Holy crap it's hot.
High 30s every day, and perhaps because the towns consist of stone streets and buildings, and perhaps because there's not much wind, but it feels much hotter than the equivalent temperatures we're used to in summer at home. (Edit: Others have pointed out humidity would be a factor too - perhaps the biggest. That may be the case, though at around 50%, it's not as humid as I've experienced elsewhere, including in Australia at times.)
We're heading to southern France next week, and the forecasts suggest the heat wave will still be in force then.
I mean, no complaints, we're feeling lucky to be here and are still having a great time, but boy, this is not what you expect in Europe.
BTW, if you want to get out and see some smaller towns:
And feel free to hit me up for any other suggestions and ideas; I lived in Padova for a number of years.
A lengthy reply by another contributor was a great help to make a Japan trip of mine most memorable.
It was probably a comment by mikekchar: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=mikekchar
According to this response by CaptainZapp (the GP) on one of his comments ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17004877 ):
About six month ago you helped me through the "minefield" of eating as a gajin in Japan.
Let's call it a rousing success (it helps if you even like natto, but I digress).
Let me state for the record that your posts are shear awesomeness in contents and the amount of information provided.
Edited to add:
A reply to Mike's comment reads as follows:
"I just wanted to reiterate how amazing your comments have been here. I honestly feel it's a disservice to you to have your words languish in soon-to-be-forgotten HN threads. I'd love to read a blog of yours, or something along those lines!"
I very much agree. It's hard to describe my appreciation for the time he took out to write it. And it was more than helpful. If you're in Japan and only slightly adventurous when it comes to food those paragraphs include everything, which you need to know about the subject:
Google's ethics my seem questionable, but you sometimes can't fault the results.
For what it's worth, one of my best friends, who grew up in the UK but has lived in Texas the majority of his life, once told me that Venice is Europe's Houston.
This just backs up his viewpoint :)
Also if you disregard the signs while climbing to Cesare Battisti's monument and go through the tunnel meant for cars(which are allowed only at certain hours) you'll experience a few minutes of much needed cooling.
Only thing, its not as long. And no beach wind, but occasionally mountain storms.
Folks back home (South-WA) say its getting colder for them in winters ..
(also, australia has usually much lower air humidity, so it does not feel as hot)
Most of coastal southeast Queensland can expect 70% humidity in Feb/March. Venturing north in summer and you're into 30C+ temperatures despite heavy rain most days.
That said, dew points would probably provide a better comparison.
A notion that emerged out of a simple abundance of land resources that had been sustainably cultivated by indigenous societies for centuries, and a government that encouraged white settlers to a first-come-first-serve buffet.
It'll be interesting to see how it all unravels.
That would take ages to resolve naturally, or if we know how to shortcut, lots of coordinated effort - and no doubt yet more emissions.
Not just a glass house, but an air tight box, with a complete ecosystem inside.
From the fungus in the soil, to bees for pollination. We need to understand how it works and how to manage it.
Where did the plants get the carbon from to build their organic structures?
In this comment's grandparent referring to researching viable, man-made, self-sustaining biomes - which should then be robust to changes in external fauna/flora and conditions, I believe the idea is either to have the human become part of the biome (i.e. the carbon in your waste gets recycled) or to add materials when food is removed in some non-intrusive way.
I wonder if the energy from the sun is enough external input to sustain human life.
The question is, how scaled-down a self-sustaining ecosystem can we create and manage, which is capable of sustaining human life?
Precisely. Not only everywhere but it will be a constant. Calling it climate change is probably a disservice because it seems to infer a binary (false ==> true) relationship, where it's just hotter than it was before - not that it will continually worsen as the problem compounds exponentially over time.
>Good farmland will become bad. Areas with bad farmland will become good. And it's not easy to just shift the agriculture industry from one place to the other, and there's no control over where this happens. Also climate change doesn't care about borders. A country that has a lot of food production could suddenly have almost nothing. And even if a country is lucky and suddenly has good farmland, it's still a food crisis until that country can get their agriculture industry up and running.
Agreed but it's also not like good farmland will also remain a constant, as the problem progresses.
I liken it to being in a car and you know you're driving in an heavy snow storm but you expect not to hit a patch of black-ice because... ...reasons?...
The problem is: Once you hit it (the black ice signifying crops dying and food supplies dwindling), it's already too late. You're over-correcting, under-correcting, what-have-you as you continue to drive the car by the cliff's edge, thinking it could never happen to you - when that assumption is gravely incorrect and people could effectively die because of your arrogance.
