|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jul 24, 2014 23:00:46 GMT
I've been thinking about this one for a while and after the threads were started about Korean Fan Death and the cracked car windows thing, I think it's time to post it.
The idea is that there are a whole lot of things we do every day, without putting much thought into them, that we might actually be doing wrong. Simple stuff, like how we use fans around the house to cool ourselves in the summer, how we wash our hands, how we defrost frozen foods and things of that nature. Most of us do these things on a regular basis, but are we doing them in the most efficient way, or are we more or less just wasting energy (both in electricity, water and so on and our own personal energy)?
The idea has been brewing for a long time, but it's gained new momentum over the past couple of days. It's been excruciatingly hot and humid around here, so we've fired up the electrical fans, but it dawned on me the other night that having a fan blow cooled air directly on me may not be the most efficient way of cooling myself. Maybe I should be trying to circulate the air instead, drawing in cooler air from outside through an open window by placing the fan in front of it? Or maybe I should try blowing the hot air in the room toward the open window? Hot air is after all lighter than cold air, so maybe trying to push it out is better? Should I possibly have more than one fan to facilitate this circulation?
Just what IS the "right way" to utilize these things?
Anyway, that's the one that's actually "creating a problem" for me right now, but there are bound to be hundreds of other things we do on a regular basis that we might be doing, if not completely wrong, then at least less efficiantly than we could be. I figured it could make a good episode to test how people usually do these things and possibly have the guys find better ways of doing them. If it could lead to some of their viewers wasting less energy in everyday life, I'm sure they'd consider that a cool side bonus.
Any ideas for other things that we (as in: most people) might not be doing right/in the most efficient way?
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 25, 2014 1:03:46 GMT
in the evening as it cools off outside, you open windows in the upwind and downwind faces of the house. then you have the option of setting a fan low in the cool side, or high on the hot side to help move the air if the wind is insufficient.
then leave the windows closed as it gets hotter outside than you want it inside.
this, my wife has never quite grasped. I had one day, it was 90 degrees outside, and 70 degrees inside - she got home and opened all the windows.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jul 25, 2014 2:28:36 GMT
in the evening as it cools off outside, you open windows in the upwind and downwind faces of the house. then you have the option of setting a fan low in the cool side, or high on the hot side to help move the air if the wind is insufficient. then leave the windows closed as it gets hotter outside than you want it inside. this, my wife has never quite grasped. I had one day, it was 90 degrees outside, and 70 degrees inside - she got home and opened all the windows. Speaking of keeping the house cool, I got back from our cabin late Sunday night and found that the central air in the house had died. Checked it out Monday morning and discovered the compressor was FUBAR. Turns out, it's a 20 something year old Trane unit and has a special compressor that can only be ordered from Trane. The HVAC supply house said that sure, they could order one for me but it would take a week to get and cost $756. He then advised me that he would sell me an entire new condensing unit for $754. Two dollars less for a whole new unit than it would cost just for the compressor for the old unit. Best part was he had them in stock. So much for conservation. The old unit ended up in the trash. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 25, 2014 3:33:05 GMT
in the evening as it cools off outside, you open windows in the upwind and downwind faces of the house. then you have the option of setting a fan low in the cool side, or high on the hot side to help move the air if the wind is insufficient. then leave the windows closed as it gets hotter outside than you want it inside. this, my wife has never quite grasped. I had one day, it was 90 degrees outside, and 70 degrees inside - she got home and opened all the windows. Speaking of keeping the house cool, I got back from our cabin late Sunday night and found that the central air in the house had died. Checked it out Monday morning and discovered the compressor was FUBAR. Turns out, it's a 20 something year old Trane unit and has a special compressor that can only be ordered from Trane. The HVAC supply house said that sure, they could order one for me but it would take a week to get and cost $756. He then advised me that he would sell me an entire new condensing unit for $754. Two dollars less for a whole new unit than it would cost just for the compressor for the old unit. Best part was he had them in stock. So much for conservation. The old unit ended up in the trash. should have taken it to a recycler - even if they just pay you for the steel, it's a few bucks in your pocket. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jul 25, 2014 16:15:42 GMT
Back to the OP.
What about queuing up? Is it better to switch lanes or stick with the one you are in?
That seems testable, and with additional 'queuing' myths would provide a very simple basis for a segment.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jul 25, 2014 16:29:04 GMT
should have taken it to a recycler - even if they just pay you for the steel, it's a few bucks in your pocket. In the long run, it did get recycled. I saw a local "picker" that always makes the rounds the night before trash pick-up looking for scrap metal the he takes to a salvage yard to get cash. I flagged him down and helped him disassemble it and load it in his truck. I was glad that someone was going to benefit from it and that it wouldn't end up in the land fill after all. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jul 25, 2014 16:29:45 GMT
Back to the OP. What about queuing up? Is it better to switch lanes or stick with the one you are in? That seems testable, and with additional 'queuing' myths would provide a very simple basis for a segment. Sounds a little like the Monty Hall paradox. |
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jul 25, 2014 20:15:47 GMT
Back to the OP. What about queuing up? Is it better to switch lanes or stick with the one you are in? That seems testable, and with additional 'queuing' myths would provide a very simple basis for a segment. I was thinking more along the lines of stuff you do at home, but yeah, that could be a good one. After all, many people drive to work and back on a daily basis, so it fits the profile of what I was going for  |
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jul 25, 2014 20:30:01 GMT
Here's another one: The mop and bucket
For years on end, infomercials have been telling us that the standard mop and bucket is a really bad way to clean your floors, because after your first run over the floor, your mop will be filthy. You then stick in the water to rinse all the crud off and continue. You do this several times, ending up with water that's more dirty than the floor you're trying to clean, so you either have to change the water or your floor will never be completely clean. The infomercial person then proceeds to tell you why you have to get yourself a "Whippedy-Doo-Da Mop" that won't only clean your floors, but also take you to the moon and have coffee ready when you come back.
