[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

GSBN: Digest for 7/7/07



This message contains a digest of the messages posted to the list today. If
you reply to this message, please be sure to change the subject line to
something meaningful. Also, be careful not to include the entire text of this
message in your reply.


---------------------------------------------------------------------


-> Re: GSBN:An inquiry from France...
     by Luc Floissac luc.floissac@...
-> Re: *** SPAM ALERT *** Re: GSBN:Cemento (combined responses)
     by "Andre_de_Bouter" forum@...
-> Re: GSBN:Cemento (combined responses)
     by jfstraube@...
-> Re: GSBN:Cemento
     by Rene Dalmeijer rene.dalmeijer@...
-> embodied energy
     by David Eisenberg strawnet@...


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 6 Jul 2007 02:21:13 -0500
From: Luc Floissac luc.floissac@...
Subject: Re: GSBN:An inquiry from France...

Hello David.
I've send an email to V=C3=A9ronique Samson.
Thanks for your message.

Luc Floissac (from France).

David Eisenberg a =C3=A9crit :
> Hello all,
>
> Here is an inquiry from a French architect that came to DCAT. I wrote back
with contact info for Andre and Martin and ESBN as well as TLS and EBnet, but
I'm hoping that some of you might contact her directly to offer more
regionally appropriate information than I can provide from here (BTW, it's
going to be 111 degrees F in Tucson today).
>
> Best,
>
> David Eisenberg
>
>
>
>
>
> From: "DCAT" 
>
>
>
> Date: July 4, 2007 9:43:22 AM MST
>
>
>
> Subject: DCAT.net Form
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
> Email: armor09@...
>
>
>
> Questions: hello,
>
>
>
> I am an architect working in France and I am
> more and more interesting in building houses in straw bales. As France
> is not as far as your country in such a field, I am asking you about
> your research concerning this material, in aspect of warmth, of
> moisture, of condition of storage, if you have information about
> clading surfaces outdoor and indoor, etc and etc
>
>
>
> Can you inform me?
>
>
>
> I would be glad to get news from you.
>
>
>
> Sincerely
>
>
>
> V=C3=A9ronique Samson
>
>  
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from
AOL at AOL.com.
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
> ----
> For instructions on joining, leaving, or otherwise using the GSBN list, send
email to GSBN@...HELP in the SUBJECT line.  
> ----
>
>
>
>
>   



- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/mixed
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/x-vcard
- ---


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 6 Jul 2007 03:13:42 -0500
From: "Andre_de_Bouter" forum@...
Subject: Re: *** SPAM ALERT *** Re: GSBN:Cemento (combined responses)

I suggest my workshop participants to look at cement as Gold (and not as
the bad guy). Gold is a material that allows us to do many amazing
things but it is very costly (not just to buy, but also to mine,
transport etc.). One would not consider building ones car out of gold
just because it is possible. It would become very heavy and therefore
more appropriate materials would be chosen. (but this often takes more
time/reflection).

Cement also alows us to do many things.... but it has its price... so we
are adviced to use it sparingly....

Andr#233# de Bouter
France




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 6 Jul 2007 08:45:21 -0500
From: jfstraube@...
Subject: Re: GSBN:Cemento (combined responses)

I think this is a wonderful approach! Makes senses to me.

Andre de Bouter wrote:
> I suggest my workshop participants to look at cement as Gold (and not as
> the bad guy). Gold is a material that allows us to do many amazing
> things but it is very costly (not just to buy, but also to mine,
> transport etc.). One would not consider building ones car out of gold
> just because it is possible. It would become very heavy and therefore
> more appropriate materials would be chosen. (but this often takes more
> time/reflection).
>
> Cement also alows us to do many things.... but it has its price... so we
> are adviced to use it sparingly....
>
> Andre de Bouter
> France
>
>
> ----

>
>



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 6 Jul 2007 08:54:25 -0500
From: Rene Dalmeijer rene.dalmeijer@...
Subject: Re: GSBN:Cemento

The 95-97% numbers refer to an average home not a low energy or even
0-energy home. In the last case obviously any savings made during
construction are very relevant. The is point is very clearly made by
the S-house research as executed by GRAT www.s-house.at. A low CO2
built structure can live for many years for a non sensitive low energy
structure. An analysis made by GRAT did came up with an 11 year lead
for a a low CO2 build to a conventional build with equal in service CO2
emissions.

A comparison I made for  100m^2 of exterior SB wall with exterior lime
plaster and a conventional wood frame with lime plaster with the rest
of the building structure kept equal. This substitution leads to quite
a considerable savings in CO2 submissions. Based on Dutch conditions
and statistics this simple choice compensates the average family CO2
output for 2.5 years this includes transport etc. I could also have
made the comparison with brick resulting in even more substantial
savings.

