There's a lot of good information in the healthyheating post, but unfortunately, some misleading/inaccurate info as well. The good - building a really efficient house is definitely the way to go. The better insulated and air sealed, the more stable the temperatures, and the less it will matter what type of heating system you use. As the poster noted: "Its not just about the flooring its about the system the building (affects heating load what you pay the utilities) the flooring affects resistance) the tube spacing (affects fluid temperature affects efficiency) .theyre all joined at the hip" I'm not sure what the comments about VOCs have to do with heating systems. I might be missing the author's point, but the implication I get from reading the posting is that somehow radiant heating helps reduce the VOCs in your home. I know that's not the poster's point, but the way it's mixed in with talk about radiant, it's quite misleading. To clarify, VOC levels are a function of materials used in the house and the fresh air ventilation rates. As for radiant heating efficiency. There is a lot of controversy surrounding the efficiency of radiant systems. The industry claim is that you can set your thermostats lower because the heat radiates up from the floor, resulting in greater psychological and physiological warmth. In actual practice, the studies have had conflicting results. While it is true that in a low-temperature radiant installation, you can operate water heating equipment at more efficient temperatures, it's not true that it's a slam-dunk savings in all situations. This is particularly true in basement radiant slab installations where a fraction of your heat is going downward to heat the earth or out the edge of the slab. This can easily result in a 10-30% efficiency penalty, or more depending on the installation. The comments about the emissivity of the floor material is a red herring. While the follow-up comment about the R-value of the floor material is valid. What matters is the ability of the system to transfer heat into the living space. Tubes in concrete, exposed, is most capable. Tubes hanging in the joist bay, under the wood floor under a carpet is a worst case scenario. It is simply not true that the floor material does not make a difference! Consider this - if you have a concrete floor and a carpet, both at 70F, which one will "feel" colder when you stand on it in bare feet? The feeling of "cold" that your feet pick up is due to the heat being more effectively transferred from your feet to the concrete floor than to the carpet. The thermal conductivity of the concrete is much higher than the carpet. The floor material makes a profound difference to the actual functioning of a radiant floor heating system. Also be aware of the flywheel effect. Large, heavy masses take a while to speed up and slow down. The same with thermal masses, like concrete slabs. They have a capacity of holding lots of energy. Because of this, they take a lot of energy to bring up to temperature. With a forced air heating system or conventional baseboard heaters, you can set the temperature back at night or when you leave for the day, saving considerable energy. With a high mass radiant system, it takes a lot more heating energy to get the slab up to temperature, so it is slower to respond. This applies to the time it takes to cool down also. Quoting from the EERE website: "Thick concrete slab systems have high heat capacity and are ideal for storing heat from solar energy systems, which have a fluctuating heat output. The downside of the thick slabs is their slow thermal response time, which makes strategies such as night or daytime setbacks difficult if not impossible. Most experts recommend maintaining a constant temperature in homes with these heating systems." This is particularly problematic in the spring and fall, when it may be in the 40's at night but sunny and in the 60's during the day. Ask people with radiant systems about their comfort in these situations and you'll find a fair number who are dissatisfied with the comfort. This is a good reason to keep a forced air system for heating as well as the radiant. Use the forced air for primary heating during mild weather and radiant when it's colder. The healthyheating describes this on their website under "myths". Unfortunately, the way it's discussed is highly misleading. Radiant heating systems do NOT act like heat lamps. Heat lamps operate at very high temperatures and have essentially zero heatup time. Heat lamps do work by radiant heating. In floor systems do not. They operate at very low temperatures and can take considerable time to warm up and cool down. Depending on the design, this can be many hours. Quoting from the EERE website: "Despite their name, radiant floor heating systems also depend heavily on convection, the natural circulation of heat within a room, caused by heat rising from the floor. Radiant floor heating systems are significantly different than the radiant panels used in walls and ceilings." I don't want to seem negative on in-floor heating systems. I like them and use them in my own tiled bathroom floors. But you need to know that it is not "child's play", even for a competent installer, due to complicating factors.

