Joe Fischer errs again:

Yesterday and today I had to run both heat and
AC, that is the only way to deal with the exceptional
high humidity both days.

No. It would be more energy-efficient to run a dehumidifier when
you need heat and an AC when you need cooling,

The temperature was ok, I don't have a dehumidifier,

Put one $80 AC in a window and one in the house. Wire the window AC to
the close-on-rise contact of Grainger's $16 2E158 SPDT thermostat and
the other to the close-on-fall contact. Run the common contact to
Grainger's $31 2E453 (Autoflo 052000) humidistat.

and warming the air lowers humidity more efficiently than a dehumidifier.

Warming air lowers the RH, but it doesn't remove any water vapor.

I run a humidifier anytime the outdoor temperature
is below 40 degrees...

Your house needs air sealing.

moist air feels warmer than dry, and
a steam humidifier is efficient use of heat.

Winter humidification uses about 10X more heat energy than it can save.

It is rare to have 90 percent humidity in the house,
and the quickest way to reduce it to improve breathing
is likely the most efficient.

Hey, a new rule of thumb: "the quickest way is the most efficient" :-)

Nick

we do this innane sort of dehumidification in my work place, because
they are too cheap to buy the dessciacnt dehumidifiers that we realy
need, so instead they spens tens of thousands of dollars a year on
running heat and AC at the same time.

Empressess #124457


The best Games


a href=http://www.gamestotal.com/Multiplayer Online Games/a a
href=http://www.gamestotal.com/Strategy Games/abra
href=http://uc.gamestotal.com/Unification Wars/a - a
href=http://uc.gamestotal.com/Massive Multiplayer Online
Games/abra href=http://gc.gamestotal.com/Galactic Conquest/a -
a href=http://gc.gamestotal.com/Strategy Games/abra
href=http://www.stephenyong.com/runescape.htmRunescape/abra
href=http://www.stephenyong.com/kingsofchaos.htmKings of chaos/abr




wrote:
Joe Fischer errs again:

Yesterday and today I had to run both heat and
AC, that is the only way to deal with the exceptional
high humidity both days.

No. It would be more energy-efficient to run a dehumidifier when
you need heat and an AC when you need cooling,

The temperature was ok, I don't have a dehumidifier,

Put one $80 AC in a window and one in the house. Wire the window AC to
the close-on-rise contact of Grainger's $16 2E158 SPDT thermostat and
the other to the close-on-fall contact. Run the common contact to
Grainger's $31 2E453 (Autoflo 052000) humidistat.

and warming the air lowers humidity more efficiently than a dehumidifier.

Warming air lowers the RH, but it doesn't remove any water vapor.

I run a humidifier anytime the outdoor temperature
is below 40 degrees...

Your house needs air sealing.

moist air feels warmer than dry, and
a steam humidifier is efficient use of heat.

Winter humidification uses about 10X more heat energy than it can save.

It is rare to have 90 percent humidity in the house,
and the quickest way to reduce it to improve breathing
is likely the most efficient.

Hey, a new rule of thumb: "the quickest way is the most efficient" :-)

Nick

wrote in message
oups.com...
we do this innane sort of dehumidification in my work place, because
they are too cheap to buy the dessciacnt dehumidifiers that we realy
need, so instead they spens tens of thousands of dollars a year on
running heat and AC at the same time.

Empressess #124457


Have you priced what it would cost in dessicant dehumidifiers and/or the
cost to regenerate the dessicant (it has to be heated to drive off the
moisture absorbed in it).

As nick pointed out, the cheapest way to remove humidity is with a
dehumidifier. The heat removed from the moisture is dumped back into the
room. Running the A/C dumps heat outside and has to be replaced by running
the heater. VERY BAD idea.

daestrom

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 19:49:05 GMT, "daestrom"
wrote:

As nick pointed out, the cheapest way to remove humidity is with a
dehumidifier. The heat removed from the moisture is dumped back into the
room. Running the A/C dumps heat outside and has to be replaced by running
the heater. VERY BAD idea.

Modern A/Cs do not drip water because they port
the condensate out to the warm side and either spray it
on warm parts or immerse the motor housing and tubing
in it.
Note that the only day in the entire year where
I found it necessary was not a hot day, it was a quite
cool day, cool enough that heat could be used.

Of course if there is a place that has that much
moisture much of the time, they need dehumidifiers.

