| General > General Technical Chat |
| Building thermal insulation. |
| << < (8/13) > >> |
| Zero999:
--- Quote from: Someone on July 21, 2022, 11:22:34 am --- --- Quote from: Zero999 on July 21, 2022, 11:08:06 am --- but you're missing the point: in the UK, it's likely we cumulatively have more cold, than heat related fatalities. --- End quote --- The graphs and study I linked to disagree with that. The number of deaths from the outlier days of cold or heat are similar in quantity. Or you want to argue some 10-20% difference as if its significant??? --- End quote --- No they don't. They just show relative mortality, referenced to a temperature when mortality is minimum, which is about 19°C and is also the mean for the warmest month in London. The relative risk is over 2.5 at 30°C, call it 2.8, so nearly three times as many people die when it's that hot, compared to when it's 19°C, yet there are only an average of 2.5 days per year above 30°C. Compare this to cold: the relative risk is just under 1.5, call it 1.4, at 0°C, yet London has 27 nights per year below freezing. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-climate-averages/gcpsvg3nc It's more nuanced than that. There are other factors at play, such as the timing of the heatwave. Read the associated text. --- Quote ---Look at it anyway you like from your local perspective/optics, but to people outside the UK, Londoners (and the UK in general) do poorly with protecting themselves from hot and cold when compared to other cities. Be that on absolute temperature, or percentile outliers, its a higher risk in all examples. Something is odd about the London (UK) populations ability to withstand temperature extremes, they're bad --- End quote --- That's because temperature extremes are much less common in London, compared to elsewhere in Europe, so when they do occur, mortality is higher. --- Quote --- --- Quote from: Zero999 on July 21, 2022, 11:08:06 am ---I can't see many people replacing their gas boilers with heat pumps, because it won't pay off. Hopefully electricity will become cheaper than gas at some point, due to market forces. --- End quote --- Lol, still blinkered with the local stance desperately looking away from solutions rather than to them. Even with the broken UK energy market forcing gas to 1/4 the price of electricity, gas heating is still not an obvious solution over heat pumps (for a greenfield install). --- End quote --- The problem is most people already have gas boilers and replacing them with heat pumps is not economical. What other solutions are they? Insulation only goes so far. Even if it's perfect the best you'll get is an indoor temperature a few degrees above the annual average. --- Quote --- --- Quote from: Zero999 on July 21, 2022, 11:08:06 am ---Oh and the last two years has shown we can't control a virus, any more than the weather. --- End quote --- No, plenty of places have shown how it is possible to control covid with reducing human contact, just like its possible to wear more clothes and not die of cold. Controlling the weather isn't required. --- End quote --- Not for very long and lots of the measures imposed have arguably caused more years of life lost. |
| Someone:
--- Quote from: Zero999 on July 21, 2022, 01:07:14 pm --- --- Quote from: Someone on July 21, 2022, 11:22:34 am --- --- Quote from: Zero999 on July 21, 2022, 11:08:06 am --- but you're missing the point: in the UK, it's likely we cumulatively have more cold, than heat related fatalities. --- End quote --- The graphs and study I linked to disagree with that. The number of deaths from the outlier days of cold or heat are similar in quantity. Or you want to argue some 10-20% difference as if its significant??? --- End quote --- No they don't. They just show relative mortality, referenced to a temperature when mortality is minimum, which is about 19°C and is also the mean for the warmest month in London. The relative risk is over 2.5 at 30°C, call it 2.8, so nearly three times as many people die when it's that hot, compared to when it's 19°C, yet there are only an average of 2.5 days per year above 30°C. Compare this to cold: the relative risk is just under 1.5, call it 1.4, at 0°C, yet London has 27 nights per year below freezing. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-climate-averages/gcpsvg3nc It's more nuanced than that. There are other factors at play, such as the timing of the heatwave. Read the associated text. --- End quote --- You seem to keep talking about your figures as if its disproving what I put up, but its just something entirely different.... --- Quote from: Someone on July 21, 2022, 10:17:24 am ---Pictured below for people who can't be bothered to read this at the same time as looking at the external site (https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/heat-and-health-2/assessment). We could take your insistence on annualised numbers and from that data with its top and bottom 2.5 percentiles marked out, oh look very similar absolute numbers of deaths occur during the 2.5% hottest days compared to the 2.5% coldest days. --- End quote --- Below is the graph again with some crayon markup to highlight the point you keep trying to argue against. The 2.5% outlier temperatures high and low, have similar numbers of deaths (area inside the circled bits) and the hot end has an elevated risk as it goes to the further extreme/limits. You just picked some arbitrary temperatures that aren't comparable in their occurrence, which I never suggested, I keep pointing back to comparable points. Comparable, similar, its not some obvious cold = more deaths unless you take an unbalanced measure of which days to include in the counting of extreme/outlier. You keep trying to make your own interpretation of what is/isnt an outlier, to suit your point, misrepresenting/misinterpreting what I'm pointing at (now with a big crayon since you keep walking this off to stupidity). |
| Someone:
--- Quote from: Zero999 on July 21, 2022, 01:07:14 pm --- --- Quote from: Someone on July 21, 2022, 11:22:34 am --- --- Quote from: Zero999 on July 21, 2022, 11:08:06 am ---Oh and the last two years has shown we can't control a virus, any more than the weather. --- End quote --- No, plenty of places have shown how it is possible to control covid with reducing human contact, just like its possible to wear more clothes and not die of cold. Controlling the weather isn't required. --- End quote --- Not for very long and lots of the measures imposed have arguably caused more years of life lost. --- End quote --- Lol, so you'd have some data/figures to back that up? "letting it rip" and taking a soft-to-zero approach to controlling covid is not a binary alternative to locking down the population in their houses, there are a huge range of measures somewhere in between that each have their own tradeoffs. But sure, just dismiss every possible control measure (I specifically suggested an effective and low impact example) as not worth it because you say "lots" of measures arent delivering a net benefit. Simple challenge, point to credible control measure that have been shown to reduce life more than it increased it, rather than just adding unsupported nonsense. |
