rastra

consider the possibilities

The Central Ohio real estate market where I live is depressed like most other markets.  So when I suggest to local homebuilders that we consider the future when building new homes, it's usually met with some resistance.  This is understandable - it's hard to think about the future if you're fighting just to make payroll.  I get that.  But let's just take a few minutes and at least talk about what's possible even in a soft housing market if we make a collective decision to simply do the right thing.  

The fact that RASTRA is building a new plant in this community is an opportunity that if fully leveraged will position Central Ohio as the leader of green building.  Central Ohio has an opportunity like no other market in the U.S. to become the gold standard of sustainable construction.  Best of all, everyone wins - homeowners, builders, the entire community including those not even building new homes - and it doesn't cost any more than today's construction methods. 

Before we "consider the possibilities" let's review the assumptions I use to make my projections.  Based on building permits through June, Central Ohio is on pace to build over 3,200 new homes in 2008.  Let's just use 3,000 for this exercise.  Because the permit total includes multi-family units I'm going to use a conservative average savings of only 2 tons of CO2 per year to account for the smaller sized units.  The average savings is much closer to 3 tons.  Other conservative assumptions are that we continue to build at this low pace of 3,000 new homes per year for the next 30 years and that energy prices don't increase at all over 30 years. 

First, let's discuss how RASTRA would reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.  If the exterior walls of 3,000 new homes were built exclusively with RASTRA in place of wood frame construction, 6,000 fewer tons of CO2 would be emitted into our atmosphere each year because it takes less energy to heat & cool the home.  Over the life of the 30-year mortgage these same 3,000 homes would reduce total CO2 emissions by 180,000 tons.  If we continue to build 3,000 homes per year, after 30 years 90,000 Central Ohio homes will be emitting 180,000 fewer tons of CO2 each and every year.  To put this in perspective, this improvement would be equivalent to removing 32,579 cars from the road. 

Over this 30 year graduated build up of homes, the collective reduction in CO2 emissions would exceed 2,790,000 tons!  Homeowners would not have to change anything about their lifestyle to make this kind of improvement - it's completely passive and they save money doing it.

Now lets see what kind of impact we could make on our local economy if we use a very conservative energy savings of only $50 per month.

At the same rate of only 3,000 new homes per year, these 3,000 homeowners would save $1.8 million per year.  Over 30 years these same 3,000 homeowners living in RASTRA built homes would save a total of $54 million.  If 3,000 new homes are added each year over 30 years, the collective savings over this period represents $837 million that would be returned to the local economy.

It's worth repeating that these savings represent only $50 per month and assumes energy prices don't increase over 30-years which is wildly conservative.  It's logical to believe that increases in energy costs over 30 years will inflate this total savings to over $1 billion in energy savings alone.

Savings in other areas such as reduced maintenance expense, lower insurance premiums and even lower interest rates could potentially eclipse the savings in energy costs.  Homeowners would also enjoy other benefits of living in a RASTRA home including a stronger, safer, quieter and healthier home.

Builders stand to gain even more than homeowners by contributing to a healthier economy.  And by building more energy-efficient homes, new homebuyers are less likely to downsize their homes to offset high energy costs helping keep the building industry strong.  Lenders are more willing to approve potential buyers when they know that energy costs are being managed.  This increases the pool of potential buyers.

This is within our reach.  All it takes is the collective will to do the right thing.  Central Ohio is in the unique position of having a RASTRA plant right here in Columbus.  This allows builders to contribute to reducing our own waste stream, create new manufacturing jobs and enjoy access to a high performance building system without freight expense.  A RASTRA wall system is suitable for any style architecture and any price point.  The only barrier is the willingness to embrace change.

Thanks for visiting.

mike warren

the price question

Whenever I’m ‘pitching’ RASTRA it usually takes about 2 minutes before someone asks “the price question”. So let’s just get it out of the way. A wall built from RASTRA can cost slightly more upfront than a wood frame wall. How much more, or how much less, depends on your project. Now don’t be discouraged, there’s good news if you stay with me.

Unfortunately people often make buying decisions based solely on what something costs without a clear understanding of what it costs to own. RASTRA may – again I said may - cost slightly more upfront than a wood frame wall, but it provides a much lower cost-of-ownership. Regardless of whether RASTRA costs slightly more or slightly less than a wood frame wall, I believe a RASTRA wall system is the best financial decision you can make when building a home or office. 

