Britain's air-con row is more than just a debate about the merits of air conditioning; it's a microcosm of the broader struggle to combat climate change. The issue at hand is not merely about comfort, but about the delicate balance between adapting to the changing climate and mitigating its causes. This is a critical juncture, where the decisions made today will have far-reaching implications for the future of our planet and our own well-being.
The urban heat island effect, where cities experience significantly higher temperatures than surrounding rural areas, is a pressing concern. This phenomenon is particularly dangerous during the night, when bodies need cooler air and cannot find it. A study by the University of Birmingham found that the heat island effect alone accounted for roughly half of the 130 heat-related deaths during a previous heatwave in the West Midlands. This is a stark reminder of the urgent need to address this issue.
Jo Shields, head of sustainability for Mandy's housing association, is on the front lines of this battle. She is grappling with the challenge of balancing decarbonization efforts with the need to adapt homes to rising heat. The residents of Ellum Pointe, a housing scheme for the over-55s, are a stark example of this dilemma. They are unable to cool their flats, and the response from their landlords has been improvisational, creating an internal cool room using a mobile air-conditioning unit.
The question of whether to embrace air conditioning is complex. On one hand, it can provide much-needed relief from the heat. On the other hand, it comes with significant costs and consequences. The debate is further muddied by the fact that spending on shade, ventilation, and cooler hospitals and homes produces little in the way of bankable returns, unlike investments in heat pumps and EVs.
Baroness Brown, also known as the engineer Julia King, chairs the adaptation committee of the government's Climate Change Committee. She argues that the imbalance between mitigation and adaptation is written into UK law. The Climate Change Act sets legally binding carbon budgets, while adaptation has no such teeth. This imbalance has led to a situation where the government writes an essay on adaptation, and the committee's job is to assess whether the government is doing the things it said it would do.
The committee's report, released just as the first heatwave was striking Britain in May, urges lawmakers to set hard adaptation targets. One of the most controversial ideas in the report is on air conditioning. Currently, only 5% of English homes have a cooling unit, and the committee recommends fitting these devices in hospitals and care homes within 10 years, and schools in 25 years. This goes against years of government advice that passive cooling was the preferred method.
Professor Mat Santamouris, the world's most-cited researcher on urban overheating, argues that machines should be the last line of defense. He points out that reflective roofing alone can drag indoor temperatures from around 43C towards 30C, while a ceiling fan gives comfort for a fraction of the cost. Putting up unshaded glass towers in cities, he says, is 'crazy'.
Santamouris is scathing about who is driving the air con demand. He argues that the industry is 'extremely powerful', and that passive cooling adds its own economic growth, as money is spent on plumbers and builders. However, others argue that Britain's hostility to cooling has curdled into a type of masochism, and that air conditioning is standard in offices, hotels, and shops, but not in schools and hospitals, where it is needed the most.
The dispute over the pros and cons of air conditioning is becoming political. Some London councils are prioritizing low-energy ways of keeping homes cool over air conditioning, while others are demanding an 'air-con revolution'. The Boiler Upgrade Scheme in England and Wales has offered £2,500 towards a reversible air-air heat pump, but the silence around this grant has been deafening, with only around 45 households claiming it in the first month.
The evidence from experts is clear: we should not go down the road of cooling every home by machine. Santamouris and Baroness Brown reach for the same answer: passive cooling first, machines where genuinely needed, clean power behind them, and the lesson that France learned painfully in the deadly heatwave of 2003 - the vulnerable protected rather than left to improvise. Cooling every home by machine would strain the grid and warm the streets, hampering the effort to slow the warming that drives the demand.
The heat of this year and last, and the prospects of it being repeated, is a future that Jo Shields is upset by. She sees it as a matter of survival, and tries to bury the thought of it most days. Meanwhile, Mandy is grateful for the new community room with its air conditioning, which provides some immediate respite. She wants one in her flat, too.
In the end, the air-con row is a reflection of the broader struggle to combat climate change. It's a call to action, a reminder that we must act now to protect our planet and our own well-being. The decisions we make today will shape the future, and it's up to us to make the right choices.
