problems are extremely rare if you had to do a statistical survey.
Problems do exist, but often it is the result of a primary issue which
is not effectively mitigated by the increased airflow. Houses generally
don't fall down because of drywall, trim, and the moment resistance in
nailed lumber joints - all things we generally ignore.
Now, to be clear, I'm in favor of (nearly) all of these "greening"
provisions - they make for better buildings, not just safer ones. If
the code only addresses energy efficiency, we'll end of with the nasty,
claustrophobic, mold-traps they built in the 1970s. With luck, there
will be enough old farts on the committees to remember the poorly
executed efficiency designs of 30 years ago and make sure that we don't
paint architects and owners into a corner.
Jordan
Christopher Wright wrote:
> Not true--at least not here. Plenty of cases as I mentioned where mold
> intrusion from moisture accumulation has caused serious ongoing health
> issues. And carbon monoxide accumulation from appliance backdrafting
> kills people. I've been involved in several cases of this sort and I
> have a colleague who makes a pretty good living dealing with moisture
> and air quality issues in existing homes. Both of these are the reason
> I hear civil and structural engineer buddies as well as misuse of
> engineered materials tell me flat out they wouldn't buy a house that
> was less than 20 years old.
>
>
******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********