10 ms·
A candle produces roughly the same amount of energy as a resting human
- josefresco 4y agoText for those who don't do the bird site: A candle produces roughly the same amount of energy as a resting human — 80 to 100 watts, also consuming about the same amount of oxygen and producing the same amount of CO2. In an enclosed area, adding candles is about like adding people from an air quality standpoint.
- dekhn 4y agoexcept that candles don't just produce CO2, they produce soot and many other molecules which have been clearly associated with negative health outcomes.
- LinuxBender 4y agothey produce soot As my bathroom walls can attest to. It took a long time to clean that up. I don't use candles for scent any more. Now I just keep them as one of many sources of emergency light and heat.
- dsfyu404ed 4y agoThe chemical alternatives don't exactly give me confidence (though who really knows what's in a modern candle?). At least candles are a known-known even if non-optimal.
- idopmstuff 4y agoI have something like this: https://www.amazon.com/ElusiaKa-Ceramic-Electric-Fragrance-Aromatherapy/dp/B09BVR2Q9N/ https://www.amazon.com/ElusiaKa-Ceramic-Electric-Fragrance-A... Melts the wax and gives you that lovely smell without any fire. The wax also lasts much longer in one of these than in candle form.
- LinuxBender 4y agoI may try one of those. My local grocery store has a few of them. Are they hard to clean?
- tylergetsay 4y agoIf it's purely ceramic and not painted, plop it in the freezer for a little bit then all the old wax comes out as a puck; no cleaning needed
- LinuxBender 4y agoThat is perfect. I will look for the ceramic non painted ones.
- themitigating 4y agoElectric light bulbs
- rsynnott 4y agoI mean, cooking with wood fires is a known-known and we've been doing it forever... but it's the biggest cause of death by air pollution.
- tnorthcutt 4y agoEven bigger than pollution from e.g. burning coal/oil/etc.?
- rsynnott 4y agoSurprisingly, yes, by many metrics. Per the WHO, 3.2 million people/year, mostly poorly ventilated wood or other biomass, mostly poor countries: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-a... _Overall_, outdoor air pollution (coal/oil/industrial effluent/etc) kills more (about 4.2 million) but in terms of single worst cause, cooking with biomass seems to be it. Even in many rich countries, wood (generally burned for heat, not cooking, in the rich world) is one of the biggest sources of particulate air pollution, as coal is phased out and vehicles get cleaner.
- oliveshell 4y agoIf you do decide to burn a candle on occasion, in case the following wasn’t obvious: Keeping the wicked properly trimmed to ~1/4 inch makes a huge difference in keeping soot emissions down. There’s a reason store-bought candles always tell you to trim before burning! If the flame starts to jump and flicker (in calm air), the wick is too long. You can see big sooty plumes be thrown off when this happens if you look.
- LinuxBender 4y agoAll good advice. I learned this from growing up with an antique oil lamp which I still have. That is another one of my emergency heat sources.
- msla 4y ago> Keeping the wicked properly trimmed to ~1/4 inch makes a huge difference in keeping soot emissions down. I bet this was widespread cultural knowledge in the era when candles were the primary method of indoor lighting.
- prometheus76 4y agoTry beeswax candles. They're more expensive but burn much more cleanly.
- musingsole 4y agoAnd humans don't just produce CO2. They shed everything from dust to viruses. Really, humans are the health concern we should be paying more attention to.
- fastball 4y agoI don't know about you, but seems to me like we paid a lot of attention to humans as a vector for poor health over the last 3 years...
- Cyberdog 4y agoIndeed. I think we can all agree now that humans are a dangerous vector for viruses, filth, and general unpleasantness, and the world would be a safer, more pleasant place if we eradicated them entirely.
- passwordoops 4y agoAnd it was on that day a small company by the name of Skynet, who merged its LLM with a networked robotics center, loosed its AI to scan the internet for ideas on how to make the world a safer, more pleasant place
- dasv 4y agoDo you frequently have problems with CAPTCHAs?
