Tuesday, January 17, 2023

Discussion time: Gas ban?

gas stove

Wondering where Almanack readers stand on the debate about phasing out gas in heating appliances and stoves. Are you on board with a “gas ban”? Or are you like “hands off my gas”?

What would potential solutions be on each side of the debate?

Related Stories


Melissa is a journalist with experience as a reporter and editor with the Burlington Free Press, Ithaca Journal and Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. She worked as a communications specialist for the Adirondack North Country Association and is currently digital editor for Adirondack Explorer, overseeing both the Explorer's website and its community forum the Adirondack Almanack. She enjoys hiking, camping and other outdoors activities, and spending time with her husband, their twin daughters, and rescue animals -- two dogs and two cats.


Tags:


90 Responses

  1. Jim Reagen says:

    Bad For The Adirondacks, Bad for Adirondackers
    Banning natural gas, propane or the devices that use them will only force more people to shift back to wood burning stoves.. Electric stoves and electric heat is a bad idea for rural Adirondackers who often face power outages everytime there’s a major weather event. Gas stoves and gas heat is reliable and safe.

  2. William says:

    My cabin along with the 1000’s of others that are completely off grid, (no power even available) would be legislated away. Our refrigerator, generator and stove run on propane. I suppose if the goal is to stop the flow of money into local communities of the Adirondacks, this is a great idea.

  3. Propane User says:

    This is an absurd idea. I am sure that gas stoves emit some harmful pollution, but I can not believe that the “dangers” of gas stoves have been unknown up to this point. There is another agenda here. Whether is is just more government control or whether it is another attempt to eliminate fossil fuels before the alternative are really viable I don’t know. Power distribution in the Adirondacks is not reliable and running an electric stove off your solar panels and batteries is not realistic with current technology. The pie-in-the-sky notion that we can completely transition away from fossil fuels in a short period of time is not based on any realistic analysis. Here is an article that suggests a hidden agenda behind the gas stove hoopla https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/what-us-gas-stove-ban-really-about

    • JohnL says:

      Great post, and great (attached) article. Thanks. All I can say is: WHAT? Our elected and unelected alphabet agency officials have an ulterior motive?? Say it ain’t so.

      • Robert N Lorenzo says:

        Just another cancel-culture idea that doesn’t care about the average guy’s wallet. I’d rather see hood requirements and leave an environmentally safer fuel alone. Maybe the world should have 30 hr work weeks, schedule driving days off. Something’s got to give by using sensible reductions, not a hysterical move before cheaper replacement technology can be invented.

  4. David Pietkiewicz says:

    The words “egregious”, “confiscatory” and “unsustainable” immediately come to mind. This is just another political stunt regarding the fossil fuel and green energy issue. I’m sure we are all in favor of reducing the human carbon footprint but where are we going to get all of this electricity from? We don’t have the infrastructure to produce it and Governor Hochul didn’t put forth a plan develop it but even if NY could generate that massive amount of electrical power, why should New Yorkers and our economy suffer at the expense of the rest of the world? All of the industrialized nations such China, India and Russia (among many others) need to do make the same efforts and, until they do, NY is only penalizing its citizens plain and simple! As a prime example, the hole in the Ozone layer was shrunk “only” when all of the industrialized nations joined in the banning of CFCs. I say continue to spread the word and follow the science but protect our citizens, businesses and our economy as we go!

    • JohnL says:

      For some reason, no-one in the Greenie world will go all out to force China, India, and Russia to reduce their pollution levels, like we have alread done. To your point, all they say is that WE have to continue to do more. They would rather we suffer. Not sure why, maybe they like them better than they do us. Maybe they’re scared of them. Hard to tell what goes on in those minds.

