only argument.

Europe found itself in a huge conundrum last year when Russia cut off the gas supply, highlighting our dependency on cheap Russian gas. It meant households went cold and lost their primary means of hot water and cooking - not so much because there was no gas, but because it was unaffordable.

But in my neck of the woods, removing dependency on gas had been ongoing for a while already for various motivations. One reason to do more with electricity, for example, is because people have cheap solar panels on their roofs now, using that to heat their house is (seems?) more self-reliant, cheaper, and less environmentally impactful in the long run.

And sure, one house won't make a difference, neither will a thousand. But it'll start to make an impact at scale.

There is no one fix for climate change, it will take tens of thousands of small changes and legislation over the span of decades.

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

#707

Post by ben_w »

JakeAl wrote: post #653
ravenstine wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhhh... woe is you? Plenty of non-poor people live with gas stoves, often without fume hoods, and even prefer gas. Not once have I ever felt ill or victimized because I had to cook on gas.

Love my gas stove, won't live without one, and it keeps my home warm in the winter even when the power goes out. Gas is much more cost effective than electric as well. Also lobe my gas water heater for the same reason. Hot baths during blackouts. This whole "gas is bad for the environment" is bunk when fossil fuels are required to generate al that electricity and that doesn't even get to the cost and efficiency of st…

Last time I had any kind of electrical power failure was, IIRC, the end of 2006 while living in the middle of nowhere: https://maps.app.goo.gl/uhgrnw1W4KFBoiRRA

So while I fully believe your lived experiences and preferences, a relevant question is: why are your electricity supplies so unreliable that having gas as well is even an important concern?

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

#708

Post by christophilus »

kibwen wrote: post #523
nemo44x wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Plus electric goes out often. Gas doesn’t. Most gas appliances also require electricity to run, and in addition the broader gas infrastructure itself requires electricity to compress the gas so that it reaches the consumer. There's no getting around the need for reliable electric infrastructure; centralized gas infrastructure won't save you from unreliable electricity.

My in-laws use their gas stove whenever the power goes out. I don’t use my electric stove when that happens. It happens maybe once a year, so I don’t really care. But if you’re in a place where outages are more frequent, it’s definitely a point in gas’ favor. On the other hand, I wouldn’t want to use gas without my hood fan properly working, so… I’m not sure what my point is anymore.

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

#709

Post by bretticus »

qwytw wrote: post #694
rayiner wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, and if you’re talking about poor people, what electric stove will their apartment have, resistance or induction? And will they have induction safe cookware? Banning gas stoves would be a huge blow to all the immigrants who rely on cooking techniques (like woks) that don’t work well on resistance coils, and require expensive special equipment to work on induction.

> what electric stove will their apartment have, resistance or induction I'd assume nobody would install a resistance stove in a new apartment (since this only applies to those)

They certainly won’t install an expensive induction stove in housing for poor people

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

#710

Post by simplotek »

goodluckchuck wrote: post #698
simplotek wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you buy a home and want it to have a gas stove, why is it the state government's place to say that you can't do so, for your own health? This is the wrong question to be made. You should ask what should be the safety standards you need to adhere to ensure health risks are mitigated. The reason why this sort of thing must at all times be regulated, without any exception, is that the personal interest of a corpora…

First, obviously regulation is a conspiracy. It will is a coordinated activity by multiple individuals. Second, none of this is an argument to ban natural gas appliances. what is the harm? Is the harm acceptable? Should a person be allowed to except the harm? Can the harm be mitigated by education or change in behavior? And who has the jurisdiction to implement these regulations even if natural gas stoves are in unre…

> First, obviously regulation is a conspiracy. It will is a coordinated activity by multiple individuals.

Your comment goes way beyond being wrong. You clearly do not know a) what a conspiracy is, b) how standards and regulations are specified and adopted. You clearly are trying to comment on subjects you're entirely oblivious about.

> Second, none of this is an argument to ban natural gas appliances.

Except it does. Again, you seem completely oblivious to what regulations and standards accomplish. You're trying to reject well established concepts and mechanisms that you know nothing about, and filling in your ignorance with conspiratorial make-believe.

For your information, builders are also forced to comply with regulation on thermal insulation in particular and climate confort in general. Why? For the very same reason NY banned natural gas in new buildings: mitigate the environmental and economic impact of climatizing ineficcient, sub-standard homes.

> what is the harm? Is the harm acceptable?

I invite you to read the regulation. You are clearly commenting on stuff out of ignorance.

Post reply on HN