Youtube Idiots

JakeCK

Yea lets build an off grid house with an outdoor boiler in NH and not put heat in the bedrooms. Nah we don't have no codes up here. A couple space heaters and it'll be fine...

Maybe we should scrap the IRC, NEC, IBC, IPC, etc. And just let natural selection do it's thing... If only it wasn't for dumb luck.

Yes I know technically you don't need heat emitters in every room to meet the requirements. And this is often possible with high performance houses. But they ain't building a high performance house. 2-3" of spray foam on 2x6" walls hardly cuts it and 3" on the vaulted ceilings doesn't even come close. They gonna be cold.

/rant

EdTheHeaterMan

And this is in reference to a video you don't want to share?

JakeCK

I don't want to advertise their channel or video.

Jamie Hall

You should have seen some of the horror shows I saw in Vermont back in the late '60s and early '70s... hippie communes, back to the land... oh my.

JakeCK

https://youtu.be/Qi9D5sRjJyg?t=394

JakeCK

Jamie Hall said:

You should have seen some of the horror shows I saw in Vermont back in the late '60s and early '70s... hippie communes, back to the land... oh my.

That made me chuckle.

TBH what they're doing isn't that horrible. Just the fact they are completely winging this build with regards to heating it in possibly one of the coldest areas of the contiguous US. And really what got me was when I quoted the IRC in a comment some other idiot replied there are no codes and they can use space heaters. Off grid. They have since deleted my comment quoting the IRC. And considering every single other comment is nothing but high praise I think they curate any negative comments.

delcrossv

^^^ LOL. "I think they curate any negative comments"
Can't allow any negative vibes- man. Well, Darwin will exact his price, vibes or not. 🤣

Tom_133

Jamie Hall said:

You should have seen some of the horror shows I saw in Vermont back in the late '60s and early '70s... hippie communes, back to the land... oh my.

@Jamie Hall You think its gotten better?! Still the same ole crew, just more of them.

In fairness, if someone wants to pay me to do something that will work but not what I prefer, fine. But its the ones who have it all figured out and ask me to do it wrong those are the rough ones.

psb75

Too bad they opted for an outdoor 'smoke dragon.' They'll be processing and storing a LOT of firewood, or else buying it in and storing it. They could have spent the same money and bought a really nice INDOOR wood boiler and burn 1/3 the amount of firewood. Except they didn't allocate the indoor space for an indoor boiler and DHW.

JakeCK

psb75 said:

Too bad they opted for an outdoor 'smoke dragon.' They'll be processing and storing a LOT of firewood, or else buying it in and storing it. They could have spent the same money and bought a really nice INDOOR wood boiler and burn 1/3 the amount of firewood. Except they didn't allocate the indoor space for an indoor boiler and DHW.

I don't even know how they plan to heat domestic water. No LP or NG, and they are running off solar and batteries. They do have a very large solar array but I think they are still going to end up way over taxing it and will come up short at the worst possible time. Coldest, longest night of the year with a ft of fresh snow on the panels. And they have made no mention of solar water heating. Maybe an indirect off the boiler?

They have said their plan is to build a bigger house in the future and heat both with that boiler and use that little house for something else so maybe that's why they aren't concerned about heating the upstairs. But for the cost of pex and the weekend afternoon to run it, it is cheap insurance.

ChrisJ

I've known people who built houses that were completely heated by a single wood stove.
The layout of the house is very important but it can and will work when done correctly.

Jamie Hall

ChrisJ said:

I've known people who built houses that were completely heated by a single wood stove.
The layout of the house is very important but it can and will work when done correctly.

When I lived in central Vermont -- decades ago -- our house had two stoves. A tiny Jotul in the kitchen annex, and a potbelly Glenwood in the ground floor room. Worked just fine. Well... with a nice comforter for the bed anyway.

KC_Jones

I have a friend that was heating with an old kitchen cook stove up until not that many years ago...in a modern construction "house". It was actually a 2 car garage with an apartment above it, stove was in one of the garage bays. The apartment was actually too hot in my opinion. He ended up divorced. There was a lot to unpack in that whole situation.

