5 ms·

Micro-houses are the future of housing for everyone. The massive living spaces we have now are not sustainable. By 2050 if we are to avoid 2 degrees of warming

Micro-houses are the future of housing for everyone. The massive living spaces we have now are not sustainable. By 2050 if we are to avoid 2 degrees of warming we need to be emitting 2 tons of carbon per year per person: http://insight.gbig.org/targeting-2-tons-closer-than-we-think/ http://insight.gbig.org/targeting-2-tons-closer-than-we-thin.... The average American today emits 11 tons, whereas 2 tons per person is closer to that of someone living in Brazil or Egypt. In climates where you need to heat and cool a home, carbon taxes will make heating and cooling the living spaces we have now financially impossible. People will drive demand for these smaller living options out of necessity. Additionally, as we make consumption less and less economically attractive people will have fewer things to want to store anyway, and personal vehicles will likely no longer be something the average person will be able to afford or want so there will be less need for parking and garages.

flerchin 8y ago
Can't I just keep my moderately sized home and add solar panels? I would definitely rather do that and bike to the train station.
- makerofspoons 8y ago
  If we implemented a carbon pricing scheme and these panels allowed you to heat and cool your home with no or minimal draw off the grid, this would be an affordable option.
refurb 8y ago
Your 11 tons is total US emissions (including industrial), spread out across the entire population. Of course the US emits 5x that of Brazil or Egypt, the US produces 5x the output. Moving into micro houses isn’t going to cut it, you’d need to slash US economic activity to reduce those numbers (an entire new technology).
- makerofspoons 8y ago
  Microhousing would be just one development carbon taxing would bring about- if we began to price our food appropriately for example animal agriculture would largely come to an end except for luxuries, and that would do a great deal to cut emissions. Personal vehicles and flying would also become cost prohibitive. These are only a few of the ways taxing carbon could make our lifestyles more sustainable and shrink highly polluting sectors of our economy such that we reach a more sustainable amount of emissions per capita.
ryanwaggoner 8y ago
Which is why we won't ever have those carbon taxes. As soon as politicians implement (or probably even seriously suggest) carbon taxes with enough pain to legitimately incentivize people to give up their homes (and all their stuff) to live in "microhousing", some other politician will come along and tell your constituents that you're crazy and they have a better way. And poof, just like that you're out of a job. We're not going to solve climate change by democracies adopting high carbon taxes.
- makerofspoons 8y ago
  I worry that without the voting public waking up to the reality of how deep in the hole we already are we won't solve climate change at all. No near-future technology has the ability to reduce emissions by the amount we need to, besides widespread deployment of nuclear power which is also not politically viable. At some point people will, either willingly or by force (such as widespread natural disaster and famine), realize that things have to change.
  - ryanwaggoner 8y ago
    That's exactly what's going to happen. Humanity will not solve climate change until we're already suffering badly from its effects.
  - magduf 8y ago
    I think the problem here is that you still have some hope that climate change can be reversed or at least mitigated. It can't. There is simply no way developed nations are going to curb their emissions enough in time, and that developing nations will refrain from increasing their emissions, for us to avoid this disaster. We might as well get used to the idea that our civilization is going to collapse before too long, and there's really nothing we can do about it. Other civilizations in the past collapsed and disappeared because of environmental change, and ours will be no different.
    - JoeAltmaier 8y ago
      Well, a little different. We have globe-spanning transportation and communications. Actual technology to bring to bear. The best chance of mitigating the disaster that has ever existed in history.

flerchin 8y ago

Can't I just keep my moderately sized home and add solar panels? I would definitely rather do that and bike to the train station.

makerofspoons 8y ago
If we implemented a carbon pricing scheme and these panels allowed you to heat and cool your home with no or minimal draw off the grid, this would be an affordable option.

refurb 8y ago

Your 11 tons is total US emissions (including industrial), spread out across the entire population. Of course the US emits 5x that of Brazil or Egypt, the US produces 5x the output. Moving into micro houses isn’t going to cut it, you’d need to slash US economic activity to reduce those numbers (an entire new technology).

makerofspoons 8y ago
Microhousing would be just one development carbon taxing would bring about- if we began to price our food appropriately for example animal agriculture would largely come to an end except for luxuries, and that would do a great deal to cut emissions. Personal vehicles and flying would also become cost prohibitive. These are only a few of the ways taxing carbon could make our lifestyles more sustainable and shrink highly polluting sectors of our economy such that we reach a more sustainable amount of emissions per capita.

ryanwaggoner 8y ago

Which is why we won't ever have those carbon taxes. As soon as politicians implement (or probably even seriously suggest) carbon taxes with enough pain to legitimately incentivize people to give up their homes (and all their stuff) to live in "microhousing", some other politician will come along and tell your constituents that you're crazy and they have a better way. And poof, just like that you're out of a job. We're not going to solve climate change by democracies adopting high carbon taxes.

makerofspoons 8y ago
I worry that without the voting public waking up to the reality of how deep in the hole we already are we won't solve climate change at all. No near-future technology has the ability to reduce emissions by the amount we need to, besides widespread deployment of nuclear power which is also not politically viable. At some point people will, either willingly or by force (such as widespread natural disaster and famine), realize that things have to change.
- ryanwaggoner 8y ago
  That's exactly what's going to happen. Humanity will not solve climate change until we're already suffering badly from its effects.
- magduf 8y ago
  I think the problem here is that you still have some hope that climate change can be reversed or at least mitigated. It can't. There is simply no way developed nations are going to curb their emissions enough in time, and that developing nations will refrain from increasing their emissions, for us to avoid this disaster. We might as well get used to the idea that our civilization is going to collapse before too long, and there's really nothing we can do about it. Other civilizations in the past collapsed and disappeared because of environmental change, and ours will be no different.
  - JoeAltmaier 8y ago
    Well, a little different. We have globe-spanning transportation and communications. Actual technology to bring to bear. The best chance of mitigating the disaster that has ever existed in history.