Almot wrote:
In energy per sq.ft RV is rarely better than a house. Poor insulation, and the whole box is made for towing/moving and "camping", - not for living. Though I believe Piano's rig is being run more thoughtfully than many houses.
You can bet on that lol
Thoughtfully yes but when it comes to being green or having a minimal carbon footprint staying put in an efficient small dwelling is the bottom line most efficient way to live.
The numbers would have to be crunched to get a total cost of a person living in 200 or 300 sq ft house but there is no RV lifestyle out there that is going to be less. The life of the building could easily be 100 years with today construction methods and materials where even most vans are ready for replacement after 15 or so max.
So a person could use less energy overall in an RV if we compare to a traditional house which is many more sq ft. To make an accurate comparison we need to compare SQ feet. That why it's also funny to read some off the sarcastic remarks when tiny houses are mentioned. If you compare a well built same sq ft tiny which spends it's life stationary or moves very little and the owner may not even own a tow vehicle there is no comparison.
Some of the trends and changes that are happening may not be totally good but they are interesting.
Compared to how we live now if we actually wanted to put a total effort into actually conserving resources we wouldn't want to even think about what it would be like. I always tell people I'm in the club, let's drive it burn it use it enjoy it. I'm in but not fooling myself.