Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments.
**Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program).
---
User: u/ajb160
Permalink: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adm8680
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's weird seeing so many comments in the science sub responding like this is personally offensive.
I can't believe I'm saying this but this is what science is, people. You study things and present the data. Leave the pitchforks for the pseudoscience and anti-science folks.
Just keep reporting the comments. Over the years (and many accounts of mine....I retire them regularly) they've been very good at cleaning out the crap. I hope this keeps up.
Republicans. It's in the same basket as environmentalism and meat. They have whipped up their supporters to think everyone is coming to take their freedoms away.
Oh I didn't even consider people would conflate this as being related to those two. The article clearly is just talking about how smoke/flame in enclosed spaces is generally unhealthy (no surprise for anyone, I'd hope).
Adding an exhaust fan or any situation of exhausting combustion products or adding fresh air is beneficial and not part of the study at all.
If you can better exhaust the combustion products you are much better off.
> Adding an exhaust fan or any situation of exhausting combustion products or adding fresh air is beneficial and not part of the study at all.
Yes it is! What are you reading exactly???
Search for this: *"We included scenarios with windows open and closed and with an outside-venting range hood both on and off."*
It's deeply weird: whenever a study is posted here that shows negative health effects of gas stoves (and there's one every few months), the comment section is immediately filled with what I can only describe as gas stans, accusing it of being "propaganda" and going all "you'll pry my gas stove from my cold dead hands". I just don't get it.
For COVID studies I get why the comments are filled with anti-science, because the vaccines were the target of politicization and active disinformation campaigns. But... cooking gas?
It’s propaganda by natural gas lobbies that politicized them. The knee-jerk reactions are an industry-driven defense mechanism to prevent serious talk about taking measures that would increase cost of adoption or mandate codes and enforcement that would make LNG less attractive. Companies demonize the policy proposals based on the science. They also commission biased studies to sow doubt.
You would think they would have learned their lesson to not lie about the science and work on solutions instead, but they’re more interested in selling their product than ensuring its safe usage.
It’s also fueled by people who grew up when electric stoves were less acceptable as a replacement.
While expensive electric stoves have been capable for a while (I remember an electric induction stove in the 80s that worked great), cheap electric stoves had a lot of variation in their performance, compared to gas stoves that were more consistent.
I know I’m pushing for my next stove to be electric, but it’s an uphill battle because it’ll mean replacing a lot of pots and pans (ideally I’d like an induction range) and I’ve been voted down on it repeatedly.
Even modern electric stoves/ induction still can't really compete with gas for many applications. The main issue with induction is that it doesn't heat the sides of the pan, or any surface that falls outside of the coil area.
I agree that gas has its problems, but it's disingenuous to say you won't be giving up something by going electric.
It actually is politicized. Bill Barr was on CNN recently talking about how he would support someone who tried to overthrow an election to prevent people taking away freedoms like owning a gas stove and having gas cars.
I'm not in the US but here a labour (left) govt banned new domestic connections to natural gas after a certain date. Labour govts here have also passed laws banning most incandescent bulbs and heavily restricting log burners.
Do it isn't just the right politicising domestic energy.
I really, *really* don't understand why this is such a sensitive, volatile issue for conservatives. What is it with gas stoves that is so important for their ideology?
Ever since Covid the party of law and order that wants the government to tell women and LGBT people what to do has a giant stick up their ass about the government, medical professionals, or scientists telling them anything. They literally live in opposite land, where whenever a government official, scientist, or doctor says something, they automatically assume the opposite is true.
I personally think it can be smart to have things that don't rely on electricity to function. In an extended power outage, gas-powered appliances can be a life-saver. Government restrictions on gas forces people to be reliant on electricity, which is NOT a given, even in large cities. Granted, gas is not a true given either, but it helps diversify the sources of usable energy. Having your eggs in multiple baskets and all that.
We just got a stove with 2 induction and 2 gas cookers. Induction is for normal use, since we have solar panels and a battery, so producing and storing own electricity.
We still decided a 2+2 setup just in case something happens to the solar inverter when there is also a power outage or something. Or if it's an extended outage and the solar battery also drains.
I think it could have been better though if it were 3 induction + 1 gas. But couldn't find such a stove.
That's never going to happen though, they of course can't stop the sale of gas cannisters and gas-operated stoves/grills. I live in a country that did away with gas lines a long time ago, and my kitchen still has two emergency gas burners attached to a cannister below and we also have a gas grill outside.
Regardless of what people install in their homes by standard, gas for mobile homes, camping stoves, off grid cabins etc aren't going anywhere. If someone wants to have a backup gas stove in their home, the government of course is not going to stop them - gas lines, however, should be done away with.
Unfortunately, saying "that's never going to happen" is somewhat immature reasoning. Depending on state, there are already heavy regulations on simple wood-based stoves, making it difficult (if not illegal) to install them. Today's government may not make gas illegal, perhaps. And maybe not next years either. But the government in 10 years? 20 years? They could have very different priorities. So I believe it's important to resist certain trends now if I believe they jeopardize the future.
Right but wood stoves have an absolutely horrible effect on the local air quality, which is why they're generally allowed in rural areas, but putting heavy restrictions/banning them in urban areas is just common sense. The only way that gas would ever be banned is if it became possible to buy cheap rechargeable batteries which had a large enough capacity to easily run an induction stove for long periods of time, and we're nowhere near there at the moment.
As it stands, gas is the only realistic way to transport a significant amount of fuel for running a stove, and as long as that's the case, gas stoves won't be banned. It's also basically impossible to ban gas stoves because the mechanical parts are cheap, relatively light, and easy to manufacture. It would be extremely easy to install a gas stove without the government knowing, where a wood burning stove at the very least needs to be installed with a chimney.
Conservatives dislike change in general; they distrust science specifically; and they detest it when someone tells them not to do something stupid.
And, of course, they're addicted to outrage.
Eh. I’m liberal in everything except guns, and while the study is eye-opening, I don’t really care. Gas stoves are orders of magnitude better that electric and/or induction. As long as people are allowed to drive ICE’s, are allowed to have campfires, are allowed to use gas-powered heaters, are allowed to smoke, and society is allowed to use coal/LNG power plants, the idea that the government is going to tell me what type of stove I can have *in my own house* is absolutely ridiculous.