Question is this: Are the mop and bucket really as terrible as the infomercials tell us, and if they are, could that be because people are just using them wrong? Is there a better way to clean your floor with a standard mop and bucket than just dunking the mop in the bucket, splashing water all over the floor and repeating, until the water looks like melted curb slush?
I've personally found that having two buckets works pretty well. One with soapy water to wash with and one with clean water to rinse in. If the floor is REALLY dirty, I'll pour the soapy water directly on it, distribute it all around the floor with the mop, let it sit for about 5-10 minutes and then start mopping it up again. That way I don't have to dunk the dirty mop back into the soapy water. I'll just rinse it off every now and then in the clean water bucket.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 26, 2014 2:23:40 GMT
Back to the OP. What about queuing up? Is it better to switch lanes or stick with the one you are in? That seems testable, and with additional 'queuing' myths would provide a very simple basis for a segment. grocery store queue? they could also test the myth that the other line always moves faster. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 26, 2014 2:25:04 GMT
Here's another one: The mop and bucket For years on end, infomercials have been telling us that the standard mop and bucket is a really bad way to clean your floors, because after your first run over the floor, your mop will be filthy. You then stick in the water to rinse all the crud off and continue. You do this several times, ending up with water that's more dirty than the floor you're trying to clean, so you either have to change the water or your floor will never be completely clean. The infomercial person then proceeds to tell you why you have to get yourself a "Whippedy-Doo-Da Mop" that won't only clean your floors, but also take you to the moon and have coffee ready when you come back. Question is this: Are the mop and bucket really as terrible as the infomercials tell us, and if they are, could that be because people are just using them wrong? Is there a better way to clean your floor with a standard mop and bucket than just dunking the mop in the bucket, splashing water all over the floor and repeating, until the water looks like melted curb slush? I've personally found that having two buckets works pretty well. One with soapy water to wash with and one with clean water to rinse in. If the floor is REALLY dirty, I'll pour the soapy water directly on it, distribute it all around the floor with the mop, let it sit for about 5-10 minutes and then start mopping it up again. That way I don't have to dunk the dirty mop back into the soapy water. I'll just rinse it off every now and then in the clean water bucket. in my experience, the Whippedy-do-dah mop does an even worse job - because it just uses the same filthy mop pad from beginning to end, unless you are willing to change pads twice as often as you would normally rinse your mop. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jul 26, 2014 15:38:04 GMT
Back to the OP. What about queuing up? Is it better to switch lanes or stick with the one you are in? That seems testable, and with additional 'queuing' myths would provide a very simple basis for a segment. grocery store queue? they could also test the myth that the other line always moves faster. Since queuing would require bringing in a reasonable number of people, which is time consuming and expensive, it would make sense to try and find similar queuing myths for them to look at and test. The obvious ones are easy enough, but I think ideally we could do with some less obvious ones - maybe other theories about queuing or techniques to queuing. I can't think of any off the top of my head - beyond 'The British are good at queuing' (not true btw) and single versus multiple lines - by which I mean a single line that feeds into several counters rather than each counter having its own queue. (I've heard that supermarkets use single lines per counter because it gives shoppers the feeling that they are more in control. But that banks use the single line because it is faster and more efficient.) I'm thinking queuing might be a good 'you are doing it wrong' idea. It's simple enough to test fairly simply, large enough to look reasonably impressive and is something that everyone will end up doing at least once a week. *Muses* Could looking at if self-serve counters really speed things up work? Do they save you time, or are delays (say if you are buying something that is age-limited/checked and have to wait for a member of staff to clear something) going to result in no real difference? Likewise, do '10 items or less' queues really speed things up, or would it be just as fast to have everyone going through the same checkouts - This goes back to the idea that supermarkets use multiple queues because it gives customers a sense of control. Will people automatically join a long queue, even if they have no idea what people are queuing for? (This is something of a comedy trope) |
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Jul 26, 2014 15:50:22 GMT
Every time I use the self serve it takes more time, something will not scan first time, unexpected item in bagging area etc, a bit of a pain, unless you have just a couple of items say for lunch.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jul 26, 2014 16:07:35 GMT
Every time I use the self serve it takes more time, something will not scan first time, unexpected item in bagging area etc, a bit of a pain, unless you have just a couple of items say for lunch. I try to avoid the self-serve checkouts. Just been burnt too many times trying to use them. |
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Jul 26, 2014 18:43:55 GMT
I've come to prefer self-serve checkouts under certain circumstances. For example, there have been times where I've needed to purchase both work-related items and items for personal use in the same trip. With self-checkout registers, I can easily break the items up into separate purchase orders (allowing for separate receipts and even separate methods of payment) without the hassle or frustration of trying to get the cashier to do it for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jul 26, 2014 19:51:20 GMT
