Well, I guess it had to happen. It got down to 56-point-something inside, and someone lit a fire. Happy fire season.
First Fire
October 26, 2011Freeze Yerself
October 24, 2011For all those followers asking, “How can I get in on all the fun of having a cold house, in a way that is full of good cheer and good company?”, I commend you to the “Freeze Yer Buns” challenge over at The Crunchy Chicken. There you can review the “pledges” made by others as to when they’ll turn on their furnace, or how low they will set their thermostats, etc. The C.C. also put up a recent post discussing how to acclimate to cooler indoor temperatures, a topic near and dear to us here.
At this house, as you know, we have no furnace and no thermostat, so our participation in the “FYB Challenge” is difficult to document. But, we’re already a bit past the day when we first lit a fire last year (it’s been warm October in New England, which has been delightful.) This morning, though, it was mid-30′s outside, and 57º inside. I believe we have an agreement that the stove can be lit for the first time when the house temp falls to 56… but of course, this is subject to constant re-negotiation. I don’t think we’re likely to re-achieve this winter our average indoor temperature of last winter (52º)– in part because we have a new housemate coming– but we’ll see.
Over the past two weeks, the (unheated) average temp in the kitchen has been 62º, and generally this has felt perfectly fine.
Cold In There
October 19, 2011Overheard in Florida on a recent rainy morning (my sister-in-law to my nephew): “Do you want to wear a long sleeve shirt to school? You’re going to be inside all day today, so you might get chilly.”
Kind of made me chuckle.
Olde-Time Wisdom
October 13, 2011“Colds are not as a rule due to drafts, but to the fear of drafts. It certainly is a fact that persons who are always afraid of colds, and see that every crevice that may admit a little fresh air is kept closed, are the ones who constantly complain of colds, while those who have no such fears are seldom affected by them.”
From “Imaginary Diseases and How Cured”, in Life and Health: The National Health Magazine, April, 1907.
First frost…
October 7, 2011… no heat. First morning below 60 in the kitchen, too.
Outside the Shock Zone
October 5, 2011I have to tell you, it is a pleasant feeling to read stories such as this one, about heating oil prices being up 32% (84¢ / gallon) over last year, and realize that the news will not directly affect me at all. An acquaintance (who I believe lives alone) posted on her Facebook page that she expects this increase in oil price will cost her an extra $800 for heating this winter. Algebra suggests that her total oil bill will thus be somewhere over $3,000– a number which just about gives me apoplexy. Anyway, she is shocked, and I would be too. Indeed, I was shocked, three autumns ago, when oil was close to $4/gallon– so shocked that I didn’t turn on the furnace until New Year’s, and started a new, and rather liberating, way of winter life. My sympathies go out to everyone who is looking at these numbers, looking at their furnaces, looking at their paychecks, then looking at real estate in South Carolina. But I have some hope that a few may be sufficiently jolted that they start to look instead at other options for living more sustainably here in beautiful New England– “radical” as the options may be.
Cold House Epidemiology & Psychology
October 2, 2011Back in May, a group called the Marmot Review Team, in conjunction with Friends of the Earth, published a paper titled The Health Impacts of Cold Homes and Fuel Poverty. An associated editorial was also published in the British Medical Journal.
The bottom-line conclusions of the Marmot paper, which focused primarily on Britain, are that living in cold housing is harmful, that the harm falls disproportionately on the economically disadvantaged, and that fairness demands that society provide more warmth to those in “fuel poverty”.
As you might expect, my feelings about this report are mixed. On the positive side, I strongly support the authors’ sense of social justice, and of course agree that living in cold housing is potentially hazardous for elderly, disabled, or otherwise physically compromised people.
I have skepticism, however, about many of the inferences drawn in the paper, which are based primarily on epidemiologic correlations, rather than proven cause-and-effect. For example, the paper notes that there is an increase in deaths over the winter months, and goes on to state: “Cold weather, and in particular cold homes, is believed to be a main factor in causing the winter increase of respiratory and circulatory diseases”. The one citation for this statement leads to another policy paper by the same group, which, by my reading, actually provides no data whatsoever to support the assertion that cold weather (rather than, say, the increased indoor contact, lower exposer to fresh air, and lower indoor humidities common in winter) cause these diseases– let alone any evidence for the “belief” that cold homes are to blame.
