[Strawbale] Geopolymeric Cements
SANCO Business Group, LLC
chansey at earthlink.net
Thu May 10 17:47:32 CDT 2007
Try contacting
The Geopolymer Institute
Dr. Joseph Davidovits
info at geopolymer.org
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Hicks, Shawn" <shawn.hicks at hiaa.ca>
>Sent: May 10, 2007 6:36 AM
>To: strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>Subject: [Strawbale] Geopolymeric Cements
>
>Hello
>
>George Monbiot in his book Heat talks about geopolymeric cements being
>made from readily available materials (including wastes) and being
>produced at a much lower temperature than other cements. My local
>concrete folks have never heard of them. Does anyone have any
>experience with these?
>
>Thank you
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: strawbale-bounces at listserv.repp.org
>[mailto:strawbale-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of
>strawbale-request at listserv.repp.org
>Sent: May 9, 2007 6:06 PM
>To: strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>Subject: Strawbale Digest, Vol 11, Issue 17
>
>Send Strawbale mailing list submissions to
> strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
>http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/strawbale_listserv.repp.org
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> strawbale-request at listserv.repp.org
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
> strawbale-owner at listserv.repp.org
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of Strawbale digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
> 1. an unsustainable policy (Alan Abrams)
> 2. The Debate rages on, eh? (Kent)
> 3. Re: bogus comparisons was: Anti Cement Folks (John Swearingen)
> 4. Re: appropriate PC (Rene Dalmeijer)
> 5. Re: [Strawbale} Anti cement folks (Ron Becker)
> 6. Re: Straw for Timothy (Raftercat5 at aol.com)
> 7. Re: Anti Cement Folks / an unsustainable policy (Hank Carr)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 13:18:12 -0400
>From: "Alan Abrams" <alan at abramsdesignbuild.com>
>Subject: [Strawbale] an unsustainable policy
>Cc: Strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>Message-ID: <004701c7925e$059c9f00$6501a8c0 at abrams19bc7ec2>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>Ah-HA.
>
>
>
>Voila, Kleinzach!:
>
>
>
>http://spiderweb.bantapubnet.com/ecostructure/200703/
>
>
>
>-AA
>
>
>
>The essay, "An Unsustainable Policy," by Ujjval Vyas, a LEED accredited
>attorney who consults on emerging construction practices, throws a
>rainbarrel of cold water on the "overselling of sustainability." Vyas
>rejects sermonizing:
>
>
>
>"...as long as sustainable building advocates continue to moralize, the
>business community cannot take sustainable building seriously, except as
>a
>marketing ploy to manipulate public perception."
>
>
>
>PHEW!!!
>
>
>
>Rather, he calls for some serious objective study of costs and benefits
>of
>green methods and materials:
>
>
>
>"Until sustainable building begins to take seriously the issue of
>building
>performance (which is HW's focus)...it will remain more a plaything for
>designers and conscience raisers rather than a set of solid business
>practices."
>
>
>
>Harsh indeed, but fundamentally true--if green is going to make a
>significant contribution to mitigating climate change, it's got to
>satisfy a
>range of basic needs, including the owner-builder's perceived "rational
>self
>interests."
>
>
>
>Alan Abrams
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 14:43:41 -0400
>From: Kent <woldfamily at gmail.com>
>Subject: [Strawbale] The Debate rages on, eh?
>To: strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>Message-ID:
> <8cb042a50705091143r17425dffxa268757ed1e5d64f at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>WOW..been a while since I kept up here ...I see things haven't changed
>much..still arguing about lime vs cement.. seems a trivial subject in
>comparison to the good alternative home building methods on the whole
>can do
>IF they were ever implemented on a more global basis..which is just how
>likely to happen if we keep arguing over 'embodied energy' .. I tend to
>agree with both sides in some fashion or other ...not that my antiquated
>opinion means much around here anymore (or ever did for that matter)
>like
>other more vocal and somewhat more visible members of this board and
>others
>I have yet to build anything with bales.. unless you count a few
>wintertime
>doghouses that my outdoor pets sure enjoyed!
>In the meantime as the 'experts' in the field argue fine points that may
>or
>may not be relevant to the bale building field in the long run.. how
>many
>are being turned off by arguments among the faithful.. reminds me of
>churches that try to reach out but can't get along amongst the
>members...
>the doors soon close..FOREVER... is our door closing on being able to
>build
>more house for more people with lower total 'COST OF OWNERSHIP' and
>greater
>RETURN ON INVESTMENT...hmmm I guess that question is best left to
>greater
>minds than mine!
