Old houses are like old people. You can learn a lot from them if you take the time and respect them.

One of my indulgences is taking time to look at a detail in an old house and trying to get into the head of the craftsman who made it. I can't say that every try is successful, but when I do figure it out there have been some great "Aha!" moments. More than a few times it's taken years and some other discoveries to see what was going on.

Sometimes it's a structural choice; how were two pieces of wood joined, why was that support here and not there. It could be material choice or why did that window go into THAT corner. Sometimes there's a really good, smart reason, other times it's tough to figure and there are some clear mistakes. These are lessons that are sitting right there waiting to be learned and many of them are still applicable today.

One important thing about successful (surviving) old buildings is that they could dry out if they got wet. Quickly too. And that's the important part, if wood stays wet it rots. If it dries quickly it's fairly forgiving of some periodic wetting. If you let it get too wet too often your building won't survive for future generations to see how stupid you were.

How did they dry and are there lessons about that for today? They dried because of lot's of air and energy flow and materials that don't trap moisture. No insulation and free air movement in wall cavities are a recipe for drying. Interior horsehair plaster dries very rapidly which also helped keep the walls dry. Of course in the 18th & 19th centuries showers and hot tubs were in short supply and indoor swimming pools were even rarer. So buildings had lower moisture loads to deal with and had good drying potential. That's a good way to make a building that will last.

We have become more regular in our hygiene and with high energy costs we want insulation in our walls and ceilings. This puts us in a bit of a bind because we just messed up our building longevity strategy. What to do? Let's go back to our original building and see what else we need to change. Well, if the walls won't dry, maybe we should keep them from getting wet! Some of those old details will still work for us and some won't. If we are expecting better thermal performance we need to give the walls (and other building parts) better water management so they can make it to the next generation and beyond.

With future posts I'll explore the details, but new construction will have different solutions than rehab, probably. With rehab or retrofit you have to think more carefully about what the strengths and weaknesses of the building are, what the extent of the planned work will be and what can realistically be done within those constraints. The reason I love working with older buildings is that I can use all those lessons I mentioned earlier and, with luck, get some more.

Oh, one more thing. When you do undertake a rehab on an old building remember to leave a penny with the year you completed the work where someone will find it when they get around to their own project in the future. They'll know that you were thinking about them and maybe take the time to learn a few lessons of their own.

Radiant barriers are seldom the cost effective option, especially in the north.

This is the current perversion of a bit of science into over enthusiastic marketing. Radiant barriers can, when properly installed, reduce radiant transfer of energy. The question is whether this is the best use of your home improvement budget. In my opinion the answer is almost always a resounding NO!

Before we go any further download this information from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&ved=0CF0QFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ornl.gov%2Fsci%2Fees%2Fetsd%2Fbtric%2FRadiantBarrier%2FRBFactSheet2010.pdf&ei=MIY3UdahKsSo0AGfnYAg&usg=AFQjCNHP3S7G_7P2KLEhesLTMuIOId31NA&bvm=bv.43287494,d.dmQ

This rather dull fact sheet lays out the case for and against the radiant barrier in different climates, with savings estimates for several starting points. In short it finds that even in warm climates radiant barriers are not always the cost effective solution. Cold weather climates really offer little opportunity for savings.

Have you ever been approached by a salesperson for this technology? What was your reaction to the pitch? Leave me a comment below.

Architectural appeal IS an important part of building science.

Our buildings should please us. Sometimes they should inspire, sometimes calm; but if we don't care about them we won't care for them.
Have you ever lived in a building that you loved to arrive at? A place that made you proud to call home, that felt like it wanted you to be there?
I hope you live there now. If not, what do you think would get you to feel that way about the place you live now?
I need a good garden space, some wildlife in my yard and a good window to see the yard from while I'm having my morning cup (on days it's too chilly to have it outside). My inside list includes a workable kitchen space, a place to read and good daylight. My neighbors figure into the equation too, but that is getting a little away from the buildings aspect. Or is it?

What would your list look like? Is the focus inside or out? Leave a comment, I'd love to hear what you think.

Doug George remembered

I tested one of the tightest houses I have ever encountered the other day. I haven't run all the parameters such as CFM/surface area or the much less desirable ACH, but my raw numbers for a 2000 sq ft walk out basement ranch WITH a garage under (not part of the 2K) was 345 CFM/50.

Must be a SIP job or more likely spray foam right? Sorry, the framed walls are insulated with fiberglass batts, the below grade walls with rigid foam and the attic with cellulose. Oh, and it was built in 1995, at a price comparable to "standard" construction of the day.

The builder was the late Doug George. I didn't know him but those who did heap praise on him both as a builder and as a human being. I do know that the man knew how to detail a building enclosure.

Every framing junction is sealed with caulk or foam. The Tenoarm air barrier is taped at all seams and to all adjacent materials. I have seen a few pictures of the building in progress and I couldn't see any faults. Most of the air leakage seemed to be coming through the wood stove and the fresh air intakes. I am humbled and impressed.

This has reminded me that what really matters in creating quality buildings is a customer who understands that there is more available than the tract house standard and a builder who understands how and why to deliver it. I think that I'm coming back around to the education theme again, don't you?

The next newsletter will cover this in more detail along with some thoughts on why every builder will not be able to follow this path and what the alternatives are.

In the mean time I would suggest that you hoist your favorite beverage in honor of Mr. George whether you knew him or not. Those of us who didn't obviously are the poorer for it.

Woods and walls

One of the interesting aspects of the human mind is how it can draw parallels between seemingly unrelated subjects. It happened to me this morning while reading a blog post about biomass and its place in our energy future.
A concern raised by one poster, and a concern I share, is the potential over harvesting of our wood resources by companies more concerned about supplying their boilers than sustaining the resource. 
My short take on this is that the answer is to apply strict management to the resource or leave it alone.The leave it alone approach, no harvesting at all, is unrealistic. Wood is too useful a resource to suddenly decide that we can forgo its use altogether. If we are going to harvest wood we need to apply resource management techniques that maximize yield while preserving the forest and all the environmental benefits it supplies.
A little management, maximizing yield only, leaves us with the situation with large clear cuts and the associated problems of air, soil and water quality problems. Strong management using sustainable harvesting techniques and using plans that address the specific site can result in a forest that can sustain wildlife, soil, water and air. So if we are going to take and use the resource we need to invest our time and energy to gt the details right.
I can apply that same management logic to the exterior walls in a building. For years we got away with minimal management of air and water movement in our outside walls. All we had to do was keep most of the water out and the uninsulated un-air-sealed walls survived just fine. The water that got in, and it did, dried quickly enough because there was enough energy flowing through the walls to evaporate and disperse the water.
Then we started asking these walls to do more. To hide the wires and pipes our increasingly technology based lives demanded. And we added insulation to keep us warmer and we asked for fewer drafts so we could wear light clothing in the winter. But we didn't do much to improve our management of the water. It still got into the walls, but now the energy flows available were greatly reduced so it stayed there longer.
Water is the great giver of life. All life forms that we know about need it. Unfortunately the life forms that tend to grow in warm dark damp places like the inside of walls are know by names like mold and rot.
A quick aside if I may, there is no such thing as dry rot. You just didn't see it when it was wet.
Back to topic: If we are going to continue to extract all these services from our walls we need to more vigorously manage the water. Exterior drainage planes and properly installed windows and doors on the outside are a good start. Exterior insulation to control condensation on the inside of the wall is a great idea too.
Inside the walls we need to use materials that reduce air movement and are moisture tolerant. We need to make sure our interior wall surfaces minimize air movement yet still allow for drying (If we are going with the drainage plane/exterior insulation). Pay attention to ventilation to control humidity and be vigilant about controlling bulk water. If we do these things we can have walls that provide the services we want and that will last a long time.
So whether it's forests or walls, if we want them to serve us we need to be willing to devote the effort to manage and maintain them. It's only fair.

Dot Edie Ewe

I harp on this subject constantly so I thought it rated a blog post. The most important thing we deliver to our customers and clients is education.
We should be delivering the specific tasks we are asked for, whether analysis of building flaws, recommendations for new equipment or building shell improvements. That is what we were hired to do. But unless we leave them with a broader understanding of the hows and whys have we accomplished anything?
There are and always will be clients who want only specific answers to specific questions. I guess they are good for business because they will pay you over and over to answer the same questions on different projects. I have a hard time enjoying that kind of work, there is very little challenge.
Answering the same question for different clients can be interesting because it is an opportunity to teach the answer, not just supply it. The client may not need you to answer that same question anymore but when other questions need answering your name should come up.
That is an opportunity for you to learn something else to educate on. And to then create a more interesting client who will ask more interesting questions which will require you to learn something... It's almost like perpetual motion. Hmm, I wonder if I can attach a drive shaft to that.
Ultimately a client who you have educated is a client who will respect you. It is also a client who will advertise for you, which is not a bad thing either.

More on Infrared

In my latest newsletter (check my website for newsletter archives) I talked a bit about interpreting infrared images. It got me thinking about the state of the technology and where it fits into building science.
When I took my course for my level 1 thermographer certification  I was impressed by the technical knowledge and skill of the instructors on all things IR. But in the section where they talked about building investigations there were a few things they said that made me realize that they were a bit weak in some building science details.
The current state of IR usage in buildings is still on the cusp as to who is using it. For years it was like the early days of computers. The tasks were performed by computer people, not people who were the experts in the task. As desk top computers proliferated and became increasingly easy to use the focus shifted back to having task experts use computers to do the job. It became easier to teach the use of the computer than to teach the task to a computer expert.
My only concern is that there are people who are learning building science only through use of infrared technology. I hope that they will come to understand that all they are seeing with the IR are clues, not facts. They still need to have a good solid understanding of what can be happening to figure out what is happening.
As always, other voices are welcome.

Avoiding the "savings" trap

The main reason people give for not pursuing building energy improvements is "poor payback". Unfortunately those of us who have been using cost savings as the sole or primary justification for recommending measures are directly to blame for this. We have set up the expectation that all energy saving improvements will "pay for themselves in just a couple of years".

When this payback period stretches beyond 2 - 3 years businesses tend to lose interest. Homeowners pass if paybacks exceed 5 years, or less if they anticipate moving. So what can we do? How about ignoring payback altogether?

Let's ask this, are buildings created with a specific payback period in mind? Usually that answer is no. Buildings are built to serve a function or set of functions that range from creating shelter from the elements to massaging the owners ego. Are there reasons within that range that we can bring in to the retrofit proposition that can trump payback? I think the answer is yes, the challenge is shifting the conversation.

Comfort is a reliable sales point. Most of my residential work is still focused on comfort issues. How do we bring in other issues such as indoor air quality and building durability? Obviously if there are glaring defects in those areas owners will be on board. But how do we bring those in proactively?

Anybody willing to chime in? I presume that since this is a new venture it will take a bit to get going, but be brave and jump in. I hope we can share thoughts. and solutions.

Let's get started

I am experimenting with a blog as a supplement to my newsletter. I expect that I will be posting a few times a month, give or take.

My hope is that this will be a little more interactive, allowing my readers to reply to me and to each other.

Let's have some fun and share a little knowledge. Knowledge is the one true all purpose tool.