• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Air Conditioners Contribute to Global Warming

No, I don't want to keep my quality of life, I want it to be better. We are Americans. We have always left the following generation better off. Just because Obama says things like we aren't going to be able to keep our homes the temperature we want, eat what we want, drive what we want, doesn't make it true. He's not going to be in office forever. Hopefully our next president will have a better vision for this great country. There's no reason, if we all pull together, that we can't undo all the damage he has done and get us back on the track to prosperity.
By the way, I didn't mention oil, but since you did, I'll say Drill Baby Drill. As long as we are using oil, it should be from our own resourses. But we need to utilize all forms of known energy and invest in new ideas. Conservation is only a small part in the big scheme of things.

Pretty words and big ideas wont protect you from basic mathematics. It's not even just energy, our resource consumption across the board is not sustainable. Hope and dreams aren't going to create more oil, coal, iron, or aluminum. Optimism and political philosophy cannot and will not change the fundamental fact that right now we consume more than the earth produces.

You act as though this is somehow political. It's not. It's reality. We can't just sit around and assume the free market will come up with a solution of its own accord. We have to work at it, hard, and we have to buy ourselves some time by curbing wasteful practices. Nobody has advocated cutting off use of fossil fuels. Nobody is suggesting we go cold turkey. What we're suggesting is that we take a step back and realize that we need a significant change in our habits if we're going to reach that goal of leaving the next generation better off than we are now.

Nothing worth doing ever came easy. Yes, goddamnit, we are going to have to make some sacrifices.
 
I think most people in the private sector do sacrifice. Some because it's the right thing to do, others out of neccessity. When do you ever hear of those in the government making sacrifices? With their lavish life styles they could conserve much more of our resources than normal middle class Americans. They should lead by example. With the technology we have today, they don't need to be flying all over the world for meetings. That would be a start.
As far as the free market coming up with solutions, I think that's our best hope.
 
Real temperatures in my area hover around 100 degrees for three months each summer, along with 115% humidity. Do not mess with my Air Conditioning unless you're prepared for World War Three.

Fracking eco-freaks.
 
Pretty words and big ideas wont protect you from basic mathematics. It's not even just energy, our resource consumption across the board is not sustainable. Hope and dreams aren't going to create more oil, coal, iron, or aluminum. Optimism and political philosophy cannot and will not change the fundamental fact that right now we consume more than the earth produces.

You act as though this is somehow political. It's not. It's reality. We can't just sit around and assume the free market will come up with a solution of its own accord. We have to work at it, hard, and we have to buy ourselves some time by curbing wasteful practices. Nobody has advocated cutting off use of fossil fuels. Nobody is suggesting we go cold turkey. What we're suggesting is that we take a step back and realize that we need a significant change in our habits if we're going to reach that goal of leaving the next generation better off than we are now.

Nothing worth doing ever came easy. Yes, goddamnit, we are going to have to make some sacrifices.


Now: nuclear power.
Soon: Solar.
Future: Fusion.

Metals and minerals for the future: asteroids.

No, we do NOT have to resign ourselves to a future of living like 3rd World peasants.
 
Now: nuclear power.
Soon: Solar.
Future: Fusion.

Metals and minerals for the future: asteroids.

No, we do NOT have to resign ourselves to a future of living like 3rd World peasants.

Again with the dark ages straw man? Really?

Maybe you just have a fundamental misunderstanding of how much people like me are talking about cutting back. You seem to be under the impression it's 99%. It's really more like 20%.

Although I agree wholeheartedly that we need to vastly expand our nuclear power generation. It's the only source of energy that fits with the energy density, technological capacity, cost, and abundance that we currently require and possess.
Edit: and screw all the ignorant NIMBY types who think nuclear plants are going to kill us all. They're wrong, grossly overestimating the dangers of modern nuclear fission.

Whether or not fusion power proves to be feasible remains to be seen. So far, we've not really been able to accomplish it in an energy-positive manner. (it takes more energy to sustain the reaction than we get out of it) Also remaining to be seen is how expensive it turns out to be. Fusion may supply an essentially limitless amount of energy, but if it has the equivalent price of $300/barrel oil, your way of life is still going to change.
 
