Comments on: The Efficient Materials Trap http://greenbuildingelements.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/ Reporting on Sustainably Built Environments from Bricks to Cities Fri, 03 Feb 2012 01:57:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Bobby B. http://greenbuildingelements.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-133 Bobby B. Wed, 31 Oct 2007 04:14:09 +0000 http://philipproefrock.greenoptions.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/#comment-133 Have any of you ever toured an industrial-type sawmill, a plywood mill, or an OSB manufacturing facility? If not, you would be amazed at the speed and efficiency of the tree-to-product processes. You always leave these factories wondering how they grow enough trees to support what goes on in just one of those places. I have watched large timber blanks go into a computer-controlled rip saw and come out the other side as dimensional lumber in a grouping of different sizes that make the most efficient use of the board. It happens in seconds. I have seen log-sized lathes peel the thinnest of skins from a log for use on the outer layers of plywood. I have watched the hot-oil stack presses cure both plywood and OSB sheets in minutes. The rip saws and gang saws make quick work in taking the oversized sheets down to the standard 4' x 8' pieces we see at the lumber yard. So, why mention any of this? The other side of the coin is the completeness of the processes. Absolutely nothing is wasted. Bark is used to fire boilers. Chips get sold to paper mills. Sawdust becomes particle board or MDF. It is truly amazing. And even more amazing is the industry's committment to replanting more than is used to guarantee its future. BTW, I also spent two years in a large paper mill. It is way cool, too. Have any of you ever toured an industrial-type sawmill, a plywood mill, or an OSB manufacturing facility? If not, you would be amazed at the speed and efficiency of the tree-to-product processes. You always leave these factories wondering how they grow enough trees to support what goes on in just one of those places. I have watched large timber blanks go into a computer-controlled rip saw and come out the other side as dimensional lumber in a grouping of different sizes that make the most efficient use of the board. It happens in seconds. I have seen log-sized lathes peel the thinnest of skins from a log for use on the outer layers of plywood. I have watched the hot-oil stack presses cure both plywood and OSB sheets in minutes. The rip saws and gang saws make quick work in taking the oversized sheets down to the standard 4′ x 8′ pieces we see at the lumber yard.

So, why mention any of this? The other side of the coin is the completeness of the processes. Absolutely nothing is wasted. Bark is used to fire boilers. Chips get sold to paper mills. Sawdust becomes particle board or MDF. It is truly amazing. And even more amazing is the industry’s committment to replanting more than is used to guarantee its future.

BTW, I also spent two years in a large paper mill. It is way cool, too.

]]> By: Bobby B. http://greenbuildingelements.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-97658 Bobby B. Wed, 31 Oct 2007 04:14:00 +0000 http://philipproefrock.greenoptions.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/#comment-97658 Have any of you ever toured an industrial-type sawmill, a plywood mill, or an OSB manufacturing facility? If not, you would be amazed at the speed and efficiency of the tree-to-product processes. You always leave these factories wondering how they grow enough trees to support what goes on in just one of those places. I have watched large timber blanks go into a computer-controlled rip saw and come out the other side as dimensional lumber in a grouping of different sizes that make the most efficient use of the board. It happens in seconds. I have seen log-sized lathes peel the thinnest of skins from a log for use on the outer layers of plywood. I have watched the hot-oil stack presses cure both plywood and OSB sheets in minutes. The rip saws and gang saws make quick work in taking the oversized sheets down to the standard 4' x 8' pieces we see at the lumber yard. So, why mention any of this? The other side of the coin is the completeness of the processes. Absolutely nothing is wasted. Bark is used to fire boilers. Chips get sold to paper mills. Sawdust becomes particle board or MDF. It is truly amazing. And even more amazing is the industry's committment to replanting more than is used to guarantee its future. BTW, I also spent two years in a large paper mill. It is way cool, too. Have any of you ever toured an industrial-type sawmill, a plywood mill, or an OSB manufacturing facility? If not, you would be amazed at the speed and efficiency of the tree-to-product processes. You always leave these factories wondering how they grow enough trees to support what goes on in just one of those places. I have watched large timber blanks go into a computer-controlled rip saw and come out the other side as dimensional lumber in a grouping of different sizes that make the most efficient use of the board. It happens in seconds. I have seen log-sized lathes peel the thinnest of skins from a log for use on the outer layers of plywood. I have watched the hot-oil stack presses cure both plywood and OSB sheets in minutes. The rip saws and gang saws make quick work in taking the oversized sheets down to the standard 4′ x 8′ pieces we see at the lumber yard.

