Ask HN: How much gas we could save in EU if we reduce our heating temp by 3°?
This question is related to the potential SWIFT block that might happen any time soon.
It sounds maybe naive but I was thinking that if we almost all turn down our heating system by ~3° Celsius (compared to our current settings) we could potentially save gas consumption that can be better used for other purposes. What do you think?
244 comments
[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 273 ms ] threadIf nuclear is still working, demand for gas will be much lower hence lowering the dependency on Russia
(and while Russia is the biggest source, there's alternatives, and more will come up due to the conflict)
Source for all numbers: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/sankey/energy/sankey.htm...
16.03e6 TJ gas total
2.03e6 TJ used for electricity only
2.30e6 TJ used for electricity & heat, 60% of resulting (usable) energy is electricity
-> 1.37TJ
-> 3.40TJ of gas used for electricity, around 21%
Had other industrial nations acted like France in the 70s our problems, health wise, climate change wise and geopolitical would be about 1000x better.
- Less uranium is being produced than being consumed.
- The Russian sphere of influence is responsible for most uranium exports by far.
If that's true then it's completely unrealistic for heat pumps to become mainstream anytime soon.
We need to find alternative sources of natural gas, fast. Fracking may be a good choice at this point in time.
"Households in England and Wales to be offered new £5,000 Government grant from April 2022 to help replace gas boilers with heat pumps."
Which is a long term win, as they won't need to import as much fossil fuels, and it helps meet climate targets. Any impact on Putin is merely a bonus.
My idea is that augmenting with heat pumps is the most sensible step for most people. Such a system might provide a portion of the heat, and could be used for smaller heat zones (eg, some downstairs living room and/or bedroom) rather than the whole building.
My thought is that the advantage for augmenting is that it makes the geothermal setup much more affordable. You'll not end up needing to go super deep, or to install sophisticated insulation barriers.
That way, your geothermal setup can be pretty primitive.
- Raise tsunami or hire incredibly incompetent operators to create nuclear reactor incident
- Wait for reactor containment vessel to crack open
- Collect hydrogen produced from hydrolysis and send it down the gas pipes
For context[0], in 2013 (the year before Russia seized Crimea), Germany generated about 100 TWh of electricity from nuclear energy, and last year it was about 70 TWh. In that time, renewables have nearly doubled, from about 150 TWh to 240 TWh.
Of course, annualised figures don't account for the fact that there is less solar potential (and more heating demand) in the winter, but if the cost of importing non-Russian gas is cheaper than the cost of replacing ageing nuclear power stations or extending their design life, then the only concern is how much you are slowing down the race to net zero.
[0] https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/g...
I mostly see this type of writing in formal settings like contracts, or in cheques I think it's also done (but I've never seen a cheque so not sure). Now I have a chance to ask! Why do you write the same number twice? I always assumed it was to make reading easier with large numbers (not having to count groups of zeroes) or prevent writing errors (in formal contracts), but this is not a large number and HN has an edit system.
Germany doesn't have an LNG import terminal:
"The current large-scale LNG receiving countries in Europe are Belgium (one terminal), France (four terminals), Greece (one terminal), Italy (three terminals), Lithuania (one terminal), Malta (one terminal), the Netherlands (one terminal), Poland (one terminal), Portugal (one terminal), Spain (seven terminals – six operational), Turkey (four terminals) and the UK (three terminals). Collectively, their overall LNG capacity is 237 billion cubic metres (of gas) (bcm), which is sufficient to cover approximately 40% of Europe’s gas demand. Russia also has an LNG regasification terminal which is supplied entirely by Russian gas." [2]
[1] https://www.norskpetroleum.no/en/production-and-exports/the-...
[2] https://www.natlawreview.com/article/lng-europe-2021-current...
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/infographs/energy/bloc-2...
E.g. we keep our house at ~15ºC. So 12ºC / 54ºF would be really pushing it.
For example, if other sources of gas are twice as expensive, then Europe might want to import half as much from alternative suppliers as it does from Russia currently. If, on the other hand, other sources are only 10% more expensive, then reducing consumption by about 10% would produce an economically neutral result. (The only difference would be that people would have X amount less thermal energy, and would be Y degrees colder on average as a result).
https://graphics.reuters.com/UKRAINE-CRISIS/GAS/gdpzynlxovw/
Many EU gas boilers are set too high, such that the boilers don't operate in condensing mode. You could save 6-8% gas by doing this: https://www.theheatinghub.co.uk/articles/turn-down-the-boile...
