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

Heat people, not spaces (2015)

solar.lowtechmagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 335 posts

Re: Heat people, not spaces (2015)

#201

Post by wolverine876 »

warner25 wrote: post #158
jerojero wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but is that sort of discomfort worth the energy usage of heating the entire room? An alternative is also, as it is mentioned in the article, to warm certain spots in a room instead of the whole of it.

I tend to be cheap, not even just frugal, but it's worth it to me. During my first winter in my own place, I set the thermostat to the low 60s F to save money. After about two weeks I concluded that feeling perpetually uncomfortable in my own place wasn't worth whatever money I was saving. It felt like trying not to drink water when thirsty to save money. Warmth is just such a basic human need. Better to save in a nu…

OK, try 65. IME, most people can turn down the thermostat and still be perfectly comfortable; just find the approximate minimum you need for comfort.

Re: Heat people, not spaces (2015)

#202

Post by chewz »

jaynetics wrote: post #190
screamingpots wrote: post #181

I'm in UK (south east). I work in tech, working from home. I very rarely put the heating on. The best part of not putting the heating on is that I've had my garden doors open almost every day through the winter. I mostly work at my laptop, just inside sitting on a comfy sofa, right next to the outdoors. In December I was mostly opening the doors about midday just for the afternoon, but since mid to late January I'm b…

I stopped heating out of necessity when I was a poor student and made the same discovery. It's funny how when you go outdoors with other people they are freezing and you feel super comfy. I seriously think that about 3/4 of Europeans could get by without any heating for about 3/4 of winter time. Well, as long as the gulf stream holds up anyways.

> I seriously think that about 3/4 of Europeans could get by without any heating for about 3/4 of winter time.

The temperatures in UK are stable during the day due to sea climate. In Central Europe we get +/- 10 degrees during the day. This is completely different story from temperature comfort/security perspective. That's why we overinsulate and overheat our houses and why we tend to have higher temperatures inside then Brits.

My Italian friend laughed that he immediately recognized Poles in Italy because in August they had blanklets and sweaters at hand. We just always expect temperatures to drop suddenly by 10 degrees.

Even on British Airways planes temperatures are lower then on other airlines...

Re: Heat people, not spaces (2015)

#203

Post by tenuousemphasis »

gkop wrote: post #140
kccqzy wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly the problem with newer design and construction philosophy. Its premise is that we will use mechanical systems, and then try to make these mechanical systems more efficient such as improving insulation, using multi-stage condensers for the AC, etc. This is epitomized in the passive house concept. In contrast the older philosophy is that natural ventilation is good enough, so we design houses to improve…

My personal preference is deeply in the natural ventilation camp, and the typically delicious air we have in the Bay Area is a boon to my wellness. I leave the windows mostly open 24/7 three seasons, and in the winter I partially open them during significant portions of the day. It’s wonderful. But during the worsening wildfires seasons, I must tightly seal and air purify my apartment for weeks straight, and had to b…

I think a passive house design would be excellent for you.

Highly insulated, air tight (but vapor permeable) building envelope. Constant intake of fresh air to bedrooms living rooms, filtered and passed through a heat exchanger to heat or cool it with air exhausted from kitchen and bathrooms.

They generally cost about ~25% more than a standard code-built house (unless you want a lot of windows), but cost much less to heat and cool. They're also more comfortable and have less pollen, dust, and even insects.

Re: Heat people, not spaces (2015)

#204

Post by wolverine876 »

oxplot wrote: post #127

Heat properly insulated spaces. I don’t want to walk around with piles of movement limiting and suffocating clothing inside my own living room. The problem is not what you heat up, it’s how well you insulate it from losing its heat. In Australia where I live, insulation is non-existent in the average home/apartment. Even simple things like tinted windows (for hot days), double pane windows and floating floor is missi…

> I don’t want to walk around with piles of movement limiting and suffocating clothing inside my own living room.

