Stanford scientists find the climate and health impacts of natural gas stoves are greater than previously thought

[The Original Tree]

The global warming kooks are going to use this as an excuse to ban the use of natural gas. Just watch:

​

Rethinking cooking with gas | Stanford News​

​

Natural gas stoves release methane – a potent greenhouse gas – and other pollutants through leaks and incomplete combustion. Stanford researchers estimate that methane leaking from stoves inside U.S. homes has the same climate impact as about 500,000 gasoline-powered cars and the stoves can expose people to respiratory disease-triggering pollutants.​

​

Humans have cooked with fire for millennia, but it may be time for a change. Natural gas appliances warm the planet in two ways: generating carbon dioxide by burning natural gas as a fuel and leaking unburned methane into the air. A new Stanford-led study reveals that the methane leaking from natural gas-burning stoves inside U.S. homes has a climate impact comparable to the carbon dioxide emissions from about 500,000 gasoline-powered cars.​

​

This extra warming from home methane leaks contributes about a third as much warming as the carbon dioxide generated by combustion of the stove’s natural gas, and sometimes exposes users to respiratory disease-triggering pollutants. The findings, published in Environmental Science & Technology, come as legislators in numerous U.S. municipalities and at least one state – New York – weigh banning natural gas hookups from new construction.​

​

“Surprisingly, there are very few measurements of how much natural gas escapes into the air from inside homes and buildings through leaks and incomplete combustion from appliances,” said study lead author Eric Lebel, who conducted the research as a graduate student in Stanford’s School of Earth, Energy and Environmental Sciences (Stanford Earth). “It’s probably the part of natural gas emissions we understand the least about, and it can have a big impact on both climate and indoor air quality.”​

​

An overlooked contributor to a growing problem Although carbon dioxide is more abundant in the atmosphere, methane’s global warming potential is about 86 times as great over a 20-year period and at least 25 times as great a century after its release. Methane also threatens air quality by increasing the concentration of tropospheric ozone, exposure to which causes an estimated 1 million premature deaths annually worldwide due to respiratory illnesses. Methane’s relative concentration has grown more than twice as fast as that of carbon dioxide since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution because of human-driven emissions.​

​

While pipeline leaks of natural gas, which is more than 90 percent methane, have been studied extensively, natural gas-burning cooking appliances have received comparatively little attention.​

​

Over one-third of U.S. households – more than 40 million homes – cook with gas. Unlike other gas appliances, such as space and water heaters that are usually placed away from living quarters, cooking appliances directly expose people to their emissions, which can include formaldehyde, carbon monoxide and nitric oxides that can trigger asthma, coughing, wheezing and difficulty breathing, occasionally resulting in hospitalization. Hood use and ventilation help reduce concentrations of nitrogen oxides and other co-produced pollutants in kitchen air, yet surveys show that home cooks on average use hoods for kitchen ventilation only 25–40 percent of the time.​

Global Warming Hoax
Russian Collusion Hoax
Scamdemic Hoax

All designed to exert more and more control over people's lives by the Fascist Globalist DemNazi Master Race.

 

[bripat9643]

Worth my time to answer one more time, due to your ignorance on attempting to say something about rate of growth of forests, when held up against the amply stated and proven facts on overall deforestation. Three times lucky on stupidity for pissants!

Really now, go play!

The facts about deforestation is that there are more trees growing than ever before.

Everything you know is wrong.

 

[bripat9643]

Worth my time to answer one more time, due to your ignorance on attempting to say something about rate of growth of forests, when held up against the amply stated and proven facts on overall deforestation. Three times lucky on stupidity for pissants!

Really now, go play!