A house with a wooden floor and basement
or crawl space should not normally be damp enough
to need dehumidification, it is slab homes and
basements that need it.

Before the condensate from an A/C was
evaporated outside, an average size A/C would
sometimes condense more water per hour than
three or four dehumidifiers.
And I assume the modern ones do - also.

Joe Fischer

"Joe Fischer" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 19:49:05 GMT, "daestrom"
wrote:

As nick pointed out, the cheapest way to remove humidity is with a
dehumidifier. The heat removed from the moisture is dumped back into the
room. Running the A/C dumps heat outside and has to be replaced by
running
the heater. VERY BAD idea.

Modern A/Cs do not drip water because they port
the condensate out to the warm side and either spray it
on warm parts or immerse the motor housing and tubing
in it.

Who said anything about water dripping outside? I was talking about the
amount of *heat* that is moved from inside to outside in the process and
having to replace the *heat*.

Note that the only day in the entire year where
I found it necessary was not a hot day, it was a quite
cool day, cool enough that heat could be used.

Of course if there is a place that has that much
moisture much of the time, they need dehumidifiers.

A house with a wooden floor and basement
or crawl space should not normally be damp enough
to need dehumidification, it is slab homes and
basements that need it.

Before the condensate from an A/C was
evaporated outside, an average size A/C would
sometimes condense more water per hour than
three or four dehumidifiers.
And I assume the modern ones do - also.


Yep. But a dehumidifier doesn't *cool* the house down (you mentioned, "it
was a quite cool day"). A/C will remove a lot of moisture, but if the
temperature in the house drops and you have to turn on the heat to
compensate, then you're really paying a lot ot remove that moisture.
Dehumidifiers will remove the moisture without removing heat from the house,
so you don't need to turn on the heater as well.

Yeah, once or twice a year isn't much of a problem (maybe cost you $2). But
if it were a common occurance (high humidity without high temperatures),
then a dehumidifier would be the way to go.

daestrom

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 20:12:55 GMT, "daestrom"
wrote:

Dehumidifiers will remove the moisture without removing heat from the house,
so you don't need to turn on the heater as well.

Yeah, once or twice a year isn't much of a problem (maybe cost you $2). But
if it were a common occurance (high humidity without high temperatures),
then a dehumidifier would be the way to go.
daestrom

Which is why I did it, today it was cool enough that
the RH in my room is less than 65, the day I mentioned
it was 90, which is extremely high for indoors in a raised
wooden floor house.

Another problem is that with age and circulation
resulting from age, breathing can be a more important
issue than the 4 hours of 1 KW at $.06.
And I didn't need an $80,000 a year efficiency
expert to figure that out for me. :-)

Joe Fischer

On 19 Sep 2006 06:13:05 -0400, wrote:

Joe Fischer errs again:
Yesterday and today I had to run both heat and
AC, that is the only way to deal with the exceptional
high humidity both days.

No. It would be more energy-efficient to run a dehumidifier when
you need heat and an AC when you need cooling,

The temperature was ok, I don't have a dehumidifier,

Put one $80 AC in a window and one in the house. Wire the window AC to
the close-on-rise contact of Grainger's $16 2E158 SPDT thermostat and
the other to the close-on-fall contact. Run the common contact to
Grainger's $31 2E453 (Autoflo 052000) humidistat.

Thanks for the off-the-shelf engineering, but this
was a one day thing.

and warming the air lowers humidity more efficiently than a dehumidifier.

Warming air lowers the RH, but it doesn't remove any water vapor.

Relative humidity is the important thing, the amount
of moisture in the air is meaningless, the amount of water
the air can hold relative to the amount of water in the air
is relative humidity.

I run a humidifier anytime the outdoor temperature
is below 40 degrees...

Your house needs air sealing.

Not really, the sensitive membranes in my nose
need sealing.

And that is one of the reasons I try to avoid
using the Cozy space heaters, they change the air
in the house very often, and even warn that space
for incoming air be provided.

moist air feels warmer than dry, and
a steam humidifier is efficient use of heat.

Winter humidification uses about 10X more heat energy than it can save.

Not a chance, the few hundred watts the humidifier
uses simply replaces the electric baseboard heat used.

It is rare to have 90 percent humidity in the house,
and the quickest way to reduce it to improve breathing
is likely the most efficient.

Hey, a new rule of thumb: "the quickest way is the most efficient" :-)
Nick

For one day only, of course.

