Last year I bought a house that was built in the early 60’s, and as far as I can tell there is no wall insulation. Does anyone have input on a good insulation system that can be retrofitted without a complete remodel? I am extremely nervous about the mold issue, as i live in the Pacific NW. Any feedback is appreciated.
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
Learn how to fight wood-boring beetles and prevent home infestations with expert advice from Richard D. Kramer, an authority in pest control.
Featured Video
How to Install Exterior Window TrimHighlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
It's not my area of specialty, but I think you could try something like blown-in cellulose insulation. It could likely be installed by cutting a small hole in the wall and flowing it into the cavity without major house surgery.
Justin Fink - FHB Editorial
hamrhed,
If mold is an issue with you then blown in celluliose won't prevent mold.. The ground up paper that celluliose is made is will if exposed to enough moisture provide the food required for mold to grow..
Foam on the other hand isn't part of molds food chain, Now mold will grow on foam but foam isn't part of it's natural food source..
There is another advantage of foam, first it will stiffin up the house dramatically reducing the creaking, moaning sounds you sometimes hear when the wind blows really hard. and second it will seal up the house. Moisture cannot penetrate foam and foam when it's sprayed in adheres to the structure of the house very well. I'm willing to bet that a properly foamed house would float while fiberglas or celluliose would add nothing to the waterproofing of the walls/ceiling..
No I don't sell foam, I've just done a great deal of reaserch prior to building my home..
I guess my question would be: Can foam be shot in like cellulose or blown in insulation through holes in the sheeting?
I believe so, but you need to be careful. If you seal yourself up good and tight.. which is great.. you may have moisture issues to deal with later. So some sort of controlled ventilation would be a good idea to plan for.-=Northeast Radiant Technology=-
Radiant Design, Consultation, Parts Supply
http://www.NRTradiant.com
NRTRob,
air to air heat exchanger! that's what you need if you seal up the house really tight.. that or you can open windows..
Air to air hat exhangers really help when you live in the frozen artic like I do and won't open a window on a 20 below day. You get fresh air and retain as much as 85% of the heat..
Well, there is more than one way to skin a cat. If you compare electrical usage, sometimes exhaust only ventilation systems with controlled make-up airlets can make sense. HRVs can be tough to retrofit as well.. definitely easier to do "controlled leakage" with a weaker exhaust fan in a attic "insulation box" in some cases. And easier doesn't just mean easier, it means cheaper too. How much heat will you have to save to save back the cost of a major demolition and renovation project?However I agree mostly, we favor HRVs or ERVs the vast majority of the time.-=Northeast Radiant Technology=-
Radiant Design, Consultation, Parts Supply
http://www.NRTradiant.com
There is no foam that can compete in price with blown cellulose.
Cellulose is treated against rot by mould and is made fire resistant by the use of quite benign chemicals- borax, boric acid and some formulations may contain a small amount of sulfate. Borax has been used for years to prevent wood rot and is recommended by the "Self-help Allergy Book' as a cleaning powder when you can stand Mr. Clean and his smelly cousins. It was actually the laundry and washing soda that your great grandmothers used.
When you look at the R value per $ spent and the fact that it is 100% recycled paper content that will last for years, its hard to recommend any other type of insulation like foam except in special situations such as (1) refrigerated tractor trailers, etc where less space used and lighter weight are prime goals or (2) to substitute foam board sheathing for wood based sheathing (the house can get more efficient for less $$ spent in some cases....bonus, bonus!!). In Canada, re-cycled cellulose fiber insulation was the first product to receive the nationally recognized "Environmental Logo".
I've been using cellulose since 1977 (used run an insulation co. fulltime; now do the odd house for friends) and stopped blowing fiberglass in 1983.
To do your own walls with a small blower setup, you would have to drill 2 holes per 8' cavity in most cases and sometimes 3 when there is a diagonal brace across 3-4 cavities. The holes only need be 1" diameter about 2.5-3.5' from the bottom plate and 1-2' down from the top plate. With the new grind of cellulose (fiberizer), the installed density to prevent settling is about 2.8 lbs/sq ft or so, achievable easily.
experienced,
Wow! this old chestnut again..
Cellulose is OK under certain circumstances.. First you need to back up your statement a little.. note I'm not calling you all wrong. I just suggest you explain the rest of the story..
