Full Hard Covering Of An Attic Floor

This job experience was imagined as content in Fine Homebuilding Magazine. Subject: the protection of insulation integrity and value, by complete air-barrier hard covering. The inspiration? Suggestion by writer Martin Holladay, that complete hard covering should apply to skylights. Great idea, I say, but it is simple logical extension then, all of an attic floor should be covered too. The example which follows is quite fully doocumented in a job photo album at Google My Drive: Woodstock Attic, Challenged Roof Joists.pdf  . 

 And, it turns out that another writer is not much wanted, at Fine Homebuilding Magazine.

I have many similar jobs with substantial floor decking, upon strong supports, found by picking blog Label: Strong Attic Floors , here, or at the right. A unique feature of this job is use of attic floor supports to keep attic weight from loading very-long 2x4 roof joists. Second floor walls do not directly support the roof, here, and fairly often. Include label: Roof Strength for this post. Try that to find more-complete discussion.

This graphic shows structures in overlay upon a satellite photo, drawn in Adobe FrameMaker.

At 6/26/2026, observe this sign of public interest:

A genuine reader, in Argentina! This inspires me to revisit and update this post. 

Full Hard Covering Of An Attic Floor

An attic floor over composite beams does much more than the protection and enhancement of insulation value. Flooring is imperative as flanging of the composite beams. Anywhere, well-attached facing of a beam adds stability and strength far better than lumber blocking between beams. It is weird that we commonly block floor joists over a basement or crawl space, rather than applying an underside covering of modestly-thick plywood that encapsulates a full filling of insulation. The excuse is in wanting readily-accessible space for wiring and plumbing, but that is not compelling reason. Any attached flanging or webbing of a beam is interruptible with affordable penalty in strength. Absent flanging at both edges of a beam, compressive loads in a beam tend readily to cause rotation and buckling, dumping transverse loads.

Focus now on the job at-hand where roof 2x4@16 framing is extremely long. Expand an offered insight upon what is achieved in roof joist 2x4s where the attic floor is strengthened by composite beams:

This is the composite-beam floor thickening and strengthening that evolved, over North and South bedrooms. 2x4 floor joists, some twisted, some bowing downward, are locked by the beam plywood. 2x4 nailers, ten ft length, are bound too, to the roof joists. A short couple in each beam line acts against bowing of roof joists, none yet detectable. Surely, added deck structures are helpful, not detrimental, and all work in the widespread construction of composite beams, stabilized by attic flooring, is justified. 

New insulation is in three layers of unfaced batts: upper and lower R19, and wider R11 batts  filling 2x spaces, in between. I don't apply flooring out to the difficult edges. Consider covering the periphery instead, with heavy cotton throws. Those throws would collect dust carried up into the attic through the heat engine of roof/ ceiling slopes. The throws could be laundered in periodic attic maintenance that includes vacuuming of roof vent screens, reducing need of a respirator in-attic.

Always add as much insulation as space allows.












The total of insulation everywhere is R49, in a depth 9.25" where compressed under decking. I think the air barrier and the added boundaries of conductive layers is good compensation for the small batt compression. This attic is improved from R4, to better than R38. 






None of this is for storage, though the space is now usable.

A possibility not taken, was in the early discussion. Slope ceilings are very badly insulated, and room usefulness would be little-diminished, if slope ceilings were rebuilt much-strengthened, with the composite beam method. The entire envelope over first-floor rooms could be raised to R49 super-insulation levels.

In most bungalow situations, knee walls perhaps-needed, interfere with possibilities of demolition to enable insulation.

How Long Will The So-Cheap Natural Gas Last?

We all need to know natural gas made cheap by evil fracking is of very short duration. Here is one reference for that, published in respected Slate Magazine.

An optimistic "proved" total of 273 tcf would last eleven years at current pace, and the price would rise strongly, much sooner. Six years from now seems consistent with the chart.

