4 ms·
> So if I developed a way to transport material between Seattle and NYC more efficiently I think the point wasn't that we need to make this trip cheaper, but t
by lostapathy 5y ago
> So if I developed a way to transport material between Seattle and NYC more efficiently
I think the point wasn't that we need to make this trip cheaper, but that we need to figure out a way to build houses with materials that travel less.
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y agoIt's complicated. Here in southwest, we have suitable (clayish) soil for building adobe with all over the place. Very little transportation in terms of miles compared to lumber, bricks etc. However ... extremely labor intensive and compared to stick framing, relatively slow. So, despite its local-ness, huge thermal mass and excellent karma, adobe loses out and stick-framed OSB sheathed things that look like adobe win.
- lostapathy 5y agoBut perhaps that's exactly where we need investment - to figure out a way to apply automation to adobe type building? Unfortunately this isn't the kind of thing the market is good at sorting out, but there could well be some breakthrough tech that makes adobe building cheap. We just don't look for it.
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y agoThere have been attempts over the centuries. Rammed earth walls attempt to do away with the "dealing with lots of relative small pieces" problem (adobe bricks). But they require form building, which adds a significant labor component that isn't there for the "lots of small pieces" approach.
- wallacoloo 5y agoTwo sides of the same coin, no? You can lower the transportation costs of materials either by doing less of it (as you suggest), or by decreasing the cost per weight/volume/distance (my earlier comment).