Remember "Time Enough, At Last" from The Twilight Zone? Well, we have a seed bank in Svalbard (Norway) with which to rebuild from any major calamity but it will be effectively useless, unless we plan now where those seeds should be planted in the future.
Lab-grown food products aren't at the technology level to scale to feed a predominant portion of the planet.
So, if we have no plan, is the plan just to have no plan? It's confounding that we're having this discussion in a "dark corner of the internet" because the implications are far-more-reaching and far-more-tangible than this discussion could hope to address, which saddens me.
I'm going to go have some ice cream or something...
This year the Farmers around me planted 4 weeks late. This was due to the non-stop rain, so they couldn’t till. That’s probably the scariest in terms of food production.
This makes me quite sad - the idea of one of the best places in the world to grow crops being wasted on massive monocultures of these industrial crops.
Also soy and corn is far from useless, these are considered two of the worlds staple crops. You’d likely starve to death without farming: wheat, corn, and soy. Even if you don’t eat it directly it what enables food to be affordable.
It's a real problem but I don't see how a snarky comment comes off as anything but rude or uninformative.
As of 2011, it required 50 kilowatt hours to produce a kilogram of hydrogen by electrolysis of water, or 50 megawatt hours per tonne:
That comes out to a total of 1550,000,000 megawatt hours, e.g. 1550 terawatt hours, to make 31 million tonnes of hydrogen.
World electricity consumption in 2016 was 20,863 terawatt hours:
Producing the world's synthetic fertilizer starting from electricity instead of natural gas would require about a 7.4% increase in world electricity production: (20863+1550) / 20863 = 1.074. It is true that this would benefit the climate only if the extra electricity generation were based on low-emissions sources like hydroelectricity, wind, nuclear, or solar.
On the larger point, I think that corn-to-biofuel is a very poor use of money, land, and indirect fossil fuel inputs.
I live in Iowa, and we definitely don't irrigate crops here. (On a mass scale at least. Specialty crops and orchards have irrigation systems set up)
Either way, the machinery used for planting corn and soybeans is developed for use on relatively dry ground. And the plants themselves cannot survive submersion for long periods of time.
Insect farming is also another area I'm interested in - you can eat the insects (super nutritious!) and use them as fish food too.
I think our globalized food network is very vulnerable, say to a bad year globally, and the best way to mitigate the risk is to produce as much of your own food as you can.
I come from a agricultural small town in the north, and up there you'd think Trump was a god. This despite every single farm up there depending on illegal migrant workers to basically survive.
I guess everyone in Europe will be moving towards installing air conditioners, and they'll need to add peaker plants to power them on hot summer afternoons. Hopefully solar & storage will be cheap enough that it isn't too bad for the climate.
My main complaint about AC and the reason we rarely use ours is that while you can heat a house very quickly, air conditioners are really only good for maintaining temperature. They have a hell of a time cooling adequately when "properly sized". So if I want to use the AC, then I have to give up on having open windows ever, which is not something I'm interested in.
An oversized AC is going to run more if you have your windows open when it's hot out although with humidity may actually work better as it'll run long enough to pull out some moisture (latent cooling).
If the issue is around fresh air your average pre-2000 house breathes plenty with closed windows and newer homes tend to have active ventilation (e.g. energy recovery ventilators).
I feel like I must be missing something or you live in a warm-temperate climate such that a heat pump heats faster than it cools (heat pumps go way down in heating efficiency as it gets cold out and most work very poorly when it's much below 0°F).
Contrast that to the winter, where you can quite easily have a whole range of temperatures throughout the day based on being home or away and dropping the temp down at night while you sleep.
Heat pumps I'd guess work quite well over the same delta range that summer AC usually operates in (30F probably, even on the hottest days).
Beyond that, natural gas or propane is going to be much more cost effective.
For me electricity is less expensive during the day (solar) and my house is well insulated so it takes fairly little to combat the heat gain during the day compared with letting the house heat soak through the day and then try to cool everything off in the evening. There's also often more humidity in summer so I'm trying to dehumidify at the same time and an adjusting AC (e.g. variable refrigerant flow or just a variable speed on the compressor) can run at lower consumption for longer to meet both needs at once.
That doesn’t seem normal (better data now, or more fluctuations?)
