If you'd like to find out more from Tiny Solar Homes, complete this form and they will be in touch: docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScZ4shHdHAL2esNRcXIKiyN-A2eE9Ss8NUIJbEAwQv4wTVywA/viewform
My local housing and code enforcement wouls never allow something like this. They require a minimum square footage of 1,800 sq ft. Discriminatory and exclusive code regulations are the epicenter of the housing affordability crisis.
The cost of building a house in the UK is largely the land. There isn’t much of it, it costs a lot and then you have to pay the get hooked up to sewage etc. love the idea but you’d be better off building a house here if you’re going to buy the land anyway.
Looks great, but when it comes to price I would note that in the UK presently building costs are estimated at £2000 per sq m, work that one out for yourself. As for Sydney house prices, that includes the land, for a comparable price try adding their price to the cost for a plot of land and I suspect you will find very little differance in cost.
@fredbloggs72 Does that 2 grand/m2 include cooker/dishwasher/fridge/house battery/shower/bed/cupboards/solar panels etc? Or is that the bare building cost? As these chaps point out, you need to know which you are talking about.
@@xxwookey You are quite correct, what does the £2000/m include/exclude compared to the 'caravan' in this vid. Well the £2000/m would include getting services into the house which the 'caravan' doesn't, what it would exclude would be the 3.5kw solar and 10kwh of batteries, and furniture. So knock of £10,000 for solar and battery, then allow for some furniture, say £4,000, and you have £110,000 left which would be a 55m.sq house, although to be fair for a house that size the cost per m would increase.
ffs 239 for that butter box, a 4x2 currently advertised to be built by a longstanding top grade building company here in perth with all the mod cons except the solar which currently can be purchased for 399 add on 20 grand for off grid solar.. goodness robert please do the research its not the build that costs its mainly the land that has skyrocketed in cost, caused by air BnB and ghost tenants using housing only for capital gains that is not taxable
Take into account the all aluminum welded frame and the solar package. I bet that adds a lot to the cost. Whether the full build is worth the money or not, I can't say but building small is often more expensive per sq foot or sq meter than building a larger unit. I tend to think these types of vehicle/homes are too expensive for what you get. I don't think they are an answer for "affordable housing" or the lack of housing period.
@@rogermccaslin5963 In this format, I agree, they arent the solution to "affordable housing", there are far more economical was of creating "affordable housing". However, this is definitely a cutting edge solution for the middle class who may have a piece of land in the desert, by the lake/river, to give them an easy "cabin" solution. For the masses, no.
due to housing shortages Granny flats are being legalised, so something like this is good to have at the back of your house so you can have some privacy with your housemates/family
the housing shortage is caused by Air BNB , ghost houses that are vacant and used for capital gains only and failed gvt policy over the last 40 yrs@@fetB
No. The invertor and panels need to be looked at differently! The invertor is high, likely for the aircon unit that will put a massive initial draw when turned on. The panels are just keeping the batteries topped up.
The inverter is a hybrid inverter. That means it handles the power from the solar panels AND from the batteries. Since the panels are 3.5kW and the batteries are 5kW it's rated to match the higher power rating - the batteries. If it was rated lower than either of those it would be a badly designed system and very in efficient. Hope that is useful info.
The expensive part in cities isn't the electricity, or even necessarily the home itself. It's the land, and taxes. Off-grid for water requires collecting rainwater in a large tank or buying water frequently. And off-grid for sewer requires composting toilet and some way to deal with gray water. And you still have to deal with trash. It's not nearly as cheap and easy as they want you to believe.
7:35 >"In Sydney it's upward of 1 Mill(ion Dollars AUD). " Yeah that's land prices tho mate. The aircon, oven, materials etc DOESN'T COST ANYWHERE NEAR $1mil. The $240k they're asking, considering they design & build it too, seems round-about fair. I mean it's definitely less than 1 factor away from what i'd expect it to cost for a DIYer (you could do all of this for probably $50k-$100k AUD, if u do the work yourself, & i doubt u can do it to this level of professsional spec). So not too bad! ps: If off-grid, you'd probably want AT LEAST 3x the battery capacity. TBH i'd prolly want more like 4-8x their puny 10-15kWh battery. 10-15kWh is more like Tesla Powerwall peak-mitigation levels, bleh, you'll need way more for offgrid ACTUAL living.
These are custom/individualized homes, built tiny and space-efficient for low energy, material, and land usage, for those who want that and home ownership. They're for a segment of people. They can be placed in the backyard of another home, or in a community like a trailer park, or out in the country (with much less involved with the infrastructure needed to place the home). Let others live in an older small home or apartments.
Given you have plenty of space and s7nshine and literally no winter, they make a lot of sense. Here in CZ less so... space is more restricted and of course we have still some cold winters and a lot less sunshine, so solar works for spring and summer but definitely not winter.
Unfortunately tiny homes are far from being the most environmentally friendly way to live. The best city design is 4-6 floor high blocks with mixed use. They are so much more environmentally friendly and economically beneficial. Sure, not everyone wants to live that way nor should anyone be forced to, but if low cost and environmentally friendly solution is what you want that is the way to go. If you have tiny single homes with gardens then your transport costs become a problem.
I'd say he was being optimistic and I'm as 'Guardian' as they come - property ownership is no longer a viable plan for many without intergenerational transfer - recent examples from Sydney - Australia, Austin -Texas, central London - above average earning couples with good credit completely locked out. This upbeat video is about making the best of the dystopia whilst being able to afford the electricity and actually stay warm@@jonathanfields4ever
Very interesting video, thanks Robert! One subject wasn't touched upon: heating. That may not be an issue in year-round sunny Australia, but what is their solution for it? Is the air con actually a air-air heat pump that could run in heating mode during the winter?
I'm not convinced - tiny homes are interesting, but for a niche audience. They actually aren't that space efficient - you often see them among massive landscaped gardens. Cities needs lots of units on a very tight plot of land, i.e. densification, and trailer based tiny homes just don't provide that. Maybe if they were built as stackable apartment units, then you are getting somewhere.
I agree about caravan style ones, that's ridiculous. Even if you put a bunch on a plot with little room around them, it's still just a trailer park. A tiny house, without wheels is fine. If it has wheels, you're trying to skirt planning permission which is silly. We should just revise that and open up more places to build. And yes, absolutely, what we really need is efficient blocks of flats that are as cheap and well designed as possible. They certainly don't need balconies, that's pointless. Shared laundry facilities saves heat, money and space. A shower rather than a bath. Parking and delivery space under the flats because it's a nightmare not having that in a city centre block - I lived in one for years and didn't even have a place for loading/unloading at all. Then the council made it worse by routing the taxi run through our alley and completely destroying the ability to get deliveries without causing blockages. Which also means you can't move in and out. Shipping containers looked attractive but architects and builders all say they're a nightmare to insulate and waterproof and you end up not saving money so they're completely pointless unless you're skilled enough to build a proper home yourself. And then you may as well do that anyway, as it's cheaper.
