Question From A Non-Home Owner

[plumtreeblossom]

Dryers pump their hot air outside of the house. So my question would be: during the winter months (in areas where winter is cold), why not have that warm air released inside the house instead, providing an additional source of both heat and humidity for that rooms and rooms near it?

What don't I know?

Comments

That's even worse!

[http://users.livejournal.com/_mattt/]

The Massachusetts Building and Fire Prevention Code unfortunately cannot readily stop people from illegal acts in progress, even if the people are well meaning and intelligence and diligence are used to circumnavigate the hazard the code intends to protect.

I saw the story above and cringed a little, but these practices are (unfortunately) not uncommon.

The individual is clearly well-intentioned and they feel as if they have circumnavigated the hazard. They may very well have, but like many laws, it is applied uniformly to the smart and the stupid.

As I always say, such code violations are akin to not putting smoke alarms in your house (as required by code) and then saying that you'll just be careful and not start a fire. You may very well be, but the code makes no distinction.

In short, you cannot obstruct the exhaust from a dryer.

It's bad for the dryer motor, but worse, you are trapping the fire hazard inside your residence. Dryer lint can be strangely flammable, and nylon stockings aren't exactly NFPA rated inflammable materials.

The story above is clearly well-intentioned. They want to recapture heat and humidity lost in winter. They may diligently clean the filter and be far more safe than the average citizen in fire prevention. But at the end of the day, the code cannot factor in intelligence or diligence, and the configuration is still illegal.

Sorry to come off so passionate about this. I come across this a lot.

Re: That's even worse!

[dietrich.livejournal.com]

A weird idea

What with the heat and humidity, my first thought was venting a dryer into a greenhouse/solarium: concrete floor, glass surroundings. Plenty of CO2 and humidity for plants to grow!

Thoughts? There must be a green solution to this...

Re: That's even worse!

[http://users.livejournal.com/_mattt/]

At the time, no, there is no green solution that can meet the MA building code.

The thing about the code is that it does not allow for user diligence (or stupidity). Things are either permitted, or not permitted. Preventing fires is of paramount importance, especially in a city like Cambridge or Somerville where there are a series of wood frame houses spaced very close together. If a fire were to get out of hand on a block, the consequences could be tragic.

Of course, a safe and green solution could be had if a user were diligent and intelligent.

Electric dryers do not create carbon dioxide; it is the gas dryers that vent CO2 from combustion. The problem is, if something were to go wrong, it is possible that incomplete combustion of gas would lead to carbon monoxide, which is deadly (and no use to plants). So venting of combustion is not permitted into an occupied space.

There is also the issue of venting lint and preventing lint accumulation in an occupied space.

Does a greenhouse count as an occupied space? I don't know... If not, then yeah, I don't see why you couldn't put your dryer vent in an outside greenhouse. The only catch is that you are limited to an equivalent 25 feet of dryer vent line. Each turn counts for like 5ft, so you run out of length pretty quickly.

Code-wise, I think the most likely legal thing to do would be to vent to the outside as normal, and then have a greenhouse intake fan with a lint filter placed in close proximity to the vent to draw in the humid exhaust.