I primarily use wood and some other material as well. Can you point to me to which specific document? I noticed the PVC was mentioned in a video.

Found it. I don't know the percentages of the material used but I think the PVC used is the binding agent. I suppose an alternative product, similar to this using rice hull that uses a different binding agent that is not based on plastic or have bad stuff like formaldehyde, etc. It would be interesting when such a product is made if such a binder is made that has durability equal to or better than the PVC.

While I would prefer to use actual wood whenever possible (and still for structural (and other building materials), if I were to use any sort of composite, pvc/vinyl containing product, this is one of the ones that I find to be better (than some or many) and more fitting when used on new buildings in historic districts (regarding alternative wood-like material) and applications where it actually looks very much like wood and not look like plastic or so "fake". 

I might get a few 'samples' (and low-quantity stock to do some kind of real world exposure tests and such) At least in my area. With actual historic buildings (listed and non-listed), I would still emphasize the priority to use material of like kind as much as possible). 

Whereas, an accessory structure, this *could* be a potentially acceptable wood-like alternative. If a better non-plastic binder can be used to eliminate use of PVC and yet comparatively perform, even better from the environmentally friendly, sustainability-oriented practice point of view. 

I can understand the goal of a product based on rice hull that can be used to reduce demand for wood in the larger perspective of managing environmental resources.

What kinds of real woods do you typically use Wood Guy?

Rick, their website is currently unresponsive so I can't tell you which brochure, but it was a general one, 15 pages long, not one of the several "technical" brochures where you would expect to see the materials listed.

Natematt, I often use eastern white cedar shingles, and sometimes white cedar boards, such as on this project: https://www.maines.design/portfolio/updatedurbanfarmhouse.

On another project we used Alaskan yellow cedar (technically a cypress) for the trim with white cedar shingle siding. Another current project will have unfinished eastern white pine reverse board-and-batten siding. Yet another will have horizontal shiplapped white pine with a painted finish.

Sometimes I have used western red cedar boards, clapboards or shakes; here's one with random-width WRC shiplap: https://www.finelinesmaine.com/gallery/item/broad-cove-contemporary. I had custom knives made so water doesn't sit on the shoulders.

I have also used western hemlock clapboards and trim; that's what we used on this modest but very high-performance project: https://www.maines.design/portfolio/trailside-net-zero. 

I prefer to use local woods and not wood from old-growth trees, so white pine and white cedar are my go-tos. I want to use more eastern hemlock, like my architect friend here: https://www.bluetimecollaborative.com/rooms-with-a-view.

Damn I love that PG garage. Mind if I ask what the ballpark construction budget was? Im assuming the interior shots are all within the same overall building?

*Edit, on second look I think I have that wrong ..

I found the PVC stuff by googling the EPD https://modern-mill.com/downloads/epd-for-modern-mill-acre/


You ever use modified woods like Kebony or Accoya? 

Curious about recommended finishes for the natural woods, had a project with WRC, and we had some issues with the finish within the first year. Product itself seems to be working well though. 

Thank you Nate for the link for one of the documents. It's mentioned in a few other document and a video. It isn't like they don't at all disclose that but they certainly are keeping low key about the PVC because when it comes to sustainable products market, there is a sizable portion of the customer base in this field that is nearly if not religiously anti-oil based products and plastics, and such.... as if it is evil. I rather not take that particular tone quite to such a religious zealot like level. 

I did notice they aren't exactly disclosing the percentages of PVCs and other plastics and such of the products manufacturing. Noted as confidential where they may have submitted a confidential supplement to SCSGlobal Services for reasons like trade secrets and such... akin to KFC's secret recipe. So it isn't publicly disclosed. I do not know if they patented this or their particular process. 

I would reason the manufacturing of the the composition of rice hull and such to be similar to Resysta products: https://resystausa.com/ - which produces a similarly made rice husk/hull pvc binded product.

I believe the composition of the products would be similar with slight differences in exact make-up. Some of Resysta's product profiles reminds me of composite decking with the hollow profile where ACRE product line are more "solid" profile. If I were to use them, in situations where the butt ends of the boards are used, the solid profile is preferred from an architectural aesthetics point of view. Of course aesthetics is not all that matters. I did find this article of Fine Homebuilding website about ACRE: https://www.finehomebuilding.com/2021/10/26/alternative-wood-option-acre-modern-mill-rice-hull

Thanks, Bench! I think it's my favorite project I've designed that's actually been built. If I were to push my own design aesthetic more it would look a lot like that. I think it was around $80K, in 2020. It's a new outbuilding and we also turned the original, attached garage into living space and made a bunch of other interior changes to the house.

Natematt, I have spec'd acetylated wood and thermally modified woods several times but as far as I know, so far none have been installed. I forgot one product my builders and I do like and use often, LifeSpan--it's plantation-grown wood with a mild pressure treated preservative.

@Richard

I wrote a longer response and didn’t save it fast enough… ugh.

 Anyway, I was saying, the PVC is the main ingredient in the Resysta product at 40%, so that’s not a good sign for either of the companies. Resysta is at least open about having PVC in it as they very clearly post an HPD on their site, which is a better indicator of product transparency anyway. MM knows that EPDs, HPDs, Declare, etc are industry standard for transparency in sustainable/healthy material cir cles, and I am very doubtful the confidential percentages are of any real critical value from a trade secret standpoint. I think it’s 100% marketing since they are trying to sell the product as sustainable, and they know PVC marketing poison to a lot of companies. 

