‘The Earth has a fever’ – the only solution is 14 billion air conditioners

From the University of Birmingham and the “more A/C exhausts, weather and climate stations hardest hit” department comes this report.

USHCN temperature sensor at Napa State Hospital, Napa, CA Photo by A. Watts.

Their press office must be asleep at the wheel, because they don’t provide a link to the report listed in the press release. And I can’t find it anywhere searching for the title.

Global quadrupling of cooling appliances to 14 billion could see staggering increase in world’s energy consumption – new report

Soaring global need for cooling by 2050 could see world energy consumption for cooling increase five times as the number of cooling appliances quadruples to 14 billion – according to a new report by the University of Birmingham, UK.

This new report sets out to provide, for the first time, an indication of the scale of the energy implications of ‘Cooling for All’.

Effective cooling is essential to preserve food and medicine. It underpins industry and economic growth, is key to sustainable urbanisation as well as providing a ladder out of rural poverty. With significant areas of the world projected to experience temperature rises that place them beyond those which humans can survive, cooling will increasingly make much of the world bearable – or even safe – to live in. With populations increasing, expanding urbanisation and climate change impacts leading to more frequent heatwaves and temperature rises, the demand for more cooling will increase in the decades ahead.

There are currently 3.6 billion cooling appliances around the world today and the University of Birmingham report authors forecast that the 14 billion devices needed by 2050 will consume five times the amount of energy currently predicted for cooling usage.

The report – A Cool World – Defining the Energy Conundrum of ‘Cooling for All’ – states that, by 2050, if we are to meet our Paris Climate targets to hold temperature increases to 2’C, total energy consumption for cooling must be limited to 6,300 TWh. Without action beyond current technology capabilities and efficiency gains, cooling could account for 19,600 TWh of energy consumption per year, against a current annual usage of 3,600 TWh. Even with new technologies coming on board, the annual energy requirement will be 15,500 TWh.

The report states that, along with aiming to reduce overall demand, if we are to meet our climate goals a whole new system approach to cooling is needed, recognising available free and waste cold and heat resources and incorporating new technologies, data connectivity, thermal energy storage to meet demand in the most efficient way.

Professor Toby Peters, ‘A Cool World’ report author from the University of Birmingham’s Energy Institute, said: “Current projections do not consider a ‘Cooling for All’ scenario and it will be impossible to meet the UN’s sustainable development goals as well as the Paris climate change targets. If we are to meet either of these, relying on technology efficiency and greening electricity won’t be sufficient.

“The challenge now is how to start with a system-led approach, better harnessing a portfolio of energy resources and adopting novel technologies. In order to achieve this, we need to start by asking ourselves a new question – no longer ‘how much electricity do we need to generate?’ but rather ‘what is the service we require, and how can we provide it in the least damaging way.”

The report concludes that:

  • Under the current scenario, over the next 30 years 19 cooling appliances will be sold every second; but this will not deliver ‘Cooling for All’.
  • By 2050, we would require a total of 14 billion cooling appliances globally to meet demand – an additional 4.5 billion appliances compared to the baseline forecast of 9.5bn– or four times as many pieces of cooling equipment than are in use today.
  • to “green” the volume of electricity required would consume more than 80% of the International Energy Agency’s projected total renewables capacity for 2050 and more than 100% in the event we do not achieve accelerated technology progress.

According to the report, if we are to take cooling demand seriously, the key stages to move towards a solution for cooling demand are:

  • Reducing the energy required for cooling: getting industry to adopt high efficiency cooling technologies and using maintenance to deliver optimum performance.
  • Reducing the need for cooling through better building design
  • Systems level thinking across built environment and transport
  • Harnessing waste resources: ‘wrong time’ renewables; waste cold; and waste heat.
  • Considering the strategies and skills required for installing appliances and maintaining them in order to maximise efficiency and reduce energy demand
  • Creating a model for delivery of affordable cooling to those in rural and urban communities based on the energy needs of local requirements, rather than imposing a ‘one size fits all’ approach.

The report authors call for the creation of a series of real world ‘Living Labs’. These labs will engage at community level, testing and demonstrating not only new technologies, but also the socio, business, governance, policy and funding models. This will ensure that new thinking on systems, new innovations and business models can be properly designed and tested.

