The world is heating up, and policies are not helping(theoryofchange1.substack.com)
theoryofchange1.substack.com
The world is heating up, and policies are not helping
https://theoryofchange1.substack.com/p/summer-is-coming-what-game-of-thrones
3 comments
Banning sulfur dioxide emissions from tanker fuel was probably a very, very bad idea. It was providing a cooling effect for the entire planet.
This article feels like a hit piece on Air Conditioning. Some groups seem to regard AC as somehow morally weak and even evil, and while the sentiment resonates with me - I grew up in Ireland! I never even saw the _point_ of AC until I moved to California! - attempts, like this one, to damn AC with logic always feel kind of, well, obtuse. They seem to deliberately miss the main benefits of AC. Which are:
1) AC literally saves lives. Continuing to reject it in hot countries is kind of evil.
2) AC is efficient. Each kWh of heat sucked out of buildings uses a fraction of a kWh of electricity.
3) AC's electricity use is strongly correlated with when the sun is shining brightest. It is the greenest (man-made) energy use I can imagine!
And, most importantly:
4) AC nowadays is almost always installed so it can work in reverse, as a "heat pump". So countries that currently heat their buildings with natural gas or other fossils, would actually _reduce_ their total carbon burden by installing AC everywhere! Because they can use these instead of burning fossils in winter! Doubly so in countries avec lots of nuclear generation, but even if they don't, burning natural gas or even coal to make electricity to drive a heat pump emits less carbon than burning the same natural gas to heat a house! (Citation needed!)
I have a pet conspiracy theory that the anti-AC lobby in Europe is funded by Big Fossil. It seems silly, even to me, but it's not totally illogical: widespread AC installation in mainland Europe will inexorably reduce dependency on oil and gas for heating, first by burning less of it to make electricity to drive a heat pump rather than by burning it directly, and second by making it _possible_ to substitute renewables for it.
1) AC literally saves lives. Continuing to reject it in hot countries is kind of evil.
2) AC is efficient. Each kWh of heat sucked out of buildings uses a fraction of a kWh of electricity.
3) AC's electricity use is strongly correlated with when the sun is shining brightest. It is the greenest (man-made) energy use I can imagine!
And, most importantly:
4) AC nowadays is almost always installed so it can work in reverse, as a "heat pump". So countries that currently heat their buildings with natural gas or other fossils, would actually _reduce_ their total carbon burden by installing AC everywhere! Because they can use these instead of burning fossils in winter! Doubly so in countries avec lots of nuclear generation, but even if they don't, burning natural gas or even coal to make electricity to drive a heat pump emits less carbon than burning the same natural gas to heat a house! (Citation needed!)
I have a pet conspiracy theory that the anti-AC lobby in Europe is funded by Big Fossil. It seems silly, even to me, but it's not totally illogical: widespread AC installation in mainland Europe will inexorably reduce dependency on oil and gas for heating, first by burning less of it to make electricity to drive a heat pump rather than by burning it directly, and second by making it _possible_ to substitute renewables for it.
Not a hit piece on AC, rather about how non coordinated a thorough policy change can have adversarial effect.
Also, yes AC is essential, but it is on track to consuming so much electricity that is has to be pushed in the right direction to not become a new problem replacing the old.
Also, yes AC is essential, but it is on track to consuming so much electricity that is has to be pushed in the right direction to not become a new problem replacing the old.