*
I am currently working on an old farmhouse.
I took off the aluminum siding ,peeled off some clapboards
and discovered there is no insulation in the walls.
Since vinyl siding is planned already I would like to take
the opportunity to blow insulation in. Is cellulose the best
choice? Will it settle or cause moisture problems?
Discussion Forum
Discussion Forum
Up Next
Video Shorts
Featured Story
A standardized approach, quick-to-install hardware, and a simplified design make building custom casework cost-effective.
Featured Video
Highlights
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Replies
*
John
Need more info. How old a home, location, are you going to have to replace the clapboards, how big a home, 1 story or 2, etc.?
1. I'm not a big fan of cellulose in walls, especially in older homes. It has a tendancy to settle a little, leaving a gap at the top of the stud bay. Are there fire stops or blocking between the studs?
2. I'm a believer in the open cell spray foam (icynene is one brand). If you are going to re-side the home, an installer will drill small holes in your outside wall at the top bottom and center between the stud bays. This way, if there is a fire stop of blocking, they know to drill another hole to fill that space.
Your new siding will cover the holes.
Vince
*cellulose... if it's balloon framed, you have to block the tops of the stud bayssub it out to an experienced insulation contractor...get a price on capping the attic at the same time..b but hey, whadda i no ?
*John: Despite the older balloon-frame (?) construction, you can have blocks in the walls where you don't expect them. You should not use standard icynene with finishes on the walls - it can expand enough to blow plaster off the walls and bind window frames, etc. Icynene has a slow-expanding foam for just this purpose, but there is an alternative.There is a good water-based (no solvents!) non-expanding phenolic foam insulation which I have just used for the first time. I am extremely leery of foam in general due to past history but this stuff, Tripolymer, worked great. It does not shrink at all and doesn't stick to every surface like Icynene. You can go with 1" holes instead of the 2 1/2" normally required for blowing Certainteed Insulsafe, which would be my next choice up (before cellulose). Plugging the 2 1/2" holes well is an art form if you have to do it from the inside (doesn't sound like it in your case) - if so email me and I'll tell you how to do it.Jeff
*john.. if this is a vinyl siding job then it has a vinyl siding budget..cellulose is the most cost effective and benign for what you want to do... give the homeowner the most bang for his buck..an experienced insulator can do that house in one day before you even start and they'll give you a great price because they don't have to do anything about plugs ..just some styrofoam plugs .. you'll be covering their installation holes..as long as they're at the site i would sell the homeowner on blowing a cap in the attic with more cellulose...they are going to sing your praises for recommending the insulation to them..there will be no settling because the cellulose is blown in at a pressure greater than it's settled density..the insulation contractors in your area will pretty much determine what you can get installed...if most of them are blowing fiberglass.. then the Insulsafe is a good choice... but if you can get cellulose.. go for it..in any case get someone with a good track record and a few years in the business...where are you located ?do you do a lot of siding jobs ?
*John. Cellulose installed in exterior wall to a density of 3.5 pounds per cubic foot does not settle.As for Tripolymer foam, what about the urea formaldehyde content? GeneL.
*There is no urea formaldehyde - that's the point! It's water soluble phenolic foam.Jeff
*Jeff,Why Insulsafe over cellulose?Ken
*We blew insulation in the walls of my Brother's older house in one weekend for less than $150. I wouldn't do it on a house I was going to live in for 50 years, but his is older and not in great shape. I thought it was a heck of an investment.
*John, I've opened up alot of walls with blown in cellulose. I've never seen any settling, never seen any dampness, never seen anything that would cause me not to consider using it (unless I thought I would be the guy has to take it out to remodel someday).
*
Thank You all for your good advice. We are calling
insulation contractors to give an estmate.
All the contractors are quite busy this time of year.
I think the cellulose will be the correct choice for this house.
