The building looks like it is big enough to house multiple families, pity it wasn't made with this in mind (judging from the blueprints).
Then it could be quite eco-friendly. Still, building a large house like this is better than building a large conventional house.

What are the drawbacks of using concrete with styrofoam insulation, aside from the carbon emissions in making the concrete?

I agree. The size is preposterous. This is a green McMansion. Kind of like describing a slave-owning human rights advocate.

I don't get the complaining about size. So what if it's 4300 sq ft!

The problem with the green community is that they focus on the negative and not the positive. People that want a big house will always want a big house. Is that bad? Irrelevant I say, cause you aren't going to stop them from doing so. Be happy that this house uses 73% less energy than a house of equal size. I say that is something to commend - not dondemn.

i agree... there is a rather strange mentality here sometimes implying that everyone has to live in pre-fab houses or houses made with straw bail insulation, which arent' even good in many other ways.

my father is a green architect and has taught me a lot... a play like florida is VERY moist. moisture and organics = mold and rot. it is many peoples opinion that mold is going to be (already is...) the next asbestos. so many houses are filled with paper-drywall and have cold pipes running all over the place that condense and cause mold to build up inside walls... straw would be even worse for this for the climate we have in most of canada and the states... maybe some of the dry mid-western states it would be good...

foam insulation is a very good thing, it is unrivaled for R value, with exception of very expensive space tech, and the amount of un-renewable resources it uses is saved relatively quickly by heat savings.

concrete adds thermal mass to the inside of houses keeping temperatures even and storing heat/cold for use at nights or whatnot... concrete is also only of the cheapest structural material, for building high density high rises... steel uses WAY more energy per strength.

anyways, not all buildings can be made out of bamboo and recycled cardboard and straw bales, and this is a good initiative i feel. the size is a bit much, but i agree like a few others: some people need / want the space

I'm struggling to comprehend this. "Urban"? "Green"? 2-car garage? 4300 sq ft for three bedrooms?!?

"People that want a big house will always want a big house. Is that bad?"

Yes.

I agree with Brian, let's not play class politics. Progress will be much easier to achieve in changing how we create and provide for lifestyles (plural) than changing those lifestyles.

2 car garage bad? This is yet ANOTHER example of people thinking their thoughts on "green" must be embraced by everyone. I saw that and thought, "only two?!". Maybe I'm a realist... I feel we need to encorporate energy savings design and technologies into buildings that the masses want instead of the other way around. I want a 3- or a 4-car garage! I enjoy woodworking and would use the space to build furniture, cabinetry, etc. Think outside the box of a traditional use of a garage. Also, one thing I always joke about with 2-car garages... most 2 car garages in the US only fit one car... and all the "crap" that people like to save. :) My 2-car garage currently houses my wife's vehicle, a new bathtub and a set of bathroom cabinets (and will soon have half a pallet of tile)... we're redoing our master bathroom. Garages don't HAVE to house cars.

And finally, to Tom, I can agree that people wanting more space is indeed bad. With that said, do I think I can tell someone what they can and cannot build? Nope. Governments/building codes can dictate energy efficiency standards - and to some degree CAN limit sizes/material use via things like conservation/historic districts and overlays. The day a city says, "you can only build a 1500 sq ft home and have only one car space" is the day that city sees it's growth trend reverse.

Market conditions have, and in the foreseeable future, will continue to drive house/garage sizes and construction materials. I live in Dallas. If I made $500K/year, would I live in a 1500 sq ft, super insulated house and drive a biodeisel or electric vehicle? Nope, and I consider myself to be much more environmentally friendly than the average US citizen. I would build a 3000-3200 sq ft ICF home, have a 3-car garage for my vehicles/storage and a 600-700 sq ft workshop (and yup, it'd be conditioned, too, when I'm working in it). Now, if I lived in NYC... even with a salary like that... I couldn't afford that much. The market would dictate that I have less than 3 cars and less square footage.

Market conditions apply to renewable energy sources also. Why don't I have PV on my roof? Costs too much! In my opinion, the ONLY way to make a major improvement in the way we generate electricity (make the jump to mostly renewable) is to make residential systems economically feasible. Just look at California - with the state incentives, they actually DO make financial sense... and the market penetration there is huge (comparitively speaking). When the market price of PV/Solar cuts in half, there will be a MASS deployment of solar technology which will rapidly change the way we product electricity. The industry has to make the product cost effective in order to get mass deployment. Most families aren't going to pay a premium to "do the right thing"... have you seen the national savings rate?! It's negative - you tell me where the average US citizen is going to get the money to pay MORE for energy?

Brian

Okay, so by Lloyd's logic, the "Katrina Kottage" , essentially a single-wide mobile home tornado magnet -- is superior to a 4300 sq. foot home, because it is ... um, smaller. Therefore, living in a 1-man pup tent must be the ultimate dream.

2 car garage bad? ... I want a 3- or a 4-car garage! I enjoy woodworking and would use the space to build furniture, cabinetry, etc.

Then call it a workshop, not a garage. Perhaps there could be room for it in place of the home office, or one of the lounges, or the "mud room" (whatever that is), or the "great room".

But I agree to some extent: some people need space for woodwork or other hobbies, often the sort of thing that's not possible or appropriate in an apartment. In a previous apartment (1500 sq ft for three adults, and it felt enormous) there was a shared garage for the building that came in very handy whenever we needed to work on a piece of furniture or something like that. Because a lot of people in the building didn't have cars, there was always space for doing that sort of work. But perhaps apartment buildings and townhouse complexes should have a shared workshop space, rather than just the usual swimming pools and tennis courts.

And finally, to Tom, I can agree that people wanting more space is indeed bad. With that said, do I think I can tell someone what they can and cannot build? Nope.

But of course you can, or at least our elected representatives can. There are rules to stop you building a 50-storey skyscraper in a suburban tract, for the very good reason that it will cause negative effects for your neighbours. If people go ahead and build huge houses with 2 (or 3 or 4) car garages, and in suburbs that are so spread out that they have to use those cars to do anything, pretty soon they'll be wanting more motorways and more car parks in the inner city, causing negative effects for other people.

The day a city says, "you can only build a 1500 sq ft home and have only one car space" is the day that city sees it's growth trend reverse.

In the neighbourhood I live in, 1500 sq ft counts as a large home (my partner and I live in 550 sq ft, and it feels pretty spacious). Nearly 40% of households don't own a car, and that's certainly not for economic reasons. Yet there's no sign of the growth trend reversing, and in fact it's been the fastest growing part of the city for over ten years.

If you want more space for your woodwork or whatever, that's great. But I get the feeling that most of the increase in house sizes has not been due to home handicrafts but to accommodate a new 30" plasma TV. And when they move into their spanking new "green" mansion, that TV looks tiny in their "great room", so it's time to upgrade to a 60" screen...

I live around the corner from this house. I love taking my dog for a walk by it and admiring it. They have even taken the consideration to plant native and drought-tolerant plants outdoors... not the grass everyone else has! I hope that when I buy, I can buy a house like this one.

They are showing the home for $10. Next door is another eco-friendly home, and another was built by the same people in a really trendy neighborhood a few miles away. When you pay to tour the home, they donate the money to charity!

ok so we found my husbands children on the internet, they had been living in motel squaller for 12 years, they came to live with us. in a 2 bedroom single wide mobil home. they say its still better, maybe because they get to eat every night!
So suddenly we have 5 kids, thats 7 people in a tiny mobilhome. I'd give my left arm for a house this big! green or not!
so its not like there arnt people that actually need a house this big!
Kim