Stackable units. Simply Google up multistorey container homes. Please note this is by no means a new idea. I gather that containers are sometimes used only "one way" and this accounts for the ads from container "recycling" outfits. Unfortunately the cost of transporting a container isn't cheap. And, if you want a container lifted over a building then you have to pay for insurance and present proof of such prior to a crane arriving on-site. All this info online.
You aren't convinced, probably because you aren't a young person faced with the incredibly daunting task of finding a way to purchase a small house that costs upwards of $500,000. Those are the people who are attracted to tiny homes like this. Not because they are cool and interesting, but because owning a proper home is financially impossible for a large number of people now. When my grandmother was in her 20s she worked in a wine store and saved up for a few years to purchase her first home outright with cash for £8,000. A decade later she purchased her second small 3 bedroom home for £23,000. Today that same home is worth over £750,000.
@@Mr.N0.0ne that young person would be better served if more studio apartments were built vs a tiny house. A small structure without shared walls and infrastructure is terribly inefficient
@@paulaspinall919 I have been massively involved in affordable housing in the Uk for the last 15 years. I have put hundreds of thousands of pounds into it. If you tried to house 50 people for example in this type of single story homes . It doesn’t works. Because a home isn’t just the physical foot print. It’s height , and infrastructure space. Hence my well researched comment
How did you get to Australia? Hopefully on some kind of electrical transport? Obviously you did not get there on a aircraft which "burns stuff" did you that would be totally hypocritical
I'm not sure why in the UK this seems like a recent phenomenon, however, here in the U.S.A. we've been doing Tiny Homes for the last 25 years. Completely off Grid, however, has been the norm since 2021. The real reason, both here, in Australia and New Zealand, as well as other developed countries, is that no one knows how to zone for them. How to fit them into their residential zoning, both from a code perspective and tax perspective. Are they a Modular? Are they a Mobile Home, and if so, do they meet those construction and manufacturing regulations and codes that have been carefully developed to ensure public safety? How does a city maximum tax revenue for the city and minimum risk to the cities/communities safety infrastructure, (Fire, EMS, Police, School Districts, Hospital and Medical Services, etc.). In other words, how does a city ensure a legitimate means to tax the hell out of a tiny homeowner who quite possibly has no mortgage and whether the owner does or does not have a mortgage, it certainly generates much smaller tax revenue per square foot, and in some cases within city lines is asking for the same services as those in $400,000.00 Home delivering much more tax revenue do. These are all arguments, being asked by zoning boards all across America. There have been cases just recently, where people have built their own off grid tiny homes, (Composting Toilet, Solar Power, Rain Water Catchment), bought, cleared, put in a drive on their own undeveloped land, only to have the county, condemn their home for not meeting codes and zoning restrictions and under their local laws, took their land by eminent domain, removed their newly built home, and destroyed it before the courts systems could ramp up to act. All because people cannot figure out how to make the right amount of money from the community of tiny home people who are a growing part of society standing against the real estate and land developers who put your country, my country and other developed and developing countries on the painful revenue driven path.
Everyone forgets about outside. You don't want noisy neighbours 6 feet from you. Give MUCH more consideration to the outdoor space. Make it private and quiet (and tiny) and it will be a winner.
don't want to be negative but a friend literally had his towed away by thieves in the south of France! He found the chassis weeks later minus all the fittings, solar and panelling.
Of course, these tiny houses have existed for decades in the UK. They are called Park Homes, and they come in all shapes and sizes as older people go from their big family homes. I've considered one myself. For one or two people they're fine, and easy to fully insulate, if not already. Put some solar/battery/heat pump into one and you're done.
Local councils' costs and taxes are causing housing to become more expensive in Australia. Plus, the population growth through high immigration. Are not helping to fill the shortages in housing.
This is all true, important and hopeful. For Aus it would need to have a way of buying a smaller (and so 'cheaper') block of land. Also eliminating negative gearing and capital gains concessions is what would stop the ludicrous rise in the price of housing.
I'm assuming that whilst a house + land package is an appreciating asset, a tiny home (like a caravan) is a depreciating one. It may make sense if you're renting the land and looking to build equity for a deposit as, for many, the first rung on the housing ladder is chest-height. But I'm wondering if it's a mis-step.
I think the biggest problem with this is it's life span. I don't think it will last for more than 20 years and it's value will depreciate quickly. Not sustainable at all.
Someone could live in sleeping quarters much smaller than that (without going down to the no-privacy barracks/ dormitory option, I mean), and not have to do without too much, if that someone could find enough other someone's to share common facilities. If you minimized the required in-unit facilities to a minimum (I'm guessing that boarding house room/ university individual dorm room level is about as far as most people could go) but then set out to try and add as much to that basic level as possible (even in an "extended private property" kind of way), I reckon you could take that far enough to be not a matter of "doing without", but instead of Having More. And if I'm right, logical people not too emotionally attached to some familiar notion of what "the family house" is might even buy into it. I mean More is More, as the great Yngwie once said. How? Well the very smallest accommodation, I've just described, I think. Near enough. Bed, shower-bath, and toilet. So what's missing from that? Well a way of getting hold of affordable cooked food, first? So you'd need some eating areas (kind of like restaurants, but with maybe more basic meal preparation/ supermarket ready cooked meals sent up from some central kitchen that services a bunch of them). I'm guessing that something like this would suffice for most meals most people eat. "Eat your cornflakes at the canteen". Still it would be nice to be able to eat in more privacy, so a delivery system might be in demand. And sometimes it's nice to cook, so maybe kitchens you can book - maybe a property right to so many hours rent free, and then pay to use them ore often, if that's your thing. Book a kitchen/dining room (say one for every 20 units, with one hour time slots), have your stuff delivered there (maybe even your utensils - which you could keep in separate storage - a well packed, well automated warehouse - something industry probably has figured out already), cook, eat, get out the way for the next family. And barbecue areas in the park outside. (You need lots of green space around these, so plenty of space for allotments, little gardens, big gardens for the obsessive, pools, barbecues, tennis courts. Some of which you get in the package you buy, some of which you rent if you underestimated what you need, or couldn't afford to pay much up front to own the time slots.) Reduce the "nest" to the "lowest rent minimum" - affordable to someone currently living under a sheet of cardboard, maybe, and then make up for that by finding ways to make the "hidden property" much bigger than a suburban house, where the owner has to choose between the tennis court/ pool/ lawn, often (in the poverty stricken parts of suburbia, anyway.) Gather the "pods" into apartments - maybe even like that Japanese one - but forbid neighbouring blocks closer than 1km away, and then make the green space down below as individually occupied (so hopefully better tended, and kept nice and secure and gang free) as possible. Yes to parks, but Kleingärten and allotments are better. Maybe a bit scruffier, but more homely. And ecclectic views are just as good as "noble vistas". If the units were dense enough, you could have a school downstairs. Or taking up a few upper floors in a tower section - with every class having a view out over the industrial wasteland all around. Best thing about this is you don't really need a better kind of wasteful car to get around in a place like that. You can just walk to most places, cycle to those a bit further away, and just use the car to get to unreachable outside places on the weekend. Banish the car to the green parking lot on the outskirts, too. No cars round the dwellings. Rather use the street space for sk8r kids. Or cricket matches if someone else has booked the Oval this afternoon. You can find better ideas on roughly this kind of approach on *Edenicity* . Here's their latest: th-cam.com/video/-jAwCPpI9vQ/w-d-xo.html (I suppose now you could beggar your neighbour and delete this comment nobody has read, but I think it's a bad idea to do that. Not my call, obviously, but that's what I think. I'm just thinking that if your team reach this point and "see a rival" referred to here, you or they might have the wrong kneejerk reaction. I'm not saying it's probable. Have no idea what makes you tick. It's just possible, and this is just a kind of ungratious, "please don't" if that impulse seems to be the way to respond.)
