this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

Europe

8484 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out [email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It’s Time To Break Up With Our Gas Stoves | Climate Town - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hX2aZUav-54

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=hX2aZUav-54

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Was it always the case though? You should probably roll back to data in the 70's for wider house appliance rollout. Then if it's not a thing for a generation, it's never gonna be a thing. For today, electricity is easier to decarbonate I guess

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's it. Gas used to be cheaper.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Why do you say that in the past tense? You can see from my figures that in Belgium gas is still cheaper.

This is something that varies from one region to another. In the US, some states have cheaper electric than gas. Electric is less efficient because of big losses in all the conversion steps:

fuel energy → heat energy→ steam → turbine → transmission → heat energy

Gas simply has:

fuel energy → transmission → heat energy

It is important to note that gas transmission is also lossy due to the impossibility of leak-free main lines, but it’s still more efficient in the end. Thus in most of the world gas is also naturally cheaper due to the efficiency difference. It gets inverted in some regions because of pricing manipulations as well as the drive to promote green energy (and rightfully so -- social responsibility should be incentivized). And in some regions they cut down on the transmission losses by putting the power plant inside or close to the big city. But in Belgium gas is still cheaper than electric even despite Russia’s war and efforts to get off Russian fuels.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Electricity is usually not made from fuel, though, but from a wide variety of resources. And you forgot the last step – transmission of heat from the stove to the food. Gas stoves are far inferior in this step, losing most of the heat into the surtounding air. Induction stoves have almost no transmission loss.

Another reason is installation. In order to use gas in the kitchen, you have to have a gas pipe in the kitchen, which has become very unusual. During construction, it's easier and cheaper to not lay gas pipes. Most people do not have a choice – either you got an old house witha gas pipe in the kitchen or a newer one with a 400 V power outlet.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

To me induction beats gas at cooking. It's always faster and more efficient to boil water using an induction stove rather than a gas stove.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

I’m still waiting for someone to show me an induction oven. This is the same as saying “don’t use an oven at all”. Of course, if you don’t need an oven, then it would not make sense to install an oven at all.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Your mistake is assuming electricity always comes from fuel.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It’s not an assumption. This is how power is produced in Belgium. There is only 1 nuclear power plant and it’s being decommissioned. 3 new fossil fuel burning power plants will be built.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Your statements are inaccurate to a degree that they may as well be false.

Only 30% is gas. 70% is not gas. Renewables are growing extremely rapidly, now at over 25%. In the medium and long term Belgium is aiming to reduce its use of gas as much as possible.

Also, there are two nuclear power plants, not one.

Betting on gas, be it a stove or something else, is just stupid.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Get your facts straight, or update Wikipedia to reflect your understanding:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Belgium

wind + solar + hydro → 20%

80% from burning fuels¹. With 3 new gas-burning plants under construction to replace nuclear, that’s not going to improve things.

Belgium is aiming to reduce its use of gas as much as possible.

Nonsense. I guess you missed the whole “Code Red” march against Electrabel last year protesting the plan to build 3 new gas-burning power plants.

there are two nuclear power plants, not one.

And that’s important why? From wikipedia:

“Belgium decided to phase out nuclear power generation completely by 2025.”

Whether there are 1, 2, or 5 nuclear plants is immaterial when it’s all being phased out, and replaced with gas-burning power plants.

Betting on gas, be it a stove or something else, is just stupid.

Betting in a way that neglects plans that have already been announced is stupid for sure.

¹ recall: fuel energy → heat energy→ steam → turbine → transmission → heat energy

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'll summarise why this is wrong too

  • Ignoring other renewables

  • Ignoring French nuclear imports

  • Ignoring current state but talking about possible future plans

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Ignoring other renewables

I have accounted for all the renewables mentioned in the linked wikipedia page, which covers sources as insignificant as hydro (<1%). What else is there? Have you thought about updating wikipedia with whatever you think is missing?

Ignoring French nuclear imports

That would only increase the proportion of fuel energy even more, which only works against your botched claim. If you want to count French nuclear, then the portion of solar, wind, and hydro is proportionally even less. Brussels currently has a nuclear power plant inside the region. Why do you think it would it be sensible to transmit over such distance? That would introduce even more substantial inefficiency in the transmission.

Ignoring current state but talking about possible future plans

The status quo only has 1 year left on it. And nuclear power still has the same stages of energy transition loss you’ve failed to debunk. What’s the point? Your claim is nonsense either way.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

No you haven't. Read your own source. Hint: biogas

Also, nuclear fuel is not gas, so this speaks for electric stoves, silly.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

No you haven't. Read your own source. Hint: biogas

biogas was used in 2009, not in 2020 when the stats were collected. Nor would it matter if it were still used. Hint: it would be an increase on the 80%.

recall: fuel energy → heat energy→ steam → turbine → transmission → heat energy

Also, nuclear fuel is not gas, so this speaks for electric stoves, silly.

That’s fuel. That’s in the 80%.

again: fuel energy → heat energy→ steam → turbine → transmission → heat energy

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Try fueling your stove with uranium and report back

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Luckily you don’t need to burn uranium to avoid 5 steps of energy transformation.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Nice corrections

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Gas ovens poison your home and make you stupid.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That depends on how well vented they are. Most people undersize their range hoods for aesthetics and don’t take venting seriously. Of course recent findings show it’s a bad idea to cut corners on that with gas stoves, and ovens to some extent. But it’s mostly stoves that have the issue you describe.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

While they are less of a problem when they’re better vented, they’re still a really big problem. You can’t possibly vent them well enough.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Still sounds like you’re talking about stoves. To use a stove, you inherently need to stand next to it and your face is between the flame and the vent. Ovens are well insulated (this is important for energy efficiency), they vent to the outside, and you are not generally standing over the oven throughout the baking.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Where do you think the oven vents its exhaust gases to? The outside? So you have an exhaust vent directly attached to the oven? Which model of stove does this? Most of them vent into the range hood like the stovetop, or just into the room.

Let’s give a better example…. A well vented stovetop…… and you burn something on it really badly….

Does the vent catch ALL the burning smell? Or does the kitchen still smell of burnt food?

Yeah, that smell is the gases and particles that the venting didn’t catch…… there’s still a fair bit, isn’t there….. can you smell the burning?

The amount of gas that’s healthy for you to consume is basically zero, so even if the range hood catches 90% (I think it’s closer to 60, but I don’t have a source on that), there’s still a lot in the air.

K, so put the condescension away when you can do these experiments at home with the help of a responsible adult.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

I think they're talking about ovens in the kitchen, not heating with gas.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Poor venting is not inherent in the technology. A diligent installer can run a duct from the oven to the outside just like we do for gas boilers. A diligent building code can even make it mandatory. The lack of gas ovens (and selection thereof) in Belgium is not likely a consequence of concern for toxic gases, because if it were, then gas boilers (which burn far more fuel than an oven would) would be far less popular than they are. So what is your theory on that difference?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You open the front of your gas boiler?

Exchanging air with the environment?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

If I were to open the boiler before and after using it just as I have a wood stove, that brief exposure to trace amounts of toxins once a day would not influence a choice to use it. That theory is quite far fetched.

The finding that gas stove toxins can be significant is also more recent than the popularity drop in gas ovens.