EPA Now Looking At Cooking Stoves

I’m not sure how this would work, since the EPA has no dominion over all the people in other nations

(Washington Times) The war on climate change may soon be moving inside the kitchen.

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy is set to unveil on Tuesday six federal grants to universities to fund research on clean cookstove technology.

The announcement will put the EPA’s resources squarely behind a United Nations’ quest for cleaner burning stoves and an end to deadly cooking pollution.

Rather, the target of this research are the 3 billion people, mostly in the developing world, who still cook using solid fuels like wood, crop wastes, charcoal, coal and dung in open fires or leaky stoves., according to the World Heath Organization. (Snip)

But they could also renew a debate back in Washington why an agency charged with protecting Americans from pollution is focused on a problem that is far more prevalent off U.S. shores.

Well, like so much of Warmist doctrine and policy prescriptions, it’s about causing problems in Someone Else’s life. And lots seem to be aimed at people living in these “developing nations”. Warmists got theirs, but want to stop others from getting the same.

I’m confident that the EPA will figure a way to hose American citizens, as well.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

9 Responses to “EPA Now Looking At Cooking Stoves”

  1. Jeffery says:

    The US EPA is sponsoring research focusing on reducing pollution from cook stoves. This research will benefit the US and especially the people in developing nations by protecting them from the direct effects of combustion pollution and reducing global warming. The US has no policy-making power over other nations.

    Why are you opposed, other than your knee-jerk opposition to the EPA?

  2. Jl says:

    “By protecting them from the effects of combustion pollution and reduce global warming.” If they want a higher quality of life, they need “combustion pollution”, because it’s cheap. For the most part, only rich, developed nations have the money to fight pollution of any kind. And no, J, it won’t reduce global warming. That’s already been reduced by Mother Nature.

  3. Jeffery says:

    j,

    “For the most part, only rich, developed nations have the money to fight pollution of any kind.”

    Duh, and the article was about one such rich nation helping the others.

    Global warming is not over, or even slowing.

  4. Better_Late_Than_Gumball says:

    I’m not sure how this would work, since the EPA has no dominion over all the people in other nations

    hasn’t stopped the bitties from trying. Note that the UN is trying to force the US to alter or ignore its constitution.

    And, no J, the EPA has no need to invest in research in to “cleaner” cookstoves for 3rd world nations. The cheapest and most efficient way to remove deadly pollution from inside their homes is to give them reliable access to electricity.

    They dont need new ways to burn wood, they need electricity. Only haters of America and the world’s poor would suggest that using America’s tax dollars to “research” would in any way make a difference in their lives.

  5. john says:

    Gummie are you daft? How much time have you spent in 3rd and 4th world countries? You want them to COOK with electricity? Sure solar power would benefit them but that will not provide enough power for a stove burner (1500 watts)
    What they DO need is to be taught to stop cooking on 3 stone open fires (probably have to google that one) and move up to something like a well designed rocket stove which will immediately reduce all pollution by 50%
    You think rural areas are going to get a power grid anytime soon AND be able to keep it running ? Dream on low tech is the way to go NGOs know taht the big power projects don’t get power to rural areas

  6. john says:

    oh and in case you are wondering I have spent about 3 years in 3rd world areas and have cooked on 3 stone fires. They suck

  7. Better_Late_Than_Gumball says:

    But yet, you want to continue to relegate them to primitive (or even updated) fire stoves. Fire is fire and that smoke is still smoke.

    Why are you opposed to these countries expanding their electric grid to the outlying areas? Why are you laughing at the idea that electricity frees up the poor to focus upon other life-enhancing options.

    Recall how our world bloomed from one of drudgery, tedium, and focused on chores to one with more family time, less housework, and more time devoted to job or farming. All thanks to electricity.

    And, for one that is so against pollution and saving the environment, I’d though that finding means to keep people from burning down their forests would be a good thing. I always find it ironic that those who profess to be environmentalists are the ones most in favor of burning wood for power\cooking.

  8. Dana says:

    Well, it’s obvious: the EPA has no power to force other nations to change, but, in theory, they could issue regulations which essentially ban the installation of new gas stoves in the United States, requiring everybody to use electric ranges and ovens.

    But, there’s more: induction stove tops are about 30% more efficient than electric ranges, so the EPA might be tempted to require induction ranges . . . which currently cost twice as much as a standard electric range.

    Then, because the Administration is looking at increased regulations on existing coal-burning power plants, the cost for electricity is going to soar, so, after you buy that induction range, even though you’ll use less sparktricity, you’ll still wind up paying somewhere around the same for it. Even Jeffrey is smart enough to understand that when you increase costs on businesses, those costs get passed down to the end consumer.

    The Democrats are supposed to be the party of the working man, but it seems that every policy they have is designed to increase the costs of living on working families.

  9. Better_Late_Than_Gumball says:

    and it should be illegal for an agency whose sole focus is within the borders of the US, to fund research for things outside of the US. Even if it is to fund UN programs (as the UN building is physically located in the US), the programs are operated and ran outside of our borders.

    For example, the Dept of Interior’s Fish & Wildlife should have no business giving money to another nation to “manage” their “interior”. I think the word “Interior” in Dept of Interior should mean something.

    The same applies to the EPA. the Dept of Energy, the Dept of Education, etc.

    The Democrats were never the party of the working man. That was one of the best biggest lies ever told. They’ve been for oppression. They’ve been for slavery. Their currently for Socialism, Marxism, and even Tyranny. Those beliefs are antithetical to the Americna way of life as it was from foundation to a generation ago. But, over the last 50 years, people have gotten fat, lazy, stubborn, selfish, and ego-driven. They are only on the look out for themselves and could care less what their actions carry politically or spiritually.

    Adults of today were kids of yesteryear when the decline of teaching began. Lack of critical thinking skills, the lack of knowledge of history, of natural processes, of civics even, has led to our moral and fiscal decline.

    Socialist Commies used to be run out of town or arrested. Now, they are elected to high office.

    America’s greatest days are behind her. How can a small minority fix what is broken? When what is broken is America’s heart and soul?

Bad Behavior has blocked 8078 access attempts in the last 7 days.