  5. Dave says:

    It seems as though all we hear about is banning the use of gas and petroleum. Electricity is a great choice, if it is available in a cost effective way with a grid that can supply it in the quantities needed and where needed. Is the cart being put before the horse? Think about the recent conversions away from nuclear power to wind and other sources. Now we hear of insufficient clean generating capacity having to be backed up by coal, natural gas or petroleum. What is needed is a well thought out transition, where new sustainable and reliable sources are developed with sufficient capacity along with the means to get it to everywhere it’s needed. Once that is in place, conversion to a reliable all-electric system of living might be feasible. Currently it seems like the is being overlooked.

    Other considerations, besides heat, light, cooking and transportation, include the use of petroleum for plastics and chemicals essential to our everyday lives. Another issue in colder climates seem to be the ability of batteries to function properly in extreme winter temperatures. These are only a few potential problems that are a concern when phasing away from the use of hydrocarbons.

    It seems that the trend of quick fixes are short sighted and will not lead to a smooth transition from hydrocarbon use without major problems and extraordinary expense for the average consumer. It’s time to look at the entire picture and how to address it in a well thought out reasonable and cost effective way and a realistic timeframe that does not overwhelm all consumers.

  6. TimT says:

    Of all the arguments here everyone is completely forgetting the fact that it’s harder to cook on an electric stove. You don’t have as much instant control over the burner heat like you do with gas. One of the main reasons I enjoy owning is finally having a gas stove after a string of apartments with electric stoves. I’m not a gourmet by any stretch of the imagination. But I really enjoy my scrambled eggs every morning. And if you think that you make scrambled eggs on an electric stove then you really don’t know how to make scrambled eggs.

  7. ADKresident says:

    I’ll ‘consider’ giving up my gas stove when those pushing these decisions on others without any real, practical plan of transition is proposed within the sphere of public debate, and WITHOUT hurting small businesses/restaurants and middle-low class citizens. They really do not care who they hurt as long as it’s not their family/circle of friends.

    Also, when I see them giving up, at LEAST, their private jet flying to global warming events, then I will at least know they are serious about what they believe and not in it for the profits and prestige they receive from those who bow at the same altar of hypocrisy, evangelizing the new religion of climate change. (the only reason I call it a religion is because no one is even ‘allowed’ to question anything they proclaim without ridicule- you just have to blindly trust, believe and obey at face value everything you are told, the very opposite of true science which welcomes debate, further questioning and opposing research.

    We see now how that worked out w/Covid, right? How many people were ridiculed when all they did was question the vaccine/lockdowns and now because of time, we can see some of those concerns were justified, foreseeing the possible negative consequences? Yet, at the time, any doctor or citizen that even questioned the narrative being pushed on all, was both censored and ridiculously labeled a Covid denier, forcing their voices of concern into silence as well as alternative treatments!

    To me, the ‘gas stove’ plan, like with the mandated vaccine, is just another ploy of control from the gov/lobbyists for more personal power/profit. But instead of being medical bureaucrats in bed w/the gov, and lining their pockets, getting rich off their decisions, it is now scientific/climate change bureaucrats. After all, if one claims to be an ‘expert’ nowadays, we are all required to just drop our own thinking and follow blindly, right? “Question Nothing” should be their campaign motto.

    I’d end with saying, “follow the money”! Agree with me or not, matters not to me, that’s my view. So until I see some honest, practical solutions/reasonably priced replacements that will not hurt you, me, or the average Joe and his business, nope- not for it.

  8. Steve B. says:

    A month or so ago, our natural gas supplier, National Grid, was asking customers to set back temperatures in their homes during the day, to 65 or so, to save gas. Seems there were cascading supply issues in the NE and into the metro NYC area. One issue that caused this is a lot of NIMBYism that forced cancellations of new pipelines to expand the supply into this region. Is it a scam by the utility company ?, I suspect not in this case, but this is the first time I have seen this issue. But it now begs the question, which utility is easier to expand as usage increases ?, and the obvious answer is electricity. Its a lot more expensive and time consuming to lay in new gas distribution. I would hate to have to switch to all electricity, though might give me a reason to move to a heat pump system, which uses electricity, not gas (AFAIK). Maybe the state would offer incentives. Gas is generally more reliable for people, though not me as I’m on a village owned electrical system that has never had a blackout during countless hurricanes, so obviously reliable electrical distribution can be done, half the battle is trimming trees. But I think electricity is going to be the solution unfortunately, I do like cooking on gas.

