I'm actually pro-container housing, but for different reasons than these capitalist pig-dogs. They're portable, easily customizable with the right know-how (easy to add expansions, and to move around different units to change the layout) and reuses the hollow remnants of this capitalistic hellscape for something worthwhile.

[–] profoundninja@sh.itjust.works 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I did a university project 10 years ago, "design an affordable environmentally friendly home".

My idea was to reuse containers, at the time they were relatively cheap. Like practically free even.

My research results were quite disappointing though. Redesigning the containers was neither cost effective or environmentally friendly.

I wonder if that's changed in the past decade?

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 5 points 7 months ago

Can you elaborate on that? Structurally they're quite a bit sturdier than typical residential construction. You need doors and windows, but that's a matter of cutting holes with a plasma torch. You can use 2x2 and foam board on the inside, and partially bury them in earth for the bulk of insulation, while running ducting, etc. under a raised floor. You certainly have limited space layouts--a CalKing bed ain't fitting--but that's not necessarily a deal breaker.

Personally, I lean more towards Quonset huts for inexpensive and durable construction.

[–] Maoo@hexbear.net 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They have too many downsides. Most of them aren't actually reusing containers because they're usually too small and they're coated with toxic materials that prevent mold and pests from living in them. They look large enough at first, but this is before you have to install a floor and walls and a ceiling with insulation all around and plumbing and electrical, etc. In addition, if you want to add windows by cutting into the sides, you've just undermined the structural integrity of the thing, as it's premised on being exactly that (stackable) box. So then you have to reinforce the crap out of it if you want windows.

Putting all of that together, to safely put together a reasonably livable container home, you're basically just using it as an aesthetic piece, as you've had to buy the shell new and then spend the rest of your budget trying to make it actually work as a home. It's cheaper and better to build a small home with commodity materials unless you really, really want that aesthetic.

[–] Hestia@hexbear.net 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I had a job modifying them before. We actually completely removed the support bars in the middle. It does not compromise the structural integrity at all. They're only nessessary if you're filling them up with shit and stacking them up dozens of units high. You can then add walls, ceilings, and roofs that pop up out of the side of the structure, expanding the size from the initial footprint.

And if you have multiple units, you can connect and expand your living space that way. Get sick of the current layout? You can rearrange the units relatively easy, and if you ever want to move, it's a hell of a lot easier to move than a full sized house.

It's also possible to remove the toxic coating. It's not imbued into the metal.

While they're not without their downsides, that goes for every type of structure and every type of building material. Alot of the downsides you listed though are non-issues and I know this because of my own experience working on them. The biggest downsides are cost (which isn't the best indicator of viability, capitalism skews our perception of value with cost) and the fact that simply put... They're pretty fucking ugly.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago

I agree, practically in every scenario where we see dystopian things happening, the underlying problem is capitalism as opposed to technology being abused by it.