Outside the US, this ignores how much happier and more productive people are when they're not overheated. Traditionally cold areas have been much more productive than warm areas, but AC could change this.
Outside the US, this ignores how much happier and more productive people are when they're not overheated. Traditionally cold areas have been much more productive than warm areas, but AC could change this.
Yes, this article is pretty much misleading end to end, and not taking into account the cost of heating is the keystone.
Everyone who thinks about this issue should stop cherry-picking some particular consumption good you think should be curtailed.
One, it's anti-humanistic, you'll end up getting slammed for telling (poorer) people from hotter areas to suck it up, and contra the article, you'll deserve it.
Two, analytically it seems to confuse even people who should know better. You have to take the whole system into account.
Directly pricing the externalities of carbon emissions solves both of these.
It is unhealthy for sure: my flatmate coming back from jogging sweating and all... first thing he does, turn AC on.
It was also sad to see AC running day and night and reading news about climate change the same time.
As for being unhealthy, that's an issue of dry, circulating air. This would be addressed better with radiative cooling and potentially humidity control. Some cleaning out of air filters may also be due.
edit: Oh and of course, building regulations (and enforcement thereof) and insulation shouldn't be forgotten, like I just did.