  9. COL (R) Mark Warnecke says:

    Ditto to all the comments above! Seems rare these days that the people unit on any issue, but it looks like the politicians have found one. I live in a remote area nearly at the end of a dead-end power line. You can bet, and understandably, we are not high on the list for power restoration when we have region wide outages. I have a propane generator and propane stove to get me through the often days long power outages that occur several times a year.

  10. Melissa Heshmat says:

    NO GAS? NO WAY!

  11. Boreas says:

    People start dying when the electric grid goes down. With wood, gas, propane, and heating oil banned, I am going to invest heavily in electric ambulances and hearses. Good luck converting crematoria to electric!

    In my neighborhood, anyone who can afford one has a propane emergency generator. We have lost power for hours twice in the last few weeks. Walk outside and you hear generators running at every house you see lights. Instead of generators, houses will need to have IMMENSE emergency battery storage backups to power electric heating, lighting, appliances, and automobile charging. How long was the local grid in NC down because somebody shot out the power a month ago?? The electrical grid in this country is feeble at best. Without alternative sources of power, we are back to the Stone Age with every weather, cyber, and vandalism attack.

    So no – I do not support an outright BAN of any power source at this time. Premature and overly-optimistic. Try it in a couple volunteer test cities and see how it works out when things get ugly.

  12. Walter Wouk says:

    I live in a rural upstate county that is subject to frequent power outages — particularly in the winter months. I grew up on Long Island where power outages were frequent, because of frequent storms and the occasional hurricane, In both situations the gas stove in the kitchen was indispensable.

  13. Todd Eastman says:

    Out of my cold dead pans…😎

  14. Bob Meyer says:

    OMG! Why do some folks always have turn this into a political diatribe? Those enviros and flying around in their private jets etc. and the like?
    Can’t we just discuss argue the pros and cons based on the science and technology as
    many here have done.
    I see merit on both sides.

  15. ADKresident says:

    There’s a simple reason for that- it IS political. And it will continue to be political.

    Sorry, Bob, that you were so triggered by my (some folks) reply and took offense to it. However, I am unapologetic for voicing my POV.

  16. David A NORTON says:

    A phase-out is not a ban! Stop hyping someones wishful thinking for media attention. Economics will take care of this issue, if it’s an issue at all!

  17. David A NORTON says:

    A phase-out is not a ban! Stop hyping someones wishful thinking for media attention. Economics will take care of this issue, if it’s an issue at all!
    Thanks,

    • ADKresident says:

      Economics alone can never support a “phase out” without already having the proper infrastructure already in place to support it. Gas stoves are the least of America’s problems/dangers. Its like swatting at a gnat in a yard that has a huge sinkhole.

  18. Mike says:

    When you control power, food, and firearms you control the people.

  19. Todd Eastman says:

    Gotta love those propane patriots, and methane heads…

    … what great dog whistle responses! 😎

  20. Bob Meyer says:

    I see where this is going or should I say has gone with many here. A nuanced dialogue on the supposed subject at hand seems impossible. I’m out of here.
    Enjoy.

    • ADKresident says:

      In other words, if you can’t stand the heat (of views that offend you or are beneath your self-perceived intellectual superiority) , get out of the kitchen! [pun intended]

      Good day to you, Bob! 👋

      • Bob Meyer says:

        No man! In other words, if arguing with you is a waste of time because you can’t discuss the issue presented without sprouting your political views on unrelated issues and making it a rant against all you despise, it’s a useless discussion.

        • ADKresident says:

          What are you talking about, Bob? I’m not arguing with you.
          So you don’t agree with what I wrote and took offence, so that makes it an argument with me? Sorry that’s how you perceive it.
          Please, in all sincerity, don’t waste your time reading any of my posts if it gets you worked up.