because the land owners have trick the rest fo the population into thinking land is a rare resource when it isn't, you could move all 8 billion people to Australia and give them 1acre each. NIMBYISM is also another reason. Both together have created the situation where people believe and cause a situation where people can only afford small homes with no gardens,
I like the concept but from an economic point of view they make little sense unfortunately. With immovable property, generally speaking you have an appreciating asset or at the very least an asset which ought to roughly maintain its value, at least in the vast majority of cases. These tiny homes on wheels are more akin to a car or caravan and their value will just keep dropping over time.
Great idea, a real shame that the government will not allow it in the UK without planning permission, which you are unlikely to obtain. You can own land and still not be allowed to do what YOU want to do on YOUR land. Surely it is time, in the UK, AND Australia that when you OWN something, you actually OWN it. Somewhere to live used to be a right, now that right can be denied.
Yeah this things so expensive, a hotel builder wouldn't even consider it. Feel sorry for all families who lose a lot of wealth via such reckless spending.
Lets say it's 25 sqm. 120,000/25=4,800. It's already completely over priced and that's the cost without land and site prep, that's usually 30% of the cost of building. Let's say it lasts 20 years, and is sold after 20 years for 20%. 96,000/20/12 = 400 per month. 400/25 = 16 per square metre per month. VERY EXPENSIVE and it doesn't have the cost of land included! I can rent a modern newly built penthouse apartment or detached house for much cheaper than 16 per square metre! Also, if you had 120,000 saved and you were receiving 2% returns per year above inflation, you would receive 2,400 year year, or 240 per month for free for ever. At 10 per square meter you could rent a nice 25 square meter apartment, without losing any money! If you bought this instead, and after 20 years received 20% back, you would lose 96,000! If you financed 120,000 over 20 years with 4% interest, you would pay nearly 180,000! 180,000/20/12= 750 per month! 30!!!! per sq meter!!!!
In Canada many (most?) municipalities have STRICTLY ENFORCED LAWS that prevent you - or anyone else - from living in a tiny home. God forbid the city not make tax dollars off you (fair point, cities provide services) and keep their army of inspectors and assessors busy. Any REAL attempt to provide an alternative housing solution to the totally unworkable mess we currently have is crushed by the rich and privileged and the NIMBY team - minority rule at it's finest!
As far as the UK is concerned the housing crisis has been maufactured by successive governments following thatcher who arranged to sell off the nation's social housing stock. The housing crisis that followed the 2nd World War was solved by the building of council houses and prefabs. Some of the prefabs that were maufactured in the 1940s with a projected time life of 25 years and nearly a hundred years later, are still being lived in! The 'tiny home' would obviously fill the role of the 1940s pre-fab and be one of the answers to the housing problem IF we had a government that was concerned for the population rather than stopping small boats full of desperate and traumatised people fleeing from war torn countries!!
First part is wrong. But the rest is right. Basically converted containers are great 'tiny homes'. Quick and easy and cheap ,way cheaper then the video thing. They should be stacked up in towns and be the only shelter supplied to those on any benefits. They also would make a much more affordable option for a first home, and instead of renting anything!
No, THIS could not be the solution for affordable housing in expensive cities. It's very low density as you can only have one story. You need to buy expensive land to put it on in the expensive city. Pop a few of them on the roof of a multi-story car park for an urban trailer park maybe.
It's about time Kryten started looking at tiny homes and off griddy stuff. 👍 I think an EV maker should merge with one of these companies. It'd be a great advertisement for someone like Rivian if you plugged in your big ute to your cabin and ran your cabin off your big ute's battery. Very 'lifestyle marketing' that would be.
There are already EV range extending caravans for lifestylers. Solved problem. This isn't a solution for the housing crisis anywhere that has a serious one, but tiny houses and flats are. Not caravans. Only permanent houses and flats. Driving a big pickup isn't a solution for anything, except advertising your trouser department deficiency. I'll grant you a small pickup is fine. But American style ones are not, particularly paired with giant caravans.
Why not have a search on YT? This topic has been covered for years. In fact the topic has almost been done to death on MSM. Robert and his outfit are just a tad late to the party, but, for those who missed the original programs then I suppose this is all a bit of a novelty. If arsed YT hosts enough platforms on the "tiny house" topic than a human has time to watch them all. Mind you most of these platforms repeat the the same info ad nauseam ... once you've seen a few episodes then you've seen them all, as in they're all variations on a theme, interesting for the first few hundred ...
@@jonevansauthorThat's not the configuration I want and it's not "problem solved". And I never said it was a solution to the housing crisis. And I don't want a big 'Murikan Pick-erp-trerrck myself (I'm more of a Ford Fiesta type person) but plenty of people do. Small willied people, yes, but small willied people are a big market!
Incinerating toilets are perfectly feasible if you have the power. Some people opt for a composting system which relies on bacteria to break down the solids, as in you only have to provide a warm "home" to aid the bacteria. A more correct term for a composting toilet is a urine separator toilet, which is gender neutral in the sense both have to sit down to wee. The urine can be diluted and sprayed on the garden as a valuable fertilizer. What with human pathogens being found in the solids it's advisable to allow them to breakdown over two years if applying the compost on food plants. Two years is recommended in temperate climes. Obviously it's less in warmer climes. No end of clips to be found on this topic all over YT. I gather Australians (other countries are available) have had decades of experience of composting/human waste management, so may be considered as very reliable experts on the topic. So yes incinerator loos will work, given enough energy, but composting the solids for future fertilizer might be considered "greener" in the sense there's no burnt gases polluting the atmosphere. When you consider that the planet has been recycling animal waste since before the dinosaurs then it's safe to say the "system" works.
It’s an affordable building, but it’s only affordable housing if the land it sits on is cheap enough. The solution for affordable housing is to provide land that is cheaper and secure, for example 25 year ground lease, company title or small subdivisions.
Way too expensive. Nice idea, but a niche market to sell into. Best of luck guys. A plot and German built timber frame building would be a better option for most people. The batteries and electronics would get shaken around during moves.
