-- Scotts Contracting - StLouis Renewable Energy

Search This Blog

10.21.2010

Plastic Recycling News

The Recycling Myth*


Collecting plastics at curbside fosters the belief that, like aluminum and glass, these will be converted into new similar objects. From one glass bottle we can make another glass bottle of similar quality, in an economic manner.  However this is not the case with plastic.

The best we can hope for
plastics is that these will be turned into other products such as doormats, textiles, plastic lumber, etc.. These products will still end at some point in the landfill – and do NOT stem the need for more virgin petroleum product.  

This is NOT recycling, but down-cycling.


But not even this down-cycling is happening.


For instance, in the US 93% of plastics are NOT recovered (put in plastic"recycling" bins). These go straight to landfills. PET bottles that have a
redemption value (cash value) fare a bit better: 62% are NOT recovered.  (EPA
data 2008 <http://www.epa.gov/wastes/conserve/materials/plastics.htm>)


How big is the problem?  How much waste is generated by single use plastics?  Artist Chris Jordan offers the following visualizations.

Imagine 8 football fields http://www.flickr.com/photos/covered
thickly with plastic bottles: this is  the equivalent to the number of plastic beverage bottles discarded in the US every five minutes (data: 2009)


Now imagine a line of plastic bottles going around the planet five times. This would be equivalent to the number of plastic bottles discarded every
week in the US..

just for waterhttp://www.storyofstuff.org/bottledwater.php
(data 2009)


Now imagine the waste created by all types of single use plastics put together,  by all the countries in the world

(the US is only 5% of the
worlds population)…

This includes plastic bottles, plastic bags, plastic
utensils, cups, containers and more.


It is hard to imagine…  We simply need to stop this insane stream of non-recyclable, non-biodegradable, toxic waste.


In most parts of the world people struggle to build basic infrastructures



--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com/

10.20.2010

Re: Join us this Saturday for the ECORIDE at the Riverfront Trail!



On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 2:22 PM, U.S. Green Building Council - Missouri Gateway Chapter <usgbc-stl@mobot.org> wrote:

REGISTER


 
ADVANCE TICKETS:
$20 per person or
$50 per family
 
DAY OF THE EVENT:
$25 per person or
$60 per family
 
Registration fee includes an event water bottle and lunch afterwards!
 
There's still time to sign up for this Saturday's EcoRide -
a fun bike ride to benefit USGBC-Missouri Gateway's Scholarship Fund!


 

Meet us at the Riverfront Trail for the EcoRide on Saturday, October 23! Enjoy the Autumn weather and beautiful scenery while riding this urban trail along the mighty Mississippi.  Proceeds from this family-friendly bike ride will help raise money for the Chapter's brand new scholarship fund.


The purpose of the USGBC-Missouri Gateway Chapter scholarship program is to provide green building & sustainability education and training for those who normally would not have access or could not afford it.  While we've given out scholarships over the years to support our broader goal of transforming every building into a green building, we're excited about creating a permanent scholarship fund in order to increase our ability to provide education around green building practices and principles.

Help us kick off our scholarship program by attending the inaugural EcoRide. And don't forget to spread the word - invite your colleagues, bring your family, tell your friends and neighbors!


WHEN: Saturday, October 23, 2010, 9 am - noon (rain or shine)


WHERE: The bike ride will be on the Riverfront Trail and will begin at the William A Kerr Foundation at 21 O'Fallon Street, St. Louis, MO 63102. There will be a 10 and a 25 mile route.

 

COST: ADVANCE TICKETS: $20 per person or $50 per family
DAY OF THE EVENT: $25 per person or $60 per family
Registration fee includes an event water bottle and lunch afterwards!


REGISTRATION: Go to the Chapter's Event Registration, scroll down and click on the "Register" button under the ECORIDE event listing.


 For more information, including a map of the Riverfront Trail, visit  www.usgbc-mogateway.org.
 
 
Thanks to our EcoRide Sponsors!