  21. ADKresident2 says:

    Just insisting that “gas stoves and gas heating are reliable and safe” doesn’t make it true; ignoring the evidence isn’t going to wish the problem away. But the concern that there is not another good option now available for the Adirondacks is a valid concern. What are those without access to the electrical grid to do? Obviously a blanket ban would be unworkable in those areas, which would become essentially uninhabitable at least during heating season, or have to rely on wood burning, which is more polluting to the environment as a whole. Even in those areas with access to the grid but with propane powered generators to handle frequent power outages eliminating the use of propane, at least as generator fuel would also seriously compromise the sustainability of those homes. So let’s not pretend that the dangers of gas heating are part of some conspiracy/made up by politicians/Big Government or other interests we don’t like, The problems are real. But so is the problem of what to do if reliance on gas is limited or eliminated and for that, there do not appear, at this point, to be any easy answers.

  22. Balian the Cat says:

    So, I can’t help but feel this is another of those hot button “issues” that get us all worked up to the point where we hoot & holler and shake our fists at one another and then nothing ever happens and we move on to the next divisive call to rhetorical arms. BANNING gas stoves is just like the purported peril represented by M&M’s and Dr. Suess, a ridiculous statement on it’s face. While I certainly don’t agree with most of the views represented by various players in this thread, is it possible that some of this stuff is designed to “trigger” (with apologies for the term) us into response and further outrage? Am I open to the concerns around the burning of fossil fuels, absolutely – but I can’t see fighting with people about headlines like these anymore. I sometimes wonder why I even read comments. I sometimes wonder at the affect the constant state of upset has on me. I sometimes wonder if it isn’t just a sucker play that I fall for all the time. I am concerned about climate change and the future of life on earth, but I heat my home with wood and have a propane range for cooking. I don’t think people with criminal / mental health histories should have ready access to weapons chambered for military rounds, but I have hunted since I was a boy and don’t fear firearms. I hate CNN and Fox equally. I can’t imagine my country being led by EITHER Trump or Biden. What does all this make me?

    • David A NORTON says:

      Quite reasonable!

    • ADKresident says:

      With all due respect, BTC, I believe most, including myself, were not triggered or even angry in replying to this thread; simply stating a POV regarding gas stoves. Typing without having invested emotion is hard to convey in digital formats and can be perceived differently than intended. But that’s on the individual reader whether they choose to take offense. Offenses always build fences. Can we listen to each other’s voice no matter how much we disagree with them, reply and not take offense in a time where offence is now a characteristic of our culture and political strategy?

      I agree, banning gas stoves is ridiculousness on face value. Yet the fact that it is even on Hochul’s radar is the reason it needs to be nipped in the bud as a nonsensical problem in light of far more serious issues. (You may as well forget any new restaurants coming to NY. ) Our silence inadvertently creates backroom deals and partnerships, and then out of the blue, they pass a law / regulations and our lives are suddenly changed by their decision because we shrugged it off as nonsensical or ran to our corners in offense or partisanship. We give far too much power to politicians in our every day lives
      JMO

  23. Ken G. says:

    I’d love to see an analysis of how many acres of solar farms and wind farms are necessary in NY to go all electric. How would the foothills of the Adirondacks look with miles of wind turbines, and how many farms would be converted and forests razed to install solar panels? Mandates don’t answer or solve these types of issues – well thought out plans and accurate communication might

    • Pat Smith says:

      As an example, the Town of Columbia is looking at a solar developer who’s facility will be 2200 acres. It is name plate rated at 350 megawatts. Given that solar in NYS averages 12-15% of capacity this facility will only produce around 40-45 megawatts. This of course usually drops way off on cloudy days or wintertime. Instead of covering thousands of acres why isn’t the state offering more monies and incentives to homeowners and businesses to install solar systems on buildings? Solar is the least efficient or cost effective way to produce electricity. Ironic that NYS has based it’s renewable energy plan on Germanys model. The Germans are now decommissioning a large wind energy generation facility to mine the coal that is under it.

