The climate kooks plot against gas stoves

 Kimberley Strassel:

Don’t believe for a second Consumer Product Safety Commission member Richard Trumka Jr.’s slippery claim that they aren’t coming for your stove. Or the media narrative that Republicans are “hyping” a new “culture war” by “pretending” the Biden administration intends to ban gas stoves.

The reason gas stoves are in the news is simple: There is a coordinated, calculated—and well-funded—strategy to kill them off. It’s the joint enterprise of extremely powerful climate groups, working with Biden administration officials who have publicly stated their aim to eliminate all “combustion appliances” in homes. Only after the GOP called them out did anyone pretend otherwise.

Some of this is being exposed in letters sent this week by Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Ted Cruz to CPSC commissioners demanding more information. The letters highlight the primary groups behind this push. One is the Climate Imperative Foundation, which became an overnight green powerhouse and reported more receipts in 2021 than the League of Conservation Voters or the Sierra Club. A board member and funder is Kleiner Perkins billionaire John Doerr, whose climate action plan calls for getting rid of gas cooking. CIF’s executive director, Bruce Nilles, has made the end of gas stoves an imperative, writing in 2019: “Your gas stove has to go.” CIF has granted money to the Rocky Mountain Institute, which has long advocated “retrofitting” existing homes to be “all electric.”

Then there’s Rewiring America, “the leading electrification nonprofit, focused on electrifying our homes, businesses and communities.” And New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity, which last year called on the CPSC to enact a gas-stove ban.

The stated goal of all these group is killing gas to “save” the planet. Yet they also know Americans won’t give up their stoves in the name of climate. So several years ago this cabal hit on the idea of contradicting decades of science and ginning up hokey studies claiming gas stoves present a “health risk.” The twin goals: scare Americans and give government a pretext to ban gas cooking.

This is how you end up with climate outfits masquerading as health experts. One frequently cited study from the Rocky Mountain Institute—claiming to find a link between gas stoves and childhood asthma—was co-authored by two RMI staffers, neither of whom has a science degree. Another favorite study by New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity claims gas stoves cause “dangerous levels of indoor air pollution.” It was written by two lawyers, and it cites . . . the RMI study. Ah, science.
...

The climate kooks have been serial wrong for decades in their prediction of doom and gloom.  The ocean is not boiling and the poles are still not ice-free and Al Gore and Barack Obama's oceanfront property is not underwater.  No wonder they are trying to use "disinformation" about the alleged health risks of gas stoves.

See, also:

Biden admin issues 20-year mining ban as it turns to foreign supply chain amid green energy push

Decision 'short-sighted, foolish and completely unscientific,' House Natural Resources Committee chair says

How in the world does importing the same material rather than domestic production impact alleged climate change.  If anything it contributes more because of need to transport it into the US. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more