SteamyTea

For a laugh, and to possibly finish this off, I did a small model of my house today. Knowing the size of it, how much energy I use, the temperature differences, and importantly, the distribution of those temperature differences, and the mass of my storage heater, I can get a good match. I also took into account air changes per hour, which is an untested unknown, so I assumed 1 ACH. The really interesting thing is that the net heating load on the house is 60 times larger than the air heating load. So it costs a lot to heat up a slab and keep it stable. The other interesting thing (well to me) is that the cooling load would be about half the heating load (not that I cool, I just open a window). So I am quite happy considering that my house is 32 years old, is nothing special, is in a warmer than average part of the country, and is timber framed.

I think so, the soap is still on the rims, and I did not need the wheel changed.

86 quid this year. They will last 25,000 miles whether they like it or not.

I need two new tyres, last year they were 88 quid, fitted, that is for two of them. Shall see what they want this year. Got a bent rim, so may need a new wheel.

Does your roof have a shading issue?

You can't, only because I say you can't. So you are wrong.

So they took a different view on the PassivHaus standard. Can start to see where it all went wrong.

That's OK, going to be up your way next month, so shall come and take my share of it.

I am paying for that. Sorry, could not resist.

feet What it is called is irrelevant. So shall call it 1.8288 metres

Scout around to find the best prices of either a complete kit, or individual parts, then ask your builder/plumber/electrician how much to fit. There is scope to save on roofing, they don't have to be bolted on top on a frame, they can be integrated. When I was working for a PV company, out two biggest expenses where sales commission and scaffolding. You don't need one of them and the other you will have on site.

Is that because you got estimates for retrofitting, rather than fitting during the build?

I am not going to get too deep into this, but when I went to Jeremy's house while he was building it, the one thing that amazed me, more than anything else, is that it was very quiet. It had none of that echo that half finished houses have. If internal walls were constructed similar to the external ones, then sound transmission may not be a problem. Worth investigating I think.

Isn't that 6 foot

One way to put a number, but it would be unitless, is to assume a house that changes temperature in step with any energy input, is given the number 1. A house that does not change temperature, no matter what energy input is given to it, is given the number 0. We could, for a laugh, call 1 Annabelle and 0 Barbara, we we dislike numbers. Though it would make subdivisions a bit tricky i.e. a Barbara Barbara Annabelle, or Annabelle Barbara Annabelle. This would still require some testing and a lot of data collection. And then another unitless number to adjust for location, orientation, size, shape etc. Or we can just use the existing Thermal Inertia formula. That can give us a number of answers regardless of which parts are missing, it is what simultaneous equations are for. I don't know why it is not used, probably ignorance.

I never wear any, the reduced mass of water that is saved by not cleaning them is, just one, of my contributions to the world.

FFS, go back and look at the figures I posted up, if they are calculated correctly, there is little difference. If just brick or concrete were the answer, why do you need to add insulation? I can answer that, but I want you to, then you might start to realise that the mass is not the be all, and end all, of thermal stability.

Was it always cold. Just teasing, I don't give two hoots really. But just for a giggle, did it have a low glass to wall ratio?

Not in your world, it is thermal conductivity that adds the time in. It is all in the units, ignore them at your peril.

But that is exactly what people think it does do, why this whole conversation started. People thinking that mass adds to thermal stability.

That is speed isn't it.

Mass is just the count of 'stuff' in an object. So no way am I saying that mass does not exist. This is getting absurd, but I am going out as it is sunny. Next time you are in a meeting and someone mentions the benefits of thermal mass, you will remember all this, and then question if what they are saying makes sense.

I don't think that you understand that you have to include all elements to have something useful, you can't pick and choose just one or two.

So what are you defining then, seems to be just mass, as without time, you cannot have any change.

But totally missunderstood because people think it is the mass that is the key element. That is like saying my Ford C-Max is more stable than a Ford Focus because it is heavier. Total nonsense. Been answered. That is because you don't understand it too. Sorry if that sounds personal, but no other way to say it.