[GRRN] Fwd: Deconstruction outlook

GaryLiss@aol.com
Thu, 22 Apr 1999 16:31:15 EDT


--part1_ce2e723b.2450e113_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 4/22/99 12:09:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
editor1@jgpress.com writes:

<< Subj: Deconstruction outlook
Date: 4/22/99 12:09:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: editor1@jgpress.com
Sender: jtrnet@valley.rtpnc.epa.gov
Reply-to: jtrnet@valley.rtpnc.epa.gov
To: jtrnet@valley.rtpnc.epa.gov (Multiple recipients of list)

The outlook on deconstruction is fairly bright as momentum builds with
new projects and support from the federal level. Nobody would claim that
deconstruction is economically competitive with demolition in every
situation. But there definitely are times when it beats demolition --
without government grants. (Should we really begrudge pilot
deconstruction projects their government grants when huge corporations
receive considerable subsidies for polluting activities?) Of course,
there also are the environmental and social benefits of deconstruction
projects.

The magazine In Business -- Creating Sustainable Enterprises and
Communities has published articles on several deconstruction outfits
that are making it work on the economic, environmental and social
levels. We profiled Pete and Robin Hendricks in our March-April issue.
Here's an excerpt from "Small-scale Projects Set Big Example In
Recovery":

One of the Hendricks' recent projects involved the deconstruction of a
4,000-square-foot house in Pittsboro, North Carolina. The original
portion of the dwelling was constructed in the 1830s, with additions
built in the 1890s, 1920s and 1940s. The cost for demolition and
landfilling would have been $35,000. Hendricks and a crew of seven
deconstructed the home in 15 days in October for $30,000. In addition,
approximately $20,000 worth of materials were salvaged for use in
construction of an office building for the Rural Advancement Foundation
International-USA (RAFI) on the same site, meaning that transportation
and storage costs of the deconstruction materials were avoided as well.
"That project will save them between $30,000 and $50,000," Hendricks
says. "And they're going to have a beautiful building made with old
growth pine." He estimates that the recovered heart pine would cost four
or five times as much as new lumber.

Also in that issue is a story on Beyond Waste of Santa Rosa, California,
which since its formation in 1995 has worked on approximately 20
deconstruction projects and outright beaten the cost of demolition in
examples cited by the article ("Mastering The Art Of Deconstruction").

Other examples are DeConstruction Services in Minneapolis, a outgrowth
of the Green Institute ("Reuse Center Refines Model for Selling Used
Materials," January/February, 1999), and Earthwise, Inc. in Seattle,
which has carved out a niche for deconstruction of homes scheduled for
demolition ("Company Builds Up While It Tears Down," July/August, 1998).
We also have profiled companies doing well by selling used building
materials.

In anyone is interested in receiving the two March/April articles, I'll
send you a sample issue of the magazine.

Dave Block
Associate Editor
In Business -- Creating Sustainable Enterprises and Communities
http://www.jgpress.com
>>

--part1_ce2e723b.2450e113_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: <jtrnet@valley.rtpnc.epa.gov>
Received: from rly-yd02.mx.aol.com (rly-yd02.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.2]) by
air-yd01.mail.aol.com (v59.4) with SMTP; Thu, 22 Apr 1999 15:09:02
-0400
Received: from valley.rtpnc.epa.gov (valley.rtpnc.epa.gov [134.67.208.16])
by rly-yd02.mx.aol.com (8.8.8/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id PAA06631;
Thu, 22 Apr 1999 15:08:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from valley (valley.rtpnc.epa.gov [134.67.208.16]) by
valley.rtpnc.epa.gov (8.8.7/8.8.0) with SMTP id PAA05101; Thu, 22 Apr
1999 15:07:27 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 1999 15:07:27 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <371F38C1.2616@jgpress.com>
Errors-To: jwhitehe@erg.com
Reply-To: jtrnet@valley.rtpnc.epa.gov
Originator: jtrnet@unixmail.rtpnc.epa.gov
Sender: jtrnet@valley.rtpnc.epa.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: editor1@jgpress.com
To: Multiple recipients of list <jtrnet@valley.rtpnc.epa.gov>
Subject: Deconstruction outlook
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: EPA's "Jobs Through Recycling" Grants Network

The outlook on deconstruction is fairly bright as momentum builds with
new projects and support from the federal level. Nobody would claim that
deconstruction is economically competitive with demolition in every
situation. But there definitely are times when it beats demolition --
without government grants. (Should we really begrudge pilot
deconstruction projects their government grants when huge corporations
receive considerable subsidies for polluting activities?) Of course,
there also are the environmental and social benefits of deconstruction
projects.

The magazine In Business -- Creating Sustainable Enterprises and
Communities has published articles on several deconstruction outfits
that are making it work on the economic, environmental and social
levels. We profiled Pete and Robin Hendricks in our March-April issue.
Here's an excerpt from "Small-scale Projects Set Big Example In
Recovery":

One of the Hendricks' recent projects involved the deconstruction of a
4,000-square-foot house in Pittsboro, North Carolina. The original
portion of the dwelling was constructed in the 1830s, with additions
built in the 1890s, 1920s and 1940s. The cost for demolition and
landfilling would have been $35,000. Hendricks and a crew of seven
deconstructed the home in 15 days in October for $30,000. In addition,
approximately $20,000 worth of materials were salvaged for use in
construction of an office building for the Rural Advancement Foundation
International-USA (RAFI) on the same site, meaning that transportation
and storage costs of the deconstruction materials were avoided as well.
"That project will save them between $30,000 and $50,000," Hendricks
says. "And they're going to have a beautiful building made with old
growth pine." He estimates that the recovered heart pine would cost four
or five times as much as new lumber.

Also in that issue is a story on Beyond Waste of Santa Rosa, California,
which since its formation in 1995 has worked on approximately 20
deconstruction projects and outright beaten the cost of demolition in
examples cited by the article ("Mastering The Art Of Deconstruction").

Other examples are DeConstruction Services in Minneapolis, a outgrowth
of the Green Institute ("Reuse Center Refines Model for Selling Used
Materials," January/February, 1999), and Earthwise, Inc. in Seattle,
which has carved out a niche for deconstruction of homes scheduled for
demolition ("Company Builds Up While It Tears Down," July/August, 1998).
We also have profiled companies doing well by selling used building
materials.

In anyone is interested in receiving the two March/April articles, I'll
send you a sample issue of the magazine.

Dave Block
Associate Editor
In Business -- Creating Sustainable Enterprises and Communities
http://www.jgpress.com

--part1_ce2e723b.2450e113_boundary--