So, why mention any of this? The other side of the coin is the completeness of the processes. Absolutely nothing is wasted. Bark is used to fire boilers. Chips get sold to paper mills. Sawdust becomes particle board or MDF. It is truly amazing. And even more amazing is the industry’s committment to replanting more than is used to guarantee its future.

BTW, I also spent two years in a large paper mill. It is way cool, too.

]]> By: Matt Dirksen http://greenbuildingelements.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-132 Matt Dirksen Tue, 30 Oct 2007 20:03:08 +0000 http://philipproefrock.greenoptions.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/#comment-132 Having designed many house additions w/ both traditional lumber and engineered lumber, I (and our field management) are quite happy with engineered lumber. It's dimensionally stable, easy to place, and very reliable. On my end, there's no extra design time required for engineered lumber. As a practice, we will use engineered lumber and pre-manufactured trusses as often as possible. I would tend to agree with the theory that traditional lumber may be more adaptable for future use, and it especially makes good sense to contemplate what may happen to all building materials at the end of it's life in a house, but a good deconstruction crew will be able to salvage a tji just as well as a piece of 2x12 (usually the plywood gets torn up by the adhesive, not the tji). The bigger problem is the adhesive. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a good zero VOC adhesive which could be dissolved in a ecologically humane way, once it’s useful life was up? Traditional Japanese wood joinery techniques with post & beam construction doesn’t even use metal fasteners, and it can last hundreds of years if well maintained. I’m sure we could come up with a way to build with the end-use in mind. Regardless, as was mentioned, I am currently much more concerned about all the perfectly good lumber being thrown into our landfill on a daily basis as a result of houses being torn down to make way for a new mcMansion. Thanks for the post - and the general reminder that efficiency is a double edged sword; and must be used properly if it is to both help us and our future generations. Matt Dirksen Case Design/Remodeling, Inc. Having designed many house additions w/ both traditional lumber and engineered lumber, I (and our field management) are quite happy with engineered lumber. It’s dimensionally stable, easy to place, and very reliable. On my end, there’s no extra design time required for engineered lumber. As a practice, we will use engineered lumber and pre-manufactured trusses as often as possible.
I would tend to agree with the theory that traditional lumber may be more adaptable for future use, and it especially makes good sense to contemplate what may happen to all building materials at the end of it’s life in a house, but a good deconstruction crew will be able to salvage a tji just as well as a piece of 2×12 (usually the plywood gets torn up by the adhesive, not the tji). The bigger problem is the adhesive. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a good zero VOC adhesive which could be dissolved in a ecologically humane way, once it’s useful life was up? Traditional Japanese wood joinery techniques with post & beam construction doesn’t even use metal fasteners, and it can last hundreds of years if well maintained. I’m sure we could come up with a way to build with the end-use in mind.

Regardless, as was mentioned, I am currently much more concerned about all the perfectly good lumber being thrown into our landfill on a daily basis as a result of houses being torn down to make way for a new mcMansion.

Thanks for the post – and the general reminder that efficiency is a double edged sword; and must be used properly if it is to both help us and our future generations.

Matt Dirksen
Case Design/Remodeling, Inc.

