Hacker News Reader

Comment by pipodeclown | Hacker News Reader

What does that even mean? Did you not get the whole, burning hydrocarbons is bad for the climate memo? We have to stop all net carbon emmissions in the next fifteen years or were screwed (propably already are) and twats like you keep going online spouting your 'i don't buy the climate argument' bullshit. We're literally talking about burning hydrocarbons to heat stuff, how the hell can you say that you don't buy the climate argument?!?

View on HN

You can believe climate change is real and an imminent threat and still hold the position that banning gas stoves is a meaningless, misguided policy that will have no effect on climate change. There is no mutual exclusivity.

A typical natural gas stove burner uses around 7,000 to 10,000 BTUs per hour, which translates to about 0.8 to 1.2 pounds of CO2 emissions per hour of use. This doesn't even qualify as a blip on the radar of the global emissions problem. It's completely irrelevant to the problem you claim is prompting your antisocial outbursts.

At some point, you'll have to decide whether it's more about the climate or more about you. Hopefully you'll choose the climate eventually.

It really depends how much of the methane in the entire chain is combusted. Uncombusted methane has a short term radiative forcing 100x as much as C02.

And it turns out there are a lot of leaks and incomplete combustion in the overall methane supply chain. Residential hookups are a significant source of slow leaks.

So completely avoiding a hookup in the first place may have a larger climate impact than your napkin math suggests.

giving per person emission numbers isn't meaningful. multiply by a couple billion people and it's a lot more. you're also missing part of the reasoning which is that if you want to also ban gas heating (which produces a lot more CO2) and get rid of the gas pipes, you also want to minimize the number of gas stoves that need to be thrown out.

We’ll muddle through. At any rate, the point is to focus on low hanging fruit —- target high emitters, an electric stove powered by a coal plant is worse than a natural gas stove.

New York doesn’t have any coal plants.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/20/nyregion/coal-energy-ny.h...

NY does get some amount of power from out of state while it having any coal plants in the state but - edit - it seems to be less than 1%. Now I actually wonder why NJ has so much coal power compared to ny.

This is actually probably untrue. Gas stoves produce a huge amount of waste heat (==extra fuel burned) that isn't produced by electric.

Oh no, we are all going to die.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com