So for this exercise let’s just assume that building with RASTRA does add cost to your project.

First, while RASTRA may cost slightly more upfront, it reduces construction costs in other areas such as downsizing your HVAC unit; and eliminates materials like insulation, vapor barrier, membrane and wire mesh on stucco applications. You can also expect to save on labor costs and realize tax savings. So when you combine these savings to the additional cost, an upgraded RASTRA wall is pretty close in price to a wood frame wall.  But let's take a look at an example of what it may cost per month to upgrade to RASTRA.

If we assume your $250,000 project costs 2% more with RASTRA, the new purchase price becomes $255,000. This difference in price represents $31 per month pre-tax on a 6.5% fixed 30-year mortgage. Depending on where you live, lower insurance premiums alone resulting from resistance to fire, tornados, earthquakes and hurricanes could more than make up this difference.  Some lenders now even offer better interest rates for energy-efficient homes that can offset this small increase.

Now let's assume that building with RASTRA lowers your utility bill by only $65 per month.  Right away your $65 savings per month more than offsets the $31 increase in mortgage expense.  But lets see what this savings means over time. Saving $65 a month means its going to take roughly 6½ years to save enough to offset the $5,000 increase in price for the upgraded wall - but remember, its costing you $24 less per month. Once you've saved enough to pay for the upgrade, you still have 23½ years left on your 30-year mortgage. 

Over the next 23½ years, if you only save the same $65 a month, that represents additional savings of $18,330 – and that’s assuming energy prices don’t increase. If we assume energy prices only increase 3% each year over 23+ years, your savings will exceed $25,000.  Add this savings in energy costs to lower maintenance costs and lower insurance premiums over 30 years, along with a higher resale value when you sell, and your original $5,000 upgrade turns out to be a great investment.

You don’t have to live in Minnesota to realize these savings. One RASTRA homeowner from Arizona informed us that his A/C cost in July was only $20! So it’s very possible that by upgrading to RASTRA you will experience positive cash flow from the first month you own your home. And the more energy prices increase, the more savings you will realize. While you can get a fixed rate loan to cap your mortgage payment, energy costs are likely to increase. RASTRA protects you from these higher energy costs by up to 50%.

Other than being cheap, wood frame walls are hard to justify. Wood rots, it burns, attracts termites, promotes mold, shrinks and warps which cracks your stucco, and by cutting down trees we reduce the earth’s ability to absorb carbon dioxide. RASTRA eliminates these problems and as a result, RASTRA reduces maintenance costs. Even your HVAC system lasts longer because it doesn’t work nearly as hard or as often.

Now let’s talk about resale value and appreciation. Two identical homes were built in the same neighborhood, one with traditional wood frame walls and the other using RASTRA and both are for sale. If you're like most buyers you'll be more attracted to the concrete home that’s safer, less expensive to heat & cool, costs less to insure, quieter, resists termites, provides cleaner indoor air quality and has lower maintenance costs. A survey by The Shelton Group found that 85.4% of homeowners surveyed said they would chose one home over another based on energy savings. So its logical to expect a RASTRA home to sell faster and at a premium.

To support the suggestion that energy-efficient homes have higher resale values, a study by the National Association of Realtors concluded that home values increase about $20 for every $1 in annual energy savings.  Based on our same $65/month savings example, that represents nearly $21,000 in 10 years and $38,000 in 30 years in increased value if energy prices only increase 3% each year.

If the first year's $65 monthly energy savings, compounded at 3% over the life of a 30-year mortgage, is added to the increased value of the home, you will realize nearly $74,000 in additional value.

Another consideration is the potential challenge of reselling your less energy-efficient wood frame home and competing against new energy-efficient homes. Buyers will recognize they can purchase a new and larger home for the same or even less monthly cash outlay. Building the most energy-efficient home possible today improves your competitive position when it’s time to sell. Once emission restrictions are placed on new construction, homes built before restrictions were put in-place will be labeled as less-efficient and could be less appealing to homebuyers on the resale market, unless the home was built beyond present day standards.  Building with RASTRA means you will exceed these standards.

Real estate is like any other investment, and for many of us its the single biggest investment we will ever make.  Building with RASTRA provides the best opportunity for a maximized return-on-investment.

Thanks for visiting.

mike warren

remember when litter was big?

