Where is it written that a green-built home must be small? Monthly energy bills determine a home’s carbon footprint, not its size. In fact, a 10,000 square foot house with zero energy bills is far greener than a 1,500 square foot energy hog.
I would argue that a large home built with no wood, using concrete, steel, and polystyrene (a petrochemical product) is far greener than a smaller home built with wood. This is because the concrete house can last 300 years with no maintenance, while the “earth-friendly” wood house is subject to mold, mildew, rot, termite and fire damage (despite being recycled, reclaimed, salvaged, or sustainably grown FCS-certified).
The periodic replacement of inferior building material, such as wood, is far more wasteful to our natural resources than a concrete house built to last. Durability trumps embodied energy.
Green building encompasses five elements: durability, energy efficiency, water efficiency, indoor air quality, and the environment – not just the environment alone. A fact sometimes lost on many advocates of green.
Dueling theories aside, there is one thing on which all building science experts agree. To save money every time, place resources into the exterior building shell envelope, not into mechanicals or renewables.
Lee Hitchox – Taken from BMail; Builder Magazine
I ran across the above graphic in an article from Multifamily Executive, a magazine I get at the office, titled Obtainable Target by Laura McKenzie. I’ve written here before about my concerns regarding the cost of “green” vs the claimed savings. From my experience I have my doubts about the above claims of costs vs returns as well as the exageration rate of concerned contractors. There is no doubt that in some cases there are legitimate savings to be obtained through green building. I just want the clients of Easterday Construction to pursue green with their eyes open. Greenwashing can be found in the form of shams from hucksters as well as exageration by wishfull-thinkng zealots. Beware of both. Do the math for yourself. Easterday Construction Co., Inc. would be happy to help you.
Congratulations Russell! Russell completed Associated Builders and Contractors’ (ABC) Green Worker NCCER course “Your Role in the Green Environment” and received certification for this achievement. This was an afterhours course presented by Dave Weitz, a trainer at ABC’s Michiana Training Facility. Russell made the committment to attend this course and passed with flying colors. We’re proud of Russell! Easterday Construction Co., Inc. encourages all of our employees to pursue continuing their education and we feel knowledge of Green Building will be valuable to Russell and our company as we go forward. We’re encouraging Russell to share what he has learned with the rest of the ECC crew.
Following up on our previous entry on corner connections which dealt mainly with exterior corners, we can look at intersections between interior and exterior walls, often referred to as T-Walls. These connections create some of the same issues. There is a need for support at the corner structurally and as a connection point for interior finish material. Traditional framing accomplishes this using two additional studs in the cross wall to provide nailing corners for interior finishes. (Figure 1) When the cross wall is an exterior wall, the same issues of maximizing insulation in the exterior wall applies. The additional studs can create an insulation void as well as unnecessary use of additional wood studs.
In a room with drywall finishes, one of the most economical and efficient methods of solving these issues is to install drywall continuously on the cross wall prior to installing the T-Wall studs. (Figure 2) This can be accomplished before the cross wall is built or the connecting stud can be left out or loose until after the drywall on the cross wall is installed. This is a technique that is often used in steel stud framing.
When it is not practical to install the cross wall drywall first, blocking can be used to provide finish support at corners. When the T-Wall is 2 x 4 construction, a 2 x 6 installed within the cross wall can accomplish this. (Figure 3) As this is only there to create a nailing strip, scrap salvaged from roof sheathing, floor decking or other areas can be substituted for the 2 x 6. Also, since the 2 x 6 is not there as structural support, it does not have to be continuous as long as it provides nailing points at least every 24″ o/c.
Further efficiency can be achieved using scrap lumber, 2 x 4 cutoffs, scrap roof and floor sheathing, etc. to create a ladder effect to provide nailing points. (Figure 4) Drywall clips are also a solution, as previously discussed.
These things require planning, but are easily accomplished.
Easterday Construction Co., Inc. will be making every effort to use these more efficient corners for T-Walls on projects as we go forward. Preferably the bypass method, but using salvaged lumber when this isn’t possible. This is Green that saves Green!
Summary
There are several ways we can improve the efficiences in the framing of outside corners. A California Corner is one designation for a wood framing pattern that rotates one of the three studs in exterior corners. On exterior walls this allows insulation to proceed all the way to the corner rather than creating an insulation void.