Overheated: The Battle Over Gas Stoves

The real issue is making sure our energy networks can provide affordable and reliable power.

By
118
Eggs cook in a cast iron pan on a gas-burning stove. (Photo Illustration by Scott Olson/Getty Images.)

On Monday, Richard Trumka Jr., a commissioner at the Consumer Product Safety Commission, told Bloomberg that gas stoves were a “hidden hazard” and that “products that can’t be made safe can be banned.”

His statement was seen as an indication that the CPSC was considering a ban on gas stoves, perhaps because Trumka also said, “Any option is on the table.” But in a tweet on Wednesday, CSPC Chair Alex Hoehn-Saric walked that back, saying “I am not looking to ban gas stoves” and added that the commission “has no proceeding to do so.” Even more remarkable: A few hours later, the White House issued a statement saying that President Joe Biden doesn’t support a ban on gas stoves. 

The pilot light for the ban on stoves appears to be out for now, but there is no doubt that some of America’s biggest climate-focused NGOs are working actively at the local, state, and federal levels to prohibit the use of gas appliances in the name of climate change. More on that in a moment. 

First, the claims about health risks from gas stoves should be taken with a commercial-kitchen-sized grain of sea salt. Although some media outlets are claiming the science about health risks is definitive, a closer look at the literature shows that’s not the case. 

Start a Free Trial
Get every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism. Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
118
By
Comments (118)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Jmacdonster

    There is a difference between a review article, which covers the current evidence concerning a particular subject, and a meta-analysis which utilizes data from multiple studies to perform a more powerful analysis.

    The author claims that a meta-analysis paper, which used various papers estimating the exposure to NO2 to estimate the population attributable fraction of childhood asthma that is likely to be caused by exposure to NO2 from gas stoves, was a literature review. This is false. The paper tried to estimate how much childhood asthma is likely due to gas stoves, given the regional rates of gas stove usage and childhood asthma rates. They estimate that nearly 13% of childhood asthma is due to gas stove use. Is that too much? Without knowing the relative rate of asthma, I can’t say. If only 1% of kids have asthma, I’m not concerned (13% of 1% is a very small number) . If it’s much higher, then maybe something to think about. But dismissing this as a simple review is incorrect.

    This meta-analysis relies on the assumption that we have evidence that NO2 may cause asthma in children. And the first citation in that meta-analysis paper is another meta-analysis of 41 papers (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23962958/) that tried to infer the relationship between gas stoves and asthma, and found consistent results, indicating that gas cooking and NO2 exposure likely do increase asthma and wheeze in children.

    We have evidence that gas stoves contribute to breathing issues in children. And we are already very careful to vent other gas-fired appliances outside (you don’t just pipe your furnace exhaust into the basement, now do you?). So at the very least we should be cognizant of the fact that a gas stove puts problematic gases into the air, so having an externally vented exhaust fan over your gas stove is a great idea. But yeah, I like my gas stove, so I’m just gonna use the fan and call it good.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Stephanie

      You beat me to it. This author is coming from a background of being knowledgeable about energy usage and not from a background of studying medical research.

      As soon as I saw him dismissing a published meta-analysis as a “literature review” (which is simply a list of studies with a brief description of each), I was skeptical of his conclusions.

      Of course you can take the time and effort and critique a meta-analysis. But that involves critiquing each and every study included to see if the data and populations have similar enough parameters to be included.

      And gas stove usage is not at all consistent across the US. Most is in the big coastal states which, having the most at stake from a health standpoint, are setting up processes to phase out gas ranges. In the heartland, most cooking is not by gas (so, electricity, I suppose? Or propane? Which burns more cleanly).

      The meta-analysis is a very interesting read.

      Collapse
  2. Trichwages

    Thanks for this extremely informative article.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Julie from Texas

    Just moved into our new house, with a new gas stove. It's so much better cooking with gas than electric! That said, we've used induction appliances in Europe and think they're fine as well. Thanks for clarifying the data, Dispatch!

    Collapse
  4. MathewA

    Our current stove in electric. We hate it. Replacing it with a propane one is high on our list.

    Say no to the nanny state from either side of the isle. We don't need the government to run our lives. If I want to eat a Twinkie it's none of your business. If I want to smoke a joint, place a bet on a game, or even pay for sex (with consenting adults of course) it's none of your business.