Cellulose is tested under laboratory conditions.. Dry and at 70degrees.. as the cellulliose gets moist it's R value goes down dramatically. In addition as the temp difference spreads cellluliose's R value goes down.. dense pack cellulose goes down less than normal cellulose but still it goes down..
Various studies show various numbers but an R 14 wall may go down to an effective R6 or 6 with a 70 degree spread (70 inside with a zero day outside) now add the loss of R value due to dampness in the material and it can have a relatively low R value when you need it most..
As I said in dry warm climate cellulose is really a good insulation material.. In damp conditions it loses a great deal of R value.. The colder it is outside and the warmer it is inside then more and more thermal washing happens further reducing the effect R value of cellulose.
Your initial statement regarding first cost is accurate.. It costs less to insulate with cellulose than foam.. However if you are able to take a long term look at the total cost of insulation you will quickly understand how little the initial cost differential really is..
The average home in America is 46 years old.. down slightly from 54 in 1990. May I use a 50 year period to show what I mean?
Assume that it costs $10,000 to insulate with foam and $6,000 to insulate with cellulose.. Over the fifty years that we are speaking of That means the foam costs $200 a year while the cellulose costs $120.00 a year.
Or does it?
Assume that it costs $400 to heat the house with foam and $640 a year to heat with cellulose.. (those are defensible numbers here in the upper midwest) times the fifty years foam will cost $200,000 and cellulose will cost$320,000 for a difference of $120,000 note to keep things simple I assumed that for 50 years energy costs would remain constant.. if you add in the expected increases the savings becomes rather dramatic!
At one time I was fully involved in the energy conservation business from blowing insulation with my own co. from 1980-1990 (and I still do a bit for friend/aquaintenaces now) to being brought into this province to be an energy advisor/analyst and responsible for the province's energy efficiency laws. So for 23 years fulltime and 5 part time, I have never heard the claims that you have made towards cellulose. I used t subscribe to Energy Design Undate (EDU), JLC, Solplan Review ( by an investigative architect from Vancouver). I occasionly bought FHP (for an energy article) and read Environmental Building News whenever I got a chance.
How moist does the cellulose get? Well in my area, dry wood in houses ranges from 7-8 to 10-11% and when it's that wet, you can't tell it has moisture in it until you weigh it and oven dry it. Same with cellulose- I've been involved with renovation of some homes with cellulose in the walls- no dampness that you could tell or feel after 15+ years.
Some of the "facts" you quote though were attributed to low or under density fiberglass (simulating cheating contractors) in a test chamber at Oak Ridge National Labs(ORNL). This loss of R value was due to convection occurring in the upper few inches of the loose glass and it got worse as the temperatures dropped. Their solution to get some of the fiberglass R value back again: blow 2-3" of cellulose over the top of the underblown fiberglass. This was well published in EDU and other places. I just noticed a reference to ORNL on a thread here somewhere today.
Also I have never heard the term "thermal washing" before; could you explain it?
Foam costs seem quite low in your area. Here foam is 2-3 times the cost of cellulose- about $1.30-1.50 per board foot plus taxes, but we don't have Icynene in our area yet.
Have found that a lot of people take shots at cellulose becasue it is a cheaper re-cycled product. They all have seen a wet newspaper and envision that when anyone mentions moisture with cellulose- not the real world.
One thread at "green building" I just read talked about the foam not allowing mice/insects in but cellulose will. They haven't been around for long.....I've seen carpenter ants eat their way up to the sill plate/mudsill through exterior covered foam board on foundations (and the ants are on the fast increase in our area- believed to be warming weather conditions expanding their range)
I've been the first to try a lot of new stuff in my area like wood foundations (my favourite), HRV's in 1981, owned a blower door in 1981, energy audits in 1981, house inspection in 1981-2, inspector/troubleshooter/researcher for R2000 (82-92), but I would still use the cellulose based systems for cost and embedded energy content in relation to oil/foam/concrete based systems.
I really appreciate the technical information you just put out. However I warn you that Frenchy will argue it until the point he is proven wrong then stop posting. Only to wait until the next unsuspecting person asks about cellulose and he will spew his "facts" again. Thanks for the detailed info! DanT
sorry 'bout that...
frenchy has decided that any experience he gained re-building his one house can be projected universally
he found some old wet cellulose in his attic and decided it was wet because of his climate
frenchy is a great guy.....well versed in rough-terrain fork lifts, but he doan no sh*d about insulationMike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
Mike Smith,
Ahhh! I've repeatedly said that differant climates merit differant considerations, the warm dry desert would never suffer from moisture absorbtion that will occur in damp and cold eviornments like mine..
