I beleive the legislation was to eliminate EPS in food packaging to keep out of the land fills

Chris, If so, then that is an inconveinent truth. An inconvenient truth that will not help the present argument about its use in houses but it may keep us honest. EPS used for food packaging versus buildings is significant in its end use. Food packaging is usually a one time use that ends up fairly soon in the landfill. EPS in homes have a tendency to last at least the life of the house. Big difference in the value to society. I think you and I will continue using EPS in the construction of buildings regardless how China rules for or against it. Right?

It may come as a surprise but the pending legislation (pending means it has not happened yet) is not about packaging.
They do not care about shipping over things that end up in OUR landfills. (think packaging)
I got the answer I was looking for--Americans are too smart to look ahead. If anyone brings up a subject that is not something the regulars want to talk about then they are just stupid and probably a communist who fell off the bamboo scaffolding too many times.
When the action happens that the original post was about happens, remember where you heard it first.
If not then it obviously is not valid because one time a few years ago a building fell down in China and that is proof positive that we are smarter than they are.

Posted By tesla-was-right on 08 Sep 2011 11:34 PM
It may come as a surprise but the pending legislation (pending means it has not happened yet) is not about packaging.
They do not care about shipping over things that end up in OUR landfills. (think packaging)
I got the answer I was looking for--Americans are too smart to look ahead. If anyone brings up a subject that is not something the regulars want to talk about then they are just stupid and probably a communist who fell off the bamboo scaffolding too many times.
When the action happens that the original post was about happens, remember where you heard it first.
If not then it obviously is not valid because one time a few years ago a building fell down in China and that is proof positive that we are smarter than they are.

Tesla; You are absolutely correct; the Chinese do not care about OUR landfills, nor do they care about selling us toys with lead paint to our babies! Their legislation on EPS packaging has already been enacted for THEIR landfills. They don’t give a rats behind about OUR safety and welfare THEIR actions are louder than THEIR words! If they ever ban EPS in construction, we will be ever so grateful for the Tesla “heads up” 如果中国这样一个伟大的社会，我会很高兴有助于您的机票

Thanks Chris for your kind offer
You are wise to study the language of your new landlord your shortsighted leaders have sold you into servitude to
Take a trip sometime and you will see the Europeans also do not build temporary houses out of material that could succumb to a host of unnecessary potentially catastrophic failures. In America it is more likely that the mortgage will outlast the materials you build with
Hopefully the fires are under control by now??
Hopefully one or two of the people directly impacted will stop the cycle by choosing yo rebuild with a quality product

Tesla,
When I owe a landlord one months rent it's my problem!
When I owe the landlord one years rent it's his!
Grab a brain I know the Chinese are intelligent but that does not mean every Chinese is intelligent (use mirror please).
When they make a mistake does that mean we all make a mistake? They built 80+% of the Olympics venues from sips with MgO and EPS core materials (?) or did another Chinese National lie to this form (?).
So I am to believe that yet again the Chinese in their wisdom put untold millions of people at risk!
Perhaps yes due to shoddy workmanship practices which as an ex employee of CCSEC I know all to well!

The root of the problem is a lack of understanding of our natural environment. Forests burn. Coastal areas erode. Rivers flood. Humans must learn how to live and build in these environments or stay away from them. There is a price to pay for the beautiful natural view out of our homes windows. EPS is not the problem.

Posted By tesla-was-right on 08 Sep 2011 11:34 PM
It may come as a surprise but the pending legislation (pending means it has not happened yet) is not about packaging.
They do not care about shipping over things that end up in OUR landfills. (think packaging)
I got the answer I was looking for--Americans are too smart to look ahead. If anyone brings up a subject that is not something the regulars want to talk about then they are just stupid and probably a communist who fell off the bamboo scaffolding too many times.
When the action happens that the original post was about happens, remember where you heard it first.
If not then it obviously is not valid because one time a few years ago a building fell down in China and that is proof positive that we are smarter than they are.

They've been working on it for years, and yes, much has already happened (more than a decade ago) and yes it was about packaging:


http://www.dairynetwork.com/article...y-Yea-0001

BEIJING (March 25) XINHUA - The State Economic and Trade Commission (SETC) has announced that the production and use of styrofoam food containers will be banned by the end of this year.

A recent issue of China Township Enterprises News reported that the styrofoam food containers have caused serious "white pollution " in China and will be replaced by substitute products made of paper and natural fibers such as rice husks and wheat shells.

Official statistics show that China uses some 10 billion styrofoam containers annually, weighing about 100,000 tons and taking about 200 to 300 years to be decomposed and absorbed. Yet the recycling rate of these containers stands at only 3-5 percent at present.

The production of styrofoam food containers will be halted immediately and of related production lines will closed. The SETC will revoke the licenses of the manufacturers found in violation of the regulations.

