Japanese Tsunami Pod (What were they thinking?)

[daiquiri]

Originally Posted by viking north

Here's an interesting fact-- the recyling of a typical metal non alum. food container creates more pollution than it's manufacture new when with the act of washing it out with potable water (drinking water) is considered.

Where did you find that info? It doesn't sound correct to me. Recycling aluminum should cut in half the energetic and water consumption, respect to producing stuff from freshly mined and refined aluminum.

P.S.
Ooops, you said non-aluminum... Don't have a data about that case. Anyways, I'd like to see where did you get that info, out of curiosity.

[DennisRB]

Viking, please cite some sources. Your post reads like a chain email. However I agree with the major point that the earth is way overcrowded.

what good is a concrete house corner if the rest of the house washes away, you'll just be left with a bunch of standing concrete corners

I said concrete houses, not concrete house corners.

People will never learn. We had foods here in Brisbane recently. Many houses went underwater and were damaged. This has happened before and will happen again, but people will rebuild in the same place then complain when it happens again. I made sure there was no flooding history in the area I purchased.

Originally Posted by Frosty

Same in USA --I saw a TV prog today about building a house and the chip board they use and nailed in windows . I sat watching with my chin on my chest as he described approved eanergy saving windows as he nailed em to the wall after a bit of insulation tape.

The inside walls are plaster board but the outside is just chip board and then planks nailed on.WTF

You can not get planning permission for a dwelling like that in UK.

Its no wonder the Huricanes and tsunamis rip em to bits, even the big bad wolf could huff and puff and blow the house down.

One thing I noticed when I was in the USA last week was the quality of the houses. They were large and comfortable, but looked very flimsy and built with cheap materials compared to houses in Australia. We use corrugated iron or roof tiles for roofs, and bricks or fiberboard on for exterior walls, and houses last almost forever. I can't even tell what it is they use in the US for roofing but it looks like fake tiles glued to flat boards of some kind. Most houses show sag in the roofing.

[Ad Hoc]

Originally Posted by ancient kayaker

.. However many of them are exquisitely made by people who take great pride in their craftsmanship, at least, that was the case when I was there. . . .

Well, that must have been around 1600!!

I've inspected many houses being built here, the methods, the materials everything. I did this before i bought my house to ascertain what the bench mark standards are and who does what etc..
Conclusions, cheap shoddy rubbish. My garden shed in the UK was built with better quality materials and better standard. Japanese are paranoid about earthquakes. On the one hand fair comment. We have about 5-10 quakes per day here, most a minor tremor. But Chile, they have had 4 of the most powerfull since 1950s and worst on record too. Their most recent last year. The houses that survived, built from steel reinforced concrete/brick. Simple (even Japanese research says this is the best way too..!!). They are not paranoid...Japanese are, thus no progress from the cheap shoddy rubbish here.

The housing companies that make the houses are also one big cartel and hands in the pocket of the politicans to ensure this remains too.

I could go on..but i wont...way off topic.

[Willallison]

Originally Posted by Percyis

If there are people who can use it effectively, then why is it pointless?

As a sphere, the occupant can decide which way is up by simply moving within.

Not if it's stuck upside down, buried in mud....
Only sure way to escape a tsunami is to not be there when it arrives. Doesn't matter much which way you go - up or out

[ancient kayaker]

Originally Posted by DennisRB

. . . One thing I noticed when I was in the USA last week was the quality of the houses. They were large and comfortable, but looked very flimsy and built with cheap materials compared to houses in Australia. We use corrugated iron or roof tiles for roofs, and bricks or fiberboard on for exterior walls, and houses last almost forever. I can't even tell what it is they use in the US for roofing but it looks like fake tiles glued to flat boards of some kind. Most houses show sag in the roofing.

A variety of roofing materials are used in the US but by far the most common - at least in the Northern areas and Canada - is "shingles" which are essentially heavy cardboard coated with tar and fine gravel which typically has a life of about 20 years before it is pulled off and replaced. Reroofing takes about 3 man-days; during the Summer the tapping of roofing hammers is a familiar sound! Alternative materials such as coated steel - with a sound absorbent backing these days as it is shockingly noisy during rain - or tile are available but far less common as they are more than x5 the cost of shingles. However in the hotter parts tiles are much more common.

Beneath the surface material, outdoor plywood is laid over wooden roof trusses, similar to flooring. Two layers are supposed to be used although some builders have been known to cut corners. In Northern areas such a roof easily supports the several feet of snow that builds up over a season, although the real load is ice if snow melts and refreezes before more snow is added. The roofs that most often collapse under a snow load seem to be larger buildings with steel trusses and covering. Nothing resists being passed over by a hurricane without serious damage, but death rates are less than one might expect due to most houses having deep basements.

Exterior wall covering materials vary widely; brick tile, aluminum or coated steel and cedar planks seem to be the most popular choices, again in the North, with more suitable materials in use in the South.

I have never seen chipboard used in house construction and doubt it would comply with building codes. Wood frame construction seems to be giving way to the use of steel framing and trusses for the outside shell but wood joists and plywood persist for floors.

