[GSBN] The EU wants 5% strawbuildings by 2020 says the Economist..

Sat Dec 21 16:55:53 UTC 2013

Good discussion. Thanks chaps! I don't know anything about rice straw or the soil structure/fertility issues involved. In the UK the organic matter in our soils is declining year on year because our wheat straw is not being returned to the land. 50 years ago straw was predominantly used as animal bedding and so carbon and nitrogen (and many other nutrients) were returned in more of a natural loop system. Agribusinesses these days prefer to buy nutrients in drums and bags  - but that does nothing for the texture of the soil and we get problems such as erosion, compaction, water logging and less worms and other beneficial soil organisms. You can't buy much straw from an organic farmer - he/she knows how important it is! Gardeners know this too - but sadly I fear many involved in agribusiness rarely get down off their huge machines and actually feel the soil (rather like mainstream builders have lost the natural connection, I suppose)

The UK Government gives huge subsidies to our electricity generators to burn straw (and timber imported from half way round the world - but that's another matter). So incensed by this madness, I did write this short article a few years back http://www.homegrownhome.co.uk/pdfs/shouldgovernmentsupportstrawburning.pdf

Season's greetings from a grey England
Carol

-----Original Message-----
From: Derek Stearns Roff <derek at unm.edu>
To: Global Straw Building Network <GSBN at sustainablesources.com>
Sent: Sat, 21 Dec 2013 9:10
Subject: Re: [GSBN] The EU wants 5% strawbuildings by 2020 says the Economist..

However, this part of the discussion reminds me of the distance between what could be and perhaps should be, and how things currently work.  It's true that almost all agriculture is pulling nutrients from the soil, and replacing them with artificial fertilizers.  Plants have been bred to minimize the waste products and maximize the salable products. So even if all stalks and roots were returned to the soil, a large amount of mass would still be removed each year.  

I'm told that two other factors militate against the return of straw to the soil.  For the same reasons that we like straw for building, it isn't particularly good as a soil builder.  It doesn't break down all that easily, and it doesn't have that many valuable nutrients.  A more severe impediment is that many farmers believe that returning plant stalks to the soil can increase the frequency of soil diseases affecting those plants.  Unless crop rotation is sufficiently diverse, tilling straw, or other plant stalks back into the soil can reduce crop yields in subsequent years.  

I read that straw is still a waste product, and that in California, storage of excess straw is a problem.  Even though finding good bales is hard, I believe that straw is still treated as a waste product across much of the west.  I would be interested in learning more about the situation in the east, and in other countries.  

Derek

On Dec 20, 2013, at 8:37 PM, Jacob Deva Racusin wrote:

I think that Carol makes a crucial point - straw is actually getting more difficult to find here, and there are a lot of competing industries both within ag and in landscaping.  Heck, there's a pretty big farm west of us that grows a straw crop specifically for horse stables (big horse racing country over there) - it's the primary crop.  Straw may be a secondary crop, but it is definitely not a waste product - and if we are considering the goal that folks in this thread have stated of dramatically increasing straw construction by adoption into the mainstream by prefab applications and other means, then we are talking about a future in which there is a lot more straw being grown for buildings (primary or secondary crop). 

By removing all that carbon from the soil and not tilling in to restore soil nutrients and tilth, we are having a net-negative impact on soil health and ecology - inherently unsustainable.  If we till back in and/or cover crop, we reduce net yield, requiring more farmland or production somehow.  There is already a growing concern in this part of the world about the competition for farmland between food and energy production (i.e. corn-based ethanol); if we add a surge in straw construction to that, coupled with reduction in yields due to diminishing soil productivity, and throw in some climate change-induced natural disasters...whoa, ok, not trying to get too down here, I honestly don't think that straw is in scarcity danger right now - far from it.  But I do believe that source is an issue we should be taking very seriously, if we are planning for the long haul - around here, the sources of our straw are not stable for the long term (I'm not even sure how much longer I can get long straws, with all the farms switching over to chop-straw combines), and there is certainly none of it going to waste.  If we truly want to scale up in production, we need to be able to ensure availability of our raw materials, and I don't feel too secure in that right now.  Of course, this involves major paradigm shift in industrial agriculture production...good thing we're all such a bunch of fired-up change-makers.  Maybe we'll be using the PAKSBAB-style bale press and go back to gathering field grasses, old-school Nebraska-style, after the revolution...

So, are farms in CA/out west still burning straw?  I thought that was banned years ago...is there really such a glut of straw out there that it's still considered waste?  Regionalism is fascinating...

Cheers,
Jacob

On 12/20/13, 8:01 PM, carolatkn at aol.com wrote:

Sorry John, but straw is ABSOLUTELY NOT a waste product - its greatest value is as a soil improver - I can't stress how important that is - even if many "modern" farmers don't seem to agree these days. Farm soils have lost so much organic matter over the last 50 years that it is very a scary situation indeed. Of course, locking up carbon in a super insulated straw wall is the second best thing - and it would be sustainable to use straw for this wonderful purpose every third year or so - in an ideal world!

best wishes
Carol Atkinson
www.strawcottage.co.uk
-----Original Message-----
From: John Swearingen <jswearingen at skillful-means.com>
To: Global Straw Building Network <GSBN at sustainablesources.com>
Sent: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 19:50
Subject: Re: [GSBN] The EU wants 5% strawbuildings by 2020 says the Economist..

