Green Building and Us

Howdy,

I sure have heard a lot about LEED recently. I keep thinking that LEED classifications pertain to the mass market materials. To be honest, it seems kinda like a good start, but if we are really talking "green" then its not even close. I must admit, that I haven't researched their merits much, and yet I have some prejudice (silly me). Does vernacular architecture (i've been using cypress lately (thumbs up)) fall within the classifications, do their codes recognize rammed earth, is embodied energy taken into account?, etc.

With the good group of people around the TFG it seems the "greenest" of homes could be built....

Nevertheless, LEED has some grasp on the control of the benefits of building "green". Is the Guild trying to enter the conversations with the powers that be on that level? Is our style of building appreciated in that realm?

LEED adds cost to the building process x tens of thousands of dollars.... whatever makes you feel good..... The higher the grade the more cash it will cost you, and that is in the implementation/design of the job, not even bring into the picture the cost of material and labor. I do think a lot of what it does is good stuff, "it just doesn't go far enough".

I think LEED is a slippery slope. It is a balancing act, weighing one thing against another and crossing, sometimes the better choice off, to appease the p.c. side of the equation.

The simpler the building process the better the building in all regards. We as people sure make things complicated.

Tim

I think a lot of us have changed our thinking over time to the practicality of efficient thermal design. Dwelling building started out that way many hundreds or thousands of years ago, and is now coming back with taking advantage of the Earth for heating and cooling and as a thermal mass, and taking the sun into account when it comes to design of facing direction, windows, eave length and height. Individual home builders are taking this more into account, big subdivision builders, much less so it would seem. But this housing bubble burst may allow the opportunity for some education so that the same type of building does not so readily come back when times get better. IF people can be educated enough so that the market demands better quality and more efficient design, it would change how many builders build. Will it happen significantly, don't know, but hope so. We'd hopefully see some better quality houses on the market rather than the match stick Vinyl covered throw away houses that they've build like crazy in my town. These houses are going to be pretty run down in 30 years I think, and no one will want to invest any money in them. Just an opinion.

30 years sound just about right......

http://www.owenscorning.com/leed/pdfs/LEED_vinylsiding.pdf

....and the mortgage is just paid off or you moved and sold it to someone else. A 'dead pledge'. This is the same base for the Mortice, a rectangular, coffin shaped hole. So, as you take out a 30 year mortgage does the note become dead or does the building die at the end of the 30 year process?

How many other LEED products come with a 30 year life cycle?

Clay and wood can be attained within 500 feet of some buildings and will recycle back into resources with in moments.

How many points do you get for using clay? 7 or 8

http://www.examiner.com/x-43343-Energy-Policy-Examiner~y2010m5d31-American-clay-earth-plaster-gains-popularity-in-green-building-projects

Tim

Here is a another link to leed and clay points

http://www.americanclay.com/leed

From vinyl siding to clay you can find material that fits into LEED certification. Is there products that do not fall into the certification or comes with very small points? They all add up to the 90-129 points needed. It now becomes a juggling act to find the products with more points. So, if you build a very simple building with very few products you will not reach the grade needed to certify. Is that a problem? If so, go out and purchase more products and systems to reach the grade.

Tim

I agree with Brad. These match stick vinyl houses here in my neck of the woods frequently get bulldozed and landfilled after only a few decades of life. Couldn't be any LESS green than that! They just don't have any appeal. I call them pho-houses. Half of the materials are pho - trying to mimic "real" materials. Yuck.

after looking into LEED in hopes it would allow me to build "outside of the box" ie. the REMOTE wall system I was having a hard time getting approved, it appears the whole idea is another "carbon credit" scheme for corporations to pat eachothers backs and brag about their LEED scores....

looks like more people are starting to see through the smoke screen....

http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blog...-way-litigation

Raff, you really rock my world! And yes, you should be comensated for the work you've done. It's a good system you're using, and I support you 100%.

hey Dave....that's what she said...

support of a timberframer = 200 LEED points

hi....good day..have fun and enjoy..


best SEO company - seo consultant - affordable seo

nice .. good day




new york tours - new york attractions - things to do in ny

There is a good thought here...

We build houses today that by a generous estimate will be totally unattractive to investors in 50 years. After 30 years, investors are not going to be willing to put forth anywhere near what they would have done at 20 years, same thing from twenty to 15, and 15 to ten.

Here an investor doesn't necessarily mean a lifetime real estate investor, but just about anyone who is going to buy a home, especially if that person seriously considers moving to a new house in ten or fifteen years, as so many people seem to do these days. 20 years in the same house is a good run it seems!

From a purely economical standpoint, wouldn't it make far more sense to make a house that is still going to be an attractive investment in twenty years? Especially if you indeed plan on moving in that time period. Wouldn't it be appealing to people to know that they are going to be able to get out of their house a significant portion of what they put into it?

From an environmental standpoint, this is a win-win scenario. The prevalence of a permanent house (instead of modern houses that I would qualify as semi-permanent) in our culture would mean less waste. IT would be an economic win, because modern houses are a terrible investment. The money you put into them will simply dissolve over time.

The key here as I see it is to make timber framing available to everyone, not just the wealthy or those who pretend they are wealthy. To me this means we need to totally rethink everything we are doing right now. We need to look at all the things before us, and decide what will move us toward this goal. SIP's are a terrible inefficiency from an economic standpoint. They inflate the cost of a frame by tens of thousands of dollars, and their prevalence severely limits the availability of timber framing.

Another thing to note, not every timber frame needs to be a grand, open hall. For the purposes of economy, they can be largely indistinguishable from other forms of buildings. Not every frame has to be a show of the fact that it is indeed a timber frame. Not that there is anything wrong with beautiful frames.

