6 ms·

All in all it's good to see the market react by cutting consumption. You may hate this post but the reality is that it's the only way forward, subsides will onl

All in all it's good to see the market react by cutting consumption. You may hate this post but the reality is that it's the only way forward, subsides will only increase the price without doing anything about the problem. Also, not many people realize this, but the problem isn't caused by the war. If you don't believe me then open an inflation chart of your country of choice and try to spot any change to the shape of the curve around Feb 2022.

newaccount2021 4y ago
DoctorOW 4y ago
It sucks because there's ultimately far more efficient ways to heat a home and the only reason they're not implemented is to try to force greater consumption.
- sokoloff 4y ago
  It’s not the only reason. I’m literally a mechanical engineer (by degree, not trade) and tried to get an air-to-water heat pump to replace my aging gas boiler. Only one firm in the area could even quote me on one, tried to talk me out of it at every step, and gave me a quote that reinforced their sales pitch. It was literally never going to payback over a combi, which dozens of companies would be happy to install and service. So, a fresh combi boiler sits on my wall (which is a good improvement over the old), but it also means that I don’t entertain the question again for another 15 years. I was among the top 0.1% aware, educated, and motivated potential customers of a heat pump and it couldn’t happen.
  - Brigand 4y ago
    Which region of the world do you live in? Also air-air and air-ground were not an option? These are more readily available.
    - sokoloff 4y ago
      Cambridge, MA, USA. Anything-to-air wasn’t going to work visually or for occupant comfort. I don’t want refrigeration linesets strung all over the outside, warts on a wall in each room, and after all that having less comfortable heat than hydronic. (On the plus side, it would give AC “for free” [in capital costs].) Ground source (to water) was my first preference. I’m on a pretty small city lot and the well cost meant for an even longer payback period than an air-to-water heat pump.
- chii 4y ago
  one should not be heating the home, but the person. Have thermal underwear, or even one of those heated clothing (may be even battery powered). Use an electric blanket, and wear an extra layer. This will use far less energy, than trying to warm up all of the air inside the home.
  - realgeniushere 4y ago
    Let them wear coats, said the out of touch queen of the freezing peasants.
  - jason-phillips 4y ago
    Great strategy to coax those intractable WFHers into the office.
red_trumpet 4y ago
> If you don't believe me then open an inflation chart of your country of choice and try to spot any change to the shape of the curve around Feb 2022. In Germany, inflation did hike up in March [1]. The Russo-Ukrainian war started on February 24th, so February's inflation is not that much impacted. Sure, inflation was already high before that. But I'm pretty sure the war increased the problem. [1] https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/inflation-cpi https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/inflation-cpi
- H8crilA 4y ago
  Zoom out a bit more. Part of the same trend.
kasey_junk 4y ago
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/future/ho.1/charts?mod=mw_quote_tab https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/future/ho.1/charts?mod... Front month fuel certainly shot up around February.
Frost1x 4y ago
If you think it's good to cut consumption, it seems like we have a lot of other places to reduce energy consumption outside of more basic necessity energy usage, like heating people's homes. This perspective just externalizes side effects of all sorts of unequal societal resource allotments and paints the problem contributor as the average person. It's akin to blaming climate change on your average person when the biggest contributors aren't your typical person whose biggest crimes might be driving to work, taking an occasional mass shared flight, or ordering something on Amazon. Or plastic waste on consumers not recycling. There's lots of these blame deflecting trends from industry. In the long term, you might be correct that we need to reduce energy expenditure (although birth rates could change this picture), but I'd say we have a lot of other low hanging wasteful consumption fruit that we should fix before having people shiver to stay warm in their homes.
- sokoloff 4y ago
  Many (most?) of these things are not either-or. I can stop watering my lawn in a drought and ask industry to improve their water efficiency. I can turn my thermostat and flow temps down a few degrees and expect companies to reduce unused lighting in their offices on nights and weekends.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- gruez 4y ago
  >It's akin to blaming climate change on your average person when the biggest contributors aren't your typical person whose biggest crimes might be driving to work, taking an occasional mass shared flight, or ordering something on Amazon Who's the biggest contributor then, corporations? If I order something from amazon, which causes emissions to be created because of the delivery truck, is that amazon's fault and not mine?
  - moring 4y ago
    As an individual, I don't even have knowledge, let alone control about the energy consumption over the production process of things I order. It won't improve anything to put responsibility for that consumption on the buyer, at least not without significant changes that could better be solved by putting an appropriate price tag on consumption. And that last part doesn't just mean to make things more expensive, which causes inflation and doesn't really make things more expensive. It means to reward saving energy compared to other costs. Asking who is to blame is -- suprise! -- not solving anything.
realgeniushere 4y ago
