3 ms·
Accepting the marketing part, since I live in a modern home (so with a VMC, hydro-regulated etc) I feel the difference BUT I have to way to calibrate sensors at
by kkfx 4y ago
Accepting the marketing part, since I live in a modern home (so with a VMC, hydro-regulated etc) I feel the difference BUT I have to way to calibrate sensors at home. That's the point marketing fall short: a classic mercury thermometer once calibrated remain essentially calibrated for it's long service life, electronic temperature sensors not much so and I suspect CO₂ monitors do even worse...
- gruez 4y ago>and I suspect CO₂ monitors do even worse... AFAIK most non-serious co2 monitors (ie. the ones you get for the home/office) have auto-calibration. They assume that the baseline co2 concentration is 400 PPM, and they'll auto-calibrate themselves to that level based on whatever the lowest concentration they saw in the past few days. For most living spaces (eg. home/office), this works because they'll be vacated at least once every few days (more typically once daily) so you can assume whatever low you saw is the ambient level.
- kkfx 4y agoThat's a bit unreliable calibration, mean CO₂ are... mean... Witch means that might vary more than a bit from here to there... With no knowledge about how such sensors works internally, my VMC have an optional CO₂-monitoring-driver to automatically regulate the fan speed: even the vendor state it's not worth the money, it might spare few € in electricity but not more.