Aegis Metal Framing

Johnny on the Spot

William A. Kerr Foundation


 
 
Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy.
US Green Building Council - St. Louis Regional Chapter | 3617 Grandel Square | St. Louis | MO | 63108



--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

Home Foundation Repair-Basic Guide-Stone/Rock Foundation

Home Foundation Repair: The Basics 

Green builders and home preservationists have a common goal: conservation. If you're looking to bring an older home up to modern standards of green building, you'll need to understand the basics of fixing a home's foundation, and what can cause foundation failure.



Old homes were designed with structural logic much different from today's. New homes are designed with strict adherence to the lumber sizing and spans listed in the building code. Old homes were built with common sense, logic and feel. Most homes built between 1880 and 1930 were built on inferior footing. These old footings offer foundation walls little support, which then may support often overspanned joists and girders. Historic home foundations were subject to improper load calculation, inferior footings and substandard mortar. Old framing systems can be vastly over- or under-built. Each is a potential point of failure. It is crucial to understand such risks during a rehabilitation.

Structural failure is a phrase that scares the average Joe. Unfortunately, most structures subject to a century of seasonal expansions, water, humans, animals, deferred maintenance, improper storage and poor footings are destined to have some structural issues that need to be addressed. Combine construction flaws, time and the dreadful soil of central North Carolina, and it's rare that I see an old home that doesn't have some sort of structural problem. Structural issues can all be addressed, however, and most are simple (but laborious) fixes.

The structure of a building is formed by foundation and framing.

The foundation is a structure that transfers loads to earth. It keeps earth and wood apart. The concept is simple: A house is heavy, so a foundation spreads that load over an area suitable for the earth to handle. The average two-story Queen Anne Victorian weighs between 30 and 60 tons, enough for three 20-ton jacks to support the whole thing (theoretically, but don't try it at home).


The framing forms the structure, defines separate rooms and carries the floor, wall and roof loads to the foundation.


I'll discuss the most common foundation and framing techniques, common problems and how each is typically fixed. I'll also discuss basic preservation and sustainability issues related to the structure.

Footings and Foundations

Footing and Foundations are constructed of footings and foundation walls. A footing is the belowground mass, generally made of concrete or brick, that supports the foundation wall. It is sized to transfer the weight of the entire structure to ground. A footing must sit on stable soil and not backfill, which compresses easily. If the soil is not stable, the footing is more likely to fail. Today footings are eight inches wider than the wall or pier they support (e.g., a 12-inch-wide wall requires a 20-inch-wide footing) and deep enough to sit below the frost line, the depth at which groundwater is expected to freeze in a respective climate.

Footing construction varies greatly on old homes. Larger stately homes may well be on large and well built footings, though it would be rare to find the metal reinforcing bar (rebar) required today. Many houses sit on a soldier course, which is nothing more than an extra course of bricks at the bottom of the brick pier or foundation wall. Soldier courses are commonly found above the frost line and are prone to mortar breakdown, especially under pressure of water.




The foundation wall carries loads from the exterior sill beam framing to the footing. Piers support interior girders and are made of a variety of materials — stone, masonry and poured-in-place concrete are all common. Mortar joints offer little resistance to unbalanced lateral forces (such as a backfilled basement wall), so tall, thin, unreinforced masonry curtain walls are prone to failure.


The foundation wall also defines the area underneath the main living space. In the northern United States, basements are common, while in the South, crawl spaces are more typical. A below-grade basement or crawl space is intrinsically unstable and problematic; the pressures of earth and groundwater are predisposed to assault its footing and wall. Based on their porosity, soils hold and shed varying amounts of water. The basement floor can actually be below the water table, most likely in spring when snow is melting both on the roof and ground.


Water causes nearly all problems in foundations. Water against a foundation wall exerts hydrostatic pressure — water trying to get from areas of high pressure (poor draining soil) to areas with less (your basement). Frost heave happens when water freezes in poorly draining soil, then expands and pushes the footing, foundation and house upward. Any footing above the frost line will rise and fall with the freeze thaw cycle. Typical frost lines vary from four feet in Maine to less than a foot in the Southeast, and footings must be at least as deep as the frost line to avoid frost heave. The best solutions for water problems are to grade, divert roof runoff, dampproof or waterproof the foundation.


