Author Archive

Humanure: Goodbye, Toilets. Hello, Extreme Composting

December 12th, 2009 by brinker
(From Time Magazine)
By Adam Fisher Friday, Dec. 04, 2009

David Bailey helped install a composting toilet in Austin. Sawdust is used to eliminate odor.

For more than a decade, 57-year-old roofer and writer Joseph Jenkins has been advocating that we flush our toilets down the drain and put a bucket in the bathroom instead. When a bucket in one of his five bathrooms is full, he empties it in the compost pile in his backyard in rural Pennsylvania. Eventually he takes the resulting soil and spreads it over his vegetable garden as fertilizer.

“It’s an alternative sanitation system,” says Jenkins, “where there is no waste.” His 255-page Humanure Handbook: A Guide to Composting Human Manure is in its third edition and has been translated into five languages, but it has only recently begun to catch on. His message? Human manure, when properly managed, is odorless. His audience? Ecologically committed city dwellers who are looking to do more for the earth than just sort their trash or ride a bike to work. (See reusable toilet wipes as one of the top 10 odd environmental ideas.)

“It’s one of those life-changing books,” says Erik Knutzen, 44, an eco-blogger in Los Angeles. “You read it, and the lightbulb just goes on.” Now he eschews his porcelain potty for a big bucket with a toilet seat. He “flushes” by tossing in a scoop of sawdust, which not only neutralizes smells but also helps speed the breakdown of material for compost. Like many back-to-basics sophisticates, he believes Jenkins’ humanure system is more sanitary and more rational than the conventional alternative. “Human waste is a perfectly good source of an important resource, nitrogen,” Knutzen observes. “Water is a valuable resource too. Why mix the two and turn all of it into a problem?”

Wastewater treatment is much more energy-intensive than composting, which needs little more than time (about a year) for complete decomposition and pathogen elimination. In Austin, Texas, a sustainably minded nonprofit called the Rhizome Collective succeeded this year in getting the city to approve what may be the first legal composting toilet in the U.S. “The hypocrisy is amazing,” says Lauren Ross, 54, a civil engineer involved in Rhizome’s four-year battle to get a permit. “The city will buy you a low-flow toilet, but they’ll fight you all the way if you want to build one that uses no water at all.”

It’s an idea that you, dear reader, might be asked to take seriously. Not long ago, Nance Klehm, 44, a self-described radical ecologist in Chicago, invited her neighbors to stop using their toilets and start saving their poop. More than half of them — 22 of the 35 households — accepted her proposal. In three months she picked up 1,500 gal. (5,700 L) of excrement, which she’ll give back to participants this spring after she and Mother Nature have transformed it into a rich bag of fertilizer. “I’ve sent a sample in for a coliform test,” Klehm says. “There is zero detectable fecal bacteria.” (Read a brief history of toilets.)

At one point, Klehm invited her “nutrient loopers” to a potluck and was surprised to see who had agreed to participate. “It was the white collar people, not the ragtag anarchists. Mostly, they were delighted that they got this wacky proposal,” she says. “They didn’t know how to connect with the earth, but they could s___ in a bucket.”

Meanwhile, over in California, the Marin Composting Portable Odorless Outhouse Project, a.k.a. MCPOOP, is doing Klehm one better. The goal of MCPOOP (which is pronounced the Irish way as opposed to the rap-star way) is to get the government into the night-soil business and put humanure toilets in county parks and town squares. The group is less than a month old but already has the support of the local environmental establishment and Marin County supervisor Steve Kinsey. “The whole thing is like a good acid flashback,” says Kinsey. “We approved several experimental permits like this in the ’70s.” He estimates that a small-scale municipal demonstration project could be under way in less than a year. (Read “Is It Time to Kill Off the Flush Toilet?”)

MCPOOP was founded by a couple in their 50s. “We’re on a mission to re–potty train America!” says John Wick, a rancher in the western part of the county. “We’re going to start by replacing those nasty blue loos,” says his wife Peggy Rathmann, referring to two chemical toilets on their town’s main square. If that goes over well, they’ll replace the chemical toilets around Tomales Bay that kayakers often use. And then, who knows? Wick and Rathmann don’t see why every home in Marin County shouldn’t be humanure equipped.

