3 ms·
Smaller houses are not a bad trend, but smaller houses are often much less energy efficient due to thinner walls, lighter weight, less thermal mass. If one doe
by droithomme 13y ago
Smaller houses are not a bad trend, but smaller houses are often much less energy efficient due to thinner walls, lighter weight, less thermal mass.
If one does not live in a very temperate area such as Hawaii, this has consequences regarding the cost of heating and cooling that should be considered.
Many poor people for example live in single wide trailers. It is not uncommon for them to have winter heating bills in the range of $500-$1000, completely destroying their income budget and keeping them mired in poverty.
Another factor with small portable homes in particular is that they depreciate and one is almost never able to use them as collateral for a business loan to help their kids or nephews or other family members get started in a self owned business, which is something that is not a problem for those with full size houses. This inability to convert housing investment into investable liquid assets is another problem with small portable housing which keeps the poor poor.
For small houses to lift people from poverty, they would need to be much more energy efficient than they are typically made, unless the owners plan to try to get through the winter without heat.
- ChiperSoft 13y agoI don't think the goal here is to lift them from poverty, I think it's just to give them a place to live. There's no particular reason why a small home would be less energy efficient. I built a 120sqft studio apartment for about $10,000 that was so well insulated that it was actually cold inside during 85° heat.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]