Nick Pope
Contributor
The Biden administration locked in a gas stove rule on Monday after insisting that it is not trying to ban gas stoves, rejecting efforts by opposed organizations to nix the rule.
The Department of Energy’s (DOE) efficiency rule for gas stoves, announced in January, will come into effect as expected in January 2028, according to a Monday entry in the Federal Register. The finalized rule is less stringent than a 2023 proposal that was subsequently abandoned, and nuance in the rulemaking process allowed for the agency to walk back parts of the regulation if it received a significant volume of negative public comments on the docket, according to E&E News, but the DOE has gone ahead with its rule over the objections of several Republican state attorneys general and advocacy groups, including the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI).
The DOE rolled out the rule as a “direct final rulemaking,” meaning that there was no published proposal for the policy, according to E&E News. The “direct final rulemaking” process also allowed for groups like CEI to leave comments about the rule with a chance of getting the agency to water down the rule. (RELATED: Forget Stoves! The Biden Admin Is Working Overtime To Phase Out All Your Gas Appliances)
“The Federal Register simply published a confirmation notice – which is a procedural step in our process for direct final rules,” a DOE spokesperson told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “We are simply following our statutory directed process for a direct final standards rule pertaining to cooking,” the spokesperson continued, adding that “the final rules mirror the joint recommendation received from a wide variety of stakeholders, including the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Consumer Federation of America, and energy efficiency advocates.”
In its comments, CEI argued that the newer, less aggressive regulation was indeed watered down from the 2023 proposal, but that it nevertheless should be withdrawn because it represents federal overreach and remained a policy that would increase costs for American consumers, according to E&E News and the Federal Register entry. Besides CEI and some Republican attorneys general, the Antonin Scalia Law School Administrative Law Clinic and other groups also commented against the DOE’s rule.
The DOE has asserted that the suggestion the government wants to ban gas stoves is a “myth” and “misinformation.” Notably, Biden administration officials submitted an amicus brief asking a federal court to reverse a decision that nixed Berkeley, California’s 2019 ban on gas hookups in new buildings, a policy that ostensibly would have outlawed the installation of gas stoves in newly-constructed buildings.
“President Biden is committed to using all the tools at the administration’s disposal to lower costs for American families and deliver healthier communities—including energy efficiency measures like the one announced today,” Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said of the rulemaking when it was released in late January.
The DOE’s regulation applies to electric cooktops, gas cooktops, stand-alone electric cooktops, stand-alone gas cooktops and ovens. The rule will likely drive up the costs of particular models up front, but the Biden administration asserts that the policy will save Americans money on their bills over time by reducing the volume of energy household stoves use, according to The Washington Post.
“The new standards will also require only a small portion of models to make modest improvements to their energy efficiency to match the level of efficiency already demonstrated by the majority of the market today,” the agency said in its January press release announcing the rule. “For example, approximately 97 percent of gas stove models and 77 percent of smooth electric stove models on the market already meet these standards.”
Nearly 70% of respondents opposed policies that would essentially ban gas stoves, according to a June 2023 Harvard CAPS Harris poll. More than 80% of Republican respondents and 71% of independents were opposed to policies that would induce a gas stove ban, as were 55% of surveyed Democrats.
Beyond stoves, the DOE has also pushed energy efficiency rules for everyday items like water heaters, furnaces and pool pump motors. The Biden administration has also spent hundreds of millions of dollars to assist state and municipal governments in developing building codes intended to “decarbonize” buildings.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Lefties are modern pagans, demonizing a trace gas that is essential to life on Earth.
_____________________________________________
Text book example of “In Your Face!”
I doubt those figures are correct- it’s probably 95% of all 3.
This is interesting, a Google search on “percent of people with gas stove us”
Turns up this:
AI Overview
38% United States
California: 70%
New Jersey: 69%
Illinois: 60–70%
New York: 60–70%
Maine: 7%
South: Less than 20%
In my best Archie Bunker, “Jeez! Will ya jes look at dat!”
