I spotted somebody the other day said they still wear black socks on workdays. As usual my mind wandered – he hadn’t mentioned any other clothes – did he still wear them?
Switch to another conversation – about how waste energy from a computer can heat a house.
Move forward to a conversation about setting personal environmental goals. I mentioned the black socks guy and joked I had not changed clothes since lockdown (JOKE!!!). I just left my clothes on until they wore out – it reduced my environmental footprint.
Okay, a joke. But it got me thinking a bit more about carbon emissions. I remember a friend being proud that they used candles on world environment day instead of electric lights. It can be hard to work out the carbon footprint of a lightbulb, but it would need to be pretty massive to be worse than a candle (or rather enough candles to light a room).
Maybe a good example is the modern electric bike. What releases more carbon – a bike co-powered by a person and electricity or a bike powered by a person?
Choosing to use manual power rather than a modern alternative is not always a way to reduce carbon – the human engine is a carbon emitting device (and sometimes less environmentally friendly gases). The efficiency of a human body is not amazing if we only look at kinetic energy production.
There are some interesting calculations around, seeĀ MPG of a Human by Tom Murphy. The crucial issue seems to be around things like the energy of food production.
The inference is that either energy efficient food production or a thoroughly modern energy efficient lifestyle are more beneficial than many of the middle options. Being lukewarm seems to be the option to avoid.