3 ms·
Building houses cheaply is largely a solved problem, and offhand I don't see any particular reason to think this is actually any cheaper than techniques that ha
by Lazare 10y ago
Building houses cheaply is largely a solved problem, and offhand I don't see any particular reason to think this is actually any cheaper than techniques that have been around for decades, in terms of producing a practical finished dwelling.
If you want to house a lot of people cheaply, build a big, ugly apartment building. Or twenty. No big deal. The cost comes from the fixtures, finishing, the land, and (most especially, in desirable areas) the building permits.
This is cool, but it's hard to see what problem it's solving.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- pascalxus 10y agothis house is much more cost effective. Here in CA, it's hard to build a house for less than 200$ per square foot (either due to laws or local labor conditions) - not even including land and permit cost.
- Lazare 10y ago> either due to laws Right. If it was legal to build tiny, cheap houses, you could build tiny, cheap houses, including using this tech. But since it isn't, you can't. The issue with housing in the bay area is NOT, by any possible stretch of the imagination, that it's technically challenging to make small, crude houses cheaply enough. Plus: > not even including land and permit cost. But you do need the land and the permit. And once you have those, why not build a nice house? It's sensible to try and use the scarcest resource most efficiently, and in coastal CA, the scarcest resource is neither building materials nor labour.