Posted By kb on 02 Feb 2013 07:26 AM
Is there any credibility to this?
The Outdoor Air Myth Exposed
While there is some validity to some of the points, they're fudging.
And though they make references to "...until it was studied...", "...not supported by research results...", etc, they cite NO REFERENCES (exactly zero!).
I'm a big believer in actual measurements in favor of the merely theoretical, yet that article is a collection of assertions about some theoretical data that exists out there somewhere to prove their case? I for one would like to see the data! (What little I've seen was relevant for very tight houses. More
general discussion here.)
In fact a house can (and should) be made tight enough for these things to matter, especially smaller homes. Even pretty big houses can come in under 500cfm @ 50 pascals, (as did a friend's deep energy retrofit on a 3 story house with a full basement). That is the equivalent of a single 3.5" diameter hole- about the same size as a dedicated combustion air line into a mid-BTU output woodstove. Are we to assume that literally ALL of the air leakage in a house will be available to the woodstove for combustion air, independent of where that leakage is located?
It's true that most existing houses leak sufficient air to make it less of an issue, but it would be silly to intentionally build a leaky house just to be able to use a cute woodstove that didn't have provisions for piped-in combustion air, but building in proximity ventilation might be a reasonable plan-B.