Given the urgency and need to combine engineering and social sciences for an integrated approach that includes the behaviour of individuals, technical solutions, and the business models to make those solutions viable, they also urge the creation of an international centre for excellence: its aim to deliver global collaboration on cooling – enhance awareness and understanding of the challenge of cooling; to build a roadmap and deliver the innovation pipeline; provide skills and education, and lead on trialling new technologies at scale.

The report builds on the University’s research partnerships in India and Birmingham recently signed an agreement with the State Government of Haryana to advance the use of ‘clean cold’ technology in India and help meet rising demand for cooling sustainably.

This landmark agreement followed the world’s first-ever Congress on Clean Cold held at the University of Birmingham last month and supported by the University’s India Institute, which also sponsored the first Birmingham-Haryana clean cold workshop last year.

Notes to Editors

147 thoughts on “‘The Earth has a fever’ – the only solution is 14 billion air conditioners

  1. A heat pump (typical air conditioner) removes heat from the space being cooled and dumps that heat plus the heat associated with operating the heat pump into the adjacent space. A refrigerator is a good example. Assume the refrigerator removes 5,000 btuh and then dumps 6,000 btuh into the kitchen. In essence the refrigerator is a net producer of heat greater than the heat removed. Beware of air conditioning as it is a global warmer!

    • Turn them around. Build a large round structure with numerous openings. Place AC units in those openings pointing outward. The Cooled air is blown outward and the heated exhaust is maintained inward. Pump the warmer air through a series of pipes to gradually cool it underground before it exhausts to the outside. Depending on the amount of heat generated, potentially use it to generate some current.

      • All that does is transfer the heat into the ground. And where do you think that heat will eventually end up….back in the atmosphere. Unless you’re actively transporting it off planet the best we’re left with is atmospheric radiation to space…..which we already have.

        A better choice is to circulate water through the heat exchangers to make hot water for washing, cooking, etc. Of course that is already being done as well.

        Obviously the proponents of this concept failed to answer the high school physics question: “When you open the door to the refrigerator does it heat or cool the room in which it sits?”
        hint: its the same as whether you cool the room by fanning the air about (it only adds work and energy)

        • Fanning the air works from a physiological perspective. Forced convection, even if the air is in the 80’s (F), will reduce your body temperature, as long as the humidity is reasonable. In still air, your body removes heat by conduction, radiation, and a very small amount of convection, and maybe a little evaporation. Five feet per second or even less of air movement will remove much larger quantities of heat.

          • Fanning only moves heat from your body to the air in the room. You are not removing any energy from the system only moving it around. And, by the very nature of adding energy to the system (by forcing circulation via mechanical means) you only increase the energy of the system as a whole. This does not even take into account the extra heat your body creates.
            Of course as your skin cools (and draws more heat from your core) you may feel better, for a while. Absent any changes eventually the system reaches such a heat state that it can no longer absorb your excess body heat at the rate in which you generate it and your body will enter hyperthermia (heat distress).

            In the post modern dystopia how you feel about something seems to be far more important than what is actually occurring.

          • A fan was all I had for cooling prior up to last year when i got an AC, very nice having that AC versus sitting in a unit with inside temps up to 97 F. The fan did help a bit, but the AC is absolutely wonderful.

          • And still, WAAAAAAAY more people die each year from hypothermia than from hyperthermia.

        • I always thought that a great design for a fridge would be sliding panels which would allow a person to access items without opening the door. I can hear my fridge kick in every time I open the door, especially at this time of year.

          • A “chest” type cooler, freezer or refrigerator with the access door on top of the unit are the most economical to operate.

            The cold air doesn’t “fall” out of them when the door is opened.

        • Inventor Don Stephens, a futurist, has designed and written about “ANNUALIZED GEO-SOLAR HEATING” AS A SUSTAINABLE RESIDENTIAL-SCALE SOLUTION FOR TEMPERATE CLIMATES WITH LESS THAN IDEAL DAILY HEATING- SEASON SOLAR AVAILABILITY” there is a PDF I have by him if anyone wants it…also it may not work(the futurist imagining part, Don is a great guy, and maybe someone can find something of value in it.) in a way ” freaking solar roadways” was at the far end of the credibility scale (and failed costing a few million in funding) ..re: http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/community/forum/mechanicals/19785/ags-annualised-geo-solaranyone-having-success-ags

    • That is based on the same set of natural principles as those by which governments operate as net producers of cost who are distributors of more poverty than the amounts that they may relieve.

