The roof previously was not properly sloped and water pooled in the middle. Birds loved this but it wasn’t that great structurally. To make things worse, water from the roof  poured onto the garage roof which caused problems when there was heavy rain (as last spring.). When the roof was repaired they removed the wood and reinforced the posts with Blu Wood. They sloped it to the rear of the house and added new eavestroughs there which directed the rain to the back yard (and rain barrels.)

Late yesterday afternoon the heavens opened. While it was still raining we noticed that water was pouring into the attached garage and from there into the basement. The basement wasn’t flooded. There was just a pool of water at the bottom of the steps into the garage. But now I am really concerned that the leak that I thought I had repaired by redoing the garage roof and adding the new siding has been exacerbated instead of repaired and that having the new siding may make it hard to identify the source of the leak and the insulation may also get soaked. Fortunately Roxul (the mineral fibre insulation that we used) is not damaged by water but presumably the wood studs could be.

It is going to take some time to sort this out, especially when the roofing company has been very difficult to deal with, and they will probably point a finger at the siding company. Stay tuned …

It turned out that the strapping was 8 ins from wall and we could add an additional 2 ins of insulation. That allowed another R7 to be added to the existing R22 for a total of R29.

On the addition there was already 4 ins studding and insulation on the first floor. On the second floor the studding is 6 ins with plywood attached to that and then a further 8 ins of studs before the siding making a total of 14 ins of insulation (on the top floor.) That is R29 + R22 (R51) so it will be very warm. On the first floor it will be a total of 12 ins (R 44.)

As expected on an old house, complications arose. One was the fact that the vent pipes for the high efficiency gas furnace were in the way of the siding and had to be extended. Unfortunately the standard for this vent had changed so that the existing plastic could not be extended and has to be replaced entirely. The first quote for doing this work was around $1000 which I declined since they wanted to charge $18/foot of vent + labour. (Unfortunately another company who quoted $2.50/foot and agreed to do the work has been a no show.)

Another problem – the deck adjacent to the addition needed to be cut back to allow the siding to be attached correctly. It still is not restored. Then the fence between my property and the neighbour’s needed to be cut in order to add insulation to the back of the addition. That needs to be replaced.

Still to be done – repairs to the drywall on the interior to the addition – to determine the extent of the water damage I had removed some of it.

I’m happy with the new siding although the deeper window wells will take some getting used to.

The insulation is Roxul (mineral) insulation. There is 2 by 6 inch strapping attached to the brick. Given that there are termites (and carpenter ants) in my neighbourhood I insisted on all wood being treated  with insect repellent. He is using Blue Wood … the “Blu” is a brand name.

After the strapping and insulation are installed he will cover it with Typar (a vapour barrier) and finally the James Hardie fibre cement siding.

The problem with using 2 by 6 strapping (to handle the R22 insulation) is that it could be too heavy to support the siding. He resolved this problem by adding a bottom plate which will support the strapping and keep the siding from being in contact with the ground.

Another problem – there is insect damage to the wooden addition at the rear of the house. There had been a leak in the roof that had gone undetected – inviting insects to do their thing. I wanted all of the siding removed right down to the existing frame in order to determine the extent of the damage … it was not pretty. I wanted any damaged wood replaced. 

This is happening right now. After the wood is repaired (the existing 2 by 4 is being replaced with more Blu wood) plywood will be added and then more 2 by 6 strapping and R22 insulation. The result will be that the addition will have R39 … R19 on the interior of the plywood and R22 on the exterior.

Removing the existing siding exposed a few gaps in the existing interior wall which explains why there were drafts there.

However, I have now decided I needed to tackle one of the bigger tasks I have stalled on – I’m a great procrastinator – applying insulation to the exterior of our house. Since it is an old (~100 years old) brick house, it is not realistic to insulate the interior. It would require a lot of ripping out of lath and plaster, and or significantly reduce the indoor square footage. 

However, insulating the exterior is not as simple as I had hoped. I want something that looks in keeping with the house yet provides the maximum insulation possible. I consulted with a couple of contractors. And I also decided to consult my guru, Danny Harvey, an expert in energy efficiency for buildings. He recommended that I get R20 insulation and consider Neopor as the insulating material. I also wanted to use cement fibre siding. Both of these products do not use HCFCs in their manufacture.

The problem I am wrestling with now is that the contractor who specializes in the Hardie cement fibre siding doesn’t want to install more than R10 insulation (2 inches) because any more than that would make it difficult to attach the Hardie siding to the bricks. Also the local Neopor distributor does not appear to be enthusiastic about selling the product for a small project like ours. The components are imported from BASF in Germany and then processed into rigid boards by the local company.

