Heat Pumps - How are People of modest means going to afford "clean energy?"

[JBG]

As Utility Bills Rise, Low-Income Americans Struggle for Access to Clean Energy

(link, no paywall)

Excerpt:

The Biden administration has deployed various programs to try to increase access to clean energy. But systems that could help lower bills are still out of reach for many low-income households.

Cindy Camp is one of many Americans facing rising utility costs. Ms. Camp, who lives in Baltimore with three family members, said her gas and electric bills kept “going up and up” — reaching as high as $900 a month. Her family has tried to use less hot water by doing fewer loads of laundry, and she now eats more fast food to save on grocery bills.

Ms. Camp would like to save money on energy bills by transitioning to more energy-efficient appliances like a heat pump and solar panels. But she simply cannot afford it.

“It’s a struggle for me to even maintain food,” Ms. Camp said.

The story speaks for itself. The U.S. is chasing its tail to solve a theoretical problem. And, in multi-story buildings heat pumps don't work too well. Trust me, the rich people at the WEF and other hoity-toity groups can afford to UBER their way around. "Saving the earth" is being done on the backs of the lower middle class and poor.

 

[Visbek]

The story speaks for itself. The U.S. is chasing its tail to solve a theoretical problem.

There is nothing "theoretical" about it.

2023 was, by far, the hottest year on record. The evidence is abundantly clear that climate change is real, it's happening. Like so many other environmental issues, it hits the poor the hardest.

The US federal government has also spent trillions over the years subsidizing fossil fuels and its supporting technologies, such as roads for individual fossil-fuel powered vehicles, or releasing massive amounts of oil from strategic reserves whenever the price of gasoline gets a tiny bit too high -- all while failing to serve working communities by providing decent public transportation.

If Americans and their government are willing to spend massively to support fossil fuels, it can certainly spend more moderate amounts to help lower income homes to transition to more efficient technologies.

And, in multi-story buildings heat pumps don't work too well.

Yes, they do. They also cost about 1/3 less to operate than fossil fuel options.

Nor is that the end-all and be-all of making homes efficient. Other options include, but are not limited to...
• More efficient appliances
• Better insulation
• Weather-proofing windows
• Stop the trend of Americans building larger homes (US homes are 3 times larger than in 1950, while average household size has dropped from ~3.5 to 2.5)

Trust me, the rich people at the WEF and other hoity-toity groups can afford to UBER their way around. "Saving the earth" is being done on the backs of the lower middle class and poor.

Yes, that is a major issue. That's one reason why plans often include increasing taxes on the ultra-wealthy.

 

[JBG]

Yes, that is a major issue. That's one reason why plans often include increasing taxes on the ultra-wealthy.

The most prominent tax effort in connection with the environment has been NYC's "congestion pricing." Does that fall mostly on the ultra-wealthy? And trust me the "ultra-wealthy" can organize their affairs to avoid the impact of those taxes.

P.S. - The "hottest year on record" is based on algorithms, not actual numbers.

 

[ttwtt78640]

There is nothing "theoretical" about it.

2023 was, by far, the hottest year on record. The evidence is abundantly clear that climate change is real, it's happening. Like so many other environmental issues, it hits the poor the hardest.

The US federal government has also spent trillions over the years subsidizing fossil fuels and its supporting technologies, such as roads for individual fossil-fuel powered vehicles, or releasing massive amounts of oil from strategic reserves whenever the price of gasoline gets a tiny bit too high -- all while failing to serve working communities by providing decent public transportation.

If Americans and their government are willing to spend massively to support fossil fuels, it can certainly spend more moderate amounts to help lower income homes to transition to more efficient technologies.


Yes, they do. They also cost about 1/3 less to operate than fossil fuel options.

Nor is that the end-all and be-all of making homes efficient. Other options include, but are not limited to...
• More efficient appliances
• Better insulation
• Weather-proofing windows
• Stop the trend of Americans building larger homes (US homes are 3 times larger than in 1950, while average household size has dropped from ~3.5 to 2.5)


Yes, that is a major issue. That's one reason why plans often include increasing taxes on the ultra-wealthy.

The problem is that federal ‘transitioning’ (to ‘greener’ technology) subsidies are mostly in the form of non-refundable federal income tax (FIT) credits - which are worthless to those who pay no FIT, but great for those with higher annual incomes.

 

[dmpi]

The heat pump works both ways, for heating and cooling. Everyone needs a heater, but now poor people get a 'free' air conditioner. So people now run this system all year round using up even more power than before.

 

[Integrityrespec]

As Utility Bills Rise, Low-Income Americans Struggle for Access to Clean Energy

(link, no paywall)



The story speaks for itself. The U.S. is chasing its tail to solve a theoretical problem. And, in multi-story buildings heat pumps don't work too well. Trust me, the rich people at the WEF and other hoity-toity groups can afford to UBER their way around. "Saving the earth" is being done on the backs of the lower middle class and poor.

