Green Means

Selecting Quality Windows

By Shannon Scott

            Selecting windows for a home involves a whole lot more than just deciding upon price, brand, and color.  With glass a major expense for any home, time and care must be taken to find two things: manufacturers that produce quality, environmentally responsible, and energy wise products; and distributors that offer competitive prices and good customer service.

            Since we’ve begun our small straw bale cottage project I phoned several window distributors in and around our area asking for Sierra Pacific brand windows, though I was open to learning about other green savvy products as well.  While many manufacturers offer claims of environmentalism, Sierra Pacific was one of the first to show genuine concern for sustainable production, from responsible timber growth to using zero VOC (volatile organic chemical) paint finishes. 

            Nu Vu Glass in Twin Falls phoned  back the same day and within two days e-mailed preliminary prices.  Mark, their chief sales rep for our area, suggested that I look into Anderson Eagle series and Weather Shield.  Nu Vu carries Marvin and several other major window brands.  Delivery to our area is included in their bids.

            After some back and forth with Mark and internet research on window configuration and brands, I narrowed it down to Marvin, Andersen, and Sierra Pacific.  Marvin definitely had nicer finish details than the other brands, but with the corresponding higher cost.  Anderson offers many options and boasts some green qualities, but ultimately I stuck with the Sierra Pacific.  The convincing feature, besides sustainably harvested wood was the no VOC exterior finish.  Now it’s up to me to find zero VOC interior wood finish products, as it doesn’t appear that Sierra Pacific offers prefinished models.

            With brand selection out of the way I had to compare glass features.  Passive solar design necessitates south window glazing that allows sun’s warmth to penetrate during winter months, while maintaining a fair level of insulation to keep out summer’s heat.  No direct sun enters south windows during summer, but the ambient outdoor temperature can still migrate inside.

            All window manufacturers post technical specifications on their websites so customers can compare glazing data.  I compared various combinations of U-values - lower numbers mean greater insular quality; SHGC or Solar Heat Gain Coefficient which indicates the allowance or disallowance of solar heat to penetrate (for south windows I want penetration, for all other sides minimal penetration); a high VT or visible transmittance for a nice clear view; and low CR, the Condensation Rating that tells how well glass resists condensation build up. 

            Deciding upon the best combination of features involves compromise.  Ideally, I could run a northern Nevada construction laboratory, build three to four identical buildings side-by-side each with slightly different glazing option combinations to see which combination of U-factor, SHGC, and VT prove optimal.  Since I don’t have the luxury of a local construction physics laboratory, I’ve got to go with available data and my best guess for optimal interior year round comfort levels and energy efficiency. 

             Higher SHGC (solar heat gain) means reduced U-value (insulation).  The slightly reduced U-value should prove negligible.  I’m weighting warmth in winter as more critical for human comfort and energy efficiency than cooling in summer.  We have relatively fewer super hot days as opposed to colder winter and spring time temperatures.  Plus, during summer months windows can be opened at night to allow in cooling high desert temperatures then closed in early morning to block out the day’s heat.  This type of physical adjustment to the building envelop is not available during winter.

            After reading charts and graphs to near delirium, I decided upon Low E² 180 Cardinal double glazed for south side windows.  These offer decent, but not great, insulation value while allowing in solar radiant heat.  For the north, east, and west faces the two better, and budget minded glazing options are either Low E²  366 i89 or Low E² 272 i89.  The final decision here will depend on price difference.  There are more heat deflecting and insulating options, like triple glazing, but they cost more.  The difference in glass quality must be measured against heating and cooling energy costs.

            Mark Birrer from Nu Vu Glass had my back on most the tech stuff.  He had quoted prices on pretty much what I had selected before I provided technical specifics.  So much of the time, unless we customers do our homework, sales forces do not ensure that we get the exact right product for our needs.  Even if you like and trust a supplier, double check technical data and specifics on everything you order.

            Frankly, I’m happy if a supplier just returns phone calls, but actually figuring tech data and then, get this, driving out to the boonies where I live to show Rob and me samples was pretty nice especially considering that our project is so small.  Mark still championed for Andersen Eagle series, which are a nice window, but ultimately we settled on Sierra Pacific.  They seem to be the underdog of window manufacturers, smaller but more humble, sort of like our project. 

            Window selection is critical for energy efficiency, comfort, aesthetics, and home quality.  Shop widely and wisely.  If you need assistance make some calls.  Nu Vu has been good to work with.  They get back to customers right away and are thinking green.  Mark showed up in Elko driving a Nu Vu Glass company Prius.  You can reach them at 208-734-9877. 

              Shannon Scott is a LEED Green Associate and green home owner, designer, builder.  You can reach her with questions or for green building help at greenmeansnv@gmail.com

             

            

Green Means

Why I Love Cement

By Shannon Scott

            Environmentally concerned construction researchers put hard effort into finding energy saving, strong, and human safe alternatives to Portland cement.  Portland cement takes a lot of energy to produce, referred to as high embodied energy. 

            Fly ash and silica fume have been widely promoted amongst green building professionals as better alternatives to Portland cement.  Several months back I mentioned fly ash as a viable alternative.  I’m retracting that position.  Fly ash is dangerous.

            Fly ash, the bottom ash from coal fired power plants, contains mineral and chemical elements specific to the original coal bed.  Fly ash’s toxic make up depends on coal origin, but generally contains one or more of the following: arsenic, lead, mercury, thallium, dioxins and PAH compounds that have proven carcinogenic and mutagenic, and several other minerals. 

            Portland cement may take a lot of energy to produce, but at least risk of heavy metal exposure is nil. 