Get to know Chris Nelder, who spoke the six-year fracked-gas number, in a radio interview that inspires this post. I listened to the interview again now for post diligence, and didn't hear the six number. It is there. Chris Nelder's analysis stands on its own, in this presentation:
http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/the-take/peak-oil-isnt-dead-it-just-smells-that-way/ 
There, read this prediction of grave happenings in only a couple of years.

"I expect world oil production to rise, weakly, for another two years or so, as America falls into a deeper slumber believing that fracking has cured everything. The media will reinforce that belief. And when it comes, the wake-up call is going to be harsh. In the meantime we’re just going to be waiting for the punchline.

So to those who can grasp the data, here’s my final thought: How will you prepare yourself for The Great Contraction? You've got perhaps two good years left of business as usual, and maybe another three or four after that before things really get difficult. I encourage you to use them well, and do what you can to make yourself resilient and self-sufficient. What will you do 10 years from now if the price of gasoline is $10 a gallon?"

Here is another reference in this, author Richard Heinberg. His book is a really easy read, in Kindle. No one can contradict the truth that fuel prices misleading planners, will turn in the next several years. Planners of weatherization must act now, to accelerate action by more than an order of magnitude. In Portland, Oregon, those who brag of weatherizing 3,200 homes under fat-laden $20,000 HPwES scams, in five years, will face humiliation. The need in this period was of progress by times-fifty, in work done honestly, perhaps in sacrifice for our common cause.

Working With Cotton Insulation Batts

This post is edited and reissued as:

https://energyconservationhowto.blogspot.com/2026/02/a-deep-energy-retrofit-fall-of-2013.html   

Please go there.

Better, find all posts discussing cotton batt insulation:

https://energyconservationhowto.blogspot.com/search?q=cotton   

This is the superseded post, not deleted.

Out of necessity for a customer, I have gained lessons in the usefulness of UltraTouch cotton batts in residential weatherization. Here is a sharing of those lessons.

The owner of the reported home aimed to be best green, in needful improvement of insulation, in Fall, 2008. Then, and now, UltraTouch denim batts by Bonded Logic, Inc., offers

impressive claims.

UltraTouch™ Denim Insulation is the successful combination of 35 years of insulation experience and a revolutionary patented manufacturing process that has created a superior and safe product.

UltraTouch is made from high-quality natural fibers. These fibers contain inherent qualities that provide for extremely effective sound absorption and maximum thermal performance. UltraTouch has No Fiberglass Itch and is easy to handle and work with. UltraTouch contains no chemical irritants and requires no warning labels compared to other traditional products. There are no VOC concerns when using UltraTouch, as it is safe for you and the environment.

UltraTouch is also a Class-A Building Product and meets the highest ASTM testing standards for fire and smoke ratings, fungi resistance and corrosiveness. UltraTouch™ Denim Insulation contains 80% post-consumer recycled natural fibers making it an ideal choice for anyone looking to use a high quality sustainable building material.

UltraTouch makes installation user-friendly. The inclusion of perforated batts allows for quick and easy off-size cavity installation. Simply measure, tear, fit and you're done!.

Many bags of UltraTouch R30 in size 23"x48" were purchased, for placement in the crawl space, by a hired top-notch weatherization  contractor, and for the attic, to be placed by the home owner. Things did not go well, with more than $8000 paid to the contractor, and more money tied up in mis-applied  or stockpiled cotton batts, by the home owner. All for little, if any, saving of energy. The home owner was responsible for misunderstanding how to insulate an attic, but was misled by the bad example of the contractor's work in the crawl space, and couldn't find guidance anywhere.

In reporting here, I intend to be useful to contractors and their management authorities everywhere. I hope to also get the attention of batt manufacturer Bonded Logic, Inc.. Bonded Logic may not sell product with no responsibility to advise in competent usage. From an experience here, consumers should learn that benefit from cotton batts is not easily obtained. There are many ways to use them inappropriately. Cotton batts are not uniquely "green;" in that deserving slack over misuse. Search, that now readily finds this blog post, nets little other help, and finds a lot of condemnation. Cotton batts are useless placed alone as wall insulation, where they can't adjustably fill cavities, and cavities not full may have no effective insulation. The recently-added Bonded Logic brag of perforated batts  is empty. Batts still will not fill a wall on thickness, and perforations will likely be at unlucky widths. 

