The Case Against Air Conditioning: Stan Cox BBS 1st Year Patterns for College Writing

 

The Case Against Air Conditioning by Stan Cox (page 183)

About the Essayist

Stan Cox was born in 1955. Most of his writings are about sustainability, ecology, and agriculture. He obtained his Ph.D. from Iowa State University. He works as a geneticist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The Main Theme of the Essay

The essay talks about why Washington/America should stop using air conditioners in everyday life, except hospitals, archives (stores), and cooling centers. The author argues by providing examples of what Washington would be like without air conditioners at work, at home, and around town.

Click for Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogmMnVVfAdg

Summary of Essay

Stan Cox wants us not to use A.C. unnecessarily. He urges that eliminating A.C. will lead to more socializing in neighbourhoods, laxer laws, and a reduction in climate change issues. Cox thinks the excessive use of air conditioning can bring problematic consequences. Cox argues usage of air conditioners in everyday life can be fatal. Its usage should be limited in the premise of public places. The air conditioner reduces humidity, busts the electricity bill, and fills the atmosphere. So, it’s wrong to use air conditioners everywhere.

The author’s message is that A.C. keeps us inside and away from interacting with one another. We shouldn’t be trapped inside every day but we should be out and about to enjoy the world around us. Cox wants readers to turn down, turn off, or just eliminate air conditioning use. He believes that it will benefit us by making neighbourhoods more friendly, laws laxer, and climate change less of an issue. People in Washington didn’t have to experience extreme heat because their houses were equipped with air conditioners. Air conditioner not only reduces heat but increases electricity bills and helps increase greenhouse effects. This isn’t a smart activity because we are ruining our environment.  Refrigerators burn fossil fuels, which emit greenhouse gases. The greenhouse gases raise global temperatures. As a result, we will need more air-conditioning.

America is one of the world’s highest greenhouse-gas emitting countries. Now the consumption of electricity in America has doubled since the early 1990s. Less than half a century ago, America used very few air conditioning devices. Americans can return to the pre-air conditioning state by reducing the use of air conditioners. The air conditioning machines should be allowed to be used only in important places such as hospitals, archives, and cooling centres. The author imagines a very beautiful America if air conditioners can be banned from use in houses.

•      At work: If we remove air conditioners, we can experience very different workplaces. During summers, workers will get more flexible and more relaxed time because offices will be closed and they will have very few working hours. All offices will be equipped with large open windows, ceiling fans, window fans and desk fans. The government will also have to provide more holidays to its workers. And the nation will enjoy little economic burden by reducing the cost of running the government. There will be fewer laws passed in the parliament. There will be less hatching of new schemes or plotting. The parliament sessions will be adjourned during the summer. During warm spring and fall days, hearings will be held under the cool shade of trees on the lawns. This will help overcome the present climate change problems.

•      At Home: The house owners will open their windows to let in fresh air and cool air which are mostly closed now due to fear of theft and crimes. People will now construct high ceilings with better cross-ventilators and windows, install more fans, and paint their roofs white to reflect solar rays to make their homes cool and comfortable to live in during the hot seasons. As a result the electricity bill with reduce. There will be no washing machines, and every house will be seen with clotheslines where they will keep their clothes dry from the direct sunlight. People will eat grilled foods and have their dinner on the porch.

•      Around town: Post-AC towns will be overcrowded with people from the neighbourhood. There will be more spending their time outdoors particularly in the late afternoon and evening, when temperatures fall more quickly outside than they do inside their homes. As a result, socializing during the summer will become common. Rather than sitting and entertaining alone in one’s room, people in the neighbourhood will get time to know one another. Because there are more people outside, there will be less crime and people will feel safer.  Deaths of elderly people inside their apartments will also decline because they will be spending more time outside. They will get more immediate care from the public than they were at home. Most people will now opt for cycling. There will be no school days for kids during the hot season. Children will also spend more time outside, somewhere in the shady playgrounds and water sprinklers will also increase in every neighborhood. All houses will have green roofs due to grasses, vegetables, etc. More greenery will be seen around the city. There will be more green tops for government and commercial buildings. These tops will reduce the room temperature.

Comprehension

1.     What does Cox think is wrong with air conditioning?

Cox says that air conditioning uses a lot of energy; running air conditioners burns fossil fuels, which emit greenhouse gases that raise global temperatures, which in turn increases the need for air conditioning. He believes that air conditioning should be used more sparingly.