Remember when being "earth-friendly" was all about litter?  Don't get me wrong, I hate litter and don't  know how people can just throw trash from their car, but when it comes to being earth-friendly the bar has been raised.  Keep America Beautiful has been replaced with Stop Global Warming.

As a cause, litter does have one big advantage over other environmental causes - its visible.  We see litter along the roadside and it reminds us we have a litter problem.  Signs along the highway read Please Don't Litter or $250 Fine For Littering.  Melting glaciers or declining air quality aren't nearly as visible.

Out of sight, out of mind - isn't that the saying?  This old saying certainly relates to today's environmental challenges.  How many of us have actually seen where a forest once stood that was cleared to build houses?  When I see lumber ads why don't they ever show me the land that was cleared to produce 2x4s?  Probably not the best visual image to promote their product I'll grant you that, but I'm guessing its also not something their proud of.  We become upset when a few trees are cleared to make way for a new subdivision but don't give much thought about the 2.3 acres cleared to produce lumber to build each house.

So the question I have is simple.  Is this the best we can do in 2008?  With all of the technology and building science available today, is clearing old growth trees is still our best option?  The answer is no.  There are newer products readily available that outperform wood in every important category including price, but we continue building with wood.  Why?

There's another old saying - the 8 most expensive words in business today are "because we have always done it this way" and I think the same saying can be applied to our environment.  Unless we stop following in the footsteps of those before us, and start to make better decisions in the materials we use, future generations will be left to clean up the mess we made of this planet.

What's even more confusing, at least to me, is that we're willing to harvest trees that represent our most effective way to absorb literally tons of CO2 from the atmosphere for lumber. Lumber that that frankly doesn't even perform all that well as a building material.  It burns, rots, warps, attracts insects, decomposes, promotes mold and is a lousy insulator.  What's the big attraction?  Man do I miss litter.

Thanks for visiting.

mike warren

why R-values are misleading

The most commonly used insulation, fiberglass, does not stop air leaks.  This isn't our opinion, it's the opinion of The U.S. Department of Energy.  The DOE goes on to say that to promote a wood frame walls's R-value as that of the fiberglass insulation used and to not account for thermal shorts is "misleading".  

Before we discuss how RASTRA eliminates this problem, let’s first discuss how R-values of a wood frame wall are presently calculated.

The advertised R-value of a wood frame wall is almost always promoted as the R-value of the insulation used. If you installed R-15 insulation, you have an R-15 wall. That’s it – that’s all there is to it.  It makes the rating process easy, but unfortunately this method of rating is meaningless. It’s safe to say that your wall will never come close to the full rating of your fiberglass insulation for several reasons. Let me explain.

First, let’s talk about the insulation itself. The assigned R-value of fiberglass insulation is calculated from the middle of the 15" wide face and measured in perfect conditions. In other words, there's no compression in the insulation and absolutely no wind. The R-value assigned represents ‘best case scenario’ and again represents only the insulation. But it really doesn’t matter what the R-value of any one component of the wall is - the only meaningful rating is the performance of the entire finished wall.

Its also a little known fact that fiberglass insulation loses as much as 40% of its insulating capacity when outside temperatures fall below 20˚F.  When this happens, an R-19 fiberglass insulated wall performs as if it were only R-9.  LEED confirms through a Canadian cold weather study that fiberglass loses half its R-value below 0˚F.  When you need it the most fiberglass insulation cannot properly insulate.

Fiberglass also performs poorly in the presence of humidity within a wall cavity higher than just 30%.  In winter this leads to condensation of moisture carried in by warm air through leaks in the wall.  This raises humidity levels inside the building.

Once fiberglass insulation becomes damp its performance decreases dramatically.  In fact, it only takes a 1.5% increase in moisture content in fiberglass to reduce its R-value by up to 50%.  When moisture is trapped in a conventionally-built wall cavity insulated with fiberglass and sealed with a vapor barrier, insulation becomes damp and loses its ability to insulate.  This also promotes mold growth and leads to structural damage.

One reason fiberglass is such a poor performer is that for fiberglass insulation to be effective it must be completely enclosed on all six sides without gaps or air pockets.  The material must be installed to be in continuous contact with its surrounding surfaces with no pockets of air left between the framing materials and the fiberglass.  This is virtually impossible to accomplish on a job site.