    • “Assume the refrigerator removes 5,000 btuh and then dumps 6,000 btuh into the kitchen. ”

      You need to read up on the efficiency of heat pumps. Using hot air to cool down cool air is the thermodynamic equivalent of shovelling shit up hill, it is a very inefficient process.

      I have typically read that it takes about 7 joules consumed for every joule extracted. The larger the temp difference, the worse it gets.

      • > The larger the temp difference, the worse it gets.

        A bit of clarification. The greater the temperature difference the more efficient the heat transfer. I think you meant the more you try to steepen the gradient the less return for any additional energy input.

      • An exceptionally efficient (and therefore exceptionally expensive) heat pump can achieve a heating Coefficient Of Performance (COP) of 3.4. So your 7:1 is only about double what they really need, but not unusual for heat pumps in the ’70s.

        The thing is, though, at least half of this country has prices for electricity that are more than 4.25 (assuming a standard furnace with only 80% efficiency, so this converts actual price paid to get the same heating) times higher than the price of natural gas at the same location. So the consumer is actually better off to buy a split-system air conditioner coupled with a gas furnace, and will pay less for their year-round conditioning than buying an exceptionally efficient heat pump (I have not recently evaluated ground source heat pumps, or even water source heat pumps coupled to a lake or running stream, so I don’t know any of their numbers off the top of my head). Or, if they have the cash, they can buy a super efficient gas furnace (a condensing furnace can approach 94% efficiency), and then the price of electricity has to be even lower to be competitive.

        What I’m trying to say is, the consumer should buy what works best for them, and never mind where the energy came from. Especially when “green energy” isn’t any lower on emissions than any other source of energy, once you work through the total (including everything given off to manufacture and install it) life-cycle emissions production of all your options.

        I have not read the report, but right up front I don’t see how 4 times as many units will use 5 times as much energy, when the efficiency of units available on the market continues to improve. How did they do that arithmetic?

    • “Beware of air conditioning as it is a global warmer!”

      Beware of the sun as it is a global warmer! Is everything that warms the planet evil now? You are free to give up air conditioning anytime you like. But you’ll have to pry it from my nicely cooled, dead hands…

  2. Which UoB? There are several. One of them calls itself ‘City University of Birmingham’. It used to be called, a decade or so ago, the Uni of Central England, but it changed its name to CUB because nobody knew where ‘central England’ was. Perhaps it’s still looking for itself somewhere.

      • I lived in Edgbaston for almost 2 years, next to the reservoir (it is part of Edgbaston, right?) Although I worked at Aston University. Good memories.

      • Nope. The article says:

        “Soaring global need for cooling by 2050 could see world energy consumption for cooling increase five times as the number of cooling appliances quadruples to 14 billion – according to a new report by the University of Birmingham, UK.”

        It is this one:

        The one where the h is silent.

    • Good things came out of Birmingham. The Triumph Toledo, Stag, Herald and Vitesse, Spitfire, GT6 which I had one, TR7 and 8 (Which was a GT7 with a rover V8 engine). All eaten away by the brown rot and 1970’s “industrial action” which destroyed British car making. Socialism at “work”.

  3. Beyond the window unit, there are bigger problems with this site.
    1) A tall building just feet away.
    2) A parking lot with cars on it just feet away.

    • 1) A tall brick building with a dark roof just feet away.
      2) Asphalt parking lot just feet away.
      And from the direction of the flag, that hot roof is helping to keep their sensor warm.

        • He effectively did the same thing though. He chose a particular tree that was adjacent some local anomaly of soil type, water supply, whatever such that its growth pattern was signficantly different to its neighbours. If you can’t fiddle the data then ‘fiddle’ the sensor and write a ‘climate science’ polemic instead of a scientific paper.

          • If you are referring to YAM06, it was the late Keith Briffa , not Mann. Mann was the one falsified Briffa’s results.

      • Per the flag, the station is located on the lee side of the building. That creates a nice air flow downwards across the heated roof shingles and channels it right onto the station!