It’s the liberal states that cook with gas.
Knuckle dragging Trumpsters not so much.
As usual, lefties get EVERYTHING BACKWARD!
I think they were/are looking at a large scope and long term scam, not just getting rid of ‘bad carbon’.
If Gas Stoves are accepted as bad/obsolete, and getting rid of them is good/necessary for the country as a whole, it would logical be to help the owners of such stoves with the mandated burden… fed monies to subsidize the replacements.
If the program worked out as planned, what areas would receive the bulk of the federal freebies???? What regulatory entities would receive 25% of the freebies to manage the freebies????
Reminds me of the tale about the camel and the tent.
Except this time the camel’s hind end is coming in first.
Why does Biden frack? To gaslight people? What are they up against – apart from facts and science?
Our planet is hotter than ever – and this is what we’re up against
Bad actors spreading disinformation online to undermine facts about the climate emergency.
Populist and nationalist politicians pushing back against environmental progress.
Teams of lawyers from the rich and powerful trying to stop us publishing stories they don’t want you to see.
Authoritarian states with no regard for the freedom of the press. – The Guardian
That level of anxiety needs treatment
I don’t think you’ll find many people in the US who have ever heard of The Guardian, let alone read an article from it.
Are the LAT, NYT etc that different?
I would think Americans would have heard of them.
Does UK have “freedom of the press“, or is that an American idea?
You can’t have freedom of the press without freedom of speech, and we’ve just had a series of reminders that we don’t have that either.
Is freedom of speech a British legal principle?
Yes, because the European Human Rights legislation was incorporated into British law at Brexit. Freedom of speech specifically is covered in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which is now British law.
Perhaps you are asking whether, before that, freedom of speech was a British legal principle?
To a considerable extent, yes, but not in the same way. A sort of negative freedom. In the English common law there was an implicit right to speak except where legislation had made such speech unlawful. So there was a negative right. An example of such restrictions was the law of blasphemy, the last official prosecution for which was in the 1920s, but it remained on the books until the present century, and a successful private prosecution was brought in 1977 (Whitehouse v. Lemon). But absent any legal prohibition, there was an implicit right.
The UK of course does not have a written constitution, and Parliament is sovereign, so if you are asking whether there is anything like the US First Amendment, the answer is no. Parliament can impose any restrictions on speech it wishes. But this applies to lots of things, it can (for instance) abolish elections too…. and do lots of other things that the US legislature cannot.
No irony or agenda, I just didn’t know. I’m a trying-not-to-be-ignorant American.
All readers here should consider the in-your-face mendacity of the modern dem party in the USA. They wanted to ban all “fossil” fuels, including NG, but they went after coal first. NG could be used in place of coal, but it was costly and dems assumed it would raise the price of electricity (another agenda item that had to be hidden, except when Obama quietly admitted it and the press had to not cover it). When clever geologist-types increased NG supply and price dropped, dems tried to stop that. Having painted themselves into a corner where they can’t stop NG from being supplied, they try to ban appliances while denying it, until they can’t deny it when they admit it. They hid Biden’s condition for over a year, which is bad, while using him to clear the primary field for Kamala, which is worse. These lies were open and obvious, and Kamala was in on the lie planning, but rather than cover it, our press is covering Kamalamania like it’s the second coming. Our press is now desperately figuring how to not cover Kamala for the next few months.
Sorry for political rant, but any person who thinks NG should be left in the ground is an enemy of civilization, no less.
“…any person who thinks NG should be left in the ground is an enemy of civilization”
_____________________________________________________________________
That goes for geoengineering as well.
While I’m at it:
Amendment 28:
Congress shall make no law to regulate,
tax sequester or license carbon dioxide.
