posted 3 months ago
Writing this as much to clarify my own understanding as give any advice- I see a parallel between bricks/rocks/stones for construction here and dimensional/roundwood timbers. If you have dimentional timbers, it is much easier and faster, particularly for someone with limited experience, to put up a sound structure. If time and reliable results are a foremost concern, building the mass out of bricks will be more suitable than some sort of rocks/stones.
But there are two major advantages I see in roundwood and rock construction. The obvious one is just the reward of knowing you built something with a greater amount of your personal energy/ingenuity. To have something more unique rather than more mass produced junk filling up the world. No clear delineation here of what is worthwhile, but the more personal inputs into your permanent environment the better.
As a collarary, if you are in a situation where obtaining material from the industrial network is difficult for some reason, roundwood/rock construction could make more economic sense also.
More abstract, I'd say roundwood/rock/stone construction gives a preferential aesthetic over more uniform materials. This may seem like a totally subjective opinion, but after listening to Alan Booker talk about the benefits of "biophyllic" elements of things like RMH heating in the first place, my opinion is that roundwood/rock/stone construction clearly serves to enhance that effect vs dimensional lumber or bricks.
The idea of constructing something with roundish stones to go in a dome house seems particularly appealing to me. Just a question of whether it is worth dealing with the challenges Glenn outlines to such work...
1
