[Closed] Low impact house - and it's so cool

No one is suggesting knocking down perfectly good houses.

No one is suggesting that all houses should be like this.

You are just making all that crap up.

There is nothing to stop some of the ideas for this becoming part of mainstream thinking - partial earth sheltering, light and local materials, more freedom to design and build for yourself and so-on. This is just a more pure iteration with a very distinctive look.

Another is all the tossers on mountain bikes who will invade starting friday.

Glenp - thanks for the book tip - looks interesting.

Dales Rider - your point about destroying energy, you're sort of on the right track but not quite. You can't get rid of energy out of a system, correct, but you CAN change its form, in this case we are changing fossil fuels into heat. Too much heat.

I'm baffled by how negative some of the responses are here. But as karin points out a lot of people seem to be only capable of seeing things as one of two polar opposites, which is pretty blinkered.

Also I don't follow the very common argument that doing some things that have some environmental impact disqualifies you from promoting or discussing 'green' issues.

Karinofnine - highly recommended, unusual book. Like a big scrapbook of loads of different things - like massive barns in the US, and tiny underground dug-outs in the woods, and a house made out of glass bottles… loads of funky stuff.

Seems to be the same mentality as "do you want us all to live in caves?!!".....as if nothing useful happened or nobody was happy between cavemen and the 21st century.

It's a nice looking place, be great as a second home in the country - lots of parking for my X5 out front 🙂

Our ISO14001 group did a tour of The Green Shop last year- really impressive and using a lot of tech that would fit into 'modern' buildings...for those of you who can't handle a hobbit house 😀

mogrim - Member

It's a nice looking place, be great as a second home in the country - lots of parking for my X5 out front

in this case we are changing fossil fuels into heat. Too much heat.

The heat isn't the problem (according to the science so far) it's the CO2 that's also produced.

Ok, I stand corrected re heat, but you get my point that the fossil deposits are being transformed into something undesirable.

The worlds changing, it always has. One day it will be no more. Just enjoy your brief spell on it.

End of thread 🙂

One day it will be no more

I'd rather it was 4 billion years' time tho rather than 2050 🙂

Just enjoy your brief spell on it.

MrSalmon - Member
I'm baffled by how negative some of the responses are here.

I'm baffled that there are any at all! One hippyish dude (assumption) and his father in law build a hobbit house. Then they start building another. What's the big deal?!

It looks amazing and saves valuable resources. I honestly can't see the problem. Nowhere does he suggest that EVERYONE MUST LIVE LIKE THIS, YOU FASCIST OPPRESSORS AND RAPISTS OF MOTHER EARTH.

Back (a bit) to the house in question: are modern houses really that unhealthy? There seems to be a lot of assuming on the website, and I note that (according to the plans) the hobbit house is basically wrapped in a plastic bag, too...

Whoever said they didn't fancy sharing a room with their kids, +1: there's a real whiff of Viz's Modern Parents here!

molgrips - Member

One day it will be no more

I'd rather it was 4 billion years' time tho rather than 2050

user-removed - Member

YOU FASCIST OPPRESSORS AND RAPISTS OF MOTHER EARTH.

Its quite astonishing how rapidly all of these modern conceits and conventions have come into being. Up until quite recent history a house built from wood and other locally available materials was the absolute norm. As was making do with a modest amount of space. Within a mere few generations we now believe that anything other than factory built and standardised boxes with a standardised way of using our own space is plain weird and must be demonised.

The ethos and construction of that house has a lot more in common with the English country cottage than the suburban semi - and that's part of the charm of it.

Matters not a jot I probably wont be here for either dates.

Well I hope to be here in 2050 and I really hope my kids are. So go easy on Mother Earth for them alright? 🙂

Fair play to him, but I'm afraid I'm with Lady G on this one. Sod living in that place; I bet it's bastard cold in winter, and damp. And can you imagine the amount of bugs and creepy crawlies?? Slugs? Eeuuw!

No, sorry, I'm a sybarite. I like the comforts and luxuries technological evolution has brought us. I like having electricity, and gas central heating. I like it, when I have a poo, that I push a button and it all gets magically whisked away for someone else to deal with.

I respect someone for giving something they believe in a go, but as for the eco side of things, I'd doubt they're more than 10% less environmentally destructive than most other people, when you weigh it all up. For all their home farming etc, they are still basically reliant on the same systems as everyone else; food has to be produced and transported, drugs developed, transport fuelled, etc. It's a nice gesture, and we could all do with being greener, but it is little more than a gesture.