Here, I find pretty decent usage of cotton batts in an attic floor as top layer with flexible fill-in of fiberglass, liking that they tolerate being walked upon. In a crawl space, after a lot of work, I guess they are ok.

Photos that follow are drawn from a Web album with similar captions:

Repairing The Installation Of Cotton Insulation Batts In An Attic and In A Crawl Space 

The attic treatment of cotton batts began with taking down batts unwisely hung from roof joists. After a couple of years, mold was starting to grow above the batts, at the underside of the roof sheathing. Batts were wet.

Cotton batts dropped from roof joists and brought up new, would cover about three quarters of the attic floor.

Top up an R21 insulation base layer using new R11 batts. Supplement R30 cotton batts crossing floor joists, with R30 fiberglass batts. Protect all soffit vents with plywood baffles, and place R30 all the way out to cover exterior wall headers.

Note a Romex electrical wire here, correctly running over, not through floor joists. With thick insulation, electrical service should be permitted by simply lifting top-course batts.

Plywood decking is very important to work access. Plywood is raised 5" above floor joists, upon new 2x4 uprights 24" oc.

Furnace return air ducts are covered with R21 insulation, minimum, including a firm skin of poly skrim kraft upon R11 basement wall insulation. Duct insulation is tucked into top layer batts, or is screwed to plywood decking.










With the blocked access, the home owner was concerned about the placement of the crawl space batts. The batt installer, after days of awful work in this, would not be confronted.  Thinking things weren't right, the home owner chose to forego a rebate claim, and didn't know what to do for resolution.

In the course of attic work, I inspected the crawl space. I reported that, as expected, the twined-up batts were sagging everywhere, only in contact with flooring in lines at edges. Full floor contact is mandated by regulating authority, Energy Trust of Oregon, ETO. Their rule stated:


Insulation shall be installed so that there is no air space between the top of the insulation and the floor.



Unacceptable work is not eligible for rebate, so a rebate now would give the home owner some compensation for the cost of needed repairs. The installer refused to accept any responsibility in this, but we will see what happens in review after the repairs.

In time, I devised a repair plan, posted for more than a year, and shared for comment with responsible parties, manufacturer Bonded Logic, Inc. and regulator Energy Trust Of Oregon. There was no thinking or standing up with me for the interest of the home owner.

This is the actual method of tying up crawl space batts that I had to work with. Batts were generally in pairs of matched 48" length, one 23" wide, the other somehow sawn 21" wide. The twine was fairly useful near to floor joists, and I left it in place. At about every 9" on average, in the slot between batts, I stapled up a loop of 17ga electric fence wire about 20" long, thus:

The battens typically were cut to 43" lengths. I used about 200 eight-foot lengths, costing $1.79 each. The lumber cost is significant.





















Now consider how this might have been done, starting with new batts. I think each batt might be thrown up, upon a 2x3 or 2x4, to then be progressively secured higher-up, with wire and battens. The wires might be preset on other wire or lumber, adding to material cost but saving labor.

The same number of battens are needed whether or not there is benefit of prior twining. Lumber cost here remains about $400. 

There is a nicer solution that has higher material cost, but would be superior overall:

Complete coverage with 3/8" CDX plywood sections costs about $15 for each eight-foot length of joist bay. Four eight-foot 1x2 battens in the same service would cost about $7. The lumber cost is doubled, but the isolation of insulation is a good deal, that should be mandatory. No insulation anywhere, not even on an attic floor, should be left raw, to be abused. Reduced labor costs might more than compensate for plywood cost. Where insulation is already hanging down but is not foul, this is a really good solution.



Home Performance Education For The Determined Or Advised Reader

The situation of waste found in this home had existed for nearly three years.  

