I guess the "don't wear ties" comment was meant to be less serious, but men's business clothing has driven a lot of office thermostats to 60⁰F over the course of my experience. Men in suits and ties are comfortable at the approximate temperature of a meat locker, while everyone else is freezing and energy is wasted. If the PM were serious about trendsetting to reduce energy use, he would ban the suit jacket and encourage men to wear shorts to work.
It's not just that, it's also that men have higher skin temps than women. If a man and woman were wearing the exact same clothes, in the exact same room, the man would still almost certainly be feeling warmer.
It is directly affected by body fat at least. Fat is insulating (hence whales, seals, etc. having a thick fat layer) and definitely being on the larger size with a higher % of body fat makes someone feel warmer.
I'd say far less than the layers of wool in a suit.
I work from home and don't do business suits. I've always kept the a/c on 26 because I don't like the shock that you get when moving even from 19 to 30. Looks like other people are finally noticing that...
I've never understood why (in some countries) public places are so cooled down in the summer and so heated up in the winter. In Japan, in the summer they put the ACs to what feels like 16ºC, so whenever you go from outdoor (very hot and humid) to indoor, you feel like you'll freeze (because you're dressed for 30ºC). In the winter, they put the ACs to 25ºC, so you move from outdoor to indoor, it's extremely hot and sticky (as you're dressed for 5ºC). Why not meet in the middle and use 21ºC or something all year round? (Or save energy and just change the temperature a little to make it a bit more bearable.)
Myself and many others seem to find 21c too cold in winter and too hot in summer in some buildings. I think it's possibly due to radiant temperature: for example, the walls/roof/floor are hotter in summer so you need to cool the air down more to make up for that.
That said, Japan and some other places (Singapore!) take it to the extreme, and in a modern well insulated building, this is much less needed than it used to be. Maybe it's a hang-over from when wall insulation was terrible?
What I really don't understand is why, in London, the short distance commuter trains and buses are heated so warm in the winter. I'm only on the train for 10 minutes, why would I want to strip down!?
Could it be for driver comfort? I sometimes have the impression that buses have their temperature tuned for the driver, who's staying in the bus for hours and has everyone's safety at least partially related to their comfort. But I find it impossible to confirm this by asking the bus companies why their buses are set this way (e.g. when windows were closed during Covid at about 20°C).
Oh yeah, I was soaked in the rain in Singapore once and took the bus home, I was basically sure I'd catch a cold, it was like stepping outside in the winter at home after taking a shower...
It happens in other places in Asia as well, not only Hong Kong. It's quite uncomfortable to go from ~34C and 98% humidity, to an environment at ~20C and less than 50% humidity. I'm surprised people don't get more respiratory illnesses more often.
First it was hard for me and making me sick, but then I got used to it also.
For a westerner, it might be hard to imagine constantly living with high temperatures like that. And for example having to sleep everyday with such climate.
In Tokyo, you sweat to death on the subway, then get off with wet underwear into the cold street and yeah, summer trains feel so cold it's like having a high fever when sitting on the train.
JR commuter trains "solve" this problem by having some carriages on longer trains intentionally set to higher temperatures, signposted 弱冷房車 ("weak cooling car").
It's very weird. In my university dorm in the common room, there was always a fight between the local students and the exchange students about the AC temperature.
For context, A/C in public places is not as prevalent as in the US. In some large retailers, e.g. El Corte Ingles, it's set to ~24 degrees Celsius, quite lower than outdoors, especially in the larger cities of Central, Southern, and Mediterranean Spain. It feels really cold.
Anyway, the odd voice here is the one from the president of the Madrid region, who went on Twitter to say that they won't comply, mostly not because of the A/C, but another bit that requires stores to shut off their lights when they are closed, effectively keeping their showcases in the dark at night.
Personally, it sounds like the stupidest hill to die on.
I mean, in a world where alarm systems usually include vibration and glass break detectors, cameras with night vision, and redundant phones for early alerts, do we really need showcases to be lit all night long?
I know. I'm from Spain myself, worked several jobs there.
I could cover a whole cafe with cameras for less than the cost of your average cash register, which, if I remember correctly, in 2008 was about 150 euro. Even convenience stores have cameras nowadays. I don't see the issue here.
> I mean, in a world where alarm systems usually include vibration and glass break detectors, cameras with night vision, and redundant phones for early alerts, do we really need showcases to be lit all night long?
