In his last post, Lee told us all about the hardships endured while avoiding frostbite on holiday in Spain. In this, his final post, he updates us on central-heating-free life in November, back in Blighty.
Well, it’s finally over. Just in time and thank god. We take so many things for granted these days, but still I underestimated what it would be like to actually live without central heating at the back end of the year in the UK.
As you may have read, we ran away to Spain for a couple of weeks, a little way into the challenge. Some very clever editing by the talented Living team (I ranted about orange women wearing yellow on cut price airlines; I don’t know why; wait, yes I do – read on) on that particular report managed to conceal the fact that I was slightly the worse for alcoholic wear at the time of writing. It won’t have hidden in any way whatsoever that I was feeling deeply smug and having a thoroughly lovely time.
Post-smugness reality
To fulfil the challenge and make the whole thing worthwhile, we committed to leaving the heating off into November on our return. To be honest, the weather at the beginning of the challenge really wasn’t that severe, but it had all taken a turn for the worse by the time we got back. And, you know, it was actually not all that nice with the heating off. Who’d have thought?
<!– The two of us didn’t actually suffer all that much. I bought Colin a pair of the rather fetching socks I was sporting in the photo that accompanied my first post. In a different colour, obviously. It’s not like we have matching anoraks or anything like that. We wore rather more than is customary when indoors (or indeed outdoors in, ooooh, let’s say Finland) and added more if it got colder.
But our poor cat had a slightly harder time of it. Our flooring, apart from the bedroom and living room, is basically a linoleum bonanza, the sofa is leather and the…no, I can’t think of another word right now…poofs are (deep breath) ‘leather-look’. Not at all cosy for the poor little mite, who consequently followed us round like a puppy and launched himself into the nearest lap as soon as we sat down. Bless ‘im.
After a few days of our being back, present in the house, not dead (I’m fairly certain corpses don’t do much to raise the ambient temperature, at least not for long) and doing the usual things like cooking, ironing, showering, etc. the temperature indoors actually settled down to a fairly constant 19 degrees.
What never went away, though, and this was the most uncomfortable thing, was the damp. Without any strong localised heat sources getting much hotter than the ambient temperature it was almost, and allow me to exaggerate here for a minute to get my point across, like living in a cave. It’s not that there was damp running down the walls, it was just very uncomfortable and you could almost imagine things were going mouldy all around you. Given that we don’t have a tumble dryer, there was the added complication with laundry that almost led to things going mouldy all over you. But we don’t need to dwell on that. Why on Earth the TV has to go on about pessaries while I’m eating every evening I’ll never understand, so I’ll spare you.
Turning up the heat
We have turned the heating back on now, with the kind permission of our Living masters, and hallelujah! I’m just getting over a rather nasty cold I picked up while doing a half marathon in the weather-warning weather a couple of weekends back and I’m sure the lack of heating in the house didn’t help much in the early part of my recovery. It’s only set to 20, as opposed to our usual 21. I guess that’s partly because we got along OK(ish) for a while at 19 and partly because we’ve got so used to wearing outdoor clothes indoors that we just don’t need it any higher. Walking on the carpets no longer feels like walking on a bed of moss. Our clothes are dry again. And the cat’s happy.
Paperless quarterly billing means we won’t really have an idea of any savings we might have made until some time in December, but if it’s at all interesting when we see the results, I’ll be certain to come back and comment here to let you know.
I’d just got back from the launch of the Low Carbon Households project, which is being run by Lewes District Council. Fellow Living contibutor Jeremy and I will be monitoring our home electricity use for a year, as will more than 30 other households in the district.
An eco-eye out
We’ve all been equipped with an eco-eye mini, a neat little device that reveals what’s going on behind the scenes.
The idea of monitoring energy use may not push everyone’s button, but when you get one of these bad boys clamped onto your supply you can’t help but get involved with it.
It’s very simple. You plug the sensor into the mains or insert a couple of batteries (they came supplied with proper ones, Duracell AAs – when does that ever happen?). Then you lock it on to one of the wires going into your fusebox – no cutting or rewiring required.
Next you put batteries in the separate monitor screen, and set the time and the cost per unit of electricity (according to your last bill). And that’s it. You’re recording real-time use of power in kilowatt-hours, and can see how much your current use would cost over a week, month or year – as well as the likely CO2 emissions.
Within seconds, you’re wondering why the level is so low, or so high, and why it’s changing all the time. It’s a bit of a jolt.
We’d been told at the meeting by Climate South East’s Matthew Bird that the kettle would be a shocker, and he was right. Making a cup of tea sent our low, mid-evening reading shooting up five-fold. You quickly realise why the National Grid struggles to cope with the surge in demand during half-time in cup finals.
And…?
So, this is all very well. But will it actually change the way we behave?
Well, the early signs are: yes. Our kettle doesn’t have a water gauge, so it’s easy to overfill. I did exactly that this morning, and felt so unable to waste the hot water that I made a full cafetiere (which could be reheated later, for rather less power, in the microwave) and a Thermos flask of tea for my train journey later in the day.
I’ve eased off the monitor-watching a bit this evening, but it’s sat there, watching, waiting, and ready to reveal the true energy impact the next time we hoover, or dry the kids’ hair or leave the TV on standby.
And as they say, knowledge is power.
Anyone else out there got an eco-eye mini or similar smart meter plugged in to their home? Let us know your experiences of whether it’s helping you to save energy.
We’ve written about Blackle so many times that I’m running out of cheap puns to use in my headlines, but it’s clearly still relevant: Charlie’s been seeing regular discussion of it via his Twitterweb, or whatever it is he gets up to these days.
For anyone who’s just joined us, Blackle provides a Google search, but it has a black background rather than the usual white screen. The site addresses the idea that it takes less energy to display a black screen than a white one, and that Google is one of the web’s most visited sites. So it follows that if enough people access the search engine through Blackle’s black screen, the energy savings should be significant.
Well, I’m not convinced. As we’ve written before, nearly all modern computer displays use LCD technology, which uses the twisting and untwisting of liquid crystals to block light or allow it to pass. The backlight, which operates at a constant brightness regardless of what’s on the screen, is the most power-hungry part, typically using somewhere around 10–20 watts. It takes a much smaller amount of power to twist the crystals, but doing so actually causes light to be blocked, meaning that a dark LCD might use fractionally more power than a light one. In practice, we can’t tell any difference using our power meter, which displays consumption to the nearest watt.
Of course, older monitors used a cathode ray tube (CRT) like that of a conventional TV. These work by firing a stream of excited electrons at a special phosphor coating, which glows when the electrons hit it. A bright screen needs more electrons, which requires more energy, so there’s no doubt that a dark CRT saves a bit of power. But while we haven’t got one to test, I’m not sure that the savings would be huge: much of the power a CRT uses goes to heating up the electron gun and creating the magnetic fields needed to steer the beam of electrons – only a portion is used to accelerate electrons at the phosphor.
Blackle’s FAQ does tackle the change in monitor technologies, pointing out that plasma screens – which are very vaguely similar to LCDs in that they contain phosphors and (multiple) almost-electron guns – use more power to display brighter images. It also says that organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screens, which don’t have a backlight, will use less power when displaying darker images.
I’ve no doubt that they’re right on both counts, and when we get the chance we’ll run some more tests to see just how much power Blackle can save with these sorts of screens, but there are better ways to make your monitor use less power. Before you worry about the colour of your desktop or the web pages you visit, consider turning down the brightness of your screen and making sure that it’s set to power down when you’re away from your computer (see below).
That’ll make a small but appreciable difference, whatever type of monitor you use. Well, every pixel helps.