            Portland cement is simply lime, clay or shale, and gypsum in varying proportions.  Dust masks or respirators must be worn if mixing Portland cement, lime plasters, or any other powdered materials containing silica dust.  Of course there are minor risks associated with any cement mixing, but not heavy metal poisoning as with fly ash. 

            Silica fume, another alternative to Portland cement, proves extremely strong and has been used in many high rise construction projects.  Silica fume is a byproduct of producing silicon metals and ferrosilicon alloys (iron and silicon).  Since it’s essentially a leftover product, putting it to good use in construction eliminates the energy demanded to produce a new product like Portland cement.  Yet it is silica particulate so wear good quality dust masks. 

            Many green buildings, straw bale, cob, and other natural construction methods recommend lime plasters for exterior applications.  I’m not convinced that lime plasters have comparable durability and flexibility as compared to old fashioned cement-lime stuccos.  Yes, I’m aware they’ve been used for thousands of years all over the world, but to what level of maintenance and care?  I’m not interested in lime washing or recoating every so many years to ensure durability, cover small cracks, or to refresh the look. 

            Certainly lime stucco breathes allowing moisture to transpire in and out which makes for a healthier and more durable wall, and with a tablespoon of linseed oil added to each mix lime plasters can be less pervious to water, but not as minimally pervious as sand-cement-lime mixtures. 

            Dryvit, a commonly used synthetic stucco, has latex in it which helps resist cracks as opposed to sand-cement-lime stuccos, but this inhibits breathability.  Moisture cannot transpire out and often causes rot around windows, fireplaces, doors and elsewhere if not sealed or caulked extremely well.

            For now, I’m going with old fashioned Portland cement-lime-sand mixes for exteriors.  They take time to mix and apply, but can be colored to suit any taste and last decades.  Any cracks are easy to repair with another swipe or two of the mix or with clear caulk.  I can spot repair and not have to resurface an entire building.  I’ll continue to use nice breathable lime plasters for interior applications over straw and other substrate, but for now I love working with cement. 

            Finding green alternatives to long used industry standards is challenging, but with homework, time, and effort we can find structurally sound, attractive, and human safe products.  We’ll just keep looking and experimenting.

            Shannon Scott is a LEED Green Associate and green home owner, designer, builder.  You can reach her with questions or for green building help at greenmeansnv@gmail.com

Green Means

Solar?

By Shannon Scott

            Elko receives enough sun, more than 130 days annually, to heat and power a home.   We’ve got sun, so let’s use it.  After doing some research and talking with Lonnie A. from Rockin’ A Electric, this is what I learned.

The difference between passive and active solar

            Passive solar design integrates building site, climate, and materials to minimize heating and cooling demands without mechanical systems – no moving parts.  Greatly simplified, sun enters south facing windows absorbing into dense materials such as concrete or tiled floors, then radiates back into a room after sun has set.  Passive solar homes require smaller and less costly heating systems of any type or fuel source.  

            Active solar uses solar collectors combined with mechanical systems to heat fluids or generate electricity.  Photovoltaic (PV) systems generate electricity.   Solar thermal collectors heat fluids. 

Differences among solar collectors

            Consider three factors when choosing either PV panels or solar thermal collectors: their performance in all light conditions; how much area they take; their intended purpose; and cost.  Better PV panels generate more watts per square foot, last for decades, and don’t lose more than 1% efficiency per year.   

            Hybrid PV panels offer good return on investment as they produce more energy per area.  Named hybrid, they combine amorphous and crystalline silicon cells to provide good performance in all sun conditions. 

            Monocrystalline silicon panels are economical, durable, and reliable.  A single or “mono” silicon crystal makes up each module on the panel for greater efficiency. 

            Polychrystalline panels absorb slightly less solar energy than monocrystalline or hybrid, so you need a few more of them to generate the same watts as monocrystalline or hybrid panels.  However, the process to manufacture these panels is simpler so they cost less.

            Amorphous panels flex.  These thin-film panels have silicon laid as thin composites, simple to manufacture and cheapest to buy.  However, they provide less electric output and may not be prove durable.

            Evacuated Tube Collectors

            Evacuated tube collectors do not generate electricity, but surpass flat panels for most fluid heating needs like radiant heat and domestic water.   Glass tubes collect and transfer heat via heat absorbers and metal pipes to a header filled with a mixture most often of propylene glycol (food safe antifreeze) and water.  The heated fluid flows within copper pipes (closed system) into a heat exchanger tank, often placed in a utility room or basement.  The hot copper pipes heat potable water within the tank and often fluid for radiant heat zones. 

                                                            How collectors are used

            Grid tie-in:  Sun shines on PV collectors that convert sunlight to direct current electricity (DC).  An inverter changes DC to common household alternating current (AC).  Inverter AC output connects to the utility grid via a breaker in the homes service panel.  These are very easy for DIYers to install as they often just have male and female connectors from panels to inverters.  A home still has grid power for periods of insufficient solar gain, or when household demands exceed solar system capacity. 

            PV systems with battery back-up: These also push excess electricity produced back to the utility grid, but can power loads when there’s no sun and the grid is down.  A more complex and higher maintenance system, DC current from PV panels enters into a charge controller then goes to battery bank, dual purpose inverter, service panel, electric meter, and ultimately the grid.  Like a tie-in system electricity can flow from and to grid. 

            Off-grid PV systems:  Off-grid requires deep cycle battery storage.  These systems prove costly, yet provide power day and night when sun is not available.  Solar panels must provide enough electricity for household demands while recharging batteries at the same time –meaning larger arrays.  Most off-grid systems incorporate a back-up generator.   Instead of going to a service panel, energy goes to AC circuits not tied to any grid source.  The largest off-grid problems include replacing expensive batteries every 6-12 years, and often not having enough juice to power household needs. 

