[GSBN] Can bale buildings be air tight?

[Derek Stearns Roff]

Sorry for the typos in my previous posting.  Here is a corrected version of my text:

Swiss architect Werner Schmidt (is he on this list?) says that 90% of the air movement needed for ventilation in a standard home is to clear out the toxins released by conventional building materials and furnishings, while only 10% is related to purely people needs.  As Tony says, the architect and builders have no influence on how the occupants furnish and use the space, so indoor air quality ends up being a bit of a question mark.  I suspect that we will see more affordable measuring and monitoring of more indoor air pollutants in the coming years.

In the meantime, well-designed, intentional ventilation ought to be substantially better for the health of both the humans and the structure, compared to a similar airflow rating in a leaky house.  In other words, it's better to build to a .88 ACH50 standard, and increase ventilation airflow, than to have the same air flow poorly distributed by building mistakes.  The articles that I read suggest that bedrooms, where occupants spend a large number of hours, are often under ventilated.  Bathrooms, which need a lot of airflow, often have holes behind the tub and around the plumbing, which provide a path to move lots of moisture into the walls.

I recently read an article, that explained that the standard, UL-listed carbon monoxide detectors are designed to trigger the alarm only at CO levels significantly above the UL-recognized health-risk level of 60 parts per million.  The reason given, is that sounding the alarm at 60 ppm would cause too many "nuisance alarms".  Some health authorities assert that the chronic exposure risk action level should be 15 ppm for CO.  Standard CO meters are useless for checking these levels.

I have two parents with respiratory issues, and both live in houses with forced air, natural gas furnaces.  I had installed CO alarms for both of them, so I was very disappointed to learn that these meters don't provide the protection that I had supposed.  I recently bought a more sensitive CO meter and alarm, and I was pleased to find that both houses show a CO rating of 0 ppm.  However, so far, I have tested three friend's homes that showed CO levels over 15 ppm; two when running their "sealed" wood stoves, and one home with a gas furnace.

There are plenty of other indoor air pollutants that I would like to be able to monitor, but so far as I am aware, the cost of meters is prohibitive for an amateur like myself to purchase a wider variety of monitoring equipment.

Derek


Derek Roff
derek at unm.edu<mailto:derek at unm.edu>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sustainablesources.com/pipermail/gsbn/attachments/20130313/cd0453f9/attachment.htm>