Our entire civilization is built on the assumption/requirement that there are enough areas of land that will remain within certain atmospheric parameters for enough contiguous months to grow a lot of food. Technology has widened the atmospheric parameters a bit, and has increased the yield enormously.
Climate change is the result of more energy in the biosphere. This energy is in the process of increasing the (effective) random variabilities of all atmospheric parameters, globally.
Our atmosphere has always been a chaotic system, and when the necessary parameters weren't met for a given region for enough time, then a lot of people migrated and starved.
Adding more energy into a chaotic system tends to make it even more chaotic.
As you noted, these permutations go in both directions.
More unusual heat waves.
More unusual cold waves.
More unusual droughts.
More unusual rain/flooding.
More unusual storms, both warm and cold.
And all of these things globally.
I think there's non-trivial chance that climate change will, on average, cut world-wide food production by a substantial amount over the next two decades. If that is indeed the case, it will be a lot of downs and ups, just as we're seeing now, but, slowly, more and more severe.
For the last few years, we've had pretty mild winters. This last one, I didn't use my radiators at all because the house is very well insulated and the temperatures didn't drop that low.
This is one of the main reasons the average 2.5 degree celsius change (which on an absolute scale would not make a huge difference in the first place, most people would hardly notice) is such a huge affair.
It can cause local variations that are a very large multiple of the 2.5 degrees, much like a heatpump does not require a whole lot of energy to move a much larger amount of energy around.
A city full of air conditioners is that much hotter. We're ploughing energy (even renewable) into the air and that's making summer that much hotter. We need to stop.
We used to rely a lot more heavily on vernacular architecture. It is possible to design a space that needs little in the way of active heating or cooling to stay comfortable.
I don't know why this isn't more widely promoted. I sometimes feel like I'm the only one who has thought of this obvious answer and I have no influence in the world, so I'm just howling into the void of the internet to occasionally comment on it on HN where it often then gets dismissed on some excuse or other.
Moreover there are funds available when you want to improve the thermal efficiency of your old house. I got my paid half of the bill to get a new heating system for example.
What i don't get in these rules, is that they requires the house to be sealed, and void of air leaks. As it is sealed, there is no natural air flow anymore and you need to install a system which regenerates the air: it gets the air from outside and vent it inside. It just blows my mind.
I find it so unnatural that i only buy old houses, where I am free to choose the insulating materials and techniques. I am against these petrol based materials which release chemicals in your house.
The air ventilation system uses a heat exchanger to keep the heat in during winter. I am still not sure as to what it does during summer. It surely doesn't feel like it makes it actively hotter, but it also doesn't cool it down.
We are required to have this system running all the time (on the lowest level). Otherwise the house would begin to mold quickly as there is absolutely no natural air flow when the windows are closed. In fact, I once deactivated the system because of bad air quality outside. It was unbearable within about two hours inside. It's really a bit weird, but on the other hand, I like that I don't have to think about opening the windows to ventilate the house and it helps keep the heating costs low during winter.
I get your confusion. I was actually reacting to this part of your comment specifically. I am for what you are saying. I just wanted to mention that modern buildings aren't always designed like that. In fact, where I live, houses seem to be increasingly designed to only keep the heat in, not let it out — as rightly pointed out above. That's a problem. We basically can't stay comfortable in summer sometimes. It's not pleasant sleeping on the upper floor during a heatwave and there's little we can do other than buy an AC (which we won't).
As a sidenote: our company just finished a new building which is designed in a similar way, but has active cooling via the heat pump/floor heating system. I hope that will work better than what we have in our private home.
There are myriad things that impact both actual temperature and perceived temperature. I don't even try to talk about any of the more "woo" sounding things that impact perceived temperature.
I'm just talking about well established design principles that were a time-honored tradition globally until recent decades popularized throwing money at the problem, using insulation and adding AC to shittily designed buildings. And I get nothing but grief most of the time.
Tempted to start blog number umpteen to bitch about this in specific. I'm calling it "While The World Burns." Maybe if people here keep pissing me off, it will actually get content and traction and yadda.
Historically, people were only interested in rubber necking at what a goddamned social train wreck waiting to happen I was. Maybe I can harness that bullshit for a change instead of trying to avoid it. Swim with the current, not against it.
But personally, I did not see yet an old building in Europe which is both warm in winter and cold in summer jusy by itself. The new insulation materials are really good now, there is no comparison with old techniques. My parents house is 200 years old, made of a wooden frame and brick. It is incredibly cold in winter, so cold that we need to burn wood as central heating is not powerful enough.
