"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 22:12:02 -0000, "IMM" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:45:58 -0000, "G&M" wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
So people in an average house can spend about £100-200 and save
about
£10 a year.

That us actually a good return on the investment and so should be
done.

I didn't say it wasn't unless the space lost matters. That can be
worth a lot more than £10 a year.

My point was that there are much larger losses of heat.

Take the same house of 7m square and 5m high.

NO! Take a house of 7m square and 5m high and split it in two and
calulate
it separtely. Then adding a lot of insulation in the loft makes one half
of
the house, the upper floors, very cheap to run and very comfirtable in
winter and summer.


I did this assuming different upstairs temperatures. It doesn't
alter the point in any significant way.

It does!!!!!!!!!! The upstairs then is much more well insulated, warmer and
consumes les fuel to heat. The upstairs room benefit greatly by heavy
insulation in the loft.

In fact if the upstairs is cooler as is typically recommended, then
there is even less point in your argument because the heat loss is
less anyway.

You have strange logic.


---
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.561 / Virus Database: 353 - Release Date: 14/01/2004