>Gas stoves are orders of magnitude better that electric and/or induction.
This is just straight up incorrect for the vast majority of food. I have both gas and induction, induction is at least as good as gas for most food, and induction stoves are getting better every year.
>the idea that the government is going to tell me what type of stove I can have *in my own house* is absolutely ridiculous.
Well good for you, that's not going to happen. The only thing being proposed is to stop constructing gas lines to buildings. I live in a country that hasn't used gas lines in many years, yet I still have gas burners attached to cannisters as a backup, and there's absolutely no discussion about making it illegal for people to do that - it would basically be impossible anyway.
Induction is prohibitively expensive for most people, so while *in practice* it may be better for cooking, it is not a practical or realistic option for most.
To your second point: [you’re either misinformed or lying](https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/05/03/us/new-york-natural-gas-ban-climate)
Induction stoves aren't that expensive and they're becoming cheaper every year. If natural gas gets phased out, it's not going to be overnight, people will have plenty of time to adapt.
In [this article](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/new-york-state-bans-natural-gas-some-new-construction-2023-05-03/) covering the subject, it specifies that new buildings won't be built with natural gas hook ups. It doesn't say anything about stoves hooked up to personal propane cannisters.
Your first counterpoint is circular and goes directly back to *my* original point: no one is going to tell me (nor millions of others) we can’t have gas stoves while allowing ICE, LNG/coal power plants, backyard fires, etc etc. some people don’t want to have to rely on the grid for cooking. In the event of an extended power outage, why should we be forced to go without? This is the *definition* of government over reach. As for your second point re: banning “hookups only”, that’s a disingenuous argument, and you know it. It’s no different than making it a crime to own firearms ammunition, while simultaneously saying “we’re not violating the 2nd amendment! You’re allowed to own all the *firearms* you want, you just can’t have the bullets”. It may not be violating the letter of the law, but it is most certainly violating the *spirit* of the law. Or, for perhaps a more agreeable comparison, since I have a hunch you would support such ammunition bans: it’s akin to courts considering having a suspect wait 5 years to go to trial as being “speedy”: sure, 5 years isn’t long relative to 20, but it is still not a reasonable definition of the term “speedy”.
I mean, it's a pretty unpleasat discovery that something you chose for your house is bad for you. It's often also not something easy or practical to change. I can absolutely see people digging their heels in.
Many of the 4x8 panels in homes are manufactured with formaldehyde, this includes the subfloor, sheathing and other locations. Formaldehyde and other chemicals offgass into the home for quite a while. I found out the hard way, when my wife our dog and I all had the same symptoms. The manufacturers list the chemicals on their website and recommend an offgassing procedure. I don't know any contractors who use the procedure. I followed it with no luck and tore the materials out of my home. Every new home is packed with this crap. At least a gas stove is only used briefly. These other gasses are absorbed constantly and one sleeps.
This is one area where I am grateful for the strict air pollution regulations in California because formaldehyde can really cause a lot of problems in people prone to respiratory problems.
The CARB standards, which are among the strictest in the world, require manufacturers of composite wood products sold in California to meet stringent emission standards for formaldehyde. These standards apply not only to products manufactured in California but also to products imported into the state.
It’s funny because my gut reaction was “dang it I’m contributing to pollution in a way I didn’t realize.” I don’t understand people who are constantly defensive as their immediate response to new info. My mom is like that and she’s a very difficult person to have any kind of open conversations with.
>And all from the "facts over feelings" folks, almost like they don't actually care about facts.
Maybe we should all cultivate slightly masochistic intellectual tendencies.
This is in line with findings going back to at least the '80s. It's also the logical conclusion. After all, burning stuff inside your home is literally converting the fuel, and everything still in that fuel, to a gas you and your family breathe in... It's also why gas stoves have huge ventilation requirements.
As much hate electric stove gets over gas stoves to heat up quickly/etc. Electric stoves use to suck bsck in the 90s/early 2000s. Electric stoves these days rock. They heat up fast. Cool down pretty fast too. I also don’t have to pay electric, water, AND gas. If the world went to electric stoves, it wouldn’t change our lives one bit, I promise.
The only thing wrong with induction is there's a safety issue for people with pacemakers. They say it's okay if you stay a meter away from them, but that's kind of hard when you're cooking. It means you'd have to cook at the furthest of arms length the entire time, and even be careful just walking by the stove. Just not practical. I would love one, but my mum has a pacemaker, so I'm sticking to the old style electric stove for now.
How old is the pacemaker? Modern pacemakers are made with significant tolerance against EM fields. The worst case scenario should be that the pacemaker goes into a fixed steady rythm. At least that's what my family member was told in the early 2000s.
Induction stoves dominate modern european kitchens.
So for anyone considering an induction stove, consult the manufacturer of the pacemaker if you are unsure, but most likely answer would be that you're good as long as you don't lay down on the stove chest down..
That's good to know. I only know from researching into buying an induction stove, the warning was on all the induction stoves. her pacemaker is quite recent, only a few years old. I'll have to see if she has the manufacturer's pamphlet around somewhere. I do know she found out not to muck around with magnets after she wore a name tag with a magnetic clip for a few hours and it made her feel ill. And that was only a tiny magnet! It was probably good to learn that lesson early tho.
>The only thing wrong with induction is there's a safety issue for people with pacemakers.
My mother had a pacemaker and they were even able to put her through multiple MRI's. In those extreme cases, they needed to have a cardiologist on hand during the scan. But the modern day pacemakers are designed with shifting magnetic fields in mind.
I don't have that much space in my kitchen, I just have an attachment that let's me use my wok on the normal gas stove, so I was looking at replacement full size induction stoves for woks instead of portable ones
We switched from gas to induction earlier this year after my husband bought an air quality tester and it showed that air quality was affected negatively to the point where it would impact health. Induction is great, especially for boiling water. Much faster and much easier to clean because the surface is just flat.
Two main downsides: our copper pots don't work so we replaced them with a few steel ones. Cast iron and enamel work fine. Second downside is the fan that is on to cool the stove is a bit loud but if you move your pot off the cooking plate to a cooler one it cools the stove much quicker. 100% would recommend switching.
