The Truth About 3D Printed Homes

[@UndecidedMF]

What do you think of 3D printing in construction like this? The first 500 people who click on the link will get 25% OFF a Fabulous subscription! thefab.co/undecided. If you liked this, check out; Do We Really Need Electric Cars? kzbin.info/www/bejne/hnu3Y6uYgLJ7arc

[@wfemp_4730]

Cool as hell, but IMO "pie in the sky" for the forseeable future.

[@thesilentone4024]

I think we should use waste rock from mines to build homes. Why well reduce demand and it helps reduce deforestation so they can just simply dump it. Why not use it thoughts.

[@justicematters5447]

Love the video but we would need a lot of clay? Really is that not one of the most abundant resources we have. That statement is pretty stupid.

[@wfemp_4730]

@@thesilentone4024 Transportation costs of a (I'm assuming) relatively dense material? I do like the idea of using waste material.

[@thesilentone4024]

@@wfemp_4730 it doesn't need to be thick heavy pieces. It can be thin long pieces ment for the outside wall to reduce weathering and keep home warm cool and reduce demand for other materials.

[@job1199]

One thing not mentioned...bugs. I lived in a mudbrick house in Australia for 16 years, and borer bugs were a huge, huge problem. Had to seal every milimetre of the bricks with a thick layer of plastic paint, or the whole thing would have been a big nest for varieties of bees and wasps. The mudbrick had some cement in it, so was harder than just dried clay, but the bugs loved it.

[@JPEight]

Why mudbrick? Was it an old house? All the results on image search look super modern. Were there any advantages?

[@job1199]

@@JPEight It was built about 1990, by a structural engineer. Mudbrick because it was supposed to be nice and cool in the hot Aus weather, and took advantage of the pervasive clay soil in Qld. It was also a very nice looking building.

[@CaedenV]

@@JPEight mudbrick has some amazing thermal properties for the wall thickness, and it can be smoothed and painted much like drywall, or hang a facade like brick construction to make it look "normal"... And the material is super durable and strong with little to no seasonal flexing. In a lot of ways it is nearly ideal. But bugs... Yeah... That's a problem to contend with in a lot of areas.

[@____________________________.x]

Use lime based paint, bugs don't like it

[@kazzTrismus]

people have forgotten that the hardwood flooring adoption was the largest increase in lifespan of humanity next to hand washing. dirt based homes will be havens for biological bacterial and environmental health problems. going back to mud huts is just a fantasy for dirty tree hugger hippies who want humanity to go back to caveman days and dying at the ripe old age of 30. their fantasy is our post apocalyptic distopia and will be theirs too.

[@nicholaidajuan865]

From a civil engineers perspective, making the clay from what is found at the site will add a massive variability to the strength and longevity of the structure. There's a reason that other house printers mix soil with cement and not just water

[@carlwest859]

Definitely the mix would have to meet certain strength and durability requirements. A weather proof exterior finish should be part of the design and a sanitary interior coating adds to the cost. Most of all why can't the walls be troweled smooth to represent a more typical structure rather than bee hives or mud dauber nests? Finally is the R value suitable for green tech mandates?

[@ancienttechnology7337]

Yeah, and certainly why people have made heated clay bricks for so long. As a building material they at least have less variables than a big clay cob wall.

[@JohnnyJiuJitsu]

I thought it said it also adds “rice waste?” Maybe the gluten and fibers add that missing component…

[@ancienttechnology7337]

@@JohnnyJiuJitsu rice waste is also called rice hulls. This mixed with clay make a basic Cobb mixture. The fiber helps to provide the tensile strength that the clay lacks. Basically the agrarian version of steel reinforced concrete.

[@yourgooglemeister6745]

Shhhhh you just made a virtue signaling soyboy cry 😢

[@boohoo788]

I used renewable biological housing for my home, I cut a tree down and layered it with other logs, very unique approach

[@ChaoticMartian]

You made a log hut.

[@topsuperseven7910]

They don't believe trees grow or that new trees appear. This is how the Amazon jungle has obviously disappeared off the face of the earth.

[@uniktbrukernavn]

You could be onto something. If built correctly it could stand for a very long time and be easily repaired. You should give it a cool, catchy name, like Log-Tech or TechLog. You see I added the word "tech" to make it seem more technological. Add "disruptive" to make it fintech compliant.

[@topsuperseven7910]

@@uniktbrukernavn He's got the main marketing idea right tho - just invoke the magic word 'Sustainability'. It evokes 'replacement Christianity' now and if you can say the cute term 'Renewables' (remember how moms loves 'lunchables') then get the couple sold on it. Sustainable. Say 'sustainability' and of course 'Green' whenever. Hey guys, what about 'True Green(tm)' or maybe 'this is Ultra Green' technology? 1st Generation Green Products?

[@ArariaKAgelessTraveller]

@@topsuperseven7910 did you go to marketing course in college?

[@privatemale27]

I personally like the brick option more. Molded interlocking hempcrete or compressed earth blocks. Easy to mix with traditional construction. Easy to assemble. Good insulation and fire resistance. Some options can be manufactured onsite.

[@melissamybubbles6139]

Yeah. Hempcrete also doesn't look so cold and hard. Are they limited to certain climate zones? Hempcrete and earth blocks are probably easier to incorporate into a range of styles, since plaster walls have a long history. For concrete walls to work, they're left with brutalist, contemporary, or at their most creative, possibly a look resembling castles.

[@totherarf]

@@melissamybubbles6139 I believe Hemp for Hempcrete is growable in most American latitudes. The main problem with it is soil fertility erosion. Great for the first couple of years but diminishing thereafter .... and not easy to get farmers to rotate crops rather than take ll the $ now!

[@oregonNYC]

@@melissamybubbles6139 hempcrete is non-load bearing, it needs to be supported by concrete, wood, or steel. It’s a substitute for insulation and paneling rather than structural. It was misrepresented on this very channel as an alternative to concrete blocks.

[@jonathanravenhilllloyd2070]

I'm hoping to build my house from CEBs

[@macmcleod1188]

@@oregonNYC the version presentedon this channel was an alternative to concrete bricks. Because it has an internal structure that acts much like a Lego block.

[@PenDragonsPig-Jam_on_Top]

I used to live in a cobb house- the walls were about 18 inches thick and made with, basically, mud, poop, straw, and animal hair, then white washed. These ingredients were the preferred materials for a long time. When it was built it had a thatched roof, later this was changed to (relatively) locally quarried slate. It was a shepherds cottage, another unit adjoined it at a slightly lower level on the "street", and a wool barn adjoined at a slightly higher level. They were more than 400 years old. A mud building in a damp climate still going after more than 400 years.

[@thedingo8833]

How long did you live there?? Did you note ant drawbacks? What country/ climate ?? ( if you don’t mind the third degree🙃

[@nox5555]

@@thedingo8833 they are all over europe, from spain to latvia. all those half timbered houses you see use mud and wood and some are 1000 years old.

[@thedingo8833]

Oh my thanks for the insight. Can you tell me if while living in one you noticed any drawbacks??? And as far as maintenance was concerned?. I heard to rethatch a roof was astronomical. Again. Thank you for the info.

[@nox5555]

@@thedingo8833 well they are pretty much all centuries old and have all the problems that come from that. but they have a very nice climate inside. Repairs are pretty expensive but they are more restauration than simple repair. they have some problems when build in swamps, but pretty much all structures have. thats why you find halftimberhouses inland and burned clay brick houses at the coast in most of central europe.

[@thedingo8833]

@@nox5555 wonder if I could build one in Oregon. My goal is to retire in brookings. IDE love to have me own little cottage there. I have been looking for alternative building options.

[@FullCircleTravis]

I'm a handyman. I'm also a 3d printer enthusiast. I think the biggest problem with homes is design and placement. We should be designing homes to be sustainable, collect rain, generate power, and absorb heat during the day to reduce fuel usage. These people are trying to solve a problem that didn't need to be fixed.

[@intuitivetyson]

Well said! I'm sure you're already aware of them, but check out earth ships if you haven't already!

[@joshuacoldwater]

This video is deceptive, almost all 3D printed homes are made using concrete.

[@trevinbeattie4888]

My initial thought on dirt walls is that it seems good for insulation and fire resistance, but might be bad for water and/or earthquake resistance. I hadn’t even considered the potential insect problem that other posters have mentioned. I think you would still need a solid concrete foundation and some kind of water-proof lining inside and outside the walls.

[@SoMuchFacepalm]

And drainage. I live in the Aus. desert and a few months ago we had a week of constant rain. Everything built to code was fine, other things are still wet. Mud huts aren't going to do to well in something like that.

[@nomms]

There's a pretty large community about building with local onsite materals. They've develiped techniques to address most of this. Dirt/Adobe/Cob walls are thermally massive, they are not insilative. This makes them fine in host places, and places with mild windters, but it's unsuitable for for places where it gets proper cold. Stawbale and balecob houses tend to go up very quick, are very cheap, and don't require much skill. They also tend to have insulation in the r40-r50 range. They have good insulation and thermal mass, allowing passive solar to heat for most of the winter. There are methods for dealing with drainage and frost heave, although I'm forgetting the style of foundation. It's all low tech stuff though, so it doesnt get coverage. These houses last, are cheap, and can be built by anyone with who is able bodied with and afternoons instruction. Putting up a vapor barrier is iffy. It's generally better to let your walls breath. If there's a large water spill, and there will be one, the water has no where to go. It'll end up inside the walls stuck against insulation and you'll get mold. The addage "build tight ventilate right" isn't as common anymore as this style of building has caused rampent mold issues in newer construction.

[@saidinesh5]

Indeed. Kind of surprised the video didn't make much of a comparison to mud huts in a video about using dirt for housing. I'm actually curious now how much work is it to bring and assemble the whole machinery vs. Just constructing a mud hut with modern tools...

[@SoMuchFacepalm]

@@saidinesh5 If it's basically a trailer that you just park and power up it'll be fine, but if there's enough assembly required, you'd be better off just making a normal wattle and daub or similar.

[@Muckylittleme]

That is a prescient comment give they resemble termite dwellings. Still, I'm sure Gates, Bezos, Soros and all the other trillionaire cop26 eco-fascists will be giving up their multi million dollar complexes around the world and moving into theirs very soon.

[@burtonschrader2]

As a building contractor I experimented with different options for house construction. You are right. Exterior walls form a very small part of the total cost. Complying with local building regulations that normally include appearance as well as proving stability of the structure must be considered.

[@DrTheRich]

In a lot of countries, especially in the west, being poor is basically illegal, as you're not allowed to build a cheap house. Regulations make it that there is a minimum amount of money you need to spend on your house, or via rent if some company build your appartement.

[@malcolmnicholls2893]

Quite so. In the UK House building is sustained by the finance industry,. In my case, it took two of us 25 yrs, and many times the original cost to pay off. Brick is regarded as often cheaper than timber. Brick can last well over 100 yrs and that pacifies the mortgage companies.

