Just to clarify, wasn't a recent study done by comparing natural gas stoves to electric? Yet propane burns much cleaner than N.G.
But frankly does anyone really believe that a 5 year old cook stove is burning as cleanly as it did the day it came off the line? If you see yellow flame on a cook stove, its NOT burning clean. I am sure that most gas stoves, propane or natural gas, are emitting some CO, as well as a variety of stuff that causes asthma.
When you cook with gas, any gas, you need to use forced ventilation. Open a window too.
But even cooking on an electric stove produces too much water vapor for a sealed up modern house. And that's assuming you never burn anything you cook! Even an electric stove should be ventilated. Study after study in commercial and residential environments say don't cook without ventilation. Black mold. I've seen it and dealt with it. UGH.
Woo boy! That small voice in my head keeps saying "Just let it go". But if forums are meant to impart information, let's wade in.
First of all, propane does not burn "cleaner" than natural gas. I did a web search on that statement and every source claiming that propane burns cleaner than natural gas was a propane delivery service. If anyone can produce a credible source, other than a propane vendor, that says propane burns cleaner, I will issue a profound apology.
Natural gas is CH4. Propane is C3H8. Propane is much denser at atmospheric pressure (that is, in normal air). That difference is generally meaningless. Both gases combust into CO2 and water vapor when burned with sufficient air, such as on a gas range. The desirability of a gaseous fuel, for cleanliness, is based on the ratio of H to C, hydrogen to carbon. The higher the ratio, the cleaner the fuel from a pollutant perspective and a CO2 (greenhouse gas) perspective. Natural gas has an H to C ratio of 4 to 1 or 4. Propane has a ratio of 8 to 3 or 2.67. Propane produces 21% more CO2 than natural gas for the same amount of energy or heat produced. Also, no commercial gas is completely pure. Both natural gas and propane, available commercially in the US, are highly pure but not completely. However, propane has slightly more contaminants than natural gas.
Articles about the superiority of propane, usually from propane vendors, mention that as propane has more energy per cu. ft. than natural gas, it is more efficient. Propane has about 2,500 Btus per cu. ft. Natural gas has about 1,000 Btu per cu. ft. That is not only meaningless, it implies either ignorance or willful deception on the part of the author to claim that that makes propane better. A cu. ft. of diesel fuel has about 1,000,000 Btus per cu. ft., 400 times more than propane. Does that mean it is more efficient than propane? Of course not. Efficiency of fuels is only meaningful in two contexts. One is cost per unit of energy (Btus). The other is useful energy delivered per total energy consumed.
Articles, again from propane vendors, claim that the combustion of natural gas releases methane. It does not. Yes, if you open the valve without lighting the flame, you will release methane, but why would you do that?
In terms of safety, natural gas is lighter than air while propane is heavier than air. A natural gas leak, outside, will rise into the air and dissipate. Propane will pool near the ground and not dissipate quickly. If released into a closed space, they are equally dangerous.
In terms of cost, the only valid comparison is the cost for an equivalent amount of energy. The comparison is usually $/million BTUs. Natural gas, delivered from your utility, will vary but will now be around $12/million Btus. Propane, at $4/gal is $44/million Btus, 3.7 times the cost of natural gas.
For RVers most of this is moot as we can't use natural gas. Storing a reasonable amount of natural gas takes very high pressure and very strong cylinders. For a home, it is a no-brainer. No one with access to both would choose propane. As far as the proposed legislation, the issue, as I understand it, is indoor air quality, for health reasons. Propane does not burn any cleaner than natural gas in an open flame. The legislation probably doesn't address propane because the number of propane stoves in homes is so small in comparison to natural gas stoves that it disappears. I agree that any gas stove should probably be vented, but natural gas burns so clean on a stove (only produces water vapor and CO2 - which we also produce in our lungs) I question whether any adverse health conditions exist in the quantities we are talking about for cooking. A poorly adjusted flame can produce CO, which is deadly. As someone mentioned, using a cooking stove for heating in a power outage, which burns large amounts of gas, can be dangerous for health reasons.
Someone mentioned the various states' efforts to ban natural gas for home heating because of climate change. They would require electric heating. That is also absurd and self-defeating. Recent natural gas furnaces (since 1990) are 96+% efficient. That is, 96% or more of the energy in the gas goes into heating the home. The other 3-4% goes up the chimney or out the vent. Right now, and for decades to come, the dirty little secret is that all of the electricity used to replace that natural gas heating will come from natural gas generation which is only about 60 to 65% efficient. (If anyone wants to understand why wind or solar don't factor in here, I'd be happy to explain that - it goes into "generation on the margin" issues.). As a result, these electric heating mandates will actually increase the use of natural gas, not decrease it. The cost to homeowners for heating these home will go up dramatically. Why are the politicians doing it? Because they think (rightly) that the public will think they are doing something to solve global warming when they are actually making it worse. I've always believed that politicians don't care about solving problems, they only care about APPEARING to solve problems.
Ok, rant is over, Sorry all.