Octopus Energy has some further tips: https://octopus.energy/blog/winter-workout-gas-saving-tips/
The real question then is how can you insulate every place in your country better.
The above is a complex question. There is the supply chain of insulation, contractors to do the work, and how to pay for it all. Still it is worth looking at.
So the question should be framed in the context of the timeframe being days not months. If you want to significantly reduce energy consumption instantly, turning the thermostat down is incredibly effective while you work on longer timescale things like insulation and alternate heating sources.
There's quite some monthly data on Air/Water systems (extracting heat from outside air, into a central heating system). I suppose good Air/Air systems could be similar. Indeed above >0, or at least >5C it would be beneficial (even more so if you also have PV installed)
We should look at insulation (for example, last year there were big protests in Britain pushing for this[2]), but it will take months or years to complete changes. Turning down the heating can be done in seconds.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30479093
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/insulate-britain
Older houses sometimes still can benefit from insulation improvements.
So go in this order:
1. effective insulation
2. conscientious and smart use of energy and avoidance of very inefficient heating systems. avoid heating large areas when they don't really need to be at very warm temperatures. (careful though to avoid damp cold range of temperatures where wood rot and permanent damage to homes will happen). Avoid unburnt natural gas, eg in badly maintained or cheap cooktops. The ideal household kitchen has ~ 4 gas burners, and one or two induction burners flush with the counter, eg https://www.amazon.com/Countertop-Portable-Induction-170-Min... This minimizes unlit gas for those very short heating needs in the kitchen.
3. think about upgrading to very efficient systems. These most promising could be (depending on your area and scale of heating needs):
-- electric-heat cogeneration
-- heat pumps that use the large volume of ground underneath the basement as geothermal heat-mass reservoir. Heat the ground mass during the summer to provide AC, and squirrel away the cold thermal mass during late fall and late winter+spring.
House is also well insulated, with heat recycling ventilation. Objective is to keep a consistent temperature.
The advice also doesn't have to be "turn it off", just "turn it down to 5°C" which would be safe indefinitely. There has to be another reason why the advice is to keep heating 24/7.
In other words, it will automatically adjust depending on the time of day, temperature outside, etc. It is possible to influence how it works, via 'administrator' settings meant for the repair guys, but I haven't touched those.
But note that the OP has not just radiant floors, but also a heat pump (which isn’t using gas, so we’re far afield from the overall question, but setting that aside).
Heat pump systems are generally sized so that compressor’s sweet spot is pretty close to your expected normal/max output.
To be honest, this is more about the lifespan of the compressor than it is energy efficiency, but there is also a small loss of efficiency if you get the system into a state where it’s turning on/off frequently.
So it seems plausible and sensible that a radiant-heat pump system would recommend circulating 24/7 in the winter rather than cycling on/off a lot.
Everytime I watched the housing offerings in Dublin I wondered how any sane being would spend upwards 1M£ for a small, moldy goat pen while parking their Porsche infront.
Edit: is it more common to use forced-air heating where you live? Are buildings brick/concrete? Heating vía radiators w/ warm water and concrete buildings tend to have more inertia in my experience, the temp will not drop down that much overnight, but that's not the case in my current home.
We're talking to our lawyers.
I personally thing that "huge" sacrifice is feasible specially when the comfortableness is directly related to democratic countries being invaded on what is just the first step of something even much more sinister.
No.
Gloves get worn at maybe -5C, -10C. Maybe.
> Canadian Standards Association (CSA) and ASHRAE standards are used for thermal comfort and ventilation in indoor offices [....] These standards are a good resource to use when considering the thermal conditions in indoor office space.
> According to CSA standards Z1004-12 – Work place Ergonomics – the comfort level at work is determined by temperature, humidity, wind and work-rest cycle. The optimal temperature range for office comfort should be 23 to 26 °C with 50% relative humidity in summers and 20 to 23.5°C at 50% relative humidity in winter.
https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/servi...
(Also, at best "cool', not 'very cold'. Let's have proper scaling here.)
I could see someone living their whole life in a tropical climate not being able to tolerate these temps, but in almost all of Europe this is a normal outdoor temperature. In the parts of Europe that actually get cold enough to need active heating, it's nothing. You would get used to it pretty quickly.
21 is cozy, 20 is absolutely fine, 19 during the day is where we’re at now because toddler (who seems to be adapting better than me). We’ve been 18 at night for years - a big ol’ down comforter from my in-laws makes that ideal.
19°C is fine if I'm remodelling, hoovering, doing the dishes, or anything else that involves not sitting behind a desk, and I don't mind being out in freezing cold as long as I'm moving and have very, very good gloves on, but working behind a desk with my brain requires my body to be comfortable, relaxed, and not annoyed by stiff fingers hitting the wrong keys.
I can adjust to higher temperatures just fine, but not sitting still (even with regular active breaks) at anything below 21°C. Our company used to rent office space when we were a startup in a place that didn't turn on the heating until temperatures outside dropped below a certain threshold. Sometimes this meant 19°C or 20°C for weeks: I don't get used to it; it just stops me being productive (and nice).
In most situations, I feel like people talking extensively about grit assume the difficulty level is the same for everyone. And they tend to be antagonistic towards people who try to explain why some things are more difficult and instead double down on pushing grit.
I wonder how many people feel that way. I've never heard of anyone having to take a hot shower to keep warm in a 20°C room no matter the clothing. I wonder if it's just a taboo, something that simply doesn't come up, or if this happens to one in a thousand.
As for tall and slim, I'm also Dutch so I imagine I'd have heard of this more than zero times before if that were the main cause.
"Hey, do you know why the English run their water pipes on the outside of their houses?"
"No?"
"It's so that they can get to them easier when they freeze!"
And then everyone laughs.
...and then years later you visit England, find out that it's actually true, and then you cry.
It's pretty eye-opening how terrible the insulation standards are outside the Nordics. It's one of those things we take for absolutely granted, and then you realize that absolutely no-one else really does this.
This video made the rounds a couple of years ago:
https://www.instagram.com/p/B2zi5GKFCf_/
Everyone from the Nordics commenting on it went "aawwww, how cute!", everyone else went "OMG THE HEATING BILL!!??!??!"
No, look at how the snow is piled up against the windows without melting. Those are quadruple-paned insulated panoramic windows. They do not leak heat.
Triple glazed windows, 25+cm insulation, heat pump + heat recuperation, solar panels and you have a passive home. No need for gas which is a fire hazard.
But if you're building a new house, wouldn't you roll in district heating if readily available.
Agreed, patching district heating into an old house might be hard/expensive.
There is also risk for the future. What if there is some corruption and private entity would take over trying to squeeze money from the people cause it's a monopoly?
I think owned by the consumers.
Indeed local regulation for the lot of land I'm on stipulates that district heating must be the primary heat source.
This gives it some economies of scale, I'm guessing...
But I do wonder if geothermal power will come along to make district heating cheap and renewable.
There are literally zero drawbacks to the way it's constructed and heated, no compromise needed, so this HN Ask is so weird to me, and it's clear that me and OP live in completely different worlds.
The Nordics have crazy high standards for insulation. We've reached the point where increasing the standards no longer makes sense.
One thing I have found is of course heat rises. I put a fan on the floor pointed at 45 degrees toward the ceiling and suddenly my place is warm with the same heating settings. I've done this at the last 4 places I've lived and the difference is striking. One place even used those high wall mounted air-conditioning + heater that blow the air out but it wasn't enough without the extra fan for circulation.
If you want to save energy, insulate or move somewhere warmer
The only risk is you might not want to go back home for spring.
It's not naive. Going to "pure" building science (I studied this in uni) the formula for the building heat loss is Q=U.A.dT where dT is the temperature difference between indoors and the outdoors.
If you assume that outdoors is 5°C on average in year, and indoors is 21°C, dT is 16. reducing the indoor temp to 18°C puts the dT at 13.
Since everything else stays the same, you'd expect a 23% decrease in heat loss (Q). And that much less energy need to be replenished.
In the real world buildings are more complicated than that. Also you may risk giving more people diseases and reduce cognitive abilities when things get cold. So perhaps also tell the public to dress warmer and drink more hot fluids.
This captures the expected dT on days when heating is required and ignores days when heating is not used. In the summer for example...
...except in the US cooling is also common so it actually captures both heating and cooling and involves multiple energy sources in many locations...which brings up that degree-days are highly variable at the local level -- consider the difference between Norway and Greece in the EU.
degree-day https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/units-and-calculators/de...
https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2022/01/the-revenge-of-the...
tl;dr is that heating people rather than spaces is a great idea with much more mileage than we give it credit for.
