Archive for November, 2007
Is Wood Heat Green?
Monday, November 26th, 2007According to Jeffrey Earl Warren, in his San Francisco Chronicle Op Ed piece just before Thanksgiving, the San Francisco Air Quality Management District announced pro forma public hearings before it takes what everyone is aware is the “Done Deal” act of banning wood fires in its district.
Nobody who heats their home with wood is particularly surprised. Though it can no more be proven than the gasoline price fixing here in Humboldt County , it’s a secret to nobody that both the utility industry and the oil industry have been gunning for wood heat for some time. And, because there are no facts to support any environmental claims against wood heat, as Mr. Warren points out in his editorial, the details supporting the need for the ban are (not) surprising lacking.
The scientific method follows a rigid methodology. Ask a question. Do background research. Construct a hypothesis. Test the hypothesis. And then, communicate the results.
So what is the question? Are the fires in our homes bad because they add to global warming? Release carbon dioxide into the air? Pollute the atmosphere with soot and particulate matter? All of the above?
Where is the research?
To answer these questions, and to analyze whether wood heat is green or not, we must consider the three impacts heating with wood has on the environment.
- Air pollution from the smoke (smog).
- The impact on air quality inside the wood heated dwelling.
- Impact wood collection/harvesting has on our forests.
Fortunately there is data available, even though the Air Quality Control Board chooses to ignore it. Let’s consider these points one by one:
Wood Smoke
According to an EPA report in 1993 (EPA-453/R-93-036), wood smoke is comprised of some fifty noxious and lethal sounding chemicals whose names bureaucrats like to toss around to frighten us. But in point of fact these fifty odd chemicals A) are only produced by a smoldering fire (the kind of fire an airtight wood stove typically produces), B) of the fifty, only a few are carcinogenic, and C) in most rural environments the smoke blows away before it can bother anyone; only in some areas are there inversion layers that cause the smoke from airtight stoves to become a health problem.
Secondly, new high-efficient wood stoves don’t smoke at all! The emissions from these stoves are only slightly higher than from an oil fired furnace. And the gases are far less complex. Basically carbon dioxide, some carbon monoxide and a number of other gases, water vapor and some not quite completely oxidized bits of hydrocarbons. In more intelligent air quality jurisdictions these EPA approved high-efficiency wood stoves are permitted where regular stoves and fire places are otherwise banned.
Another valid question is: Does wood smoke contribute to global warming?
The answer is no. Heating with wood is technically carbon neutral. If you factor in the fossil fuels that are burned in its production (chain saw gas, wood splitters, trucks to haul it, etc.) it’s not quite neutral, but still — studies done in Canada show that the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere to produce a given amount of heat from wood is about fifty percent (50%) less that the amount released by fuel oil to produce the same amount of heat, even factoring in the fossil fuels burned to “make” that wood!
Why?
 |
About 50% of the content of wood is carbon that the tree has absorbed from the atmosphere over its lifetime. If the dead wood is allowed to decay (oxidize) in the forest, that carbon is re-released into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide (CO2) over time. If the wood is burned it is released quickly. This is why, in fact, wood turns black when it burns. The non-carbon constituents (volatile oils, cellulose, etc.) burn off fairly quickly leaving only the carbon. The carbon contains more heat and thus burns more slowly, giving off CO2 gas. But it’s the same amount of CO2.
By heating our homes with wood we are simply tapping into the natural carbon cycle flow of CO2 from the atmosphere to the forest and back again.
Fossil fuels, on the other hand, introduce new carbon to the atmosphere, thus throwing the whole natural balance out of whack. Do it long enough, which we have, and the result is the greenhouse effect we’re now beginning to experience.
And as for the end result of smelly old wood smoke: As particles go, wood smoke that you can see is really big, really gooey, and really heavy. It travels only a short distance (relatively speaking) before falling to the ground where it becomes part of the mix of new, rich loam. Soil for new growth.
Indoor Air Quality
This is mostly a matter for each home owner. Obviously, breathing wood smoke isn’t good for you. And like all smog, it’s hardest on young children and the elderly. But choosing a wood stove that doesn’t smoke every time you open the door is the responsibility of the buyer. Obviously cheaper (or older) airtights are more likely to smoke than newer, more expensive models. High-efficiency stoves don’t smoke at all when you open the door.
Forest Impacts
In the United States “fuel wood”, as it’s called, normally comes from two sources: A) Hardwoods harvested as part of normal logging operations that are then purchased by firewood vendors, or B) dead fall removal from U.S. Forest Service via the Forest Service’s long standing fuel wood permit program.
