Our Green Dream Home

At $312,000 bucks for a 2400 square foot house, this type of a home is far beyond the reach of most folks. And what? No solar panels on the roof? For that kind of money one would think this duo of engineers would have gone with less in the way of luxury wood trim and allocated 10% of that $312,000 to a full-scale grid-tie and storage solar energy system. Hey, I've lived in eastern Washington state, not only is there plenty of sun, but stiff winds blow steady much of the time -- where's their wind-generator? Sure, it's a nice-looking effort, but considering the how litte green alternatives they actually got for all of their money (straw bales walls are supposed to be *cheap* you know, and so is geothermal heat-sourcing), coupled with the fact that they are still using coal-generated grid electricity, I just don't see how this can qualify as any kind of geunine "green dream home".

I'd like to see pictures of that litter-pan setup. Five humans, 10 cats, 1300 sqft-- I'd like to see pictures of anything that incorporates the words "litter pans" and "space saving."

I love strawbale construction. Sturdy, warm, renewable-- I just wish it was more viable for wetter climates, and I wish someone could tell me if it can be worked with in areas that may become prone to earth shift.

There may be some jealousy afoot in my next comment. For a mechanical engineer and a housewife, $55 per sqft is a reach; $130 per sqft is out of even fantasy range. With that in mind, from the bottom of my spacious 1300 square feet, where in the heck does one get the idea that a 2400 sqft house for 2-3 people is actually green??? I appreciate all the lengths they've gone to to need less heat, less maintainance, less and less, and I do allow that people need to know that "living green" doesn't have to mean "eschewing all luxury and living on top of each other in a canvas yurt," (even if some sick little ascetic in my does fantasize about it weekly), but that's still a lot of unnecessary space there.