Hello everyone,
I have an additional bedroom in the basement that is used quite often.
The builder installed exhaust air ventilation there, and in the adjacent storage room, they installed supply air.
1. He says this cannot be reversed anymore (the construction is almost finished).
2. He also says it is not a problem that the two rooms have been switched.
Are both of these statements correct? I would appreciate a prompt response, as I have a meeting with him early tomorrow morning.
Thank you very much for your help.
wangry
I have an additional bedroom in the basement that is used quite often.
The builder installed exhaust air ventilation there, and in the adjacent storage room, they installed supply air.
1. He says this cannot be reversed anymore (the construction is almost finished).
2. He also says it is not a problem that the two rooms have been switched.
Are both of these statements correct? I would appreciate a prompt response, as I have a meeting with him early tomorrow morning.
Thank you very much for your help.
wangry
I don’t get it either. It could simply be that the client wanted it exactly that way. It’s not necessarily the case that things on the construction site get changed last minute and then no longer match the building plan...
The overall airflow volume for the house is hardly going to have a fundamentally different heat recovery potential due to the change (storage room!), and thus it’s unlikely to affect the eligibility for incentives. A mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery remains a mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery.
The overall airflow volume for the house is hardly going to have a fundamentally different heat recovery potential due to the change (storage room!), and thus it’s unlikely to affect the eligibility for incentives. A mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery remains a mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery.
Similar topics