SO happy other people are realizing this. Watching the actual braindamaged Canadians argue over housing while ignoring the existence of apartments as a solution is mind boggling
this post was submitted on 20 May 2023
34 points (90.5% liked)
Green - An environmentalist community
5315 readers
66 users here now
This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!
RULES:
1- Remember the human
2- Link posts should come from a reputable source
3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith
Related communities:
- /c/collapse
- /c/antreefa
- /c/gardening
- /c/eco_socialism@lemmygrad.ml
- /c/biology
- /c/criseciv
- /c/eco
- /c/environment@beehaw.org
- SLRPNK
Unofficial Chat rooms:
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
It will never cease to amaze me how much people in North America despise apartment living. Getting a house seems to be a life goal here.
Houses are a thing of the past.
Environmental has been discussed, but there's also practicality. The number of people per household is rapidly decreasing^[https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11-630-x/11-630-x2015008-eng.htm].
The scaling impact of this is twofold - Everything is going to be further away, and the sense of community will be greatly lessened (and that's not even considering how much more time people spend inside compared to 20 years ago).
Fewer people in a house means more maintenance per person too - and if you're going to hire someone else to do it, that's gotten more expensive^[https://www.thumbtack.com/guide/content/average-home-maintenance-cost-440876223059787781].
If you want a house, you can get a house. But things have changed - It's not the best option for most people, and it's certainly not the best option for any competent government.
Completely agree, and it's important to note that there are lots of quality of life benefits to well designed microdistricts where you can have parks, shops, entertainment venues, and so on, all within walking distance.
100 houses with huge private gardens. If you get rid of the private gardens, it leaves lots of space for nature and common spaces.
Absolutely, this is hoarded space that would be far better utilized as parks or community centres.
I never understood the desire to own a home besides not wanting to fatten a landleech's loot bag. I'm only speaking for myself, but I only really need a bed and a place I can go to be somewhat private for myself. Bathrooms, kitchens, living rooms (whatever the apartment equivalent to that is) etc. would be best shared by multiple extended family members or people from multiple families. I think growing up and living in a suburb, combined with a terminal case of being online, has turned me into a schizoid.
Yeah, I've always preferred living in a condo myself. Could be cause I grew up this way back in USSR. It's just really convenient, and you don't have to worry about maintenance the way you do with a house.
@CannotSleep420 @yogthos im one of those poeple whose stupidly particular about kitchens, i need my own kitchen i dont cate what anybody says. being stuck in capitalism im honestly going back to van life just to get away from the landleeches
What does a kitchen have to do about a house vs apartment?
@OsrsNeedsF2P nothing, but the idea mentioned is sharing the kitchen that im pushing back on here. in my current living situation i have two room mates who just trash our shared kitchen making the thing utterly unusable for me hence my desire for a personal kitchen. it doesnt help that im like 98 sure im neurodivergent in some way so i really need a space like that to be setup a very specific way
Don't put too much hope on apartment buildings. My country is plagued with buildings since it's a passive source of income for wannabe landlords. In the last twenty years the entire coast was cluttered with concrete blocks and the countryside is witnessing a similar trend.
As long as population is uncontrollably accruing due to artificial economic growth, no solution will be adequate enough.
While those suburbs you have in America are a nightmare, this poster is too simplistic to give you a full picture of the situation.
I mean capitalism has to be abolished regardless of how we tackle housing. :)
I didn't want to state the obvious
I think that it isn't so easy. The necessary infrastructure depends on the number of people rather than the number of buildings (electricity, water, pipes, streets, etc). An urbanization with individual houses can generate its energy needs sufficiently with decentralized solar and wind panels, which is not possible for the same number of people in a single building. The best example is the environmental impact of towns with individual houses and small buildings, comparing the impact of large, densely populated cities, which even influence the climate. The real world is not an island, as this drawing of yours suggests.
Large cities with huge buildings cannot be integrated into nature they always replace it.
You're completely ignoring just about every other reason apartments are better.
- [Environment] Condense people = walkable cities
- [Environment] Fewer cars
- [Environment] Hubs are more efficient for transporting goods
- [Environment] Extra space can be preserved
- [Environment] Heat insulation is better ^[https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/housing/articles/energyefficiencyofhousinginenglandandwales/2021]
- [Environment] Sewage, water, and electricity lines don't require n^2 sprawl
- [Livelihood] Better public transportation
- [Livelihood] Closer to nature (your image is a joke and not how most house-based neighborhoods look)
It's easy to see big cities like NYC and think "that's bad for the environment", but it's easier to forget how much worse it would be if everyone lived in houses.
And to the point of energy - Use nuclear.
How many walable citys do you know with fewer cars, preserving extra space (Parks are no woods or nature), a good public transport and closer to nature? How to make a big building energy autonom? Big aglomerations are not the way. Energy by nuclear is a joke for several reasons. Even if you show the article from the gov, which shurly is objective and independent, the realyty is other. Come to Europe and see the problems with nukes they had and its form of housing.
How many walable citys do you know with fewer cars, preserving extra space (Parks are no woods or nature), a good public transport and closer to nature?
I live in SE Asia and the answer is "almost all of them"
I've always seen per-house solar panels to supplement the energy requirement which is mostly met through conventional means. Do you have an example of "decentralised solar and wind" energy meet the needs completely?
Several, here in Spain there are quite a few chalets that use solar roofs for their own consumption and even have surpluses to repay surpluses to the network. Decentralizing energy production is a more efficient way than centralized production, naturally the energy industry is still putting obstacles, but this is already changing little by little. People realize that a house can be energetically self-sufficient with current technologies. https://www.homebiogas.com/blog/energy-self-sufficient-home/
How is it more efficient?
It's more efficient because you're constantly producing energy that you don't always need, so you feed it back into the grid that otherwise burns coal/etc to make up the deficit.
Is it good? Yes. Does that mean houses are better than apartments? Lol no
While I agree with this it doesn't address the issues at least in the US with the cost of rent and all the problems associated with renting (landlords and property management companies treating their residents like garbage) I wish we could have more apartments where the unit is owned by the individual.
Well yeah, commodification of housing has to end without a question. Housing should be made for people to live in not to speculate on.
view more: next ›