There's not going to be much on the subject of aircon on this page but firstly, before we even mention that subject let me put a few points to you which may at first seem irrelevant but which will I hope soon become clear.

I must have been conceived within a few days of the start of World War II. This means that all my early formative years were in an era of austerity and deprivation, particularly with the provision of food, indeed food rationing did not finally disappear until I was 14 years old. As a result of this austerity mothers everywhere were adept at not wasting a thing. My own mother continued in this vein all her life, you could say that she was frugal, a state not fashionable today in this consumption society but perhaps it had better return. For over 67 years after I was born until the day she died she continued to waste very little because it was so engrained in her psyche. Not surprisingly I have this trait engrained in me; I always clear my plate (to the detriment of my figure), I keep the same car for years and years and rather than throw anything away, if there is any possibility of it being useful, I'll keep it 'just in case'. My wife who, was born much later than I, laughs at this behaviour. My son despairs of me.

What has this got to do with the environment? Quite a lot actually. Occasionally I have been lectured to by "holier than thou" cyclists (sometimes with a beard) on wasting the planet's resources on AC, yet these same people may think nothing of changing their mobile phone every year and need to change their laptop every two years to keep it current. Presumably they fail to see that the raw materials and the energy required to produce these products are all part of the same equation. In theory, each person on this planet should have an equal portion of its resources but in practice inequalities in their wealth mean that the distribution is unequal. That shouldn't mean that we in England need to beat our breasts in shame - who does more to deplete the planet's resources, he who uses the aircon on his car or he who burns down a whole section of virgin Amazon forest in order to clear land for crops. We're all entitled to a share of these resources, let's just not waste what we take for ourselves. It is very fashionable in the UK for the media to bleat about the USA not signing up to the Kyoto Treaty and implying that the Americans are too wasteful with their "gas guzzlers". This seems to ignore the fact that most of the legislation on vehicle emissions and the technology that it spawned first saw the light of day in California. How many hybrid vehicles have we in the UK compared to the quantities in the USA. If you want to see a high Per Capita Carbon Footprint look not towards America but towards the Middle East.

During my youth we had some extremely cold winters that are scarcely imaginable in south east England now-a-days. Over this winter (2007-8), as in the past few winters, there have been few days when the temperature dipped below zero degrees C yet only about 25 years ago there were periods of WEEKS when the temperature did not rise ABOVE zero. Completely unimaginable today. One winter buses and lorries were coming to a halt because it was so cold the diesel was turning to wax and vehicle fitters sent out to restart the engines had to resort to lighting fires beneath the fuel tanks on the lorries in an effort to melt the wax. Fuel companies had to bring in a whole new standard for the provision of fuel with additives to ensure fuel could take temperatures of at least minus 17 degrees Celsius before waxing occurred. After some years of these cold winters many experts were telling us that we were moving into a period of a Mini Ice Age as had occurred a number of time in previous centuries. A few years later it became obvious that these experts had been mistaken, as experts often are. Yet now everyone listens to the "experts" and believes every word they say. Maybe they are right this time, sometimes they are, but time will tell in the end.

History is what happened before you were born. Everything that you remember in your life is Experience but your Experience may only be History to someone born a lot later than you. Experience is a wonderful thing, with long experience you remember that there had been "experts" before. I remember well nine years ago many "experts" being trotted out to warn that the modern world would virtually fall apart on December 31, 1999 as computers would not be able to cope with the changeover to the the year 2000. As an ex computer professional myself, I knew that this was nonsense apart from a few poorly written programs but was this contrary view ever presented in the media? If so, I never saw it in any newspaper or on the Beeb - all the experts that the TV and newspapers presented simply ranted about "The Millennium Bug". It's not surprising really, TV stations need to gain viewing figures, newspapers need better circulation figures and as was always said "Never let the Truth get in the way of a Good Story". so we the viewing public took it all in, as we usually do. Even the Government didn't have the sense to question whether these "experts" had sufficient knowledge or were just full of misplaced self-confidence. I expect that some of our current crop of "experts" are like that.

Currently the temperatures in Britain and in much of the world are higher than for the 1970's and we have plainly entered a period of warming. Not only are the temperatures higher but the level of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere is higher. Some scientists are theorizing that it is the increased level of CO2 that has caused the earths temperature to rise, whilst other scientists are of the opinion that the rise in CO2 is the result of the rise in temperature. Chicken or Egg, who's to tell? As far as I know there is no proof either way, merely theories. Governments having a vested interest (they feel that they can rake in more taxes) are plumping for the former theory. Not being a scientist, I'm keeping out of the way. All I know is that 100% of the heat in the earth's atmosphere comes from the power of the sun. I also know that the heat from the sun is not constant, solar radiation varies at least on eleven year sun-spot cycles and there may be more long term cycles that man is as yet unaware of. Additionally I read last year that some reputable astronomers have reported that the climates on Mars and Jupiter are also heating up. If that is true then the explanation of why the planets in our solar system are heating up can have nothing to do with CO2 as it is a nonexistent gas on both Mars and Jupiter.

So if the higher levels of CO2 are the effect of the higher temperatures or are simply another factor which effects it neither way then trying to limit CO2 emissions is irrelevant to global warning. If, on the other hand, history finally proves that the theory of CO2 being the cause of global warming is factual then we might have left it too late to do anything - and there's the rub. Just in case that is the cause perhaps we should try to limit our production of CO2 as far as possible. Perhaps it is not going to make one iota of difference. Back in 1888 I think it was, "Experts" were concerned about the huge number of horses that were being used as transport in London, pulling wagons and traps and omnibuses and Hackney cabs. These experts forecast that there was no way that London could not be submerged under six feet of horse manure by 1948. My mum and dad used to take my sisters and me to London in 1948 and although I can remember the trams going through the tunnel at Kingsway down to the Embankment I don't remember any piles of horse manure anywhere. It seems completely farcical now in retrospect but these experts had not realised how innovative man is, nor how the newly invented internal combustion engine would completely revolutionize transport and supercede the horse. But we cannot rely on innovation and technology to get us out of a hole. Perhaps we should just be careful and waste as little as possible over the next few years until we might see the true situation with regard to global warming. Of course we could cease to use our cars at all - never take the kids to see grandma or to the zoo or to the seaside - but you won't find me doing that, I'm just going to continue trying not to waste things, just like mum taught me all those years ago.

While we are thinking about wasted resources, what about the potential massive waste of resources which is the result of a lack of policy from the government on sea inundations. It is proposed that many acres of eastern England are to allowed to be flooded by the sea due to lack of coastal protection. A few years ago much of this land was thought to be of little use due to full agricultural production, excesses of many foodstuffs (European Food Mountains), the EU encouraging farmers to leave some of their land fallow by paying "Set aside" subsidies. A lack of joined-up thinking had not envisioned the desires of the populations of newly enriched emerging nations for burgers and buns rather than rice and rice and rice. As a result, with just a little help from a warming climate creating several poor harvests, there is now a serious shortage of feedstuffs for cattle and wheat for bread - the law of supply and demand increased the price of wheat threefold in months. This land, to be allowed to flood, is now becoming valuable for cropping. Perhaps it is fortunate that this crisis with food production has occurred now and not ten years down the line when it might have been all too late. I wonder what our children will think of us a generation from now, that we could have allowed this dreadful waste of almost our most precious resource - land, this is England, there are already too many of us crammed onto a small island. I can't think that there would be many Dutchmen happy to allow the sea to reoccupy their dearly won land or even the French or Belgian polders, all very productive agricultural land now.

I read last week in the paper that one government minister was given permission to keep his diesel powered Jaguar and not have to use the eco-friendly Prius that ministers are supposed to use. This was partly because he covers quite high mileage. This seems to me just like government policy is based upon two minutes of thought. Toyota Prius and other similar hybrid vehicles are undoubtedly very eco-friendly vehicles but under certain restricted conditions. They are outstandingly economical under urban stop-start conditions or even in extremely hilly areas. On the open road however they offer few advantages except in extremely congested motorways when driven by inexperienced drivers who are unable to anticipate events ahead and are constantly on the brakes. Government ministers have chauffeurs however so one would hope that they are all reasonably experienced drivers and should not drive thus. For someone driving high mileage on modern highways a modern high-efficiency diesel engined vehicle (as is the Jaguar) is almost certainly going to produce lower overall CO2 emission costs particularly if one considers initial build costs, battery life costs and component replacement costs. I suppose I should be surprised that they (the government) don't seem to have investigated the facts more fully but somehow I'm not.

Sometimes we have to take decisions on which way we turn. Do we allow a very powerful security light to turn on for several minutes every time it detects movement after dark? Obviously very non-eco this powerful light probably 500 watts, might just make the difference between being robbed or not. The threat from the burglar being ever present and possibly immediate, the threat to the planet being vague and long term. The movement might be only a cat, but then it might not. Most of us would opt for the security light.

I've wandered far and wide on this subject, too far and too wide but it worries me slightly that we too readily accept the words of experts as facts when frequently they are not proven facts, merely likely theories. To return again to air conditioning in your car, the safety aspects that come with AC, such as being able to see clearly through all the glass under very moist conditions must overcome even the most eco-friendly auguments. Being more alert on long journeys must lesson the risk of accidents and thus make the AC perfectly acceptable. For me, I use the AC whenever I feel it is helpful for keeping cooler or drying the air and don't feel bad about it but I am not wasteful. Maybe when fossil fuels are really almost running out then perhaps I might think of scarcely turning on the AC but by that time I would have expected Volvo cars to have given you the option of turning off all those lights in daylight.

Another scenario - which situation is worse in this case - leaving in winter with a windscreen which is scraped clear of frost externally but starts to freeze up immediately on moving off or is it acceptable to leave the engine ticking over for ten minutes before leaving to warm up the car ande to completely defrost the glassware. One is using precious fuel and creating unnecessary emissions but the other is safer to every other person in the vicinity of that car. Saving the planet might be our long term objective but it is not the sole criterion, if we are all a little frugal we'll be doing our bit.

Contact me

Return to the Contents Page

Continue onto the next Subject