Joe Fischer

Joe Fischer errs again:

I run a humidifier anytime the outdoor temperature
is below 40 degrees...

Your house needs air sealing.

Not really, the sensitive membranes in my nose
need sealing.

Any house that needs winter humidification needs air sealing.

moist air feels warmer than dry, and
a steam humidifier is efficient use of heat.

Winter humidification uses about 10X more heat energy than it can save.

Not a chance, the few hundred watts the humidifier
uses simply replaces the electric baseboard heat used.

Houses leak air. Especially your house :-) Lennox stopped advertising that
winter humidification saves energy after I convinced their engineering VP
that it uses 10X more than it can save.

Nick

wrote:

Any house that needs winter humidification needs air sealing.

...

Nick

Not always. However I would agree that often that is the case or at
least part of the problem.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

Joseph Meehan wrote:

Any house that needs winter humidification needs air sealing.

Not always...

I'd say always. Andersen says an average family of 4 puts about 2 gallons
per day of water (16.7 pounds) into house air. In an absolutely airtight
house, the RH would rise to 100% near windows with wintertime condensation.

ASHRAE says houses need 15 cfm of fresh air per full-time occupant, so
4 half-time occupants need 30 cfm at 0.075 lb/ft^3, ie 30x60mx24hx0.075
= 3240 lb/day of fresh air. January outdoor air in Phila has an average
humidity ratio wo = 0.0032 pounds of water per pound of dry air. If minimal
ventilation with no condensation removes 3240(wi-wo) = 16.7 lb/day of water
from the house, wi = 0.00834, and 70 F air at 100% RH has w = 0.0158, so
the house RH would be about 100wi/w = 53% with minimal ventilation, or more,
with a small efficient air-air heat exchanger with outgoing condensation.

Keeping the RH 60% (wi = 0.00948) means condensing 3240(wi-wo)-16.7 = 2.03
lb/day (2 pints) or 0.085 lb/h of water from the outgoing air, with a latent
heat of 1000x0.085 = 85 Btu/h (about 25 watts--not much), ie lowering the
outgoing humidity ratio to 0.00834 at 100% RH, ie lowering its temperature
to about 52 F. If we recover 90% of the heat, E = 0.9 = 1-e^-NTU, so the
Number of heat Transfer Units NTU = -ln(0.1) = 2.3 = AU/Cmin, where A is
the heat transfer area in ft^2, U is its film conductance in Btu/h-F-ft^2,
and Cmin is the heat capacity flow rate in Btu/h-F.

U = 2 and Cmin = 30 make A = 2.3x30/2 = 35 ft^2, so we might preheat
incoming 30 F outdoor air with a small fan pulling outgoing 70 F air
between 48 1'x1'x1/8" Coroplast sheets in a 1' cube with A = 96 ft^2
and NTU = 6.4 and E = 1-e^-6.4 = 99.8% heat recovery. The condensation
might drip onto a large green plant that re-evaporates it.

An average US house naturally leaks about 200 cfm. A 2400 ft^2 house
that meets the Canadian IDEAS (post R2000) standard would naturally
leak 2.5 cfm.

Nick

wrote:
Joseph Meehan wrote:

Any house that needs winter humidification needs air sealing.

Not always...

I'd say always.

You can say what you like, but I think you need to speed more time in
the real world.


--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

wrote in message
...
Joseph Meehan wrote:

Any house that needs winter humidification needs air sealing.

Not always...

I'd say always. Andersen says an average family of 4 puts about 2 gallons
per day of water (16.7 pounds) into house air. In an absolutely airtight
house, the RH would rise to 100% near windows with wintertime
condensation.

ASHRAE says houses need 15 cfm of fresh air per full-time occupant, so
4 half-time occupants need 30 cfm at 0.075 lb/ft^3, ie 30x60mx24hx0.075
= 3240 lb/day of fresh air. January outdoor air in Phila has an average
humidity ratio wo = 0.0032 pounds of water per pound of dry air. If
minimal
ventilation with no condensation removes 3240(wi-wo) = 16.7 lb/day of
water
from the house, wi = 0.00834, and 70 F air at 100% RH has w = 0.0158, so
the house RH would be about 100wi/w = 53% with minimal ventilation, or
more,
with a small efficient air-air heat exchanger with outgoing condensation.


