Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Daniel Scharf's avatar

The most important measure is to work towards the space and fabric being heated and insulated, and the household equipment are meeting genuine housing needs. While over 50% of these resources are underutilised (ie due to under-occupation) the wasted space/fabric/equipment will be duplicated through new building emitting intolerable levels of upfront/embodied carbon. Balancing the size of dwellings and households is the classic win/win.

Expand full comment
Stephen  Sheehy's avatar

I definitely agree that the initial focus should be on recognizing what the efficiency issues are. And airtightness should come next. Most US codes now require a new house to be tight enough (3 air changes per hour at 50 Pascal of pressure, roughly equivalent to a 20 mph/30 kph wind, usually stated as 3ach50) to require mechanical ventilation. But most older house are not going to achieve that level of airtightness without a total gut rehab. So mechanical ventilation is not necessary in most existing houses. But going from 12ach50 (not at all uncommon) to 6ach50 will make a huge difference.

Use a blower door test with a thermal imaging camera to help figure where the leaks are.

Expand full comment
13 more comments...

No posts