>> Double glazing is very expensive but no one in Europe would go without it.

This isn’t true. I’ve lived in 3 places in London with single glazing. They’re surprisingly common. All new properties come with it but the majority of our housing stock is old.

There’s also little comparison between air con and double glazing. One will be helpful for 4-6 months of the year and reduce my energy bills. The other will be necessary at most 1-2 weeks a year and will cost me thousands of pounds up front. Most people simply can’t afford that.

▲

jdkoeck 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Unless the aircon is a heat pump, in which case it’s also useful in the winter, it’s more efficient and carbon neutral if your electricity grid is decarbonised.

If most people can’t afford a heat pump, why do we entertain the idea of making them pay an order of magnitude more to better insulate their home, which doesn’t even work in the end?

You’ve been misinformed by European media. Please do your research, it’s all online.

▲

basisword 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't think you have any conception of how little money most people have. Why would I spend £15-20k I don't have on a heat pump so I can get 'free' air con when my house is already heated via another method? Most people don't have £500 spare for a portable air con unit.

On top of that, until a few months ago, government subsidies for heat pumps didn't apply to the versions that include air con so anyone who did get a heat pump didn't get that version.

>> why do we entertain the idea of making them pay an order of magnitude more to better insulate their home

We don't. There have been various schemes over the last couple of decades where people could have this done for free or at very low cost.

>> You’ve been misinformed by European media. Please do your research, it’s all online.

I suggest you do the same.

▲

jdkoeck 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Something needs to be done with the heat. The common euro talking point: aircon doesn’t solve the problem, let’s insulate instead (an order of magnitude more expensive). Apparently you entertain an even more absurd idea: let’s just do nothing, because everyone is too poor. That’s just wrong, plenty of home owners or real estate owners have the means to foot the bills, especially if regulation mandates or subsidises heat pumps.

Besides that, just know you’re participating in a system of belief that needlessly kills thousands each year (and many more to come, if you believe as I hope that climate change is real). Just dwell on it a little. Thousands dead because of ideological comfort and resistance to change, which in and of itself is a weird form of climate skepticism.

If you answer this, please address each of my points from both comments. You have adressed none so far.

	▲	omnimus 19 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Let me introduce you to… cold related deaths. They are 8x more common in europe than heat deaths. Since both of the cases happen mostly indoors we can assume it's both thanks to state of the buildings. Not everyone can afford AC or insulation and cold used to be and still a bigger problem. Heating is absurdly expensive with leaky building so people prioritize insulating. “Ideological comfort” lol stop it what the hell. Do you think people in europe wouldn't like to have AC if they could reasonably have it?