4 ms·

(not a rhetorical question) Won't stick+drywall houses require more diligent maintenance in order to stand 500 years? E.g., new asphalt roofs, etc. It's not u

by pinko 5y ago

(not a rhetorical question) Won't stick+drywall houses require more diligent maintenance in order to stand 500 years? E.g., new asphalt roofs, etc. It's not unusual for homes in Europe to last that long with major maintenance needed every hundred+ years rather than every thirty. It also seems like the impact of deferred maintenance is lower on stone+clay homes (e.g., you can realistically restore a stone farmhouse that's gone to ruin more easily than a stick+drywall house that has), no? My sense is that the 500-year TCO is many times higher (maybe as much as an order of magnitude) for US-style homes.

whafro 5y ago
They may require more maintenance, but that maintenance may also be lighter. You could also argue that this type of construction allows more room for generational upgrades than those expected to last 500 years. Integrating PV solar into the roof might be a more reasonable proposition if you know you're planning to replace the roof in a few years. If you don't expect to have to replace it for several more decades, you're less likely to make that investment. This also applies to insulation, air sealing, electrical upgrades, etc.
lotsofpulp 5y ago
Why would I want a house to stand 500 years? Just in the short 30 years I have been alive, there have been amazing advances in communications technology (cat 5 and cat 6 wiring), Wi-Fi, mobile phones, PVC to plex plumbing, insulation technology, zone heating / cooling, etc. > e.g., you can realistically restore a stone farmhouse that's gone to ruin more easily than a stick+drywall house that has), no? My sense is that the 500-year TCO is many times higher (maybe as much as an order of magnitude) for US-style homes. No, labor for masonry related work is insanely expensive, and rightfully so. Even at its most basic, more mass needs more force to move around. It is so cheap and easy to cut some wood and drywall and install new things and patch it up rather than deal with masonry that will last 500 years.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
stonemetal12 5y ago
My house has a steel reinforced concrete slab under it. Reinforced concrete has a life time of 50-100 years, if everything was done right. You are going to have a hard time convincing me that I should care if the building on top will last longer than that.

by pinko 5y ago

whafro 5y ago

They may require more maintenance, but that maintenance may also be lighter. You could also argue that this type of construction allows more room for generational upgrades than those expected to last 500 years. Integrating PV solar into the roof might be a more reasonable proposition if you know you're planning to replace the roof in a few years. If you don't expect to have to replace it for several more decades, you're less likely to make that investment. This also applies to insulation, air sealing, electrical upgrades, etc.

lotsofpulp 5y ago

Why would I want a house to stand 500 years? Just in the short 30 years I have been alive, there have been amazing advances in communications technology (cat 5 and cat 6 wiring), Wi-Fi, mobile phones, PVC to plex plumbing, insulation technology, zone heating / cooling, etc. > e.g., you can realistically restore a stone farmhouse that's gone to ruin more easily than a stick+drywall house that has), no? My sense is that the 500-year TCO is many times higher (maybe as much as an order of magnitude) for US-style homes. No, labor for masonry related work is insanely expensive, and rightfully so. Even at its most basic, more mass needs more force to move around. It is so cheap and easy to cut some wood and drywall and install new things and patch it up rather than deal with masonry that will last 500 years.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

stonemetal12 5y ago

My house has a steel reinforced concrete slab under it. Reinforced concrete has a life time of 50-100 years, if everything was done right. You are going to have a hard time convincing me that I should care if the building on top will last longer than that.