You're thinking like a rich technologist. You're also assuming a pretty fast police response. What good does that stuff do if the police don't respond and thief or vandal wears a mask?
People feel more comfortable doing wrong when they're hidden in the dark. Keeping the lights on will deter a lot of people. A lot of gizmos no one will notice will not deter anyone.
I don't think I understand what you are trying to say here.
Currently, basic cameras and alarm systems are very affordable, more so than most of the staple devices in any given shop, e.g. cash registers. And if we are talking about actual deterrents, then they should be looking at steel window grills.
But let's assume that it is true that keeping a store lit is a deterrent, then why wouldn't they put up cheap, motion activated lamps, around the store?
Point is, businesses need to keep up with the times. Just stating that lightning keeps thieves away is not going to cut it.
What does that have to do with freedom? You mean the freedom of a business owner to set their AC to whatever they like? Why is that symbolic of "freedom" in any way? As a business owner we have agreed as a society that there is a lot of rules you have to obey already - you cannot throw your rubbish out on the street, you must post your prices clearly, you must provide disabled access, you must give refunds for faulty items, etc etc etc. How is it freedom to be able to set your AC to 25C, but not building disabled access for your customers isn't?
The fact that we don’t have as much freedom as we should means we have carte blanche to keep taking freedom away from us? What an argument. A self fulfilling prophecy!
Yes we should have the freedom to keep our lights on if we want as long as we pay our bills. And if we want we shouldn’t have to build a ramp to our business. How are these things even something to argue about?
>>And if we want we shouldn’t have to build a ramp to our business.
Are you serious? How is this even a thing to argue about???
>>Yes we should have the freedom to keep our lights on if we want as long as we pay our bills.
Even in an energy crisis? I imagine when you are faced with severe drought you also argue that you should be able to use as much water as you want as long as you pay your bills? What an argument. I'm not entirely sure where it comes from - blatant disregard for the needs of the society over the needs of an individual? Just money? Belief that as long as you pay for something then the greater impact on everyone else shouldn't be considered? I'm so baffled by replies like yours.
This energy crisis is a self inflicted wound- people here have consistently voted for candidates that have refused to build nuclear, have put CO2 caps in place, have made enemies of everybody who could sell us gas, etc. They deserve everything that is coming to them. I have absolutely no sympathy for the prices that they are having to pay.
I don't see how that's relevant here though. And I especially don't see how that's relevant to Spain - Spanish people don't vote for or elect politicians in Germany, which is the country most in trouble right now due to its idiotic energy policies
>>have made enemies of everybody who could sell us gas, etc.
Spain can solve all those problems by ourselves. If the EU doesn’t let us, then Spain must leave the EU.
Yes I mean Russia. I don’t give a shit what they are doing. What’s the alternative, buying liquefied gas from the USA? Have you been paying attention to what they’ve done the past decades? Lol
Hold on, so your definition of “freedom” is becoming dependant on a fascist state who actively threats your very own neighbours, just for the chance of keeping some arguably useless store lightning on?
Then, they alone should suffer the consequences, right?
If they refuse to acknowledge that Spain is in dire need of saving energy, then they should be the first ones to be shut down if/when there is no enough power to warm up the country on winter.
The hardest part is that you first have to understand what freedom means. I guarantee most people don't really get it. It's just a nice word to throw around, it has a nice sound to it. "Freedom". "We live in a free country". Yeah, then you proceed to spend half of your life in a work environment where you have no decisional power at all and you're subject to stupid rules imposed by the owners. "Freedom".
What would a modern human do without technology? Judging from the comments here it seems almost nobody can tolerate anything less than perfect thermal confort. Personally I find this ridiculous. Our bodies are perfectly capable of regulating their temperature over a pretty wide range of circumstances, especially with the help of adequate clothing, yet people are complaining about 18c in the winter or 25c in the summer.
> Judging from the comments here it seems almost nobody can tolerate anything less than perfect thermal confort.
You could use the same argument against any modern technology.
A car? Our bodies are designed to walk for hours. A hot shower? Our bodies can withstand cold water, and don't need to be washed every day anyway. And so on and so forth.
> You could use the same argument against any modern technology.
Yes, technology is there to make our lives more comfortable, but at what price? Is modern society mature enough to weigh the pros and cons of each technology? I doubt it.