While the former may, or may not be sustainable (depending on ones view of any particular logging operation) the latter is a venerable program that allows citizens and commercial firewood sellers to remove only dead and downed wood from the National Forest. Each load must be tagged and logged onto the permit form by the collector for inspection by the Forest Ranger. In the thirty or so years this program has been in operation there has been no apparent deleterious effects to the forests from this very ancient firewood collection practice.
So yes, properly managed and harvested, wood heat is green and is good for the planet. One of the only nearly universal sources of heat for cooking, heating water and our homes available to mankind that can make that claim. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District needs to cop a clue!
Technorati Tags: fuel wood, wood heat, air quality, smog, firewood, high-efficiency, air-tight, wood stove, solid fuel appliance, EPA
The Problem of Indoor Air Quality
Thursday, November 15th, 2007“Sick house syndrome.” Also known as “sick building syndrome.” A growing crisis in indoor air quality. And until recently I, and many other contractors — even contractors whose business focus is remodeling — didn’t know it.
Like most green builders, I did know that there were indoor air quality problems in many new and remodeled buildings. Off gassing of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and other toxins in everything from new carpeting and vinyl flooring to paints to plywood to new floor finishes all create that distinctive “new home”smell that is anything but healthy.
What I didn’t know is that after these VOCs go away, new problems start to develop. And because buildings built in the last 20-30 years or so have been built to retain more heat (and cooling) these problems can build up until, as remodeling contractor Ron Haycook discovered, the indoor air quality reaches crisis proportions! The problem in older buildings is primarily the build up of mold. Something we here in the Pacific Northwest know a lot about! But there is also mildew, pollen, dust mites, pet dander — a whole host of allergens that effect health, especially children, who breathe twice as fast as we do.
Just take a look at these rather startling facts:
- Fully half of all illnesses are either caused by, or aggravated by, poor indoor air quality. (The American College of Allergists)
- The levels of hazardous pollutants in indoor air has been found to be 70 times greater than in outdoor air. (EPA)
- Two out of three indoor air quality problems involve the HVAC System. (various studies)
- But most commercially available fiberglass furnace filters are less than 7% efficient. (ASHRAE)
- And yet, most people spend 60%-90% of their time indoors, in that polluted air. (The American Lung Association)
So what is one to do? Well, for a long time, short of remodeling with controlled air flow in mind I didn’t know. Remodeling is expensive. But the little air purifiers and dehumidifiers may solve the problem for a single room, but they’re not up to the task of dealing with the whole building — and the results are often less than stellar.
Then six months or so ago I was approached by a company called E-Z Breathe, a manufacturer of building ventilation systems. They had a unit that they needed installed in Crescent City. Like Ron Haycook, that got me to researching their product to see if it lived up to their claims.
While it is still too new to have had any completely independent studies done on it, E-Z Breathe seems to be an enough honest company to have commissioned some independent studies of their own. The improvements in indoor air quality provided by a properly installed unit are fairly impressive. So impressive, in fact, that Miss Rita’s Small World Daycare actually lists her E-Z Breathe in the “Health and Safety” section of her FAQ.
So if you’re looking for a way to improve indoor air quality, or if you have a structure that has sick building syndrome, the E-Z Breathe might be a viable solution for you to discuss with your contractor — and your doctor!
Technorati Tags: indoor air quality, sick house syndrome, sick building syndrome, mold remediation, indoor air pollution, green building
Why Contractors Say No
Thursday, November 8th, 2007“I have had X contractors look at my project and none of them want to do it. Why?” I’ve heard some form of this several times in the last few months — sometimes as direct question, sometimes as an offhand comment — so it seems only appropriate that I address the issue here.
When a contractor or the contractor’s job estimator looks over a new project, they’re looking at a lot more than just the results that the property owner wants to achieve. From a builder’s perspective, all projects look pretty much the same and require the same skill sets with only minor deviation.
But the business of contracting is made up of much more than demolition and drywall, so to speak. And when looked at from a business perspective, there are lots of reasons why a contractor might say no to a project. Reasons that can be boiled down into three broad categories.
Time frame: The customer’s job just may not fit into the contractor’s schedule in the time frame the customer wants the job completed.
Fit: The job may not fit the company business plan. In larger metro areas contractors tend to be much more specialized than up here behind the Redwood Curtain. In the metro areas its not uncommon to find contractors that only do bathroom remodels, kitchen remodels, decks, siding, windows, and nothing else!
Up here contractors tend to be more generalized, but they still have certain ideas about what “fits” them well. Some don’t like small jobs, for instance. Others only do new construction. Some focus on remodels, others prefer commercial construction, and so on.
Risk: All construction is risky. Our legal system system makes sure of that. But some jobs are riskier than others. To put it simply: the greater the number of unknowns, the riskier the job is likely to be. This is why many contractors stick with new construction. What few problems that do arise are (usually) easily remedied. It follows then
that renovation projects have a greater number of unknowns, and thus a greater degree of risk. And usually, the older the building the greater the risk.