What do the numbers look like with an average outside dewpoint of 0F ??
While the daily 'highs' here can sometimes reach 30F, the overnight low and
dewpoint of outside air is usually much lower for Jan/Feb. My psychrometric
charts don't go down that far so I can't do the calc.

Seems like 'always' is a pretty risky statement considering some parts of
the country. Pellston MI is often one of the coldest places in CONUS, or
International Falls MN.

How much air exchange happens when the door is opened eight times a day
(four people leaving for work/school and returning). Just wondered if you
have some data on that?

daestrom

On 19 Sep wrote:

Joe Fischer errs again:
I run a humidifier anytime the outdoor temperature
is below 40 degrees...

Your house needs air sealing.

Not really, the sensitive membranes in my nose
need sealing.

Any house that needs winter humidification needs air sealing.

You need to study more about relative humidity,
and about the differences in people's nasal passages.
I would not be able to use the Cozy space heaters
if I sealed the house, they need to draft up the chimney.
Maybe you are too young to have seen a furnace
that uses indoor air for the flame?


moist air feels warmer than dry, and
a steam humidifier is efficient use of heat.

Winter humidification uses about 10X more heat energy than it can save.

Energy used is not even an issue with my nose,
and I have decades of experience with it.

Your number of 10 X is so absurd that it would be
laughable if you were not contaminating minds.

Not a chance, the few hundred watts the humidifier
uses simply replaces the electric baseboard heat used.

Houses leak air.

It is essential that the air in a house is changed at
least every 2 or 3 hours, and much more often with
some kinds of heating appliances.

A major factor in my decision to try to get by
with electric baseboard heat is the reduced number
of times the air in the house changes in 24 hours,
because one Cosy stove has the flue pipe removed
and the flue blocked (and nailed shut to keep the
chimney birds in the chimney).
And I won't light the pilot on the other stove
until the temperature goes below 20 degrees F.

Especially your house :-)

It is 111 years old, so what else is new?

Lennox stopped advertising that
winter humidification saves energy after I convinced their engineering VP
that it uses 10X more than it can save.
Nick

How did you do that, with BS or numbers?

I don't like the fan humidifiers, they need a
chemical added to the water and the water changed
every day. It is easier to change the water with a
steam humidifier, and as long as I am using electric
resistance heat anyway, your number does not apply,
no matter how low you revise it.

If doctors were to advise patients who get
head colds every winter to humidify when the
outdoor temperature is below 40 degrees F, the
number of head colds would be reduced by at
least half, and maybe as much as 80 percent less.

For those who may have believed your
mistaken opinion, I will explain why indoor air
relative humidity drops dramatically with lower
outdoor temperatures, and why humidifiers
make it seem warmer and why temperatures
are more stable with 50 percent relative humidity
indoors all winter.

The air in all house changes, and there is
a definite number of times it needs to change,
the type of heat determines that, but a house
should never be sealed so tight that it takes longer
than 3 hours to change completely.
(Check the furnace or heater instructions).

As the air changes, outdoor air that has
a relative humidity of 40 percent at 30 degrees F
that is warmed to 70 degrees F undergoes a
change in relativity humidity according to well
know charts showing how much water air at
those temperatures can hold.

At lower outdoor temperatures and
lower out door humidity, the indoor humidity
can become very low, as low as 10 percent or
less, even without any removal of water vapor.

Warm air __CAN__ hold more water,
and cooler air can only hold so much less, and
that is why _relativity_ changes when outdoor
air replaces indoor air in winter.

This is a health issue, for a large number
of people, while others have no problem at all
with head colds or sore throats in winter.
It is not an energy efficiency issue, not
a home repair issue (as long as health comes before
minor moisture damage), it is not a frugal living
issue if the doctor visit costs more than all other
associated costs, and it is not a homepower issue,
it is a health issue, so I don't know why even a
trouble maker like you would crosspost so many
groups. :-)

I already posted the effects of low relativity
humidity on sensitive nasal membranes, and already
posted the explanation of how moisture in fabrics
in the house is drawn from the fabrics as air dries,
carrying germs, and is breathed, and the germs
are able to get a foothold in the nasal membranes
of people who do have that sensitivity problem.

So a shallow consideration of only energy
used and it's effect on air temperature is not pertinent.

But moist air carries more BTU per pound
than dry air, even though moist air occupies more
space per pound.
Between cycles of the furnace, moist air
resists cooling more than dry air in the same period
of time.
And warm moist air feels warmer than warm
dry air, although this is pretty much a personal
judgement issue. (Moist cool air feels colder than
dry cool air).