>Answering relevant questions and making Bale Building more accessible
>just
>maybe should be the overall goal of our best minds.. instead of arguing
>incessantly about lime vs plaster and speaking so far above the heads of
>those that would like to become the faithful that they decide it just
>isn't
>worth trying to dig out the bits of trash from the rubble of
>contention..
>Oh well..just this old grumps opinion ...for what it is worth..
>Kent (WG9)
>ps..on a personal note I am now moved and a permanent resident of
>Canada..so
>that makes me what? A displaced American? Canuck wannabe? Just give me a
>job
>and let me do it.. looking now ..frustrating process!
>John S ... good to see your still around.. hope your back is holding
>out..had my surgery (two level fusion) and doing ok..
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 11:46:14 -0700
>From: "John Swearingen" <john.skillfulmeans at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [Strawbale] bogus comparisons was: Anti Cement Folks
>To: "Stone Tool" <owly at ttc-cmc.net>
>Cc: STRAWBALE at listserv.repp.org
>Message-ID:
> <9d3d82d00705091146y2b2a7848yea647b2cea13f59e at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
>On 5/9/07, Stone Tool <owly at ttc-cmc.net > wrote:
>>
>>
>> Here's why:
>>
>> Cement and Lime are both lime based products, and the lime must be
>> calcined which releases CO2 into the atmosphere as the lime is
>converted
>> from calcium carbonate to calcium hydroxide. In this case lime
>> produces more because cement is composed of only 75% lime
>
>
>I could be wrong, but I believe you've got it backwards. Lime
>sequesters
>CO2 when it sets, though not enough to make much difference. It is
>cooked at
>a lower temperature, and so, overall would have a lower embodied energy.
>
>
>> This means that cement does not require much shipping, and in many
>cases
>> lime must be shipped many hundreds of miles to get to your building
>> site.....Do you give a damn about the truth?
>
>
>Let's take a little time to discover the truth, shall we. You have an
>interesting theory, about transportation costs and on the surface it
>appears
>self-evident. Embodied energy analysis is tricky, though. The devil is
>in
>the details. Let's look a little deeper, in pursuit, as you suggest, of
>the
>truth.
>
>First, there are 115 cement plants in the US, in 38 states. To me, that
>means that there is still plenty of room for trucking, even thought the
>plants are strategicly located to reduce transport costs.
>
>According to the Portland Cement Association, then, a goodly amount of
>your
>"local" cement might have come from thousands of miles away:
>
>"The gap between domestic production and consumption was filled in 2002
>by
>24.2 million metric tons of imported cement and cement clinker. About
>56% of
>cement and clinker imported in 2002 came from four major countries:
>Canada,
>Thailand, China, and Greece. Imports from Thailand, less than one
>million
>metric tons in 1998, surged to 4.3 million metric tons in 2002.
>
>"Cement and clinker importation is generally cyclical. Typically smaller
>amounts of cement are imported during recessions ? perhaps less that 5%
>of
>total national consumption ? but during boom times, imports can increase
>to
>20% or more of total national consumption."
>
>So, that cement truck hauling down the highway with the American flag on
>the
>side might be smokin' some of that famous 'Thai clinker". Oh, and
>another
>interesting tidbit: "Foreign companies now own approximately 81% of U.S.
>cement capacity, up from about 22% in 1980."
>
>> Let's remember that so called "embodied energy" is a huge
>>
>part of the cost of most products we buy. If it takes more energy to
>> produce and deliver, it will cost more........ that's pretty
>> simple......
>
>
>Ah, no sooo simple. The whole smoke and mirrors of the problem is that
>the
>embodied energy in a material, or more specifically the environmental
>cost,
>is not usually reflected in the relative purchase price of that item.
>Just
>a few examples, you can find many more in your local Costco, Wallmart or
>Home Depot, where price rules over all other considerations:
>
>
> - Aluminum windows have a very high embodied energy,and vinyl windows
> have a high environmental cost, but they are cheap relative to wood
>windows.
> - Tobacco is cheap, but cigarettes have been determined to carry with
> them a high cost to the government in health care: sickness, lost
>work and
> death.
> - Death from smoking might be cheaper than a long life with emphysema
> (a cost of asbestos), but it's not a desirable social cost.
> - Synthetics and high-tech products generally have high embodied
> energy and environmental costs, but low labor costs, and so are
>cheaper to
> buy (cotton vs. polyester).
> - Imported goods (you name 'em, we've got 'em) also reflect lower
> labor costs which greatly offset the higher transport costsm etc.