            Direct-tie: The simplest PV set-up directly ties panels to a pump or fan.  The pump only runs when the sun is out.  This works great for attic fans and to pump water at remote livestock troughs.   

            Solar Thermal:  These systems transfer heat from solar collectors, often evacuated tubes, to heat transfer fluids or water.  Pumps circulate cool fluids to solar panels or evacuated tubes, where it picks up heat, then moves it to radiant heat systems, hot water taps, or a swimming pool.  Flow control or mixing valves keep water from overheating beyond demand or for personal safety.

Cost Effectiveness

            A typical Nevada residence uses about 30 Kwh/day of electricity (2011 statewide average).  Materials costs for a grid tie-in system vary depending upon solar panel type.  A friend told us that his tie-in system to power a 5,000 square foot home, cost more than $60,000.  Another bid for a 2,200 sq. ft. home came in at just over $30,000.  These costs reflect solar PV system only – no back-up heating system, ducts, radiant, or other mechanics.

            For radiant heat and domestic hot water, thermal solar systems appear the most cost efficient.  They can meet 80% or more of 1,000 sq. ft home’s heating needs for about $13,000;  a 3,000 sq. ft. home just under $20,000 (Floor Radiant Company, VT).

            If you’re interested in learning more about how solar can work for you contact Lonnie Anderson at Rockin’ A Electric here in Elko.  He’s energetic and does solar with a passion for quality and customer satisfaction.   

           

            For more information check out: www.energy.gov and  www.builditsolar.com

           

Green Means

Straw Bale Cottage

By Shannon Scott

             Anyone physically able with horse sense and persistence can build an energy-wise home on a shoestring budget, without hired help.  This week’s column tells how to begin a one bedroom straw bale cottage - site selection, drafting, and gathering price estimates.

            First, select a money-saving building site.  For this project I chose a south sloping spot, less than 100 ft. from an existing well, close to a power transformer, and easily accessible off a graveled driveway.  This site maximizes sun exposure for passive and active solar heating, yet minimizes trenching, pipes, wiring, and road work. 

            Second, build small.  Smaller costs less.  Using free on line design software, along with graph paper and scale ruler, I drafted a 40’ x 26’ rectangle, 1,040 square feet, with open floor plan and mono-slope roof.   24” thick straw bale exterior walls result in a 792 sq. ft. living space.  1,040 square feet x $50 per square foot = $52,000. 

            Is it possible to build an energy smart, green home for $50K?  If I skimped more on materials I could probably do it for even less.  Plus, green materials and solar energy mean a few federal tax rebates.

            Third, with rough drafts in hand, I shopped for a good structural engineer.  Structural engineers have extensive mathematics and physics backgrounds, requisite knowledge how and why building components bear loads, maintain shear strength, and stand up to erosive elements such as water, soil, and climatic conditions.  Cost depends upon project size and complexity. 

            Lostra Engineering produces clean, easy to read blue prints for a flat fee.  They produced sound prints for my first project, and will use them again.  Avoid any professional who charges per square foot.  Often the second thing they tell you, following flattery, is “Go bigger”.  Engineering costs for this cottage will run about $3,000. 

            Now gather utility hook up prices, permit requirements, and materials estimates.  You’re not actually applying for permits at this phase, just gathering costs.

            In city limits, you’ll need municipal water and sewer hook-up costs. 

            Elko County requires a septic permit as a prerequisite for a building permit.  DIYers can perform their own percolation test, examining and recording soil composition at different depths and water drainage rates.  The State Department of Public Health offers explicit instructions how to conduct a perc. test.  They review test data, then issue site specific requirements and permit.  The permit runs a few hundred dollars, tank and lines generally under $2,000.   

            After obtaining a septic permit and with completed blue prints, apply for a building permit.   Permit fees vary with building size, based on a building’s total valuation.  Bigger buildings have higher rates.  Currently, if a building’s valuation is $50,001 to $100,000 a permit will cost $580 for the first $50,000 plus $6.25 for each additional $1,000. 

             A transformer within 100’ from the proposed cottage makes electric hook up easy.  Since a solar system drastically reduces propane demand, I can plumb a small propane tank, less than 100 gallons, through a wall, no trenching required.  Utility service hook-ups total less than $1,000.

            Sierra Pacific aluminum clad fir, Low E² windows from a supplier in Twin Falls, came in under $10,000.  Loewen, a comparable brand, would cost just over $10,000.  Both companies use Sustainable Forest Initiative (SFI) or Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) lumber. 

            Floor Radiant Company of Vermont gave me a package price for everything to heat domestic water and supply floor radiant heat: solar collectors, Grundfos pumps, floor tubing, heat exchanger, on-demand water heaters for back up, manifolds, copper pipes, fittings, the works,: $13,000 delivered. 

            Pacific Steel in Elko has good ASC brand metal roofing prices and told me they could have panels on the next truck – great local service.  Finish roofing for cottage plus carport - about $3,000.  Pacific Steel also carries rebar and other steel construction products.

            Concrete runs about $110 per cu. yd.  For footings, block fill, and slab about $3,000 for this project. 

            Straw bale prices fluctuate, currently $6 - $8 per bale, about $700.  

            Completed blue prints enable a DIYer to sketch plumbing and electrical schematics, and to get prices on these materials.  Blue prints allow accurate lumber and steel estimates as well.

            Plan well, do some homework, and it’s possible to build a lovely home for under $100,000.  Budget 10% - 15% of total cost for unforeseen or unexpected circumstances, and when soliciting prices remember, "The bitterness of poor quality lingers long after the cheap price is forgotten." – unknown.