[@DavidStruveDesigns]

Another problem with building regulations - other than making every project more expensive - is how slow they are to update and bring themselves up to modern times. This makes doing anything different or experimenting in any way headache-inducingly difficult at the best of times and completely impossible at the worst. This issue just compounds the more "different" and "experimental" a potential property becomes. Which is why most modern homes are boring carbon-copies of each other with zero individuality and nothing to make them stand out - and in the rare cases where they DO have such things, that immediately makes them ridiculously expensive and unobtainable for the average person, let alone if you're on the poorer end of the scale.

[@laurie7689]

@@DavidStruveDesigns I agree. If we want to change/update our homes in any way, we are obligated to adhere to stricter building regulations using more costly technologies and materials making the changes/updates out of reach of affordability for most average people. Over time, this causes one or two problems: 1) Either the home is NOT updated and it becomes rundown and the owners lose out on the marketability of the home; OR 2) The home IS updated and becomes out of affordable reach for many people.

[@redhammer92]

​@@DrTheRich Well.....yeah. Just like a car, there's a minimum you need to spend if you want something that runs and is safe. Building houses is expensive and skilled work. Until that changes(Builders work for free i guess?) there will always be a barrier to entry.

[@Jason-33W]

When I was a soldier in Iraq, there were Iraqi's living in clay-type houses and you know what, DUST was a HUGE issue. I bet it would be horrible in there.

[@kerra3699]

It would be possible to seal the walls by painting a clear coat sealant on the inside and maybe even outside.

[@robgrey6183]

@@kerra3699 LOL, you're so wrong.

[@thefourthdymensionmusic]

moisture is my main sinus problem.

[@goncalodias6402]

Does the dust come from the walls or just from the outside. Since iraq is in a sand desert region.?

[@nothanksnoname7567]

@@kerra3699 Perhaps a lot of linseed oil will help on the external.

[@kalisthenes6650]

So glad to finally see a balanced presentation on 3d printed housing. As an architect who has been fascinated by additive manufacturing for decades now, all of the misinformation around this topic is a concern.

[@maudepotvin8660]

Do you think we will ever get to a printed high rise ?

[@natenesler5028]

@@maudepotvin8660 Germany is already doing multi-level 3D printing and their next certification is for high rise. So yeah.

[@maudepotvin8660]

@@natenesler5028 That will be something to see ! My FDM printers feel so small now ... lol !

[@jonathananderberg2607]

@@maudepotvin8660 we are actively working on it.

[@raeishimura]

As a fellow architect, I agree with you on that point. Getting reliable information is concerningly difficult, and it's good to see a balanced presentation on it

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

The reason I don’t buy in the “3D printed home” hype is because construction isn’t a huge problem for us. Corporate landlords buying all property, and single family home zoning are the problems really hurting us. Edit: also, the reason 3D printing is such a big deal in manufacturing is because it allows you to do designs that are just impossible with other methods like injection molding or extrusion. And it allows you to do this while keeping the costs low because you don’t have to purchase tooling. 3D printed homes aren’t pushing against these same issues so they’re unable to get the same benefits.

[@uhohhotdog]

+

[@satviktasupalli4885]

This, zoning and land use laws are the true factor in housing affordability becoming less common

[@oregonNYC]

This. Especially since the actual hard parts of construction - land procurement, zoning, permitting, grading, utilities etc - are not the ‘building’ part of construction. I’m a pretty mediocre amateur carpenter and can fairly easily build the walls and roof framing of a modest house when all those hard parts are done. As far as building in remote (ie poor, developing countries) its far easier to just drop off modular buildings.

[@oregonNYC]

@@MeanPhyllis land is the issue. Not structures.

[@SaveMoneySavethePlanet]

@@MeanPhyllis that’s the point that I tried to address in my edit. You’re looking at it the right way, but I don’t think that’s going to happen for homes. In injection molding a mold can easily cost 100’s of thousands of dollars while the part you make with it may only sell for $1. So you only use that process for products which you know will have large enough production runs in order to ultimately be profitable. 3D printing made a huge splash in that industry because it took away that initial investment and made it much easier to be profitable with small production runs. Housing doesn’t work like this though. It’s quite common that the most expensive part of a home is the land that it sits on. As others have mentioned, the part of building a home that often takes the longest isn’t putting up the walls, but is simply completing the paperwork so that you’re allowed to build. So I think you’re looking at it the right way, but I just don’t think that applies to housing.

[@kyleolson8977]

I know someone who was working on a 3D printed house project in the US and the issue was that they needed many pre-fab or custom parts. In fact, it was likely more practical to use all pre-fab parts and ship them in, but the project was funded because it was 3D printing so they kept the printing.

[@anomalousanonymous]

Issues I have seen with the only 3d printed building I have ever seen was the lack of rebar or other means of reinforcing the concrete and the building structure began cracking within the first year.

[@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking]

Rebar is the thing that weakens concrete. Just watch some videos about "spalling." The Roman Parthenon, has stood for thousands of years. You don't need rebar. The Romans probably rejected it as idiocy, which it is. Insert a bar inside concrete, made of iron...at the first sign of moisture, it rusts, and EXPLODES the concrete away from itself. The sooner we ban that super-collapsible, extremely weak construction method - the better.

[@richardprofit6363]

@@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking as shown by the horrible building collapse recently in Miami...which I hope won't happen again but probably will...

[@NoName-md5zb]

@@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking ?? Or maybe make sure moisture doesnt get to rebar?

[@lach0125]

@@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking its to take the tensile forces. Without rebar concrete doesn't have the ability to withstand tensile forces. Sure, you can design concrete in a way to always be in compression, but this generally leads to inefficient designs. There's a reason it exists. Please don't assume you know more than all the industry experts out there who have dedicated their life to studying this subject

[@anomalousanonymous]

@@andrewlayton6728 It will not feed into the printer without balling up. There is no linear feed in the unit here, only a trough.

[@teacon7]

Also you'd really want to figure out how well clay exterior walls would last under environmental events like "rain" or "mud wasps looking for a new home." Durability under earthquakes also seems relevant. Maybe they should build these at campgrounds in different climate zones and see how it goes after a few years.

[@saliferousstudios]

Ummm. We have adobe houses that have been around centuries. We know exactly how well mud houses work... We've been doing it since before history started being recorded.

[@jsprunger6246]

@@saliferousstudios Mud huts have a wood foundation

[@saliferousstudios]

@@jsprunger6246 and you think the 3d printed ones cant do that?

[@jsprunger6246]

@@saliferousstudios This one doesn't so it doesn't exactly represent most air dried mud huts.

[@aLwE17]

​@@saliferousstudios I'm an architect and like about everything construction related, adobe houses and mud huts work for certain environments only, adobe houses can only survive dry arid environments and require constant maintenance and protection from moisture, if air-dried mud huts, like in the video, were built in my country, The Philippines, it would wash away or literally melt when the annual typhoon seaons with flooding comes. It would be best and practical to be skeptical of new construction method, especially with claims that are too good to be true, because human lives are at stake when the house collapses. Even here in my country, throughout our history, each region and province have developed a completely different native house design and construction materials independently depending on their soil, sub-surface composition, flooding, earthquake-proofing(around fault lines), humidity, altitude, etc.; For example, in flood-prone areas, our ancestors have developed two-storey houses wherein the ground floor is made up of stones to survive floods, while the upper livable spaces are made of wood for ventilation because of our hot and humid climate.

[@JxH]

"3D Printed Homes" First rule of 3D Printing hype: Whatever noun follows the phrase "3D Printed" is *ALWAYS* the incorrect word. In this case, 3D Printed *walls* are only one small part of what makes a "home". Walls are not a "home". This rule is essentially never broken. You'll see it EVERYWHERE. The hype stinks, and I'm left wondering what's the reason for this clumsy attempt at deception, and why doesn't everyone notice and call them out on it? Crazy nonsense. The technology is fine. I'm complaining about the above-mentioned dishonest hype.

[@mrshorts2310]

true and underrated comment

[@theYoutubeHandle]

reason is money.

[@hxpelives]

You'd call a house with brick walls a brick house, not list every single material the house is made of. It's just not convenient.

[@goodvybe679]

It just doesn't make sense to say 3d printed walls in the same way you wouldn't list every single PC part to someone when you tell them about your PC (unless they ask)

[@thegodhead]

It’s a new technology. People being enthusiastic about tech is not equal to deception.

[@ThirdFront]

Ok, I used to live in a mud house. You basically need to cover every inch of the exterior from rain. Any water will make the house collapse without any prior indication. Whatever they saved printing this will be lost by water-proofing for sure.

[@marwerno]

I guess this is easy, just have a large roof overhang. You get a free 360degree veranda😁

[@ThirdFront]

@@marwerno That was one of the method, but not a complete and practical solution.. in our place rain even flows parallel to ground due to heavy winds..

[@marwerno]

@@ThirdFront In this case: the major wind is mostly from one side only, the other directions mostly rare events (so it can dry off). In Germany for example, I would avoid having a raw wood facade in north or westerly orientation, it would not easily dry off and rot quickly.

[@corujariousa]

Once printed houses are build under code in hurricane prone areas (i.e.: South Florida) we can consider it has reached a level of quality we can trust.

[@Jehty_]

Why would you need a house that can withstand hurricanes if you don't live in a hurricane prone area??

[@corujariousa]

@@Jehty_ My thought is that would ensure this new technology and structure will be strong enough. If I were the one trying to create a good proof of concept to market this, that is what I would shoot for. Also, if I were to buy one.

[@wtsane5449]

Everywhere has something: hurricanes, tornados, blizzards, snowstorms, sandstorm, monsoons, drought.

[@corujariousa]

@@wtsane5449 Mostly yes but not many of those events can make your house crumb on top of you or become a projectile. My point is that there is a lot of commercial hype and misinformation about this technology (for profit).

[@BloodHawk31]

Studying civil engineering, be gentle: We did soil tests on different soils and there is a reason we don't use clay, it expands and retracts too much, it's an unstable aggregate, so I can't see that this would work without something added to it, we've seen clay houses in dessert areas but built with poles and straw to help stabilize it. Wet areas will be a nightmare for the owner. Size in my mind would be limited, people would say no, there are skyscraper of clay, just keep in mind, I live in cape town and not a dessert, we are renowned for wet winters, so I just don't see a clay 5 bedroom two storey that will be safe and cost effective in my area. But I am open to ideas, I guess as a student this is our job, to research and bring forth ideas, they are drilling environmental studies on us and trying to find alternatives to cement.

[@jamoecw]

clay is a great building material, but in wet areas it doesn't stay dry, and thus it tends to collapse. this material has been used for a long time and people moved away from it for a reason. it is still used because it has some great advantages in dry climates, while still being cheap. most modern versions used for garnering buzz use additives to compensate, or are used for temporary structures that people don't follow up on for longevity (they hide its flaws). just like with other green technologies there is far more buzz than is warranted, but not completely worthless.