  24. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Todd Eastman says: “Out of my cold dead pans…”

    I read every one of these posts up to here, and at once a big laugh was sent out from my person……….. in the quiet library. Thank you!

  25. Charlie Stehlin says:

    Mike says: “When you control power, food, and firearms you control the people.”

    How about money also! Down in the DC area I was told that there is the first ‘Whole Foods’ which is cashless. Shoppers walk in, fill up their carts, and walk out without once having to reach for their wallets, or a card. The technology scans them. To think how much closer to total control it will be when they take cash (or coin), as a means of payment, out of the equation. They’ve been working on this for years! Who are ‘they?’ The rich….who else! The ones who are close to owning 50% of the world’s wealth. The ones who can never have enough! We all lose in the end, even them, or their progeny.

  26. Charlie Stehlin says:

    JohnL says: “It’s all about controlling us…”

    Just look all around the world and one can see where this “control’ thing is going. Look at the technology with its social media platforms, all of the hate and lies, and look at how so many of the people fall for it, or identify with it! Look how easy it was for Alex Jones to get some people to believe his big lie about the Newtown School shooting which killed all of those innocent children! That’s called being overly gullible at the very least, and it is not such an uncommon theme in today’s society.
    That’s control! Not a pretty picture.

    Look at how at the same time, the population, or large segments of it, are all for getting rid of the newspapers! ‘Fake news’ was the seed which seems to have gotten that in high gear. Reporters are now risking their lives just to get their stories. It was never like this! More and more news reporters are being assassinated the world over. Control yes! And in more ways than we realize.

  27. Paul says:

    Nuclear fission will solve all these issues. Use nuclear fusion (the nuclear power we have now) till we figure out fission. It already works with the grid we have so that issue goes away. And keep gas it is so much more efficient than it used to be. You don’t even need a chimney for your modern gas furnace.

    • ADKresident says:

      I recently read an article where there is a group of scientists who have been working on a new, clean energy source that is based off the power of frequencies, sacred geometry, light, sound and implosion. (ie. as a probable technology how the Egyptian pyramids were erected) These historical researchers/scientists/inventors have kept it under lock/key from the media until they were able to get a patent on it (which they received in Aug 2022) to keep it out of the hands of governments and corporations that do not want corrupted by using for their own power and profit.

      This is both a breakthrough and a fascinating hope for the future of our planet. Time will tell.

  28. Ken G. says:

    Yes it will – fully agreed. And in their haste to go green, NY just shut down one it’s remaining nuclear sites in the Hudson Valley. Hence the need for a comprehensive plan vs. an unthought out mandate.

    • Steve B. says:

      Apparently it was no longer economically viable for the private operator to run the plants. As well, there has always been huge controversy running what had been 3 reactors in a densly settled region. Ironically, they were essentially replaced by 3 newer natural gas facilities. Seemingly not the direction NY State wants to go. I’m a believer in technology and am of the opinion that safer nuclear facilities can be built and that would be a good direction to go, but that renewable resources such as solar and getting better efficiancy in energy savings is equally important and half the battle.

  29. COL (R) Mark Warnecke says:

    I’m all for nuclear power. It is hands down the cleanest power available. I’m also for continued emphasis on new technologies. This is where our elected officials (they are by in large not leaders as they like to call themselves, they are representatives of the people) could make a worthwhile contribution. But all that ignores the real problem that makes propane so important in rural areas. It’s the failure of the distribution system during storms or other catastrophic events. So regardless of our day-to-day power generation method, we need something that will provide reliable back up.

  30. Naj Wikoff says:

    There is no perfect solution, if we are to ban gas stoves, that should mean we ban gas fireplaces, hot water heaters, and monitors of the same reasons. By that same logic, we should no longer allow wood stoves and fire places, burning brush and campfires, etc. Meanwhile, electricity is expensive unless you live in places like Lake Placid and Saranac Lake that gets hydro power. Further, we do have power outages, so then we’d have no backup for heating. Because winters are getting more likely, ice storms are more likely, which can cause major outages as experienced.