Grading refers to the slope of earth around the foundation. Code requires a 5 percent slope to 6 feet around the foundation, and many old homes fail this bench mark. Any place where a slope does not meet such grade is subject to water problems. Solutions include swales, which create a low point six to 12 feet from the foundation to capture water, and French drains, a subsurface swale covered with perforated pipe and drainage gravel, allowing surface grading to remain unaltered.

RE: Roof runoff (rainwater) is diverted away from the foundation by either gutters or proper grading. In cold climates gutters cause ice dams which can result in roof leaks and eave damage, which is why some forgo gutters in favor of ground-based drainage often involving plastic water barrier protection covered with decorative gravel or a continuous pitched concrete grade.

 

Dampproofing keeps most water out of the foundation, but allows water through in a torrential rain. A perforated pipe is set just below the exterior of the footing, sloped to direct water away via gravity or sump pump.A dampproofing approach may or may not include a latex waterproofing paint on the foundation wall, now required by many local ordinances on new construction.


Waterproofing keeps all water from entering the foundation and is necessary if using the basement as finished space. It is much more involved than dampproofing. Waterproofing can be done inside or outside the foundation wall; it's better to stop water before it enters the structure though that does requires a more expensive exterior waterproofing. First, a thick, impermeable dimple sheet is installed to keep water out of the foundation. Next, just below the footing, a perforated pipe is set which captures groundwater and drains it to either daylight or a sump pump. A sump pump is used to remove water accumulated in a sump pit, commonly placed at the low point in a basement, crawl space or exterior.


Bentonite clay is a natural waterproofing material that functions by suspending water in a gelatinous form. Less natural but more common is extruded polystyrene foam board insulation (XPS), which is a cheap and common detail on new foundations, particularly in northern climates. It is nonpermeable (except at its seams), helping resist water infiltration.



It's important to differentiate between problems caused by surface water runoff and a high water table. The first can be fixed rather simply, the latter may be impossible. High water tables enter the structure through the wall and the basement floor. Concrete is porous, and no match for such pressure. Today, vapor barriers of 4- or 6-millimeter-thick polyethylene are installed under slabs and are an excellent tool against such an assault. Old homes won't have such a barrier. A possible fix is to install a vapor barrier and pour a new slab. Still, while it's feasible to waterproof a new footing and all its transition points it's nearly impossible to waterproof an old footing. Footing drains outside should relieve some of the pressure, but not all. If there is evidence of a high water table, it's recommended that you leave the basement unfinished. Finished basements require a 100 percent success rate against water, and the costs to insure such a rate would be too excessive.



Lastly, a wet basement can occasionally be caused by a blocked drain tile, failed sewer or stormwater line. Unfortunately, private lines are not easily explored by anything short of excavation. Plumbers do have pipe camera tools that can avert a major dig, though many are cautious about sending an expensive piece of equipment up a pipe with an unknown blockage.

House Jacking

Fixing the foundation, or rebuilding it entirely, requires the temporary transfer of the house's loads above in order to perform the work. Holding the house consists of temporarily lifting the load-bearing girders or sills on a portion of the house just enough to remove failed members. One-half inch is usually enough. Raising the house consists of lifting the entire house at once. One foot elevation to an entire story is typical. Raising strategies might be considered when a usable basement is desired in tandem with major foundation reconstruction. The house may be raised as much as eight to ten feet to allow for the addition of a new floor below.



The merits of permanently raising a house are an ongoing debate in the preservation community. An argument that the house must be raised to ensure its longevity as a healthy structure makes a stronger case than arguing it must be raised because the owner wants a game room. Generally speaking, lifting the house significantly disrupts the streetscape by creating an unusually tall structure, particularly so if raising more than a few feet. In New Orleans, of course, it's argued that raising houses is necessary now to survive potential future flooding, so the debate continues.



