Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zero energy ready homes are coming

energy.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 454 posts

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#191

Post by rootusrootus »

wyre wrote: post #184
rootusrootus wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about those of us who live in suburban towns that are doing just fine for well over a century and not getting any subsidies from this mythical 'inner core'? From where did you pull that $20K number?

How are you sure your suburb is not getting subsidies from the inner core?

Because the county and city government budgets are public. We get no direct money from the nearest urban core and the only method of transfer would be through the state. We get very little of our yearly revenue through the state general fund, and we pay enough income(and other) tax to completely offset it.

We're self-sustaining primarily through property taxes and have been that way for more than a century.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#192

Post by kitsunesoba »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #170
Fauntleroy wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can find a way to convince Americans they don't all need a yard that can easily fit 6 (japanese) houses, we'll be well on our way.

Well in the city where I live (Minneapolis) they've been tearing down houses in several areas of the cities where post-world war II architecture was abundant. Small houses (under 1,500 sq ft) with a small front yard and back yard. The very typical "American Dream" kind of a starter house. Now they're getting bought up and the people are literally building houses from every end of the lot, often time getting variances…

That increased demand for extra space I’m sure was bolstered by the pandemic and ongoing wave of WFH. The downsides and annoyances of small houses/apartments become much more evident when you’re staying home all of the time instead of only being there at nights and on weekends.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#194

Post by TheCoelacanth »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #188
johnweldon wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally speaking, people will always choose to spend money living as close to their ideal as they can, with the resources they are able to give toward it. The fact that so many people choose to live in suburbs, or the "sticks", suggests that there is something desirable to _them_ about living there. I.e. the same spending power required to live in a house in the suburbs, or rurally, could usually be used to live in…

> The fact that so many people choose to live in suburbs, or the "sticks", suggests that there is something desirable to _them_ about living there. A major reason for the preference is the lower price per square foot in the suburbs than in higher density areas. They can't afford that much space in the city, which in turn is so expensive because the amount of high density housing is artificially limited by zoning. You…

The market has decided. High-density is better. If it weren't, then it wouldn't be so much more expensive.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#195

Post by johnweldon »

babypuncher wrote: post #179
johnweldon wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally speaking, people will always choose to spend money living as close to their ideal as they can, with the resources they are able to give toward it. The fact that so many people choose to live in suburbs, or the "sticks", suggests that there is something desirable to _them_ about living there. I.e. the same spending power required to live in a house in the suburbs, or rurally, could usually be used to live in…

They are able to make that choice because we pretty heavily subsidize it for them. Rural communities receive a disproportionately large amount of federal aid per capita in order to build and maintain the infrastructure that makes that lifestyle possible. If the individual cost of buying a house "in the sticks" was reflective of that, people might start to think twice.

> If the individual cost of buying a house "in the sticks" was reflective of that, people might start to think twice.

I don't buy that subsidization is what makes buying a house "in the sticks" so much cheaper.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#196

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

johnweldon wrote: post #144
Fauntleroy wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can find a way to convince Americans they don't all need a yard that can easily fit 6 (japanese) houses, we'll be well on our way.

Why do we need to convince someone they don't "need" anything? Each person has the best information about their own situation to decide what they need (or even want - you don't have to _need_ something to have to justify _wanting_ it)

If you think about it, younger market participants are being effectively priced out with just about every expense set against that generation. Even if they feel/think ( depending on philosophical bent in that area ) they need X, they may not simply be in a position to do that.

I am obviously biased given that I currently exist in a suburb.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#197

Post by masfuerte »

yieldcrv wrote: post #175
johnweldon wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do we need to convince someone they don't "need" anything? Each person has the best information about their own situation to decide what they need (or even want - you don't have to _need_ something to have to justify _wanting_ it)

Convince them not to want it

Stop convincing them to want it

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#198

Post by germinalphrase »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #170
Fauntleroy wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can find a way to convince Americans they don't all need a yard that can easily fit 6 (japanese) houses, we'll be well on our way.

Well in the city where I live (Minneapolis) they've been tearing down houses in several areas of the cities where post-world war II architecture was abundant. Small houses (under 1,500 sq ft) with a small front yard and back yard. The very typical "American Dream" kind of a starter house. Now they're getting bought up and the people are literally building houses from every end of the lot, often time getting variances…

At least in my corner of South Minneapolis, the houses being built that match your description almost all appear to be built by investors, not owners (and the design incentives for investors are clearly to maximize square footage). They are also being listed at about 2x the neighboring house values.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#199

Post by TheCoelacanth »

prottog wrote: post #135
xthrown1 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let them pay the $20,000 in rates they will without subsidies from the inner core. The free market will sort it out in short order.

> without subsidies from the inner core Like how the residents of New York City are able to get the food and water it needs all produced within the five boroughs? Or is that a different kind of "subsidy" from the hinterlands.

Food is produced by rural areas, not by suburbs. Suburbs produce nothing that cities can't produce.

Re: Zero energy ready homes are coming

#200

Post by bkettle »

johnweldon wrote: post #140
xyst wrote: post #64

I just see this as another subsidy for single family housing developments. The home may be "zero energy ready" or whatever greenwashing term they want to use. But the fact is they are spending that energy in driving from the sticks (in some cases >20 miles away) and back, driving from their home to the grocery store and back, driving to areas of interest (ie, parks, restaurants, doctors appointments). All of this is…

Generally speaking, people will always choose to spend money living as close to their ideal as they can, with the resources they are able to give toward it. The fact that so many people choose to live in suburbs, or the "sticks", suggests that there is something desirable to _them_ about living there. I.e. the same spending power required to live in a house in the suburbs, or rurally, could usually be used to live in…

"Happy City" by Charles Montgomery brings an interesting angle on the typical urban planning story by focusing largely on how we can plan cities and communities to maximize happiness. In the book, he discusses that people have this "ideal" of moving to the suburbs, owning their own house, etc, but then the long commutes, isolation of living in a car-dependent neighborhood, dangers of living among high-speed cars, etc. all lead many people to actually be less happy overall after moving to the suburbs.

So I think that some of this fact that the suburbs are desirable is not necessarily completely rational, and may instead be heavily influenced by the idea that moving to suburbs is what they grew up seeing as their future (due, of course, to federal programs that incentivized suburbanization) and by auto-industry lobbying and marketing that idealizes a car-dependent lifestyle.

Obviously there will be variability and I'm sure many people enjoy a suburban/rural lifestyle more than they would a city lifestyle. But I don't know if a preference for suburban living is really part of our human nature, and I think assuming that it is can be detrimental as it can take effort away from recreating the peace and quiet and nature access in a way that is accessible to all in a more efficient urban setting.

Post reply on HN