Sorry autocorrect changed heat pollution to ‘what pollution’, I’ve fixed that now.

There is some impact on others, particularly those without ac.

In a country like Australia where building density is extremely low that’s a negligible problem?!

	▲	grey-area 19 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Sure if building density is low in your area and you have no nearby neighbours it probably doesn’t matter, you’d just be heating your surroundings a little.

▲

CalRobert 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If you’re using rooftop solar then presumably the net heat generated by your aircon is the same as the amount your roof is no longer absorbing. Otherwise you just described a perpetual motion machine?

▲

grey-area 22 minutes ago | parent [-]

I imagine that absorption by the roof or panels is around the same - however the aircon moves heat from inside to outside, so you are moving heat outside for other people to deal with. In an isolated house it makes little difference. If every building has aircon in a city it does impact outside temperatures and adds to the heat island effect.

	▲	CalRobert 4 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Right, but energy that would have heated the roof goes towards powering the aircon (which likely is on the roof itself), which then emits the same amount of heat, no? Say a roof is absorbing 10000 watts. You install solar panels that absorb 2000 watts, used to power an airco. You now have your roof absorbing 8000 watts (released as heat) and ann airco absorbing (using) 2000 watts (also released as heat). Am I wrong? Seems like a conservation of energy problem. And you get a cooler roof so less airco demand too!