*
Of course, you'll have to consider the source, but here's one or two reasons
Jeff
*jeff....fiberglass insul. mfrs have been trotting out that irresponsible malarkey since the late 70's... b i'm surprised you repeat it...let's you and me take this test..put a fistful of fiberglass insul in your hand with a penny on top.. take a plumbers torch and heat the penny to cherry red....i'll do the same with cellulose....and there won't be any smoulder either..or build three identical houses and insul. one with fiberglass... one with the foam of your choice ..and one with cellulosenow put a couple gallons of accelerant in the corner of a first floor room.. and light each one..tell me which one burns up first... and which one second ...and which one was still standing after everyone gets tired and goes home...the only thing better than cellulose in terms of fire safety is the foam insulation made with cement.....fiberglass insul is ONLY better than no insulation..because it melts and then there is no insulation and the stud bays become chimneys...the fire burns thru the sheathing and then jumps into the roof system and the house is gone...it never happens with cellulose insulated walls and attics...
*OK Mike, you go first ... :)Jeff
*ouch... singed the hair as i passed over.....damn.. the penny deformed.....i don't think i can spend it any more...ok jeff..besides the singed hair.. no problem here..now you.....
*
As an insulation contractor in NY, I've discovered the following points concerning insulation options...
b Cellulose:
Research (from independant sources) has shown that cellulose does, over time, settle by up to as much as 30%, and the chemicals (typically Borax) used to make it fire-retardant do oxidize and become inactive over a period of time... depending on weather and humidity conditions. As a matter of fact, one house I did work for has clumps of moldy cellulose bunched up at the base of the walls.
b Icynene
This, and other polyurethane products, are petro-based chemicals, which burn quite easily and release highly toxic gasses in the process! Upon installation, toxic (and flammable) gasses are released as well, and require volatile chemical solvents to clean up any mess.
b Urea Formaldehyde
Forget it. Doesn't meet building codes... not even produced in this country as a residential insulation any more, as far as I know.
b fiberglass
Excellent product, easy to use and install... has several drawbacks - as discussed here earlier. I tend to use this material as an attic or roof insulation.
b Tripolymer
By far the best insulation I have found! Non toxic upon installation or as the final product, non-flammable - will not burn or release toxic gasses when subjected to high heat. It doesn't expand, so it's perfect for retrofit work. It doesn't shrink or settle over time. It's non-corrosive to piping and wiring inside the walls. Clean-up requires water, and excess can be dumped in a public landfill... and there's more... Including an EXCELLENT R-value! (see http://www.tripolymer.com )
I've done excessive research into this matter to try to find the best and safest insulation solution for my customers. All of my research was done independantly through trade publications, newspapers, etc...
*
Mike, I rest my case.
Jeff
*... but which three of your neighbors' houses did you burn down? :)PS - See below (and no, I've never met Steve)Jeff
*Steve... not fer nuttin... this is b**ls**t. <<<<>>>one house does not make a class action suit.....i can find clumps of moldy anything in some of the houses i've worked on..and cellulose OR ANYTHING else cannot settle beyond it's settled density...it's settled density is 1.4 lb/cf.. that's loose blow and yes it will settle up to thirty percent because it isn't blown in an open attic at it's settled density..in a sidewall application.. it is blown at 2.7 lb /cfand a proper application will have no settling , most applications these days are using DensePak.. which is a 3.5 lb/ cf installed densityJeff: in your link.....notice the language used by ownens Corning trying to slam cellulose... more b**l s**t.. they don't want to make any liable statements so they make all oblique slams...no test results.. and no product identificationSteve>>>if you are an insulation contractor.. i would venture to say you have NEVER installed cellulose or you wouldn't be saying the things you are saying...if you want to sell and install tripolymer.. go right ahead.. but why can't you do it without slamming a tested and proved product...also... SHOW me the cost effectiveness of your tripolymer... like installed cost per R-value...right .. i didn't think so....b but hey, whadda i no ?
*I wish you could show us the research - like who paid for it and what was the methodology. When the fg manufactures tried to slam cells for fire, the cell folks put up the bucks for an independent testing lab. Fibrelglass walls burn through significantly faster than cells. It was good enough that the fg folks backed off.So please point me in the direction of the research you mention.
