I’m curious as to how this would compare to a properly insulated home?
most the houses in texas are uninsulated to keep construction costs down. (despite the fact that even a minimal amount of insulation would pay for itself inside of a year or two.) (Why would you want to insulate against heat, right? global warming is a woke-ist hoax! /s)
New houses or ones built in the 1960’s? If its new houses, how does code not specify a minimum R value? Its not just about keeping heat in in the winter, its needed to keep the heat out in the summer.
texas doesn’t require a specific r-value for walls in the southern third of the state. (the rest it’s r-5). They do require some insulation in an attic.
Most (cheap) homes don’t slap up insulation if they don’t have to. and r-5 is an extremely low value.
and further, that’s only on new houses. There’s plenty of old houses still in circulation and the vast majority of the old houses are entirely uninsulated. a properly insulated house, you can keep rooms warm just by being in them. we saw that’s not true of homes in texas during the big freeze a while back.
Its not just about keeping heat in in the winter, its needed to keep the heat out in the summer.
that’s this sarcastic comment was about:
(Why would you want to insulate against heat, right? global warming is a woke-ist hoax! /s)
When I was growing up the people across the street had an uninsulated houses – in NW Wisconsin.
I guess Texas is going to do Texas things but with the heat and the grid falling apart every couple of years, they really should mandate the same level of insulation that we do up north.
It’s not like we don’t get triple digits ourselves in recent years. And it really does come down to shaving down those construction costs. The insulation would pay for itself in like 2 years, though.
A properly insulated industrial freezer should consume less electricity than a house with AC, even if it’s set at a reasonable temp.
TIL. It makes sense that they can be more efficient now that you pointed that out.
I’m curious as to how this would compare to a properly insulated home?
most the houses in texas are uninsulated to keep construction costs down. (despite the fact that even a minimal amount of insulation would pay for itself inside of a year or two.) (Why would you want to insulate against heat, right? global warming is a woke-ist hoax! /s)
New houses or ones built in the 1960’s? If its new houses, how does code not specify a minimum R value? Its not just about keeping heat in in the winter, its needed to keep the heat out in the summer.
texas doesn’t require a specific r-value for walls in the southern third of the state. (the rest it’s r-5). They do require some insulation in an attic.
Most (cheap) homes don’t slap up insulation if they don’t have to. and r-5 is an extremely low value.
and further, that’s only on new houses. There’s plenty of old houses still in circulation and the vast majority of the old houses are entirely uninsulated. a properly insulated house, you can keep rooms warm just by being in them. we saw that’s not true of homes in texas during the big freeze a while back.
that’s this sarcastic comment was about:
When I was growing up the people across the street had an uninsulated houses – in NW Wisconsin.
I guess Texas is going to do Texas things but with the heat and the grid falling apart every couple of years, they really should mandate the same level of insulation that we do up north.
Yeah… I’m in MN.
It’s not like we don’t get triple digits ourselves in recent years. And it really does come down to shaving down those construction costs. The insulation would pay for itself in like 2 years, though.
That sound you hear is Texas loudly pushing back on any sort of gubmint infetterance.
Did you mean interfetterance?