UPDATE: I've re-published the "Affordable, Sustainable Housing" series to the Intentional Communities Research and Development Group because the series led to interest in and the formation of the group.
This is a bare bones overview of a topic that covers a lot of ground. If there is interest I will develop additional diaries on specific materials and methods in the future, including some not covered here.
See Affordable, Sustainable Housing I: As Direct Action, for an overview of cultural and market issues affecting affordability, sustainability and affordable, sustainable housing today, and why this is an excellent opportunity for Direct Action in fighting back in the Class, Climate and Consumer Culture Wars.
WHAT ARE SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS?
Using local materials is a more sustainable practice because less energy is required for transportation. (If industry consolidation and the corruption of concentrated wealth were discouraged, and the value of the environment for sustaining life was understood and accounted for in market practices, market forces would more appropriately favor locally produced materials, but that's a different topic.) The most sustainable approach involves using materials from the building site itself, such as sand, clay, lime, gravel, rock, water, straw, wood, etc. These materials are also typically less expensive, especially if they come from the site, than processed alternatives shipped in.
Fortuitously, using these same materials is also more sustainable because they are natural materials produced with the energy of natural processes, and are widely available and/or regenerative; so long as the material's regenerative capacity exceeds the rate of harvesting and use, using natural material building is, by definition, more sustainable than practices which either a) deplete resources and/or b) require more energy consumption to extract, process, transport, market, sell, etc. than they would save by using alternatives.
Using reclaimed materials is generally a more sustainable approach because it eliminates the need to produce and consume additional energy for new materials. Reclaimed material use takes advantage of embodied energy, that energy previously expended to extract, process, transport, market, sell, etc. that material. These materials include lumber, shingles, urbanite (recycled concrete), bricks, tile, glass, sheet and other metals, etc., so long as they do not contain toxic materials or have other attributes that would require significant energy to make them suitable for use in structures intended for human habitation.
Fewer materials is perhaps the easiest way to increase the sustainability of our construction, maintenance and energy consumption practices with regard to building. Take a look at how the average NEW home size has grown (in square footage):
1950s: 938
1973: 1,525
1990: 1,904
2000: 2,057
2007: 2,277
2009: 2,135
2011: 2,233
Natural Resources Defense Council - What's going on with new home sizes - is the madness finally over?
National Association of Home Builders - Breaking Down House Price and Construction Costs
United States Census Bureau - Characteristics of New Housing
NPR - Behind the Ever-Expanding American Dream House
The NAHB anticipates that new home sizes will continue to decline slowly.
Whether you use local, natural, reclaimed and/or fewer materials, the benefits of sustainability will affect construction, maintenance and energy use.
Home Sizes and The Recovery
The financial collapse has certainly driven much of the trend toward smaller new houses. Recovery by some definitions notwithstanding, limited or non-recovery for most people likely will be permanent when you consider:
1) After all the job "recovery" we are still about 7-8 million in the hole from where we should be based on population growth since the collapse. At the rate we are going, we won't be fully "recovering" until after a few more recessions, if ever.
2) In the meantime, wages have fallen, so lots more people who might be full participants in the economy are below, at or around the poverty level.
3) In the past, money from the recovery would go back into jobs and wages. Now, they fund the continued concentration of wealth. With that goes influence and power. So, 90% continue to lose influence over their future.
4) Climate change impacts will increasingly disrupt markets and economic activity, potentially until growth is impossible.
5) Policies are trending toward austerity, not recovery.
For these reasons, it is realistic to anticipate that most of those who have suffered will not regain their former income status and trajectory. Ever.
Among Millenials and Y's, there are tons of un- or under-employed young people, many with degrees, even lawyers and MBAs, people with hefty educational debt and slim prospects. Historically, generations entering the job market under these conditions are permanently economically disadvantaged.
If there's a bright side, it may be that those affected, especially the Millenials and Ys whose attitudes and expectations may be more plastic, are by circumstances being encouraged to reconsider and reject traditional measures of success, including the dubious relationship between consumption and happiness, which is good for civilization and the planet.
Even among those who are buying homes in this economy, some will no doubt be looking for smaller, more affordable homes than they would under different circumstances. Fresh off the first- or second-hand experience of the bubble and collapse, what with the glut of McMansions and other large homes on the market, and financial uncertainty in general, real estate is not looking like the place to store money or build up obligations. (Sorry realtors, mortgage brokers, bankers). And the affordability of a home is measured not only in the purchase price but in repair, maintenance and energy costs, all of which are affected significantly by the size of the home.
In addition to economic and lifestyle drivers,
increasing concerns about Climate Change are also influencing the trend to smaller accommodations.