Wrong. Our forests are growing back:

​

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/we-are-making-the-globe-greener/article26147272/​

If the air feels just a bit fresher, it may be because the trees are making a comeback. Despite a lot of bad news on climate, our planet has become measurably greener, as seen from space. And that points to a way out of the climate crisis.​

​

A group of scholars at Australian, Chinese, Dutch and Saudi Arabian universities recently published, in the journal Nature Climate Change, a 20-year study measuring the precise quantity of the Earth's "terrestrial biomass" – that is, the total mass of living organisms, most of which are plants. They used two decades of microwave satellite readings (which are an accurate way to measure biological material) to determine how the world's stock of living things has changed over time.​

​

Because biological matter absorbs and stores carbon, it is crucial to protecting the Earth from climate change: If we diminish the amount of plant matter, then more carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, ends up in the atmosphere.​

​

What the study found was, in the initial years, predictably depressing: Between 1993 and 2002, the world's stock of plants declined – in large part because of large-scale deforestation in the tropical rain forests of Brazil and Indonesia.​

​

But then, between 2003 and 2012 (the last year they analyzed), something surprising happened: The trees started growing back. Their results showed that deforestation in Brazil and Indonesia slowed sharply, while better growing conditions in the savannahs of northern Australia and southern Africa added mass, and – most dramatically – the vast forests of China and Russia grew back at a considerable pace. The last point is especially significant: The boreal forest, which stretches across Northern Canada and Russia, stores almost 60 per cent of the world's carbon (tropical rain forests store about half that much).​

​

The result was, they reported, "an overall gain" in the world's carbon-absorbing green matter – a result that has been reproduced in other recent studies showing an expansion of the global carbon sink. Another study, published in July, found that the share of carbon emissions caused by deforestation has declined by a third in the past decade.​

 

[Donald H]

Wrong. Our forests are growing back:

​

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/we-are-making-the-globe-greener/article26147272/​

That's s single isolated opinion amongst dozens that say otherwise. Bearing mind of course that trees grow. Overall the forested areas are shrinking. Find yourself a peer reviewed study by a credible institution, not a newspaper. Then if you can manage to keep yourself together, we'll talk about it.

 

[bripat9643]

That's s single isolated opinion amongst dozens that say otherwise. Bearing mind of course that trees grow. Overall the forested areas are shrinking. Find yourself a peer reviewed study by a credible institution, not a newspaper. Then if you can manage to keep yourself together, we'll talk about it.

It's based on a NASA report, moron. Why would anyone trust a gang of government subsidized academics?

NASA: The Earth is greener than it was 20 years ago​

Despite the continuous news on deforestation, raging wildfires, and land exploitation, the Earth seems greener than it was 20 years ago, says NASA. For a large part of this successful reforestation, two countries, China and India should be praised. But what have these two nations done that we can learn from?​

Around 15% of the world’s total global carbon emission is caused by deforestation. The increasing demand for paper, urbanization mining and farming purposes, causing the forests to be cleared up all around the world. These human activities are directly contributing to climate change, not to mention the harm caused in the wildlife, and ecosystems directly connected to the forests, like the habitats in rivers and lakes. Illegal deforestation is particularly hard to control in countries, like Brazil, that’s sheer scale and size makes it difficult to police the destructive pursuits.​

​

Even though the massive deforestation that is raging all over the world, NASA has some good news. The Earth appears to have more green areas than it had 20 years ago. It was recently published in the journal, Nature Sustainability, that NASA had compared satellite data from the mid-90s to today. They have used Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) to get a detailed picture of how the world’s global vegetation has evolved over time. This technique provided up to 500-meter resolution, four shots of every place on Earth, every day for the last 20 years.​

 

[elektra]

The standard for calling someone a scientist has reached a low that can not get lower.

By these standards, my dog is a scientist and at that, we got to call my dog a leading scientist.

 

[Donald H]

It's based on a NASA report, moron. Why would anyone trust a gang of government subsidized academics?

NASA: The Earth is greener than it was 20 years ago​

​

Earth's Forests Aren't Just Shrinking, They're Getting Younger - And That's a Problem

The fate of Earth's forests remains uncertain.

www.sciencealert.com

I'll entertain you for a while until you go off, because you're going to learn something from the experience. For example, Christmas trees aren't equivalent to tall redwoods and other very large species. And I'm pretty sure that you've already learned that all trees grow and paint a green picture.