Given increased heat from global warming, we can also borrow techniques from places like Mexico and the Middle East for cooling a house using air flow. For example:
We've been doing this around the world since well before we invented AC. We just seem to have conveniently "forgotten," never mind that these techniques are actually still in widespread use.
I've experienced similar issues in the UK. It's a worse problem than being cold in winter - I can just wear more layers. Not being able to cool your house is frustrating as you can stick your hand out the window and it feels cool, but you're sweating buckets at 2am
One of the reason the US is porch-crazy is because historically it was too damn hot here. Rather than trying to keep the house cool, you said to hell with it, and spent as much time on the porch as possible, even sleeping on it when the house was too hot at night.
They still sleep on porches in India and "porch sleeping" was common across the US until not that many decades ago, even in New York City where they would sleep on the fire escape or roof in hot weather.
It would be great to see this type of preparation put into new builds.
I have a serious medical condition. Years ago, while getting divorced and crammed into a single bedroom with my two teenaged sons fir nearly a year in Georgia, we discovered that getting rid of all cardboard boxes from food items stored in our room reliably and consistently dropped the temp 5 degrees Fahrenheit, lowered the humidity and stopped the invasion of roaches. I am routinely told I'm full of shit for telling that story. It's merely an anecdote.
I've lived without upholstered furniture for years. I currently have no carpeting and no mattresses. We remain strict about removing cardboard and papers from our rental.
I'm in a hundred year old building with no AC. When things get hot, other tenants open their window and door trying to get a cross breeze and are clearly miserable. We just open the window. Once in a great while, I will go run errands or spend time at the library to reduce the number of bodies in our cramped room from three to two to bring down the temperature in our room.
I've lived this way more than a decade. I'm an environmental studies major who wanted to be an urban planner as my dream career.
I get ignored, mocked, dismissed, attacked, treated like I'm stupid and crazy and have no idea whatsoever what the hell I'm talking about.
The world treated me with potentially deadly callous disregard while I was deathly ill and homeless. Now its bullshit misogyny and classism is causing it to continue to turn a deaf ear to suggestions that actually work.
While the world burns and wrings its hands I get on with making my life work. It's increasingly hard for me to believe people actually want to solve this. If they wanted to solve this, they would jump on such anecdotal evidence, do some research to confirm it and start spreading the word.
I've been on HN nearly a decade. I appear to be the only woman to have ever spent time on the leader board here. Men here routinely get told they must be smart if they have a lot of karma. I routinely get told I'm a fool obsessed with worthless internet points and shut up.
You don't have to rebuild the entire world. Just make some lifestyle tweaks.
But it won't happen because I'm a woman and everyone wants to explain to me why I shouldn't worry my silly little head about such things and I simply don't understand how anything works.
It's also unclear what your comment is railing against exactly. Cardboard, or upholstered furniture and rugs? Are you saying that your home is somehow cooler because everyone else is storing lots of cardboard? How much cardboard does one have to store in order to elevate indoor temperatures?
Of course, I can understand about living into a temporary apartment with moving boxes stacked everywhere. Cardboard is an excellent insulator, so obviously living in a tiny room insulated with cardboard is going to bring up the temperature. Not a common situation, though.
Cans of soda in cardboard boxes and leave them in the boxes?
Cereal in cardboard boxes and leave it in the box until it used up?
Cookies, crackers, etc in cardboard boxes and store them in their original cardboard box until you are done consuming them?
Cake mixes, instant meal prep items, etc in cardboard boxes and leave them in the box (that has the instructions on the outside) until you are ready to actually cook it?
I mean, it's possible to just buy meat and produce and so forth and never bring home a food item in a cardboard box, but I'm quite shocked to hear that you never buy such and none of your friends do either. That seems statistically unlikely to me if you are an American or live in most developed countries.
But that's all immaterial, because I don't at all buy the argument that the average person would hoard so much cardboard that it would have an effect on indoor temperature. So I still don't understand your comment.
"When [hay] is baled at moistures over 20% mesophilic bacteria release heat causing temperatures to rise between 130°F and 140°F. If bacteria die and bales cool, you are in the clear, but if thermophilic bacteria take over temperatures can raise to over 175°F,”...
Most wet bales catch fire within six weeks of baling, Hartschuh says.
