The Forum > Article Comments > Natural building as a community game changer > Comments
Natural building as a community game changer : Comments
By Murray Hunter, published 5/2/2014Likewise, in Australia, even with flawed regulations biased towards conventional dwellings, many owner builders flocked out to the outer Melbourne suburb of Eltham.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All
I've renovated one of those original rammed earth dwellings out at Eltham, it was a bloody nightmare to work on, I don't think they ever put a spirit level or a plumb line on anything LOL. Their claims to thermal efficiency are pretty dubious since there are gaps and holes all over the place, we did the job in July and August and even though we had a roaring fire going in the grate all day once we'd replaced the ceilings and insulated them the place was still freezing all the time. The benefits probably come in summer because the way a lot of those dwellings are sited and oriented with the sun is sensible but then again, I shudder to think what would happen if a fire took hold in one of those gullies,the "alternative" dwellings up at Flowerdale and Marysville fared very badly in the fires, the stories I heard described how basically the walls disintegrated even before the structure was fully alight.
Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 5 February 2014 9:44:14 AM
| |
Uplifting recollections Murray, thanks!
The sustainability of earth technologies really appeals to me, but I am very sure that unless we address poverty, no technology will prove sustainable as "holy wars" for justice will escalate & will no longer be fought with sticks & stones. I note that the alleviation of "poverty" was also your bottom line. However, I recall a question posed by a famous philosopher "How can a person be said to have a country where he has no right to a square inch of soil; where he has nothing but his hands, & urged by starvation, must bid against his fellows for the privilege of using them?" The "system" has stolen our birthright. Today, you only get "property" by being competitive, which CREATES winners and losers. Cooperation would need commons for food AND shelter. Nature provided land air water & sunlight for life & this is the foundation stone for any sustainable building. Until the birthright of access to land for shelter is restored, the poor will be denied justice or at best be dependent on "welfare". Chris Baulman @landrights4all Posted by landrights4all, Wednesday, 5 February 2014 10:18:03 AM
| |
jay,
A properly constructed pise or a mud brick building can be fireproof, BUT, no timber should be used in the construction and, preferably it would be built on a heavy, well reinforced slab. The roof would also be concrete (a light weight aerated mix) with a slight slope to allow for run-off to tanks and a parapet that, when blocked, will allow a minimum of about 8 cm of water over the entire roof when there is a fire. Not a fashionable shape but effective. Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 5 February 2014 1:35:35 PM
| |
< Natural building is a potential tool in poverty eradification as well. It prevents the need to borrow money to purchase conventional building materials, thus reduces debt and reliance on high interest micro-financing within any community. >
We can't have that now can we, Murray. Without asbestos in our walls and formaldehyde in our cabinets how can the banksters/elite maintain their control and riches? From the piece you linked to in the Australian: While mudbricks have been a sustainable building material for thousands of years, they cannot readily satisfy energy-efficiency standards. Part of the problem is that the solid mudbrick wall, which is 25cm thick, does not rely on additional insulation, so it scores poorly when measured by official energy rating tools. By contrast, the ratings tools give the green light to most new houses built with modern materials which have a much higher carbon footprint, having required large amounts of energy during manufacture. "It is utterly frustrating because we know how environmentally friendly mudbrick homes are," Marshall said. "The carbon issue does not make sense -- making a mudbrick requires very little energy, unlike the manufacture of conventional building materials like a kiln-fired house brick, which require a huge amount of energy. --- And you're confused by this? I would have thought it was painfully obvious. They don't want independence and carbon reduction, they want dependance on their mates! You also don't pay tax on those damn pesky home made bricks. How are they suppose to increase their pensions? Look! We just can't have people running around the country building their own homes with home made materials. The plebs might make pitchforks while they're at it. Posted by RawMustard, Wednesday, 5 February 2014 4:13:23 PM
| |
Raw Mustard,Is Mise,
You both make good points, I also worked on a high tech Pise building, Gilgai Farm up at Nagambie and that was a whole different matter, I was involved in the internal fitout and it was an amazing project: http://www.gilgaifarm.com.au/images/farm/large/photo1.jpg Posted by Jay Of Melbourne, Wednesday, 5 February 2014 7:25:47 PM
|
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All