No subject

</excerpt>of radiata 

<excerpt>pine in the near future. Must have been wrong. Maybe it's 

</excerpt>different for 

<excerpt>hardwoods.


...So theft of increasingly valuable timbers will continue 

</excerpt>unless more 

<excerpt>people are aware. It may become more valuable than gold or 

</excerpt>ivory or 

<excerpt>rhino horn etc...


Maybe. And it is likely to continue unless a concerted, 

</excerpt>national 

<excerpt>programme to deter the purchase of such timbers is 

</excerpt>instituted. This 

<excerpt>takes money and time. The alternative is to introduce 

</excerpt>legislation to 

<excerpt>deter importation of these timbers. This too is a big job 

</excerpt>for a 

<excerpt>thinly-spread activist community.


In relation on Four Corners to allegations of corruption and 

</excerpt>illegal 

<excerpt>logging in the Asian timber trade, there is another 

</excerpt>allegation that 

<excerpt>gives the business a more sinister and politically 

</excerpt>destabilising impact.

<excerpt>

Made a few weeks ago in the Weekend Herald, the allegation 

</excerpt>was that 

<excerpt>Asian logging companies, among others, were importing into 

</excerpt>PNG modern 

<excerpt>weapons concealed in containers. These supplemented arms 

</excerpt>shipments via 

<excerpt>speedboat from Australia, those coming over the Indonesian 

</excerpt>border, other 

<excerpt>left over form the civil war on Bougainville and others from 

</excerpt>the PNGDF, 

<excerpt>including AK47s, M16s and AR15s (for those unfamiliar with 

</excerpt>weapons, 

<excerpt>these are modern, automatic military-issue weapons with high 

</excerpt>rates of 

<excerpt>fire). The context of the Herald story was the violence of 

</excerpt>the PNG 

<excerpt>national elections.


This implies that those involved in these weapons transfers 

</excerpt>are 

<excerpt>participating in the active destabilisation of the region, 

</excerpt>the growth of 

<excerpt>crime (including the crime of illegal timber trading) as 

</excerpt>some weapons 

<excerpt>are traded in the PNG highlands for drugs that are then 

</excerpt>exported to 

<excerpt>countries of demand, and the futility of development 

</excerpt>assistance efforts 

<excerpt>in failed or failing states in the region.


The only response to this level of crime, of course, is, 

</excerpt>initially, a 

<excerpt>very strong policing response on a regional scale, based on 

</excerpt>reliable, 

<excerpt>careful intelligence; soft words fall on hard ears and are 

</excerpt>not heard. 

<excerpt>That would be followed by regional political initiatives to 

</excerpt>consolidate 

<excerpt>gains made and throttle the illegal timber/ weapons industry.


The environment lobby in developed countries such as 

</excerpt>Australia and New 

<excerpt>Zealand could play a positive role were such initiatives 

</excerpt>ever to be 

<excerpt>instigated through their capacity to lobby government and 

</excerpt>educate 

<excerpt>citizens about purchase of materials that supported regional 

sustainability.


...Russ Grayson



________________

Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 14:47:25 +1000

From: Pacific Edge Permaculture + Media 

</excerpt><<pacedge at magna.com.au>  

<excerpt>Subject: Re: [permaculture-oceania] Fw: 4 CORNERS - TIMBER  

To: permaculture-oceania at lists.cat.org.au


In the IT business there's a concept called 'TCO'. It stands 

</excerpt>for 'Total 

<excerpt>Cost of Ownership' and it refers to the total cost of 

</excerpt>systems aggregated 

<excerpt>over the expected lifetime of the system. I think something 

</excerpt>analogous 

<excerpt>can be applied to building.


The 'lifecycle analysis' (LCA) process applied in product 

</excerpt>design is 

<excerpt>something similar, looking at the social and environmental 

</excerpt>costs 

<excerpt>associated with product development, from the sourcing of 

</excerpt>raw materials 

<excerpt>to the disposal of the product at end of life. The 

</excerpt>Stringybark Grove 

<excerpt>energy, water and materials efficient townhouse development 

</excerpt>in Sydney in 

<excerpt>the early 1990s used this type of analysis. Generally, LCA 

</excerpt>seems to have 

<excerpt>been applied with an environmental bias, having been co-

</excerpt>opted by 

<excerpt>environmentalists to highlight the environmental costs of 

</excerpt>product and 

<excerpt>materials and in uses I have seen does not include financial 

</excerpt>factors or 

<excerpt>the time of users of materials absorbed in their maintenance.


