"Joe Fischer" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 20:34:06 GMT, "daestrom"
wrote:

snip

It sounds like you and Nick did not appreciate
or understand what I posted about the absorption and
emission of water vapor from carpets and fabrics.


No, I don't think so. I was pointing out that dewpoint is a much better
measure of the amount of moisture in the air than RH. After all, in the
winter time around here when it's 20F, the weather report often says
humidity is above 75%. Of course that's the RH at the prevailing
temperature (20F) and not very meaningful. You have to do a lot of
calculations or use a chart to figure out what that would be if heated up to
70F. But compare the dewpoint (about 15F) with a desired dewpoint of 45F
and it's easy to tell that the air is really 'dry'.

And there is a huge difference in noses, some (me)
actually have capillary bleeding if the air gets too dry,
sometimes a cold follows, sometimes not.


My son has that problem. If I don't humidify the house, he'll wake up with
blood stains on his pillow each morning.

I can feel the drying of my sinus in a 20 mile
trip in the car with A/C set to 70 degrees on a hot day.


Airplane trips are another nasty one. The air at 35,000 feet has a very low
dewpoint.

The problem is, studies may not show anything
definite about the nose, and the "disease" is not considered
serious enough to warrant serious study.
But I am surprised there is not definitive data
on the drying of expensive wood items, especially
antiques and artifacts.


I'm sure there is. Museums often put precious relics in climate controlled
cases. Gettysburg has a lot of Civil War memorabilia that is preserved this
way. Uniforms and leather items are subject to this issue as well.

So any company that sells humidifiers should
keep on selling, and advertise what they do for wood
and fabrics, if not for people or noses.
I don't have any fine wood items, but I have
a nose that has a lot of influence on my H, V, and A/C.


Well, I agree with Nick that humidification costs you energy, it doesn't
save energy. But that's not to say that you shouldn't do something to
control the humidity levels. Nick likes to play with numbers and posit some
'we could' or 'it might'. Gets people thinking. If we reduce the
air-exchange rate, we don't have to work as hard to maintain a nice humidity
level. Nick is fond of quoting ASHRAE (the manuals cost a lot, may as well
get his money's worth). I'm not so sure that as little as 15 cfm is enough
to maintain "indoor pollution" levels, but I have to agree that most US
homes are much too 'leaky'. An air-exchange every couple of hours seems
like way too much.

But then, I lived on a submarine for years, so I may be a little more
sensitive to air contamination issues than some folks. Ventilation is one
way to reduce indoor air pollution levels, but removing the source of the
contaminants is another. No contaminants, don't need much ventilation.
Little ventilation, less moisture needs to be constantly added to maintain
'comfort' levels.

daestrom