2 ms·
Thank you for pointing that out, I should have set out my qualifiers, it is definitely not for everyone nor every use case. I favor the extremely stable propert
by yourapostasy 9y ago
Thank you for pointing that out, I should have set out my qualifiers, it is definitely not for everyone nor every use case. I favor the extremely stable properties and far lower environmental impact over XPS. For my specific use case, I want an application where the lifetime of the building is measured in >100 years, without having to go in and replace the insulation during that period, and without significant deterioration from the ocassional penetration of water or dampness. I wanted the natural flame retardant properties without doping in chemicals that have to be extracted out later with solvents (yielding its own set of recovery, recycling and disposal challenges) during recycling like we currently have to employ with recycling XPS (if the recycling facility extracts it out at all). I really like the concept of building this insulation once, and being able to re-use it indefinitely until it is physically compromised, capturing the embedded energy to make the insulation in a one-and-done cycle.
I'm not a huge fan of plastics or styrofoams outside of very well-contained use cases since its breakdown in the outside into extremely small pellets is already easily detectable in our seawater-based salt supplies, and unabated, I'm not sanguine about our keeping it from pervasively entering our food supply. The actual plastic itself I'm not too happy about mainly because it represents energy waste to me, and at least those types that have phytoestrogenic effects are still debatable. The doped compounds attached to those plastics however, I'm not terribly enthusiastic about that stuff leaching out into our environment and letting the sun and weather eventually breaking them down before they materially damage our bodies.