JakeCK

ChrisJ said:

I've known people who built houses that were completely heated by a single wood stove. The layout of the house is very important but it can and will work when done correctly.

I know it can work, and the code handles that by going by a minimum temperature that needs to be met. Not by demanding heat emitters in the room(s). But considering how little insulation they're using for their climate I'm willing to bet they will have problems when it gets real cold. Bottom line they have not mentioned in any of their videos any heat loss calculations, how they have sized the boiler, or even any kind of calculations for the radiant slab. Based on their indecision it's a pretty safe bet they haven't done any of the math off screen. Yet they were willing to spend 10's of thousands on foaming the house and still falling short of code minimum. Lol

psb75

A side benefit of spray foam is its air-sealing component. So...they've at least got that going for themselves. Downstairs radiant won't make the upstairs comfortable. It depends on how the two levels are separated (i.e. loft, # and type of stairwells etc.).

JakeCK

psb75 said:

A side benefit of spray foam is its air-sealing component. So...they've at least got that going for themselves. Downstairs radiant won't make the upstairs comfortable. It depends on how the two levels are separated (i.e. loft, # and type of stairwells etc.).

The air sealing is going to be real good. At least initially, doesn't spray foam potentially shrink and pull away from the framing as it ages?

If it was a loft like setup it would probably work. But it isn't, just an L staircase.

Edit: Actually that begs another question. How are they planning on handling ventilation. Doesn't foam off gas too? :P

psb75

Foam doesn't shrink...lumber sure does though! Good questions about ventilation. ALL designers/builders today should pay close attention to air quality issues. It's a hot topic of course, that is now 'raging' during the pandemic!

kcopp

psb75 said:

Foam doesn't shrink...lumber sure does though! Good questions about ventilation. ALL designers/builders today should pay close attention to air quality issues. It's a hot topic of course, that is now 'raging' during the pandemic!

Foam Does shrink...

https://foursevenfive.com/blog/foam-fails-reason-5-excessive-shrinkage/#:~:text=Foam shrinks unpredictably and excessively, compromising the air,Shrinks" in a Feb/March 2012 Fine Homebuilding Article.

ratio

Physics, what a downer. If only there were some institution that, I don't know, taught this kind of thing, or something.

JakeCK

kcopp said:

Foam doesn't shrink...lumber sure does though! Good questions about ventilation. ALL designers/builders today should pay close attention to air quality issues. It's a hot topic of course, that is now 'raging' during the pandemic!

Foam Does shrink... https://foursevenfive.com/blog/foam-fails-reason-5-excessive-shrinkage/#:~:text=Foam shrinks unpredictably and excessively, compromising the air,Shrinks" in a Feb/March 2012 Fine Homebuilding Article.

I've heard of these issues with foam, I've also heard of some of the issues with it curing if the mix is off, or the temperatures aren't with in range. 

The worst thing about it when that seal fails is that you now lose the vapor protection. Now it is even more risky to add additional insulation in the stud bay. 

Solid_Fuel_Man

I simply cannot understand the love for spray foam in a studded wall. All that thermal bridging. And it's so expensive, better to have spent money on a real wood burner. 

I could be off grid with my electrical consumption. Actually we just had an 80% increase in electricity.....so I'll just conserve more. 

For what it's worth, my own home has no emitters upstairs and radiant slab below and R35 walls and anR60 ceiling. Triple glaze windows etc. 

JakeCK

Solid_Fuel_Man said:

I simply cannot understand the love for spray foam in a studded wall. All that thermal bridging. And it's so expensive, better to have spent money on a real wood burner. 

I could be off grid with my electrical consumption. Actually we just had an 80% increase in electricity.....so I'll just conserve more. 

For what it's worth, my own home has no emitters upstairs and radiant slab below and R35 walls and anR60 ceiling. Triple glaze windows etc. 

Exactly. So expensive yet not as effective as other options

They did have a professional carpenter build the structure and dry it in. But he was old school. Headers even on non bearing walls. And all of the headers were dimensional lumber with plywood to make up the difference. Advanced framing allows for foam board in place of the plywood if your with in the limits, and doors and windows can be built with out headers on non-bearing walls. Reduces the usage of now very expensive lumber and reduces thermal bridging. 