Green Means

Green Codes, Not Tax Incentives

By Shannon Scott

           

            In 2005 Nevada State Legislature passed a green building incentive program to encourage healthier private developments, or so it seemed.  Developers could receive up to $3 for every $1 spent meeting LEED requirements.  

            The 2005 Legislation, AB 3, required the state to construct two LEED Silver or higher certification structures during each two year budget cycle.  Simultaneously, it provided sales tax reductions of 2% for all construction materials and a 50% property tax reduction for ten years to the owners of privately constructed buildings.  Referred to as “The Nevada Experience” it yielded a national example of how not to structure green building legislation.  

            Initially, losses projected to exceed $940 million over the 2005-2007 biennium.  This poorly researched legislation created a financial crisis, forcing the next legislative session in 2007 to reexamine and modify the program.

            “The Nevada Experience” typifies corporate influence on legislation.  Rent-seeking, common at the federal level where more money can be had, proves akin to  run-away inflation.  Nationally, G.E. is a major recipient.  In Nevada, MGM-Mirage’s Project City Center will likely receive $900 million over its life due to AB 3.

            In 2007, the Nevada Legislature voted to repeal AB 3, but not without grandfathering in six projects under the 2005 legislation.  These modifications reduced projected state losses from the $940 million to $493 million. 

            Green developments save corporations billions over decades via reduced energy costs, increased employee productivity, and greater real estate asset values.  Green is smart business.  Around the globe, corporations and developers, large and small, understand this.  It’s not like multinational corporations and other businesses all of a sudden got a social and environmental conscience.  Accounting teams compared and studied the bottom line – green development methods beat traditional construction and building operations hands down.  Everyone smiles on their way to the investment company.

             As of February 2011, Nevada legislation, AB 202, allowed for partial property tax abatements for certain manufacturing businesses when buildings are LEED Silver Certified.  Obviously, this bill is too limited and rewards likely one particular company’s piece of real estate.   AB 202 does nothing on a broad scale to establish energy savings awareness, healthier indoor environments, or resource preservation.  The manufacturing business, already poised to save huge due its green building measures, will now benefit even more at public expense.

            Legislators must stop giving tax breaks to companies already profiting from going green via reduced energy costs, increased real estate asset values, and improved employee productivity.   Individuals and companies can receive federal tax breaks simply by installing green, energy saving alternatives during construction.  They don’t need hard working Nevadan’s tax revenues. 

            The International Code Council developed the International Green Construction Code (IgCC).  The IgCC includes sustainability measures for the totality of the construction process – site consideration, design, construction, and ongoing operations.  The code makes buildings more efficient, reduces waste, and impacts health, safety, and community well being.  Legislatively, adopting the IgCC proves the best option to ensure a sounder economic future for Nevada, without tax payers subsidizing industry.

            The IgCC is flexible.  Jurisdictions can adopt the codes at several levels of compliance, from core provisions to higher building performance electives.  It is also easily enforceable, reviewed and often quickly adopted by expert inspectors who needed safe construction coupled with sustainability.  A 29-member committee, taking input from more than 100 experts in government, business, academia, and environmental health developed the IgCC over the better part of a year. 

            Adopting IgCC avoids legislating LEED Certifications, avoids property tax abatements, and offers up tax payer friendly solutions to energy and resource savings. 

            Adopting IgCC would mean home buyers in Elko County and across Nevada could be assured of buying or building newly constructed homes with low utility costs, safer indoor environments, and constructed from responsibly harvested and manufactured products – without having to take the contractor’s or developer’s word for it. 

            Building codes mandate safety and sanitation.  Over decades, science and research has informed code adoptions for public good.  With soaring energy costs, a more fragile environment, and human health problems increasing, let’s adopt new and additional codes, not tax incentives.

             

Green Means

No Perfect Homes

By Shannon Scott

            Alas, neither error free blue prints nor the perfect house exist.

            When my eldest son was in college in Pennsylvania he visited Frank Lloyd Wright’s, Fallingwater.  Partially built cantilevered over a waterfall, the home connects inhabitants with nature.   It was named, “best all time work in American Architecture” in 1991 by the American Institute of Architects (AIA).  I asked Kevin to recall his tour. 

             “Wright was way overrated.”

              Kevin, 6’5”, broad shouldered, yet slim, continued, “Wright felt that the ideal home should suit people who are about 5’7”.  I got through the tour, but given that I could barely fit down the hallways, nearly banged my head on thresholds, and had to duck in places, I couldn’t wait to get out of that nightmare… Plus, construction crews were redoing much of the concrete foundations and retaining walls.  They hadn’t been adequately reinforced with steel.”

            Fallingwater had some serious problems: mold, concrete deflecting (displacing under load pressure), and leaky roofs.  Yet, the home’s merits outweigh its weaknesses.  One size doesn’t fit all and building technologies advance. 

An exterior view of Fallingwater

            One of the most impressive pieces of residential architecture I’ve seen, the Osprey House, boasts hundreds of square feet of custom made Marvin windows designed to look like feathers.  From the air the home depicts an osprey in flight. 

            Rooms left and right of the centrally located living room, lay underneath the protective cover of outstretched wings.  A fanned tail, part of the overall roof design, shades and protects the front entry and serves as a carport.   Wood ribbing on the interior’s south wall replicates delicate bird bones. 

            The living room has floor area dimensions of roughly 16’ x 18’, with a higher than 24’ ceiling.  Standing in the living room, I felt that I was at the bottom of a silo.  The floor area too small, or the ceiling too high, a slight adjustment of one or the other would have made the space feel better – at least to me.  Notice that in the photo full ceiling height cannot be viewed.  Yet, the overall design, thought, construction, and beauty of this home are top notch.  Marvin uses this home as a case study, a tribute to their engineering team’s know-how. 

