• SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    But then you need to do significant construction with that material. And it’s not just one material: there are pipes, electrical, insulation, flooring, etc. It’s only replacing a few admittedly major parts of the material. Everything else still takes tons of labor. I could be wrong, but I’m not convinced the labor savings are greater compared to modular housing.

    • bhmnscmm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re completely right. The framing, which is what this 3D printing replaces, is one of the fastest parts of home construction.

      The site preparation, utilities, and interior finishing work are what take the longest. Modular homes can significantly speed up all of those components.

    • Scratch@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re probably right, right now. But I am put in mind of ya boi Ben Franklin when asked “What use is [a prototype hot air balloon]” He replied “What is the use of a newborn child?”

      Early plastic 3d printers were clunky and of poor quality, but now entire industries have spawned around them and they have revolutionised at-home prototyping.

      Right now, this is a gimmick. But the potential, if nurtured is pretty serious, imo.

      • SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I suppose I’m questioning even the potential. Some technologies don’t pan out, which is why we’re not all riding around on our Segways. Underestimating future technology is certainly one risk, but the other risk is assuming every technology is inevitable progress.