Living with the Nest #3 - six months in

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


I’ve been using the Nest thermostat ($249) for a little over six months now. How has it been working out? Read on to find out.

The last time I wrote about the Nest was back in August 2012 - I haven’t written about it since then, because, well, I haven’t thought that much about it. This is partly by design, and partly because I am a nerd.

So what’s been going on in the last six months? Once I had it set up with what I thought would be good set points (around 78F when we’re home, which is usually only in the evenings, and at night, and 81F when we’re not home, which is usually during the day), I only had to give it a few nudges here and there. Nudging would happen usually when we had people over at the house; a lot of cooking and extra bodies tended to warm up the house.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Now that it’s winter (an exaggeration here in Austin, TX), the Nest has new set points to trigger the heater. The system is programmed to keep the house at 68F during the night and warm up to 71F at 6AM - right before we get up to get ready for work. At 9AM, the temperature is bumped down to 65F, because no one is home. There is minimal nudging because we were thoughtful about how to set the temperature.

Other than that, I don’t interact much with the Nest. I don’t wave my hand in front of it to see it light up (great party trick, by the way), or even check in using the app or website. The novelty of controlling my HVAC system via the Internet has worn off.

I think that the Nest is designed to be forgotten about. Once it learns your behavior, there is little need for you to interact with it. I like this about the Nest. When technology gets out of the way and does the heavy lifting for you - without you thinking about it - I think it’s a successful product.

But for me the Nest is overkill. My housemates and I were diligent about programming the Nest with our temperatures based on our schedules. There wasn’t much for the Nest to do because we gave it a solid foundation from the beginning. Had we not opened the app or bothered to set it at all, I might be surprised to realize that after a while, we wouldn’t be getting up to turn the knob. I'm think I would be served just as well by a wireless thermostat.

For those who have no idea what temperature to set at each hour of the day (or simply don’t care), the Nest is probably great. You can play around with it. It will learn what you like (and don’t). Programming the Nest is magnitudes simpler and more fun than a standard programmable thermostat you can pick up at Home Depot or Lowe’s. Being able to open up an app or a webpage is far easier than navigating through level after level of menus, all the while punching a one or two buttons, hoping that you did it correctly.

I still think the killer feature of the Nest is being able to see when you’re using energy to heat and cool your home, so I would recommend it on those grounds. But that information is only useful if someone does something with it.

Questions about the Nest? Shoot me an email.

David Wogan is an engineer and policy researcher who writes about energy, technology, and policy.

David's academic and professional background includes a unique blend of technology and policy in the field of energy systems. Most recently, David worked at Austin Energy, a Texas municipal utility, implementing a Department of Energy stimulus grant related to energy efficiency. Previously, David was a member of the Energy & Climate Change team at the White House Council on Environmental Quality for the Obama Administration.

David holds two Master's degrees from The University of Texas at Austin in Mechanical Engineering and Public Affairs. While at UT, David was a researcher in the Webber Energy Group, where his research focused on advanced biofuel production to offset petroleum use in the transportation sector. David holds a Bachelor's of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering from The University of Texas at Austin, where he researched nuclear non-proliferation measurement technology.

David is a 2013 Aspen Institute Journalism Scholar, joining a select group of journalists from Slate, ABC News, and The New York Times.

David lives in Austin, Texas. Follow along on Twitter or email him at david.wogan@me.com.

More by David Wogan

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe