3 ms·
> The video talks about "no cost at all", except it ignores the massive amount of labour and time required to hand make bricks from mud and go from there. Cost
by littlestymaar 3y ago
> The video talks about "no cost at all", except it ignores the massive amount of labour and time required to hand make bricks from mud and go from there.
Cost and labor are two different things, especially for people whose market assign very little monetary value for their labor.
> How do you house the population on this planet without making use of cheap to produce, scalable and durable materials such as steel or concrete?
Well first of all, the global population is growing at a much lower pace than it used to, so the challenge is becoming easier and easier every year.
Then (reinforced) concrete is pretty much the opposite of durable, at least with the current “cheap and scalable” technology we use today with steel rebar that corrode and eventually destroy the structure.
And finally, the current technologies aren't the only one that are low-cost or scalable, we've been working with them and refining the entire supply chain efficiency, but that doesn't mean we cannot scale other technologies. And dismissing dirt as a possible replacement because it sounds like a thing of the past makes as little sense as would dismissing concrete because that's something the Romans used.
- thelastparadise 3y ago> Cost and labor are two different things, especially for people whose market assign very little monetary value for their labor Plus the fact that many places (including the US) have tax burdens >= 50%. So if it would cost $50K to hire a contractor to build a minimal house (labor + materials), we'd have to first sell $100K of our own time. On top of that we'd be be fighting an uphill battle against inflation and land scarcity. So it really doesn't take much for this kind of thing to be worthwhile.
- HPsquared 3y agoThat's the big factor driving DIY of all kinds. And a lot of other things which look strange and inefficient.
- Turing_Machine 3y ago> specially for people whose market assign very little monetary value for their labor. Those people get approximately the same amount of lifespan as anyone else (even less, in most cases). If they use up more of their lifespan making mud bricks (by hand!) rather than learning to read, spending time with their families, or maybe even just having fun, that is a waste of their lives, regardless of what monetary value the local economy puts on their time. > Then (reinforced) concrete is pretty much the opposite of durable, at least with the current “cheap and scalable” technology we use today with steel rebar that corrode and eventually destroy the structure. Less durable than unbaked mud bricks? I'm... skeptical, to put it very mildly.
- littlestymaar 3y agoPlease tell me you're trolling, really…
- Turing_Machine 3y agoBy saying that reinforced concrete is stronger than unbaked mud bricks, and that the time used in making them by hand is not available for doing other things? That's not "trolling". Those are simply facts.