Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)

Categories



Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.
Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!


powered by Surfing Waves




Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
 Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.




Heating and cooling: Measuring CO2 to control ventilation

Bottom of Page

1 to 20 of 20

  1.  
    • CommentAuthormicforster
    • CommentTimeMar 8th 2016 edited
     
    The Green Building Council of Australia gives extra credits to buildings that have installed CO2 detectors for ventilation purposes. While this makes sense for a commercial building, does it also make sense for your average home? The cost of CO2 detectors are coming down, but does it outweigh any energy savings that are gained by turning a house over to demand control ventilation (DVC)?

    For those who are new to this topic, here is an article on why you need to measure CO2 inside buildings: http://www.edaphic.com.au/why-you-need-to-measure-co2-inside-buildings/
    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeMar 8th 2016
     
    You would need more and more ventilation as time went on.

    Like you say way too expensive and ott for houses, we turn ours right down and I am thinking of turning it off overnight and when we are out
    • CommentAuthorEd Davies
    • CommentTimeMar 8th 2016
     
    Wow, what a coincidence - the MD/CEO of Edaphic Scientific seems to be called Michael Forster, too. Maybe it would be funny if you introduce yourself to him.

    http://www.environmental-expert.com/professional-profiles/michael-forster-325813

    Or declare any connections you might already have, of course.
    • CommentAuthormicforster
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2016 edited
     
    Hi Ed,

    I'm not sure where that came from but it is nice to meet you. Do you have anything constructive to add to the conversation? I am curious to know whether anyone out there with green building experience has incorporated CO2 detectors into homes. It would seem a rather innocuous inquiry.

    Michael
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2016
     
    Wow
    I would like a CO2 sensor to put with my other sensors.
    But I would like it to be less than a fiver and have more than 90 days warranty.

    Also
    http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=584&page=1
    • CommentAuthorjfb
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2016
     
    link doesn't work for me steamy
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2016
     
    Works for me.
    All it is, is about advertising and commercial interest rules for this forum.
    If you go to the main Discussion page, it is towards the top.
    • CommentAuthorEd Davies
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2016
     
    Posted By: micforsterI'm not sure where that came from…
    There are quite a few spammers who turn up on this forum (though not so many recently). If you are just making an innocuous inquiry then it seems at least courteous to mention your connection? Eg, “my company makes CO₂ sensors - do you think we can market them for houses…”. Also, other forum members would probably like to be aware of the circumstances.

    I've made quite a lot of silly and irrelevant comments on this forum but I think some of what I've written has been constructive.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2016
     
    Ed
    Make more silly and irrelevant comments, I do :bigsmile:
    • CommentAuthorEd Davies
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2016 edited
     
    Posted By: tony: “You would need more and more ventilation as time went on.”

    Assuming there's a house where COâ‚‚ is the limiting requirement for ventilation (as opposed to water vapour or VOCs or whatever) then this is true though it'd be a very small effect but not completely irrelevant if you accept the 700 or 800 ppm target levels mentioned in that article. My understanding though is that humans are tolerant to noticeably higher levels than that so the proportional effect of further growth in ambient COâ‚‚ levels over the next half century or so would be small.

    In fact, aren't levels closer to 700 or 800 ppm quite common for outdoor air in some cases, anyway? Even on the top of Mauna Loa it varies quite a bit. See, for example, the Linden-Giessen data here:

    http://www.ferdinand-engelbeen.be/klimaat/beck_data.html

    where the local COâ‚‚ concentration varies from 350 to, some days, 550 ppmv on a daily basis. If you're ventilating to a target of 700 ppmv that would mean sometimes needing 40% of the ventilation you'd need at other times. Growth in average atmospheric COâ‚‚ over the next few decades would (we can hope) be small in comparison to that.

    It'd be interesting to see any real data indicating that 700 or 800 ppmv is a worthwhile target, anyway.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2016
     
    Our old mate JSHarris monitors his CO2 levels.
    Here is a comment from the 'other place'

    "I proved, beyond any reasonable doubt, that opening a bedroom window does very little, if anything, to improve the air quality overnight. What's needed is through ventilation, and with no fans that means having fairly large openings. From the data I posted earlier (first graph in this post: http://www.ebuild.co...ch/#entry159324 ) you can see the improvements in air quality every time the bedroom door was opened in the night, just because that allowed some through ventilation from the always-open window and, perhaps more importantly, because it provide a low level "escape route" for the heavier CO2 to leave by. "

    And here is one of the charts:
      JSH CO2.jpg
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2016
     
    Oh, and our old mate Damon has done some monitoring/research at a school.
    Probably on his website somewhere.
    • CommentAuthormike7
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2016 edited
     
    Posted By: SteamyTeaOur old mate JSHarris monitors his CO2 levels.
    Here is a comment from the 'other place'

    "I proved, beyond any reasonable doubt, that opening a bedroom window does very little, if anything, to improve the air quality overnight.>


    It might put it beyond reasonable doubt for JSH in his house, where I can imagine he has reduced leakiness to a minimum, but for a house of average leakiness I could see leaving a window open having a substantial effect.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMar 9th 2016
     
    Not sure, it is his old house, not the new one.

    But if you have a leaky house, then the internal air is going to be similar to external air most of the time.
    • CommentAuthormike7
    • CommentTimeMar 10th 2016 edited
     
    So to summarise:

    If its very leaky, opening a window will make no difference - fresh air anyway.
    If its not very leaky at all there will be little throughflow and so not much difference.
    If its more leaky than hardly leaky at all but less leaky than a lot leaky it could make a significant difference.

    - I'm off for a leak.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMar 10th 2016
     
    :bigsmile:
    • CommentAuthoradwindrum
    • CommentTimeMar 10th 2016
     
    While the CO2 changes are clearly very visual, do they actually make any impact on quality of air, we are talking roughly a range of 450-1300ppm? The RH and temp seem steady.
    •  
      CommentAuthorSteamyTea
    • CommentTimeMar 10th 2016 edited
     
    I suspect not, but not my area of expertise (biology/physiology).
    I know that the data I got off Damon showed a good correlation between RH and CO2. So maybe RH is the one that 'upsets' people the most.
    Or it could be temperature if it is too high.

    I think it is easy to assign a problem to something that is seemingly 'unnatural', such as elevated CO2 levels, or 'farm smells', or 'something', but this does not mean it is really causing a problem.
    • CommentAuthorringi
    • CommentTimeMar 10th 2016
     
    CO2 can be used to tell you how many people are in a building. People create RH problems and "smells".
    •  
      CommentAuthordjh
    • CommentTimeMar 10th 2016
     
    Posted By: ringiPeople create RH problems and "smells".

    Dogs are even more famous for it. As are pigs and cows! :bigsmile: Not to mention skunks.

1 to 20 of 20

  1.  
Add your comments

    Username Password
  • Format comments as
 
Back to Discussions Top of Page
   
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   
Logout    

© Green Building Press