- Cyberdog 4y agoI find them quite organic-normative.
- amelius 4y agoThis is why I only use hydrogen torches at my dinner table.
- bell-cot 4y agoUnless fully enclosed, burning hydrogen is really too dangerous for the dinner table: https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=detecting%20a%20hydrogen%20flame https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=detecting%20a%20hydrog...
- tomtomistaken 4y agoIf you prefer NOx ;)
- LazyMans 4y agoI prefer oxygen candles, personally.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoMy dad was on submarines and talked about these. Do they also provide light, and if so what color and intensity?
- tofof 4y agoThey burn at 600C (1100F) so I don't think you'd want to view the reaction directly; usually they have to be deliberately contained to contain the heat to sustain the reaction. https://youtu.be/g3Ud6mHdhlQ?t=738 https://youtu.be/g3Ud6mHdhlQ?t=738 (linked to correct timestamp) shows the remains of a burned one and loading fresh ones on a submarine.
- anemoknee 4y agoDepends on what state the oxygen is in and any other friends who may react/combust with.
- dekhn 4y agothey're not visible and you almost don't feel it when it burns you...
- passwordoops 4y agoI'm disappointed by the lack of a methane emissions joke
- steveylang 4y agoThey left an opening for you, carpe diem!
- singularity2001 4y ago"they produce soot and many other molecules" welcome to my family Also s/produce/release/g
- red-iron-pine 4y agoUnderrated response. Not only a subtle fart joke but also pedantic about words.
- dekhn 4y agoNo, candles "produce" not "release", because the soot doesn't exist before the chemical reaction.
- cjmcqueen 4y agoAlmost the exact same thread and thoughts shared on the tweet are here too... Interesting stuff. I wouldn't think Twitter and HN would be so closely aligned.
- recuter 4y agoI am insulted and feel personally attacked by your reductionist sentiment. We are nothing like those people!
- doublerabbit 4y agoTwitter to HN. HN to SlashDot. SlashDot to Reddit. Reddit to Twitter only to arrive back on HN. The perpetual internet carousel
- RGamma 4y agoTurns out the "HN is turning into reddit" jokes only had the platform wrong.
- padobson 4y agoI would bet the factors that lead to following John Carmack highly correlate with the factors that lead to opening an HN account.
- bawolff 4y agoHN is really only a unique place when it comes to computer topics. For everything else its basically the same as any other website.
- warinukraine 4y ago> Text for those who don't do the bird site: Having the text here instead of linking to an appallingly bad website should always have been the norm. But nooo, we had to wait for Elon Musk to buy the thing.
- tzs 4y ago> Text for those who don't do the bird site OT: speaking of the bird site...how does it decide what to recommend in the "More Tweets" section? I'm kind of baffled by the stark differences between its recommendations on two recent visits. Yesterday I followed a link to a Paul Graham tweet. Then I scrolled down to see what else Twitter recommended. It was full of right wing conspiracy theories, climate change denial, anti-vaccine stuff, one about Bill Gates' plan to depopulate the world, and of course something about the Jewish bankers that control the world. There was almost nothing that wasn't similar to the above. Today I go there to view this John Carmack tweet, and what Twitter is recommending is a tweet from Joe Biden, a Greta Thunberg tweet, a tweet about the Formosan clouded leopard being declared extinct in 2014 after no sightings for 40 years but then was spotted in 2019, an Edward Snowdon tweet, a tweet from the National Park Service, various humor tweets, a tweet about a lecture on how to build GPT from scratch, and a couple about business acquisition. There were a couple of right wing political tweets (from Scott Adams and Glenn Beck) but they were mild and about Musk so I assume that's why they are there. There was also one from Andrew Tate that was a pretty good inspirational statement and did not mention Musk at all. Oh and this great but best not read if you going to sleep soon tweet "16 of the creepiest paintings ever made" [1]. Is this difference because of Twitter's inferences about the kind of people that read Paul Graham and read John Carmack? I'd guess Graham is more to the right than Carmack but from what I've seen not anywhere enough that reading Graham is any kind of signal that you would be interested in the kind of conspiracy theories and such that it was recommending yesterday. [1] https://twitter.com/culturaltutor/status/1615648152983572480 https://twitter.com/culturaltutor/status/1615648152983572480
- yreg 4y agoMy "More tweets" section under that tweet is ~70% same as yours. Including 16 of the creepiest paintings ever made.
