News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Scientists’ warning on affluence. Parent comment

Re:Scientists’ warning on affluence by mikro2nd on Sunday June 21, 2020 @06:37AM (#23591211)
In the context of the cost of a building, the cost of these elements is near-insignificant. Less true if you're retrofitting them to an existing building, but for new builds (which is what OP suggested) they ought to be mandatory.

IIRC there is a limiting factor with (ground-based) heat-pumps, though... the in-earth elements can't be placed too close to each other before they lose efficiency badly through competition for the same heat energy stocks. (Somebody who knows more about this should correct me.)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Scientists’ warning on affluence by hammock on Sunday June 21, 2020 @07:34AM (#23591427)
>In the context of the cost of a building, the cost of these elements is near-insignificant.

The same could be said of 99% of building code requirements...and it adds up.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Scientists’ warning on affluence by TomSwirly on Sunday June 21, 2020 @09:28AM (#23591893)
Houses in Europe have such building code requirements and yet don't seem outrageously expensive by any means.

Shock! It turns out that doing it right at scale just isn't much harder, and pays society back in spades over the life of the building.

[ Parent | on HN ]