Having a background in political science and public policy, I have learned that anything can be politicized: pronouns, baby formula, art, face masks. Especially in an age with such high political polarization, the most seemingly innocuous item can become an item of political discourse. What got politicized last week? Gas stoves. Richard Trumka Jr., who is a commissioner for the Consumer Product Safety Commission, said that gas stoves are a hidden hazard. Trumka went as far as telling media outlet Bloomberg that "any option is on the table" when it comes to gas stoves. He proceeded to say that "Products that can't be safe can be banned." It caused a political firestorm, especially among conservative media that thought that the Biden administration was coming after everyone's gas stoves. The political contention got heated enough where Trumka had to announce that the CPSC has no intention of banning gas stoves.
While the federal government claims no intention of bans, there have been local bans in Left-leaning jurisdictions. The state of California has banned gas stoves in multiple municipalities. The state of New York is banning the installation of new natural gas lines. And even if the government is not going after already-existing gas stoves, not allowing for the production or installation of new gas stoves is still a ban. The question I would like to ask today is whether a ban on gas stoves, whether it is only new gas stoves or on all gas stoves, makes sense.
Health Considerations
The main premise of Trumka's statement was that gas stoves increase likelihood of childhood asthma. This was based on a study released last month finding that about one in eight cases of childhood asthma in the United States is linked to gas stoves (Gruenwald et al., 2022). This finding seems to line up with a meta-analysis showing increased risk of childhood asthma from gas stoves (Lin et al., 2013). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the World Health Organization linked air pollutants from gas stoves to respiratory issues. Nevertheless, there is doubt to believe whether gas stoves cause statistically significant respiratory harm.
The International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood still is the most comprehensive study to date on the topic. This robust study of 47 countries concluded that there was "no evidence of an association between the use of gas as a cooking fuel and either asthma symptoms or asthma diagnosis" (Wong et al., 2013). If that was not enough, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency states that "gas stoves (and gas fireplace inserts) do not require EPA certification. Whether designed to burn natural gas or propane, they burn very cleanly, emitting very little pollution." While there is plausibility in the release of nitrogen oxides from gas stoves causing respiratory issues, the Left-leaning Slate expresses skepticism that gas stoves play a major role in asthma or other respiratory issues.
Effects on Climate Change
There is a secondary claim that we should convert from gas stoves to electric stoves because of its effects on greenhouse gas emissions, with methane in particular. Let's sidestep the fact that climate change is not an imminent threat. Let's assume for a moment that it is imminent. The net effects of greenhouse gas emissions would depend on where the electricity is coming from. As of November 2022, the Energy Information Administration found that 38.4 percent of electricity in the United States comes from natural gas, 21.9 percent from coal, 18.9 percent from nuclear, 9.2 percent from wind, 6.1 percent from hydropower, and 2.8 percent from solar.
Right now, 60.3 percent comes from natural gas and coal, both of which emit at least some carbon into the atmosphere. Nuclear is a carbon-free option, which environmentalists tend to dislike. Renewables account for 19.8 percent. Given the current composition of source of electricity in the U.S., the net effects on greenhouse gas emissions are not in favor of a ban. But let's choose California as a counterexample. Yes, they have a higher percentage of electricity coming from renewables, but rolling blackouts are common in California. European countries are experiencing an electricity crunch in light of the Russo-Ukrainian War. Whether electric stoves would help or whether it is desirable to rely on electric grids more is a matter of debate
Economic Impacts of a Gas Stove Ban
An estimated 38 percent of homes have gas stoves, which is about 40 million stoves. How much would it cost to remove and replace gas stoves? I will use data from the Porch Group, which is a vertical software company specializing in home improvement and repairs. There is the cost of removing the gas stove and the gas line. There is the cost of the purchase of an electric stove, as well as the installation of that stove. The national average for labor and materials cost is $1,500, whereas the average cost for a new cooktop is another $1,337. Multiplying $2,837 by 40 million stoves amounts to $113.48 billion.
Keep in mind that this back-of-the-envelope calculation only includes residential areas. Gas stoves are even more widely used in restaurants. According to the National Restaurant Association, 76 percent of restaurants use natural gas. Converting to electric stoves would have an impact on multiple restaurants, especially Chinese and Korean cuisine. Not only would that mean added costs for a restaurant to comply with a ban. In the best of times, restaurants run on thin profit margins. Many are still financially recovering from the pandemic and the lockdowns that harmed the restaurant industry. The cost of replacing a gas stove would set many restaurants back, thereby hobbling the economic progress of the food services industry.
Which Stoves Are Better for Cooking: Gas, Electric, or Induction?
There is a reason why gas stoves are so widely used: because they are effective. Gas stoves heat up quickly, are easier to control, have greater usability with varied cookware, are easy to clean, offer more space, and have lower maintenance costs. Electric stoves take a long time to heat up and cook unevenly. A 2021 Morning Consult poll showed that 55 percent of people would likely consider a gas stove as their next stove. The major reason cited by survey respondents holding out on going electric is because they have used electric stoves and they do not work as well.
There is the possibility of induction cooktops: "Induction cooking uses electricity to produce a magnetic field that induces currents in atoms the cooking vessel." In spite of being faster to heat up than electric ovens and having easier clean-up, induction ovens nevertheless require various types of cookware and are more expensive to purchase. We should not understate the importance of quality food in our lives. Food is an essential in life. Not only can it be a way to live healthily, but quality food is a way millions over time and across cultures enjoy life.
Conclusion
If the technology behind induction stoves gets better and cheapens over time or we come up with an even more efficient type of cooktop, that's one thing. That would be an example of market forces encouraging a trend instead of government mandate trying to force the change. But we are not there yet when it comes to the technological progress. Gas stoves are considered a superior option by many chefs and cooks. It is also likely that we reach a moment where most of our electricity comes from carbon-neutral sources. I have stated before that natural gas is a medium-term solution and that we would eventually need to shift more to nuclear power and renewables because fossil fuels will not last forever. But again, we are not there yet.
We should ask if a gas stove ban makes for good policy based on the merits of the argument. Whether we are talking about COVID lockdowns, menthol cigarettes, marijuana, refugees, human organs, trans fats, or plastic straws, bans are almost always blunt economic instruments with negative unintended consequences. The only exception I can recall writing about all these years was a partial smoking ban (keyword being "partial" because of its targeted nature). At the same time, an exception does not contradict the norm that bans are by and large harmful.
Since gas stove bans are so new and there are no data available on economic impact of gas stove bans, I bring up bans on other consumer goods as a proxy for what the effects could be like. But let's come back to gas stoves specifically. There are serious doubts as to whether a gas stove ban would significantly improve respiratory health or reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It is clearer that a gas stove ban would have considerable economic costs and affect the quality of food. As such, there is no reasonable justification based on available data or the economics of bans that a gas stove ban would be a net benefit to society.
Rather than have a government bureaucrat intervene in consumer choices, here's a thought: individuals can gather information and make informed choices based on their own risk tolerance. We should be able to choose what sort of stove we want and whether to purchase a ventilator over the stove or simply open a window to improve ventilation in our homes. Treating adult consumers like actual adults. What a novel concept in our time!
No comments:
Post a Comment