- steveylang 4y agoI normally only get tweets leaning towards one side of the political spectrum. I read an article and liked a tweet, and suddenly found myself in a mirror-image alternative universe. The echo chamber is real. For all its potential, Twitter is no way to learn about the world. But the same goes for any web site with algorithmically served content.
- CamperBob2 4y agoHe's off by at least an order of magnitude. Otherwise, lighting 10 candles would be like firing up a 1000-watt space heater, which is obviously not the case.
- nicholsonpk 4y agoOr the space heater is more efficient because it's not producing light.
- CamperBob2 4y agoSafe to say it's a fraction of a watt at most. Some sources found via a quick Google search indicate that the light output from a 70-watt incandescent light bulb is equivalent to about 100 standard candles. Sounds truthy enough.
- voisin 4y agoThere’s some excellent discussion in the book Burn: The new science of metabolism about this.
- h2odragon 4y agoPeople concern for "air quality" lately has me wondering how in the world humanity survived to this point, in utter ignorance of the horrid damage everything they could smell was doing to them. Perhaps we should be encased in sterile bubbles at birth, with all inputs filtered for purity and consistency. Surely that would be the best way to avoid all the dire consequences of the pollutants surrounding us.
- melling 4y agoWell, I wouldn’t say it’s a recent concern. Nixon started the EPA in 1970. Historically, there have been issues with coal and air quality. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog_of_London https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog_of_London Now that we have 8 billion people on the planet at once, even a small human footprint adds up.
- BeefWellington 4y agoVisiting any older city in Europe that hasn't had a good cleaning done to every building, you can really see the soot buildup that remains even today on buildings that are being cleaned[1][2] for example. Granted that was acquired over centuries of burning coal and wood to heat houses. [1]: https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/nostalgia/manchesters-dark-history-archive-pictures-8722223 https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/nostalgia/manch... [2]: https://old.reddit.com/r/powerwashingporn/comments/6d3l6p/this_is_the_palace_in_vienna_austria_its_in_the/ https://old.reddit.com/r/powerwashingporn/comments/6d3l6p/th...
- rsynnott 4y agoAnd note that the Great Smog was nearly a century after the UK started passing serious air quality legislation. Things were _significantly worse_ in the 19th century; while recording of cause of death wasn't great, it's all but certain that there were worse incidents than the great smog.
- IceDane 4y agoSterile bubbles?? Made of what, plastic? But what of the microplastics? I upvoted your comment because I, too, am tired of the constant doom and gloom rhetoric. It turns out that practically anything and everything we are exposed to as we live our lives can have negative effects on us. I'm gonna keep using scented candles, and if they want to be the death of me, well, they will just have to get in line behind basically everything else on this planet.
- forgingahead 4y ago[flagged]
- morley 4y agoMy impression of the gas stove hubbub was: > First they made specious claims about gas stoves, and I made a big stink about it because it got me activity on social media.
- maxbond 4y agoVery poor taste to compare a mild critique of candles to systematic murder.
- weakfortress 4y ago[dead]
- Cyberdog 4y agoVery odd take to compare gas stoves to systematic murder, if that’s what you’re doing.
- maxbond 4y agoThat's not what I'm doing. They're referencing this poem: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_... A lament about systematic murder and the complicity of the speaker.