It's widely accepted that ebikes are some of the most energy efficient personal transport possible, because they're moving so little vehicle mass relative to passenger payload. Just 250 watts can give you rapid enough point to point mobility for trips up to 10 miles or so.
In the same way, heating and insulating people is vastly more efficient than heating air and brick walls. 100w of active electric heating together with a couple of layers of clothing is plenty to keep most people pretty comfortable at an ambient temperature of 14-15c.
Example: Let's say for half year the average temperature is 11°C and for half year it's 31°C. That gives an average temp of 21°C and a δT of 0, even though you would still need to heat for half a year.
This is an old wife's tale. Especially at 18C. No one is going to be getting diseases.
Also, the immune system works better hot, aka fever. Cooling the body can be expected to suppress the immune system.
Before you dismiss proverbs (old wives’ tales), consider that they could persist because they’re true.
I was curious, so I looked it up, and according to [1] and [2], that's a natural reaction to help the nose turn cold, dry air into warm, moist air.
"When cold air enters the nose, it stimulates the sensory nerves within the nasal cavity to activate a process via a cholinergic reflex or pathway. It causes the vessels in the nasal cavity to expand and become engorged, leading to congestion and mucus secretion which produces a runny nose. It’s a compensatory mechanism that’s trying to maintain ideal conditions inside the nose by adding humidity and warmth while filtering the air."
1: https://medicine.uq.edu.au/article/2017/10/why-does-your-nos...
2: https://wexnermedical.osu.edu/blog/is-the-cold-weather-causi...
We have evidence-based medicine exactly because even when it would seem logical, biology puts a curve on that and the opposite of the intended effect happens.
If you sit still at 18°C, working on a computer, you'll get very cold before the ~3h of work in the morning is over if you don't also adjust your clothing. I don't find it such a leap to assume this body temperature change reduces your immune system, but then I don't really know. I'd be interested in the answer, but at this point OP's argument makes more sense to me than yours and neither is backed up with links so...
That's the thing though. If you live in an area where heating is required in the winter, you definitely have the necessary clothing to get through a period of 18 °C in your home.
I was shocked by the housing situation, prices were going crazy sure, that’s to be expected, but the actual quality of the housing was also terrible, and there wasn’t any cultural awareness of how bad they were
Didn’t move in the end, mainly because we wouldn’t have the money for the kids to see grandparents. Still not sure it was the right decision.
House prices weren't too bad but quality wise they weren't great. I can't say they were much worse from London tbh (but it may be more related to how everything is expensive in London, outside of London house quality is way better).
Also taxes are pretty bad.
I'm completely appalled at how they're dealing with COVID so I'm glad I kept away from NZ and AU
House prices are very very high relative to wages and the quality is deeply average. Comparing house prices to London is not very logical, as the wages are nowhere near the same.
Dealing with covid - compare the death rate to pretty much anywhere. That was the point and what we wanted.
I eventually found a house that had decent insulation, and since then I've never let it get cold in my place. I've got solar, and I keep the heat cranked.
Edit: and I know this because I start the workday at 17°C in winter months. I live in an old building with poor-ish window insulation so I turn off heating in most rooms for the night, and in the bedroom for the day to conserve energy.
During the cold snap where it was below -15C during the night in the southern US last year I did exactly what i specified, and i didn't bother using my central heat. I haven't used central heat at all for 2 years. I do have mini split air systems, but at -15C they spend more time defrosting than heating, so the mitigation was to use lots of blankets in the bedrooms and turn the minisplits to heat at about 6AM to take the chill out for the morning routines, but shut them off at 10PM. There's no sense in wasting heat defrosting on "less efficient" heat pumps.
for perspective it's about 19C(66.2F) and i'm wearing shorts and a short sleeve shirt, indoors. One other thing that may not be true everywhere is i run de-humidifiers nearly year round, so that does dump about 800-1000W in the air when they're actively removing moisture, so your mileage may vary.
Yeah something doesn't add up here. Unless that lamp has a crazy wattage and you look down at this "mining" laptop on your lap for 8 hours a day (no desk, all heat going to legs, wrists, and hands), I don't really see this being realistic.