To Joe (Mr. Humanure) Jenkins, nothing could be better news. “On a small scale, my system works like a dream,” he says. “But in order to do more research and development, I need to to collect humanure on a larger scale.”

MCPOOP and other projects are eager to help on the supply side. “We’re going to have plenty,” predicts Rathmann. “Tons of tourists come to West Marin, and they all leave us their poop!”

This is an expanded version of an article that originally appeared in the Dec. 14, 2009, issue of TIME

  • Share/Bookmark

Permaculture in a Nut Shell

December 12th, 2009 by brinker

Permaculture in a Nutshell

  • Share/Bookmark

Greening the Desert

December 12th, 2009 by brinker

Greening the Desert II: Greening the Middle East from Craig Mackintosh on Vimeo.

  • Share/Bookmark

Local Wood Products

May 18th, 2009 by brinker

RUSTIC EDGE

http://www.rusticedgefurnishings.com

About

The start of  the design process

This is where our design process begins!

Our work has always taken a top down approach. From our more rustic days till now, we have always thought it important to know where your materials come from. The finished piece is more real when there is no disconnect between the cutting down of a tree and the application of the last coat of oil. Having control of every step of the process not only gives us unique design capabilities but it is almost virtually wasteless. Trees, which would normally see a quick ride through the mulcher, get whittled down in a way that allows them to recognize something more meaningful.

  • Share/Bookmark

Reuse Warehouse

May 18th, 2009 by brinker

Reuse Warehouse Now Open

Reuse Warehouse

StormCenter Communications, Inc.
Ellicott City, MD

Article Courtesy of:
Sandra Jackson
Assistant Public Information Officer
City of Houston Solid Waste Management Department

REUSE WAREHOUSE NOW OPEN

The City of Houston’s newest recycling jewel, The Building Materials Reuse Warehouse, is a little rough around the edges now but there are big plans ahead. To polish this gem, project organizers from the Mayor’s Office of Environmental Programming, the Solid Waste Management Department, Public Works, Health Department and the Police Department are working together on an ambitious agenda. Their goal is to provide a one-stop recycling shop. The site will be used for storing and distributing building materials, a neighborhood depository, a recycling drop-off center and office space. It’s worth noting that the project itself is an example of reuse; the facility lay vacant for five years before being repurposed for this project.

Reuse Warehouse

The Reuse Warehouse
Photo Credit: Danny Hinojosa

The driving force behind this project is Sarah Mason, an environmental analyst with Mayor White’s Office. When tasked to think of new recycling programs, Ms. Mason looked around for inspiration. That’s when she heard about Dan Phillips and the Phoenix Commotion, a recycling project run in conjunction with the City of Huntsville that allows building contractors to drop off excess materials at a storage site for other people’s use, including the building of affordable housing.

Sarah Mason
Photo Credit: Danny Hinojosa

She took Mr. Phillips’ basic idea and modified it to fit Houston’s needs. Contractors can drop-off excess materials at the Reuse Warehouse which benefits them in three ways: 1) eliminates landfill fees, 2) provides a tax deductible donation, and 3) provides LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification points. Citizens can also make donations. The warehouse allows non-profit organizations to take the donated materials for their use. This provides a direct benefit to the city in reduced landfill consumption. The warehouse is equipped with scales to measure donations for LEED scoring and to track the amount of material diverted from landfills.

Long-term plans include finishing the office space and cleaning a second warehouse to host do-it-yourself classes. Although the materials donated are building materials, the hope is that some non-profits, especially the ones that work with children, will take these materials and reuse them as birdhouses, dog houses or other such crafts.

mason

The Warehouse with Donated Lumber
Photo Credit: Danny Hinojosa

The Reuse Warehouse opened on April 29, 2009, mostly to get inventory before the grand opening scheduled for June. To make a donation call Project Manager, Jonathan Lohn at 281-814-3324. Items accepted include cabinets, fans, sinks, showers, windows, concrete blocks, pavers, copper, doors, windows, flooring material, glass and gutters. For a complete list and additional information, visit www.greenhoustontx.gov/reuse.html

Site Supported By: Information Provided By: Site Presented By:
Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB) Environmental Protection Agency Galveston Bay Estuary Program Houston-Galveston Area Council (HGAC) Information Provided By StormCenter Communications, Inc.

