Re: SB: Re: two story v one story

[Marcus Hardwick <marcus1@sonic.net>]

Wayne Saewyc wrote:

> Two points: smaller ground footprint means less land taken out of
> organic activitiy (possibly offset by green roofing). 

	Good point and an excellent reason to build small. However the larger roof of
the single story house could provide more opportunity for rain water catchment.
That coupled with gray water and humanure could increase net organic activity on
the site in some situations (with willing human participants). 

	BTW, for a large lot/rural location, the footprint of the driveway/road could
very likely take more area out of organic activity than this small house -
single or two story.

>And the foundation
> was repeatedly mentioned to be slab due to environmental constraints,
> thus the 4" section of the slab really would be half the surface area,

	The foundation section under the bale walls would be considerably thicker than
the 4" inch slab. So, no, the perimeter foundation is not the same as half the
surface area. 

	IMO, the main trade off between a concrete slab and an earthen floor (in my
single story, loadbearing, SB flat, passive solar oriented, Meditrainian climate
etc. etc.) is that the concrete is a better heat sink representing better
thermal mass. Although I suspect that an earthen floor is a good enough heat
sink in my area.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, send a message to:
   <strawbale-unsubscribe@crest.org>

or for the digest to:
   <strawbale-digest-unsubscribe@crest.org>

Please send any list administration questions to
strawbale-owner@crest.org