<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Martin,<br>
<br>
Flax bales are really great building bales (tough stalks, very
moisture resistant, dirt cheap), as are hemp bales (though it's
unlikely that will matter in any American codes). We've also built
with spelt and rye, both of which were really good bales because
they have un-modified stalk lengths and thicknesses and make good
straw. There are a bunch of switch grass growers up here and their
bales look great, though I haven't used them yet.<br>
<br>
Instead of having to define every species of plant stem that could
work, could a straw bale be defined as being composed of dry stalks
of grasses or cereal grains with no more than x amount of leaf and x
amount of seed by volume? Any type of grass with most of the leaf
gone and most of the seed gone will work. If I let my lawn grow to
its usual height, I often look at it and think that I could get at
least 4 decent bales off of it by fall. Those stalks are as good as
any straw.<br>
<br>
Does it matter exactly how you specify those x-figures for leaf and
seed? Since the exact amounts are unlikely to be measured, it would
give a marker that, whoa, there's a lot of green stuff or a lot of
seed in here, maybe these aren't good. How about 5% by volume? Too
round a number? How about 6.8%? If I were an inspector looking at a
bale and saw a whole whack of greenery or seed in it and knew that
there was a percentage that wasn't good, I'd ask the question. I
know the codes aren't a place to be flippant, but all you'd be
trying to do is raise a red flag about the stuff we don't want in
there.<br>
<br>
Chris<br>
<br>
On 12-02-09 9:52 AM, martin hammer wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:CB591DB9.11A5B%25mfhammer@pacbell.net"
type="cite">
<title>Re: [GSBN] Update, question re: proposed SB code (hay
bales)</title>
<font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt">Derek,<br>
<br>
Thanks for persisting with this. You’re right that if only
straw from the five named plants is permitted, then everything
else is not pemitted, including hay. But sometimes something
is so commonly misused, it’s worth explicitly prohibiting it.
On the other hand, I was actually revisiting the issue of
building with hay bales. (Is it in fact a misuse.)<br>
<br>
You’re also right that alfalfa is often referred to as hay
(the words “alfalfa hay” were spoken to me yesterday) and it
is not a grass, which I didn’t know until looking it up just
now. You raise a good point. And according to at least some
definitions, cereal grains are a type of grass (or </span></font><span
style="font-size:11pt"><font face="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial">graminoid).
So stating that hay (cut and dried grass) is prohibited seems
to unwittingly also prohibit the use of straw from cereal
grains. (Depending on what definitions are agreed upon.) (RT
seems to concur that cereal grain plants are grasses.)<br>
</font><font face="Arial"><br>
And flax? Maybe. That’s why I opened the question. Should
flax be added to the list of permitted building bale
materials? I’ve never seen a test that included flax bales,
which could be a problem when this is all scrutinized. But I
don’t believe I’ve seen a test with rye straw bales either.
As with virtually every small and large part of this,
pandora’s box is not far away.<br>
<br>
The task here, as with every inch of the proposed code, is to
find the best place to draw the line, all relevant things
considered. <br>
<br>
Do you want to propose how this should be worded?<br>
<br>
Martin<br>
<br>
<br>
On 2/8/12 7:59 PM, "Derek Roff" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="derek@unm.edu">derek@unm.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
</font></span>
<blockquote><span style="font-size:11pt"><font face="Arial">"I
don’t think hay vs. straw is as fuzzy as you suggest." How
fuzzy did I suggest? For people who are paying attention to
strawbale building, I agree that the distinction is clear
enough. But the number of articles and reports, and even
occasional statements from SB home owners, that mention "hay
bale houses" is high enough, that I think there is plenty of
confusion in the broader public. My guess is that lots of
code officials, who spend most of their time with concrete
and frame construction, may not immediately grasp the
distinction. For example, alfalfa is called hay, is sold
without seed heads, and isn't a grass, nor a cereal. <br>
<br>
Your response says that, for the purposes of the code, straw
allowed for construction is one of five plants. With that
language in the code, hay is banned, whether it is mentioned
or not. For what it is worth, the few people who have
posted to the SB lists on building with flax bales have
rated flax as their favorite bale material. <br>
<br>
Derelict<br>
Derek Roff<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="derek@unm.edu">derek@unm.edu</a><br>
<br>
On Feb 8, 2012, at 7:24 PM, martin hammer wrote:<br>
<br>
</font></span>
<blockquote><span style="font-size:11pt"><font face="Arial">Re:
[GSBN] Update, question re: proposed SB code (hay bales) <br>
</font></span><font face="Arial"><font size="2"><span
style="font-size:10pt">Hi Derek,<br>
<br>
The code proposal doesn’t define hay. When words are
not defined in the code, they have “ordinarily accepted
meanings such as the context implies.” A short
dictionary definition of hay is “cut and dried grass”.
