All these assume that the ambient temperature outside will be lower than the temperature in your home, hence you want the air to come in but keep the sun out.
In southern Europe this is false for many weeks during the summer. During heatwaves you want to open all the windows during the night, and close everything at 9ish-10. Because the temperature outside is going to rise to 40-45 celsius the ambient air will only heat your house, even drafts will feel burning hot. So not just shutters, but glass windows and curtains too,
Then about 8 hours later, you want to open everything back up and wash your balcony or terrace (evaporative cooling it essentially), you want to use a minimum amount of water, that will evaporate in the next 30-40 minutes because it attracts mosquitos.
> In southern Europe this is false for many weeks during the summer.
This is also now often false in non-southern Europe as well.
Apparently one of the reasons why French don't have air conditioning is because nights tended to be cool in the past, and so people left windows and doors open while sleeping creating drafts and letting the masonry cool.
But in the last ~15 years nights have been as hot as days at times, and so this strategy is no longer effective: you're cooked at night as much as you're cooked during the day during the heat domes. So the all-the-AC-all-the-time thinking of the US may be excessive, nowadays so is the never-AC thinking of many people.
You don't need to get down to 22C, but least <27C will save the lives of many people, especially the elderly (unless France wants to save on pensions?).
"So the all-the-AC-all-the-time thinking of the US may be excessive,"
Unfortunately, there are many areas of the US where humidity is the real reason for running the AC so much. In places like the Mid-Atlantic states you might get a month or so in spring and fall where you mostly don't need AC or heat. Once summer actually hits, it seems rare to have a day where it's under 85F and under 70% humidity. The south is even worse.
nice of you to think that by evening you get cooler air :D we have had days where the only time of the day where the outside temp was lower than indoor's was between 01-07. So either you stay up to open the windows, or wait till early morning... but then you just get 1-2 hrs before having to close everything again
Yeah, anecdotally night time temperatures have gotten much worse the last decade. But in the 90s-2010s you could easily get by without air-conditioning and no misery, with just passive temperature control.
If you live in a brick/stone hours you can still go a long way by maximally ventilating house at nigh and during the day keeping sun out (shutters, awning e.t.c) and keep ventilation minimal. It would not help if the nights are warm (so you'd need AC) but there are still many more days with cold nights and by using shutters and timed ventilation you can reduce AC energy use.
AC full on without other measures and passive thermal control techniques are no only two available options, one can combine them.
Many years ago I lived in a brick apartment and the afternoon/evening sun would hit the wall next to my bedroom, making it very hot at night. I started going out with buckets of water to splash on the wall a few times each evening and it made a real difference. A white sheet hung across the wall might have helped more. Lots of things can be done if you don’t mind looking silly :) Unless you’re in the an area with high temp and high humidity. That is bad.
I have long regarded Monocle with prestige and still to this day do. No gatekeeping - just get down to business - well researched and written. Keep it up folks.
Maybe we need shade structures - a shade above/around the building and detached so that air flows underneath and there are no thermal bridges to the building proper. Like you would make to protect tents at e.g. Burning Man.
In theory, houses are close to this. The attic is supposed to allow air to flow—the house itself having an insulating blanket on all sides.
My home though appears to have very limited air flow in the attic-space. I'd like to get those "twirly things" installed on the roof to bring the attic-space air temperature down.
I have a temp controlled fan (I should verify its working). The thermostat is downstairs so the upstairs where we slept was generally 5 F hotter. Installed that fan near the roof peak (actually replaced an existing vent) and it made a big difference in the summer.
In various places in Europe, there are 2-16 weeks when AC is needed, and the reasons people don't have it include being gaslit about not 'needing' it; legislation/landlords preventing installation; not being able to afford the units or the electricity; and being stubborn and stuck in their ways particularly around wanting to preserve tradition or appearances of buildings
They are complimentary. Shutters reduce the amount of heat coming in. AC gets whatever heat managed to go in out.
One thing I'll never understand is not having shutters, only curtains. I live in France, almost everyone has shutters. But in other countries it's often different. I lived in Thailand for a couple of years and had only curtains, so the sun would still get past the window pane, heat the curtain, and the AC would then have take this heat outside again. This seemed massively inefficient.
I thing the best compromise is using whatever traditional, passive means of cooling we can, and then AC as needed.
Most of the time these things are governed by whatever's cheaper (in the short run).
Maybe electrical energy is massively subsidized or just cheap in general. Installing shutters can be a large up-front investment, especially when installed by somebody else. It may take many years of burning energy with an AC to earn that back.
Also maybe the home isn't even yours, but you are renting. The owner doesn't care about your energy bill.
I thought it was more of a cultural thing, or perhaps enforced by the building code ? Here in France I've never seen a house or flat without shutters. In Bangkok, when I was looking for a condo, none of them had shutters.
A cursory web search tells me shutters can influence the DPE ("diagnostic de performance énergétique".) A bad rating means you can't rent your property.
Bangkok being tropical, in summer the sun basically shines straight down (and some on the east and west walls in summer and winter), some N/S roof overhang and you’re set. In Northern Africa and southern Europe the sun is significantly lower and will shine straight through windows.
There’s definitely a cultural or historical component. In my experience shutters are extremely common, near universal, in southern Europe but much less so in northern. Which is a shame because a modern PVC roller shutter, well installed and with insulated slats, also does wonders in winter.
Since they’re using French for the rating, I’d think the shutters improve the score and that contributes to their pervasiveness.
From a quick search, older versions of the DPE ignored shutters, modern ones take them in account and their effect ranges from neutral to positive depending on details (materials, insulation, fit). It’s not entirely clear if both high seasons are considered (insulation and fit I’d think a lot less critical in summer).
>> While all of these might offer some cooling in your home, nothing beats air conditioning.
> By what measurement? […]
The measure of the air's temperature.
It does not matter if you have shutters: if the air outside is 30C then eventually the air inside will eventually get to 30C (good insulation will simply mean it takes longer).
If your outside is >30C then the only way to keep your inside <30C is to transfer the heat (which an AC does via an evaporator, refrigerant, and a condensor).
But that is exactly the point. Air conditioning doesn't keep heat out - it burns energy to change the air once the heat has gotten in. There are ways to keep it out in the first place.
FWIW, it isn't either/or - we practice keeping the shades, curtains, and windows drawn when it is hot, open when it is cool.... and we have air conditioning. Best of both worlds.
You’re simply never going to get through to someone who has internalized the idea that AC is perfect and free. They have accommodated to the luxury and will burn the planet to keep it.
We have more energy hitting the planet every second as radiation than we can possibly use. This is a non-issue for any civilised society switching to solar.
Going for an AC before you even have shutters or anything on the outside is like sending an audio file of you reading a pdf per email because the "record reply" button is right there, but figuring out where on the filesystem the PDF you have open on your screen would take 5 seconds. It's not about whether you can afford it or if the recipient can, but more what it says about you and your whole approach to this life thing.
I’m in central Texas and it isn’t uncommon for rooftop solar to generate enough power to cover central a/c. Peak sun and peak a/c happen at the same time.
> But that is exactly the point. Air conditioning doesn't keep heat out - it burns energy to change the air once the heat has gotten in. There are ways to keep it out in the first place.
Yes, it's best to keep the heat out. Good insulation helps, but no insulation is perfect and eventually (thanks to the second law of thermodynamics) some will get in.
Insulation is way more important than cooling capacity.
Instead of adding a 2nd condensing unit, try adding spray foam and double glazed windows. I can keep my 2400 sqft Texas home ice cold with a small 3 ton system. There are similarly sized homes right down the street from me with 5+ tons of capacity across multiple condensing units.
The biggest problem with oversized cooling systems is latent heat removal. It's much better to have a slightly undersized system running constantly through the hottest part of the day than it is to have a very powerful system running with 50% duty cycle. It's also significantly better for system life (capacitors last much longer this way). During summer months, my hvac system cycles maybe one time between the hours of 10am and 10pm.
I've put some fabric on the outside of my windows using nylon thread, a stapler and some plastic suction cups. It made the day time temperature of my living room go from about 32°C to about 23°C during a heatwave in the UK. I won't need aircon in that room now. I do have an upstairs office that will keep on getting hot, so I might get an aircon there in a year or two. But I'm not desperate thanks to a tiny bit of effort.
As other commenters pointed out, the US has many areas with extreme humidity, which AC helps with. There are also desert cities (such as Phoenix or Las Vegas) where aboveground human habitation wouldn’t even be possible without AC, at least not on the scale of a city.
We are also (rightly) suspicious of people attempting to remove or restrict some personally favored appliance or tool. Often the early stages of this process appear as social media influence campaigns about how the thing in question is unnecessary or harmful. (I don’t think AC is at risk of being restricted here, but I can see why others might be overly protective.)
Many northern areas of the US still have buildings without AC, mostly older buildings.