Compost heaps also give off heat. So we know -- and this is well established fact, no need to listen to my "nutty" fucking personal anecdotes -- that rotting materials give off heat. In fact, they can give off so much heat as to start fires. So this is not an insubstantial amount of heat.
I got to see firsthand under fairly extreme conditions how this impacts comfort at home. I was sharing a single bedroom with my two teenaged sons. I had little control over what was in that bedroom. It was supposed to be a temporary situation. It was filled to the gills with furniture, carpet, blah blah blah.
Just coming home and taking all the sodas and snacks out of the cardboard box consistently dropped the temp by 5 degrees Fahrenheit. There was a thermometer in the window, so we were able to check.
After two or three incidents where we removed all the cardboard boxes from the room and the room went in short order from unbearably hot and muggy to comfortable enough where we could sleep, it became our policy to pull everything out of cardboard boxes and trash them as soon as we brought home groceries.
I currently live in SRO. It's more space than when we shared a bedroom at a relative's house and we have more control over our space here than we did there. We still remove bakery cookies from the cardboard box when we get it home and similar. We don't keep mail sitting around. All junk mail is promptly trashed.
We don't have a trash can. When we were living in a three bedroom, two bath apartment, we noticed that food sitting in the trash similarly raised the temperature in the house and also made us feel ill because me and my oldest son have a compromised immune system. It became our policy to take trash out promptly following meals. We still do that and we do not own a nasty ass trash can.
But I generally don't bother to go into all the details because I am consistently given absolute shit by the entire goddamn internet and treated like a total fucking idiot rather than having people ask for more details or express genuine curiosity or whatever. It's always "That's stupid." or "That doesn't make sense." Or "I don't believe you." or similar.
Meanwhile, people are dying in heat waves, but, meh, actually figuring out something useful isn't a priority. No. Treating some poverty stricken woman like absolute shit and like she couldn't possibly know any fucking thing of any actual use -- that our priority.
The worldn't isn't going to hell in a hand basket because there aren't any solutions. It's doing so because people who currently have money and so forth need to cater to their ego far more than they want solutions.
On a typical summer day where I live, it cools down significantly at night and many open their windows to cool down. The daytime indoor temperature is later strongly influenced by this overnight cooling effect. Now, a bare room cools down very quickly, while a room full of mass will retain the heat of the day for much longer. Classic passive solar design working the wrong way round, if you will.
Mattresses, bedding, & cardboard all absorb moisture from the air, while food scraps are moist by themselves, so each could retain an appreciable amount of heat. They could even be contributing additional humidity if they absorb moisture during the hot day & release it in the cool night.
I don't believe their mass taking up space explains it. I believe them giving off heat like a rotting compost pile is vastly more likely.
But feel free to make me look like idiot by testing it under lab conditions all scientifically in a way that I was in no position to create as a desperately poor divorced single mom just trying to get to sleep at night by removing the cardboard from my room because it actually helped.
I had to read your comment four times to develop half an idea of what you were trying to say. You could be very intelligent with something valuable to contribute to the discussion- but if your point is not made clear, people will struggle to see that.
For travel abroad, I got into the habit of checking https://weatherspark.com. They have very well done charts that give a really good idea of how it's like "over there".
(Just a satisfied user.)
Mind you - earlier this week it was 12C and raining here - so back to proper summer weather.
Of course Dubai's skyscrapers wouldn't be very well suited to this method so yeah, they'd have a problem in this situation. I've been there during summer and merely standing outside is very tough on the system. Of course as a wealthy European that was only a mild inconvenience as you move between the overcooled mall and the SUV. Now if you're one of these modern slave workers coming from poorer countries and tasked with digging a ditch outside or something like that, it's probably a different story...
Yes, you must remain indoors in non-evaporative air-conditioning, dehumidification or near sources of cool water, or you die.
Power outages? People can die.
You can also have high-mass buildings that you shut up during the day and ventilate over night. This is the traditional approach, and works well if the night temperature is a lot lower than the day.
And this is why the existence of Dubai is a testament to the hubris of humanity.
Houston didn't really take off until the invention of air conditioning but even when my house was built people engineered around it. When first purchased my house had a number of shade trees because blocking sunlight is extremely effective. Every room with the exception of one bathroom has multiple screen windows to facilitate natural airflow through the house. That one bathroom still has two doors and a window to help with air movement.