I think that TCO could be applied to the question of the use 

</excerpt>of timber 

<excerpt>as a construction material that this discussion has focused 

</excerpt>on. In a 

<excerpt>wider sense, LCA can be applied to older buildings that 

</excerpt>people might be 

<excerpt>thinking of renovating.


What I have in mind is the maintenance required to keep 

</excerpt>timber 

<excerpt>structures in good order over the years, especially as they 

</excerpt>get older. 

<excerpt>Now, I have no facts or figures to offer, just questions. My 

</excerpt>questions 

<excerpt>stem from:


1. recent experience with minor renovations of a building 

</excerpt>erected during 

<excerpt>the 1970s

2.  observations of neighbours carrying our renovations

3.  concern expressed by a friend over demolitions of 

</excerpt>residential 

<excerpt>buildings adjoining her house.


In instance 1, the need to replace rotting, weather-exposed 

</excerpt>timbers, the 

<excerpt>need to repaint (with the waste disposal problems of paints 

</excerpt>and timber 

<excerpt>finishes wastes) and the obvious requirement for regular 

</excerpt>maintenance of 

<excerpt>timber structures leads me to ask whether steel structural 

</excerpt>elements and 

<excerpt>concrete walling, despite initial, higher LCA costs than 

</excerpt>timber, might 

<excerpt>not in the long run result in less environmental pollution 

</excerpt>and less cost 

<excerpt>to the householder.


Instances 2 and 3 involved both private residents and a 

</excerpt>construction 

<excerpt>company demolishing old fibro (asbestos cement) houses 

</excerpt>without use of 

<excerpt>the required safety precautions for handling this dangerous 

</excerpt>material. 

<excerpt>The fact that the home renovators were immigrants leads me 

</excerpt>to wonder 

<excerpt>whether there should be some process to go through before 

</excerpt>demolition, in 

<excerpt>which a responsible authority verifies that the renovators 

</excerpt>understand 

<excerpt>and makes use of the safety precautions. It also leads me to 

</excerpt>ask whether 

<excerpt>immigrants joining the building industry, in the interests 

</excerpt>of their own 

<excerpt>and the wider public safety, should not go through training 

</excerpt>and 

<excerpt>certification before being allowed to practice, that they 

</excerpt>understand 

<excerpt>safe materials handling and removal.


What would be useful is a table estimating the TCO, time in 

</excerpt>maintenance 

<excerpt>and cost estimate in dollar values at time of building or 

</excerpt>renovation for 

<excerpt>timber, steel and concrete.


IN PRAISE OF NEW BUILDINGS

Most retrofitting of energy efficient technologies will be 

</excerpt>to existing 

<excerpt>housing stock because, to my understanding, it is cheaper to 

</excerpt>renovate 

<excerpt>and retrofit than to demolish and rebuild. This makes TCO 

</excerpt>factors 

<excerpt>pertinent as well as accessible information on the safe 

</excerpt>handling of 

<excerpt>hazardous materials. Much of this information is available 

</excerpt>online.

<excerpt>

Old houses are seldom energy efficient. I was told by  a 

</excerpt>person in the 

<excerpt>business that installing solar water heating in the building 

</excerpt>I inhabit, 

<excerpt>for instance, was likely to be of limited efficiency because 

</excerpt>of the 

<excerpt>building's orientation to the sun and the steepness of the 

</excerpt>roof. 

<excerpt>Installing insulation would be of benefit but quite costly. 

</excerpt>When the 

<excerpt>structure was built in the 1970s, insulation put in was 

</excerpt>minimal. 

<excerpt>Placement of windows, too, left a lot to be desired in terms 

</excerpt>of thermal 

<excerpt>efficiency and light.


And that leads me to another question: with the toxicity of 

</excerpt>old building 

<excerpt>materials, the often poor access to light via windows and 

</excerpt>the effect on 

<excerpt>building thermal efficiency attributable to window placement 

</excerpt>and lack of 

<excerpt>insulation, it would seem that modern buildings, especially 

</excerpt>those using 

<excerpt>concrete and glass, often have a distinct advantage. So, 

</excerpt>does concrete, 

<excerpt>steel and large areas of glass (properly shaded in summer 

</excerpt>and with 

<excerpt>proper orientation) have a valuable role in better building? 

</excerpt>Concrete, 

<excerpt>for instance, has better thermal mass than timber (making 

</excerpt>timber a good 

<excerpt>choice for the subtropics and areas north) and, used 

</excerpt>thoughtfully, 

<excerpt>should contribute to lower heating and cooling energy costs. 