I think it is an American thing; a principled grounded in many Americans not actually believing people like you when they claim "that isn't being suggested". Moralistic arguments that using air conditioning is harmful to society (which certainly exist in America, even if they're more common in Europe) are the rhetorical basis for actual laws regulating the use of air conditioning and trying to legally discourage its use as a matter of government policy. I have learned via European heat wave discourse that there are actually a surprising number of building regulations in various places in Europe that restrict or ban the installation and/or use of air conditioning. These kinds of laws are less common in the US, but there's definitely vocal energy conservation activists who would like to see more of them enacted here. And those are the people who the "you'll pry it from my cold dead fingers" types are opposing.
> Moralistic arguments that using air conditioning is harmful to society
Can you name one? That isn't the same argument as against all needless waste?
What I'm seeing is we can't even talk about shutter designs without talking about AC instead. Using AC may not harm society, but some people knowing about it kinda does.
The old school way where? And for what class of people? The working class weren't moving for the summer.
Further I put a jumper on in the winter, have insulation in my house, have curtains etc to keep heat in. What's wrong with having passive ways of keeping warm or cool?
The old-school way of dealing with excess heat or excess cold was to go somewhere else. People have been doing that for thousands of years. And yes, workers would also leave the cities and go stay with their relatives in the cooler countryside.
There's nothing wrong with the passive ways, when they are enough.
Ah the entire population of Spain moved to the UK every summer and back in winter. That must be the immigrant invasion that Reform are screeching about.
If we’re talking about mass seasonal exodus, then this is an entirely recent phenomenon in southern Europe, post-WW2. So depends on OP’s definition of “old-school”.
Also before WWII. Nomadic tribes have followed the seasons for thousands of years.
And before industrialization, cities were administrative centers and not production centers. The king or ruler and all the elite would go away in the summer to escape the heat, and then there wasn't much reason for everyone else to stay in town. And it didn't cost money to go stay with your relatives in the countryside or seaside. But you'd probably have to help out with farm work.
Agreed. Interesting to see the HN echo chamber of downvotes in full force on this subject of what is efficient modern technology. AC is civilised and a huge quality of life improvement, I won't be uncomfortable and miserable in summer if I can afford not to be.
You seem to be hellbent on marketing AC. I don't understand why it has to be a polarizing issue.
Clearly it is much different than heating in winter; the latter is a matter of survival, while the former is mostly a matter of comfort.
One could indeed argue that in the precarious state we are in, expending energy for unnecessary comfort should be minimized, something that passive designs can aid.
As we also try to minimize energy expenditure of heating, through insulation and other passive means.
People literally die of heat exhaustion and legislation is being discussed now about mandatory AC in care homes. You and others on the "AC is far right" brigade are the polarising commentators here, not us.
But that circles back to my original comment: Should people use only the absolutely minimum heating needed to survive, or is it okay if they have some comfort also?
You can survive the winter in a house with a 5 centigrade temperature by putting on a lot of clothing and continuously drinking hot tea, huddling together under thick blankets. So would you have a problem with those who heat their houses more than that on this warming planet?
There really is nothing "unnecessary" about the comfort of AC. Just like there isn't anything unnecessary about the comfort of heating in winter. People can at worst die without it, and they do. When your environment is uncomfortable, that is your body telling you that the environment is wrong, and it has millions of years of wisdom.
Anything except using AC like the rest of the world, hey Monocle? There is no comparison, and not to mention the excellent efficiency of R-32 based super inverter systems that are no different to winter heating heat pumps. AC should be the norm in Europe, but apparently it's "far right"!
All these assume that the ambient temperature outside will be lower than the temperature in your home, hence you want the air to come in but keep the sun out.
In southern Europe this is false for many weeks during the summer. During heatwaves you want to open all the windows during the night, and close everything at 9ish-10. Because the temperature outside is going to rise to 40-45 celsius the ambient air will only heat your house, even drafts will feel burning hot. So not just shutters, but glass windows and curtains too,
Then about 8 hours later, you want to open everything back up and wash your balcony or terrace (evaporative cooling it essentially), you want to use a minimum amount of water, that will evaporate in the next 30-40 minutes because it attracts mosquitos.
But overall air conditioning is the way to go.
> In southern Europe this is false for many weeks during the summer.
This is also now often false in non-southern Europe as well.
Apparently one of the reasons why French don't have air conditioning is because nights tended to be cool in the past, and so people left windows and doors open while sleeping creating drafts and letting the masonry cool.