[@BloodHawk31]

@@jamoecw can agree with all of that, people talking about container units and plastic roads, they all can work, but there are a lot more behind it that people do not see.

[@goncalodias6402]

To build with earth this 3d printing method is not good at all. People have being doing it for ages. You need to pour the dirt (rich in clay) mixed with straw and then compress it. That is done in layers and takes much more than 24 hours. Then in most places they are white washed with lime wich protects the walls and kills any bugs. These houses last for centuries. Its also important that the walls are usually 40 to 60 centimeters in thickness

[@EleneDOM]

@@goncalodias6402 Yes, here in New Mexico we have adobe houses that have been around for centuries, and the dirt is indeed mixed with straw, and the walls are very thick.

[@alexK661]

I used to live in a clay house. it had 2 types of wall: clay and straw brick walls that, as you said started eroding away and something akin to foundation-like walls. the walls were built into wood planks wolds from clay and wine vines used as an armature. the clay would then be compressed using hammer-like tools. after about a century, when we renovated, we had to sculpt the walls to get something remotely string; metal sparks would come out of the axes and the blade would dull a couple of times a day. clay can be a very good material, used in the right way. not to mention the fantastic thermal insulation it can give

[@nezihmertbolgul3605]

SLS: Selective Laser Sintering. You are confusing it with SLA: Stereolithography. SLA requires photo sensitive material. SLS only needs lasers (or electron beam) to generate heat to fuse powders. SLS can fuse many powder types such as; metal,plastic etc.

[@bobprickett2223]

I built my own passive solar Adobe home in the late 70’s. I don’t understand why Adobe hasn’t become more popular. It was the best house I’ve ever lived in. We rented it for a month from the current owner last year and it was as good as new. I didn’t see any settling cracks or any signs of age.

[@marblelibrarianlibrarian4983]

Unless it is FIRED, adobe will fail in wet environments.

[@bobprickett2223]

@@marblelibrarianlibrarian4983 The adobes I used were “semi stabilized”. I think that with a stem wall high enough to prevent moisture wicking up and overhangs large enough to keep water off the walls that they would outlast a frame wall. It’s just a hunch. I think there should be more research on Adobe building in various climates. They are the ultimate in eco friendly construction material.

[@marzadky4934]

What does Adobe home mean?

[@gregorioeduardo]

@@marzadky4934 Adobe Mud? An adobe building is classified as a structure created by earthen and organic materials. It’s the absolute earliest form of structured shelter building known in all of human history. Adobe is Spanish for mud brick, and its life starts out as exactly that. Mud mixed with other organic matters, and turned into bricks and dried. ps. You can find out almost any information by making an Internet 👀 🔍

[@SpaceCrete]

That is a good story - thanks for sharing it. Temperate dry climate?

[@danielmalinen6337]

In Finland, we usually live in houses built of wood, where moisture, mold, rotting fungi and radon are a bigger problem than insects, but insects also love to live in the structures of houses built of wood and, for example, a beehive in the attic or between the walls is no surprise. But for example, desirable indoor insects are usually flies and small spiders. And less desirable are cockroaches, mealworms, ants and silverfish. And it is often difficult to prevent insects from entering the house, for example many insects use open openings in drains or a door or window that is kept open. And no matter how hard you try to keep the insects out, they still come inside.

[@SpaceCrete]

Well sure, you would try to get inside, too! Did not know about the radon part. It is very wet here also in N Coastal California, which affects building practices likewise.

[@chrisblake4198]

Simple fact is, multiple storeys adds too much economy of scale and versatility for current 3d methods to ever top. Even using traditional methods to add another level just means you have to build ground floor one way, then transition the entire site to traditional building for the next. Also would require a massive shift in consumer expectations, selling homes that are essentially un-alterable once they're built. Legally speaking, there's also massive headaches involved in getting the changes or carveouts needed in building codes to allow these.

[@jonathananderberg2607]

You're right about building codes, but you can print in cavities to cast out reinforced pillars. Single story is for amateurs, we can go to 3 with our current printer.

[@mfpears]

All extremely easy to overcome

[@nasonguy]

Yeah, the concentration of people into urban/population centers means dense housing like 5+1 buildings are extremely cost efficient (more profit for the owners....).

[@Number6_]

The workers live in a cheap to build wasps nest that easily crumbles back into the ground as soon as the rich law makers are done with it and you. Even disposal of your body and possessions will be green. As your bodies are converted into food to feed the workers! No wasted space. They, the environmental liberals have been planning this since the early 1970's. The clean shiny paradise is only for them!

[@Sturgeonmeister]

One of the issues I see, is the ability of the homeowner to make changes to the structure, such as adding an extension or maybe interior changes. With the current stick frame construction, installing or changing power, comm, water and gas, or easier to do.

[@PerennialWheat]

This.

[@Nurr0]

One thing that is rarely touched on with a lot of these projects is that round spaces are really awkward to use. Want to hang a picture? It's awkward. Want to put a wardrobe up against a wall? It's awkward. Most modern furnishings aren't curved or round, that may change if printed houses take off but it's something to consider.

[@SpaceCrete]

cabinets, beds, windows doors....

[@user-gu9yq5sj7c]

There are rectangular 3d printed buildings.

[@CaedenV]

I love the idea of a 3D printed house... But I seriously wonder about the practicality of it. As an example, my home was built in the early 1950s, and it (like many homes in the neighborhood) have housed several different families over the years. In the 1960s someone finished the attic space for a couple more bedrooms. In the 70s someone added a small extension. In the 80s someone added some insulation and upgraded to a modern HVAC system. Through the 90s and early 00s the owners were barely ever home and didn't maintain anything, so we got it for a steal right before the 08 crash. And over the last 15 years we have worked a lot on insulation, replacing old plaster, and some minor structural improvements. Not to mention someone added a phone system with 3 phone Jack's and at least 1 cable outlet in every room (including the bathroom lol). And I added a lot of cat5. Nobody in 1950 could really see a need for any of that. Point is, it is thesiesis ship, ever changing and evolving over the past 70 years. And sure, not everyone is as gung-ho about tearing open a wall and unraveling the mess found inside like I am... But people will make changes to their home over time. A house that is 3d printed may work great as a dream home for the first family moving in. And when the home doesn't suit needs perfectly I am sure most people are less stubborn than I am about making changes to make my house work for me. But inevitably some new thing will force a change... How viable will it be to make changes to these homes? If an accident happens and a hole needs to be patched how hard will it be compared to drywall? And when much more conventional construction comes in near the same price and similar efficiency... Well... Is there a point? And I say this as a huge believer in the idea that we will literally have some traditional construction jobs being replaced by general purpose robots in the next 10 years. Atlas in 2032 will totally be able to put a house together perfectly to code working day and night using current day construction methods. And neat as 3d printing is... It just won't compete with that in 10 years. There is little point to making a specialized robot that can do 1 thing when something like an atlas platform will do everything just as well, just as cheap, and be able to be tasked on any number of projects over its useful life. Pains me to say it... But 3d printed housing needs some truly massive improvement to make itself worthwhile. 3D printing holds a lot more promise in unique to medium scale production of complicated parts. Changing a 3d printer to mass produced goods is fundamentally misunderstanding the tech. Use a 3d printer to make a mold for a wall, and then use the mold to make a million mass produced walls. That is the direction to go in.

[@NathaNeil27]

As the world runs out of lumber over the next 100 years, other housing materials will be needed. Perhaps that's where this tech could become more viable. Then again, bricks are always a thing.

[@BgStalker]

@@NathaNeil27 you know that trees literaly grow every year, right? Lumber is the ultimative renewable material known to humanity for ages.

[@jaqssmith1666]

@@NathaNeil27 GOOD NEWS MY FRIEND!! I have contacts in the Orient that tell me of new developments! They call it "farming" and tell me it will be big very soon.

[@keithnewton8981]

You know what our home are built 9f brick stone and block and it just as easy as dry wall to repair or open up but it last longer than you shed homes in North America

[@NathaNeil27]

@pyropulse Today, only 4 billion hectares are left. The world has lost one-third of its forest - an area twice the size of the United States. Only 10% of this was lost in the first half of this period, until 5,000 years ago.Feb 9, 2021

[@ThisWontEndWell]

We have 500-year-old cob houses in the UK, this is basically a complicated cob process so would be interesting to see a cost analysis between the two.

[@vantongerent]

This industry / technology is progressing so fast, Matt, maybe you could just make this an ongoing series, and do one video per quarter on 3D printed homes

[@beccas.6983]

I would watch this!!

[@IAMElectric369]

It’s not new. It’s just now being rediscovered.

[@GamerAwesomeness9000]

I came for the new technology, I stay because of the puns.

[@michaelginever732]

Every episode seem to have more puns than the last. 🤣🤣🤣

[@ArthurKiyanovski]

Pundecided (pun intended :))

[@MrSharpdrop]

There are a lot of them to dig through, but he keeps spitting them out!

[@VitaEx]

„Puns are the highest form of literature.“ - Alfred Hitchcock

[@messman10]

3D printing for now will probably be best used for niche things, like foundations. The printers work great with concrete, which is not that great for the environment; but using the printer with a honey comb like structure, and maybe aircrete infill of the chambers, Foundation costs could probably be dropped along with their environmental impact. Surprised no one is looking into using CNC machines to lay bricks and other structural units, like hempcrete blocks, or doing 3d printing with hempcrete onto an existing frame. That would make a logical step, on a similar idea, with just some differences in the mechanics.

[@RickHowell89]

Look up SAM, the bricklaying robot.

[@johnmorris1162]

Fastbrick Robotics has a working prototype in Western Australia. Has build some one and 2 storey houses in Australia and Mexico using large blocks.

[@kenji214245]

There are already several bricklaying robot companies showing of their skills for building houses fast and easy. That can work 24/7 and set up the foundation for laying pipes and lay out powerlines. The sales pitch is that you only need a crew for transport, details and final quality checks. And then the robot or robots can build the base of a full 4 bedroom house in 48-72 hours. Some have claimed 24 but that was only for singe floor plan housing. But they are becoming popular in Scandinavia so. Also there are some companies showing of how to take down houses with minimal risks and high automation with robots doing most of the work and creating less rubble. I think the construction market is one of the future places where worker demand will plummet.

[@stormRed]

This definitely reeks of trendy marketing and there's bound to be more unforeseen consequences, but I gotta say, the aesthetics are immaculate, it looks so sci-fi and I would absolutely live in it.

[@thefourthdymensionmusic]

ikr? who knew that dirt and water could turn out to look so futuristic. xD

[@darkzeroprojects4245]

Im all for 3d printer stuff,but I don't consider it should be used in such things like actually building a HOUSE.

