• uis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    air tight, less moisture, more efficient heating, permanent hot water, triple glazed windows.

    And why “I moved from unmaintained house” is argument against old housing? I have all those things in 50 years old house.

    • Squizzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      So you gave your old building a retrofit with new technologies… more in line with today’s standards and have seen results more in line with today’s standards.

      What is your argument here?

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So you gave your old building a retrofit with new technologies… more in line with today’s standards and have seen results more in line with today’s standards.

        So you understand this!

        • Squizzy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          So modern building standards, materials, technologies and completed products are better than old?

          I don’t see many people taking out the cavity insulation to make their homes more old style.

          • irmoz@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Your argument only defeats theirs if their argument was “old buildings are perfect and will never benefit from renovation”

            But they didn’t say that, did they?

            • Squizzy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not in so many words but they did say “When these bad boys are maintained they can outperform new apartments”

              I didn’t argue against them being capable of improvement, I’m arguing against the idea that they can outperform newer type buildings.