>etc.
> etc....
>
>
>
>> Shut off you AC and your lights and refrigerator.....
>
>
>Excellent idea! Generation of electricity and fuels used for heating
>and
>cooling are a major of greenhouse gases Make your home energy
>efficient.
>
>A recent NPR show on questions about global warming (
>http://mail.google.com/mail/?account_id=john.skillfulmeans%40gmail.com)
>puts
>things into perspective :
>
>An average car in the United States emits about 4.5 tons of CO2
>equivalence
>into the atmosphere per year. A power plant, by contrast is 8.3 million
>tons
>for a coal-fired power plant. And you think about the difference in the
>scale ? you may be driving your car significantly, but the kind of power
>that you're choosing to purchase actually has a bigger impact over the
>lifetime of those emissions. A difference between a hybrid and an SUV,
>however, is quite significant.
>
>*Harris: *And the power plants are about 40 percent of our
>greenhouse-gas
>emissions.
>
>*Siegel: *Well, then that's still only accounting for about 60 percent
>of
>all the greenhouse emissions. Where is the rest coming from?
>
>*Harris: *Industrial uses are a big part of it. And a lot of heating ?
>for
>example, buildings are a huge consumer of energy.
>
>*Layke: *Globally, another source of emissions is actually land use
>change.
>And that is the difference between where the United States is in its
>development pattern and other countries like Brazil or Indonesia that
>have
>very serious conversion going on from forests to agriculture in order to
>help development cycles.
>
>John "Disembodied Energy" Swearingen
>
>
>John Swearingen
>Skillful Means, Inc.
>Design and Construction
>www.skillful-means.com
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 20:59:06 +0200
>From: Rene Dalmeijer <rene.dalmeijer at hetnet.nl>
>Subject: Re: [Strawbale] appropriate PC
>To: strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>Message-ID: <d606a95b23696dd7066a7d68a5ab30eb at hetnet.nl>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
>Dear flaxstraw,
>
>Pc or even Fly ash cement is an open nerve on this list. As it is one
>of the products that is very difficult to avoid specifically in
>foundations. (not to forget the steel rebar). Many people on this list
>strive to minimise embodied energy (CO2) used in building their
>ecological house. Some push the envelope by limiting the use of high
>embodied energy materials altogether I am happy they do, as effectively
>I hope they are able to successfully push the envelope. The obviously
>ridiculous idea of using straw bales to build a house is a good example
>of envelope pushing Everybody is free to choose the level of greenness
>they seek.
>
>What I personally strive for is a balance between low ecological impact
>(based on full life cycle analysis LCA), comfort and the fact that it
>should be possible in a heavily built up environment ie a city suburb.
>This means the foundation (and concrete piles) and ground floor use a
>substantial amount of fly ash cement (fly ash is not special here but
>the norm) and a prefab concrete/EPS floor system (this system uses the
>least amount of cement possible for a stone ground floor. These choices
>off course are strongly determined by local circumstances. Besides this
>the rest of the house is built using renewable/re-growable materials. I
>also have some mechanical systems like a heat pump and an ERV system
>but based on LCA this is not a bad deal and yes I use steel screws .
>I would like not to use the cement in the foundation and ground floor
>but see no other suitable alternative as yet.
>
>BTW It is possible to use pure lime plaster forgoing the use of any
>cement. But then again using lime instead of cement is not such a big
>deal. Can anybody say how much CO2 a pure lime plaster saves compared
>to a cement plaster?
>
>As HW states transport can have a tremendous impact on the CO2 balance
>of so called green materials. The off-grid deep green house might be
>not so green as a std high rise downtown apartment once you take all
>the commutes into account, and how about LCA of the road to the off
>grid house? Just imagine what would happen if all we green folks move
>out of town is that a good idea, I doubt very much.
>
>Times are changing what we do has consequences we are now more aware of
>then ever before. I hope we personally make the right choices for
>ourselves before beleaguering others with how they should make their
>choices.
>
>Rene
>On May 9, 2007, at 19:00, strawbale-request at listserv.repp.org wrote:
>
>> It never ceases to amaze me that when anyone mentions cement that
>> everyone goes on and on about how it is the root of all evils. Well
>> it isn't. When we talk about cement stucco every limehead forgets
>> that there is one part cement, two parts lime and six parts sand. Now
>> if that isn't a lime stucco with a cement additive I don't know what
>> it is. Furthermore, when people talk about cement stucco failures
>> they forget to mention that it was placed on and forgotten whereas
>> lime stucco must be tended to every few years or it will also fail.