[@public.public]

It looks like a giant wasp nest.

[@user-gu9yq5sj7c]

Why put down people who are trying to innovate? Of course there'll be flaws. You have to start somewhere before you can fix the flaws. How is this different from some houses build out of mud or clay by hand, tribal, or ancient houses? Who are people to judge those kind of houses?

[@user-gu9yq5sj7c]

@@darkzeroprojects4245 How is this different from some houses build out of mud or clay by hand, tribal, or ancient houses? Who are people to judge those kind of houses?

[@AtomicShrimp]

I think there's an element of 'perfect is the enemy of good/better' here - if people are going to continue living in suburban/rural settings, then the question becomes not 'is this perfect', but merely 'is this better' - is it better to construct a house out of local mud, or out of bricks that have been fired using fossil fuels, bonded together with mortar (containing lime that is again roasted using fossil fuels)? Both houses will need wiring, plumbing and other things to make them habitable, so that's probably a wash, but this does seem like it could have potential for incremental improvement. Although in the UK, where it rains whenever it wants to, I wonder how long a mud house would remain a house at all.

[@willabyuberton818]

3D printing is great for one-off, highly customized, and structurally complex, but small objects. Houses, especially the ones that I've seen 3D printed, are mass-manufactured, identical, and simple but, as far as objects go, fairly large. Why are we trying to 3D print them again?

[@AtomicShrimp]

@@willabyuberton818 an automated method of creating large, seamless walls doesn't seem like a terrible idea.

[@miketheskepticalone6285]

The UK is where we got wattle-and-daub, and cobb from. There are houses there that have not only been standing for LITERAL centuries, they are still in use. There are problems. Problems can ... and will ... be solved.

[@cristibaluta]

UK must be dumb to allow construction of houses that don't fit their style.

[@ancienttechnology7337]

So I love clay, I’ve actually been working with clay as an art media since I was a child. Clay’s strengths are often overlooked in today’s modern world made of plastic but its weaknesses cannot be overstated. In its green form there’s far too many weaknesses for clay to be my go to home building material. Just for starters not all clay is created equal and the ceramic industry spends a lot of time and money testing materials. Locally sourced clay may sound good on its face, but I remind you that clay comes from decomposed granite. The farther you get from that source in the mountains the less pure it becomes. At the valley floor where most humans want to live clay has many metallic impurities making it red, brown even nearly black. These are thing no one should be breathing in daily. Secondly the source granite many clay deposits come from is also a host for radioactive isotopes like thorium radium iridium uranium etc. Again not stuff you want kicked up while sweeping your kitchen.

[@marblelibrarianlibrarian4983]

Yikes! I had been wondering about the chance of native arsenic, lead, and mercury.

[@DocBree13]

Great points!

[@NickVenture1]

The small round shaped huts looked nice. Probably it will be advantageous to use mobile grinder units which can create an efficient mixture best suiting for the particular geographical area. Probably there should be found an ingredient which for sure will stabilize the mortar against erosion by rainfall. This material may not be found locally and will need to be imported.

[@eastanglianlife5461]

The best thing to do with a mud house to make it rain proof is to whitewash it

[@jayshah7497]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/an6ve6ZngLeUZrs

[@ymi_yugy3133]

Thank you so much for finally including density in the discussion about 3d printed homes. So much of the sustainability "innovation" in the construction industry seems to revolve around really unsustainable developments.

[@dewiz9596]

The house I own and have lived in since 1971 was factory-built in two halves 450 miles way, and trucked to be placed on a cast concrete foundation. Due to height limitations for transport, the three-room bungalow has 7-1/2 foot ceilings. . . In my neighbourhood, there are two, three and four room bungalows, split levels, and even a few two-storey homes. To me, one of the issues in construction are the quality of local labour. Everything done in the factory has been trouble free, while work by local contractors after placing the two halves on the foundation, and the foundation itself have been problematic.

[@delboy7039]

Which is great, but as mentioned urban sprawl due to low density, causes more problems than it solves, high density is what is required, going forward...

[@fakiirification]

@@delboy7039 high density leads to mental health decline and social strife. Humanity was not meant to live in cement towers in the sky.

[@bobbyboucher6661]

@@delboy7039 High density is for rats and worms

[@SallijaBule]

Would be nice to see a list of disadvanteges like what is the lifespan of a home like this, inluding mold, insects, smell, dust, durability against very dry, arid climates. Also about the maintenence and durability. But very interesting video about the very hyped up industry!

[@sammy13ificationable]

That's Cob, weve been doing that for tens of thousands of years. Hella rad that they managed to do it with machines rather than hard labor. You can also use hay, grass, gravel, or horse manure as a binding agent in the mixture too. It makes a great cement when used to pack and insulate stacked stone. It's an OLD technique

[@UNSCPILOT]

Sometimes some of the best solutions are *OLD*, simple and reliable methods and tech tend to need far simpler supply chains too

[@AtPeacePiece]

Poop as a binding agent? Stop sir.

[@sammy13ificationable]

@@AtPeacePiece it's a thing. Horse manure works best, but I prefer hay... more sanitary

[@kadian3904]

@@sammy13ificationable generally i believe straw, grasses and other fibers were used in main cob construction the manure was usually mixed in for finishing coats as the fibers were much smaller and made a much smoother finish. But nothing a good grinder couldn't simulate these days lol....could you use manure entirely? Absolutely, but I'm just thinking all the leftover straw from harvest would have been a much quicker solution to the bulk of a building going up for a family in those times as opposed to picking the horse fields.

[@velvet3784]

@@UNSCPILOT exactly. Today it seems like everything has to be overly techological. Especially "smart this" and " smart that". Like everything has to have some soft of computer in it, even washing machines.

[@terrafirma9328]

The printing aside, I'm more interested in the rice paste for the mud mixture. If someone could make a mold and use the clay/rice mix to form their own bricks, blocks, etc. They could put their own sweat equity into the build and save even more.

[@szlatyka]

Interestingly enough the best 3D printed house concept (so far) came from the 60s from the Danish as far as I know and used en masse in former Soviet countries. They would make wall sections (called panels) from reinforced concrete with all tubing for water and electric lines pre-installed. They would transport these panel on-site, weld the connecting rebars together, use a but more contrete fo fill in panel connections and there you go. In Hungary they even went further establishing multiple "house factories" that would manufacture complete bathrooms complete with plumbing and tiles fitted even before transport - they would then transport the complete room into the building site, place it and connect it. Only thing they messed up is the design, most of these panel buildings look horrible (though a lot of them getting new insulation and with it paint jobs, which help a lot).

[@garywheeler7039]

As an architect and 3d printing enthusiast, I have to admit, the 3d printing only really prints WALLS. Not really roofs or foundations, windows, second floors. And it does not touch electrical, plumbing, plastering, cabinets, fixtures, doors, and all the miscellaneous stuff that makes a home. No insulation, no vaper proofing, no moisture barriers, overhangs, architectural ornaments, decorations, the things that make a house a home.

[@PaulZeeX]

As you'll probably know, it's a rapidly improving space. Excavation: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bKDUdn6vqMqoaLc. Wall Insulation that could be clad externally with Adobe or Concrete: kzbin.info/www/bejne/iJjTZaGZmJaqhbM. Internal Wall surface plaster, render, paint: kzbin.info/www/bejne/o4iaiJKeZtF1nKc, etc

[@tenchuu007]

No reason it can't print a roof or a second floor. Increase the gantry height and reinforce it and use biodegradable foam blocks to hold up the top as it dries.

[@garywheeler7039]

No reason? You just posted one. You have to support foam blocks under any layer put out by a 3d printer? Almost as bad as some filament printers that require "support" below horizontal elements. Much of the material is wasted and has to be thrown away.

[@tenchuu007]

@@garywheeler7039 you can make that support material out of any number of reusable or compostable materials. Supports don't have to be made of the same materials, in many high end 3d printers a dissolvable layer of support material goes down first. There is no reason that can't be done even more efficiently with on-site workers placing blocks of mushroom foam or the like.

[@garywheeler7039]

@@tenchuu007 : Or temporary scaffolding phased correctly.

[@Primalmoon]

Another consideration: how much water does it use? You might have all of the clay or dirt you want, but needing to get enough water to get the clay printable might itself be prohibitive in drier regions.

[@nandu7750]

Its lesser than used to mix concrete. I read somewhere and ill send the link if i find it

[@efreitorhabibulin238]

​@buffalo wt hey now, stop ruining new fads with your solid logic and practicality.

[@cosmicerror2924]

@buffalo wt Trees take a lot of water too...

[@SavageOne420]

If they are trucking in a shipping container for the printer they can probably ship in the needed water or a machine that can extract the water from humidity in the air or waste water sources

[@zarddin]

@@SavageOne420 Or you can just create a house from the shipping container.

[@Mikalent]

Another thing 3d printed formats have to prove is longevity. The earliest 3d printed house was in 2014, but we also need houses to last at MINIMUM an entire generation. As instability is housing is a major factor in all other financials, and family planning, with the oldest 3d printed house only going on 8 years now, and with that still rather expansive initial investment, having a house that only lasts say 24-30 years would more likely further exasperate the housing crisis in the world.

[@SpaceCrete]

Good points. Lack of track record being critical.

[@markhemsworth2670]

Been waiting for this video. I live in Zambia (Southern Africa) and local labor is cheap, and local building methods are also cheap. Some compressed formed blocks are much more practical than a "robot" ... at least in our context.

[@bzuidgeest]

We already have that, we call them bricks. And robots can produce and stack them

[@markhemsworth2670]

@@bzuidgeest my point though is to get away from robots. A press that creates interlocking blocks like this is more what I see as the most practical given the labor and other conditions in Africa - kzbin.info/www/bejne/l3uTpH-sfbGKpac

[@bobbyboucher6661]

@@bzuidgeest Robots cannot stack bricks faster than a human, but computer programs can design homes better than a human architect

[@bzuidgeest]

@@bobbyboucher6661 maybe not now, but that is only a matter of time. And even if robots are slower in stacking. They don't eat, work 24x7 and so on. No human can.

[@skytek7081]

Most 3d-printed home concepts are like the Wasp printers, in that they imagine this vast low-density ultrasuburb setting, where what we need is to bring the density Up in many housing situations. quad-plexes, 6-packs and larger apartment structures need to be in numbers high enough to make things affordable. Also- Stressing that the house can be broken back up into dust when someone is done with it? Since I have never heard of demand for housing really sinking like that it sounds like they are trying to double-dip on the market. Imagine a house that was only good for ten years before you had to pay someone to come mash it up and re-print it? It's crazy.

[@jestagaming8123]

But this comes with many added problems, like much higher spread rates of sickness and bugs, (bed bugs, roaches, etc) which in turn cause more health and psychological problems. Too much density is as big of a problem as too little density, just pick your poison. I like the concept of a 3D-printed home, but I want a home that is going to last me, eco friendly is fine as long as it lasts. My foot print is a fragment of the size of the rich people, I do my part in walking or biking where I can and recycling but they lose me in the "you were never here" frame of mind.

[@betsyolsson-mackowski7682]

THIS! Δ👍👆🆙voted 🔼⏫⬆️⤴️🔝

[@christopherconkright1317]

Idk how 450,000 is affordable my mom bought her first house 110,000 we saw the same house sold 1m and it’s 50 years old it’s crazy

[@theparkourlady894]

What happens to the clay structures in a flash flood? Just wondering as that would be my primary concern with that particular material.

[@kazzTrismus]

snowy and high rain environments will degrade that structure in very short order.....theyre already a serious problem

[@bzuidgeest]

Maybe they'll invent a way to bake your house next. Make it a pottery house. Might even be water tight 😜

[@Aikano9]

Maybe light a massive bonfire inside and have it going full blast for a week straight to make it weather resistant?

[@hazonku]

@@bzuidgeest Ya know, that's not a bad idea actually. Regular FDM printers work by heating the plastic & shoving it through the hot end via an extruder. I bet you could totally just flip that concept on its side & have a hot end that trails behind a clay extruder baking the layer as its laid. The question then is can you do that and maintain structural integrity or will it just be a stack of loosely fit clay rings?

[@bzuidgeest]

@@hazonku or you could do it the way any factory "robot" does it and form the clay and shove it all in an oven thousands of bricks a time. Some things are far more efficient without a print head.

[@Nighthawkinlight]

Silly. Cob is easy and proven with minimal skill. Or even better, earthbag walls which are not reliant on a specific soil composition.

[@walpurgis943]

Rammed earth is not quite as simple as cob or earthbag, but they are much more resistant to animal and plant intrusion. It can be done by hand or mechanically, and is suitable for multistory construction. Loamy soils can be an issue for local materials sourcing, but most sandy and clay-ey soils can be used. It would be better to use loamy soil for agriculture or wilderness restoration anyway though haha.

[@malcolmnicholls2893]

Plenty of cob houses in Dorset. I'd prefer blotting paper.

[@Cspacecat]

The biggest problem with housing is the roofing system, primarily, insufficient overhang. Houses rot away if not painted regularly with insufficient overhang. Buildings not hooked together, east to west allow sunlight to heat the houses inside. Dark roofing material also increases air conditioning costs by 1/3rd. Once constructed, a closed cell spray foam on the outside and then painted would solve the weathering issue as well as place the thermal mass on the inside, allowing a constant internal temperature. Fancy housing is expensive. Well-designed housing is "dirt" cheap.

[@SpaceCrete]

Good points.

[@drillerdev4624]

It'd be interesting to see a comparison in time / effort / cost between 3d printing walls and good old brick laying.

[@kasimirb5155]

... not to speak of pre-cast concrete construction!

[@hamjudo]

If the soil is suitable, bricks can be made on site. The house can then be assembled by people where jobs are needed, or _pick and place_ machines where labor is in short supply. Regardless of the construction method, designing in accessible utility conduits makes a home much more adaptable as plumbing, power, heating and cooling technology changes over time.

[@JPEight]

Yes. “Concrete is bad, clay is good” we have that already, it’s called bricks.

[@drillerdev4624]

@@hamjudo you need to bake the bricks, unless you're thinking of adobe huts, and that's not easy to do on site, specially at a certain scale.

[@Eidolon1andOnly]

Or sandbag construction with a plastered finish.

[@dracorosso7129]

Pretty sure we already been building dirt houses for tens of thousands of years already.

[@leoriottot8666]

Yeah that’s the point, using technology to re-introduce dirt construction in the world housing !

[@leoriottot8666]

On every continent since -8500 !

[@itsallfunandgames723]

Other than saving on people's backs, it doesn't seem like this has much advantage over just driving a truck of concrete blocks to the place and building walls with them. It's essentially just a mechanical placement device.

[@SpaceCrete]

But its new and shiny.

[@heavypen]

I saw my first photovoltaic house in the 1980s and it took almost 30 years for me to live in one. With the speed of tech development, I think 3D printed homes will be livable reality in far less time.

[@toomanyaccounts]

3d printing has been around since the 1980s and haven't really advanced one iota.

[@heavypen]

@@toomanyaccounts I get that, but "they" said much the same thing about photovoltaic energy and wind energy. Now look at where we are. The march of technology continues.

[@toomanyaccounts]

@@heavypen solar panels are toxic to make. wind turbines if not in the proper area do not make a ROI. wind turbine production, disposal is heavily toxic. lots of wind turbines have to be disposed like toxic waste. sorry you are being lied to about both. neither is green

[@heavypen]

@@toomanyaccounts So burning logs and coal is better? Drilling for oil, mining for coal and uranium are less toxic? And btw... my solar panels have long since paid for themselves. Progress continues!

[@toomanyaccounts]

@@heavypen yes drilling oil and coal is less toxic then burning wood and harvesting wood to make wood pellets.

[@kronk358]

Cant repair it, cant hang pictures on the walls, cant run new electrical through the walls, looks weird, hard to sell. We figured out the solution to the housing crisis a long time ago. We just ended up attaching a stigma of trashy people and trashy neighborhoods to it: manufactured houses.

[@Snooder]

Not really. The problem with manufactured homes is that they often aren't actually cheaper than stick-built once built to the same rigidity and level of quality. Sure, manufactured homes are usually cheaper, but that's because they are also much more flimsy. Thin walls, shallow foundations. Etc.

[@michaelsorensen7567]

We didn't attach any stigma. The sigma grew naturally in experiential fashion. And it doesn't end up solving the problem either lol

[@dgrubelic]

We started building our house 2 months ago. There were many options on what kind of house to build. We went with classic reinforced concrete + bricks approach. 2 years ago in Croatia there was huge earthquake and lots of people lost their homes. Anyone who had reinforced steel concrete house had only minor cracks. I would never allow my kids to sleep in a house that doesn't contain reinforcement steel.

[@SpaceCrete]

Well said.

[@mmmhorsesteaks]

Happy to see some criticism of the project. There is a staggering amount of hype in the 3dp industry.

[@SpaceCrete]

That very hype drove me to do a video making fun of it.

[@Sic_Ca_Rax]

What does it use to prevent pests? Such as wasps, rats and ants, from making a dwelling in the dirt/ clay walls.

[@SpaceCrete]

Good question.

[@catnium]

Meanwhile in the Netherlands we have modulair prefab concrete building technology. We build whole suburbs in a few months. Those ppl printed a few walls for a single living unit and took months to put the roof on, the doors and windows in and connect it to the mains and sewage. That's not very impressive tbh.

[@glenw3814]

I was waiting for you to address the issue of suitable climates for the TECLA houses. It seems to me they will only work well with a waterproof exterior coating, or in very dry climates.

[@sebastiangeorge7714]

where i live that structure will not live long enough to Receive the interior.

[@FelixTheAnimator]

There isn't really a housing shortage ya'know. There's six empty houses in the USA for every homeless person. The problem is housing hoarders.

[@JPEight]

That and easy credit which makes it a massive bidding war where only bankers and rich elite win. If banks gave out less credit then people would have less money to spend and the price would stay low.

[@kazzTrismus]

the empty houses fallacy has beenb debunked as the greedy commie propaganda it is. many of those homes are peoples cottages that they worked hard their wholes lives saving up for and will only own for a medium/short time until its their retirement home. additionally included are condemned / abandoned buildings that just havent been torn down but you wouldnt put an animal in. besides which the argument is based on the idea that the only thing that makes a person homeless is the lack of a dwelling not the fact theyd rather spend rent money on drugs or alcohol or the mental health crisis that does exist. it is greed in a glossy wrapping because we both know these "corporations" causing the housing crisis are in league with the government using it as a ploy of power against all of us not in the club

[@FelixTheAnimator]

@@kazzTrismus I don't know where you are, but it's definitely true in my city in Texas. 90% of the single family homes on the north side of town (aka the bad side) are owned by a single person who happens to be on the city council.

[@kazzTrismus]

@@FelixTheAnimator you cant say that isnt a government endorsed monopoly... thats sketchy as F and obviously the exception to the rule.....even if its got all kinds of "guy should go to jail" written all over it.

[@joshlamingo1145]

The cost of walls is similar for a house with bricks. A majority of the material cost came with the roofing and flooring when my parents were building their house.

[@ChrisHovord]

I would be interested to know how easy it would be to for ants and other insects to make home inside your home 🤔 wouldn't want to wake up in a house made from mostly dirt and find that a ant nest has taken up all the walls... I imagine that would be difficult to get rid of

[@Kausan1]

Yep

[@Number6_]

They don't intend to live in these things themselves. These places are for the workers! It and you are biodegradable. No messy cleanup costs for them!

[@kenji214245]

They will likely not mention that the walls are also filled with some other stuff that either scares of insects or instantly kills them. XD

[@orionishi6737]

Just as easy as it is for them to do so in the houses we have now. Just because they don't have a seal or facade on these Proof of Concept showings doesn't mean they never will be.

[@kevinkent6351]

I'm a hobbyist homebuilder. The only useful thing about 3D-printed clay homes is the unique-ish architecture, which appeals to me. I really do dig the design. Other than that, I don't see a real use.

[@EliosMoonElios]

This shit is a obvious scam to catch investors , always some "innovator" claim they invention will solve a world's problem to lure money.

[@leoriottot8666]

Perhaps because you don’t know what you’re talking about, and you just take the opinion of one random guy on KZbin who spend few hours on internet to destroy something that has future. Do some research by yourself you’ll see that it has so much potential, and it’s too easy for this guy to just break down everything with few arguments, about a new technology wich need time to evolve

[@EliosMoonElios]

@@leoriottot8666 FOUND THE ANGRY FANBOY!

[@leoriottot8666]

@@EliosMoonElios yeah men sorry for the agressivity but l can’t stand anymore people who crush possible future solution to make view on KZbin, l spend 6 month in architecture school working on this subject and it’s obvious that this guy don’t know anything except some sources on the internet, and a pseudo critic view of it, what does this guy bring ? Nothing, just saying wait what they do isn’t 100% good, instead of showing what’s still cool in the project. We can see he don’t know what’s he is talking about. À shame every time someone propose something with good intentions there is a "clever" guy who do nothing ruins it. If you want for example more info on this concept, you can look the website of the IAAC, a university in Barcelona wich work on those subject

[@kevinkent6351]

@@leoriottot8666 what problem, specifically, does this process solve? Be specific.

[@geluix69]

Unfortunately building regulations in quebec canada would never allow for such construction. We can’t even use containers in most municipalities, mini homes are also illegal. Are building regulations are ridiculous and controlled with an iron fist.

