6 ms·

This sounds like a good idea until mold starts growing in your house. Back in the day the houses were not insulated as tightly and people did not shower every

This sounds like a good idea until mold starts growing in your house. Back in the day the houses were not insulated as tightly and people did not shower every day.

mrob 12y ago
Depending on the exact climate/heating system, the energy saved might be enough to run a dehumidifier and still come out ahead. The dehumidifier will also raise the air temperature.
- fixedd 12y ago
  Recently, I've been wondering why we use exhaust fans in bathrooms and not dehumidifiers. I might be way off base here, but it seems like taking conditioned air that's a little moist and dumping it outside and replacing it with drier unconditioned air would be less efficient than just removing the moisture from the already-conditioned air. I imagine it isn't one of those things where it's "always cheaper to do X", but there's probably a break-even point. Does anyone know how to do the math to draw that chart?
  - saiya-jin 12y ago
    too dry air ain't very good for your "mucous" membranes (nose, throat, eyes etc). You want to be sicker just to save few bucks for heating? If poor, I guess it's the only option, but otherwise having heated place is same "luxury" as say buying a cheap & good coffee in the morning instead of doing it yourself...
  - tonyarkles 12y ago
    Think about some of the other things that happen in the bathroom, and ask yourself whether you'd want that air recirculating in your house.
x1798DE 12y ago
Just a (cheap) shot in the dark, but I suspect that readers of "low tech magazine" might not shower every day either.
Theodores 12y ago
In the UK we have plenty of old houses where there is no central heating, double glazing, loft insulation or fitted carpet. Typically the windows are wood framed 'sash' windows with the walls made from quite thick stone (1 - 4+ ft thick). Heating might be just the one fireplace with the kitchen cooker also there to warm the house up. I grew up in such a house and not once did I see mould. Typically such houses were built centuries ago for 'cottage industries' such as making cloth. Back then family sizes were much larger so herds of children would also warm the place up. There might also be an actual herd of animals too - pets as well as livestock, e.g. goats. Also changed is global warming - the pipes would freeze in the 1970's. Nowadays, nada. There was an art to keeping warm. Most important - the fire. This would be open and powered by coal or wood. It would not be 'turned on' until the evening or early afternoon if it was the weekend (in winter). Once started the fire would suck air from wherever possible so that was the primary source of a draft. To mitigate the draft thick curtains would be the thing. The front door would have a curtain as would internal doors to the living room. If you wanted to keep the fire 'in' for the next day you could smother the fire in coal and keep the ashes in underneath. Air would by restricted that way so the fire would slowly burn through the available fuel. Rake it through in the morning, top up with more coal and perhaps some kindling (a word I haven't used in a while) and the fire would live another day. The default would be 'off' though. As for clothing, one word - layers. Wool rather than cotton or anything else. The layers approach also worked for the bed. If you were lucky you might have a hot water bottle, otherwise no heat in the bedrooms. Due to the thick stone walls heat would be retained in winter and cold during summer. Consequently, regardless of the time of year, there would never be 'T-Shirt' weather indoors. You would be acclimatised to the cold and expect to see your breath in most of the house mid winter. There would also be that thing where the side of you facing the fire would be red hot whilst your back would be freezing. To solve this problem you would need the air to circulate, so no standing right in front of the fire, blocking the heat, even if that was very pleasurable to do. A cast iron fire grate would be red hot and in your living room. Today's central heating does not do 'red hot' in the living room - radiators don't glow bright red like that although electric 'bar' fires get close. As for showers, a bath, once a week was it. We actually had a copper bath in front of the fire and that was filled with a hose connected to a twin-tub washing machine. Emptying the bath involved making an actual siphon, there was none of this 'plug' and 'plumbing' convenience. Needless to say it was very easy to dry off in front of the fire and towels would be toasty. Personally I prefer watching a fire to watching TV.
adrianN 12y ago
Invest ten bucks in a hygrometer and open the windows when the humidity gets too high. Mold is not caused by cold temperatures.
- fsloth 12y ago
  Mold is caused by humidity. One way to increase humidity in building's shell is to have humid air and large thermal gradients in poorly ventilated areas. Opening windows does not help in the humidity that gets into structures when air with vapour enters colder structural parts of the building and releases it's moisture. Warmer houses-> the point where moisture is released moves closer to outer wall. That's at least my laymans understanding of one of the mechanisms which affect houses.
  - saiya-jin 12y ago
    true, proper term is "dew point" I believe, that's where all the wet magic happens (however weird that sentence looks like, it's perfectly normal)