I do have to use more heating if the temperature stays below 4C or so for more than 24 hours. That is, my indoor ambient temp was 11-12C on the night it was -15C outside - had it remained that cold for longer than a night i would have had to raise the indoor temp with electric heat, as mentioned, the split-air was woefully inadequate. I was just trying to avoid the central electric heat since it smells bad the first few times you use it in a season and it always wakes everyone up.
all this being said, people are different and my wife and son would have been miserable in the exact same situation. I was speaking directly to "fingers get too cold to type" with the laptop thing.
having a couple hundred watts of heat per person will lower your overall heating bill, all else being equal.
Building is from 1910s with central heating that I can control for my apartment, so doesn't affect my electric bill directly. Any form of electric heating would likely be more expensive.
Finally, I start wearing shorts and t-shirts at around 25°C, and my favourite indoor temp in summer is 27°C so I guess you're just better adapted for cooler weather.
> I start the workday at 17°C in winter months. I live in an old building with poor-ish window insulation
That might also be your problem rather than the temperature. If there is any amount of air movement, like even just air being refreshed so to say, that takes away any lingering heat and replaces it with new, cold air. Of course, everyone's internal thermostat also works differently so I'm not saying this must be it but... something to consider.
Yes, very possible. The windows have basic insulation but there is a small draft for sure. I'm renting so I'm not going to do any window renovations though.
I do notice in the morning if I forget to turn on the heater (we're on the ground floor but sandwiched between neighbors who seem to keep it toastier) and the room is ~15°C. It takes an hour before I get cold after coming out of bed, but then, yup, typing is one of the things I notice after that time.
The bedrooms are colder BTW.
You have it backwards. I'm saying there's no difference. The person making the claim there is a difference is the one who needs evidence.
https://jech.bmj.com/content/57/10/784
>most countries suffer from 5% to 30% excess winter mortality
>The strong, positive relation with environmental temperature and strong negative relation with thermal efficiency indicate that housing standards in southern and western Europe play strong parts in such seasonality
Could you explain this part? This is exactly opposite of what I've seen my entire life.
That's taking about what's generally accepted. The body of literature in this field defines a "comfort zone" that spans around and above 20°C. it's been studied that with better comfort there is better attention. Also being cold appears to weaken the immune system.
It "appears" to weaken by giving it a run to its knees, but actually making it stronger while doing that.
If you expose yourself to more cold, you start never getting ill.
First of all, the average yearly temperature means nothing for indoor heating. Suppose this average is 20°C: it could be half of the year at 5°C and half at 35°. It's even more complex, for instance if cold days and hot days alternate they have very little impact. The heating is mostly needed when the temperature stays low several days in a row.
Then, there are external sources of heat, like sun or human heat. They can increase the indoor temperature for a few degrees. I worked for years in an office, facing South, with no heating even when it was freezing outside, and it was okay.
Finally, the formula does not imply what you said. In plain words, it means the energy (heat) is proportional to the mass and the temperature difference. The factor depends on the material. So it does mean that increasing the temperature of 13° instead of 16° uses about 23% less energy. But it does not mean that this much energy is needed to keep this temperature inside a building. Suppose that, with an external temperature of 7° (the average for my city for February) an insulated building at 20° would lose 5° a day. Then dT=5 in the formula above. Whereas the same building at 17° would lose 3° per day, so dT=3, a 40% decrease in the energy needed.
In my opinion, there are too many factors to give a simple answer. It know it's possible to estimate this for a single building, given a proper model of the weather and sun exposure, but it is hard to generalize from an individual response.
* It's colder than average today, to reducing the setpoint has more effect vs an annual average. If sun takes part of the heating, then the ratio of dT to gas saved is even bigger.
* The formula actually does work that way, maybe you're thinking of a different formula? i.e. Q (flow of heat) is a function of some heat transfer coefficient (U), area (A) and the temperature difference (dT) between inside and outside. So the (simple) correlation between dT and gas consumption to maintain a temperature is linear. This will be influenced by e.g. wind (increases U, therefore gas consumption) and other factors of course.
Anyway, it's winter. If there is any time where you can reasonably reduce your gas consumption by lowering the thermostat, it's today. In fact, I'll try this now and see if it works. Maybe time to start a movement.
(Also note that residential heating and office account for roughly a third of gas consumption in e.g. the Netherlands. Reducing that by 20% is still 7% reduction in total, and potentially a 17.5% reduction in Russian gas given the current gas mix)
I'm all about dialing back the thermostat, but I've also noticed a huge comfort difference between 18C and 19C. Quality of life starts to nosedive for a few percent more saving; it's better to fix up your house.