That’s not how any of this works. 1) Weird to check the inflation charts when you can just check the price of oil and natural gas. They have moved considerably due to the war. 2) Natural gas is not a perfect long term market. It’s a consumable that has to travel through the supply chain and then be consumed in a short amount of time. 3) No reason to expect a massive shift right at the beginning of the war. No one expected the war to drag on this long. No one expected the West to double down on sanctions so dramatically. No one expected Nordstream 2 to get blown up and foreclose Germany’s options. 4) Inflation has many many causes. A major pandemic, a decade and a half of printing money like never before, political trouble in the US, and now a twitter-driven suicidal sanctions regime.
realgeniushere 4y ago
You’re so close to openly admitting it. Just say it. The ultimate goal is to make it so only the rich can afford comfortable home heating, privacy, transportation, and travel, while the lower and middle classes pay the price for this climate religion.
- joxel 4y ago
  I'm glad your name is realgenius, because I wouldn't have been able to tell by your comments.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - yucky 4y ago
    Not the person you're responding to, but they have a point. If it's not the main goal, are you saying it's just a happy coincidence?
lozenge 4y ago
Inflation measures an increase in prices, so if the price of fuel rises, then it will, mathematically, cause inflation to go up. The price of any good that is delivered using fuel also goes up, which again causes inflation to go up.
Denvercoder9 4y ago
> If you don't believe me then open an inflation chart of your country of choice and try to spot any change to the shape of the curve around Feb 2022. That's not how it works. It takes time for price increases to propagate through the supply chain. Utilities usually contract their gas months ahead, so if the prices for natural gas increased in February due to the war, the increase in consumer prices wouldn't have happened until months later.
- H8crilA 4y ago
  We've already had those "months later", it's still roughly a straight line since some time in 2021 that might have broken recently. Again, I recommend just opening it and looking at it.
  - kasey_junk 4y ago
    Can you link to whatever chart you are referencing? Because every chart I’ve looked at shows both a big jump in heating oil future prices, and more importantly, volatility starting at the end of February. That is completely consistent with what you would expect, the war roiled energy markets and consumers are now paying the price.
  - Denvercoder9 4y ago
    The chart for my country show both an obvious jump from February to March and from June to September: https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/visualisaties/dashboard-economie/prijzen/inflatie https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/visualisaties/dashboard-economie/pr...
wiseowise 4y ago
> All in all it's good to see the market react by cutting consumption. People are freezing and you consider this good? Why? > You may hate this post but the reality is that it's the only way forward, subsides will only increase the price without doing anything about the problem. Which one?
sokoloff 4y ago
Inflation charts often exclude food and energy specifically because of the volatility in those categories. To the extent the Russian invasion spiked those, it may not show up in a “core inflation” chart.
hiq 4y ago
Most market-based solutions have to be looked at carefully to make sure they don't just translate into more inequalities. Food, shelter, education and other basic needs are supposed to be taken care of in developed countries (by definition) in the 21st century. Just leaving it up to the market means that poorer people won't have these needs fulfilled, and we can't pretend that it's just fine and so be it. Maybe energy prices should be proportional to your wealth, like fines in some countries.
- bgorman 4y ago
  In the US, we have government programs to educate, feed and house the needy. None of these programs have solved the problem. Public education in particular sees very bad outcomes for poor students. It is time to privatize.
- willnonya 4y ago
  This is a strange take on what defines a developed country. Moast developed countries can meet these needs but that isn't what makes them developed countries. The idea to make energy cost proportional to wealth is also bizarre. The first problem with it is how will you determine wealth? The second problem is how will you determine need? The goal is to provide according to need while taking according to ability, right? This has been tried many times in many ways and inevitably results in more inequality and a lower standard of living than allowing market forces to balance supply and demand based on economic signals. You're conflating markets with inequalities and implilying a causal relationship when the market is simply the scale in the middle attempting to balance consumption with economic contribution. It's almost ironic that markets are the way in which you can achieve this Marxist ideal.
  - hiq 4y ago
    > that isn't what makes them developed countries What does then? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developed_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developed_country mentions quality of life, aren't basic needs part of that? > how will you determine wealth? Some countries have wealth-based taxes and so have apparently answered this question, so that can be a starting point. I don't understand your point about markets solving inequalities on their own. If energy is expensive, poor people don't have heating, rich people do. Are you saying that's just fine? Also not sure what the Marxist ideal is, is wanting poor people to have heating a Marxist ideal? I'm honestly confused by your comment.
vinyl7 4y ago
Reject modernity, return to monke

newaccount2021 4y ago

DoctorOW 4y ago

It sucks because there's ultimately far more efficient ways to heat a home and the only reason they're not implemented is to try to force greater consumption.

