[Strawbale] [SB-r-us] Re: Forced air

[Mark BP / Low Energy Design Ltd]

Robert Tom wrote:

>I must confess that I've not taken the time to download the Brit  
>regulations simply because
>I can already guess what Brit "ventilation" (such as is) standards are...  
>that is, where a ventilation scheme exists, it's probably some variation  
>of a primitive, exhaust-only, passive inlet ventilation system (EOPIVS)  
>... hit or miss at best and for the most part, unworkable in Canadian  
>conditions.
>

Rob -

That is indeed the most-used of the 4 options described in the regs.  
It's simple to install, it's cheap, it works well for the vast majority 
of British housing designs, it does so with a minimal energy cost, and 
it creates a noise nuisance for only a few short periods per day.

Whether it would be workable for a house with a water-based heat 
distribution system "in Canadian conditions" depends on whether the 
limiting factor for ventilation requirement in the dwelling concerned is 
relative humidity or airborne toxin concentration.  It depends on the 
house plan.  It depends on the location - Iqaluit is very different from 
Vancouver, and both are very different from Ottawa.  And it depends what 
you are trying to achieve.

And for the last reason, it is not something that I personally am ever 
likely in the future to make use of either in Canada or in Britain - 
because the sort of energy standards I want to work to would require an 
HRV in either climate.

But people working to less exacting standards - including a lot of sb 
selfbuilders - could find this simple technology (together with the 
guidelines necessary to make it work properly) useful _even_ sometimes 
in "Canadian conditions".  I'd like all those people to shift to the 
sort of energy standards that you or I might favour, Rob, but not all of 
them will, for a variety of reasons.

Mark