How does insulation in brick construction affect the indoor climate?

We are considering three house construction options: timber frame, solid wood, or a brick house.

Many timber frame manufacturers, e.g. Griffner, advertise that their indoor climate is particularly good because only wood is used in the walls and these are diffusion-open, meaning they release moisture well.

Now, I have heard several times that bricks are also very good for the indoor climate because they conduct moisture very well. But here is the question: What happens if you add additional thermal insulation on the outside of the bricks? Additional thermal insulation should be standard by now. But do bricks then retain their good properties?

And is there anywhere a somewhat neutral source on the issue of indoor climate, heat, and sound for timber frame vs bricks vs solid wood?

The indoor climate consists of temperature, relative humidity, CO2, pollutants. It is also influenced by drafts and -- I would say -- radiators (cold/hot surfaces).

Modern houses are airtight. Walls do not breathe. This just in advance.

A damping of humidity (e.g. cooking or 10 children storming into your living room --> rapid increase in humidity) can possibly be achieved through diffusion-open walls. I dare to claim that the effect is small and other features (room volume, carpets, curtains, upholstered furniture, plants) have a much greater effect. The influence of the wall is probably small.

The temperature (and the feeling) is greatly influenced by whether walls (or windows) are cold. That used to be the case, but today it is no longer so. Thanks to low U-values or insulation (however), the walls and windows inside are rather warm. It feels more comfortable; you can feel just as comfortable at 20 °C as you used to at 22 °C.

You can control CO2 and pollutants by ventilating, manually or controlled. (For pollutants, you can additionally influence the input by acting carefully ...).

My conclusion: For the (objective) indoor climate, the construction type (wood, stone, ETICS yes/no) does not matter. Controlled residential ventilation yes/no has a great influence on the indoor climate. If there are large window fronts, then shading is an important issue.

As my predecessor says... whether sand-lime brick, wood, aerated concrete, or brick, whether with extra insulation or without, ... no impact on the indoor climate, since all new buildings have to be airtight anyway (the "diffusion-open" is a marketing phrase and is physical nonsense). That always sounds somehow bad, but has significant advantages compared to old buildings (some of which have already been mentioned... consistently pleasant temperatures everywhere, no freezing by the window due to cold radiation, ...).

Ventilation systems have a big effect. Some resist them, but anyone who ever had one usually never gives it up again. Fresh warm air with the window closed in winter and after getting up, no further ventilation necessary if you don't feel like it ... priceless (ventilation systems are not really economical, but a high gain in comfort).

Is controlled residential ventilation not a hygiene problem (mold, fungus, germs)? I always have the idea that the fresh air from outside must be better than air redirected multiple times through pipes. I always think of fully air-conditioned buildings, which are not necessarily healthy either.

Oooouuuh, diving right into the hornet's nest. [emoji85]

Just take a look at a few houses in your circle of acquaintances with a modern, central ventilation system and then decide for yourself.

In my opinion, it is not comparable to air conditioning. It is only distinguishable from window ventilation by the fact that no cold air comes in during winter anymore, but pre-warmed and thus pleasant air. Otherwise, there is no difference in air quality. By the way, a ventilation system does not exclude window ventilation if you feel like it... it just doesn't force it, and especially at night in winter or similar times, you simply don't want to have a window open but still want fresh air... -> Controlled residential ventilation.

I am not aware of any hygiene problems in my circle of acquaintances. The majority of people also recommend nowadays not building without it. Of course, there are other opinions, especially online, to be read. Even if I had to disinfect the entire system every 5 years, I would always choose a controlled residential ventilation system again. I don't know any older or new houses without controlled residential ventilation that have such great air quality around the clock as houses with controlled residential ventilation.

Blablabla, if you have the chance, sleep a few nights in a house with controlled residential ventilation. If you then say "oh noooo," then forget it. But it's unlikely ;)

For example, Nordlys doesn't like anything modern and is an old penny-pincher, would also leave off the roof if it were possible ;)