Super-insulated clothing could eliminate need for indoor heating | Hacker News Reader

Super-insulated clothing could eliminate need for indoor heating

phys.org

49 pointstwsted50 comments

"Eliminate the need for indoor heating" seems like a goofy application of what is really just a new type of breathable insulated fabric. You will still want the objects you interact with barehanded to be at room temperature; and many building elements and appliances are designed to be operated within a regulated temperature range, e.g. plumbing.

On the other hand, depending on the weight and breathability of the fabric, it could see use in the outdoors community for hikers, backpackers, climbers, etc.

Agreed. The invention seems solid, but gods, I do not want to handle everything with mittens.

Maybe this is how we get room temperature super conductors. Move to Antarctica and wear this.

well what about space applications, or any other place with very controlled or strenuous to maintain conditions? Does it preclude mittens made of the same material, full body suits and the like?

Also, why do people keep looking up when we got a whole world under us?

In manned space enclosures, getting rid of heat is usually more of a problem than producing it.

Not applicable. I dunno if you ever looked at thermos bottles, but they use a layer of vacuum to insulate the liquid.

But I agree, there is no telling where your invention may be used. If method of bottle opening can be used to extract babies[1], who knows what this invention can be used for.

[1]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/14/health/new-tool-to-ease-di... .

You also want to keep a lot of things above freezing, like water pipes.

Pets also tend to want at least that much warmth.

Water pipes were the first thing I thought of, too, but many possessions would suffer badly from being kept in an environment that swings between (say) -15C and 24C every year.

Houses themselves could even be damaged, over time. Interior materials and building practices probably don't account for wild seasonal temperature shifts the way they used to.

Also, mold likes cold and damp.

You may be able to heat way below regular room temperature though. I don't think it matters too much if an object has 60 or 70 degrees.

I agree on the "eliminate" part, especially in a wintry climes. Possibly it could greatly reduce energy usage if this special clothing is worn. But of course, we already have a similar solution: turn down the thermostat and put on a sweater.

Plus, what would be the effects of breathing in cold air all day long, while warm yourself? Not great for respiratory health I'd imagine.

Do Inuits have any particular respiratory problems from living in the cold?

Not that I've seen, but they are wrapped in scarves etc today (source: photos) so will have warned the air before inhaling. Also, much drier air than we would find inside a house.

It doesn't seem to be a problem for skiers or hunters.

Whoever wrote that headline has never walked from the shower to their bedroom in an unheated house during winter. It's like being punched in the stomach.

Chiming in with others, my immediate thought was "Wearing a beanie and gloves seems undesirable", certainly a click bait title.

"Clothing coated in AgNWs would feel virtually identical to normal clothing because such a small amount of AgNW solution is required to achieve high reflectivity."

Normal as to outer winter wear? I imagine for say, pants, they'd be more akin to shell-pants for snow than blue jeans. However, it does seem like a prospect for better winter wear. It'd take quite the cultural shift or cost pressure to make people forgo heating their homes and opt to wear mittens in one's own home.

Wouldn't it make more sense to design houses that are significantly cheaper to heat but are still breathable?

Could this material help in the design of such homes?

A lot of people talk about frozen plumbing, but food, plants and pets are also a consideration. I don't know about you, but I sure as heck am not going to dress my cats.

If it must be clothing, then I can definitely see the appeal of spring-weight clothes that keep you warm in the winter. I would love to wear something like that.

>>> Wouldn't it make more sense to design houses that are significantly cheaper to heat but are still breathable?

Homes have a lot more surface area, so the power required to keep them heated is higher, given similar insulation, etc. On the other hand, house insulation can be thicker and lower tech.

Stopping short of eliminating home heating altogether, it can make sense to improve the insulation of a home, turning down the thermostat, and putting on an extra layer or two of clothing. Everybody in my house is wearing a sweater right now.

Naturally, reducing the exposed surface area by making houses smaller or attaching them together (i.e., apartment buildings), could make them cheaper to heat too.

The headline should be "These scientists apparently do not live in a house with toilet seats"

Waking up in the morning, shivering cold, and needing to sit down on a toilet seat that was about 0°C for a very, very necessary bowel movement, was probably one of the least pleasant experiences in my life so far.

I'd say you're doing pretty well then ;-) but point taken.

Well, you could have certain "warm rooms" in your house that are heated normally. Heating bathroom(s) is significantly less area and cost than heating a whole house.

I guess they shouldn't have used the phrase "eliminate need for indoor heating" in the title then.

Japan is indoor heating deficient...why do you think they invented heated toilet seats and the kotatsu!

No problem: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B008Q6EN1C

Warm clothing has been solved a long time ago. This is not the critical point why houses are heated.

I am skeptical.

"Mylar blankets, which are made of aluminum and plastic, are extremely warm but are not vapor-permeable, causing moisture to accumulate on a person's skin."

Mylar may reflect some heat back, but the loss of heat from the system often negates this. Insulation is still needed.

You can see this yourself - go out on a chilly day in shorts / t-shirt, wrap up in a mylar blanket, and you will be cold.

