[Greenbuilding] (1850's Michigan) adobe question

[Chris Green]

Adam wilson wrote:
> In my opinion, there would be multiple reasons for locals to choose fired 
> brick over adobe.  It wouldn't require plastering to finish, wouldn't fall 
> down if moisture did penetrate the walls, and probably because it was 
> historically the accepted norm to use fired brick in anglo culture.
>   
A more telling reason would be that at time in North Eastern United 
States, there was a drastic labour shortage, especially in a 'frontier' 
region like Michigan in the 1850's. So the labour to build stuff was a 
big cost factor. The entrepreneurs of the day had to deal with this 
labour shortage by inventing a lot of machinery for industrial uses, and 
water- powered and even  steam-powered sawmills were among the 
solutions: so lumber became relatively cheaper, as it is today: it's a 
lot cheaper to have a crew build a stick-built wall than to hire someone 
to build a rammed earth or adobe wall. Takes less time, too, and people 
needed shelters built rather quickly, before winter set in.

Eartharchitecture.org states that  many immigrants from Europe, 
especially from Germany, brought the practical skills to build rammed 
earth buildings with them and did so. Some of these still exist, but 
often the occupants of the buildings aren't aware they live in rammed 
earth houses.
See the entry dated Sunday, March 12, 2006, at the link below, entitled 
"Is Thomas Jefferson's Monticello Constructed of Rammed Earth?" (The 
answer is No. )

http://www.eartharchitecture.org/index.php?/categories/61-United-States-Other-Regions

Also, the farmers and other settlers had other things to do, such as 
clear land, raise animals, and bring in crops to get food on the table 
and for sale to the nearby markets, so they just didn't have the 
available time to spend building with earth.

Time and money are always factors.

Cheers,

Chris Green.