Metals & Alloys

Why use perishable product when non perishable (bricks and mortar, concrete) will last ten times longer? In the long run which is "greener"?

Chas

Besides being outside the scope of the topic.

In the long run wood or metals can surpass bricks, mortar and concrete in utilities within the scope of the topic.

Good steer... I'm very impressed but my attention has been drawn to the engineered wood products specifically framing and beams etc..

What say you of engineered wood building components?

Well, I can speak to engineered wood products a little bit. Laminated Strand Lumber¹ (LSL) has been pretty commonly used by major wood door manufacturers for quite a while now. Currently, there is a real push for buildings to be certified 'Green' using LEED² points. This requires things like Urea and -aldehyde free resins, adhesives, and solvents, tracking the life of recycled components through a 'Chain of Custody'... more can be found at captioned website.

I agree with you bwire; there are many ways we can limit or reduce waste material and wasteful practices. Sometimes, these methods cost more cash, but there can be a result that is larger than a cash dividend.

¹Laminated Strand Lumber (LSL)
A composite of wood strand elements with wood fibers primarily oriented along the length of the member. The least dimension of the strands shall not exceed 0.25 in. and the average length shall be a minimum of 150 times the least dimension. _{(Excerpted from Marshfield Door Systems website)}

²For more about LEED, visit http://www.usgbc.org/

Thanks for the link, seems many contractors are reluctant to deviate from what they're accustomed to and comfortable with even when a newer concept maybe cost effective, as those whom insist on using premium plywood when OSB is adequate.

WOW bwire,

If you were in some of the homes that disintegrated onto almost as many pieces of woody materials as it takes to create even one 4'X8'X7/16th " sheet of OSB, you would not make that statement. Coastal Building Codes now require at least 5/8" thick plywood for roof sheeting and 1/2" thick side wall sheeting. I have constructed buildings using OSB when the building code permitted its use, but I insisted that it be clued to the framing member as well as being nailed as per the building code.

One of the most obvious problems with the use of materials that are of composite construction using wood chips, fibers or particulates, is that it cannot resist moisture and is therefore not suitable for use where it may absorb moisture or get wet. It is suitable for use for interior componants such as doors and trim. but today's builders prefer not to install wood exterior wood doors. Even the false shutters are being made of plastic.

As mentioned before, I am a retired contractor. I will construct one more home for myself and wife. It will be framed with light Gage galvanized steel. The roofing including the trusses and all of the trim will also be of steel. The exterior doors will like wise be steel. The floor joisting will be steel bar joists with coraform sheeting on top. This will be filled with light weight concrete. The Foundation will of course be cement block on top of a concrete footing. This building will be insulated with spray on foam and feature thermo paine windows. Even the exterior siding will be pre-finished steel lap siding. Will It be "Green", well it will certainly be among the most energy efficient methods of construction as it will be constructed mostly of recycled materials. It will be stronger than similar wood framed structures. will have a longer estimated life span, will not burn or rot or be damaged by termites. Further it will resist hurricane force winds, and less expensive to insure.

As for your other wood products such as Glued, Laminated wood beams, there is really no substitute if you are seeking the appearance of beautiful open beamed wood structures. I do like them and they do have their place in the building world.

There are however many different shades of "Green", and some very thin layers of the coatings that resemble "Green". You must be your own judge, as it is your money you spend, now and maybe again in the future.

TMF

I did write using OSB where it is adequate....and I prefer screws, torx or square socket heads.

I too like the new no-load plastic stuff.

A similar line of topic and related discussions can be viewed in the forum thread 'FUTURE ALTERNATIVE BUILDING MATERIALS' by S.Udhayamarthandan.

The basic reinforcement and support structures being dependent on metal and concrete reinforcement, the walls part can be structured using modified wood which seems to be the best choice between strength, durability, recyclabilty and renewabilty. Even the so called recycled building materials are found use only in non load and pavement uses. Minerals and Metals being non renewable ,the combined choice with wood seems to be much balanced.

Actually, S,ufjdkdsiwleoxmxjdueo

You should consider a shorter I.D. Just for convenience sake.

When I review the assorted ways to build "GREEN" by "unskilled do it your self'ers' I am reminded of of our early settlers of the American western plains with their sod huts, and the Native Americans who lived in TEE PEES. Also there were those who cleared the land and used the logs to construct buildings chinked with mud, etc. Yes one can build basic shelter from that which is available. These structures cannot pass modern building and health codes, but they were certainly "GREEN".

The fact is that wood is attacked by wood destroying organisms. It can be treated, but the chemicals used for prevention have a limited life span and therefore this use of wood combined with other materials will be subjected to the shortest length of time of the most vulnerable material.

Concrete cracks and is a horrible insulator subjecting said constructed shelter to need significant energy input for climate control just to make it habitable. But it is recyclable, so is the asphalt roofing and the steel reinforcing and joisting. So it can be considered green too.

Green therefore seems to be in the eye of the person promoting their favorite construction material.

"I" personally have used virtually every modern building material and building method currently available. Iron recovered from ore is expensive mine, process and further reprocess into useful goods. Iron products in this manner are not "Green", however metal produced from recycled iron/steel is very green as it cost only about 10% of the original cost to convert it into useful building products again, and again, and again, almost forever.

The fact of the matter is that "Green is as Green does". If I construct a building to live in that cannot keep out the winter cold and summer heat I will be caused to spend my dollars on artificial means to be comfortable. However if I add the insulation and heating and cooling equipment that will take decades to recover said cost of installation, this is not "really" green either, as this additional cost might have been invested and returned many times its original value.

We should refrain from delighting ourselves with the term "Green" and reconcile the true costs in black and white.

TMF

It's surprising how many fair old adobe structures are still habitable and where some are located, Wisconsin for example.

Everyone can't live in the most temperate of zones because that's where the food grows...

I would have no problem living underground but the bidding was to high on the old silo's and suitable bunkers