    • The real problem is that there are too many “universities”. A “university” is what used to be known as kindergarten.

  4. A warmer world would at the same time require less heating.
    How come they don’t factor that in?
    If the amount of warming did some how manage to reach the level of a little bit uncomfortable, humans would probably react in the form of fewer people moving closer to the equator when they retire.

  5. I hope they keep pushing AGW theory. Push it harder then ever so you can have more egg on your face when it fails to come to fruition.

    As we speak the climate is in a cooling trend but they are so caught up with their theory that they could not see it coming even if it hit them smack in the face. The blind leading the blind. AGW nonsense has set climate science way back but has given opportunities for guys like myself to come up with alternative theories and see how they play out.

    The test is on and now-next few years will tell us much. Below I have some commentary on the current climate situation and some thoughts abut it.

    I like the way it is going thus far this year. Global temperatures and overall sea surface temperatures both continue to be lower.

    July is looking quite cold in particularly in Antarctica.

    One has to predict BEFORE it happens if it has any meaning. I say 2018 is the transitional year. I much rather be early then late when predicting.

    Of course it is still to early to celebrate and more months have to go by but it has to start sometime if it is going to occur.

    The climate when it does really shift or go to another regime does so abruptly not slow and gradual. Ice Core data shows this to be the case.

    The climate post Dalton shifted to the present climatic regime in a period of 10 years and has been in the same climate regime other then the climatic shift in the late 1970’s, which was all natural and accounts for all of the rise in temperatures since the Little Ice Age.

    If I turn out to be correct I will be on pretty firm ground because I would not have only pin pointed the transitional year(before it happened) but also the reasons why and how and my website climatebusters.org backs this up.
    My website being done some 5 years ago way in advance of this potential change.

    • It doesn’t matter what the temperature actually is doing it’s always “(put name of previous month here) was the hottest on record,” even when it actually is dropping. My local paper has been running that headline for at least the last 18 months every month.

  6. Regarding their proposed solution to a maybe 0.2 to 0.5C increase in global temperatures:

    1) Reducing the energy required for cooling: getting industry to adopt high efficiency cooling technologies and using maintenance to deliver optimum performance.

    Already being done.

    2) Reducing the need for cooling through better building design

    Already being done.

    3) Systems level thinking across built environment and transport

    Say what?

    4) Harnessing waste resources: ‘wrong time’ renewables; waste cold; and waste heat.

    Already being done.

    5) Considering the strategies and skills required for installing appliances and maintaining them in order to maximise efficiency and reduce energy demand

    Isn’t this a repeat of number one?

    6) Creating a model for delivery of affordable cooling to those in rural and urban communities based on the energy needs of local requirements, rather than imposing a ‘one size fits all’ approach.

    I think they are saying you shouldn’t install 10 tons of cooling when only 5 tons is needed. Not that anyone is actually doing that.

    As always, the so called “researchers” are completely out of touch with the real world.

    • I think they are saying you shouldn’t install 10 tons of cooling when only 5 tons is needed.

      Air conditioners are one case where smaller is definitely better. An air conditioner isn’t properly lubricated until it is running. That means when it starts it wears faster. In terms of longevity, running 24-7 is much better than a lot of starting and stopping. short cycling My well insulated, tree shaded, house is cooled by one 5000 btu window air conditioner that runs constantly.

      • Smaller is better, but only till you reach the point that is too small to remove the heat being generated.

        • As was the first AC I got. It ran constantly and by late evening the temperature in the house was in the 80’s (F)

      • An oversized A/C unit is poor design/application. It will not properly remove moisture from the conditioned space due to lack of circulation. A major design consideration is lowering humidity for comfort. An oversized unit ‘dumps’ cold air and fails to properly remove the moisture content.

        • For most of the country. In the western US when it is hot it is usually quite dry. That is why it does get cool enough at night to open the windows and really finish off the cooling of the house (with the exception of low elevation AZ and CA-Sorry guys)

          • I live by the beach in So. Cal. w/o AC.
            It gets warm during the day, but ocean breezes cool it off during the evening. Some parts of CA can stay on the list.

    • #5 sounds like “give us some more money for a study to tell you how smart we are and how stupid you are.”

    • Hang on

      There’s around 2 billion people between China & India, presumably, on average, 4 to a household.

