The Devil Queen

How my wife and I sold our souls to the Queen Anne Victorian we tried to save.

My Photo
Name:
Location: Crow Mountain, Arkansas, United States

Synopsis: This is a cautionary tale. A seriously disturbed couple find the charming, old ruin of a Queen Anne Victorian in Russellville, Arkansas, and buy it for $1.00. They tore the roof off, cut it in half, and had it moved to some land they owned sixteen miles away because they didn't know any better. Since then, they have hired and fired contractors, had all of their tools stolen, re-wired, re-plumbed, insulated, and essentially rebuilt the entire house. Their only problem is that after four years it still isn't finished. Now they are tired, broke, and wonder what in the hell it is they've done to themselves. And, it's haunted.
(Last updated on April 3, 2008)

Press: Russellville Courier Article - December 2003, HGTV website article, AP story - October 2006, and Victorian Homes Magazine - February 2008 (link coming soon).
Art: From time to time, I receive requests for my art. If you would like to look at more of my art, go to The Failed Artist. If you would like to buy my art, email me. I am more than happy to answer any questions you might have. Thanks!

Friday, September 16, 2005

Insulation Question

Before a I forget, I have a question for all you house-bloggers out there. Which is better for insulating your attic, rolled bats or blown insulation? We've heard conflicting things about them. Some folks say that rolled insulation offers better coverage than blown insulation, that blown insulation isn't uniformly deep. It has thin spots that don't insulation as well. We have also heard that they are comparable to one another.

So which is it?

It will cost 50% less to have blown insulation put in the attic. That makes it very tempting. On the other hand, we don't want to use inferior insulation. Heating costs are way too high to skimp on this.

Suggestions?

5 Comments:

Blogger derek said...

It would depend on what you blow in as well. I think the blown in is better, it gets in to all the areas that are hard to get with the rolls. Cellulose is said to be better than fibreglass by some, there seems to be a lot of debate about it. I'm using stuff called Roxul, it's made out of basalt, it doesn't let as much air pass through as FG and it's fire resistant.

9:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"on the other hand we don't want to use an inferior insulation..."

If that is the case, use closed cell polyurethane foam like Insulstar or Corbond...

12:20 PM  
Blogger Patricia W said...

I'm no expert and can't even tell you from experience but I have been told by two roofers that inspected the attic before roofing to get about 12 inches of blown in fiberglass. I asked them if that was the best and both said that there wasn't much difference.

3:46 PM  
Anonymous Neil said...

Another consideration with insulation is the impact on the environment and air quality. Foam insulation is awful stuff from an air quality stand-point, and will still be there long after your home is gone. Fibreglass is not great for the environment in its construction, and can cause some damage to your lungs in the long run.

I would use either blown in cellulose (recycled newsprint, with a fire coating), or roxol, which is a bi-product of smelting (which is not great for the environment, but its being created already, so we might as well use it).

I believe in the end blown-in is better for an attic as it leaves less air gaps. Cellulose is better than fibreglass too, as it retains more insulative value as it settles over time. Don't let it get wet, though...

9:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

More misnomers about foam: Actually, foam is considered a "green product" made (often) from the sugars from beets/soy...Do some investigating on this issue, and you'll learn that foam is not only more "green" than fire-retardant-sprayed-newspaper, but it out performs it considerably.

3:59 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Free Web Site Counter
Website Counter