In Kansas or West Texas or many other places celluliose is an excellant low cost insulator.. In North Dakota or Montana it even might be fine.. In Minnesota land of 10,000 lakes (actually almost 12,000) it has it's limitations.. I can imagine that along costal Miane or along the coast of Alaska it would be less effective than Foam..
Several of you who make your living installing celluliose and have a long term vested interest in selling it may simply be blind to it's short comings.. No insulation is perfect, no Not even foam!
You might do better if you ask me what the short comings are of foam.. I'll be glad to discuss it's negatives..
"In that dense pack celluliose was put in the attic"
Was it really dense packed, or just blown in? It was my understanding that densepacking required an enclosed space. Was this in the rafter space?
The attic was packed with celluliose under 1/4 inch plywood and then fiberglas batts installed on top. That might not really be dense pack but in the 20+ years I was there it never settled an micro inch (I'm actually the one who put the fiberglas batts on top of the plywood.. since the rafters were only 8 inches deep and I didn't believe that was enough..
frenchy... i don't make a living installing cellulose.. we install it in our projects because it'smore convenient and we do a better job than we used to get by subbing it out
you are sadly mistaken if you think Minnesota has a more humid climate than coastal Rhode Island... you are just plain wrong...
if you want to use foam.. go right ahead.. it's a good product.. higher R-values per inch..we use a lot of PerformGuard EPS to augment our R-values in areas that we can't get enough cellulose in..
you think you know what happened in your own house... but you don't... it didn't get wet because you have a humid climate.. it got wet because you had massive air leaks shipping huge amounts of wet interior air into your attic and condensing on the roof sheathing..
no matter what the insulation was at that time .. it would have gotten wet.. fiberglass or foam would not have absorbed the water .. it just would have let it leak down thru your ceilings..
cellulose absorbed it and would have held it until it reached the saturation point
you know almost nothing about cellulose and i wish you would stop referencing any claims about cellulose.. good or bad.. because you are ignorant of the truth about cellulose
you think your solution is a universal truth.. and it isn'tMike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
Mike,
Let's take your last statement first.
I have repeatedly said that in certain locations under certain conditions cellulose is fine, the limitations I mention don't apply. Frankly Cellulose appeals to me.. As 'I've repeatedly said I'm cheap and I like to recycle.. Grind up old newspapers add a fire retardant and a few other chemicals and what's not to like?
My objection is and always has been that cellulose isn't always the correct answer.. (nor for that matter is foam or Fiberglas)
Finally Mike, you and I will simply not agree on the source of dampness. I feel that it is extremely arrogant of you to dispute my observations and close examination of the facts in my case.. Let me restate them.. There was an excellent vapor barrier in place..complete and undamaged... ( an even if there had been, in the dead of the winter here the moisture would be in the low single digits often under 5%){ yes nose bleeds and dry cough} There were never any leaks of any sort in the roof.
The only path to the cellulose was thru the soffit vents and ridge vents as well as whatever moisture could be absorbed thru builtrite in the walls.. { Here I'll admit ignorance regarding the perm rating of Builtrite}
Your comment regarding the water retention capability of cellulose is most certainly valid. The soggy mess I could find in the attic in the dead of winter would dry out completely in the summer... Fiberglas wouldn't have done as well nor would foam have held any water at all..
what ?... me , arrogant ?... why , i oughta.....Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
You are ignoring a possible big source of the moisture- snow blowing in vents- that's why I have been fighting the venting rules in the codes since about 1983!!! I have a number (like 20 or more) of stories and even some pictures of my own house over the past 2 winters (I'll post them when/if I figure out how) of snow blowing in gable end vents, and in another house I worked on, 12' up throught metal soffit vents, air channels over cathedral ceiling (like raftermate; we have a locally produced Truvent system here) and into the blown celluose insulation.
experienced,
While that certainly has merit, I tried to block off my vents the second winter in the house.. In the fall I duct taped over them thinking I was keeping heat in. For some reason I couldn't keep them duct taped no matter how early I duct taped and how clean I made sure they were.. I mean the tape seemed plenty sticky when I put it on in the fall but by spring over half of them would be loose...