Read the science thoroughly because I'm not going to entertain ignorance with you.

 

[Donald H]

The standard for calling someone a scientist has reached a low that can not get lower.

You too can learn if you can avoid political bias and keep an open mind. Bow wow!

 

[elektra]

You too can learn if you can avoid political bias and keep an open mind. Bow wow!

yes I can, as I learned that my dog is more of a scientist than those paid professionals at stanford university

 

[bripat9643]

Earth's Forests Aren't Just Shrinking, They're Getting Younger - And That's a Problem

The fate of Earth's forests remains uncertain.

www.sciencealert.com

I'll entertain you for a while until you go off, because you're going to learn something from the experience. For example, Christmas trees aren't equivalent to tall redwoods and other very large species. And I'm pretty sure that you've already learned that all trees grow and paint a green picture.

Read the science thoroughly because I'm not going to entertain ignorance with you.

You've made a bunch of assumptions that aren't justified.

I read the science. You read 20 year old propaganda.

You're a fucking moron.

 

[bripat9643]

You too can learn if you can avoid political bias and keep an open mind. Bow wow!

Let me get this straight: you believe you avoid political bias?

 

[elektra]

That's s single isolated opinion amongst dozens that say otherwise. Bearing mind of course that trees grow. Overall the forested areas are shrinking. Find yourself a peer reviewed study by a credible institution, not a newspaper. Then if you can manage to keep yourself together, we'll talk about it.

Why do you think Green Energy is contributing to Deforestation across the globe if they believe Green Energy is the solution to Global Warming.

If forests make a difference, than we would not be destroying forests to build Solar and Wind Farms.

 

[Donald H]

Why do you think Green Energy is contributing to Deforestation across the globe if they believe Green Energy is the solution to Global Warming.

If forests make a difference, than we would not be destroying forests to build Solar and Wind Farms.

If there were no christmas trees then there wouldn`t be a santa, and we know that santa, jesus, tooth fairy, peter pan, tinkerbell, god, and leprecauns are all real and not sky fairies.
Therefore good Christians should be in favour of saving our seedlings to make sure they become full grown christmas trees. Little pissants don`t think so but they`re possessed by the satan fairy.

 

[bripat9643]

If there were no christmas trees then there wouldn`t be a santa, and we know that santa, jesus, tooth fairy, peter pan, tinkerbell, god, and leprecauns are all real and not sky fairies.
Therefore good Christians should be in favour of saving our seedlings to make sure they become full grown christmas trees. Little pissants don`t think so but they`re possessed by the satan fairy.

Is that your conception of logic?

 

[elektra]

If there were no christmas trees then there wouldn`t be a santa, and we know that santa, jesus, tooth fairy, peter pan, tinkerbell, god, and leprecauns are all real and not sky fairies.
Therefore good Christians should be in favour of saving our seedlings to make sure they become full grown christmas trees. Little pissants don`t think so but they`re possessed by the satan fairy.

It is surprising that those that think themselves scientists, that those that believe, that they can control the climate, that they can change the climate, it is surprising that those great minds, cut down trees to make room for their solar panels and wind turbines.

You seem pretty confused as to what you wish to say, are you trying to be insulting? Is that your idea of being clever?

I do know, that good Christians have fought evil, that of the marxist ideology. And good Christians, have entertained our children, unlike the marxists.

 

[sparky]

But a good thread to provide the opportunity to put the matter into it's proper perspective!

You are being gas-lit and being propagandized with bullshit.

Sunshine and unicorn farts,

You are all going to have to eat, and cook to do so.

And, you're going to have to pollute by way of using some energy to do so

That said, add up the energy, and pollution most food processing adds into this equation, and you'll find whatever cooking fuel you've employed is inconsequential

~S~

 

[Donald H]

You are all going to have to eat, and cook to do so.