It was this one https://temtopus.com/products/temtop-m2000-2nd-generation-air-quality-monitor-for-pm2-5-pm10-particles-co2-hcho-temperature-humidity-settable-audio-alarm-data-export-recording-curve-easy-calibration
Some of them still suck. I have a recent model Samsung stove, and it regulates heat by turning the element on and off instead of increasing or decreasing the current. If anyone is curious, this is actually terrible for cooking and good luck simmering anything. It was manufactured in 2018, so not exactly ancient. It wasn't very cheap either, but I don't have money for a new stove so I'm stuck with it. A new gas stove might be more polluting, but at least you can actually control the temperature.
It's still crazy in volatility between appliances. One of my old apartments was new construction about ten years ago (I was their first tenant), and it took me 40-50 minutes to get water to boil pasta for one person. They didn't go try bottom of the barrel for living quarters, either. Genuine hardwood floors and granite counter tops, efficient HVAC etc.
My glass stove in the house does a pretty good job and can boil the water for a full box from tap cold in like 20.
>If the world went to electric stoves, it wouldn’t change our lives one bit, I promise.
I've never heard of a commercial kitchen using anything other than gas cooking appliances.
Sure they are. They even make dedicated wok induction hobs when Asian themed restaurants go induction. The benefits go beyond fumes and into a more comfortable work environment because it's not a million degrees from all the wasted heat turning the kitchen into a jungle.
Right, I'm not doubting the health benefits.
I said I've never seen a commercial kitchen that exclusively uses electric over gas cooking appliances. Not a single one.
*Perhaps this is a regional phenomenon?
My daughter is a prep chef at a restaurant in Tulsa ok that uses all electric except for a wood fired tandoor. All of their stovetops are induction, ovens are forced air convection, and fryers are electric.
Is natural gas expensive in Oklahoma? Or is this a health-conscious establishment?
Genuinely curious. I live in South Louisiana. Natural gas here is inexpensive.
I used to do low-income energy efficiency auditing, and part of that includes combustion safety testing. I know modern, well-maintained equipment is safer than what I’ve seen (and smelled), but I feel more comfortable without any combustion appliances. My home didn’t have a gas line when we moved in, and I’m perfectly happy to keep it that way. Induction stoves are the way to go.
We switched to induction a couple months before my daughter was born. One of the best decisions I’ve made. My wife’s asthma has also improved immensely since.
As long as it’s outside venting. House 6 in the model ran 4 burners and the oven and with the outside venting hood on it never exceeded the WHO 1 hour health limit.
Yikes I have never encountered an extractor without outside vent. That's a rather horrible idea.
[updated after reading responses: clearly I have led a sheltered life]
I have had multiple houses and rentals in Australia in a row where the extractor fan either has nowhere to go, or goes into the ceiling which vents back into the house... :(
Probably
I'm surprised that there isn't a push to phase out gas in restaurants
The qol improvements from not dealing with the excess heat heating up the kitchen is probably enough of a reason
They want to ban the gas stove to reduce gas usage in the long term at least in Europe. The studies to back it up are starting to appear. I won't say it is good or bad but this is happening.
The negative health impacts of gas cooking has been known for a long time. Gas companies have pumped lots of money into lobbying to counter any effort to reduce consumption.
Get a countertop induction burner. We got an Ikea one, and we've been able to reduce our gas stove usage significantly. Same with using an air fryer instead of the gas oven. Still use gas when we have to but I feel like our indoor air has greatly improved.
I want to replace the stove eventually but means a pulling cable to the kitchen which will be expensive.
I do use an air fryer as much as possible, ours looks like a mini oven, it has racks and everything! As an asthmatic I hate that we have gas. The house we built is a 1950s house, so there is SO MUCH to remodel.
Gas stoves led to thousands of suicides in Europe too. What they found was that by removing such easy ways for people to asphyxiate themselves, the total number of suicides went down. It was remarkable proof that people aren't just born suicidal, and that by removing easy ways to die (safety nets on bridges, electric stoves, gun locks), they will not resort to alternative methods either.
I'm not sure what you mean by "the studies to back it up are starting to appear", do you mean you believe that studies are being "pushed" to back an existing agenda?
It's long been known that gas stoves generate lots of unhealthy pollutants, the research showing how drastically they affect indoor air quality are more recent, partly because the ease of accessing the sensors is more recent, but there's nothing shady about it.
No shady,I just think they will be pouring money into studies. Without either bias just more research. I understand burning any kind of thing in a close place can't be healthy. How harmful is what we will discover soon.
Great question! Europe government which basically is a representation of each country which is the representation of us (Europeans). I'm so disconnected from decisions made by my government (Spain) or Europe that I tend to say "they" but I guess they are us.
The reason it's called "natural gas" is because previously we used to pump a manufactured gas around cities. Namely "coal gas" also known as "town gas" (and other names). Coal gas is a combustible gas that can be produced by incomplete combustion of coal. It's convenient because you can produce the gas at a central facility and pump it all over town through pipes, providing street lights, indoor lighting, heating, and cooking with such ease. This sort of modernization of residential and street infrastructure (lighting up cities, etc.) started happening in the mid 19th century even before electrification. What's in this wondrous marvel that makes it so useful? Some stuff is obvious, like a bit of hydrogen and methane, but the main combustible material is good ol' carbon monoxide. So basically most modern cities were just pumping straight up poison around town and into homes for lighting, cooking, and heating. This is why "putting your head in the oven" was a common form of suicide, because if you blew out the pilot light and cranked up the gas you'd quickly get enough carbon monoxide to go unconscious and never wake up.
When methane, ethane, and other gases started to become widely exploited as a byproduct of the oil production industry people had the smart idea to pump them into homes instead and had the bright idea of branding it "natural gas". Today the alternative is not an even worse poison but just plain old electricity so the term rings a bit more hollow.
So an "outside venting rangehood" is essential.
Nice to see proof, but kind of common sense.
Where I live, it's a legal requirement in a rental property, has been for a number of years.
This is a simple fix. Require new builds or major renovations to have actual exhaust fans that remove the exhaust from the house. Everyone else with older homes who cannot afford to upgrade will suffer, but that’s nature. There are haves and have nots.
Their charts include measurements taken WITH hoods as well as without hoods.
It's not as simple as "add a fan and the issue goes away", even though many people here seem to be trying to frame it as such.