      So that’s 500 million domestic air conditioners required.

      Africa has around 1 billion people, 4 to a house, that’s 250 million domestic air conditioners.

      South America is around 0.5 billion people, 4 to a house, that’s 125 million domestic air conditioners.

      Most of Europe and N.America either have all they need, or just don’t need them.

      So 825 million new domestic air conditioner installations, assuming no one already has one in these countries (which they do).

      And industry will need it’s fair share, say 2 billion.

      But I’m kind of missing 11 billion + air conditioners here.

      Am I being especially dense today?

      Or do they need them all in the Antarctic?

        • A good portion of the developing world will need to buy a house before they need to buy an A/C unit to cool it.

      • HotScot: Well, maybe double your estimate as most households will probably also want a refrigerator. But before the boom in A/C and fridge sales, some one is going to need to build a lot of power plants and transmission lines. And no one’s going to buy a refrigerator with only wind or solar power that won’t keep it running 24/7. Also assumes they live in a country with a functional economy and can afford the cost of the equipment and electricity. But these guys seem to think poverty will be eradicated by 2050, so that’s good.

        Gotta go get a beer from the basement beer fridge (next to the chest freezer) and check the A/C thermostat setting.

        • I’ve seen a lot of homes with two A/C units. Makes a lot of sense for a two story with the bedrooms upstairs. Turn off the downstairs unit when the family goes to bed.
          Many homes have a refrigerator and a separate freezer. Not to mention the occasional dehumidifier.

          • MarkW

            Fair comment. I haven’t read the paper so no idea if it mentions fridges and freezers as well as air con.

          • MarkW

            Perhaps I was misled by the title of the article:

            “The Earth has a fever’ – the only solution is 14 billion air conditioners”

  7. Sounds like we will need to tap our nuclear resources for the countries without large coal or gas deposits.

  8. I hardly ever use my aircon for cooling but almost constantly during the winter.
    Yet more BS.

  9. In some parts of the world, air conditioning is up there with indoor plumbing as things which make life pleasant. Hard to imagine a delicate beauty using the out house on a 100 F day with 90% humidity.
    Think of the world in 1920. That’s what it is like with no air conditioning.
    I cannot see windmills or solar panels supplying sufficient energy to keep 7.5 billion people warm, dry, cooled, well fed, and entertained.
    Wait . . .

    • 1920?
      When many rural places had outhouses over intermittent streams.
      Spring brought snowmelt and the waste was flushed down into the nearest river.

      • John F. Hultquist

        1960’s and early 1970’s urban UK, it wasn’t unusual to see outhouses.

    • A good bit of the world still lacks indoor plumbing and we are worried about their potential A/C bills?

    • In 1990 I visited Ireland for 2 weeks in July. It was clear as crystal, brilliant blue skies, and temperatures in the high 70’s. It was stifling indoors everywhere in Dublin except McDonald’s, the only building with central air.

  10. Living labs? You mean like free-market capitalism delivering affordable comfort addressing a global demand.

  11. No to mention all the datacenters for your iPhones, Google Internet, Facebook, Amazon, … and all the other modern conveniences of life,….

  12. We need a just say “No” campaign.

    We tell all those new users of AC in China, India and the developing to go without. To take one for the team.

    All my relatives in China have started using air conditioners. Are they crazy? Don’t they realize they are Destroying Mother East?

    The need to dial it back to the pew- 1992 Rio days.

    It does not matter if they are elderly. They need to take one for the TEAM!

    • Charles

      ‘just say No’ didn’t go well for Brexit.

      Mind you ‘just say Yes’ bombed with Scottish Independence.

  13. Hmmm…If only there was some way to both drive up electricity costs, and make it less reliable at the same time, people, especially poor people would be forced to use less. Of course, the number of heat-related deaths would rise, but sacrifices must be made in order to “save the planet”. Think of the children!

  14. If you go to Brimingham’s UK web page, “Clean Cooling” almost sounds like the Green Climate Fund just switching CO2 for Cooling. Here are their highlights for their “Sustainable Development Goal”. I guess they want a piece of the pie too. All this time I thought CO2 was magical, now Cooling can do many of the same things. Who knew?