- clircle 4y agoConfidently wrong
- aqme28 4y agoWhy is a mostly-incorrect* analysis of candles on the frontpage? Just because Carmack is saying it? *: Wattage might be the same, but the effect on air quality is different. Humans don't exhale carbon monoxide and smoke.
- medstrom 4y agoIt's not incorrect, just misuse of "air quality". In principle it looks like candles and humans could have a very similar effect, because both work by the process of combustion. Humans even supply fat as fuel which is similar to the candle wax. But the details differ so of course different gases could come out as a side effect. Both consume oxygen, which is certainly part of "air quality". But the lesson could've been narrowed down to just oxygen, "air quality" involves other things. Seems main takeaway is that one candle = one human, wrt. oxygen in the room. If the numbers are right.
- danans 4y ago> It's not incorrect, just misuse of "air quality". To ignore the the central subject of the comment - air quality - in order to call it "not incorrect" is doing quite a bit of work. > Seems main takeaway is that one candle = one human, wrt. oxygen in the room. If the numbers are right. If we can ignore air quality, what is the difference between this and the comparison between 2 60lb dogs and a human in a room? Or any other animals of similar mass that respirate in the same way? Clearly the comment was an overtly reductive missive targeted at recent concerns about air quality issues created by indoor combustion.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jvm___ 4y agoHow bad does our bedroom air quality get? or how much CO2 do two adult humans produce in a 10x10 closed room overnight? Is it enough to push the CO2 high enough to have an effect? I've noticed I sleep better when I sleep separately from my wife. I'm the more violent sleeper, so it's not movement related, so I'm wondering if it's air quality related.
- doctorhandshake 4y agoAbsolutely it does - lots of studies available to show CO2 in enclosed spaces exceeding 1k or even 2k ppm (beyond the level of impairment). Eg a bedroom with two people in ~7 hours or a conference room with 8 people in 1-2 hours.
- medstrom 4y agoHeh, enclosed spaces. Before civilization, we just tented outdoors. Imagine doing that all your life.
- Rewrap3643 4y agoBody temperature can influence sleep significantly. You’re probably warmer when co-sleeping.
- altairprime 4y agoWhat is your outdoor air intake solution: Is your home drafty? Do you leave a window open in your bedroom at night? Does it have a fan in it that either pulls air in or pushes air out? Do you have a window open elsewhere in your home that has a fan in it? Does your home HVAC pull air in from outside and pump it into your room? Do you use fan-only recirculate mode? CO2 measurement gadgets are useful for measuring how stagnant your air is, but the above parcel of questions is a great predictor: if your answers are No for all questions, then you’re probably spiking CO2/humidity uncomfortably high at night. Changing any of those answers from “No” to “Yes”, in any way that increases the amount of indoor air exhausted outdoors from your bedroom, and/or outdoor air drawn into your bedroom, may help a lot. Measuring relative CO2 levels using daily graphs from a gadget is an excellent indicator of whether any change had an effect.
- Traubenfuchs 4y agoRelated discussion, humans have an oxidation field that oxidizes their surroundings. The immediate consequence and conclusion of that research is that any research on air that does not include humans and their oxidations fields is inaccurate in regards to impact on humans. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32722409 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32722409
- implements 4y agoA bit tangential, but an electric under-blanket on as little as a 10W setting makes a huge improvement to sleep quality in an otherwise chilly bed.
- themitigating 4y agoI don't even put the heat on in my apartment after buying an electric blanket. It gets down to 53F but with the blanket only on 3/10 I love it. Another benefit is my head stays cool which I find more comfortable
- implements 4y agoAhh. I’ve been pondering creating an enclosed bed [1] - which I believe was common in medieval times. [1] AKA: https://www.thevintagenews.com/2019/02/25/box-bed/ https://www.thevintagenews.com/2019/02/25/box-bed/
- recuter 4y agoTeach a man about indoor pollution and he will worry for a lifetime. Set him on fire and he will (roughly) produce the same amount of CO2 as a candle. Got it.