*Mike - In case you think that only the fiberglas companies are guilty of slamming other products, you should try out this link, for example.I just love the 'Schools Open, Insulate Carefully' approach by the 'Victims of Fiberglas.' Hey, you know guys were just talking insulation here, no need to get so riled up.PS The installed cost of Tripolymer on the job we used it on was roughly the cost of blown-in Insulsafe - a little higher for materials but less for plaster patching, due to smaller holes.Jeff
*jeff.. it's hard to understand how these same specious arguments can stil be around twenty years later...so far as i know... there are a lot of good insulation proccts on the market...fiberglass, polyiso foil-faced foam, eps in various densities.... your tripolymer sounds promising...icynene has its proponents..what i don't like to see is the attempt to confuse the issue by misleading the public that some of these products are (((UNSAFE))most of them have a better application for various instances.. and i'm glad that they are all available so i can use them as needed...in a typical whole house remodel.. i will usually have some poly-iso, some fiberglass... some eps..some styrene such as foamular or Styro-SM, and a lot of cellulose....the specific application and the budget help me advise the homeowner as to the best product...sure is a far cry from what we had available when i got started in '75...
*
I'm under contract to purchase a house in upstate N.Y. It was built in 1938. It has serious peeling paint and other signs of a moisture problem (rotted exterior trim among them.) There is confirmed wet blown-in insulation in one part of the house (where the vents have been sealed with paint!) and suspected blown-in insulation in the rest of the house.
Everyone seems to agree the insulation needs to come out. What are the options for removing it, and how expensive are they? The house is about 1400 sq. feet (one story) with an unfinished 1/2 story upstairs.
Also, the inspector thinks a probable lack of a vapor barrier in the stone foundation is probably the main culprit and suggests putting down lightweight rolled roofing, overlapping 3" and joints sealed with with silicone caulking. A contractor says this is ridiculous and won't work. Some problems may also be coming from the roof.
Help! I'm running out of time and would greatly appreciate any info. Thanks!
*
der confused... so am i...
first ..if the blown-in insulation is wet in one part of the house.. this sounds like a leak... at this time of year....it shouldn't be wet because of plugged vents...
there is something else going on...
what is the source of the (((wet))) IMHO.. it is NOT the vents that have been painted shut..
and you suspect that there is blown -in insulation in other parts of the house...ok.. but that's not neccessarily bad... it's probably good...!
the stone foundation being the source of the (((wet )) sounds bogus... what does that mean.. is ther water comming thru the stone foundation walls ?
or is there water comming up thru the dirt floor (((what is the basement floor made of ?)))
the rolled roofing is rediculous.. so i'm with your contractor on that one..
the inspector sounds a little short on experience...
if you want to waterproof a stone foundation.. first you have to stop any water that is actually flowing...at its source..
next you parge the walls with a cement mortar..
then you seal the walls with one of the masonry waterproofing materials such as (((Thoro))
if the wall are wet.. it's either a roof leak.. a gutter leak.... or a plumbing leak...
but i'm here and you're there.. get a better inspector or ask your contractor to tell you what's going on.. or find somone who knows what they're looking at..
b but hey, whadda i no?
*Jeff, your link is pretty mild compared to the one that I found by going up one step on the URL link you gave, which then transferred me to a site that included, among other comments, the following:Unwary installers continue pumping potentially lethal loose glass fibers into attics all over the world. Tons of filthy, rotting fiberglass insulation lurking in aging buildings endangers trades persons, cleaning crews, even teachers and schoolchildren. Homeowners tromping through attics unwittingly dust their family with tiny glass shards. Fiberglass is ubiquitous, yet most people know very little about this man-made replacement for asbestos.Kind of makes you think that they don't like fiberglas...(This is from http://www.sustainableenterprises.com/fin/ if you really want to read the whole thing...)
*
Mike... regarding your reply...
Cellulose doesn't settle beyond it's settled density? What if it gets wet?
I used one example only because I'm not writing an essay here...
As for efficiency - if the basics of insulation still hold true today, higher density makes for a lower R value... specially when referring to fiberous materials.
