What's so great about Old Buildings?

[petromax]

I have merely scanned the above because there is so much thrown in - like stuffing a baby bird in its nest - swallowed wholesale without thought, interpretation or even reference to source, other than 'my mate in a plane'.

It is fantastically costly, financially and environmentally, to build new infrastructure, particularly where it already exists; it is fantastically irresponsible to throw away building material and construction energy for want of creative thought on adaptive use; and it is fantastically immoral to suggest that all land could or should be built on.

And what an environment there would be... an endless and soulless sprawl of suburban mediocrity - a truly green, 'pleasant' and boring land.

[pablo42]

I have merely scanned the above because there is so much thrown in - like stuffing a baby bird in its nest - swallowed wholesale without thought, interpretation or even reference to source, other than 'my mate in a plane'.

It is fantastically costly, financially and environmentally, to build new infrastructure, particularly where it already exists; it is fantastically irresponsible to throw away building material and construction energy for want of creative thought on adaptive use; and it is fantastically immoral to suggest that all land could or should be built on.

And what an environment there would be... an endless and soulless sprawl of suburban mediocrity - a truly green, 'pleasant' and boring land.

Reckon so Petro, but I think WW is saying that the souless estates needn't be the only way. I agree with that, these housing estates are pretty dreadful.

[Ged]

Liverpool's old civic buildings were designed by and built to show wealth with particular rich benefactors such as William Brown and Walker.

Private buildings such as Insurance Companies, some being those in Castle st, Dale st and the Liver were built as headquarters and again with no expense spared when it came to making a statement. The likes of which will never be built again. We should be proud of them.

[pablo42]

Liverpool's old civic buildings were designed by and built to show wealth with particular rich benefactors such as William Brown and Walker.

Private buildings such as Insurance Companies, some being those in Castle st, Dale st and the Liver were built as headquarters and again with no expense spared when it came to making a statement. The likes of which will never be built again. We should be proud of them.

Dunno Ged, don't think we'll ever see those big stone buildings any more, but there are some pretty good new ones scattered around. Trouble is they are few and far between.

[kevin]

Sorry WW, I never believe statistics.

27.34% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

[pablo42]

27.34% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

Naw, only 28% would believe that according to Harvard News.


It helps to add a publication that don't exist.

[kevin]

Naw, only 28% would believe that according to Harvard News.


It helps to add a publication that don't exist.

The trick is to add a few percentage points, rather than use a whole number like 28. Makes people believe it's been calculated in some sort of way, rather than invented or guessed at.

[pablo42]

The trick is to add a few percentage points, rather than use a whole number like 28. Makes people believe it's been calculated in some sort of way, rather than invented or guessed at.

You're getting good at this. I'll not believe another thing you say. 97.6 people agree with me.

Ha, it works.

[kevin]

You're getting good at this. I'll not believe another thing you say. 97.6 people agree with me.

Ha, it works.

As an academic I use statistics frequently - if I agree with how they were gathered and turned from raw data into meaningful statistics. However, in most cases I question their validity and how they've been used to try and validate an argument. Once I see the weakness in the stats, which is quite easy with a bit of practice, I see the weakness in the argument.

I'm a strong believer in the use of stats, but they've got a bad name because of the way they are incorrectly used by many.

[pablo42]

As an academic I use statistics frequently - if I agree with how they were gathered and turned from raw data into meaningful statistics. However, in most cases I question their validity and how they've been used to try and validate an argument. Once I see the weakness in the stats, which is quite easy with a bit of practice, I see the weakness in the argument.

I'm a strong believer in the use of stats, but they've got a bad name because of the way they are incorrectly used by many.

Can't agree with that Kevin. I don't believe any statistics, they've been too discredited. They can say whatever you want them to say. People pick up pseudo statistics and they become accepted, nobody challenges the original track.

You got a new avatar. A handsome man indeed.

[Waterways]

It is fantastically costly, financially and environmentally, to build new infrastructure, particularly where it already exists; it is fantastically irresponsible to throw away building material and construction energy for want of creative thought on adaptive use

Re-Cycling Materials

Recycling old bricks is big business and few are throw away these days. MI have seen many modern highly insulated homes clad in old Victorian bricks. I saw a house in Surrey with bricks from old terraces from Manchester. These are mainly top of the range homes, not the developer tripe we see, which I would like to see the end of and the developers cut right down to size. Old masonry is broken up for hard core for foundations and floors.

