4 ms·
Reminds me of a surprising armchair heat macguyvering idea I've had: if for some reason you are stuck with resistive heating, you could use an old fridge as you
by usrusr 4y ago
Reminds me of a surprising armchair heat macguyvering idea I've had: if for some reason you are stuck with resistive heating, you could use an old fridge as your resistive converter, with the cold end inside (cold end outside would be an actual heat pump, but probably not a good one and very limited in placement, likely losing more to the insulation downgrade from the placement): open the door just enough to get the inside walls below condensation of your current humidity level, collect the condensed water in a way that it doesn't just evaporate again but can be carried to the sink.
Why? Slightly less air replacement required to fend off mold, slightly more heat created, because the condensation is the inverse of evaporative cooling. Haven't done the math but I think it's safe to assume that the benefits would be tiny, but if, for some reason, you were limited to resistive heating, doing it this way would be slight
ly less bad.
- Gare 4y agoMy humidifier uses about 3 liters of water per day for 40m2 apartment during winter, to keep the humidity at acceptable 40%. Otherwise it's extremely dry inside.
- fsh 4y agoThat's just a very ineffective dehumidifier.
- sgc 4y agoExcept you usually have a very dry environment when heating due to the lack of moisture in the colder environmental air, and need to add moisture to avoid falling out of healthy humidity levels for human beings.
- usrusr 4y agoDry air is less unhealthy than moldy air.
- sgc 4y agoWe are talking about large amounts of moisture that need to be added to the air when heating. There is 0 risk of mold in that situation. Ideal humidity: General recommended range: 40-60%; ideal/goldilocks humidity, 50%; mold conducive conditions: 60%+; air when heating: often ~30%.
- usrusr 4y agoPerhaps if the house leaks air like a sieve and you just compensate by more heating watts (or if you use some fancy heat recovery ventilation), but in a properly closed shell, with considerable cold outside, your primary problem is getting rid of all the humidity human life produces without the water condensing on whatever surface is coldest. I suspect that we are talking about very different environments.
- sgc 4y agoIf you have a house that tight, you need to compensate by a certain number of minimum forced air changes per hour, on top proper ventilation in your bathrooms and kitchen. In fact, modern building code in the US, and likely throughout most developed countries, requires a tighter envelope than the minimum number of air changes per hour, thus requiring, intrinsically, that all houses have ERVs or HRVs. This is all a solved problem, and you are never going to need to dehumidify during the heating season if you are respecting the principles of building science. It is possible to build "too tight" by neglecting basic ventilation principles, but that is not what I would call "properly closed".
- usrusr 4y agoProperly built modern houses would certainly not be the realm of slightly less bad resistive heating improvisations. But here in Germany we have plenty of old stock modernised to the point where is sufficiently air tight for insufficient ventilation to become an issue (and often it does!), but not to the point of active ventilation. Moisture buildup is a major concern, particularly at times of heating scarcity (which is when improvisations become more likely) As I said, different environments.