[Greenbuilding] Aggressively Passive: Building Homes to the Passive House Standard

[Reuben Deumling]

Good point, Gord. But I could also see this used as an excuse to build
bigger. I work from home, and we have a kid. Is 650 square feet enough for
all that? I think so, but I realize others might see this differently.
You used the term 'reasonably sized' Are you referring to the seriousness of
the business or the area it occupies, because in my mind these are
independent parameters. I earn a decent living with a laptop and a modem in
a 60 square ft room that doubles as my daughter's playroom, and when the
need arises it is also a guest bedroom.

Just my 2 cents.

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Gordon Scale <schoolhouse at live.ca> wrote:

> Somehow I believe new standards of measurement should
> try to foster benefits to those considering housing with home based
> businesses
> of substance.  The resulting energy benefits in transportation energy are
> considerable, especially if married with compact urban form.
>
> I see no reason to penalize a somewhat larger than average home - if it
> includes
> a reasonably sized retail, professional or service use.  Food for thought
> when
> striving for practical energy standards for new housing and
> infill/renovations.
>
> Gord Scale
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Greenbuilding mailing list
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> Greenbuilding at bioenergylists.org
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110112/231c8b8d/attachment.html>