that I have quite obviously stepped on some toes here. I was not aware that the thorn sat so deep in some people.
That's because you rant against insulation without understanding the physics behind it... but that's slowly coming along.
Insulating a facade from the outside with meter-thick Styrofoam or whatever just does not fit my idea of a house.
You might be surprised, but very few houses have meter-thick insulation... it is rather the monoliths without insulation that then resemble a bunker...
Nevertheless, I would like to pay a fair price for a fair service. And you only get this price-performance ratio if you do a bit of research and don’t just fall for the first best offer.
Everyone here wants that... and houses with standard insulation don't perform as badly in terms of price/performance as one might think...
You can leave a patio door open for 2-3 hours in these enterprise-technology houses without it becoming disproportionately uneconomical?
No, why should you? As others have already said, in winter yes... but you always have that regardless of how a house is built...
Summer-daytime-door open = moisture comes in.
Summer-night-door open = moisture goes out.
If that’s true, then why all the insulation?
For the winter! okay. We’ll see...
Hey, 100 points! You're starting to understand...
Winter-daytime-door open = very cold and bone dry. -> Heating and expensive. Insulation would then be somewhat counterproductive since cold air cannot escape easily and thus must be heated first through high energy input?
No, because the cold air is warmed within minutes since it's warm inside the house... the house is insulated, so all the furniture/walls/people etc. are part of the heating system... and everything inside has a much higher temperature than the cold air from outside. So energy must of course be used to warm the cold air, but this happens relatively quickly and efficiently. In a house from around 1900 you have cold walls etc. and that leads to the known problems.
How does the argument hold that, for example, natural stone absorbs the daytime heat more slowly but also releases it more slowly? So the stored warmth can in part also end up inside the house, which in turn saves heating costs? Is that nonsense?
No, that is not nonsense... it is exactly like that...
On the other hand, a heavily insulated house does not let the sunlight/heat into the house at all and thus cannot transfer it?
Yes, but you have windows... so the heat comes in, and in large amounts... that’s why passive houses usually have a south orientation, preferably with a full glass facade.
I need to train as a bricklayer, natural scientist, physicist, mathematician, and biologist. Otherwise, I don’t get it.
Yep, that’s the only way to really understand all that.
Perfect! That’s where I want to go.
(It partly sounded exactly the opposite. Not from everyone! But some posts gave the impression that ultra insulation was mandatory.)
As I already wrote, that is quite possible... with a aerated concrete block, for example, you can do a lot without a mm of insulation.
Wow! That actually doesn’t sound like most users here in the forum! There are some here who know the subject well alongside their own job. At least that’s how it seems. (Who am I to judge that realistically...). All the more surprising that not so many implement it?!
Not everyone who is active here daily is described by my statement, that’s the broad mass, people who just go to the general contractor and say “Build me a house.”
And personally, I see absolutely no problems with insulation... why should I build a bunker if I achieve the same with an inch-wide insulation on the facade?
I admit that the title is poorly chosen!
Changed!
If you can believe Mr. Fischer, then often it simply doesn’t do that.
Just don’t listen... Mr. Fischer’s personal pride simply does not allow him to recognize and approve professionally incorrectly constructed facades.