All this together makes your meddling in
the marketing practices of a company with decades
of experience in heating and cooling, despicable,
in my opinion.
When I had a house with central air, I
bought and installed a self filling humidifier from
Sears, and it make a big difference in comfort
at the same temperature settings.

So study about relative humidity, how
warming air changes the relativity without any
change in the amount of water it contains, and
the harmful effects that can have on the health
of certain people.
And also study how air too dry can
damage furniture, woodwork and other
materials, just as much as air too moist.

Joe Fischer

Joe Fischer wrote:

Maybe you are too young to have seen a furnace
that uses indoor air for the flame?

No, but I may be less senile than you are :-)

Lennox stopped advertising that winter humidification saves energy
after I convinced their engineering VP that it uses 10X more than
it can save.

How did you do that, with BS or numbers?

With numbers. Bull****ting engineering VPs isn't easy. I started with
the president/legal department and worked my way down.

For those who may have believed your mistaken opinion,
I will explain why indoor air relative humidity drops dramatically
with lower outdoor temperatures...

Yawn.

Nick

On 19 Sep 2006 14:57:58 -0400, wrote:

Joe Fischer wrote:
Maybe you are too young to have seen a furnace
that uses indoor air for the flame?

No, but I may be less senile than you are :-)

Unfortunately you'll catch up.

Lennox stopped advertising that winter humidification saves energy
after I convinced their engineering VP that it uses 10X more than
it can save.

How did you do that, with BS or numbers?

With numbers. Bull****ting engineering VPs isn't easy. I started with
the president/legal department and worked my way down.

For those who may have believed your mistaken opinion,
I will explain why indoor air relative humidity drops dramatically
with lower outdoor temperatures...

Yawn.
Nick

Buildings today seem to be getting away from
natural and passive systems and moving toward more
complex active systems that require energy.
My house has transoms, but they were painted
shut when A/C became available and never used again.

In 1943 I was assistant manager of an 800 seat
theater, and it had a passive warm weather ventilation
system that I had no appreciation for at the time.
The roof had a center section that was higher,
and windows tilted in on both side walls of that high
section. There were huge vent ducts which were
not noticeable with floor grilles.
With a large crowd, the heat generated per
person increased the natural convection out those
top windows, drawing air in the hidden floor ducts.
On really hot days there were huge low speed
fans in those ducts, but they rarely were needed.

If removing moisture with dehumidifiers for
a family of four in a home in winter is an engineering
problem in the classroom, then there a lot of homes
that are apparently too moist, because there are few
if any dehumidifiers used in homes other than in
basements or laundry rooms.

There was a program on TV a few years ago
that showed a southern home with the same type of
natural ventilation as the theater I mentioned.
And there has been some mention that
some pyramids were constructed the same way.

Passive solar and natural convection ventilation
systems seem to have been replaced by more positive
systems that require energy, but that do provide more
capacity at any time (as long as the grid is up).

Joe Fischer

"Joe Fischer" wrote in message
...
On 19 Sep 2006 06:13:05 -0400, wrote:

Joe Fischer errs again:
Yesterday and today I had to run both heat and
AC, that is the only way to deal with the exceptional
high humidity both days.

No. It would be more energy-efficient to run a dehumidifier when
you need heat and an AC when you need cooling,

The temperature was ok, I don't have a dehumidifier,

Put one $80 AC in a window and one in the house. Wire the window AC to
the close-on-rise contact of Grainger's $16 2E158 SPDT thermostat and
the other to the close-on-fall contact. Run the common contact to
Grainger's $31 2E453 (Autoflo 052000) humidistat.

Thanks for the off-the-shelf engineering, but this
was a one day thing.

and warming the air lowers humidity more efficiently than a dehumidifier.

Warming air lowers the RH, but it doesn't remove any water vapor.

Relative humidity is the important thing, the amount
of moisture in the air is meaningless, the amount of water
the air can hold relative to the amount of water in the air
is relative humidity.


Actually it's more complicated. Partial pressure of water vapor in air and
the partial pressure of any standing water determine evaporation/drying
rate. Human sinuses have 'water' that stays at the same temperature (unless
you're running a fever), so the partial pressure of water vapor in air is
pretty much it. And the pp of water vapor is saturation pressure for the
dry bulb temperature times the RH. Heating air doesn't change the pp of
water vapor (saturation pressure rises as much as RH drops).

