That's not the point - only a few loonies on the left are pushing it. Most of the left and the right are opposed. That makes it not a left/right issue.

Fossil fuel gas hobs and boilers BANNED in all new-build homes from 2025.

UK Government legislation ... from a right wing government.

Yes. This doesn't mean gas stoves are banned (existing ones are not outlawed). In fact its not about stoves at all. It means some countries are doing at least something to address climate change.

Eventually we all need to move away from gas, this is about that. Not banning gas stoves overnight, but gradually banning all fossil fuels, which you can't do if everybody is still cooking on gas. You need to gradually reduce your dependency on it.

No, countries do not need to move away from gas even if you're convinced CO₂ is the cause of all our woes. What you'd want to move away from is natural gas, not gas in itself. There are plenty of other ways to get methane - which is what natural gas is (more or less) - which do not add CO₂ to the environment. Domestic waste can be fermented for local production, industrial, agricultural and forest-industry waste for larger-scale installations. Methane is a good energy carrier given the ease at which it can be transported and handled. It is not poisonous, it can be compressed and/or liquefied and it burns cleanly without the need for complex burner designs.

No, I'm asking has any right leaning party or politician came out in the media and said yes we should ban gas stoves?

I've only seen the tweet from Biden appointed Trumka - https://mobile.twitter.com/TrumkaCPSC/status/161255345946272...

The gas stove ban that is in the news is a US thing, not a EU or CA as far as I know. I haven't heard of any gas stove bans in the EU being talked about, though some were already on the table in an effort to get rid of gas altogether.

If I'm not mistaken, it was _not_ a political initiative, at least not initially, but talked about as an option by The US Consumer Product Safety Commission in the case if stoves could not be made safe, in response to scientific research revealing its hazardous effects.

Generally, right-wing parties care less about health hazards (if at all), so I wouldn't expect any supporting such a ban. Mind you, what is considered right-wing varies from country to country.

> The gas stove ban that is in the news is a US thing, not a EU or CA as far as I know.

Gas stoves are not banned in the Netherlands but natural gas is being fazed out leading to the same outcome. When I bought a new house in the Netherlands in 1996 I had no choice but to move to electric cooking since the whole are was built gas-free. I ended up buying/building an induction range out of a separate induction hob and an electric oven. I sold the house in 2002 after moving to Sweden where I now cook and heat the house on wood - no gas here but no need for it either given our 21 hectares of forest and land. I prefer the latter over the former by far since there is no way meddling busybodies or warmongering Soviet-wannabees can increase my heating/cooking bills.

In itself the subject of indoor pollution is not a "left vs right" thing just like climate hysteria or SARS2 scaremongering are not innately so. That said it is remarkable that it is those who proclaim themselves to be on the "left" side who are far more susceptible to this type of scaremongering than those who claim to be on the "right" side. This is probably related to the "left" thinking in terms of the collective over the group over the individual where those on the "right" tend to think in terms of (traditional conservatives) "group - individual - collective" or (libertarians) "individual - group - collective". This makes those on the "left" side more susceptible to this type of group think based on appeals to authority - the "experts" agree that gas stoves need to go, "experts" agree that masks need to be worn, "experts" agree that young children need to be exposed to "norm-breaking" or "queer" sexuality, "experts" agree that CO₂ is the main cause of the recent warm spell and that human activities are the main cause of the rise in CO₂ concentration - since it is expected for individuals to sacrifice personal freedom for the good of the collective. Sometimes the "experts" are real experts but often they are activists for a cause.

This is also inherent in the "left" vs "right" discussion since those on the "left" can gain to fame by forwarding themselves as spokesperson for a "marginalised" group which is "oppressed" by "(fill-in-the-blanks)-normativity". Once one of these self-proclaimed "experts" gets into the limelight and gets the ball rolling the collective needs to follow to avoid accusations of "(fill-in-the-blanks)-phobia" or "*-ism". On the right the way to fame lies in portraying yourself as the defender of traditional values and/or being the one to fight the dragons coming from the left. This is a vicious circle since any new goofy idea from the left is fodder for a dragon-slayer on the right and thus the circle game continues.