The property owner(s) are also a factor in the risk calculus. Once the project’s risk factor is determined, questions going through the estimator’s mind are: Does the property owner have enough money to cover the likely contingencies? Are they going to be a “hard to please” customer? Does it seem to the estimator or contractor that a good working relationship with the property owner can be established and maintained throughout the project? For many companies, an answer of “no” to that last question automatically puts the project in the rejection bin. For others, it’s simply one more factor in the overall risk assessment of the project.
So yes, it can be difficult at times to find just the right contractor for a project. Especially if your project falls into the higher risk category. When you couple the needs of the contractor with your need to feel comfortable with the contractor you hire, it can be harder to find the right contractor than family physician.
Technorati Tags: remodel, renovation, new construction, choosing a contractor
Sometimes Lumber Is Green
Thursday, November 1st, 2007Deforestation and predatory logging practice being the major concern of many that it is, regular old sawn lumber is rarely considered a green product. But for everything there is an exception. And my summer project ended up being one of them.
Every stick of lumber used on two of the three projects completed was cut and sawn (or split) right there on the property. The family that owns the land has been carefully managing its forest. Every year trees are harvested. But there is more standing timber on the land now than when they bought it fifty years ago, insuring a perpetual income that can go on indefinitely. It has been a great comfort and resource for the family.
 |
The first project was to replace an eighty foot long retaining wall/terrace with rough cut posts and rough sawn lumber. As you can see from the picture, the wall is so long that the camera in my little camera-phone couldn’t keep the whole wall in focus for the picture. (None of these pictures are really great, I’m sorry. I’m actually surprised there were a few that at least give you an idea of what I’ve been doing.) The wall followed the curve of the hill for its length, and just below the surface, only six inches down in places, was solid rock, or “substrate”. (The New Englanders call it “ledge”.) While the property owner really didn’t want to spend the money to set all the posts in concrete, we finally agreed that it was going to be essential to set those where the substrate came so close to the surface in concrete. Even more fun was digging out the old posts. The crew had fun with that one, let me tell you. (Not!)
 |
The second major project that used lumber from the property was residing the front of the garage/shop. We’ll do the rest of the building and its attachments next summer. (There wasn’t money in the budget, or the lumber, to do it now.) But the front was rotten; residing it was critical to preserving the building and its contents over the winter.
The actual siding job itself was no more than routine. It was simply rib and plank siding. What made it unique was the lumber. It was neither a uniform width or thickness. Three hundred feet of lumber had to be cut down to a uniform width, then I had Almquist plane and sand it on one side. Finally, I back-primed everything before assembly.
 |
The (fuzzy) picture shows the planking going up. The white spots on the planks are where the primer spotted the sanded side. No biggy. I primed the planks with good ol’ white primer. I had a second gallon tinted to a neutral base so that the top coat would match the old paint. Not particularly visible in the fuzzy picture are the hand milled top and bottom water tables, or the flashing. A water table on the bottom of the top section was essential since the planking and ribbing change direction from horizontal to vertical below the doors. This can be seen more clearly in the second picture, which shows the finished job (less outdoor light, the paint hadn’t cured). The water table at the top was necessary because the overhang of the corrugated roof was neither uniform, nor long enough to ensure water could not get behind the siding. The double defense of a counter-flashed water table on the top was a lot cheaper than fixing the roof!
The third job was to rebuild the doors for some of the kitchen cabinets, and to change the facade to match the rest of the kitchen. Unfortunately, I didn’t get any pictures of this job. I tried and tried because from a technical standpoint it was the most challenging, and the most fun. But the lighting situation in the room was just too complicated for the camera in my cell phone. (Yes, I know, I need to get a better camera for this.)
First, the cabinets had been built in by friends of the property owner decades ago. So there were no straight lines. One cabinet was a corner piece, so I had to construct two trapezoidal shaped doors that would still pivot in the middle on a piano hinge (or “continuous hinge”), and swing open and closed normally on its spring loaded cabinet hinges. In other words: the door had to operate like it was square and look like it was square, even though it wasn’t. Once completed, the doors and facades were stained and given three coats of polyurethane on the outside and one coat on the inside. It’s amazing how good basic shop grade plywood and fir 1x4s can be made to look when you want them too!
Next: Well, for sure, I’ll be going to Crescent City to install an Ez Breathe ventilation system in a newly remodeled home. There’s also discussion about two new green build projects (one less than a mile from where I live!), and yesterday I looked at a yummy remodel project on a Victorian era craftsman. So we’ll see; we’ll see…
Technorati Tags: deforestation, predatory logging, retaining wall, substrate, ledge, siding, flashing, water table, kitchen cabinets
