4 ms·

I'm German and this was drilled into my head since I was a child. My dad insisted on doing this. Every landlord I had so far required doing this to avoid mold.

I'm German and this was drilled into my head since I was a child. My dad insisted on doing this. Every landlord I had so far required doing this to avoid mold. I do it before I go to sleep, because some fresher/cooler air also helps me sleep better. It is also done in offices and schools.

ano-ther 3y ago
Seems to be the best way to get rid of stale air (while conserving energy) in a country that prides itself of its tightly sealed windows. > Asked by the tabloid BILD-Zeitung what feelings Germany awakes in her, Angela Merkel once famously replied, 'I think of well-sealed windows! No other country can make such well-sealed and nice windows [dichte und schöne Fenster].' https://nybooks.com/articles/2013/08/15/new-german-question/ https://nybooks.com/articles/2013/08/15/new-german-question/
- konschubert 3y ago
  No. The best way is ventilation through heat exchangers.
  - sjfjsjdjwvwvc 3y ago
    Wrong. The best way is the method described in the OP post.
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      Why do you think that? If you ventilate through a heat exchanger when inside and outside are different temperatures, you can have more fresh air more of the time while saving energy.
      - bgnn 3y ago
        energy consumption wise, yes, I guess. though mechanical ventilation requires electricity to be used, so it costs energy too. the heat exchangers are max 90% efficient as far as I know from my own research on what's available on a reasonable budget and size. there are some potential issues if outside temp is higher and it's humid tough. these systems can cause mold.
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        > there are some potential issues if outside temp is higher and it's humid tough. these systems can cause mold. Moreso than the shock ventilation method? If there's worrying amounts of moisture, we could go ahead and say we'll do the same amount of air with the heat exchanger. Is that worse for mold potential than the alternative?
        konschubert 3y ago
        Have you done the math on how much energy the ventilators use, vs how much energy the heat exchangers recoup? Because without doing the math on that, such a statement is absolute pointless. I wouldn’t be surprised if the heat exchangers save 1000x the energy that they consume.
        jeffreygoesto 3y ago
        Did you do the math for that number though?
        konschubert 3y ago
        In my head, roughly, yes. How much money do you spend on powering the vent in your laptop vs how much money do you spend on heating? But the burden of proof is on the one that’s making the extraordinary claim.
- throwaway8877 3y ago
  In comparison to what and how? It really doesn't matter how fast you replace the air. If you let in the cold air then you need to warm it up. What you actually do is a compromise between energy conservation and properly ventilated room as for the morning the room will be filled with high concentration of CO2 and humidity (from your breathing and sweating) and you more than often end up with bad sleep and headache. Constant proper mechanical ventilation is the key for better sleep and health when windows are goods as German windows (some other European countries make good windows too).
  - _Microft 3y ago
    > It really doesn't matter how fast you replace the air. If you let in the cold air then you need to warm it up. Ventilating quickly is preferable to ventilating slowly. Heat transfer through materials is comparatively slow. That means that exchanging the air in an instant retains the heat in the walls, furniture,… exchanging the air slowly allows heat from materials to „leak out“ as well.
fch42 3y ago
It was one of the most stunning finds for me when I moved to England to discover that my tenancy agreement, and later my flat's lease, stipulated to dry my clothing inside. Because using the garden or balcony is "unsightly". To this day it amazes me how one can, at the same time, complain about mould in the flat while refusing to air it. And yet this is a totally common attitude around here ...

ano-ther 3y ago

Seems to be the best way to get rid of stale air (while conserving energy) in a country that prides itself of its tightly sealed windows. > Asked by the tabloid BILD-Zeitung what feelings Germany awakes in her, Angela Merkel once famously replied, 'I think of well-sealed windows! No other country can make such well-sealed and nice windows [dichte und schöne Fenster].' https://nybooks.com/articles/2013/08/15/new-german-question/ https://nybooks.com/articles/2013/08/15/new-german-question/

konschubert 3y ago
No. The best way is ventilation through heat exchangers.
- sjfjsjdjwvwvc 3y ago
  Wrong. The best way is the method described in the OP post.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    Why do you think that? If you ventilate through a heat exchanger when inside and outside are different temperatures, you can have more fresh air more of the time while saving energy.
    - bgnn 3y ago
      energy consumption wise, yes, I guess. though mechanical ventilation requires electricity to be used, so it costs energy too. the heat exchangers are max 90% efficient as far as I know from my own research on what's available on a reasonable budget and size. there are some potential issues if outside temp is higher and it's humid tough. these systems can cause mold.
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
        > there are some potential issues if outside temp is higher and it's humid tough. these systems can cause mold. Moreso than the shock ventilation method? If there's worrying amounts of moisture, we could go ahead and say we'll do the same amount of air with the heat exchanger. Is that worse for mold potential than the alternative?
      - konschubert 3y ago
        Have you done the math on how much energy the ventilators use, vs how much energy the heat exchangers recoup? Because without doing the math on that, such a statement is absolute pointless. I wouldn’t be surprised if the heat exchangers save 1000x the energy that they consume.
        jeffreygoesto 3y ago
        Did you do the math for that number though?
        konschubert 3y ago
        In my head, roughly, yes. How much money do you spend on powering the vent in your laptop vs how much money do you spend on heating? But the burden of proof is on the one that’s making the extraordinary claim.
throwaway8877 3y ago
In comparison to what and how? It really doesn't matter how fast you replace the air. If you let in the cold air then you need to warm it up. What you actually do is a compromise between energy conservation and properly ventilated room as for the morning the room will be filled with high concentration of CO2 and humidity (from your breathing and sweating) and you more than often end up with bad sleep and headache. Constant proper mechanical ventilation is the key for better sleep and health when windows are goods as German windows (some other European countries make good windows too).
- _Microft 3y ago
  > It really doesn't matter how fast you replace the air. If you let in the cold air then you need to warm it up. Ventilating quickly is preferable to ventilating slowly. Heat transfer through materials is comparatively slow. That means that exchanging the air in an instant retains the heat in the walls, furniture,… exchanging the air slowly allows heat from materials to „leak out“ as well.

fch42 3y ago

It was one of the most stunning finds for me when I moved to England to discover that my tenancy agreement, and later my flat's lease, stipulated to dry my clothing inside. Because using the garden or balcony is "unsightly". To this day it amazes me how one can, at the same time, complain about mould in the flat while refusing to air it. And yet this is a totally common attitude around here ...