You mean like happens in electric vehicles. Suggest you contact EV manufacturers as soon as. I would suggest they will be very interested in your insights. Well done you!.
@@t1n4444 it’s a great idea, don’t get me wrong. But if I had £124k to spend on a trailer, I’d more likely look at a mobile home to go places and see the world.
Tiny homes and vanlife have become a trend because the previous generations have built an economic situation where the next generation are priced out of normal sized homes and unable to enjoy the standard of living which was previously taken for granted
So called tiny homes are the solution to housing. Basically converted containers are ideal. Especially stacked up in towns not new build houses polluting green fields. A lot cheaper than the vast and excessive price of that fancy Australian thing too!
Absolutely fab - my wife and I dream of these, hopefully legislation will catch up with them in time. I’ll be coming to sydney hopefully from Newcastle 👍
Eyeopening to see all the strongly sceptical comments here. For a while already, fully charged's onesidedness on technical "solutions" in the shape of new Products made me loose interest in the channel. The episodes on Dutch cities or really innovative vehicles like the Sono Sion were interesting though and I really appreciate Robert, Jake and all the other funny and entertaining moderators. Please take it as a constructive hint for a new balance of content ;D
You can get the drawer dishwashers in the UK (they come from a New Zealand manufacturer) as we have one. Does mean you can do half loads more easily but in truth its probably a bit more form than function.
No, it is not expensive building in a city, it is expensive to get land to build on. The solution for housing affordability is to increase density, by building more apartments!
No, it’s not, because that lets governments and banks off the hook for mismanagement of the housing market and continues to hold house prices up when they need to go through a serious correction, painful though that might be in the short term.
Surely, the solution is to encourage people to move away from expensive cities, where standards of living are being eroded. We are citizens, not consumers.
Quick answer, uhm NO. You don’t lower the cost of housing by reducing what would be regarded as a reasonable sized home to something that is less than what an average buyer would need. It’s not the house cost that is necessarily the stumbling block (although there is that), it’s the cost of land and infrastructure that you would need to site it on as well. Unfortunately. If you think these are a great solution to the housing problem, then perhaps you should live in one for a year and see how you get on. The problem with land is that we are not making any new bits. So we have to find other ways of using what we have already taken up and then hanging on for new releases that are serviced, and as we know, will replace arable land. Not an easy task to navigate IMHO. Tiny homes may be OK for temporary accommodation, but we already have highly efficient tiny homes on offer. They are called apartments.
What if you want to live in the countryside but in a small property? Something like this is all you need if you're single/ a couple. Might need a bigger version if you want kids. More choice is always good, I'd much rather live in a tiny home than an apartment.
@@smvsspould The whole issue at the moment (as it has been for a long time) is something like you have just described. A small country property, with a small home on it. It’s a fantasy, as it’s out of the question for anyone who is on a low budget. Buy the house, but can’t afford the land. If you can afford a small country property, you would not settle for a tiny house. Tiny houses have been around for a long time and fulfill a stop gap role as temporary housing, mining camps and the like, or a specific requirement (like living off grid). They’re great for that. Most people need to be where the jobs and infrastructure are, so they opt for the suburbs, even if they are on the fringes of cities with limited access to everything. Because it’s cheaper than anywhere else. This is a very niche solution to a much bigger problem. The tech and quality look great but it needs to be separated from the reality of small dwelling living. Just my opinion though and no disrespect to the advocates of this type of living. If anyone who thinks this is all that a small occupancy would require, then be my guest and try it out. Provided they have some land to put it on of course. 😀. I will give them 3 months. It’s caravan living of sorts, but in fact a caravan can at least can be towed to new locations, so thats more versatile, and probably cheaper. Cheers.
When you have to qualify and mumble the price, no this is not the affordable housing we were looking for. This just a luxury RV without the wheels. Nice and all but no not affordable.
Indeed, my house powers itself - there is a $$$$ to pay of course - like the cost of a small car in energy / utility services... (I do use the grid for AC and cooking to avoid overdrawing my batteries.)
What kind of appliance do you use for cooking? Conventional resistance elements or induction? Microwave cooking is quite economic and might be a case of buying a book on microwave cooking. Air fryers are useful for smaller families as you may know. Induction hobs come in all sizes and powers so you may get away with using your batteries without stressing them. Again, plenty of platforms on YT catering to cooking on induction hobs.
If you'd like to find out more from Tiny Solar Homes, complete this form and they will be in touch: docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScZ4shHdHAL2esNRcXIKiyN-A2eE9Ss8NUIJbEAwQv4wTVywA/viewform
Robert checkout Carbon Scape who are scaling sustainable biographite anode materials.
My local housing and code enforcement wouls never allow something like this.
They require a minimum square footage of 1,800 sq ft.
Discriminatory and exclusive code regulations are the epicenter of the housing affordability crisis.
As is mass immigration. Millions more people who all need to live somewhere sending house prices spiraling up
The cost of building a house in the UK is largely the land. There isn’t much of it, it costs a lot and then you have to pay the get hooked up to sewage etc. love the idea but you’d be better off building a house here if you’re going to buy the land anyway.
Looks great, but when it comes to price I would note that in the UK presently building costs are estimated at £2000 per sq m, work that one out for yourself. As for Sydney house prices, that includes the land, for a comparable price try adding their price to the cost for a plot of land and I suspect you will find very little differance in cost.
@fredbloggs72 Does that 2 grand/m2 include cooker/dishwasher/fridge/house battery/shower/bed/cupboards/solar panels etc? Or is that the bare building cost? As these chaps point out, you need to know which you are talking about.
@@xxwookey You are quite correct, what does the £2000/m include/exclude compared to the 'caravan' in this vid. Well the £2000/m would include getting services into the house which the 'caravan' doesn't, what it would exclude would be the 3.5kw solar and 10kwh of batteries, and furniture. So knock of £10,000 for solar and battery, then allow for some furniture, say £4,000, and you have £110,000 left which would be a 55m.sq house, although to be fair for a house that size the cost per m would increase.
Going to start calling my static caravan a tiny home.
That’s massively radical! I’ll join you.
Only when you get solar panels.
ffs 239 for that butter box, a 4x2 currently advertised to be built by a longstanding top grade building company here in perth with all the mod cons except the solar which currently can be purchased for 399 add on 20 grand for off grid solar.. goodness robert please do the research its not the build that costs its mainly the land that has skyrocketed in cost, caused by air BnB and ghost tenants using housing only for capital gains that is not taxable
Why a generator when an EV could use the vehicle to load function to run the home for days between driving off to recharge?
Only problem is these things seem to typically cost more than a regular house, I’m all for a cheap one though
aye theres way better available
You need to take into account that solar package they have installed!
Take into account the all aluminum welded frame and the solar package. I bet that adds a lot to the cost. Whether the full build is worth the money or not, I can't say but building small is often more expensive per sq foot or sq meter than building a larger unit. I tend to think these types of vehicle/homes are too expensive for what you get. I don't think they are an answer for "affordable housing" or the lack of housing period.
