shhhhhh- the children, the children
saving energy, homes vs commecial buildings
- Thread starter Cybrvanr
- Start date
Help Support :
jasonl
New member
Spare the rod, spoil the child
Also, we're said to "turn the other cheek"
Also, we're said to "turn the other cheek"
Spankage?
Well, I suppose it's one way to generate heat
Well, I suppose it's one way to generate heat
Designgeek
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2004
- Messages
- 865
In the Bay Area I often see commercial buildings where the lights and air circulation all shut down at 6:00PM. This while I'm trying to install/program/reprogram someone's phone system. Positively infuriating precisely because it attempts to compensate for one type of idiocy (waste) with another (schedule-coersion), rather than doing something intelligent instead.
The reason you get wasteful commercial buildings, is that the energy costs are passed along by the owners into the rents paid by tenants, and this is usually a "hidden cost" until a tenant starts getting their utility bills and discovers they can't do anything about it. In essence it's a shell-game of cost-fraud passed along to the tenants.
There is a simple enough way to deal with this, which is libertarian-acceptable:
Require building owners to publish the energy cost of heating/cooling per unit of space (e.g. on some standard unit of space, such as per thousand square feet), to some standard temperature (for example 70 degrees). This is not a case of onerous regulation, but rather, full disclosure: "This is what it's *really* going to cost you to have an office in this building." Once that's done, market forces will kick in and force rents down in wasteful buildings, producing an incentive to owners to upgrade their properties accordingly. Problem solved.
The reason you get wasteful commercial buildings, is that the energy costs are passed along by the owners into the rents paid by tenants, and this is usually a "hidden cost" until a tenant starts getting their utility bills and discovers they can't do anything about it. In essence it's a shell-game of cost-fraud passed along to the tenants.
There is a simple enough way to deal with this, which is libertarian-acceptable:
Require building owners to publish the energy cost of heating/cooling per unit of space (e.g. on some standard unit of space, such as per thousand square feet), to some standard temperature (for example 70 degrees). This is not a case of onerous regulation, but rather, full disclosure: "This is what it's *really* going to cost you to have an office in this building." Once that's done, market forces will kick in and force rents down in wasteful buildings, producing an incentive to owners to upgrade their properties accordingly. Problem solved.
Yep, when I worked in computers I often had to deal with coming into offices at night or on the weekend when not only the lighting but the ventilation systems were shut down, with no way to turn them on. It would get uncomfortable and stuffy, to say the least. However, most data center computer rooms are air conditioned 7x24 and usually I'd have to wear a warm jacket in one of them.
I miss older office buildings where the windows actually opened.
I miss older office buildings where the windows actually opened.