The government has listed the promotion of biodegradable food containers high on its agenda. The Ministry of Science and Technology, State Environmental Protection Administration and related departments have placed priority on developing environmentally-friendly products. Enditem 25/03/99 08:57 GMT

-------------------end clipped text from 1999--------------

Then in 2005, the ban was extended to include other disposable packaging:

http://www.plasticstoday.com/blogs/...what-waste

But I'm not yet clear on what the new extended ban does and does not cover and whether it's merely directed at one-time-use applications vs. a wholesale ban on all EPS manufacturing (which would be pretty sweeping, China being a serious world player in EPS production.)

Rumors abound that they're even going to lift the ban on use of EPS for disposable plates & cups, etc:

http://www.plast-world.com/china-to...-3468-news

SOOoooo...

What's all this about China banning EPS, really?  I'm looking for a reference.

Posted By ICFHybrid on 08 Sep 2011 10:12 AM

In an american style of living the transitory suphur builds up and caused problems.

Are you talking about Americans having "tight" homes?

I beleive that is the knock... because we build superior energy efficient homes they don't breathe enough for the sulfer ridden Chinese drywall. ...........its odd that the US drywall works just fine in those tight homes

http://www.flickr.com/photos/texasparkswildlife/

The answer my friend, is blowing in the wind. The answer is blowing in the wind.

"as long as people can insure stupid, they will build stupid" (insert firewood houses in place of stupid)

Posted By tesla-was-right on 16 Sep 2011 11:01 PM
http://www.flickr.com/photos/texasparkswildlife/

The answer my friend, is blowing in the wind. The answer is blowing in the wind.

"as long as people can insure stupid, they will build stupid" (insert firewood houses in place of stupid)

great case to build with steel

I agree steel is a little better and than building with firewood and shows at least a little imagination. However, since a thin steel sheet over foam cannot pass the thermal transfer tests such as E-119, you would not fare any better in a fully involved fire. (I know you have an "assembly" approved. Your assembly of a panel with hat channel and two layers of fire-x is proof the two layers of sheetrock and the space created by the hat channel will delay the thermal transfer for a while. One could take a piece of tissue paper and encase it in enough thermal isolation to get an approval like that. In a fully involved fire your steel will melt at a relatively low temperature and the foam will melt and flow out the seams and the building will fall. Period. What I am saying is that all of that is unnecessary and, in my opinion, not a responsible action. To continue to build with temporary materials and expect a permanent result is lunacy.

Posted By tesla-was-right on 18 Sep 2011 12:03 AM
I agree steel is a little better and than building with firewood and shows at least a little imagination. However, since a thin steel sheet over foam cannot pass the thermal transfer tests such as E-119, you would not fare any better in a fully involved fire. (I know you have an "assembly" approved. Your assembly of a panel with hat channel and two layers of fire-x is proof the two layers of sheetrock and the space created by the hat channel will delay the thermal transfer for a while. One could take a piece of tissue paper and encase it in enough thermal isolation to get an approval like that. In a fully involved fire your steel will melt at a relatively low temperature and the foam will melt and flow out the seams and the building will fall. Period. What I am saying is that all of that is unnecessary and, in my opinion, not a responsible action. To continue to build with temporary materials and expect a permanent result is lunacy.

Tesla was right, but you may be wrong. Our approval is for a 1 hour Load bearing rating "ASTM- 119-05a" . At the conclusion of the test the EPS foam core was completely intact.Which a logical conclusion would be that the panels would sustain much longer than 1 hour, but for certain one hour of direct flame contact from a passing wild fire. The stucture would be still be intact. EPS does not flow anywhere. Codes require 1 layer of drywall anyway, so to add a second layer to the exterior envelope is cheap insurance for anyone in a forest fire prone area. We have tested proof that our panels would fare well in a fire.

tesla, it is clear that you have some preferred building material, but I don't think you've come out and said it yet in this thread.  I would be interested to hear what you think we should all be building with.

mortman Thank you for your reasonable question. There are several ways to build that do not burn in a few minutes and do not create a chemical soup in which, even though each individual item is below the off-gas maximum, the total combined interaction creates a toxic soup. A reasonable man with a natural curiosity also looks at the way in which the testing is conducted. If the results are only cited in lab conditions or at ambient temperature, one must wonder what the performance is in real world conditions (where most people live) All of the systems I, personally would advocate (ie, put my children in) are one form or another of concrete and mineral based foam for insulation. People who would but their baby in a Styrofoam cooler, put the lid on and then provide mechanical aspiration--sometimes with a manual switch--are nuts in my opinion. New materials are being developed but probably one will have to go outside of the US in order to see true innovation due to the lack of a market and the contracted economics in the US at the moment. In my travels around the world I see mostly concrete construction except those cultures who are extremely poor in finances or in spirit (have a temporary mindset) MGO board is certainly a step in the right direction -- and most of the world sees that--even though most of it comes from China as of now--- I know, I know, parts of China use bamboo for scaffolding--as if that is pertinent and a building fell over in China, and they do not look like us, etc, etc. (in all of China last year 28 people fell from scaffolding) these things happen even on proper staging. by the way, one billion (with a B) birds died in the US from colliding with glass on high rise buildings. Maybe we should ban the use of glass.