They really are a good example of a family with more money than brains. 🤷

OH, in one video he mentioned that spray foam increases the strength of the house 300% because it glues it together. Hurricane strapping would probably be more cost effective if he was that worried about it.

Also at r-35 and r-60 your coming up close to passive house levels of insulation. I bet you leave windows open until November...

Jamie Hall

You know, there really are times when I'm very glad that the most recent building I care for is part of a house that was built in 1893 (the rest of the house was built between 1780 and 1829). Another building is 1872, and another is around 1800.

There are some interesting challenges (we've taken to milling all our own wood for repairs; "2 x 4"s which are a shade under 1 1/2 by 3 1/4 weren't all that common... and you often need wood which is a lot stronger than plantation grown pine or fir...) But on the whole... yeah. A little harder to heat... a little more expensive to repair damage... but they'll be there after a modern stick built place is long gone and forgotten.

JakeCK

Jamie Hall said:

You know, there really are times when I'm very glad that the most recent building I care for is part of a house that was built in 1893 (the rest of the house was built between 1780 and 1829). Another building is 1872, and another is around 1800. There are some interesting challenges (we've taken to milling all our own wood for repairs; "2 x 4"s which are a shade under 1 1/2 by 3 1/4 weren't all that common... and you often need wood which is a lot stronger than plantation grown pine or fir...) But on the whole... yeah. A little harder to heat... a little more expensive to repair damage... but they'll be there after a modern stick built place is long gone and forgotten.

Well built and energy efficient are not mutually exclusive. Both can be achieved. The issue is many contractors do not grasp the science.

Solid_Fuel_Man

My rant about construction.......

I work on repairs, and new construction, residential and commercial, with some industrial mixed in. 

It amazes me at the vast differences in wood framed buildings. I've seen some 100+ year old stuff which is horrendous, but is still standing. Joists cut with no support, heavy cast iron plumbing hung on them twisting them. 2x6 floor joists spanning 15 feet at whatever spacing they decided to do irrespective of the last ones they put in. This isn't from some 1960s bastardization either. 

I've also seen 1950s construction which is the same. Also some construction from the post war era which is so straight and tight that I bet you couldn't fit a sheet of paper between any of the [square cut] lumber. 

There are very few people in construction who truly understand how heat moves.....leaves a structure. Here in climate zone 7 that is an important factor. Sheet good insulation products are wonderful for that. 

To me spray foam is best for retrofit in older homes. Especially good for sealing up an attic very quickly with as little damage as possible to the interior. 

@JakeCK when I walk onto a jobsite which is new construction and I see headers in gable walls with a truss roof.....it's the same mental reaction I have when I see a contractor putting the circulators on the return on a new I stall boiler. They simply don't understand what they are doing. They just do it the same as they did the last one.....

Rant over....for now....

kenjohnson

Well built and energy efficient are not mutually exclusive. Both can be achieved. The issue is many contractors do not grasp the science.


The spray foam link is a little alarmist - it is on a site that sells air-sealing materials in competition with spray foam insulation. I agree that one should not rely on spray foam as the primary or only air seal because of the likelihood of failure, but one should not rely on any one "thing" alone - there she should be backups and multiple layers - they will all fail somewhat over time, for some reason.

My home renovation took place over a nearly five year time period. It is a 1920s arts and crafts home, framed with larch (very tough, rot resistant). The outside was wrapped in VP100 Blueskin and I also put 2" of foam in the walls. I also had to do a lot of acoustical caulking on the framing, and I eliminated every thermal bridge on the framing with 1/2" of polyiso insulation. The remaining wall cavity was filled with rockwool (time-consuming - I wouldn't recommend doing this, and wouldn't do it again). Attic has R-60 or more insulation (mostly cellulose, a little bit of Rockwool). It is all about attention to details - there is no one magic bullet, as much as the spray foam industry would like you to believe they have it. I did most of the air-sealing and insulation work myself because I would not trust a contractor to get the details right.

In any case, the walls were open for two years after being spray-foamed and before I installed the Rockwool. I never saw any shrinkage (I was looking for it). The frame was all old, dry larch, so that helped - there was no framing shrinkage. I can imagine that new framing that shrinks would be a problem with foam.