Here's another example. Poor African nations with little to no infrastructure where women spend their day doing menial labor. A large part of that is gathering wood for fuel for a host of uses. Windmills aren't coming, solar panels aren't coming. So trying to mix Africa into the climate change mix as often happens is silly. Those folks have so many other needs.
Climate change models with hand picked numbers to plug in to make an argument that doesn't really exist.
All these people need less expensive energy not more expensive.

 

[Visbek]

The problem is that federal ‘transitioning’ (to ‘greener’ technology) subsidies are mostly in the form of non-refundable federal income tax (FIT) credits - which are worthless to those who pay no FIT, but great for those with higher annual incomes.

Yes, and that problem can be solved by adjusting the tax incentives, or finding other ways to subsidize transition costs.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Here's another example. Poor African nations with little to no infrastructure where women spend their day doing menial labor. A large part of that is gathering wood for fuel for a host of uses. Windmills aren't coming, solar panels aren't coming. So trying to mix Africa into the climate change mix as often happens is silly. Those folks have so many other needs.
Climate change models with hand picked numbers to plug in to make an argument that doesn't really exist.
All these people need less expensive energy not more expensive.

Wood is a renewable resource.

 

[Winston]

Heat pumps aren’t going to work during the heating season for most northern states. The efficiency drops off pretty steeply as temperatures get below 40 F.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Yes, and that problem can be solved by adjusting the tax incentives, or finding other ways to subsidize transition costs.

Many things can/could be, I’m talking about what (current) policy is.

 

[Visbek]

The most prominent tax effort in connection with the environment has been NYC's "congestion pricing." Does that fall mostly on the ultra-wealthy?

OK, let me get this straight. I talk about a stated policy plan which discusses adding wealth taxes, which specifically target the wealthiest in the US. You flat-out ignore anything along those lines, and instead talk about a congestion tax... which has only been legislatively passed in one US city... and hasn't even been implemented yet... and only covers around 10% of the area of said single city.... as the "most prominent tax." This means what, exactly? That the only environmental tax we can levy is a congestion charge?

Back in the real world, the purpose of congestion pricing is to discourage driving in parts of Manhattan. This reduces pollution (which, again, hits poorer households harder), reduces traffic (which benefits everyone, especially those traveling by means other than cars), makes the area safer, and so on. In most cases, nudging people to take public transport instead of driving will save them money, and in many cases will be faster as well.

And trust me the "ultra-wealthy" can organize their affairs to avoid the impact of those taxes.

So we should just let the ultra-wealthy get away with unlimited tax avoidance? Why bother to even try to tax them in the first place?

P.S. - The "hottest year on record" is based on algorithms, not actual numbers.

Spare me this rank bullshit. The evidence is abundantly clear that humans have caused the environment to warm for over 170 years now. If you can't accept that basic fact, then you aren't debating in good faith.

What next? Are you going to say that cigarettes aren't actually carcinogenic?

 

[Integrityrespec]

Wood is a renewable resource.

Oh, so we need to stop all the regulations on mining, timber cutting, drilling in forested areas then. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Oh, so we need to stop all the regulations on mining, timber cutting, drilling in forested areas then. Thanks for clearing that up.

Nobody mines or drills for wood

 

[ttwtt78640]

Heat pumps aren’t going to work during the heating season for most northern states. The efficiency drops off pretty steeply as temperatures get below 40 F.

While that is somewhat true, it’s a drop from a very high initial efficiency rate.

The claim that heat pumps don’t work well in really cold weather is often repeated by fossil-fuel companies, which have a competing product to sell.

There’s a kernel of truth here—heat pumps can be less efficient in extreme cold. As the temperature difference between inside and outside increases, a heat pump will have to work harder to gather heat from that outside air and disperse it into the room, so efficiencies drop.

Everything you need to know about the wild world of heat pumps

Heat pumps could help address climate change and save you money. Here’s how they work.

www.technologyreview.com

 

[Integrityrespec]

OK, let me get this straight. I talk about a stated policy plan which discusses adding wealth taxes, which specifically target the wealthiest in the US. You flat-out ignore anything along those lines, and instead talk about a congestion tax... which has only been legislatively passed in one US city... and hasn't even been implemented yet... and only covers around 10% of the area of said single city.... as the "most prominent tax." This means what, exactly? That the only environmental tax we can levy is a congestion charge?

Back in the real world, the purpose of congestion pricing is to discourage driving in parts of Manhattan. This reduces pollution (which, again, hits poorer households harder), reduces traffic (which benefits everyone, especially those traveling by means other than cars), makes the area safer, and so on. In most cases, nudging people to take public transport instead of driving will save them money, and in many cases will be faster as well.