Which is a rather cut and dried definition. <br>
<br>
Straw is defined in the code proposal as “The dry stems
of cereal grains after the seed heads have been
removed.” (Though the allowed straw is currently limited
to five cereal grains - wheat, rice, rye, barley, and
oat) (am I missing any that anyone uses?) <br>
<br>
Even without hay being defined in the code, I don’t
think hay vs. straw is as fuzzy as you suggest.
However, I might ask ICC for their opinion on whether
hay should be defined. <br>
<br>
Martin <br>
</span></font><span style="font-size:11pt"><br>
<br>
On 2/8/12 5:13 PM, "Derek Roff" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="derek@unm.edu">derek@unm.edu</a>
<x-msg:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="//63/derek@unm.edu">//63/derek@unm.edu</a>>
> wrote:<br>
<br>
</span></font>
<blockquote><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt">How
does the code proposal define hay? Hay vs. straw is a
fuzzy distinction, especially if you want to compare
current agricultural products with those of a hundred
years ago. The use of synthetic fertilizers and new
grain varieties make historical comparisons less
valuable for code work, in my opinion. Anything grown
with a high dose of synthetic fertilizer is likely to be
more subject to spontaneous combustion. <br>
<br>
Derelict<br>
<br>
Derek Roff<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="derek@unm.edu">derek@unm.edu</a>
<x-msg:<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="//63/derek@unm.edu">//63/derek@unm.edu</a>> <br>
<br>
On Feb 8, 2012, at 4:04 PM, martin hammer wrote:<br>
<br>
</span></font>
<blockquote><font face="Arial"><font size="2"><span
style="font-size:10pt">Hello all,<br>
<br>
After resubmitting the proposed SB code to the
International Code Council last week, I received
their comments and will submit final revisions on
Monday.<br>
<br>
Thank you to those who gave input re: clay plaster
in the proposed SB section of the International
Building Code. There was a mix of opinion,
sometimes in direct conflict. I used some of the
suggested changes. I generally loosened the
language (we’ll see how much vagueness is accepted
without challenge) and eliminated any required
percentage of clay. I still welcome clay plaster
input from those who expressed initial interest, but
whose busy lives probably got in the way (but asap
please). Particular thanks to Graeme North who gave
input on the entire proposed code (as he did in a
past iteration).<br>
<br>
One other question for input:<br>
<br>
Prohibit use of baled hay? (That’s what the
proposed code currently says.)<br>
<br>
This is the conventional wisdom, but weren’t some of
the first buildings in Nebraska built with hay bales
(some still standing?), or has anyone successfully
used hay bales (or bales with other non-straw
“grasses”)? Yesterday I had a discussion with a
California rice farmer who bales straw and alfalfa
hay. He says that apart from the notion that hay is
more subject to degradation, hay is 2 to 3 times as
expensive so is much less likely to be used as a
building material. Regarding the notorious
proclivity for stacks of hay bales to spontaneously
combust, in addition to witnessing that, he has
twice seen a stack of rice straw bales spontaneously
combust.<br>
<br>
Thanks<br>
<br>
Martin (what the hay) Hammer<br>
</span></font></font></blockquote>
<font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt"><br>
</span></font></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<font face="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><span
style="font-size:12pt"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span></font><font face="Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt"><br>
<br>
<br>
<hr align="CENTER" size="3" width="95%">_______________________________________________<br>
GSBN mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="GSBN@sustainablesources.com">GSBN@sustainablesources.com</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN">http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN</a><br>
</span></font></blockquote>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
GSBN mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:GSBN@sustainablesources.com">GSBN@sustainablesources.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN">http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.chrismagwood.ca">www.chrismagwood.ca</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.endeavourcentre.org">www.endeavourcentre.org</a></pre>
</body>
</html>