But in the last ~15 years nights have been as hot as days at times, and so this strategy is no longer effective: you're cooked at night as much as you're cooked during the day during the heat domes. So the all-the-AC-all-the-time thinking of the US may be excessive, nowadays so is the never-AC thinking of many people.
You don't need to get down to 22C, but least <27C will save the lives of many people, especially the elderly (unless France wants to save on pensions?).
"So the all-the-AC-all-the-time thinking of the US may be excessive,"
Unfortunately, there are many areas of the US where humidity is the real reason for running the AC so much. In places like the Mid-Atlantic states you might get a month or so in spring and fall where you mostly don't need AC or heat. Once summer actually hits, it seems rare to have a day where it's under 85F and under 70% humidity. The south is even worse.
nice of you to think that by evening you get cooler air :D we have had days where the only time of the day where the outside temp was lower than indoor's was between 01-07. So either you stay up to open the windows, or wait till early morning... but then you just get 1-2 hrs before having to close everything again
Yeah, anecdotally night time temperatures have gotten much worse the last decade. But in the 90s-2010s you could easily get by without air-conditioning and no misery, with just passive temperature control.
If you live in a brick/stone hours you can still go a long way by maximally ventilating house at nigh and during the day keeping sun out (shutters, awning e.t.c) and keep ventilation minimal. It would not help if the nights are warm (so you'd need AC) but there are still many more days with cold nights and by using shutters and timed ventilation you can reduce AC energy use.
AC full on without other measures and passive thermal control techniques are no only two available options, one can combine them.
Many years ago I lived in a brick apartment and the afternoon/evening sun would hit the wall next to my bedroom, making it very hot at night. I started going out with buckets of water to splash on the wall a few times each evening and it made a real difference. A white sheet hung across the wall might have helped more. Lots of things can be done if you don’t mind looking silly :) Unless you’re in the an area with high temp and high humidity. That is bad.
I have long regarded Monocle with prestige and still to this day do. No gatekeeping - just get down to business - well researched and written. Keep it up folks.
Maybe we need shade structures - a shade above/around the building and detached so that air flows underneath and there are no thermal bridges to the building proper. Like you would make to protect tents at e.g. Burning Man.
That's called a tree, they work quite well! A little time consuming to grow to sufficient height however
Great for low density single storey dwellings, not so helpful for medium/high density multi-floored residential.
In theory, houses are close to this. The attic is supposed to allow air to flow—the house itself having an insulating blanket on all sides.
My home though appears to have very limited air flow in the attic-space. I'd like to get those "twirly things" installed on the roof to bring the attic-space air temperature down.
I have a temp controlled fan (I should verify its working). The thermostat is downstairs so the upstairs where we slept was generally 5 F hotter. Installed that fan near the roof peak (actually replaced an existing vent) and it made a big difference in the summer.
Already in widespread use https://www.sips.org/what-are-sips
But there is no airflow inbetween the outside and the building core - the panels are still part of the building itself.
While all of these might offer some cooling in your home, nothing beats air conditioning.
In many places in Europe, there is only 1-2 weeks where AC is needed, and that is the main reason why many people don't want to bother with it.
In various places in Europe, there are 2-16 weeks when AC is needed, and the reasons people don't have it include being gaslit about not 'needing' it; legislation/landlords preventing installation; not being able to afford the units or the electricity; and being stubborn and stuck in their ways particularly around wanting to preserve tradition or appearances of buildings
By what measurement? They all surely beat air conditioning in terms of energy usage.
They are complimentary. Shutters reduce the amount of heat coming in. AC gets whatever heat managed to go in out.
One thing I'll never understand is not having shutters, only curtains. I live in France, almost everyone has shutters. But in other countries it's often different. I lived in Thailand for a couple of years and had only curtains, so the sun would still get past the window pane, heat the curtain, and the AC would then have take this heat outside again. This seemed massively inefficient.
I thing the best compromise is using whatever traditional, passive means of cooling we can, and then AC as needed.
Most of the time these things are governed by whatever's cheaper (in the short run).
Maybe electrical energy is massively subsidized or just cheap in general. Installing shutters can be a large up-front investment, especially when installed by somebody else. It may take many years of burning energy with an AC to earn that back.
Also maybe the home isn't even yours, but you are renting. The owner doesn't care about your energy bill.
I thought it was more of a cultural thing, or perhaps enforced by the building code ? Here in France I've never seen a house or flat without shutters. In Bangkok, when I was looking for a condo, none of them had shutters.
