New home retrofit business (unsealing homes)?

[Uncle Bob]

Providing of course, that you could re-educate homeowners who have purchased sealed homes; is there any law against "unsealing them" after they have been purchased?

I realize that there would have to be some research into the best methods; and, would be impractical in some new homes; but, for most homes couldn't it be done at a reasonable cost?

Just a few (off the cuff) thoughts:

1. Target wall stud spaces that have water lines in them.

2. Remove seals around electrical outlets.

3. Install grill covered openings (very small) in lower section of walls and drill holes in top plates and install piping to extend above insulation; to allow the movement of air.

Along with the above idea; investigate, and test interior manufactured products for toxins; such as marble counter tops for radon, and furniture, carpeting, imitation wood flooring, etc. for toxic chemicals.

Ok, poker tourney coming up; gotta go.

Uncle bob

 

[mark handler]

Uncle bob

Im sure Conarb will join in.....

 

[conarb]

Uncle Bob:

The California Building Standards Commission paid for a study from Panasonic, the fan industry, it was a great surprise to all that the study showed that people didn't open windows anymore, so fans must be installed in all new homes. They took ASHRAE 62.2 and eliminated the option of openable windows, and gave us a nice explanation in a sidebar as to why they had to do it.

As houses have been tightened upover the last twenty years due to

energy cost concerns and the use of

large sheet goods and housewrap,

what used to be normal infiltration and

exfiltration has been significantly

reduced. In the meantime, we have

introduced thousands of chemicals

into our houses through building

materials, cleaners, finishes,

packaging, furniture, carpets, clothing

and other products. The California

Standards have always assumed

adequate indoor air quality would be

provided by a combination of

infiltration and natural ventilation and

that home occupants would open

windows as necessary to make up

any short fall in infiltration. However,

Commission sponsored research on

houses built under the 2001

Standards has revealed lower than

expected overall ventilation rates,

higher than expected indoor

concentration of chemicals such as

formaldehyde and many occupants

who do not open windows regularly for

ventilation. The 2008 update includes

mandatory mechanical ventilation

intended to improve indoor air quality

in homes with low infiltration and

natural ventilation rates.

What people are doing is disabling the fans because they are so costly to run, others who suffer from pollen allergies are also disabling them, people who suffer from hay fever used to run into their homes and close their windows, I even hear radio commercials from nasel spray companies that tell people to go home, close all windows and doors, and spray their noses with Astelin®. The problem is living in toxic homes, homes built with junk from the forest floor to "save our forests", the CBO in Livermore actually told a lady to sell her million dollar vacant home and find a good 50 year-old home, sounds like good advice given the quality of materials in new homes today. Kind of ironic, old homes that weren't sealed-up use to do a pretty good job of filtering air naturally through minor leaks in the structure, they also didn't rot out from water trapped in the walls. So you don't have to unplug your minor air leaks, all you have to do is open windows, unless you are an allergy sufferer or a maniac or something. When I started in this business required ventilation was 1/16th of floor area, then it went to 1/20th, now it's 1/25th, and there are those who predict that we are headed to the day that codes will mandate no openable windows to "save the earth", and sell fans in the process. We who watched the code process in Minneapolis know how the code adoption system works don't we? We saw the bribe letters, we saw the firemen celebrating on the floor, we hard about what went on in the "hospitality suites". Do you really think that fire sprinklers are the only fraudulently obtained code mandates?

 

[RJJ]

UB: Food for thought! CA: if you were in Baltimore you saw the show shut down because it didn't meet the egress or fire code! Then a few hundred pipe fitters bussed in to vote to keep sprinklers alive! It is just about money under the cloud of life safety!

It is a sad day in America!!!!

 

[Uncle Bob]

Points taken; but, let's not go back to Minnesota and Baltimore here please.

Does anyone know of any law that prohibits "unsealing the homes" after Certificate of Occupancy has been issued? Code Section and/or law please.

Providing of course, that you could re-educate homeowners who have purchased sealed homes; is there any law against "unsealing them" after they have been purchased?

I realize that there would have to be some research into the best methods; and, would be impractical in some new homes; but, for most homes couldn't it be done at a reasonable cost?