]]> By: Matt Dirksen http://greenbuildingelements.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-97657 Matt Dirksen Tue, 30 Oct 2007 20:03:00 +0000 http://philipproefrock.greenoptions.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/#comment-97657 Having designed many house additions w/ both traditional lumber and engineered lumber, I (and our field management) are quite happy with engineered lumber. It's dimensionally stable, easy to place, and very reliable. On my end, there's no extra design time required for engineered lumber. As a practice, we will use engineered lumber and pre-manufactured trusses as often as possible. I would tend to agree with the theory that traditional lumber may be more adaptable for future use, and it especially makes good sense to contemplate what may happen to all building materials at the end of it's life in a house, but a good deconstruction crew will be able to salvage a tji just as well as a piece of 2x12 (usually the plywood gets torn up by the adhesive, not the tji). The bigger problem is the adhesive. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a good zero VOC adhesive which could be dissolved in a ecologically humane way, once it’s useful life was up? Traditional Japanese wood joinery techniques with post & beam construction doesn’t even use metal fasteners, and it can last hundreds of years if well maintained. I’m sure we could come up with a way to build with the end-use in mind. Regardless, as was mentioned, I am currently much more concerned about all the perfectly good lumber being thrown into our landfill on a daily basis as a result of houses being torn down to make way for a new mcMansion. Thanks for the post - and the general reminder that efficiency is a double edged sword; and must be used properly if it is to both help us and our future generations. Matt Dirksen Case Design/Remodeling, Inc. Having designed many house additions w/ both traditional lumber and engineered lumber, I (and our field management) are quite happy with engineered lumber. It’s dimensionally stable, easy to place, and very reliable. On my end, there’s no extra design time required for engineered lumber. As a practice, we will use engineered lumber and pre-manufactured trusses as often as possible.
I would tend to agree with the theory that traditional lumber may be more adaptable for future use, and it especially makes good sense to contemplate what may happen to all building materials at the end of it’s life in a house, but a good deconstruction crew will be able to salvage a tji just as well as a piece of 2×12 (usually the plywood gets torn up by the adhesive, not the tji). The bigger problem is the adhesive. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a good zero VOC adhesive which could be dissolved in a ecologically humane way, once it’s useful life was up? Traditional Japanese wood joinery techniques with post & beam construction doesn’t even use metal fasteners, and it can last hundreds of years if well maintained. I’m sure we could come up with a way to build with the end-use in mind.

Regardless, as was mentioned, I am currently much more concerned about all the perfectly good lumber being thrown into our landfill on a daily basis as a result of houses being torn down to make way for a new mcMansion.

Thanks for the post – and the general reminder that efficiency is a double edged sword; and must be used properly if it is to both help us and our future generations.

Matt Dirksen
Case Design/Remodeling, Inc.

]]> By: Jason Browne http://greenbuildingelements.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-131 Jason Browne Tue, 30 Oct 2007 01:31:33 +0000 http://philipproefrock.greenoptions.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/#comment-131 Interesting post. I am reminded of the debate concerning the estimated energy wasted making plastic silverware vs. washing your fork when you're done. On a side note, I have to disagree about the "properly framed house with real lumber" lasting longer. These glues are probably NOT going to break down when used appropriately. For all we know they could be like styrofoam and in fact take longer or never break down. As far as structural integrity, it is widely known man-made boards shrink and expand less than dimensional lumber. If you ever check out the joist system of an old home, you'll see countless areas where the nails have started pulling out from joists due to the shrink/expand cycle, causing gaps at nailed intersections, and inevitably failure. These engineered products help reduce the damage due to repeated climate change and wind racking. On the other hand, these engineered joist systems place an extra burden on both architects and flooring installers. Herein we lose that efficiency; the design limitations caused by increased deflection, unacceptable/unconventional joist spacing, and added preparatory work for conventional flooring make for a troublesome and increasingly expensive installation. The I-beams do make handy wheelbarrow ramps though. Interesting post. I am reminded of the debate concerning the estimated energy wasted making plastic silverware vs. washing your fork when you’re done.

