This will be a sort of series describing the differences between ICF construction and Cob(b) construction. When I started my new job, I quipped the basic difference between my husband and me is that he’s ICF and I’m Cob housing. My husband likes to insist that when we build our dream house it should be ICF, especially if it lines up next to some State Game Area somewhere. I have many sustainable desires, and I want our dream house to be formed from the (local) ground in a thoughtful, heat tolerant (slow to cool and slow to heat) manner.
One of the gal’s I now work with, a gal on our Sustainability Team, is building an ICF house as her dream house.
Maybe it’s not as bad as I thought.
So, I’m going to explore it in this series. The goal is to examine differences in a post at some regularity, weekly or monthly, the difference between ICF and Cob(b) to come up with at least guidelines I’m comfortable with or arguments why ICF won’t work. That is, I’m either going to convince myself it’s sustainable or have a list of cons why we shouldn’t pursue this form of building when we get to the time build our dream house.
You’ll be able to find these posts in the menu under “ICF v. Cob” and through the many sustainability tags.
- Big Surprise: New Study Shows Insulated Concrete Forms Are Better Than Crap (treehugger.com)
- An English Pub (Public House) (xwidep.com)
- The frontier cconomy and the culture of monotony (energybulletin.net)
- ParKnPool Builds New Million Dollar Green Operations Center (prweb.com)
- Green Framing Offers More Sustainable Homes (cleantechies.com)
- David Shepler: What Does It Take To Achieve a Net-Zero-Energy Home? (huffingtonpost.com)