For non naive calculation, one would expect using real world data to estimate the actual weighted average.
I mean it is ok to have a naive guesstimate, or to sound better, a Fermi estimate. But for order of magnitude guesstimate, just use 1 sig fig to convey you really don’t have that much confidence.
Also I think while providing a ratio is technically answering the question, but people probably expect the absolute scale, in terms of $ or may be a ratio comparing to annual spending (given a country.)
I think in short this is not a simple question and we should not pretend it to have simple answer.
- Before having to pay my own energy bill and, honestly, actually being aware at all that this is a choice, I would sit in a t-shirt and just heat up my bedroom to (presumably, I didn't measure back then) 23°C.
- With a cardigan* over the t-shirt, 21°C is just fine as well.
- Add one thin layer of long underpants and put up the hood of your cardigan and 19°C is fine as well.
- Second cardigan (I have a big comfy one that nicely fits over others) makes 17°C be on the low side but still warm enough.
- To go 16°C or lower, I need to add clothing that starts to impair mobility, like a jacket/coat meant for outside. Arms are fine; but fingers, legs, and feet get cold within two hours. This is a bit too extreme for me.
To-dos / failed things:
- I need to look into thicker pants meant to keep heat in rather than just look stylish (jeans) or act as underwear.
- For hands, I've tried fingerless gloves for typing reasons but I couldn't get used to it (it kept impairing my typing) and I ditched that idea again.
- A radiant heat source like infrared lamp is also a thing I'm considering, but I'd have to position it somehow to heat my hands and the one my girlfriend got has a very bright red color (and I'd want to check what the effect of that level/strength IR is on my eyes).
- A heated mouse helps (over longer periods of time it's noticeable, even at just 2.5W USB) but only for one hand, so it's not really a solution. Heated keyboard seems harder to make and has a lot of surface where heat gets lost.
- Intermittent movement, like 5 minutes of treadmill every hour is something I'm considering. Might also help towards exercise in general, since my current exercise scheme is nonexistent, but I wonder if that would add up to be enough or if it needs to be 30 minutes of continuous movement before it's in the realm of reasonably enough to stay healthy.
* Not a native speaker: I had not heard the word cardigan before. As wikipedia says on the sweater page: nomenclature can be quite confusing. What I mean is something thicker than a blouse but thinner than an outdoors jacket, with sleeves (long enough to cover your wrists), a zipper that can be closed, and often but not necessarily a hood. Hope I got the right word.
Also in lieu of heated keyboard and mouse, a laptop that is doing something energy intensive will put out 100-200W; some through the keyboard, but also to the nearby areas of the desk. I know it's not ideal for how a lot of people work, but i've gotten used to it. I also use a trackball instead of a mouse so i can just put the trackball near the laptop exhaust and keep it warm too.
So here's my advice for people:
1. Start today! Don't wait to see what happens in Ukraine. Lower your temperature by 1 degree right now. Just do it. 1 little degree isn't a big deal. Let your body acclimate to that. It'll happen on its own - our bodies constantly adjust to different temperatures throughout the year. Know that a temperature barely lower than you're used to won't give you hypothermia. It's not a threat to you. It's just a slightly different temperature so embrace it. Welcome the change, mentally choosing it. Once you're comfortable, lower the temperature again. Rinse and repeat. If you do this, you'll look back and be shocked at how you once thought a homeostasis temperature was necessary (or even desirable).
2. Eventually you'll feel the need for extra heating. The most efficient ways are directly heating the body through appropriate clothing and direct heat sources. For clothing, if you're cold, just add more. For direct heat, use a hot water bottle. You can also get an electric bed mattress pad. A heated mattress pad is amazing.
3. Warm food and drink: in summer, drink cold things. In winter, drink warm things. Eat warm foods like porridge (oatmeal/grits/cream of wheat/etc.), soup/stew, etc. When drinking, hold the hot mug in your hand. When eating, hold the hot bowl in your hand.
3. Water conservation - a lot of the water we use has been heated, for showers, washing hands, etc. Efficient showerheads and faucet aerators are CHEAP! Some of them have their usage etched into the side, if not, you can measure its flow rate with a measuring cup and a stopwatch. Once you know how much it uses, look into upgrades. When showering, turn the water on, get wet. Turn off the water. Soap your whole body, then wash the soap off. Now you're almost done with ~45 seconds of water use. It's easier in summer, but I'm now doing this in winter also.
