Can You Enjoy a Cozy Winter Without Heating (or Nearly So)?

[Un article de The Conversation écrit par
Gaëtan Brisepierre – Sociologue indépendant, École Nationale des
Ponts et Chaussées (ENPC)]

While the French have just turned the heating back on, what remains of the two years of energy sobriety that we have just experienced? Remember: in 2022, faced with the conflict in Ukraine and its repercussions on energy prices, the government itself asked businesses and citizens to limit the thermostat to 19°C.

Even if a majority of households now report heating at 19°C or less, the implementation of true thermal sobriety is still limited, or even equated with fuel poverty – which nevertheless remains a key issue and a reality experienced by more than one in five French people.

However, it is possible, under certain conditions, to spend the winter at a temperature between 14°C and 18°C ​​at home, and even turn off the heating, while feeling good.

Last winter, around fifteen families attempted the adventure of the Sober Comfort program, accompanied by an energy designer. This experiment gave rise to a sociological study which will soon be the subject of a scientific publication.

Living well at less than 19°C

None of these families, all with individual heating, are now considering returning to their old heating habits. Reductions in energy consumption, measured by households themselves, are far from being the only perceived benefit.

The participants highlighted better well-being linked to a cooler atmosphere: quality of sleep, less fatigue, reduction in winter illnesses, etc. They also valued the autonomy gained by being less dependent on heating, and thus felt better prepared for future crises.

These households having chosen to engage in a sobriety program are not necessarily “ecological extremists”. Some had already, before the experiment, increased actions to reduce their energy budget, and wanted to see if it was possible to go further without losing comfort. Others – sometimes the same ones – were on a journey of ecological transformation of their lifestyle and wanted to reduce the impact of their heating consumption.

Sober comfort: what is it?

The sobriety program tested here is a variation adapted to individuals of the “Energy Design Method”, invented by Pascal Lenormand, already tested in buildings in the tertiary sector.

The expression “sober comfort”, used to name the program, contributed to the strong interest it generated: more than 500 applications received! This oxymoron allows us to circumvent the imaginary deprivation associated with sobriety. By the end of the program, it was part of the participants' everyday language.

Concretely, households were followed for a winter, with five videoconference meetings led by Pascal Lenormand. Between each video, they were invited to experiment with new practices at home through missions much broader than the usual eco-gestures, for example, better insulating their own body by dressing differently. Several successive and progressive “training periods” encouraged them to acquire a posture of experimenters of their own comfort.

A WhatsApp group was set up by the team to allow participants to collectively take ownership of the experience. At the end of the program, the participants decided to extend it. This dynamic between peers strongly supported thermal sobriety efforts, even if the radicalism of certain participants may have marginalized others, as will be illustrated later.

And in practice?

The new practices adopted by households followed the progressive logic planned by the program. Measuring temperatures and energy consumption provided a good starting point. Often carried out with the means at hand and by the households themselves, this monitoring led them to become aware of their limiting beliefs about comfort. For example, they were able to realize that they were, in turn, comfortable at 17°C at certain times of the day, and refrigerated at 19°C at other times, depending on the time of day, their state of shape, etc.

Stopping the heating set to a default set temperature opened up new control perspectives, relying on the feeling rather than the measured temperature. In certain cases and for certain households, this could lead to a complete shutdown of heating.

This detachment from the logic of central heating took place in stages, with reversals depending on the weather, the state of health, etc. Of course, it is all the easier in well-insulated and/or sunny accommodation, which remains temperate despite the absence of heating.

The combination of different types of thermal practices as alternatives to heating made it possible to feel comfort despite a cool atmosphere, with varied configurations depending on the rooms.

The adoption of warm indoor clothing, in particular, represented a particularly effective lever, which was the subject of a search for personalization (charentaises versus crocs) by the participants according to their identity.

These thermal practices cover a vast and heterogeneous repertoire of compensation tactics: adding a rug, insulating an outlet, doing housework or exercising to temporarily increase one's metabolism, accepting a temporary feeling of cold, occasionally using fan heating rather than central heating, having a hot drink, etc.

“Cold shower challenge” and social transgression

Hot water consumption is a theme that was spontaneously addressed by some of the participants, even if the implementation of the recommended technical optimization actions (for example, lowering the temperature of the water heater) remained rare. Several of them still launched a “cold shower challenge”, which sparked a divide in the group, with some wanting to stay away from a practice considered radical.

This divide is also explained by the fact that the adoption of certain thermal sobriety practices can appear as a transgression of current social standards of comfort.

In fact, within homes, the upheaval of habits required taking into account the sensitivities of each person: following or recalcitrant spouse, rebellious or eco-friendly teenager, baby and dependent elderly person. The difficult negotiation with the most cautious involves compromises and exceptions. This pushed some participants to act without saying it, to impose or even to give up.

Despite the sobriety plan in force since 2023, some of the participants observed a phenomenon of overheating of certain premises outside their homes: homes of those around them, workplaces, businesses, and particularly health and early childhood places. They then deplored the lack of options: uncovering themselves, or discreetly turning down the heating, which was not always possible.

With their guests, on the other hand, households had thermal prescription capacity. The designer's proposal to organize an evening without heating was an opportunity to experiment with a new art of entertaining: choosing guests who are not too cold, announcing without frightening, rearranging the living room, offering accessories as some cafeterias do on the terrace (for example, throws or slippers), activities or dinners that heat up (for example, a raclette evening), etc.

The stigmatization (“crazy”, “extremist”) suffered by some of the participants from those around them sometimes led to an attitude of caution, or even a concealment of their participation in the experiment (for example, turning on the heating again when the grandparents came to the house).

On the other hand, the participants spoke more readily of their thermal experiences within the framework of what we call weak ties: professional world, extended neighborhood, associative circles, etc.

Should we review our standards of modern comfort?

In recent years, research has converged, starting with that of historians, to demonstrate that contemporary standards of comfort are relative. Multiple sociotechnical experiments underway are opening up the field of possibilities and could well contribute to a new start in this area.

Let us cite for example that of the Belgian pioneers of Slow Heat, the designer Lucile Sauzet or the architect Martin Fessard. Our experiment is part of this line and draws the contours of a new ideal type of thermal comfort, which we propose to call: sober comfort.

It constitutes an alternative to the principle of central heating – heating (often uniformly) all the rooms of a home – an essential component of modern comfort, which became popular in France during the Trente Glorieuses (1945-1975). The sober comfort project is to reconcile the achievements of modernity with the current demands of sobriety.

Until now, thermal sobriety is too often reduced to the application of a set temperature. But to talk about sober comfort is to go beyond the single thought of 19°C. Our experiment showed under what conditions households could enter into a process of in-depth review of their heating needs to achieve a form of voluntary detachment. This type of approach could serve as a basis for the implementation of a real policy of energy sobriety, voluntary rather than forced.

Indeed, the current housing energy transition strategy is still too often based on a form of technological solutionism. However, participants in the experiment on sober comfort often rejected intelligent piloting systems in favor of manual piloting.

Improving the energy performance of housing remains of course essential and can facilitate the adoption of simple comfort. But the latter questions the relevance of a global renovation model applied blindly to all housing.

Of course, this experiment remains, at this stage, a pilot only tested with around fifteen families. But the extent of the changes observed among these households and their desire to extend the experience – or even deepen it – this winter indicate that the path is interesting. The modalities of remote support (video, WhatsApp, etc.) suggest that large-scale expansion is possible, through energy suppliers for example.