Prices of lumber for January delivery on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange CME +0.04% reached $392.80 per 1,000 board feet Thursday, their highest trading level since April 2005. Prices have climbed nearly 40% since late September. The latest price jump, which began in mid-November, sent the January contract up 22% over just five weeks. Home-sales data released in that period showed improving... [more]
Prices of lumber for January delivery on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange CME +0.04% reached $392.80 per 1,000 board feet Thursday, their highest trading level since April 2005. Prices have climbed nearly 40% since late September.
The latest price jump, which began in mid-November, sent the January contract up 22% over just five weeks. Home-sales data released in that period showed improving demand. The Commerce Department reported new-home sales for November rose 4.4% from October to the highest level in more than two years. Sales of previously owned homes have grown sharply, too, reaching a three-year high in the latest month
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324274404578211514007860952.html[less]
Response by Riversider
almost 13 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
Prices rose by almost 45 per cent in 2012 alone, as builders have constructed more homes in response to an uptick in demand from homebuyers eager to take advantage of record-low mortgage-interest rates. Softwoods such as spruce, pine and fir are used to make lumber for homebuilding materials such as boards and plywood.
“We’re at the beginning of a long upward cycle in the housing market,” said Paul Jannke, principal at Forest Economic Advisors, a Massachusetts-based consulting firm. “Total consumption of lumber in the US will be up 10-15 per cent a year for the next three years at least. Demand is still well below historic levels.”
guess it depends on the definition of "durable". to me, durable means that once built, the structure can be used for 2-4 generations, but for centuries, like many homes in Europe can be used. i don't get the feeling that homes in USA are built thinking long term.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 13 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
notadmin, Homes are expensive enough. I get the feeling those homes would be priced out of the market, and not something a Lennar or a Toll Brothers would even consider. I suppose people building one of a kind homes on top end lots could consider but even there probably not.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by NWT
almost 13 years ago
Posts: 6643
Member since: Sep 2008
In most parts of the U.S. lumber has always been cheap and available, so there's an established supply chain of material and labor.
I guess there's also a cultural aspect. E.g., in Germany wood==flimsy even for spec housing.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by marco_m
almost 13 years ago
Posts: 2481
Member since: Dec 2008
You can see plenty if homes all over New England that were made completely from wood and have been standing for 100 years and are still fine .
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
almost 13 years ago
Posts: 13572
Member since: Apr 2009
The wood discussion borders on silly. A well made home that includes wood, can withstand a hundred years if maintained. Balance that against the likelihood that a family will maintain that residence for at least as long.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by truthskr10
almost 13 years ago
Posts: 4088
Member since: Jul 2009
Sorry but Occam's razor suggests mid November and on lumber prices more a result from Sandy than just plain "housing."
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by alanhart
almost 13 years ago
Posts: 12397
Member since: Feb 2007
Those 100+ year-old houses were made from solid, old-growth wood -- hardwoods, if I'm not mistaken.
Houses more recently (1950s on?) are framed with crappier sticks, and worst of all the rest of it is plywood, which is held together by adhesives that deteriorate over time. And then the plywood starts to delaminate.
I believe the main reasons that stick-built houses remain popular in the US are:
1. We want bigger and bigger houses -- double the sf compared with the immediate post-WWII average.
2. Stick-built requires a very low level of labor skill, = lower wages
Low-cost, long-lasting solid Three Little Pigs-approved concrete "block" was used for the outer walls to build many US tract housing developments from the 1940s until the mid-80s, when builders started using sticks instead. To build faster without much worker training: balsa-wood, chicken-wire and sprayed on insulation, quickly hidden behind sprayed-on stucco or crappy vinyl siding.
truthskr10, I was going to guess non-US consumption is driving construction lumber (no, I didn't open the link), but Sandy makes more sense.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by huntersburg
almost 13 years ago
Posts: 11329
Member since: Nov 2010
COlumbiaCOunty's outhouse in Columbia County is made from Chinese Drywall.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by alanhart
almost 13 years ago
Posts: 12397
Member since: Feb 2007
racist
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by huntersburg
almost 13 years ago
Posts: 11329
Member since: Nov 2010
I agree alan.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by notadmin
almost 13 years ago
Posts: 3835
Member since: Jul 2008
> Houses more recently (1950s on?) are framed with crappier sticks, and worst of all the rest of it is plywood, which is held together by adhesives that deteriorate over time. And then the plywood starts to delaminate.