On a side note, I have to disagree about the “properly framed house with real lumber” lasting longer. These glues are probably NOT going to break down when used appropriately. For all we know they could be like styrofoam and in fact take longer or never break down.

As far as structural integrity, it is widely known man-made boards shrink and expand less than dimensional lumber. If you ever check out the joist system of an old home, you’ll see countless areas where the nails have started pulling out from joists due to the shrink/expand cycle, causing gaps at nailed intersections, and inevitably failure. These engineered products help reduce the damage due to repeated climate change and wind racking.

On the other hand, these engineered joist systems place an extra burden on both architects and flooring installers. Herein we lose that efficiency; the design limitations caused by increased deflection, unacceptable/unconventional joist spacing, and added preparatory work for conventional flooring make for a troublesome and increasingly expensive installation.

The I-beams do make handy wheelbarrow ramps though.

]]> By: Jason Browne http://greenbuildingelements.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-97656 Jason Browne Tue, 30 Oct 2007 01:31:00 +0000 http://philipproefrock.greenoptions.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/#comment-97656 Interesting post. I am reminded of the debate concerning the estimated energy wasted making plastic silverware vs. washing your fork when you're done. On a side note, I have to disagree about the "properly framed house with real lumber" lasting longer. These glues are probably NOT going to break down when used appropriately. For all we know they could be like styrofoam and in fact take longer or never break down. As far as structural integrity, it is widely known man-made boards shrink and expand less than dimensional lumber. If you ever check out the joist system of an old home, you'll see countless areas where the nails have started pulling out from joists due to the shrink/expand cycle, causing gaps at nailed intersections, and inevitably failure. These engineered products help reduce the damage due to repeated climate change and wind racking. On the other hand, these engineered joist systems place an extra burden on both architects and flooring installers. Herein we lose that efficiency; the design limitations caused by increased deflection, unacceptable/unconventional joist spacing, and added preparatory work for conventional flooring make for a troublesome and increasingly expensive installation. The I-beams do make handy wheelbarrow ramps though. Interesting post. I am reminded of the debate concerning the estimated energy wasted making plastic silverware vs. washing your fork when you’re done.

On a side note, I have to disagree about the “properly framed house with real lumber” lasting longer. These glues are probably NOT going to break down when used appropriately. For all we know they could be like styrofoam and in fact take longer or never break down.

As far as structural integrity, it is widely known man-made boards shrink and expand less than dimensional lumber. If you ever check out the joist system of an old home, you’ll see countless areas where the nails have started pulling out from joists due to the shrink/expand cycle, causing gaps at nailed intersections, and inevitably failure. These engineered products help reduce the damage due to repeated climate change and wind racking.

On the other hand, these engineered joist systems place an extra burden on both architects and flooring installers. Herein we lose that efficiency; the design limitations caused by increased deflection, unacceptable/unconventional joist spacing, and added preparatory work for conventional flooring make for a troublesome and increasingly expensive installation.

The I-beams do make handy wheelbarrow ramps though.

]]> By: lloyd alter http://greenbuildingelements.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-130 lloyd alter Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:14:40 +0000 http://philipproefrock.greenoptions.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/#comment-130 Terrific post. I also worry about how long they will last before the glues dry out and they fall apart under your feet. A properly framed house with real lumber will last hundreds of years; I doubt these things will last thirty. Terrific post.

I also worry about how long they will last before the glues dry out and they fall apart under your feet. A properly framed house with real lumber will last hundreds of years; I doubt these things will last thirty.

]]> By: lloyd alter http://greenbuildingelements.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-97655 lloyd alter Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:14:00 +0000 http://philipproefrock.greenoptions.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/#comment-97655 Terrific post. I also worry about how long they will last before the glues dry out and they fall apart under your feet. A properly framed house with real lumber will last hundreds of years; I doubt these things will last thirty. Terrific post.