That is a strawperson - People wear a sweater all the time - they are pretty popular, believe it or not - without wearing "piles", having their movement limited, or even suffocating. If you find yourself suffocating when wearing sweaters, see a doctor!

Holy cow, the burden of wearing a sweater is just incredible in some of these comments!

Re: Heat people, not spaces (2015)

#205

Post by wolverine876 »

Normal_gaussian wrote: post #197
wolverine876 wrote: post #187

At night, the heat is off. Just a warm comforter is plenty in almost any weather, and the cool air feels great. In fact, I always try to position the head of my bed near a window and even in cold weather, at least crack open the window - breathing fresh air all night feels great . For anyone who has gone camping, they know that a warm enough sleeping bag is fine, no problem at all, and again, the fresh air is a wonde…

As a counterpoint - camping is famously hated by a significant portion of the population.

> camping is famously hated by a significant portion of the population

Not very famously, because I haven't heard that. Some people don't like it, I have no doubt. No matter what is suggested, nay-sayers can point to some people not liking it; what does it mean? And the people who don't like camping likely object to other aspects of it - just random chance among many aspects, and many much more burdensome such as carrying all your stuff, the food, less personal sanitation, no TV, no sushi or pizza delivery, etc. etc. I don't recall hearing anyone in my life object to fresh air, but I'm sure someone does!

Re: Heat people, not spaces (2015)

#206

Post by wolverine876 »

opensores wrote: post #112

In the US wood construction is the norm for residential buildings. These cannot go below a certain temperature, not much below 60F, otherwise dry rot will slowly but permanently damage these buildings in most places (depends on humidity). I suppose if you drop the humidity below a certain point you might get by with pretty low temperatures.

> These cannot go below a certain temperature, not much below 60F, otherwise dry rot will slowly but permanently damage these buildings

Wouldn't the most exterior pieces drop below 60 deg in the winter? Plenty of homes have wood that is actually on the outside of the house all winter.

Re: Heat people, not spaces (2015)

#207

Post by wolverine876 »

Ekaros wrote: post #10

I much prefer having the whole house heated. I have read about Japanese using this concept and it always sounds horrible. I don't think it is even too horrible as long as there is proper insulation in place and technology used makes sense.

Have you tried it? There is no risk to doing it for a day.

Re: Heat people, not spaces (2015)

#208

Post by wolverine876 »

lucidguppy wrote: post #42
sfe22 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cant you keep the space above freezing? Just not as warm as people would prefer

The temperature of the house is not uniform - areas are colder than others. But when you heat up to 68F - then the really cold areas of the house stay (usually) above freezing. If you let the house drop to 60-55 F - there's no guarantee that the colder parts of your walls and pipes freeze.

Maybe in your house, but the temperature here drops into the 50s at night (or when we're on vacation) regularly in the winter, and zero issues or signs of anything freezing. When we're not using it, we set the thermostat at 10C / 50F.

> If you let the house drop to 60-55 F - there's no guarantee that the colder parts of your walls and pipes freeze.

That sounds like pretty high variation? ~25-30 deg F?

Re: Heat people, not spaces (2015)

#210

Post by wolverine876 »

Normal_gaussian wrote: post #194
wolverine876 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An issue with keeping yourself warm with clothing is some hotspots get too warm, and others too cold. Like the armpits usually get too warm, but your exposed hands too cold. We can sit and imagine problems with every course of action, and never step forward. In my life, I've never had the quoted problem and I've never heard anyone else say it's a problem. On my list of things to worry about, this ranks near the bot…

> In my life, [...] I've never heard anyone else say it's a problem. [...] yet somehow we all do fine. I expect our bodies adjust fine to such variations. Take the commentor you replied to and myself as people with this problem. Its not for not trying - growing up counting pennies, not in poverty but money was tight, lead to a layers based heating mentality. One of the greatest benefits of the extra wealth afforded t…

2 = 0 for these purposes.
Post reply on HN