</excerpt>Likewise 

<excerpt>the proper use of glass in reducing electricity consumption 

</excerpt>in 

<excerpt>artificial lighting.


And there's another pertinent factor in favour of modern 

</excerpt>materials (I'm 

<excerpt>not talking about chipboard and the like, even though the 

</excerpt>outgassing of 

<excerpt>possibly toxins reduced the potential for adverse health 

</excerpt>effects over 

<excerpt>time) - the design is often better than old housing stock. I 

</excerpt>am aware 

<excerpt>that some modern building materials do have potential health 

</excerpt>problems, 

<excerpt>such as toxic outgassing from particleboard, furnishing 

</excerpt>materials and so 

<excerpt>on and that this needs to be addressed, however such 

</excerpt>shortcomings should 

<excerpt>not deflect us from an awareness that older buildings are 

</excerpt>equally or 

<excerpt>even more dangerous and may require higher time and 

</excerpt>financial coats for 

<excerpt>maintenance over the years than concrete, steel and glass.


BUCKY'S GOOD IDEA

The polymath, Buckminstrer Fuller, was an experimenter with 

prefabricated housing in the 1940s and 1950s. People who are 

</excerpt>too young 

<excerpt>to have a decent knowledge of recent innovation might still 

</excerpt>be aware 

<excerpt>that Bucky invented the geodesic dome. Bucky's experiments 

</excerpt>in prefab 

<excerpt>housing were developed around his 'dymaxiion' concept and, 

</excerpt>in one 

<excerpt>iteration at least, made use of aluminium. It is certain 

</excerpt>that Bucky 

<excerpt>lived ahead of his time as far as innovation went - the 

</excerpt>correct place 

<excerpt>for a practical visionary.


But it's the principle of prefab housing which deserves 

</excerpt>renewed 

<excerpt>attention today. Sure, there are prefabs on the market but 

</excerpt>from what I 

<excerpt>have seen they lack energy efficient performance. And it's 

</excerpt>this which 

<excerpt>interests me - why can't we have energy efficient prefab 

</excerpt>housing 

<excerpt>developed to be scaleable around standard modules, produced 

</excerpt>in a 

<excerpt>workshop then trucked to site and erected by a small crew.


The point is to increase cheaper access to housing, to make 

</excerpt>housing 

<excerpt>affordable to more people and to further the spread of home 

</excerpt>ownership.

<excerpt>

Back in the 1980s, I met a man by the name of Doug. I don't 

</excerpt>remember his 

<excerpt>last name but he lived near Bathurst and he made prefab 

</excerpt>hexagonal 

<excerpt>'yurts' modeled on the portable Mongolian structures. The 

</excerpt>structure's 

<excerpt>supporting element was a stainless steel cable tensioned 

</excerpt>around the 

<excerpt>upper circumference of the building. The thing about these 

</excerpt>strong, 

<excerpt>timber structures was that Doug made a range of models at a 

</excerpt>range of 

<excerpt>sizes, single and double storied, in a range of timbers. He 

</excerpt>looked after 

<excerpt>council approval and would truck them anywhere and, with his 

</excerpt>crew, erect 

<excerpt>them in no time at all.


I wonder if something similar - not necessarily a yurt - 

</excerpt>could be 

<excerpt>manufactured from either natural materials or perhaps using 

</excerpt>a steel 

<excerpt>supporting substructure with thin but strong concrete slab 

</excerpt>sides and 

<excerpt>insulated metal roof? Alternatively, it might be worth 

</excerpt>looking for 

<excerpt>lightweight, synthetic materials or composites with good 

</excerpt>thermal 

<excerpt>properties or materials with poorer thermal properties but 

</excerpt>using design 

<excerpt>elements such as eaves, pergolas and so on to compensate for 

</excerpt>inferior 

<excerpt>thermal performance. The purpose would be to produce prefab 

</excerpt>housing with 

<excerpt>a minimum 3.5 energy star rating (the minimum specified 

</excerpt>under energy 

<excerpt>efficiency performance for local government areas 

</excerpt>participating in the 

<excerpt>NSW Sustainable Energy Development Authority's Energy Smart 

</excerpt>Homes 

<excerpt>Scheme).


I know that building purists will say that, in thermal 

</excerpt>performance, you 

<excerpt>can't beat mudbrick or earth construction. I agree. But 

</excerpt>earth 

<excerpt>construction is not widely accessible because of time 

</excerpt>constraints (most 

<excerpt>people I know who built earth construction houses took quite 

</excerpt>a long 

<excerpt>time) or the high cost of having someone build the structure 

</excerpt>if you do 

<excerpt>not have the time available. It would seem that the common 

</excerpt>hollow 

<excerpt>concrete brick offers a potentially energy efficient 

</excerpt>solution to solid 

<excerpt>concrete walls when coupled to good design.