  • Share/Bookmark

Missed Opportunities in Structural Sustainability

April 16th, 2009 by brinker

April, 2009
Structural Sustainability – discussions of sustainability and preservation as they pertain to structural engineering
Missed Opportunities in Structural Sustainability
Ben Hays, P.E., S.E., LEED A.P. and David Cocke, S.E.

Many structural engineers view the sustainable building movement as affording them little opportunity. Additionally, the predominant metric for measuring sustainable buildings, the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system, offers few points for specifically structural solutions. To date, engineers following the LEED scorecard can recommend fly ash in concrete, recycled materials in steel, and sustainably harvested FSC wood. Beyond that, however, most engineers agree in principle with the comments of a LEED consultant in a recent meeting the authors attended: “As structural engineers, you guys can’t do much for sustainability.” This article argues otherwise, looking at the growing link between the reuse of buildings and sustainability and the role structural engineers can play in this type of design.

In 1987, the Bruntland Commission issued a report to the United Nations that included what has become the most widely accepted definition of sustainability as: “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”[1]. Since that time, most discussion about sustainability has included three aspects: environmental, economic, and social sustainability [2]. The common approach to sustainability from structural engineers (where there has been any approach at all) has focused almost exclusively on the environmental elements, in particular specifying reusable or renewable materials. There is a great need for broader thinking about sustainability from the structural engineering community. As engineers, we can significantly expand our impact on environmental sustainability, as well as contribute to economic and social sustainability, with only minor shifts in our thinking and practice. To do this, we must first understand the concept of embodied energy as well as become more willing to work with existing buildings.
Embodied Energy and Existing Buildings

When a building is constructed, significant amounts of energy are consumed in extracting, processing, and assembling raw materials into the finished product. Studies suggest that a building’s embodied energy ranges anywhere from 15 to 20 percent of its total life cycle energy use [2]. This reality lends credence to Carl Elefante’s adage: “the greenest building is one that is already built”[3]. If a structure is demolished at or before the end of a building’s 50-year service life, all of its embodied energy is wasted. This energy waste is in addition to the physical waste created, as well as the energy required in transporting the physical waste to a landfill. Another increasingly selected option exists for the design team, namely adaptively reusing the building.

Recent projects serves as an example of how reusing buildings makes sustainable sense. The authors completed an adaptive reuse of a 1950s, 2-story concrete warehouse (Figure 1). The building is not on the national or local historic registers and the owner could easily have chosen to demolish it and erected a new, similar sized building in its place. Instead, it was decided to retrofit and reuse the building, though not necessarily for sustainable reasons. Using an online calculator, the embodied energy in the 50,000 SF building is 56,500,000 million BTUs [4]. In addition, the energy required to demolish the building would be 775,000 MBTUs, a small percentage of the embodied energy. Finally, by not demolishing the building, an equivalent amount of energy saved by not having to construct a new building, another 56,500,000 MBTU. While any number of comparisons could be made for this quantity of energy, the total energy represented in the sum embodied energy+demolition+new construction is roughly equivalent to 1,000,000 gallons of gasoline. Ironically, a new energy efficient building would take longer than 50 years for its own efficiencies to equal, and thereby pay back, this same amount of energy.
Figure 1: Reuse versus demo: embodied energy calculations.

The numbers related to a building’s embodied energy present a compelling case for expanding our impact on environmental sustainability beyond specifying materials. The concept of embodied energy does not require a cognitive leap of faith. The challenge for engineers is what Patrice Frey quotes as: “shifting the presumption on stewardship of built heritage to favor reuse” rather than demolition [2]. Many engineers, whether through training or experience, do not like working with existing buildings. This is even more the case in California, where “seismic concerns” regularly trump desires to keep otherwise well-performing buildings. If we want to have an impact on sustainability, we must change this prevailing belief within our profession and be more vocal about our efforts in our industry.
Opportunities for Structural Sustainability

The opportunity presented to engineers at the intersection of reusing buildings and sustainability is significant. The Brookings Institute estimates that, by 2030, the United States will replace 82 billion square feet of its current building stock [6]. Our willingness to work with, rather than preemptively condemn many of these buildings, will go a long way toward contributing to sustainability. Architects, developers, and building owners look to engineers to provide honest recommendations regarding the potential of existing structures. Firms that become experts in working with, rather than avoiding, existing buildings will gain a competitive edge as market conditions and sustainable concerns increasingly favor building reuse.