This sounds like a good idea until mold starts growing in your house. Back in the day the houses were not insulated as tightly and people did not shower every day.

mrob 12y ago

Depending on the exact climate/heating system, the energy saved might be enough to run a dehumidifier and still come out ahead. The dehumidifier will also raise the air temperature.

fixedd 12y ago
Recently, I've been wondering why we use exhaust fans in bathrooms and not dehumidifiers. I might be way off base here, but it seems like taking conditioned air that's a little moist and dumping it outside and replacing it with drier unconditioned air would be less efficient than just removing the moisture from the already-conditioned air. I imagine it isn't one of those things where it's "always cheaper to do X", but there's probably a break-even point. Does anyone know how to do the math to draw that chart?
- saiya-jin 12y ago
  too dry air ain't very good for your "mucous" membranes (nose, throat, eyes etc). You want to be sicker just to save few bucks for heating? If poor, I guess it's the only option, but otherwise having heated place is same "luxury" as say buying a cheap & good coffee in the morning instead of doing it yourself...
- tonyarkles 12y ago
  Think about some of the other things that happen in the bathroom, and ask yourself whether you'd want that air recirculating in your house.

x1798DE 12y ago

Just a (cheap) shot in the dark, but I suspect that readers of "low tech magazine" might not shower every day either.

Theodores 12y ago

In the UK we have plenty of old houses where there is no central heating, double glazing, loft insulation or fitted carpet. Typically the windows are wood framed 'sash' windows with the walls made from quite thick stone (1 - 4+ ft thick). Heating might be just the one fireplace with the kitchen cooker also there to warm the house up. I grew up in such a house and not once did I see mould. Typically such houses were built centuries ago for 'cottage industries' such as making cloth. Back then family sizes were much larger so herds of children would also warm the place up. There might also be an actual herd of animals too - pets as well as livestock, e.g. goats. Also changed is global warming - the pipes would freeze in the 1970's. Nowadays, nada. There was an art to keeping warm. Most important - the fire. This would be open and powered by coal or wood. It would not be 'turned on' until the evening or early afternoon if it was the weekend (in winter). Once started the fire would suck air from wherever possible so that was the primary source of a draft. To mitigate the draft thick curtains would be the thing. The front door would have a curtain as would internal doors to the living room. If you wanted to keep the fire 'in' for the next day you could smother the fire in coal and keep the ashes in underneath. Air would by restricted that way so the fire would slowly burn through the available fuel. Rake it through in the morning, top up with more coal and perhaps some kindling (a word I haven't used in a while) and the fire would live another day. The default would be 'off' though. As for clothing, one word - layers. Wool rather than cotton or anything else. The layers approach also worked for the bed. If you were lucky you might have a hot water bottle, otherwise no heat in the bedrooms. Due to the thick stone walls heat would be retained in winter and cold during summer. Consequently, regardless of the time of year, there would never be 'T-Shirt' weather indoors. You would be acclimatised to the cold and expect to see your breath in most of the house mid winter. There would also be that thing where the side of you facing the fire would be red hot whilst your back would be freezing. To solve this problem you would need the air to circulate, so no standing right in front of the fire, blocking the heat, even if that was very pleasurable to do. A cast iron fire grate would be red hot and in your living room. Today's central heating does not do 'red hot' in the living room - radiators don't glow bright red like that although electric 'bar' fires get close. As for showers, a bath, once a week was it. We actually had a copper bath in front of the fire and that was filled with a hose connected to a twin-tub washing machine. Emptying the bath involved making an actual siphon, there was none of this 'plug' and 'plumbing' convenience. Needless to say it was very easy to dry off in front of the fire and towels would be toasty. Personally I prefer watching a fire to watching TV.

adrianN 12y ago

Invest ten bucks in a hygrometer and open the windows when the humidity gets too high. Mold is not caused by cold temperatures.

fsloth 12y ago
Mold is caused by humidity. One way to increase humidity in building's shell is to have humid air and large thermal gradients in poorly ventilated areas. Opening windows does not help in the humidity that gets into structures when air with vapour enters colder structural parts of the building and releases it's moisture. Warmer houses-> the point where moisture is released moves closer to outer wall. That's at least my laymans understanding of one of the mechanisms which affect houses.
- saiya-jin 12y ago
  true, proper term is "dew point" I believe, that's where all the wet magic happens (however weird that sentence looks like, it's perfectly normal)