Can I just replace the sawdust with insulation?

[Claes Sörmland]

but then you don't know how moisture problems work.
nighttime radiation creates big problems even in the summer in attics.

I am doubtful of your claim but open to empirical references.

But if by summer you also mean autumn, then I agree.

 

[Ville_Vessla]

and why should you do it when you are going to carry out a measure on a house, when there are better materials?

I got a few bales of spån over 10 years ago. Chose to empty it in the attic instead of throwing them away.

 

[Davion]

There is definitely no "bunch of legal validity." There is no legal validity at all. They can define what the certificate requires and then issue it themselves. However, they are experts at disclaiming risks.

There is in this context, indeed, not least from the perspective of the marketing law, but I really do not intend to spend either time or energy on that dialogue.

 

[fribygg]

and why should one do that when taking action on a house, when there are better materials?

Counter question: Why should one shovel out the existing flawless insulation in a hundred-year-old house, isn't it just as good to tear down the old house and build a new passive house if that's what one wants?

 

[Aunty]

You are objectively completely wrong and it's incredibly obvious. It's embarrassing. Here you go: Regler för att bli certifierad besiktningstekniker - Anticimex

Regarding the construction company, I absolutely will not do you the favor of regurgitating it because you simply don't deserve it and will have to humbly expand your own meager knowledge. Do your own research. It seems it's the first time, it's noticeable.

I have worked with this for over 20 years and am a trained civil engineer, so I have my bases covered in the area.

If you believe what Anticimex says, you're just being fooled. There is no relevance in it, it's just a made-up position that Anticimex came up with themselves. Just read the requirements, they disclaim it so that anyone can basically become it.

Regarding the construction company, you have no idea.

 

[Pin]

It certainly does in this context, not least from a marketing law perspective, but I really won't spend any time or energy on that dialogue.

Then at least we agree that it's mainly about marketing .

 

[Davion]

I have worked with it for over 20 years, am a trained civil engineer, so I have my feet on solid ground in the area.

if you believe what anticimex says, then you're just being fooled.
there is no relevance in it, it's just a self-invented occupation that Anticimex has come up with.
just read the requirement they disclaim it so everyone can become it in principle.

regarding the construction company you have no idea

Then you can rejoice in having received some free professional development and learned something new - certified inspection technician is an established term, and no, it's not just Anticimex that uses it. I assume the concept of an inspector is also foreign ...

Regarding the construction company, I am very aware, but choose not to elaborate here as it clearly falls on deaf ears. It's tragic that someone with over 20 years of education and experience doesn't know things such as wet room certification or standards as a concept (referring to, for example, ISO). Good luck, or something.

 

[Davion]

Then we at least agree that it is mainly about marketing .

It was in that context that I meant the whole thing, yes box.

 

[Pin]

Counter-question: Why should you remove the existing faultless insulation in a hundred-year-old house, isn't it just as good to tear down the old house and erect a new passive house if that's what you want?

If enough energy is used and energy prices are sufficiently high, it eventually becomes a good deal. But before that, it's probably profitable to add extra insulation and/or change the heating system.

 

[Pin]

It was in that context I was referring to the whole thing, yes box.

So salespeople and not engineers writing the protocol?

 

[Aunty]

Counter-question: Why should one remove the existing flawless insulation in a hundred-year-old house? Isn't it just as good to demolish the old house and build a new passive house if that's what one wants?

Then you can take joy in having received some free professional development and learned something new - certified inspection technician is an established term, and no, it's not just Anticimex that uses it. I assume the concept of an inspector is also unfamiliar...

Regarding the construction company, I am quite knowledgeable but choose not to elaborate here since it evidently falls on deaf ears. It's tragic that someone with over 20 years of education and experience is unaware of things such as wet room competence or standards as a concept (referring to e.g., ISO). Good luck, or something.

but which of these standards on attics etc., not wet room competence (which, by the way, is not a standard, you're probably thinking of Säker vatten, or something similar).

But then you should know that anyone can claim to be an inspector and many do, inspector is not a protected title.

 

[Davion]

So sellers and not engineers writing the report?

No, the services offered by Anticimex (and others) Certified Inspection Technicians are publicly covered, among other regulations, by the Marketing Act

And the report is written by:
"A certified inspection technician should have a relevant college or university education, an engineering degree, or alternatively, equivalent vocational technical education deemed by the certification body to meet the requirements for certification. However, an inspection technician without relevant education can obtain a certificate if they have many years of relevant professional experience.
Professional experience
With relevant theoretical foundational knowledge:

• Experience from at least 40 transfer inspections in the last two years.

Without relevant theoretical foundational knowledge:

• Five years of relevant professional experience* including at least 1,000 house inspections** and experience of at least 40 transfer inspections in the last two years.

"
A slightly better résumé than the average byggahusforummedlemmen, not least judging by this thread

 

[Pin]

Then you can rejoice in having received some free skills development and learned something new - certified inspection technician is an accepted term, and no, it's not only Anticimex that uses it. I assume the concept of inspector is also foreign ...

Regarding the construction company, I am very aware, but choose not to elaborate here as it clearly falls on deaf ears. It's tragic that someone with over 20 years of education and experience doesn't know things like wet room authorization or standards as a concept (referring to e.g. ISO). Good luck, or something.

But wet room authorization is also similar to what the industry organization has come up with, right?
https://www.bkr.se/fakta/vad-ar-behorighet/
All of this is good, but it is not a must.

ISO is also good, but the end result doesn't necessarily have to be good because of it. You can certify yourself in manufacturing life jackets in concrete. Or insulate with wood shavings, or wool, or any alternative mentioned in the thread.

 

[Aunty]

No, that the services offered by Anticimex (and others') Certified inspection technicians in their disclosure, among other things, are covered by the Marketing Act

And the protocol is written by:
"A certified inspection technician must have relevant college or university education engineering degree or an equivalent technical vocational education assessed by the certification body to meet the certification requirements. However, an inspection technician without relevant education may receive a certificate if they have many years of relevant work experience.
Work experience
With relevant theoretical basic knowledge:

• Experience from at least 40 property inspections in the last two years.

Without relevant theoretical basic knowledge:

• Five years of relevant work experience* that includes at least 1,000 house inspections** and in the last two years experience of at least 40 property inspections.

"
A slightly better résumé than the average byggahusforummedlemmen, not least judging by this thread

in other words, a retrained old carpenter still stuck in what he learned on the construction site in the 80s.
have done numerous inspections I know how it works.

but we have strayed from the question.

wood shavings are not good insulation - use another
you can have moisture problems - it can be managed in several different ways

 

[Davion]

but which of these standards on attics etc, not wet room authorization (which, by the way, is not a standard, you're probably thinking of Safe Water or something similar).

But then you should know that anyone can call themselves an inspector and do so, inspector is not a protected title.

I never said that wet room authorization itself was a standard. I was providing examples based on your vague question from #57.
I find it rather pointless to continue the dialogue though. You're welcome for increased competence regarding established terminology. If a happy building amateur who doesn't have your robust experience can know that these are normative terms, it seems reasonable that you do too.