>>
>> If we are going to compare products, please compare all components of
>> the materials life cycle
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 13:09:17 -0600
>From: Ron Becker <ron45 at tularosa.net>
>Subject: Re: [Strawbale] [Strawbale} Anti cement folks
>To: Strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>Message-ID: <6e1518fb2446a152447c544aa02863c8 at tularosa.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
>Beautiful Frank. Well said. The sound of that guy's mind slamming shut
>was not a pleasant experience. I remember how shocked I was to learn
>that people on a strawbale list are not talking about a house of bales
>but an embodied energy gobbling behemoth and sticking some bales here
>and there so they can have their `lie' window so show off to the
>Yuppersons next door. They all stand around with their wine glasses
>going "yep we're green alright! I joined this list because I was
>looking for info on earthen plasters and there is some of that around
>for sure. But I'm sorry, I never thought strawbale construction would
>be infiltrated by the republiban. I'm outa here. You may be too if
>enough people whine about you mentioning forbiden subjects. `What's his
>name' forbid that they should be exposed to other viewpoints.
>Ron
>
>Those who question global warming have a financial or emotional
>interest in the status quo.
>
>
>On May 8, 2007, at 4:50 AM, Frank Tettemer wrote:
>
>> Stone, I'm sure you're not alone.
>>
>>> I'm sure I am not the only one here
>>> who has arrived at this conclusion...... just the only one to say so.
>>
>> Even the President of the great US of A agrees with you. He certainly
>> does what serves him best. But, gosh, I really shouldn't delve into
>> politics here, nothing anti-administration, at least.
>>
>> And I really shouldn't discuss the consequences of Peak Oil on this
>> list, 'cause it's not a truly proven fact,
>> and anyway, what has that got to do with cement? Besides, the only
>> reason anyone on this list builds with SB's is to save money and be In
>> Fashion.
>> Plus, there's no alternatives to using cement ... not for a truly
>> self-interested person who simply wants the Best structure for
>himself,
>> and to heck with everyone else, and their stinking obsession with the
>> environment.
>>
>> No sir-eee, you're probably right. Build with what you want, and
>serve
>> yourself best, that's what I always say.
>>
>> Frank Tettemer
>> Living For Yourself ~ Building & Design
>>
>>
>>
>>> As I have said before the
>>> "carbon footprint", "embodied energy", and other politically and
>>> environmentally correct considerations .... DO NOT ENTER INTO MY
>>> DECISIONS ON CONSTRUCTION AT ALL......... I will build with the
>>> materials I feel will serve me the best and that is all there is to
>>> it.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Strawbale mailing list
>> Strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/strawbale_listserv.repp.org
>>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 15:28:56 EDT
>From: Raftercat5 at aol.com
>Subject: Re: [Strawbale] Straw for Timothy
>To: strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>Message-ID: <c65.132a6ca9.33737af8 at aol.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>From: "Timothy Minerd" <tfminerd at hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [Strawbale] Anti Cement Folks / an unsustainable policy
>To: Strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>Message-ID: <BAY101-F772A69448CD2A30BE5678C4440 at phx.gbl>
>Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
>Greetings all
>
>I've been silently reading trying to take in as much data as possible.
>That
>includes opinions as well as statistical test information. I
>understand HWs
>frustration with being plastered (or is that stucco) for willingly
>using
>cement. I also heard an appeal from him, and it could be well serving
>to
>this group to hear.
>
>Perhaps if there were a collection of: methods, experiences & costs
>that
>could be referenced, those looking for quick information could be
>served,
>but more important (and costly) is to find hard data on general costs,
>R-value, availability, etc. that could turn the eye of conventional
>builders
>beyond a small but highly concerned group, and wouldn't that create a
>larger
>impact on the whole?
>
>I care about cost of construction, but also the cost to heat and cool
>my
>home and structural maintenance.
>
>I'm even having difficulty finding straw alone. (AAAaaaaa!!!)
>
>I read about supercompressed bales that sound just incredible, but
>again
>that is in early stages fo testing.
>
>I've read attacks from both sides and neither are beneficial. I hope
>to see
>more construction data.
>
>Thank you for your consideration of this rambling thought.
>
>I'm going back to listening and learning.
>
>TM
>
>Timothy: You can probably ask around about where to find straw at your
>
>local animal feed store, or where hay is sold. Maybe they can talk to
>the farmer
>they get it from to give you a call. Or maybe you can look up your
>local
>Farm Market Bulletin (check online). I'm SURE there's straw in your
>area.
