Space-Age Houses
An anonymous reader writes "The dream of building the Jetson's Skypad Apartment may come to true because technology designed for space could become the basis of the
new German Antarctic station. The same ultra-light composites that ESA uses onboard its spacecraft for antennas and solar panels, will be used to make a self-supporting lightweight shell-like structure able to withstand severe earthquakes. This approach is in sharp contrast to many contemporary design solutions that use ever more steel and concrete..."
Because light is better than strong and heavy. In a gentle earthquake still most of the injuries are caused by fixtures and fittings flying around or objects falling from shelves. This increases but with the strength of the quake but almost all deaths are caused by crushing or suffocation when a structure collapses. Yes you would be flying around like seeds in a pod but unless your computer monitor decides to hit you back for all the times you whacked it then you can at least know you are going to survive with a few bruises.
It's no dumber than a lot of the stuff they do in coastal areas to try and make houses "hurricane proof". I used to build them, so I know more about it than I ever wanted to.
First, three meters of water is no big deal. Three meters of water hitting your house as a storm surge is a big fucking deal. Most houses on the coast are build on sand, under the cement. Sand is good. Makes a nice foundation...Until hurricane driven tides wash it and your heavy ass house away.
As for durability...Most modern houses aren't set to last anywhere near 100 years. Sheetrock and plywood only go so far.
Considering what a subdivision of stilt-houses looks like now, I don't see what the difference is. What looks weirder, a normal house on stilts or a house that looks like it's SUPPOSED to be on stilts?
Seems like a perfectly decent idea to me. Solar power is way underutilized on the coast, and god knows regular housing doesn't fare all that well.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.