Those are the basics and you'll get better with time. Eventually you'll be able to see heat like Dr. Manhattan sees atoms. You'll just see it everywhere, how it moves in and out of the system, and how you can harness and hold on to it, using it multiple times before it's gone.
Not wishing to open a(nother) can of HN-worms, but what happens if you share your home with members of the opposite sex?
My wife and my daughter are the two members of the household who complain about feeling cold. In the winter they each want a hot water bottle to take to bed.
My sons and I just don't seem to mind .. and all the bedrooms are at the same temperature!
No reason to bring sex into it. My girlfriend complains that our home is too warm meanwhile I sit under a blanket with a hot water bottle.
New study reveals the evolutionary reason why women feel colder than men https://phys.org/news/2021-10-reveals-evolutionary-women-col...
And it depends on how extreme you want to go: 13°C is laudable but I'm trying to do the same and 16-17°C is the limit before I need to put on a real winter coat and actually impair comfort/mobility while working on my computer. And that's with headwear and everything (which I take off for customer video calls, to come across a bit more professionally...). If you'd want to go 13°C then I guess shared spaces might be more towards the comfort side of the spectrum.
Not wishing to be completely silly, but you've obviously not met my wife and daughter. You are correct in one sense, there is no choice: the [whole] house will be warm.
At a slightly less silly level: I'm not sure we win the climate debate by picking fights within our immediate families.
My experience is that leak sealing based on results of blower air test brings nice heating use reduction while fixing the cold/drafty areas. After that take off window trim molding and spray foam both inside and out. Then apply extra insulation AFTER sealing. Maybe then another blower door test. If you start by replacing windows it will be expensive and less effective.
Here in the upper Midwest in the US, not having your heat running during the coldest winter days (-40 wind chills) means your plumbing would freeze and pipes burst in a day or two, less if it is an older house.
We used to have a guy in my country who was telling us to wear a warmer coat during the winter to compensate for the complete lack of heat. He's no longer with as after 25 December 1989, but people still regret him.
Either that or like you.. I'm going to need a heated desk, keyboard and mouse.
Energy consumption does not depend ONLY by the target temp but ALSO by the external temp, or the Δt between them, the level of insulation of your house, how airtight (and eventually with what kind of VMC you have) etc even approximated answers can't be much meaningful.
What I can testify having switched from a "classic" (low insulation, no good vent etc) home to a new "class A" (french BBC to be more precise) one is that insulation, ventilation, good passive heating (windows on south, well exposed to the low winter Sun, but covered for the high summer Sun) does work enormously well. Or, the "Green New Deal" do have some tangible basis, unfortunately it's not much practical in most of the EU, at least in cities and in general in dense area, to rebuild anything accordingly, especially in a short term.
If you want to save money and have a better life, my real suggestion is: flee the city, looking for a home you can afford, one in a reasonably served place and do your best to telework. You like it or not that's the direction we heading, so the better you can get in this direction the batter you'll get paid off in the future... Other "emergency gimmick" do not really work, if they it's too little for too much effort, or they are simple raw cuts like "to save money do not go on holidays" witch might work in some short term terms, but are not much sustainable in the long run...
To be honest I think this is the only way people in the UK are going to survive this year with energy costs literally doubling. Half the population can barely afford energy as it is.
Where do you put all your cheese? :)
But yes if I want some fish, I'll buy and consume right after
Related: eggs are stored and sold at room temperature in Germany. The first time I saw that kind of display, I thought some grocery manager had lost their mind. No, perfectly normal, and safe enough. Watch the refrigerate by dates on the carton.
But I still refrigerate them immediately after getting them home even if I think I’m going to use them quickly, because some habits are impossible to break.
https://energysavingtrust.org.uk/energy-at-home/
They usually recommend turning down the thermostat in rooms you aren't using, and setting a timer to fit your schedule but there's a bunch of low hanging fruit that will make your home cosier, save you money, help save the planet and annoy fossil fuel oligarchs, all without any cost to yourself except using this media coverage to spur you into action.
One that they might not list, but which is interestingly geeky and so might appeal to HN, is short term rental of infra red camera to find where homes are leaking heat (best done during cold weather).