Health and Heat

Today in Kentucky promises to be another scorcher, embedded in an unusually hot summer. Like most people, I’m enjoying climate control in my car, home, and workspace. However, I’ve been wondering about the implications. Climate researchers seem convinced that average lows and highs are on a slow but steady incline which is continuing amidst daily peaks and troughs of temperature. In the winter when we have the occasional very cold day, that does not refute global warming, just as an unseasonably hot day is not further proof of global warming. Because of modern technology, our lifestyles and daily routines are the same whether it is 80 degrees or 90 degrees. The natural ecology is much more sensitive and is unprotected by the relatively simple devices and methods we use to protect us from extremes of high and low temperature. If temperature change induces changes in growing cycles or mating and spawning times, we don’t really have the capability to alter those types of effects. Climate change is likely to have more of a direct effect on the rest of the natural ecology, more of an indirect effect on us. Nevertheless, those indirect effects could prove to be significant, and possibly catastrophic.

At the same time, we are faced with energy problems. The tried and true carbon fuels, coal, petroleum and natural gas, are becoming harder and harder to acquire, both because they are non-renewable, and because many of the world’s sources are nations which seem to hate our success and our values. The economic impact of increasing oil prices is a threat to continued economic growth and prosperity, and potentially will challenge a world order of relative peace. Over a long time frame, other sources, such as solar and wind, nuclear energy, and fuel cell technology will be able to replace the carbon sources. In the meantime, Americans are in the uncomfortable position of having to drive less or more efficiently, be more sparing in their use of home electricity, turn up the AC temperature in summer months and turn down heating temperature in the winter. We are also being asked to replace inefficient appliances, incandescent bulbs, and install more insulation and replace older windows with designs more resistant to heat transfer in or out. The item in this list which will give the most visceral impact is getting used to hotter temperatures in the summer and cooler temperatures in the winter.

It is customary to say normal room temperature is 72 degrees. Of course for most of recorded history, room temperature may not have been much different from outside temperature, certainly in hot weather. Could we get used to living and working with summer room temperatures around 80 degrees? How would it effect us? Certainly a temperature of 80 degrees would not present a health risk, especially if people are adequately hydrated. It would seem very uncomfortable for most Americans, and would stimulate innovations such as ways to cut down on direct sunlight coming into houses, and perhaps new clothing designs to accommodate higher temps. Perhaps formal dress codes would fade away. Engineers would try to develop more efficient and sophisticated fans to promote air movement. There would be unintended consequences. For example, with an average room temperature increase of eight degrees, would there be more food poisoning, as microorganisms would have an even more favorable growing condition? Many people exercise indoors in the summer. How would exercise patterns change when thermostats are turned up to 80?

In the winter, the opposite would occur. Rooms would go from 72 to 65. There is no health hazard presented by such a change, and in fact, we might be even healthier. Again it would take a major adjustment, expecting to be comfortable at 65 when we’ve been used to 72-75. When Jimmy Carter was President he encouraged Americans to turn down their heat and put on sweaters. He was ridiculed for being a tree-hugger and pessimist. We like our Presidents to give us a good word, not necessarily the truth.

Those two things, hotter rooms in summer and cooler rooms in winter might help bridge the energy gap in the meantime, but we are all too self-indulgent to make the change, certainly without whining.

On the other hand, there are so many unknowns. I remember when Paul Ehrlich’s Population Bomb was an impending threat – world population was growing faster than the earth could accommodate, and we were facing a world wide collapse of societies and food chains. Yet here we are, forty years later, and the population explosion has been brought under control. Of course there are still limits to how many people can occupy Planet Earth, but the recognized threats are now different. Nevertheless, mankind has the capacity to innovate new technology and solve problems.

Do you think the future will be better or worse than current projections? Will we adapt and innovate enough to avoid planetary pitfalls, or does the path lead to entropy as the ecological order becomes more and more out of balance?