That was over 20 years ago and shortly after that I started to buy Fine Home Building.. At someplace in there I read how that was a no-no So I never tried that again.
I suspect, (but admit that I never conclusively proved) that the late fall humidity got the cellulose and Fiberglas damp. Then without the heat of summer baking the moisture out it remained damp all winter.
I've watched the humidity as reported by the weather service and for the past two weeks and while we haven't received any rain it's always been near 100% in the morning.. Some days it stays in the high 80's and someday it's higher.. Now that's not here by the lake but in town.
Falls here in Minnesota tend to be humid and sometimes rainy and dreary.. The vents admit air into them and if that air has moisture in it, it stands to reason that moisture would get into the cellulose.. Compound that with the moisture given off by the lake and you see where the problem may be..
I could understand how I missed seeing blown in snow,, if some came in with all the heat I was losing due to damp insulation the snow would quickly melt. given the excellent vapor barrier there could have actually been ponding water and none of it leaked into the ceilings.
Frenchy, you say at 5% RH your cellulose was damp?
Is this like spontaneous humidity happening in your attic?
When should I expect the bottom of my insulation machine to rust out?
Why isn't there water leaking out the bales of cells when I get them?
You've analyzed the hell out of it, but you're wrong & you're giving out bad advice to people looking for answers. Some of them might think you actually have a clue.
Joe H
JoeH
You don't have the facts correct as I've relayed them.
The celluliose doesn't come damp, it get's damp.. I've repeatedly speculated that the dampness may have come from the moisture in the air.. Humidity gets near 100% in the fall around here and remains near those levels for weeks.. That's in town and not here by the lake where humidity is worse!
My roof (as most roofs) have vents top and bottom. Air gets into those vents and if that air has moisture in it what is to keep the celluliose from getting moist?
As it gets moist it loses it's ability to insulate.
What part of that statement do you disagree with?
Frenchy, What part of that statement do you disagree with?
All
of
the
above.
It just isn't true.
People ask about insulation, and you post this nonsense.
I know you're full of sheet, but these new people asking the questions have no way of knowing you don't know what you're talking about.
Joe H
JoeH
OK, then you feel that the air around here is dry?
Or do you feel that somehow that air with 100% humidity in passing thru thru the soffit vents it dries out somehow? How?
Or do you feel that cellulose can't get damp?
or that if cellulose gets damp it doesn't affect it's ability to insulate?
experianced,
You make many valid points and what you claim is correct.. As far as you take it..
Now here's the rub.. it is virtually impossible to get accurite numbers in the real world.. virtually every location is differant..
For example I live in a home that was originally carefully insulated to the standards of the day.. In that dense pack celluliose was put in the attic and fiberglas was correctly installed in the walls.. An excellant vapor barrier was installed and carefully taped.. (in the demolution I can't find a single flaw or open spot)..
Yet the heating bills were terrible! as much as $500.00 a month in December and January. This is with a new high efficency furnace that gets a yearly tune up. I own a digetal thermometer that allows me to shine on a surface and it will tell me what tempurature that surface is..
The portions of the home that are stick framed with fiberglas insulation read between 49 degrees and 53 degrees. (it's easy to find a stud, since that's at 49 degrees and the walls with insulation are at 53) The thermostat was set at 70 degrees and it was zero outside..
Ceilings were 8 degrees warmer (67degrees) and the floor was six degrees cooler (about 47 degrees, varied a little bit depending on if I measured near a window) the portion of the house that was built with SIP's (about 1/2 of the house measured at 68 degrees no matter where I pointed the thermometer.
I'm really proud of that since the ceilings in the great room are 28 feet above the floor which was at the same 68 degrees) In addition the 1/2 of the house built with SIP's had only one 4 inch heat duct dum,ped out in the middle while the portion of the house as originally built had 14 4 inch heat ducts.. (sorry, bragging over!!!) <G>
Now the rest of the story.. I live right on a lake, fall is a little later here than a few blocks away since the big thermal mass that makes up the lake retains it's heat about two weeks longer than nearby. In the morning you see vapors coming off the lake and there can actually be a fog around my house that the neighbors just off the lake don't have..
Moisture arrives into the fiberglas and celluliose from outside.. (my home was built prior to the use of Tyvek and 15 pound felt made up the water barrier but allowed moisture into the insulation from the outside..