grocery store queue? they could also test the myth that the other line always moves faster. Since queuing would require bringing in a reasonable number of people, which is time consuming and expensive, it would make sense to try and find similar queuing myths for them to look at and test. The obvious ones are easy enough, but I think ideally we could do with some less obvious ones - maybe other theories about queuing or techniques to queuing. I can't think of any off the top of my head - beyond 'The British are good at queuing' (not true btw) and single versus multiple lines - by which I mean a single line that feeds into several counters rather than each counter having its own queue. (I've heard that supermarkets use single lines per counter because it gives shoppers the feeling that they are more in control. But that banks use the single line because it is faster and more efficient.) I'm thinking queuing might be a good 'you are doing it wrong' idea. It's simple enough to test fairly simply, large enough to look reasonably impressive and is something that everyone will end up doing at least once a week. *Muses* Could looking at if self-serve counters really speed things up work? Do they save you time, or are delays (say if you are buying something that is age-limited/checked and have to wait for a member of staff to clear something) going to result in no real difference? Likewise, do '10 items or less' queues really speed things up, or would it be just as fast to have everyone going through the same checkouts - This goes back to the idea that supermarkets use multiple queues because it gives customers a sense of control. Will people automatically join a long queue, even if they have no idea what people are queuing for? (This is something of a comedy trope) Would we be looking at ways for the customer to better navigate to the right queue, or which queue type is better and should be adopted by supermarkets? I'm asking because my original idea was to test things that you as a person could be doing wrong, not society as a whole. The objective should be to help people do things more efficiently in their everyday lives, not to make them angry that other people could be making all our lives easier but choose not to. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jul 26, 2014 20:45:43 GMT
rolling down the windows in a car - is it really the only way to get fresh air into the car?
some people cannot seem to sit in a motor vehicle without rolling windows down. (and I'm not talking about Mrs TLW who turns the defog on maximum heat and then regulates the interior temperature by rolling down her window.)
Clarification: is the air quality better in a car with the windows rolled down, or using the ventilation system to draw in air?
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jul 26, 2014 20:54:15 GMT
Well if they look at queuing in general, which as I said is going to involve bringing people in to create a queue, they might as well test which type of line really is more efficient. It's not like the set up would be complex or time consuming after all, all you need is a couple of poles and rope which would take all of five minutes to lay out and put up. This in itself might make the idea more tempting, as they have the option of doing an additional myth for no extra cost.
As far as the show goes trying to find as many ideas that they could test using this setup, regardless of if those ideas are in regards to 'individual' choices or not. As I've noted before in relation to posting ideas, sometimes what gets tested isn't the original idea but a variation on that myth - which may be more practical or just be more visual.
If you think that 'Queuing' should be a separate thread feel free to start that thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jul 26, 2014 23:20:22 GMT
Well if they look at queuing in general, which as I said is going to involve bringing people in to create a queue, they might as well test which type of line really is more efficient. It's not like the set up would be complex or time consuming after all, all you need is a couple of poles and rope which would take all of five minutes to lay out and put up. This in itself might make the idea more tempting, as they have the option of doing an additional myth for no extra cost. As far as the show goes trying to find as many ideas that they could test using this setup, regardless of if those ideas are in regards to 'individual' choices or not. As I've noted before in relation to posting ideas, sometimes what gets tested isn't the original idea but a variation on that myth - which may be more practical or just be more visual. If you think that 'Queuing' should be a separate thread feel free to start that thread. I don't know... If they'll be testing existing forms of queues and the choises people make and should make regarding those, it fits fine with this category. On the other hand, it's a good idea in its own right, whether they'll be testing individual decisions, queue types or both, so maybe it should have its own thread. If for nothing else, then at least to make it easier for the researchers to find. |
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jul 26, 2014 23:26:45 GMT
rolling down the windows in a car - is it really the only way to get fresh air into the car? some people cannot seem to sit in a motor vehicle without rolling windows down. (and I'm not talking about Mrs TLW who turns the defog on maximum heat and then regulates the interior temperature by rolling down her window.) Clarification: is the air quality better in a car with the windows rolled down, or using the ventilation system to draw in air? I like that idea. Maybe they should try for the energy efficiency test of both ventilation, windows and AC. We all know the car uses more fuel when the AC is running, but how long would you have to run it compared to the regular ventilation/windows open to get the temperature you want and where does that leave you in terms of fuel usage? After all, open windows create drag, so which costs you more? Do the windows have to be open longer to get the desired temperature, effectively costing you more fuel than the AC, or is it the other way around? Which is the most efficient way of getting the temperature you want, both in terms of the time it takes and the energy spent? |
|
