LEED notes - fly ash

a couple of notes on fly ash concrete - 

how is fly ash made?

from the combustion of coal.  fly ash is the residue gathered from the chimneys of coal-fired power plants.  it is one of two kinds of coal ash.  the other is bottom ash, which is, you guessed it, found on the bottom of the coal furnaces.

what is fly ash made of?

many, many different compounds.  silicon dioxide, calcium oxide, and other toxic constituents (including arsenic, beryllium, mercury, thallium, et cetera).

how is it stored?

at coal power plants and in landfills.  approximately 43% of the fly ash is recycled, which is utilized in the production of Portland cement.  it is also used in the synthesis of geopolymers and zeolites.

how is fly ash classified?

it is broken down into two distinct grades - class F fly ash and class C fly ash.  the difference between the classes are the trace amounts of calcium, silica, alumina, and iron in the coal ash.  these four elements all highly influence the way coal is burned during the process of fly ash formation.  

what is class F fly ash?

class F fly ash burns anthracite and bituminous coal.  it is pozzolanic (cementitious with calcium hydroxide) in nature, containing less than 10% lime.  it requires the presence of a cementing agent, typically portland cement with water, in order to cure.

what is class C fly ash?

class C fly ash is produced from the burning of lignite or sub-bituminous coal.  it is also pozzolanic, but also has some self-cementing properties.  it also contains 20% lime content, and unlike class F, does not require an activator for the hardening process.

how is fly ash recycled?

not easily.  with increasing landfill costs and with national efforts to push sustainable design, too many u.s. coal-fired power plants are reporting minimal tonnages of fly ash recycled.  this in turn causes unnecessary purchases of unwanted acreages in landfill space.  

what are the environmental benefits of fly ash?

the main benefit is the reduced demand for virgin materials that would need quarrying.  it can also easily substitute for similarly strong materials (such as portland cement).

what are the uses of recycled fly ash?

some include: portland cement and grout, embankments and other structural fill, waste stabilization, cement clinkers, soft soils, aggregate, and cellular units of concrete (geopolymers, roofing tiles, paints, etc.).

all in all, fly ash accounts for an innovation in design credit for the LEED AP exam, and it is fairly useful (not to mention enlightening) to know that even a sturdy unit of construction, which concrete is, can still be recycled economically and (somewhat) efficiently.

just do it

ah, the wonderful knowledge that nobody is paying attention.  whether it's on a drafting board, or in a kitchen, nobody seems to be following the recipes.  take for instance, the wonderful work of joshua prince ramus.  ramus is, truly, a masterful architect in that he actually is an architect.  or better put, he's a client's architect.  to ramus, the vision is thoroughly ancillary to the client's needs.  "do," he says, "it's much more powerful," adding, "i've never seen a client give a shit about my personal vision."  

ramus is not the example of ignorance - he may well be the anti-example - but rather the causal effect of it.  too often, one hears the words "conceptual development" propounded by elite schools of design.  whether it be in fashion, writing or cooking, a personal statement seems to be the underlying message sent from an older generation to a younger, more interconnected one.  this sentiment is a sign of the times - after all, contemporary architecture expresses the individual as much as the building - however, it can (and does) leave designers with a seemingly fundamental question: what is a concept?  

it's an answer best left to the pocketbooks.  simply put, a "concept" is so poorly defined, that quality architects, such as ramus, advocate process in design over conceptual development.  it is more economical to design with a solid program and be fundamentally absurd, he argues, than it is to "have a vision."

this all raises a question - is there a problem with conceptual development?  or more likely, is there some pedagogical complexity in arriving towards a foundational "concept?"  for chefs today, molecular gastronomy seems to present this dilemma - namely, how do you teach molecular gastronomy?  The lack of proper insight, or understanding of the science of taste, makes the most well-thought menus seem fundamentally childish, or child-like, in approach (depending on the skill of the chef).    

it's as if an entire nation of artists sat down for an exam, answers in hand, and only a handful of them could recall the order of operations to each particular problem.  as a young designer, i could care less for those answers (after all, they're just numbers or words), and could care more for the recipes, which although forgotten, are not entirely lost.

i'll say first that i'm not a designer who is inherently creative.  i'm more of a minimalist in that if someone shows me an idea (particularly other students or close friends), where they add, i tend to subtract.  this is why i find ramus so enlightening.  not because i agree with him, but because through his hegelian candor he's at odds with the liberal approaches young designers are taught.  "ideas [should] get torn apart," he boldly asserts, "the more interesting an idea, the more aggressive the tearing apart."

the success of this idea, and of his firm, OMA, should not come as a total surprise.  he's practically darwin at a drafting table, and it's hard to argue against the overall success of evolutionary theory.  

from contracts to buildings, from conception to maturity, ramus is doing far more for the realm of design than other proponents of "organic" design.  "biomimetics" ultimately seems too long of a shortcut for designers to get anywhere.  It often involves laborious contracts with consultants too often not relevant to the execution of a project.  "green" design or sustainable design seems to have some footing in the LEED AP process, but it's critics argue that at best, this form of design is in it's nascent stage and has yet to truly be tapped. 

ramus, as an architect, embodies the ideal that anyone can be creative if given their shot.  i won't kiss his ass and say he's a great architect - his project in louisville screams thinker and not designer - but he's smart enough to belabor himself to the position where he, and those he works with, can "tear".  essentially, he's listened to the fading voices around him, found the recipes, and started from scratch.  it's why he's a force to be reckoned with.  the famed american theologian paul tillich once quoted that "the first duty of love is to listen."  it's architects, like ramus, that "do."