What Makes Small and Tiny Homes Sustainable

Not all Small and Tiny homes are sustainable; they actually range in a broad spectrum from achieving high sustainability to not being sustainable at all… Many are sustainable because they use recycled, upcycled and minimal amounts of building material; with small space comes a smaller internal envelope, making heating and cooling less energy intensive; and by living the Small-Space lifestyle occupants generally consume and waste less store-bought products, further helping to reduce the planet’s overall carbon footprint. Sustainability in Small and Tiny home culture is a spectrum of principles and ethics based on the idea being mindful in how we interact with our personal and global environments’, which hopefully carries forward to our interactions with others.

The issues that work against Small and Tiny home design is that the Small-Space lifestyle does not suit people who have a lot of stuff, or are not in a financial position to make life changes, it is not reasonable to ask or expect people get rid of stuff or change their psyche to live in a small space. Additionally the cost of permits to legalize Trailer (Tiny) homes and Shipping container homes by California building codes is so expensive that the investment building these places is usually not worth the return. Other states are different and have more permissive building codes. For people who want to live mindfully of environmental issues not everyone needs to live in a small space. There are numerous options in larger types of architecture that allow an occupant to live by sustainability principles.

However, building-out small and tiny livable space can be a labor of love! To work with steel and convert an old shipping container into an appealing, attractive industrial looking guest room; to craft wood and colorfully paint a delightful Tiny home on a trailer frame; or construct an endearing artsy cottage from cob, cord wood, glass, or earth bags, these buildings have a charm and value separate than improving property values and wholly separate than living by ethics of environmental mindfulness, rather they can evoke a sense of artistic pleasure and are a form of interactive art that inspires awareness of how we relate to our surroundings.

Sustainable Spectrum - Design Ideals for Small or Tiny homes

1) Uses an Independent energy source, solar, wind, geothermal, etc. (off the grid)
2) Has a high insulative total R- value, design has a low energy intensive foot print.
3) Lots of recycled and upcycled materials used. Minimal new building material used in construction and maintenance.
4) Any building materials used are non-toxic (or minimally toxic) to environment as they break down over time.
5) All materials used are locally built, manufactured and acquired. Materials used are manufactured with sustainable philosophies as much as possible. (No stuff manufactured in China)
6) Reduced square footage, which creates a low potential for occupants to consume large amounts of household products.
7) Waste water recapturing systems (grey water) and organic methods of processing black water.
8) Food garden, either indoor or outdoor integrated into the home’s design.
9) Positive feel and character, pleasing aesthetics, which creates a wholesome ambiance for the occupant when interacting with the living space.

Zaproot and Green Macbooks

I get this stuff in my email. One of the benefits of having a micro-famous blog, I suppose. But this one is cool because it tells about GreenPeace's successful effort to get Apple to go green on iPods and Macbooks.

Triumphant Election

Crafty Girl and her mama put up some nice posters out front of the house: "Be the change you would see in the world" and "Obama/Biden."

Later, watching the returns in the common house, she wanted to know, "Now that he's won, will he come visit us?"

Hank pondered a moment. "You know, it's just possible that permaculture will come across his radar. You do know that the ABC news clip about us went international? So, possibly... possibly."

We were impressed with McCain's concession speech, and sad that his supporters were so ungracious in defeat. But then, the Republicans have been trying to win based on fear and hatred, so I suppose it's not much surprise that their crowds are a bit ugly. McCain showed some real statesmanship on the podium. Good men like him deserve better supporters.

We noticed in Obama's speech, that by using a 106-year-old woman's life story, he also laid out a 100 year goal. Have we ever had a present ask us to think that far in advance?

I am filled with hope and gratitude right now.

Later we joined some of the rowdy people dancing and hoorah-ing on the streets.

Envisioning the Future

From a BBC News correspondent in Venezuela:

After a five-hour bus ride south of Caracas - interrupted by a rock smashing through the windscreen as a gang unsuccessfully tried to ambush the vehicle and rob us - we arrived at the Venezuelan equivalent of Nasa's Houston space control centre.

I am strongly reminded of Heinlein's futures, in which he imagines for us worlds that are both filled with technology and still haven't solved many of the underlying issues that create unrest. His balkanized, mediocre-topias helped form my beliefs about how civilization matures and evolves.

