At least religious people believe in a life after death for their self-imposed suffering. Euros suffer all this for what exactly? Too feel superior to Americans. Lmao.
First of all, an aircon unit is just the same as a fridge. It is a refrigeration unit that takes heat from one place and TEMPORARILY puts it in another place.
In a fridge it takes heat from inside the box and puts it outside (the grid on the back), but of course the insulation isn't perfect so the heat leaks back in again. THERE IS NO NET INCREASE IN HEAT TO THE OUTSIDE ENVIRONMENT.
An aircon in a car does exactly the same; it takes heat from inside the car and moves it outside the car, but the inside of the car is colder so also cools the outside air by exactly the same amount! No net heat increase to the environment!
The only increase in heat is from the mechanism itself, the electric motor in a fridge or aircon makes a tiny amount of heat, as does the compressor. Irrelevant in the scheme of things, especially compared to the cat it is fitted to.
The other point to make is that home aircon in France, for example, is fundamentally different to aircon in America. This is because electricity in France is almost all nuclear, hydro and renewables, so almost zero carbon, and so running aircon doesn't add much to the CO2, if any.
In America where much electricity is fossil fuel generated, obviously aircon kills the climate with CO2 pollution. That'll get worse under Trump.
Please, if you are going to tackle a technical subject, get your facts right.
Is AC really right/left issue? I don't like AC as it is not good for health, same as I hate artificial ventilation in huge office buildings. Germs incubators ;) Regarding some solutions to heat: siesta :), return to beautiful and functional architecture that works well with the changing seasons.
Love to see you writing about this Sam. It is a subject near and dear to my heart. A few important elements to consider in addition: a city with additional green space and trees is not only cooler but has significantly more capacity to absorb water. As rains get more intense this will ability is key for lessening massive damage from flooding. Finding room for green space and trees in a packed city is difficult. We can't tear down buildings to out up a park. So what's the lowest value land in a city? On street parking. Cooling cities as you describe will require a massive reduction in in street parking and it will be a hell of a battle. We need a big investment in public transport and bike lanes (both of which move many more people per M2 than cars) to free up more space for these kind of interventions. The cities that do this well will flourish. The cities that don't will whither. And if we do succeed in the broad greening of our cities what will be the impact on the car industry? I can imagine they will fight these efforts tooth and nail.
Thanks! In fact it was your post on LinkedIn that directed me to the Energy Cities piece, which was really informative. I agree that all these issues are linked, and that once you start down the path of sympathetic urbanism then one thing should flow naturally into another. Whereas a selfish urbanism model, for want of a better term - represented first and foremost by the private car - makes everything more difficult.
At least religious people believe in a life after death for their self-imposed suffering. Euros suffer all this for what exactly? Too feel superior to Americans. Lmao.
Ok, what you are saying is technically WRONG!
First of all, an aircon unit is just the same as a fridge. It is a refrigeration unit that takes heat from one place and TEMPORARILY puts it in another place.
In a fridge it takes heat from inside the box and puts it outside (the grid on the back), but of course the insulation isn't perfect so the heat leaks back in again. THERE IS NO NET INCREASE IN HEAT TO THE OUTSIDE ENVIRONMENT.
An aircon in a car does exactly the same; it takes heat from inside the car and moves it outside the car, but the inside of the car is colder so also cools the outside air by exactly the same amount! No net heat increase to the environment!
The only increase in heat is from the mechanism itself, the electric motor in a fridge or aircon makes a tiny amount of heat, as does the compressor. Irrelevant in the scheme of things, especially compared to the cat it is fitted to.
The other point to make is that home aircon in France, for example, is fundamentally different to aircon in America. This is because electricity in France is almost all nuclear, hydro and renewables, so almost zero carbon, and so running aircon doesn't add much to the CO2, if any.
In America where much electricity is fossil fuel generated, obviously aircon kills the climate with CO2 pollution. That'll get worse under Trump.
Please, if you are going to tackle a technical subject, get your facts right.
Cool, well happy to have made the comment then. I like the sentiment of 'sympathetic urbanism'. That's a nice turn of phrase.
Is AC really right/left issue? I don't like AC as it is not good for health, same as I hate artificial ventilation in huge office buildings. Germs incubators ;) Regarding some solutions to heat: siesta :), return to beautiful and functional architecture that works well with the changing seasons.
Ac would kill the cafe culture of France so please don’t adopt it 😎
Very clear argument. Besides, there can be no growth without discomfort!! Europeans must develop the growth mindset!
Love to see you writing about this Sam. It is a subject near and dear to my heart. A few important elements to consider in addition: a city with additional green space and trees is not only cooler but has significantly more capacity to absorb water. As rains get more intense this will ability is key for lessening massive damage from flooding. Finding room for green space and trees in a packed city is difficult. We can't tear down buildings to out up a park. So what's the lowest value land in a city? On street parking. Cooling cities as you describe will require a massive reduction in in street parking and it will be a hell of a battle. We need a big investment in public transport and bike lanes (both of which move many more people per M2 than cars) to free up more space for these kind of interventions. The cities that do this well will flourish. The cities that don't will whither. And if we do succeed in the broad greening of our cities what will be the impact on the car industry? I can imagine they will fight these efforts tooth and nail.
Thanks! In fact it was your post on LinkedIn that directed me to the Energy Cities piece, which was really informative. I agree that all these issues are linked, and that once you start down the path of sympathetic urbanism then one thing should flow naturally into another. Whereas a selfish urbanism model, for want of a better term - represented first and foremost by the private car - makes everything more difficult.