Another problem with fiberglass is that for it to work it must be fully expanded to allow air pockets to perform.  If it’s stuffed into an opening or compressed by electrical and plumbing lines it simply doesn’t work.  If you have electrical outlets on an exterior wall it’s a safe bet that there’s no insulation between the inside and outside of the wall where these outlets are placed.  You simply can’t install a 3” deep outlet box in a 3½“deep wall cavity and insulate properly.

Wood frame walls are typically built with 2x4s and fiberglass insulation. Pieces of fiberglass are cut to fit around cross members or electrical outlets and stuffed into awkward corners. Cavities are often filled with several smaller pieces that form butt splices. The quality of the installation varies which means the effectiveness of the insulation also varies from project to project.

Houses are also becoming progressively larger and their architecture is becoming progressively more complex. As a result, the amount of wood framing is increasing. A recent study by the California Energy Commission determined that 27% of an average residential wood frame wall's surface area is now represented by solid wood used for framing. Let me explain why that's an important statistic.

The 2x4 studs used to construct walls have an R-value of about 1 per inch or R-3.5. So you can’t claim the entire wall to be R-15 because everywhere there's a stud, header or cross brace, the wall is only rated 3.5. On a typical wall, framing lumber makes up 27% of the entire wall surface, so 27% of the average wall is rated R-3.5 regardless of the R-value of the insulation. This means the R-value for a 2x4 wall insulated with R-15 fiberglass performs well below the advertised R-value.

But there is another – even bigger – problem with wood frame walls. Every time the fiberglass meets a stud, a ‘thermal break’ is formed. This break, or gap, allows air to pass. If you have an 8’ x 40’ wall with studs every 16” on center, you’ll have over 610 linear feet of thermal break when you include cross members plus the 25% of the wall that's rated R-3.5. Your insulation can be rated R-90 and you’ll still have 610’ of thermal break that allows air to pass. I don’t care how well your insulation is installed, air will pass. Don’t believe me? Take a knife and slip it between the fiberglass insulation and the stud. If you can do this, how hard is it for air to pass through this same space? One industry study concluded that when you add up this type of thermal break for an averaged sized house, it’s “like leaving a window fully open all year around”. If you need a visible example of how poorly your wood frame wall stops air leaks, hold a lit match against an electrical outlet on a windy day. Testing labs have concluded that 20 mph winds can "easily double the volume of air infiltration".  Even if you use an expanding foam insulation product between studs, 27% of the wall is still uninsulated.

Tests have shown that a typical 2,400 square foot wood frame structure with 8' ceilings has so much air infiltration that the entire volume of air inside turns over once every 2 hours! This is air you pay to heat and cool. The same air inside the RASTRA building only turns over once every 26 hours.

Now I’m assuming you wouldn’t buy a boat that leaked water, so why build a house that leaks air?  It doesn’t matter how well the wood slats that form the hull hold back water if water passes between them.

By now I’m sure you get the picture, but there are other factors that make fiberglass insulation even less effective. For fiberglass to achieve its full rating it has to be fully expanded. In other words, if it’s meant to be 3½“ thick but compressed by electrical or plumbing lines, it loses about 50% of its rating.  It's virtually impossible to install a 3" deep outlet box in a 3½“ wall cavity without compressing the insulation or having no insulation at all - it can't be done.

Some will suggest that all of the potential air leaks be caulked with a sealant before closing up the wall.  But as wood shrinks or warps as all wood does, or as the caulk deteriorates, these seals are broken.  So as the wall ages its thermal performance also deteriorates.  As energy prices are rising the thermal performance of a wood frame wall is deteriorating.  Not a good plan.

Now that you understand the problems with fiberglass insulation, the million dollar question is “how does RASTRA solve this problem?” To begin, we don’t use studs so we eliminate thermal breaks. Panels are designed so that seams line up with the center of the 6” concrete core so there is no air infiltration. Secondly, our walls are 10”, 12” or 14” thick and made of concrete and 85% highly insulative Styrofoam. That’s a pretty fair layer of insulation.

Mass Wall manufacturers like RASTRA use a whole wall rating system called "Effective" Whole Wall R-value. Whole Wall R-value includes the thermal performance of not only the insulation, but also includes all of the framing connections that make up a typical wall.  By the way, RASTRA didn’t create this rating system; it was created by The U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory, managed by UT/Battelle.