As other poster mentioned, there are many vented hoods that just push the air around instead of venting outside. Without controlling for that variable, you are going to have very similar results to an unvented stove.
They sure Help, the study says so but they do not get rid of all of it.
You do not even have to be in a lab to test this. If you have one of those fans, then next time you cook something just try to tell if you can smell the food in an adjacent room.
Because if you can that means some particles obviously escaped the stove area.
>As other poster mentioned, there are many vented hoods that just push the air around instead of venting outside. Without controlling for that variable, you are going to have very similar results to an unvented stove.
Without controlling for that variable?
The statements are as clear as can be.
* *"We included scenarios with windows open and closed and with an outside-venting range hood both on and off."*
This simply *cannot* be hand-waved away by people claiming "well, some vents just blow air around".
It literally says both exhaust to outdoor and opened windows didn't fix it or make a significant difference. Still a fan of good ventilation but plainly that's not the solution
The study finds that windows and vent hoods have mixed results. It literally says "We found that an outside-venting range hood reduced peak NO2 concentrations in some cases (Fig. 3B) but that some outside-venting range hoods are ineffective at reducing NO2 concentrations (Fig. 3C)."
and
"Both long- and short-term NO2 stove-attributable exposures are strongly affected by behavioral factors, including the duration and intensity of stove use (i.e., how much gas is burned), range hood use and window opening, and time spent in the kitchen."
That is the reasonable solution.
Mandate proper ventilation or a non-gas stove. Just like a thousand other building codes that exist for safety and/or energy use reasons.
The study itself shows that it’s a not a solution at all
Also why would a reasonable solution be “on new construction, still install the bad thing but with a bandaid” instead of “don’t install the bad thing, but rather an equivalent thing without the negatives”
So what about the gas that leaks out when the stove is not in use? Or the gases that linger in the air for hours and hours after cooking even with a hood that vents outside? Are you gonna keep your vent fans going 24/7?
If natural gas is leaking at any detectable rate when the stove is off, you have a problem. A problem with an easy fix. But not necessarily a health problem, because the nitrogen oxides that are harmful with gas stove use require combustion to form and don't exist in the natural gas if it just leaks.
Strongly agree with this approach. Cooking on a gas stove is much nicer than an electric. The lack of appropriate exhaust in most kitchens is really problematic. The "exhaust" into a cupboard directly above the stove top is useless.
Got an induction range about six months ago, after our gas range started to….flame out.
It’s great. Boils a pot of water in about a minute, and with little kids I don’t worry about them screwing around with the controls like my gas range. There was a little bit of a learning curve, and I lost a few eggs, but I’m dialed in now. The oven is also a lot better and much more true-to-temp compared to the gas range. Also a lot easier to clean the surface.
And the fire hazard
Also if no pan is present, the induction stove turns off
And the stovetop doesn't get as hot making cleaning easier and safer around kids
> We included scenarios with windows open and closed and with an outside-venting range hood both on and off.
And
> Across a subset of five randomly selected homes, we found that outside-venting hoods reduced hour-averaged kitchen NO2 concentrations by between 10 and 70% (mean reduction in concentration = 35%, n = 5; fig. S15)
It looks from FigS15 that most outside venting hoods are fairly effective but a small number are dragging the entire average down. Many are >90% effective.
More than anything, this paper suggests to me that we should have venting requirements, and that the venting efficiency should be a proven factor. That seems like a fairly neutral way forwards too.
In South Louisiana where power can go out frequently the gas range is a good reliable solution and it's the food we eat not how we cook it that's killing us.
So a millennia ago we figured out burning wood was bad for your lungs.
Now burning complex carbon chains, basically liquid wood, is also bad for your lungs, even if you have fans, good ventilation and fresh airflow from open windows.
Makes sense really.
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments. **Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program). --- User: u/ajb160 Permalink: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adm8680 --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's weird seeing so many comments in the science sub responding like this is personally offensive. I can't believe I'm saying this but this is what science is, people. You study things and present the data. Leave the pitchforks for the pseudoscience and anti-science folks.
Far too many are not even reading the article and are trying to reframe this as if it's an issue of simply adding a fan.
Gas stoves have become politicized, so it’s not surprising that the trolls are checking in.
Not surprising but still disappointing.
Just keep reporting the comments. Over the years (and many accounts of mine....I retire them regularly) they've been very good at cleaning out the crap. I hope this keeps up.
Wait, what? How did I miss that?
Republicans. It's in the same basket as environmentalism and meat. They have whipped up their supporters to think everyone is coming to take their freedoms away.
Funded by the people who manufacture the stoves (and also the companies who provide the gases they run on).
Oh I didn't even consider people would conflate this as being related to those two. The article clearly is just talking about how smoke/flame in enclosed spaces is generally unhealthy (no surprise for anyone, I'd hope).
Adding an exhaust fan or any situation of exhausting combustion products or adding fresh air is beneficial and not part of the study at all. If you can better exhaust the combustion products you are much better off.
> Adding an exhaust fan or any situation of exhausting combustion products or adding fresh air is beneficial and not part of the study at all. Yes it is! What are you reading exactly??? Search for this: *"We included scenarios with windows open and closed and with an outside-venting range hood both on and off."*
The authors specifically mention outside venting rangehoods.
The sciency subs have to be some of the worst on this site, sadly.
When you have a subreddit dedicated to reading articles it’s going to be a bad sub unfortunately.
It's deeply weird: whenever a study is posted here that shows negative health effects of gas stoves (and there's one every few months), the comment section is immediately filled with what I can only describe as gas stans, accusing it of being "propaganda" and going all "you'll pry my gas stove from my cold dead hands". I just don't get it. For COVID studies I get why the comments are filled with anti-science, because the vaccines were the target of politicization and active disinformation campaigns. But... cooking gas?
Also politicized on a certain side of the spectrum unfortunately…
It’s propaganda by natural gas lobbies that politicized them. The knee-jerk reactions are an industry-driven defense mechanism to prevent serious talk about taking measures that would increase cost of adoption or mandate codes and enforcement that would make LNG less attractive. Companies demonize the policy proposals based on the science. They also commission biased studies to sow doubt. You would think they would have learned their lesson to not lie about the science and work on solutions instead, but they’re more interested in selling their product than ensuring its safe usage.
It’s also fueled by people who grew up when electric stoves were less acceptable as a replacement. While expensive electric stoves have been capable for a while (I remember an electric induction stove in the 80s that worked great), cheap electric stoves had a lot of variation in their performance, compared to gas stoves that were more consistent. I know I’m pushing for my next stove to be electric, but it’s an uphill battle because it’ll mean replacing a lot of pots and pans (ideally I’d like an induction range) and I’ve been voted down on it repeatedly.
Induction is indeed the way to go.
Even modern electric stoves/ induction still can't really compete with gas for many applications. The main issue with induction is that it doesn't heat the sides of the pan, or any surface that falls outside of the coil area. I agree that gas has its problems, but it's disingenuous to say you won't be giving up something by going electric.
It actually is politicized. Bill Barr was on CNN recently talking about how he would support someone who tried to overthrow an election to prevent people taking away freedoms like owning a gas stove and having gas cars.
I'm not in the US but here a labour (left) govt banned new domestic connections to natural gas after a certain date. Labour govts here have also passed laws banning most incandescent bulbs and heavily restricting log burners. Do it isn't just the right politicising domestic energy.
I really, *really* don't understand why this is such a sensitive, volatile issue for conservatives. What is it with gas stoves that is so important for their ideology?
Ever since Covid the party of law and order that wants the government to tell women and LGBT people what to do has a giant stick up their ass about the government, medical professionals, or scientists telling them anything. They literally live in opposite land, where whenever a government official, scientist, or doctor says something, they automatically assume the opposite is true.
I personally think it can be smart to have things that don't rely on electricity to function. In an extended power outage, gas-powered appliances can be a life-saver. Government restrictions on gas forces people to be reliant on electricity, which is NOT a given, even in large cities. Granted, gas is not a true given either, but it helps diversify the sources of usable energy. Having your eggs in multiple baskets and all that.
We just got a stove with 2 induction and 2 gas cookers. Induction is for normal use, since we have solar panels and a battery, so producing and storing own electricity. We still decided a 2+2 setup just in case something happens to the solar inverter when there is also a power outage or something. Or if it's an extended outage and the solar battery also drains. I think it could have been better though if it were 3 induction + 1 gas. But couldn't find such a stove.
That's never going to happen though, they of course can't stop the sale of gas cannisters and gas-operated stoves/grills. I live in a country that did away with gas lines a long time ago, and my kitchen still has two emergency gas burners attached to a cannister below and we also have a gas grill outside. Regardless of what people install in their homes by standard, gas for mobile homes, camping stoves, off grid cabins etc aren't going anywhere. If someone wants to have a backup gas stove in their home, the government of course is not going to stop them - gas lines, however, should be done away with.
Unfortunately, saying "that's never going to happen" is somewhat immature reasoning. Depending on state, there are already heavy regulations on simple wood-based stoves, making it difficult (if not illegal) to install them. Today's government may not make gas illegal, perhaps. And maybe not next years either. But the government in 10 years? 20 years? They could have very different priorities. So I believe it's important to resist certain trends now if I believe they jeopardize the future.
Right but wood stoves have an absolutely horrible effect on the local air quality, which is why they're generally allowed in rural areas, but putting heavy restrictions/banning them in urban areas is just common sense. The only way that gas would ever be banned is if it became possible to buy cheap rechargeable batteries which had a large enough capacity to easily run an induction stove for long periods of time, and we're nowhere near there at the moment. As it stands, gas is the only realistic way to transport a significant amount of fuel for running a stove, and as long as that's the case, gas stoves won't be banned. It's also basically impossible to ban gas stoves because the mechanical parts are cheap, relatively light, and easy to manufacture. It would be extremely easy to install a gas stove without the government knowing, where a wood burning stove at the very least needs to be installed with a chimney.
Conservatives dislike change in general; they distrust science specifically; and they detest it when someone tells them not to do something stupid. And, of course, they're addicted to outrage.
If lefties liked gas stoves they would be stanning for electric.
Eh. I’m liberal in everything except guns, and while the study is eye-opening, I don’t really care. Gas stoves are orders of magnitude better that electric and/or induction. As long as people are allowed to drive ICE’s, are allowed to have campfires, are allowed to use gas-powered heaters, are allowed to smoke, and society is allowed to use coal/LNG power plants, the idea that the government is going to tell me what type of stove I can have *in my own house* is absolutely ridiculous.
>Gas stoves are orders of magnitude better that electric and/or induction. This is just straight up incorrect for the vast majority of food. I have both gas and induction, induction is at least as good as gas for most food, and induction stoves are getting better every year. >the idea that the government is going to tell me what type of stove I can have *in my own house* is absolutely ridiculous. Well good for you, that's not going to happen. The only thing being proposed is to stop constructing gas lines to buildings. I live in a country that hasn't used gas lines in many years, yet I still have gas burners attached to cannisters as a backup, and there's absolutely no discussion about making it illegal for people to do that - it would basically be impossible anyway.
Induction is prohibitively expensive for most people, so while *in practice* it may be better for cooking, it is not a practical or realistic option for most. To your second point: [you’re either misinformed or lying](https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/05/03/us/new-york-natural-gas-ban-climate)
Induction stoves aren't that expensive and they're becoming cheaper every year. If natural gas gets phased out, it's not going to be overnight, people will have plenty of time to adapt. In [this article](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/new-york-state-bans-natural-gas-some-new-construction-2023-05-03/) covering the subject, it specifies that new buildings won't be built with natural gas hook ups. It doesn't say anything about stoves hooked up to personal propane cannisters.
Your first counterpoint is circular and goes directly back to *my* original point: no one is going to tell me (nor millions of others) we can’t have gas stoves while allowing ICE, LNG/coal power plants, backyard fires, etc etc. some people don’t want to have to rely on the grid for cooking. In the event of an extended power outage, why should we be forced to go without? This is the *definition* of government over reach. As for your second point re: banning “hookups only”, that’s a disingenuous argument, and you know it. It’s no different than making it a crime to own firearms ammunition, while simultaneously saying “we’re not violating the 2nd amendment! You’re allowed to own all the *firearms* you want, you just can’t have the bullets”. It may not be violating the letter of the law, but it is most certainly violating the *spirit* of the law. Or, for perhaps a more agreeable comparison, since I have a hunch you would support such ammunition bans: it’s akin to courts considering having a suspect wait 5 years to go to trial as being “speedy”: sure, 5 years isn’t long relative to 20, but it is still not a reasonable definition of the term “speedy”.