Partially viewed to the left and right are windows depicting wings.  www.Marvin.com “Soaring Osprey”   Note: This home is not a passive solar design.  It is located in an area of the northwest that receives extremely limited sun during winter months.  It is not green built, nor energy efficient.

            More than twenty years ago, I toured Earthships in Taos, NM.  The concepts were good: energy efficient, constructed with recycled and found materials such as bottles and old tires, reduced water consumption, black and grey water use, and so forth.  Earthships are cool. 

            Earth-bermed on three sides with highly glazed south walls, Earthships incorporate passive solar design elements.   Given their embedded-in-the-ground nature and natural, organic materials Earthships harmoniously tie inhabitants to natural surroundings.  Many have indoor food gardens, which use waste water for fertilizer and watering needs.

            A problem with Earthships is that having windows on only one side disallows cooling cross breezes and cross ventilation.  Earthships do have roof top ventilation and exhaust fans, but this isn’t as pleasant as having views out in more than one direction.  Earthships likely work and feel best to inhabitants who identify with Hobbits.

A nice exterior, but with windows on only one side, breeze pathways are negated.

            Our individual unique natures mean that no structure will function optimally for any two people.  Since many of us would rather live with our partners than alone, we settle for close enough, and don’t get too worked up over small details. 

            Make 2013 the year to build.  Hire an architect, engineer, or DIY.  Create and construct.  No matter the imperfections, your selections and designs will be distinctly yours and beyond fabulous.  Build green, save money, and live well.  Happy New Year, and all the best with your green projects.

            

Green Means

Healthy Walls, Healthy Spaces

By Shannon Scott

            Without walls houses would be, well, tents.  Walls offer protection from weather, buffer sound, create shape, and impart personality.  Walls offer safety and security while simultaneously creating functional interior and exterior spaces.  Plan construct, and finish walls with care.  After all, what would Fido’s portrait be without a fabulous backdrop?

             Straw bales, masonry, rammed earth, large diameter logs, and double framing techniques often offer greater energy-savings performance than regular framed walls.  Inhabitants feel more insulated and protected because they are more insulated and protected.  Stout walls radiate permanence.  Since exterior walls serve as physical and psychological barriers from the outside world, make these walls thickest, insulating them well.

            Interior wall thicknesses and insulation capacities depend upon a room’s purpose and personal taste.  Insulate boiler or mechanical rooms enough to keep unwanted heat from living spaces during hot summer months.  It may be a good idea to insulate common rooms that adjoin bedrooms to minimize sound penetration.

            A wall’s length, depth, and height merit equally as critical as core, membrane, and finish materials.  Hallways of any significant length, especially narrow ones, waste valuable, utilitarian space and rarely prove interesting.  Ceilings too high for their floor areas make rooms feel like chutes.  Homes divided into too many tiny rooms feel smaller and cramped. 

            While contemporary tastes have dictated open floor plans, comfortable corners and cozy nooks offer intimacy and options for solitude.  Small conversational alcoves along larger room edges create couples’ retreats and friendship corners.  One way to do this is incorporate half walls, deep bay window areas, or libraries adjacent to larger living rooms. 

            Creative green building enthusiasts and building materials manufacturers continue coming up with healthier, higher performing interior wall materials.  Gypsum board is actually a fairly green and healthy product, its outer layers often made from recycled paper.  Now, more drywall options are hitting the market.

 

            U.S. Gypsum makes a standard drywall made with recycled residue from air scrubbers at coal fired power plants.  It’s strong, dense, and more durable than standard drywall.  Higher density makes it better at retaining heat.  It is slightly more expensive than standard drywall, but heat savings may easily offset any cost differences. 

            Micronal® PCM  SmartBoard ™ has a wax-like substance in the gypsum core.  This waxy core, considered a “phase change” material melts and solidifies (one state or phase to another) within relatively narrow temperature fluctuations.  As temperature change occurs, the wall absorbs heat to catalyze the melting phase.   This stored heat radiates back into a room, as the waxy substance solidifies again.  Phase change drywall offers similar benefits of stone, concrete, and other dense thermal mass materials without the associated weights or costs. 

            Walls constructed with responsibly harvested and manufactured materials make our homes, society, and natural environment better.  Using natural building materials increases connections with nature, which improves physical and mental health.  This extends to finish materials as well.

            Lime plaster over straw or other solid, porous substrate breathes emitting negative ions into interior atmospheres. Negative ions, the same ones that create the sense of well being when standing near a water fall, are offered into interior environments when transpiration takes place.  Transpiration involves the absorption and release of moisture into and out of surfaces.  It’s important for straw bale walls to breathe or diffuse moisture, but lime can be used on nearly substrate to achieve this purpose.  Lime can be finished using nearly infinite combinations of textures and colors. 

            Many non-VOC and low-VOC (volatile organic compounds or chemicals) paints and walls finishes have become available locally.  My favorite so far is Green Planet’s Clay Paint (The Green Building Center, Salt Lake City, UT).  It goes on with a brush or roller like any other paint, covers beautifully, and affords inhabitants a sound sleep since it doesn’t emit harmful vapors.  Casein or milk paints have increased in popularity, as have Venetian plaster finishes that look nearly like marble when finished with a steel trowel.

            Consider walls carefully.  Through them you can create gala gathering rooms or dark man caves, elbow room or standing room only.  Walls dictate our movements and functions in daily life.  They have even dictated how societies operate – just think Berlin, Ancient Rome, and China.  Use walls sparingly.  Humpty Dumpty may have eventually become king of the realm had there never been a wall.