Tatty dump. I bet it right pongs, too.

(Ooh! 100th post!)

Whilst personally I can't stand this kind of sub-Hundertwasser builidng, I don't have any real problem with people building them. My original concern, which I think is still valid is his understanding of moisture control within a building and where he's placed his "plastic sheeting" in relation to the straw bales. Although as he sees these as short term buildings then I don't think he really cares.
There's lots of "old" technology out there which is becoming increasingly useful as the limitations of modern construction systems become apparent.

Thing is, you don't go into a 14thC timber framed wattle and daub'd pub and think "euch - so damp and smelly in here". Or I certainly don't. I think it feels wonderfully "real", and I love the smell of the fire and the funk of the five hundred year old beams. Give me that any day over scrubbed and chemical-ed and charmless modern buildings with horrible air quality.

And why do people think that low impact and sustainable means being cold and having no electricity?

Talkemada

Sense at last 😀

Mind I'm going to give it a go.
So I go get a chainsaw, find a bit of hilly land to buy where no one is overlooking it. Dig a hole into the hill, chop down 30 or so small trees.
Build a frame, buy a load of straw bales from an intensive farm and stack em around the frame.
Approach the petrol chemical industry for some of their plastic to wrap it all in and finish of with some mud, glass windows [spome on else bought them so its green] and a door [from a skip] that originaly was part of a rain forest.
Nobody saw me do it and its fairly well buried so I'll apply for retrospective planning permission, best bit is I'm signing on and claiming benefits so you lot will pay for it. 😀

You can do 'low impact and sustainable' without it looking like a hermit's hovel.

They build lots of reasonable eco-friendly wooden houses in Scandinavia. They mostly look quite good.

[img] [/img]

Eco-friendly doesn't have to look crap. A bit of thought applied to the design, and you could have something very nice.

Dales rider is just....like...sooooooo 20th century 😉

Nice house there Talkemada 😀
Now that I could live in 😀

'I think I've got it. The clue's in the name - Dales_rider - are you James Martin?

I can see that house going down well on a housing estate in Rochdale - I assume that it'd be ok if you had a couple of acres and a lot of trees to screen it? there's a recent German tech/sustainable house that has been lived in by a real family for the last year and they've already said that the ability for all their neighbours to watch them doin everything rather put them off the design.
I quite like this:
[img] [/img]

[i]And you know what else bugs me? All these people saying how good this house is and how eco friendly, are no doubt the ones who think nothing of putting a bike in a car to go for a bike ride - how is that eco friendly??[/i]

I'm quite interested to see that no-one has denied doing this ❓

I'm quite interested to see that no-one has denied doing this

I think they were ignoring it.

But since you ask...
Truth is, I do both. mostly I ride locally, because it's there, but it's also great to explore further afield.

As I said before - no everyone can't live like the hobbit guy, but it does show people that they can do small things to lesson their impact.

Not sure why you hate this guy so much. Did he build his house on your land?

Talkemada

Eco-friendly doesn't have to look crap.

Of course not.

Why then, have you posted a picture of some horrific glass monstrosity, which looks total crap in a natural environment ❓

😕

I'd rather live in a concrete tower block in Croydon, than in a glorified mud-hut, personally.

The above pic is just an example of an alternative eco-house. Not my cup of tea personally, but a darn sight better than Stig of the Dump's gaff.

My point was, that you can build eco-friendly sustainable houses, that aren't shacks built from scrap. That bloke's done a good job, although I'd question the £3000 figure he reckons it cost (mechanical diggers cost hundreds per day to hire -what about the diesel pollution??).

There a millions of people worldwide, who live in shacks made from whatever they have to hand. Many are probably better than this one.

I bet his family suffer from tummy troubles a fair bit. Have you seen the state of his jumper?

I'd rather live in a concrete tower block in Croydon, than in a glorified mud-hut, personally.

Well you've obviously never lived in a concrete tower block in Croydon then.

Us mud-hut dwellers might be poor.............but at least we're happy 8)

The 3000gbp figure assumes someone gives you the land, most of the materials, and free labour.

The Scandinavian house is more up my street, so to speak.

