[GSBN] health (ill) effects of earthen floors

Thu Jan 5 18:21:01 UTC 2012

Well I have to say can't think of anything you said to disagree with.  Quite sensible for whatever kind of King you are.  Anyhow, I just wanted to point out the difference between the kind of dirt floors that I think the article was referring to and other types of earthen floors - sealed, stabilized or whatever.  I think the choice of floors will have much to do with the context, the dwelling, the inhabitants, what kind of kids are part of the family, etc.  I can think of all kinds of contexts where earthen floors wouldn't make any sense whatsoever.  And I sure wouldn't want to try and talk someone out of a floor they like such as Jorge and his choice of cement/lime.  

Other alternatives often come to mind when imagining floor alternatives.  For the low cost houses that we did, we were able to find sufficient amounts of broken-up concrete slab pieces and assemble them in a manner resembling a flagstone floor.  Those floors were fabulous - durable and cheap.  Love them to this day.

Bill Steen
bill at caneloproject.com
www.caneloproject.com
www.caneloproject.com/blog
HC1 Box 324
Elgin, AZ85611

On Jan 5, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Bruce King wrote:

> 
> Thanks, Bill.
> 
> I agree with you and David E., that very likely a decent oil, lime or emulsion finish on a well-tamped earthen floor is likely to provide the same benefit.
> 
> I also agree about cement.  It's a fantastic building material -- when used skillfully -- and highly problematic when not.  And it comes at very high cost:  financially to a very poor person, and ecologically to everyone.  I saw in Haiti what I fear is a bit common, that people would spend very precious cash on cement and rebar, but then use them without knowledge or guidance, effectively throwing the money away and getting the illusion of modernity, durability and seismic safety.   Bad concrete & masonry construction all over the world bakes people in summer, freezes them in winter, and kills them outright in earthquakes.  By spreading just a little of the right knowledge we can make that construction less expensive, more thermally comfortable, and safer.
> 
> Most of us on this list are painfully aware that clay-based construction is a viable, if not superior, alternative to  the many forms of cement-based building that are now widespread everywhere.  I would guess that the built environment of the past 100 years could have all of the good benefits, and maybe a few extra ones, and a lot less bad effects, if about half as much cement overall had been used -- skillfully.  As we promote earthen building as an alternative I really want to keep the science tight both to be sure, and also to not provide ammunition to the bad guys who rise up to resist our noble crusade.
> 
> Bruce "Ain't no good at bein' noble" King
> 
> bruce at bruce-king.com
> (415) 987-7271
> Twitter: @brucekinggreen
> blog: bruceking.posterous.com
> Skype: brucekingokok
> 
> On Jan 5, 2012, at 9:16 AM, Bill Steen wrote:
> 
>> Yes and no I would say.  It's talking about dirt floors that have no treatment whatsoever.  That's quite different than floors that have been sealed with oil or that have lime included.  I would assume there is no data available or studies looking at the tataki floors of Japan that have both lime and salts (magnesium chloride) included in the mix but I seriously doubt that hookworm would have been a factor.  Or the same I would think hold true for floors that have been stabilized with cement and sealed in form or another.  In short, that's my answer.
>> On a note that is indirectly related to all this, the use of cement, not that I'm against it in all respects,  in the third world countries has produced what amounts to a plague of cold in the winter/hot in the summer houses and buildings that in the overall scheme of things, have had a very negative impact.
>> 
>> 
>> Bill Steen
>> bill at caneloproject.com
>> www.caneloproject.com
>> www.caneloproject.com/blog
>> HC1 Box 324
>> Elgin, AZ85611
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 5, 2012, at 9:31 AM, Bruce King wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> Happy New Year, baleheads!
>>> 
>>> I came across the article linked below about how adding concrete over earthen floors has a measurable positive impact on occupant health--  especially children's.  Many of us think "Yuck!" at the idea of concrete instead of earthen floors, but you can't argue with the science.
>>> 
>>> Anyone have a rebuttal or additional relevant information?  At the very least, this seems like something we natural building types should take a cool-headed look at.
>>> 
>>> Paving Paradise - by Charles Kenny | Foreign Policy
>>> http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/01/03/paving_paradise
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Bruce "Cool Head Cold Feet" King
>>> 
>>> bruce at bruce-king.com
>>> (415) 987-7271
>>> Twitter: @brucekinggreen
>>> blog: bruceking.posterous.com
>>> Skype: brucekingokok
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GSBN mailing list
>>> GSBN at sustainablesources.com
>>> http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> GSBN mailing list
>> GSBN at sustainablesources.com
>> http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GSBN mailing list
> GSBN at sustainablesources.com
> http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sustainablesources.com/pipermail/gsbn/attachments/20120105/5bc4ed17/attachment.htm>