|
| Back to Contents Page |
Home
Energy Index |
About
Home Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page
| Back Issues of Home Energy |
Home Energy Magazine Online July/August 1998
TRENDS
Insulation Systems: Same Tightness
The National Association of Home Builders Research
Center recently compared various wall insulation products, and found that
with good air sealing, different insulation systems do not necessarily
change a home's airtightness. It found that fiberglass batts were far cheaper
and quicker to install than other products, but that the quality of their
installation was inferior.
The experiment was carefully conducted. Four
builders constructed 26 houses that were evaluated between January and
late October 1997. They used different insulation systems: Blow-In-Blankets
(BIBs), spray cellulose, low density polyurethane, and fiberglass batts.
The nearly identical two-story colonial houses were all built with good
air sealing practices--double studs and plates were caulked or glued; foundation
sills were sealed; windows were chinked with fiberglass and sealed with
air barrier tape.
Once air-sealing practices were accounted for,
the alternative methods did not significantly reduce air leakage. In other
words, if a house is correctly air sealed, it can have rocks stuffed in
the walls and there won't be an increase in leakage.
The test was conducted for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. The goal was to compare the price as well as the performance
of the various insulation products. Measurements were taken to determine
house tightness, worst-case depressurization, total labor time, initial
moisture content, and installed quality. Infiltration and energy savings
were also estimated to calculate simple paybacks. In the end, it found
that cellulose and BIB systems cost 70%-150% more and took 22 times longer
to install than fiberglass batts. However, when it came to installed quality,
batts didn't do so well. On a scale of 0-8, where 0 was best and 8 was
unacceptable, batts averaged 6.4, spray cellulose rated 1.8, and BIBs topped
the field at 0.7.
The test conclusions did not consider potential
performance problems due to convection loops, settling, and poorly installed
insulation. It also failed to answer a persistent question in home performance
circles--how effective are different insulation products at reducing air
movement in, out of, and through walls, when complete air sealing is not
feasible or possible?
The full report, Field Demonstration of Alternative
Wall Insulation Products is $25 from NAHB Research Center Incorporated,
400 Prince George's Blvd., Upper Marlboro, MD 20774. Tel:(301)249-4000;
Fax:(301)249-3096; Web site: www.nahbrc.org.
--Tom Sluis and Steven Bodzin
| Back to Contents Page |
Home
Energy Index |
About
Home Energy |
| Home Energy Home Page
| Back Issues of Home Energy |
Home Energy can be reached at: contact@homeenergy.org
Home Energy magazine -- Please read our Copyright
Notice
|