Surely you've noticed that running the heat up high in the winter doesn't do
anything for your sinuses. Humidification (raising the pp of water vapor)
does.

Trouble is, the partial pressure of water vapor is not readily measured. It
can be calculated from RH and dry bulb temperature. (find the saturation
pressure of water at the dry bulb temperature, then multiply by RH). The
next best thing is to track the dew point. When you heat air, the dew point
doesn't change. Hot air is better at drying 'things' because the hot air
provides more energy to evaporate the liquid.

This winter, rather than track the RH as my house temperature rises/falls
(set-back thermostat), I plan on tracking the dew point. I suspect it will
give me much more consistent data.

snip

moist air feels warmer than dry, and
a steam humidifier is efficient use of heat.

Winter humidification uses about 10X more heat energy than it can save.

Not a chance, the few hundred watts the humidifier
uses simply replaces the electric baseboard heat used.


It's not just the electric to power the humidifier, it is also the energy to
evaporate the water. With many simple humidifiers, that energy comes from
the air blowing through it. So the furnace works harder to heat the air
back up again.

Yes, it's certainly more comfortable (I have problems with wintertime
humidity as well). And the human body 'feels' comfortable when the heat
losses through convection and evaporation are matched to our optimum value.
Lowering evaporation heat loss (by raising the dew point) can allow for
slight increase in convection losses (setting the thermostat down a degree
or two). But it's very subjective.

daestrom

On Tue, 19 Sep 2006 20:08:24 GMT, "daestrom"
wrote:

"Joe Fischer" wrote in message
.. .
On 19 Sep 2006 06:13:05 -0400, wrote:
Warming air lowers the RH, but it doesn't remove any water vapor.

Relative humidity is the important thing, the amount
of moisture in the air is meaningless, the amount of water
the air can hold relative to the amount of water in the air
is relative humidity.

Actually it's more complicated.

I am sure it is, I wondered about it ever since I saw
a meteorologist put cotton on a thermometer and swing
it round and round in 1946.

Partial pressure of water vapor in air and
the partial pressure of any standing water determine evaporation/drying
rate. Human sinuses have 'water' that stays at the same temperature (unless
you're running a fever), so the partial pressure of water vapor in air is
pretty much it.

Sure, but breathing through the nose moves a lot
of air over the same tissue. I won't go into Bernoulli
or Venturi.

And the pp of water vapor is saturation pressure for the
dry bulb temperature times the RH. Heating air doesn't change the pp of
water vapor (saturation pressure rises as much as RH drops).

Please don't say that carpeting doesn't dry out if wet. :-)

Surely you've noticed that running the heat up high in the winter doesn't do
anything for your sinuses.

It sure does, it makes them bleed, and feel like the
tissue is stretched. Then a few hours later they start
producing moisture.

Humidification (raising the pp of water vapor) does.

And you base this on the next sentence?

Trouble is, the partial pressure of water vapor is not readily measured.

Try running a cool air humidifier, and see that
it stops evaporating water after a certain humidity.
I use a steam humidifier so I can go to higher RH.

It
can be calculated from RH and dry bulb temperature. (find the saturation
pressure of water at the dry bulb temperature, then multiply by RH). The
next best thing is to track the dew point. When you heat air, the dew point
doesn't change. Hot air is better at drying 'things' because the hot air
provides more energy to evaporate the liquid.

Yes, I have read many of the papers by Einstein
on specific heat and latent heats.

This winter, rather than track the RH as my house temperature rises/falls
(set-back thermostat), I plan on tracking the dew point. I suspect it will
give me much more consistent data.

You are more of a scientist than I want to be
to keep a nose dry. :-)

snip

moist air feels warmer than dry, and
a steam humidifier is efficient use of heat.

Winter humidification uses about 10X more heat energy than it can save.

Not a chance, the few hundred watts the humidifier
uses simply replaces the electric baseboard heat used.

It's not just the electric to power the humidifier, it is also the energy to
evaporate the water. With many simple humidifiers, that energy comes from
the air blowing through it. So the furnace works harder to heat the air
back up again.

Which is another reason I use a steam vaporizer,
I try to put at least 2 gallons of water in the air on a cold
night, and I only do this in my room, the rest of the
house doesn't matter.

I really need to avoid colds and trips to the doctor.

