[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

GBlist: re: Housing Costs



Chris Koehn wrote, in part:

>Most new construction in Germany makes judicious use of wood. There is 
>virtually no stick framing as we know it. What wood is used is celebrated 
>in the structure. Most floors, exterior and interior walls are masonry.  
>Roofs will often have timber purlins, which are built up, strapped and 
>tiled. Windows and doors could probably serve double duty on a submarine, 
>they're so tight and well constructed.  
>
>The point is this: building a new home in Germany is considered a 
>tremendous privilege. It carries great responsibility as well.  Obviously 
>the financial burden is high. This encourages folks to think long and 
>hard about what they want to build, how big, and where.  They know that 
>the mortgage will probably be passed on to their children, and hopefully 
>their grandchildren. As will the house. If one is going to go to the 
>trouble and expense of building a house, one had better construct it to 
>far outlast the mortgage. 

I found this perspective very interesting;  thanks for sharing it.

It would be unfortunate, if not unimaginable, to have a new house cost so 
much money.  On the other hand, the situation Chris describes so well 
would automatically engender a lot of the "green" goals that have been 
mentioned on this list, without any further need for encouragement.  
Market-based strategies are very effective in our money-orientated 
society.

Timber cutting in our national forests is, or at least was, subsidized by 
our government, as is various other resource-extractive industries.  If 
these products paid their own way, the true costs would emerge, and the 
construction market would be free to find its "real" levels, which I 
think, would quickly reveal the various "sustainable" methods and 
materials to be cost efficient.  The other end of that equation would be 
to add the cost of disposal of various products onto their initial price. 
 Finally,  one could also factor in the cost of cleaning up the water or 
air pollution caused by various materials into their initial cost.

I think Chris implies that social rigidity and similar disadvantages are 
other aspects of the European equation.  Over here, the government would 
have to institute these programs, but I find such reality-based 
procedures to be quite palatable as compared with regulations, laws, and 
restrictions that have little relationship with anything except someone's 
political agenda, or a bureaucrats job security, and thus are resented 
immensely.  Market forces are also a far more effective tool than wishing 
for improvement in other people's consciousness, ethics, or awareness.  
As the saying goes, "Money talks;  uh .... you and I walk".  Or something 
like that.

Buzz Burrell
Bolder Building 
Boulder, CO
______________________________________________________________________
This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by CREST <www.crest.org>
Environmental Building News <www.ebuild.com> and Oikos <www.oikos.com>
For  instructions send  e-mail to  greenbuilding-request@crest.org.
______________________________________________________________________