| Zero999:
--- Quote from: Someone on July 21, 2022, 11:06:54 pm --- --- Quote from: Zero999 on July 21, 2022, 01:07:14 pm --- --- Quote from: Someone on July 21, 2022, 11:22:34 am --- --- Quote from: Zero999 on July 21, 2022, 11:08:06 am ---Oh and the last two years has shown we can't control a virus, any more than the weather. --- End quote --- No, plenty of places have shown how it is possible to control covid with reducing human contact, just like its possible to wear more clothes and not die of cold. Controlling the weather isn't required. --- End quote --- Not for very long and lots of the measures imposed have arguably caused more years of life lost. --- End quote --- Lol, so you'd have some data/figures to back that up? "letting it rip" and taking a soft-to-zero approach to controlling covid is not a binary alternative to locking down the population in their houses, there are a huge range of measures somewhere in between that each have their own tradeoffs. But sure, just dismiss every possible control measure (I specifically suggested an effective and low impact example) as not worth it because you say "lots" of measures arent delivering a net benefit. Simple challenge, point to credible control measure that have been shown to reduce life more than it increased it, rather than just adding unsupported nonsense. --- End quote --- Given humans are a social species, reducing human contact is a fairly costly measure. There isn't solid data to prove solidly which measures genuinely helped and which did harm more than good. Every country did different things and there are too many confounding factors to link cause and effect. Most of the measures seem to have done more harm, where I live. Either way, this isn't the place to discuss it. I shouldn't have taken the bait, when you mentioned COVID. :palm: --- Quote from: Someone on July 21, 2022, 10:55:42 pm --- --- Quote from: Zero999 on July 21, 2022, 01:07:14 pm --- --- Quote from: Someone on July 21, 2022, 11:22:34 am --- --- Quote from: Zero999 on July 21, 2022, 11:08:06 am --- but you're missing the point: in the UK, it's likely we cumulatively have more cold, than heat related fatalities. --- End quote --- The graphs and study I linked to disagree with that. The number of deaths from the outlier days of cold or heat are similar in quantity. Or you want to argue some 10-20% difference as if its significant??? --- End quote --- No they don't. They just show relative mortality, referenced to a temperature when mortality is minimum, which is about 19°C and is also the mean for the warmest month in London. The relative risk is over 2.5 at 30°C, call it 2.8, so nearly three times as many people die when it's that hot, compared to when it's 19°C, yet there are only an average of 2.5 days per year above 30°C. Compare this to cold: the relative risk is just under 1.5, call it 1.4, at 0°C, yet London has 27 nights per year below freezing. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-climate-averages/gcpsvg3nc It's more nuanced than that. There are other factors at play, such as the timing of the heatwave. Read the associated text. --- End quote --- You seem to keep talking about your figures as if its disproving what I put up, but its just something entirely different.... --- Quote from: Someone on July 21, 2022, 10:17:24 am ---Pictured below for people who can't be bothered to read this at the same time as looking at the external site (https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/heat-and-health-2/assessment). We could take your insistence on annualised numbers and from that data with its top and bottom 2.5 percentiles marked out, oh look very similar absolute numbers of deaths occur during the 2.5% hottest days compared to the 2.5% coldest days. --- End quote --- Below is the graph again with some crayon markup to highlight the point you keep trying to argue against. The 2.5% outlier temperatures high and low, have similar numbers of deaths (area inside the circled bits) and the hot end has an elevated risk as it goes to the further extreme/limits. You just picked some arbitrary temperatures that aren't comparable in their occurrence, which I never suggested, I keep pointing back to comparable points. Comparable, similar, its not some obvious cold = more deaths unless you take an unbalanced measure of which days to include in the counting of extreme/outlier. You keep trying to make your own interpretation of what is/isnt an outlier, to suit your point, misrepresenting/misinterpreting what I'm pointing at (now with a big crayon since you keep walking this off to stupidity). --- End quote --- We were focusing on different parts of the graph. I didn't look at the bar chart, which just says the most number of deaths occur when the temperature is 11°C, which oddly enough is close to the mean annual temperature for London. The dotted lines you've highlighted are close to the mean overnight low in January and July daily high. The article just talks about deaths vs temperature. It doesn't try to directly attribute cause and effect. Infectious diseases such as influenza peak in the cold months here, yet when it's hot people might do risky things to cool of, such as go for a swim in lakes and rivers. |
| Siwastaja:
I think people dying out of cold vs. hot are different segments. Ignoring really harsh climates like Siberia, so in UK and similar, it's much simpler to protect oneself from cold vs. hot. So dying out of cold means total homelessness, lack of any kind of shelter, lack of clothes, lack of motivation to harvest some cardboard boxes or used clothes out of trash - basically, total inability to live. Probably many who died out of cold in statistics would have died out of drugs or alcohol if not cold. But ignoring the danger of heat can easily be explained by much smaller motivational issues, like "I don't want to invest in air conditioner, it's just a few weeks a year, besides it consumes a lot of power, and I have been on this planet for 85 years, bloody youngsters and their toys". But we are getting back to this again, people in UK should be aggressively installing air-to-air heatpumps whenever possible, as they will significantly ease the energy problem during winter, and also help during summer. Of course it is then tempting to use a lot of energy to provide comfortable cooling but the net effect is still positive. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |