Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Insulation: First the body, then the home (2011)

lowtechmagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 314 posts

Re: Insulation: First the body, then the home (2011)

#131

Post by idolaspecus »

marttt wrote: post #110
gwd wrote: post #53

> Because vasoconstriction only occurs when the core body temperature falls, it won't happen if you're dressed warmly enough. While insulating your neck and feet will greatly improve your thermal comfort, there is no need to wear gloves or caps indoors. In fact, it doesn't matter very much which parts of your body you choose to insulate - the important thing is to limit total heat loss so that the body core temperatu…

Maybe this is too extreme, but starting barefoot running and/or taking cold showers will greatly increase one's cold tolerance.

I'm interested in the idea of running barefoot, could you share a reference or two?

Re: Insulation: First the body, then the home (2011)

#132

Post by jusssi »

nabla9 wrote: post #5

Study that measured cold resistance among Finnish population found out that city dwellers in the south (Helsinki) had better cold resistance than people living in the north (Lappi). People in the cities wear thin city clothes even during winters, and freeze their ass off, while people living in much colder rural regions dress sensibly and stay warm.

Also, being close to the sea, wind and humidity. Vs inland dry air and much less wind.

Even though the "feels like" algorithm must be written by a dev in California (it's +5C, brr, feels like -3C), I guess there's something to having the "feels like" temps consistently 5 to 10 degrees below the actual air temperature.

Re: Insulation: First the body, then the home (2011)

#133

Post by wolverine876 »

com2kid wrote: post #117
wolverine876 wrote: post #102

I expect people on HN to have already figured out the obvious: It takes much less energy to heat the area under your clothes, using existing heat, than to heat a room or building with artificially generated heat. Your body is 37 deg C. Wearing low-insulation clothing and letting that heat float away, and then heating the entire room or building to warm you up again, is absurd if you understand basic physics and think…

None of this keeps my hands warm. Or makes me feel comfortable. After growing up in a house with no insulation and being miserable all winter long, now for an extra ~$50 a month during the winter I get to keep my house at a nice toasty 74-76 degrees F and I'm comfortable year round.

> None of this keeps my hands warm.

> Or makes me feel comfortable.

I wrote, 'Keep the thermostat at the lowest comfortable temperature', not an uncomfortable one. Don't lump me in with strawpeople who tell you to be uncomfortable.

> for an extra ~$50 a month during the winter I get to keep my house at a nice toasty 74-76 degrees F

I agree that you can do what you want with your $50. But there are other costs too: Our choices creates climate change for others.

Re: Insulation: First the body, then the home (2011)

#134

Post by secabeen »

wolverine876 wrote: post #102

I expect people on HN to have already figured out the obvious: It takes much less energy to heat the area under your clothes, using existing heat, than to heat a room or building with artificially generated heat. Your body is 37 deg C. Wearing low-insulation clothing and letting that heat float away, and then heating the entire room or building to warm you up again, is absurd if you understand basic physics and think…

As I get older, I'm finding my extremities are not maintaining circulation/warmth. While I can wear socks no problem, I don't really want to wear gloves indoors. Heating the house more makes it feel cozy and nice, so I can see why some people would make that choice.

Re: Insulation: First the body, then the home (2011)

#135

Post by odiroot »

afterwalk wrote: post #4
xcambar wrote: post #3

After 5 winters of Berlin, I have decided to treat myself proper heat tech clothing. The difference in comfort is such that I barely feel any kind of fatigue or depression that the cold temperatures used to put on me. It has changed my perception of winter and I couldn't have spent my money any better. This is a costly investment though, be warned. For the curious, the keyword that started it all: "layered clothing"…

Any specific suggestions on brand/tech/material?

I usually wear Uniqlo heattech sweater and when it gets very cold, Uniqlo heattech undershirts.

I don't like puffy winter jackets so I wear a long wool coat instead.

Re: Insulation: First the body, then the home (2011)

#136

Post by comeonseriously »

We keep our home thermostat, in the winter, set to 66. 1) It's FL, so we may hit that once per year. Our home almost never gets below 68 and it takes a few days of cold wx to get there. 2) We are perfectly fine with layering because the day, and thus our home, will warm up.

Re: Insulation: First the body, then the home (2011)

#137

Post by wolverine876 »

Kluny wrote: post #114
wolverine876 wrote: post #102

I expect people on HN to have already figured out the obvious: It takes much less energy to heat the area under your clothes, using existing heat, than to heat a room or building with artificially generated heat. Your body is 37 deg C. Wearing low-insulation clothing and letting that heat float away, and then heating the entire room or building to warm you up again, is absurd if you understand basic physics and think…

> Maybe go a step further and wear long underwear and maybe even a hat; why not? Some reasons why not: you may live with other people who have different basal temperatures from yours, aren't comfortable at 16 degrees or whatever you settle on, and didn't consent to participating in your wacky experiment; other people may come over to visit your house without realizing in advance that they need to wear long underwear;…

> Some reasons why not:

> you may live with other people who have different basal temperatures from yours, aren't comfortable at 16 degrees or whatever you settle on, and didn't consent to participating in your wacky experiment;

> other people may come over to visit your house without realizing in advance that they need to wear long underwear;

C'mon. We can't figure out the solutions to these problems, in a moment? :) If you can't, I'm not hiring you to wash dishes. (I.e., I believe you can.)

Edit: I think there's an assumption that this is some dogmatic straw-argument. It's not; it's practical. The argument is: Be practical.

Re: Insulation: First the body, then the home (2011)

#138

Post by gwd »

marttt wrote: post #110
gwd wrote: post #53

> Because vasoconstriction only occurs when the core body temperature falls, it won't happen if you're dressed warmly enough. While insulating your neck and feet will greatly improve your thermal comfort, there is no need to wear gloves or caps indoors. In fact, it doesn't matter very much which parts of your body you choose to insulate - the important thing is to limit total heat loss so that the body core temperatu…

Maybe this is too extreme, but starting barefoot running and/or taking cold showers will greatly increase one's cold tolerance.

Honestly, I think that's part of the cause of my problem. For 9 years I spent one weekend outside every month, summer or winter, rain or shine. (Military reserves.) My feet spent a lot of time hovering just above frostbite level. I think the speed with which my body cuts circulation to my feet is probably a learned adaptation from that time period.

Re: Insulation: First the body, then the home (2011)

#139

Post by chrisseaton »

danans wrote: post #97

Being able to be comfortable in our homes while being minimally clothed in the winter is one of those "luxuries" of the fossil fuel age that we take for granted. The constellation of technologies needed to achieve this efficiently (with far less fossil fuels) and healthily (with healthy internal air quality) exists: heat pumps, heat-recovery-ventilators, airtight but vapor permeable house sealing materials - the stan…

> Being able to be comfortable in our homes while being minimally clothed in the winter is one of those "luxuries" of the fossil fuel age that we take for granted.

Did you know that the Romans had under-floor heating.

Re: Insulation: First the body, then the home (2011)

#140

Post by germinalphrase »

gwd wrote: post #53

> Because vasoconstriction only occurs when the core body temperature falls, it won't happen if you're dressed warmly enough. While insulating your neck and feet will greatly improve your thermal comfort, there is no need to wear gloves or caps indoors. In fact, it doesn't matter very much which parts of your body you choose to insulate - the important thing is to limit total heat loss so that the body core temperatu…

I’m sure you’re already aware - but be mindful of what’s under your feet. A folded blanket can do wonders to insulate your feet from the floor.
Post reply on HN