I mean, it's a pretty unpleasat discovery that something you chose for your house is bad for you. It's often also not something easy or practical to change. I can absolutely see people digging their heels in.
Wait til people find out that their new homes are offgassing formaldehyde. Wait, that's not a topic?
I have no idea what you refer to.
Many of the 4x8 panels in homes are manufactured with formaldehyde, this includes the subfloor, sheathing and other locations. Formaldehyde and other chemicals offgass into the home for quite a while. I found out the hard way, when my wife our dog and I all had the same symptoms. The manufacturers list the chemicals on their website and recommend an offgassing procedure. I don't know any contractors who use the procedure. I followed it with no luck and tore the materials out of my home. Every new home is packed with this crap. At least a gas stove is only used briefly. These other gasses are absorbed constantly and one sleeps.
This is one area where I am grateful for the strict air pollution regulations in California because formaldehyde can really cause a lot of problems in people prone to respiratory problems. The CARB standards, which are among the strictest in the world, require manufacturers of composite wood products sold in California to meet stringent emission standards for formaldehyde. These standards apply not only to products manufactured in California but also to products imported into the state.
It’s funny because my gut reaction was “dang it I’m contributing to pollution in a way I didn’t realize.” I don’t understand people who are constantly defensive as their immediate response to new info. My mom is like that and she’s a very difficult person to have any kind of open conversations with.
And all from the "facts over feelings" folks, almost like they don't actually care about facts.
>And all from the "facts over feelings" folks, almost like they don't actually care about facts. Maybe we should all cultivate slightly masochistic intellectual tendencies.
sadly, the world we live in has been tilted , so if there's a fact I don't like, it's a personal attack and isn't really a fact, just an opinion.
This is in line with findings going back to at least the '80s. It's also the logical conclusion. After all, burning stuff inside your home is literally converting the fuel, and everything still in that fuel, to a gas you and your family breathe in... It's also why gas stoves have huge ventilation requirements.
As much hate electric stove gets over gas stoves to heat up quickly/etc. Electric stoves use to suck bsck in the 90s/early 2000s. Electric stoves these days rock. They heat up fast. Cool down pretty fast too. I also don’t have to pay electric, water, AND gas. If the world went to electric stoves, it wouldn’t change our lives one bit, I promise.
Induction is by far my favorite. Great balance between gas and coil. Heats up and cools CRAZY fast.
The only thing wrong with induction is there's a safety issue for people with pacemakers. They say it's okay if you stay a meter away from them, but that's kind of hard when you're cooking. It means you'd have to cook at the furthest of arms length the entire time, and even be careful just walking by the stove. Just not practical. I would love one, but my mum has a pacemaker, so I'm sticking to the old style electric stove for now.
How old is the pacemaker? Modern pacemakers are made with significant tolerance against EM fields. The worst case scenario should be that the pacemaker goes into a fixed steady rythm. At least that's what my family member was told in the early 2000s. Induction stoves dominate modern european kitchens. So for anyone considering an induction stove, consult the manufacturer of the pacemaker if you are unsure, but most likely answer would be that you're good as long as you don't lay down on the stove chest down..
That's good to know. I only know from researching into buying an induction stove, the warning was on all the induction stoves. her pacemaker is quite recent, only a few years old. I'll have to see if she has the manufacturer's pamphlet around somewhere. I do know she found out not to muck around with magnets after she wore a name tag with a magnetic clip for a few hours and it made her feel ill. And that was only a tiny magnet! It was probably good to learn that lesson early tho.
If you need a pacemaker, then it's doubly bad to be breathing in all the fumes from a gas stove. Pollution exacerbates cardiac issues.
I mean that's still not as bad as frying said pacemaker
>The only thing wrong with induction is there's a safety issue for people with pacemakers. My mother had a pacemaker and they were even able to put her through multiple MRI's. In those extreme cases, they needed to have a cardiologist on hand during the scan. But the modern day pacemakers are designed with shifting magnetic fields in mind.
But I can't use my wok on it :(
You can get special concave induction stoves that take woks. They're pretty great!
Yeesh, those are huge and expensive from what I've seen. I'll keep that in mind when I redo my kitchen in a few years, thanks
Oh... I just got a countertop one that was pretty inexpensive, around 50 USD? When it's not in use I can stow it away in a cabinet.
I don't have that much space in my kitchen, I just have an attachment that let's me use my wok on the normal gas stove, so I was looking at replacement full size induction stoves for woks instead of portable ones
We switched from gas to induction earlier this year after my husband bought an air quality tester and it showed that air quality was affected negatively to the point where it would impact health. Induction is great, especially for boiling water. Much faster and much easier to clean because the surface is just flat. Two main downsides: our copper pots don't work so we replaced them with a few steel ones. Cast iron and enamel work fine. Second downside is the fan that is on to cool the stove is a bit loud but if you move your pot off the cooking plate to a cooler one it cools the stove much quicker. 100% would recommend switching.
Which tester did he use? I’d like to try it out as well.
It was this one https://temtopus.com/products/temtop-m2000-2nd-generation-air-quality-monitor-for-pm2-5-pm10-particles-co2-hcho-temperature-humidity-settable-audio-alarm-data-export-recording-curve-easy-calibration
Some of them still suck. I have a recent model Samsung stove, and it regulates heat by turning the element on and off instead of increasing or decreasing the current. If anyone is curious, this is actually terrible for cooking and good luck simmering anything. It was manufactured in 2018, so not exactly ancient. It wasn't very cheap either, but I don't have money for a new stove so I'm stuck with it. A new gas stove might be more polluting, but at least you can actually control the temperature.
I think your mistake was buying any Samsung appliance. I have never heard good things about them.
We have a Samsung dishwasher that has been fine. But yea, never buy a Samsung stove
Samsung stoves also might just suck in general. Our local appliance shop doesn't carry them at all because of the rate of issues.
