I stumbled across this article published last year in the Washington Post and thought it was worth reading. The main idea in the article is that smaller houses consumer fewer resources and are inherently more “green” than a larger home. I’m not sure where this fact comes from but it says that a 2200 sq foot home uses 1 acre of forest to produce the lumber needed to build that home. That seems high to me, but I don’t know why. I also liked the comments from my Architect friend Peter Pfeiffer who says that a smaller infill urban house is greenest of all due to existing infrastructure, shorter commute times to work, ability to bike to stores, and less lawn maintenance than a 4 acre homestead in the country. This is a timely article as I’ve recently found out my wife is pregnant with our 4th child and we’re deciding if our 2200 sf house is enough for the 6 of us. It’s an individual decision for sure, but it’s a good reminder to think along the “Not so big house” lines as you plan your remodel or new home. -Matt Risinger
This is an urban infill house designed by Barley & Pfeiffer Architects that I built a few years ago.
Passivhaus in Austin’s Climate? Next Post:
Supplemental Stand-alone Dehumidification Install & Review Video