Stan Cox (b. 1955) focuses most
of his writings on sustainability, ecology and agriculture. He
obtained his PhD from Iowa State University and spent his thirteen years as a
geneticist for the U.S Department of Agriculture. Right now, he is a senior
scientist at the Land Institute, an agricultural research and policy organization
in Salina, Kansas. Since 2003, he has regularly written several articles and investigative pieces for both electronic and print media.
In the essay The Case against Air Conditioning, it seems that Stan Cox talks about Washington DC only but in fact, he talks about the whole world giving the example of America. He has tried to show us that using the air conditioning is not smart. It has kept us inside and away from interacting with one another. The author argues that Washington DC should stop using air conditioners in everyday life except for hospitals, archives (stores), and cooling centres. He supports his argument by providing examples of how Washington DC would look without air conditioners at work, at home, and around town.
Cox through this writing urges us not to use air conditioning unnecessarily and excessively. He wants us to stop its use except for some places and to eliminate its exploitation completely if possible because its elimination will make us more socialized, the laws much softer and lessen the climate change issues like global warming.
According to the author, excessive use of air conditioning can cause several negative consequences for humans and other creatures on the earth. Among the world's highest greenhouse gas emitters, it is one of the worst power guzzlers. As it is being used in American homes and retail spaces, the consumption of required energy has doubled since the 1990s and it emits greenhouse gas that raises global temperatures. So, he argues that its unnecessary use in everyday life can be fatal. It is better and wiser to leave it in hospitals, archives and cooling centres only. Moreover, air conditioning reduces humidity around, multiples electricity bills and fills fluorocarbon in the atmosphere. Therefore, the author opines that it is not wise to use air conditioning everywhere.
At Work
Cox believes that if we avoid unnecessary use of air conditioning, we can experience different working places. A.C. free Washington will reduce long summer business hours and allow us to have relaxed siestas. It will also give us month-long closings back once again. As office employees no longer have to carry sweaters or space heaters to work in the summer because there will be windows wide open. They will have once again ceiling fans, windows fans and desk fans in their offices and workplaces and it will bring back the days when there used not to be air conditioning. Reduction in unnecessary use of air conditioning will allow the Americans to remain away from Washington's biggest business, i.e. government actions of promulgation of more laws. That will also cause fewer activities of lobbyists. This will let the Americans enjoy more holidays and will reduce the economic burden to some extent by reducing the cost of running the government.
During the summer, the parliament sessions will be adjourned and they will take place under the cool shade of trees on the lawn during warm spring and fall days. This will obviously help to get rid of hazardous environmental causes.
At Home
Due to the use of air conditioning, Americans are afraid of opening their homes and windows to get night breezes; they often have fear of theft and crime. They are deprived of getting fresh and cool air in. On the other hand, in the air conditioning-free situation, renovations and new construction works will take place. They will construct high ceilings with better cross-ventilation. There will be more fans installed in their houses. They will also use white colour to paint their roofs to reflect the sunlight to better feel cool and comfortable during the hot days. It will also have electricity bills plummet.
People will forget heat-generating appliances like washing machines to dry clothes and room heaters. They will have clotheslines to get clothes dried straight in the sunlight and will enjoy their dinner sitting on the porch.
Around Town
Turning off A.C. means gathering outside under the open blue sky. People will spend more time communicating with one another and that results in good socialization. It means socialization will be common among them. Instead of remaining inside in chilly rooms, people will come out and will know one another through communication. Where there used to be crimes in the streets will be safer as they will be full of human movement. As people will enjoy more time outdoors, this will also reduce the deaths of elderly people during heat waves: people will look after their vulnerable neighbours inside sweltering apartments. Children and others will enjoy cycling and riding bikes/scooters to experience the cooling effect of air movement. There will be no school days in summer and as we know they will opt for spending more time outside in the shady playgrounds than inside.
