Hakan, To keep it straight, responses are interjected between your comments.
> Ok, since this is the only material, except straw and earth, that we have > mentioned in this discussion, can we leave this about materials and look at > realities. There was, of course, your mention of "we have to look for a material or mixing with a material that give[s] a significant reduction of the emission factor..." I believe that it was the mention of a non-descript material that opened the topic up to the broad spectrum of building materials beyond hemp, straw and earth. > >What I did take acceptance to was your implication in general > >that "professionals" in your field, which I presumed to be > >somewhere in the realm of construction, construction materials, > >materials engineering and or engineering in general, > > http://about.energy.saving.nu/ is a background And I wasn't too far off the beaten path, as you list a few of your qualifications as "education in business and engineering with experiences in fields like Building Acoustics, Energy Simulations in Buildings...", and then incorporate your knowledge with two other professionals well rooted in the construction and materials fields to form a business revolving around largely just that. > >are best > >suited to make decisions relative to energy efficiency measures > >in buildings (construction) - that somehow persons who are not > >professionals in such a field or fields are less than competant > >to make some of the most simple and basic decisions that can > >reduce their energy waste - that somehow they don't know what > >they are doing, or at least don't know what they are doing as > >well as "professionals" in these fields - that it takes > >complicated mathematics to calculate the comfort zones of heat > >engines (humans) within dwellings or other buildings, with > >laborious formulae dependant upon their mass, caloric intakes, > >transpiration rates, etc, plus all the specifications of the > >building mass, heat outlets and air flow within the building - > >that since Joe and Jane Bread Maker are more in tune with how > >much yeast and banana to put in their muffins than with calculus > >and physics that they should leave all the decision making up to > >the "professionals." > > I have already clarified that (see my previous answer) Do you mean the one where you forgive my ignorance and presumably the ignorance of others who have not pursued full blown and accredited engineer status? Nice guy you may be, but we both know that there is a pervasive "diety syndrome" amongst engineers, doctors, lawyers and entire barge loads of other "professionals." ("Forgive them father, for they know not as much as I.") > > >While you might think that this is all rather an embellishment, > >there most certainly was an underlying whiff of "professional" > >versus "non-professional" arrogance in your postings, whether > >intentional or not. If expression of what was inferred is > >interpreted as abuse, even after being announced as "tongue in > >cheek," well..............? > > You are not always communicating with native English speaking and I might > not have the same understanding of the finer details in your > wordings. What the ... does "tongue in cheek," means? Well...I can sure give you credit for your understanding of "expletive deleated" ... :-) "Tongue in cheek" - half-throttle, half-humorous, not with full intensity. (Analogy? Try speaking while keeping your "tongue in cheek." That should give you a chuckle.) > >Why would you think that a person who doesn't enter a room with > >prolific announcement of credentials and degrees would not > >understand something as simple as habitual oversizing of HVAC > >equipment (to be read "site-specific inefficient")? Sure, someone > >should take greater pains in identifying specific construction > >materials, their heat absorption and retention rates and other > >criteria at the end use site before the unit is (mis-)matched to > >it. > > http://intro.energy.saving.nu/ Sorry. But a simple hot link doesn't explain any automatic presumption of the inability of others to understand. > >But all that is a bit too late and generally not applicable to > >someone who finally wakes up ("energy wise") in the middle of a > >situation where the compressor is running full time, with only > >R-13 in the attic, single pane windows, black tile roof, direct > >solar gain through southern exposed windows, uninsulated crawl > >space and 20 or so small space heaters plugged into every > >lightbulb socket throughout the household. This is exactly where > >the enormous majority of consumers find themselves when they do > >wake up, give or take a few variables. > > Is it not awful to wake up in this situation and it says something about > the kind of professional engineering that went into building this house. > Don't you think that it is something missing in the construction industry? Virtually no arguement there. Personally? Were I in your field of endeavor, I would muster up all the like minded professionals I could and make as loud and large a stink as possible, skipping right over all the political and industry soothsayers ("channels"), so that the public was directly and unmistakably informed as to how politics and initial construction cost avoidance almost always sway the day and leave the end use consumers