[@TigreBrian]

Matt, great perspective. One interesting thing which folks might be interested to hear about is the development of Graphene Enhanced Concrete. We all know that concrete has hardly changed in 2,000 years. Yes, we have various additives, but basically the structure of concrete hasn't changed all that much since the Romans built with it. But, in a recent white paper I read (Graphene for the Construction Sector), the addition of tiny amounts of high quality Graphene (much less than 1% by weight) into the cement mix radically changed the strength and curing time of poured and printed concrete. This has allowed the company to actually pour real world concrete foundation slabs WITHOUT rebar! And, because much less concrete is needed this has a huge effect on CO2 emissions (not to mention the lack of steel, its mining, production, transportation, labor, etc.). Also, the rapid cure time of the concrete means that construction on the slab can begin much sooner. In 3D printing the rapid cure time and increased strength could mean much quicker printing of thinner cross sections without waiting for printed layers to "set" before printing subsequent layers. I have also read where Graphene enhanced concrete could also turn the walls of a building into a battery! Now that's crazy! Imagine a "Smart Structure", that can monitor the structure of the house and its interior. The possibilities seem endless. Anyway, I find it fascinating... So, while "Dirty Houses" :-) may have their place, I think I'd rather live in a more "permanent" structure. Not to mention resale of the home at a later date, because as you know, reselling a home is basically reusing previous materials, and that can't be bad. Cheaper by far to update a home than to build a new one. I do believe we are still in the infancy of 3D printed homes, and there will be innovations, such as Enhanced Graphene Concrete, which will allow faster construction, with less cost, less concrete, less CO2 emissions, stronger designs (imagine the beautiful futuristic forms that could now be envisioned by architects with stronger thinner cross sections), with long lifespans, and of course, concrete can be recycled.

[@turolretar]

Some say that if you snort graphene it can make all your problems go away

[@AFO1]

I can't imagine the insect and rodent infestation you'd have bring food into a home with walls made of compressed dirt. That would be a nightmare keeping them out.

[@uufol]

About 15 yers ago I observed houses being built for $5,000 in Haiti. Concrete cinder blocks were made locally, assembled on a concrete slab with wood shutter doors and windows, 4 rooms and tin roof over optimized 2x4 framing. No electrical or plumbing. Local labor. Quite impressive.

[@smlgd]

Local labor, that's the key. People there are paid shit salaries that's why it's so cheap

[@jpjay1584]

they are paid local wages. and most of them are happy to have a job and provide for their families. even you call that shit salaries, they are still "regular jobs" there @@smlgd

[@roamingmillennial2200]

The way I see it is that there isn't anyone perfect solution to anything. 3D printed homes are great in specific situations and will ultimately help with the affordability crisis that most of the country is facing right now... but they do have their own issues that need to be solved for prior to truly being the best overall solution.

[@Veylon]

It's a solution to a problem that doesn't really exist anywhere. People want to live where there are lots of other people. In metropolises, they live in skyscrapers. You can't 3D print a skyscraper. (Or maybe you can, but that's not what's being shown here) In third world shantytowns, people build as cheaply as they can because they don't own the land they live on and the only guard against being forcibly evicted from their residences is the inefficiency of their government. Somebody in that insecure situation is going to invest as little as they possibly can in their housing. 3D printed houses are a cool concept, but the market for them is people who own a clear title to land that isn't already built upon. That's going to be land that's far away from the jobs and amenities of a city and therefore the owner must be financially secure enough to be able to comfortably forgo them. It's a toy for rich people, not a solution for poor people.

[@roamingmillennial2200]

@@Veylon I think you're looking at this in a subjective light... I don't want to live next to everyone else. I prefer smaller cities or towns. Rural America and much of the world can benefit from this tech.

[@Veylon]

​@@roamingmillennial2200 I prefer living in a smaller city myself. But those aren't places with housing crises; they're places that have trouble keeping the houses that they have occupied. People are abandoning the rural landscape in droves and have been for the past century. I got my house dirt cheap precisely because the general trend is for people to leave my smaller city rather than come to it. Look at what the 3D printing is: it's making a mud hut with little human labor. Nobody who lives in a place where labor is expensive is liable to settle for a mud hut and someone who lives where labor is cheap and is poor can't get title to land to build one. I wouldn't mind living in one, but until society as a whole has very different expectations, there isn't going to be much demand for such a minimalist accomodation in the places where such a thing can be afforded.

[@NakedAvanger]

I love how some of Matts recent videos were about things i knew for a year or longer now and things im really passionate about (natural building, hempcrete, tiny housing, etc.) a profession where i want to build my career in as an environmentalist senior. If some of your next videos are bout the viability of living completely and independently off-gird i'll go nuts :D Keep up the good work!

[@cupbowlspoonforkknif]

You probably see the irony of building a super expensive machine and transporting it to Africa where people have already been building houses from mud by hand for a long time.

[@davidparker5530]

Anyone who has watched construction sites knows that the framing takes the shortest amount of time. It takes months to excavate, level, lay pipes, build a foundation, etc. for a site, then when you finally get to the framing it goes up in just weeks. Then many more months for interior walls, electrical, appliances, etc. 3D printed homes essentially optimize the shortest and least expensive part of home building, the framing. Everything else still has to be done traditionally.

[@rule1capital]

That is why Boxabl will smoke houses like this because they are pre-wired, pre-plumbed, kitchen installed, bathroom installed, HVAC installed, breaker box installed, utility hookups turnkey ready... all made in a couple hours in the factory... the Boxabl wall panels (galvanized steel/polystyrene/magnesium oxide) are way stronger than stick/nail/air gaps, currently take 20 minutes to produce, and will drop that time to 3-5 minutes with new automation equipment being installed in Q2 2023...

[@jcsjcs2]

I would have appreciated some words on how they prevent the clay to just melt away with the next rainfall. Also, it's one thing to find an area with clay and build a house in the middle of it, compared to finding a place you actually want to live and then trying to locate the closest source of clay.

[@ajnasreddin]

Do they fire harden the "clay" walls? If not, a rainstorm will likely wash the home away.

[@nonyabusiness1126]

Pretty sure people intelligent enough to 3D print a structure thought about rain...buuuuuuuut, it is 2022. Great question!

[@julianshepherd2038]

@@nonyabusiness1126 I think they built it in a desert

[@nonyabusiness1126]

@@julianshepherd2038 A desert that will never get rain?

[@kazzTrismus]

@@nonyabusiness1126 deserts get rain..but not a weeks worth of perpetual wet constantly... but they do get dry again real quickly and draw the moisture out at a fast pace too. which probably isnt good either. clay is good at rejecting water after drying and not being super absorbent in short time frames all that said..the bugs and critters are adapted to that exact environment as well

[@robgrey6183]

How do subcontractors install electrical, plumbing, vents, whole house ventilation systems, alarm systems, etc.? I live in Teton County Wyoming. How would these homes meet: -Insulation requirements for an area that has a 5 month winter and sees -30F. temperatures? -Seismic requirements. This area has rigorous seismic codes. Clay houses won't meet them. How does clay hold up as an exterior and interior finish? Not well, I'm guessing.

[@SpaceCrete]

Details, minor details.

[@mfsolutions]

Great points about the applications (low density) and effectiveness in addressing housing for the homeless. I visited a town in South Africa where the majority of the buildings were newer cinderblock with steel roofs... hard to beat this construction method and cost although the carbon footprint of concrete is high... I would also like to emphasize an important point that you mention... Labour in the third world is very cheap. You will never justify displacing $5/day construction workers with a skilled crew to set up and run a 3D printer.

[@jong7513]

That last part is key, and might be a way bigger issue in the field once you try pulling it off.

[@UnexpectedBooks]

It seems best suited for printing storage buildings. Then, water, sewage, electrical can be ignored or greatly simplified.

[@SpaceCrete]

Yeah those are issues with the way they print now.

[@BubuMarimba]

Is anybody here dreaming to live in a 100% concrete house? If the best materials for a house are brick & wood, C'mon make your 3d printer work with them. After all who said that 3d printer needs to be single nozzle, single material? One nozzle can supply concrete, while the other - sand/rocks/bricks/you name it. They just need to be more complex and everybody will like them.

[@SpaceCrete]

Good idea!

[@ottofarkas5645]

I love how these companies present something as revolutionary when building a house from dirt has been around for a few years... I live in a house made from clay/mud, horseshit and reeds. People built this house in 1 month (hot summer time when there is not much rain as it ruins the walls) using a technique which is fairly similar to concrete pouring as the walls had wooden sides where they put in the reeds and then poured in the wet clay/mud/horseshit combo and plummeld it from above with large wood pillars. This house stands now for over 100 years, there is no solid foundation only the ground that was plummeld in a similar manner without the use of any machinery. Also fun fact, when today outside was 36 degrees celcius in the house is about 23-24 max, and I do not have any type of airconditioning. Downsides are that over the years sometimes cracks form, which need to be fixed with the same material otherwise they are persistent. Oh and yeah, as others mentioned bugs or insects are somewhat of an issue, but as we do not have any very nasty ones in Hungary (yet) its not that big of a problem. If you want a sustainable house, come to Hungary, buy one of these houses for 5-6K euroes (with large garden 1-2 thousand square meters minimum) and you are good to go.

[@daymenleo6895]

Like a proud American i rater go with 2x4 beams and brick layers my house is from the 80s its more then unfuckable unlike building with animal fesses or is that dirt i guess

[@velvet3784]

I would argue mediterranean stone houses are also quite susutainable

[@velvet3784]

@@daymenleo6895 I do like the American brick houses too. Historic brickwork is also always a neat detail to see.

[@kaboom-zf2bl]

a few years .... now THAT is an UNDERSTATEMENT ... wattle and dob ... adobe ... etc has been around for millenia ... LOL and they call the fact that they have a spinny pipe that pumps the adobe or sob into a wall shape is just a new twist nothing more LOL

[@t.c.a.3335]

If Clay-Based 3D printing ever takes off, there are other issues: finding suitable land with the right clay soil; once the clay is excavated what do you replace it with or leave a big hole; if you don't have clay, you'll have to buy it and ship it in and the cost of clay soil will skyrocket to meet demand; and they added organic waste product to help solidify the mixture and the price of that and local availability would effect the cost also... how do you run wiring and plumbing, lighting, and wouldn't clay walls block wireless communications?

[@StreakyBaconMan]

I highly doubt clay supply will be an issue - clay is extremely cheap (like less than $20 a ton) and found nearly everywhere, and it's already used extensively in the construction industry because of how cheap and available it is. The vast majority of bricks are made out of clay. That being said, I think these 3D printed houses are just a gimmick for the most part - it's a way to erect walls in a very short period of time, which is great at grabbing headlines. Doesn't actually do much to solve the issue of sustainable housing or reducing emissions and rarely is cheaper than a house built with traditional construction methods - plus there is the issue that some of these methods result in structures which just aren't going to last for more than a few years without extensive and expensive maintenance to prevent the weather and nature from rendering it uninhabitable. They are just taking advantage of the fact that people desire to be more green and live more sustainable lives to take care of the environment to push crap that nobody would use otherwise, despite the fact it doesn't actually solve the problems it claims to solve at all.

