Good points, but none of that is really critical or important.
The only real point is gas heating.
And I am not saying to ban immediately gas stoves at all.
It would not be a bad thing to get rid of gas cooktops in my opinion.
When my town put a ban on new gas hookups, at first I thought it was ridiculous.
I don't think that any more. First, though very infrequent there have been houses
that fill up with gas an explode. Then there is the massive leakage of the natural
gas infrastructure in terms of greenhouse gases, but also the cost of maintaining.
A whole city block in San Bruno, CA has an explosion due to improper maintenance.
There are some points on the side of natural gas, but at some point it is going to go
away, like gas cars. You might as well adjust to future realities ASAP.
As to heating, my take is this - if you look at the developed world's housing stock,
most of it was built to take advantage of very cheap energy. Most houses were not
insulted, or built with energy conservation in mind. We're told the solultion is to
massively retrofit all our housing stock, and to build new houses with very expensive
green technology. Green technology is not bad, but the cost of doing this, and the
resources used do not compute.
It would be much more profitable and affordable to bring back cheap energy, and
the way to do that is to build large numbers of nuclear plants all around the world.
It's a sad example, but look at Ukraine, they had/have a small number of reactors
installed that provide 60% of their power. France is nuclear, and has excess capacity
and sells it to the rest of Europe. They've had no significant problems with their
nuclear.
It would be much more sensible to concentrate on energy production, because
in today's work energy is the key to the economy. Electricity can be beamed all
over the world at the speed of light ( a slight exaggeration ) and the conducting
wires are much safer and easier to maintain than gas, and using electricity is not
a toxic hazard. Natural gas should be used in powerplants until there is enough
nuclear capacity, which is completely carbon-free.
Imagine the future need for electricity in desalinating water and pumping it
around the country to areas that are now parched and turning into desert. We
will need to save these places and the investments that have been made there.
The big picture says switch to electricity and every little bit helps move forward.
reply
share
Abed303 (282)
2 years ago
You were the one who stated that the switch to electric would be a big win for cooking. Claiming that evidence refuting your statement isn’t critical or important seems rather silly to me. It’s no coincidence that chefs prefer to cook with gas. Gas offers better responsiveness and control, use of a wider variety of cookware, and a wider variety of cooking methods. Maybe that’s unimportant to you, but you brought it up. It’s not unimportant to an entire industry of people that make a living cooking for others, that overwhelmingly prefer gas. I’m sorry, but it’s not a win for cooking at all.
You also made the point that it’s great “now that we have electric induction stoves to get rid of the massive expensive gas infrastructures in cities”. You said that; it was your point. I stated that the electrical grid should be invested in long before any proposed bans on gas, it was the crux of my argument. You seem to be supporting this in your long-winded and pedantic reply.
reply
share
TrentnQuarantino (9187)
2 years ago
> You were the one who stated that the switch to electric would be a big win for cooking.
It is.
reply
share
Abed303 (282)
2 years ago
I've offered numerous advantages of gas over electric. The only support to your claim that you provided was that heat flows around the cookware with gas, something that I pointed out is actually advantageous in many instances. So how is cooking improved through the switch to electric?
reply
share
TrentnQuarantino (9187)
2 years ago
I disagree with what you call advantages. But, even if there were advantages for gas over INDUCTION, not just electric, health has a priority over some advantages in cooking.
reply
share
Abed303 (282)
2 years ago
Induction is a form of electric heat. It uses electricity to create a magnetic field that rapidly oscillates polarity and heats the cookware through friction. Induction will not work on aluminum or copper cookware, another disadvantage. If the cookware is slightly warped it's useless on an induction top. All cookware, aside from cast iron will warp over time and cast iron has its own set of disadvantages, such as heating time, weight, and required care. If you don't understand the advantages of gas I suspect you have very little experience cooking, beyond feeding yourself.
