# Super-insulated clothing could eliminate need for indoor heating



## qubit (Jan 11, 2015)

This is a potentially revolutionary advance, but I'm sure the energy companies would fine ways to increase the cost of heating to compensate for using so much less energy...









> By wearing clothes that have been dip-coated in a silver nanowire (AgNW) solution that is highly radiation-insulating, a person may stay so warm in the winter that they can greatly reduce or even eliminate their need for heating their home. Considering that 47% of global energy is spent on indoor heating, and 42% of that specifically for residential heating, such highly insulating clothing could potentially have huge cost savings.
> 
> Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-01-super-insulated-indoor.html


----------



## Steevo (Jan 11, 2015)

Umm, why not add this to fiberglass so homes use less heat? If they could make it thin and insulate the top of exterior walls and window shades in the windows, or even build it into drywall it should have the same effect plus no need to wash it or wear it out.


----------



## qubit (Jan 11, 2015)

The idea is that by putting it in the clothes, the heating doesn't need to be run at all, which you would still need to do if a building was coated in it, albeit at much lower power. Think of opening and closing doors and drafty areas as sources of heat loss and the fact that a building cannot be airtight or you'd asphyxiate.

Having said that, it's probably not a bad idea to coat buildings with it anyway.


----------



## Easo (Jan 11, 2015)

Yeah, because having everything else cold would be so good, right?
Or having to wear clothing all the time?
Insulate the building itself...


----------



## Norton (Jan 11, 2015)

Has already been done:




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbestos



Spoiler:  An old film about this other magic material












and a second look at its history:












Not a good idea imho to add another mineral particle to our air...


----------



## remixedcat (Jan 11, 2015)

Why not just wear ski pants or swishy pants?? I do and it keeps me warm.


----------



## newtekie1 (Jan 11, 2015)

qubit said:


> The idea is that by putting it in the clothes, the heating doesn't need to be run at all, which you would still need to do if a building was coated in it, albeit at much lower power. Think of opening and closing doors and drafty areas as sources of heat loss and the fact that a building cannot be airtight or you'd asphyxiate.
> 
> Having said that, it's probably not a bad idea to coat buildings with it anyway.



Pipes would freeze and burst.  We have "snowbirds" in my area, people that live here in the summer and live in Florida or California or some other place warm in the winter.  Used to see it all the time, especially people that were doing it for their first year.  They set their thermostat to 40-50°F thinking that would be good enough since the house would be empty in the winter and then leave.  When they came back in the spring they found a flooded house with busted pipes.  Once outside temps go sub-zero you better have your thermostat set to at least 65 if you don't want the pipes in your outside walls to burst.

That being said, they could coat the house in the stuff and it would greatly reduce the amount of energy/fuel needed to keep the building at a comfortable temperature.  I do think that would be a better solution than using it for clothing.  Wrap the home/building in the cloth the same way they wrap houses in Tyvek.  Plus, from the sounds of it, it would help keep the heat from the sun out during the summer, which would reduce cooling costs as well.



remixedcat said:


> Why not just wear ski pants or swishy pants?? I do and it keeps me warm.



I think the idea is this does the same, or better, with just a single layer of fabric.

I do see some applications for this in areas were mobility is an important factor.


----------



## Steevo (Jan 11, 2015)

I keep the house at about 68F during the day when we are here, 58F at night and when we are gone, so our normal week means the house is only warm from the time we get home a night till bedtime around midnight, so about 7 hours, and the rest of the time its 58F during the winter. Weekends we generally have it warm all the time except when we are in bed, so like midnight to 8AM if I get to sleep in a bit.

And yeah, having a unheated house while its -12F or -34F like it has been in the last couple years...... good way to ruin water lines and other stuff.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Jan 11, 2015)

Made of silver....

yea that isn't healthy for anyone.


----------



## erocker (Jan 11, 2015)

Eliminate indoor heating? No. Unless you live in a house that contains nothing. Other things besides humans are susceptible to cold.


----------



## Nordic (Jan 11, 2015)

Glad to see I wasn't the only one to think of everything but the person. Plumbing is a perfect example of why you need to heat your home.

Clothing is the last thing I would design this for, and if I were to it would be for outdoor gear.


----------



## Drone (Jan 11, 2015)

I don't even have indoor heating. I kinda sorta like cold environment. It works easier when it's cold and I'm more focused and concentrated.


----------



## Schmuckley (Jan 11, 2015)

and..this will disappear fast 
too good of a thing for the people..
too bad of a thing for energy-sellers.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jan 11, 2015)

well i already need no indoor heating ... (and i live in mountain in Switzerland) this winter ... pfeh is a bit hotter than usual ... even working in t-shirt at the job ... 



Drone said:


> I don't even have indoor heating. I kinda sorta like cold environment. It works easier when it's cold and I'm more focused and concentrated.


pretty much that ... 

also Odlo and many other brand have silver wire in some clothing ... big new... oh wait the Nano is new indeed ... altho the silver in the Merrinos socks is more for "odor catching" than insulating ...


----------



## Blue-Knight (Jan 11, 2015)

qubit said:


> Super-insulated clothing could eliminate need for indoor heating


Cool! Now we just need a thing that could eliminate the need for indoor cooling.



