Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I have a notion that folks on both sides of this issue would struggle to write a coherent paragraph defining the issue, and even more so on any practicable solution.

The CO2 generated by using NG is about half that of coal in generating electricity.  We really use very little oil to generate electricity.  They use it some in Hawaii for obvious reasons.  NG has some clear advantages in electrical generation when used as a peaker plant, which we'd need a lot of if we used a lot of solar and wind.

Coal is of course a lot dirtier cradle to grave.

But the point of banning NG appliances in new construction is different than NG vs coal vs oil. 

It's that today, we might have a mix in our electrical generation in geographic area X of 25% coal, 30% NG, 40% nuke and 5% renewables. 

20 years from now, that balance might be 0% coal, 25% NG, 50% nuke and 25% renewables. 

If you install an electric stove in a house, that stove has now seen its CO2 emissions involved in its use drop IMMENSELY over 20 years because the electricity used to power it is cleaner. 

But if you install a NG stove in that house, its CO2 emissions involved in its use are the same in 20 years as they are right now. Cleaning up electrical generation has no benefit to the NG stove's emissions.

You can't make a NG stove environmentally cleaner over time, but you CAN make electricity generation cleaner over time, and if the stove is electric, the benefit cascades down. 

But the point of banning NG appliances in new construction is different than NG vs coal vs oil.

It's that today, we might have a mix in our electrical generation in geographic area X of 25% coal, 30% NG, 40% nuke and 5% renewables.

20 years from now, that balance might be 0% coal, 25% NG, 50% nuke and 25% renewables.

If you install an electric stove in a house, that stove has now seen its CO2 emissions involved in its use drop IMMENSELY over 20 years because the electricity used to power it is cleaner.

But if you install a NG stove in that house, its CO2 emissions involved in its use are the same in 20 years as they are right now. Cleaning up electrical generation has no benefit to the NG stove's emissions.

You can't make a NG stove environmentally cleaner over time, but you CAN make electricity generation cleaner over time, and if the stove is electric, the benefit cascades down.

and that would be great if it actually solved our preceived global warming problem but you could replace every NG appliance immediately and it wouldnt make a dent as far as the world is concerned

it would just cost me more money

Here in the US I gave up using a cheeper energy source but the world has not and shows no sign of doing so

I have a very expensive induction stove. You simply cannot cook on it like you could on a gas stove.

Every Chinese restaurant would be out of business...

I don't have enough experience with induction to form an opinion. I definitely prefer gas to traditional electric. So I get the anger at an attempt to ban them, since most people can't afford those expensive induction stoves anyway. I sure as hell don't want an electric stove. They suck. 

And that anger is what allows right-wing media sources to turn their base into such a frothing mess that they interject gas stoves into a civil discussion about whether people who believe climate change is human-caused and a major problem are in favor or opposed to nuclear power. 

most folks are not skilled at debate, argument, or discussion 

most folks are not skilled at debate, argument, or discussion

They are so ...