this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
321 points (99.1% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5222 readers
796 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world. About 1C of total warming. Second chart: about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability. Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases. About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
silence7@slrpnk.net
321
Yes, heat pumps slash emissions even if powered by a dirty grid | Installing a heat pump now is better for the climate, even on U.S. electricity generated mostly by fossil fuels. Here’s why (www.canarymedia.com)
submitted 8 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
60 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The article doesn't go into it, but a key advantage they have is that heat pumps move heat, rather then trying to generate it. So they can move a lot more heat into your house than would be generated by running the electricity they use through a resistor. This makes them effectively more than 100% efficient (the exact amount depends on temperature) as compared with burning a fuel or resistive heat.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Can you convert an existing AC system to do both and save money on getting a whole new system installed?

[–] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's probably not worth it. If you have a system more than 10 years old, then you're probably going to have to replace the accumulator as well if it uses a different kind of refrigerant. It's likely cheaper to buy a whole unit and furnace than messing with it.

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

What about a new system? Had the AC compressor replaced last year but not the gas fired furnace due to cost lol

[–] carl_dungeon@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

I believe so but you need a new compressor - the heat exchanger in the house can stay the same I think.

[–] OminousOrange@lemmy.ca 3 points 8 months ago

You have a furnace that provides heat, air handler that moves the air, and compressor that forces heat in a certain direction (inside to outside in the case of AC) with coils in the air handler to make use of that (re)moved heat.

Heat pumps have several features that make them a bit more than backwards AC, like defrost systems, VFDs and often dual-fuel controls. If it snows where you are, you'll also want it off the ground. So, best to get a new system.

As another said, you might be able to reuse the coolant lines and coils in the air handler. It might not be a bad idea to keep the furnace for backup when it's extra cold.