Tom: Let me give you a few more of my thoughts/observations about growing Norway spruce stands. As for provenance/variability. In addition to the general differences in the adaptation of various strains/provenances to different parts of the country, another thing I have observed in the 15 or so substantial NS stands I have seen and collected seed from in the nearby MD, WV, VA, and PA area, there is also a distinct variation in the amount of variability from tree to tree in each stand. In some stands, the trees look more like each other than in others. As luck would have it, in my own two older stands I see more variation than I have seen in any of the others I have visited--I have no idea why this should be so. The trees were planted between 1962 and 1966. But the variation is such that I can sit now and picture in my mind dozens and dozens of individual trees and the color and weeping character of their foliage, branching angles, bark color. I have quite a few special favorites. This may seem strange, but you have to understand that in addition to walking through my NS stands very often, I have pruned each individual tree in several phases up to at least 25 feet, and in some cases well over 30 feet. Anyway, one of the things I especially like about NS is this variability--with the possible exception of red maple, I have never seen another species of tree like it. For me, the effect in a forest stand of NS is glorious. Next, if you plant 6 X 6, or even 8 X 8, in about 12 to 15 years what you will have is a really dense "thicket" of NS trunks and branches that you will not be able to walk through. If at that point you want to thin and prune, you will need loping shears just to work your way into the stand, unless you have long arms, a good pruning saw, and dont mind getting scratched. I would recommend not doing anything for about 30 years, and then if you prune and thin, do it yourself by hand and leave all the wood to compost the soil and be taken up by the remaining trees. But if for aesthetic reasons you want to do some early pruning and thinning, that can do no harm. But for the long term magnificence of the forest, you dont really need to do anything. Norway spruce trees express dominance as well or better than any conifer I know. A couple years ago I called Professor Edwin White at SUNY Syracuse with a few questions that followed up on the studies he directed a few years before, and in the conversation I marveled about the stand at Glady, WV, which I had visited again shortly before--marveled at the strength and beauty of the trees that had continued to express dominance since I first saw the stand almost 20 years before. And he said he was not surprised that I was so impressed, and that if one wants to have the most magnificent stand of NS, and white pine for that matter, there was no need to do any thinning (or pruning) at all. He emphasized that both species expressed dominance over the long run very efficiently. My own observations make me think that NS is even better than white pine in this regard, but I dont have any data--just my informal observations--to back that up. One of the studies that Professor White directed was a site factors study. I will look that up for you and give you the reference--it was published in the SAF Northern Journal of Applied Forestry. If you are near the U of WI you can find it there (they do have a school of forestry?), but if you call SUNY Syracuse I would guess they would send you a copy. I am not sure how useful this would be to you in selecting a site for your planting, but I found the study fascinating. It is an observational rather than an experimental study, so it is not easy to understand exactly what it all means in practical silvicultural terms. But I can suggest that NS will grow well in soils with a pH above 4.8, and maybe 4.4 or a bit lower, but pH above 5 with some good amount of magnesium is probably best. I have soils in the 4.8 range and I experimented by broadcasting some high mag crushed limestone around a few groups of trees. No dramatic results, but perhaps some improvement--the kind of measurements really needed to determine exactly what the effects have been, were too difficult for me to do with any accuracy. One surprising finding of the study was that slope position and aspect were apparently unrelated to NS growth. For many species the lower east and north facing slopes are best. When I remarked about this to Professor White, he said that since I am so much further south, that may not be true for NS grown here. Anyway--interesting! Well, if I can think of anything else, I will come back and post it. In the meantime I will look up the site factors study and give the specific reference. Oh, I just thought--about larch. There is a professor at SUNY Syracuse who has dome some work with larch--I cant remember his name now, and he told me that larch does best where the soil is fairly deep--he gave me a number like an "A" and "B" horizon (or rooting zone) of at least 18 inches, or something like that. But then he added that if growing on a slope they can do well with less soil depth. I dont know if you have any slopes on your new land. Anyway, for what its worth --Spruce