Like the poetry of Donne in another age, Heinlein's subject matter is provocative across a broad range of human experience, so as a 14 year old boy there were ideas that resonated, and as a 40+ year old boy there are even more ideas that resonate (except now I have to sort of wade through the author's own adolescent style, so it's more fun to just take his ideas and let them play in my head).

Our sustainable future will only come about if we succeed in enrolling the disenfranchised and in decentralizing power. There's a mural down the road (painted undoubtedly when the Panthers ran this neighborhood) that says "Power is never given away, it must be seized from those who have it." I can understand that attitude-- though it doesn't match with my experience (there are those I encouraged to find their own power only to have them run and hide). People taking care of people, assuming responsibility for each other, and living in close enough connection to each other is the path to a future I want to live in.

Not that a Heinlein-esque future would be bad... just less equitable for many people.

Marketing the future

Marketing is so much fun. How we talk and think about what we talk and think about actually eliminates some of our choices. Which is somewhat of a good thing, since there are really too many choices each day. We need a shorthand. We need to shortcut sometimes.

Marketing preys on this need.

We've finally entered the peak-oil part of the supply curve, and as feeding our oil habit gets more expensive, we can all agree we want relief. The folks who got us into this problem, who reacted to the first oil shock in the 70s by very effectively killing research and implementation of alternative energies, are still around.

Their solution? Drill more.

Look how effective the first ad is. "Find It. Drill It." You can almost hear your stern Father commanding your obedience ("Tell Congress"), and the implicit promise that if you live according to his rules, everything will be okay. Isn't that what we want from Dad? A firm hand and the surety that he's paying the bills? I want me some of that stability!

Look how effective the other ad is. "Free Us." Gentle colors, nurturing spokesperson, you can almost feel yourself sitting comfortably in the kitchen, your gentle parents encouraging you to make your own choice... while letting you know the best choice not only solves the immediate problem of energy scarcity but also creates new opportunities, many of them for someone other than you, in terms of green jobs.

I wonder what would happen if the two sides switched the focus of their marketing? People who voted for Bush, who think Cheney is a statesman, looking at a touchy-feely ad to increase drilling? Or on the other hand, crunchy hippies looking at an ad full of command and control telling them what to do?

Oh, by the way, the first ad is from a front organization for Petroleum Partners. So you know they are after just more of the same: drill, pollute, and concentrate the money in the hands of a few people. The second is an organization working within the policy framework of Al "We can shop our way out of this problem" Gore. As the ideas of green jobs and sustainability work their way into that population, we might come up to some real solutions.

That's my hope, in any case. We really need to level out the income structure in this country. Creating jobs is something I am sure everyone can agree on. Perhaps that's the ad that I really want to see: something in the "strict father" vein that clearly communicates the employment opportunities within the sustainability movement.

So you, want to, go to the show?

Life as we know it is changing forever as the pincers of Peak Oil and Global Climate Change close upon us. What to do?

Pay down your debt (you'll need the cash later)
Grow your own food
Get to know the neighbors (take down the fences, grow more food and borrow more tools)
Drive less
Have more parties
Learn to entertain without using fossil fuels

We've begun construction on Willow Stage, soon to be one of the premier backyard venues. Who knows what sorts of homegrown skits and nonsense we will get to watch? To act in? To direct? We will be inaugurating it during our all-night solstice party.

"The willow makes an amazing backdrop for the stage," says Betsy. "Like it already has curtains."

Yay! Gasoline is expensiver!

No conspiracy theories, no collusion behind closed doors, simply self-interest at work: here's the real reason gasoline costs are up and will stay high at least through the Presidential election.

The United States no longer controls the world oil market.

Traditionally, US Big Oil lowers prices during elections to keep oil-friendly politicians in office. That won't happen this time because different players are in charge, and they are eager to usher in a new era in US politics.

The strong plus to this is that we US citizens might choose to take this opportunity to really assess how we consume, how we relate to each other, and what sort of world we want to leave to our descendants. Our #1 export is our attitude: when the whole world sees us over-consuming, they want to, too. Can we make living within our means, spending earth's resources' interest rather than the principle, sexy and inviting to the rest of the world?