[@t.c.2776]

@@StreakyBaconMan I can't disagree with most of your comments... I actually agree that much of what we are doing won't solve many of the issues they claim will be solved. One problem is the overuse and Liberal redefinition of "sustainable".

[@StreakyBaconMan]

@@t.c.2776 I think a good way to start to eliminate the problem would be to regulate the use of that type of language to describe products. Give words like green, sustainable, environmentally friendly etc specific definitions within advertising that line up to the publics expectation of what those words mean, and fine people who falsely advertise their products and services as those things. People want to make the right choices for the environment, but it's not easy when companies get away with blatantly misleading the public as to just how environmentally friendly their products or services are in reality. It's such a shame when you think about just how much money has been spent by well intentioned people who have been mislead by a business into thinking they are helping the environment that could have ACTUALLY helped the environment if that practice was not allowed.

[@user-by7hj4dj9s]

it will never take off, there might be a tiny niche but it will not be mainstream. if you are building in the middle of nowhere its easier to fly in lumber and build traditionally than to fly in specialised equipment and dig clay out of the ground (you'll need to process tis clay to some degree) or fly clay in and you need to power the damn printer.. you probably cant even use it yourself so you you will need the technician on site operating the printer

[@kanisohana]

3D printing a house only takes care of the framing. A four man crew can frame a 5000 sf house in a week. The rest of the construction takes about 50 more weeks for a luxury custom home. Wood is environmentally probably pretty good because it grows naturally with free rain and sunlight. The reality of a home’s costs is that it takes tens of thousands of parts that need to travel hundreds of miles and then it takes tens of thousands man hours to put together.

[@SpaceCrete]

Though it takes longer to finish putting together if you printed the walls.

[@adamlytle2615]

I think that there is bound to be some role for 3D printing in the future of construction - especially given the decline in the number of people going into construction. We're going to need automation of one kind or another to help fill that gap. But that said, 3D printed houses remind me a bit of the concrete houses Thomas Edison built in New Jersey. I'm sure some people thought that would be the way of the future, but as we know, that did not turn out to be the case.

[@aritakalo8011]

" We're going to need automation of one kind or another to help fill that gap. " There already is automatable alternative. Prefab element building. The stick framing for example can be done on a factory build table on a big building table by a robot. One can already by a prefab element framing robot from industrial robotics company like HOMAG. Only reason it can't be done on-site, is that robots deal badly with changing circumstances (which by the way would be issue with bringing 3D printer, which is essentially a big robot, to a new work site). So you don't try to. Instead one has regionally somewhere nearby house factory/building element factory. There they can on big production lines with big automatic production machinery make just as well timber frame or concrete cast the walls. Main difference being... none of this has to be done upright. Since the factory can have perfectly flat and true build table onto which either place a concrete mold or start laying framing timbers. In case of concrete (or anything castable or moldable. Be it concrete, rammed bonded earth, hempcrete) you just fill the mold and move the mold on wards. In case of concrete as I remember the process is to let them cure sometime flat on a waiting area and then once they are firm enough to not sag, but not yet completely cured one moves lifts them upright and places on curing racks to wait out the full curing. This has also the benefit of not having to use quick curing concrete just so the building site is not halted. One can have multitude of molds at the factory. So you just keep casting and all you need is molds and warehousing area to wait out even long curing concrete without halting production. This might be desired in case of one wants better properties which might be allowed by slower curing concrete. With assembled construction like timbers.... automated saw is given the cut plan of "we need this many of this length, our source size is this". It cuts optimal selection based on "how to minimize waste cuts" in order. Belts feed these to assembly robot. It places the timbers on an assembly jig. Nailing robot comes along, nails everything in place. Same with robots rolling out vapor barrier sheets from roll, robots lifting and nailing in place sidings like plywood and so on. Robot blowing insulation like mineral wool into the frame element, put another sides facing in place. Robots can even automatically cut and drill conduit passages. I think actually snaking in the conduits is still manual, since well that is fiddly dexterity needing work. What is to say, you can already robot build walls. It is just easier in factory controlled environment. Once all the elements is ready (and foundation has been cast on site), book a mobile crane and transport (meaning usually truck) all the elements to building site. Crane lifts the elements in place and small installation crew secures them in place both to foundation and each other (usually foundation has anchoring points installed in it during casting for this purpose). On site time to have walls up and roof in place (which also can be done as elements in factory) for small house is usually a day. Bigger buildings take longer. Of course as always stuff like appliances and so on installation comes on top. However for example interior painting or say wall paper installation can already be done in the factory. At least for some kind of surfacing. Some wall papers probably are too delicate to survive the transport and installation to non heated house frame and so on.

[@drxym]

I constantly see articles proclaiming 3d printing will mean the end to housing shortage, that it will mean cheap housing for poor people etc. Anyone who has seen the videos of a 3d printed house should also be able to see the limitations - it produces really ugly houses and it still takes a considerable amount of time and labour to produce even a single story house. And nobody is going to want to living in a house than can wash away so it'll be concrete, mortar or something like it. And besides all that putting up the walls is only about 10% of the time taken to construct a house so it's a complete nonsense herald it as a solving anything. Besides, if speed of construction was the limiting factor then it would be solved with modular houses which can be prefabricated in factories and assembled on site to a far greater level of completion than some glorified coil pot.

[@topsuperseven7910]

There isn't really a housing shortage tho. There are city councils who deliberately hold back permission to build them. that is all there is to it.

[@matthewparker9276]

@@topsuperseven7910 that's part of it, but there is also the developers pushing for more low density housing in unsuitable areas, rather than quality mid density housing in areas nearby existing infrastructure, because that's what's more profitable. And then there is housing policy that favours investment over habitation. There are a number of factions contributing to keeping housing scarce and expensive.

[@youtube-handle-are-a-joke]

Ever tried to put furnitures in a round house? If on top of that it tapers toward the top... Be ready for some custom furniture if you don't want to loose floor space or only low and narrow furniture.

[@Davethreshold]

Matt, you do a great job of explaining the caveats of so many subjects that you cover. For instance, the media was on a TEAR for a year about hydrogen fuel cell cars, and how wonderful they would be. NOT so much!

[@grinpick]

If I heard correctly, the most prominently featured 3D-printed house in this video is basically made from clay-earth and water. No mention of portland cement or anything else that might make it more resistant to simply melting away when rained on. Maybe I missed something. I'm pretty sure this can't be correct. But if there was no mention of this problem, I'd say that constitutes a major weakness of this video.

[@julianshepherd2038]

What this guy says

[@JPEight]

With a proper roof it might be ok, but for anywhere that’s not a desert it would be washed away in anywhere from a couple days to maybe a year or two max. Not a lot of clay in the desert either...

[@aceg81]

If you coat it with a flexible water-proof coating, it should be no problem. I'm more concerned about resistance to natural disasters. When earthquakes hit areas that have a lot of mud-brick buildings, for example, the casualties are enormous. In quake-prone places, this kind of structure is a non-starter unless it can be demonstrated to resist earthquakes, and I can't see any way to do that without building in some kind of tensioned post-stressing system, which would increase the cost and construction time significantly.

[@pat8988]

Big question for many areas, will it meet building codes, especially relating to earthquakes.

[@HEMPPASTE]

3D Printed Bunkers is what I need right now. Anyone else?

[@sygneg7348]

In my opinion, the biggest problem for me with 3D printed houses was how would they install stuff such as piping, and electrical wires. To me, it seemed like there was absolutely no space for those in the walls, and it would be extremely costly and time consuming to knock down holes in the walls to install the utilities and other things, or completely reroute them through other parts of the house or require some absolutely big brain thinking to install them properly and efficiently.

[@kaptainasskrak]

Your forgetting that pipes and wires don't have to be in walls. Also the narrator did state that the clay takes some time to set so conduits and pipes could be fitted and installed while printing the house. Or you could arrange the electrical and plumbing so it is outside the home making the utilities safer than installing them inside the house. Personally I always felt it unsuitable to have electrical wires and water pipes installed inside walls. As is was hard to find and repair the damaged bits of these utilities behind a wall.

[@robgrey6183]

@@kaptainasskrak You've obviously never built a house. I have, log, frame, R Panel. You are wrong, especially about installing supply and drain plumbing outside the walls. Go work construction for a year and get back to me.

[@kaptainasskrak]

@@robgrey6183 just because you done it a certain way for years doesn't make it the only way. I should of implied that it would be fine for where they are building this house. Which I am sure don't have the standards and rules that USA or the UK would have. Besides I have been in plenty of buildings with utilities outside the building, like warehouses and storage units.

[@tristangray3821]

@@kaptainasskrak Installing conduit costs a lot in labor. As an electrician I imagine I'm charging more than the framer. What you save on the home you have to pay me and the other in wall trades. All of which cost more than the framer.

[@bogdan78pop]

@@kaptainasskrak You have no idea about construction...do you..!!!!!!!

[@jacobmerrill7382]

I recently built a concrete pad to be used as foundation for a 3-d printed building. We poured over 180 cubic yards of concrete JUST for the foundation (which has to be perfectly level otherwise the printer won't work on it). I'm highly skeptical when it comes to 3-d printed homes. Unless huge technological breakthroughs happen and they're able to work around some of the inefficiencies, we won't be getting rid of contract construction labor anytime soon.

[@SpaceCrete]

The 185 yard pour I just worked on was for a $10-million home that is too big to fit on a 24x36 paper at 1/4 in ch scale. Footings 5' tall. I don't know of any 3DCP anywhere near this size, so I am guessing that is one beefy slab!

[@minhvunguyenviet7821]

3D printing tech is just some marketing hype BS. I am studying mechanical engineering and know well that anything 3D printed in FDM or SLA will have significantly lower strength, especially in the Z axis. The problem is that 3D printing is literally building on layers and counts as a discontinuity. The structure is only as strong as its weakest part and that part is literally every single layer up the Z axis. just print out a vertical stick and a horizontal strict and snap it, the vertical one will snap easily. Moreover, concrete must be enforced with metals or else it will crack easily. These houses are printed with not only weak layers but also no reinforced metal bars. I'm gonna be surprise if these houses can last for 1 year without cracking. 3D printing should only be used for prototyping period.

[@SpaceCrete]

Very good points. But money is really pushing this stuff.

[@booneylander]

I’d like to see something on the cutting edge of making affordable housing out of waste plastic. Seems like a logical use of a resource that’s just ending up buried or in the ocean.

[@NirvanaFan5000]

my concern with this is microplastics, which we're increasingly finding are abundant and have negative health effects.