Can't really improve upon tigerdunes minimun specs above, efficiency performance dehumidification (if sized correctly..)staging electric strips. R-8 should be for all ductwork supplies and returns. All connections should be mastic..not foil or duct tape but paint on mastic and/or mastic tape. load calc to show how much air is needed and how to distribute air.(duct sizing & design) I'd invest in the room by room load calc and see how they plan to size the ducts and lay them out. you don't mention where ahu & heaters will be located. one in crawl space the other in attic? both in conditioned space with ductwork in attic and crawl? one thing to know going in is that sheet metal duct is best under houses. animals love flex duct, while you can usually deal with mice in attics..coons, possums can wreak flex duct. also sheet metal duct ( I call it hard pipe) leaks air at all connections. in addition to screwing duct together all joints and seams should be mastic sealed...before duct is wrapped. duct wrap should be stapled, and taped with duct tape (fsk tape) 80 years ago we built houses for ventilation. tall ceilings, balloon framed walls. to add central air to these homes is to change the dynamic of the house. in my area we usually foam floors with closed cell as it is the most cost effective way to both air seal and insulate the floors. here is a link to LaHouse (LSU Baton Rouge, La) about insulating floors: http://www.lsuagcenter.com/NR/rdonlyres/D33F711D-DC4B-4E4C-9ED6-A97DCE9DB026/79806/pub3187insulatingraisedfloorsHIGHRES.pdf you'll have to cut and paste for it to work.. if ductwork is in attic, another option is to foam the roofline and keep ductwork in a conditoned space. this will minimize problem areas like recessed lights that are not air tight, which allow attic air and insulation particles to enter the house. we use open cell installed in rafter bays and covering the face of the rafters. in my experience with older homes you have to fix the house in terms of air leakage and insulation for the central installs to provide comfort, dehumidification and savings. otherwise you just throw more tons of a/c at a leaky structure. insulating floors and attic would be to your benefit. air sealing the house is a good investment. there are lots of energy raters in Texas. you should talk to a few and get more information before spending so much for a/c. unlike a lot of audits an energy rating unbiased information that provides a blue print for efficiency, recommendations specific to your home and performance & install verification. best of luck.

The peeve of mine that gets the best workout has to be improper detailing of porches or porticos that folks are trying to make appear classically-inspired. Seems like most of the time the lintels are larger or thicker than the column underneath - a big no-no. Then, the entablature is compressed to fit under the eaves or second floor window line so much so that the proportions are further distorted. It is also likely that the columns are some mishmash of style, composition or proportion. If the beam is arched, it appears it was cut freehand with a jigsaw, without regard to any evenness or flow to the curving line. The overhanging portions are quite often botched, too. From zero overhang to a fascia that is equal in visual weight to the lintel, we see it all around here. You might expect this on starter homes or where an owner/builder is in charge, but on houses double the median price? I do go on, but I'll finish with this-- good proportions don't cost more than poor ones. Casey

Cup of Glad this thread is continuing to get so much traffic. I'm curious first, why are you replacing your windows? I ask because what most people don't realize is in "most" cases the best windows for any home are the ones that were originally installed - The exceptions to that can range from poor quality windows, poor install, failure Think about many homes that were built around turn of the century - 75 -100 yrs ago, how the windows have stood the test of time. Yes, they are not "energy efficient" however, from a proper fit & aesthetic view point they work. I think when the window sales people massage the homeowner on the "efficiency" issue - If you are changing out 16 windows let's say at avg rate of $750/window - for product & install that would be 12K - . The equation the sales people negate to offer said homeowner is what the return on investment would be & how long it would take to get there. I have done this, believe me - It would take most folks 10-20yrs to realize any investment. If you have done your homework & still feel replacement is the way to go - other considerations that should be taken; What is the original architectural render of the home? Can a replacement window capture that? think size/scale - muntins, mullions, configuration, trim, fascia - One can't just figure a one size fit & then install without a compromise elsewhere. Pictures of the exterior of your home in daylight & night help with proper choices. This is where I see many failures. One can have a beautiful 1900 home and take out all windows & replace w/replica vinyl - One could put in custom wood in the same home, but that does not guarantee aesthetically correct rendering. I found looking in window books & catalogs helpful only to a certain degree - I had to make sure the size, material configuration was indeed matching to what the original rendering of the home was (that was only for 4 windows!). Yes, it took some doing - when I finally thought I had it right, my architect friend brought yet another issue to light - "The muntins make the window look squatty" huh? - turns out the configuration of the muntins created a rather horizontal appearance in the individual panes rather than vertical - she was right. BTW we used Marvins - the project was a kitchen gut in 1930 Dutch colonial home. The replacement windows were done because the part of the kitchen we replaced the windows was once a screened in porch and PO put in aluminum picture windows w/side casements on front & back - ALL wrong for the home & unbalanced. Research here and other places led me to the Marvins - very pleased with the product. For the rest of the windows (26) double hung - we considered Marvin's sash replacement product (mentioned above) but do to the scope of our original renovation & cost over runs we decided against this. Instead I found "the window doctor" - yes that is the name of his company. For $200/window he replaced all parting strips, re-weighted where needed, all new roping, repaired chalking - Many of the windows were not operational, painted shut etc. Every window is now operational & they are lovely over 80 yrs young & very fitting to the home. I wish more homeowners would give consideration to rehabbing windows rather than ripping them out for a substandard product. Ok, I'm an old house snob - truth is told Best to you - stepping off soapbox