and the environment in a lurch. Consumers need accurate answers, not compromised products of butt smooching (ass kissing). > >The resolve for such problems is not to drop $400 for a > >"professional" consultant to come in and recommend common sense > >and basic retrofits. > > > >As for "unique visitors" versus "hits" at a web site....Please > >accept my humble apologies. I have always operated under the > >premise that all persons are unique, therefore all visitors are > >unique. Apparently what I simply thought was a polite Swedish > >vernacular was a more specific categorization based upon interest > >or dwell time or some other such criteria. > > It is clear definitions of what is what, concerning web statistics. Since > you changed my definition to an other definition, I must assume that you > knew what you talked about. Generally a visitor is someone that enters you > site and are active on it. Normally the web technology is event driven, > i.e. you request a file and the server delivers and forget about you, which > means that the page file is one "hit" and any images and other things are > other files, each one represent a "hit". How many hits you have is > therefore dependent on the web design. Each hit is a defined event or > session and treated as such by the server. It is methods to go over to a > sort of on line mode and keep sessions open, like during payments etc. but > this is a very small part of activities. > > Visitors can only be defined from the log file, where you can se a sequence > of hit from the same Internet address (IP). The log analyzer will therefore > look for consecutive hits and the time between them. The default definition > is that if it is more than 30 minutes between two hits, it will be a new > visitor. This because that most IP addresses are allocated dynamically and > can represent several visitors. > > It is many people that know the difference, so when you change my unique > visitors to hits, it is easy to belive that you are trying to ridicule > instead of serious discussions. Especially since your discussion technique > on the subject clearly follows the same lines and it is careless and far > from straight forward. You've taken offense where none is necessary or intended. Until your explanation above, I had never differentiated between "hits" and "unique visitors." Apparently there is a language gap here, as I'm not an IT "professional." I guess it's one of those situations where one person uses fish eggs for bait and the other pays $100 an ounce and spreads them on crumpets. > >Anyway...all this is simply being straight forward as to how it > >struck me. It was not an intentional broad side with a 2 x 4. > >Just honesty. > > > >Now about those cereal-straw bale houses....with hemp pressboard > >covered interior walls.............. > > Since you are spending so much time on this anyway, why do you not read > through http://energysaving.com/ so you at least understand where I come > from. Then we can have an interesting discussion about the subject, that > everybody can participate in. You said that this was interesting for this > list. I agree with you that it can be very interesting for all alternative > fuels, mainly because how efficient the energy uses are, defines the > production needs and pollution. I've taken notes of the general intent and purpose of http://energysaving.com/ That's probably one reason why I've kept "tongue in cheek." In the short and long run, you're not after anything different that what I am, or so it appears. > And when you write, do remember that I am a ignorant foreigner and do not > understand the finer details in many of your expressions. Please write in a > simple and clear way and if you use an expression, attach an explanation > for educational purpose. i.e. what is, "Ignorant foreigner" with an engineering degree? Although a degree is not a completely adequate yardstick of intelligence or its implementation, I don't gather that your self-depracating assessment is any more accurate than my own of being a "hick" and a "hayseed." > broad side with a 2 x 4 = ? To smack upside the head. To torpedo. To assault violently with words or other. > polite Swedish vernacular = ? Gentile (that's "gentle") Swedish mannerisms in speech or in print. > "tongue in cheek," = ? Please see description above, or simply place tongue in cheek and attempt to converse. > (half in jest) = ? Half serious. Half not. > wee tad = ? A little bit. > Luther = ? Martin Luther. Father of religious reformation. His "Ninety-Five Theses," so called due to its 95 points of contention, was tacked to the Wittenburg church door (October 31st ?) 1517. It refuted the pope's and church's authority to supplant God's. 1483-1546. > R-13 = ? (I have no reason to know US building codes) R-"x" (R-value) is the reciprocal of U-"x" (U-value). R-value is the measure of resistance to heat flow. A higher R-value means better ability to resist heat flow through it. R = Hr/ftÓ/degreeF/BTU U = BTU/hr/ftÓ/degreeF (Btu's per hour transmitted through one square foot of material for each one degree Fahrenheit in temperature difference between the two sides of the panel. R=1/U Todd Swearingen ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Plan to Sell a Home? http://us.click.yahoo.com/J2SnNA/y.lEAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