- bilsbie 4y agoIs there such a thing as a clean burning candle? Produces only co2? Aren’t there some that actually produce oxygen?
- bell-cot 4y agoOnly CO2 would be a candle made of carbon, not wax (which also has plenty of hydrogen, producing H2O when it burns). And coming up with a cheap way to get 100%-clean combustion from a tiny fire would be a Nobel-prize-ish discovery. Yes, oxygen candles are a thing. Check out the MSDS for one here: https://www.msdsdigital.com/system/files/85984.pdf https://www.msdsdigital.com/system/files/85984.pdf Summary: It is neither particularly safe nor advisable to store oxygen candles around the house. Let alone use them.
- bilsbie 4y agoNow I’m wondering if I can heat my house with 50 or so candles. Easier than installing a fireplace and it might look nice.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y agoEasier than having 50 friends come over, too.
- bell-cot 4y agoVisit the house of somebody who likes burning lots of candles. Notice the heavy soot on the walls, ceiling, etc. Read the Wikipedia page on Black Lung Disease.
- iancmceachern 4y agoSomething something the matrix
- Eric_WVGG 4y ago… yeah so that was a thing that bothered me, "human batteries… like… even if that was possible, there's no way even billions of people could generate as much power as a handful of nuclear reactors… a more sensible idea would be if they were using our brains as CPUs in a massive network, like [spoiler] in Hyperion…" And years later, I learned that was exactly what the earlier drafts of the script said. They changed it because the studio execs thought the audience would find the concept confusing.
- moogly 4y agoI do not know what am I supposed to do with this information of questionable accuracy.
- josefresco 4y agoI submitted this for three reasons: 1. It's John Carmack. 2. It's "sciencey". 3. It (his assertions) seemed slightly "under informed" or vague, and I wanted to see what the HN crowd had to say given the wide array of expertise. So happy to see it climb to the front page to see this debate pan out!
- kderbyma 4y agoboo hoo. lmao. Can't they just go away.
- kderbyma 4y agopeople like Carmack...not candles.
- patwolf 4y agoI live in a newer house which is air sealed to improve energy efficiency. With all the talk of indoor pollutants like CO2 and NOx, I often wonder if the air quality is worse than it would be in an older, drafty house. When I research it, most of the results on google are from companies that perform sealing, making it difficult to get unbiased answers.
- anonymouskimmer 4y agoNatural gas and cooking, for most people, add the most indoor pollution. The EPA page on indoor air pollution monitors: https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/low-cost-air-pollution-monitors-and-indoor-air-quality https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/low-cost-air-poll... If you do have a problem companies such as E. L. Foust Co. sell air filtration systems and HVAC filters which contain mixes of activated carbon and various minerals to reduce indoor air pollution. The one we've got is marketed for 500 square feet and eats 75 watts when on, so I'm not sure the plus/minus on the energy efficiency. Still, if you live in a place with wildfires or industry it is useful even if you lived in a non-sealed house.
- tuatoru 4y agoInstall an energy recovery ventilation system[1] [2]. If you have the money. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_recovery_ventilation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_recovery_ventilation 2. Schematic picture: https://www.panasonic.com/nz/hvac/products/energy-recovery-ventilator.html https://www.panasonic.com/nz/hvac/products/energy-recovery-v...
- kderbyma 4y ago"I'm smart - tax candles" -
- skrbjc 4y agoSo you're telling me the robots from the matrix could have avoided all that trouble if they just went with candles?
- hokkos 4y agoflagged as inaccurate, from an air quality standpoint a combustion won't be as clean a humain respiration lot of dangerous particulates from the violent chemical reaction of burning, also the CO2 of humain is mostly biogenic and from a candle it is mostly fossil
- kristianp 4y ago"The Matrix would have been a lot less fun to watch if they had used candles instead of humans" - one reply.