why would anybody buy a house built like that after its best years are behind it? say, after 30+ years, depreciation with those materials is much faster than with proper materials. i'm not saying that stone is the only way to go, there are other possibilities.
hey, i would like to know how long these ones will last:
'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
Prices rose by almost 45 per cent in 2012 alone, as builders have constructed more homes in response to an uptick in demand from homebuyers eager to take advantage of record-low mortgage-interest rates. Softwoods such as spruce, pine and fir are used to make lumber for homebuilding materials such as boards and plywood.
“We’re at the beginning of a long upward cycle in the housing market,” said Paul Jannke, principal at Forest Economic Advisors, a Massachusetts-based consulting firm. “Total consumption of lumber in the US will be up 10-15 per cent a year for the next three years at least. Demand is still well below historic levels.”
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/260953fc-5c18-11e2-bef7-00144feab49a.html#axzz2IcmtXANI
i'm still surprised that USA housing stock is built with lumber instead of with more durable materials. why is this so?
Here you go....
http://home.howstuffworks.com/home-improvement/construction/materials/5-long-lasting-building-materials.htm#page=0
not 100% related but a classic
http://xkcd.com/1163/
guess it depends on the definition of "durable". to me, durable means that once built, the structure can be used for 2-4 generations, but for centuries, like many homes in Europe can be used. i don't get the feeling that homes in USA are built thinking long term.
notadmin, Homes are expensive enough. I get the feeling those homes would be priced out of the market, and not something a Lennar or a Toll Brothers would even consider. I suppose people building one of a kind homes on top end lots could consider but even there probably not.
In most parts of the U.S. lumber has always been cheap and available, so there's an established supply chain of material and labor.
I guess there's also a cultural aspect. E.g., in Germany wood==flimsy even for spec housing.
You can see plenty if homes all over New England that were made completely from wood and have been standing for 100 years and are still fine .
The wood discussion borders on silly. A well made home that includes wood, can withstand a hundred years if maintained. Balance that against the likelihood that a family will maintain that residence for at least as long.
Sorry but Occam's razor suggests mid November and on lumber prices more a result from Sandy than just plain "housing."
Those 100+ year-old houses were made from solid, old-growth wood -- hardwoods, if I'm not mistaken.
Houses more recently (1950s on?) are framed with crappier sticks, and worst of all the rest of it is plywood, which is held together by adhesives that deteriorate over time. And then the plywood starts to delaminate.
I believe the main reasons that stick-built houses remain popular in the US are:
1. We want bigger and bigger houses -- double the sf compared with the immediate post-WWII average.
2. Stick-built requires a very low level of labor skill, = lower wages
Low-cost, long-lasting solid Three Little Pigs-approved concrete "block" was used for the outer walls to build many US tract housing developments from the 1940s until the mid-80s, when builders started using sticks instead. To build faster without much worker training: balsa-wood, chicken-wire and sprayed on insulation, quickly hidden behind sprayed-on stucco or crappy vinyl siding.
truthskr10, I was going to guess non-US consumption is driving construction lumber (no, I didn't open the link), but Sandy makes more sense.
COlumbiaCOunty's outhouse in Columbia County is made from Chinese Drywall.
racist
I agree alan.
> Houses more recently (1950s on?) are framed with crappier sticks, and worst of all the rest of it is plywood, which is held together by adhesives that deteriorate over time. And then the plywood starts to delaminate.
why would anybody buy a house built like that after its best years are behind it? say, after 30+ years, depreciation with those materials is much faster than with proper materials. i'm not saying that stone is the only way to go, there are other possibilities.
hey, i would like to know how long these ones will last:
http://www.huf-haus.com/en/home.html
http://www.huf-haus.com/it/italia/lugano.html