Nett Zero Madness #379 : Wooden Houses Are Potentially Lower Maintenance.

[Mkapaka 220]

3 hours ago, Chekhov said:

I am not "furious", but I am frustrated about how truth is "blurred" (or ignored outright) when it comes to encouraging attempts to get to "nett zero". People should not sleep walk into buying a wooden house.....

 

>>but if they can be as easy to maintain<<

 

I do not see how a wooden house could possibly be easier to maintain than a brick built house, even more so as it would almost certainly be constructed in soft wood

Do some basic research then. And you might feel less frustrated. 

[HumbleNarrator 286]

Pavarotti on a moped.

 

 

[hackey lad 3,991]

Very random .

[Chekhov 488]

2 hours ago, Mkapaka said:

Do some basic research then. 

I have.

Wood rots.

Bricks don't rot.

[RJRB 688]

Some materials are tried ,tested and proven over many years.

Venice is built on wooden piles which have petrified and lasted for centuries due to the absence of oxygen in the marshes.

In other situations wood decays  in a few years due to wet rot /dry rot or is subject to other risks such as woodworm or in some countries termites.

Give me a traditional brick or stone construction anytime.

Steel and concrete builds are also well tested ......apart from that aero bar type concrete which was introduced and now found to be less than satisfactory.

 

[Prettytom 1,648]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

I have.

Wood rots.

Bricks don't rot.

Neither of those things are strictly true.

 

Wood can last for thousands of years without rotting, in the right circumstances.

 

Bricks can erode and fall apart in the wrong circumstances.

 

Also worth noting that many Victorian brick and slate houses contain almost as much wood as brick.

 

Maybe time for slightly deeper research on your part.

 

 

[Chekhov 488]

1 hour ago, Prettytom said:

Neither of those things are strictly true.

Wood can last for thousands of years without rotting, in the right circumstances.

Bricks can erode and fall apart in the wrong circumstances.

Also worth noting that many Victorian brick and slate houses contain almost as much wood as brick.

Maybe time for slightly deeper research on your part

Not really.

All wood rots if it gets damp, though I concede that hardwood rots slowest. Having said that the aforementioned fact is irrelevant because they would never be using hardwood as it is deemed "environmentally unfriendly", and it's much more expensive....

 

Some bricks can erode if they get water on them in the winter and it freezes which is why gutter maintenance is the second most important thing one should do to ones house (after roof maintenance). But if we cease to get freezing temperatures due to global warming freezing won't be a problem any more will it will it ?

[Chekhov 488]

1 hour ago, RJRB said:

Some materials are tried ,tested and proven over many years.

Venice is built on wooden piles which have petrified and lasted for centuries due to the absence of oxygen in the marshes.

In other situations wood decays  in a few years due to wet rot /dry rot or is subject to other risks such as woodworm or in some countries termites.

Give me a traditional brick or stone construction anytime.

Steel and concrete builds are also well tested ......apart from that aero bar type concrete which was introduced and now found to be less than satisfactory.

I would be happier having steel reinforced concrete structures if the reinforcing was stainless steel !

 

 

But it's a bit irrelevant for this discussion anyway because the nett zero lot don't want us to use concrete as it's not nett zero compatible.....

So it's wood, or wood, or paper ?

[RJRB 688]

22 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

Not really.All wood rots if it gets damp, though I concede that hardwood rots slowest.

Oxygen is also needed ,also pitch pine is a “soft wood” but resists decay more than some “hard woods” due to its’ high resin content.

[Prettytom 1,648]

21 minutes ago, RJRB said:

Oxygen is also needed ,also pitch pine is a “soft wood” but resists decay more than some “hard woods” due to its’ high resin content.

You can also treat softwood to slow the decay process. Or encase it. 
 

The 130 year old wood in my house is largely intact. I’ve found a few bits of rot in the window frames and one joist. All the rest is fine. That includes the roof timbers that were under a leaky roof and were soaking wet in places.

[Padders 2,881]

2 minutes ago, Prettytom said:

You can also treat softwood to slow the decay process. Or encase it. 
 

The 130 year old wood in my house is largely intact. I’ve found a few bits of rot in the window frames and one joist. All the rest is fine. That includes the roof timbers that were under a leaky roof and were soaking wet in places.

You could put a small bungalow inside a Giant Redwood..

[Prettytom 1,648]

38 minutes ago, Padders said:

You could put a small bungalow inside a Giant Redwood..

Depends on the size of the tree.

 

There are loads of redwoods in the UK, Padders. This website has a list of them. Including some in Sheffield.

https://www.redwoodworld.co.uk/locations.htm