Bucky designed one model of his prefab house to be stackable 

</excerpt>on a 

<excerpt>central support/ access, erecting what is in effect was a 

</excerpt>small 

<excerpt>apartment block of up to five stories. And that's a good 

</excerpt>height, 

<excerpt>according to a designer friend who had experience in the 

</excerpt>more densely 

<excerpt>populated, older suburbs of German cities. She told me that 

</excerpt>the maximum 

<excerpt>height for medium density apartment style housing should be 

</excerpt>that at 

<excerpt>which you can recognise the face of friends in the street 

</excerpt>below - and 

<excerpt>that turns out ro be around six levels.


So, is it worth reconsidering modern materials for building 

</excerpt>or are we to 

<excerpt>remain in the realm of the past, the traditional? Bucky 

</excerpt>wrote that the 

<excerpt>building industry was certainly an archaic one. Where all 

</excerpt>other major 

<excerpt>industries had changed their approach and techniques over 

</excerpt>time, building 

<excerpt>was the only one still using techniques thousands of years 

</excerpt>old. It was 

<excerpt>time, he said, to consider new approaches, new materials. In 

</excerpt>part, this 

<excerpt>conservatism is due to the fact that the old techniques 

</excerpt>still work.

<excerpt>

But today, all over the world, there is a growing need, a 

</excerpt>growing 

<excerpt>urgency, to find cheaper and more energy efficient 

</excerpt>techniques and 

<excerpt>approaches to building, approaches that are affordable and 

</excerpt>accessible to 

<excerpt>a great many more people. This must mean that, while not 

</excerpt>abandoning 

<excerpt>traditional techniques and materials, we must honestly 

</excerpt>consider new 

<excerpt>materials and design approaches, even synthetics, that we 

</excerpt>apply TCO  

<excerpt>principles to the renovation of older structures and that we 

</excerpt>develop 

<excerpt>cheap models of efficient prefab housing that people can set 

</excerpt>up to the 

<excerpt>size they require and adapt through the addition and 

</excerpt>subtraction of 

<excerpt>modules. Surely, with today's scientific knowledge, with the 

</excerpt>innovation 

<excerpt>so often demanded of industry, we can do better, we can do 

</excerpt>more with 

<excerpt>less and do it better than it has been done.


...Russ Grayson


On Friday, August 2, 2002, at 10:31  PM, Kathryn wrote:


<excerpt>Coincidently,I was talking to a builder person today & he 

</excerpt></excerpt>said that 

<excerpt><excerpt>timber

will be unavailable in Australia in 12 years time, except 

</excerpt></excerpt>for plantation

<excerpt><excerpt>timber, which will need many more years before it is
ready 

</excerpt></excerpt>& there's not

<excerpt><excerpt>enough to satisfy growing demand anyway.


I said then the price of imported timbers will obviously 

</excerpt></excerpt>soar in price.

<excerpt><excerpt>Therefore solid timber furniture new (if you can get
it) 

</excerpt></excerpt>or second hand 

<excerpt><excerpt>will

also soar in price.

I said what will (average) people build their houses with?

Chipboard he said.


Groan!!


So theft of increasingly valuable timbers will continue 

</excerpt></excerpt>unless more 

<excerpt><excerpt>people

are aware. It may become more valuable than gold or ivory 

</excerpt></excerpt>or rhino horn 

<excerpt><excerpt>etc

etc

I didn't see that particular show, did they offer any 

</excerpt></excerpt>solutions?

<excerpt><excerpt>

Kathryn Gregg

Beaches LETS

Buderim Qld




----- Original Message -----

From: "Penny Ferguson" <<fergusonp at bigpond.com>

To: "permaculture oceania" <<permaculture-

</excerpt></excerpt>oceania at lists.cat.org.au>

<excerpt><excerpt>Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 4:39 PM

Subject: [permaculture-oceania] Fw: 4 CORNERS - TIMBER



<excerpt>Re ABC TV 4 Corners program on rainforest timber 

</excerpt></excerpt></excerpt>thefts.   this was one

<excerpt><excerpt><excerpt>response on Friends of the ABC list.  It's
something we 

</excerpt></excerpt></excerpt>should all be

<excerpt><excerpt><excerpt>thinking about - buying stolen goods.