In the winter when you'd expect the insulation to be nice and dry (since the inside of the house is drier than a popcorn fart) (less than 5% moisture) I found the opposite to be true.. I attribute it to the freeze thaw cycles that make up winter around here and the dampness that starts from fall rains and fog..
Thus in a actual measured real world situation where my only interest is the best insulation. I found a dramatic improvement in foam over fiberglas and celluliose.. My neighbor also has just recently foamed his house.. and My sister is going thru her third year with foamed walls.. Modest heating bills and still stick built!
As for your comment about recycled newspaper, to me that would be a positive.. I love low cost! (I'm so cheap my shoe laces squeak <G>) What convinced me to go foam wasn't first cost.. rather one winter when I went up into the attic and noticed the frost on the bottom of the roof boards.. that was due to the moisture in the celluliose.. (and before you assume that the moisture was due to a roof leak let me assure you that I spent nearly every rainy night one summer with a flash light looking for the tinest trickle or leak! )
Now to be fair, the summer heat mangages to dry the celluliose/ fiberglas out completely (to the touch) and even though my home has well over 25 years since it's last remodel there wasn't a single rotted board or sign of any mold!
Thermal washing is a phrase I picked up from some article about the effects of tempurature diferentials..
If the walls are at 70 degrees on the inside and say 20 below on the outside that gives a giant tempurature gradiant in a narrow area. (say 3 1/2inches) both fiberglas and celluliose are capable of allowing air to move through them.. now to be fair fiberglas is far better at air movement than dense pack celluliosebut neither will completely eliminate air movement. Thre is quite a big engine to move the air, heat rises, cold settles and with that sort of differntial the outside air is desperately diving to the floor while the inside air is climbing just like a hot air ballon.. Air molecules rub against each other in that close proximity and transfer heat. It doesn't show up much in lab tests since they never test at those kind of temp differentials..
regarding unwanted critters, You are correct in that carpenter ants, mice etc. will tunnel into it the same as any other insulation.. I bought SIP's with Bug break they add trace borax to it that causes ants and other bugs to die and doesn't make a mouse feel very healthy either.. But you still need to take the same precautions with SIP's you do with any house!
I think my previous post clearly showed that while celluliose is a lower first cost insulator, It doesn't remain a low cost insulator when considering the other portion of the heating equation..
For the average sell it in five years and move kinda person you make the best economic decision.. I doubt the differance in energy bills will overcome the higher intial costs. But if the cost of energy doubles as it's predicted to then foam is looking better and better.. and if energy takes a bigger and bigger portion of the family budget the first cost differential will be eliminated..
Finally I suspect the reason foam is more competitive here is that there are far more foam instalerrs around here than there ar fiberglass or celluliose installeres.. Many firms offer all three methods and even a few more!
Ben in this game too long Frenchy!!
The part of the house (new SIP's) you are comparing the fiberglass/cellulose to cannot be compared since one is retrofit where it is very hard to be perfect. This part of the house has no exterior air barrier such as building wrap so air will go through the walls to some extent. The fact that there was a vapour barrier on the interior has only a little significance to the argument unless you tested it with a blower door. If you looked at it and assumed it was tight, it's like a cop without a radar gun, fining you for going 125. It won't stand in court.
And I assume that since it was an older part of the home with the fiberglass, the walls were only 4 inches thick- R12 batts, right. The SIP's usually have R25 -32 in them if I remember correctly........so there's your temperature differences accounted for just by installed R value and not degraded R value in the other section as you suspected.
If you're living in 5% moisture levels in the house, you wouldn't be leaving at that fpor long since you'd have severely cracked lips, skin etc. Some deserts are in that range. When the RH gets down below 20- 25% in houses, someone generally starts to complain. What do you have for measuring RH. I've seen a brand new dehumidistat supplied with an HRV read a full 20% off the set value. These are not highly scientific pieces of gear as are the hygrometers sold at hardware stores. You need a sling psychrometer to get within +/- 2-3%. At 5%, everyone would definitely have nosebleeds if they spent any amount of time in the house.
As for your "thermal washing" just by temperature differential in properly installed cellulose and fiberglass, keep dreaming!! ORNL got thermal convection and reduced R value in really improperly installed (read ripoff) loose long fiber glass insulation blown in attics by adjusting their temperatures to match the real world in an environmental chamber.