Just a few (off the cuff) thoughts:

1. Target wall stud spaces that have water lines in them.

2. Remove seals around electrical outlets.

3. Install grill covered openings (very small) in lower section of walls and drill holes in top plates and install piping to extend above insulation; to allow the movement of air.

Along with the above idea; investigate, and test interior manufactured products for toxins; such as marble counter tops for radon, and furniture, carpeting, imitation wood flooring, etc. for toxic chemicals.

thanks,

Uncle Bob

 

[RJJ]

As far as changing products after a CO it would depend on if you need a permit. I would say removing a counter top that has radon gas coming from it OK. If you start to alter the energy requirements for which a CO was issued then I think a violation has occurred.

 

[Uncle Bob]

RJJ,

Yep, your right; I leaped before I looked. "Permits, R105.1 Required"; is worded to include any alterations to any code requirement.

I suppose the only thing that could be done is; go to the HOBB, HADD and other pro-safe-homes websites and provide instructions on how to make your home safe from government required sealing.

The Government has given itself the right to force human beings to live in sealed containers.

Uncle Bob

 

[RJJ]

That seems to be the path we are on. I don't like it,but it is a minimum code! However, at times it is over the top and down right oppressive.

Sometime I just want to throw the code book on the floor and say enough is enough.

 

[peach]

I guess I'll say it again; the other codes are all minimum codes - all this energy stuff is 30% above the minimum (or more in some places).

When everything else can be minimum/marginal products.. sealing it up doesn't make much sense.

As to a permit required; look for a lot of work being done without them.

 

[north star]

* * *

UB,

I agree with what has been stated above. What laws would be or

already have been violated, ...the laws of common sense for starters.

Big Brother is requiring [ forcing ] more and more mandates on the

populace every day. Some of it good, ...most of it "not good!" The

federal government has grown too large and empowered itself way

too much! Kinda reminds me of a fatted hog. It's past time to

slaughter it...

If a homeowner "unseals" the house / home to accomodate their

needs, so what? I think that their health would have primary

importance vs. what Uncle Sam dictates. Most all of the trendy

Green Building wave is a big sham hiding the political, self serving

interests of a few. Do we Americans need to reduce our energy

consumption? ...ABSO-FREAKING-LUTELY !! We definitely need

to get off of the oil teat, and especially, the "foreign oil teat"!

But that's not going to happen! The oil terrorists will continue to

serve up all of the oil that we can consume, ...when they want,

...how they want, and in what quantities they want. Has anyone

else noticed that there hasn't been any new refineries built lately,

or any new nuclear power plants? Hmmmmmm...

We Americans have become too soft, comfy and dependent on

consuming huge; and increasing, quantities of energy and have

delegated away our responsibilities and commonn sense to those

who willingly, knowlingly and arrogantly sell to the highest bidder

under the banner of "doing the peoples business". We have

slowly and gradually lulled ourselves into a full blown "oil addiction"

and the drug lords are supplying our every whim. "Waaaaaaah,

I need air conditioning! I want marble countertops, because

the other type of countertops don't match what the Jones' have.

I don't want an openable window in the bathroom, I want the

trendy glass blocks [ in a lot of cases, "plastic" blocks ]. That's

what the Jones' have... and on and on and on and on and on it

goes.

The idea that we American s "NEED" convenience has been sold

to us brilliantly and we have eaten it up! We are THE richest,

most powerful, most blessed country in the entire history of the

world and yet, we are continuing to consume more and more

energy and resources, but at what costs?

I think that peach has made a very profound statement. There

WILL be a lot of un-permitted work, both now and in the future.

People are sick & tired of Uncle Sam being in their lives so much.

Besides, the old addage of "seeking forgiveness is easier than

gaining permission" is all too true!

BTW, lead on Uncle Bob, ...lead on! Good to have you back!

FWIW, is that avatar picture your most current pic.?

* * *

 

[Uncle Bob]

North Star,

Yep, the picture was taken two years ago. I have a new hat now. Same type; just a little fuller.

And, Peach is correct; to protect themselves and their families people will start retrofitting their homes on weekends.