Since you have chosen warmboard over gypcrete, what was your reasoning behind it besides responsiveness? I am sorry for the confusion. I didn't build a house with Warmboard, I had it in a house where original owner had installed it. It wasn't a house I built. I used it in the sense that I heated the house with it. I looked at the Gypcrete system and somehow feels uneasy about it. Doing a concrete pour over first and second floor does not sound structurally sound to me. Gypcrete has positives and negatives but shouldn't be overlooked because of structurally sound. I think a competent and knowledgeable designer is much more important than which type of system you use. So if you don't have a lot of experienced local people, you have to find experienced people who can help design at a distance. I would start with Radiant Engineering (talk to many companies though). A long somewhat unbiased discussion of radiant: First, it should be noted that radiant heat isn't an efficiency discussion. As people have pointed out many times hydronic radiant systems rarely have a positive payback. They are simply too expensive to install and they never payback if you are installing central air. However, every decision in your house isn't about payback. There are many decisions, such as paint color, cabinet color, cabinet design, many fixtures, etc., that are about your enjoyment of your home. No one has a pool installed because they want it to add value to their house. Radiant fits soundly into that category. Next: A discussion of trade-offs between the different systems. It is important to note that ALL radiant floor systems will provide a comfortable environment to a home that other heating methods struggle to achieve. There are basically five considerations in radiant heat (1) installation costs, (2) operating costs, (3) responsiveness (4) allowable customization and (5) noise (as hot water passes through cold aluminum plates it makes noise). If we look at the different systems we can typically see how they handle each of these things. Warmboard is (1) very expensive to install, (2) it has a low operating cost as it is a warm water system rather than a hot water system, (3) incredibly responsive for radiant heat (able to heat a structure in hours rather than days), (4) low customization and (5) low noise. Underfloor transfer plate systems are (1) moderately expensive to install, (2) low operating costs as they are also warm rather than hot water systems, (3) are somewhat responsive (4) highly customizable and (5) have more expansion noise. Gypcrete overpour is (1) moderately expensive (still cheaper than the two above), (2) have low costs as,they too are warm water systems, (3) not responsive at all, (4) are highly customizable and (5) eliminate almost all noise. Staple up systems are (1) pretty cheap (2) high operating costs as they are a hot water system, (3) not responsive at all, (4) limited customization (they are more limited by physics than design), and (5) are pretty noisy. So looking at Warmboard vs. similar systems - the only real concern from using any aluminum covered plywood system is the noise. Warmboard eliminates expansion noise because of the "special" glue they use to adhere the aluminum to the wood. I can't really tell you how special their glue is, I feel confident they will say super special and their competition will disagree. Warmboard type systems vs. underfloor transfer plate systems - Warmboard is quieter but the loops are not really customizable. Loops are 8" apart with Warmboard, so you can choose not to put warmboard in places but you can't get the loops closer together. With transfer plate systems you can customize the heat of a room by simply moving the loops closer together. This means that you can make the floor right outside the shower warmer than the floor beside the toilet (not many people spend a lot of time standing beside their toilet), but there is more expansion noise. Warmboard is a bit more responsive than transfer plates. Warmboard vs, gypcrete overpour - Gypcrete overpour gives you almost unlimited customization without the noise associated with aluminum transfer plate systems. However, it is not at all responsive. Staple up systems - They are more expensive to operate than any of the above systems but are cheaper to install and easier to maintain. You are not likely to nail through a staple up system with a nice thick transfer plate. Also easier to remodel with staple up systems. TL:DR In the end, if I was ranking a radiant system today - I would probably rank it - underfloor transfer plates > gypcrete > Warmboard. But it is a three way photo finish so it wouldn't take a lot to change the order. Also noisy houses don't bother me at all.

My table is 46"w x 76"l, with 2 20" leaves for a max length of 116". Comfortably fits 10 chairs and 12 with a bit of squeeze. It may be wider than typical, because many standard size table cloths only have a couple inches of overhang along the sides. (That's something to keep in mind when sizing a table.) I buy banquet sized cloths for when I have both leaves in. I much prefer wood to glass tops. First, I like the ability to expand a table using leaves. In addition, I don't want to see everyone's legs when I eat, so I would end up covering a glass top anyway. (And that's the unfortunate thing about my table: it has a beautiful inlaid wood top that I love, but to protect it when we have dinner guests I use table pads and a table cloth, so no one sees the top anyway. Maybe I need to invest in some fancy placemats.) I'm not a fan of trestle or pedestal tables. We're a tall family and we need leg room under the table. It would bug me if a pedestal or trestle got in the way.

Laura- It's not an issue for you. The example I gave above was for oak flooring stored in an unheated attic for 25 years in the Seattle area. If you had a piece of yours sitting in your home that you compared to one in your garage it would be indistinguishable unless one of them had water dripping on it for a while. Wood naturally expands and contracts from humidity changes wherever it is. I used to notice small gaps between installed pieces that would show up around the heating vents in the floor each winter and then disappear the rest of the year when the drying heat wasn't running as much. And it never permanently damaged the floor. If you've lived here in the PNW long enough you'll notice that there is plenty of outdoor wood that gets rained on for half the year and manages to still hold up pretty well. I've been doing woodworking for decades and all my various wood supplies sit for years in my unheated garage with no issues.