Clim reversible inverter Carrera Bricoman the savings?

Heating, insulation, ventilation, VMC, cooling ... short thermal comfort. Insulation, wood energy, heat pumps but also electricity, gas or oil, VMC ... Help in choosing and implementation, problem solving, optimization, tips and tricks ...
User avatar
Capt_Maloche
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 4559
Registration: 29/07/06, 11:14
Location: Ile-de-France
x 42




by Capt_Maloche » 22/10/09, 10:40

Christophe wrote:It's fine about this but would anyway kWh put some green in it all right?
...
here you pay € 0.21 kWh for the nuke ... !! : Evil:
...
Capt_Maloche wrote:Otherwise you have to rebuild a house BBC (50Kw.h / year and m²)


Well it starts when these specifications?

oil or gas sellers will cry their mother! Banzai!


It's not the subject of this subject : Cheesy:

21cent? Pu_ain! it's twice our price, and that's probably what hangs in our face

I prepare these specifications as soon as I have 3 minutes, there is demand, and we can now make a home without additional heating (or an insert at worst) thanks to the MCP :D
0 x
"Consumption is similar to a search consolation, a way to fill a growing existential void. With, the key, a lot of frustration and a little guilt, increasing the environmental awareness." (Gérard Mermet)
OUCH, OUILLE, OUCH, AAHH! ^ _ ^
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 22/10/09, 10:47

Yes that's not the subject but it has been on my mind for a few days since your message ...

A) I do not think that without additional heating is a good solution: the investment of "passivity" being exponential when you reach 100%!

In short, it is better to make a semi-passive house that consumes, let's say, around 500 L of EP equivalent fuel oil per year than a house that really consumes 0 ...

Especially that a house without lighting and appliances, I do not know ... (well yes it should enter into account).

B) In short for me it would be necessary to create a new eco-friendly housing performance index which would replace the Kw.h / year.m² which is already bad (at least imprecise) because it does not take into account
- the regional climate of the house!
- the occupation of the house!

Indeed; 50 KWh / year.m², all the 300m² villas in second homes with outdoor swimming pool on the French Riviera are probably less than 50 kWh / year.m² but are they passive or eco-friendly ??? I do not believe...

Something like this (electricity not intended for heating included): kWh EP / DJU.person.m² seems not bad to me ... but there may be a "conflict" between person and m² ... because the 2 are generally all the same proportional ...

We could relate this to the investment cost also!

Must seriously think about it !!
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 22/10/09, 14:16

1) "Passive" does not mean without heating.

2) For information, an Open House day to visit passive houses on November 6 and 7.

View: http://www.lamaisonpassive.fr/spip/spip.php?rubrique1

3) Effinergie takes into account the situation (climatic zone and altitude): "The maximum primary energy consumption objective is set at 50 kWh / m².year, to be adjusted according to the climatic zone and the altitude."

4) Depending on the label, energy other than for heating is included or not.

Ex:

Passive house: "Whatever its construction method and its geographical location, a passive house, with all the current comforts, does not need more than 15 kWh per m2 and per year ..."

Three criteria are used to determine whether a building can obtain the “Passive House / Passivhaus” label (link to MP label):

• Needs in heating <15 kWh / (m2a)

• Tightness of the enclosure: n50 ≤ 0,6 h-1

• Needs in total primary energy (household appliances included): <120 kWh / (m2a)

For Effinergie, this is the total primary energy consumed for heating, lighting, ventilation and DHW (so if I understand correctly, excluding other devices, boxes, TVs, watches ...).

Conventional primary energy consumption (Cep according to the RT 2005 calculation method) for:


heating,
the recooling,
ventilation,
the auxiliaries,
domestic hot water production
room lighting

The conventional primary energy consumption must be less than or equal to a value in kWh / m² Shon of primary energy which is expressed in the form:
Cep <or = 50 x (a + b)

(a) is given by a map depending on the geographic location
(b) results from the altitude

Conclusion, before re-inventing the powder, remember that the Chinese did it a few centuries BC !!!
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 22/10/09, 14:19

Did67 wrote:1) "Passive" does not mean without heating.


Flat, without heating it does not exist!

Without a dedicated heating SYSTEM would be more "fair"!
A residential house must necessarily be heated! A solar contribution is heating !!

Did67 wrote:3) Effinergie takes into account the situation (climatic zone and altitude): "The maximum primary energy consumption objective is set at 50 kWh / m².year, to be adjusted according to the climatic zone and altitude."


"To be modulated" = openness to shenanigans, starting with those of building contractors ...

By reporting this to the local DJUs you would have all of this directly (area and altitude !!) and it would give the house thermal capacity in ONE NUMBER, no need for correction or weighting ... Only must know precisely the DJU of his house ...

In addition with DJUs, not even worth consuming over a year, a few weeks are enough !! It is much, much more judicious in my opinion ...