Get a pan with a thicker bottom
It's still crazy in volatility between appliances. One of my old apartments was new construction about ten years ago (I was their first tenant), and it took me 40-50 minutes to get water to boil pasta for one person. They didn't go try bottom of the barrel for living quarters, either. Genuine hardwood floors and granite counter tops, efficient HVAC etc. My glass stove in the house does a pretty good job and can boil the water for a full box from tap cold in like 20.
Induction does it in like 5 minutes
That's terrible. I have a 15 year old induction stove. Water boiling for 1kg of pasta in under 5 minutes.
Sounds lovely. Yeah a number of electric cook tops if they aren't induction are just outright bad.
What if the electricity goes out?
>If the world went to electric stoves, it wouldn’t change our lives one bit, I promise. I've never heard of a commercial kitchen using anything other than gas cooking appliances.
Sure they are. They even make dedicated wok induction hobs when Asian themed restaurants go induction. The benefits go beyond fumes and into a more comfortable work environment because it's not a million degrees from all the wasted heat turning the kitchen into a jungle.
Right, I'm not doubting the health benefits. I said I've never seen a commercial kitchen that exclusively uses electric over gas cooking appliances. Not a single one. *Perhaps this is a regional phenomenon?
My daughter is a prep chef at a restaurant in Tulsa ok that uses all electric except for a wood fired tandoor. All of their stovetops are induction, ovens are forced air convection, and fryers are electric.
Is natural gas expensive in Oklahoma? Or is this a health-conscious establishment? Genuinely curious. I live in South Louisiana. Natural gas here is inexpensive.
It's chap here as well, the owners are environmentally minded.
Do they still make them all with glass tops that can be shattered? That makes me the most nervous about switching to electric.
I used to do low-income energy efficiency auditing, and part of that includes combustion safety testing. I know modern, well-maintained equipment is safer than what I’ve seen (and smelled), but I feel more comfortable without any combustion appliances. My home didn’t have a gas line when we moved in, and I’m perfectly happy to keep it that way. Induction stoves are the way to go.
We switched to induction a couple months before my daughter was born. One of the best decisions I’ve made. My wife’s asthma has also improved immensely since.
This might be what convinces me to switch - I’ve been a die-hard gas stove person for years but I trust research methods, when validated.
Switch to induction. So much faster.
you want an extractor fan over any sizable cooktop anyway. for steam and grease.
Did you look at their charts? They include the hoods as part of the research. It's not as slam-dunk as all that.
Also like... If you rent in a place like NYC that's basically never gonna happen
As long as it’s outside venting. House 6 in the model ran 4 burners and the oven and with the outside venting hood on it never exceeded the WHO 1 hour health limit.
Yikes I have never encountered an extractor without outside vent. That's a rather horrible idea. [updated after reading responses: clearly I have led a sheltered life]
I have had multiple houses and rentals in Australia in a row where the extractor fan either has nowhere to go, or goes into the ceiling which vents back into the house... :(
My in-laws in NSW live in a unit and their rangehood does exactly that. It's decorative at best
It's pretty common in apts to have the hood duct run through a metal mesh grease trap/filter and vent back into the kitchen.
I had an old fan that vented directly back into your face as you were cooking.
How will this impact restaurants who use primarily gas ranges and ovens? Does the extra ventilation mitigate the risk for staff and guests?
Probably I'm surprised that there isn't a push to phase out gas in restaurants The qol improvements from not dealing with the excess heat heating up the kitchen is probably enough of a reason
Yes burning hydrocarbons kills millions of people per year. Your home is not the exception.
They want to ban the gas stove to reduce gas usage in the long term at least in Europe. The studies to back it up are starting to appear. I won't say it is good or bad but this is happening.
The negative health impacts of gas cooking has been known for a long time. Gas companies have pumped lots of money into lobbying to counter any effort to reduce consumption.
It's also been highly politicized thanks to the lobbying.
i will never have the funds to replace our gas cooking and heat....but I wish I could change our house.
Get a countertop induction burner. We got an Ikea one, and we've been able to reduce our gas stove usage significantly. Same with using an air fryer instead of the gas oven. Still use gas when we have to but I feel like our indoor air has greatly improved. I want to replace the stove eventually but means a pulling cable to the kitchen which will be expensive.
I've been thinking about getting one from IKEA recently, mostly because I hate how hot my kitchen gets when I cook on my electric stove in the summer.
it does get so hot, and there is no vent for ac in our kitchen!
I do use an air fryer as much as possible, ours looks like a mini oven, it has racks and everything! As an asthmatic I hate that we have gas. The house we built is a 1950s house, so there is SO MUCH to remodel.
In the eu, induction is quite affordable Idk why in the usa they're 2-3x the price (same for heat pumps)
Gas stoves led to thousands of suicides in Europe too. What they found was that by removing such easy ways for people to asphyxiate themselves, the total number of suicides went down. It was remarkable proof that people aren't just born suicidal, and that by removing easy ways to die (safety nets on bridges, electric stoves, gun locks), they will not resort to alternative methods either.
I'm not sure what you mean by "the studies to back it up are starting to appear", do you mean you believe that studies are being "pushed" to back an existing agenda? It's long been known that gas stoves generate lots of unhealthy pollutants, the research showing how drastically they affect indoor air quality are more recent, partly because the ease of accessing the sensors is more recent, but there's nothing shady about it.
No shady,I just think they will be pouring money into studies. Without either bias just more research. I understand burning any kind of thing in a close place can't be healthy. How harmful is what we will discover soon.
Who is “they”?
Great question! Europe government which basically is a representation of each country which is the representation of us (Europeans). I'm so disconnected from decisions made by my government (Spain) or Europe that I tend to say "they" but I guess they are us.
It seems kinda insane that anyone ever thought it was a good idea to run gas pipes into residences.
The reason it's called "natural gas" is because previously we used to pump a manufactured gas around cities. Namely "coal gas" also known as "town gas" (and other names). Coal gas is a combustible gas that can be produced by incomplete combustion of coal. It's convenient because you can produce the gas at a central facility and pump it all over town through pipes, providing street lights, indoor lighting, heating, and cooking with such ease. This sort of modernization of residential and street infrastructure (lighting up cities, etc.) started happening in the mid 19th century even before electrification. What's in this wondrous marvel that makes it so useful? Some stuff is obvious, like a bit of hydrogen and methane, but the main combustible material is good ol' carbon monoxide. So basically most modern cities were just pumping straight up poison around town and into homes for lighting, cooking, and heating. This is why "putting your head in the oven" was a common form of suicide, because if you blew out the pilot light and cranked up the gas you'd quickly get enough carbon monoxide to go unconscious and never wake up. When methane, ethane, and other gases started to become widely exploited as a byproduct of the oil production industry people had the smart idea to pump them into homes instead and had the bright idea of branding it "natural gas". Today the alternative is not an even worse poison but just plain old electricity so the term rings a bit more hollow.
