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
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 22/10/09, 15:44

Christophe wrote:Quiet ...

Take my example of the villa of the Riviera used in secondary residence: it passes BBC according to the sole criterion of kWh / m².an ... as indeed most second homes! Too easy ... do not you think?

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 ...
..


1) Yes, I'm calm! Yes, we can search better

2) I do not agree with you: we labbelise a building, not the use that possible fools make!

So this BBC villa, if I buy it, knowing how I'm going to use it, I know what's waiting for me; That's what I expect from a label.

Your A ++ freezer, if you put it in your veranda in full sun in summer, it will not have the performance advertised. The label is "to be able to ... used in such standardized condition". It's always like that because it has to be comparable (and verifiable).

3) Exactly. Let us work. For this it must be simple, understandable, comparable, verifiable.

4) It will not be passive long since the lighting is included in the case of passive houses.

Then you will never be able to keep fools off

Ditto for the PRIUS who drive to UN in the city center. (NB: it's less worse than Landcruisers!)

5) A conviction of old con: you will never advance a schmilblic whatever it is by justifying your reasoning by the errors of the others!

Corollary: it's too easy to justify its small mistakes by the big nonsense of others ...

But here I become a philosopher ...
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, 16:18

Thank you Did67I was reluctant and you comfort them ...
Given the consumables cost of this periodic maintenance (less than 3 €) and its environmental impact ... : Mrgreen:
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 22/10/09, 17:37

Did67 wrote:3) Exactly. Let us work. For this it must be simple, understandable, comparable, verifiable.


Exactly through the DJU, we can really and objectively compare a home, whether it is in Couchevel, Lille or Marseille! Impossible with the kWh / m².an, even with the coef. correction !!

In addition the DJU, variable from one year to another (what I say from one day to another), allow to make more accurate statistics, piecemeal (from month to month ...) that the / m² .an (even corrected for the climatic zone which is approximate but mostly static from one year to another) !!

In short, the DJUs are more precise, more relevant ... and not necessarily so much more boring to calculate (just have the precise DJUs of your city for the period studied). Finally, icing on the cake, we can consider other coef. performance based on "real" DJU not in relation to 20 ° C (depending on the definition) but 18 or 19 ° C, ie the real temperature inside the house!

As you say: the behavior influences enormously but with "real DJU" ... impossible to "cheat" ...

Did67 wrote:4) It will not be passive long since the lighting is included in the case of passive houses.

Then you will never be able to keep fools off


The lighting is included since when? According to which label?

Did67 wrote:5) A conviction of old con: you will never advance a schmilblic whatever it is by justifying your reasoning by the errors of the others!


Rohhh that it is suceptible ... does not prevent, the 1er not towards the best, it is the criticism ... : Mrgreen:

Did67 wrote:Corollary: it's too easy to justify its small mistakes by the big nonsense of others ...

But here I become a philosopher ...


Who's the big donkey? : Mrgreen:
You're lucky I never liked philosophy, because I did not understand there : Cheesy:

Answers to aerialcastor :

a) an unoccupied second home is not heated, it is kept freezing (and still not everywhere) ... so reduced over a year, its consumption in kWh can be very low ... that's all that I wanted to say...

b) it does not matter if people know what a DJU is, you think that many people know exactly what 1 kWh represents (do a survey, I'm sure that more than 60% of people think it's only a electric unit, cf invoice edf!)?

The important thing is to have a performance comparison element as objective as possible between 2 dwellings no?

Obviously, I am not against the kWh / m².an because it is still more accessible (evaluation of the energy bill quite fast) but I think and say that it does not allow to make real objective comparisons technologically ...