@@rogermccaslin5963 In this format, I agree, they arent the solution to "affordable housing", there are far more economical was of creating "affordable housing". However, this is definitely a cutting edge solution for the middle class who may have a piece of land in the desert, by the lake/river, to give them an easy "cabin" solution. For the masses, no.
I have been enjoyed, so thank you for delivering.
due to housing shortages Granny flats are being legalised, so something like this is good to have at the back of your house so you can have some privacy with your housemates/family
is there a housing shortage or just jacked up rpices
the housing shortage is caused by Air BNB , ghost houses that are vacant and used for capital gains only and failed gvt policy over the last 40 yrs@@fetB
5:35 I wonder why the inverter is rated much higher than the panels. Shouldn't the inverter actually be slightly lower than the panels for efficiency?
No. The invertor and panels need to be looked at differently! The invertor is high, likely for the aircon unit that will put a massive initial draw when turned on. The panels are just keeping the batteries topped up.
The inverter is a hybrid inverter. That means it handles the power from the solar panels AND from the batteries. Since the panels are 3.5kW and the batteries are 5kW it's rated to match the higher power rating - the batteries.
If it was rated lower than either of those it would be a badly designed system and very in efficient.
Hope that is useful info.
Would they do it without the solar and battery so we can put a reasonable quality system on instead of a black and gold special?
I'm totally convinced this would work in Malaysia! We need to start making these!
The expensive part in cities isn't the electricity, or even necessarily the home itself. It's the land, and taxes. Off-grid for water requires collecting rainwater in a large tank or buying water frequently. And off-grid for sewer requires composting toilet and some way to deal with gray water. And you still have to deal with trash. It's not nearly as cheap and easy as they want you to believe.
7:35 >"In Sydney it's upward of 1 Mill(ion Dollars AUD). "
Yeah that's land prices tho mate. The aircon, oven, materials etc DOESN'T COST ANYWHERE NEAR $1mil.
The $240k they're asking, considering they design & build it too, seems round-about fair.
I mean it's definitely less than 1 factor away from what i'd expect it to cost for a DIYer (you could do all of this for probably $50k-$100k AUD, if u do the work yourself, & i doubt u can do it to this level of professsional spec). So not too bad!
ps: If off-grid, you'd probably want AT LEAST 3x the battery capacity. TBH i'd prolly want more like 4-8x their puny 10-15kWh battery. 10-15kWh is more like Tesla Powerwall peak-mitigation levels, bleh, you'll need way more for offgrid ACTUAL living.
I mean what I’d personally do would be ban landlords and build mid-rise apartment blocks of tiny flats for council homes. High quality as well.
These are custom/individualized homes, built tiny and space-efficient for low energy, material, and land usage, for those who want that and home ownership. They're for a segment of people. They can be placed in the backyard of another home, or in a community like a trailer park, or out in the country (with much less involved with the infrastructure needed to place the home). Let others live in an older small home or apartments.
Isn't this just like a mini-version of the American trailerpark trailer for double the cost with 10k in solar and batteries added to it...
Given you have plenty of space and s7nshine and literally no winter, they make a lot of sense. Here in CZ less so... space is more restricted and of course we have still some cold winters and a lot less sunshine, so solar works for spring and summer but definitely not winter.
Unfortunately tiny homes are far from being the most environmentally friendly way to live. The best city design is 4-6 floor high blocks with mixed use. They are so much more environmentally friendly and economically beneficial. Sure, not everyone wants to live that way nor should anyone be forced to, but if low cost and environmentally friendly solution is what you want that is the way to go. If you have tiny single homes with gardens then your transport costs become a problem.
What about the land to put it on ?.
Having build a large camper conversion I love these tiny homes. Good video
This looks like the premium pod Blackrock will allow you to rent, provided you have good social credit.
You sound like you watch Fox News
@@jonathanfields4ever Trust your neighbour, not your screen. And stay curious my friend.
I'd say he was being optimistic and I'm as 'Guardian' as they come - property ownership is no longer a viable plan for many without intergenerational transfer - recent examples from Sydney - Australia, Austin -Texas, central London - above average earning couples with good credit completely locked out. This upbeat video is about making the best of the dystopia whilst being able to afford the electricity and actually stay warm@@jonathanfields4ever
Yet houses have increased in size by 50% since the 70s so we are heading in the opposite direction (and thus people want smaller homes)
Very interesting video, thanks Robert! One subject wasn't touched upon: heating. That may not be an issue in year-round sunny Australia, but what is their solution for it? Is the air con actually a air-air heat pump that could run in heating mode during the winter?
Yes, AirCons in Australia are usually reverse cycle - so heat and cool.
How long are they supposed to last....septic tanks , water tanks compsot toilets It more like a caravan or narrow boat than a house
Absolutely brilliant 😊
I'm not convinced - tiny homes are interesting, but for a niche audience. They actually aren't that space efficient - you often see them among massive landscaped gardens. Cities needs lots of units on a very tight plot of land, i.e. densification, and trailer based tiny homes just don't provide that. Maybe if they were built as stackable apartment units, then you are getting somewhere.
agreed...
I agree about caravan style ones, that's ridiculous. Even if you put a bunch on a plot with little room around them, it's still just a trailer park.
A tiny house, without wheels is fine. If it has wheels, you're trying to skirt planning permission which is silly. We should just revise that and open up more places to build.
And yes, absolutely, what we really need is efficient blocks of flats that are as cheap and well designed as possible. They certainly don't need balconies, that's pointless. Shared laundry facilities saves heat, money and space. A shower rather than a bath. Parking and delivery space under the flats because it's a nightmare not having that in a city centre block - I lived in one for years and didn't even have a place for loading/unloading at all. Then the council made it worse by routing the taxi run through our alley and completely destroying the ability to get deliveries without causing blockages. Which also means you can't move in and out.
Shipping containers looked attractive but architects and builders all say they're a nightmare to insulate and waterproof and you end up not saving money so they're completely pointless unless you're skilled enough to build a proper home yourself. And then you may as well do that anyway, as it's cheaper.
Stackable units.
Simply Google up multistorey container homes.
Please note this is by no means a new idea.
I gather that containers are sometimes used only "one way" and this accounts for the ads from container "recycling" outfits.
Unfortunately the cost of transporting a container isn't cheap.
And, if you want a container lifted over a building then you have to pay for insurance and present proof of such prior to a crane arriving on-site.
All this info online.
You aren't convinced, probably because you aren't a young person faced with the incredibly daunting task of finding a way to purchase a small house that costs upwards of $500,000. Those are the people who are attracted to tiny homes like this. Not because they are cool and interesting, but because owning a proper home is financially impossible for a large number of people now.
When my grandmother was in her 20s she worked in a wine store and saved up for a few years to purchase her first home outright with cash for £8,000. A decade later she purchased her second small 3 bedroom home for £23,000. Today that same home is worth over £750,000.
@@Mr.N0.0ne that young person would be better served if more studio apartments were built vs a tiny house. A small structure without shared walls and infrastructure is terribly inefficient
We don’t have the land space in the UK
Which is why these tiny homes are so relevant!
@@paulaspinall919 I have been massively involved in affordable housing in the Uk for the last 15 years. I have put hundreds of thousands of pounds into it.
If you tried to house 50 people for example in this type of single story homes . It doesn’t works. Because a home isn’t just the physical foot print. It’s height , and infrastructure space. Hence my well researched comment
Would sure love to try living in one of these... in the states.
A UK version would be great! Problem is planning permission though.
not at £123,000 theres far far better options
@@H4N5O1O there are cheaper options in the uk.
But are they built with all of this technology into them?@@markbrown83
No, the problem is land.
@@jamesbarker7145 there’s plenty of land. You just can’t get planning on most of it.
How did you get to Australia? Hopefully on some kind of electrical transport? Obviously you did not get there on a aircraft which "burns stuff" did you that would be totally hypocritical
I'm not sure why in the UK this seems like a recent phenomenon, however, here in the U.S.A. we've been doing Tiny Homes for the last 25 years. Completely off Grid, however, has been the norm since 2021. The real reason, both here, in Australia and New Zealand, as well as other developed countries, is that no one knows how to zone for them. How to fit them into their residential zoning, both from a code perspective and tax perspective. Are they a Modular? Are they a Mobile Home, and if so, do they meet those construction and manufacturing regulations and codes that have been carefully developed to ensure public safety? How does a city maximum tax revenue for the city and minimum risk to the cities/communities safety infrastructure, (Fire, EMS, Police, School Districts, Hospital and Medical Services, etc.). In other words, how does a city ensure a legitimate means to tax the hell out of a tiny homeowner who quite possibly has no mortgage and whether the owner does or does not have a mortgage, it certainly generates much smaller tax revenue per square foot, and in some cases within city lines is asking for the same services as those in $400,000.00 Home delivering much more tax revenue do. These are all arguments, being asked by zoning boards all across America. There have been cases just recently, where people have built their own off grid tiny homes, (Composting Toilet, Solar Power, Rain Water Catchment), bought, cleared, put in a drive on their own undeveloped land, only to have the county, condemn their home for not meeting codes and zoning restrictions and under their local laws, took their land by eminent domain, removed their newly built home, and destroyed it before the courts systems could ramp up to act. All because people cannot figure out how to make the right amount of money from the community of tiny home people who are a growing part of society standing against the real estate and land developers who put your country, my country and other developed and developing countries on the painful revenue driven path.
IN OZ they MUST be mobile. No planning permit required.
IN Germany you can do the same for 3 years
Everyone forgets about outside. You don't want noisy neighbours 6 feet from you. Give MUCH more consideration to the outdoor space. Make it private and quiet (and tiny) and it will be a winner.
don't want to be negative but a friend literally had his towed away by thieves in the south of France! He found the chassis weeks later minus all the fittings, solar and panelling.
Of course, these tiny houses have existed for decades in the UK. They are called Park Homes, and they come in all shapes and sizes as older people go from their big family homes. I've considered one myself. For one or two people they're fine, and easy to fully insulate, if not already. Put some solar/battery/heat pump into one and you're done.
Local councils' costs and taxes are causing housing to become more expensive in Australia. Plus, the population growth through high immigration. Are not helping to fill the shortages in housing.
Can’t what to see this up close in a couple of weeks!
Are there any companies in the uk that do this sort of thing.
THE NSW GOV NEED TO SUBSIDISE AND LEGISLATE THE RULES BETTER FOR THESE PORTABLE HOMES
Looks expensive but that solar system is awesome! I could easily run my bricks and mortar house with that!
Those homes look amazing 🤩
there are problems with council approvals in some areas they don’t want tiny houses in their neck of the woods
Great granny flat option 🤔
This is all true, important and hopeful. For Aus it would need to have a way of buying a smaller (and so 'cheaper') block of land. Also eliminating negative gearing and capital gains concessions is what would stop the ludicrous rise in the price of housing.
I wish Jack would have been there to put this tiny house to scale for tall people ;)
He's in Sydney so we'll do a Jack test for you!
@@EverythingElectricShow You're the best!!! ;)
I'm assuming that whilst a house + land package is an appreciating asset, a tiny home (like a caravan) is a depreciating one. It may make sense if you're renting the land and looking to build equity for a deposit as, for many, the first rung on the housing ladder is chest-height. But I'm wondering if it's a mis-step.
I think the biggest problem with this is it's life span. I don't think it will last for more than 20 years and it's value will depreciate quickly. Not sustainable at all.
Someone could live in sleeping quarters much smaller than that (without going down to the no-privacy barracks/ dormitory option, I mean), and not have to do without too much, if that someone could find enough other someone's to share common facilities. If you minimized the required in-unit facilities to a minimum (I'm guessing that boarding house room/ university individual dorm room level is about as far as most people could go) but then set out to try and add as much to that basic level as possible (even in an "extended private property" kind of way), I reckon you could take that far enough to be not a matter of "doing without", but instead of Having More.
And if I'm right, logical people not too emotionally attached to some familiar notion of what "the family house" is might even buy into it. I mean More is More, as the great Yngwie once said.
How? Well the very smallest accommodation, I've just described, I think. Near enough. Bed, shower-bath, and toilet.
So what's missing from that? Well a way of getting hold of affordable cooked food, first? So you'd need some eating areas (kind of like restaurants, but with maybe more basic meal preparation/ supermarket ready cooked meals sent up from some central kitchen that services a bunch of them). I'm guessing that something like this would suffice for most meals most people eat. "Eat your cornflakes at the canteen".
Still it would be nice to be able to eat in more privacy, so a delivery system might be in demand.
And sometimes it's nice to cook, so maybe kitchens you can book - maybe a property right to so many hours rent free, and then pay to use them ore often, if that's your thing. Book a kitchen/dining room (say one for every 20 units, with one hour time slots), have your stuff delivered there (maybe even your utensils - which you could keep in separate storage - a well packed, well automated warehouse - something industry probably has figured out already), cook, eat, get out the way for the next family.
And barbecue areas in the park outside. (You need lots of green space around these, so plenty of space for allotments, little gardens, big gardens for the obsessive, pools, barbecues, tennis courts. Some of which you get in the package you buy, some of which you rent if you underestimated what you need, or couldn't afford to pay much up front to own the time slots.)
Reduce the "nest" to the "lowest rent minimum" - affordable to someone currently living under a sheet of cardboard, maybe, and then make up for that by finding ways to make the "hidden property" much bigger than a suburban house, where the owner has to choose between the tennis court/ pool/ lawn, often (in the poverty stricken parts of suburbia, anyway.)
