The eco house (yawn) yesterday had a huge concrete block and stone
spine wall with solar heating pipes in it, and was to be used as a
storage heater to release heat at night.
However, the spine wall penetrated the outside wall (and kevin said
the roof as well). So it was open to the elements at the edges. Surely
this does not make sense !
Simon.

On Nov 4, 11:02*am, sm_jamieson wrote:
The eco house (yawn) yesterday had a huge concrete block and stone
spine wall with solar heating pipes in it, and was to be used as a
storage heater to release heat at night.
However, the spine wall penetrated the outside wall (and kevin said
the roof as well). So it was open to the elements at the edges. Surely
this does not make sense !
Simon.

I was wondering what would happen if or when the pipes started
leaking. Were they sealed in or could you get access to repair them?

We were in Ambleside last month - there's a plaque in the Ambleside
pier building indicating the height of the 2009 flood, so it was
interesting to see it on film!

--
Halmyre

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember sm_jamieson
saying something like:

The eco house (yawn) yesterday had a huge concrete block and stone
spine wall with solar heating pipes in it, and was to be used as a
storage heater to release heat at night.
However, the spine wall penetrated the outside wall (and kevin said
the roof as well). So it was open to the elements at the edges. Surely
this does not make sense !

Yep, that struck me as daft, too.
I couldn't find any further info about the wall on the G/D site or on
the designer's one.

On Nov 4, 11:02*am, sm_jamieson wrote:
The eco house (yawn) yesterday had a huge concrete block and stone
spine wall with solar heating pipes in it, and was to be used as a
storage heater to release heat at night.
However, the spine wall penetrated the outside wall (and kevin said
the roof as well). So it was open to the elements at the edges. Surely
this does not make sense !
Simon.

I thought the roof was pretty stupid. The thing was only strong
enough for a thin layer of soil. I suspect it will dry out & the grass
will all die. If it was thicker soil, it would have massive weight
when wet. I'd love to know what they covered the roof with (under the
soil).
I dunno why these "designers" have to go against a thousand years of
experience. Just to create a talking point I expect. It will have to
be demolished in ten years I bet.

On Nov 4, 11:02*am, sm_jamieson wrote:
The eco house (yawn) yesterday had a huge concrete block and stone
spine wall with solar heating pipes in it, and was to be used as a
storage heater to release heat at night.
However, the spine wall penetrated the outside wall (and kevin said
the roof as well). So it was open to the elements at the edges. Surely
this does not make sense !

Having just got round to viewing it last night ...

Why on EARTH did he build the extension bit (the bit they moved
into)? He knew he was short of funds to start with, and the bit round
the old house was supposed to be big enough for living in during the
winter.

The geodesic roof was stupid too - there was no visible curve on the
roof in the direction the purlins would have gone.

I found the whole thing incredibly painful to watch - it was like
watching a car crash in slow motion.

On 2010-11-08 14:13:42 +0000, Martin Bonner said:

On Nov 4, 11:02*am, sm_jamieson wrote:
The eco house (yawn) yesterday had a huge concrete block and stone
spine wall with solar heating pipes in it, and was to be used as a
storage heater to release heat at night.
However, the spine wall penetrated the outside wall (and kevin said
the roof as well). So it was open to the elements at the edges. Surely
this does not make sense !

Having just got round to viewing it last night ...

Why on EARTH did he build the extension bit (the bit they moved
into)? He knew he was short of funds to start with, and the bit round
the old house was supposed to be big enough for living in during the
winter.

Indeed. The 6 metre high slate wall (!) was such a clearly delimiting
feature that it made total sense to make a habitable half a house
first, and then do the rest later. OK, lay the foundations if you
really want to, but stop there.


The geodesic roof was stupid too - there was no visible curve on the
roof in the direction the purlins would have gone.

I found the whole thing incredibly painful to watch - it was like
watching a car crash in slow motion.

I was amused/interested by the build a big tent over the entire build.
It was something I'd wondered about but didn't know if it was feasible.
Seems it's feasible for a year.

On Nov 8, 3:55*pm, Piers Finlayson wrote:
I was amused/interested by the build a big tent over the entire build. *
It was something I'd wondered about but didn't know if it was feasible.
*Seems it's feasible for a year.

They are pretty normal around here when doing a loft conversion (which
is very common). Allows you to take the roof off, without letting
water into the house below.

In article
,
Martin Bonner wrote:
On Nov 8, 3:55 pm, Piers Finlayson wrote:
I was amused/interested by the build a big tent over the entire build.
It was something I'd wondered about but didn't know if it was feasible.
Seems it's feasible for a year.

They are pretty normal around here when doing a loft conversion (which
is very common). Allows you to take the roof off, without letting
water into the house below.

Correction. 'Without letting as much water into the house below.' ;-)

--
*You can't have everything, where would you put it?*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 2010-11-09 13:51:14 +0000, Martin Bonner said:

On Nov 8, 3:55*pm, Piers Finlayson wrote:
I was amused/interested by the build a big tent over the entire build.*
It was something I'd wondered about but didn't know if it was feasible.
*Seems it's feasible for a year.

They are pretty normal around here when doing a loft conversion (which
is very common). Allows you to take the roof off, without letting
water into the house below.

Where's "here" - somewhere less wet and windy than mid-Wales?