    #1 – No poverty
    #2 – Zero Hunger
    #5 – Gender Equality
    #10 – Reduce Inequalities


  15. To paraphrase our Leftwinger friends, “Cheap, safe, abundant and reliable electricity is a basic human right.”

  16. This paper and the institute that created it are not really related to climate change at all. Professor Toby Peters, is a Professor in Cold Economy and Fellow of the Institute for Global Innovation.

    It is a simple fact that modern societies use a lot of “cold” — air conditioning, food refrigeration and freezing, cooling computer labs — and we really don’t have anything more efficient than the refrigerant heat pump to produce all that “cold” — we use electricity to run the cooling units.

    On our boat, and most long-distance cruisers, refrigerator/freezer represents the highest energy demand on batteries and generators — a near constant drain.

    As the developing world develops, they will demand the same level of comfort and safe food handling (refrigerators/freezers) that the rest of us enjoy — and that’s calls for a LOT more electricity and electrical infrastructure.

    • Kip Hansen

      Careful now. You’ll give the greens the idea that we should stop transporting bananas to Europe and have us all eating seasonal fare, bringing back rickets.

      • HotScot ==> That the Greenie point about a/c — the worry that all those Indians, Pakistanis, Chinese and Malaysians will want a/c units in their bedrooms to cool off at night. With the current electrical infrastructure, there is no way to provide the power for them — so ChIndia will have to build more coal and nuclear power plants — no way around it.

    • Ammonia absorption refrigerators are an option if you have some medium quality waste heat available. In the tropics that might be as simple as a re-purposed solar hot water heater.

    • Servel used to make gas refrigerators, developing world could use them with LNG or LP.

  17. First, of the 2C increase, 3/4of it will be in polar/subpolar regions where it will be welcome but barely noticed. Zero increase will be in the tropics – according to IPCC science and my observations since 1965 of Lagos Nigeria temperatures, and the other part of a degree will be in the temperate zones where it will be barely noticed. The 5 C in polar regions will result in very marginal melting.

    More snow there will reduce sea level. They know this but dont put it in reports because they want to alarm people. 90% of the ice in polar regions is at greater than 2km altitude and remains frozen. Sheesh, they bank on 1+1 equaling 2 among the linear misanthropic thinkers.

  18. The Green Blob simply intends to kill Billions in normal heat waves by making the electricity to run A/C too expensive for the masses.

    The Elites will have the financial means to pay for their super expensive electricity to run their A/Cs. But for the unwashed masses… unless they are working in an air conditioned factory or office that the Left sees essential to their rule and life-style, they’re on their own.

  19. That press release is such a bunch of Liberal Arts academic speak and gobldygook.

    “if we are to meet our climate goals a whole new system approach to cooling is needed, recognising available free and waste cold and heat resources and incorporating new technologies”

    Alright then, let’s get started.
    Waste cold:
    We are constantly told dire stories about WAIS (West Antarctic Ice Sheet) getting ready to collapse.
    Antarctica produces huge icebergs, 50 miles long by 20 miles wide and 1000 feet thick.
    All we need to do is grab some of those bergs and tow them to North America and Europe. Then we can harvest the ice and give it away for everybody to supply their iceboxes and air chillers. Of course, people living on the coast beside the iceberg will not need air chillers at all. A double win.
    Best of all:
    Like Wind and Solar, it is free, Free, FREE!!!

  20. I don’t know what the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals are, but if it’s to make the First World environments available to all countries, they’re asking a good question. Page 3:

    If we are to deliver on the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals societal, health and economic targets, Cooling for All will be essential. But what should Cooling for All look like and what would it mean for our renewable energy systems and overall climate change mitigation targets? Can we solve both the challenge of ensuring equitable access to cooling for all humans and mitigate its future, as well as current – and already significant – energy and environmental impacts without radical intervention?

    Unless the answer turns out to be “No.”

    NOTE: I should have read page 9 for the goals. A double page PDF is hard for me to read on a small screen. Some of the goals are good, but some are silly. I.E. “Climate Action.”

    • And some are designed for total control of people and their lives, i.e. “Peace and Justice.”

  21. Weren’t some of the old CFC refrigerants more efficient than the new ones? I wonder if they’ll ever have to choose between CO2 and ozone. That would be a funny dilemma to watch.