Downsizing Your Carbon Footprint
Many of us have been involved in and continue to consider and adopt new ways to reduce our carbon footprint. Some of us more successfully than others. Creatures of habit as we are, and as seductive as convenience, acquisitiveness and entertainment are, it is a struggle for most of us. Many times, it is like curing an addiction, requiring experimentation, relapse, recommitment...try, try again.
If you take nothing else away from this diary, however, and you currently are using more than 500-600 sft per person, you can make a substantive difference in your carbon footprint by "simply" :) downsizing in the next few years.
For some of us, myself and my wife included, this represents both a huge change and an enormous opportunity to contribute. As soon as our younger daughter graduates HS in '15, we plan to sell our 5,000 sft home, move closer to work, and downsize to as far under 2,000 sft as we can find, given all factors. [Then again, once we sell, my wife goes on sabbattical in Europe and we may just stay there... :)
Downsizing is also a great opportunity to reset your priorities for consumption: acquiring, storing, re-locating, maintaining and otherwise managing your stuff vs. having more time and money for other aspects of your life. (We are really looking forward to that.) If you think about it, downsizing has a domino effect on your carbon footprint. And don't forget, you can also downsize (or eliminate) your mortgage! Cha-ching!!! Or, you can use the extra money to buy a smaller place with higher quality amenities.
NOTES
1) If you are already in a small place, intentionally or not, you are already contributing! Thank you, thank you, thank you!
2) For some people, downsizing could begin (and end?) with emptying storage units. How? By reducing demand for constructing and maintaining more storage units and all that asphalt! Especially if they're heated.
MICRO-APARTMENTS
Downsizing applies not only to homes but apartments. There's also a trend toward micro-apartments, in many cases adopting designs, materials, fixtures and furnishings developed for space-constrained metro areas in Japan and Europe.
WHAT ARE SUSTAINABLE BUILDING METHODS?
Modern mass construction mostly assumes that all locations are interchangeable, the sustainability considerations of siting and orientation the house on the lot is either irrelevant or secondary and materials, so designs and methods used in Burlington, VT need not be much different from those used in Salt Lake City, UT, which is ludicrous. Cradle-to-grave sustainable construction (i.e., not just a conventionally built home with solar panels and water collection) being pursued today by a growing community of interested parties begins within a "permaculture" design methodology that is specific to the site and its immediate and surrounding environment.
The design optimizes the passive solar potential of the site and addresses opportunities for water reclamation, food production, waste composting and recycling. Permaculture will also drive the design toward multi-function, space-optimizing layouts and components, which will naturally result in smaller spaces requiring fewer materials. The design also will incorporate energy conservation and renewable energy sources.
Principles of permaculture drive material selection as well, which is why natural building is a significant segment of the "market" for affordable, sustainable construction.
Note that I chose smaller, simpler models for the examples below. Also, pretty much all of these home construction methods allow for a wide variety of "looks", so don't let these images give you a fixed impression. Go to google images...
ADOBE
COB
STRAW BALE
CORDWOOD
RAMMED EARTH
EARTHBAG
EARTHSHIP
CONCRETE
and
FERROCRETE
HEMPCRETE
DOMES
ROUND HOMES
YURTS
SHIPPING CONTAINERS ("CARGOTECTURE")
QUONSET HUTS
TINY HOMES (on trailer chasis)
Small homes, cottages and cabins are also in the mix.
Small House (500sft)
Camping trailers, RVs, modular homes and kit homes are candidates to the extent they use the right materials, construction methods and energy options (and you aren't burning tons of fuel moving them all the time).
A couple of important considerations arise where the permaculture rubber meets the mass culture road. The first is visual appeal and the second is real estate appreciation.
Visual appeal, of course, is in the eye of the beholder. Some people like the look of an adobe villa or a dome, many do not. Whether a quonset hut can be made attractive or not, even after you have seen a variety of efforts, is up to debate. Heck, the appeal of an English cob cottage is far from universal. Click the links above and see what your eyes tell you. The fact is, a wide variety of models have been and are being created with these materials and methods, and there are more and more people not only choosing to call them home but also thrilled to have done so. To what degree that satisfaction with them is based on affordability, livability, sustainability or visual appeal varies from person to person and otherwise is unknown, so far as I know. But there it is
Financial appreciation of all buildings is predominantly based upon the land, not the structure. The main reason a modular home loses value, for example, is because it is typically sold as chattel, like a car. If houses were sold separately from the land, we would find that they, too, overwhelmingly, decrease in value, like all other used products. (Of course there are always exceptions for those things that are rare and desirable.) What does appreciate in most cases is the land, unless of course it is purchased during a bubble, in which case much, much more time will be needed to realize any appreciation.
If there seems to be interest in the subject of the Materials and Methods used to create Affordable and/or Sustainable homes, I'll produce more diaries in the future. Also, I'm not territorial about this. I'm just sharing information I'm gathering anyway. If you have similar information to share, please do. I'd be happy to learn from you, too.