[Greenbuilding] overhead cellulose dense pack?`

[Drew A. Gillett, P.E.]

on the frig you may have a point although my experience with the frig is 
that it is never big enough to take advantage of the sales.  there also is 
the issue of aspect ratio (how cubical is it or how close to matching the 
heat loss thru the various surfaces)  and the features issue (icemaker, 
double doors, cat doors, door on top etc),  but in most cases the bigger 
frig is a bargain for the user.

on the house, please read closely. i said to redesign the house (make it 
smaller footprint, but include the basement as living space.)  this will 
result in the same total space with a lower heatloss than insulating the 
ceiling of the basement of a larger house.. especially if you factor in the 
lower infiltration rate of below ground spaces.

your ultimate goal might be lowest absolute energy use, my clients typically 
want the most value for the least cost.

following your logic, don't buy foods that need refrgeration so you will use 
no energy and don't have a basement (which by the way results in my design 
given the lower floor becomes living space. )

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ted Inoue" <tedinoue at gmail.com>
To: "Greenbuilder list" <GREENBUILDING at listserv.repp.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] overhead cellulose dense pack?`


> This is mistaken logic.
> You may get more space per btu, but if you don't need the space, why 
> bother
> wasting the energy to condition it?
> The ultimate goal is to reduce absolute energy usage. To do so, you want 
> the
> smallest, most efficient structure (fridge, house, etc). If a 15 cubic ft.
> fridge serves your needs, use it instead of the 25 cu. ft. model unless 
> the
> total energy used by the 25 is less than that used by the 15, you're 
> better
> off with the 15.
> Basement is the same. If it's not a living space, let it float to ambient
> ground temperature and insulate it off from the rest of the house.
>
> On 4/5/07, Drew A. Gillett, P.E. <deaneg at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> yes you are,
>>
>> both this and corwyns previous post illustrate the problem.
>>
>> on the frig you get over 3 times the volume useful space for only twice
>> the
>> heat loss. this is the main reason why smaller frigs are less efficient
>> per
>> cubic foot and more costly to buy per cu ft.
>>
>>
>>
>> same story on the basement ceiling.  if you don't need the space, make 
>> the
>> whole house smaller, but keep the basement in the insulating envelope.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Corwyn" <corwyn at midcoast.com>
>> To: "Reuben Deumling" <9watts at gmail.com>
>> Cc: "Drew A. Gillett, P.E." <deaneg at hotmail.com>; "Greenbuilder list"
>> <GREENBUILDING at listserv.repp.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 9:21 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] overhead cellulose dense pack?`
>>
>>
>> >
>> > On Apr 04, 2007, at 16:39, Reuben Deumling wrote:
>> >>  Or am I missing something?
>> >
>> > Not that I can see.  Insulating the basement ceiling is better than
>> > insulating the basement walls and slab (even if you could get the same
>> > insulation levels at the same price and embodied energy).  If you 
>> > aren't
>> > using the space, move it outside the heating envelope.
>> >
>> > In my experience, basement ceilings are the single biggest heat loss
>> > location in reasonable homes.
>> >
>> > Thank You Kindly,
>> >
>> > Corwyn
>> >
> _______________________________________________
> Greenbuilding email list
> List info: 
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_listserv.repp.org
> List email: Greenbuilding at listserv.repp.org
> Managed by BuildingGreen, Inc. http://www.buildinggreen.com
>      publisher of Environmental Building News and GreenSpec(r)
> Hosted and archived by REPP / CREST http://www.crest.org
>