<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: A less sexist approach to addressing climate change	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2015 01:24:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.6</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: John Salmond		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/#comment-471042</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John Salmond]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2015 01:24:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=21364#comment-471042</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;Despite the extremely cold climate in which they lived, early Yahgan wore little to no clothing&quot;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaghan_people

every time someone parrots about hard-wired aspects of gender differences, etc, remember that human-controlled social behavioural ranges are immense]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Despite the extremely cold climate in which they lived, early Yahgan wore little to no clothing&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaghan_people" rel="nofollow ugc">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaghan_people</a></p>
<p>every time someone parrots about hard-wired aspects of gender differences, etc, remember that human-controlled social behavioural ranges are immense</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Calli Arcale		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/#comment-471041</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Calli Arcale]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Aug 2015 22:54:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=21364#comment-471041</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I read another article about this study which raised an interesting point -- the problem isn&#039;t just the sexist patriarchy, but also the pernicious desire to appear affluent, especially in traditionally hot parts of the country like Arizona.  There are many ways for a business to show off how successful it is (which is important for attracting both clients and investors).  Instituting a dress code, tasteful water features outside your office, well-nourished potted plants in the lobby, new carpeting, fashionable furnishings, and so forth.  Air conditioning is another.  By setting the temperature just a little lower, you show off that you can afford to do that.  If it&#039;s hot in your office, it may seem like you&#039;re trying to save a few bucks.

The irony, of course, is that you&#039;re losing productivity (research shows office workers are more effective when they&#039;re a little hotter than they want, than when they&#039;re equally colder than they want, so one really should err on the higher side) so your&#039;e actually creating a situation where your business is quantitatively worse in order to make it appear better.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read another article about this study which raised an interesting point &#8212; the problem isn&#8217;t just the sexist patriarchy, but also the pernicious desire to appear affluent, especially in traditionally hot parts of the country like Arizona.  There are many ways for a business to show off how successful it is (which is important for attracting both clients and investors).  Instituting a dress code, tasteful water features outside your office, well-nourished potted plants in the lobby, new carpeting, fashionable furnishings, and so forth.  Air conditioning is another.  By setting the temperature just a little lower, you show off that you can afford to do that.  If it&#8217;s hot in your office, it may seem like you&#8217;re trying to save a few bucks.</p>
<p>The irony, of course, is that you&#8217;re losing productivity (research shows office workers are more effective when they&#8217;re a little hotter than they want, than when they&#8217;re equally colder than they want, so one really should err on the higher side) so your&#8217;e actually creating a situation where your business is quantitatively worse in order to make it appear better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Bernard J.		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/#comment-471040</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bernard J.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2015 01:32:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=21364#comment-471040</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[On a related matter, every girl I&#039;ve ever gone out with has had a much higher preference for shower temperature than I have.  I noticed this especially with mixer style lever taps, where the temperature is set separately to turning the water on/off.  I&#039;ve had showers after a partner has had hers, and had to jump out of the cubical after the water heats rapidly to the point where I can&#039;t bear to stand under the stream.

I once called out to a partner to ask her if she really showered at that temperature or if the lever had been bumped.  She stuck her hand in and said that is was lovely, whilst looking at me in surprise as I flared lobster red all over from the (perceived) extreme heat of the water on my own skin.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On a related matter, every girl I&#8217;ve ever gone out with has had a much higher preference for shower temperature than I have.  I noticed this especially with mixer style lever taps, where the temperature is set separately to turning the water on/off.  I&#8217;ve had showers after a partner has had hers, and had to jump out of the cubical after the water heats rapidly to the point where I can&#8217;t bear to stand under the stream.</p>
<p>I once called out to a partner to ask her if she really showered at that temperature or if the lever had been bumped.  She stuck her hand in and said that is was lovely, whilst looking at me in surprise as I flared lobster red all over from the (perceived) extreme heat of the water on my own skin.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Donal		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/#comment-471039</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donal]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2015 00:49:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=21364#comment-471039</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Legionnaire&#039;s disease infects cooling towers:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/05/nyregion/new-york-officials-move-to-regulate-towers-tied-to-legionnaires-disease-outbreak.html]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Legionnaire&#8217;s disease infects cooling towers:<br />
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/05/nyregion/new-york-officials-move-to-regulate-towers-tied-to-legionnaires-disease-outbreak.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/05/nyregion/new-york-officials-move-to-regulate-towers-tied-to-legionnaires-disease-outbreak.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Paul Toftness		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/#comment-471038</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul Toftness]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2015 22:08:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=21364#comment-471038</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[It used to be standard for commercial buildings to always run air conditioning at maximum and use the furnace to regulate temperature. Where my dad worked in the sixties the air conditioning was designed to run at 20 degrees F cooler than outdoors.
It may still be common, in which case the building saves money by being icy.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It used to be standard for commercial buildings to always run air conditioning at maximum and use the furnace to regulate temperature. Where my dad worked in the sixties the air conditioning was designed to run at 20 degrees F cooler than outdoors.<br />
It may still be common, in which case the building saves money by being icy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Eric Lund		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/#comment-471037</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Eric Lund]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2015 19:05:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=21364#comment-471037</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;the temperature in most office buildings is frequently out of control, rather than being controlled at an inefficient set point&lt;/i&gt;