Another factor to consider is the the energy /CO2 investment during
building is done and unchangeable and cannot be reclaimed later with
new technology or more sustainable sources later on.
Rene
On Jul 3, 2007, at 23:04, Catherine Wanek wrote:

> At 11:43 AM 7/3/2007, `Darryl wrote:
>> ...... in Stuart Cowan / Sim Van der Ryn's book, Ecological
>> Design.  They mention it almost in passing that 97% of the energy
>> used in buildings in the U.S. is "maintenance energy" which is what
>> is required to heat, cool and fix.
>
> I heard this "statistic" a number of years ago during a presentation
> at a Department of Energy -sponsored  conference.  It was given as
> part of the results of a study done by the concrete industry.
>
> For what it is worth, their results were:  95% "maintenance energy,"
> based on a 100-year life of a building.
>
> -Catherine
>
> Each year the amount of energy lost through UNINSULATED homes in the
> United States is equivalent to the amount of fuel delivered annually
> through the Alaskan Pipeline -- U.S. Department of the Interior, 2000
>
>
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
> multipart/alternative
>  text/plain (text body -- kept)
>  text/html
> ---
> ----
> For instructions on joining, leaving, or otherwise using the GSBN
> list, send email to GSBN@...HELP in the
> SUBJECT line.  ----
>



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 6 Jul 2007 09:45:22 -0500
From: David Eisenberg strawnet@...
Subject: embodied energy

In regard to embodied energy, here's an excerpt from a recent ASES (American
Solar Energy Society) publication:
=C2=A0=C2=A0 Tackling Climate Change in the U.S.: 
=C2=A0=C2=A0 Potential Carbon Emissions Reductions 
=C2=A0=C2=A0 from Energy Efficiency and Renewable 
=C2=A0=C2=A0 Energy by 2030=C2=A0 

 This is available for download at www.ases.org

This comes at the embodied energy issue a bit differently, talking about it
from the standpoint of how many years of operating energy the embodied energy
of a typical house represents and the total GHG emissions over the life of a
house. They say 8 to 10 times the annual operating energy. 

For many years I've watched and occasionally participated in a debate about
the importance of reducing embodied energy of buildings. A lot of people who
look at the relative size of operating versus embodied energy say that the
magnitude of the operating energy makes the embodied energy insignificant.
I've argued that embodied energy is far from insignificant - it's large and
operating energy is typically astronomical - the hugeness of the one does not
make the other smaller, it just makes it seem smaller. That is not to say that
it might not be wise to focus on operating energy as the first priority, but
I've never agreed with those have argued to just ignore it. For one thing,
that assumes that we're always going to have the energy or be able to afford
it so that we can drag resources all over the planet from wherever we find
them to wherever we want to use them and process them to whatever degree meets
our desires or particular standards.

David Eisenberg

=C2=A0 Building Envelope Embodied Energy

=C2=A0 The complexity of calculating embodied energy has given rise to a wide
range of
=C2=A0 estimates. The Consortium for Research on Renewable Industrial
Materials (CORRIM)
=C2=A0 was recently formed to examine the environmental and economic costs of
building
=C2=A0 materials=E2=80=94from tree planting to building demolition [14].
Results show that the
=C2=A0 building=E2=80=99s embodied energy equals about 8 to 10 times the
annual energy used to heat
=C2=A0 and cool it and that the GHG emissions range from 21 to 47 metric tons
over the
=C2=A0 life of a house. The best way to reduce this significant embodied
energy in a building is
=C2=A0 to salvage and reuse materials from demolished buildings, even
considering the extensive
=C2=A0 cleaning and repair often required of the salvage materials [15].

=C2=A0 The building design, size, regional material sources, and framing
material selection all
=C2=A0 greatly affect the embodied energy and GHG emissions. The CORRIM
compared two house
=C2=A0 designs (wood framed versus concrete or steel framed) and found that
for the same
=C2=A0 amount of living space, a wood frame house contains about 15% less
embodied energy
=C2=A0 and emits about 30% less GHGs than does either a concrete frame or a
metal frame
=C2=A0 house [16]. Other studies in this area have reached similar conclusions
[17]. Nonetheless,
=C2=A0 optimizing the appropriate mix of low-GHG building materials will
require project-specific
=C2=A0 analysis. For example, wood can store carbon that would otherwise have
been emitted to 
=C2=A0 the atmosphere. Concrete can reduce operating energy consumption by
providing thermal 
=C2=A0 mass to buffer temperature swings. Metal frames may contain up to 90%
recycled material.

14. Mumma, T., =E2=80=9CReducing the Embodied Energy of Buildings,=E2=80=9D
Home Energy Magazine
Online, January/February 1995. Referenced May 2, 2006. Available at
<a  target="_blank" href="http://homeenergy.org/archive/hem.dis.anl.gov/eehem/95/950109.html";>http://homeenergy.org/archive/hem.dis.anl.gov/eehem/95/950109.html</a>

15. Lippke, op. cit., 2004. [Environmental Performance of Renewable Building
Materials,=E2=80=9D Forest Products Journal 54(6), June 2004, p. 819.
Referenced May 2, 2006. Available at
<a  target="_blank" href="http://www.corrim.org/reports/pdfs/FPJ_Sept2004.pdf";>http://www.corrim.org/reports/pdfs/FPJ_Sept2004.pdf</a>]

16. Energy and the Environment in Residential Construction, Sustainable
Building Series
No. 1, Canadian Wood Council, 2004. Referenced May 2, 2006. Available at
<a  target="_blank" href="http://www.cwc.ca/pdfs/EnergyAndEnvironment.pdf";>http://www.cwc.ca/pdfs/EnergyAndEnvironment.pdf</a>

17. =E2=80=9CResearch News,=E2=80=9D Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory,
May 16, 2003. Referenced
May 2, 2006. Available at
<a  target="_blank" href="http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/EETD-aerosol-injection.html";>http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/EETD-aerosol-injection.html</a>

________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from
AOL at AOL.com.


- --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
- ---


----------------------------------------------------------------------

End of Digest

To request a copy of the help file, reply to this message and put "help" in
the subject.