The mandate for adding outside air through HVAC duct systems is an example of the foolishness of the government to pretend that our well-being is important to them. Using electricity to force air into our homes is not enery efficient and natural ventilation is free.

The government allows manufacturer's to produce and market products that are known to be made with toxic chemicals that are harmful to humans (and you don't have to eat them to suffer).

I guarantee; that in the near future openable windows will not be allowed in new residential construction.

There are over 70,000,000 (70 million) single family residences in the U. S.; and, only the new homes are required to meet these requirements; for now. The next step; which Austin, Texas has already considered to take on; is for homes to be brought up to code prior to resale.

There are over 6 Billion people on Earth. How many will be affected by our silly regulations? Saving the planet? I don't think so. China and India are manufacturing toxic based products and shiping them to the U. S. as fast as our government requests them.

Uncle Bob

 

[ewenme]

Any building official who says the owner can't do what he wants after the CO is lying, or trying to threaten the home owner for some show of power. Once the CO is issued, all I can say is: 'Have a nice day.' We have no jurisdiction if there is no construction, remodel, demolition, etc. to look at. The Property Maintenance Code takes a different look, and it applies mostly to slum lords.

 

[jim baird]

Wasn't it Thoreau who said that when a man builds a house he is just making a box to die in?

 

[Robert Ellenberg]

I want to jump in because I see the "minimum" being thrown around as it is in many of these forum threads.

There may be instances where the minimum requirement of the code is just barely enough but I think most of the time it is more than adequate. I am a builder--not an inspector and I know we sometimes have differing viewpoints but I often see this thrown around in a way that insinuates that if you only build to code that a house is barely safe to live in and I think it is wrong to imply that.

I really appreciate how much information those of you who are inspectors share on this forum. The experience and expertise that you bring are invaluable to me as a builder and I have a whole file of notes that are strictly things I learn here. What I would like to see when you honestly think there is a section of the code that is barely adequate or "minimum", quote that part of the code and state why in your opinion we as builders should be doing it differently/better or whatever.

I also appreciate your honesty about all the green stuff as I totally agree. I have to do it and to some degree I will use it as a marketing tool, but I am already working on a disclaimer document to give to new owners warning them about the dangers of not ventilating their houses enough.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Robert

I appreciate the positive feedback and your appreciation of how much info is available here that you have been able to gleen.

What I would like to see when you honestly think there is a section of the code that is barely adequate or "minimum", quote that part of the code and state why in your opinion we as builders should be doing it differently/better or whatever.

I will try to remember to do that might even be a topic for a new thread someday

 

[jim baird]

Robert I hear your concern, but minimums are established only because they must be.

Designers and contractors both want to give the client what he wants, but the client doesn't always know what is deemed safe and/or legal. Ergo, the inspection role, which BTW, carries no burden of accountability, as does the designer/contrator's license.

Your post sounds to me more like some kind of statement against "gubmint" control over enterprise, no better example of the failure of which is evidenced by the Big Gulf Oil Spill.

Next question: Why is that event an occurrence of only regulatory failure?

Listeners yield the floor to those who might ask it.

 

[Uncle Bob]

Robert,

As, Jim Baird stated; most of the code refers to minimum requirements; so using that term is normal for us Inspectors. Every day we meet contractors who refuse to keep up with the "minimum" or even know what it is; so please understand our frustrations sometimes.

When answering a code question; I "try" to be sure to quote year and section that is applicable; but, as I'm sure you have seen; we also discuss the generalities and our opinions of the codes.

Before I retired; when inspecting; I always kept to the words in the codes; and not my opinion.

I am grateful that you are here; and wish we had more Builders on this forum. When I first started on the old ICC BB; I learned that a thick skin was a necessity. Although we do get into spitting contests; I believe that most of us would do anything we could to help others on this forum.

Uncle Bob

 

[RJJ]

EWENME: I have to disagree with you on this one! It is not lying or threatening! Our job is to enforce the code!!!! If they are altering what has been approved it would be a violation. I understand your position but it is not code enforcement. The CO is not some magic document that says we as code people have no more to do with the approved plans, specs and inspections. If we are not aware, then so be it. Sorry I can't turn a blind eye.

Am I going out of my way to find such stuff? No. Would I encourage it? No!