this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
54 points (100.0% liked)
Business
422 readers
51 users here now
A place to share business news and insights.
Rules
- Follow lemmy.world rules
- Only post content related to business
- Do not use this community to promote your business
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Enjoy the asthma.
Edit: Just be aware that there's a concerted, ongoing campaign by the fossil fuel industry to astroturf for gas stoves.
I hope you have proper ventilation for your electric stove, too.
Attacking other users violates the lemmy.world TOS. Removed.
https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
I do have proper ventilation, but "proper" ventilation – short of a laboratory setup – doesn't exist for piping methane (95% of what "natural gas" is along with carcinogens like benzene) directly into your kitchen and then combusting it to produce nitrogen dioxide. You should not be using a gas stove if you care about your respiratory health or the respiratory health of your family.
Edit: this user is literally just making shit up at this point. Below, they cite this article as evidence that fans adequately reduce PM2.5 and NO2 emissions. Let's break down what this article is actually about, because I believe they expect other users not to read it knowing or simply not caring that it doesn't do that whatsoever. This article is about if running the fan after cooking helps reduce harmful indoor pollutants. As you can see from the abstract, it makes no assessment as what "adequate" would be, but we can continue into the article itself, which immediately reads as follows (I emphasize that I've read the entire article, and at no point do they claim that the pollutant levels even when following best practices are acceptable for human health):
Why did you edit your reply like this instead of making a new one to me?
You originally claimed that proper ventilation was not available for residential applications. The paper I found, indirectly referenced by the article you shared, lists three models that were all capable of keeping NO~X~ exposure under the the 1 h U.S. ambient air quality standard of 100 ppb. That is the relevant standard and it's mentioned in the text your quoted from the article. Any fan that can beat it is objectively adequate and all three models that were tested did so consistently.
100 ppb is not the relevant standard, holy shit. 💀 The World Health Organization – the relevant authority on public health here – sets air quality guidelines around pollutants like NO2, wherein "[e]xceedance of the air quality guideline (AQG) levels is associated with important risks to public health." These guidelines set the standard at 10 μg/m^3^, which is essentially 5 ppb. Likewise, they set the 99th percentile amount at about 20 μg/m^3^, or about 10 ppb.
And then we get to the following facts: 1) if they do completely mitigate the hazard as you describe, plenty of people are not adequately using the fan. It's a simple fact that gas and propane stoves are attributable to around 50,000 current cases of pediatric asthma (up to 200,000 by some counts) and thousands of annual deaths. Of course, however, they don't completely mitigate it. 2) As noted in the article, using the built-in fan literally perfectly as intended resulted in a concentration of 15 ppb, which is 1.5x the WHO's 99th percentile limit. 3) The article notes: "our results suggest that manufacturer specified flow rates alone may not provide sufficient information" about their efficacy, meaning that even if you were willing to pay hundreds of dollars to upgrade the fan which 99.99% of people aren't, good luck without a laboratory setup figuring out which ones aren't still well past safe NO2 levels even when run as directed. 4) No amount of NO2 is good for you. 5) NO2 isn't the only pollutant let off by gas stoves; NO2 is thought to be responsible for only a quarter of pediatric asthma cases caused by gas stoves. 6) The article suggests that "in homes with gas ranges levels were generally between 5 and 12 ppb [of NO2]" (2–5 without) which as defined by the WHO is definitely unhealthy.
I agree that no amount of NO~X~ exposure is completely safe, but per the EPA and the WHO, some amount of exposure is safe enough. Otherwise, there's no point to specifying exposure limits. Per the link you provided, the WHO guidelines for NO~2~ exposure are 10ug/m3 (5.316ppb) for one year and 25ug/m3 (13.291ppb) for 24 hours. The EPA standard is 100 ppb for one hour and 53 ppb for one 1 year. None of the tests in the Dobbin paper showed concentrations greater than either of the EPA limits. The best performing fan that was tested kept concentrations under the WHO yearly limit, which was not exceeded for more than about 45 minutes with either of the other fans. That is in spite of the fans not meeting the CFMs claimed by the manufacturer.
Indeed, people might not properly install or use their exhaust fans, and there should be regulations and enforcement to improve on that, but that's just the way it is. Regarless of stove type, you need an exhaust fan for protection from particulates anyway. So if you have a gas connection, you might as well get a gas fired stove since it provides a superior cooking experience at a lower price point with fewer electronics.
Removed, civility. The whole bit about attacking other users applies to their implied families as well.
That is not the conclusion of the article to which you linked. Rather, it acknowledges that cooking exhaust fans are an effective mitigation. If you follow the link in the relevant paragraph, you get to an article that references many papers covering the effectiveness of exhaust fans. This one clearly demonstrates that exhaust fans that adequately remove pollutants from cooking, including PM~2.5~ and NO~X~, are available on the market for residential use.
It doesn't at all say that; it notes that you should be using an electric stovetop but that vents can reduce the exposure.
In the text you quoted, it says that you can replace your gas stove, not that you should. That's a far cry from what you originally said: "You should not be using a gas stove if you care about your respiratory health or the respiratory health of your family."
When I'm in a reading comprehension competition and my opponent actually makes this argument