In addition there is a whole house fan that draws air from throughout the house to the attic. This helps both exchange air when people want air movement which is cooling and also helps move heat out of the attic which is coming from a blazing hot roof. The attic itself is nearly the same height as the floor below it and each end of the attic has huge slatted exhaust ports. They are easily four feet wide and seven or eight feet tall. They are needed because the whole house fan can draw hard enough to break a window, or so I've been told.
Although the house was designed to breathe and move air because it was all they could do to combat the heat these days I shut all the windows and run the air conditioner. I may be a fan of the architecture but I'm not a fan of the lifestyle. My friends in sealed houses have much lower energy bills, but if my power fails I can at least open the windows.
(The population is composed of just 15% native residents, with the remaining 85% being composed of expatriates, see http://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities/dubai-populati...)
Which is good because it would be lethal otherwise.
These conditions are lethal, for plenty - the very old and the very young tend to suffer the most.
The thing is that traditional recipes are being lost. Like you mention, old houses have thick stone walls and shutter on windows: In summer you close the shutters and open the windows to create airflow and it's fresh.
These days it's all glass patio doors and you cook... And then people install air con to compensate.
Last summer in Provence when we had the heat wave that lasted for weeks you had to live in a grotto to get a fresh atmosphere.
And yeah, we stumble around in the dark and head out into the anvil of the sun. Even the insects have given up and shut up. Hot in the height of summer is normal here - but this is both early in the year, and those few degrees make a big difference at high humidity - above/below body temperature. I’ve been more comfortable than I am right now in 55 degrees in a desert, as in the bone-dry air, sweating works remarkably well, as long as you stay hydrated.
It's an old house with thick stone walls and traditional shutters but all that glass is making it unbearable right now in Marseille.
Thinking I'm gonna tear it down before next year.
The domino effects rapidly get ridiculous.
Where is this? The place referenced in the article, Villevieille, is currently 43C and 20-40%ish humidity. Googling hasnt brought up anywhere higher. (Obviously temps were higher during the day)
When there's high daytime temps and low nighttime temps, my understanding is there isn't high humidity - humidity levels would get above 100% (100% relative humidity, that is) and leave the air as precipitation.
 https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=current+weather+Villev... (take your pick of results)
As to the moisture, you’re right, it does go somewhere - dew. I’ve been contending with water dripping off the telescope there’s so much of it - and when the sun comes up, it all evaporates and sits around until the sun sets and it starts condensing again.
Edit: today, it isn’t evaporating. 1pm, 34 and rising, but not hot enough to add more moisture to the air yet. Normally, there’d have been a storm to break the cycle.
Makes for surprisingly good astronomical seeing, however - very stable atmosphere.
Hot AND humid is really the worst...
The UK is a notable exception because Thatcher broke the coal industry for ideological reasons but I don’t think countries like the US will be able to take meaningful action. Heck, a major reason for Australia’s recent election outcome was the question of a major coal mine being granted permission to open.
It’s either going to take major regional climate changes in some part of the world that the media cares about (Europe or North America) before political and public opinion shift decisively enough for meaningful action to take hold. By then it will probably be too late, except for those who are wealthy enough to buy their way into places which benefit from climate change. The rest of us will be left to fend for ourselves.
Personal biases are also a big factor. Eg: a conservative is more prone to believe global warming when presented an article about "free market solutions with nuclear power" than "government legislation against co2", which are just different takes on the same underlying truth.
We also get down to -30C (-20F) with high winds in the winter.
Welcome to the Midwest!
That being said, surprised this is happening in France. I recommend no one move to a place like this for the weather...
It's hit 105 a couple of times over the course of a hundred years. The hottest temperature since 2013 is 97. The average daily high in the hottest month is less than the bottom range of 85-105- it's 84.1 in July.
Hitting 45C is a big deal
In either case, I’m not belittling the current heat wave in France. Just saying those temperatures are within “normal” for the Midwest. Which was the grandfathers comment. I agree with the few degree difference being a lot, especially if sustained.
Edit: Honestly the Midwesterners who would take that heat the best would probably be Minnesotans as it would be a great excuse to be on all of those lakes they are always telling me about.
I'm from the Great Lakes area, and barely anyone there has air conditioning. It's considered a luxury.
Up until recent years, the reality has been that it just hasn’t been necessary - you might have had a few days a year when you wished you had it.
If climate change seriously disrupts the gulf stream, much of northern Europe is in serious trouble.
Stick around to play with the other options in the hamburger menu in the lower left.
The way maps are usually shown makes you think New York is up there with Sweden.
I remember that one, it coincided with high air pollution: so much that one evening while leaving work, I realized that the Eiffel tower, quite close to the workplace, was barely visible in a haze of pollution. Also that heatwave, compared to the current, was made worse by a lack of wind, as far as I remember.
The five hottest summers in Germany since we have reliable temperature records have been 2008, 2010, 2003, 2016 and 2002. This year also also going strong already.
always watch when they start adding new terms to dismiss history.
CLIMATE MODELING - CONCLUSIONS
1C RISE (2005) : BARELY NOTICEABLE
2.5C RISE (2038) : MAJOR ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES, STRONG REGIONAL DEPENDENCE
5C RISE (2067) : GLOBALLY CATASTROPHIC EFFECTS
A 2.5C RISE BRINGS WORLD ECONOMIC GROWTH TO A HALT CA. 2025.
PRESENT DAY SIGNIFICANCE OF THE IMPACT DEPENDS STRONGLY ON CHOICE OF A FUTURE DISCOUNTING FACTOR.
I guess we know what sort of discounting factor they applied.
Yes, climate change is impacting how we live in Spain... but please don’t underestimate how humans can adapt and modify our environment... we have been doing it here for 2500 years. Romans digging to extract gold, Kings cutting forest to build ships (and today are deserts), seas of plastic nowadays to feed Europe of vegetables all seasons...
Even under a heavy heat wave like this, the impact will be much higher in other countries; because we are already use to it. The news about France are more scary than Spain’s.
Why some people suffer during heatwaves:
Having said that, I believe you are right that reducing CO2 output is most likely not going to cut it anymore (if that is even possible at all). But there might be other ways to slowly reduce the carbon levels in the atmosphere.
Whether it's possible to do something short term (effective within decades), yes, I also highly doubt that.
Some of use have been screaming about the bloody thing for 30 years. Now the car is crashing into the wall. It's too late to steer right or left. Bracing for impact is the best we can do.
> but I don't think it's the right thing to just call this unsolvable.
Making our peace with what could have been is often the only way to salvage what can be and prepare for real-world scenario, aka worst-case scenario regarding climate change.
We obviously already have a feedback loop that doesn't act in our favor. While it's surely a good idea to start preparing for the worst, I think it's not a good idea to add to the problems by spreading hopelessness.
We unequivocally NEED to stand behind a singular message:
1) it IS our activities causing it
2) we can and should curtail these activities IMMEDIATELY
3) while we can't avoid the effects "in the pipleline", we can prevent further effects from piling up.
4) number 3 is our duty to the children and their children, it's our legacy.
there can be no winners in such a disaster, let's stop jostling for position.
(We, the USA, are literally the only unilateralist nation with regards to this issue. We are an outlier, some would say a criminally negligent outlier. Time to make up for past misdeeds!)
"but mom, he's doing it worse/also!" is not a mature response to the single biggest threat facing humanity that has ever appeared in our known history.
Mind you: June isn't the hot month, the hottest month of the year is typically July, so the worst might be still to come...
I'm from Colombia, the Caribbean region to be more exactly, and it's obviously common there (if you're middle class and upwards, and can afford the rise on the energy bill), but in other not so warm cities you barely see them. I'm currently living in Chile and I've yet to see an AC in an apartment/house.
That said AC at reasonable levels is wonderful.
This year (last week) I bought a second one to put in the bedroom and set it up for the night. That breeze was really refreshing.
However I feel that this year people are buying the Portable AC units a lot more (there’s no stock left for moderately priced portable units on Amazon at the moment). I’ve lived in Delhi most of my life so I can survive 33 degrees in Paris, but our cat doesn’t seem to enjoy it.
But malls, offices and the like have AC.
I've never been in South America, but I'd say that the average weather conditions in France (less heat and humidity) makes AC less important.
Lots of neighbors have AC running but all the windows and doors wide open.
Edit: I live in an pre-Haussmann flat (5th floor, right under the roof). Crazy hot but no AC and no fan, all the windows open since Monday, days and night, even when I'm not at home. Crossing fingers re possible theft, but at least no one can steal my non-existent AC).
It's quite scary. Even in the UK, it's been unnaturally warm for most of this year and there were times in February and March where it was unseasonably temperate.