[Greenbuilding] Just how big is natural building?

[RT]

Since these lists are quiet , I thought it wouldn't hurt to send along the  
following.
The original message and ensuing thread in its entirety may be viewed at

      http://sustainablesources.com/pipermail/gsbn/2012q2/002068.html


On Sun, 13 May 2012 , the following was posted to the GSBN list:

===============message #1 [snipped]=============

> To: Global Straw GSBN <GSBN at sustainablesources.com>
> Subject: [GSBN] Just how big is natural building?
>
> Howdy, folks --
>
> Anyone else out there wonder just how many people are knowledgeable
> about, interested in, and/or wild about natural building?
>
> Me, too, and I'd like to start to map the territory for a group
> conversation at the upcoming International Straw Bale Building
> Conference in Colorado in September.  Which will of course really be
> about natural building in general.
>
> Here's just a first pass.  I would really appreciate if you could fill
> me in on what's happening in your area or country.
>
> Organization			location or base	    	Membership
> (however "organized" 									(Even if you don't have "members", how
> many people receive
> you may or may not be)									your mailings / ever wrote you a check?)
>
> CASBA						California, USA				????
> COSBA						Colorado, USA				????
> Ecological Building Network	California, USA				1400 / 500
> Natural Building Network		???							????
> ASRI						Victoria, Canada				????
> Builder Without Borders		New Mexico, USA			????
> Kleiwerks					North Carolina, USA			????
>
>
> I KNOW I'm forgetting organizations even here in North America, much
> less on the other side of various ponds, so please help me here.
> Results, once collated, will of course be public.
[snip]
================== end of message #1 ============


to which Stronzo di Nord replied:
=============message #2 [snipped] ===============

> I'd say that aside from the First World NatBuilders who are members of  
> the associations mentioned by His High-ness and others, natural building  
> is quite likely practised by most persons living outside of major urban  
> centres world-wide and whose annual incomes are at or below subsistence  
> level.
>
> As a wild-ass guess, I'd peg that number at somewhere between 1 and 3  
> billion people.
>
> That's BIG. Eh ? (I'd wager that the UN would have real good numbers on  
> this.)
================= end of message #2 ======================


which then prompted this response from a non-listmember (ie he could not  
post it to the list)
=============== message # 3 [snipped]========================

On Mon, 14 May 2012 09:31:54 -0400, Sherwood Botsford  
<sgbotsford at gmail.com> wrote:

> Once more I'm afflicting you with my thoughts to pass on, if you think  
> they are worthy of consideration by the rest of the group.
>
> While I agree that a good fraction of the earth's population live in
> natural houses, I suspect that the initial questioner is actually asking
> about houses that have plumbing, and electricity, and phone lines.  At a
> first kick, these are 'super-natural' houses.  Are present stick build
> houses made from 2x6 and plywood and gyprock 'un-natural'  How about a
> nylon tent?  A canvas tent?  A cave with some discarded sofa cushions?
>
> Just what is a natural house?
>
> Do we end up with a crazy definition of what can go into a natural house
> like we do organic gardening?  Hmm.  An artificial definition of natural
> houses.  Gotta love that.
>
> Possible definition:
>
> * A natural house is one that you can build the foundation, walls and  
> roof  out of materials found on your own land.
>
> This one makes it tough in the city.  Lots are so small.  So let's expand
> it just a bit:
>
> *  ... or with materials that can be found close to your house.
>
> How close?  Well let's look at transport cost as a good measure.
>
> * ... such that the cost of moving the material to the site is under 5%  
> of the project cost.
>
> Ok.  This means that a log cabin is un-natural housing on staked plains  
> of Texas.  And perhaps a straw bale house is un-natural in the rain  
> forests of Haida Gwaii
>
> Or is a natural house one whose roots can be traced to pre-industrial
> civilization.  Seems to me that a baler is most emphatically industrial
> equipment.
>
>
> Ok.  I live 50 km away from an OSB plant.  Can I use OSB in my natural
> house?
>
> "No of course not.  All that poison guck in with the wood chips."  But at
> least you can recognize it as wood.    How about brick?  Is it natural?   
> It is processed and doesn't look much like the pile of dirt you started  
> with, nor is in benign in terms of energy.  And if you aren't careful of  
> your
> sources bricks can contain lead, arsenic, mercury...
>
> And can I use MDF board to support my formica pictures of natural stone?
> How much super-natural content can we have.  Ceramic sinks shipped from
> Ceylon. (say that 5 times fast..) Enamaled cast iron sinks?  Stainless
> steel sinks?  Phenolic resin with carbon fiber sinks?   Is copper pipe
> natural?  How about cross linked PVC (evil material...) Or do we have to
> bore out the partitions of bamboo for our plumbing.
>
> Adobe is great.  Lime is natural but concrete is not?  Every material  
> get a  rating a 'natural ability' based on it's energy cost,  
> recycleability,
> sustainable use?  And you have to score so many natural points to call  
> your house natural?
>
> Maybe natural is not the right word.
>
> "Alternative houses."  That may be better.  We can still use plywood
> subfloors.  That still allows free form plastic foam houses, and geodesic
> domes.  "Wait, they can't join our club!"
>
> "Low embodied energy houses"  How low?  Transport included?  This is  
> going to leave brick and tile possibly in a bad way, especially if they  
> aren't
> made nearby.  (Even if they *are* built nearby.  I suspect that back yard
> brick works will raise eyebrows in the neighborhood.)
>
> How about "Total energy cost over lifespan of the building houses"   
> Someone better come up with a clever acronym.  TECOLOB housing anyone?
>
> How about "extended lifespan housing"  Housing made to last at least a
> century with minimal maintenance.
>
> (In passing, what would happen if a house builder had to contract for all
> the structural maintenance for the first 50 years of a house.  The money
> for this was part of the mortgage, and was doled out to the builder on a
> year by year basis.  Hmm.  Someone would game the system.)
>
>
>
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Sherwood of Sherwood's Forests
>
> Sherwood Botsford
> Sherwood's Forests --  http://Sherwoods-Forests.com
> 780-848-2548
> 50042 Range Rd 31
> Warburg, Alberta T0C 2T0
===================== end of copied material =================

If responding to the above, PLEASE <snip>  out all but that which is  
necessary to set up the context for your thoughts.

-- 
=== * ===											AOD257
Rob Tom
Kanata, Ontario, Canada

< A r c h i L o g i c  at  Y a h o o  dot  c a  >
(manually winnow the chaff from my edress if you hit "reply")