Re: [GBlist] Mold question and beyond

[John Salmen <terrain@shaw.ca>]

thanks Seth for continuing the thread a little more. Perhaps it is a good
beginning for a new year thread. I can't quite remember how long I've been
contributing to this list but over the years the consistent base for the
conversations has been building products, and the technology or building
science behind them. We have had to relegate the 'problems' to the more
speculative threads that dwindle quickly.

The GBlist focus on products however is appropriate in perspective as much
of the last decade has been a development of product within an economy that
could afford to build upon all the available technology - and find a
marketplace (however slim.)  In other words it has been a bit of an
entrepreneurial decade which has been a boon for green building products.
Some of these products have been inspired by improving IAQ standards or
energy concerns, some by the increased availability of recycled components,
and still more by the diminishing availability of virgin materials, whether
wood or water.

In this rush to get products, materials, and even concepts into the
marketplace I think there has been a bit of loss of perspective or perhaps
foresight . LCA's are a wonderful theoretical tool but in a more vulgar
perspective I'm starting to consider simple basic questions like - can we
afford to replace our Pella or equiv. windows every 15-25 years. Can we
afford the repainting of an exterior every 5-10 yrs., the compressor on a
heat pump every 8 or so yrs., the surfacing of a driveway, etc. When you
look at the mortgage structures on most buildings they generally don't
suffice to cover the replacement of the wearable components. It is a
speculative nightmare and not to an 'owners' advantage.

When I look at public or lower income 'housing solutions' the nightmare
grows worse as I'm looking at designs and material usages that are hard
pressed to survive a single occupancy much less a generations. Our
engineered wood products are not designed for long term durability, our
composite finishing products are very suspect. Our VOC finishing
alternatives are a chemical soup, and our mechanical contraptions are simply
that, often or potentially appropriate but more often not.

I'm not meaning to sound negative, and generally view most developments in a
positive sense but am curious how other building professionals have viewed
the developments of the last decade.

best
John Salmen
TERRAIN E.D.S.


----- Original Message -----
From: "David Seth Melchert" <dmelchert@earthlink.net>
To: "Steven Shepard" <sbtdesigns@earthlink.net>; <greenbuilding@crest.org>
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: [GBlist] Mold question


> Steve:
>
> Indeed there is a message here to consider.
>



______________________________________________________________________
This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by REPP/CREST, creator of
Solstice http://www.crest.org, and BuildingGreen, Inc., publisher of
Environmental Building News and GreenSpec http://www.BuildingGreen.com
______________________________________________________________________