Spoiler: Additional information



Fans are nice but circulating indoor air @ 37°C is not so good. It can avoid your sweat, but that doesn't mean comfort. 
Air conditioners do a great job, but they are *too expensive *(to buy and to sustain).


----------



## Liquid Cool (Jan 11, 2015)

Sounds as though wrapping your house could get expensive.  Another use for silver is that it has excellent antibacterial properties...it's already used in dishwashers, socks, linens, steering wheels etc.

I keep my house at 70 day in/day out...or I get chilled to the bone.

LC


----------



## MilkyWay (Jan 11, 2015)

Eh so what if you want to run around naked in your home? To be serious this could be good technology for working outdoors, less layers meaning less cumbersome and more agility/movement.


Norton said:


> Has already been done:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Asbestos was the worlds most disgustingly dangerous building material, they knew it and still they used it.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 12, 2015)

qubit said:


> The idea is that by putting it in the clothes, the heating doesn't need to be run at all, which you would still need to do if a building was coated in it, albeit at much lower power. Think of opening and closing doors and drafty areas as sources of heat loss and the fact that a building cannot be airtight or you'd asphyxiate.
> 
> Having said that, it's probably not a bad idea to coat buildings with it anyway.


Ever lived up north?  Any skin that is exposed (e.g. hands/face) will be cold.  You're never going to sell the idea of being clothed head to toe 24/7 to them.  As Steevo said, better off looking at housing insulation to cut down on heating costs.

Being "so warm" means you sweat which is more uncomfortable than being cold.



MilkyWay said:


> Asbestos was the worlds most disgustingly dangerous building material, they knew it and still they used it.


Yup.


----------



## AsRock (Jan 12, 2015)

qubit said:


> The idea is that by putting it in the clothes, the heating doesn't need to be run at all, which you would still need to do if a building was coated in it, albeit at much lower power. Think of opening and closing doors and drafty areas as sources of heat loss and the fact that a building cannot be airtight or you'd asphyxiate.
> 
> Having said that, it's probably not a bad idea to coat buildings with it anyway.



Drafty area's lol, more like drafty kids.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Jan 12, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Ever lived up north?  Any skin that is exposed (e.g. hands/face) will be cold.  You're never going to sell the idea of being clothed head to toe 24/7 to them.  As Steevo said, better off looking at housing insulation to cut down on heating costs.


I completely agree with you on the necessity to cover all exposed skin rendering the "eliminate indoor heating" argument moot.  Even if this material can make very thin fabrics, you still have to wear gloves and a ski mask all day, which not only can be uncomfortable but can be impractical.  Intricate tasks like typing on a keyboard, something we all do, would be difficult with any gloves, and you can forget about using expensive gloves to perform messy tasks like preparing a meal.  Another thing that is forgotten keeping the building cold is the lack of humidity; you can expect lots of chapped skin not to mention materials like wood cracking due to the low humidity in a cold building.

However, as far as using this as a building insulating material, I have trouble seeing where it will succeed in that market.  While increasing the insulation value of the walls of a building in never a bad idea, the material has to compete with just making the walls thicker with more conventional (fiberglass) insulation.  You can't make the argument that material will enable thinner walls and more interior space because then the thinner walls can't support the floors above.  But what I think is by far the most important argument is that most of the heat loss in a residence is through the windows and doors, and unless this material can be made transparent, increasing wall insulation will only have a minimal reduction on the heat loss of the building.


----------



## Steevo (Jan 12, 2015)

The Von Matrices said:


> I completely agree with you on the necessity to cover all exposed skin rendering the "eliminate indoor heating" argument moot.  Even if this material can make very thin fabrics, you still have to wear gloves and a ski mask all day, which not only can be uncomfortable but can be impractical.  Intricate tasks like typing on a keyboard, something we all do, would be difficult with any gloves, and you can forget about using expensive gloves to perform messy tasks like preparing a meal.  Another thing that is forgotten keeping the building cold is the lack of humidity; you can expect lots of chapped skin not to mention materials like wood cracking due to the low humidity in a cold building.
> 
> However, as far as using this as a building insulating material, I have trouble seeing where it will succeed in that market.  While increasing the insulation value of the walls of a building in never a bad idea, the material has to compete with just making the walls thicker with more conventional (fiberglass) insulation.  You can't make the argument that material will enable thinner walls and more interior space because then the thinner walls can't support the floors above.  But what I think is by far the most important argument is that most of the heat loss in a residence is through the windows and doors, and unless this material can be made transparent, increasing wall insulation will only have a minimal reduction on the heat loss of the building.




It was mainly for the insulation value that we went to 2X6 construction in the US, few people were willing to pay for spray in foam, bonded spray in cellulose, or anything other than fiberglass, which by itself is a good insulator, but no where near as good as foam or cellulose. Lumber became so cheap it was cost effective to do for most new builds in cold and hot climates.

The only downside is cost, and proper installation of it, right now our windows lose a large portion of the heat in homes, and something as simple as coating blinds between the panes of glass would help, or creating a cheap user adjustable mirror effect inside the window, use light to power it like welders hoods. http://www.smarttint.com/ kinda like this.


----------



## vega22 (Jan 12, 2015)

Blue-Knight said:


> Cool! Now we just need a thing that could eliminate the need for indoor cooling.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



insulation works both ways. if this works as well as they say buildings that use it would keep heat out in hot places as well as in, in cold.


----------