A cursory web search tells me shutters can influence the DPE ("diagnostic de performance énergétique".) A bad rating means you can't rent your property.
Bangkok being tropical, in summer the sun basically shines straight down (and some on the east and west walls in summer and winter), some N/S roof overhang and you’re set. In Northern Africa and southern Europe the sun is significantly lower and will shine straight through windows.
There’s definitely a cultural or historical component. In my experience shutters are extremely common, near universal, in southern Europe but much less so in northern. Which is a shame because a modern PVC roller shutter, well installed and with insulated slats, also does wonders in winter.
Yes I'm pretty sure that I cannot put up shutters or awnings here (in the UK) on the front of my house. These may become necessary in the years ahead.
Do shutters make it worse? How? Is it just a bad metric?
Since they’re using French for the rating, I’d think the shutters improve the score and that contributes to their pervasiveness.
From a quick search, older versions of the DPE ignored shutters, modern ones take them in account and their effect ranges from neutral to positive depending on details (materials, insulation, fit). It’s not entirely clear if both high seasons are considered (insulation and fit I’d think a lot less critical in summer).
Low-E glass in the U.S. is supposed to reduce this by blocking a significant amount of infra-red radiation.
>> While all of these might offer some cooling in your home, nothing beats air conditioning.
> By what measurement? […]
The measure of the air's temperature.
It does not matter if you have shutters: if the air outside is 30C then eventually the air inside will eventually get to 30C (good insulation will simply mean it takes longer).
If your outside is >30C then the only way to keep your inside <30C is to transfer the heat (which an AC does via an evaporator, refrigerant, and a condensor).
By the measure of "keeping the summer heat out of your home", which was in fact the topic at hand.
But that is exactly the point. Air conditioning doesn't keep heat out - it burns energy to change the air once the heat has gotten in. There are ways to keep it out in the first place.
FWIW, it isn't either/or - we practice keeping the shades, curtains, and windows drawn when it is hot, open when it is cool.... and we have air conditioning. Best of both worlds.
You’re simply never going to get through to someone who has internalized the idea that AC is perfect and free. They have accommodated to the luxury and will burn the planet to keep it.
We have more energy hitting the planet every second as radiation than we can possibly use. This is a non-issue for any civilised society switching to solar.
Going for an AC before you even have shutters or anything on the outside is like sending an audio file of you reading a pdf per email because the "record reply" button is right there, but figuring out where on the filesystem the PDF you have open on your screen would take 5 seconds. It's not about whether you can afford it or if the recipient can, but more what it says about you and your whole approach to this life thing.
By all means, install off-grid AC powered by solar on your roof. Please report on how well it goes.
Why is off-grid a requirement?
I’m in central Texas and it isn’t uncommon for rooftop solar to generate enough power to cover central a/c. Peak sun and peak a/c happen at the same time.
It proves the system is self-contained, with no side effects other than cooling.
> But that is exactly the point. Air conditioning doesn't keep heat out - it burns energy to change the air once the heat has gotten in. There are ways to keep it out in the first place.
Yes, it's best to keep the heat out. Good insulation helps, but no insulation is perfect and eventually (thanks to the second law of thermodynamics) some will get in.
Passive measures should always be in place first (and often do enough), with active as the last resort.
Insulation is way more important than cooling capacity.
Instead of adding a 2nd condensing unit, try adding spray foam and double glazed windows. I can keep my 2400 sqft Texas home ice cold with a small 3 ton system. There are similarly sized homes right down the street from me with 5+ tons of capacity across multiple condensing units.
The biggest problem with oversized cooling systems is latent heat removal. It's much better to have a slightly undersized system running constantly through the hottest part of the day than it is to have a very powerful system running with 50% duty cycle. It's also significantly better for system life (capacitors last much longer this way). During summer months, my hvac system cycles maybe one time between the hours of 10am and 10pm.
I've put some fabric on the outside of my windows using nylon thread, a stapler and some plastic suction cups. It made the day time temperature of my living room go from about 32°C to about 23°C during a heatwave in the UK. I won't need aircon in that room now. I do have an upstairs office that will keep on getting hot, so I might get an aircon there in a year or two. But I'm not desperate thanks to a tiny bit of effort.
That’s amazing and inspiring! Does it look like what’s described here? https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2025/06/dressing-and-undre...
Is this an American thing? There seem to be a number of comments akin to "you'll prise it from my cold dead fingers" when that isn't being suggested.
As other commenters pointed out, the US has many areas with extreme humidity, which AC helps with. There are also desert cities (such as Phoenix or Las Vegas) where aboveground human habitation wouldn’t even be possible without AC, at least not on the scale of a city.
