Friday, December 14th, 2007 | Popularity: 34%
I would bet that many of the individuals affected by the formaldehyde don’t know they are sick yet and they may not show symptoms for some time to come. The symptoms some people are experiencing include bloody noses, difficulty breathing, chest pain, and more. The frustration I have is that we as a nation can’t seem to talk enough about building green yet our own government will not take the lead on the topic. What would it really have cost the U.S. Government top build these trailers without the toxic chemicals that are now getting people sick? More than the cost to treat their medical conditions? I doubt it. This is the preachy part of my post: We as a nation seem to prefer to spend less money up front in preventative measures and more out the back door. I see it every day when I build houses and clients want some fancy gadget in place of a more efficient heating system. It is all about flash and little about long term savings and health benefits. I am tired of that and want to make a change in the way we as a nation view our options.
Stumble it!If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
I was saddened yesterday when I heard that the temporary trailers given to victims of Hurricane Katrina by FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) have very high levels of formaldehyde. The toxic chemical is off gassing from the construction materials used to build the structures. This seems so typical for government: build with cheap, toxic materials to make the job easier. The results, however, are hundreds if not thousands of sick people.
I would bet that many of the individuals affected by the formaldehyde don’t know they are sick yet and they may not show symptoms for some time to come. The symptoms some people are experiencing include bloody noses, difficulty breathing, chest pain, and more. The frustration I have is that we as a nation can’t seem to talk enough about building green yet our own government will not take the lead on the topic. What would it really have cost the U.S. Government top build these trailers without the toxic chemicals that are now getting people sick? More than the cost to treat their medical conditions? I doubt it. This is the preachy part of my post: We as a nation seem to prefer to spend less money up front in preventative measures and more out the back door. I see it every day when I build houses and clients want some fancy gadget in place of a more efficient heating system. It is all about flash and little about long term savings and health benefits. I am tired of that and want to make a change in the way we as a nation view our options.
I would love to see the government actually take a leading position on green construction. I don’t mean creating new building codes for us to meet or new programs that certify our structures. I mean “put your money where your mouth is.” Any FEMA structure used in circulation should be green. Any government offices built or remodeled should be green. It is time to practice what they preach. That is my preaching for the day. Perhaps I am preaching to the choir, but I felt it needed to be said.
Popularity: 34%
Like this? Click here to buy me a Wolaver's Organic Oat Meal Stout!About the Author
Andrew Morison is a licensed contractor specializing in straw bale and green construction. He has shown thousands of people how to build their own straw bale projects through his comprehensive series of instructional straw bale, concrete foundation, and plastering DVDs. You can check these out at http://www.LearnStrawBale.com.
Get Updates of New Articles and Posts
To be notified of new entriesblog entries and articles and to get our "7 Essential Steps to Straw Bale Success e-course" absolutely free, enter your email address below then check your inbox to confirm. More Info>>
December 14th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Totally agree, especially since they will have saved next to nothing by making a botch job of it - and probably made it more expensive when you consider, as you say, the cost of medical care that results, and the cost of replacing the temporary structures with permanent ones (as opposed to having done something that could incrementally become a suitable permanent structure). And if they really had to go temporary, high-end tents would be better, cheaper and more reusable than trailers. After that, some sort of relatively simple construction that the tent-residents could get involved with (and, what the heck, paid for - it’s not like someone else isn’t getting paid for the work now after all) would do a lot for good results, good will and good sense.
I’m curious - what sort of heating systems that you think poorly of do people want, and what do you recommend? (I rather like the idea of underfloor heating; if I was considering it in a new construction I’d do it using the hot water such that it would be just as efficient as the water-heating method, but also making things comfortable and gadgety-feeling.)
December 14th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
I agree with your thoughts. After all, if Extreme Makeover Home Edition can build a 3000 SF house in 5 days, the government should be able to build a 600 SF house in a couple days. Tents would be even faster.
The heating systems I was talking about are standard HVAC systems that have low energy ratings. In some cases, we will install forced air units and people try to skimp and save money by using an 80% efficient unit instead of a 94+% unit just so they can buy a fancier refrigerator! I love the use of radiant floor heating; however, framing over a concrete floor is very difficult if it will be your finish floor. It is certainly easier to build over a framed floor system.
December 19th, 2007 at 6:52 am
I agree. Let me take it a step further - I live in California. Why isn’t all new construction in a sun state required to incorporate solar collectors? We spend so much money and waste so much energy creating energy that is available to us free here - and if every home had solar collectors and was selling the excess back to the energy companies, we could probably both heat and air condition half of the homes in the United States. A little less money spent on phony rock fronts could be spent on an enery requirement and probably not increase the cost of a home so much as to make it unaffordable.