3 ms·

>as well as building new housing with an expected lifespan of 20-40 years so it can be torn down and rebuilt afterwards As opposed to 60 - 80 year old wood-fra

>as well as building new housing with an expected lifespan of 20-40 years so it can be torn down and rebuilt afterwards As opposed to 60 - 80 year old wood-frame homes that are energy inefficient, falling apart, and barely worth the 750,000USD average selling price? Where you will either live with the design choices the previous owner made (regardless of how much or little you like them...nevermind efficiency or quality) or spend tens of thousands more doing renovations? And this is all considering that you don't get surprised with an electrical circuit or an HVAC layout that is not up to snuff for modern times. At least in Japan, you can get a home built to specification to your reasonable desires, with all modern amenities, without the baggage of the past-owner's taste -- all for the great price of around 350,000 USD. This, by the way, supports an entire ecosystem of builders, architects, and suppliers who must keep up with the times and are constantly exploring new innovations in house-building.

fomine3 5y ago
> This, by the way, supports an entire ecosystem of builders, architects, and suppliers who must keep up with the times and are constantly exploring new innovations in house-building. Just add the real: Houses aren't good unless you manually choose better one. Known one is that Japanese insulation standards are still quite bad. Aluminum single glass window is still allowed to use for new building. It's horrible to use a material for insulation that used for heat sinks. This is partially due to the window manufacturer is also a big aluminum manufacturer.