One might look at the idea of reusing buildings and embodied energy and think that we are merely expanding our impact on environmental sustainability alone. While on the surface this is true, reusing existing buildings also promotes the economic and social aspects of sustainability. According to a report by the Brookings Institute, the decision to reinvest rather than tear down or abandon a building “presents convincing evidence that ‘preservation pays’ when viewed in economic terms.” This payment comes in the form of driving economic growth, job creation, friendliness to small businesses, and promoting high wage jobs. All of these are forms of sustainable economic development when viewed long term. Additionally, reusing existing buildings adds to social sustainability by protecting social diversity and maintaining our sense of place in our increasingly globalized world. Patrice Frey expands greatly on how existing buildings promote social and economic sustainability, and the reader would be well served to read her paper [2].
Conclusions

In closing, we return to the question of how LEED recognizes the contributions of the structural engineer to sustainability. At present, LEED primarily credits environmental sustainability in the form of material specification; recycled content in concrete and steel, and sustainably harvested wood. In its current form, LEED awards the same number of credits for reusing 75% of the building’s walls, floors, and roof as it does for specifying bike racks and showers for 5% of a building’s occupants. At present, it does not address the idea of embodied energy directly and does not take into account the cultural heritage associated with preserving buildings. LEED 2009, which launched in March of this year, gives much greater credit than its predecessor to metrics such as Community Connectivity and Alternative Transportation, both of which favor existing buildings. In addition, there is now an Alternative Compliance Path that specifically recognizes an existing building’s embodied energy. Lastly, a Sustainable Preservation Coalition has been formed to incorporate preservation, social, and cultural values into LEED, though probably not until its next release in 2011 [5].

Admittedly, the choice to reuse existing buildings does not rest solely in the hands of structural engineers though our opinion often becomes the deal-breaker. We must partner with owners, architects, and developers in order to maintain our built heritage. Engineers have a more extensive role to play than merely specifying sustainable materials. If understood and promoted properly, the intersection of sustainability and reusing buildings affords structural engineers a great opportunity for professional development, marketing, and occasion to contribute to a greener future.▪
Ben Hays, P.E., S.E., LEED A.P. is a Design Engineer with Structural Focus, a Structural Engineering firm in Los Angeles. He can be reached at bhays@structuralfocus.com.
David Cocke, S.E. is owner and principal of Structural Focus. David currently sits as the SEAOC-appointed Alternate member of the California Historical Building Safety Board. He can be reached at dcocke@structuralfocus.com.
References

[1] Brundtland, Gro Harlem and World Commission on Environment and Development. [1987]. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: “Our Common Future.”

[2] Frey, Patrice. [2007]. Making the Case: Historic Preservation as Sustainable Development. (www.preservationnation.org/issues/sustainability/additional-resources/DiscussionDraft_10_15.pdf, accessed 1/16/09)

[3] Elefante, Carl. [2007]. The Greenest Building Is…One That Is Already Built. Forum Journal. Vol 21, No 4.

[4] www.TheGreenestBuilding.org

[5] Campagna, Barbara. [2009]. How Changes to LEED™ Will Benefit Existing and Historic Buildings. (www.aia.org/hrc_a_200812_campagna, accessed 1/16/09)

[6] Nelson, A.C. (2004) Toward a New Metropolis: The Opportunity to Rebuild America. Brookings Institute. (http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2004/12metropolitanpolicy_nelson.aspx)

  • Share/Bookmark

Homegrown Revolution

March 9th, 2009 by brinker
  • Share/Bookmark

You think our houses are expensive check out these little ones

December 2nd, 2008 by brinker

http://www.tumbleweedhouses.com/houses/xs-house/

We should build a small portable Nauhaus and then I’ll live in it and we can take it on the road whereever as a demo…what do you think?

  • Share/Bookmark