Unfortunately we can't recycle all masonry. We need to make new materials. Masonry gives excellent thermal mass, essential in some eco homes.

The idea is cut down the continuous use of fossil fuels for transport and homes. This poisons the air we breathe and blackens buildings.

Eco Matters

Forests

Planting more forests. It has been estimated that the UK requires 450,000 homes per year in the next 20 years or so to keep up with replacement and current shortages. These homes will require a hell of a lot of wood.

The UK imports about 6 billion pounds worth of timber each year and rising. If we planted more forests to cope with the our current demand we would absorb more CO2 and wipe out most of the trade imbalance.

Wheat & Ryegrass

Rather than slow-growing forests, which would certainly have their own
benefits, there are plenty of other building materials that require less
land & time to grow.

Composite boards & panels can be made out of wheat and ryegrass stems. A similar process could be used to manufacture engineered "I" beams and the like, or the facings for structural insulated panels (SIPS). Furthermore, the insulating portion of SIPS could be made from soy, or other plant oils, rather than petrochemicals:
http://www.unitedsoybean.org/lib_fs_...id=10&type=one .

SIP Panels


A SIP panel house. The walls are mainly high value rigid insulation, not needing heating systems, cutting back on fossil fuel use and energy to make the heating system - boilers tend to last 10 years. The house can be erected in a few days and clad in any material you like, even old bricks.


A finished house in SIP panels.

Earth and masonry also tend to require less land for production, especially when considering complete life cycle costs. The expense of such building
materials may be more palatable with reduced taxation of building values (Land Value Tax) - and may be economically advantageous given their longer life cycles.

UK's Land Not Used Properly

The UK's 16,943,000 ha of agricultural land could feed almost 365 million people. Alternatively, the UK's 60 million people could be fed from 1/6th of her agricultural land - with the remainder available for meat, dairy, or fibre production, just left as wilderness or used for people to live on.

But wee need land reform to do this, or introduce Land Value Tax (LVT) and this naturally sort it all out - no change in business behaviour.

and it is fantastically immoral to suggest that all land could or should be built on.

It is fantastically immoral not to use the vast amounts of land available for the use of the population. Once again only 7.5% of land is settled and 5% of that is parks and gardens - what don't you understand about that figure? Do you think it is a large figure?

And what an environment there would be... an endless and soulless sprawl of suburban mediocrity - a truly green, 'pleasant' and boring land.

Oh no!! Not again. "Urban sprawl", "concreting over the countryside", etc. Propaganda words used by the Countryside Alliance, etc. Only 7.5% of the UK is settled and 5% of that is parks and gardens, so, only 2.5% is paved.

Read this and then the three links at the top left hand corner.
How land affects YOU

You have been fed propaganda - like us all. You refuse to disbelieve what you have accepted for so long. Despite facts negating the propaganda it is still bouncing around your head.

[kevin]

Can't agree with that Kevin. I don't believe any statistics, they've been too dicredited.

Discredited indeed. But a lot of the work I see has the methodology of the research identified and explained - how the data was gathered and how it has been interpreted. This gives me sufficient info to make an educated guess about the validity, or not, of the stats I'm presented with.

When I just see stats and no background, which is what you mostly get in the public domain, I too refuse to take them at face value.

[pablo42]

Discredited indeed. But a lot of the work I see has the methodology of the research identified and explained - how the data was gathered and how it has been interpreted. This gives me sufficient info to make an educated guess about the validity, or not, of the stats I'm presented with.

When I just see stats and no background, which is what you mostly get in the public domain, I too refuse to take them at face value.

Ahh, I agree with those statistics.

[kevin]

You got a new avatar. A handsome man indeed.

That was the give-away that your avatar wasn't real.
No sign of the Cosmo Smallpiece-type glasses.

[pablo42]

That was the give-away that your avatar wasn't real.
No sign of the Cosmo Smallpiece-type glasses.

Don't worry, they're in the car.