Columbia has been adding something similar to their clothing, from baselayers to outerwear:

http://www.columbia.com/technology-omniheatreflective/

The idea being, the silver dots will reflect heat, but the gap between them will allow moisture management. I'm not sure how well it works in all scenarios but I'm sure I couldn't turn my heat off in the home and be comfortable with an omni-heat baselayer.

As for the Ag nanowires, i would worry these would become airborn and inhaled as the fabric breaks down from washing, use, etc.

I have a pair of those omni-reflective gloves - they work really quite well for any kind of outdoor exercise in the winter (cycling, hiking, etc.). If you're body is sweaty and warm they warm up quick and stay fairly dry.

I've got a pair too but I hadn't given that silver any thought at all until I just read the parent comment. Do you find them much better than any other pair of gloves? I generally don't wear them to work, but maybe I'll give them a shot tomorrow.

The problem with any gloves, even these, is that they separate your fingers and increase surface area, making it a lot easier to lose heat. Mittens are the solution to that, but the problem with mittens is that you lose dexterity and look stupid.

I have this Columbia Omniheat jacket: http://www.columbia.com/mens-heat-mode-ii-softshell-jacket--...

I live in the Chicago suburbs. The jacket is only good to about 32°F, and not good at all with cold winds.

I was hoping the reflective coating would help, but I don't notice it helping at all. Definitely no more than a 5% improvement.

My Carhartt jacket (1000 Denier Cordura Plus Nylon) is much better for wintertime.

It seems like stopping the outside wind from getting in does a lot more to help you stay warm than does reflecting your body heat.

But maybe put the lining inside the Carhartt jacket to get the best of both worlds?

A similar application was to use aerogels, which are highly insulating but not reflective, as clothing insulation. I recall a number of companies have explored this in the past [1]. The issue with aeogels appears to be two-fold: firstly, they are relatively expensive to manufacture, but secondly, the resulting garments are often too warm!

[1] http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-gear/clothing-apparel/H...

I agree with the comments below, both on not wanting the inside of a house to be cold, and being worried that the degradation of nanowires would prove in some way to be catastrophic to either human health or the environment or both. Even the breakdown of synthetic fabrics is causing environmental damage that is poorly understood right now. Silver could prove even more problematic to certain life forms.

That said, I'm not sure why this wouldn't just be used in the the insulation of a house directly? If we could drastically improve the insulation of a house without causing a major vapor retention problem, that would do wonders. Of course, glass is a major problem with good insulation, but I wonder if this material could be made into a partially transparent insulating layer that could be applied to glass temporarily?

I wonder if the reflective properties make it unsuitable for 4-season home insulation. During the summer months wouldn't that keep too much heat inside?

Perhaps a home of the future might have the ability to roll the sheet up or down like window blinds inside the wall depending on the outside environment to self regulate.

AC means you’re keeping heat out in the summer. A well-insulated house is cheaper to heat in the winter and cool in the summer. Traditional housing in warm climates focused on removing heat from homes but fans take take little energy to move lots of air so that's not a major issue in a modern home.

The real gains come from managing solar heat gain. A fairly small solar hot water heater can keep a well insulated house warm in most of the world, other options include things like a solar porch etc. External shade can also drasticaly reduce heat gain in the summer.

Pushing past that and using things like ground source heating can also work, but they rarely pay off.

I find a little disturbing the idea of having silver in contact with your skin 24h/7days/3-6months each year for many years:

http://www.rosemaryjacobs.com/

http://health.howstuffworks.com/skin-care/problems/medical/c...

It's really hard to type with cold hands.

http://www.usbgeek.com/products/usb-heating-gloves

Have you used these? Seems like it would be annoying to be plugged into USB while I type (especially since I have no more USB ports available!).

I use fingerless gloves and a mini personal heater occasionally in the office when it gets cold. My coworkers find it a bit strange, but I like to program in comfort.

I wonder how expensive this might be to incorporate into lightweight outerwear. If it really remains breathable enough for use in high output activity then I could see this being useful in high-end mountaineering, alpinism, and ice climbing apparel/gear especially gloves, boots, and hard shell outerwear.

It would be awesome to have lightweight, super reflective materials for socks, gloves, jackets, and base layers. But, eliminating indoor heating is clearly ridiculous. Although, reducing the thermostat several degrees while remaining comfortable is certainly a reachable goal.

Super-insulated houses could eliminate need for indoor clothing AND heating!

Given that it's -9F out where I am right now, I'm very skeptical.

Heating helps fight humidity in Winter which in turn prevents mold.

why they don't wrap a house in this fabric instead?

Who the hell wants to see their breath indoors?

I don't wear clothes when I'm indoors.

I was surprised by this bit: 47% of global energy is spent on indoor heating, and 42% of that specifically for residential heating. Seems like a lot to me. A cynic may say that, if that's true, then global warming would be self-correcting since, as the world heats up, fewer people will need heating.

It's not true. According to the EIA, 11% of global energy consumption went to residential uses in 2007:

http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/archive/ieo07/enduse.html

So it would be difficult for residential heating to be more than 10% of total consumption.

If you google the stat, it seems to be a little more plausible: 47% for heating and cooling. it is not obvious that global warming would be a net savings of energy: much of the world is already very warm and relies heavily on air conditioning.

The only plausible way to reach 47% is for "building energy consumption". So excluding things like industry and transport.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com