Comparison of a Wooden House and a Porous Concrete Masonry House, Essay Example

?urica, Pavol; Badurové, Silvia; ?asnocha, Peter. Comparison of a Wooden House and a      Porous Concrete Masonry House. Slovak Journal of Civil Engineering, (2014), Volume 22, Issue 2, pp.1-6.

?urica, Pavol; Badurové, Silvia; ?asnocha, Peter compares a wooden house and a porous concrete masonry house to bring out the difference that allows them to make a final conclusion on the best building material based on different factors.

The article evaluates the continual rise in the cost of energy globally. The article underscores that the only solution for decreasing energy consumption is to build constructions, which at least to passive standards. Thus, in order to meet these standards, the authors recommend that there is the need to use ecological building materials that have very low impact on the environment in their whole life cycle. The article finds that, despite the intensive public debate on the advantages of utilizing natural materials for building in the past years, whereby investors either do not trust such constructions or discouraged by greater investment costs. The authors use comparison methods to evaluate good building materials that should be used in the modern environment coupled with the environmental impacts. The authors, through effective economic, ecological, and building energy balance assessment find out that based on outer measurements, as well as the dispositions of both assembly family buildings remained preserved, wooden houses are more spacious founded on useful areas. Furthermore, the article underscores the reality that the impact of buildings on environments, wooden houses have much better preconditions, primarily in their confrontation will silicate variety. The mining and industrial production of these materials lead to high energy along with environmental demands. It is clear from the article that stores of silicate materials are projected to last for approximately 200 years. Lime-sand blocks that have markedly better ecological balance that porous concrete, present a more suitable alternative, like the use of graphitic extruded polystyrene rather than traditional polystyrene material. Nonetheless, the article addressed the issue of environmental problems posed by these building materials through comparing wooden and block houses.

The article offers valuable information that is supported by statistics and calculations to compare the building materials. For instance, through calculations by the authors, it was found that wooden houses have lower weight and much lower requirements for material transport that has a positive influence on lowering air pollution. The statistics were important towards understanding better building materials and makes recommendations, which is valuable for engineers and other stakeholders in the building industry. The information provided is useful in allowing the engineers make important decisions. The authors were realistic in their assessments because it is clear that they used tables and graphs to support their ideas regarding effective building materials.

Furthermore, the technology used in block buildings is more demanding, as not only would a mobile crane needed for building operations, but also other machines will be needed, for example the concrete mixer. The liquidation is quite fast for wooden houses, and there is the possibility of recycling or changing the building waste into energy during combustion. Block houses require more demolition work, as well as the costs for moving and storing the building waste  are greater. Thus, the wooden construction appears to be costly alternative despite of the reality that wooden houses have greater rates of building works and also have less need for technical equipment in the building site. Block houses need a higher amount of water during the construction period and is much time-consuming and needs more technological breaks as compared to wooden houses. But once the block house is completed it lasts for longer. Therefore, blocks are better wooden for construction purposes.