OK, not eco friendly, but if I had to live in the woods this is what I'd want:

[img] [/img]

http://studiowellspring.blogspot.com/2008/03/stal-tre-hus-steel-tree-house.html

I'd prefer Talkemada's eco-solution for housing. Much better than Robo-house above and Frodo's attempt at destroying the countryside.

ooOOoo - Member

Dales rider is just....like...sooooooo 20th century

Correct and you are obviously 21st century.

glenp - Member

'I think I've got it. The clue's in the name - Dales_rider - are you James Martin?

James Martin, banned from my house. Mind every cyclist would hear me coming especialy when I kick down my V8 automatic to pass them.

 

And you know what else bugs me? All these people saying how good this house is and how eco friendly, are no doubt the ones who think nothing of putting a bike in a car to go for a bike ride - how is that eco friendly??

I'm quite interested to see that no-one has denied doing this

Why? It's straight from the school of thought that says that if you live in a house with electric lights you're some sort of hypocrite if you have any environmental concerns. It's just daft, and the only person saying that environmental awareness == living in a mud hut wearing rabbit furs is you.

Frodo's attempt at destroying the countryside...

[img] [/img]

v.

A concrete plant's attempt at destroying the countryside...

[img] [/img]

Talkemada, I'm sorry but that house is not eco-friendly, like most Scandanavian houses it is energy greedy. Few of their houses are triple glazed and with that amount of glass winter energy loss will be enormous whilst a low winter sun provides almost no heating (even if they cut down the trees on the south side). No signs of any energy production.

[url= http://earthtrends.wri.org/text/energy-resources/country-profile-173.html ]Sweden is using more energy whilst other European countires are satbilising or even reducing consumption of fossil fuels.[/url] Take a look at ooOOoo's project if you want to know how to build a house that uses very little energy.

My 30s house now includes most of the features in ooOOoos project. This year's gas bill is under £200 and it's the last I'll be paying as I'm currently replacing it with a wood burner. The solar panels produce more electricity than we use except for the four winter months when we draw 50-120kWh/month from the grid.

[img] [/img]

Talkemada, I'm sorry but that house is not eco-friendly, like most Scandanavian houses it is energy greedy. Few of their houses are triple glazed

Have you ever been to Scandinavia? I have, several times. Stayed in a number of houses, from traditional log cabins, to modern flats. All but the summer houses were triple glazed. When temperatures drop below -10, triple glazing is essential. In some of the more modern houses, large expanses of glass let as much light in as possible, which is good, as light is a precious commodity in winter.

I've seen quite a few places being built, and had a good view of how a modern family house is constructed. Energy efficiency is maximised, and careful use of materials results in houses that are toasty warm in winter, yet relatively cheap to heat, as well as being cool and well-ventilated in summer. I found it eye-opening, how much recycled material was being utilised, and how clever some of the energy saving methods were. The house I was fortunate to see being built, was constructed largely of sustainable timber, and used lots of natural materials as well. Even the paint used on the exterior was a much more environmentally friendly type than is used commonly in the UK. Norway (where I stayed) has strict laws on building and environmental issues.

You do know that the process of making solar panels is pretty environmentally destructive, don't you? 😉

Over the life time of the panel it produces about ten times the energy it costs to produce it, that's good enough for me. The water heating one is all recyclable. What else should I have spent the £19 000 on? A new car?

Most Scandanavian houses aren't new are they though. In Denmark I had a very good look at the houses of various generations and most are no better than the British housing stock - lousy. As you say, Triple glasing or double glazing with shutters is essential and they simply didn't have it. I never went through a double door and the walls were distictly brick.

Ah, but you're forgetting the waste products from their manufacture. Quantities of mercury and other nasties.

£19000 is a lot of money. It may well save you money in the long run, but it's a large initial outlay.

As for Scandinavia; I've not been to Denmark, and can only really comment on Norway, but most homes there are at least double glazed as a minimum, and many have triple glazing. Shutters and heavy duty blinds are used a lot too. As for the age of the houses; most seemed to be less than 50 years old, and many of the older ones have been updated extensively. They know how to manage the cold, the Norwegians, I tell you.

As for British housing stock, I'd say we enjoy a fairly high standard of quality, relative to many other countries.

I don't really understand your argument.

My argument follows from ealier posters. One said you don't have to live in a hovel to be eco-friendly and he's right. The other said we can improve the current housing stock and he is right. You provide an example which has just about everything wrong hence my gripe.