So why don’t fiberglass manufacturers practice a “whole wall” rating method? One, because they only control one component of the finished wall. Two, how well the insulation is installed has a lot to do with the effectiveness of their product, which is again something they don't control. But most importantly, it’s simply not in their best interest since their product is the highest rated component of the wall. In fact, it’s safe to say that if the entire wood frame & fiberglass wall was rated as a whole wall, the rating would be less than half of the insulation’s rated R-value.

I hope this provides some insight into why we use a different rating system. It's not our intention to confuse the subject, it's to provide a meaningful rating system that finally measures the entire wall.

Thanks for visiting.

mike warren

hello columbus

Well here I go - my first step into the world of blogging. I spend most of my day trying to talk people in to stepping outside their comfort zone to try a better wall system, so I guess it doesn't hurt for me to taste some of my own medicine.

Over the past few months so many people have expressed interest on the progress of the new Columbus plant, I thought a blog might be the best way to keep everyone informed. The only problem is that I know nothing about blogs. I expect that just like working with a new building material, my first attempt may take a little longer than I'd like, but eventually my comfort level will increase and before you know it I'll be blogging like a champ.

After a few short delays the much anticipated Columbus facility is starting to take shape. Walls are going up and equipment is about ready to ship. Rodger Cooper our Plant Manager is busy interviewing candidates and setting up his waste stream for recycled polystyrene.

Once the plant is operational, our team will be training on the new equipment and honing their skills so capacity will be somewhat limited for awhile. We will make every attempt to satisfy everyone's schedules but orders will be filled on a first-come first-served basis. Once fully operational Columbus will be the most automated and productive plant in our entire network.

Since I began with RASTRA in February I have talked with hundreds of people who have explored different wall systems and it's really amazing how many on this side of the country have timed your projects to take advantage of the Columbus plant opening. I thank you for that!

One of the conversations that stands out was with Charles Hull of Oregon. Mr. Hull and his wife are building their retirement home off the coast of North Carolina and during our discussion Mr. Hull made an observation that I wish I could take credit for. Mr. Hull, who has extensively researched wall systems, stated that his motivation to use RASTRA was to build the safest, most energy-efficient home possible - not just for the cost savings over the next 10 years - but because he recognizes that new homes built 10 years from now when its time to resell, will all be more energy-efficient. In 10 years home buyers will compare the cost-of-ownership of his home to the improved homes being offered by builders. If the Hull's choose to save 1-2% now and not build the most energy-efficient home, buyers will recognize that they can buy a larger more energy-efficient home and pay out the same per month. He's absolutely right! Saving 1-2% today could be an expensive decision if the house doesn't fully appreciate or sits too long on the market. I wish I had said that.

Thanks for visiting.

mike warren

how green is rastra anyway?

During a recent presentation someone asked me "how green is RASTRA"? I wasn't really sure how to answer the question - I mean how do we measure how green a product is - but it did make me think.

Most people see RASTRA as environmentally-friendly because we divert plastic waste from landfills - alot of waste. For an average sized 2,400 s.f. house we divert about 3,100 cubic feet of styrofoam that would never decompose in a landfill. That's pretty good. But RASTRA's biggest contribution to the environment is reducing the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere - both by reducing energy consumption and saving trees. You see, a 2,400 s.f. house requires 2.3 acres of forest to build, and as we all learned in the 6th grade, trees absorb CO2. If left to grow, these same trees would absorb 11,818 lbs of CO2 per year. So when you add this total to the amount we save in reduced energy consumption, a 2,400 s.f. RASTRA home positively contributes by 8-10 tons each and every year! That's 240-300 tons over the life of a 30-year mortgage and alot more over the life of the home itself. Now I don't know how to rank that level of performance on any 'green scale', but this is a pretty big deal in my mind.

I'm starting to sound like an infomercial - "but wait, that's not all".

Because RASTRA eliminates wood rot and has a much longer service life, it reduces landfill waste. New construction waste is also reduced. And for those living near one of our manufacturing plants, we don't use alot of fossil fuel to ship the materials. Lastly - and this is it - we only use less than 2kWh to produce one panel.

For those who include indoor air quality in your green criteria, RASTRA does not promote mold growth, allows HVAC systems to more effectively remove irritants from the air we breathe, and eliminates wood preservatives and pesticides.

I can't quite remember how well I answered the question "how green is RASTRA" during my original presentation, but I think a safe answer would be "as green as it gets".

Thanks for visiting.

mike warren