Talk:Shipping container architecture
|↓↓Skip to table of contents|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Shipping container architecture article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details.|
Disadvantages - Temperature/Insulation
An R19 value has been ascribed by ASTM C236 testing but the effect is not neccessarily cumulative as the thermal transmission is eliminated to an R-19 equivalency but that doesn't correspond to a cumulative value for the multiple coats. The mechanism is different from traditional insulative materials. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 00:47, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
The following should be documented, replaced or corrected; R-28 from two coats of paint is beyond belief.
Actually the below reference, while simplified, has been shown to be effectively correct. It has been shown to be accomplished, not with simple paint and an additive, but with a liquid ceramic coating developed for NASA, under the SUPERTHERM product line.Gmantex (talk) 01:57, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
By spraying two coats of a Ceramic powder additive in spray paint an insulation value of R-28 thermal efficiency can be achieved, thus no traditional insulation is required for heat or cold.
The two spray "Multi-ceramic" (which generates 521 hits via google) coating from Supertherm inc (32,000)is a reflective coating vs radiant heat (alleged 95% reflection). So it's may be very effective preventing heat gain on an item such as a roof (which is it's primary application judging from the site), but not necessarily useful for walls and general insulation as no data is provided on either conductive nor convection based heat transference of any kind (critical for traditional insulation). So there is no evidence of any kind that the "spraying [of] two coats of ceramic powder" will create "an insulation value of R-28". Additionally, R-28 is a measure of thermal resistance, not efficiency. "Traditional insulation" is a confounding term, in that I'm unclear why an R rated insulation isn't "traditional" nor why "heat or cold" were brought into the sentence. The sentence format is such that I suspect the writer had no scientific evidence other than his own conjecture, and is likely not well versed in the ways of science. Which is not an irrelevant characteristic (Ad hominem) considering his Argument from authority.
containers as prisons
I have removed: "and there were no reported ill effects from this method" from
During the 1991 Gulf War, containers saw considerable nonstandard uses not only as makeshift shelters but also for the transportation of Iraqi prisoners of war. Holes were cut in the containers to allow for ventilation and there were no reported ill effects from this method.
Containers are use as prisons and (temporary) storage of prisoners in many places. In general, due to strong temperature variations, locking humans up in container is an inhuman and may even have a torture-like function. Thus, any suggestions that this has been done in a human way, must be documented. Else, it is a pure ideological/political assertion.
Not notable? Are you joking? It's a unique interesting concept that is considered to be radical, out-of-the-box thinking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zsmith (talk • contribs) 20 December 2005
- If you think about it, it's rather in the box, since...well...that's what you're living in... Cernen Xanthine Katrena 22:35, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- Well, after my "Political football" other use was deleated by User:CubBCas "a joke". I will let the community decide whether that is true or not for my project: <a href=http://www.itsogood.com/containerworkshop/tarball/government/index.html>Develeper/Planning Correspodence</a>. User:bwildasi Wed May 28 18:00:32 UTC 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 21:04, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Abandoned Shipping Containers
I have seen a few articles mentioning abandoned shipping containers are piling up in U.S. ports; however, I have been unable to find any information to verify this. I am curious as to exactly what ports these are piling up in, and what is done with abandoned containers? Are they given away for free? Who's responsibility is this--the shipping company or the port's management? Squideshi 16:50, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- I kinda recall something similar. The problem is largely due to the US trade imbalance whereby the US now imports a lot more manufactured products than it exports. Much of it I imagine, comes from China through the Port of Long Beach. In addition, I also recall something about container ships coming from the US having a sizable load of empty containers. - Htra0497 09:49, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- There are already plenty of links, examples, and references and such. A link to a site with only examples by one company is generally considered to be spam here, and is usually added by obvious company shills or anonymous accounts. (I'm not saying you are one, but it would help if you had a login id and a history of editing beyond just three attempts to 'share' this one company's references.) Unless there is an obvious or overwhelming reason why we would reference or feature one company's works, it is unlikely that this sort of thing would be added to the article on an ongoing basis. Centerone (talk) 18:21, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Recently the cost per unit was raised from USD$900 to USD$1200. That was the best price someone could find in Houston, Texas. I think that is still low. When I saw the change I did a local search in Vancouver, British Columbia, and the best price I could find was C$2175 (USD$2129) for a 20 foot. Of course, 40 foot units are even more expensive.
That may be accurate, reflecting the fact that in Houston you'd most likely ship them dead head by rail to the west coast, then deadhead to Asia for reuse, whereas in Vancouver you're already on the coast, and can load directly to a ship for the return trip. The price of surplus containers can be expected to vary widely in different locales. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 15:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Unit cost will depend if the container is new or used. I have recent pricing ex-works China (direct from CIMC), but I don't think pricing should be included unless it is mentioned in online article. Referencing this article might be a good start. http://green.yahoo.com/blog/daily_green_news/8/twelve-amazing-shipping-container-houses.html Surfing bird (talk) 08:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I think one major aspect is not mentioned. For a lot of big buildings (by example the travelodge hotel in London) with many identical units, only NEW containers are used. For these containers many disadvantages are not valid any more ( Cargo Spillages, Treatment of timber floors, Solvents), because these containers are manufactured under the precondition to be used only as housing containers. Additionally the special welding and cutting work (closed front plus entrance door hole, windows, additional structural elements) can be done by the specialists of the the container manufacturers. Of course, this is only possible for orders bigger than 100 containers.
The idea to combine prefabrication and containers to new elements, which allows another type of interesting architecture with low cost is not mentioned. some companies follow this path (MOD, Agson Engineers, Verbussystems). These prefabricated containers are almost all produced in China, to use the lower salary level, compared to USA and Europe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjgo (talk • contribs) 11:27, 12 June 2010 (UTC)