Gather the "pods" into apartments - maybe even like that Japanese one - but forbid neighbouring blocks closer than 1km away, and then make the green space down below as individually occupied (so hopefully better tended, and kept nice and secure and gang free) as possible. Yes to parks, but Kleingärten and allotments are better. Maybe a bit scruffier, but more homely. And ecclectic views are just as good as "noble vistas".
If the units were dense enough, you could have a school downstairs. Or taking up a few upper floors in a tower section - with every class having a view out over the industrial wasteland all around.
Best thing about this is you don't really need a better kind of wasteful car to get around in a place like that. You can just walk to most places, cycle to those a bit further away, and just use the car to get to unreachable outside places on the weekend. Banish the car to the green parking lot on the outskirts, too. No cars round the dwellings. Rather use the street space for sk8r kids. Or cricket matches if someone else has booked the Oval this afternoon.
You can find better ideas on roughly this kind of approach on *Edenicity* . Here's their latest: th-cam.com/video/-jAwCPpI9vQ/w-d-xo.html
(I suppose now you could beggar your neighbour and delete this comment nobody has read, but I think it's a bad idea to do that. Not my call, obviously, but that's what I think. I'm just thinking that if your team reach this point and "see a rival" referred to here, you or they might have the wrong kneejerk reaction. I'm not saying it's probable. Have no idea what makes you tick. It's just possible, and this is just a kind of ungratious, "please don't" if that impulse seems to be the way to respond.)
because the land owners have trick the rest fo the population into thinking land is a rare resource when it isn't, you could move all 8 billion people to Australia and give them 1acre each. NIMBYISM is also another reason. Both together have created the situation where people believe and cause a situation where people can only afford small homes with no gardens,
I like the concept but from an economic point of view they make little sense unfortunately. With immovable property, generally speaking you have an appreciating asset or at the very least an asset which ought to roughly maintain its value, at least in the vast majority of cases. These tiny homes on wheels are more akin to a car or caravan and their value will just keep dropping over time.
That won’t work in the UK as it’s to dark half the year.
Thank you.
Great idea, a real shame that the government will not allow it in the UK without planning permission, which you are unlikely to obtain.
You can own land and still not be allowed to do what YOU want to do on YOUR land.
Surely it is time, in the UK, AND Australia that when you OWN something, you actually OWN it.
Somewhere to live used to be a right, now that right can be denied.
Interesting episode
That kitchen is bigger than the kitchen in my first flat!
Would be much better to just a build a house which will last 10x longer or more. The laws need changing rather than finding ways to avoid it.
Yeah this things so expensive, a hotel builder wouldn't even consider it. Feel sorry for all families who lose a lot of wealth via such reckless spending.
all we need in the UK is a sun generator!
Some wind turbines on the roof would do the trick though..
See you and the tiny Home in Sydney
Not long to go now!
Lets say it's 25 sqm. 120,000/25=4,800. It's already completely over priced and that's the cost without land and site prep, that's usually 30% of the cost of building. Let's say it lasts 20 years, and is sold after 20 years for 20%. 96,000/20/12 = 400 per month. 400/25 = 16 per square metre per month. VERY EXPENSIVE and it doesn't have the cost of land included! I can rent a modern newly built penthouse apartment or detached house for much cheaper than 16 per square metre!
Also, if you had 120,000 saved and you were receiving 2% returns per year above inflation, you would receive 2,400 year year, or 240 per month for free for ever. At 10 per square meter you could rent a nice 25 square meter apartment, without losing any money! If you bought this instead, and after 20 years received 20% back, you would lose 96,000! If you financed 120,000 over 20 years with 4% interest, you would pay nearly 180,000! 180,000/20/12= 750 per month! 30!!!! per sq meter!!!!
Try this in Britain, and you'll see how quickly the council can turn up with a bulldozer.
In Canada many (most?) municipalities have STRICTLY ENFORCED LAWS that prevent you - or anyone else - from living in a tiny home. God forbid the city not make tax dollars off you (fair point, cities provide services) and keep their army of inspectors and assessors busy.
Any REAL attempt to provide an alternative housing solution to the totally unworkable mess we currently have is crushed by the rich and privileged and the NIMBY team - minority rule at it's finest!
Personally would love to own and live 8n tiny house ❤❤❤
As far as the UK is concerned the housing crisis has been maufactured by successive governments following thatcher who arranged to sell off the nation's social housing stock. The housing crisis that followed the 2nd World War was solved by the building of council houses and prefabs. Some of the prefabs that were maufactured in the 1940s with a projected time life of 25 years and nearly a hundred years later, are still being lived in! The 'tiny home' would obviously fill the role of the 1940s pre-fab and be one of the answers to the housing problem IF we had a government that was concerned for the population rather than stopping small boats full of desperate and traumatised people fleeing from war torn countries!!
First part is wrong. But the rest is right. Basically converted containers are great 'tiny homes'. Quick and easy and cheap ,way cheaper then the video thing. They should be stacked up in towns and be the only shelter supplied to those on any benefits. They also would make a much more affordable option for a first home, and instead of renting anything!
Will definitely take a look in Sydney. Hope you have a frame on trailer to look at. Keep smiling everyone
No, THIS could not be the solution for affordable housing in expensive cities.
It's very low density as you can only have one story.
You need to buy expensive land to put it on in the expensive city.
Pop a few of them on the roof of a multi-story car park for an urban trailer park maybe.
It's about time Kryten started looking at tiny homes and off griddy stuff. 👍
I think an EV maker should merge with one of these companies. It'd be a great advertisement for someone like Rivian if you plugged in your big ute to your cabin and ran your cabin off your big ute's battery. Very 'lifestyle marketing' that would be.
There are already EV range extending caravans for lifestylers. Solved problem. This isn't a solution for the housing crisis anywhere that has a serious one, but tiny houses and flats are. Not caravans. Only permanent houses and flats. Driving a big pickup isn't a solution for anything, except advertising your trouser department deficiency. I'll grant you a small pickup is fine. But American style ones are not, particularly paired with giant caravans.
Why not have a search on YT?
This topic has been covered for years. In fact the topic has almost been done to death on MSM.
Robert and his outfit are just a tad late to the party, but, for those who missed the original programs then I suppose this is all a bit of a novelty.
If arsed YT hosts enough platforms on the "tiny house" topic than a human has time to watch them all.
Mind you most of these platforms repeat the the same info ad nauseam ... once you've seen a few episodes then you've seen them all, as in they're all variations on a theme, interesting for the first few hundred ...
@@t1n4444I have seen it on youtube -- very extensively in fact -- I just thought it was time Rob's channel covered it.
@@jonevansauthorThat's not the configuration I want and it's not
"problem solved". And I never said it was a solution to the housing crisis. And I don't want a big 'Murikan Pick-erp-trerrck myself (I'm more of a Ford Fiesta type person) but plenty of people do. Small willied people, yes, but small willied people are a big market!
Those are pretty cool THOWs. Could they be fitted with an incinerating toilet?
Incinerating toilets are perfectly feasible if you have the power.