Avoidance of the use of A.C. all around means almost no emission of infectious gasses. Green plants get sprouted around and even on the roofs of government and commercial buildings in the city. Layers of soil and vegetation on top of a crucially leak-proof surface of the roof protect the interior parts of the building from the scorching sun and at the same time, water from the plant's leaves provides evaporative cooling. Thus, these types of roofs obviously reduce the room temperature.
In conclusion, the message the author has tried to convey is the excessive and unnecessary use of A.C. causes a global problem of high temperature in the long run. This will force humans to remain inside and will also cut them off from all human contact. And if it is eliminated, things will get reversed; more greenery will be seen around resulting in a decrease in global temperature.
Comprehension
1. What does Cox think is wrong with air conditioning?
Cox thinks that it is not smart to use air conditioning. It is one of the worst power guzzlers that burn fossil fuels because of which greenhouse gases get emitted. It also contributes to the high global temperature which again increases the need for air conditioning. Therefore, he believes that air conditioning should not be used unnecessarily and excessively.
2. According to Cox, what would be the results of a largely "A.C.-free Washington" (3)? Does the scenario he outlines apply only to Washington DC? Only to urban areas? Does it apply to other parts of the country as well?
According to Cox, the reduced air conditioning use in Washington DC would result in more flexible work schedules, renovation of building to better accommodate heat, decreased use of heat-generating appliances, and increased socialization resulting from time outside. These changes could apply to other towns and cities across the country as well.
3. Beginning in paragraph 4, Cox discusses the positive effects of reducing the use of air conditioning. What negative effects does he ignore?
Reducing air conditioning use could be difficult for people who do not tolerate heat well; they may feel as if they are confined to spaces that have air conditioning and have difficulty functioning during the summer. This could also pose problems for pets who are intolerant to heat.
4. Aside from "hospitals, archives, and cooling centres for those who are vulnerable to heat" (3), what other facilities and groups do you think need air conditioning?
Supermarkets, pet stores, animal shelters, and gym houses would all need air conditioning. People who are sensitive to heat, such as the elderly, those with handicaps, and young children should be able to use air conditioning freely as well.
5. What does Cox mean in paragraph 5 when he says that the end of air conditioning will bring paperweights back to American offices?
Cox means reduced air conditioning use would allow people to look for other options of cooling gadgets, similar to fans, etc. As the fans produce a heavy air current, the use of fans would make people bring paperweights back again onto their desks to hold their papers from blowing off their desks.
Purpose and Audience
1. When Cox's article was published, during a record-breaking national heatwave, he received more than sixty pages of angry emails, including at least one death threat. Why do you suppose his essay generated such strong reactions?
Due to the heavy use of air conditioning for a long time, people have become used to air conditioning and they feel more comfortable in the summer. Now, they cannot imagine their life without it. It has become difficult to deny the benefits of air conditioning in their homes and others. Although it may appear easy for Cox to propose that air conditioning should be taken away from their life, this thought of giving up air conditioning is a challenging idea for many people because he sounds very idealistic in conveying people to decrease the use of it. People seem to have developed a longing for air conditioning in their daily life to lessen the sweltering heat in the summer; they seem reluctant to give up the air conditioning, and on the other hand, he is realistically urging people to stop using it since the world is facing the problem of global warming. Thus, it is challenging to fully control the impact of air conditioning on global warming; this explains the outrage this article created.
2. What specific event or situation prompted Cox to write this essay? What other, less immediate causes might have inspired him?
Looking at his date of birth (b. 1955) and the boom in residential air conditioning that came with the development of smaller units after World War II is worthwhile to see the reason that prompted Cox to write this essay. This essay was published during a time when people were experiencing intense heat waves around. There must have been heavy consumption of air conditioning around him at that time. He has grown with air conditioning's rise in popularity; he has been an eyewitness of how its use evolved over time as it spread from industrial purposes, cooling factories, and textile mills to hospitals, hotels, and movie theatres; and then to individual homes. The global warming that he has talked about in some beginning paragraphs has also inspired him to write this essay because climate change is likely an issue that was also in his knowledge.