sokoloff 4y ago
It’s not the only reason. I’m literally a mechanical engineer (by degree, not trade) and tried to get an air-to-water heat pump to replace my aging gas boiler. Only one firm in the area could even quote me on one, tried to talk me out of it at every step, and gave me a quote that reinforced their sales pitch. It was literally never going to payback over a combi, which dozens of companies would be happy to install and service. So, a fresh combi boiler sits on my wall (which is a good improvement over the old), but it also means that I don’t entertain the question again for another 15 years. I was among the top 0.1% aware, educated, and motivated potential customers of a heat pump and it couldn’t happen.
- Brigand 4y ago
  Which region of the world do you live in? Also air-air and air-ground were not an option? These are more readily available.
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    Cambridge, MA, USA. Anything-to-air wasn’t going to work visually or for occupant comfort. I don’t want refrigeration linesets strung all over the outside, warts on a wall in each room, and after all that having less comfortable heat than hydronic. (On the plus side, it would give AC “for free” [in capital costs].) Ground source (to water) was my first preference. I’m on a pretty small city lot and the well cost meant for an even longer payback period than an air-to-water heat pump.
chii 4y ago
one should not be heating the home, but the person. Have thermal underwear, or even one of those heated clothing (may be even battery powered). Use an electric blanket, and wear an extra layer. This will use far less energy, than trying to warm up all of the air inside the home.
- realgeniushere 4y ago
  Let them wear coats, said the out of touch queen of the freezing peasants.
- jason-phillips 4y ago
  Great strategy to coax those intractable WFHers into the office.

red_trumpet 4y ago

> If you don't believe me then open an inflation chart of your country of choice and try to spot any change to the shape of the curve around Feb 2022. In Germany, inflation did hike up in March [1]. The Russo-Ukrainian war started on February 24th, so February's inflation is not that much impacted. Sure, inflation was already high before that. But I'm pretty sure the war increased the problem. [1] https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/inflation-cpi https://tradingeconomics.com/germany/inflation-cpi

H8crilA 4y ago
Zoom out a bit more. Part of the same trend.

kasey_junk 4y ago

https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/future/ho.1/charts?mod=mw_quote_tab https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/future/ho.1/charts?mod... Front month fuel certainly shot up around February.

Frost1x 4y ago

If you think it's good to cut consumption, it seems like we have a lot of other places to reduce energy consumption outside of more basic necessity energy usage, like heating people's homes. This perspective just externalizes side effects of all sorts of unequal societal resource allotments and paints the problem contributor as the average person. It's akin to blaming climate change on your average person when the biggest contributors aren't your typical person whose biggest crimes might be driving to work, taking an occasional mass shared flight, or ordering something on Amazon. Or plastic waste on consumers not recycling. There's lots of these blame deflecting trends from industry. In the long term, you might be correct that we need to reduce energy expenditure (although birth rates could change this picture), but I'd say we have a lot of other low hanging wasteful consumption fruit that we should fix before having people shiver to stay warm in their homes.

sokoloff 4y ago
Many (most?) of these things are not either-or. I can stop watering my lawn in a drought and ask industry to improve their water efficiency. I can turn my thermostat and flow temps down a few degrees and expect companies to reduce unused lighting in their offices on nights and weekends.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
gruez 4y ago
>It's akin to blaming climate change on your average person when the biggest contributors aren't your typical person whose biggest crimes might be driving to work, taking an occasional mass shared flight, or ordering something on Amazon Who's the biggest contributor then, corporations? If I order something from amazon, which causes emissions to be created because of the delivery truck, is that amazon's fault and not mine?
- moring 4y ago
  As an individual, I don't even have knowledge, let alone control about the energy consumption over the production process of things I order. It won't improve anything to put responsibility for that consumption on the buyer, at least not without significant changes that could better be solved by putting an appropriate price tag on consumption. And that last part doesn't just mean to make things more expensive, which causes inflation and doesn't really make things more expensive. It means to reward saving energy compared to other costs. Asking who is to blame is -- suprise! -- not solving anything.

