Beideck

Anyone that thinks that the impact on global climate change should be a consideration in deciding what is "green", is very strongly encouraged to read the essential article on this at the green building advisor.

http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/energy-solutions/avoiding-global-warming-impact-insulation

The lifetime global warming potential of HFC blown closed cell foam insulation is 450 times that of cellulose! In fact it can takes decades for the spray foam to save enough energy consumption, even in a cold climate, to make up for the damage done in making it.

Mike,

Thanks for this very useful post. I've been considering using Timbersil for a deck project coming up. Great to hear from someone who has actually used the product. It'll be nice to use a real wood product with good evironmental properties.

There is somewhat of a middle ground. Timbersil uses real wood and fuses it with glass. The product looks like untreated wood, and they claim that it is rot resistant etc. I've seen the product, but not actually used it (yet). I'd be curious if anyone has experience with it that they'd be willing to share.

Rob, this is an interesting topic. However, I was a bit disappointed with your very opinionated slant. The piece could have been much better with more facts and less opinion. For example, next time you might consider including the percent of recycled content instead of statements like, "it may make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to know that a shred of your old milk jug may one day end up in a deck." Some of us want to do the right thing environmentally. Including the facts can help us separate the really sustainable products from those that are pretenders. My guess is that you don’t know the answer but you went ahead and made the recycled content sound small since that makes your argument sound stronger.

The Passivhaus standard is a great goal. They are doing good work and deserve much credit. However, I think some of their terminology needs to be re-thought. A reader of this article is lead to believe that passive solar homes are something new and that only homes meeting their new standards is a passive (solar) home. The journalist who wrote this article is to be forgiven since the terminology used by the Passive Solar Institute is misleading. For example, the book “Homes for a Changing Climate” written by the leaders of the US division of the Passive Solar Institute claim that in 2003 “the first Passive House in North America” was built. Only a very careful and educated reader would read this and think that passive solar homes have been built in North America before very recently. In fact, passive solar homes have been around for a very long time. What they call a “passive home” is a solar passive home. However, not all solar passive homes meet their criteria to be called a “passive home.” The average person is going to be confused by this unfortunate choice of terminology and might be scared away from pursuing passive solar techniques as too new or complicated. The Passive Solar Institute should give serious thought to new terminology, at least in English speaking countries.