    As I don’t get enough sunlight, because my house is surrounded by tall trees, installing solar panels isn’t an option. As my trees store carbon I am loath to cut them down. All that said, the question then is what will do the least harm. My monitor is very fuel efficient and at least the fumes go outside, so there is that. It, of course doesn’t work when the power goes out. Thank God under those circumstances I have a wood stove. So it looks like, I’ll just have to stick with the way I am at least for heating the house.

  31. John Delesky says:

    We moved to the ADKs so we were not on top of neighbors noise, light pollution, congestion and we would be freer to hike and ski and hunt in wilderness. Along with that comes limited cell phone (OMG how can anyone live light that?) and services and the choice to live more how we want. And doing more for yourselves and neighbors (which can be several miles away). And the right to choose. We heat with wood cut from our 200 acres. Nobody tells us we can’t do that. Publish all the studies they want on gas vs electric stoves but the choice is ours and not theirs. I wouldn’t ever consider telling anyone how to cook dinner and politicians shouldn’t either. Stay out of my house.

  32. Pete Wirth says:

    Science tells me that if you add enough CO2 to the atmosphere the planet slowly warms. This science goes back over 150 years when the first experiment was conducted. My father taught biochemistry at a Catholic college so believing in science comes natural to me.

    What do people propose that suggest it isn’t a problem to keep burning natural gas, propane, oil etc. which adds billions of tons of greenhouse gases worldwide every year?

  33. Stephen Gloo says:

    Rules, regulations and laws made by naive politicians will eventually leave us freezing and stranded. Solar power as a primary source of home power and heat, and transportation is a mistake. Effective and affordable battery systems do not yet exist that will heat our homes and charge our vehicles during several days of bad weather. Let’s let industry and innovation drive this, not naïve politicians.

    • Steve B. says:

      Heres a YT link to a couple that is completely off grid, in WV. Not exactly a great place for solar, but they figured it out at a home built house. If well planned it is completely a possibility.

      wild wonderful off grid

      • Stephen Gloo says:

        Since most of us aren’t builders and aren’t building “ off the grid” home, retrofitting my 1940s to that standard would be cost prohibitive. Further, most of us aren’t interested in living a “ off the grid” life style.

        • Steve B. says:

          I agree, but its incorrect to state that its a mistake. It can be done with proper planning. And actually retrofitting is entirely possible to get some degree of reduced power usage. A friends daughter lives in Northampton, MA, did a heat pump plus solar with lithium battery system in a 100 year old farm house,. They’re power expense is about $200 a year and they are energy independent most of the time. Its possible to retrofit and sometimes the economics work out.

  34. nathan says:

    honestly, just a simple no. People should be allowed to make their own choice. I grew up with a gas stove, my whole extended family grew up with gas stoves. Number of family with asthma? ZERO.
    What’s next Ban candles? Kerosene lanterns? coleman lanterns and stoves?
    Government is not ment to be oppressive or over bearing.
    Fostering overall good is fine, cover prime farmlands with solar panels, clear the trees for solar farms, dont put deposits on all plastic bottles, dont recycle plastics 3 through 7. pour tons of salt on roads, allow road crews to spray herbicide along all the roads guard rails.
    I think gas stoves are the least of our worries right now, so people can choose gas or electric, or both. i have both, gas is a great bonus when powers out to cook or even heat, along with a few gas fireplaces it’s warm with power out for days.

  35. David West says:

    I grew up with electric stoves in the kitchen. We have electric stoves in our home and cabin. I have always been aware of gas stove fumes when in homes that used gas, but never experienced any adverse effects from the fumes.

    We love our induction top electric stove, but it was way more expensive than conventional electric or gas. Shifting to induction stoves will initially be expensive (induction costs), but there will be improved efficiencies with electric and without methane emissions. This transition is needed, similar to what we are seeing with the move to electric vehicles. It also emphasizes the need to rebuild the electrical grid distribution systems and get off fossil fuels for electricity generation.