  22. Solution?

    Have the Chinese produce more insulation, with their ozone depleting gases and we’ll barely need aircon units.


  23. [ Ultra High-Temperature Pasteurization – (UHT) milk packaged in a sterile container, if not opened, has a typical unrefrigerated shelf life of six to nine months. In contrast, HTST pasteurized milk has a shelf life of about two weeks from processing, or about one week from being put on sale. ]

    Use heat to lessen the need for refrigeration?

  24. The air-conditioner is bad but what about the huge pavement area all around ? only a complete idiot or a climate shyster would put a thermometer in this location .

  25. More A/C equals more outdoor heating. A/C makes it hotter causing more A/C needs making it even hotter, and so on and on! Cities burst into flaming Armageddon from A/C use. The point of no return. It’s worser than we thought.

    Only salvation is to capture hot air and pump it into the ground and retrieve it in the winter!

    HACC — Hot Air Capture and Storage to the rescue!

  26. Their press office must be asleep at the wheel, because they don’t provide a link to the report listed in the press release. And I can’t find it anywhere searching for the title.

    No that’s normal practice, that way they can freely misrepresent what the paper actually says and spin it to fit their agenda.

  27. 1)”Reducing the energy required for cooling: getting industry to adopt high efficiency cooling technologies and using maintenance to deliver optimum performance.
    2)Reducing the need for cooling through better building design
    3) Systems level thinking across built environment and transport
    4)Harnessing waste resources: ‘wrong time’ renewables; waste cold; and waste heat.
    5)Considering the strategies and skills required for installing appliances and maintaining them in order to maximise efficiency and reduce energy demand
    6) Creating a model for delivery of affordable cooling to those in rural and urban communities based on the energy needs of local requirements, rather than imposing a ‘one size fits all’ approach.”

    The above is all socialist/ communist philosophy of trying to control everything

    1) Industry always does this anyway. If you dont sell efficient products you wont last in the marketplace.
    2) Building designers already have this in their goals.
    3) Everyone has been taught systems level thinking.
    4) Waste is a dirty word these days so we already do this even to a ridiculous non optimal sense.
    5) Maximizing efficiency is already done but attempting to globally reduce energy demand is futile if you understand Economics 101 which most socialists don’t.
    6) Industry will deliver cooling to the masses, NOT a socialist bent bureaucrat.

    THIS WHOLE STUDY IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF socialistic/communistic mentality that proposes to make our life better but in reality will make our life a living hell.

  28. Howzabout we apply the Rock Solid Settled Science of the GHGE?

    Air con: Cools the air and in doing so condenses whatever water vapour there may be in that air.
    I used to have a little single room unit and it actually had a ‘dehumidifier’ setting.

    We all know that water vapour is THE Green House Gas so by installing & running all these air cons – would that not reduce the magnitude of the Green House Effect?
    That is, removing water vapour from the atmosphere will reduce the GHGE – and thus reduce the need for more air cons?
    Should not folks be actively encouraged to install air-cons and reduce Global Climate Weird Whatever Warming Change?
    ** See note below

    This goes deep, very deep, does it not?

    The alert reader will be wondering why folks want to remove CO2 from the atmosphere when water vapour removal is so much easier and in fact, well established.
    (We actually do know: CO2 removal is the realm of Government Cronies printing money for themselves)

    Same alert reader will now be wondering how much energy it takes to create water vapour from liquid water, compared to the amount of energy it ‘traps’ via its GHGE.

    Because, if it traps less energy than it takes to create, the creation of water vapour is a cooling effect and the GHGE is a Dodo.
    If it traps more energy than it took to create, then Mr Big Climate Scientist has his work cut out to explain why the situation does not run away with itself. You have a thing which creates itself.

    Explicitly: Trapped Energy creates water vapour which traps energy which creates more water vapour which traps more energy etc etc ad nauseam.
    AKA: Positive Feedback and especially strong feedback given Stefan’s Law describing how power and temperature relate to each other. And the positive feedback is even stronger given that the Specific Heat capacity for water vapour is only half that of liquid water.

    Open Question to those who believe in the GHGE: Why is the Stratosphere not where the ocean is and vice-versa and everywhere else at some unimaginably high temperature?
    What puts the brakes on, and, Stefan is not the answer because Stefan is the *positive* driving force here.