3. Cox states his thesis in the first sentence of paragraph 3: "A.C.'s obvious public-health benefits during severe heat waves do not justify its lavish use in everyday life for months on end." Do you agree? How does his use of the word lavish reveal his bias? Does this word weaken his thesis?
Yes, I agree with Cox's statement. Despite the fact that I unquestionably am at real fault for the lavish use of air conditioning he describes, I truly do accept that I could manage to live though with difficulty if I reserved air conditioning use for only the hottest days. The use of the word lavish tells us that he sees people have reflected selfish nature through excessive use of air conditioning and have largely contributed to global warming. This is his bias. However, I do not think that the word lavish weakens his thesis. This word is a perfect diction to depict what he means. He, of course, does not mean that we should completely discard the use of air conditioning in their life, but he believes that we have arrived at that point where we are using it more than necessary.
4. In paragraph 6, Cox quotes Russell Baker. What does this quotation add to this essay?
In his quote, Baker refers to the help felt by both the nation and lobbyists when Congress had to suspend activities to avoid Washington's torturous summer days. He has also pointed out that it is too costly to maintain a government running with air conditioning at full blast.
5. Do you think Cox is really trying to persuade readers to live in a world without air conditioning, or do you think he has some other, less extreme purpose in mind?
I don't think Cox is trying to persuade his readers to live in a world without air conditioning because it would be foolish to believe that the world without A.C. would be possible today. However, he probably is thinking about a less-extreme version of what he is describing in the essay. His tone is extremely optimistic. I think the way he has raised the issue in this essay is a good idea to list out as many benefits of reducing A.C. as possible to persuade the readers.
Style and Structure
1. Does this essay focus on cause or on effects? What specific words does Cox use to indicate this focus?
This essay centres around the effects of lessening the heavy use of air conditioning. The focus on effects is shown by some phrases like "In a world without air conditioning... (p. 184)", "...with the right to open a window... (p.184)", "With more people spending more time outdoors... (p. 185)", and "...because of the cooling effect... (p. 185)".
2. In his discussion of a future air-conditioning-free environment, Cox uses present tense (for example, "Three-digit temperatures prompt siestas", paragraph 4). Why? What other tense could he have used? Do you think he made the right choice?
The scenario Cox is portraying is an extremely hopeful one. It seems impossible to imagine a world in which all of the things Cox discusses actually happen. I think his use of present tense best fits to discuss the things he has presented because this tense makes the effects more immediate and vivid. Everything seems more plausible in this tense. He could have used the future tense as well; however, his choice to go with the present tense was more surprising, and it helps to make his writing seriously interesting.
3. Paragraph 12 describes a casual chain. Diagram this casual chain. What other casual chains can you identify in this essay?
Without air conditioning, being outside is more comfortable than being outside
↓
Neighbours get to know one another outside
↓
High-crime areas become safer
↓
People look out for their neighbours
↓
Deaths from heat decline
In addition to the above one, casual chains can also be found in paragraph 4 when Cox talks about the workplace becoming more relaxed; in paragraph 9, when he talks about renovations leading to decreased home utility bills; and in paragraph 14, when he talks about the environment becoming more luxuriant.
4. Evaluate the effectiveness of Cox's one-sentence conclusion. Does it make sense to close the essay this way? Is it consistent in tone and content with the discussion that precedes it?
Cox's one-sentence concluding statement is expected to support his idea that diminishing the heavy use of air conditioning will lead to spending more time outside as well as getting a more environmentally-friendly world; he is imaging the very consumerist-oriented environment of the mall being replaced by a nature reserve.
This concluding sentence is consistent with the rest of his essay, which imagines an alternate reality where such changes are widespread. His use of this statement as a conclusion is an effective choice because it serves as a symbol for the rest of his ideas.
Vocabulary Projects
1. Define each of the following words as it is in this selection.
2. Cox uses many hyphenated compounds as adjectives to modify nouns - for example, "month-long closings" (4). Identify these compounds, and then identify the nouns they modify. Try to substitute single-word adjectives for these compound modifiers.
0 Comments