I have often said, only half in jest, that in many office buildings the climate control system has two settings: too hot and too cold.

I often find air conditioning set to what any sensible person ought to consider ridiculous levels. For instance, one hotel in Tennessee where I stayed when I was visiting in October had the air conditioning on and thermostats set to 60 degrees F--and housekeeping staff were evidently instructed to return the setting to that level during the day (I would raise my thermostat setting in the evening, leave it there in the morning, and come back to find it changed back to the lower setting). Where I live (New Hampshire), October is the beginning of heating season, and it is against the law here for a landlord to set the thermostat in a residential rental unit below 65 degrees F--a tenant can legally withhold rent under such circumstances.

I live without AC at home--under 20th century climate, I&#039;d only need it a few nights a year. That&#039;s true of most houses here: if your house in New Hampshire has central air, it was probably built after 1985 (a few houses have been retrofit, but you can only do that if your heating system is forced hot air, which most houses around here aren&#039;t), and even many newer houses don&#039;t have it.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>the temperature in most office buildings is frequently out of control, rather than being controlled at an inefficient set point</i></p>
<p>I have often said, only half in jest, that in many office buildings the climate control system has two settings: too hot and too cold.</p>
<p>I often find air conditioning set to what any sensible person ought to consider ridiculous levels. For instance, one hotel in Tennessee where I stayed when I was visiting in October had the air conditioning on and thermostats set to 60 degrees F&#8211;and housekeeping staff were evidently instructed to return the setting to that level during the day (I would raise my thermostat setting in the evening, leave it there in the morning, and come back to find it changed back to the lower setting). Where I live (New Hampshire), October is the beginning of heating season, and it is against the law here for a landlord to set the thermostat in a residential rental unit below 65 degrees F&#8211;a tenant can legally withhold rent under such circumstances.</p>
<p>I live without AC at home&#8211;under 20th century climate, I&#8217;d only need it a few nights a year. That&#8217;s true of most houses here: if your house in New Hampshire has central air, it was probably built after 1985 (a few houses have been retrofit, but you can only do that if your heating system is forced hot air, which most houses around here aren&#8217;t), and even many newer houses don&#8217;t have it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Donal		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/#comment-471036</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donal]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2015 14:35:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=21364#comment-471036</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m a guy, but even I keep a sweater at the office year round. Some days it is just freezing in here, and I usually show up with a glow from riding the bike.

Related to your point, buildings and houses use to be built with air and vapor porous materials. No one cared too much about air changes because energy was cheap. My 1949 house had no insulation but was heated with coal, which probably blasted out so much heat as to keep the shrubs near the house warm. With the 1970s energy shocks we started adding more insulation and weatherstripping to save energy. Some people inadvertently installed vapor barriers in the wrong places, which in some cases led to moisture damage, mold and mildew. I think most people are more careful about vapor retarders now, but the International Energy Conservation Code now follows ASHRAE and calls for continuous air barriers in most climate zones. Commercial and institutional buildings without operable windows are totally reliant on mechanical systems for fresh air, just as the many windowless rooms are for light. How habitable will these buildings be if we go through brownouts, or just suffer the sort of benign neglect mentioned above?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a guy, but even I keep a sweater at the office year round. Some days it is just freezing in here, and I usually show up with a glow from riding the bike.</p>
<p>Related to your point, buildings and houses use to be built with air and vapor porous materials. No one cared too much about air changes because energy was cheap. My 1949 house had no insulation but was heated with coal, which probably blasted out so much heat as to keep the shrubs near the house warm. With the 1970s energy shocks we started adding more insulation and weatherstripping to save energy. Some people inadvertently installed vapor barriers in the wrong places, which in some cases led to moisture damage, mold and mildew. I think most people are more careful about vapor retarders now, but the International Energy Conservation Code now follows ASHRAE and calls for continuous air barriers in most climate zones. Commercial and institutional buildings without operable windows are totally reliant on mechanical systems for fresh air, just as the many windowless rooms are for light. How habitable will these buildings be if we go through brownouts, or just suffer the sort of benign neglect mentioned above?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Omega Centauri		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/#comment-471035</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Omega Centauri]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2015 02:18:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=21364#comment-471035</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[To expand on Adams point, not only is one temperature fits all a problem, but in places like where I work, the vents are far more powerful in some offices than in others. So the person two doors down who turns up the heat, may be legitimately cold, because his office doesn&#039;t get much of the heat, whereas my office gets a double dose. Clearly individual thermostats would be a vast improvement.

