4 ms·

Excellent idea as a proof of concept, and even beautiful in design. However one cannot help but wonder how structurally sound these materials are. Stress tests

Excellent idea as a proof of concept, and even beautiful in design. However one cannot help but wonder how structurally sound these materials are. Stress tests are needed to determine how well this would hold up over years of exposure to the elements before being produced en masse. For a sustainable alternative, homes made from repurposed shipping containers are a cost-effective solution for housing. They are made of weather-resistant Steel which, while not rust-proof, will not rot. A single unit can be kitted out and furnished for as little as $25,000, and yields 300+ square feet of space, comparable to a smaller studio apartment. Check out the YouTube Channel "Containing Luxury" which illustrates the sustainability of Container Homes and demonstrates them as a solution to several housing issues: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_sclvzg9dM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_sclvzg9dM

tonyedgecombe 5y ago
I don't understand why people think shipping containers are a good idea for housing. They were never designed for this and will always be compromised when you come to put windows, doors, insulation and services in them.
- kingsuper20 5y ago
  I guess because a shipping container is rectangular and that a house can be rectangular. This wasn't a bad series: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA5fh29rhLs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA5fh29rhLs Put me in the 'shipping containers make shitty houses' camp.
  - hindsightbias 5y ago
    I love that they wood frame the interiors for insulation and walls. Could have just built a wood frame house. Quicker, faster and more roomy.
    - saalweachter 5y ago
      $80 / square foot is, like, cheap, but I'm not sure I would really call it amazingly cheap.
- bhandziuk 5y ago
  Right, they're so bad. Structurally unsound once you start putting windows in. They need insulation which either significantly intrudes on your interior space or you put it on the outside and you then need to do basically a traditional exterior and lose any supposed benefit of the metal enclosure.
- ihunter2839 5y ago
  Could you elaborate on what you mean by "compromised"? Sure, they can no longer be stacked 7 units high, but I am skeptical that cutting out a handful of windows and a door is going to make a container structurally unsound for the purposes of container homes. Cut out a whole side wall? That's a very different story.
bsanr2 5y ago
"Shipping container housing" is the "nuclear energy" of housing solutions.
- Robotbeat 5y ago
  ?
- reversengineer 5y ago
  Can you elaborate? Not everyone would see this as a bad thing. Many would argue that nuclear energy, while not perfect, is a logical next step that, solves quite effectively for the problem of demand.
  - BBC-vs-neolibs 5y ago
    "It will fix all thing things!" Maybe? (Shipping container housing sometimes invokes the same enthusiams which could seen at times in the 1950s for nuclear.)
  - ehnto 5y ago
    Often container homes go above and beyond in their retrofits, and it would have been more effective to just build it conventionally. Both from a cost perspective and as a final result. If someone is happy with a simple container home, it really wouldn't be hard to build a similar box more conventionally. I suspect the real issue at hand is that you're usually not allowed to build such a house, which is where the "tiny home on wheels" trend came about. Ignoring the part where an entire group of people seem to have forgotten that caravans exist, the "on wheels" part lets you build out-of-code homes and put them places you wouldn't be allowed to otherwise. It really depends on a lot of factors though. What draws someone to a container home, is it the re-use and recycling? Is it the do-it-yourself nature of the project? If so, that's wicked, but I think we can probably work out ways to achieve those two things while also getting better and cheaper houses as the end result, if regulations would let you actually deploy such a house.
    - VBprogrammer 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

tonyedgecombe 5y ago

I don't understand why people think shipping containers are a good idea for housing. They were never designed for this and will always be compromised when you come to put windows, doors, insulation and services in them.

kingsuper20 5y ago
I guess because a shipping container is rectangular and that a house can be rectangular. This wasn't a bad series: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA5fh29rhLs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA5fh29rhLs Put me in the 'shipping containers make shitty houses' camp.
- hindsightbias 5y ago
  I love that they wood frame the interiors for insulation and walls. Could have just built a wood frame house. Quicker, faster and more roomy.
  - saalweachter 5y ago
    $80 / square foot is, like, cheap, but I'm not sure I would really call it amazingly cheap.
bhandziuk 5y ago
Right, they're so bad. Structurally unsound once you start putting windows in. They need insulation which either significantly intrudes on your interior space or you put it on the outside and you then need to do basically a traditional exterior and lose any supposed benefit of the metal enclosure.
ihunter2839 5y ago
Could you elaborate on what you mean by "compromised"? Sure, they can no longer be stacked 7 units high, but I am skeptical that cutting out a handful of windows and a door is going to make a container structurally unsound for the purposes of container homes. Cut out a whole side wall? That's a very different story.

bsanr2 5y ago

"Shipping container housing" is the "nuclear energy" of housing solutions.

Robotbeat 5y ago
?
reversengineer 5y ago
Can you elaborate? Not everyone would see this as a bad thing. Many would argue that nuclear energy, while not perfect, is a logical next step that, solves quite effectively for the problem of demand.
- BBC-vs-neolibs 5y ago
  "It will fix all thing things!" Maybe? (Shipping container housing sometimes invokes the same enthusiams which could seen at times in the 1950s for nuclear.)
- ehnto 5y ago
  Often container homes go above and beyond in their retrofits, and it would have been more effective to just build it conventionally. Both from a cost perspective and as a final result. If someone is happy with a simple container home, it really wouldn't be hard to build a similar box more conventionally. I suspect the real issue at hand is that you're usually not allowed to build such a house, which is where the "tiny home on wheels" trend came about. Ignoring the part where an entire group of people seem to have forgotten that caravans exist, the "on wheels" part lets you build out-of-code homes and put them places you wouldn't be allowed to otherwise. It really depends on a lot of factors though. What draws someone to a container home, is it the re-use and recycling? Is it the do-it-yourself nature of the project? If so, that's wicked, but I think we can probably work out ways to achieve those two things while also getting better and cheaper houses as the end result, if regulations would let you actually deploy such a house.
  - VBprogrammer 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]