Did67 wrote: Total primary energy needs (household appliances included): <120 kWh / (m2a)


There is also a problem: the needs for PE including ME must be reported not to m² but to the number of people in the household !!

I drill and sign: kWh / m².year is not really significant (with some exceptions) the thermal performance (and responsible behavior of the inhabitants) of a home!
Last edited by Christophe the 22 / 10 / 09, 14: 36, 1 edited once.
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 22/10/09, 14:36

You are again in the expeditious, to judge before watching !!! Sometimes I wonder if you ever consider that something that doesn't come from you can have any value!


1) Two posts above, you suggest that it would be better to take into account the geographical situation. I quote you: "... because it does not take into account
- the regional climate of the house! "

2) I copy / paste you to tell you: precisely, the Effinergie label (unlike the Passive House label) does ...

Answer, it's pipo !!!!

3) Just for your info, in case you still want to think before you draw (I'm going to call you Lucky Lucke if you continue!): It's standard (I didn't want to copy / paste everything) : the coefficients (a) and (b) are precisely defined ... It is not each one who, according to his mood, "modulates". In a given area (Alsace for example, for a given altitude, any "Effinergie" house will have the same performance).

Afterwards, it is certain that it is a very crude "zoning", there, one could agree. But in terms of standardization, either you make as many standards as there are situations, or you make a standard for yourself!

You can make your label "Econologis". But if everyone does not care, apart from your ego which will have swelled, what will you have won?

4) Labeling according to the occupation would be something else entirely. Because the occupation can change.

In my opinion, the labeling of a house should serve to "enhance / devalue" a house according to its performance or its "footprints". Whether for rental or in case of purchase / resale. So that its value does not depend on the "look", but on the "green" side ... And that obviously cannot depend on the occupation ...

Then, that we pass a judgment on such and such who alone occupies a house of 300 m² BBC, of ​​course, that we can be critical. But it won't be the house's "fault"! And the house will keep all its value for a family of 10 ...

I think it's better to be pragmatic at times ...
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 22/10/09, 14:38

Rather than getting upset, a piece of information for those who are interested in passive houses: the Open Day that I just mentioned is international.

There is a search engine to find the buildings that can be visited where you are interested here:

http://www.passivhausprojekte.de/projekte.php?lang=en
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 22/10/09, 14:41

Calm down ... it's you who draws there! We still have the right to offer better than what exists, right?

Take my example of the French Riviera villa used as a second home: it passes BBC according to the sole criterion of kWh / m².year ... like most of the second homes! Too easy ... don't you think? Apparently if according to your 4) on which I completely agree ... must also report to the occupants!

I would simply like to work for more understanding in the figures given on the energy efficiency of homes!

And houses (supposedly) passive where halogen turn 14h a day it makes me laugh ... or rather laugh yellow ...

It's a bit like the Zero CO2 electric car powered by coal ...
0 x
aerialcastor
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 865
Registration: 10/05/09, 16:39
x 21




by aerialcastor » 22/10/09, 14:57

To be labeled BBC your 300m² house must ensure the temperature of legal comfort in France is 19 ° C during the day and 16 ° C at night without exceeding 50kWh / m² / year weightable according to the region.
I do not see how the fact that it is a second home changes it enough.

Otherwise, taking the consumption of household appliances for a label is nonsense to me ...
What it takes to measure the intrinsic quality of the house for a well defined scenario and the same for everyone. The behavior factor of the inhabitants should not be taken into account because it is very difficult to measure.

Otherwise yes taking into account the DJU would be a plus for those who know what it means .... or not many people. A label must be able to make itself understood by the general public otherwise it will not get things done.
0 x
User avatar
I Citro
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5129
Registration: 08/03/06, 13:26
Location: Bordeaux
x 11




by I Citro » 22/10/09, 14:58

Capt_Maloche wrote:... funny remark about the reversible air conditioning;
in heating mode, the outside group that absorbs energy (cold blast) and there is a lot of condensation

Well I get these condensations water (demineralized water) to the central steam ironing :D

rainy weather yesterday, I filled a canister in 5L 24h, cool
(Dry weather is 2 days)
I wonder if the quality of this water (pH, impurities, ...) would be appropriate to complete the electrolyte batteries of my electric vehicles.
:?:
Because they drink ... about 10L for cars every 4.000km. Either every 3 months or 8 times a year for cars.
+ the scooter, about 3L every 1500km (once or twice a year)
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 22/10/09, 15:33

I think I remember that it is not recommended, because even if it is "distilled" water at the start, it dripped on the fins and was loaded with aluminum, tin or I do not know which metals, which for electro-positivity reasons, are real poisons for lead batteries ...

I don't remember exactly, but there is something. Mistrust. Unless someone more sophisticated can specify ...
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Heating, insulation, ventilation, VMC, cooling ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 393 guests