A Market for Straw
by Jim Walker
This paper is an exploratory introduction into the feasibility and issues regarding the growth of strawbale construction. The ideas expressed are being investigated further by the author for thesis work at the University of Texas at Austin. Any comments or criticisms are welcome.
Straw based construction began as a practical response to the need for housing in a region without valuable timber. Grassland pioneers combined the technology and materials at hand with the old geometry of building with blocks. Community buildings as well as private houses were made with strawbales indicating support of the method was not limited to a few individuals. The advent of straw based construction in other parts of the world (much earlier than in North America) also reflects a regional sensitivity to materials use, meaning, builders were using a local supply of raw materials to meet a local demand for construction materials.
The rediscovery of straw based construction[1] in North America (I don't have a lot of information about the revival in other countries) began in the early seventies with a little push from some positive media coverage and with a big push from the devoted energy of a handful of individuals. People saw a "new" building process that not only utilized an annually generated waste product, not only provided long-term energy savings on heating and cooling bills, not only lent itself to community participation and social equity, but also resulted in a beautiful building. Straw based construction seemed to presage both the spirit and literal meanings of the 1987 Brundtland Report's definition of sustainable development as "meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."[2] Traditional economics theory also embraces the fundamentals of straw based construction, an industry that links suppliers (farmers) and producers (builders) within a region keeping money circulating in the region thereby strengthening the regional economy.
Straw based construction in Texas has grown dramatically in the last decade, largely as a result of the incredible amount of cereal grain (straw) production in the state, a steady housing market, and, again, a handful of devoted souls. In 1994 over one million tons of cereal grain straw[3] was generated in Texas, primarily in the panhandle and across north Texas.[4] Estimates vary on how much straw is left per acre after the cereal grain itself is harvested, but one agricultural agent indicated roughly 1200 lbs./acre for rice and 600 lbs./acre for the other grains. (This discussion does not include corn and similar crops which also generate significant amounts of waste which may also be used in construction applications.) An average 2000 sq. ft. building requires roughly 350 bales, calculating for 45 lbs./bale, a little over 7.5 tons of straw per building. In "Build It With Bales II," author Matts Myhrman speculates using only 25% of available straw for construction and leaving the remainder for other potentially valuable uses such as tillage.[5] This would leave Texas with over 271,000 tons of straw available for construction. So, using the above rough estimates, the annual supply of straw in Texas could produce over 34,000 decent sized homes.
In 1996 Texas had a population of 19,128,261 people, a distant second to California. Over the period of 1990-1996, Texas had the tenth largest percent population increase at 12.6%, more than double the population growth rate of the country over the same period at 6.1%. But perhaps most significantly, Texas had the largest absolute population increase in the country from 1990-1996, adding 2,141,926 people in six years (California was a mere 20,000 people behind). A majority of this new population has settled into and around major Texas' "Metropolitan Statistical Areas," most of which have growth rates from 1990-94 [6] of over 8%.6 Additionally, most of this growth is occurring in suburban areas, rather than inside cities where building codes are more rigorous. Population growth is widely projected to steadily increase through the year 2000. The demand for quality housing in Texas is healthy. A healthy housing market is a good environment in which to champion new approaches and attitudes to building.
So if we can reasonably assume that there is a sufficient supply of raw material, and a significant and steady demand for a high value use of this material, the challenge becomes linking up the two sides of the equation. Currently straw is acquired by individual builders who have contacted a supplier directly who happens to have or can generate the required quantity and quality of straw. A price which is beneficial to both parties is negotiated. With strawbales in Texas this can usually only happen during the harvest months (May-June) and only if the farmer still has a square baler, and if, for whatever reason, the farmer feels they can't get more value from the straw in another use. A growing option is straw-in-panel products which are available year-round, but which may require special handling or installation. In all straw based construction currently there is a middle-man, a friend of the builder or supplier, government officials or professionals in the know, this contact leads to direct contact between the builder and supplier, and the availability is not guaranteed prior to the builder's starting their search.
An important assumption in considering expanding straw based construction is the optimistic thinking that if the supply of construction grade straw is increased and is beneficial to the agricultural sector, then demand for buildings of straw can increase more dramatically than it might otherwise. But there are several important questions that must precede the decision to increase the supply of construction grade straw in a region. Perhaps most importantly, some crops may receive a greater benefit if straw is tilled back into the soil, depending on soil type and erosion conditions; sustaining topsoil in agriculturally productive areas probably outweighs the energy savings and immediate profit to the farmer generated by straw buildings. This leads to the question of the value to the farmer of their straw as a construction material competing with its value as a soil amendment, animal bedding product, and as a last resort animal feed product; although at current market prices, straw as a construction material yields the greatest dollar value, not accounting for the cost to the farmer of using a different soil amendment to replace straw. This is an easier question in agricultural areas where conditions may dictate burning straw in the field. Another question involves what the straw building faithful desire of their movement; strawbale buildings in particular may be best left a niche, custom home option. Another question addresses what type of straw based construction is promoted; if the base assumption is to maximize the use of an agricultural waste product, then straw-in-panel products may offer the best volume market.