And, you're going to have to pollute by way of using some energy to do so

That said, add up the energy, and pollution most food processing adds into this equation, and you'll find whatever cooking fuel you've employed is inconsequential

~S~

The OP thought it was important to compare it to 500,000 cars but didn`t take into account that America alone has 290,000,000 cars.

However he could have been trying to make the point that most of them will be electric cars soon, and then it will be time to deal with the gas stoves and `gas ovens`.

 

[washamericom]

The global warming kooks are going to use this as an excuse to ban the use of natural gas. Just watch:

​

Rethinking cooking with gas | Stanford News​

​

Natural gas stoves release methane – a potent greenhouse gas – and other pollutants through leaks and incomplete combustion. Stanford researchers estimate that methane leaking from stoves inside U.S. homes has the same climate impact as about 500,000 gasoline-powered cars and the stoves can expose people to respiratory disease-triggering pollutants.​

​

Humans have cooked with fire for millennia, but it may be time for a change. Natural gas appliances warm the planet in two ways: generating carbon dioxide by burning natural gas as a fuel and leaking unburned methane into the air. A new Stanford-led study reveals that the methane leaking from natural gas-burning stoves inside U.S. homes has a climate impact comparable to the carbon dioxide emissions from about 500,000 gasoline-powered cars.​

​

This extra warming from home methane leaks contributes about a third as much warming as the carbon dioxide generated by combustion of the stove’s natural gas, and sometimes exposes users to respiratory disease-triggering pollutants. The findings, published in Environmental Science & Technology, come as legislators in numerous U.S. municipalities and at least one state – New York – weigh banning natural gas hookups from new construction.​

​

“Surprisingly, there are very few measurements of how much natural gas escapes into the air from inside homes and buildings through leaks and incomplete combustion from appliances,” said study lead author Eric Lebel, who conducted the research as a graduate student in Stanford’s School of Earth, Energy and Environmental Sciences (Stanford Earth). “It’s probably the part of natural gas emissions we understand the least about, and it can have a big impact on both climate and indoor air quality.”​

​

An overlooked contributor to a growing problem Although carbon dioxide is more abundant in the atmosphere, methane’s global warming potential is about 86 times as great over a 20-year period and at least 25 times as great a century after its release. Methane also threatens air quality by increasing the concentration of tropospheric ozone, exposure to which causes an estimated 1 million premature deaths annually worldwide due to respiratory illnesses. Methane’s relative concentration has grown more than twice as fast as that of carbon dioxide since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution because of human-driven emissions.​

​

While pipeline leaks of natural gas, which is more than 90 percent methane, have been studied extensively, natural gas-burning cooking appliances have received comparatively little attention.​

​

Over one-third of U.S. households – more than 40 million homes – cook with gas. Unlike other gas appliances, such as space and water heaters that are usually placed away from living quarters, cooking appliances directly expose people to their emissions, which can include formaldehyde, carbon monoxide and nitric oxides that can trigger asthma, coughing, wheezing and difficulty breathing, occasionally resulting in hospitalization. Hood use and ventilation help reduce concentrations of nitrogen oxides and other co-produced pollutants in kitchen air, yet surveys show that home cooks on average use hoods for kitchen ventilation only 25–40 percent of the time.​

Bripat 1 Al Gore 0

 

[petro]

I refuse to own an electric stove.
They flat out suck!!!

I finally ran a gas line to the kitchen and installed a new modern gas stove. Wife was bugging me for years to switch it. Got the microwave unit that goes above also.
Much better than electric.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I finally ran a gas line to the kitchen and installed a new modern gas stove. Wife was bugging me for years to switch it. Got the microwave unit that goes above also.
Much better than electric.

The Wife and I's first house had an electric range.
I hated the damn thing!!! It takes to long to increase or decrease the temps. With a gas stove top you can see whats going on and the temps change rapidly.