I had better stop now, my post is fast turning into a rant! But this is my vision, it is a major goal for me right now and I have put quite a bit of thought into opening up timber framing to everyone, like it used to be 200 years ago.

Maybe I will have to construct a detailed proposition and post it up on the forums some time!

Hi D L,

I don't think your post is a rant. I, too, would like to make timber framed homes more available. I think there is a common misconception that TF is only for the affluent. I started a thread a few years ago about TF philosophy. I'll reread it and see how mine may, or may not, have evolved over the last few years. I think periodic introspection is important.


http://www.tfguild.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2835#Post2835

well I have certainly developed a philosophy of my own! And surely it will evolve over time as well.

I think America is at an important point, and what we do right now will likely have significant effect on the course of our future. I think we are in desperate need of some cultural and economical introspection. We need to thoroughly review ourselves and look at what it is exactly we are doing wrong; I think we can all agree that we are indeed doing a lot of things wrong. I also think we as a people need to be willing to step up and take responsibility for our own mistakes, or else this current mess is just going to keep getting worse. We need to stop expecting everyone else (i.e. the government) to take care of our problems, but rather we need to step up and shoulder some responsibility.

I think that in any culture, including ours, home building is an effective microcosm of cultural values. What we value in our houses reflects what we value as a whole.

And what does our culture value in this regard? Fast, flashy homes that go up fast and start rotting away as soon as they are built. Houses built for the short term, with little concern as to what they will be 10, 20, or 30 years down the road. We prefer to build flashy houses for the wealthy, that in 30 years will have to be re purposed because no one with any money would want to live in it any more.

So that's a major part of my philosophy. We need to change.

But we can't expect that change to happen in the alternative remains so far out of reach.

By building timber frames to be showpieces,, to be 'works of art' we in the end are really just making ourselves a part of the problem. we so often are not selling people on quality and endurance, but rather on flash and pomp.

Perhaps we should step back and ponder, not every timber frame has to be a show piece. Maybe we shouldn't always be building a timber frame merely for the purpose of building a timber frame. We seem to have made it an end unto itself, and in so doing we have betrayed the heritage that we so cheerfully uphold.

Personally I have been in a number of old buildings -around here that would be church houses- that I did not realize were timber frames at all until perhaps I went into the basement. They were built that way because that was what worked, and then the frame was immediately plastered over, never to be seen again. Not to say we should plaster over our frames and hide them, just to illustrate that some times a timber frame is a thing of function first and foremost.

I have been working for some time to develop a system that fits my goals. I aim to create a system that can be affordable, be beautiful, adaptable, and efficient. I want a system that can work using natural materials, but also can make use of modern materials equally well. I have been trying to work around the inherent difficulties of a timber frame, such as thermal bridging of timbers. I have come up with a system, surely with flaws that need to be worked out (I am indebted to members of these boards who pointed me in the direction of the german clay walls systems, and plan to use the collected knowledge and wisdom here again!)

One major thing I did was to look at the frame itself, and how it is built. My system, as a result, is designed around a frame that has more in common with frames of the middle ages than with modern American timber framing. To further my research into this I plan on traveling to Germany and Switzerland to see the buildings themselves. I think we would do good to consider other forms of the timber frame. Many have done much work to introduce the Japanese frame, and I think the same should be done for the German frame. It I think it is an inherently far more adaptable and free form than bent framing, and I think if it were executed with local timbers its almost exclusive use of smaller timbers (both in cross section and length) and timbers with rectangular rather than square sections could potentially make it far cheaper, which is part of the reason it developed that way in the first place. Furthermore, I think this building style has effectively proven itself, with examples standing firm from the 1300's at least, some of which stood proud against the assault of 2 devastating world wars. (Ironically, the only major thing that has threatened these buildings has been the use of modern cements to repair the infills, which were incompatible with the original materials and caused frame damage and rotting)

I agree that the attitude we have towards building in the US needs to change. It is sad that the 30yr mortgage has become the measuring stick for a homes life. There is another important thing to factor in when looking at the centuries old buildings around the world. The fact that they are still standing is certainly a sign of the quality of their construction, but also a sign of the quality of their maintenance. Those building have been cared for throughout their lifetimes. Materials will inevitably weather and deteriorate over time. High quality craftsmanship goes a long way towards delaying that. However, the design and construction of a house needs to be such that it can be maintained (and materials replaced if necessary) as time takes its toll, which it will.

Good point you have there!

And that I have always thought is one of the biggest advantages of natural materials. While I am no environmentalist and I admit the word 'green' gives me a strange feeling (no offense to those who think otherwise intended) the idea of 'green' building has always made sense to me, largely for this reason. The materials involved are so easy to repair or replace.

But we need to cultivate an attitude of care. If you have a building that will stand up to that care, then that attitude will certainly be easier to get at.

I have liked the concepts to do with natural building since the 1970's. The latest edition of Fine Homebuilding has an article in it about the history of homebuilding in the USA. It discusses how the industry got off track and possible solutions.
In Canada we have followed the building trends of our southern friends. It is sad to see unsustainable homes being built now. I hope to see more green building happening in the near future. Our Guild members have lots to contribute to green building and new trends in Timber Frame construction.

To go along with this thread, you can even find Will Beamer in there some where. A nice list of books.

http://www.greenhomebuilding.com/natural_building.htm

I am looking forward to the latest issue of fine homebuilding to see their opinion of where it all went wrong.

I live in a remote section of the country and whenever I venture out into the more populated areas, southern New England- Boston and such, I get a harsh reminder of the hugh number of people really out there. And along with that reality check I often wonder if there really is a solution? We can do our small part, whatever the flavor.

Hello,
there is one book that anyone concerned with building, and this so called green building in particular, should really be familiar with - A Pattern Language, by Christopher Alexander.

Oh yes !!

It's not only a good read you know!