[Cob] strawbale

[GlobalCirclenet]

People who take a healthy discussion and turn it into personal attack and
ridicule usually show little to support their opinions. This is the case
below.  Nothing in that post refutes the points I made about strawbale
disadvantages such as cost, labor required, and constant maintenance. 

Instead we are expected to all run out and build strawbale for these
reasons:

That person is a long time fan of strawbale and has experience with natural
building materials, and especially since they resent hearing it called a
"fad".

There are supposedly 3,000 strawbales built in this country. In other
words, almost non-existent.

The fact some codes allow strawbales is supposedly proof that they couldn't
be impractical. 

And for some reason we're told fiberglass and foam attract vermin. Untrue. 

And strawbale is supposed to be great because you have to plaster cob also.
Never mind the fact that if you neglect the cracks in cob plaster you don't
get mold and sick building syndrome from it. 

And then we get a claim that's frankly, pure bullshit:  "Moisture is no
more likely to develop in a properly detailed bale home than it is in a cob
home or a conventionally stick-framed home or a Rastra blockhome."  Nobody
can see inside a bale to check moisture content already there, and cracks
in cob plaster or Rastra never, ever, result in moisture penetration with
mold and illness. 

 And here's another gem: "plaster provides significant thermal mass on the
insulated inside".  But of course that's absurd since nobody is going to
put on plaster several inches thick. This person needs to stick to facts.
It takes four square feet of concrete or stone, six inches thick, to absorb
the direct gain from one square foot of south facing glass. 

 Another "fact" is the claim that strawbale is fast and easy. If that
person really has any experience as claimed they should know it just ain't
so.  Ever try plastering an entire home inside and out?

There are so many other low-embedded energy alternatives including cob,
stone, pumicecrete, adobe, etc. etc. And all those have the potential to be
far cheaper and more low maintenance than strawbale. Where I live adobe has
been used for four hundred years, and now and then I see adobes still
standing long after their roofs have crumbled to dust. They were warm in
winter and cool in summer, and they were built for pennies. Today adobe and
pumicecrete are serious business, and building with earth is the ultimate
sustainable method.

paul at largocreekfarms.com
http://medicinehill.net
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 7/20/2004 at 1:49 PM Barbara Roemer and Glenn Miller wrote:

>Hey, Global Circle Net,
>
>Your post really grabbed my attention and raised my hackles.  I'm a
staunch
>cob supporter, and particularly interested in code being developed to
>support its use (even went so far as to pay Otherfish, John Fordice, for a
>couple of hours of his extremely well-informed advice to advance the cause
>in my county).  I am also a long-time advocate for bale building, having
>built the first rice-straw building in the country with my California 5th
>graders about 12 years ago....  We are partners with another couple in a
>light straw/clay mixer which my son built, and which we have used to build
>a
>straw/clay infill building.  My experience with natural building materials
>spans many approaches.
>
>
>Your uninformed post is the sort of misinformation that has made the
>general
>public skeptical about bale building.  Happily, it hasn't resonated with
>those who do even a smattering of research, the 3,000 or so of them in
this
>country and probably an equal number around the globe who have built,
often
>permitted, gorgeous simple or complex straw bale buildings as homes,
>workshops, studios, meditation spaces, clinics, office buildings, and
>wineries.  A fad?  Your head must have been under the covers for a loooong
>time.  Were straw building, whether it's in the form of bales, in light
>straw clay, or in cob, so wildly impractical, it's unlikely there would be
>ANY permitted buildings.  There are even jurisdictions in this country
>which
>are now offering incentives by way of green-building credit to bale
>builders.  It's not only legit., it's becoming most desirable!
>
>NOW:::
>
>Every tight building must have roof insulation, even cob structures.  What
>does "regular" insulation mean?  Is that fiberglass, or fiberglass without
>formaldehyde, or blown in cellulose, or recycled jeans cotton batts, or
>foam
>board?  How about bagged or blown in rice hulls?  A perfect use for a
waste
>product whose current use is primarily as a soil amendment, but whose
>future
>includes being compressed with natural resins as a dry wall replacement.
>Critters?  Ever looked as your fiberglass or cotton or even foam
insulation
>in the walls for evidence of nesting critters?  In our area, everything
>loves all insulation except properly plastered bales.  Plaster of some
>sort?
>It's exactly the same plaster you'd use on your cob building: earth,
>chopped
>straw, perhaps lime, perhaps magnesium chloride, perhaps seaweed.  Could
it
>be stucco or gypsum?  Yes, but that's much less likely.  Those baleheads
>have the same concerns we cobbers do, including a predilection for natural
>materials with low embodied energy.  Yes, plaster must be properly
>maintained, and depending on your climate and the overhang protection for
>the walls, that might mean a lime wash as often as every 5-10 years.
>Interior plaster isn't any more or less fragile on bales than on cob, and
>will need to be recoated or repainted no more often than the wear and tear
>of its occupants dictate.
>
>Moisture is no more likely to develop in a properly detailed bale home
than
>it is in a cob home or a conventionally stick-framed home or a Rastra
block
>home.  It's all in a proper foundation and roof, exactly the same
>constraints no matter what the building system.  And any building can give
>its occupants sick building syndrome if ventilation is not handled
>properly.
>I've seen far more mold on cob walls than on bale walls, but it is not
>difficult to avoid mold in either.
>
>The cost of a non-load bearing straw building if you hire a contractor and
>have the work done is comparable to that of stick framing and depends
>almost
>entirely on the foundation, fixturing, flooring, wall finishing, windows
>and
>roofing - all the considerations that are present in costing out any
>building.  Wall systems are a small percentage of the total in any
building
>system.  Just for comparison's sake, straw bale building entails no
further
>insulation in the walls, and its plaster provides significant thermal mass
>on the insulated inside, whilst cob building needs no further thermal
mass,
>but provides little insulation and the mass is not insulated.  Straw
>building is just as accessible as cob building, the detailing is simple,
>the
>code provides for it, even in seismically active zones like the Bay Area,
>and it's quick to erect, so for many people, it's the way to go.  It's far
>better insulated than a stick framed house with stud cavity insulation: to
>get comparable insulation with stick framing, you'd have to do a wrap of
>foam, hardly sustainable.  Cob is more easily sculpted, usually found on
>site, provides great mass, and is easy but slow for the owner builder to
>work on herself.  Cob building for a dwelling is currently permitted (as
>far
>as I know) in only one county in the country, and the obstacles to cob
>building in seismic zones are formidable.  When significant investment in
>engineering and testing has been made, cob building may be feasible in
>seismic zones.  For me, the best home will be a hybrid, including
>straw/clay, bales, and cob, each where it's most appropriate. It will be
>low-cost, pay-as-we-go, with us doing most of the work because it's ALL
>user
>friendly.  It won't outgas toxics, will contain very few materials that
>aren't locally available, and will last our children's grandchildren's
>lifetimes, at some point in the future sinking gracefully into the earth
>from which it came.
>
>We in the natural building world have a lot to learn from each other, and
>we
>all benefit from examining the claims and strengths of each type of
>building, incorporating what is sustainable, local, practical, and
>beautiful.
>
>PJ, contact me off-list if you want to discuss bales further.  There are
>several farmers in northern California who have adapted baling machines to
>provide building bales of very tight, dense, uniform configuration.  Rice
>straw with its high silica content is unpalatable to insects, isn't used
as
>fodder, and is essentially a renewable waste byproduct of rice growing.
>Please don't use baled weeds or hay: we know a lot more about appropriate,
>sustainable materials than we did when the buildings in the Sand Hills of
>Nebraska went up in the 1800's. Those of you who are further interested
>might even hang out on the SB-r-Us list at Yahoo where you'll find very
>open
>folks.
>
>Barbara in the Sierra Foothills.
>
>
> 
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Coblist mailing list
>Coblist at deatech.com
>http://www.deatech.com/mailman/listinfo/coblist