In any case, heat loss is maximum 20,000 BTUs per hour at 0 degree F in a 7500 degree day climate with <1.0 ACH50. Square footage is 1750 square feet.

kcopp

kenjohnson said:

Well built and energy efficient are not mutually exclusive. Both can be achieved. The issue is many contractors do not grasp the science.


The spray foam link is a little alarmist - it is on a site that sells air-sealing materials in competition with spray foam insulation. I agree that one should not rely on spray foam as the primary or only air seal because of the likelihood of failure, but one should not rely on any one "thing" alone - there she should be backups and multiple layers - they will all fail somewhat over time, for some reason.

My home renovation took place over a nearly five year time period. It is a 1920s arts and crafts home, framed with larch (very tough, rot resistant). The outside was wrapped in VP100 Blueskin and I also put 2" of foam in the walls. I also had to do a lot of acoustical caulking on the framing, and I eliminated every thermal bridge on the framing with 1/2" of polyiso insulation. The remaining wall cavity was filled with rockwool (time-consuming - I wouldn't recommend doing this, and wouldn't do it again). Attic has R-60 or more insulation (mostly cellulose, a little bit of Rockwool). It is all about attention to details - there is no one magic bullet, as much as the spray foam industry would like you to believe they have it. I did most of the air-sealing and insulation work myself because I would not trust a contractor to get the details right.

In any case, the walls were open for two years after being spray-foamed and before I installed the Rockwool. I never saw any shrinkage (I was looking for it). The frame was all old, dry larch, so that helped - there was no framing shrinkage. I can imagine that new framing that shrinks would be a problem with foam.

In any case, heat loss is maximum 20,000 BTUs per hour at 0 degree F in a 7500 degree day climate with <1.0 ACH50. Square footage is 1750 square feet.</p>

Its all about the details...

bucksnort

I question too the amount of foam installed. I've been following this channel for almost 2 years as entertainment. I had to comment to the guy that when his wife runs a nail gun she needs eye protection. You have to wonder how he finances all this stuff. He got a nice tractor/loader for free to showcase it on the channel. There's money to be made right now on the Tube and he is cashing in.. I'm amazed that every time he digs in the dirt he unearths boulders the size of a VW bug. Either he's pulling in $$$ from the channel or he inherited a nice trust fund. I wouldn't mind 1/4 of the guys energy.

JakeCK

That reminds me, this bozo was digging trenches that were above his head and was piling the dirt right up on the edge of the trenches...

THEN HE JUMPED INTO THE HOLE AND STARTED WORKING WITH NO SHORING! 

When I watched him jump into it with a shovel I actually yelled out ****. Startled the wife and kids in the room with me. I think he even had his wife in one of the trenches too... This guy claims he's worked construction in the past but based on his cavalier attitude towards safety and ohsa regulations I question his experience. Like I said pure dumb luck. 

I also like the one where he ran a nail through his leg with the nail gun. Maybe that's why he has a thing for screwing everything together? Lol

woobagooba

Idiots? Hmmm.

Call it $4 per 1000 views, that video has 137K views as of today. That's about $550 so far.

I count 192 vids on this channel last year. That's $105K video revenue.

Someone check my math

JakeCK

woobagooba said:

Idiots? Hmmm. Call it $4 per 1000 views, that video has 137K views as of today. That's about $550 so far. I count 192 vids on this channel last year. That's $105K video revenue. Someone check my math

It's been established that brains are not a prerequisite of money. They're cashing in on YouTube and making a good buck while doing it, cool. But the next time he does something stupid like jump into a 6ft hole with an 8ft high pile of dirt next to it and it all collapses on to him would you still considering him intelligent for trading his life for a few 100 thousands? Or spending half of what he made last year on YT insulating a house while not even meeting code minimum when it can be insulated to greater affect for a fraction of the cost. And further more would doing things safely and correctly reduce or increase the value of his YouTube channel?

I wonder what his daughter would think if he killed himself doing something stupid for YT bucks.

JakeCK

Maybe this is a better example of what I'm talking about:

Any else see a problem with this?

woobagooba

I hope this guy will learn on the job from his followers and commenters. At 105K / yr, that would be a well paid apprenticeship.
OK so now you sucked me into this Youtube channel
He seems to have done a good job with his water and air control layers. Zip sheathing well taped, the windows look to be properly flashed, full Ice and Water on the roof. House will be tight. Might need an HRV/ERV for air exchange.
Thermal layer? I would not have done the spray foam. I would instead have used ZIP R to break the thermal bridge and dense packed the stud bays with mineral wool.
But I am saying this not knowing what short term price gyrations he had with his supply chain.

JakeCK

He didn't frame the house or really do the zip sheathing. That was mostly the contractor he paid. It is well done though. His attention to detail around the windows is good, won't have a problem there. Maybe he learned from his shipping container debacle. This will be a tight house. But unless he adds more insulation to those stud bays he'll be at maybe r12 in the center of the bay. Considerably less where the framing is. Unless he uses an hrv he will have moisture and air quality problems. He's going to want an hrv over an erv just because of the moisture. And because of the low r value of that foam is he's gonna have mold. 4" of polyiso over the sheathing would have eliminated the moisture potential and combined with 6" of cellulose would have made for a really warm house heated by nothing but his own flatulence.

Zip r is only about 3r I think unless I'm mistaken. Far to low for the climate to keep the sheathing above the dew point, they easily get into the negatives Jan. and Feb.

woobagooba

"He didn't frame the house or really do the zip sheathing" ... but he was smart enough to pay for a proper job.
You can get ZIP up to R12. ZIP R or polyiso ... agreed w/ mineral wool or cellulose in the stud bays. Again caveats with supply chain / pricing madness.
What he do ... 4" inches closed cell foam in the walls? That will net him about an R20 wall (accounting for 20% thermal bridging of the studs). I was told last year that dense pack and spray foam were quoting close in price.

bucksnort

I thought his trench he was in for his hydrant line was going to collapse on him. He dug in super sloppy soil and he was standing in a foot of water in the bottom of the trench. I wonder if his wife would've edited out the cave in. When he shot himself with the nail gun was funny. I worked with a guy that shot MIG wire into his thigh one day. That had to hurt.
Ken's Carpentry has a YT channel to that I watch. He's old school that get's it done. I'd hire him. I wonder how much of a discount he got for the building to show Ken building the house? With 127K viewers I'm sure he's getting nice discounts on products as advertisement. He could triple his viewership if his wife wore a skimpy bikini like those sailing YT's

bucksnort

And this building is just his temporary digs. He's going to build a main house. I bet he has people willing to pay big bucks to stay at this shack and see the YT star in action. He does stuff and moves on. He cleared all the land at his old place and has done nothing with it. He built the greenhouse and hasn't shown it this year. I was going to tell him he needed a 8' foot fence around his blueberry shrubs but I'm sure the deer already did. I haven't seen their kid in a year. Maybe Social Services took her away. They're too much that doesn't add up even with 100K a year coming in from YT. Not sure price per acre for NH is but at 2K an acre that 500 acre would be a million $$. Just the well had to be over 20 and the solar 30 at least.

JakeCK

bucksnort said:

I  wonder if his wife would've edited out the cave in.

Kind of hard to edit out death. If the trench I posted the screenshot of would have collapsed he'd be dead before his wife even had a chance to turn the camera off. That's thousands of lbs of soil waiting to crush him.

bucksnort

JakeCK said:

bucksnort said:

I  wonder if his wife would've edited out the cave in.

Kind of hard to edit out death. If the trench I posted the screenshot of would have collapsed he'd be dead before his wife even had a chance to turn the camera off. That's thousands of lbs of soil waiting to crush him.

It's one thing to have 3 guys standing around that could jump in and start digging him out, but he's out in no mans land with just his wife standing there panicking. What's strange is last Winter they logged his "farm" out. He could've had them leave 10-20 cords of logs in a pile for later use. When he fires up that outdoor boiler, there isn't a stick of dry firewood anywhere. This is what will be interesting. And it will be in peak, sub 0 weather. Going to interesting what he comes up with to clean of his solar panels when a foot of snow sticks to them.