It also is impossible to raise a house without reconstruction of chimneys, since the practice will throw all your hearths off elevation. Floors are raised while chimneys are not. Balloon-framed homes can be more difficult to jack than platform-framed structures. Since a balloon-framed floor may be tacked onto the studs with nothing more than a few nails, jacking up the floor may lift only the floor system, while not lifting the walls. To correct this, jacking may be required from the inside and out, and sometimes a temporary wall between floors is needed to ensure the whole structure rises in tandem.

New Foundation Construction

 

After the house has been lifted, a new foundation wall can be built. Often a pier and curtain wall will be replaced by a continuous masonry wall made of either brick, CMU block or both. Wood wicks water from masonry, which is why building codes now specify that any wood in contact with masonry now must be pressure-treated. If a new foundation wall is supporting an existing non-treated sill, termite protection should be installed — either pressure-treated wood or a termite flashing made of 20 gauge aluminum. Be sure to install sleeves for utilities. Short PVC stubs suffice for electric, water and HVAC lines.


As with all exterior features, try to match any foundation detailing. If the piers protruded beyond the curtain wall on the exterior, or had some masonry corbelling for example, it would be good to restore that detail. I've found preservation boards to be reasonably flexible so long as the old foundation wasn't extremely distinctive.


Additional Links:

Foundation walls are usually made of poured concrete or stacked concrete block, materials that reinforce the feeling of the basement as a secondary space. To give the basement main-floor style, cover the concrete with your choice of ...
Your basement is basically a box of porous concrete, buried in wet ground, and when that ground gets saturated with water, the resulting hydrostatic pressure pushes the water against the foundation walls. That water will eventually find ...
Rock Foundation Repair and Water Proofing PhotosScotts Contracting Job Site Photos
This page contains various job sites photos of projects .

Scotts Contracting performs the repairs needed in our City's Typical Rock Foundations found on a Large Percent of City Dwellings. Addresses Below to email scotty for a free estimate on your next project.


 Newly added Basement Photos: 

Friday, October 22, 2010


Basement Conversion Photos 

Friday, October 22, 2010


Basement Remodeling Photos-Basement Design Photos

Friday, October 22, 2010


Before and After Fireplace Photos

--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com


Fed Govt-Wants Banks to Buy Back Some Bad Mortgages- B of A Listed

To the long list of those picking fights with banks over bad mortgages, add the Federal Reserve.

Two years after the Fed bought billions of dollars in mortgage securities as part of the financial bailout, its New York arm is questioning the paperwork — and pressing banks to buy some of the investments back.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York and several giant investment companies, including Pimco and BlackRock, have singled out Bank of America, which assembled more than $2 trillion of mortgage securities from 2004 to 2008.

Bank of America is already dealing with the fallout from the fight over whether foreclosures were handled properly. It insists that no foreclosures have been initiated in error, and on Monday announced it would resume the foreclosure process in 23 states where court approval is required to go ahead.

But while the human toll of the foreclosure crisis has grabbed the headlines, the fight over how these loans were created in the first place could last longer and ultimately cost the banks much, much more. And it is setting the stage for a huge battle between mortgage holders like the government, hedge funds and other institutional investors on one side and the big banks on the other.

"It's very serious," said Glenn Schorr, an analyst with Nomura Securities. "The numbers are all over the map."

If the Fed and the investors succeed, it could cost Bank of America billions of dollars. On Wall Street and in bank boardrooms, the question of whether investors can force banks to buy back, or "put-back," the bad mortgages to the banks that sold them is dominating the debate and worrying analysts, money managers and banking executives.

It also makes for some strange bedfellows. After all, it was the government that bailed out Bank of America — twice — during the financial crisis, the same government that includes the Fed.

And it is going to be a fight. On Tuesday, after watching its shares get pummeled again, Bank of America went on the offensive, vowing to "defend the interests of Bank of America shareholders," and hire more lawyers.

"It's loan by loan, and we have the resources to deploy in that kind of review," said Brian T. Moynihan, Bank of America's chief executive, on a conference call to discuss the bank's results for the third quarter.

Although the bank turned in better results than expected, much of the call was given over to the put-back issue. "We have thousands of people who are willing to stand and look at these loans," Mr. Moynihan told analysts. "We'd love never to talk about this again and put it behind us, but the right answer is to fight for it."

