5 ms·

None of this keeps my hands warm. Or makes me feel comfortable. After growing up in a house with no insulation and being miserable all winter long, now for an

None of this keeps my hands warm. Or makes me feel comfortable. After growing up in a house with no insulation and being miserable all winter long, now for an extra ~$50 a month during the winter I get to keep my house at a nice toasty 74-76 degrees F and I'm comfortable year round.

wolverine876 6y ago
> None of this keeps my hands warm. > Or makes me feel comfortable. I wrote, 'Keep the thermostat at the lowest comfortable temperature', not an uncomfortable one. Don't lump me in with strawpeople who tell you to be uncomfortable. > for an extra ~$50 a month during the winter I get to keep my house at a nice toasty 74-76 degrees F I agree that you can do what you want with your $50. But there are other costs too: Our choices creates climate change for others.
- throwaway2245 6y ago
  > But there are other costs too: Our choices creates climate change for others. Optimising your personal heating choices has a maximum benefit of $50 per month of fuel saved in the fight against climate change, then. That rounds to zero compared to industrial-level decisions, and requires perhaps similar mental thinking time. I don't see climate change being fought this way, not even if engaged people make themselves feel uncomfortably cold in the winter to the point of risking hypothermia (which is already a significant risk especially in the older population).
  - Aachen 6y ago
    I don't see it being fought any other way, either. You think we can tell the big polluters to take it down to zero and just continue by ourselves? Not only is that incongruous, we wouldn't be reaching 1.5°C either. Unless perhaps you pay for scrubbing of your CO2, which would be fine by me (I currently pay for Climeworks, not because I can reach net zero that way (yet) but because it helps them fund the way there, they just need enough customers; something tells me we'll need scrubbing tech and capacity in addition to cutting emissions, seeing as the person above... let me just stop there).
wffurr 6y ago
Keeping your core warmer, especially with the thermal underwear discussed at length in the article, will also keep your hands warmer. There's an entire section of the article titled "Hands and feet". You could read it instead of dismissing the whole idea out of hand.
- wolverine876 6y ago
  > Keeping your core warmer, especially with the thermal underwear discussed at length in the article, will also keep your hands warmer. That's a lesson of wilderness camping in cold weather - if your hands are cold, put on another layer.
- com2kid 6y ago
  > Keeping your core warmer, especially with the thermal underwear discussed at length in the article, will also keep your hands warmer. That works on the general case, but not always. I've worked in buildings where I can be sweating in my coat and still have cold hands. I can easily wear extra thick socks, have my feet swimming in my shoes, and still have my ears be cold. Theory is great until it runs into reality. (If theory worked so well, there wouldn't be an active market for desk heaters to warm up hands!) edit: Example from the article >> But of course, the permeability index is not of any importance for indoor couch potatoes: they don't sweat. Which is complete BS. I am sitting here in a t-shirt right now and the part of my back that is up against my chair is rather sweaty. Likewise, feet sweat in shoes. > However, it is important to note that if the body as a whole is kept warm enough, hands and feet will not be greatly affected by lower indoor temperatures. Again, not true in my experience. > While insulating your neck and feet will greatly improve your thermal comfort, there is no need to wear gloves or caps indoors. If the indoor temp is below 65f I am not going to be typing anything for very long. For that matter at around 68f I'm starting to get uncomfortable. Truth of it is, I've worked in more than one office where I was stuck wearing a cap indoors.

wolverine876 6y ago

> None of this keeps my hands warm. > Or makes me feel comfortable. I wrote, 'Keep the thermostat at the lowest comfortable temperature', not an uncomfortable one. Don't lump me in with strawpeople who tell you to be uncomfortable. > for an extra ~$50 a month during the winter I get to keep my house at a nice toasty 74-76 degrees F I agree that you can do what you want with your $50. But there are other costs too: Our choices creates climate change for others.

throwaway2245 6y ago
> But there are other costs too: Our choices creates climate change for others. Optimising your personal heating choices has a maximum benefit of $50 per month of fuel saved in the fight against climate change, then. That rounds to zero compared to industrial-level decisions, and requires perhaps similar mental thinking time. I don't see climate change being fought this way, not even if engaged people make themselves feel uncomfortably cold in the winter to the point of risking hypothermia (which is already a significant risk especially in the older population).
- Aachen 6y ago
  I don't see it being fought any other way, either. You think we can tell the big polluters to take it down to zero and just continue by ourselves? Not only is that incongruous, we wouldn't be reaching 1.5°C either. Unless perhaps you pay for scrubbing of your CO2, which would be fine by me (I currently pay for Climeworks, not because I can reach net zero that way (yet) but because it helps them fund the way there, they just need enough customers; something tells me we'll need scrubbing tech and capacity in addition to cutting emissions, seeing as the person above... let me just stop there).

wffurr 6y ago

Keeping your core warmer, especially with the thermal underwear discussed at length in the article, will also keep your hands warmer. There's an entire section of the article titled "Hands and feet". You could read it instead of dismissing the whole idea out of hand.

wolverine876 6y ago
> Keeping your core warmer, especially with the thermal underwear discussed at length in the article, will also keep your hands warmer. That's a lesson of wilderness camping in cold weather - if your hands are cold, put on another layer.
com2kid 6y ago
> Keeping your core warmer, especially with the thermal underwear discussed at length in the article, will also keep your hands warmer. That works on the general case, but not always. I've worked in buildings where I can be sweating in my coat and still have cold hands. I can easily wear extra thick socks, have my feet swimming in my shoes, and still have my ears be cold. Theory is great until it runs into reality. (If theory worked so well, there wouldn't be an active market for desk heaters to warm up hands!) edit: Example from the article >> But of course, the permeability index is not of any importance for indoor couch potatoes: they don't sweat. Which is complete BS. I am sitting here in a t-shirt right now and the part of my back that is up against my chair is rather sweaty. Likewise, feet sweat in shoes. > However, it is important to note that if the body as a whole is kept warm enough, hands and feet will not be greatly affected by lower indoor temperatures. Again, not true in my experience. > While insulating your neck and feet will greatly improve your thermal comfort, there is no need to wear gloves or caps indoors. If the indoor temp is below 65f I am not going to be typing anything for very long. For that matter at around 68f I'm starting to get uncomfortable. Truth of it is, I've worked in more than one office where I was stuck wearing a cap indoors.