So we should just let the ultra-wealthy get away with unlimited tax avoidance? Why bother to even try to tax them in the first place?


Spare me this rank bullshit. The evidence is abundantly clear that humans have caused the environment to warm for over 170 years now. If you can't accept that basic fact, then you aren't debating in good faith.

What next? Are you going to say that cigarettes aren't actually carcinogenic?

170 Years of Earth Surface Temperature Data Show No Evidence of Significant Warming

Author: Thomas K. Bjorklund, University of Houston, Dept. of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Science & Research [Notice: This November 2019 post is now updated with multiple changes on 5/3/2020…

wattsupwiththat.com

 

[Winston]

While that is somewhat true, it’s a drop from a very high initial efficiency rate.

Everything you need to know about the wild world of heat pumps

Heat pumps could help address climate change and save you money. Here’s how they work.

www.technologyreview.com

Yeah, I hear conflicting things about them.

 

[Integrityrespec]

Nobody mines or drills for wood

LOL. Again you insight is remarkable. Let me clear this up for you. Didn't say that happens, it was a statement about overzealous environmentalist who want to protect against those things in some areas by denying cutting or clearing of timber to do so. Hope that make this more clear for all.

 

[mrjurrs]

As Utility Bills Rise, Low-Income Americans Struggle for Access to Clean Energy

(link, no paywall)



The story speaks for itself. The U.S. is chasing its tail to solve a theoretical problem. And, in multi-story buildings heat pumps don't work too well. Trust me, the rich people at the WEF and other hoity-toity groups can afford to UBER their way around. "Saving the earth" is being done on the backs of the lower middle class and poor.

Theoretical? Nope.

Heat pumps are a relatively new innovation that will decrease in price as they grow in acceptance. Your final sentence would be correct if you removed middle class and added 'of the world' to the end.

 

[Visbek]

Heat pumps aren’t going to work during the heating season for most northern states.

It's not 1995 anymore. Yes, they do work in winter; many new units work down to -22º F. Long story short, you just need to get one with a variable speed compressor, and/or vapor injection.

Can Heat Pumps Actually Work in Cold Climates? - Consumer Reports

Consumer Reports looked into the mixed messages about whether modern heat pumps can truly replace traditional heating in cold climates. Here's what we found.

www.consumerreports.org

Even when temperatures are below freezing, heat pumps are up to 3 times more efficient than fossil fuel based devices.

Heat Pumps Up To 3 Times More Efficient In Cold Conditions - CleanTechnica

Heat pumps work fine in cold weather and can save customers lots of money on heating bills by working more efficiently.

cleantechnica.com

 

[madman]

The heat pump works both ways, for heating and cooling. Everyone needs a heater, but now poor people get a 'free' air conditioner. So people now run this system all year round using up even more power than before.

maybe the dumb conservative runs it all year. Meanwhile, normal people mind their monthly electric bill.

think before you speak.

 

[Winston]

It's not 1995 anymore. Yes, they do work in winter; many new units work down to -22º F. Long story short, you just need to get one with a variable speed compressor, and/or vapor injection.

Can Heat Pumps Actually Work in Cold Climates? - Consumer Reports

Consumer Reports looked into the mixed messages about whether modern heat pumps can truly replace traditional heating in cold climates. Here's what we found.

www.consumerreports.org

Even when temperatures are below freezing, heat pumps are up to 3 times more efficient than fossil fuel based devices.

Heat Pumps Up To 3 Times More Efficient In Cold Conditions - CleanTechnica

Heat pumps work fine in cold weather and can save customers lots of money on heating bills by working more efficiently.

cleantechnica.com

Yeah, the reading I did just now said that there are compressors out there driven by inverters that allow them to exceed 60hz.

Still, for most heat pumps on the market what I said appears to be true, you will need an auxiliary heat source, heat strips, when temperatures drop below freezing.

I’m still a believer in a 90% gas furnace.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Yeah, I hear conflicting things about them.

You are correct that a furnace is required in colder climates (for days which remain below freezing), but the heating season, which includes many days with temperatures above freezing, is significantly longer in those climates, making using a heat pump more efficient than using the furnace (alone).

 

[Winston]

You are correct that a furnace is required in colder climates (for days which remain below freezing), but the heating season, which includes many days with temperatures above freezing, is significantly longer in those climates, making using a heat pump more efficient than using the furnace (alone).

It just comes down to picking the correct heat pump for the job as well.

 

[Manc Skipper]

170 Years of Earth Surface Temperature Data Show No Evidence of Significant Warming

Author: Thomas K. Bjorklund, University of Houston, Dept. of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Science & Research [Notice: This November 2019 post is now updated with multiple changes on 5/3/2020…

wattsupwiththat.com

Fake news.

 

[madman]

Fake news.

why do people read shit blogs??

Watts Up with That - Bias and Credibility

CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence.

mediabiasfactcheck.com