Times Website ExertEarlier this year Bob Stoker, 66, from Nottingham, became the first Briton to have his property insulated with aerogel. “The heating has improved significantly. I turned the thermostat down five degrees. It’s been a remarkable transformation,” he said.

Why would insulating more mean he can turn his thermastat down? Surly it just means he can use less heat to get to the same temp?

Posted on behalf of David Olivier:

These U-values quoted of 0.35, O.41 etc, are pretty pathetic.

It's about where new buildings in Sweden and Denmark were in 1970 to -80. Since then, some of the rest of Europe has progressed to the point that a number of existing homes in Germany are now being improved to the Passivhaus Standard, with U values dropping to 0.10-0.12 or occasionally as high as 0.15.

We have a climate change problem. That requires us to improve buildings to the point that we can be more comfortable for far less fuel, not more comfortable for the same fuel usage as before.

Internally, 75 sprayed limecrete; or if externally, multifoil. Or both. Beat that for thickness - and retaining benefit of heavyweight interior.

Yes, that's extreme. Once patent systems have been released for fixing multifoils, to improve on counterbattening (they've ready to go, waiting only for the clouds to clear on accreditation), then a multifoil external cladding solution will be only 5-10mm more than the multifoil thickness (currently typically 30), plus the overcladding - thin self-finished board, or render on board or rendermesh, or boarding on battens. That will give whole-heating-season heat retention equivalent to 200-250 min wool or 160 Cellotex - however both the multifoil and the min wool/Cellotex (and Aerogel too) at a real-life heat-retention performance only 40% of what we've been led to expect by application of published steady-state k-values for min wool/Cellotex (and Aerogel).

The entire world has been content to accept the long pedigree of scrupulously controlled steady-state k-value tests, as the true measure of insulants - Aspen, NASA or whoever included, I'm sure. At the same time the whole world has been trying to explain the universally disappointing results for insulations tested over e.g. a whole heating-season, blaming poor installation, unpredictable clients opening windows etc. when they shouldn't. Only recently has the flaw been spotted - the careful establishment of steady-state conditions before taking test readings, has guaranteed that 50yrs of pukka building science has been barking up the wrong tree - steady-state doesn't exist in the real world. And only recently has the quite simple understanding emerged, as to why there's a huge difference between steady-state performance, and performance under dynamically-varying conditions.
As a result (from http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=125&page=5 ):

"17 European companies manufacture multifoils and, having just now reached agreement on protocol, the testing houses of 7 European countries are begining construction of between 13 and 20 very expensive test rigs. US, Canada, Australia have agreed to sit back and watch, for the time being. Multifoils will be tested against conventional insulants, Cellotex etc as well as mineral wool. Each rig has dozens of thermocouples recording at frequent time intervals, the 'like real life' dynamically varying test cycles will run over months, or a year. Under investigation will be actual energy loss, and old-fashioned slide-rule-era concepts like R- (or k-) value won't get a look in. The huge data sets will be number-crunched to reveal the hidden patterns and the key determinant criteria, chaos-theory-style. Each insulant's performance will be shown to vary considerably, depending on the prevailing conditions. The days of single R-value rating for a given insulant are numbered; in future the expected heat-retention performance of any given insulant will be modelled, with local weather data, plugging in the key operative criteria that they're about to start deriving empirically. There will be big winners and embarassing big losers."

Aerogel is a nanotechnology I think and there are a lot of concerns about the safety of nanoparticles. Has any body looked at it from this angle?

Just to resurect this one - Anyone know how thick aerogel can be applied? Is there a limit?

Thanks Biff, but I meant technical limitations not financial ones

Aerogel also being discussed here..

http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1921&page=1#Item_1

I have used aerogel from Proctors (via their distributor Travis Perkins). This was in the bottom panel of a back door. One tip is to get Proctors to cut the aerogel panel into six pieces if you do not need a large size. This drastically saves on transportation costs (which otherwise would have been more than the aerogel).

The back door has two large panels. The top panel had a single panel of glass and this was replaced with a double glazed panel with low-e reflex glass plus argon.

The bottom panel of 23 X 21 inches had the aerogel from Proctors added. The bottom recessed panel is typical of an English door and is made of a single layer of plywood. I just filled in this recess with aerogel and added another wooden panel on top. The new panel went flush with the surrounding frame of the door. Aerogel is good in this application because it gives decent insulation in a thin layer.

I think this was worth doing. Probably in comfort terms more than anything. The payback in fuel savings could be quite long - maybe ten years. But heck the missus is happier.

I have a front door I need to fix also. This has too many panels, the seal is bad, and the door has warped. Plus the top panel is stained glass which is falling apart. So I think it may be a replacement door in this case with the stain glass inside a double glazed panel (if that is possible).

I posted this question in another thread but it was during a 'testy' bit so may have been missed.

Anyone who has played with aerogel (saint tends to hold the candle but there must be more of you out there) care to comment on what it would be like if used as an over wooden (floorboard) floor insulation with a vapourcheck on top.

Posted By: BrianRI have a front door I need to fix also. This has too many panels, the seal is bad, and the door has warped. Plus the top panel is stained glass which is falling apart. So I think it may be a replacement door in this case with the stain glass inside a double glazed panel (if that is possible).

Yes, it is possible - easy, really. The stained glass artist needs to make up the panel with a Y-section lead around the edge; this fits into a slot on the inside of a DG spacer. The stained glass person needs to speak to the DG manufacturers to make sure that the panel is made exactly the right size to go into the unit - when I was doing this I needed to make up the stained glass panels with the shoulder of the Y-lead 15mm in from the finished size of the DG unit, but obviously it depends on the profile of the spacer and ahould be checked.
The finished panels - triple glazed with leaded glass in the middle - have very good soundproofing properties, and are very heavy!

All we need to do now is get Proctor to halve the price

James,
Check with Proctor 01250 872261 for thickness and pricing. As for any insulation sensible to balance cost against return but at 30mm you'd be a salesman's dream. Some of the UFH supplier's insulation recommendations are way over the top, some leave it up to you.....chance for added value (margin) or ignorance? Either way best advice: Talk to someone in the insulation business