    And how I cook food damn sure isn't any of your business .

    not to mention all the government regulations that have made our appliances suck in the name of energy efficiency. No matter which administration we elect, the nanny state continues to grow, it just grows a bit slower under Republican administrations.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Stephanie

      How do you feel about seatbelt laws? Motorcycle helmet laws? Indoor smoking regulations? Banning lead based paint or leaded gasoline?

      Any health related regulation is based on principles of public health. It’s not a sexy topic. These regulations are based on the effects of problems that may never affect you as an individual, but can be measurable across a population.

      Collapse
      1. MathewA

        I'm against seatbelt laws, and motorcycle helmet laws.

        I'm in favor of the indoor smoking ban because of 2nd hand smoke. Also the same reason that I'm in favor of DUI laws. Because of the risk to other people

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Stephanie

          I can see your point about the helmet laws, as the benefit is kind of hard to prove. The helmets might obstruct vision; they won't prevent s high spinal cord injury and paralysis, they only prevent a traumatic brain injury from being worse, and probably same chance of being an organ donor with or without. Bad motorcycle accidents are rare, but no protection for the body as in a car when they do happen. That's just a risk the rider must accept.

          Seatbelts, not so sure. Other people's safety is implicated. An awful thing happened to one of my nephews when he was only in his early 20's: his car left the road (not sure why) and rolled over. His friend riding shotgun wasn't belted in, slid out of the window and was crushed to death under the car.

          The same with air travel: if you get injured during extreme turbulence, couldn't you say "My choice to not fasten the seatbelt." The airlines give no choice.

          Why? maybe liability lawsuits? In fact my nephew was extremely lucky his friend's family decided to not sue. The so-called seatbelt defense if permitted in one's state is probably the only mitigating factor in such a lawsuit.

          Collapse
          1. MathewA

            I do think air travel, or even just being in a Taxi is probably different.

            You follow the rules of the owner

            Collapse
    2. MathewA

      Oh, and we just installed a wood cook stove in our house. A couple of years ago we went without power for 12 days. That meant our house was about 40 degrees for 12 days with two small kids running around.

      Never again.

      Collapse
      1. Hartzlk

        This is an option I too would like to have.
        There are so many trees around the power lines that come to our property, it is not a question of if we lose power, but when. We lose power multiple times every year. But wood? We've got that. Did I mention we have trees around here?

        Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Mudskipper

    I wouldn't mind replacing my gas stove with one of the induction electric stoves. (The cooktop would be much easier to keep clean, for one reason.) The thing that stops me is that I can use my gas stove when the electricity is out. I find it comforting to think that I might be sitting in the dark, so to speak, but I can still boil some water for my morning tea.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      DougCLE

      I keep my gas water heater for the same reason. The house may be 20 degrees and pitch black, but I can take a hot, candlelit bath!

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Show Jay Janney the 🚪!

        We're dual fuel--heat pump and a gas furnace. We run the gas furnace during cold snaps, basically whenever the temperature drops below 20 degrees. Otherwise the heat pump is fine.

        We also have a working wood burning chimney, and a wooded acre, plenty of fallen trees and sticks to burn. Plus memos from work.

        I set a small tea kettle on the wood-burning insert, and heat hot cocoa with it.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Stephanie

          You’re the first person to mention heat pumps, but they’re a viable alternative. Some states (including NY where I live) offer tax incentives.

          Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Mudskipper

        " I can take a hot, candlelit bath!"

        How girly of you, Doug! Lavender-scented bubble bath included? 😄

        I have a gas furnace as well. When I replaced my old furnace a couple of years ago, the installers wanted to get rid of the electrical cord that plugged in my garage wall and wire the furnace directly to the panel. Said it was code in many places to do so. I said no, which surprised them. I told them I wanted to be able to plug my furnace into some sort of portable generator if the electricity went out.

        This year I bought a reasonably powerful battery backup with just that purpose in mind. Of course, my power has somehow remained up during all the storms battering us in California these past few weeks. Go figure.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Eston

          By "girly," I assume you mean "smart." If the house is 20 degrees, and you can get a hot bath, do it! Not sure how to get out of that bath, though......

          I have a gas boiler, with a double pole switch so it normally uses grid power, but I can switch it to a plug-in tail that I can run to a generator. Apparently that met code. After that, I got a whole-house gas generator, so the heat stays on even when I'm away and the electricity goes out.

