We have city-wide central heating system. If you don't pump (literally) boiling water into the system, it gets pretty cold in apartments furthest from the heating station. I live somewhere in between, so it gets even hotter the closer you live to the station. What do people do to combat this? They open the windows, and it's -40°C outside. This further lowers the efficiency of the whole system, so they get the water temperature even higher. Rinse and repeat.
Of course, instead of opening the windows, you could always install a gate valve (or whatever it is called in English) and close it to make the water go through your apartment's heating elements without actually (mostly) heating them, and that's what they recommend, but why bother? The level of self-entitlement of many people here, you wouldn't believe. I could tell stories all day long.
Like a caricature of a stereotypical American tourist.
Copenhagen has the same system (it's actually steam that is piped around the city; gases are much easier to move than liquids). It's called district heating.
In the basement of my building there's a heat exchange, which uses the steam to heat water. This water is piped around the building.
My fairly new apartment has a meter fitted on that hot water pipe. It measures how much heat I extract from the water, and I'm charged accordingly.
In some older buildings, they have some sort of temperature logging device on each radiator. I assume this is to charge the residents according to their usage.
Minor thing, but Copenhagen is odd with the steam. They're in the process of moving to hot water.
The trend is towards heating the water less, houses are getting better insulation, less energy is needed, and the hotter water is more expensive when heated by a heat pump and also in losses.
That sounds ridiculously ineffeicient. My post-Soviet city has district heating, and similar temperatures, but usually bottoms out at -35c.
In each building there is a system which takes the district heat and uses it to heat the water of the building. Both hot tap water and central heating. But the water is separate from district heat, so in each building the temperatures can be adjusted.
In older buildings you still have the issue you describe on a macro level - apartments on the bottom floor are too hot, and on the top are too cold - but it doesn't matter how close or far your building is from the district heating station.
Yeah, they've been talking about implementing something like that for as long as I can remember. The current system wastes so much heat that it's always 10-15°C warmer in the city than outside its borders.
I mean, how much coal do you have to burn to warm the air outside by 10-15°C?
By whom? They are given a job to provide heat for the city - and they are doing so. The people telling them to do that job are probably also the same people unwilling to schedule any budget to upgrade the system so make it more efficient.
Thermostats have been around for a hundred years or so. Could solve the problem...
What I've heard is that some portion of pension is given as free heating. So it makes no sense for the individual to conserve it. Giving it as money and then billing for the heating could create some other problems too.
In which nordic country do you live? Im swedish and we have centralized water heating, and to me it sounds insane that people where you live does not have gate valves. The only time I heard of someone without that was when a friend changed the heating system in his building, and that was like a week of high temp. 30 degrees inside during winter sounds totally insane. Here we discuss that we should lower from 23 in the winter to save resources.
These buildings were developed in massive numbers back in post-WW2 years, across the whole Soviet Union. with the task to move people out of barracks in some sort of relatively comfortable housing. Back then there wasn't much money to spare (still isn't). They typically have pretty bad insulation and are built out of, as we say, "cardboard" walls.
When it's cold enough outside (-35°C and lower), you can see the energy losses with a naked eye, as hot air escapes through every crack in the building (and there are a lot of them). No need for thermal cameras.
People over here just don't give a fuck about nature. Now it's the middle of summer, it's +33°C outside. I am sitting in the office with two ACs running at full capacity and with all windows open, because "there isn't enough air". I tried arguing with this, but it's pretty difficult to go against all my coworkers at once. It's a cultural problem, and I have no idea how to fight this.
Thanks for the sanity check, though, at least I know it's not me going crazy.
> I am sitting in the office with two ACs running at full capacity and with all windows open, because "there isn't enough air". I tried arguing with this, but it's pretty difficult to go against all my coworkers at once.
What is your solution? To close windows and enjoy excess CO2?
When people complain about not having enough air it's almost always mean that ventilation system in building is insufficient and there in fact too much of CO2.
Sure. They don't seem to have any problems in the middle of winter, when windows stay fully closed for at least 3 months each year.
About a half also smokes, and then they "don't have enough air".
By the way, the office faces an arterial road, as they are called, with heavy traffic right outside. When you open a window, it fills very quickly with traffic fumes. This gives me persistent headaches almost every day.
> They don't seem to have any problems in the middle of winter, when windows stay fully closed for at least 3 months each year.
It's very much possible that during the winter ventilation performs better since there is hot air inside and cold outside. Or your office building just have similar hot air loss as your housing and it's helps to remove excessive CO2. Thermodynamics huh.
Also oxygen consumption and overall feel can be affected by temperature of environment.
> About a half also smokes, and then they "don't have enough air".
No surprise since heavy smoker lungs and hearts often perform worse and they going to be more sensitive to CO2. It's even worse if they're overweight or have other health issues.
> Is it really better than CO2?
I cannot say without some kind of measurement, but I guess yeah: even if there is massive road outside it's could still be better than staying with constantly high CO2. It's can be worse long-term for your health, but to be productive human brain need oxygen and many people more sensitive to CO2 level than others.
Personally I don't smoke and have healthy lifestyle, but I still extremely sensitive CO0 and without proper ventilation I just can't work efficiently if at all. So any room I stay in will always have open window no matter if there is AC working or not.
So it's great that you don't have same issue, but please keep in mind that people not just imagining things. Yeah they can quit smoking and watch their health, but CO2 is still extremely important. If you don't believe me rent some air quality meter and check it for yourself.
Of course, instead of opening the windows, you could always install a gate valve (or whatever it is called in English) and close it to make the water go through your apartment's heating elements without actually (mostly) heating them, and that's what they recommend, but why bother? The level of self-entitlement of many people here, you wouldn't believe. I could tell stories all day long.
Like a caricature of a stereotypical American tourist.