Reducing climate impact from energy production requires both reducing it at the point of production and at the point of consumption. By switching to electric energy at the point of consumption, you reduce demand for gas, etc. The production can then be switched to something zero-impact.
> The production can then be switched to something zero-impact.
There's no such thing as zero-impact. Wind farms have an environmental impact. Building solar-sensitive cells require dirty processes that also create pollution and waste as they don't last forever.
In most countries is changing rapidly as renewables ramp up and it’s not uncommon to hear about major countries having entirely renewable days.
The important part to remember is that natural gas infrastructure is always polluting, and tends to leak a fair amount of fuel which is never even used (around me, there are estimated that this is as high as a third of the total usage). That’s all locked in when you use gas, whereas an electric stove can be powered by a mix of sources which change hourly without the owner even having to know about it.
The other thing to consider is that a professionally-managed and monitored power plant is usually better than equipment as maintained by the average person. Lots of people don’t even get their gas appliances checked once a year on average, and you’ll pretty regularly hear about leaks or fires caused by poor maintenance at apartment buildings where you’d think they’d be at least a little more responsible.
doesn't matter. gas pipes leak, and shall appliances aren't efficient, so even if the grid was 100% fossil fuel (which it's not), it still would be more efficient to use electric in the home.
> it still would be more efficient to use electric in the home.
Efficiency wise you may be wrong. Carrying electricity is not efficient (you lose energy with distance) while gas (as long as leaks are limited) is a more efficient store of energy from start to end.
