Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

ekodum - Re: Fiber glass (Ecose) [was Re: [Ekodum] pěnové sklo]

ekodum AT fsv.cvut.cz

Předmět: Ekologické stavebnictví

List archive

Re: Fiber glass (Ecose) [was Re: [Ekodum] pěnové sklo]


Chronological Podle vláken 
  • From: David Kutalek <kutaturk AT seznam.cz>
  • To: Ekologické stavebnictví <ekodum AT fsv.cvut.cz>
  • Subject: Re: Fiber glass (Ecose) [was Re: [Ekodum] pěnové sklo]
  • Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 14:29:34 +0100 (CET)
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=seznam.cz; h=In-Reply-To:Received:Date:To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:X-Country:X-Abuse:X-Seznam-User:X-QM-Mark; b=dtQLJmI//dbXPGkJIG1+asD9e1MjBsxbPw9fyYRxSTOBtoTNDjIHy79JtBjv6XAOj tr3DqAqwspJMbQxG24d8K04CVrPFStqco6i+Ia68vwghAsKXrW6AeZ2lU5GsGw3FdCo TCaTbRmQTE7DSjtCAA+SgwvFudp6Rygw7PDhIBg=
  • List-archive: <http://mailman.fsv.cvut.cz/pipermail/ekodum>
  • List-id: Ekologické stavebnictví <ekodum.fsv.cvut.cz>

Hi Max,

late response too, sorry :-). Comments inline:

> Let me start by adding that I don't follow up on the development
> within mineral wools (rock or glass), due to the simple fact that
> data (as well as common logic) shows that there's too much embodied
> energy in producing it, and countries rarely has facilities to
> recycle it.

I was wondering about the embodied energy. According to Knauf, their Ecose
stuff is produced in Czech Republic and energy needed is 8.3GJ/t [1]. Which
is 2306kWh per 1000Kg, which may be around 20-25m3. So around 100kWh/m3. That
amount can be saved in heating in one or two years, isn't it?

In some table I found general glass wool value of about 40GJ/t. Quite an
improvement. But of course, straw is probably still much much better (don't
have numbers - may depend a lot on transport efficiency).

As to recycling, this glass wool itself is made 60-80% of recycled glass [2].
Don't know details about possibilities recycling it again, though.

> I am aware that a new 'silk' technology has been developed, which
> explains for the smoothness you feel, however I personally prefer a
> poison with a really bad flavour! In other words, to my knowledge,
> the health problems in mineral wool has never been the formaldehyde,
> colors etc. It's all about the small fibres which gets in your
> lungs, in some cases through your skin.
>
> -This is especially why in general the new nano-technology is
> extremely dangerous, as it's made commercially available without
> sufficient testing.

I agree with your nanotechnology point of view. IMHO we still even cannot
imagine what can happen... In this case, it is probably not used. It sould be
much less fibre-lossy as is usuall according to [2].

And, my common sense says - this material should be put into walls with
air-proof barrier to inside, and with wind barrier to outside, so it
shouldn't be risky during usage, should it? During installation, it is
possible to use high-quality mask, I hope it will help.

> ...And I've always been able to find a better alternative than using
> mineral wool. In worst cases expanded polystyren, in most cases
> hemp, flax, cellulose, wool, reed-mats, straw. Yes, this is
> typically more expensive. Sorry; it's a market driven economy, and
> if not enough buys it, it will stay more expensive (Yes; that was a
> hint!).

polystyren - isn't styren also carcinogenic? ; embodied energy is similar or
even bigger; recycling?
hemp - usually sold with plastic fibres (around 10%), so not compostable etc.
flax, - don't know details; borax too?
cellulose - contains borax (hemp usually too), colors chemicals
wool - when you buy it, isn't it treated against insects etc using chemicals?

So to get around chemicals etc, you need 'raw' material - like raw straw
bales, raw hemp, raw reed, isn't it?

> As far as fire engineers goes, then it's my experience that many CZ
> round stamp holders are simply uneducated about the alternatives,
> and don't want to learn. Our straw bale house was the first to get a
> fire approval of simply 3 cm earth plaster direct on the bales (both
> sides).

Thanks for your recipe. Unfortunately we do not have energy and time now to
fight fire-eng-issue beast.

But it seems there are more cases to consider. For example, in other case
than you described, cellulose can burn out easily when you put light bulb
into it, while glass wool can handle it well. [3] My fire-eng told me, even
with glass wool it is still open construction - they _know_ about glass
melting. But, as I understand - it does not emit significant additional heat
during fire. While straw probably can (not big fire, but 'zhnuti'?).

Don't take me wrong - I am fan of straw, has one small straw building on my
garden. Will probably use it on some parts of my house. But unfortunately,
with my [free] time frame, I cannot handle pure-straw solution on my house.

David


[1] http://www.caschranitenergii.cz/knauf-insulationzavod-krupka
[2] http://www.stavebnivyrobekroku.cz/db_binary_file/plans/1480.pdf
[3] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dn4lWy8CVlY




Archivace běží na MHonArc 2.6.19+.

Top of Page