Indeed, I cannot picture any way that scientific conclusions on this topic could be drawn from epidemiology alone. Why? Because Read the rest of this entry »
Green House Tour
October 1, 2011We just went to check out a neighbor’s house, which is part of the “Green Buildings Open House” tour day (sponsored by the Northeast Sustainable Energy Association). His house, which is lovely, is similar to ours in size, and also similar in heating costs, but no doubt a lot warmer in winter– what with double-thick exterior walls, hyper-insulated roof, triple-glazed windows, extreme air-tight construction with a heat-exchange ventilation system, etc. It’s a beautiful and inspiring house.
Other houses on the tour, such as the one described here, are even more intriguing and outlandish. (Impressive as achieving R-80 insulating values is, I have trouble accepting one or two people occupying a 2,900 sq ft house as “sustainable” living. And, to avoid being labelled as a crank, I will desist from discussing the environmental impact of the decision to have 4 children… though it does make me scratch my head.)
I’m thinking maybe next year I will volunteer the Cold House to be part of the tour. But we might not be welcomed, because there isn’t much to see. Of course, that would be the point. There’s little to buy, little to demolish and rebuild, little to design. Most of the “technology” is in the brain and the body, not in the walls and or the “systems room”– and the rest is rather cheap (cast-off joint compound buckets, for example). I’d like to appeal to people who would like to save the world (or at least, lower their heating bills into the three-figure range), but don’t have the resources or inclination to do five- or six-figure renovation or construction projects.
I love that technology may save us. But I greatly fear that it will not save us fast enough. I think we should consider other alternatives based in things we’ve forgotten how to do, rather than in things we haven’t yet invented.
Season’s First Conversation about Heat
September 10, 2011J: When did we first have a fire last year?
D: October 24th.
J: Oh, I don’t think it will be that late this year.
D: Oh? Why not?
J: I just don’t think it will be the case…
[Current indoor temperature: 72F]
Not Burning Enough Fossil Fuel Again
August 16, 2011Long-time readers may remember the time at the previous Cold House (a couple years back) when my heating-oil supplier called because he noticed I wasn’t using nearly as much oil as usual. He was genuinely concerned that my furnace was broken and I was freezing. That was nice. (His name, in fact, was Adam Nice. He’s a nice guy. If you need oil.)
In the same vein, but less nice, I recently received a “Dear Propane Gas Customer” letter. In it, my propane supplier, Fielding’s Oil & Propane Co., identified me as “a low usage customer” (with super-helpful further explanation: ” ‘Low usage’ means you use very little propane gas”). Mr. Fielding went on to say that because I use so very little petroleum, and because of “the increasing cost of propane gas”, as well as “steel prices”, he has “no choice” but to “implement a tank rental fee”, of $78.00 per year, per tank (we have two tanks). This comes to $158/year, which would represent a 40% increase in our heating costs (for nothing but having two big steel tanks sitting in the yard.)
Two alternatives were offered: (1) “If you buy your heating oil from us, then the rental fee would be waived.” or, (2) “You could use more propane. If you increase the propane usage, then the fee would be waived.”
Since we use no heating oil at all, I am tempted to agree to option (1), but somehow I think they will see through that ploy. As to (2), I have no idea what “more” propane means. I am not sure that a lawyer vetted this letter before it went out.
I can understand where they are coming from. When I moved here 2 years ago, before I was sure we’d have a wood stove in time for winter, I topped off the tanks, paying them about $300 in the process. But since then, I’ve probably burned only 3 or 4 gallons. The tanks are connected to two propane heaters (detached guest room, and cellar) which we virtually never use. But, I’ve liked knowing the option was there, just in case. (On the other hand, it makes me a bit uneasy knowing that we have enough propane on-site to blow the house to Jupiter). Anyway, while I’ve been sitting here not buying much more propane from him, I’m sure they have been up nights worrying about whether my tanks are doing okay, whether all the piping is safe and secure, etc. This has surely taken a toll on them, so I can see why he now needs to recoup monetarily.
So, I’m not sure what to do about this. ”Can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em” and put in an actual propane heating system, like everyone else? Say “Eff you and your effing propane”, have him come pick up his tanks and the devil-gas they contain, and really truly commit to the wood forever? Other?
