No controls

Another post on the same kind of theme as the last one. After finding that the lights are not subject to human control in the Bodleian Library, I went to St Anne's College (Oxford) to hold a conference in their smart new building by the front gate. All very swish and the rooms were beautifully equipped for the kind of meeting we were having. But the windows were all sealed, and there appeared to be no air conditioning. When we asked if we could adjust the heat and get some fresh air, we were told that there was no way to adjust the heat or fresh air in the room, apart from opening the two doors marked fire exit (which open onto the garden). Well, fortunately it turned out these were not alarmed, and they could indeed be opened, which we did. But the choice was masses of fresh air from an open door, or two open doors, or none at all. And is it really best to heat the room and then cool it by opening the door? And ought it not to have a supply of fresh air anyway when there are a whole lot of breathing bodies in it? Why was it made with no controls and no air vents at the windows?
It was also impossible to raise the slatted blinds (though you could adjust the angle of the slats). My impression is that they don't want anyone to have any control over anything lest they do it wrong. No one should be permitted to make themselves comfortable. There is one compulsory condition of artificial light, no daylight and no fresh air. If that's not how you like it, don't live in the "state of the art" buildings we build today in this country.

Air conditioning on trains

Does anyone else share my abhorrence for trains which have sealed windows and air conditioning?
There are two main problems in my experience.
One is that if the heating/air conditioning goes wrong there is nothing whatever anyone can do about it. One of the trains on the Norwich line had a faulty heating system in the winter which was blowing out extra cold air on some of the really cold days, so that you were chilled to the bone even sitting in an insulated ski-jacket.
Now we have the problem of "summer". The train companies seem to think that we want the train kept at exactly the same temperature whether it is winter or summer, and so (quite unnecessarily) they cool the train down on a nice warm day, so it's like getting into a fridge. What they don't seem to realise is that in the winter you get on in your thick socks and shoes, woolly sweater and long-sleeved shirt. Then you want the temperature set to the sort of level at which it's comfortable to read, without having to peel off all your warm clothes.
In the summer, by contrast, you arrive lightly clad, with sandals and short sleeves. On a warm day you probably don't even have a jumper or jacket with you. Three minutes into the journey on this refrigerated train you are perishing cold. You ask the "conductor" (meaning the guard) whether he can make it a bit warmer, but the answer of course is "no". There are no controls. The thing is just set at a certain temperature, presumably the same temperature winter and summer.
What a waste of energy! Most of the time we wouldn't need to be air conditioned: the outside air would be perfectly fine. And even if we do have air conditioning, it doesn't need to be working like a fridge to make us into blocks of ice. It could be set five degrees warmer, and we'd all be just fine. 21º in the winter and 25º in the summer would seem a sensible system to work on, to minimise energy and maximise comfort.
But best of all, let the human beings have control instead of the machines. Because, after all, we're the ones who have feelings...

Heating 5

I've been doing some experiments with my electricity consumption in Norwich. For two weeks (one cold and one mild) I kept the heater in the living room on all the time instead of on a time switch. I used 266 units of electricity in the cold week and 198 in the mild week. Last week, which was mild, I had it on the time switch. I used 119 units.

This suggests that it is more economical to have it on only some of the time. HOWEVER this doesn't take any account of my gas consumption (the more I use the gas fire, the more the electric heater will switch off). So I really ought to read my gas meter as well.

How complicated.

What this is all leading to is my wondering whether the best solution to being a bit greener about my energy would be to install a wind turbine, rahter than have some gas central heating. Because basically it takes quite a lot of energy to heat the place, and whether that's electricity or gas it is using precious resources and giving off greenhouse gases unless I can find a way to secure some renewable energy to feed it. I've got a pile of logs in the garden, but the gas fire occupies the place where I'd burn logs so that's not an option right now.

Heating 4

In Cambridge we've turned down the thermostat on the heating from 20º (that's roughly where we had it mostly last winter) to 19º. So far, not a problem, except that the way thermostats work it has to get down to quite a bit less than 19º before the heat comes on again. When the weather isn't very cold, the process of going down below 19º can take a very long time and we seem to sit at about 18º for ages. Then you get chilly, especially since you hadn't put on your largest woolly jumper, since it was a mild day. So ironically, it's warmer and more comfortable in cold weather than in mild weather. And this winter has been mainly composed of mild weather.

In Norwich I typically keep the panel heater set quite low, and on a time switch, and then use the coal fire to make the main living room feel warm when I'm there. The rest of the house is generally quite cold. The bathroom is always very cold, hopelessly cold.

Is this an efficient way to do it, I wonder? In 2005/6 the cost of gas and electricity for the Cambridge house was £873.79 and for the Norwich cottage it was £366.12. In Cambridge we have 9 warm rooms for that price; in Norwich we have one warm room (some of the time).

Umm. This might have something to do with double glazing and other things regarding insulation. I think I need to do some experiments. Would it be worthwhile installing central heating in Norwich I wonder?

Heating 3

You'd think, with all those sources of heat, that my Norwich place would be warm.
After all it's only got one bedroom and one living room (and a bathroom and a little kitchen and a bit of a lean-to out the back that the estate agents fondly called a "dining room" haha).
So with eight heaters (not counting the oven etc, or the outdoor chimenea) that's about four per room, and you'd think I should end up being quite cosy.

Probably if I used all of them at once all the time it would be quite cosy, actually.

Heating 2

Sources of heat in our Cambridge house:

1. Gas boiler with radiators
2. A coal effect gas fire
3. An aged electric convector heater (rarely used).
   

Heating

A list of the sources of heat at my Norwich place:

1. Three electric panel heaters, thermostatic
2. Two wall mounted 2 KW electric fan heaters
3. One free standing electric fan heater (3 KW)
4. One large wall-mounted gas heater with balanced flue
5. A coal-effect gas fire
6. The electric oven, hob and fridge
7. A cast iron chimenea for use outdoors