We are also (rightly) suspicious of people attempting to remove or restrict some personally favored appliance or tool. Often the early stages of this process appear as social media influence campaigns about how the thing in question is unnecessary or harmful. (I don’t think AC is at risk of being restricted here, but I can see why others might be overly protective.)
Many northern areas of the US still have buildings without AC, mostly older buildings.
I think it is an American thing; a principled grounded in many Americans not actually believing people like you when they claim "that isn't being suggested". Moralistic arguments that using air conditioning is harmful to society (which certainly exist in America, even if they're more common in Europe) are the rhetorical basis for actual laws regulating the use of air conditioning and trying to legally discourage its use as a matter of government policy. I have learned via European heat wave discourse that there are actually a surprising number of building regulations in various places in Europe that restrict or ban the installation and/or use of air conditioning. These kinds of laws are less common in the US, but there's definitely vocal energy conservation activists who would like to see more of them enacted here. And those are the people who the "you'll pry it from my cold dead fingers" types are opposing.
> Moralistic arguments that using air conditioning is harmful to society
Can you name one? That isn't the same argument as against all needless waste?
What I'm seeing is we can't even talk about shutter designs without talking about AC instead. Using AC may not harm society, but some people knowing about it kinda does.
The old school way was to go away somewhere else in summer.
There is no replacement for air conditioning. It's a modern marvel. People who hate it should also refuse to have heating in winter.
The old school way where? And for what class of people? The working class weren't moving for the summer.
Further I put a jumper on in the winter, have insulation in my house, have curtains etc to keep heat in. What's wrong with having passive ways of keeping warm or cool?
The old-school way of dealing with excess heat or excess cold was to go somewhere else. People have been doing that for thousands of years. And yes, workers would also leave the cities and go stay with their relatives in the cooler countryside.
There's nothing wrong with the passive ways, when they are enough.
Ah the entire population of Spain moved to the UK every summer and back in winter. That must be the immigrant invasion that Reform are screeching about.
Or maybe just from the cities to the seaside....
https://blog.myheritage.com/2018/08/good-old-summertime-our-...
If we’re talking about mass seasonal exodus, then this is an entirely recent phenomenon in southern Europe, post-WW2. So depends on OP’s definition of “old-school”.
Also before WWII. Nomadic tribes have followed the seasons for thousands of years.
And before industrialization, cities were administrative centers and not production centers. The king or ruler and all the elite would go away in the summer to escape the heat, and then there wasn't much reason for everyone else to stay in town. And it didn't cost money to go stay with your relatives in the countryside or seaside. But you'd probably have to help out with farm work.
Agreed. Interesting to see the HN echo chamber of downvotes in full force on this subject of what is efficient modern technology. AC is civilised and a huge quality of life improvement, I won't be uncomfortable and miserable in summer if I can afford not to be.
You seem to be hellbent on marketing AC. I don't understand why it has to be a polarizing issue.
Clearly it is much different than heating in winter; the latter is a matter of survival, while the former is mostly a matter of comfort.
One could indeed argue that in the precarious state we are in, expending energy for unnecessary comfort should be minimized, something that passive designs can aid.
As we also try to minimize energy expenditure of heating, through insulation and other passive means.
People literally die of heat exhaustion and legislation is being discussed now about mandatory AC in care homes. You and others on the "AC is far right" brigade are the polarising commentators here, not us.
I have absolutely no problems with AC when necessary, but I do have problems with unnecessary energy consumption in a warming planet.
I do not think AC preference has anything to do with political beliefs, and I despise the "us and them" tribal mentality.
But that circles back to my original comment: Should people use only the absolutely minimum heating needed to survive, or is it okay if they have some comfort also?
You can survive the winter in a house with a 5 centigrade temperature by putting on a lot of clothing and continuously drinking hot tea, huddling together under thick blankets. So would you have a problem with those who heat their houses more than that on this warming planet?
I think you are the only person polarizing here.
There really is nothing "unnecessary" about the comfort of AC. Just like there isn't anything unnecessary about the comfort of heating in winter. People can at worst die without it, and they do. When your environment is uncomfortable, that is your body telling you that the environment is wrong, and it has millions of years of wisdom.
Anything except using AC like the rest of the world, hey Monocle? There is no comparison, and not to mention the excellent efficiency of R-32 based super inverter systems that are no different to winter heating heat pumps. AC should be the norm in Europe, but apparently it's "far right"!