Enter then, myself, first for the attic work. I was discovered through new home owner membership in Angie's List. Already in Fall, 2011, I had been banished as a Trade Ally of Energy Trust of Oregon, and could not be found among the "players." Banishment for a year, but now seemingly forever, was for reporting to each customer the things I do, that are not done by those within the embrace of Energy Trust, contractors who brag upon the misperceptions of "Home Performance With Energy Star," HPwES. 

The problems with HPwES begin with a basic false claim, that a blower door is the guide and measure of weatherization progress. As guide, in eight years of ever more-professional service, I have never seen a situation needing guidance of a blower door. As measure, achievable sealing rarely has value of more than $20 per year.

I have repaired many large energy bleeds not at all detectable by a blower door. Most attic floor pits, as with the generally-found chimney chase, have little effect on blower door readings. Where the goal is real or jiggered improvement of blower door readings, by hundreds of CFM50,  correction of floor pits is not rewarded.  

Even where they might affect blower door readings, bleeds are almost never found that way. The clean-shirted technician can not and will not be in the usual dark and dangerous attic while his blower door is operating.  Workers will rarely take initiative to fix the things they might see and care about, of course unknown, then not in a contract. Buried problems usually have much higher opportunity cost, than any benefit.

Among issues that could be seen and expressed, the home owner was very upset by ugly and useless "sealing", as characterized by this crude aerosol orange foaming about the exhaust duct of the kitchen microwave, in a kitchen cabinet. 


















The conditions of unacceptable sealing found, and their repair, can not be summed up in a few photos. For the detailed story of sealing, please download and study a large pdf album:

Real Sealing Fixes HPwES Sealing In An Oregon Attic 

Where CFM50 = 7.5 * (Hole Size, sq in), total ducts hole size is 71 sq in., as with more than two 6" ducts (28 sq in each) fully detached. If workers found two duct sections detached, and reset them without comment, that is not duct sealing action of goop troops. It should not count. If ducts can fall down, then how could workers justify leaving the crawl space inaccessible after their departure? Leakage of 205 CFM50 is still huge, and should not be allowed. None of the steel ducts were found or left with required screws. Nearly all joints, now stiffened with goop, remained closed by dried-out ordinary duct tape. This was not duct sealing by some scientific process, and was not worthy of compensation. Most of the involved money should be reclaimed to compensate the home owner for the cost of my fully replacing the ducts, needfully and with courage, restoring access for extremely difficult work in the crawl space.

I don't believe sealing actions could have amounted to more than a few hundred CFM50. A 100 CFM50 reduction is closure of 13 sq in, a total equivalent hole four inches diameter or a gap 1/16" wide and 18 ft long. The great majority of reported reduction was from knowing fraud in devising a to-be-closed air handler room yet attic floor pit, with a gasketed new door. It is not allowed that an interior door may be closed in pre or post "Home Performance Testing." The door was a mystery to the home owner, perhaps to be closed for convenience.

This was my third run-in with this contractor, where I did the real sealing. In one, there were a car-bashed large hole in the garage wall, hidden behind a woodpile, and two closets with large leakage to outside controlled by closing doors; of course none found by blower door.

No one does better sealing of an attic floor or HVAC ducting than I do, with absolute disdain for fraud of Home Performance. I find problems as one must, digging down and dirty, by sight. I don't just reduce duct leakage. I methodically eliminate it, verifiable by sight as I go, and in method-sampling photos.

Here is discussion of my improvement of the crawlspace HVAC ducts in this home:
http://energyconservationhowto.blogspot.com/2013/11/more-hvac-circuitry-in-crawl-space.html 

The ugly obstructions beginning at the access hole are gone! Repair of the cotton-batt insulation could only be done after removing the found HVAC ducts for recycling. Quite a pile. Hundreds of pounds of steel that had responded to every furnace cycle .

Looking For A Reading Light

A story here is first told in a web album:
Looking For A Reading Light 

Now tell the story again, here.