Last edited:
Conserving only maintains the status quo and does nothing to move us forward. To much emphasis is put on it.
That idea about slowing down to keep from running the AC is just plain stupid. Crank it to where you're comfortable and get to work on something productive.
 
I think most people in the private sector do sacrifice. Some because it's the right thing to do, others out of neccessity. When do you ever hear of those in the government making sacrifices? With their lavish life styles they could conserve much more of our resources than normal middle class Americans. They should lead by example. With the technology we have today, they don't need to be flying all over the world for meetings. That would be a start.
As far as the free market coming up with solutions, I think that's our best hope.

Yes, a significant part of the problem is that the people in charge of making the tough decisions would have to sacrifice as a result of this sort of decision. Human beings being selfish and shortsighted, generally speaking, our prospects for substantial change are not very great.

Conserving only maintains the status quo and does nothing to move us forward. To much emphasis is put on it.
That idea about slowing down to keep from running the AC is just plain stupid. Crank it to where you're comfortable and get to work on something productive.

Compounding the problem is not helpful to solving the problem.
 
Yes, a significant part of the problem is that the people in charge of making the tough decisions would have to sacrifice as a result of this sort of decision. Human beings being selfish and shortsighted, generally speaking, our prospects for substantial change are not very great.

Personally, I don't think most Americans are selfish and shortsighted.. I do think the rich and powerful could do more to conserve and less time lecturing those of us who can't make that much a difference. I mean, I recyle, I shut off lights I'm not using, I plan my shopping etc. to save gas. Hell, I even hang my clothes out to dry! What does Al Gore do? What does Barrack Obama do? My little bit of conservation doesn't mean squat except to my pocketbook.



Compounding the problem is not helpful to solving the problem.

Compounding the problem would be making yourself less productive just to save energy.
 
Crap I don't know how to do that quotey thing right. sorry
 
I have no interest in giving up my AC but is it necessary for some businesses to be frigid in summer. Could the AC be set at 72 or 75 instead of what feels like 65?
 
Compounding the problem would be making yourself less productive just to save energy.

Running your AC less often does not make you less productive.
 
I guess if one's productivity is relegated to oprah and judge judy this is true. :ssst:

I'm having a hard time thinking of jobs where going from 65 degrees to 80 degrees would grind work to a halt.
 
I'm having a hard time thinking of jobs where going from 65 degrees to 80 degrees would grind work to a halt.




I have a subdivision in my company that runs low voltage wire for datacenters, offices, etc.... They are far more productive at "60" than they are at "80".... This is but one example.
 
I have a subdivision in my company that runs low voltage wire for datacenters, offices, etc.... They are far more productive at "60" than they are at "80".... This is but one example.

Good for you. Now how about the other 99.99% of jobs that function fine with that temperature difference? You're being deliberately ridiculous here, nobody is suggesting that people fry sensitive equipment to save on AC.
 
Good for you. Now how about the other 99.99% of jobs that function fine with that temperature difference? You're being deliberately ridiculous here, nobody is suggesting that people fry sensitive equipment to save on AC.




99.9%?


Where did you arrive at that number? Talk about rediculous. :lamo
 
I know, let's try an experiment.

We'll give Rev and Duece each a Store, side by side. Both stores must sell the same things, at the same prices.
HOWEVER, Deuce can put a sign in his window saying HIS store is helping save Mother Earth by keeping the AC at 80.

Let's see who has the bigger sales at the end of summer.
 
99.9%?


Where did you arrive at that number? Talk about rediculous. :lamo
By all means, continue to ignore the substance of what I'm trying to say. Bill the insurance man who sits at a computer responding to insurance claims doesn't drop dead if you turn down the AC a few degrees.

I know, let's try an experiment.

We'll give Rev and Duece each a Store, side by side. Both stores must sell the same things, at the same prices.
HOWEVER, Deuce can put a sign in his window saying HIS store is helping save Mother Earth by keeping the AC at 80.

