poppins Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 It depends on which State you live in, houses in some as States are mostly brick where other States build with wood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cressida Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 I'd move State if it happened to me, insurance if they can get it must be costly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 You never build brick houses in California unless you want a ton of the stuff coming down on your head during a quake. A house built on a concrete slab with a wooden frame on the other hand is able to move with the rolling motion of a quake and perhaps with the exception of a loss of a few roof tiles able to withstand all but the most severe quakes Garden walls are reinforced with steel re-bar in the centre to stop then toppling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Did they not teach you at school that these trees that you speak of (an ever decreasing number) are the main thing on the planet for reducing the carbon foot-print. Build an house of brick and you won`t have to do any reusing. Oh dear. Try looking at it from this angle: If you grow some trees they will remove some CO2 from the atmosphere. If you then use the wood from the trees to build a house the carbon from the CO2 stays in the wood. Then, when you replace the chopped down trees with new ones, you remove even more CO2 from the atmosphere. This does not happen when you use bricks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 It's always occured to me when a hurricane strikes in America, it wipes out whole communities, and it's very very distressing. But,.... shouldn't someone tell them, wood probably isn't the best choice of building materials where there is a likelyhood of hurricanes and other adverse weather conditions? Yep, I know bricks cost more, and roofs get blown off brick buildings..etc...But surely wood isn't a good choice, when you can feasibly lose everything! Just a thought Norway also uses a lot of wood in house construction, reason is there's a lot of it. An English friend here, who is a bricklayer, has had to repatriate because nobody is using brick any more. I have to agree with you. Back home, when I lived in Cornwall, I would see seafront homes being battered by huge waves and remain standing, while many homes along the Connecticut shore were wiped out. But on the other hand, a timber framed home can be quickly built, and if you have the right insurance, you're OK. The secret to living on the shoreline is to evacuate when you're told to. Some of the people who died refused to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppins Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Oh dear. Try looking at it from this angle: If you grow some trees they will remove some CO2 from the atmosphere. If you then use the wood from the trees to build a house the carbon from the CO2 stays in the wood. Then, when you replace the chopped down trees with new ones, you remove even more CO2 from the atmosphere. This does not happen when you use bricks. Good thinking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 If a wooden house collapses 1.it will inflict less damage 2.it can be rebuilt rapidly 3.wood is renewable,bricks are not I think the people in the USA are quite aware of different building materials and techniques without the intervention of an amateur from Sheffield with little engineering knowledge. I saw no harm in Pete Morris asking the question, nor was he intervening.As you say, Americans are well aware of what are the right materials and methods to be used, but most Brits are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 It depends on which State you live in, houses in some as States are mostly brick where other States build with wood There's lot of terraced brick houses in Pennsylvania cities, especially Philadelphia. That carries on into Maryland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buck Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 I'd move State if it happened to me, insurance if they can get it must be costlyA hurricane the size of Sandy is rare, especially when it is followed by this week's Noreaster. The last time this state was hit this hard was 1938. We've been hit with a few big ones, but not this much damage. Insurance rates or not, people continue to buy seafront homes at much higher prices than ones built away from the shore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted November 9, 2012 Author Share Posted November 9, 2012 It just seems logical to me, that a brick built home will withstand more than a wooden structure (I accept that in California, it may be a different kettle of fish). It's not even so much the home itself, as has rightly been pointed out, it can be rebuilt fairly quickly. It's the possesions and the treasured memories and documets and the photograpgs...and trinkets. How can you replace them? Someone said, About the bricks flying at 100mph.....sorry, but if I was in the cellar in my brick built home...Who cares!!!!! As for the sustainability of brick compared to wood...who cares about that either...it's your home!!!! At some point insurers will price the wooden homes out of ever affording it (except for the super rich). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.