I work in the industry. I have absolutely ZERO first, second, or even third hand experience with health problems stemming from exposure to a gas range. I'm talking about people that cook for 40+ hours per week for years. Someone at home cooking once or twice a day using their range for a couple hours is a drop in the bucket. You're more at risk for breathing carbon monoxide by walking down a city sidewalk than cooking your meals. Many of the other air pollutants caused by cooking stems from the heating of fats and oils; those risks are still present when cooking with electric. Anyone cooking on any range should have the hood turned on, which is highly effective.
reply
share
TrentnQuarantino (9187)
2 years ago
> If the cookware is slightly warped it's useless on an induction top.
BS. And there are plates that can go under pots that cannot be used that tranfers the heat just as well. Most cast iron will work fine on induction cooktops.
I didn't say gas is useless, our stove at home is gas. But I'd give it up with no problem.
I'd prefer to have an induction cooktoop, and election countertop convection over or air-fryer and save huge space in the kitchen - to get a lot more counter space and storage, and save money on energy bill.
Yet they are health consequences to gas stoves - you just want to deny them. Perhaps "in the industry" they have industrial ventilation systems, like every restaurant I've ever seen.
Most of what you say is talking out your ass. You like gas. I used to like smoking, so what. Live and grow, or whine and complain.
The main savings is in energy, global warming and infrastructure - massive, and take that gas that would go through all those expensive, leaky pipes and generate electricity with it. Improving the health of people, especially children whose asthma incidence is through the roof these days is a bonus.
reply
share
Abed303 (282)
2 years ago
A warped pot or pan that doesn't sit flat will absolutely not work on induction. Even if there's enough contact to activate the coil, it will heat wildly unevenly. I'm speaking from extensive personal experience. It's not bullshit, it's a fact. I also never said that cast iron doesn't work with induction. Do you have issues with reading comprehension?
You don't need to be in a commercial kitchen to have good ventilation. I have a hood in my home kitchen. I'm willing to bet you do too. They're highly effective. Like I said, I've never heard of anyone in a kitchen developing health issues from exposure to a gas stove. I'm not arguing that there are no health risks associated with gas stoves, only that they're being greatly embellished all of a sudden. If someone uses a range without turning on their hood, it's being operated incorrectly and you increase risks because of it. If you drive a car without your seat belt, same thing. Americans have about a 1 in 100 chance of dying in a car crash during their lifetime. Do you still use cars?
Hell, I even know a few people that suffer from baker's lung. It's a problem in the industry, should we ban baking? Should we ban bread? Of course not. Should protection be worn during certain stages of bread production? Yes.
Yes I prefer gas, for reasons that I already stated. I'm not talking out of my ass, you're the one talking out of your ass. You said switching to electric was a win for cooking; you're wrong. You've yet to provide any support for that claim, the one that YOU made. Sure there are benefits in energy efficiency and the environment by switching to electric, but that's not what I was refuting. I'm not arguing that gas should be used in perpetuity either. I only said that there are real benefits to cooking with gas and banning gas is a much later step in a long, long list of environmental changes. Eventually, I'm sure that gas will be phased out, I don't have a problem with that at all.
reply
share
TrentnQuarantino (9187)
2 years ago
What's your problem?
Why does everything hinge with you on warped pans.
I'll bet you use cheap nonstick cookware, don't you?
Why do you have warped pans to begin with?
If you want to cook with a warped pan, you buy a new pan or find a flat piece of metal, I forget what they call it, and place it under your pan to transfer the heat up.
It's a win for cooking because the pans respond faster than to resistance or gas burners. You did not refute a thing, you just said there were costs on inconveniences involved. Tough tiddlywinks.
I don't care what you've heard or what you think because you think you know everything and cannot be talked to, and you are dishonest in what you say just to push a bad conclusion.
> I've never heard of anyone in a kitchen developing health issues from exposure to a gas stove.
Well, it's all about what you've heard isn't it? That is what they've just studied and found out. Reading comprehension you say?
So now that you agree with all my other points, I guess you'll have to agree on the warped pan issue too. Anyway, I'm out, you just closed-minded and unpleasant.
reply
share