Re:Restoring the Old Way of Warming: Heating People, Not Places
by mrob on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @05:18PM
(#9036093)
Depending on the exact climate/heating system, the energy saved might be enough to run a dehumidifier and still come out ahead. The dehumidifier will also raise the air temperature.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Restoring the Old Way of Warming: Heating People, Not Places
by fixedd on Thursday February 12, 2015 @02:07AM
(#9037805)
Recently, I've been wondering why we use exhaust fans in bathrooms and not dehumidifiers. I might be way off base here, but it seems like taking conditioned air that's a little moist and dumping it outside and replacing it with drier unconditioned air would be less efficient than just removing the moisture from the already-conditioned air.
I imagine it isn't one of those things where it's "always cheaper to do X", but there's probably a break-even point. Does anyone know how to do the math to draw that chart?
Re:Restoring the Old Way of Warming: Heating People, Not Places
by tonyarkles on Thursday February 12, 2015 @10:27AM
(#9039140)
Think about some of the other things that happen in the bathroom, and ask yourself whether you'd want that air recirculating in your house.
Re:Restoring the Old Way of Warming: Heating People, Not Places
by saiya-jin on Thursday February 12, 2015 @09:12AM
(#9038817)
too dry air ain't very good for your "mucous" membranes (nose, throat, eyes etc). You want to be sicker just to save few bucks for heating? If poor, I guess it's the only option, but otherwise having heated place is same "luxury" as say buying a cheap & good coffee in the morning instead of doing it yourself...