Yes, outdoors, with high humidity, and 27C can become uncomfortable. But keep indoors away from direct or indirect infra red radiation (hot surfaces in sunlight like external walls and roofs can radiate a lot of IR into windows and the like, sunlight streaming into a window can add 1KW heating per square meter of window), in humidity low enough so you don't sweat, and add a fan then as you can see from that graph (area 12) it can be pleasant up to 30C. But remove the fan, raise the humidity, and even 25C can become downright unpleasant.
Setting the air-conditioning to 27C should be comfortable in the right clothes. Provided it is significantly hotter outside, the air conditioning won't just drop the temperature to 27C, it will drop the humidity as well. Keep the air moving and your body will do the rest.
I work from home most days, living in Sweden which makes me more used to colder temps. Some weeks ago we had a few days over 27C and my working space thermometer measured 26C inside. It was perfectly comfortable.
My working space thermometer was also measuring 26C last week and I was very uncomfortable. Tolerance for warm and cold temperatures is different for everyone.
For whatever reason, I don't comprehend Celsius intuitively. I convert that to Fahrenheit and see 80.6 degrees. Is Spain dry? Or humid? I would revolt as I much prefer cold.
Probably because you didn't grow up with Celcius. Celcius makes sense because it's based on water, 0 is freezing and 100 is boiling. What's Fahrenheit based on? Anything we use in our daily lives?
Yes, it’s incredibly useful for outdoor temperature. 0 F means it’s very cold, 100 F means it’s very hot. Meanwhile, 0 C means it’s sort of a little cold, and 100 C means your eyes will melt.
I grew up with and actively use Celsius, but this instinctive disdain for other measurement systems leaves me… a little cold. It’s not even like Fahrenheit has weird non-decimal ratios. Save your mocking for the avoirdupois furlongs!
What's your standard of too hot? Uncomfortably hot? From the climate I'm used to then 80F qualifies. I'm not sure 80F is any less arbitrary a threshold than 25C. Don't confuse "my personal range of comfortable temperatures goes from 0-100F" with "0-100F maps neatly to every person's preferred temperature range and therefore is an advantage to fahrenheit"
(and that's before we get into the effects of humidity, or if outdoors, windspeed, on perception of temperature)
Similarly, 0F is -18C. -18C in my country would be a minor disaster, given our historical low is -5C. Our usual yearly low is about 0C, and 0C is more logical here than 32F, with negative temperatures actually being exceptional
I’m honestly unsure how personal preference enters into it. For the vast majority of the planet, within an acceptable margin of error, 0 - 100 F will be a useful temperature range for almost all naturally occurring outside temperatures.
As for personal preference, I think the first two thirds of that range are unbearable. I grew up in an subtropical area that regularly rises over 100 F in the summer. I don’t go around pretending that’s not hot though. It’s very hot! Unless you’re proposing different temperature scales for every climate, I’m unsure how your point about your local area is relevant. Surely people travel outside of your (and my) warm climate.
As I said, I grew up with and actively use Celsius, so I’m unsure why you’re explaining it in a reply to me. I’m also Australian, so your ranges are wildly off for my climate. Summers don’t get started until the 30 C days, and less than 20 C is the heart of winter.
Celsius has many strengths, and is obviously better suited for scientific purposes. Fahrenheit is handy for outdoor temperatures. That doesn’t mean Celsius is useless for those.
These turf wars are weird. A good engineer doesn’t spur different tools, for different tools have different strengths. I can immediately make sense of both systems, and I consider that to my advantage.
It's literally no better for 'outdoor temperatures' in any way. Both F and C systems are effectively arbitrary. It's just about personal preference/what you grew up with.
The range each degree represents in F is smaller, so it allows for more precision while restricting oneself to whole numbers. The may be considered advantageous by some.
1. Casual conversation and weather reports. It's quicker and easier to discuss whole numbers. Also the decade ranges offer more precision, so the 10s, 20s and 30s C cover roughly the same range as the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s F, which can be useful. It's not uncommon to discuss the weather in those terms.
2. Adjusting the temperature on a digital climate control interface. You generally just have up and down arrows so you're going to be dealing with fixed increments, and it's convenient for those to be whole numbers.
A minor advantage to be sure, but I think this is what people mean when they say it's better for atmospheric temperatures.
> and is obviously better suited for scientific purposes
Celsius and Fahrenheit are equally arbitrary / bad for scientific purposes, Kelvin is the only scale that makes sense since it's zeroed at absolute zero. Celsius is only marginally better than Fahrenheit in that you mostly deal with temperature increments rather than absolute values and celsius increments are the same as kelvin increments
Celsius and Kelvin are the same scale with just different starting points for 0. So I wouldn't say it's on the same league as Fahrenheit for scientific purposes, you just need to sum/subtract -273.15 to convert. F to C or K is a much more cumbersome conversion comparatively.
As someone from a tropical country, 0C is not a little cold and 100F is a normal day. As a universal unit, Celcius makes more sense because it can be defined easily.
As usual there is a relevant XKCD even if I can't find it now.
In Fahrenheit 0 and 100 are defined in random ways, but it ends up covering most of the range of temperature human experience in the environment.
Celsius's definition does not include putting a thermometer inside an adult horse, but the common range of everyday temperatures is -18 to 50.
There are points of view in which imperial units can claim to be easier to use.
In the end the SI are technically better for sure; US imperial units are defined in terms of SI units, according to Wikipedia the pound is "legally defined as exactly 0.45359237 kilograms", nor it is a coincidence that -40F° = -40C°
I think it might be because Fahrenheit is the one unit in the US customary system which is not particularly arbitrary compared to the metric equivalent and it actually has some advantages in day to day use since it maps pretty well to human temperatures
It probably has an element of catharsis for people on the receiving end of "metric is superior" whining to point out celsius is not particularly rational
> element of catharsis for people on the receiving end of "metric is superior"
Yes, I get that, but that's what it will always remain — just a cope, but not much else.
The reason: Customary isn't criticized, as far as I can tell, based on how the individual units are defined. That wouldn't be really valid, because all base units are arbitrary, including those of SI.
No, the unit system is criticized as a whole. The way conversions are defined between each other, that's what makes them so much less practical. The fact that a foot isn't 10 inches, a mile isn't 1000 nor 10000 feet (hell, even 5000 would've been better). That 1 gallon of water doesn't weigh 1 pound.
In "daily life", both Celsius and Fahrenheit are mostly isolated scales – you don't relate them to other units very often, and you almost never have to convert them to anything else. So it doesn't really matter how they are defined — definitely not on the same level as length, mass or volume.
I live in an area of Europe that used SI units, but did use customary units before. I think that part is conveniently forgotten in discussions, it’s not like America is exceptional in having some heritage units. Other parts of the world just managed to migrate.
Anyway what I say going to say is there was a migration Path here which went along the lines of changing from a base-12 conversion to a base-10 conversion. So there suddenly was a customary unit and a transitional unit. After that metric base units were introduced
The reason is simply familiarity. If you had lived your whole life with an inverted, nonlinear temperature scale that has freezing water at 53 degree, body temperature at 20 and boiling water at 0 degree you would also find that intuitive.
Both. Spain is one of the European countries with most diverse ecosystems. The local weather ranges from "tropical Mexico" to "Siberian winter". We have deserts and relic cloud rainforests. The inner core is dry and hot (not much unlike US pairies), the North is like Ireland and the West would be similar to California. Canary Islands are subtropical.
Currently most big cities are reaching over the 104ºF (40ºC). A pretty hot year. Environmental crimes made it much worse, so we are having a dry year also.
(Stupid note for myself: It seems that all the years with big wars are extra hot. Somebody should study how all this extra energy released locally by bombs and missiles interact with the weather models).
27 is a comfortable indoor temperature for me (if I wear a T-shirt and don’t do heavy physical work). I wonder where a big difference in preferred temperature comes from, given that body temperature is almost the same for all healthy people?
You better understand Celsius when you use body thermometer. Normal body temperature is 37, 38 is a light fever, 40 is severe fever.
So 27 is temperature of a pleasant summer day, not too hot not too cold.
Sorry, I should have clarified I meant when it's hot, which I think was what OP meant in the context of AC.
When I meant dry, is that when it's hot (like the 35+°C), it's dry, not that it's never humid. Entire days with 30+ and 100% humidity pretty much never happens in Europe.
For instance, Bilbao is quite humid right now (about 80%), but max temps are in the 25°C.
Madrid is expected to reach 39°C today, but humidity is about 30%.
Celsius was based on scientific ideas and works great for describing scientific processes. Fahrenheit was based on everyday weather experience and works great for describing that. They're of course equivalent, and it would be better if the world could agree on one standard (not just for temp, cough cough, metric system).