The idea that the British housing stock is a "fairly high standard of quality, relative to many other countries" is true but just confirms it is equally lousy. No worse than Denmark then! And in absolute terms compared with what can be achieved? Look at the average British household energy consumption [url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/household-bills/7144386/British-households-risk-unaffordable-energy-bills-Ofgem-warns.html ]£612 a year just on heating[/url], and that with most households using gas which is as cheap as chips in the UK. 15-20 OOOkWh/year between gas and electricity is a figure I've seen quoted. Even the standards for new housing simply aren't good enough.

My panels are made by [url= http://www.environmentalleader.com/2010/03/26/calyxo-solarworld-top-solar-module-scorecard/ ]Solarworld[/url]. Not the cheapest but no mercury or other nasties in them.

Personally i think the so called "hobbit house" is fantastic, i wouldn't have a prob living in it at all but then again i do have a friend who's lived in his self built treehouse for the past 15 odd years, he started building it when he was still at school and it's an ongoing process as the trees grow but thankfully he had the foresight to build all structural joints using hemp rope and self made shackles (he's a blacksmith and glass blower [url= http://http://www.northglen.co.uk/index.html ]here[/url] so when the walls/roof/beams etc start to get a bit squirrily he adjusts the frame or builds new walls to suit.

And for all the trolls on this thread?.......good try at a wind up, but i do think it's about time for you to crawl back under your steel reinforced concrete bridges....or return to the ugly cookie cutter artificial housing scheme where you so obviously belong.

OK, not eco friendly, but if I had to live in the woods this is what I'd want:

FFS, that looks like an AT-AT! Not really in keeping with the surrounding area is it? Besides the obvious trolling, it is funny to see how many people are really defensive about this kind of development. It's almost like you have a guilty conscience 😀

Frodo's attempt at destroying the countryside...

v.

A concrete plant's attempt at destroying the countryside...

I thought we where considering eco-housing? I'm not convinced you can big up Frodo's house by comparing it with an concrete plant.

somafunk - Member

i do think it's about time for you to crawl back under your steel reinforced concrete bridges....or return to the ugly cookie cutter artificial housing scheme where you so obviously belong.

Yank, in England its a Biscuit

Yank?..... Sorry to disappoint you Dales_rider but i was using grammatical prose to feed the trolls so the billy goats gruff could pass safely to their environmentally friendly shelter. I'm sure you'll agree the phrase doesn't sound quite as dramatic when you substitute "Biscuit Cutter" for "Cookie Cutter" and as i was using the term as a derogatory adjective to describe a lack of originality i stand by my original words.

So Pfft!

Not a yank by the way.

Have a nice day ya'll.

;o)

Yank, in England its a Biscuit

are cookies biscuits or cakes? using the courts ruling a cake is something that starts soft and if left out goes hard and a biscuit is something that starts hard and goes soft if left out.. (english courts re Jaffa cake and VAT)..

cookies go hard if left out so are they cakes?

Love stuff like this, and second the recommendation for the Home Work book. I'd say it's not so much the "hobbit" aesthetic that appeals to me, as the leap away from brick-and-mortar construction, which most affordable homes in the UK seem to be hidebound by.

The idea that you can build a house out of cob, or straw, or just the soil from your site, is heresy to most people, yet people have built perfectly serviceable, and in many ways superior, homes using these methods for thousands of years. The longevity of some of these places may be moot, but then you could say the same about the crappy Barratt boxes that infest our suburbs. For a slightly different take on building a home from found or reclaimed materials, check out [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthship ]Earthships[/url].

On another note, has anyone else noticed that Fred is back, and as hungry for attention as ever? 🙄

Call me an old hippy but I am a fan of this sort of thing, don't get me wrong i'm not a fan of dreadlocks on middle class white kids that had overbearing parents, and other folk that still listen to old Levellers albums, they generally grate a little my general outlook on life. But i do like the idea of building your own house out of this that and the other, what's more damaging after all to society, pricing your average 2.5 bed semi out of the reach of 80% of the population that don't have any equity, or some guy in a grubby jumper building a permanent(ish) home for him and his kids and freeing up another council property for Vicky Pollard [i]et al[/i].

Good luck to him!

Anyway, it's all been done before and kind of makes sense in many, many ways. This one's a little Hobbity for my liking, but i like the concept! Check out the Aussie ones!

[img] http://davidwallphoto.co.nz/images/%7B7141848A%2D21AD%2D4DB3%2DB927%2DB90243530FC4%7D%2Ejpg [/img]

some guy in a grubby jumper

The guy in the OP was actually a photographer and graphic designer when he built that house. Not that they don't wear grubby jumpers.