Let's see who has the bigger sales at the end of summer.

Well, the goal is to have both stores keep the AC at 80, so your experiment would be a strange one. However, given the popularity of "going green" these days, I suspect the outcome might have a chance at being something other than what you're implying.
 
By all means, continue to ignore the substance of what I'm trying to say. Bill the insurance man who sits at a computer responding to insurance claims doesn't drop dead if you turn down the AC a few degrees.


Yes, but he smells like a pig when he has to interact with clients.


He gets lower sales when face to face meetings are in an uncomfortable climate.

His dry cleaning bill and its associated pollution goes through the roof when he has to clean his garments more often.


Well, the goal is to have both stores keep the AC at 80, so your experiment would be a strange one. However, given the popularity of "going green" these days, I suspect the outcome might have a chance at being something other than what you're implying.



Yet the hippy co-op market down the street has those wasteful open refrigerators for produce and what not, and they keep thier cooling down to a comfortable 75. :lol:


People talk the talk. I could sell more hippy beads and hemp shopping bags in my AC store than you could in your 85 degree sweat lodge. :ssst:
 
At least until our consumption habits drive energy prices through the roof.

Also, dry cleaning energy use is nowhere near air conditioning.
 
Last edited:
Good for you. Now how about the other 99.99% of jobs that function fine with that temperature difference? You're being deliberately ridiculous here, nobody is suggesting that people fry sensitive equipment to save on AC.
file.axd


Which temperature is best for your productivity?

There you have it, workers are most productive between 71 and 77 degrees Fahrenheit, any hotter than that and there is a dramatic decrease in productivity. Good day, sir. :lol:
 
At least until our consumption habits drive energy prices through the roof.


sky-is-falling.jpg



Also, dry cleaning energy use is nowhere near air conditioning.



"Dry cleaning can help keep your favorite cashmere sweater in top condition, but it’s not always the best choice for the environment. Perchloroethylene, also known as tetrachloroethylene, perc, PCE, C2Cl4, Cl2C=CCl2, or tetrachloroethene, is a solvent used by 90% of dry cleaning businesses in the United States. Perchloroethylene is a highly effective cleaning agent, although it can result in color bleeding or loss if not used properly. However, perchloroethylene is also toxic and causes several harmful side effects."


Awesome! :thumbs:
 
Although I am generally against government regulation, this is an area where regulation helps.

1) The minimum standard, as dictated by the EPA, is now 13 SEER.

2) Get a 16 SEER system with a 13 Energy Efficiency Ratio installed, and get up to $1,500 back in tax credits.

3) No chlorinated refrigerants are allowed in new equipment anymore. The new refrigerant is R-410A, which contains no chlorine.

4) By law, ALL refrigerants must be recovered and either disposed of or recycled.

These are all good rules. The ozone hole is now actually beginning to close a little, recovering refrigerants is reducing the amount of carbon in the atmosphere, along with the amount of chlorine, and the higher SEER being mandated means that fewer power plants will need to be built.

It's not the end-all solution to global warming, nor the problem with the ozone hole, but it's a good start.
 
Last edited:
sky-is-falling.jpg







"Dry cleaning can help keep your favorite cashmere sweater in top condition, but it’s not always the best choice for the environment. Perchloroethylene, also known as tetrachloroethylene, perc, PCE, C2Cl4, Cl2C=CCl2, or tetrachloroethene, is a solvent used by 90% of dry cleaning businesses in the United States. Perchloroethylene is a highly effective cleaning agent, although it can result in color bleeding or loss if not used properly. However, perchloroethylene is also toxic and causes several harmful side effects."


Awesome! :thumbs:

Simple mathematics of rapidly increasing demand and increasing difficulty and expense of oil extraction. Sky is falling? No, that's more conservative hyperbole. "Trouble ahead" is a more apt description.

Also, dry cleaning pollution is not dry cleaning energy usage.
 
Back
Top Bottom