The cost of Tripolymer per R value is equal or better than that of cellulose... at R 4.8 @ 32 F... R 5 @ 0 F... you'll have to call the manufacturer for details on pricing, as I have done.
Testing on the product has been done by several laboratories, including V-Tech Labs, United States Testing and Factory Mutual... and NASA, who says Tripolymer is 45% more efficient than fiberous insulations. Again, the company reps were more than happy to provide me with any information I requested - and a great deal is available on their site.
C.P. Chemical, the manufacturer in question, has been extremely helpful in all aspects of my own research... which is just a bonus as far as I'm concerned. And as for installing cellulose myself - I no longer do it... I don't like it. That's a personal opinion, and I'm not trying to force it down your throat - only share the knowledge I've discovered. I could show you the effectiveness of this Tripolymer by holding it in my hand and putting an o-a torch to it... then grabbing the burnt section immediately after removing the flame. Not even warm. Show me any other product which can do this.
Regards,
Steve
*
sounds like a winner, steve,... just like cellulose
*CaseyR - Ya think? Did you read their disclaimer:i Our advice could be incomplete, misleading, or incorrect. Different people have different needs and respond to similar things differently. You could fail to follow our advice completely. You could misinterpret our intentions or our advice. You could implement our advice completely, and not get the desired result. Kind of says it all - at least they're 'honest' ...Jeff
*b I just pretend to know everythingI didn't know 'glass fibers were capable of "lurking".Hmmmm......I wonder what the rest of my house is up to???
*Jeff - perhaps we should build on their disclaimer for one here at Breaktime...
*Steve, your statement "As for efficiency - if the basics of insulation still hold true today, higher density makes for a lower R value... specially when referring to fiberous materials." is simply not true for cells and similar materials. Within a cavity of a fixed depth, the denser the cells (or fg) the better the insulating value.
*This is a textbook failure in the building science community.The uninsulated walls provided both a drainage plane and a capillary break. Blowing in the cels eliminates the capillary break and the drainage plane and now allows moisture (in the form of vapor pressure) to diffuse directly through the insulation pack and into the back of the siding. Since in our part of the world (I am in Rochester, NY) houses dry to the outside, this moisture keeps right on going through the siding and takes the paint with it.Due to pressure differentials in the house, this is especially noticable just under the soffits and overhangs (the most protected part of the wall). This is why it is possible to drive down the street and spot this problem. Which is again why it is possible to tell 90% of a buildings problems from the outside!Yes, the wet basement is a problem, probably the main problem. Unless in your daily life you will generate anywhere from 10 to 15 gallons of water vapor. You may have other leaks that are allowing water in.I doubt the insulation needs to come out, unless it is molding.Roofing is commonly used to repair these areas, but it is usually rubber membrane roofing material on the floor only. The walls are covered with poly and sealed to the rubber with vapor barrier tape.Feel free to e-mail me directly regarding this problem.-Rob
*Well, yes, sort of. I think you might be thinking about some research that found that the EFFECTIVE insulation value of "6-inch" fiberglass forced into 2x4 bays was better than the "4-inch" stuff. What happened here was that the crushed stuff sealed tighter against the walls and prevented air currents from occuring, thus sealing better.This applies also to your statement: For cellular materials, the smaller the cells AT THE SAME DENSITY means better insulation because it prevents air circulation which would allow faster heat transfer. In general, the higher the density, the lower the insulation value -- just carry the thinking to its logical conclusion of a solid material.For this reason, blown-in (or foamed-in) materials are always superior to batts. They seal around pipes, fill in odd sized bays, and prevent air movement.
*The smaller the air cells, the better the insulation. It was not just the fact it sealed better against the surfaces but rather that the air pockets were smaller and allowed less convection within the air cells. The newer, higher density fg is an example of this. Greater density equals smaller cells.
*
I am currently working on an old farmhouse.
I took off the aluminum siding ,peeled off some clapboards
and discovered there is no insulation in the walls.
Since vinyl siding is planned already I would like to take
the opportunity to blow insulation in. Is cellulose the best
choice? Will it settle or cause moisture problems?