          I do like my gas range, and consider the flames a link to my Neanderthal heritage. I've also lit all the burners in an electricity outage to help heat the house.

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            DougCLE

            You stay in the bath until the electricity comes back on, duh, even if that’s 36 hours.

            Collapse
        2. Georges

          “ Of course, my power has somehow remained up during all the storms battering us in California these past few weeks. Go figure.”
          Same here. Unexpected but quite welcome.

          Collapse
        3. Avatar photo
          DougCLE

          Cedarwood, thank-you-very-much. It's a much more manly girly-bath scent.

          Collapse
          1. CatoTheElder

            I go with sandalwood myself. Although I really wish they had a Southern Yellow Pine scent.

            Collapse
    2. Clisbyw

      I would mind, since it's a lot easier to cook on a gas range, but yeah - the main reason I always want a gas stove is that I live in the hurricane land of coastal SC. Same reason I want a gas water heater.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Mudskipper

        Have you cooked on an induction range? My understanding is that they have different performance characteristics than your standard electrical range.

        Collapse
        1. Clisbyw

          Yes. I agree that it's better than a standard electric range, but that's not saying much. In my case, I can't think of any kind of electric range that would be preferable to having a backup source of cooking fuel if the power is knocked out.

          Collapse
  6. MikeS

    Environmentalists spoiling to outlaw gas stoves are irritating, especially when they cloak their advocacy (to which they are entitled) in scientifically questionable arguments about the safety of the appliances.

    However, the issue is not solely one of affordable and reliable power. The issue is providing these while reducing emissions of greenhouse gases to ameliorate the effects of climate change. Failing to frame the issue in this way is just as disingenuous as using consumer product safety to eliminate appliances that burn fossil fuels.

    Collapse
  7. MLE

    I love my gas appliances. Everything heats up more quickly. Having a gas tankless water heater means not worrying about the hot water running out even with the dishwasher, washing machine, and shower going simultaneously. And gas is cheap. Also, as someone who lives in stormy Florida, it's nice knowing that even if the power is knocked out, we will have the ability to heat up food and water. (I do question which is more harmful to one's health, the fumes from a gas stove vs. eating seared meat? :P Don't you dare try to take either away from me!)

    I've seen a lot of people who are starting to use induction stovetops, and that's probably the best compromise, but it's an expensive option.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Show Jay Janney the 🚪!

      Eating red meat is not bad you. Eating green meat? Yeah, that's bad for you, no matter how much you cook it.

      Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Danny M

    My take on this kerfuffle is that, similar to many other environmental kerfuffles, it loses the forest for the trees. Ocean plastic, for example, is a major contributor to a variety of problems in our oceans. You know what's not a major contributor to the ocean plastic problem? Plastic straws. Yet, here we are, banning plastic straws, plastic grocery bags, and so forth rather than addressing the real issue, which is plastic or plastic-derived fishing netting & equipment.

    Electrification is, broadly speaking, a good thing for a variety of reasons with regard to reducing household waste CO2 emissions. Heat pumps are generally more efficient than furnaces, electric water heaters are becoming (if they aren't already) faster & better than older gas-operated ones, electric cars (even considering the CO2 emissions present in the extraction & construction of their batteries) are less carbon-intensive than ICE cars, and electricity is easier to decarbonize than gas heating. However, gas stoves are such an inconsequential portion of household gas usage that quibbling over it is not only unlikely to make a serious dent in gas usage & CO2 emissions, but it may also actively hinder other efforts to boost electrification & decarbonize the country by pissing off otherwise receptive & persuadable people.

    I'm certainly biased, but this comports with my personal experience that many liberals & progressives would rather do something ineffective that feels good and righteous instead of taking action that's demonstrably more effective, but less flashy. A shame, really.

    Collapse
    1. Wsampson

      your points are good. on the last paragraph, though, you should add that something like this gets wind because "conservatives", whatever that means, are always looking to find the devil. I think most of us are in the camp of understanding that finding a way to not burn things is good. Getting electric to be efficient and reliable enough to replace natural gas is the challenge. A great business opportunity.

      Collapse
      1. Hartzlk

        "I think most of us are in the camp of understanding that finding a way to not burn things is good."

        Just to be nitpicky I'll add that not all burning is bad. Biochar has been touted as being very good for the soil.

        Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Show Jay Janney the 🚪!

        There's also a third category--pragmatics. These are people who do what they think is best for them, not what others think ought to be done.

        As an example, Because I drive about 15k a year, i drive a hybrid. I average about 45 mpg. It took less than 3 years of driving to pay the price difference between a hybrid and pure ICE. Since I have had the car six years (and will keep it longer), the hybrid has been a good investment. Will I ever buy an EV? Sure...when it is a good investment for me.

        OTOH, I burn firewood because I have so much wood to burn. I have over 60 mature trees on my property--it's easiest to burn them. So we heat the house often with firewood.

        Some people prefer cooking with gas, invection, electric, etc. To each his own.

        Collapse
      3. Avatar photo
        Danny M

        True enough. Certainly takes two to tango and the modern GOP loves nothing if not a good culture war skirmish. I figure people here hear me complain about my old party often enough that I should keep it fresh and target my ire on my *other* least favorite political group every now and then lol.

        Collapse
  9. Belisarius.Aves

    For me, the issue is the notable change from Climate issues to childhood asthma. Obviously, the studies cited are from activists wishing to have electricity everywhere. This is akin to a study commissioned by George Santos that notes that lying Congresspeople make better negotiators because opponents never know their limits.

    But the switch is notable for a larger reason. When activists are pushing for greater vaccination or electric cars, they are arguing for societal good. Presumably, unvaxxed can harm others. By switching to what is essentially a parental choice, the activists are now inside the home, inside the family, dictating decisions. Gas stove equals bad parent. If that concept of leftist activists dictating in-home living does not send a chill then you are not paying attention.

    Collapse
    1. CatoTheElder

      As a biomedical professional, I can say with absolute certainty that their claims about how much gas stoves contribute to asthma are almost entirely…oh, what’s the word?…oh, that’s right: bull***t. And I only use the “almost” qualifier just in case I missed something.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Stephanie

        Are you a pediatrician? A pulmonary specialist?

        The American Academy of Pediatrics has guidance on the subject. Households with gas ranges should be using ventilation. Range hoods that vent to the outdoors. Not a common situation.

        And not all children are living in the conditions that Dispatch subscribers are. Asthma is a big problem in cities where millions of lower income families are living in rentals where they have gas stoves and no ventilation to the outside and no idea how to change the situation.

        Collapse
        1. CatoTheElder

          I’m a now-retired pediatric intensive care specialist, with a history before that in occupational health. My particular interest and expertise is in pulmonary physiology. Enough credibility for you? As for specific guidelines or even a policy statement on the subject, the American Academy of Pediatrics doesn’t have an official publication on the matter. Their latest policy statement regarding childhood lung disease and air pollution, from 2021, doesn’t even significantly mention gas ranges.

          Range hoods venting to the outside is not required by national code, though some jurisdictions do require venting, generally in new construction. You’re right, though, many older apartments, homes, etc., and especially those in low-income areas, don’t have vent hoods over the cooktop. I cannot find any reliable data on the prevalence of vent hoods in homes with gas ranges, however. But there’s more: an article in the journal Pediatrics found that reasonable venting at least largely ameliorated the risk of lung disease, including asthma, in children in homes where a gas range was used, though that paper did have some weaknesses, as do all observational studies, which is basically all there is in this area.

          Regarding the cost of vent hoods, one finds a study performed with DOE funding looking at the benefits and costs of residential venting of homes with gas ranges, which found that the annual added cost, after installation, runs approximately $15/yr. Of course, in some instances, installation is quite costly, but in most single-family homes it’s not prohibitive, especially if it’s a smaller home, with relatively easy access to the outdoors for the vent. Purchase and installation of a vent hood over our new gas cooktop, including the ductwork to run up the wall, over the ceiling of a two-car garage, and exit safely, came to just under $1000. And we didn’t buy the most affordable hood. Cost of replacing a gas cooktop with an electric cooktop, including purchase and installation, isn’t going to be much less than installing ventilation over an existing gas range, if any cheaper at all.

          If the government wishes to effectively (regarding both safety and cost) while having the least negative impact on society in the dreadful matter of indoor gas ranges contributing to poor indoor air quality and pulmonary disease, they’d do best to resort to economics. Give a tax credit of $500 for installation of either a satisfactory vent to the outdoors or replacement of the gas stove with an electric stove. But that wouldn’t entirely solve the problem. Because—and this is actually kinda funny—the simple act of cooking on a range indoors, of whatever sort, actually generates significant (in comparison to occupational exposure standards) levels of indoor air pollution. As an article from Vox put it: “One reason the debate over cooking pollution is so murky and easily confused is that cooking of any kind produces some pollutants that are harmful if not properly handled.” Note that “cooking of any kind”. So elimination of gas stoves wouldn’t eliminate the problem.

          I’m very much aware that there are children living in conditions less salubrious than my own, or those of the typical Dispatch subscriber. Indeed, I grew up in a household of rather modest socio-economic status. But I’m also aware of what good science looks like, and there’s precious little of it published on the finer points of risks of childhood asthma due to gas ranges. Much of what is published comes from people with an axe to grind, or who are jumping onto the bandwagon of the month, so to speak, producing work that can generate some headlines—and maybe help their job status—but is embarrassingly bad science. Some of it is even published in the “quick peer review” pay-to-play arena of online journals, where, for a few thousand dollars, you can get pretty much anything published in a journal with a catchy, impressive-sounding title.

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Stephanie

            This is a postscript to my response. Just a question.

            Back in the 90’s when listserves were common, one I was subscribed to was the Occ-Med list based at Duke and moderated by Gary Greenberg. Were you by chance on that list serve?

            Collapse
          2. Avatar photo
            Stephanie

            Thanks, for the long and thoughtful reply.

            Your AAP reference from 2021 probably trumps mine from 2015, entitled "CLINICAL REPORT Guidance for the Clinician in Rendering Pediatric Care:
            Indoor Environmental Control Practices and Asthma Management" https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/138/5/e20162589/60439/Indoor-Environmental-Control-Practices-and-Asthma?autologincheck=redirected

            It has the standard guidance listing gas stoves among the sources of indoor air pollution/environmental control which are potentially under the control of the parents (if they own rather than rent).

            The same advice about the risk of gas stoves/appliances is found in various other publications from respected medical societies or medically-adjacent organizations:

            https://www.thoracic.org/patients/patient-resources/resources/burning-indoor-fuels.pdf

            https://www.massmed.org/Publications/Vital-Signs---Member-Publication/Connection-Between-Natural-Gas-Stoves-and-Pediatric-Asthma/

            https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/have-a-gas-stove-how-to-reduce-pollution-that-may-harm-health-202209072811

            Perhaps they're all wrong and you're right.

            You at least care enough about the indoor pollution risk to have invested in an appropriate venting system in your own home.

            I admit that on the past when i did have a gas range (but no family members with asthma) I rarely used the vent, unless I burned something, because of the noise.

            Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Aylene Wright

      "This is akin to a study commissioned by George Santos that notes that lying Congresspeople make better negotiators because opponents never know their limits."

      Ok this has me struggling to NOT laugh out loud.

      Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Cthocas

    This happens all the time. Progressives talk to one another about a policy. Conservatives catch wind of this policy and object. Progressives then tell everyone conservatives made it up. Climate activists have been clamoring for gas stove bans for years, and it's rather insulting for the left to suddenly pretend this is something nobody is trying to do. The health angle is simple a tactic in that larger battle.

    I'm rather protective of the gas appliances in my house. The electrical grid is not flawless, and it goes down when you need it most—after an ice storm, for example. Being able to keep my home and family warm when it's 10 degrees and the town is immobilized is precious.

    As we push for more and more electrification and more and implement more and more alternative energy sources that are variable and unreliable, it will in fact become that much more important to have natural gas appliances. I'll take mine out when commercial fusion drops.

    Collapse
    1. Belisarius.Aves

      This is a symptom of the echo chamber. Conservatives were accused of making it up but it came from Trumka himself, not even a leak. Hear is the other madness, "products that can’t be made safe can be banned." Electric ranges are not that safe, accidentally touch one of the burners before full cool down and you will get the picture. But with this inane standard what to do with this; according to the Electrical Saftey Foundation there are 51,000 electrical fires and 4,100 injuries every year due to electrical fires.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Cthocas

        You'd kinda think cat persons of the world would be heavily interested in banning electric stoves. The way elements stay hot for ages is genuinely unsafe for them.

        Collapse
Load More