• alvvayson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    In the winter, I emit more when I WFH.

    At the office, I don't need to heat my house. And my bike+train commute emits very little.

    • SuckMyWang@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      64
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Great point, because the energy used to heat your office and power your train are imaginary

      • Spzi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        It's economy of scale. A centralized building can be much more efficient than many individual houses. Big emphasis on CAN.

        It all depends on how wasteful people are at home, wether they commute by train or bike (or how much car trips they do while WFH), and how responsible the office is managed.

        The last studies I saw posted in Lemmy about this highlighted the nuance, while people jumped on the maximum possible saving as if that was real.

    • LordKitsuna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Presumably your house is not just a giant glass box though. If that office was not built and not heated it would offset your house Heating as well as everyone else's.

      Obviously not all offices are skyscrapers, but the ones that are are insanely wasteful. Fun fact Heating and Cooling to Greenhouse is expensive and that's what skyscrapers are giant greenhouses they are wildly inefficient. And there are definitely tons of Industry that we just shove and to skyscrapers for literally no reason that they could be done from home without any change in workflow other than the lack of a commute

      • Hyperreality@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ah. This is a simple mistake.

        You seem to think that corporate owners of commercial properties switch off the lights, heating and/or AC when they're empty.

        In reality they leave them on even in empty properties, then lecture the rest of us about how it's our fault the climate is fucked because we forgot to unplug a 12 volt phone charger or flushed the toilet twice.

        On a related note, remember that time you put the lid of a cola bottle in the wrong recycling bin? Clearly you're a hypocrite and in no position to suggest a factory dumping 12 tonnes of microplastics in a river is bad.

        • alvvayson@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This is the answer, I work in a corporate office that is heated regardless of whether I am present or not.

          But to be fair, the office is never empty during office hours, so it's not like an individual working from home would allow them to turn off the heat.

        • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If working from home was standard, there'd be less need for offices, and less, smaller, offices would exist. Leading to less energy wasted in heating offices (as well as .kre space for residential).

    • nautilus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Honestly fuck the downvotes, this shit ain’t our fault anyways. Tired of being told that it’s our job to fix the climate instead of the corporations that continue to make billions off of destroying it

      • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        JuSt DOnT bUy FRoM tHEm!

        That’s not a feasible option when our society has been set up so that not giving a shit about other people or the environment makes you tons of money.

        • nautilus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          while there is indeed no ethical consumption under capitalism, at this point it’s unrealistic to not participate in it

    • Unaware7013@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Do you really turn your heat down a statistically significant amount for 8-10 hours a day when you are away from home?

      • alvvayson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, I do. It saves easily 50 kWh of natural gas consumption per day.

        On the days nobody will be home, we just let the thermostaat on 13 degrees Celsius for the whole day. When we are home it's 18 degrees during the day.

        • the_seven_sins@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Assuming you are coming home every evening and not living in a really cold area, your house must be badly isolated if it cools down so significantly during the day.

          • alvvayson@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It's reasonably insulated - above average for my location, but it does get cold in the winter.

            Obviously, I'm only saving this heating fuel on the colder winter days.

      • LordKitsuna@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don't know about them specifically but my family generally did set the automatic timers on the thermostat. Down to 55 when no one was home back up to 68 slightly before people were supposed to be home

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Your home is still heated to above freezing and your office is also heated. There's a net lose in HVAC requirements with WFH regardless.