Tesla-was-right; if you are going to put a baby in styrofoam cooler, poke a hole in the lid. Or if you live in a EPS foam insulated home they are not "hermetically sealed". Ya still gotta open a door to get in and out. There are also other points of air leakage in any home. While I have an ERV in my home I have not needed to run it. I no longer endorse the ERV's as they are simply not needed.

Chris,
did this onset of the inability to have a lucid thought start after sleeping in a very tightly built foam house with no air exchange. The occasional opening of a door is not sufficient to qualify for ensuring a safe interior environment--especially in the bedrooms.
If you can show me the official testing showing the validity of your claim that one should not even provide an ERV then I will be surprised.
In the meantime I will still say it is extremely irresponsible to say such a thing on a forum where everyone may not be astute enough to study the issues for themselves and wish to just take it from the "experts" even if those "experts" are self appointed.
It may come as a surprise but not everyone goes in and out daily (invalids, shut-ins, reclusive researcher types) Also, some people take trips to see the world and leave the house closed up during their trip. Maybe they will come home on a chilly day and not leave the windows open for a few hours to provide a much needed air exchange.
Laying the issue with OSB and foams aside, there is AMPLE reason to advocate for sufficient aspiration and air exchange from just the off gassing inherent in the furnishings and carpets and drapes, etc.

Get some fresh air now and then.

Posted By tesla-was-right on 25 Sep 2011 06:28 AM
Chris,
did this onset of the inability to have a lucid thought start after sleeping in a very tightly built foam house with no air exchange. The occasional opening of a door is not sufficient to qualify for ensuring a safe interior environment--especially in the bedrooms.
If you can show me the official testing showing the validity of your claim that one should not even provide an ERV then I will be surprised.
In the meantime I will still say it is extremely irresponsible to say such a thing on a forum where everyone may not be astute enough to study the issues for themselves and wish to just take it from the "experts" even if those "experts" are self appointed.
It may come as a surprise but not everyone goes in and out daily (invalids, shut-ins, reclusive researcher types) Also, some people take trips to see the world and leave the house closed up during their trip. Maybe they will come home on a chilly day and not leave the windows open for a few hours to provide a much needed air exchange.
Laying the issue with OSB and foams aside, there is AMPLE reason to advocate for sufficient aspiration and air exchange from just the off gassing inherent in the furnishings and carpets and drapes, etc.

Get some fresh air now and then.

Tesla; Th eopening the door is a tongue and cheek comment. Hovever, I have no drapes, very little carpet and very little fabric furniture in my home, no OSB, no particle board. I don't drink nor do drugs my thoughts are quite lucid and still have some common sense................... Even inavlids are having visitors bring in groceries and mail. But there are many areas of leakage thru negative pressure in which air is drawn into a home. Send me your email and I will send you the testing. If it is a concern you can still open a window

Chris, do you put expanding foam in all of the seams (top, bottom and sides) of the steel SIPs when you erect them? If you don't then I suspect that could allow infiltration. Otherwise, how do you account for the amount of infiltration that you're seeing? I guess temperature fluctuations of the air inside the house could cause a "bellows" like effect, pushing air out, and then pulling fresh air back in. Is your AC dehumidifying your air?

Posted By Dick Mills on 25 Sep 2011 06:19 PM
Chris, do you put expanding foam in all of the seams (top, bottom and sides) of the steel SIPs when you erect them? If you don't then I suspect that could allow infiltration. Otherwise, how do you account for the amount of infiltration that you're seeing? I guess temperature fluctuations of the air inside the house could cause a "bellows" like effect, pushing air out, and then pulling fresh air back in. Is your AC dehumidifying your air?

Dick; of course my AC is dehumidifying the air, besides cooling thats what it does and the reason for a condensate tube. The air in my home during the summer is a constant 74 degrees it never changes. Panels are foam to foam contact no spray foam @ joint. Air infiltration will occur from: windows, doors (sliding glass doors and double doors are particularly bad), while not running back drafts from range vents, bath vents, dryer vents and fireplace flues, fireplace freshair intake, any penetration thru envelope such as wires, plumbing pipes and plumbing vent stacks. Any exhausting vent that runs and/or HVAC system that runs will cause negative presure in a home and infiltration will occur where mentioned above.