    ** Do bear in mind the discomfiture that human animals have when passing off untruths. Everyone recalls James Hansen’s Pants On Fire Moment involving air cons – is that Achilles Heel of Global Warming and *nobody* actually does believe in or even understand the GHGE

  29. Just because no one’s said it yet, “I got a fever, and the only cure is more cowbell!’

  30. • Reducing the energy required for cooling: getting industry to adopt high efficiency cooling technologies and using maintenance to deliver optimum performance.

    Every single HVAC designer already knows this. The TCO for any system is minimized by design efficiency and maintenance. What they are arguing instead is for higher SEER no matter the cost and higher maintenance costs regardless of ROI.

  31. Right now there are about 7 billion people in the world, which might increase to 8 billion by the year 2050.
    Why would 8 billion people need 14 billion air conditioners, or 1.75 air conditioners per person?

    Most of the world’s people live with families in apartments or single-family houses, each of which probably only needs at most one air conditioner (some homes in cold climates don’t have air conditioners), so that the number of air conditioners in 2050 will probably be less than the population at that time.

  32. From the article: “With significant areas of the world projected to experience temperature rises that place them beyond those which humans can survive”

    Be afraid. Be very afraid. Order your air conditioner now!

  33. I’ve avoided the need for an AC (in a climate that rarely gets over 90F) by installing an attic fan and two large awnings.

    I suspect houses in areas with inexpensive water could be kept cool enough to avoid AC by installing a thermostat-controlled sprinkler system on their roofs. Evaporation would do the work. I’m surprised such systems aren’t being offered for sale yet.

  34. In a World that was warming, most of the warming would occur towards the poles and little would occur at the equator where you really need the air-conditioning. The pole-wards areas would benefit from a lower need for heating and increased agricultural output from warmth and CO2.

  35. A modestly warming world will indeed need more air conditioners. A non-warming world will *also* need more air conditioners, and it will need them in the same places a warming world would. Even a cooling world would still benefit from air conditioners. It’s heat waves that are dangerous, and places where air conditioners are common are the *most* resilient to heat waves.

    You could substitute “heaters” for air conditioning above, of course. Man’s ability to control the *indoor* climate renders us able to live in a huge variety of outdoor climates, as long as we have the resources (such as equipment and energy) necessary to do so. People die from weather today when they lack these things, and even if hideously expensive mitigation measures prevented global warming entirely (not at all likely) they would *still* die from lacking those things.

  36. His analysis of the requirement for more A/C is reasonable enough. I have always maintained that we need 3-5 times our current energy production (soon) just to bring the majority of humanity up to a modern living standard.

    The problem comes with his proposed solutions, which are just idle fiddling with the demand curve. At best, they might bring a 10% reduction in energy demand at huge cost.

    The real solution is that word he dare not utter: Nuclear. Small, sealed, modular units that can be trucked in, buried on the outskirts of a community and provide power for 20 years or so before being dug up and replaced. With this small step, massive areas of the earth would suddenly become available for habitation.

    As an example, I recently visited Morocco and the Sahara desert. In the photo, the houses are made of mud from the land they stand on. They may last hundreds of years. However, note that some are new. This community is growing. Most interesting, notice the number of white dots – satellite dishes. With satellite TV, A/C and wifi people can lead comfortable and modern lives in what were previously the most brutally primitive conditions.


  37. The ACs are needed so that they can be used as in the photo. More ACs give higher temps therefore more money to buy more ACs for more “global warming” for more money.

  38. The authors have done a masterful job of tip-toeing around Gigantor The Elephant in their workshop of future Utopia scenarios. What happens when all the greenies get their wish of electric vehicles plugging in by the 10s or 100s of millions? Do they think a few billion refrigerators and air-conditioners can compare with that?

  39. I couldn’t let this one pass, even if I’m 4 days late to the discussion:

    “With significant areas of the world projected to experience temperature rises that place them beyond those which humans can survive…”

    *Bzzzzzzzt* FAIL! Supposes facts not in evidence! Even the buggered and jiggered Surface Temperature Records show possible increases in daily minimums, but daily maxima are flat-lined, no increases at all. And (correct me if I’m wrong?) this includes urban locations as well as rural stations.

Comments are closed.