   Also heat/cold tolerance is strongly mediated by fashion. In many offices men have to wear a suit and tie, and that means they are more prone to overheating. The fashion sense of our culture has little sense of energy efficiency. At home it reverses, as I can tolerate a few extra degrees by removing my shirt, but my wife would consider it improper to do the same. So cultural norms which can be sexist themselves have an effect.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To expand on Adams point, not only is one temperature fits all a problem, but in places like where I work, the vents are far more powerful in some offices than in others. So the person two doors down who turns up the heat, may be legitimately cold, because his office doesn&#8217;t get much of the heat, whereas my office gets a double dose. Clearly individual thermostats would be a vast improvement.</p>
<p>   Also heat/cold tolerance is strongly mediated by fashion. In many offices men have to wear a suit and tie, and that means they are more prone to overheating. The fashion sense of our culture has little sense of energy efficiency. At home it reverses, as I can tolerate a few extra degrees by removing my shirt, but my wife would consider it improper to do the same. So cultural norms which can be sexist themselves have an effect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Desertphile		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/#comment-471034</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Desertphile]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2015 23:29:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=21364#comment-471034</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Damn the sexist Freon patriarchy! But.... the large majority of women I know work in the ice and snow, mud and quicksand, rain and broiling heat, and they don&#039;t complain even half as much as the men working with them. The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers needs to visit the rez and maybe go and talk to some cowgirls here.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Damn the sexist Freon patriarchy! But&#8230;. the large majority of women I know work in the ice and snow, mud and quicksand, rain and broiling heat, and they don&#8217;t complain even half as much as the men working with them. The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers needs to visit the rez and maybe go and talk to some cowgirls here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: AdamR		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/08/03/a-less-sexist-approach-to-addressing-climate-change/#comment-471033</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[AdamR]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2015 20:19:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/?p=21364#comment-471033</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In a 30-year career in the HVAC controls industry, I found that the temperature in most office buildings is frequently out of control, rather than being controlled at an inefficient set point.

Often, building cooling systems are operated in &quot;on-off&quot; mode due to failed control systems,  the AC running either full blast or not at all, with full blast being the default.  The energy wasted in this regime is large, of course, not to mention the discomfort of lower-metabolism occupants.  Building owners who won&#039;t do the maintenance pay for that carelessness in many ways.

Even when there are functioning thermostatic controls, there is war between the warm- and cold-natured occupants over who sets the temperature.  Pity the building engineer caught in the middle of those conflicts!  The difference between comfortable and uncomfortable is barely 2 deg. F for most people in sedentary occupations, with people all over the scale as to where their comfort spot is.

The least aggravation comes in buildings where management sets the cooling at a middling figure like 74 F and occupants are told, &quot;That&#039;s it: live with it.&quot;  There will be grumbling from people who like it chilly, but they will get used to it, especially if you can get them to admit they would not be willing to pay to keep their own homes as cold as they want it at work in the summertime.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a 30-year career in the HVAC controls industry, I found that the temperature in most office buildings is frequently out of control, rather than being controlled at an inefficient set point.</p>
<p>Often, building cooling systems are operated in &#8220;on-off&#8221; mode due to failed control systems,  the AC running either full blast or not at all, with full blast being the default.  The energy wasted in this regime is large, of course, not to mention the discomfort of lower-metabolism occupants.  Building owners who won&#8217;t do the maintenance pay for that carelessness in many ways.</p>
<p>Even when there are functioning thermostatic controls, there is war between the warm- and cold-natured occupants over who sets the temperature.  Pity the building engineer caught in the middle of those conflicts!  The difference between comfortable and uncomfortable is barely 2 deg. F for most people in sedentary occupations, with people all over the scale as to where their comfort spot is.</p>
<p>The least aggravation comes in buildings where management sets the cooling at a middling figure like 74 F and occupants are told, &#8220;That&#8217;s it: live with it.&#8221;  There will be grumbling from people who like it chilly, but they will get used to it, especially if you can get them to admit they would not be willing to pay to keep their own homes as cold as they want it at work in the summertime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