Some people opt for a composting system which relies on bacteria to break down the solids, as in you only have to provide a warm "home" to aid the bacteria.
A more correct term for a composting toilet is a urine separator toilet, which is gender neutral in the sense both have to sit down to wee.
The urine can be diluted and sprayed on the garden as a valuable fertilizer.
What with human pathogens being found in the solids it's advisable to allow them to breakdown over two years if applying the compost on food plants.
Two years is recommended in temperate climes. Obviously it's less in warmer climes.
No end of clips to be found on this topic all over YT.
I gather Australians (other countries are available) have had decades of experience of composting/human waste management, so may be considered as very reliable experts on the topic.
So yes incinerator loos will work, given enough energy, but composting the solids for future fertilizer might be considered "greener" in the sense there's no burnt gases polluting the atmosphere.
When you consider that the planet has been recycling animal waste since before the dinosaurs then it's safe to say the "system" works.
did you not see the fuse box in the bogs cupboard the whole gaff can get incinerated.
It’s an affordable building, but it’s only affordable housing if the land it sits on is cheap enough.
The solution for affordable housing is to provide land that is cheaper and secure, for example 25 year ground lease, company title or small subdivisions.
Way too expensive. Nice idea, but a niche market to sell into. Best of luck guys. A plot and German built timber frame building would be a better option for most people. The batteries and electronics would get shaken around during moves.
You mean like happens in electric vehicles.
Suggest you contact EV manufacturers as soon as.
I would suggest they will be very interested in your insights.
Well done you!.
@@t1n4444 it’s a great idea, don’t get me wrong. But if I had £124k to spend on a trailer, I’d more likely look at a mobile home to go places and see the world.
Tiny homes and vanlife have become a trend because the previous generations have built an economic situation where the next generation are priced out of normal sized homes and unable to enjoy the standard of living which was previously taken for granted
We just want affordable real homes.
So called tiny homes are the solution to housing. Basically converted containers are ideal. Especially stacked up in towns not new build houses polluting green fields. A lot cheaper than the vast and excessive price of that fancy Australian thing too!
Absolutely fab - my wife and I dream of these, hopefully legislation will catch up with them in time. I’ll be coming to sydney hopefully from Newcastle 👍
GBP124,000 for a caravan?
The issue is council
Dont have a farm
Councils.need to allow these homes now no red tape etc
Eyeopening to see all the strongly sceptical comments here. For a while already, fully charged's onesidedness on technical "solutions" in the shape of new Products made me loose interest in the channel. The episodes on Dutch cities or really innovative vehicles like the Sono Sion were interesting though and I really appreciate Robert, Jake and all the other funny and entertaining moderators. Please take it as a constructive hint for a new balance of content ;D
Towns around here don’t allow them. :(
You can get the drawer dishwashers in the UK (they come from a New Zealand manufacturer) as we have one. Does mean you can do half loads more easily but in truth its probably a bit more form than function.
Love these things! Will be putting my order as soon possible!
cook for a family of 4 in a tiny home... something wrong here ?
I'd rather have an apartment block than a standalone place like this.
You came on here to tell everyone that?
Excellent presentation.
6kW hybrid Inverter - ARE YOU LISTENING GivEnergy!!!
No, it is not expensive building in a city, it is expensive to get land to build on. The solution for housing affordability is to increase density, by building more apartments!
No, it’s not, because that lets governments and banks off the hook for mismanagement of the housing market and continues to hold house prices up when they need to go through a serious correction, painful though that might be in the short term.
We need passive houses for families, NOT trailer parks.
The housing crisis is artificial; there are plenty of vacant properties being kept empty in order to drive up prices. This idea wouldn't solve that.
I'll take 1 in the US, (?) mate....
Surely, the solution is to encourage people to move away from expensive cities, where standards of living are being eroded. We are citizens, not consumers.
Quick answer, uhm NO. You don’t lower the cost of housing by reducing what would be regarded as a reasonable sized home to something that is less than what an average buyer would need. It’s not the house cost that is necessarily the stumbling block (although there is that), it’s the cost of land and infrastructure that you would need to site it on as well. Unfortunately. If you think these are a great solution to the housing problem, then perhaps you should live in one for a year and see how you get on.
The problem with land is that we are not making any new bits. So we have to find other ways of using what we have already taken up and then hanging on for new releases that are serviced, and as we know, will replace arable land. Not an easy task to navigate IMHO. Tiny homes may be OK for temporary accommodation, but we already have highly efficient tiny homes on offer. They are called apartments.
What if you want to live in the countryside but in a small property?
Something like this is all you need if you're single/ a couple. Might need a bigger version if you want kids. More choice is always good, I'd much rather live in a tiny home than an apartment.
@@smvsspould The whole issue at the moment (as it has been for a long time) is something like you have just described. A small country property, with a small home on it. It’s a fantasy, as it’s out of the question for anyone who is on a low budget. Buy the house, but can’t afford the land. If you can afford a small country property, you would not settle for a tiny house. Tiny houses have been around for a long time and fulfill a stop gap role as temporary housing, mining camps and the like, or a specific requirement (like living off grid). They’re great for that.
Most people need to be where the jobs and infrastructure are, so they opt for the suburbs, even if they are on the fringes of cities with limited access to everything. Because it’s cheaper than anywhere else. This is a very niche solution to a much bigger problem. The tech and quality look great but it needs to be separated from the reality of small dwelling living. Just my opinion though and no disrespect to the advocates of this type of living.
If anyone who thinks this is all that a small occupancy would require, then be my guest and try it out. Provided they have some land to put it on of course. 😀. I will give them 3 months. It’s caravan living of sorts, but in fact a caravan can at least can be towed to new locations, so thats more versatile, and probably cheaper. Cheers.
Plastic Top but close enough.
When you have to qualify and mumble the price, no this is not the affordable housing we were looking for. This just a luxury RV without the wheels. Nice and all but no not affordable.
People are living in tiny homes because normal sized homes are unaffordable. The younger generation has been stiffed.
Why do people talk about living off grid, as if it's a good thing? Living off grid, means you don't contribute, help, cooperate...
Indeed, my house powers itself - there is a $$$$ to pay of course - like the cost of a small car in energy / utility services...
(I do use the grid for AC and cooking to avoid overdrawing my batteries.)
What kind of appliance do you use for cooking?
Conventional resistance elements or induction?
Microwave cooking is quite economic and might be a case of buying a book on microwave cooking.
Air fryers are useful for smaller families as you may know.
Induction hobs come in all sizes and powers so you may get away with using your batteries without stressing them.
Again, plenty of platforms on YT catering to cooking on induction hobs.
Putting us in smaller and smaller boxes is not they way forward
This is great timing, just bought my first off grid property in Spain. I’m gonna move there when this war kicks off with Israel .
Solar powered shoe boxes for plebs.
See you in two weeks! :D
Interesting but not relevant in UK🤔
These are the only answers for would be house owners as mainstream just out of reach! Also you are not saddled with huge debt for life!