Meaning re geoengineering is unclear:
“…any person who wants geoengineering is an enemy of civilization”
“…any person who does not want geoengineering is an enemy of civilization”
Google search on “geoengineering”
Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages
ge·o·en·gi·neer·ing
/ˌjēōˌenjəˈniriNG/
noun
the deliberate large-scale manipulation of an environmental
process that affects the earth’s climate, in an attempt to
counteract the effects of global warming.
I would broaden the context away from global warming.
From the definition selected I’d guess you don’t like it, but I’m still only 90% sure.
All definitions of geoengineering that relate it purely to global warming are BS. Geoengineering is a generic term for any large-scale attempt to affect the environment. Cloud seeding is geoengineering. Flood levees are geoengineering. What you are seeing is today’s version of George Orwell’s Newspeak, where every possible generic term is twisted to relate it only to manmade global warming. NB. “climate change” is an example of that.
Kamala- whatever she is- she ain’t presidential. The got where she is because she’s a 3fer.
What is a 3fer?
Checks 3 progressive identity politics/oppressed victimhood boxes, with an added “boost” from Willie Brown.
female, black, south Asian
if she was gay, she’d be a 4fer
libs give people points like that- the more points the better- if you get enough, you get nominated for important jobs
A litmus test: will the new DOE efficiency rule(s) for stoves apply across the entire Department of Defense—in fact, across all gas/electric stoves to be purchased by the Executive Branch—or, instead, will the Executive Branch make a “special exemption” for themselves.
We’ve seen it before: Do as I say, not as I do.
How do soldiers cook while “in the field”. Do they use cooking stoves like backpackers? If so, that ‘s propane, right? Will it be forbidden? Will they have to bring batteries for portable electric stoves?
😎
Some ration packs “cook” themselves by mixing two chemicals that produce an exothermic reaction. (In the same pack but separate from the food.)
Dragged into the future – kicking and screaming
I’d like to drag you somewhere kicking and screaming.
How naughty.
Mr. name: Didn’t we all emerge from a birth canal kicking and screaming? Most of us then began to learn things after that. Not you, though, you evidently prefer a dead end in your future. And you’re willing to go quietly?
Windmills and solar are the past, they lead backwards.
Why do you suppose the Industrial Revolution took off?
Personally I much prefer cooking on electricity. But there is no way you can seriously argue that its greener. Just as heat pumps are not greener than gas boilers.
The problem is the losses when you use the gas to generate electricity, then transmit it with the associated losses to the appliance. Gas boilers in the UK are all condensing (by law) and so are 90%+ efficient. Heat pumps use gas generated electricity which is probably 40& efficient, then figure transmission losses, and you don’t make up the gap even with the extra efficiency of a heat pump.
A gas hob is about 40% efficient, compared to electric which is around 70% – higher if you use induction – but this too does not make up the losses in converting the gas to electricity instead of just burning it where you need the heat.
I am probably unusual here in greatly preferring an electric hob. But much as I prefer them, I think its absurd to think there is something more environmentally righteous or future oriented about them. Are they the future? In the UK about 60% of hobs are electric. This is just people choosing on the open market. It is much more sensible to allow this to drive electrification rather than provoking resistance by legislating it.
And to repeat, there is not the slightest climate justification for legislating it. Its pure fantasy virtue signalling.
analogous to the ‘it’s good for you’ lobotomy movement. The movement that won the chief lobotomizer a Nobel prize for his social advancements (as he went on personal tour with his effective knitting needles).
For a period of time those opposed to the movement were dragged, kicking and screaming.
So the future is cooking and heating only when there is wind and solar.
No cooking on a windless evening… I hope that is YOUR future.
Cold uncooked food eaten in the dark…
No-one sane would want it, though.
Your little inner city ghetto wouldn’t last 1 day without access to fossil fuels. !
Your idea of the future is a dystopian hell straight out of some 1980’s sci fi movie. Talk about dragging someone to hell…. But, luckily such sci fi stories are warnings that can be heeded, and hopefully avoided.