realgeniushere 4y ago

That’s not how any of this works. 1) Weird to check the inflation charts when you can just check the price of oil and natural gas. They have moved considerably due to the war. 2) Natural gas is not a perfect long term market. It’s a consumable that has to travel through the supply chain and then be consumed in a short amount of time. 3) No reason to expect a massive shift right at the beginning of the war. No one expected the war to drag on this long. No one expected the West to double down on sanctions so dramatically. No one expected Nordstream 2 to get blown up and foreclose Germany’s options. 4) Inflation has many many causes. A major pandemic, a decade and a half of printing money like never before, political trouble in the US, and now a twitter-driven suicidal sanctions regime.

realgeniushere 4y ago

You’re so close to openly admitting it. Just say it. The ultimate goal is to make it so only the rich can afford comfortable home heating, privacy, transportation, and travel, while the lower and middle classes pay the price for this climate religion.

joxel 4y ago
I'm glad your name is realgenius, because I wouldn't have been able to tell by your comments.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- yucky 4y ago
  Not the person you're responding to, but they have a point. If it's not the main goal, are you saying it's just a happy coincidence?

lozenge 4y ago

Inflation measures an increase in prices, so if the price of fuel rises, then it will, mathematically, cause inflation to go up. The price of any good that is delivered using fuel also goes up, which again causes inflation to go up.

Denvercoder9 4y ago

> If you don't believe me then open an inflation chart of your country of choice and try to spot any change to the shape of the curve around Feb 2022. That's not how it works. It takes time for price increases to propagate through the supply chain. Utilities usually contract their gas months ahead, so if the prices for natural gas increased in February due to the war, the increase in consumer prices wouldn't have happened until months later.

H8crilA 4y ago
We've already had those "months later", it's still roughly a straight line since some time in 2021 that might have broken recently. Again, I recommend just opening it and looking at it.
- kasey_junk 4y ago
  Can you link to whatever chart you are referencing? Because every chart I’ve looked at shows both a big jump in heating oil future prices, and more importantly, volatility starting at the end of February. That is completely consistent with what you would expect, the war roiled energy markets and consumers are now paying the price.
- Denvercoder9 4y ago
  The chart for my country show both an obvious jump from February to March and from June to September: https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/visualisaties/dashboard-economie/prijzen/inflatie https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/visualisaties/dashboard-economie/pr...

wiseowise 4y ago

> All in all it's good to see the market react by cutting consumption. People are freezing and you consider this good? Why? > You may hate this post but the reality is that it's the only way forward, subsides will only increase the price without doing anything about the problem. Which one?

sokoloff 4y ago

Inflation charts often exclude food and energy specifically because of the volatility in those categories. To the extent the Russian invasion spiked those, it may not show up in a “core inflation” chart.

hiq 4y ago

Most market-based solutions have to be looked at carefully to make sure they don't just translate into more inequalities. Food, shelter, education and other basic needs are supposed to be taken care of in developed countries (by definition) in the 21st century. Just leaving it up to the market means that poorer people won't have these needs fulfilled, and we can't pretend that it's just fine and so be it. Maybe energy prices should be proportional to your wealth, like fines in some countries.

bgorman 4y ago
In the US, we have government programs to educate, feed and house the needy. None of these programs have solved the problem. Public education in particular sees very bad outcomes for poor students. It is time to privatize.
willnonya 4y ago
This is a strange take on what defines a developed country. Moast developed countries can meet these needs but that isn't what makes them developed countries. The idea to make energy cost proportional to wealth is also bizarre. The first problem with it is how will you determine wealth? The second problem is how will you determine need? The goal is to provide according to need while taking according to ability, right? This has been tried many times in many ways and inevitably results in more inequality and a lower standard of living than allowing market forces to balance supply and demand based on economic signals. You're conflating markets with inequalities and implilying a causal relationship when the market is simply the scale in the middle attempting to balance consumption with economic contribution. It's almost ironic that markets are the way in which you can achieve this Marxist ideal.
- hiq 4y ago
  > that isn't what makes them developed countries What does then? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developed_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developed_country mentions quality of life, aren't basic needs part of that? > how will you determine wealth? Some countries have wealth-based taxes and so have apparently answered this question, so that can be a starting point. I don't understand your point about markets solving inequalities on their own. If energy is expensive, poor people don't have heating, rich people do. Are you saying that's just fine? Also not sure what the Marxist ideal is, is wanting poor people to have heating a Marxist ideal? I'm honestly confused by your comment.

vinyl7 4y ago

Reject modernity, return to monke