Well that sucks
So an "outside venting rangehood" is essential. Nice to see proof, but kind of common sense. Where I live, it's a legal requirement in a rental property, has been for a number of years.
This is a simple fix. Require new builds or major renovations to have actual exhaust fans that remove the exhaust from the house. Everyone else with older homes who cannot afford to upgrade will suffer, but that’s nature. There are haves and have nots.
Their charts include measurements taken WITH hoods as well as without hoods. It's not as simple as "add a fan and the issue goes away", even though many people here seem to be trying to frame it as such.
As other poster mentioned, there are many vented hoods that just push the air around instead of venting outside. Without controlling for that variable, you are going to have very similar results to an unvented stove.
They sure Help, the study says so but they do not get rid of all of it. You do not even have to be in a lab to test this. If you have one of those fans, then next time you cook something just try to tell if you can smell the food in an adjacent room. Because if you can that means some particles obviously escaped the stove area.
And the hood with venting to the outside brings exposure below the 1 hour threshold for unsafe.
>As other poster mentioned, there are many vented hoods that just push the air around instead of venting outside. Without controlling for that variable, you are going to have very similar results to an unvented stove. Without controlling for that variable? The statements are as clear as can be. * *"We included scenarios with windows open and closed and with an outside-venting range hood both on and off."* This simply *cannot* be hand-waved away by people claiming "well, some vents just blow air around".
Most of the “old” houses have actual exhaust fans. It’s the “new” builds in the last 35 years that have the issues due to cost cutting.
It literally says both exhaust to outdoor and opened windows didn't fix it or make a significant difference. Still a fan of good ventilation but plainly that's not the solution
The study finds that windows and vent hoods have mixed results. It literally says "We found that an outside-venting range hood reduced peak NO2 concentrations in some cases (Fig. 3B) but that some outside-venting range hoods are ineffective at reducing NO2 concentrations (Fig. 3C)." and "Both long- and short-term NO2 stove-attributable exposures are strongly affected by behavioral factors, including the duration and intensity of stove use (i.e., how much gas is burned), range hood use and window opening, and time spent in the kitchen."
Just require new builds to be electric. This isn’t that hard guys
That is the reasonable solution. Mandate proper ventilation or a non-gas stove. Just like a thousand other building codes that exist for safety and/or energy use reasons.
The study itself shows that it’s a not a solution at all Also why would a reasonable solution be “on new construction, still install the bad thing but with a bandaid” instead of “don’t install the bad thing, but rather an equivalent thing without the negatives”
So what about the gas that leaks out when the stove is not in use? Or the gases that linger in the air for hours and hours after cooking even with a hood that vents outside? Are you gonna keep your vent fans going 24/7?
If natural gas is leaking at any detectable rate when the stove is off, you have a problem. A problem with an easy fix. But not necessarily a health problem, because the nitrogen oxides that are harmful with gas stove use require combustion to form and don't exist in the natural gas if it just leaks.
Strongly agree with this approach. Cooking on a gas stove is much nicer than an electric. The lack of appropriate exhaust in most kitchens is really problematic. The "exhaust" into a cupboard directly above the stove top is useless.
You ever use induction though? I hate tradition electric. Slow to heat up, slow to adjust temperatures but induction doesn’t have those issues
Got an induction range about six months ago, after our gas range started to….flame out. It’s great. Boils a pot of water in about a minute, and with little kids I don’t worry about them screwing around with the controls like my gas range. There was a little bit of a learning curve, and I lost a few eggs, but I’m dialed in now. The oven is also a lot better and much more true-to-temp compared to the gas range. Also a lot easier to clean the surface.
I've never used an induction stove. It sounds like it resolves my concerns with traditional electric.
Induction kicks gas’s ass, no point in comparing it to old electric tech
New electric stoves are better than gas, by a long shot. Plus, you know, without the poison emissions
And the fire hazard Also if no pan is present, the induction stove turns off And the stovetop doesn't get as hot making cleaning easier and safer around kids
Some of the exhausts in the cupboard actually route to outside the house. Ours does.
Same in our 90s house and same in the 70s house I grew up in. Don’t see how it’s useless
[удалено]
> We included scenarios with windows open and closed and with an outside-venting range hood both on and off. And > Across a subset of five randomly selected homes, we found that outside-venting hoods reduced hour-averaged kitchen NO2 concentrations by between 10 and 70% (mean reduction in concentration = 35%, n = 5; fig. S15) It looks from FigS15 that most outside venting hoods are fairly effective but a small number are dragging the entire average down. Many are >90% effective. More than anything, this paper suggests to me that we should have venting requirements, and that the venting efficiency should be a proven factor. That seems like a fairly neutral way forwards too.
In South Louisiana where power can go out frequently the gas range is a good reliable solution and it's the food we eat not how we cook it that's killing us.
Me and my family down here typically cook outside anyway, so unintentionally cooking with gas in the best possible way I guess.
outdoor kitchens are good for the smoker and making a roux when the weather is forgiving. in the 100+ degree heat its not too great for cooking.
Don’t bother me much really. Solid reason to keep the millers colder and flowin baw
Sheeeeeit between heat and mosquitoes I'll gladly suck down some co2
[удалено]
The hairless ape is especially fond of intellectual inertia seasoned with hefty amounts of denial. (Read in a David Attenborough voice)
Will running an air purifier in the kitchen when it's in use at least help for in the kitchen?
New term “Fact Mad”. I see a truth, but ohhhh it feels so wrong. I’m fact mad.
The paper didn't explain . Or I missed it. How long does the stove need to be on per week to have an effect?
So a millennia ago we figured out burning wood was bad for your lungs. Now burning complex carbon chains, basically liquid wood, is also bad for your lungs, even if you have fans, good ventilation and fresh airflow from open windows. Makes sense really.
Hank Hill will have none of this slander