There’s no sign of any ‘heed’ or ‘avoid’ among our political rulers yet – Italy, Netherlands and a few other countries excepted.
Without fossil fuels.. THERE IS NO FUTURE !
Meanwhile:
Electric trains in Boston? The governor is proud of “clean and green” trains- despite very little electricity in the state coming from wind and solar.
Electric trains coming to MBTA Commuter Rail in 2028
Instead of footrests… pedals.
The length they go not to invest in catenary.
I’ve rode those trains into Boston. They took the same time as traffic-slowed drive because of stops, cost the same as the Rt90 tolls because of fares and station parking and did not alleviate my need for a car because I lived 2 miles from the station.
Boston Commuter rail is different from the boston “T”. The commuter rail system extends rail from a city where it would be nice, except the target demographic can’t afford it, to the suburbs where the target demographic can afford something nicer so won’t use it.
I took the pictured train for about a year while I waited for a spot to open in the garage. During the time I did that parking tickets went from shrug price to a real deterrent. For a while the most economically effective path for me was to pay both tolls and a cheap parking ticket.
If you ever find yourself stuck in morning traffic into Boston, look out your car window and see one person slow-rolling alone in a 12mpg ICE SUV, you should know that person voted for the one against fracking.
The train stations are filthy, dark, and ugly.
I used to laugh, commuting through high-income suburbs with “homeless veterans” with faux-ratty clothes and cardboard signs on their way to higher wages downtown.
10 miles… whoopy doo!
Battery might just make it. !
“We are simply following our statutory directed process for a direct final standards rule pertaining to cooking,”
Superior orders. Also known as The Nuremberg defense.
Top down?
“”“The Federal Register simply published a confirmation notice – which is a procedural step in our process for direct final rules,””
Where do they get their neo-feudal inspiration from? Ten quid to the person who can tell me who wrote this:
“”I understood the infamous spiritual terror which this movement exerts, particularly on the bourgeoisie, which is neither morally or mentally equal to such attacks; at a given sign it unleashes a veritable barrage of lies and slanders against whatever adversary seems most dangerous… this is a tactic based on precise calculations of all human weaknesses and its result will lead to success with almost mathematical certainty…””
I guessed then Googled. Yup. Keep the quid.
william l. shirer
ah – got it.
“direct final rulemaking” … but not a law?
“simply following our statutory directed process” … but not a legal process?
A tiny detail: this is illegal according to the plain text of the U.S. Constitution which specifically vests all legislative powers in Congress. No other branch of the federal government is allowed to make law. No one but our elected representatives is allowed to make law and set penalties for law breaking, which is a fundamental principle of a representative democratic republic where the powers granted to government are derived from the consent of the governed. That’s us. Last time I checked, the DOE is not part of Congress. Until the Constitution is amended to make exceptions—which it hasn’t been—every law, rule, or regulation instituted by any branch that isn’t Congress is null and void. We just need someone to challenge it on the specific point that the Constitution does not allow anyone other than Congress to make law, nor set penalties for breaking the law. Neither are they allowed to delegate that responsibility to anyone else. It would nullify 99% of the federal code, which would be the greatest restoration of freedom since 1787. Our elected representatives can start doing their job for a change and start reviewing, debating, and enacting new law. We need the President’s branch to stick to its job of enforcing the law, and the courts do theirs to adjudicate according to the law, the way it was intended.
These Biden/Harris people just flat out lie straight to your face. They don’t even pretend anymore.
Vote them out.
This is all irrelevant now. The Chevron Deference was overturned, so the DOE can make its rules but nobody has to obey them.
If one has to switch from gas cooking to electric induction, all the pots used for gas cooking will have to be replaced. No more Lodge Le Creucet, not more old cast iron skillet or dutch ovens.
I assume no one included these cost when creating a new standard.
Most importantly, my wife may just stop cooking if gas ranges are eliminated.
That’s not good for me and many others she cooks for!
We need a radar range that can cook a steak to perfection. Until then….