3 ms·
This has actually been on my mind lately and I've been looking for statistics, from Denmark, but haven't been able to find any going back far enough. My assump
by mrweasel 2y ago
This has actually been on my mind lately and I've been looking for statistics, from Denmark, but haven't been able to find any going back far enough.
My assumptions is that we in the late 1940s through the 1950s had achieved a reasonable standard of living, but perhaps not available to all. Even if we assume that everyone in a country has access to the same, high, late 1950s standard of living, but applied modern technology, like improved insulation, district heating, EVs, energy efficient light bulbs and appliances, then how much would that lower (or raise) our energy usage? More of the energy would surely be moved to electricity, from coal, gas and oil delivered directly to our home, but is it enough chance the environmental impact?
- TSiege 2y agoWell I can answer one question for you. There are studies that show that better insulation only briefly lowers the energy use. Once people adjust to the new insulation they end up heating or cooling their houses more since in their mind it is cheaper, but they end up using the same or more energy. https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/insulation-only-provides-short-term-reduction-in-household-gas-consumption-study-of-uk-housing https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/insulation-only-provides...
- mrweasel 2y agoI would not have guessed that that would be the answer. That's kinda crazy, but it also makes sense, every time I visit someone in a newly built home the temperature is always crazy high.
- harrison_clarke 2y agopresumably there are limits to that. once every room is the preferred temperature, i'm going to stop running the heater although maybe i'd get bored and run the heater and the AC at the same time
- nine_k 2y agoOften you can't because the heater and the AC is literally the same unit, the heat pump.
- pjc50 2y ago> same, high, late 1950s standard of living .. I suspect this is wildly less good than most people would expect, along with forgetting about how widely distributed it was or wasn't. Just look at the first chart here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42182497 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42182497 If you could get people back to 1950s level of travel, whether in 1950s vehicles or (way better!) modern EVs, that would make a huge difference to the environmental impact. But of course if you actually suggest measures to force that people (correctly) notice it would reduce their standard of living.
- mrweasel 2y ago> if you actually suggest measures to force that people (correctly) notice it would reduce their standard of living. I guess people are different, the less I have to travel the higher my quality of life. Excluding the US, where things are just further apart, I do wonder why people need to move around so much. More and more jobs barely require you to leave your house. I know that the Danish government is proud that Denmark has a highly mobile workforce, meaning that we're willing to transport ourselves relatively far for work, which is a weird thing to be proud of, knowing how much that pollutes.