I also worry about how long they will last before the glues dry out and they fall apart under your feet. A properly framed house with real lumber will last hundreds of years; I doubt these things will last thirty.

]]> By: Bobby B. http://greenbuildingelements.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-129 Bobby B. Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:27:54 +0000 http://philipproefrock.greenoptions.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/#comment-129 "So while it saves on material, it also reduces the flexibility with which it can be used." So, the high efficiency vehicle encourages the wasteful to drive more than if they owned a gas-guzzling SUV. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. However, what the U in SUV does for the owner is allow the flexibilty of the 2 x 12 in lieu of the rigidity of the engineered I-Beam. U = UTILITY, right! As such, one can use an SUV to accomplish all of the usual getting around tasks but he can also add towing, hauling, and improved comfort to the list. The SUV can tow the livestock trailer, the tool trailer, or maybe the boat on the weekend. It can make a run to the lumber yard and haul thousands of pounds of materials in one trip instead of multiple trips. It can take half of the soccer team to practice in one - instead of 5 - vehicles. Sure they use a bit more fuel, but the econo-car's limitations may not suite every buyer. Good post, Philip. “So while it saves on material, it also reduces the flexibility with which it can be used.”

So, the high efficiency vehicle encourages the wasteful to drive more than if they owned a gas-guzzling SUV. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. However, what the U in SUV does for the owner is allow the flexibilty of the 2 x 12 in lieu of the rigidity of the engineered I-Beam. U = UTILITY, right! As such, one can use an SUV to accomplish all of the usual getting around tasks but he can also add towing, hauling, and improved comfort to the list. The SUV can tow the livestock trailer, the tool trailer, or maybe the boat on the weekend. It can make a run to the lumber yard and haul thousands of pounds of materials in one trip instead of multiple trips. It can take half of the soccer team to practice in one – instead of 5 – vehicles. Sure they use a bit more fuel, but the econo-car’s limitations may not suite every buyer.

Good post, Philip.

]]> By: Bobby B. http://greenbuildingelements.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/comment-page-1/#comment-97654 Bobby B. Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:27:00 +0000 http://philipproefrock.greenoptions.com/2007/10/29/the-efficient-materials-trap/#comment-97654 "So while it saves on material, it also reduces the flexibility with which it can be used." So, the high efficiency vehicle encourages the wasteful to drive more than if they owned a gas-guzzling SUV. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. However, what the U in SUV does for the owner is allow the flexibilty of the 2 x 12 in lieu of the rigidity of the engineered I-Beam. U = UTILITY, right! As such, one can use an SUV to accomplish all of the usual getting around tasks but he can also add towing, hauling, and improved comfort to the list. The SUV can tow the livestock trailer, the tool trailer, or maybe the boat on the weekend. It can make a run to the lumber yard and haul thousands of pounds of materials in one trip instead of multiple trips. It can take half of the soccer team to practice in one - instead of 5 - vehicles. Sure they use a bit more fuel, but the econo-car's limitations may not suite every buyer. Good post, Philip. “So while it saves on material, it also reduces the flexibility with which it can be used.”

So, the high efficiency vehicle encourages the wasteful to drive more than if they owned a gas-guzzling SUV. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. However, what the U in SUV does for the owner is allow the flexibilty of the 2 x 12 in lieu of the rigidity of the engineered I-Beam. U = UTILITY, right! As such, one can use an SUV to accomplish all of the usual getting around tasks but he can also add towing, hauling, and improved comfort to the list. The SUV can tow the livestock trailer, the tool trailer, or maybe the boat on the weekend. It can make a run to the lumber yard and haul thousands of pounds of materials in one trip instead of multiple trips. It can take half of the soccer team to practice in one – instead of 5 – vehicles. Sure they use a bit more fuel, but the econo-car’s limitations may not suite every buyer.

Good post, Philip.

]]>