One last question:
If they are so superior, why aren't all the building scientists who are leading us into a more efficient and durable future housing stock jumping up and down about foam, ICF's etc. over all the other kinds of insulation?
experienced,
Your comments are again correct,. No there was no house wrap in the old portion of the house and yes the walls were 2x4's but the facts are I could locate each stud simply because of temp differential.. 53 vs 49 The SIP's were 78 degrees.. anyplace!
Yes the house dries out that much in the winter.. yes we get sore throats and dry cough and nose bleeds.. I tried adding a humidifier and found the results were worse. (YES I HATE WINTER!!!!!) I'm putting in an air exchanger even though I expect it to cost me higher heating bills, but something needs to be done to deal with the winter dryness..
OK I will grant you that the equipment I have isn't certified and tested. On the really damp and wet days it reads as high as 90% and on the really dry days during the winter it reads at 5%
I wish I could find the article regarding thermal washing, since the house is under construction and my library a victim of that construction I won't waste any time looking for it... Too many boxes and too much stuff piled on top of those boxes.. later next summer when the library is finished (or further along) I'll look up the source of that article.. (heck it might even have be been one of the articles in Fine Home Building)
Now you bring up the $64,000 dollar question. If under certain conditions why isn't the nation flocking to foam?
This is pure speculation on my part.. I suspect first cost is part of it, entrenched contractors combined with lack of real interest on the part of the buying public. (much easier to be impressed by granite countertops than a superior insulation) environmentalists who view anything made with petroleum with horror. mis information and effective marketing by manufactures. Finally in some locations cellulose is just fine. and it's easy for a do it yourselfer to put batts of Fiberglas in the attic and feel better..
The fact that your house is getting down to 5% RH in the winter (assuming your equipment is ssomwhat accurate) is from overventilation. Your house is a sieve or else, it is very large with ony one or two peole living in it producing very little internal moisture. Adding an HRV will make the problem worse, no it can't get much worse.
If you take a psychrometric chart and look at the outdoor air at -20 deg C (about -4 F, I think, no temp chart at hand) and 90% RH....... by the time you bring it in and warm it to +20 C (68 F), the RH is now about 5% RH. So you don't want to increase the air change, it'll put your heating bills up!!!!
experianced,
Thank you, I think I understood that.. As I understand it the need for a heat recovery unit is not to save on heating bills but to induce fresh air to the inside where air can get pretty pollutied.. As I understand it they cost a great deal (and I really don't have a line on a good source where they are more affordable) in addition the numbers I've been given regarding their ability to recover heat seem fairly unreliable.. (I wish Consumer Reports would test them..)
I'm speculating that the heat recovery unit,, (awww, why don't I just use HRV?) will add moisture to the house during the thaw periods.. those days in the middle of the winter when the sun is shining and the snow is melting..
Franky I don't think I have enough knowledge to make an informed decision regarding the need for a unit.. I know that thru the spring/ summer and much of the fall we will simply open windows. There are darn few days in the summer when it's warm enough to want airconditioning.. less than a dozen and sometimes less than 5 When it's well over 90 degrees in the city it's still extremely pleasant here, we get a soft cool breeze off the lake and the shade given by the large mature trees keeps it extremely pleasant..
Yes it was fairly large before, about 3500 sq.ft. and yes there is usually just the couple of us here most of the time, (teenage daughters have this need to socialize by going to the mall, movies, and friends houses <G>)
The new house is approaching 5000 sq.ft.* and yes it's still primarily just the two of us. In addition where we had relatively low ceilings before today the great room is 28 feet, and the first floor has 9 foot ceilings with 8 foor ceilings on the second..
* who knows what size it really is,, an insurance broker considered it larger and realitors consider it smaller.. The city says simply that it's too big for the lot even though my neighbors have relatively larger homes..
Frenchy, I thought we were agreed that as you had absolutely ZERO experience with installing cells, you were gonna lay off the BS about them being the soggy monster that would ruin any house they were in?
Joe H
JoeH
Please show anyplace where I laid claim that celluliose would ruin any home?
I have never discussed that aspect.
My comments are well born out by articles right here in Fine Home Building and I've sited them repeatedly.
To review, Moisture lowers the R value of both celluliose and fiberglas.
Thermal washing occurs with both celluliose and fiberglas..
The two items are not mutally exclusive. another words it is possible to have both..
There are some extra 0's in your calculation.. :)