Consumer Homes.

Question:

  I am a student of architecture at Chubu University, Japan. As a part of my English class called English for Network Communication, I am about to > find about environmental issues in architecture. >   Which do you think is more environmental friendly, houses made of > concreteor wood.   >   I am concerned about deforestation too but I think wooden houses > are better for environment. Because even when houses need to be pulled > down,some of the parts could be recycled.  In case of  houses made of

concrete, What would happen to the wrecks? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

1)The rubble can be pulverized and used as aggregate in more concrete or asphalt. 2) How often are houses pulled down?  More houses are removed because the structure has failed (i.e. wood sills have rotted, roofing has failed, etc.) than are pulled down for civic improvement, etc. 3) With such amenities as concrete shingles, pneumatically applied foundations, etc.  the life span of concrete houses can be almost indefinite… — Steve & Tawnya’s Home Page   http://musial.server101.com – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >  I am a student of architecture at Chubu University, Japan. As a part >of my English class called English for Network Communication, I am about >to > find about environmental issues in architecture. >   Which do you think is more environmental friendly, houses made of > concreteor wood. >   I am concerned about deforestation too but I think wooden houses > are better for environment. Because even when houses need to be pulled > down,some of the parts could be recycled.  In case of  houses made of >concrete, What would happen to the wrecks?

Response:

Trees are a "renewable" source.  I put the quotations there cause the reality is that farm trees are not as valuable as wood (what corporation makes 100 year investments, let alone millenial ones) nor are tree farms the bio source that an old growth forest was.  another reality is that in most cases where the old growth trees are taken, nothing is replanted unless it is a farm.   The redwood forests of California are now mostly scrubs and houses.   As another poster noted, houses are rarely taken down except for extreme damage from rot or diaster.  However, even in cases were buildings are removed, very little salvage occures as the labor required would be intensive and except for specific architectural features, there is no established market for what would be considered scrap wood.  I’ve seen bins of scrap wood marked FREE.  The owner saw the advantage of giving it away rather than pay for the high fees of trucking it to a landfill. Again, as another poster stated, old concrete can be broken and crushed to reuse, the process is part of the demolition anyway and so the labor cost is lessened. Your propositon is too limited, there are other materials, steel frame houses are relatively new here.  There is also the prospect of recycled materials like schredded and reformed plastics in composites.   – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >   I am a student of architecture at Chubu University, Japan. As a part > of my English class called English for Network Communication, I am about > to > find about environmental issues in architecture. >   Which do you think is more environmental friendly, houses made of > concreteor wood. >   I am concerned about deforestation too but I think wooden houses > are better for environment. Because even when houses need to be pulled > down,some of the parts could be recycled.  In case of  houses made of > concrete, What would happen to the wrecks?

Response: