Hi Jan,
Thank you for the kind words.
I read through the GP website information about paperless gypsum board and here are
my thoughts. If a home is properly built, i.e., it is built to reduce
moisture from known sources, is built with good insulation levels to keep interior
surfaces warmer, is built with the proper barriers within the building envelope
and has a proper ventilation system, there is no need to worry about mold growing
on drywall or anywhere else for that matter.
I didn't see anything mentioned in the website that talked about the "green-ness"
of the product from a production point of view. In other words, that using the
fiberglass mat to hold the gypsum together was actually more green than using
recycled paper. The "green" they are talking about is related just
to moisture problems in buildings and the growth of mold and how that relates to
indoor air quality. In fact, I wonder if there is an issue with the
fiberglass mat from a health or "green" point of view?
The problem I have with this, is two-fold. First, here we have another giant
company jumping on the "green" bandwagon and promoting a product that may or may
not end up making a building more green. After all, mold grows in a
lot more places than just drywall paper and the mold is just the "canary in the
coal mine" telling you that there's an underlying problem that is not being
addressed. This brings me my second point. In my 20 year career,
I have witnessed, and continue to witness to this day, a reluctance on the part
of a lot of people to accept the notion that our homes must be built properly,
which also means being mechanically ventilated. Products that promise
to withstand the assault of moisture while promising good air quality don't do
anything to further the cause that we need to mechanically ventilate our homes.
Someone reading the GP website might get the idea that if they use GP's
paperless gypsum board, that their air quality will be much better. I'm
not convinced of that. If they've got enough of a moisture problem to
cause mold to grow on drywall, then I submit that they've got enough of a moisture
problem to cause mold to grow in other areas too. Using a drywall
that doesn't promote the growth of mold will have no positive affect on the
underlying problems in the home. If the builder does not pay attention
to air leakage, and the leaking air carries moisture vapor with it through a wall
assembly, and the moisture vapor turns to a liquid within the wall assembly,
what the heck difference is it going to make if the drywall is paperless?
I believe "green" construction has much more to do with building science and
the use of proper building techniques than it does using specific products.
Furthermore, I would submit that because of the "green" marketing that is
inundating industry magazines, people are easily distracted from those techniques
that would best serve them to build green homes in favor of products that make
questionable claims. In other words, why don't we get the building
envelope built right first, get the mechanical systems right first, start building
foundations that are completely insulated and have the proper barriers first;
then we can talk about paperless gypsum. I think you'll find that if
the house is properly built first, 90% of the "green" goal will have been
met. Leaving me to wonder if it's worth going after the remaining
10% by seeking out heavily marketed green products; or, $25,000 alternative
energy systems for that matter.
It's just not as sexy to talk about air/vapor barriers as it is to talk about solar
water heating. So when a magazine decides to do a "green" article,
they focus on those "green" ideas that sell magazines. Where does that
lead the average person? In a direction that is not best suited to
their real goals.
Now maybe I'm just making too much of this as I sometimes do! But perhaps
I've given you a perspective on this that you are not getting anywhere else?
Regards,
Greg Roberts