4 ms·
>Environmentalists and many energy experts have reacted with disbelief and anger at some of the measures in the strategy. >They cannot believe the government h
by tonyedgecombe 5y ago
>Environmentalists and many energy experts have reacted with disbelief and anger at some of the measures in the strategy.
>They cannot believe the government has offered no new policies on saving energy by insulating buildings.
>They say energy efficiency would immediately lower bills and emissions, and is the cheapest way to improve energy security.
Doesn't most of the evidence point to people keeping their houses warmer after they have been insulated. Not that this is a bad thing but it doesn't do much for CO2 emissions.
- blitzar 5y agoI was under the impression that people set their thermostat at XX.X degrees and determine their comfort level more from that value on the wall than actual temperature.
- stdbrouw 5y agoBoth can be true. A well-insulated houses loses maybe 0.2W/K/m^2 whereas an unimproved building from the 50s is easily 2W/K/m^2, so that's an order of magnitude difference. By comparison, keeping your house warmer by one or two degrees Celcius will add 5 or 10% to your heating bill. The same is true for many other rebound effects, such as the change from filament light bulbs to LED lighting: yup, people do use more lighting more of the time, but not nearly enough to offset the energy savings from the new technology.
- blitzar 5y ago> The same is true for many other rebound effects I use my 2.5W LED light bulbs for 2-4x the length of time as the 100W bulbs they replaced. The energy usage is night and day different (pun intended)