Controlled residential ventilation yes - heat recovery no - justification in the text!

First, you have to manage this: writing an article about ventilation and indoor air quality without once addressing the CO2 concentration of the indoor air!

We currently ventilate through drafty windows in our old building (despite expensive additional seals from tesa). At a normal indoor temperature, a window reveal temperature of under 15 °C was recently recorded. The cold draft is also unpleasant.

Radiant heaters may be interesting, why not. Still, I would not want to do without controlled residential ventilation with heat recovery. And I would argue that no matter how sophisticated the (radiant) heating is, it does not prevent cold window reveals if the windows are permanently tilted open or drafty for ventilation.

That is absolutely clear. As already mentioned, the article is somewhat sensationally worded, which is why one should of course not take it at face value. Nevertheless, it points out the partly absurd regulations and presents a few interesting lines of thought. That’s all I wanted to say, no more and no less.

When building, there are many controversially discussed topics, including Controlled Residential Ventilation. I just wanted to bring in a different perspective again, because as a newcomer in this thread one almost has to think that Controlled Residential Ventilation is the only true solution. Questioning something critically has also never hurt.

The article is already very one-sided, and many things are claimed but not substantiated. Since buildings in Germany must now be airtight and underfloor heating (a mixture of convection and radiant heating) is mostly used, controlled residential ventilation or frequent airing is then necessary. Moreover, fresh air is needed for the residents even with radiant heating (as gym explained well), and the humidity must be removed.

The article is partially (!) correct and yet it does not provide any arguments against a ventilation system.

Main arguments for controlled ventilation:
- Human need for fresh air
- Reduction of CO2 concentration to a natural level
- Ventilation of volatile organic compounds, which occur always and everywhere (from carpets, furniture, plastics, building materials, ...)
- Ventilation of numerous other pollutants that inevitably occur, see here:

Link removed by moderation

Where does the article address even one of these topics? How are bricks and lime plasters supposed to help with even one of these topics?

Just briefly on the article, section "too high air exchange rates" – who exchanges the entire indoor air 14 to 19 times? Answer: This is the case in practically every old building. The regulations should only ensure that the more airtight new buildings at least reach this level of air exchange.

Other magnificent works by the same author:
"The Myth of the Climate Catastrophe"
"DIN Standards – an Instrument of Deception"
"The Impact of Green-Alternative Scientific Understanding on Research"

With this outstanding knowledge, he has rightly earned his place on Konrad Fischer’s website.

That was a Wikipedia link...
Why is not even Wikipedia allowed?

Edit: And why are links then automatically even converted at all? Why not instead automatically blocked by the forum software if even Wikipedia links don't work?

Do you even know what Wikipedia is and by whom it is fed with info? Don’t start discussing the [AGBs] here – it’s pointless, even this year