Penny Ferguson


----- Original Message -----

Subject: 4 CORNERS - TIMBER



<excerpt><excerpt>I think that the best way of ensuring you don't
support 

</excerpt></excerpt></excerpt></excerpt></excerpt>this

<excerpt><excerpt>horrendous

<excerpt><excerpt>activity is to stipulate to your supplier that you
do 

</excerpt></excerpt></excerpt></excerpt>not wish to buy

<excerpt><excerpt>any

<excerpt><excerpt>timber sourced from rainforests, either here in 

</excerpt></excerpt></excerpt></excerpt>Australia or from

<excerpt><excerpt><excerpt>overseas,

<excerpt>and to express to your supplier that they or their 

</excerpt></excerpt></excerpt></excerpt>suppliers should 

<excerpt><excerpt><excerpt><excerpt>make

</excerpt>the

<excerpt>effort to find out from where the timber is sourced and 

</excerpt></excerpt></excerpt></excerpt>take an

<excerpt><excerpt><excerpt>appropriate

<excerpt>stand.


To me, it's the least we can do as an individual.  If we 

</excerpt></excerpt></excerpt></excerpt>force the 

<excerpt><excerpt><excerpt><excerpt>issue

things may have an opportunity of changing.


Aina



</excerpt>

_______________________________________________

permaculture-oceania mailing list

permaculture-oceania at lists.cat.org.au

http://lists.cat.org.au/cgi-

</excerpt></excerpt></excerpt>bin/mailman/listinfo/permaculture-oceania

<excerpt><excerpt><excerpt>

</excerpt>


_______________________________________________

permaculture-oceania mailing list

permaculture-oceania at lists.cat.org.au

http://lists.cat.org.au/cgi-

</excerpt></excerpt>bin/mailman/listinfo/permaculture-oceania

<excerpt><excerpt>

</excerpt>

________________

Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 15:18:05 +1000

From: Pacific Edge Permaculture + Media 

</excerpt><<pacedge at magna.com.au>  

<excerpt>Subject: Re: [permaculture-oceania] Yakon recipes?  

To: permaculture-oceania at lists.cat.org.au


Hi Mitra...

Yakon (aka: Peruvian ground apple; Polymnia sanchifolia) are 

</excerpt>fine raw. 

<excerpt>Marinate in lemon (perhaps lime?) juice.


Nice snack.


...Russ Grayson



On Saturday, August 3, 2002, at 06:53  PM, Mitra wrote:


<excerpt>Continuing the recipe theme ....


Does anyone know a good recipe for Yakon, I harvested my 

</excerpt></excerpt>first batch 

<excerpt><excerpt>yesterday, steamed them and added some garlic chives
to 

</excerpt></excerpt>try out on 

<excerpt><excerpt>neighbors at a "bring a plate" dinner. The response
was 

</excerpt></excerpt>underwhelming 

<excerpt><excerpt>(half the people liked but "so what" and the others
didn't 

</excerpt></excerpt>like them) 

<excerpt><excerpt>so I'm wondering if there are some better ways to
prepare 

</excerpt></excerpt>them.

<excerpt><excerpt>

- Mitra


-----------------------------------------------------------

</excerpt></excerpt>---------------

<excerpt><excerpt>* http://www.mitra.biz

* Tyagarah Sustainable Community Alliance (Tyagarah 

</excerpt></excerpt>Progress 

<excerpt><excerpt>Association) www.tyagarah.org

* mitra at mitra.biz

* Home 02-6684-8096, let it ring as it forwards to my 

</excerpt></excerpt>mobile 

<excerpt><excerpt>0414-648-722  fax 07-3319-6130

*

**** Life is a mystery to be lived, not a problem to be 

</excerpt></excerpt>solved ******>

<excerpt><excerpt>

_______________________________________________

permaculture-oceania mailing list

permaculture-oceania at lists.cat.org.au

http://lists.cat.org.au/cgi-

</excerpt></excerpt>bin/mailman/listinfo/permaculture-oceania

<excerpt><excerpt>

</excerpt>



________________

_______________________________________________

permaculture-oceania mailing list

permaculture-oceania at lists.cat.org.au

http://lists.cat.org.au/cgi-

</excerpt>bin/mailman/listinfo/permaculture-oceania

<excerpt>

</excerpt>_______________________________________________

permaculture-oceania mailing list

permaculture-oceania at lists.cat.org.au

http://lists.cat.org.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/permaculture-oceania


</excerpt>
--Apple-Mail-2-988491344--