I have a genuine need for a bedside reading light. But for the living room with its fancy ceiling, each room is lit with one or more Glimpse LEDs, mounted in new RACO175 junction boxes of course. An overhead light is crummy for seeking sleep, badly aimed at a book, and not amenable to drowsy shutoff.

As a solution, I was offered this desk lamp with ready-to-go 100 watt incandescent bulb. I just can't bear to use it. I tried a clumsy directional LED bulb appearing in photos to follow. No go. I couldn't keep the lamp from toppling. 

I no longer expect to find innovation at Home Depot, but dutifully walked the aisles again this week. I found this, and went on to also buy new T47 and T67 disk lights. I hoped the bad dimmer buzz in those disk lights might be resolved. Wishful thinking, and all three trials will be returned. Darn the packaging. With this ecosmart, know to twist out the front-face bubble with little damage. Never get angry and use a knife or scissors.

I would try this much-lighter new version of the ecosmart technology, in my lamp!

Here is a labeled array of bulbs discussed here, out of packaging.

The year-old "75w" version of the ecosmart LED is at left. Next to it is the new "65w" ecosmart. At right is a Utilitech version of the L-Prize replacement of a 60-watt incandescent. 

Labels A through D are edited-in, for comments to follow. First, note weight of each. A = 429.2 g. B = 145.2 g. C = 27.5 g. D = 247.3 g.

In the desk lamp, the "65w" ecosmart is still toppling, and a bit ugly. I won't use it.

A 65 watt incandescent flood looks the same and is less toppling, but I won't use it even in cold-cold winter, where the heat feels good. I'm leaving that in place for night-time fumbling-for-a phone. It beats any stupid point source bulb. It's hard to believe people still use "bulbs."

Here is a collage of three individual photos of task illumination, with very limited discrimination of brightness. I use a Canon Digital Rebel SLR camera in No Flash mode for all comparisons. The setting allows automatic adjustment to found light, and individual photos are not comparable, except perhaps that brightness might be reveled in better camera focus achieved. It is not the way to do testing.

Again, I can rely on my Living Room test stand for unambiguous comparisons. Comparisons are most valid where side-by-side specimens have the same color temperature.

At left is a 4" Glimpse, 2700°K, 425 lumens.

At right is the "65w" ecosmart, 2700°K, 650 lumens.














Labels applied to comparison photos state unambiguous conclusions, where Brightness Numbers are noted. B4 is the standard, assigned to a 100 watt incandescent bulb. For all directional light beaming from a plate, compute Brightness Number as:
Tested Lumens/450 * B4.

The topply Ecosmart LED flood in a reading lamp is brighter than a 100 watt incandescent by *650/450 , brighter by  44%.

Here is one more demonstration of "B4", equivalence of a 100 watt incandescent and a 3000°K 4" Glimpse, 450 lumens.

Add some more test-stand observations. These will further illustrate that task illumination, that properly distinguishes luminaires of differing construction, is not at all expressed in numbers of lumens or lumens per watt. The observations are useful in seeking a reading light, applying Year-2013 source material for a Year-2016 debate about "High-Efficacy Lamps." This addresses misconceptions about point-source LEDs. The point to be made is that a point-source lamp of any kind can never be "high-efficacy." An LED bulb that might screw into an old reading lamp must be directional with large beam angle, not with some concentrating lens. See the inefficiency of the US DOE "L-Prize" point-source LED bulb. vs. good directional LEDs:

A point-source LED A19 bulb, the Utilitech offering of the L-Prize bulb, gives really-awful illumination. Such expensive bulbs should never be used as desk-lamp reading light. Point-source bulbs are inferior for any task illumination.

It really hurts consumer decision-making when directional LED lighting is under-rated, by a large amount. It is time we fixed the packaging.

I'm still waiting for a good reading light. It might be in an art piece suspended from the ceiling. For a child, I have imagined illumination from "landing lights" on a remote-control model airplane, at quite modest cost. For me, it might be a soft-light broad panel with some provision for aiming, mounted to the wall. All best solutions will come where we at last have direct attachment to low-voltage DC.