The legal battle turns on the question of whether the banks properly represented the loans they put together into mortgage-backed securities when they sold them to investors. If the banks ignored evidence that the underlying mortgages did not conform to underwriting standards or they lacked the proper paperwork, the banks could be obligated to buy the troubled mortgages back.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the other large investors are pressing Bank of America to buy back a portion of the $47 billion in mortgages it originated, most of which were assembled by Countrywide Financial just before the real estate boom turned to bust in 2005, 2006 and 2007.

Countrywide, which specialized in subprime mortgages, was acquired by Bank of America in July 2008.

"People did not think bondholders would be able to organize themselves, but they can," said Kathy Patrick, a Houston lawyer who is leading the effort. "It's a large amount of money but the principle is simple. When you promise to do something in an agreement, you should do it." A letter from Ms. Patrick detailing the claims was obtained by The New York Times.

The danger posed by angry — or opportunistic — investors 'putting-back' mortgages to the banks is hardly limited to Bank of America. Other giants like Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase face similar claims, and last week JPMorgan set aside $1.3 billion just for legal costs, including put-backs.

JPMorgan has said it expects repurchases of mortgages to run at about $1 billion a year, but that expense should be covered by $3 billion it has earmarked specifically for put-backs.

At Bank of America, repurchases have been running at about half a billion dollars a quarter. The bank estimates total put-back claims stand at $12.9 billion, as of Sept. 30. In the third-quarter, Bank of America recorded an $872 million expense for put-backs.

Besides the major institutions, hedge funds like York Capital and Moore Capital have been jumping into the game recently, buying up bad debt in the hopes it will eventually be bought back, according to traders and money managers. Both funds declined to comment.

And smaller ones are sniffing around, hoping to ride the depressed securities higher as the fight over put-backs gathers steam.

"Any hedge fund with a distressed desk is contemplating this trade," said one analyst who insisted on anonymity. "The idea of bottom-fishing vulture funds buying this stuff up for a nickel on the dollar so they can sue the banks to get 100 cents must be pretty odious for the Treasury, which bailed out the banks in the first place."

Indeed, the group that includes the Fed is one of two coalitions that is gearing up for a fight with the banks.

Bill Frey, chief executive of Greenwich Financial Services, leads a group of investors that holds just under $600 billion worth of mortgage-backed securities.

But it is the recent controversy over foreclosures that has jump-started interest by pension funds, hedge funds and other players. "In the last two weeks, there has been a flood of new investors," Mr. Frey said. "We haven't even had a chance to do the arithmetic, that's how fast they're coming in."

Besides all the lawyers that billions can buy, the banks have other weapons in their arsenal. Some hedge funds and other investors are nervous about challenging the banks too forcefully, because they trade with them daily.

There is risk too for the government, despite the Federal Reserve claims. If the banks are indeed forced to spend tens of billions to buy back securities, they could turn once again to the federal government for help.

Given the legal resources available to the banks, though, that is unlikely to happen quickly. And for now, broader conditions in the financial services are improving. On Wednesday, Bank of America reported that operating earnings in the third quarter hit $3.1 billion, in contrast to a loss a year ago.

A substantial portion of the profit gain came from the expectation of lower losses among credit card and mortgage borrowers, rather than new business, but the bank was able to recapture money it had earlier set aside. It released $1.8 billion from reserves, compared with a release of $1.45 billion in the second quarter.

On a noncash basis for the quarter, the bank reported a loss of $7.3 billion because of a $10.4 billion write-down in the value of its credit card unit, attributed to federal regulations that limit debit fees and other charges.


Minh Uong/The New York Times


--
Scott's Contracting
scottscontracting@gmail.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.blogspot.com
http://www.stlouisrenewableenergy.com
scotty@stlouisrenewableenergy.com

Connect with Scotts Contracting

FB FB Twitter LinkedIn Blog Blog Blog Blog Pinterest

Featured Post

Perfect Aircrete, Kitchen Ingredients.