 I doubt this product would ever get specified on a building my firm works on given the PVC issue, but that said we are all out here using PVC for other things that are hard to avoid for price reasons. As much as we might try not to, it happens.

When I look at the raw material in the Resysta documents, ~60% rice husk/hull, and ~40% being salt and mineral oil. (adding the approx. percentages together). Ironically, do not outright indicate percentages of "PVC" or "plastics", etc. unless that PVC/plastics and binder is made from salt and mineral oil and trace percentages of other ingredients. 

I'm not a chemist nor was it in my college studies. So, it is something I have done as much study beyond knowing how to make photo emulsions and such incidental to my work past (pcb etching for example) and present (pertinent to the work of building design). Not to what I would consider a professional chemist level. Others may have done more academic study or experience in chemistry. 

The reason that I would like to see some of those numbers is that it helps in a more scientifically informed approach to sustainable building design. Can't fault me for not wanting to know that.

Additional to the PVC matter is how well the product performs over time. If it fails in 6 months to maybe a few years, not so good. Actual performance in real-world situations or even in a mock model study that is tested in real environment exposures for a study that is comparable to real-life practice.

Where are you getting those percentages from?

The HPD is real clear that PVC is 40%.
https://resystausa.com/technical-center/testing-certification/

This EPD I had to find on google matches that info, but is clearer about the other materials which the HPD is not. This is a little older and not available through the ideal channels, but given the alignment with the HPD I'm guessing it's probably accurate. 
https://www.greenbooklive.com/...

PVC is made of Vinyl Chloride(the VC in PVC), and VC is definitely not made of salt and water.

Salt is sodium and chloride, and water is hydrogen and oxygen. Vinyl chloride is made of carbon, hydrogen, and chloride. So different molecules made of mostly different elements. You may have heard a bit about Vinyl Chloride recently given that it’s what that train in ohio spilled all over causing an ecological disaster. It’s not good stuff.

Well… not good for the environment. From a performance standpoint, PVC is generally pretty good. Pipes, windows, roofing, floors, etc. It’s all over in buildings. In lots of places we’ve found ways to replace it with more sustainable stuff, but it’s still pretty common, especially in cheaper construction and has been a bit hard to replace in a cost effective manner for things like resilient flooring. Here is an article about PVC flooring relative to the recent train derailment. https://www.fastcompany.com/90855194/the-dirty-truth-about-your-fake-wood-floors

I'm anti-PVC in general, mainly for the external effects such as the train derailment, and the high levels of cancer-causing dioxins created when it is formed, or when it meets one of its common fates, being burned. Like most petroleum products it's amazing at what it's good at; modern life wouldn't be possible without plastics. But they have downsides, such as various emissions, and also that they last a very long time in the environment.

You'll hear more about PFAS if you haven't already; it's what makes Teflon, Scotchguard and similar products work, and causes serious health problems. It's likely what killed my FIL and has caused major health issues for my MIL. Like PVC, the health and environmental impacts of PFAS have been known within the industry for decades, but because we live in a corporatocracy, the risks are downplayed in the pursuit of profits. 

But sometimes plastic or other petroleum products really are the best choice. My friend Corinne has an excellent blog for chemically sensitive people; here's her recent take on flooring: https://www.mychemicalfreehouse.net/2021/04/zero-voc-flooring.html.

Did you see the movie Dark Waters with Mark Ruffolo. Crazy.

No, but I can imagine. My mom used to study dioxin poisoning and from what I recall it's scary stuff.

My firm has a general ban on using PVC, we don't have any product samples in our libraries that have it and we don't spec it on projects unless required by owner. Commonly we end up with PVC pipes in particular for cost reasons though, and sometimes other things.

While it is the production and disposal that are often most problematic, using it in things like flooring in particular seem like a bad idea. The article I posted above points out that it can have negative effects on interior environment even in use. Additionally, for something like flooring that's far more likely to be replaced in high volumes after relatively short periods of time. 

You don't "have to have binder," because you don't have to use plastic composites, despite what the industry has convinced people.

I'm not saying you have to use plastics but how would you hold a bunch of little rice husk together to form a singular whole as a product without something to "glue" the pieces together?

You need cement as a binder to hold sand and aggregates together to make concrete. 

I'm looking up or trying to figure out if there is a non-plastic "binders" that could be used as an alternative to the "plastics" that will achieve similar properties.

I think the point is that you don't have to use this type of product. Most manufactured wood products don't use PVC... But from some of the stuff i'm reading on this, the PVC level performance (because it is mostly PVC) is a real selling point... and honestly pretty deceptive. I did a little googling myself, and thought this article was kinda hilarious given what we now all know about the product composition: https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/article/rice-husk-siding-and-trim-board

Composites in general are problematic because mixing materials in a way that makes them difficult to separate ensures that they will never be recycled. Lignin is a good natural binder; it's what holds wood together. But it's not durable enough to use to glue rice hulls together. This conversation reminds me of bamboo flooring--glue together grass and ship it across the world, slap a "green" label on it and feel good about yourself! ;-)

On one hand, I do kind of support the idea of upcycling/recycling waste products that would otherwise be landfill. The biggest concerning issue rests with the use of plastics to bind the husks. Environmentally more sustainable alternatives to pvc would be interesting. I know they exist to bind. It's done with kitchenware. The question relates to the product makeup. Kitchenware might be too brittle and stiff but not sure they can behave quite like they need to be for the application so perhaps layers of interweaved long natural fiber mesh so they can perform. I say natural fiber without specific type of fiber as that would be determine by product research.