Re: Humidifier to reduce need for Heating

Anyone else care to answer ole hardheads questions here.
I seem to have run into another psuedo-expert that cannot
do his own simple research. And yet he quotes rses etc.

Nick Pine wrote:
> 
> Addle-pated, milk-clotted pig-snorker Don Ocean  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> >> >I am kinda curious as to why a BTU or Calory factor would be added to
> >> >the disapation(sp) of humidity in the common furnace...
> >>
> >> It's just a matter of physics. I admire your curiosity.
> 
> ...and urge you to give it free rein.
> 
> >Simple Physics indicates the useage of waste energy..Therefore
> >not a taxable energy utilized for humidification.
> 
> Would you clarify this?
> 
> >Aprilaire claims that efficiency is increased...And I agree.
> 
> Would Aprilaire be a humidifier manufacturer?
> 
> >I think your hangup is on free perpetual motion machines. Surely they pay you
> >enough to comfortably heat your domocile.  As for your consumption
> >factors
> >of humidifying  a given space in the normal residence...I don't believe
> >that
> >you can accurately measure it. The factors in many situations would be
> >negligiable.
> >Therefore not problematical.
> 
> It takes about 1000 Btu to evaporate every pound of water,
> about 3 cents, at 10 cents per kilowatt-hour...
> 
> >> >> >I would guess that you are not aware of the effiency of both old and new
> >> >> >humidifier systems...
> >> >>
> >> >> You might be surprised to learn that it takes about 1000 Btu to evaporate
> >> >> a pound of water, no matter how you do it.
> >> >
> >> >Even if sucked into a vapor....or injected....Or just splashed around?
> >>
> >> Yes. You might say "efficient humidifiers" like green plants or wet clothes
> >> on an indoor clothesline use no energy to get water vapor into house air,
> >> BUT it still takes heat energy to evaporate the water. That energy has to
> >> come from somewhere, in this case the house heating system.
> >>
> >> This wouldn't be a big deal, if we only had to evaporate the water once, but
> >> houses are not airtight. As moist indoor air leaks out and dry outdoor air
> >> leaks in, we have to keep evaporating water in order to humidify house air.
> >
> >We have houses tight enough to blister the interior paint. And sick
> >house syndrome
> >has given rise to the mandatory mechanical makeup air systems in ALL new
> >homes.
> 
> Would you have any evidence to support this statement? I'm surrounded by new
> home construction in PA. I don't think any of them have "makeup air systems."
> 
> >Air exchangers are required. Ultraviolet cleansing of interior ducts is
> >required on
> >energy efficient homes here..
> 
> How do you know? Where is "here"?
> 
> >Especially berms. Black mold of the nasty
> >kind has
> >invaded ..All the way up from the southern states.
> 
> Sounds like killer bees.
> 
> >> >Some is even ultrasounded. None of the common methods really require a
> >> >lot
> >> >of caloric input to disseminate.. I don't think that a perpetual motion
> >> >machine
> >> >is required to maintain economy of heat and humidity dispersal. A
> >> >teakettle used
> >> >to work quite fine on top of a space heater. I don't think the caloric
> >> >loss was
> >> >significant.
> >>
> >> It is, if you look at the whole house.
> >>
> >> >As for tight houses...All codes require 10 percent outside
> >> >makeup air.
> 
> ...10% of what?
> 
> >This is only in the colder US climates... 20% required elsewhere.
> >
> >> You might be hard-pressed to find one.
> 
> >Everything built in the last couple of years.
> 
> I was asking about the codes you mentioned.
> 
> >Install them every day to National code!!
> 
> I was not aware that the US had a national building code.
> What is it called? Where can I buy a copy?
> 
> >Also local code...We follow
> >Minnesota, Iowa
> >Nebraska, Illinois,North Dakota, Montana, Wyoming and Wisconson..
> 
> Who are "we"?
> 
> >> >And that usually requires and air-exchanger in most American climates.
> >>
> >> I think you will find air-air heat exchangers are rarely required.
> >
> >Required by code again...
> 
> Which code? Would you please cite a paragraph number?
> 
> Nick