[Greenbuilding] embodied energy was Polyiso strength on roof (ErgoDesk)

Thu Dec 11 22:38:04 CST 2014

Actually it is something to be considered.  

The EPS product I use is manufactured from polystyrene beads which combine
styrene (0.1% by weight of finished product) and pentane (1% by weight of
finished product). These beads representing 1.1% of the final product are
manufactured in Alberta (about 1000 km from me). They are shipped to
Vancouver (about 130 km from me) where they are manufactured into board
stock using steam (local water and heat) and packaged into roughly 96 cu.ft.
polyethylene wrapped bundles (88 sq.ft. of 2ml poly). 

Each bundle weighs about 67 lbs with .067 lbs (about 1 ounce) of styrene
monomer and would insulate 64 sq. ft. of wall to roughly R40.  20 bundles
could do the walls of a 1600 sq.ft. house – about 20 oz of styrene
(equivalent to 10 milk jugs when they were made of styrene)

So basically I had about 6.7 lbs of polystyrene beads shipped 1000km then
converted into 67 lbs of finished insulation wrapped in 88 sq.ft of poly (
and shipped 130km where it gets put into buildings and hopefully
subsequently taken out in board form and put into other buildings or
whatever things get recycled into in the future – probably milk jugs).

I’m not sure I can do better than that at this point with less impact for a
local solution that works well in my climate –

Straw would have to be shipped an equivalent distance (we have no local
wheat) – ironically it would take about 20 bales (about 900 lbs) to insulate
an equivalent area which takes about a ½ acre of farmland to grow and about
.1 lb (1.6oz) of petroleum derived fertilizer to generate the growth.  Straw
does not work in my climate.

For cellulose the equivalent wall area or insulated area would be about 200
lbs of shredded newspaper – so I could collect and shred papers locally but
I would still have to ship in 60 lbs or so of borates to make up that amount
at at least 4  times the distance. Also we are getting more information that
borates might not be as safe as we thought – not a well investigated
material. Also I have spent a lot of time politically working on having
newspaper recycled as pulp mills are a huge environmental liability in my
region as is deforestation.

For rockwool for walls the equivalent wall area would be about 162 lb and I
would have to ship that about 3000 km (so double the weight and 3 times the
distance – and 4 times the packaging). If I wanted to use a rockwool as a
board material comparable to the eps for slabs the equivalent area weight
would be about 800lbs (additional weight being formaldehyde binder for
density). 

So it is a complex decision making process. All design decisions are.  Is
1oz of styrene as dangerous as 60 lbs of borate salt, chlorine pollution and
tree loss, or potentially 600 lbs of formaldehyde glue,  or even the soil
loss and petro fertilizer usage from something as green as strawbales. I
don’t know and getting information to know a little more is a continuous
process -  but am certainly not at this point going to accept simple
arguments for simple materials having discovered long ago there is no such
thing as a simple material. Some of the most ‘natural’ materials out there
are still the most toxic and/or inappropriate. 

\

From: Greenbuilding [mailto:greenbuilding-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org]
On Behalf Of Gennaro Brooks-Church - Eco Brooklyn
Sent: December-11-14 8:56 AM
To: Green Building
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] embodied energy was Polyiso strength on roof
(ErgoDesk)

John: " In my case a foam brand is about 60 miles away "

I doubt that. If it is like most products on this planet, it's ingredients
span across all continents: soy from Nebraska, ingredient A from China,
Ingredient B from the Philippines, canisters from Mexicon etc. 

This the argument for simple building materials. Less ingredients, less
travel. Cob: hay and mud from next door. Now that's green.

Gennaro Brooks-Church
Director, Eco Brooklyn Inc.
Cell: 1 347 244 3016 USA
www.EcoBrooklyn.com
22 2nd St; Brooklyn, NY 11231

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:19 AM, John Salmen <terrain at shaw.ca> wrote:

So if diverting energy from the food stream and the deforestation that
results is unacceptable in the case of soy foams – why is diverting energy
from the paper stream and subsequent deforestation of NA acceptable?  The
question is density and the amount of a virgin material used to get a result
– and then the question becomes appropriate virgin material.  I don’t like
bringing food material into the building or waste stream but it may be
better than producing synthetic material – I don’t know?.  

All insulations are simple – a material that is made to encapsulate air. .
Cellulose or fibre material is odd because we are harvesting, processing and
transporting a coarse material that either naturally encapsulates air or is
made to do so rather than simply introducing air into a material in a
geographically more local context – and most foams are produced close to the
regions where they are marketed. In my case a foam brand is about 60 miles
away whereas mineral wood is about 3000 miles.

Again not a defense of foam just trying to make sense of the discussion.

From: Greenbuilding [mailto:greenbuilding-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org]
On Behalf Of Alan Abrams
Sent: December-11-14 3:37 AM
To: Green Building
Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] embodied energy was Polyiso strength on roof
(ErgoDesk)

and that 5% that is soy has the carbon of the fertilizer and fuel it took to
grow, harvest, transport, and process it. I would not doubt that is a
greater EE factor than pure plastic. 

not to mention, the diversion from feedstock. IOW's, how many more acres of
Amazon forests does it take, to grow feedstock for raising cattle, because
of the soy that was used for manufacturing insulation?

put another way, could you eat your insulation if you got hungry enough?

AA

Alan Abrams
certified professional building designer, AIBD
certified passive house consultant, PHIUS

certified passive house builder, PHIUS
cell     202-437-8583
 <mailto:alan at abramsdesignbuild.com> alan at abramsdesignbuild.com
HELICON WORKS  <http://www.heliconworks.com/index2.html> Achitecture and
Education

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Gennaro Brooks-Church - Eco Brooklyn
<info at ecobrooklyn.com> wrote:

They tell me it's made from soybeans and pop bottles so it must be good.
Ross Elliott         

A whopping 5% of the foam is soy. The other 95% is just like any two part
foam. Last time I checked. 

_______________________________________________
Greenbuilding mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Greenbuilding at bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioener
gylists.org

-- 
Gennaro Brooks-Church
Director, Eco Brooklyn Inc.
Cell: 1 347 244 3016 <tel:1%20347%20244%203016>  USA
www.EcoBrooklyn.com
22 2nd St; Brooklyn, NY 11231

_______________________________________________
Greenbuilding mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Greenbuilding at bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioener
gylists.org

_______________________________________________
Greenbuilding mailing list
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Greenbuilding at bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioener
gylists.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20141211/14dc2c24/attachment.html>