EBMUD intiates water rationing

The news came down today that our municipal water agency, EBMUD, has initiated water rationing. At the same time, I see an article from a San Diego newsfeed that those officials aren't issuing any gray water system permits, in spite of a huge demand and tight water supplies there, too.

At our house, we just installed an outdoor sink. We'll use it for washing after working in the garden. The water and dirt drains in to a small wood chip field. There's really low possibility for spreading any contaminants because this isn't a bathroom sink. The water is going to soak in right at the roots of one of our raised beds, so we're getting two-for-one by recycling the water on site.

I was really distressed by the tone of the news from San Diego. City officials clearly have an agenda to centralize the resource. I suppose I have a fundamentally different view of what government is for. I want government that regulates infrastructure and preserves or encourages opportunities for growth and increased social equity. I do not want government that is in the role of delivering a product or commodity to me.

The primary learning that our civilization is faced with now is this: how much centralization/decentralization do we want? Centralization works really well for concentrating wealth and power into the hands of a very few. Guess what? Those very few are very much in power right now, and of course aren't at all interested in decentralization.

This issue is so poorly understood. Take for example, the "debate" about biofuels. The goal is to engage in relocalization and foster local economies, but instead the centralizing powers export biofuel production to the tropics where horrible choices get made: slashing old-growth rain forests, displacing women farmers, damming water sources for massive irrigation projects and so forth.

Try this as a guide, a measure, for discerning whether an idea is truly a solution, or if it adds to the coming woe: does it promote relocalization?

• Hydrogen economy: Fail.
• Biofuels: Perhaps.
• NAFTA: Fail.
• Global produce market: Fail.
• Community gardens and agriculture: Pass.
• Municipal toilet-to-tap water reclamation: Maybe.
• Any form of protectionism: Fail.
• Any form of open trade: Pass.
• Permaculture: Pass! Great solution for promoting relocalization.

In less than a generation, our economies will be constrained to our respective bioregions, our watersheds. Clearly many of us will be making money selling ideas over whatever the internet evolves into, but many more will be making it or breaking it using whatever is available at hand. Get a jump on this. Earn and spend within your community. Demand fair prices for yourself, and for your neighbors. Don't let your dollars escape overseas, or even over the next ridge line.

Relocalization. It's here, it's the future, and it's how we can all keep feeding and sheltering ourselves as centralized control continues its collapse.

Arctic Sea Ice

A new record for Arctic Sea ice minimum, and the birth of a navigable northwest passage!? I generally don't post stuff like this anymore: for one thing, you can find it in the general news, for another, it generally polarizes people, and for another... well, it's just a downer.

But I had to write this: anyone who thinks this sort of thing is some sort of natural cycle, just look at all the drowning polar bears. They didn't evolve to cope with this. So this phenomenon is newer than their evolution.

Bush, Castro, USA, Cuba

I reacted poorly to President Bush's insensitive remarks about Castro's poor health. So I'm glad I waited a couple of days before writing anything.

Bush might sometimes look like he's a caring person, but true compassion isn't something you turn on and off, depending on who you're looking at. I'll describe two lakes as a metaphor: the lakes look the same, wide, clear, gentle waves moving across the surface, but one is fed by a river that flows through a coal mine tailing, and the other by a river that flows through a pristine meadow. The one lake is toxic and the other good to drink from.

Bush's waters run deep, and toxic.

In any case, "opening Cuba to democracy" must not include returning them to an oil-based economy. They are doing quite well, thank you, in their post-carbon economy. Oxen plow fields, urban gardens feed people, there are more teachers per student than in US schools, and their literacy rate matches ours. Health care is still free. They've weathered their revolution and our economic embargo.

President Bush should have said, "Let's invite the economic leaders of Cuba's post-carbon economy to our nation, to teach us how to thrive and prosper without foreign oil imports."

Rarebooks.org

Although the present is not technically the future, in the sense of a highly anticipated period of time filled with ease and innovation, it is. And has been since about 1980. Anyway, I found you some future: http://www.rarebookroom.org/

Although, in the real future I would be able to read latin by eating a latincapsule.