             

             

Green Means

Green Building Step-by-Step

By Shannon Scott

             

            Since my husband, Rob, made the executive decision for us to build a straw bale mother-in-law cottage, I thought this would be a great opportunity to relate the steps as they unfold.  Follow and modify them to your needs, steal ideas, or just think how you might make all of it even better.  Maybe I can alleviate any trepidation you might harbor about building your own super cost effective, energy efficient, state-of-the-art green home.

            This is also a great time to offer the hands-on DIY straw bale construction workshops which many of you have requested.  As soon as I know the approximate building schedule I will organize classes and costs for each phase.  There will be a discount for those wanting to learn it all.  Workshops will include green building design principles, how to build a foundation, slab floor with floor radiant tubing beneath, rough plumbing and wiring to meet codes, straw bale work, roofing, and finish detail work like lime plastering and making your own concrete counter tops. 

            In the Green Means column, over this next year, interspersed among other relevant home building topics, I’ll chronicle our steps, joys and challenges, in building a straw bale cottage.  And since more heads and didactic conversations lead to great things, if you have any awe-inspiring ideas on cost savings or building tips to help other DIYers, please e-mail me.  If they apply, I’ll post them in upcoming columns.

            Winter 2012-2013: Planning Phase

            Planning involves deciding what to build, how big, where, and so forth.  All factors must consider the triple bottom line: environmental health, human well-being, and economic sustainability.  Cost weighs heavily.  Cost overruns can cause immense stress and take the fun out of building, so every consideration and effort must be made to cut back here and do with less there, without sacrificing quality.

            The question Rob and I asked ourselves is this: Is it possible to build a straw bale, green, primarily solar heated, mother-in-law cottage for around $40,000.  We’re going to try our best.  Or should I say, we will do it or die trying.  Determination is paramount for DIY project success.  Never underestimate human will.

            Well, that initial planning phase was easy!  Now let’s go further.

            In keeping with sound green build principles, the cottage will be constructed upon previously disturbed ground, utilize passive and active solar applications, use healthy responsibly harvested and manufactured materials, feel good to inhabit, and prove economically rational to build and operate after completion. 

            When trying to figure out a style and floor plan my first thought was: How will this space be used?  What will make it highly functional?  What can I do to make this room or living space feel and look good?  Function precedes the form.

            I like harmony amongst buildings.  Since our existing house and garage have roof pitches of 4 on 12 (4 feet rise over 12 feet of linear distance) and corrugated roofs, I want the cottage to have the same.  Metal roofs last a lifetime, hold up to the elements, and are aesthetically pleasing.  Corrugated styles prove less expensive than standing seam.  The roof must accommodate a south facing solar array, so over such a small structure, there can’t be too many corners, angles, or small sections.  One or two broad areas such as a gable or shed style would work well.   I like the looks of shed roofs for a modern casual, or also a rustic look, so we’ll try that.

            Since floor area is limited the interior space must be open, with few interior walls.  The longest east-west wall will face directly south, with 12% glazing (glass) of total floor space on the south wall to maximize solar gain during cold winter months.  Glazing on other sides will allow cross ventilation or breeze pathways, make rooms feel good, but kept to a minimum.  Everyone likes a view, and fresh air is important to human health indoor environmental quality.  Quality glass matters, so installing aluminum clad, double or triple pane, Low E glazing, may be the single largest expense on the project.  Ouch.

            Solar floor radiant heat and domestic hot water, with flash on-demand hot water back-up will account for primary energy consumption.  Maybe there will be a wood stove for ambiance.  Very likely the solar system will be the second most costly element for the cottage, yet it should pay for itself in approximately four years - the amount of time our homes’ solar system realized payback.

            Considering that too many corners cost more and take longer to construct.  I came up with a small rectangular building, 36’l by 24’w, 864 square feet.  Since straw bale walls take up approximately 24” of space the resulting interior space will be around 640 square feet.  Wow, sounds small.  On the bright side, smaller costs less.

            We’ve reduced potential costs by planning to build small, reducing corners, keeping a simple roof line, and planning for energy efficiency.  I’ll provide more cost reducing strategies in my next column. 

            If you are interested in participating in DIY green building classes during the 2013 construction season, please e-mail me at the address below.  

Green Means

Preserving Great Architectural Works

By Shannon Scott

Update: The Write House was saved and is no longer in danger

            Frank Lloyd Wright planted the seeds for today’s green building - natural materials, minimalism, and built to last.  Using open floor plans, unadorned exteriors, and connections to the outside world Wright profoundly influenced the way we live and work.  His buildings pay homage to their American landscapes.

            My son, Kevin, argues that we are experiencing a grave cultural decline, symbolic of a failing society.  Given that two guys from Meridian, Idaho planned and to tear down one of Frank Lloyd Wright’s masterpieces just to make a buck, Kevin may be correct. 

            In Arcadia, an upscale Phoenix, Arizona neighborhood land is gold.  So when developers, John Hoffman and Steve Sells, bought a house on 2.2 acres for $1,000,000 less than the previous owners paid for it, they saw an opportunity to subdivide and profit.  Their plan was to demolish the existing house, then build and sell two contemporary mansions on the open lots.  They immediately applied for and received a demolition permit. 

            Hoffman and Sells learned that Frank Lloyd Wright had design and built the lot’s existing home.  According to a recent New York Times column Hoffman said, “I didn’t know Frank Lloyd Wright from the Wright Brothers.”   

            Wright designed and built the Arcadia neighborhood house, overlooking orange groves, for his son David.  The home, known as The David Wright House, is one of Wright’s masterworks.  The home’s design mirrors the coiling behaviors of southwestern vipers and the curvaceous style of a larger work Wright had on the drawing board, the Guggenheim Museum. 

