Alex, if it turns out like that, thank God we built our house when we did. Living in a plastic bag with styrofoam insulation—terrible. The windows are probably screwed shut, and if the mechanical ventilation system fails, you suffocate. Your eyes constantly itch and everyone gets asthma because of the dry air.
No way. The EU? Seriously? Poland, Greece, and Slovakia are going along with this nonsense? I just can’t believe it. Karsten
No way. The EU? Seriously? Poland, Greece, and Slovakia are going along with this nonsense? I just can’t believe it. Karsten
...yes, back again. And good for you if you decide to treat yourself to it once in a while.
As for us—here I can really say "we"—we didn’t want it. I didn’t because of asthma. Neither of us wanted it because we like to have windows open. (That would be completely counterproductive for a passive house.) And because neither of us wanted a mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery. Plus, with the savings from that, we can heat well and for a long time, since a typical standard suburban house like ours doesn’t consume that much energy anyway. And then... we’re dead. Karsten
As for us—here I can really say "we"—we didn’t want it. I didn’t because of asthma. Neither of us wanted it because we like to have windows open. (That would be completely counterproductive for a passive house.) And because neither of us wanted a mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery. Plus, with the savings from that, we can heat well and for a long time, since a typical standard suburban house like ours doesn’t consume that much energy anyway. And then... we’re dead. Karsten
Regarding my two physics arguments here.
What I mean by balance is this: Think in terms of compensation. Burn 100 liters (approximately 26 gallons) of oil. You would then have to compensate with 100 liters of oil. Impossible. That’s inconvenient. Now burn 10 cubic meters (about 353 cubic feet) of pine wood. You must compensate with the same volume of pine wood. Ah, that’s possible. Planting trees is feasible. Clear? Or is this too simple for both of you?
What I mean by balance is this: Think in terms of compensation. Burn 100 liters (approximately 26 gallons) of oil. You would then have to compensate with 100 liters of oil. Impossible. That’s inconvenient. Now burn 10 cubic meters (about 353 cubic feet) of pine wood. You must compensate with the same volume of pine wood. Ah, that’s possible. Planting trees is feasible. Clear? Or is this too simple for both of you?
Nordlys schrieb:
Or too easy for both of you? I think so. You’ve ignored the time factor again. Burning a tree and growing a tree is a time difference of 1 hour to 80 years. That won’t work in the long run.
C
chand198631 Jan 2018 13:32Nordlys schrieb:
Or is that too easy for both of you?No. Everyone can do it at their own pace. But not all at the same time. Then it won’t work. That was my point.
The reason is the time gap: what burns in 30 minutes takes 30 years to be absorbed again. It only balances out if not too many burn simultaneously, otherwise all the planting comes too late.
Nordlys schrieb:
You would now have to compensate 100 liters of oil. That’s not possible.It is possible. Plant a tree and wait 100 million years. Done. Explain why growing a tree over 100 years is okay, but turning a tree into oil over 100 million years is not! So you do have the time factor in mind after all?
kaho674 schrieb:
I believe so. You are ignoring the time factor again. Burning a tree and growing a tree is a time difference of 1 hour versus 80 years. In the long run, that doesn’t work. But my planted pine tree doesn’t start absorbing CO2 only after 80 years; it actually starts doing so from day one, as long as it doesn’t die on me. Right?C
chand198631 Jan 2018 13:42Karsten, you have taken out a CO2 credit if you offset every meter of burned wood by planting trees. The CO2 is only "paid back" when the tree has grown to nearly the size of the wood that was burned. This takes decades. The repayment starts from the germination of the seed, correct.
But for the climate issue, time matters. Repaying too slowly is not ideal from that perspective.
But for the climate issue, time matters. Repaying too slowly is not ideal from that perspective.