Another complication is that the house has a wooden addition at the back of the house. This addition has suffered water damage, so I must do something about it soon. There isn’t the same problem with this addition because it has a wood frame and originally had wood siding which we covered with Aluminum siding shortly after moving in. I will have both sidings removed and start from scratch. 

But the question about the brick exterior is unresolved. I checked with Danny Harvey again and he recommends that I hold out for R20. He is in Germany at present at a conference on Passive Houses and is getting information on materials that might be better for my situation. I may proceed with the addition and wait for the brick walls until my options are clearer.

I was disappointed to discover that there was a veritable gale coming from the window jambs around my new windows. Since these were retrofit windows the window installers did not remove the original frames, but inserted the new windows into the existing frames. They were supposed to foam and caulk the area between the new windows and existing frames but they must have missed a few spots. The draft-proofing technicians sealed the leaky jambs with silicon, and the gale stopped. They also insulated the basement headers with sprayed on foam (R12).

It will be interesting to see how this will affect my heating bills for the winter.

You may wonder if my return trip was any better. It wasn’t. Although I confirmed the departure time of the bus from Queretaro to Monterrey (where I had to transfer to the bus to San Antonio, Texas) I did not think to confirm the arrival time in Monterrey. According to  Greyhound’s schedule (and my ticket) I would arrive in Monterrey about 90 minutes before the other bus was due to depart. However, I arrived 20 minutes AFTER the next bus left.

I was in the frustrating position of trying to find another bus that would get me into San Antonio in time to get the train to Chicago (which was scheduled to depart the following morning at 7 am.) My non-existant Spanish did not help. I was able to get a bus which departed 90 minutes later, but it was due into S

an Antonio around 7 am (the actual arrival time could not be guaranteed because of the unpredicability of the time required to clear US customs.) Clearing US customs was a breeze – no questions other that showing passport. I was amazed because we spent around 60 minutes clearing customs on the train from Toronto to Buffalo. It was possible that the bus might arrive in San Antonio in time to get the train.

The bus arrived in San Antonio about 6:50 am but they took their time off-loading luggage. In the meantime I hailed a taxi and had the driver wait until I got my luggage. My only (very faint) hope was that the train had not departed on time. But that was not to be. We arrived there about 10 minutes after the train departed.

I knew from the schedule that it stopped in Sam Marcos about 80 minutes later and 50 miles away. The taxi driver got instructions on how to find the Amtrak station in San Marcos and said he would get me there for $100. I really had no choice because the other option was to wait 24 hours and possibly have to pay another fare for the entire trip. We set off for San Marcos and arrived there with about 15 minutes to spare (although the instructions for finding the station were not clear so he had to stop and ask for directions.)

He left me at the “station” although really it was what I would call a “halt”. In fact I had to ask someone where the platform was because there were no signs to it. Fortunately it was ideal weather as I waited on the platform … and waited and waited … I was worried that it had reached San Marcos before I had and had left ahead of schedule. I watched the track anxiously … and was very relieved when I heard the whistle and saw the approaching train. It was about 20 minutes late already but I was so happy that I wanted to hug it!

The rest of the trip to Chicago was relatively uneventful except that we arrived there 4 hours late – my plans for doing some sightseeing had to be abandoned. Sleeper passengers boarded 60 minutes before departure and instead of dinner (it was round 9 pm.) they served us wine and cheese.

We left Chicago on time and travelled overnight to Buffalo arriving slightly early! There was about 5 hours to wait for the train to Toronto and I was considering taking a taxi to the Greyhound station to see if there was a bus that would get me to Toronto earlier.

But luck was with me this time. A fellow passenger offered me a lift with her husband to Burlington GO station (GO is the Government of Ontario commuter train service.) They were driving to Brandford. They had a mini-van with lots of space to take my luggage. I happily accepted their offer. Clearing Canadian Customs took a couple of minutes and we arrived at the GO station in time for the 1 pm train. I was home around 2:30 pm instead of 10 pm. I was very grateful for their kindness. It compensated for all of the other frustrations.

So what did I learn from my return trip? I learned that I have to triple check departure and arrival bus times in Mexico. I learned that I have to leave lots of time for transferring to avoid missing connections. I learned that Amtrak is congenitally late due to having to wait for freight trains to pass. And it is useful to bring a Spanish phrasebook for emergencies.

But I also learned that taking a long trip on a train can be enjoyable. It allowed me to meet very interesting fellow passengers in the dining car and I had the opportunity to finish a few books that I never find the time for at home. I also relearned that complete strangers will go out of their way to help you when things do not go according to plan.

I’ve been asked whether I would do it again. The answer is yes. I’d make sure to allow at least two days to allow for delays. I’m going to learn some basic Spanish phrases.

This fall I am attending a course given by Prof. Danny Harvey at University of Toronto. Danny is a member of the IPCC and an expert in Energy Efficiency. In the last lecture he discussed the energy requirements of the food system. His closing statement was that cutting back on meat consumption is the single most effective change that we can make to reduce our carbon footprint … more effective than not driving a car, not travelling by air, insulation our homes etc. I guess I’ll have to aim for 100% now.

http://site.climateletter.org/

Here is one quote from the site: “We owe it to our children to vote strategically for the environment in this eection. Time is running out …”

The English text follows:

“We have been disturbed by what we perceive to be a lack of attention to the environment during this election campaign. While it’s clear the public accepts that global warming is a threat, it seems people have simply no idea how serious this issue is. Global warming is without a doubt the defining issue of our time, and we cannot let economic turmoil in the USA dissuade us from addressing the problem. Dealing with the environment means dealing with economics in a sustainable way.

Global warming is a problem that must be dealt with now, before it’s too late. Any further delay will only increase the risks of damage and costs of action. The world needs to start down a path of greenhouse gas reduction to avert the most serious consequences of global warming. Many may not realize that even if we immediately stabilized atmospheric greenhouse gases at current levels, the Arctic would still go ice free in the summer, between 10% and 25% of the world’s species would still be committed to extinction, and weather will continue to become more extreme. We have as much warming in store over the next few decades as has already transpired since preindustrial times when the Thames River in England used to periodically freeze over. Why is this so?

Let’s suppose you place a pot of room-temperature water on the stove and then turn the element on. Does the water immediately boil? Of course not; it takes time for it to heat up and eventually boil. Even if you turn the element down a bit, the water continues to warm. The only way to stop the water from boiling is to turn the element way down or off. But even then, the water doesn’t cool to room temperature immediately. It slowly loses its heat to the surrounding air. It’s the same with the climate system. When you add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, it takes a while for the oceans to warm up and heat the climate system; even if you stop emitting greenhouse gases completely, it also takes a very long time for the oceans to cool down.

We are at a critical juncture in Canadian history. The 14th United Nations Conference of Parties (COP14) to the Climate Change Convention will be held in December in Poland and COP15 will follow next December in Copenhagen. It is at this latter meeting that a post-Kyoto global warming treaty will be proposed. It is absolutely critical that Canada play a constructive role in negotiations leading up to this event.

In the last two years, Canada has obstructed international efforts designed to develop policies to deal with global warming. At the 2007 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Uganda, Canada scuttled attempts aimed at getting consensus on a strongly worded commitment to greenhouse gas reduction. At the United Nations meeting in Bali in December 2007, Canada was an international embarrassment, winning a record total of fourteen not-so-flattering Fossil of the Day awards given by the international organization Avaaz.org to the countries who did the most to block progress. Canada resisted all attempts to include specific reference to reduction targets by 2020 proposed by the European Union and others. Our country also blocked efforts to include language calling for global emissions to peak in ten to fifteen years.

So how do Canada’s current policies look? The current government’s plan focuses on emission-intensity not emissions reductions. Reducing emission-intensity means that you continue to pollute, but do so more efficiently. For example, as part of the plan the oil sands sector will be required to reduce its emissions intensity by 2020. But oil sands production could quadruple by that time. The overall net effect of the federal regulation would be to allow a tripling or more of greenhouse gas emissions from the oil sands sector by 2017, and possible continued increases after that. Frankly, no matter how you try to spin it, that is not a reduction.

Economists around the world agree. There is only one way to deal with global warming. And that is to put a price on emissions. This can be done through either a carbon tax, a cap and trade system, or both.

The carbon tax provides price certainty, is easier to implement, more transparent, easy to make revenue-neutral and less open to abuse. Cap and trade systems require self-regulation and reporting, cumbersome bureaucracy to administer and take a long time to implement while details, such as credit for early action, process of awarding emissions permits, and reporting requirements get worked out.

In both cases the price is passed on to the consumer through an increase in the price of carbon-intensive products. In the carbon tax case the consumer sees what price is added whereas it is obscured in the cap and trade system.

It is disingenuous to claim on the one hand that the carbon tax will cause an economic disaster and on the other hand advocate for a cap and trade system. They are equivalent economic instruments that have the same effect of pricing emissions. Ordinary Canadians deserve to be told this and not have the issue obscured in political rhetoric.

On the other hand, perhaps Canadians have decided that we owe nothing to future generations and that we don’t care about the future of modern civilisation. We, the undersigned, think we do care. In 2008, we urge Canadians to vote strategically for the environment.”