4 ms·
I've geeked out on thermal mass as much as the next guy, but I don't think it's a good solution at scale. Adding thermal mass is expensive, both due to the mate
by jonstewart 2y ago
I've geeked out on thermal mass as much as the next guy, but I don't think it's a good solution at scale. Adding thermal mass is expensive, both due to the materials cost and that it's a niche building technique. Insulation, heat pumps, and solar all benefit from mass production and technology improvements. Combine them with light-colored roofs and solar panels, and that can probably beat thermal mass construction.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y agoThe material costs for adobe are almost certainly close to zero if you live in an area that can benefit from using it. The labor costs for adobe have become very high, mostly it seems because the descendants of the families that started the amazing adobe brick "factories" no longer want to be dirt farmers. > can probably beat thermal mass construction. You have to define what "beat" means. My hundred year old adobe did not rise above 81F as an interior temperature this summer, despite outside highs around 100F. That would be possible (or even lower!) with the technologies you mentioned, but my adobe house did that with no energy utilization at all.
- NegativeLatency 2y agoCould do both though, it’s not an either-or situation.
- WalterBright 2y agoThermal mass is also known as "dirt" or "rocks", and is not expensive.
- jonstewart 2y agoConcrete is often used for thermal mass, too, and that is expensive.
- WalterBright 2y agoRocks and dirt have been used forever - adobe! Another option is water. Water is cheap, and you can pile up gallon jugs of it. Or use your pond/swimming pool. Geothermal HVAC makes use of the thermal mass of rocks and dirt, too.
- asdfman123 2y agoOlder technology is often neat in a lot of ways and has certain benefits, but there's a reason why we moved on.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- rootusrootus 2y agoSometimes I wonder how many people who espouse old building technology have actually spent a lot of time living in an old house. Everything has advantages and disadvantages, and living in an old house growing up ... well, lets just say I prefer my modern house of today.
- bumby 2y agoThe old-tech can also be less compatible with new tech. If you live in an adobe house the high thermal mass can also block WiFi.
- kjs3 2y agoDo you want to be comfortable for reasonable AC cost or watch cat videos in HD instead of SD. Decisions, decisions.
- bumby 2y agoAnd heaven forbid you try to use WiFi-enabled doorbells or AC controllers.
- kjs3 2y agoHeaven forbid I know how to extend WiFi ranges or otherwise accommodate outliers. If only such technology existed. But sure, getting off my ass to change the temp or see who is at the door is basically an unthinkable inconvenience in these modern times.
- bumby 2y agoI thought this exchange was in good nature but the tone seems to point to something else. Have you ever lived in an adobe home? They can create a unique set of issues more modern methods don’t need to deal with. Yes, most problems have engineering solutions. It all comes down to whether the juice is worth the squeeze. FWIW I’m generally in favor of the increased reliability of low tech, but also acknowledge I’m in the minority.
- kjs3 2y agoSorry if you took that personally. Living in a mud hut where it rains 120 days a year doesn't sound like the solution. Bricks work better.