            Tied to the natural world, Wright’s timeless designs endure with lasting materials like mahogany, teak, and concrete.  Wright built for perpetuity, for humanity, and with the larger natural world at the forefront of his thoughts.  The David Wright House exemplifies this, as a one-of-a-kind icon of American genius.

            Learning about Sells and Hoffman’s plans, preservation groups began campaigning to register the home as a National Landmark.  This would stay demolition for three years.  Then, if no wealthy home buyers or preservationists come along to buy the property Hoffman and Sell will demolish it. 

            The Idaho boys’ may have accidently fallen into owning an architectural work of art, it’s possible that their arts and cultural education genuinely lacked, but their business strategy boasts deliberate hostage taking. 

            Sells and Hoffman’s threatening to destroy something of immeasurable value unless someone pays up illustrates capitalism at its worst, casts darkness on American values, and bolsters a commonly held eastern U.S. perception of westerners, especially rural westerners, as unsophisticated ignorant hicks. 

             If Hoffman and Sells succeed in getting their price for The David Wright house, their act opens the door for further extortionist style marketing.  The Wright masterpiece will be preserved, but greed mongers will recognize that threatening to destroy precious cultural artifacts proves profitable.

            If Hoffman and Sells demolish the Wright home, they will reduce property values in the neighborhood where they hoped to maximize financial gain.  

            Market value of any home in an upscale neighborhood, with a Frank Lloyd Wright designed home amongst its ranks, proves far greater than a neighborhood boasting clustered contemporary boxes.  Open space, low number of units per acre(s), and architecturally meritorious homes sustain values greater and longer than Mc Mansions offering views of scattered or clustered contemporary box homes. 

            Sustainable living and building practices negate destroying anything in fair condition.  Even repurposing buildings necessitates salvaging as much as possible for environmental and economic reasons. 

            Razing a house of any quality, simply to build more structures, degrades land, reduces open space, and defies sound environmental and economic judgment.  Subdividing already small land parcels, such as two acres, erodes neighborhoods, reduces wildlife habitat, minimizes recreation opportunities, and sours residents’ chances of communing with nature. 

             Maybe preservationists ought to look the other way, allow Hoffman and Sells to level the home.  Let them put more money into the site for less return.  This would set a precedent that holding hostage cultural works of genius doesn’t prove profitable.

            The late biologist, Rachel Carson, once wrote, “The human race is challenged more than ever to demonstrate our mastery, not over nature, but ourselves.” 

            While Carson wrote these words in the late 1950’s regarding controlling widespread pesticide use and harmful biochemical advances, at no time do they seem more relevant than now. 

            Green and ethical should be the only way of doing business.  

As of the first week of November 2012, according to Hoffman and Sells’ company website, www.8081meridian.com  (each of the two men graduated from Meridian high school in ’80 and ‘81, respectively) the house has sold for $2.38 million and is currently in escrow.  Hoffman and sells paid $1.8 million for the home in June 2012.  

Green Means

Sustainable Communities

By Shannon Scott

            Through local action, everyone can contribute to environmental stewardship and consequent economic responsibility.

            Traditional construction practices prove the single largest contributor to land, soil, and water degradation.   Cities and towns, the greater built environment, inefficiently consume earth’s resources and economic assets.  Every community and individual world-wide is now faced with finding the best-suited solutions to save resources and costs. 

            Sustainable behavior must be profitable from construction throughout a building’s life or else no developer or building owner will build green.  Two practices can help ensure environmental soundness and cost effectiveness: life cycle analysis (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC).  

            LCA is an investigation and valuation of all environmental impacts of products over the course of their useful life, from either cradle to grave (creation to landfill waste) or cradle to cradle (origin to reuse or recyclability).  Life cycle analysis ascertains the full cost of all components of a building or development to humans, the environment, and the economy. 

            LCC determines the full life cycle costs of all components used in a building and the building itself including ongoing maintenance and operations over its useful life from cradle to cradle or cradle to grave.  Comparing traditionally designed, built, and operated buildings with more sustainably designed and constructed buildings yields eye opening results.  For developers, true green homes, not green-washed homes where developers falsely advertise green living simply because they’ve put in energy efficient appliances, sell more quickly for more money.  Commercial and industrial building owners and operators realize savings in operations, increased employee productivity, and higher resale values.    

            Smart urban planning utilizes land wisely, offers beautiful and functional, sustainable architecture, connects people with one another and open space, supports healthy human occupation, increases commerce and makes inhabitants feel better.  Great cities, towns, and buildings are enduring, attractive, no larger than necessary, adaptable to other future uses, use resources efficiently, and meet the needs of the area and society contemporarily and for generations to come.  

            The sketch that this newspaper showed of Elko County’s proposed recreation center, a stunning architectural rendering, ought to have sustainability goals, reduced long term operational costs, and community connectivity at the forefront.  Looks aren’t everything and fade fast, especially in traditional construction resulting in wastefully high operating costs.

            Given our vast land area, public transportation must be paramount to reduce pollution, traffic congestion, and allow more tax payers to access the facility – especially children and the elderly.   Any new municipal facility should allow residents to walk or cycle to it, and be centrally located to all major residential areas.

            A good municipal site, in Nevada at least, must support passive heating and cooling, to help ensure long-term sustainability.  Ideally, any public building would operate with net-zero energy use – meaning co-generation of electricity and selling back to the utility provider thus further minimizing costs to tax payers.

             A community recreation facility should provide preferred parking areas for hybrid or electric cars and carpools.  Reuse waste water in landscaping and help reduce storm water runoff – perhaps have a living roof.  All lumber used in the building should be FSC certified and all steel from recycled sources.  Recycled steel is plentiful and relatively inexpensive.  Green insulation comes in all types and forms and there’s no excuse for not using something environmentally friendly and human safe. 

