Grym
2017-04-30 04:01:26
- #1
Controlled residential ventilation saves 30-50 minutes per day. A perfectly adjusted window automation, which always does exactly what I want and where there are no switches, no remote control, and no app, saves a maximum of 1 minute. An imperfect automation costs time. That doesn’t mean it can’t be done. Steffen spends 80,000 EUR on his automation. That’s possible if you want to. In our opinion, that’s where the limit of "reasonable" is exceeded. That’s our opinion, mind you. Someone else might see it differently.Blind control please without technical devilry, but when replacing analog window ventilation it is helpful. I don't have to understand everything.
Nice for you. But fly screens and F7 filters have nothing to do with each other.I clean my windows definitely more often than every ten years, and a fly screen in midsummer is air filter enough for me.
I do appreciate that in a controlled residential ventilation house the air is noticeably cleaner than outside in the ambient air. The fine dust/diesel/direct injection issue will accompany us for at least another two decades, and it is already proven today that fine dust damages lungs and heart. It’s like smoking yourself. If you are shielded from that at least half of the day you spend in your own house – that’s a good thing.
Filters should also be changed much more often than every 10 years. Several times a year, possibly quarterly. That’s where all the crap collects that has not entered the house but was filtered out. And quite a lot collects there. You have to consider that otherwise it would be inhaled.
And the burdens from VOCs, formaldehyde, etc. are invisible but present. Just because you don’t see it doesn’t mean it’s not harmful. Didn’t a user just compare this to radioactivity?