Memo To US Government: How to Fix the Housing Industry

There's an elephant in the room and no one's talking about it. The candidates are spending a lot of time talking about fuel-efficient cars and alternative energy — all of which is very, very important — but there's a industry that accounts for 48% of all greenhouse gas emissions and consumes 76% of all electricity generated in this country and no one seems to want to mention it. Its the housing industry and Treehugger has a great memo for the US Government that you should take a look at...

Groups such as architecture2030 have put out a challenge to reduce consumption by 50% by 2010 and for buildings to be carbon neutral by 2030. Mayors in many major cities have adopted this plan which may seem overly ambitious but is definitely attainable. A 50% reduction in energy consumption by buildings would do far more to reduce our dependence on oil and get us back on track. With the building industry slowing down along with the economy it's time to take a look at what we've been doing wrong and how things must change as we move forward.

Click here to read Treehugger's Memo To US Government: Five Ways to Fix the Housing Industry.

The best news is that the technology to achieve this is already here. Through small measures we can all make smart decisions that will not only reduce our consumption but save us money in the long run — and not just for new building projects. Things as simple as turning up the thermostat in summer and keeping it a little lower in winter, and choosing energy efficient appliances and lighting have dramatic effects on energy consumption and everyone can do it.

Comments (10)

Beyond the uses of technology, if houses were just built smaller they'd also be more affordable to purchase, easier to clean, cheaper to furnish and heat and cool...

Smaller house also = less room to put stuff = less stuff consumed and eventually thrown away.

I blieve when asked about the sacrifices needed from American people Mr. Obama did mention in one of his debates that we should try & cut down on our energy usage. That in my book includes smaller homes, less stuff, fuel efficient cars, cfl bulbs, etc.

Three notes about growing house sizes.

1) The post-war houses were still being built in the "traditional" way. A family would buy a small house and then add onto it when more space was needed. Often the homeowner themselves would do the construction. Stricter building codes and the younger generation being used to buying not building furniture, etc. brought an end to that.

2) Another thing to think about when looking at growing house sizes - how many family members are expecting to do noisy things at the same time? The fifties family probably had one radio and fewer than 10% had a television. By 1970, there would have been at least one television and by their teens, kids would expect to have room to listen to their own music. By 2000, there is the expectation that every family member can watch/listen/surf/play video games without disturbing anyone else. I think that is a huge driver of people wanting larger houses.

3) The lot for a house is a sunk cost. Profits are higher on larger rather than smaller houses. Developers don't care what you want to buy, they care about how much money they will make.

let's not forget where you put that house. 900 sf or 2400 sf, if it is still in the burbs you are most likely to need to drive everywhere, and not be within walking distance of things like cafes and parks and other third places that make small living a more viable option. we've got a lot of the tools to solve this crisis without the tech solutions.
if you look at maps of foreclosures you'll notice a large number of them are in the exurbs. and nobody is talking about it.

what about government housing?

Feathers, the point about people adding on to their homes later is a good one but there are other points to be made as well:
1. families today are smaller then they were 50 years ago but they still want more space
2. headphones: that way you can have someone watching tv and someone playing on their pc in the same room. Plus a laptop and a small table do not take up a lot of space.
3. building ecologically is usually still more expensive (because for instance solar panels are not cheap), but you use less space so you need to buy less land.
4. In my home country people who build ecologically or even just make adjustments to existing houses (be it a one family home or an apartment building) will get some of this money back from the state so the state supports those who think of the environment. I think this is a good way of starting.

A PS to feathers' #3: realitors are often paid a percentage of the home's cost, so they, too, are interested in selling you a bigger home than you need. A friend of mine had to get a little snappy at hers when she kept pushing her to buy a McMansion in the exurbs when what she wanted was a townhome closer to everything. (Salley, good point, especially being that fuel prices are going up.)

Also, there are housing restrictions on just how small you can go. There are restrictions against drying your laundry on a line. There are the aforementioned building restrictions.
The government needs to push the local codes to allow for smaller housing before this can occur.