>BTW...I haven't heard back from your wife about the SB house stuff.
>Hope to
>hear from her soon.
>- Kathy
>
>
>
>************************************** See what's free at
>http://www.aol.com.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 7
>Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 16:06:20 -0400
>From: "Hank Carr" <hank at dna.ca>
>Subject: Re: [Strawbale] Anti Cement Folks / an unsustainable policy
>To: "'REPP Strawbale'" <strawbale at listserv.repp.org>
>Message-ID: <002f01c79275$83799240$5f66facd at DNA.CA.local>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>Timothy Minerd wrote:
>
>> Perhaps if there were a collection of: methods, experiences
>> & costs that could be referenced, those looking for quick
>> information could be served, but more important (and costly)
>> is to find hard data on general costs, R-value, availability,
>> etc. that could turn the eye of conventional builders beyond
>> a small but highly concerned group, and wouldn't that create
>> a larger impact on the whole?
>
>Tim,
>
>We've started to put together what I think you're talking about. We've
>begun to build a straw bale construction portal. It seems to be a
>fairly
>popular destination even in its infancy as we're getting over 2000
>sessions
>per week from around 60 countries.
>
>The portal is temporarily located here:
>
>http://www.dna.ca/sbportal
>
>It includes a long FAQ as well as some free complete plans.
>
>With respect to this whole pro- vs. anti-cement thread the discussion is
>really about the difference between practical environmentalism and
>romantic
>environmentalism. If you go to Google and type in practical
>environmentalism" there is LOTS of information. I think that this is a
>very
>good article:
>
>http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.14079/pub_detail.asp
>
>Cement is neither good nor evil. It is an inanimate building material.
>Yes, it has a great deal of embodied energy and as a result is
>responsible
>for a great deal of CO2 production but it is extremely long lived, well
>accepted, and readily available. It also produces a plaster that is
>easy to
>reproduce and that has consistently good performance.
>
>I've been a member of this list and SB-R-Us for years. I have yet to
>hear a
>single substantiated story of a well built and well maintained cement
>plastered straw bale wall failing. There have been many examples cited
>where the failure resulted from cracks or poor detailing but those
>failures
>would have occurred in earthen and lime plastered buildings as well.
>Not a
>single case.
>
>There are plans on our straw bale portal for a 27' 8" x 27' 8" building
>(25'
>x 25' interior) building. That building contains around 300 bales of
>straw.
>It would use less than a tonne of cement were it plastered with cement
>plaster. The atmospheric carbon sequestered in the straw when the
>building
>was built would be equivalent to 5.9 tonnes of atmospheric CO2. The
>average
>energy savings here in Canada based on the CMHC study would be around
>750 kg
>per year. Over an extremely conservative 50 year lifespan of the
>building
>the CO2 reduction as a result of that energy savings would be in the
>order
>of 37.5 tonnes. By comparison the CO2 from the cement is rather small.
>
>I started the Practical Straw Bale Construction list a few years ago to
>complement the big two romantic straw bale construction lists and to
>offer a
>place where the environmental politics of the list members wouldn't get
>in
>the way of a practical discussion of the hows and whys of straw bale
>construction. It's now up to more than 350 members and is the fastest
>growing straw bale construction list on the internet by far. It will
>never
>replace this list or SB-R-Us, especially if you're planning to use lambs
>wool to insulate your attic or plastered used carpet for your partition
>walls but if you're going to be shopping at Home Depot it might be
>useful.
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/practical-sbc
>
>All of the things that people like Chris Magwood in Canada and John
>Swearingen in Australia are doing are definitely better for the
>environment
>than cement. I've been working hard to reduce the amount of cement that
>goes into the buildings that I've been drawing and we're looking at even
>more radical (for us) changes in the next few months. The uber-green
>building isn't for everyone, though, and it's better that you do what
>you're
>comfortable doing than to do nothing at all. I know...that isn't very
>romantic of me to say but I'm a practical environmentalist.
>
>Hank.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Strawbale mailing list
>Strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/strawbale_listserv.repp.org
>
>End of Strawbale Digest, Vol 11, Issue 17
>*****************************************
>
>_______________________________________________
>Strawbale mailing list
>Strawbale at listserv.repp.org
>http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/strawbale_listserv.repp.org
SANCO Business Group
Paul Salas, Gen Mgr
PO Box 45741
Rio Rancho, NM 87174
(505) 505-927-2219
paul at sanco-bg.com
visit us http://www.sanco-bg.com
More information about the Strawbale
mailing list