> So, my point is this: use a fan, and use deliberate holes. In other
> words, think out what you are doing, and understand the consequences.
> Don't just say "let the house breath." I'm sure we would all
> agree—planning for air movement is better thaan not planning and leaving
> everything up to chance.
The point that I thought I made was that if there is going to be any
development on 'breathable walls' there will be properties involved that
can allow for careful planning and predictive results providing the
opportunities are there for the research and application - and those
opportunities won't be there if it gets dismissed to early in the
process.
I'm sure that some applications will require the introduction of larger
quantities of air than might be predictably achieved passively but that
would be simply to achieve the pressure difference that draws air into
the structure (no one is relying on magic) The point of drawing air
through the body of the building in a diffuse manner is to make maximum
use of the potential benefits of air movement through materials:
- potential for thorough and continuous dehumidification or
humidification and decontamination of materials across all surfaces as
air moves through
- potential for passive heat transfer
- potential for biological process
This might seem fanciful but I think there is enough supportive work to
continue looking at the potential. I know there is enough research on
the drawbacks of current practice to warrant major changes.
Cutting boards; my source was a CBC news story and now I'll have to look
into it.
John Salmen
TERRAIN E.D.S.
terrain@seaside.net
__________________________________________________________________
This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by Oikos (www.oikos.com)
and Environmental Building News (www.ebuild.com). For instructions
send e-mail to greenbuilding-request@crest.org.
__________________________________________________________________