Almost all regulation is intended to shape demand toward particular industries. There are so many ways to build a cheap house. One reason for codes, supposedly, is to make sure a roof doesn't fall on you. To meet them you need to build even heavier. But you can also build so light and cheaply it doesn't matter.
Some might call that a tent, and think that's no way to live. In either case it's your right as a human to make shelter for a thousand dollars instead of hundreds of thousands if it can be safe, or even if it isn't.
But because a house is expensive it needs to last for a long time (durable), and therefore it needs to cost even more. And because it is heavy it needs to be safe (durable), and cost even more. A house like that isn't bad but it should be one of two options. If you can build shelter for $2,000 then you could build a house every year and spend less. Not a good house. But it's an option. If it lasts 5 year instead of 1, which is likely, that's even better. It's the non-luxury option that the poor used to have. Now it's the luxury option or homelessness.
Another point. Being able to build a home for $300 and not needing to heat it while in Arizona makes a good point about living where you don't need to heat. I did the math once. It would be cheaper and more environmentally friendly if everyone moved seasonally. Moving an RV costs less energy than people are buring in either AC or heating. Not that people want to do that. But with so many able to work remote, it would be more energy efficient to move people twice a year. People would probably enjoy having the outdoors always be nice. But if we did that at scale we'd have a lot of real estate sit empty for half the year.
They never regulate before they have regulatory capture. Loopholes rule.
Long before AirB&B, when I was young and moving at least every year, I dreamed of "luxury" parking garages with views for RVs in all the cities. They would not be run-down trailer parks, but well-kept respectable mobile-hotels. Further, they'd make it nice and easy for folks to ship their occupied RV by train so you wouldn't have to drive as much, ideally being more sustainable too.
If the thermal mass gets too hot during the day there are also other passive ways to keep the space cool without requiring energy. It's as simple as shade management, roof vents, crosswind use, courtyards, and underground cooling ventilation. Also, there are clever ways to illuminate rooms within during the day. https://engineerine.com/plastic-bottle-lighs-homes/
*It's sad they don't mention how, after the great tsunami, he went over to Sri Lanka (or Madagascar?) to help them rebuild sustainably, cheaply, and quickly - not with earthships, but domes.
Log in
Almost all regulation is intended to shape demand toward particular industries. There are so many ways to build a cheap house. One reason for codes, supposedly, is to make sure a roof doesn't fall on you. To meet them you need to build even heavier. But you can also build so light and cheaply it doesn't matter.
Some might call that a tent, and think that's no way to live. In either case it's your right as a human to make shelter for a thousand dollars instead of hundreds of thousands if it can be safe, or even if it isn't.
But because a house is expensive it needs to last for a long time (durable), and therefore it needs to cost even more. And because it is heavy it needs to be safe (durable), and cost even more. A house like that isn't bad but it should be one of two options. If you can build shelter for $2,000 then you could build a house every year and spend less. Not a good house. But it's an option. If it lasts 5 year instead of 1, which is likely, that's even better. It's the non-luxury option that the poor used to have. Now it's the luxury option or homelessness.
Another point. Being able to build a home for $300 and not needing to heat it while in Arizona makes a good point about living where you don't need to heat. I did the math once. It would be cheaper and more environmentally friendly if everyone moved seasonally. Moving an RV costs less energy than people are buring in either AC or heating. Not that people want to do that. But with so many able to work remote, it would be more energy efficient to move people twice a year. People would probably enjoy having the outdoors always be nice. But if we did that at scale we'd have a lot of real estate sit empty for half the year.
They never regulate before they have regulatory capture. Loopholes rule.
Long before AirB&B, when I was young and moving at least every year, I dreamed of "luxury" parking garages with views for RVs in all the cities. They would not be run-down trailer parks, but well-kept respectable mobile-hotels. Further, they'd make it nice and easy for folks to ship their occupied RV by train so you wouldn't have to drive as much, ideally being more sustainable too.
If the thermal mass gets too hot during the day there are also other passive ways to keep the space cool without requiring energy. It's as simple as shade management, roof vents, crosswind use, courtyards, and underground cooling ventilation. Also, there are clever ways to illuminate rooms within during the day. https://engineerine.com/plastic-bottle-lighs-homes/
Similar to adobes, there's quite a bit on Wikipedia, YouTube, and beyond, about cob homes, straw-bale homes, earthships (and other Michael Reynolds innovations*), etc.
*It's sad they don't mention how, after the great tsunami, he went over to Sri Lanka (or Madagascar?) to help them rebuild sustainably, cheaply, and quickly - not with earthships, but domes.