Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Heating is the only reasonable answer here. Obviously some hot places were unhabited, but mostly because they offered no ressources (deserts). Heating is necessary where I live and we still have quite mild winters for our latitude. A/C would be nice some days in July / August but seriously it's harmful to the planet on a large scale.
You can certainly melt enough ice to meet your survival needs without a fire. If you're still alive, your body will be around 37C or 98.6F. That's plenty warm enough to melt some ice or snow that will provide enough water to hydrate yourself.
So you're suggesting hugging bottles of ice in subfreezing conditions, having no source of heat other than your body? Long enough to melt a bare minimum of, say, 2 liters of water per day? And then, because you're thirsty and dehydrated, immediately drinking that water, which is at 1C? Ummm....
So you're suggesting hugging bottles of ice in subfreezing conditions, having no source of heat other than your body? Long enough to melt a bare minimum of, say, 2 liters of water per day? And then, because you're thirsty and dehydrated, immediately drinking that water, which is at 1C? Ummm....
Yes, this was my question. I think you would get hypothermia really quick if you did this.
heating for sure -while I think temperate climates are healthier, I think the elements will kill you quicker without protection, than in the tropics.
I agree about the historic significance, but in the future AC will be much more important. With the rise in global temperatures, many areas will become uninhabitable and many species of wild plants and animals will be eliminated. Even livestock will have to be kept in air conditioned enclosures during heat waves.
We often hear of how places like Phoenix, Houston, or Miami were sparsely populated before the advent of air conditioning. But why doesn't anyone say that Toronto, Montreal, or Minneapolis were hardly inhabitable before the advent of modern heating?
Wood stoves and furnaces were very inefficient, contributed to filthy indoor air quality, and it was very hard to stockpile any amount of wood, often, on the windswept praries.
And let's face it: you'll die far faster if exposed to the elements during a winter in the upper Midwest than exposed to the elements during a Florida summer.
That's why God invented the heat pump. One device, does both
Even livestock will have to be kept in air conditioned enclosures during heat waves.
Not really. All you need is a barn with a misting/sprinkler system. In Texas the cows here can bear 120F in the full sun with no problems. The pigs get hot but the farmers simply spray them down with a hose. Chickens in chicken coops/barns have large fans and misting systems.
Some animals are more hardy like cows. Other animals can't take the heat but water solves that problem.
So you're suggesting hugging bottles of ice in subfreezing conditions, having no source of heat other than your body? Long enough to melt a bare minimum of, say, 2 liters of water per day? And then, because you're thirsty and dehydrated, immediately drinking that water, which is at 1C? Ummm....
We're talking basic survival, not living the high life. Yes, you could do it, and with snow too (probably more easily than with ice).
Stranded in the middle of nowhere with no equipment during very cold weather, you'll die of exposure/hypothermia/freeze to death/starve to death long before you did of dehydration.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.