Jacob's points about supporting local and sustainable business are well taken, but these are choices that we can make, with our pocketbooks, in order to bring about better communities.

That said,  I think the bottom line is that straw is a waste product. Unlike wood, it's not grown for construction, and it has limited use--for erosion control (composting) or to spread over muddy paddocks for livestock.  Extra straw, and there is a lot, would likely be burned. 

Following the very sound sustainability principle of "highest and best use",any use of bales for construction involves taking garbage and putting it to good use and that's worthy of support. When you consider that bales sequester carbon, that's an extra benefit.  

John (Trash Talk) Swearingen

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Jacob Deva Racusin <buildnatural at googlemail.com> wrote:

Valentina,

I appreciate your perspective.  This is a conversation that has come up a number of times in our courses and conversations with our colleagues - namely, the roll of agribusiness in providing feedstock for our construction.  I think 'greenwashing' may be a bit strong, when I compare to the claims of the concrete and foam industries as being 'green'.  That said, the impacts must be considered, and the benefits of using straw in regards to deep ecological and social impact should not be overstated if the source of straw is not being considered.  We have access to straw that is grown from medium- and small-scale farms, which come closer to the higher potential of working with this material.  It is very analogous to working with wood -the same framing member can come from a local sawyer practicing sustainable silviculture, or from a genetically-engineered clear-cut plantation pine shipped across the world.

>From data I've seen, even industrial straw is a fraction of the embodied carbon of other common forms of insulation, so context is relevant when evaluating materials for deep impact. You make an especially good point about the danger of introducing this material to industrial scale, and losing more of the benefits/exacerbating the liabilities in favor of snapping the technology into the mold of industrial housing/building development.  We would do well as a community not to lose sight of the importance of scale, and as you mention the relevance of the social benefits of working with straw.  At the same time, access to a much larger market and making the technology available to many more people is an arguable net gain, even if there is a sacrifice for environmental and social impact in production - again, compared to the alternatives.  I think there is room for both, and as long as we continue to engage in the debate, I have confidence that we'll continue to move the ball further down the field.

Cheers,
Jacob

-- 
Jacob Deva Racusin 
Co-Owner
New Frameworks Natural Design/Build

Author, The Natural Building Companion
Chelsea Green Press, 2012

(802) 782-7783
jacob at newframeworks.com
http://www.newframeworks.com

On 12/18/13, 12:43 PM, valentina maini wrote:

Martin, John, Caroline, and all
as Herbert Gruber recently suggested on Leonardo group,  this article maybe very well connected with the EU funded ( eco-innovation) investigation on @Modcell ....based in the UK and with BathUniversity support 

I personally got in touch with the founder of this panels in 2011 and met with professionals here in spain that are collaborating in this EU funded program of analysis and implementation of this "patent" strawbale panels....i've seen fantastic software and marketing tools they were presenting at Eco event in London 2011

>From my point of view and with very recent experiences on professional development of strawbale in Spain i think and see this article as a call for action to present the real value of strawbale and strawbale network..that goes, in my view, very much beyond the "simple" energy efficiency issue...
and i very important reminder for all that straw is not at all a really safe for the environment product...since is a byproduct of one of the most contaminated  human "fabric"...as industrial agriculture ...as very well reminds Luc Foissac in is great book on strawbale...

from my point of view...The very big risk/reality at the moment is that straw is used very much as a "simple" greenwash.....
 and even if  i really celebrate the greenwash for what it means in terms of getting rid of toxic materials...i think and personally value much more the social innovation related to strawbale... the ability of people and networks to create opportunity and solutions.... 

what is happening is just "business as usual" with a more eco-material... what the strawbale network gave me  me is much much more than simple "strawbale tech"... i learned.... thank to you all.... the value and the tools to innovate and collaborate and manage uncertainty.... and adapt and always look for the best solution for people, planet...and even profit... 

and personally i'm really convinced that the risk for environment and quality (equality) in our society is so big.....,  that is not enough anymore to "change" material... and hope that the strawbale network (that i value for itself) can make a huge step and show the world that strawbalers are bringing much more to community and economy that a "simple" prefab panel for passive house... a huge step to defend as the real value the mission and vision of all the pioneers in strawbale .... at least this is how i see you all ...

hope my english is good enough...and...my mind is getting clear on this issue just in this lasts months... so hope this comments are of some interest for you ;-)

best regards to you all, valentina

Valentina Maini
italy-spain

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. Use, disclosure, distribute, print or copy of this communication is prohibited by law. If you received this email in error please notify the sender and then delete it.

_______________________________________________
GSBN mailing list
GSBN at sustainablesources.com
http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN

-- 
John Swearingen
Skillful Means Design & Construction
2550 9th Street   Suite 209A
Berkeley, CA   94710
510.849.1800 phone
510.849.1900 fax

Web Site:  http://www.skillful-means.com
Blog:         https://skillfulmeansdesign.wordpress.com 

_______________________________________________
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

-- 
Jacob Deva Racusin 
Co-Owner
New Frameworks Natural Design/Build

Author, The Natural Building Companion
Chelsea Green Press, 2012

(802) 782-7783
jacob at newframeworks.com
http://www.newframeworks.com
_______________________________________________
GSBN mailing list
GSBN at sustainablesources.com
http://sustainablesources.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/GSBN

Derek Roff
derek at unm.edu

_______________________________________________
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/20131221/00c23bfb/attachment.htm>