Yes, it's certainly more comfortable (I have problems with wintertime
humidity as well). And the human body 'feels' comfortable when the heat
losses through convection and evaporation are matched to our optimum value.
Lowering evaporation heat loss (by raising the dew point) can allow for
slight increase in convection losses (setting the thermostat down a degree
or two). But it's very subjective.
daestrom

In order to try to conserve (prompted by the rise
in retail natural gas last fall), I am only heating my room,
the kitchen and the bath.
I wouldn't heat the kitchen but I can feel the
convection drafts as the cool air moves into my room.

I really should build a balcony in my room and
put the bed and computer and TV on it as I have
eleven foot ceilings. I bought some 36 inch balloons
that I am going to fill with air (not helium, I talk
funny enough now), and put screw-eyes in the wood
strips on the ceiling and pull them up with a string,
and if the air leaks out I will be able to let them down
to fill them.

Every house and every person is different, my
house was designed originally as two large rooms with
a double fireplace in the common wall, and if it were
not for that fireplace, the house would have floated
away when the river was up to the peak of the roof
in January 1937.

Houses with working fireplaces can't safely
be sealed air tight, even if air tight is just a figure
of speech.

Actually, the faster the air changes, the
higher the relative humidity may be )without
a humidifier), I really haven't considered
that though, I need it warm, and I want to
conserve in a reasonable and rational way.

Joe Fischer

And what effect did that have, insulating the thermometer by wrapping
the bulb with dry cotton? Seems like it would read the temperature
much faster if the bulb wasn't insulated.

--

Christopher A. Young
You can't shout down a troll.
You have to starve them.
..

"Joe Fischer" wrote in message
...
Relative humidity is the important thing, the amount
of moisture in the air is meaningless, the amount of water
the air can hold relative to the amount of water in the air
is relative humidity.

Actually it's more complicated.

I am sure it is, I wondered about it ever since I saw
a meteorologist put cotton on a thermometer and swing
it round and round in 1946.

Partial pressure of water vapor in air and
the partial pressure of any standing water determine
evaporation/drying
rate. Human sinuses have 'water' that stays at the same temperature
(unless
you're running a fever), so the partial pressure of water vapor in
air is
pretty much it.

Sure, but breathing through the nose moves a lot
of air over the same tissue. I won't go into Bernoulli
or Venturi.

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 21:56:08 GMT, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

And what effect did that have, insulating the thermometer by wrapping
the bulb with dry cotton? Seems like it would read the temperature
much faster if the bulb wasn't insulated.

Sorry, I didn't say the cotton was dry, it may have
been wet with water or even alcohol, I am not a trained
weather man. :-) I assume he was checking dew point,
but I am not certain. Moist air is lighter than dry air,
so dew point was important in several ways for Army Air
Force weather forecasting.

Joe Fischer

Stormin Mormon wrote:

And what effect did that have, insulating the
thermometer by wrapping the bulb with dry cotton?

Its wrapped in wet cotton, thats what the wet bulb temperature is.

Seems like it would read the temperature
much faster if the bulb wasn't insulated.

Yes, but its wet cotton, not dry.


"Joe Fischer" wrote in message
...
Relative humidity is the important thing, the amount
of moisture in the air is meaningless, the amount of water
the air can hold relative to the amount of water in the air
is relative humidity.

Actually it's more complicated.

I am sure it is, I wondered about it ever since I saw
a meteorologist put cotton on a thermometer and swing
it round and round in 1946.

Partial pressure of water vapor in air and
the partial pressure of any standing water determine
evaporation/drying rate. Human sinuses have 'water' that stays at
the same temperature (unless you're running a fever), so the partial
pressure of water vapor in air is pretty much it.

Sure, but breathing through the nose moves a lot
of air over the same tissue. I won't go into Bernoulli
or Venturi.

If you need to know how much moisture is in the air then you need to know
the (GRAINS PER POUND) of water in the air. You can also use the dew point
if you know what you are looking for but the GPP works better.
http://www.humiditysource.com/RH_101.html
The formula is on the page above. We have special equipment at work that
does the math for you. They also make slide rule or disks that you can set
to the temperature and the RH that will give you the GPP.


You can also buy (LGR) low grain refrigerant dehumidifyer. They come really
close in removeing moisture compared to desicates.
Take a look at http://www.dryitup.com
There is some links there for dehumidifier manufacturers.

I hope this helps..

Joe
IICRC Water Restoration master.
Yes I dry out buildings for a living...