[@JPEight]

Can’t imagine there’s much plastic waste that’s going to be useful. All the useful stuff already gets melted down and used again. Maybe it could be used as aggregate of some kind but the smooth non-porous nature of plastic doesn’t make for a good bond. Insulation maybe? Problem is it’s not very good at it and saving energy is more important than reusing waste plastic over the lifetime of a building. I’d like to see it if it’s possible, but I don’t imagine it would be economical.

[@booneylander]

There’s definitely some challenges that’s why I’m curious if there’s anything being developed that could do something productive with all the plastic waste that’s just being landfilled currently. I know that where I live, despite the fact that plastics are picked up as recyclable, the majority ends up in landfill since a few years ago when it become no longer economically viable to ship it overseas for the high value recyclable plastics to be separated and actually used.

[@JPEight]

@@booneylander Yes, it’s a big problem - all the plastic used to be shipped to china, Philippines etc. Where they could employ cheap labour to do the sorting. But those countries are fed up of being garbage dump for the world because they only recycled the valuable stuff and dumped the rest. The west either needs to take the hit and accept the extra cost of recycling locally through taxes, force manufacturers/importers to pay for recycling, or find a way to automate the recycling.

[@jonathananderberg2607]

Using plastic in a printer is hard because the plastic must be shredded to an accurate and consistent size. For now it's concrete, but we are working on it :)

[@StarGateSG7]

To get 3D printing of houses down to a cheap enough level for the average North American and European consumer, you need a portable ARTICULATED ARM crane unit that fits inside of typical 20 foot container AND that has easy-to-assemble tracks so it can move about, flexible elbows and wrists AND has onboard lasers to determine ABSOLUTE 3D-XYZ coordinates of all parts of itself and calculate the RELATIVE distances from previously printed items! This armature can be built and sold for about $10,000 USD using modern metal and plastic hydroforming techniques. The 3D-printed material itself SHOULD be volcanic ash-infused and fibre-reinforced self-healing concrete (i.e. calcium infused) which can set even underwater or in heavy rain in addition to hot and dry or hot and humid climates. There is enough volcanic ash in just the rail-accessible Mount St. Helens area in Washington State (i.e. a big eruption happened in 1980 spewing BILLIONS of tons of ash everywhere!) that it could supply enough raw volcanic ash material in a fibre-reinforced concrete mix for 3D printing BILLIONS of houses! That material could be mixed into a fine powder and packed into fork-lift -accessible or trailerable 1000 litre plastic tanks and shipped to an onsite location inside of a twenty foot container along with the 3D printer itself which shipped inside of a separate 20 foot container! From there, you use local fresh water to mix into the concrete mix powder and the 3D printer will create 15 cm thick walls (6 inches) and floors which are both thermally efficient (retaining and dissipating heat on a regulated basis!) and it will be rain, snow, hail, sleet, ice and pest proof! If you add enough glass or carbon fibre to the volcanic ash-based concrete mix, it will also be earthquake and explosion proof! Even GLASS WINDOWS could be installed by 3D printing of fused SAND (i.e. silica) via LASER-based fusing which can be onsite polished by common grinders to a reasonable optical clarity OR you can leave it roughly finished to allow a beautiful DIFFUSED glow through the entire house! You could even add dyes to the fused silica to give windows that stained glass look --- even ARTISTIC IMAGES and PATTERNS could be made into the glass by changing the colour of the dyes added to the silica powder (i.e. sand) mix just before laser-based fusing! Even CONCRETE can be dyed to ANY COLOUR by mixing colours/paints on the fly during 3D printing to create intricate patterns and artistic images in the final house! For final INTERIOR and EXTERIOR surface finishing, you can have the 3D-printer automatically grind and polish the exterior or interior concrete down to a mirror smooth finish or to a rough texture once it's fully dry AND THEN spray and FUSE clear or colour-dyed silica as a two millimetre thick protective coating and have on-board polishers SMOOTH the finish to modern architectural standards! That fused glass coating would last for DECADES! Add in 3D-printed concrete tables, benches, chairs, beds, patios, shelving, dry goods storage boxes, and liquid goods storage tanks, septic tanks, hot-tubs, pools, sinks, bathtubs, workshops, etc., it means you would even have built-in furniture to go along with your house! And since 3D-printing allows ANY form to be made, graceful curves, hard lines, sharp or rounded corners, and other unusual shapes can be 3D printed for any interior and exterior house feature! For the future, it will ALSO be possible to 3D print using laser sintering to MELT metal powder such as stainless steel beams and/or high-strength reinforcing round bars and i-Beams RIGHT INTO the concrete as a whole-house reinforcing system. This could be eventually UPSCALED to commercial and industrial scaled to be able to 3D print steel reinforced concrete warehouses, entire apartment blocks, downtown commercial towers and even bridges! With enough multiple robotic armature 3D-print at the same time, 3D printing a whole 3000 square foot concrete home could be done in MERE HOURS! 3D printing using multiple large-scale armatures of a whole apartment block or concrete tower WITH 3D printed steel reinforcing bars and beams could be done IN A WEEK depending on how fast the metal and fibre-reinforced concrete sets and dries! V

[@SpaceCrete]

Good ideas!

[@Kaiserland111]

It seems like 3D-printed houses have a ton of potential, but it's going to take some time for the technology to mature and for this technology to be widely available.

[@RS-ls7mm]

So far they look like Flintstones houses. Pass.

[@bryankautz826]

@@RS-ls7mm I'd love to live in a Flintstone home, who wouldn't want a talking wooly mammoth shower head, or a sarcastic porcupine scrubrush, or an Octopus dishwasher??!!! 🤪🤣🦣🦕🦖🐙

[@tims8603]

The shell of a home is, roughly, 1/3 the cost of a finished home. I can see where you can save some money with 3D printing but it won't be a huge savings. Concrete production produces lots of CO2. Of course, using dirt or clay would be better but the right kind may not be available depending on location.

[@zarfmouse]

And how much concrete goes into the shell of most housing anyway?! 3D printed houses still need a foundation which is probably concrete and they still need roads and sidewalks and driveways which are probably concrete. 3D printing will do almost nothing to reduce the use of concrete regardless of the material used. Meanwhile wood framing sequesters carbon for the lifetime of the structure.

[@darthvader5532]

Its funny how we have churches, castles and homes over a thousand years old still in use, and we've got people worried about developing "sustainable" homes.

[@SpaceCrete]

Exactly!

[@The_Flamekeepers]

He says the building is climate resistant. I was already wondering how a clay house doesn’t wash away in the first major rain storm. They must treat it somehow?

[@JPEight]

The biggest problem with all these solutions is that I’m yet to see a multi story version. That’s fine for the USA where land is cheap and and abundant. For the rest of the world, most people live in 2+ story houses or apartment blocks. Add to that that nobody wants to live in a dirt house if they’ve got other options. Even the concrete houses are ugly and would need framing out on the inside to create wall cavities for utilities. Round houses are poor in space efficiency and are impractical as furniture is usually rectangular, and wall space is useful.

[@legendofPump]

This ain’t for the first world…

[@JPEight]

@@legendofPump That’s the problem - the economics only work in 1st world countries. In places where the wage of an average labourer could be $1 a day or less, any kind of high tech automation becomes vastly more expensive in comparison. Even in the developing world most people live in urban areas with little space. Those who do live in rural areas need all their land for crops so still have tiny houses with lots of people crammed in. The kinds of places you’re imagining this to be useful are remote and have terrible roads. For people who live in a place where a dirt hut is an improvement, do you really think they’ve got time and money for roads that can take a big truck carrying that machine. Do you think those communities have big trucks? Do you think they could afford to hire and fuel such a truck?

[@stickyfox]

Look... the people who had this earth before us figured out how to make homes out of dirt and they did it without electricity, let alone computers. The problem with using 3D printing is that the guy with the 3D printer still expects you to pay $100,000 for a 3D printed home, because of the high tech machine he had to invest in to achieve what was done in primitive times with bare hands.

[@SpaceCrete]

Yeah.

[@mikeskutches1018]

"Four Thousand Weeks- Time Management for Mortals," by Oliver Burkeman probably makes it into my top 5 books of all time. It's more of a "how-to-look-at-life" book instead of a time management book. Matt had mentioned being mindful of exactly what we choose to spend our time on; this book does an excellent job discussing this. There is only so much time, though, and tough choices need to be made. If you're stressed out about time, please read this book. You won't be sorry.

[@Ralph2]

Looks interesting Mike thank you. I have just ordered a copy.

[@mikeskutches1018]

@@Ralph2 You're welcome, Ralph. I really hope you enjoy it.

[@dkail08]

It kills me when it's argued that cities are more eco friendly due to population density. If the housing areas were better designed (actually planned out instead of the mess they usually are here in the US) and had mass transit systems put in place then the efficiency would likely be comparable. If people would stop reaching for the moon and apply a little common sense and be pragmatic then we could make things a lot more sustainable without having to reinvent the wheel. There are hundreds of well known methods that have been historically successful and yet they are often ignored for some trendy new thing.

[@vitmartobby5644]

But commie blocks will always be more eco friendly than suburbia tho... Mass transit is one of the reasons yeah, but it is definetly not the only reason... For starters, sprawl incentivises car centric approaches, which are terrible (roads are terrible, cars are terrible), houses are less energy efficient, houses are by definition less green. Logistics of goods is worse too, not just human transportation.

[@jaemac1410]

Well they're not designed better, mass transit in the US is negligible, so the stats are correct, and your point is moot until we get better city planners who actually understand the problem.

[@vitmartobby5644]

@@jaemac1410 who are you talking to, me or OP?

[@dkail08]

@@jaemac1410 stats for old design standards are irrelevant if they start using sustainable designs. While new tech might aid in solving some of the problem it isn't going to help much if no effort is made to address the underlying problem which is poorly designed urban developments. Also, moving everyone into cities isn't feasible unless you have a dictatorship. Even then you need people to run farms and things outside of the cities.

[@dkail08]

@@tristan7216 my comment is exclusively related to the eco impacts, which I stated. Being environmentally efficient is obviously not money efficient. Otherwise everything would be transitioned over to sustainability already. Very few things are both environmentally friendly and the cheapest choice. As far as how suburbs lose money... that is in large part due to poor design and stupid laws. Plus some is already baked in. Even if you have vast swaths of empty land you are still going to have roads, bridges, and other transportation infrastructure in place for a variety of reasons. Complaining about poor cost efficiency for 300 miles of highway through empty fields in Montana makes about as much sense. You can't really compare the EU to the US for these sorts of comparisons since you can shove the entirety of Europe into Texas. Either understand that some things are just required or figure out how to get goods and personnel from one coast to the other effectively without thousands of miles of roads.

[@darek795]

It says that this house is built from dirt but it is from clay like traditional houses which use bricks made form clay. So it;s not so different and has its drawbacks because not everywhere you can find good clay.