The commonest inside wall material is drywall, made of gypsum between two layers of heavy cardboard. This supresses sound well and is surprisingly durable, usually withstanding flooding. If the inner material supports mold growth - as most do - it has to be replaced anyway after a flood.

After from drywall these materials have been in use for a very long time - by N. American standards - and "Century Homes" are sought after on the housing market, more for lot size and cachet than any percieved superiorety of construction I suspect as bringing one up to code and modern standards of convenience can be quite costly.

BTW I am not a house builder, just passing what I have observed.

[viking north]

Daiquiri & DennisRB --Sorry I can't recall the t.v. program but it was one relating to re cycling and the preporation of containers for recycling, specifically washing out cans, bottles and plastic milk containers. It was discovered from a survey that most people were using potable water from their homes supply and more alarming a high percentage using hot water. The program went into great detail that using cold potable water was at best a break even and hot water a definite energy loss when compared to the manufacture of a new non. alum. metal container. It was recommended to use saved grey water from the home or collected rain water if the recycling program required cleaning the containers. In the study they referred to a city water supply and the energy consumption involved in cost per gallon (energy)of pumping and treatment to render it potable. The problem with alot of these earth saving claims is the whole picture is not viewed from cradle to grave of the products or programs involved. I am not convinced that wind generators or electric powered automobiles are are net gain to the enviorment when this approach is taken. Yes it creates good political hype and sales by playing upon the "that good feeling" of the public but I question if it's much more than that. Solar on the other hand certainly seems to be a winner.---

[ancient kayaker]

I thought the main purposes of recycling programs were to conserve resources and reduce the pressure on landfill sites. I did not see the show, but if they just looked at the use of potable water it seems very narrow minded, almost as if the program people were trying to make recycling look bad. Mostly people wash these containers to discourage flies, at least in the Summer, and also to avoid attracting animals, since recycling containers do not - at least in my area - have lids.

I do, however, agree with the view that a lot of alternative energy sources are probably doing more harm than good and are unlikely to show a gain even in the long run.

Personally I am all in favor of efforts to reduce landfill, which tends to displace land near cities that themselves are usually located near good farmland for historical reasons. In my area compostable material has been also separated for some time, which has the added benefit that the garbage bags do not get ripped open by stray animals. Win-win IMHO. Of course, around here there is no shortage of water, there are places where perhaps that would be a significant consideration. .

[viking north]

Terry, The point of the show and the point i was trying to make was to maximize the benifit by not using potable water or any water which required more energy to provide washing than the payback of recycling. In the case of non alum. containers while they occupy landfill space they do decompose rather quickly as we well know by our rusting automobiles. Here in Halifax we have one of the most successful recycling programs in the world and regularly have many visiting engineers doing studies to start or improve on their own systems. However like all operations it is only as good as the participents.

[DennisRB]

Thanks Viking. Do you think you can remember the name of the program? I wouldn't mind taking a look. Regardless of if it is or isn't more energy efficient right now, we still need to do it. My prediction is in these times of dwindling resources, that countries who are best at recycling/renewable energy will have a global advantage when we finally run out, and we are starting to get there now.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by Frosty

Same in USA --I saw a TV prog today about building a house and the chip board they use and nailed in windows . I sat watching with my chin on my chest as he described approved eanergy saving windows as he nailed em to the wall after a bit of insulation tape.

The inside walls are plaster board but the outside is just chip board and then planks nailed on.WTF

You can not get planning permission for a dwelling like that in UK.

Its no wonder the Huricanes and tsunamis rip em to bits, even the big bad wolf could huff and puff and blow the house down.

What's wrong with 'nailed in windows?' When you have aluminum-framed windows with flanges, that's the proper way to install them. Once nailed they aren't going anywhere, and properly flashed they stay weathertight for the life of the house. Of course, in new construction they're installed before the siding and trim, or before stucco is applied.

I don't approve of chip board sheathing on roofs, because it almost invariably sag sooner or later. It also doesn't survive leaky roofing very well.

I've never seen chip board used under siding. I assume they must have been using fairly flexible siding, that needed support behind it. But if the siding job is done properly so water doesn't get through, the chip board should lindefinitely.

Here in California, they don't generally put anything but building paper behind siding. The oldest part of my house went up in 1940, and it has thin redwood lap siding over building paper. The walls are still in one piece, and still watertight.

[viking north]

Dennis I mentioned the program to my wife and she thinks it was a live local program some 4 or 5 yrs. ago so it could be lost in the other thread's time warp (Just had to say that)---Geo.

[Percyis]

Remarkable how this thread turned into a slanging heap on terrestrial housing when it centered on a sphere as a survival strategy.

Will: Put in a couple more hatches.

[DennisRB]

Originally Posted by Percyis

Remarkable how this thread turned into a slanging heap on terrestrial housing when it centered on a sphere as a survival strategy.

Will: Put in a couple more hatches.

Welcome to the internet.

[viking north]

Ya If you think this is a drift off course how about the Einstein time/space thread which received multiple star rating on a boating forum under Boat Design however it did propel me to build a new space sailing craft whose name" Miss. Solar Wind" I have already chosen. By the way a little quiz here; which popular magazine did I get that name from and describe the artwork on that page. (1960/70's era)