why don't you just put a link for this product so i don't have to jump all over the PLACE!!!!!!!!!!!!

LA: Um, click on ::Andrew Maynard.

A very good idea, if only they could get it to run on lima beans and peanut butter it'll sell like hot cakes! (and smell like 'em too)

These prototypical designs for mobile housing almost always neglect security - which is a huge issue if you are living on the road (or on a street somewhere). Those tissue-paper looking sides and top better be made of kevlar!

I have to admit, I don't understand the TreeHugger[dotcom] obsession with prefab housing, and RVs of any type just seem wasteful.

It seems like densely populated cities built vertically are a lot more environmentally sound (less sprawl, more possibilities for biking/walking/mass transit, etc) than miles of sprawling trailer parks.

What am I missing?

I think a small house is a green house, and this is definitely small. However, I don't see this being used as a house. Like a reader commented people wouldn't really feel safe or comfortable(for a number of reasons) living in one of these. These would end up being used as a substitute for an RV, which I also think is a bit wasteful. I say this on a general level. There might be some travelling bohemians out there who want to live a carefree life; maybe for those few this would be more practical than constantly renting. Maybe. However, I definitely see potential for this as some type of emergency relief service vehicle where a temporary facility is required. It would be better than trucking in some of those portable shelters often used.

i don't think you're missing anything, DG. all the eco sites are on the prefab bandwagon because they think that off-site production reduces waste and saves tranport. problem is that they are only correct when they compare prefab to the average mchousing development, not to anyone who actually builds for the site and climate with locally sourced materials and labor. not to mention the energy efficiency difference of the home once it's built.

they also tend to overlook the fact that inspiring thousands more people to set up their ready-made camp based on the notion that it is cheap, easy, and 'eco friendly' that they are actually opening up previously unpopulated areas to development. just an opinion.

I agree about the secrurity issue and it being more suited to sunny climates.

I'd rather see this vehicle with Habitaflex incorporated http://www.habitaflex.com/accueilAng.php

or even Palaces Suitcase House
http://libraries.mit.edu/archives/exhibits/suitcase/suitcase-detail.html

Dug

I am in basic agreement with your first paragraph. I don't tend to be a fan of prefab, and the reasons you have stated are some of the main reasons.

As for your second paragraph, I believe unpopulated areas will not be seriously affected by this vehicle or prefab in general. In an off-grid home, the house, especially if it is a small one, is a minor part of the total cost required to be able to live there. A number of independent self-sufficient systems need to be established, such as the electrical system, the water system, the heating and cooling systems, the wastewater and solid waste disposal systems, possibly a transportation system (such as a dirt or gravel road), possibly a telecommunications system. Building a home in a suburb is easy in comparison - you build the house, and then just plug the preexisting water, electric, gas, communication, and transportation grids in. I have an off-grid home that I have built myself. And the costs and time for setting up these self-sufficiency systems have surpassed the materials cost and time of the home (not counting labor since I did all the work).

The prefab homes of the future are the SUV's you see driving around today. When gas and maintenance become unaffordable they will get parked somewhere and become living spaces.

You just watch....

J

I'd have no problem living in one of these. Most houses are easy to break in to. Since it is mobile it could be taken to a sewage disposal facility. They could make a towable model to cut the cost. The problem I see is where would you put it. I can't think of any place here in Southern California.

i don't know houston, since most systems are built into many of these packages, you don't need anything more than septic, well and a few concrete piers. even those aren't totally necessary in areas where compost toilets are legal. if it's designed as a mobile, local codes don't even apply. some of the companies do all of the infrastructure setup for you. all you do is ask for the price.

this is a different demographic from suburb dwellers. for example, city folks who long for a cabin in the woods and can afford it. show them a prefab option and things gel pretty quick. prefab is streamlining the process of finding that place in the country.

Dug

I agree with your second paragraph. My reasoning in my other post was based on full-time occupants who require a different set of needs. I do think as vacation places people are willing to go with a little less than what they have at home, and therefore would be able to afford much smaller 'utility' systems. I could see how these might lead to an increase in countryside weekend places.

And now that I think of it, I am starting to suspect that most prefab construction is for this purpose - as vacation homes. If this is the case, then it makes me even less of a fan of prefab than the little I was before. Having a big house is unenvironmental; having two houses is even more unenvironmental.

Price for that house?