The final question I'll raise here involves the regional incentives of straw based construction. Straw as a building material is not directly subsidized for the sake of enlarging its market share, as are timber and mining materials, which effectively limits it to regions where straw is generated. Some builders have been forced by immediate demand to import straw from faraway sources which may offset any larger environmental benefits gained by using straw over conventional building materials. But sometimes this is not a bad thing. The larger environment may receive a greater benefit when one region imports particular materials from another region where that material may generate large negative impacts. For example, as one agricultural specialist indicated, of the cereal grains grown in Texas, only rice straw does not have significant value in being tilled back into the soil, which must be removed and disposed of by other means. Importing rice straw may then have a greater positive impact on the larger environment than using regionally generated wheat straw. Interregional trade is not inher-ently in opposition to regional sustainability.
Let's assume for the sake of discussion that we've satisfactorily answered the above questions and have decided to pursue the expansion of straw based construction in our region. The challenge then for the straw faithful in Texas is to build strong regional market alternatives for straw that benefit farmers, builders and building owners. The absolute supply and demand exists. Education then, becomes the most significant component of this challenge - to develop a strategy of marketing and information based on sound economic theory and method which targets the private and public sectors involved in agriculture and construction.
Setting aside, but not at all discounting, the environmental and social costs and benefits of straw based construction, the economic arguments for this method of building may be the best way to encourage its widespread practice. Typically a new, regionally produced building material or method enters and competes in the regional construction market by being cheaper, easier, prettier, or,hopefully, more environmentally friendly in a process tagged by economics as "import substitution." Every new building material faces the additional daunting task of receiving acceptance by the construction industry, which largely depends on educating builders. Straw based construction materials have been receiving increasing support from materials testing associations, building code officials, and the professional design community. These endorsements are all tools in educating and convincing designers and builders that straw construction benefit the bottom-line of the building owner and hopefully also the environment.
The challenge of increasing the construction market share of straw materials through education may be approached in several ways. We, as the straw faithful, can leave well enough alone and let the straw movement prove itself through continued steady growth, workshop by workshop, building by building. Stepping up in scale, individuals or regional associations such as the Strawbale Association of Texas[7] may take it upon themselves to promote straw based construction in the tradition of informal information exchange which spreads the value of the information throughout the market. Such groups might also graduate into cooperative ventures loosely on the model of Community Supported Agriculture programs.
But this challenge may be also greatly aided by financial investment. Indeed, a fairly major market aspect of increasing straw construction is that once it looks profitable and low risk, someone in the private sector will do it. An individual with minimal invest-ment could probably become a strawbale middleman today with nothing more than a phone, linking up demand and supply as needed; the long term market development aspects, however, would be difficult to manage. Similarly, additional investment in a cooper-ative venture and market development, beyond operating costs, may encourage the growth of the straw construction industry. The next level would be the formation, or adoption, by a private sector company of the regional straw construction supply and provision of technical assistance. Again, the education of suppliers (farmers) and producers (builders) must be on-going. At this level the market will have to have been developed enough that the housing market demand was driving the continued supply of construction grade straw. Note that there are an increasing number of alternative fiber board companies in the construction industry, many of whom use straw exclusively or combine straw with another material (typically some type of bonding material such as plastics) to produce straw-in-panel or dimensional lumber products.
Another interesting aspect worth considering is the expansion of straw construction markets by the public sector. Public agencies with interests in either the agriculture or construction industries may be encouraged to direct public funds to straw advocates in the form of development grants, capital seed money, or technical assistance. Perhaps even more exciting is the potential of public sector capital investment, meaning public buildings built with straw, in setting a precedent and model for using straw.
To the straw faithful the question of whether or not straw based construction is an earth and region friendly, economic, and beautiful way of building goes without saying. That it should be encouraged and brought to the masses also goes without saying. We are like missionaries. But the unconverted masses are tough to convince. Barring their attendance at a strawbale workshop, the costs and benefits of straw based construction must be rational, economically sound, and practical. The absolute arguments of supply and demand regarding straw for the small building market are largely dependent on regional conditions and these data are easily available. Determining and answering the questions of the larger costs and benefits of straw to individuals and the environment also largely depends on regional market and environmental conditions. The various strategies available to localities for encouraging straw construction depends on the assessed appropriateness and feasibility of straw construction, and on the vitality of the local straw faithful.
[1] "Straw based construction in this paper is meant to include straw bales, straw-mud cobs, and straw in-panel products unless otherwise noted.
[2] "Our Common Future." The World on Enviroment and Development. New York, Oxford University Press, 1987.
[3] The cereal grains - barley, oats, rice, rye, and the various strains of wheat - are generally acknowledged to provide the best construction grade straw because of the low nutrient value of the straw fiber.
[4] "Texas Agricultural Statistics, 1994." Texas Agricultural Statistics Service. Austin, TX, 1994.
[5] "Build It With Bales, Version Two." Matts Myhrman and Steve MacDonald. West Press. Tucson, AZ, 1997. p.8.
[6] Texas State Data Center, Development of Rural Sociology. Texas A&M University. Derived from US Census Bureau Population Estimates.
[7] Contact the Strawbale Association of Texas at 512/323-8137 or write to 3102 Breeze Terrace, Austin, TX 78722.