If the entire population did this in the UK we would have a patch 4 x 4 Metres.

Mr Agreeable - Member

some guy in a grubby jumper

The guy in the OP was actually a photographer and graphic designer when he built that house.

That's as maybe Anthony, but it kind of ruins the 'visual' of my post! 😀

juan - Member

If the entire population did this in the UK we would have a patch 4 x 4 Metres.

You mean like most of the people in big cities have then?

May be more maths are probably wrong, something like 242,000 square Km and 61 million people

BTW someones put in planning permission for a bigger version in the Dales

[img] http://www.cravenherald.co.uk/resources/images/1235874/?type=display [/img]

dales rider yes very wrong indeed
242000 sqaure km is equal to 242000000000 square metres. That about just under 4000 square metre per head.

I prefer Earthships - although they don't quite translate from New Mexico to the south coast.
[img] [/img]

The assumption that kids living in a ore earthy way suffer "tummy troubles" - kids living in an endlessly disinfected way are made ill because of it, according to recent realisations - allergies esp are much worse when a healthy spectrum of background bugs is interfered with. I don't believe in having my house (and kids) overly clean, certainly not with the use of chemicals and disinfectants all ver the place.

And as for someone who would rather live n a tower block in Croydon! Jeez. Blimin' townies.

juan - Member

dales rider yes very wrong indeed
242000 sqaure km is equal to 242000000000 square metres. That about just under 4000 square metre per head.

So a patch of about 63 x 63 thats about as much as I've got already 🙂

although they don't quite translate from New Mexico to the south coast

Apparently they've built one in Scotland. 😯 http://www.sci-scotland.org.uk/earthship_centre.shtml

I prefer Earthships - although they don't quite translate from New Mexico to the south coast.

There is another in Stamner park in Brighton.

And as for someone who would rather live n a tower block in Croydon! Jeez. Blimin' townies.

Heh! I'll admit I was being deliberately obtuse (cos it's fun!), and I do think we all need to be 'greener'.

The bloke who's built this house should be commended for his efforts; it must have been a bloody difficult task. Hats off to him indeed. He is, in his own way, setting an example for others to follow. But, it is a bit of an idealistic hippyish dream, to suggest we can all live like that. I don't actually want to. I prefer my modern comforts too much. As for bugs and germs, his kids look remarkably healthy and happy.

[img] [/img]

As the (stupid)song goes, 'It's not easy being green'. It's not that cheap, either, as Edukator has proved. And there will always be an man-made impact on the environment. It's about managing that impact carefully and sensitively.

Personally, I don't think it means we all have to live in mud huts. But if some want to, good luck to them.

FFS, that looks like an AT-AT! Not really in keeping with the surrounding area is it?

I'd love an AT-AT, too. And I'd say it's perfectly in keeping with the surrounding area, in much the same way that Falling Water fits in with its environment.

Agreed it's not massively environmentally friendly, though!

I know that a number have been built here - they don't quite have that desert vibe thing going in Brighton or Scotland though do they? There was one on Grand Designs a couple of years ago - strange how that programme seems to have stopped now isn't it?

I guess I feel more of a link to that kind of house because I'm only one generation away from living in something quite a lot more basic. During the war (not forgetting, this only changed in the early fifties) there were thousands of people living in the countryside in whatever could be found. My mum's family had a house on Leith Hill with no amenities at all and a very basic shed-like construction. Immediately post war there were lots of families who moved into army nissin huts in the woods and they (and my mum's family) were rehoused eventually in rural council estates - like the one I live in now (actually the same one).

As I said in an earlier post, our addiction to and expectation of what we think is a minimum standard of warmth and chemical cleanliness is very recent - like this current generation recent.

There was one on Grand Designs a couple of years ago - strange how that programme seems to have stopped now isn't it?

Thank God. I loved the programme, just can't stand Monty Don.

Did [url= http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/tax-rebate-plan-for-green-drivers-and-homeowners-1836032.html ]this tax planever happen?[/url]. Living where I do I'll get about £7 000 of tax relief and the electricity company buys the electricity I produce at a price that means the return on investment is significantly better than the long bond.

I remember building something like that (on a smaller scale) in the woods at the back of my folks house when I was 10. It provided a nice habitat for all sorts of creepy crawlies.

What disturbs me more than anything about this type of project, is that given 6 months of not shaving, washing or having a haircut, I could look exactly like this 😯
[img] [/img]