  36. Plowboy says:

    Considering the inadequate power line infrastructure in the north country it seems to make no sense to limit ones. Heating and cooking needs to just one option. Also improving the power lines infrastructure is almost impossible inside the blue line ask the folks that live in Old Forge
    I’m sure there are a lot of folks that are glad they have a wood/gas stove or generator for backup during frequent cold weather power outages

  37. Pete Wirth says:

    I added an electric heat pump to my gas furnace. Mt home is well insulated and tight as I’ve slowly been working away on it over the years. It is a 4 bedroom, split level hose built in 63.

    A new gas furnace and BOSCH electric heat pump cost me about $6,500 (after rebates and tax incentives) plus another $1,000 to run a 220 line over. Not exactly a lot of money.

    • Pat Smith says:

      Will you continue to use your gas furnace? I do agree that all homes and businesses should be equipped with solar panels. The state, in its rush to meet their time-line, is wasting money and destroying farmland and its associated habitat for wildlife by encouraging huge industrial type solar facilities. In my area we are looking at 5000 plus acres covered with panels that barely produce 12-15% of their capacity. I am also curious as to why NYS is not pursuing updating and expanding hydro power.

  38. Pete Wirth says:

    All I can tell you is what my system is rated at and what it gets throughout the year. It produces more than I use in the spring, summer and fall. Less in the winter. My meter runs backward for 3 seasons and i get credit for that. I draw on it during the winter months.

    I had it installed 11 years ago. Best investment I ever made.

  39. Charlie Stehlin says:

    COL (R) Mark Warnecke says: “I’m all for nuclear power. It is hands down the cleanest power available.”

    Clean until a plant fails COL. Think the most recent accident at Fukushima! Nuclear waste never goes away it is here to stay. The radioactivity from it is another matter in itself. Nuclear energy is not a thing to play with, or even to be utilizing. It’s insanity even thinking this! We need to do something different that’s for sure, but not nuclear.

  40. Charlie Stehlin says:

    ADKresident says: “Typing without having invested emotion is hard to convey in digital formats and can be perceived differently than intended.”

    Yes sir!

  41. Pete Wirth says:

    I think we are talking apples and oranges. A 350 Kwatt panel rated panel produces close to 350 kwatts in the course of a year.

    Do you have solar on your house?

  42. Charlie Stehlin says:

    ADKresident says: “banning gas stoves is ridiculousness on face value. Yet the fact that it is even on Hochul’s radar is the reason it needs to be nipped in the bud as a nonsensical problem in light of far more serious issues.”

    > Agreed! Hochul’s problem, as is in far too many of our leaders, is she is playing the politician, trying to win favors from her base versus thinking wholly and rationally. She has been guilty of this more than thrice since she’s been in power and one wonders if there is any such thing as a real statesman (or woman) anymore!

  43. Charlie Stehlin says:

    John Delesky says: “I wouldn’t ever consider telling anyone how to cook dinner and politicians shouldn’t either. Stay out of my house.”

    Which is not to say that we don’t need government at all. We do! We just need to figure out how to bleed it of its dysfunction, which is a universal peculiarity it is not just that select entity. Our problems are becoming more profound and trying to come up with solutions is not going to be a cake-walk, especially with this gap which is widening between the haves and the have-nots, the one whom can never have enough, the other struggling more and more. The haves themselves will eventually begin to be depleted of their energy it’s only a matter of time. I mean because after all….our resources are finite, eventually they’ll be nothing left to sustain us unless your idea of utopia is an artificial world. All’s we ever do is put band-aids on our wounds which, as I say, are becoming more and more intense.

  44. peter Wirth says:

    I am aiming for net zero which means i produce all the energy we use. So far this winter I haven’t used my gas furnace at all it as I’m still drawing against wattage we have “in the bank.” I’ll know at the end of the winter. i think I have to do more insulating projects to have zero usage of my gas furnace. The projects get harder to do as I get older.