Well, we'll stop the controversy ... if you want?
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 22/10/09, 17:39

citro wrote:Thank you Did67I was reluctant and you comfort them ...
Given the consumables cost of this periodic maintenance (less than 3 €) and its environmental impact ... : Mrgreen:


Nothing understood, there is no subject greance there? : Shock:
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, 21:31

Christophe wrote:
citro wrote:Thank you Did67I was reluctant and you comfort them ...
Given the consumables cost of this periodic maintenance (less than 3 €) and its environmental impact ... : Mrgreen:
Nothing understood, there is no subject greance there? : Shock:
Other answers interposed ... :?
Capt_Maloche wrote:... funny remark about the reversible air conditioning; ... and there is a lot of condensation ...
Well I get these condensations water (demineralized water) to the central steam ironing :D
yesterday rainy weather, I filled a can of 5L in 24h, 8)
(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.
:?:
... is that they drink ... about 10L for cars every 4.000km. Let 80 be 100L / year
Did67 wrote: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 do not remember exactly, but there is something. :?. Unless someone more sharpened can specify ...
0 x
User avatar
Capt_Maloche
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 4559
Registration: 29/07/06, 11:14
Location: Ile-de-France
x 42




by Capt_Maloche » 23/10/09, 00:32

I quickly answer Christophe: Did67 rightly, lighting consumption is included and calculated in the RT2005, there is even the "daylight factor" under the HQE label

and here, I just learned that there will be no RT 2010, 2015 and 2020, we go directly to the RT2012 implemented in 2011 with a Cep ref 50Kw.h / m² per year for all new constructions

It'll be hot

for geographical areas, it is general of course, but the goal is to limit energy consos on the territory, so some will have more efforts to make than others


For the condensation water, it is H2O with a dust of ambient dust, no worries in my opinion, I have to have ph paper to see
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! ^ _ ^
User avatar
I Citro
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5129
Registration: 08/03/06, 13:26
Location: Bordeaux
x 11




by I Citro » 23/10/09, 11:18

Capt_Maloche wrote:... For the condensation water, it's H2O with a dust of ambient dust, no worries in my opinion, I have to have ph paper to see
In the boiler + CESI installation that is running at home, a condensate neutralization kit is included to reject only condensates of neutral pH ...
0 x
User avatar
Capt_Maloche
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 4559
Registration: 29/07/06, 11:14
Location: Ile-de-France
x 42




by Capt_Maloche » 23/10/09, 11:35

We are not talking about a boiler here, where the condensed water is in contact with sulfur and other carbon particles, but of an air-conditioning exchanger where circulates only ambient air :? : Cheesy:

it's cleaner than rainwater
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: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 23/10/09, 11:47

Capt_Maloche wrote:I quickly answer Christophe: Did67 rightly, lighting consumption is included and calculated in the RT2005, there is even the "daylight factor" under the HQE label


Oh? Do you have the text? On the 17 slide of this doc: https://www.econologie.com/reglementatio ... -3352.html
it is indicated :

The energy consumption of your building for heating, domestic hot water, cooling, auxiliaries (as well as non-residential lighting) must be less than the reference building


By non-residential lighting, what should we understand? Outdoor lighting (garden, driveway ...?) ???

If this is the case then I bow, but then how do I distinguish between kWh lighting and kWh other devices? The lighting only represents 5 to 10% of the consumption of an "average" household (I exclude the fools, see did remark, with halogen running 10 hours a day).

But the debate with did mainly concerned the fact that kWh (EP or not) /m².an can be replaced by a more judicious unit ... I think ...

Capt_Maloche wrote:It'll be hot


It will not be hot, it will be impossible and there will be scheming on shenanigans on the part of the building contractor, because bourin question and mule head, some must not be far from fishermen or farmer alsaco! : Mrgreen:

Capt_Maloche wrote:For the condensation water, it is H2O with a dust of ambient dust, no worries in my opinion, I have to have ph paper to see


Yeah it must be clean enough but do not forget that the battery brews thousands of m3 air ... so dust ...
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79126
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10974




by Christophe » 23/10/09, 12:06

Good here https://www.econologie.com/forums/nouvelle-r ... t3137.html you said (Maloche) that it was 12W / m² for lighting ...

What gives in kWh / m².year?

Assuming 3 h per day on average, so would be 12 * 3 * 365 / 1000 = 13 kWh / m².an

If we go to EP we are 13 * 2.58 = 34 kWh EP /m².an NOTHING that lighting .... in RT2012 should be 50 kWh EP FOR EVERYTHING?

The gap between the RT2005 and RT2012 IS SO HUGE !! IRREALISABLE IN MY OPINION ...

Finally, it costs me nothing to be ambitious ...
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 321 guests