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?

Cox says that reduced air conditioning use in Washington would result in more flexible work schedules (business, including governmental ones, closing and adjusting for heat), renovation of buildings 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 that 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?

Grocery stores, pet stores, animal shelters, care facilities, factories, and gyms would all need air conditioning. People who are sensitive to heat, such as the elderly, those with disabilities, 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?

Without air conditioning, people would make use of alternative cooling devices, like fans. Since fans create an air current, people would need to begin using paperweights to keep 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?

Many people have grown quite used to air-conditioning and cannot imagine life without it; it has helped make summers much more comfortable and it is hard to deny these benefits. For Cox to suggest that this comfort should be taken away is a challenging idea for many people, especially since his tone is very idealistic and treats this decrease as a very simple task. This, combined with how difficult it is to fully grasp the impacts of air conditioning on global warming, explains the outrage this article generated.

2.     What specific event or situation prompted Cox to write this essay? What other, less immediate causes might have inspired him?

Cox's essay was published during an intense heatwave; there was probably an enormous amount of air conditioning use around him during this time that prompted him to write this essay. Cox was born just in time to watch air conditioning rise in popularity; he has been able to see first-hand how its use has evolved as it spread from hospitals and businesses to individual homes. Judging by the way he speaks about energy usage contributing to global warming in his first few paragraphs, climate change is likely an issue that was already on the author's mind.

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?

I agree with Cox's statement here. Even though I certainly am guilty of the lavish use he describes, I do believe I could get by if I reserved A.C. use for only the hottest days. His use of the word "lavish" shows that he sees excessive air conditioning as selfish and those who overuse it as spoiled; this is his bias. This word, in my opinion, does not weaken his thesis. It is a good word to describe what he means. He is not suggesting that air conditioning should be done away with altogether, but he does think that we have reached a point where we are using it more than we need to.

4.     In paragraph 6, Cox quotes Russell Baker. What does this quotation add to his essay?

In his quote, Baker cites the relief felt by both the nation and lobbyists when Congress was forced to adjourn during the summer heat. He also raises a point about how costly it maintains Congress with the air-conditioning running at full blast.

5.     Do you think Cox is 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?

Cox likely is thinking about a less-extreme version of what he is describing. His tone is extremely optimistic; it would be foolish for someone to genuinely believe that a world like the one he describes is possible. Cox's choice to exaggerate as he did was a way to list as many benefits of reducing A.C. as possible in an attempt to persuade the reader.

 Style and Structure

1.     Does this essay focus on causes or effects? What specific words does Cox use to indicate this focus?

This essay focuses on the effects of reducing air conditioning usage. The focus on effects is indicated by phrases like "In a world without air conditioning,", "with the right to open a window,", "With more people spending more time outdoors," and "because of the cooling effect".

2.     In his discussion - of a future air-conditioning-free environment, Cox uses the 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 describing is a very optimistic one, almost excessively so. It can be difficult to imagine a world in which all of the things Cox discusses happen. His use of the present tense makes the effects he discusses feel more immediate and vivid; they seem more plausible in this tense. He could have used the future tense, but his choice to use the present tense was more unexpected, which helped make his writing more interesting.

3.     Paragraph 12 describes a causal chain. Diagram this causal chain. What other causal chains can you identify in this essay?

Without air conditioning, being outside is more comfortable than being inside. Neighbours get to know one another outside. High-crime areas become safer. People look out for their neighbour's Deaths from heat decline Causal chains can also be found in paragraph 4, when Cox talks about the workplace becoming more relaxed; in paragraph 9, when Cox talks about renovations leading to decreased home utility bills; and in paragraph 14, when he talks about the environment becoming lusher.

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 closing statement was intended to reinforce his idea that reducing air conditioning use would lead to more time outside as well as a more environmentally-friendly world; he is imagining the very consumerist-oriented environment of the mall being replaced by a nature reserve.

This statement is consistent with the rest of his essay, which imagines an alternate reality where such changes His use of this statement as a conclusion is an effective choice because it serves as a symbol for the rest of his ideas.

 

***

Click for the Next Lesson: https://limbuchandrabahadur.blogspot.com/2025/05/two-ways-to-belong-in-america-bharati.html