Posted on 01/21/2023 10:05:20 AM PST by karpov
The latest environmentalist fad is to ban gas stoves, with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission now doing a study on their ill effects (and a commissioner saying a ban on their import and manufacture is on the table). The agency's rationale is that such stoves degrade indoor air quality. The pushback has been severe given that any self-respecting cook would rather heat up a frozen dinner in the microwave than pan-fry dinner on an electric burner.
Gas banners have touted studies showing that gas cooking exacerbates asthma—although a properly vented stove hood minimizes the risk. The main push behind this moral panic comes from climate-change worriers, who are intent on reducing the nation's carbon footprint. Some cities already are imposing moratoriums on natural gas.
What does this have to do with today's topic of water policy? One gets a sneaking suspicion that with any resource issue the environmental up-lifters are more interested in disrupting our lifestyles than solving actual environmental issues. The real climate threat comes from developing nations—not high-end gas stoves in suburban American households.
Likewise, some targeted investments could solve the state's water issues—by bolstering our water-storage capabilities, building desalination facilities, recycling water, improving groundwater recharge basins, and promoting water trading. California now faces a budget deficit, but last year we had a $97.5-billion surplus. A small portion could have fixed the problem for decades.
Instead, many California environmentalists prefer water rationing—with the goal of forcing us to use much less water even though we've vastly reduced our per-capita water usage. Conservation is good, but the end goal should be assuring plenty of water for our homes and businesses rather than forcing the public to do penance. Am I the only one who thinks our policymakers want us to suffer?
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
And it is much fun hearing a loud pop every time you light the H2 stove while your house shakes on its foundation.
You can’t blame Dominion for
Anything ?
Another dominionite dupe speaks up.
You get your H2 from a refinery that has a reformer.
>You get your H2 from a refinery that has a reformer.
Fine. How much energy is required to extract the H2 from a hydrocarbon vs how much energy do you get from burning the H2?
And if you are getting the H2 via a reformer which is processing a methane gas such as nat gas and your intent is to burn the H2 as a heating/cooking fuel, then why not use nat gas in the first place?
Energy-wise, it’s a loosing proposition. Storage is also a problem.
If we had functioning fusion reactors with unlimited Free(TM) electricity, H2 becomes much more practical. But those are still in the unicorn fart design phase.
“more efficient just to use the electricity to power the stove directly”
Some people like to cook with a flame.
“Hydrogen when used in this context is a means of storage of energy.”
Also, maybe mostly, used in industrial processes.
?“more efficient just to use the electricity to power the stove directly”
?Some people like to cook with a flame.
Me too. Gas is superior.
This sub-topic started by a suggestion to use H2 as the “fuel”. H2 isn’t a fuel but rather a means of storage of energy. The H2 has to come from somewhere so the costs of extracting the H2 either from water or a hydrocarbon must be included when determining the efficiency of the system. As things are, using H2 as a fuel is horribly inefficient and does not scale well.
All that rain and it’s going right back into the ocean. Next month Californication will be back to drought conditions. What a bunch of idiots. You can’t fix stupid.
They could divert it to the Central Valley.
But they won’t.
A shame you haven’t got a brain cell to think with. Dominion isn’t the only problem, but apparently you are incapable of seeing that. Have a nice life idiot.
Reformers do not process CH4 but increase octane number of liquid hydrocarbon to produce gasoline using a catalyst. Byproduct is H2. Anyone wanting to use H2 for domestic use is a fool or fell asleep at chemistry 101.
They (WEF et al) are suggesting that H2 be generated via electrolysis where the electricity is supplied by PV panels.
Whatever turn these non-scientists on. I would not want my family to be even NEAR an H2 source. The reaction of H2 and Air is truly frightening. The flame is invisible which makes it even more dangerous. Talk with any refinery operator with H2 experience. I would like for the entire WEF crew to be in a kitchen cooking on H2 gas. I am waiting for them to suggest That we cook on acetylene, That will be even more fun.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.