            Here in Nevada there is absolutely no excuse for any swimming pool that operates year round not to be solar heated with only a minimally sized boiler for back up.  Many municipalities beg for the amount of direct sun or solar gain we have, so let’s capitalize on it. 

            Wasteful, destructive, toxic, and expensive construction practices are quickly going the way of the dinosaur.  We don’t want our community to be a dying one.  A neighborhood trying to attract sustainable new businesses that puts human health, environmental welfare, and economic needs first leads and breaks new ground green for green building standards.  When individuals, business owners, tax payers, and governments have a choice, they choose healthy, sustainable, and green. 

Green Means

Sustainable Expansion is not An Oxymoron

By Shannon Scott

Green is in, hunting is hip, and rural Nevada has it all.  The problem is that the quickest way to ruin an area is to inhabit it.

Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook and youngest billionaire, has embraced harvesting and processing his own game.  He’s the most famous hunter under the age of 30. 

Michael Pollan’s books on food, self-sufficiency, and raising or harvesting one’s own meat have many taking up a sport they once found abhorrent.

Barbara Kingsolver’s, Animal, Vegetable, Miracle, catalyzed many to live more rurally, till backyard garden plots, and grow vegetables in pots on high rise terraces. 

Smart economics coupled with health and environmental concerns have more middle and upper income groups growing and harvesting their own food.  Rural life ways are in vogue.  This growing demand might suggest that the lives we’ve lived in the rural west may be seeing twilight.

Nouveau-riche techies, urban trendsetters, and their star-struck followers whose predecessors congested Montana, central Arizona, and western Nevada, seek more remote places.  More people want sun for off-the-grid homes, space to grow vegetables, and access to hunting.  Stalking coastal mule deer and troublesome wild boars has Silicon Valley trendsetters riding their $18,000 bicycles to their nearest gun stores. 

All of us seek areas that match our interests – fishing, mountain biking, opera, or theatre.  Star struck types also move to trendy, boomtowns that attract the who’s who.  Whitefish, Bozeman, Aspen, Missoula, Santa Fe, Ketchum, and Sedona well know this population influx trend.  People move to areas for jobs, but surprisingly often to pursue a lifestyle. 

Fifty years ago in northern California’s Napa Valley, land owners grazed dairy cows, maintained olive orchards, and grew a few grapes.  People hunted ducks and geese on the Napa River.  The valley’s bucolic qualities attracted visitors and residents alike.  As the valley grew, Robert Mondavi proposed producing upscale wines from good vintages.  The valley vintners’ association told Bob Mondavi that he was crazy if he thought he ever would see more than $3.50 for a bottle of cabernet sauvignon.

 

Mondavi’s ideas struck gold.  Hollywood trendsetters discovered Napa.  The L.A. jet-set bought land and started micro-wineries.  Congested with traffic, Napa Valley’s air became thick and dirty.  Upscale businesses boomed.  Corner drug stores folded.  Agriculture changed from crop diversity to solely wine grapes.  

With acreage fast disappearing, residents wanted to preserve open space and valuable soils.  They voted to limit residential and commercial development initially in the hills, then on the valley floor.  Slow growth initiatives and building moratoriums seemed like a good way to support economic growth, while maintaining the area’s tranquil qualities.  Bare land became more prized and valuable than Robert Mondavi’s Private Reserve cabernets. 

Through similar slow growth initiatives, the Sierra Club and Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) have tried to protect the Lake Tahoe Basin.  The limited growth legislations coupled with bans on deforestation, while good intentioned, have proven insufficient to the point of disaster.  The basin is congested and polluted, just like the Napa Valley.  For those who remember and viewed Lake Tahoe’s miles of un-constructed, unadulterated shoreline as a treasure, the exploitation of the Tahoe Basin bears out as an epic environmental tragedy. 

A similar growth trend hit Montana.  Who would have ever thought that Hollywood hipsters and Florida beach combers would survive -40˚F winters and grey, depressing air inversions?   Survive they have, and multiplied.  Montana became an outdoor playground for the rich and famous, resort goers, yoga junkies, and non-profit organizations.  Few remember, nor would recognize Chet Huntley’s Big Sky.

All of these areas were in turn, “the last great place”. 

Population densities, commercial demands, and short sighted land use restrictions worked against residents’ visions for their communities and their children’s futures.  Residents’ children could no longer afford to live where they were raised. 

The areas mentioned above once provided decent places for all to live - low income, middle class, and affluent.  Yesterday’s single income wage earners easily supported families in Napa, Big Fork, Sedona, and others.  Now two-income, working class families can’t afford average homes in these places.  These once pastoral lands and integrated communities are gone.

  

Northeastern Nevada has much to offer: mountain biking, open space, hunting, fishing, rivers, lakes, skiing, reasonable housing, a college, Amtrak, an airport, poetry gatherings, brothels, western color, and cities within easy driving distance.  Yet demand for open space and too loosely regulated growth in our area may mean that those who need to hunt and access public land the most won’t be able to afford it. 

With Zuckerberg’s  Silicon Valley, the Bay Area, Sacramento, and Reno a quick I-80 drive away, word is spreading about the “undiscovered” Ruby Mountains.  Newly minted hunters, the more affluent, and their followers, seeking something better, something greener, are less than a day’s drive away.   

Growth may be inevitable, but environmental destruction and life style death is avoidable.  Our challenge as a community is to vehemently protect open space along with public access to it, grow up not out, think long, hard, and green, so that further development secures our area’s pristine qualities.  More importantly, growth and land use policies must ensure access for all, so that future generations across the socio-economic spectrum can feed their families safe, healthy, harvests and enjoy the great outdoors.