    Based on actual use figures from my home your estimates are way to low. My system is pretty standard.

    I’m glad there are solar farms being constructed all across NYS. The sooner we transition off of fossil fuels the better.

    The Daks are losing their snowmobiling industry. There was an article in the Adir. Almanc on that a few weeks ago. Winters are less snow and more rain. Not good!

    • Pat Smith says:

      You can also see the states base load electric usage at NYIOS. Let’s say we want to generate 15000 megawatts. It takes between 50-55 acres of panels to generate 1 megawatt in NYS. That translates into 750000-825000 acres. Hardly the most efficient and environmentally friendly way to save the planet. Check out the NYSERDA DER performance profiles and you can see each facilities capacity factor for yourself. This is data that NYSERDA makes available to everyone not something I am making up. Nationally the average capacity factor is between 20-25%. Again your system in the exception to the rule, please look at a larger data set for a more accurate analysis.

    • ADKNative says:

      The “Daks” don’t want the snowmobile industry. Just look into past articles on this site.

  45. David West says:

    For anyone interested, this is a link to a somewhat recent article, authored by scientists at Stanford University, on the use of natural gas stove tops in homes:

    https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.1c04707

    The front end of the article does a nice job of quantifying the environmental and health issues associated with natural gas stovetop cooking. I’ll leave it to the readers here to decide whether their results are consequential enough to justify phaseout of gas cooking being discussed.

    An FYI:
    In an earlier post I noted that I am a cook and user of an induction stovetop. I can boil a couple cups of water in about a minute. “Induction” cooking is every bit as fast and responsive as gas cooking.

    I seriously doubt that I will see the end of either gas cooking or internal combustion engines in what is left of my lifetime. To my way of thinking, we really need to support anyone trying to improve our environment or who is working towards making our way of life sustainable for the generations that follow us. Eliminating gas stoves, by itself, will not save the environment or seriously impair my ability to live comfortably in the Adirondacks. It will support the overall effort towards the long-term sustainability goals. I haven’t heard anyone say that we should not pack out what we packed in; or that we should not clean up our own mess.

  46. ADKNative says:

    Better add water – that’s in the forefront too.

  47. JBF says:

    David, this means nothing UNLESS, it is compared to the emissions resulting from the generation of the electricity required to fuel your electric stove. Most electricity is still generated from fossil fuels. The claim that wind and solar produce no pollution is bogus. Electric vehicles produce no tailpipe pollution but the pollution is there none the less. Pollution reduction and ann improved environment will only come from honest pollution accounting.

    • Bob Meyer says:

      Please explain how wind and solar produce the CO2 and other carbon-based emissions that occur with fossil fuel use. Nothing is perfect but it seems that wind and solar energy production is a vast improvement over 20th century, fossil fuel dominance. True, we need to be honest with our statistics but I think those statistics will bear out the benefits of increased clean energy production.

      • Dave Pietkiewicz says:

        There is an enormous amount of petroleum that goes into the fabrication and manufacture of wind turbines and solar systems. Currently, neither can be constructed without petroleum based products.

        I’m hoping the recent developments in the generation of fission power will lead us in the future. We’ll see…

    • Steve B. says:

      Correct, nothing is ideal or perfect. BUT is moving to an all electric system using less fossil fuel overall and the answer is yes, so maybe we take what we can get. We know that petroleums are used to create the plastics needed for wind generation equipment, but is the manufacturing process using less than used to power vehicles, again the answer is yes. Yes, we still use fossil fuels to generate electricity, but there are always efforts to reduce the need to do so, solar and wind being examples, There are a lot of things we need plastics for, as well as other items that require petroleum products to manufacture, but if we can find ways to not use fossil fuels and instead use alternatives, thats a gain.

  48. David Pietkiewicz says:

    Actually, I did. Sorry about that! There’s quite a difference!!

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Wait! Before you go:

Catch up on all your Adirondack
news, delivered weekly to your inbox